The Diamondbacks front office has repeatedly drawn flak for unusual trades and signings under GM Dave Stewart’s leadership. Club executives are unconcerned by the outside chatter, writes Joel Sherman of the New York Post. The most often critiqued moves include the trades for Shelby Miller (full post), Jean Segura (post), and the salary dump of Bronson Arroyo (post). Many industry observers believe Arizona received terrible value on their young talent in these swaps. Executive Tony La Russa views the deals an instance of zigging while the rest of the industry zags. La Russa may be correct to view prospects as over-appreciated these days but part of a successful “zig” involves taking advantage of market inefficiencies. Arizona has seemingly ignored the current market for prospects.
- Of course, there’s more to it than just prospects. Since Arizona has to somehow beat the big payroll Dodgers, they have to pick their windows to contend, writes Nick Piecoro of the Arizona Republic. The team has a window over the next few years while Paul Goldschmidt and A.J. Pollock are exceptionally inexpensive and in their primes. The club believes they have enough middle infield depth, explaining their willingness to part with Dansby Swanson and Isan Diaz for major league upgrades. They also believe pitching prospect Touki Toussaint is four to five years from major league ready – outside of their current window.
- DBacks executives compare Goldschmidt to former Cardinals star Albert Pujols, writes Scott Bordow of the Arizona Republic. Goldschmidt is coming off a vintage Pujolsian season with 33 home runs, 21 stolen bases, and a .321/.435/.570 slash. He also earned a Gold Glove award. La Russa, who managed Pujols, is among those to make the comparison.
- Star outfielder Pollock remains questionable for Opening Day, writes Chris Gabel of MLB.com. Pollock has been held out of game action since March 8 due to right elbow soreness. The club may look to play him only in minor league contests for the remainder of Spring Training so they can backdate a potential stint on the disabled list.
I’m sure Goldschmidt would cost more than that.
Dream on bigpapi4ever he’s Goldy4everDback
AZ isn’t rebuilding, have you ignored everything that was just posted? I know Stewart has made bad moves, but he has categorically said he’s keeping Goldy &; Pollock no matter what happens and he’s building around them.
You want Goldy? Think Moncada, Betts, Bogaerts & Shaw to start. Exactly. Not. Happening….
“Potential”, “potential”, “upside” being the key words of your proposal that sank it.
Goldschmidt IS a superstar. Go research and find one single instance of a superstar (perennial MVP) on a team friendly contract with multiple years remaining who gets traded.
Hint: there are VERY few examples, and the ones that exist entail elite-level prospects along with proven MLB young talent.
i mean, you’re talking about Stewart, who doesnt seem to have a clue, so who knows,lol
You would love for the Red Sox to make that deal who are you kidding. But even the D’backs would not be so dumb as to make that trade.
What are you talking about… as great as Goldschmidt is, I’d rather have Betts and Bogaerts alone than him, especially considering when each of them hit FA. Also, Arizona isn’t immune to a rebuild if they underperform this season much like what the Padres could be heading for after trying to contend last year. In that scenario, Goldy could potentially be shopped, given that he’s a FA in 2019. Would he get a ton in a trade? Absolutely. But a top 5 prospect in baseball, a top 5 ML SS, a top 20 overall ML position player, and a solid power bat in Shaw? Absolutely not.
You use the word potential like you know what it means. EVERYONE is a potential perennial all star. Heck, I’m a potential perennial all star. Sure, I’m 29 and haven’t played since high school, but there is potential. Foolish statement, but it conveys the point.
Brett Wallace was a potential super star. As was Gordon Beckham, Colby Rasmus, or Jason heyward. Heyward is a fine player, but never has hit the point most thought he would.
If you can give up potential for a young, proven guy with multiple years of control, you do it if you are in a spot to win now.
That said, that ignorant trade you threw out is a complete joke.
That is good that u are reconsidering that trade. Arizona would say hello and next u would hear a click off that proposal. You are right that they all could be great but they all could turn out to average or worse major leaguers. Add betts or bogaerts and another prospect to your offer then maybe it will be taken seriously.
Any team who wanted Goldy would need to give up 3 of the top 5 prospects in their farm – and 2 of them would need to be to be the second coming of Mike Trout.
I’m not sure that drunk LaRussa understands the “zig zag” analogy, you can’t say you are zigging by making bad moves vs. everyone else zagging by making smart ones!
AZ simply has not gotten value for their prospects. The package they gave up for Miller could have gotten them Chris Sale.
I could not agree more Just Another Fan!!!!!
I agree with your point by and large. DBacks may be onto something that the market is overvaluing prospects, and the criticism should be that they’re not getting *as much value as they could* in return for theirs.
That said, we can’t say for certain that Stewart didn’t attempt to get a Sale type, and Shelby was simply the best he could find…
Yeah, I hated the Shelby Miller trade, but I find it hard to believe that Stewart pulled it off if he could’ve gotten Sale for that package. Did they overpay? Absolutely, but suggesting that “they could’ve gotten so and so for that package” probably isn’t true. The market for pitching was out of control, and their decision to drastically overpay for a mediocre player is the most extreme example of that
Anyone who looks at trades in terms of “market inefficiencies” is almost certainly missing pretty much everything to do with the actual game of baseball. The D-backs wisely understand that they have an opportunity to win something over the next 2-3 seasons that won’t come around again soon no matter how “efficient” they try to be. Making winning happen is always going to call for putting some extra chips on the table. Their fans should be grateful that ownership is trying to win instead of chasing efficiency.
Exactly BlueSky…. Finally a post with common sense
+1
For the record, this Dodger fan hates what is going on in Arizona. We know the D-backs can’t keep it up for long and may very well crash and burn after 2018. By then another team in the NLW will be going for the brass ring in the same way, but at least the Dodgers will continue to take home the prize for cost effectiveness and profitability.
if you can get what you want for less than you’re willing to trade… you get it at the discount. you don’t overpay just because you want to prove a point that what you’re selling isn’t worth what somebody else thinks it is.
going ‘all in’ to win now is fine…. selling low on your future just because you’re desperate in the present is never good business. If the rest of the market thinks Prospects are insanely valuable and you don’t, it’s okay to let the other set the value when you’re the seller.
I will never agree with what Stewart parted with is smart. However, I work in the auto industry, and I have seen people willing to buy a vehicle for $5,000.00 more than the next guy because that is exactly what he wanted. Market value is what it is. If the Zag that LaRussa speaks of is overpaying to get what he wants… so be it… It will always be a lost prospect which =gold in baseball trades I am happy for the fans of Arizona who have a dim witted/win now type of GM. Chicago had the same thing in Jim Hendry. It always lights a fire under the fans and promotes great attendance. Fortunately for the D’Backs, they have 2 of the top 50 players in the game and paid dearly for Grienke & Miller to go next to Corbin which will fix a lot of issues! Good luck in this strategy, and I am in no way clowning it. It is just going to eventually hurt, I don’t care how you think it helps today, the pain of losing prospects will always hurt in the long run. Good luck AZ!
my point is more that the guy who pays an extra 5 grand for the car he wants might be getting the car he wants but he’s still not getting a good deal… he’s getting fleeced and he knows it.
So it’s not exactly a question of ‘zigging’ and ‘zagging’ because the D-backs aren’t thinking outside the box… they’re ignoring the market because TLR doesn’t like the market and getting poor value for their trade assets because of it.
This is not how market pricing works. The guy who paid more for his car than someone else would have paid for a car hasn’t gotten fleeced, he paid what the car was worth to HIM to own to meet HIS preferences and needs, and based on HIS means, not somebody else’s preferences or needs or means. By definition! The baseball teams behave in exactly the same way. If a team feels they are a player away from fielding a winning club, their willingness to pay to acquire that asset is going to be greater than a club that doesn’t have that need or the means. The idea that some sort of objective market price exists for these assets represents a fundamental misunderstanding of markets and how they function.
I totally agree Petrie000! He is getting fleeced! I could not agree more… the value they give up to get the things they want is amazingly ridiculous! I mean, even the trades that Steward didn’t make made very little sense.
How’s this….. The Cubs traded Welington Castillo to the Mariners after it was widely publicized that AZ was about to acquire him. Stewart then makes a statement to the media that he is not going after a catcher and started the season like that. The Cubs acquired a C level minor lg reliever for him. Eventually the D’Backs sacrificed Trumbo and Nuno in a 6 player trade when they could have acquired Castillo for a minor lg prospect just prior to the season. Totally crazy way to do business!
fine, but anyone who supports their team being a sucker is betting on a fool’s game. Teams need to be frugal and extract value in trades, especially trades like the Shelby Miller deal. In the short term you can say “but their window is 2-3 years” well, it surely is NOW that they traded young players away for less control years NOW!
Good teams tend to keep and develop young players and only trade them away when the cost/benefit ratio of extending them stops making sense.
you’re the one that has it backwards, not me. value in a vacuum is what most people would pay for something… paying more than that because you think it’s worth more means you overpaid. If you see something listed at one price, but are willing to pay more… well, you’re not getting good value, pure and simple… because you could have had it for less, or something just as good as if you weren’t so dead set on having one particular item.
that applies to baseball as well. Shelby Miller isn’t bad, but he’s nothing special. They could have gotten him or a pitcher like him for considerably less if they’d used ‘market value’ considerations for what Swanson was worth instead of their own. Same applies to Segura… for a prospect like Isan Diaz they probably could have gotten somebody who was actually an upgrade for them at SS… instead La Russa just saw a guy a few years away and didn’t even bother considering that his value might increase the closer he got to the majors.
and let’s not even get into the stupidity of giving away Touki just for salary relief… talk about squandering a long-term asset….
paying more than you have to to get what you want is fine… but anybody who tries to call is good business doesn’t understand the fundamental point of business in the first place. Trying to talk somebody’s price UP in negotiation is the complete opposite of what smart people do.
instead La Russa’s still acting like he just understand baseball better than the rest of us because he doesn’t buy into all this newfangled fascination with prospects….
FWIW, as a D-Back fan, I can get behind what you’re saying, in terms of free agency. I understand that the end of the contact is likely to be terrible, but I’m happy that money won’t sit in Ken Kendrick’s pocket. At the same time, I think the Miller trade was unnecessary, since I didn’t see Miller as much of a necessity, and it opened up a hole at the top of the lineup (which had to be filled via trade with a questionable player) and in left field. I don’t view it quite in terms of “efficiency”, but one still needs to be cognizant of the ripple effects of the moves you make (not saying that TLR and Stewart weren’t, by the way, but personally I think they’re a bit overly optimistic in Segura and Tomas)
You want to argue efficiency, but how about expecting your management team to make wise baseball decisions? I think the Diamondbacks are a worse team today with Miller and Tomas than Inciarte and Blair. That doesn’t even take into account that Stewart added the top player from the most recent draft to make his team worse this year and more expensive. Extra money that could have been used on another player to help his team improve further this year. As a Dodger fan I can understand why you would be a fan of the move, but most others see a terrible trade by the D-Backs.
No, I just got through saying that as a Dodger fan I hate what Arizona is doing. I have a strong feeling we will be looking at their tail lights all season long. The wisdom of the roster moves they made will play out with the season, but the main point I am making does not change either way. Players who might contribute several years from now do not have any impact on the more immediate term on which the team is now so clearly focused, the two or three years when the core of this roster will be together.
after all that they did to “improve” the end result appears to be a similar team as they rostered last season , in terms of total value anyway.
2015 D-backs- 79-83
2016 D-backs projected to go 80-82
sure projections aren’t set in stone, but I don’t see them having the sort of “unquantifiable ” defense and bullpen to make up enough games to be a division winner.
Projections are carved in solid jello. The D-backs scored plenty of runs last season (top in the NL I believe) and plus defense. What they lacked was a rotation, which now they have.
they just badly overpaid to get it and now have no farm system.
you can say the end justifies the means… but the D-backs now don’t have the payroll or the prospects to patch any holes that may show up in the coming seasons, so they’re definitely working without a proverbial safety net… all because they refuse to be ‘new school’ in their thinking.
nobody’s arguing the D-backs didn’t get better, just that they didn’t get there in a very intelligent or efficient way.
they just lost defense by forcing Tomas as a starter and lost hitting as well. They pretty much gave up the same number of wins that they gained.
Good luck offering that for Goldy. The phone would be hung up in record time.
If things go south for the Red Sox I wonder if they become sellers? I’d love to get my hands on…nobody on Boston’s team!
I wonder if the Tigers could get Betts for Holaday? None of Boston’s catchers are better. One can’t hit, one can’t catch and the third is overall mediocre.
lol I’d make that trade
Can’t imagine the dbacks would attempt a tear down until 2017 trade deadline the earliest. They’re paying Greinke too much for too long to tear down this early, by then again, this is Dave Stewart we’re talking about.
You literally might be the dumbest person on the face of the earth. Moncada, Bogarts, and Espinoza. That just gets things started.
Bogarts, Moncada, Anderson Espinoza and Andrew Benintendi. That gets talks started.
Pujolsian: That is an awesome term! Let me see…. The opposite of Pujolsian…….. could be….Maybe……..(Ryan) Howardian? (Pedro) Alverazian? (Marcus) Seminian? (Chris) Carterian)
Let’s try some of these in a sentence:
After turning in 4 consecutive Pujolsian seasons, Anthony Rizzo was rewarded with a record setting 5 year/ $250 million dollar contract by Theo Epstien, however, that contract has led to 2 consecutive Howardian seasons that saw Rizzo’s production falter to just 13 homeruns in 1490 PA’s while hitting a very Carterian .223, with a very Semienian 45 errors since signing his contract.
I Love it! Thanks Brad!
Just because you have gold does not mean you are going to get someones last bottle of water, people make up all these trade ideas for people that are not even remotely available like Sale and Gray. He bought the best water he could, the Indians were not moving any of their starters and dead set on that.. I think a lot of fans have trouble understanding real life isn’t a video game. The Dbacks invested heavily into Greinke they are not going to waste prime years of his they are going for it now.
Mostly, it’s jealousy.
What exactly are people jealous of? It’s ridiculous how much that word is thrown around…if someone has a dissenting opinion, it’s because they’re “jealous.”
Keep words Not remotely available. That’s all that needs to be said.
I’m guessing Grienke had his prime before Arizona acquired him.
He just had what could be argued as his best season ever if you think he is out of his prime you don’t watch baseball.
The Red Sox would need to give up their whole team for Goldschmidt.
Love Dave Stewart. Another anti-PC guy (they’re popping up all over America), fighting the war against Groupthink.
When one sees what one wants, they don’t “shop around”. And as for the “value” stuff – some value statistics, some value winning. All this reminds me of the speech Paul Konerko gave at his day the Sox threw for him when they retired his number and gave him a statue. Konerko thanked one of his first coaches in the Dodgers organization that went over to talk with him and asked if he would like to continue to play for his statistics, of if he would like to play to help his team win. Konerko was thrown a bit, but agreed to the latter. The coach worked with him and put him on the right road. Konerko became a winning player, and a team leader. Funny how the Sox play on the field fell apart without him on the field and in the locker room in 2015. There’s probably some selected statistics that can explain that. I’ll check with Dave Cameron. He knows everything and has the selected statistics to prove it.
As for the DBacks – they’ll be competitive for more then 2-3 years. As for anyone can do that if they just spend money – sure, look at the Steinbrenner’s Yankees from the early 1980’s till the mid 1990’s. And people still don’t believe the Royals.
Everyone values winning. But sacrificing the future for one-year gains, when it’s not clear you’ve even done enough to get your team over the top for one year, is not smart.
The point of the criticism is that, for what they gave up, they could have gotten a significantly better pitcher than Shelby Miller. Chris Sale, maybe, or Jose Fernandez. So yeah, value matters, regardless of whether you want to live in the Stone Age.
Nobody says current baseball statistics are perfect. We’re just saying that some attempt at objective quantification of player value (which, you know, correlates to wins) is better than just going off gut instinct and throwing prospects and money around without due consideration. Which is what Stewart has done. He doesn’t have some master plan; read the interviews he’s given. He’s not smart.
If and when the Diamondbacks make the playoffs every year for the next five years, then you can talk about how Stewart’s a smart GM who knows what he’s doing and doesn’t make bonehead moves. Until then, stop embarrassing yourself. Proudly flaunting your ignorance doesn’t make you look good. You might as well talk about how you “don’t need no fancy book learnin'” and you’d sound equally bright.
Earth to Dan: the heart of this team is under contract for the next three seasons or beyond, so if anyone is talking about “one year gains” it’s only you. After three years, it’s anybody’s guess, but for a mid-market team being seriously competitive for a few years at a stretch is pretty much the best plan they can make. Well, assuming the fans are anywhere in the mix. Never want to assume that anymore, so many “fans” now making arguments buried in business plans instead of the game.
appeal to tradition logical fallacy.(combined with an appeal to ignorance)
value is value, not one single person on here has demonstrated that the Shelby Miller trade gave the D-backs enough value to turn them from a 79-83 team into a contender. NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON.
& you know why that is? it doesn’t. it kept them about the same.. you give up 3 WAR to gain 3 WAR you haven’t improved your team. now if it was a one for one deal of Inciarte for Miller you could argue that need won the day over straight up value and I would agree with that. BUT, when you throw in Swanson and Blair……..well, you have mortgaged some of your future for no improvement in the present, and that doesn’t make much sense.
That’s why THEY have the jobs and you don’t. All guys look at NUMBERS only and think you know better than people that see players on a day to day basis. Let me KNOW when the analytical ONLY teams start winning World Series repeatedly
you mean analytical teams like the Red Sox, Giants and Cardinals? All have won multiple titles in the last decade and all are known for for highly valuing minor league talent and devoting a lot of resources to their minor leagues
Or are you only counting recent winners like the Royals… who built on a solid foundation of those over-valued prospects?
Dave Stewart went from a pitcher to an agent to a GM… if he wasn’t an old buddy of La Russa’s, he wouldn’t be a GM, so let’s not pretend like his opinions on these things are somehow more ‘expert’ then ours.
Actually l, he was an asst GM before becoming an agent. Btw…. I’m sure he’s forgotten more than any of US Amateurs have ever learned. GIANTS aren’t an analytically based team, so don’t inflate the numbers.
the Giants are most definitely an analytical team, they’re just not as flashy about it as others. They were at the forefront of the ‘youth’ movement in baseball and built a 3-title dynasty mostly based on the strength of drafting and development, not big name free agents and flashy trades. Sabean was one of the first to crunch the numbers and realize just how valuable prospects really were.
and i’ll believe Dave Stewart’s forgotten anything once he actually shows he ever knew it to begin with.
While I agree that you shouldn’t necessarily mortgage the future for short-term gain, you should be careful about throwing around phrases such as, “Proudly flaunting your ignorance” and then assuming that there actually were better pitchers they could have gotten for that same, or similar, trade package.
For example, you mention the possibility of acquiring Jose Fernandez; yet, this website ran a rumor that the Dodgers would have had to give up Urias, Pederson, Seager, AND another pair of players to get him (all 5 players, not just 1 or 2 of those 3 specific names).
Then, Sale, who is on a team that has plans to compete and has an absurdly team-friendly contract, might have been even more expensive. That’s not to say that there weren’t better pitchers that the Dbacks could have gotten for the same, or similar, package; but, assuming this to be fact is definitely not an accurate assumption.
Dan…. If you think or anyone else think they could’ve gotten Sale or Fernandez for what they gave up for Miller you guys are CRAZY. It would’ve taken at least 3-4 MLB impact guys to even get the conversation started for those guy. They are number 1 starters
they probably could have gotten very close to Hernandez with that package… another top prospect or a couple more ‘b-listers’ and the Marlins might have jumped.
especially if they’d have still had, say, a former 1st round big arm pitcher to include in the deal… but alas, they threw that trade chip away last season….
which is really the problem a lot of us have with the dbacks moves… they’re not bad short term moves, but 3 seasons from now, if they haven’t won it all, that team will be an absolute train wreck.
a good front office mixes long term and short term concerns… the Dbacks don’t seem to care about their longterm future at all
Will they not be able to draft ANY players these next few years?? That’s what the draft is for, to restock the system. If they don’t win in 2-3yrs it won’t matter. You think they care about what their replacements have to work with?
oh, they’ll draft ’em… then, if the FO doesn’t change, give them to the Braves for peanuts… again…
unless of course those draft picks flame out entirely, which is possible. since it takes a long time to develop good talent. Which is kinda’ why minor leaguers tend to go up in value the longer the survive the attrition process… and why you really should hold on to the good ones as long as possible even if they won’t help you immediately…
and no, i don’t think La Russa or Stewart care about three years down the line, which is why i wouldn’t want either of them calling the shots for any team i root for… nobody wants to be last year’s Phillies, except for TLR and Stewart, apparently
For someone as good as the first basemen in the game. Your definitely giving up a package like Betts,Bogaerts,Moncada plus 1 more prospect.
If the Red Soxs wanted a MVP caliber first baseman the Reds still have Votto. He would cost a lot less than Goldy because of his contact. He’s a wasted, diminishing value to the rebuilding Reds.
The Red Sox don’t need Goldy. They already have the next Goldy in Sam Travis
twitter.com/JonHeyman/status/713911991316967424
I wonder if we can generally bury the term “inefficiency”….teams now have their own set of systems and there’s general knowledge around the game. It’s just not as easy to game the system in such a broad sense…and when it was done…such as Scott Hatteberg in Oakland..there’s not enough emphasis given to that outstanding rotation that was built through scouting or that left side of the infield. In this day even the Red Sox and Yankees study inefficiency. When money means less to teams than it did before with the increased revenue…a veteran might actually be undervalued in winning. Yes, the dollars to the win might not be efficient…but what does that mean to teams making absurd amounts of revenue. What’s the bottom line difference between 700,000 and 7 million to teams awash in cash. If the majority of teams swerve toward the 700,000 players…there truly is a swath of value there among the veterans.
We just don’t live in a day an age now that teams don’t comprehend the value of obp.
Teams are all dealing from the same statistical deck, so how does any one of them leverage any so-called inefficiencies? It’s like trying to outguess the stock market. You can’t unless you have information nobody else does, and good luck with that. Winning is never going to be efficient. Trying to tout efficiency in baseball is like saying you could win the Indy 500 with a Prius, if only the race goes on long enough. Too bad it doesn’t. We know a team spending $25m in payroll can win 50 games at least at maybe a half-million per win. Now try to win 100 games without spending at least four times that much. Those next 50 wins are so hugely inefficient it’s a wonder that anybody ever goes for them.
people outguess the stock market every day and make a huge profit doing so.
The Cubs gambled that hitting would become harder to buy than pitching and drafted accordingly, even though everybody ‘knew’ you rebuilt by drafting pitching first and foremost. Now pitching is easy to buy and power worth it’s weight in baseball gold.
the Royals found an inefficiency by collecting a lot of speed and OBP guys and won by manufacturing runs instead of paying the big dollars for the power hitters in a market where they’re badly overpaid.
there’s always holes to exploit if you look hard enough.
efficiency is maximizing the value of what you have. it has always existed in baseball and always will. it’s not about dollars spent, efficiency and winning usually go hand in hand because the teams that use their resources the best usually have the most talent because of it.
the difference between an 80 win team and a 100 win team is usually not who spends more, but who spends better.
No, statistically, even the most astute investors can’t consistently beat stock market averages. Nobel Prizes have been awarded for demonstrating that very thing, not that people don’t continue to try prove it wrong (without success). It’s all about information and how it is priced into markets. You can’t beat what the market knows collectively on any consistent basis without access exclusive information, which basically, nobody has, either in the stock market or baseball. Hence my point that the concept of exploiting market inefficiencies is an illusion — in both.
My example was between 50 games and 100, but thanks for changing to it to suit your argument and not mine.
lol, you are not very good at debate son. Nor do you seem to understand baseball very much. It’s all appeals to authority, special pleading and straw men galore. I thought dodger fans liked modern sabermetrics??? apparently only the smart ones…..
Anybody else getting mad pop ups on this site?
I would expect that any Red Sox deal for Goldy would start with Mookie Betts and still have to include 2 out of 3 of Moncada, Devers and Benitendi, plus a mid level guy or two (and the D-backs probably throw in a relief arm or so.
It would probably look like this:
Red Sox receive- Goldschmidt , Tyler Clippard and C- Oscar Hernandez
D-Backs receive: Mookie Betts, Yoan Moncada, Andrew Benintendi, Sam Travis,Michael Kopech and Jonathon Aro
I see no way the D-backs move Goldy and his contract for less than that, and that may be selling him short
Stewart gets a lot of guff for the Miller trade and its unwarranted.
Miller is a 25 year old sp with play off experience and numbers similar to Chris archer. Arizona only gave up: Blair – great minor league era but doesn’t seem to be able to get the strike outs needed to be a TOR arm. He is still a gamble.
Danby Swanson – first overall pick and cute name – dual threat. This draft was one of the weakest in years, plus he never played in a wooden bat league (wooden bats have a far smaller sweet spot than aluminum). He could be a very nice player eventually but he has all of the first over all hype.
Inciarte – I know he had an out of no where year. But he isn’t the second comming of ellsbury, he is barely comparable to Alex rios. Plus, there isn’t a hugely significant drop off to tomas who Arizona paid a ton to acquire.
Stewart should make that deal any day of the week. He only gave up one mlbstarter (which he has a replacement already on the roster) and two prospects. That’s a no brainer – not an over pay.