« Branyan Rejects Mariners' Offer |
Main
| Anthopoulos Would Deal Within Division »
By Tim Dierkes [November 11, 2009 at 12:15pm CST]
Patrick Saunders of the Denver Post has the Rockies hot stove chatter; let's take a look.
- GM Dan O'Dowd explained that, "There is a difference between listening and attempting to move a player." Brad Hawpe falls squarely into the "listening" category. Ken Rosenthal and Jon Paul Morosi of FOX Sports say the Rockies would probably seek a right-handed hitting outfielder and a reliever for Hawpe.
- New contracts for O'Dowd and manager Jim Tracy are still pending a few small details.
- The Rockies are trying to trade Garrett Atkins. If and when they fail, they'll release him. So rather than wait until the December 12th non-tender deadline, Atkins should join the free agent ranks by November 20th at the latest. The Rangers have "moderate interest" in Atkins, according to Jeff Wilson of the Dallas Morning News.
- The Rockies will attempt to sign arbitration-eligible players Clint Barmes and Huston Street to multiyear deals, but if that doesn't work they'll simply get one-year contracts.
- Catcher Paul Phillips who had 54 plate appearances with the big club this year, is expected to be designated for assignment re-signed to a minor league deal to create 40-man roster space.
- Click here to read Monday's Rockies rumors.
Do people think the Rockies would have interest in hometown Roy Halladay?
As a Jays fan, I think a great package would be based around Chris Iannetta and Dexter Fowler, plus perhaps Chacin or Freidrich.
Does this sound realistic? I know Iannetta is in the plans as the starting catcher next year, but Fowler is somewhat expendable, as the Rockies have a bunch of good, young outfielders.
Posted by: dizzle | November 11, 2009 at 10:31 AM
So if a player is released his old team is on the hook correct? At a bargin basement price I could see the Twins kick the tires on Atkins, not sure how the money works out though.
Posted by: BabyJesus | November 11, 2009 at 10:38 AM
@dizzle yes, I'm sure the Rockies are keen on mortgaging their future for 1 year of Roy Halladay.
Posted by: RockiesMagicNumber | November 11, 2009 at 10:43 AM
Oh, my mistake RockiesMagicNumber. I meant do you think the Rockies would be interested in Garrett Atkins for Roy Halladay? Wouldn't want the Rockies to have to give up anything important in a trade.
Posted by: dizzle | November 11, 2009 at 10:46 AM
Garrett Atkins isn't under contract, so the Rockies aren't on the hook for anything. He's under team control for 2010, but the (rightful) speculation is that the team will cut bait rather than offer arbitration considering a $450k Ian Stewart >>>> a $6 million (estimated arbitration award) Garrett Atkins.
Posted by: vtadave | November 11, 2009 at 10:50 AM
I'm sorry, but I see no justifiable reason to keep Hawpe around.
He's their highest paid outfielder, but he's arguably their fourth best option behind Gonzalez. Smith and Fowler, and his trade value is presumably pretty high coming off another nice season, in terms of OPS.
"As a Jays fan, I think a great package would be based around Chris Iannetta and Dexter Fowler, plus perhaps Chacin or Freidrich."
Obviously Halladay is great, but I don't think one year of him is worth Iannetta, Fowler and Chacin/Friedrich.
Posted by: scribbletone | November 11, 2009 at 11:01 AM
What kind of package do you think would be worth Halladay, Scribbletone? Honest question, the Rockies have some great parts and match-up well with the Jays needs, so I'm just wondering.
Posted by: dizzle | November 11, 2009 at 11:02 AM
I could see the Phils jumping in on Atkins - he and Utley were teammates at UCLA and Chase has sung his praises to management before. Signing him w/out giving up anything would be great, but given they'd drop him anyways, can't imagine a trade would cost all that much - what's the trade price tag look like for him?
Posted by: dmerandom | November 11, 2009 at 11:12 AM
Actually, the Rockies don't match up well with the Jays because A) Halladay's salary is out of the Rockies price range B) Trading high upside propsects for a one year rental goes completely against the Rockies philosophy C) Any Halladay trade would take a major hit on their farm because so many of their grat young players already contribute to the MLB roster and D) Trading one of those MLB players like Fowler or Iannetta would hurt their playoff chances because it would be creating a hole on their team.
The Rockies rotation is one of their biggest strengths, the only thing the Rockies should be focusing on right now with the rotation is making sure Francis can come back back to 2006-2007 levels.
Posted by: bballrox4717 | November 11, 2009 at 12:39 PM
So the Rockies are going to release Atkins if they fail to trade him?
How does that work for the team that picks him up? I had always thought that the team that picks him up would pay him the league minimum whereas the Rockies would then have to pick up the remainder of his contract? Is that right, and if it is, why wouldn't the Rockies just keep him?
Posted by: Sen | November 11, 2009 at 02:22 PM
@sen if we NT Atkins he is a FA and will fall under arbitration past a 1 year deal
@dizzle as bball said, we're not a good matchup. You are proposing like 3 of our top 5 prospects (if you count Fowler as a prospect) and a possible top-5 catcher (if he can get his damn babip up) for one year of an awesome pitcher who we have zero chance of resigning, given what a realistic Halladay contract would run.
It's not an issue of having to give up "something" of value, those guys are going to be pretty integral in the Rockies' plans moving forward the next 3 years or so. If Halladay was guaranteed to re-sign reasonably, I'd say maybe, but Halladay + 2 picks doesn't seem worth 2 pitchers within a year or two of the majors along with our starting catcher and starting CF.
I'd make a sarcastic counter offer of like Ubaldo Jimenez for Travis Snider, J.P. Arencibia, Kevin Ahrens, and Ricky Romero, but Ubaldo's under a very favorable contract and won't be a FA anytime soon.
See what I'm getting at?
Posted by: RockiesMagicNumber | November 11, 2009 at 02:59 PM
The thing is if Ubaldo Jiminez had Halladay's pedigree and status, and the Jays were in the Rockies position of being possible contenders with the right moves, your sarcastic trade proposal wouldn't be that out there.
Obviously the ability to re-sign Halladay is a crucial element of it, but that's part of why the hometown team would have a better chance of him re-signing. Whether you guys can afford to re-sign him is a different issue.
Posted by: dizzle | November 11, 2009 at 03:24 PM
No, the rockies so not want roy halladay, that should be common sense. they can't afford him, and the rockies pitching staff is already perfect. Within the coming years if not this year jimenez will be one of the best pitchers in the league so why would we want halladay? We have many other options if any pitchers becomes unhealthy next season
Posted by: tonymr95 | November 11, 2009 at 04:06 PM