Re: Dodgers open to trading Andre Eithier
posted at 10/30/2012 5:32 PM EDT
In response to MadMc44's comment:
In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:
In response to Alibiike's comment:
In response to moonslav59's comment:
.under .650 career vs LHPs.
That's worse than Crawford.
He's a glorified platoon player. Pass.
Certainly not worth 14.5M, but a glorified platoon player? Hardly. Look how many years Papi had trouble with LHP. Eithier also is GG OFer, something Drew didn't have, and the Sox paid him nearly as much.
Eithier is certainly better than what we have now. We could move Ross to LF, where he should be playing anyway.
Who would give up for Andre's services?
He's a quality player--overpriced--If Salty doesn't go in a proposed trade started by TitleTown in another thread for Brett Anderson--perhaps he goes for Ethier or a package of prospects or even up for Ellsbury.
We may owe the Dodgers a huge favor for the last trade, but taking on Ethier's contract while also giving up arguably our best all around player is a bit much.
I realize a lot of people want Ellsbury traded, but the Sox aren't going to give him away. They'll gladly let him play out his contract next season and take the pick. A lot can change in a year, so it's not "completely" out of the question that they try to bring him back after 2013, especially if Jackie Bradley somehow regresses or is moved. I have a feeling that with Granderson's contract up after next season, the Yankees are going to be very interested in Ellsbury. He has the power to hit 40 home runs in that stadium and he's arguably a better all around player than Granderson when healthy.