Deals will get done if...

[Mackus]

From BP 2007-

From a BP article about this past AFL

From Kevin Goldsteins Future Shock Article

I have read a lot of favorable stuff on Hu.

I like Hu a lot and have never said otherwise. That said, he isn't anywhere near Kershaw in terms of value. Hu's upside is Omar Vizquel, which I said in my previous post and also just happened to be the only comparison made to him in the clips you posted. Thats very valuable, but its not as valuable as even Kershaw's mid-range potential, which would be a #2/3 type starter, and obviously no where near the solid #1 to maybe even HOF level talent player Kershaw could be if he maxes out as well.

There is a ton to like about Hu, but there is absolutely no way you can prefer him to Kershaw.

[66-70-83-??]

You're certainly welcome to your opinion of who will be better, but I think unless you've personally scouted each of these guys extensively, that its pretty outrageous to go with a much lower rated and equally unproven player as the guy you want.

LaRoche isn't that much of a stretch, he's closer to the majors and had great minor league numbers and does have a great upside. But Hu doesn't make any sense. His upside is a good SS, not a star, so even if all the stars align and he becomes every bit as good as he can be, he's Omar Vizquel at best. Thats a valuable player, but I think it'd be crazy to turn down someone of Kershaw's ability and potential to go for a guy like Hu.

But, the "ratings" are dynamic- ever changing.

Guys come out of nowhere to appear on a list of prospects, others drop like a rock, others never show up.

The "rankings" are only a snapshot in time.

And what are the ratings ? Someones opininon or a group consensus.

Is it based on tools ? Stats ? Combination ?

You could have three different lists depending upon whether it is tools based, stats based, or combination based rankings.

Take BA's 2002 list:

The top 10:

Josh Beckett

Mark Prior

Hank Blalock

Sean Burroughs

Carlos Pena

Juan Cruz

Joe Mauer

Wilson Betemit

Drew Hensen

Mark Teixeira

The bottom ten (90-100)

Erik Bedard

Eric Byrnes

Ramon Vazquez

Tony Blanco

Joe Crede

Omar Infante

Matt Belisle

Victor Martinez

Dustin McGowan

Ryan Dittfurth

Jack Cust

Not a huge difference. There are 80 players in between. Each year has similar results.

[Big Mac]

I like Hu a lot and have never said otherwise. That said, he isn't anywhere near Kershaw in terms of value. Hu's upside is Omar Vizquel, which I said in my previous post and also just happened to be the only comparison made to him in the clips you posted. Thats very valuable, but its not as valuable as even Kershaw's mid-range potential, which would be a #2/3 type starter, and obviously no where near the solid #1 to maybe even HOF level talent player Kershaw could be if he maxes out as well.

There is a ton to like about Hu, but there is absolutely no way you can prefer him to Kershaw.

Hu's offensive upside is much higher than Omar Vizquel, IMO.

[odogs101]

Not sure if this has been mentioned, but if we get Hu from the Dodgers, I would have Patterson be a part of the Cubs deal. Then see if you can package him w/ Tejada to the Angels in order to have Kendrick in the return.

C Hernandez

1B Morre/Millar

2B Kendrick

SS Hu

3B LaRoche

LF Ethier

CF Stop Gap/Colvin at AAA

RF Markakis

SP

Guthrie

Loewen

Cabrera

Gallagher or Marshall

Olson

Bedard and mid level Prospect for Kershaw, Ethier, Laroche, Hu

Tejada and Patterson for Kendrick and Adenhardt or O'Sullivan (Saunders or Santana if Adenhardt or O'Sullivan is too much)

Roberts for Gallagher or Marshall, Patterson, Colvin

Thoughts?

[square634]

Not sure if this has been mentioned, but if we get Hu from the Dodgers, I would have Patterson be a part of the Cubs deal. Then see if you can package him w/ Tejada to the Angels in order to have Kendrick in the return.

C Hernandez

1B Morre/Millar

2B Kendrick

SS Hu

3B LaRoche

LF Ethier

CF Stop Gap/Colvin at AAA

RF Markakis

SP

Guthrie

Loewen

Cabrera

Gallagher or Marshall

Olson

Bedard and mid level Prospect for Kershaw, Ethier, Laroche, Hu

Tejada and Patterson for Kendrick and Adenhardt or O'Sullivan (Saunders or Santana if Adenhardt or O'Sullivan is too much)

Roberts for Gallagher or Marshall, Patterson, Colvin

Thoughts?

Yeah, no way we get Kendrick.

[66-70-83-??]

I don't know, ask 66. If he wanted to caution optimism on Kershaw, he should just have posted tnstaapp instead of calling out Mackus for being ridiculous.

Chill out.

No need to be so sensitive.

I wasn't "calling out" anyone. I was responding to one statement.

I am sorry, as it obviously offended you. Next time i will choose my words better and not refer to anything as "ridiculous".

[dedwretched]

You can't ask for too much. If you were to deal Bedard 2-1 this off season, I'd ask for Kemp, Mcdonald, and I'd be a little greedy and ask for a 10-15 prospect. Sounds fair, though I wish both Kemp and Kershaw could come back.

[Jimbo81]

You can't ask for too much. If you were to deal Bedard 2-1 this off season, I'd ask for Kemp, Mcdonald, and I'd be a little greedy and ask for a 10-15 prospect. Sounds fair, though I wish both Kemp and Kershaw could come back.

Kemp, LaRoche, Hu, McDonald

Two high prospects and two mid+ sounds fair to me.

If we have to through something in so be it.

[Sports Guy]

Bigbird has said it will be 4 for 1...If that is the case, my guess is they take Kemp, LaRoche, Meloan and Elbert.

I would prefer to replace Meloan and Elbert with McDonald and Hu.

[ShoelesJoe]

Bigbird has said it will be 4 for 1...If that is the case, my guess is they take Kemp, LaRoche, Meloan and Elbert.

I would prefer to replace Meloan and Elbert with McDonald and Hu.

I don't think LA will do a 4-1 deal that includes both Kemp and Laroche. I'd love to be wrong, but I'd bet the only way we'd get both those guys is if it's a bigger deal where we're at least sending them Tejada along with Bedard.

[rolliefingers]

Bigbird has said it will be 4 for 1...If that is the case, my guess is they take Kemp, LaRoche, Meloan and Elbert.

I would prefer to replace Meloan and Elbert with McDonald and Hu.

I agree, Kemp, LaRoche, McDonald, Hu works for me.

[Moose Milligan]

I don't think LA will do a 4-1 deal that includes both Kemp and Laroche. I'd love to be wrong, but I'd bet the only way we'd get both those guys is if it's a bigger deal where we're at least sending them Tejada along with Bedard.

Don't remember who said it or what the source was, but it was that the Dodgers were down on LaRoche.

If they're so down on him, why isn't Bedard looking at fancy new homes in LA?

[bird watcher]

What is the story behind Laroche's injuries (back problems)? The O's may not want him if they know something that we don't.

[ShoelesJoe]

Don't remember who said it or what the source was, but it was that the Dodgers were down on LaRoche.

If they're so down on him, why isn't Bedard looking at fancy new homes in LA?

I don't know where that report comes from, whether it was just a vibe people were getting from the Dodger org at the end of the season, or wishful thinking from others who thought it would make it easier to trade for Laroche during the off season. But looking at statements from Ned Colletti and the various pundits and fans on their message boards it looks to me like LA is planning on starting '08 with Laroche at third base. And who else do they have at that position? Nomar and his .371 SLG%? Don't think so.

So, in order to let us have Laroche the Dodgers are going to have to get another 3rd baseman from somewhere. I'd recommend adding Tejada and either Payton/Bradford/Walker to the Bedard trade and asking for Hu and McDonald along with Kemp and Laroche. LA isn't left w/o a 3rd baseman, and a 4-3 deal will be an easier sell than a 4-1 deal. Remember, it matters not what we believe the relative value of our players amounts to -- all that matters is what the Dodgers believe the relative value of our players amounts to. The Orioles need to get this deal done, whether it's 4-1 or 4-3 is of little long-term consequence.

[Boy Howdy]

Don't remember who said it or what the source was, but it was that the Dodgers were down on LaRoche.

The most believable thing I read about this was that the Dodgers weren't confident that making La Roche their everyday 3B would solve the lack of power in their lineup. With his age and inexperience, they couldn't afford to gamble on him.

Now that they've signed Andruw Jones to beef up the batting order though, they're able to give La Roche the job unless he falls flat on his face.

Not good news for Orioles fans, so I hope it's off-base analysis.