Do you see any NL minor-leaguers who could be traded at the deadline? I'm looking for guys to pick up who might be dealt for starters/good Tuesday-Thursday players as the trade deadline approaches.I'm assuming that anonymous plays with the old "compensation" rule, where you get back the player who is traded in for your farm player.
I'll go back to my posts on this subject from earlier in the month about the N.L. as well as the A.L. I don't think much has changed since then, but I'll do a quick update of what I said then.
National League: The Phillies dealt Josh Outman and Adrian Cardenas in the Joe Blanton deal, and it doesn't sound like they'll move Carlos Carrasco. Jason Donald was mentioned in conjunction with the Royals and Ron Mahay. The Diamondbacks were linked to Mark Teixeira, but didn't have much to deal, didn't want to swap Conor Jackson, and were reluctant to discuss Max Scherzer or Jarrod Parker. Andy LaRoche could still be moved for the Dodgers. The Marlins are looking for a catcher, so someone from their system could go. The Mets won't move Fernando Martinez or Jon Niese.
American League: It's hard to see a big deal happening, so it's hard to see a big name moving. Jason Bay to the Rays is the biggest possibility that might happen, but the Rays would probably have to give up one of their bigger names, and they might not want to make that kind of commitment. The Yankees won't give up any kind of prospect for Jarrod Washburn. The White Sox are thinking about adding a starter, and Jack Egbert keeps getting mentioned as a guy who would get flipped. The Manny rumors seem silly to me, and even if they do move him, they'd want a major league OF back, not prospects.
Guessing who will get moved is just that: a guessing game. It's a fun exercise, but I don't have any better idea of what will happen than you do. Sorry I couldn't be of more tangible help.
3 comments:
Speaking of, what do you think of the compensation rule in AL- and NL-only leagues? I'm starting to sour on the idea.
I've seen some leagues continue to keep stats for players who switch leagues, and I think it makes some sense since interleague play started several years ago and the idea of NL hitters hitting only NL pitchers is a thing of the past.
Do you have any recommended alterations to the rule?
My league gives a topper right to the owner losing a player.
Personally, I'd prefer if we kept the stats of the traded player.
Failing to get that, I'd like to see my league return a pro-rated portion of a player's salary (based on the number of remaining weeks) as free agent cash. Then again, some guys are slightly under-valued because of the perception that they'll get dealt (Brian Roberts in March/April).
I do not want to speak for Mike, but I have a preference for the returned FAAB rule.
I've played under a variety of rules. In my opinion, the "compensation" rule where the owner with the highest salaried player sent to the other league in a trade receives first rights on any player coming into the league in that same trade is inherently unfair. I cannot begin to mention how many top quality free agents coming into the league went to people who had some second tier minor league player.
And while inter-league play has in fact diminished the NLvNL or ALvAL only matchups, I believe that trade risk is an essential element of valuation at the auction or when determining in-season trading; if you get to keep the stats, it really takes the pressure off of your analysis, no?
FAAB return, however, gives considerable flexibility and puts people on a level playing field (I'm talking about FAAB awards in the amount of the player salary lost to the other league, btw). If you believe you have a player that can be traded, you can spend your FAAB more aggressively than usual to find a replacement and/or play keep away from your opponents. When you lose a player, you can instantly use the money to try and buy his replacement coming into the league.
Faab Return just seems to make the most sense to me.
Post a Comment