Trading Youk?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Trading Youk?

    In Response to Re: Trading Youk?:
    [QUOTE]There is no way the Angels are trading Trout.  Other than Bryce Harper he is the best prospect around.  I also highly doubt that Tori Hunter is going to get moved - he has the added dimension of being the leader of the Angels - so why would they trade him for a sore-backed, grumpy Youkilis?
    Posted by Schumpeters-Ghost[/QUOTE]

    I do doubt the Angels would move Trout, but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t, or at least shouldn’t consider it. History has shown that the #2 prospect doesn’t always turn into one of the best players. The Patterson/Pujols example I cited was a bit extreme, but clearly what would have looked like a lopsided deal for the Cardinals would have turned into a lopsided deal for the Cubs.

    And looking back, how many of these other deals would have looked bad one way, and then benefited the team getting the lower ranked prospect:

    2000: #2 Pat Burrell for #37 Lance Berkman

    2002: #2 Mark Prior for #38 Miguel Cabrera

    2003: #2 Rocco Baldelli for #54 Zack Greinke

    2004: #2 BJ Upton for #52 Adrian Gonzalez

    2006: #1 Delmon Young for #49 Ryan Braun or #50 Andrew McCutchen or #57 Jered Weaver

    2007: #2 Alex Gordon for #43 Joey Votto

    Hindsight is 20/20, and high profile prospects are rarely dealt for each other. Heck, even young major leaguers are. The Delmon Young/Matt Garza trade was a rare swap of high profile younger players with years of control and anger issues. It’s a tough call to make as a GM, but being the #2 prospect is no guarantee of being even an average Major Leaguer. This position has been held in the past by the following luminaries: Ben McDonald, Andujar Cedeno (RIP), Todd Van Poppel, Brien Taylor, Ruber Rivera, Paul Wilson, along with the names above. Cooperstown beckons!!

    Certainly, there have been some successes as well, such as Chipper Jones, Vladimir Guerrero, Paul Konerko, and Felix Hernandez. But if the Angels were to be able to get a high profile star player who better fit their needs, it is not necessarily a bad idea.

    In reality, the only way they might do it is if Boston sweetened the return, although by how much is anybody’s guess.

    As for Hunter, while the Angels would undoutedly prefer to move Wells, don’t overvalue Torii’s leadership. First of all, the leader of the Angels is Mike Scioscia, end of argument. Second, are you questioning the leadership skills of Youkilis? Or the heart and intensity of Youkilis? Really? If I asked you to quantify why you think Hunter was a more valuable leader, you couldn’t. Neither could I. And third, the Angels have an overcrowded outfield. And while hill points out the WAR advantage over Boston, it is probably worth noting they cannot get the offense (Trumbo) or the defense (Callaspo) on the field at once. WAR can be skewed by small sample sizes, as one or two good plays can give a misleading UZR that has not had the chance to right itself. And Youkilis would really only relegate Callaspo to the bench, since Trumbo is more useful in the outfield, so any offensive benefit he gives to the WAR is not going to be displaced. What would get displaced is the negative contributions from Vernon Wells.

    I do think the Angels would love (or at least, should love) to trot out a Trumbo-Bourjos-Trout outfield everyday, as opposed to the revolving door they have been using all season long. And while Wells has easily made an excellent case for being benched and removing himself from the equation, Hunter has not, and yet he still stands in the way of that outfield.

    The Angels will probably keep Trout.  After all, he is the most publicized and highest ranking prospect since Brandon Wood.   Say, if they could turn back the clock, think the Angels might want to deal 2006 #3 prospect Wood for #76 Jay Bruce?

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: Trading Youk?

    In Response to Re: Trading Youk?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Trading Youk? : I agree completely. Some people like to "hear" themselves talk.... online... lol
    Posted by ddimaria[/QUOTE]

    OUCH !!!! and then there is the Idiots poster, or wannabe poster.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: Trading Youk?

    On Youk, I think as we all probably do is that he must be healthy. If so then I would seek out one of the more established middle relievers or perhaps another closer. Someone who might help us this year but more importantly in 2013.

    I think some team would find use in such a trade. Getting prospects or a key hitter from them for Youk just won't happen.

    Lars might be a good player to bundle with Youk.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: Trading Youk?

    In Response to Re: Trading Youk?:
    [QUOTE]Excellent post, I'd hate to see it get burried by posters who create 5 new threads a day and then pump their own work over and over again.
    Posted by EnchiladaT[/QUOTE]

    I agree. And we are being bombarded by multiple threads by the same handful of posters. You can't even keep the conversations that are already going on. There should be a limit per day for each poster.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: Trading Youk?

    In Response to Re: Trading Youk?:
    [QUOTE]notin always has thoughtful posts. He got my vote for  "Poster of the Year: 2011" . His post got me wondering if LAA would take Youk, Barnes, Ranaudo, and Cecchini for Trout. 
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Agree again. Who creates threads that are so thought provoking like Notin? No offense, Moon. You're second for sure, but at least I know you understand.

    This really makes you wonder if it's possible.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: Trading Youk?

    In Response to Re: Trading Youk?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Trading Youk? : I agree completely. Some people like to "hear" themselves talk.... online... lol
    Posted by ddimaria[/QUOTE]

    If you look at the board on any given day, he's not the only one. It's the same culprits all the time though. Maybe I should threaten to start five threads a day if it doesn't stop. That should take care of the situation.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from jgallag1. Show jgallag1's posts

    Re: Trading Youk?

    Youk will probably wind up getting moved to a team needing a 1B or a 3B. He does bring that versatility. And he'll be traded for a #4 type pitcher to a team who really needs it. There's a few NL teams out there who could use him, and he'd probably feast on NL pitching. He'd be better suited to a smaller park as well.
    As far as trading Middlebrooks is concerned...no f'n way that happens. The Sox would rather stash him in AAA for the season, then let Youk go in the offseason. Middlebrooks won't bring back a prospect like Trout, and the only pro talent he'd bring is someone we'd remember later in the same light as Larry Anderson.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Trading Youk?

    ...I do think the Angels would love (or at least, should love) to trot out a Trumbo-Bourjos-Trout outfield everyday, as opposed to the revolving door they have been using all season long.... 
    -notin

    ...and for this reason, from the Angels' standpoint, a Hunter for Youk foundation makes more sense. That is, if the Sox think they have a chance this year, otherwise, Youk should be dealt for a prospect(s)- along with a few others.


     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: Trading Youk?

    In Response to Re: Trading Youk?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Trading Youk? : I agree. And we are being bombarded by multiple threads by the same handful of posters. You can't even keep the conversations that are already going on. There should be a limit per day for each poster.
    Posted by kimsaysthis[/QUOTE]


    All true, one of them continues to just cut and past the same photos thread after thread.... normally Bill and Idiots make up 80% of the posts in their threads, because few people care to post on them. Yet these two every morning launch a combined 6 threads per day.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Trading Youk?

    bump
     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: Trading Youk?

    Does anyone need bellhorn_ here? Who was that other poster who used to include dashes next to his name everytime he was banned?
     

Share