Jump to content

Trading De Aza


Scrat1

Recommended Posts

I like de Aza and think he'll be a solid outfielder this year, but as everyone knows we're in the midst of a big roster crunch. Most of the discussion has been around Lough vs. Paredes with Lough most likely losing out. But Lough is useful, cheap and under control for a long time and I'd absolutely hate to lose him. Considering de Aza is only under control for 2015, I'd rather ship him out than Lough.

We have Pearce, Jones, Snider, Young and Lough already scrambling for playing time, with Alvarez and Urrutia in Norfolk. De Aza is expendable. DD has some time before Hardy and Flaherty are ready so if I were in his shoes I'd start shopping de Aza to see if we could get some salary relief and/or a low minor league arm or two. Oakland is missing both Zobrist and Crisp, so that might be a good place to start.

Basically, I think Keeping Lough for this season and future seasons is more important than having de Aza for this season alone, especially with all of our outfield depth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 98
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Who would be interested in him at 1/5?

Probably no one, but that doesn't mean much. O's can eat all the salary and try to get a decent prospect back or just eat some of it to free up some cash for the deadline. The move is more about keeping Lough than it is about getting a significant return.

De Aza is not being traded. He will be platooned heavily against RHP and is a very good option to fill that role. Way too early to give up on him. He is cheap and he is our best option to help this team win IMO.

I agree it's unlikely to happen, but I think it's the smartest move available. As I said, I think he's a good player, I'm not at all "giving up on him." I was very much in favor of tendering him a contract, but then we signed Snider and Young and now Paredes is hitting, so Young is going to see more time in the field. The issue is we have a lot of similarly productive players for too few roster spots. Someone is going to have to go. Right now that person is likely Lough. Would you rather have de Aza for just this year or Lough for the next four?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Steve Pearce hits he might take most of the LF ab's. Do you lose Lough to keep De Sza?

Correct on Pearce.I have no idea on Lough but I suspect a lor of NL teams may covet him as a 4th outfielder, I' d just be surprised to see DeAza dealt anytime soon unless he is slumping badly and making more dumb plays like that cs attempt. Obviously Paredes isn't going anywhere now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably no one, but that doesn't mean much. O's can eat all the salary and try to get a decent prospect back or just eat some of it to free up some cash for the deadline. The move is more about keeping Lough than it is about getting a significant return.

I agree it's unlikely to happen, but I think it's the smartest move available. As I said, I think he's a good player, I'm not at all "giving up on him." I was very much in favor of tendering him a contract, but then we signed Snider and Young and now Paredes is hitting, so Young is going to see more time in the field. The issue is we have a lot of similarly productive players for too few roster spots. Someone is going to have to go. Right now that person is likely Lough. Would you rather have de Aza for just this year or Lough for the next four?

I would deal Lough. There will be value there and I don't foresee him as a future starter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but it would extremely shortsighted to lose Lough over de Aza. Next year alone of Lough is worth more than de Aza this year.

Lough is a 4th outfilder. A very good 4th oufielder, but a 4th oufielder. Not that big of a deal. We'll get some return for him but the Lough WAR story is way overblown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would deal Lough. There will be value there and I don't foresee him as a future starter.

But he doesn't have to be a starter to be valuable. I see him as a ~400 PA 4th outfielder, who comes in frequently as a defensive sub and pinch runner, and can play a legitimate center field. You could even make a strong case that the team is better off with Lough than de Aza this season, since we have other players similar to de Aza, like Snider and Pearce, but no one else like Lough. Buck is good with specialized tools. Then when you take into account the future years, it's not, in my opinion, a very difficult decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lough is a 4th outfilder. A very good 4th oufielder, but a 4th oufielder. Not that big of a deal. We'll get some return for him but the Lough WAR story is way overblown.

Is De Aza more then a fourth outfielder? He's got a career OPS+ of 99 and isn't better then OK with the glove.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But he doesn't have to be a starter to be valuable. I see him as a ~400 PA 4th outfielder, who comes in frequently as a defensive sub and pinch runner, and can play a legitimate center field. You could even make a strong case that the team is better off with Lough than de Aza this season, since we have other players similar to de Aza, like Snider and Pearce, but no one else like Lough. Buck is good with specialized tools.

I have stated numerous times he's valuabe...he's just replaceable .... and not that good of a fit for this team right now. De Aza platooning I LF against RHP is a much better option than the ones you have listed imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

he's just replaceable .... and not that good of a fit for this team right now.

This could be said for de Aza as well and probably even more so, since his skillset - okay defense, decent contact with some nice pop - is redundant on this team. Lough can do things no one else on the team can. That's not true for de Aza.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he's a better fit than De Aza IF Pearce hits, which I suspect he will. The service time issue can'at be ignored. Lough has 5 years. De Aza has one. De Aza has to be clearly the better fit by a wide margin to chose him. JMO

That's fine. I would go with De Aza platooning in LF this year. Bench guys are replaceable and Lough's value is way overstated by WAR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This could be said for de Aza as well and probably even more so, since his skillset - okay defense, decent contact with some nice pop - is redundant on this team. Lough can do things no one else on the team can. That's not true for de Aza.

I guess I need to say platoon 100 times to get through. Not sure what else to say. I'll take DeAza's platoon value over Lough's leveraged value. How's that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...