Comments on: Pre-Emptive Trade Reactions

By: Tek Jansen

Tek Jansen — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 19:09:41 +0000

Drayer reports that Yuni is off to KC for two minor league pitchers (heard it on 710 ESPN).

By: Mike Snow

Mike Snow — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 18:51:32 +0000

I have to agree with the concern, though, if it’s anything more than money. That is, I’d take on Jack Wilson or anybody else’s salary to trade Betancourt. But I wouldn’t package players to get somebody to take Betancourt. It’s not easy to separate out, but if for example Halman + Clement gets you a better package than Halman + Clement + Betancourt, then you take the better option.

By: TheMsfan

TheMsfan — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 18:49:28 +0000

Ya……kinda sad that I’m a journalism major and I still let stuff like that happen (laziness). If anyone cares, I was just saying that Sanchez would be a pretty nice number 2 hitter behind Ichiro, and I salivate thinking how affective the hit and run could be with those guys hittin back to back.

By: The Ancient Mariner

The Ancient Mariner — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 18:39:32 +0000

Liam: if it’s a matter of balancing money (i.e., if we’re taking enough back), Yuni’s tradeable.

By: Jeff Nye

Jeff Nye — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 18:26:01 +0000

It’s just so refreshing to not be dreading the trade deadline, for once.

By: Liam

Liam — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 18:25:47 +0000

I thought that Yuni was untradeable as no one would want him. Has that changed?

By: TheMsfan

TheMsfan — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:51:46 +0000

[9 errors]

By: John S.

John S. — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:50:24 +0000

I tend to think the M’s are going after Wilson more than Sanchez. He’s just a better fit a shortstop. I also think they’d be crazy not to try to get Snell thrown into the deal, even if it meant sending the Pirates a reliever like Kelley or Lowe.

By: Tek Jansen

Tek Jansen — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:29:59 +0000

But if you look at an OF of Saunders/Guti/Ichiro next year and for the forseeable future, and then you also have Ackley in that mix, Halmanâ€™s path could be pretty blocked. If his stock is still good now, trading him for pieces that help the team more makes all the sense in the world to me.

I agree, but he is still the toughest with which to part if only because his potential value is the greatest. Still, he can be moved in the right deal. Plus, Langerhans might be around next year. That would add to the OF depth.

By: nickwest1976

nickwest1976 — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:15:01 +0000

I have no problem moving Halman if it nets the M’s middle infield help and/or Snell. The M’s are obviously in serious need of middle infield help and Snell would really allow them to trade Bedard or Washburn for other parts.

But if you look at an OF of Saunders/Guti/Ichiro next year and for the forseeable future, and then you also have Ackley in that mix, Halman’s path could be pretty blocked. If his stock is still good now, trading him for pieces that help the team more makes all the sense in the world to me.