If the A's are sellers...
what would it take to acquire Mark Ellis? The Cardinals definitely need to upgrade one of the middle infield spots. Since the Cubs just sent the A's the replacement for Ellis, the Cards would not need to send a MI back (none of ours have value).
After thinking about this today, I recall the A's also trying to move Huston Street earlier in the year. He is a young (25), proven closer who could solidify the closer role for the next few years (by giving him an extension). Alan Embree could also help the left side of the pen as well (option for '09 at 3 million) even though his splits say differently for this year.
The Package: Obviously, Reyes needs to be traded. I can see Beane taking a chance on Reyes as part of the package. With Street being part of the deal, I believe that makes Chris Perez expendable in the deal also (big plus for Billy since he is under club control for a while). One area of need for Oakland is at 3B, where the Cardinals could send Freese or Craig, whichever Billy prefers (most likely Craig due to power and OBP). Since Billy likes the high OBP guys, then Jon Jay or Daryl Jones (huge upside with only 1 good season of pro-ball) could close out the deal.
So, would a package of Reyes, Chris Perez, Allen Craig, and Daryl Jones/Jon Jay (the more I think about this, the Cards may be getting hosed?) for Mark Ellis, Huston Street and Alan Embree work? What are your thoughts?
14 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
We don't need Street.....
Especially for Perez. Perez is going to be good, really good, and he is young and cost controlled.
Wouldn’t mind adding Ellis, especially if we could do so without giving up Anderson, Jones, Wallace, or Rasmus (as far as hitting spects).
Do you really know...
if Perez is going to be really good? Street has proven himself and does not have the question mark about control. Sure, he is two years older, but at 25 and 23 that really isn’t that big of a deal. I would be all for trying to get Street and Embree and Ellis without giving up Perez, but I don’t think it will happen. I would take the experience over the cost control because we all know Izzy hasn’t been playing for peanuts.
Street has an injury history too
If we ended up trading Perez for him and he ends up on the shelf, where would we be? We could play “what if” games all day long, but I’m not sure that’s a risk I would take.
Ellis, on the other hand, would be a great addition. I wonder if Oakland would have any interest in Brian Barton. We can trade him even though he’s a Rule V guy, right? That could give us a decent 2B, ease the OF logjam and allow us to dump Kennedy or Izturis.
"Cross a lawyer with the Godfather, make you an offer you can't understand" - Don Henley
by Futility Infielder on Jul 9, 2008 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions
You can trade
a Rule V pickup, however, the same rules apply to his new team. He must remain on the Big League Roster or be sent to back to his original team.
I really don’t see the Cardinals dumping Izturis this season. TLR is a big fan of his leather.
I know
there’s always hope….
"Cross a lawyer with the Godfather, make you an offer you can't understand" - Don Henley
by Futility Infielder on Jul 9, 2008 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions
We can't give up Wallace
he is protected until a year after the day he is signed, IIRC
* sarcasm might be involved in this comment
There are sellers and there are fire sellers
The A’s have a different organizational philosophy and model. Their success hinges on young, talented, low cost, and under control players. The A’s are never not sellers because they can’t really afford to be—they don’t have the financial resources to get bogged down in multiple, big money, long-term contracts. The Harden trade is Beane dealing a player at his peak value, flipping someone who hasn’t pitched over 100 innings in a season since 2005 for a #3/#4 type of starter and possible starting outfielder in Murton and secondbaseman in Patterson. He received a maximum return for Harden, given Harden’s injury history, IMO and I think that Beane would rather have gotten all of this than chanced merely having a DL’ed Harden.
That said, one has to wonder if acquiring Patterson opens the door on an Ellis trade.
I think you've explained it pretty well, bgh
I would not be surprised to see the A’s continue to contend for the AL Wild Card, though the odds are probably against them.
perhaps it will
but probably not right now. they’ll wait a little bit
strikeouts from left-center
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Jul 9, 2008 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions
i just GLANCED at Ellis' stats...
for about 10 seconds, but whats this guy got that Kennedy doesnt really?
www.GriffinandtheGargoyles.com
www.myspace.com/GriffinandtheGargoyles
Dont take me seriously :-D
He's a career
.253 first half hitter and .285 in the second half. He’s been really good in August through Sept/October. That’s about it though.
Ellis
His numbers don’t look great, but he’s got a little more power than Kennedy, and you have to factor in the fact that he plays in a huge ballpark so that will suppress his numbers a bit as well. He’s also a bit younger than Kennedy and a FA at the end of the year.
Kennedy has been on a tear in the month of July though, so maybe this problem will take care of itself.
"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller
Something of note..
Ellis is easily a Golden Glove 2nd Base. He broke the record for fielding percentage 2 years ago and did not win the GG. I don’t know how that is possible, but apparently it is. He is currently leading the league in fielding percentage again this year. He has ridiculous range and he always works the count. Also, for a 2B, he has 9 homers before the All-star break. I don’t know about you, but unless you are Chase Utley or Dan Uggla, that’s pretty nice.
BTW, this is coming from an A’s fan, if it was not obvious.
AND….I would absolutely HATE to lose Ellis. He’s a pro’s pro.
ask Tommy Herr how that is possible
defense means nothing in regards to GG. I firmly believe that.
* sarcasm might be involved in this comment


















