Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?
posted at 12/1/2013 9:43 AM EST
In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
In response to moonslav59's comment:
Exactly. And trading players while their value is high or highest is usually the best way to make that happen.
The value Lackey brings to our team is worth the same of maybe even more to other GMs who do not have as deep a SP pool to choose from. That is the basis for a good trade, when a player we have is worth more to another team than to ourselves.
There will be several desperate for pitching help GMs at the end of this winter.
And what about the adage 'you can never have enough pitching'? Wouldn't that in itself preclude trading Lackey?
That's why it is an adage. 5 SPs is never enough since you will lose games to injuries. The best possible solution is to estimate how many games you will lose to injury, and figure the most cost-effective way of addressing it.
Think of the exercise like you were picking a #4 OF. If you're lucky, you'll average 145-150 GS from each OF, meaning you'll need say 50 starts from your #4 OF. You want the most cost-effective #4, not the best #4. If you want the best #4, that might be Granderson for #14M.
For the #6, Dempster is not a bad solution. But for $500k, wouldn't Workman provide a similar value? For #7/8, don't we need to take a look at DLR and Webster, and maybe others? Two years ago, in the bridge was being built. In that case, I'd probably pay more for a guy like Dempster since we had no other AAA choices. Now? Not so very much.
So, if you can come to the conclusion that Workman, Webster, DLR, Renaudo, etc., are fine choices for 6/7/8/9, the Dempster, especially at his salary, becomes too much pitching.
Now, if you have reached the conclusion that we can rid of a vet SP, I'm guessing almost everyone would be comfortable getting rid of Dempster. However, and this relates a bit to what Hugh said, you have to consider the value.
All these guys have a value. Dempster is not getting us anything. Maybe I have stars in my eyes because of what TB and the NYMs did to KC and TO, but if that type of deal popped up for us, I think we absolutely have to weight 6 years of good prospect(s) v one or two years of Lester and Lackey.