Possible Tejada scenario?

[Fan4Life]

I don't think Santana would be a #5, but to your point, sure, it'd be easy to add someone to the rotation who would improve what we got from Chen, Ortiz, Lopez etc... But you'd be hard pressed to get add someone w/top of the rotation stuff like you'd get from a Santana w/o trading a Tejada.

Again, they probably won't all develop in time to be a legitimate contender in 2007 but I don't think it's outlandish to say that if Bedard, DCab, Loewen, Santana and Penn come anywhere close to reaching their ceilings we'd be looking at one of, if not the best rotations in baseball. Even if they don't I still think we'd be looking at good rotation as early as 2007.

I agree, and I was thinking more of Santana sliding in at #3 or 4 and moving everyone else down.. which would be an improvement at #5 generally.

[erb8472]

I agree, and I was thinking more of Santana sliding in at #3 or 4 and moving everyone else down.. which would be an improvement at #5 generally.

Well then you are ignoring the fact that Santana would have been our 2nd best starter this season.

If we had Santana next year he could easily be the ace of our staff next year, and for years to come.

[utvolzac]

You don't deal Tejada for Aybar and Kotchman. If the prospects included in the deal were the quality of Mathis and Kendrick then you make the deal. Not third level suspects who ain;t done squat.

Aybar & Kotchman aren't even close to third level prospects.

Aybar has been among the top 50 prospects since he was signed. And before the mono hit Kotchman was a top 5 overall prospect in all of baseball.

I'd love for us to get Kotchman, I think with mono out of his system and being full strength, he'd be a steal.

I think everyone would rather keep Tejada and build around him. However, given our history with top level free agents lately, that might not be possible. Worse than taking a gamble on prospects would be wasting the rest of Tejada's contract because we couldn't build around him.

If the FO can't get impact players to come here in the off-season, then they need to move Tejada for as much young talent as possible. Guys who don't have a choice where they play and who are under contract for years to come.

[geschinger]

I agree, and I was thinking more of Santana sliding in at #3 or 4 and moving everyone else down.. which would be an improvement at #5 generally.

Absolutely. Bringing it back to Tejada, if you can acquire a Burrell and Ensberg (or equivalent offense) I think you have to make the move if you get Anaheim to add that 3rd player (prospect) to the mix.

I don't care how good the Yankees or Red Sox are if you build a dominant pitching staff you have a chance to compete. It's impossible (w/o an unlimited budget) to build a dominant pitching staff by acquiring guys who are already proven. Mazzone is the best pitching coach in the business, let's give him the absolute best talent possible and tell him to turn it into that dominant pitching staff. Give him Bedard, Cabrera, Loewen, Penn and Santana to work with and I'll take my chances.

[markdublya]

I think BigBird's point - and I would agree - is that when you decide to trade a player like Miggy, you demand Lackey over Santana, Wood over Aybar, etc...

You're giving up one of the best hitters in the league with a very affordable contract, you AT LEAST get the best they have to offer at a position (best pitching prospect, best IF prospect).

[Fan4Life]

Well then you are ignoring the fact that Santana would have been our 2nd best starter this season.

If we had Santana next year he could easily be the ace of our staff next year, and for years to come.

Ok, but he alone can't get us into the playoffs.. the discussion isn't whether or not Santana is a very good young pitcher, it's whether or not what we get from him is enough to makeup for what we lose from Tejada... I say no, you say yes.

[El Gordo]

Absolutely. Bringing it back to Tejada, if you can acquire a Burrell and Ensberg (or equivalent offense) I think you have to make the move if you get Anaheim to add that 3rd player (prospect) to the mix.

I don't care how good the Yankees or Red Sox are if you build a dominant pitching staff you have a chance to compete. It's impossible (w/o an unlimited budget) to build a dominant pitching staff by acquiring guys who are already proven. Mazzone is the best pitching coach in the business, let's give him the absolute best talent possible and tell him to turn it into that dominant pitching staff. Give him Bedard, Cabrera, Loewen, Penn and Santana to work with and I'll take my chances.

ARod is traded to LAA so I never have to hear about Satana, Aybar, and Kotchman again. :SuN024:

[Fan4Life]

ARod is traded to LAA so I never have to hear about Satana, Aybar, and Kotchman again. :SuN024:

or AROD!!!

[Sports Guy]

or AROD!!!

Or Lee, Soriano, Zito or Mussina.

[El Gordo]

Well then you are ignoring the fact that Santana would have been our 2nd best starter this season.

If we had Santana next year he could easily be the ace of our staff next year, and for years to come.

That he will be better than Bedard next year why does LAA want to trade him? Are all their pitchers better than Bedard as well, and Santana just the least better. He's certainly not the most expensive. Could they know something we don't. Or maybe they just spend too much time watching him pitch and not enough time looking at his peripherals(pay no attention to that 5.95 ERA away, it's an anomaly).

[Fan4Life]

Or Lee, Soriano, Zito or Mussina.

We could field a pretty good team with all the guys we're going to stop talking about...

[geschinger]

That he will be better than Bedard next year why does LAA want to trade him? Are all their pitchers better than Bedard as well, and Santana just the least better. He's certainly not the most expensive. Could they know something we don't. Or maybe they just spend too much time watching him pitch and not enough time looking at his peripherals(pay no attention to that 5.95 ERA away, it's an anomaly).

They'll end up keeping him if nothing is worked out for ARod or Miggy and it'll go down as the greatest non-move they ever made.

[BigSkip]

Absolutely. Bringing it back to Tejada, if you can acquire a Burrell and Ensberg (or equivalent offense) I think you have to make the move if you get Anaheim to add that 3rd player (prospect) to the mix.

I don't care how good the Yankees or Red Sox are if you build a dominant pitching staff you have a chance to compete. It's impossible (w/o an unlimited budget) to build a dominant pitching staff by acquiring guys who are already proven. Mazzone is the best pitching coach in the business, let's give him the absolute best talent possible and tell him to turn it into that dominant pitching staff. Give him Bedard, Cabrera, Loewen, Penn and Santana to work with and I'll take my chances.

Do you really think we can downgrade from Tejada to Ensberg or Burrell and even stand a chance?

If we played in the NL West where nobody hits, sure. But not in the AL, not at all.

[Sports Guy]

Do you really think we can downgrade from Tejada to Ensberg or Burrell and even stand a chance?

.

If you looked at from a DH point of view, ie taking position out of considersation, Burrell and Ensberg are very close or every bit the offensive player Tejada is.

You aren't paying attention to what gesch or I are saying...Improve the defense...Improve the bullpen and the depth...GEt another top of the rotation starter.

Get enough offensive help where we can still score 820-850 runs.

You can do all of this without Tejada.

[geschinger]

Do you really think we can downgrade from Tejada to Ensberg or Burrell and even stand a chance?

If we played in the NL West where nobody hits, sure. But not in the AL, not at all.

Have you compared their numbers offensively? Other than BA they are very similar if not a slight advantage to Burrell. Ensberg is certainly a step down from Tejada but certainly a big upgrade from what we got from 3b and Mora would be big improvement from what we got of LF. I'm curious, how exactly do you conclude that as being a downgrade?