Dunno if this has came up before, but with all the ideas of trading this guy or that guy. I am just curious what we can get for Berkman. Aside from Kent & Beltran (who both might not be w/ us next season) is the only other every day player that has trade value. We probably could get better prospects than we what have now in which we can reload instead of rebuild and maybe this would increase our chances of keeping Beltran.
You would trade Berkman for Torii Hunter??? Hunter with the lifetime .266 average and .316 OBP for Berkman with the lifetime .301 average and .416 OBP? Hunter averages 116 Ks and 38 BBs per year. Berkman's OPS of .975 dwarfs Hunter's OPS of .772 and far and away negates Hunter's superior defensive skills. Berkman averages 10 more HRs and 30 more RsBI per year. If Berkman maintains his .460 OBP this year he will be only the 6th player since 1962 to sccomplish that feat.
The best defensive CF in the game imo, and the twins offense has been awful, put him in a productive lineup like the Astros should be and his offensive #'s would improve
You really dont Tori Hunter if you have Beltran. I rather have a catcher, 3rd baseman and/or new 1st baseman.
Productive offense? What season are you talking about? Astros having some big innings in Philly - 7 run inning today!
ehh close enough... he's definately not head and shoulders better than Jones, but I'd rather have Hunter on my team long term Not really sure I'd give up Berkman in the first place... just speck-a-laten
Don't forget that Berkman is one of the guys that Beltran wants to have around in order for him to sign with Houston.
With radical offseason changes seemingly inevitable, I wanted to know what you thought about this plan: Let Kent leave as a FA, trade Miller before he demands a large extension, and let Clemens and Biggio retire (hopefully). Plug in Burke at 2nd and leadoff,promote Buckholtz into the rotation, give Lane Left Field and begin an all-out youth movement. Here's where it gets tricky: Go to Berkman and Beltran about a contract extension. But make Beltran priority #1. If he wants anything more than Vlad Guerrero got last year, let him walk and use the money to resign Berkman. But if he can be had for $80M over 6 years, and Berkman is going to make at least 80% of that anyway, I would sign Beltran and trade Berkman. My reasoning is that Lance, while a great all-around offensive player, is only a slightly (if at all) better hitter than Beltran. However, Beltran is a fantastic base-runner (which Lance is not) and a fabulous defensive player at a premier defensive position (which Lance is also not). As much as I love Lance, if it came down to starting over with him or Carlos as the centerpiece of the franchise, I'd rather keep Beltran. To complete the transformation, call up Tavares to platoon in right, plug in a decent 4th/5th starter picked up from Berkman/Miller, and use the remaining money to fix the middle relief. The remaining team would look like this: 2B - Burke/Whiteman SS - Everett/Vizcaino CF - Beltran 1B - Bagwell RF - Tavares/Palmeiro 3B - Ensberg/Lamb LF - Lane/Jimerson C - Ausmus/Chavez Oswalt Petitte Hernandez 4th starter picked up in trade Buckholtz Lidge I think this team could become really good the year after next. We could completely transition from a slow, veteran team to a fast, young team almost overnight by 2006. Can you just imagine the speed and range of a starting outfield consisting of Jimerson in Left, Beltran in Center, and Tavares in Right? How about a 2006 lineup like this: Burke - Great contanct hitter, speed at top of lineup (new Biggio) Jimerson - Carl Crawford-type burner could be dynamite in two-hole Beltran - All-around superstar just entering his prime Bagwell/Lane - Old vet ready to slide over for (by this time) excellent power hitter Tavares - Great speed/power combo Whiteman/Ensberg - One should become a reliable starter Gimenez - Young C should be ready Everett - Veteran defensive whiz at short We could backload Beltran's deal so that he became the highest paid player after Bagwell leaves. Also, with the payroll flexibility gained by unloading Kent/Berkman/Miller/Clemens, we can fix the bullpen while also locking up Oswalt and Lidge with contract extensions. I would feel much better about the future of this franchise if, after this offseason, we have Oswalt leading the rotation, Lidge leading the bullpen, and Beltran (even if it costs Berkman) leading the lineup.
Burke is completely unproven. You simply don't take a guy like that and make him your everyday leadoff guy. Bucholtz has been pretty bad at AAA this year. Why would I want to give him a ML rotation spot? Berkman and Miller are two of the 4 guys that Beltran wants to be in an Astros uniform before he will consider re-signing with the club. So trading Berkman makes zero sense.
Refman, What do you propose instead? Kent is overpaid, too old, has no defensive ability, and costs $9M to keep. We've already put him through waivers, so he is gone, one way or another. Burke is a former 1st-round pick (#10 overall) who has been groomed for the 2nd-base job since he was converted from a college SS into a Pro 2B. If his time is not now, when is it? As for leadoff, unless Biggio returns, what better options do we have? Everett? Bagwell, Berkman, Ensberg, Beltran and Lane are all run-producers, not table setters. As for Buckholtz, I know he has been underwhelming, but why send him back to AAA? He is the supposed centerpiece of the Wagner trade, and he's already spent a whole year in AAA. It's time to see what he can do, much like Burke. In my proposal, I'm basically writing off 2005 to get a jumpstart on 2006. So that means Burke, Tavares, Buckholtz, Gimenez, Jimerson, Qualls, Whiteman and others get all of next year to prove they belong. I'm not convinced any of them are ready to produce in the bigs for a winner, but this year's team has proven the 'Stros, as presently configured, are not winners. Why not lose next year with a young, exciting team instead of an old, tired team? Cleveland dismantled its team of veterans (Colon, Manny, Thome) to start from scratch, and although last year's audition was painful to watch, this year they are in the Division and Wild-Card hunts b/c the kids they brought up last year (Victor Martinez, Travis Hafner, Lee, Davis, Drew, Crisp) are blossoming in the middle of a pennant race. Miller, IMO, is a timebomb waiting to implode. He has some of the worst mechanics I've ever seen, and I see this year's arm problems as a harbinger of many future breakdowns. I'd rather move him now, while he is still seen as unrealized potential, than later when he is overpaid and broken-down. And about Berkman...the trade makes perfect sense if you see it from my point of view. I basically see one of two things happening: A. Beltran costs too much, Berkman wants an extension, so we let Beltran walk and sign Lance to an extension beyond next year (when he can walk for free, a la Beltran this year). or B. We sign Beltran to a fair deal, then move Berkman in the last year of his deal. This is done because we can't afford Lance and Carlos, so we keep the better of the two (Beltran) and move the one who still has value to us (Berkman). I prefer option B. Sign Beltran to a backloaded deal as 'the man', and use Berkman, along with Miller, to bring in a catcher and a reliable starter. Then let the kids sort themselves out next year, all the while looking toward 2006.
I didn't do any research, but Hunter seems to be getting better, and Jones going the other direction maybe that is just media coverage..?
I think it's media perception - Andruw Jones has been this mega-talent for a few years and people expected him to become the next Willie Mays, and while he can play defense like Mays - his effort is erratic and his hitting has stabilized at a free swinging power guy. So there's an air of dissapointment about him, despite the fact that he's probably the best CF in the game. Torii Hunter, meanwhile, everyone knew he could play defense - they just didn't know if he could hit at the major league level with any consistency, because of his big swing. That he has, and that his emergence coincided with the emergence of the small-payroll Twins as playoff contenders has given him a more positive light in the media than Jones. Also, the fact that he always seems to be smiling, and he gives consistent effort - the media loves that. At least, that's my theory. Anyways, I don't believe we could get more back than Berkman gives us now in a trade - so I'm opposed to any deal involving Berk.
Agreed. I never stated otherwise. Except that we put a lot of guys through waivers to determine the interest, not because we have an interest in trading them. I am all for cutting ties with Kent. You see what a young guy can do by bringing him off the bench and giving him spot starts when appropriate. You don't do it by turning over the reigns full time. Biggio likely will return, and could play 2B if needed. Buckholtz may develop into a good major league pitcher, but he isn't ready for the bigs. That's pretty much the industry wide consesus. I really don't want to push this guy too soon and mess with his head. A mid-market team simply cannot afford to do that. I don't necessarily disagree with this. My problem is that we do not have anybody who is major league ready to step in. That wouldn't involve trading Berkman, which was what I was responding to. Ummm...Bagwell will likely retire really soon, and Berkman is the only guy we have who could play 1B full time. Not only that, Beltran wants Berkman here as a condition of him signing.
Refman, I think the fundamental difference between the two of us is in how we view the 2005 season: While you seem to be (correct me if I'm wrong) looking at us as a playoff contender next year, I have already resigned myself to the fact that we cannot possibly be any better than this year without drastic changes. Since we all know a mid-market team can't just go out and buy expensive veteran replacements, they must come from within. Therefore, I am in favor of an all-out transition from the veteran core of our current team to younger, cheaper replacements. Basically, I'd rather have a 67-95 young team than a 75-87 old team next year. I view the experience gained for our young players as more valuable than the extra 8-10 wins we might pull out over the course of a season by playing mostly veterans. Since the Biggio/Bagwell era is rapidly closing That means Burke (for Kent), Hernandez (Miller), Buckholtz (Clemens/Redding), Whiteman (Ensberg), Lane (Biggio) and others get on the job training in the big leagues next year. That way in 2006, when Jimerson, Tavares, and Gimenez are ready to come up, you already know where you stand because you've had a whole year to evalute the young guys ahead of them in the system. This way, if Lane gets 450 AB's and proves a huge dissapointment, you can give Tavares the RF job in 2006, instead of wasting that year on Lane just to learn he can't hack it. Same thing with Burke...let him get 500 ABs in 2005 to see what he can do. If Biggio insists on returning, moving him back to 2nd may not be much (if any) improvement over Kent defensively...Burke is definitely much better than both at this point. I see Burke starting regardless; but Biggio would still hit leadoff even with Burke in the lineup, just from LF.
A team with Oswalt, Berkman, Lidge and Beltran should be able to contend with some adjustments. I say stay the course.
