Cards get Jeff Weaver

Post by **heyzeus** » July 6 06, 8:12 am

MDCardsFan wrote:Honestly, does anybody feel comfortable with the idea of "trading one of our pitchers now that we have Weaver?"

I mean, really, our pitchers outside of Carp have little trade value right now and they all are performing horribly, but I wouldn't count on Weaver being better than any of them. I take it this guy can't be sent to the minors, so we could actually be hamstrung by this deal if he continues to get bombed.

Totally correct. What could we get for marquis/suppan/ponson right now? Consider that the Angels had to offer cash along with Weaver and all they got was a low-level prospect. If we're going to unload one of our struggling starters, what could we realistically expect to get in return?

JL21 · Post by **JL21** » July 6 06, 8:14 am

Wow- I missed 15 page thread! AND didn't know about the Weaver deal until this morning.

I don't know why it'll matter, but... here's my two cents.

It's a good move, albeit a risky one. Something- ANYTHING- had to be done. Watching the starting rotation these days is like watching the trusty, loyal dog you've had for years slowly deteriorate.

I don't think Weaver's going to suddenly become a monster or anything. But I think a 4.00-4.50 ERA is well within his reach. His peripherals are all comparable to his career numbers, with only his DER and BABIP being out of whack.

Popeye_Card · Post by **Popeye_Card** » July 6 06, 8:15 am

I'm interested in Green. I'm interested to know where his power disappeared to too, but it's good to know that he at least can still hit HR's.

I'm not sure his trade value is as high as you say though. He still makes more than his production suggests. LA traded him to AZ for peanuts. His production hasn't gone up much since then. To ask for more than peanuts now for a 33 year old would be a coup for the D'backs.

I'm not interested in sending them anyone that negatively affects our future (like AW or AR). If they want Marquis and a fringe prospect for him (for payroll relief in 2007), I say go for it.

Leroy · Post by **Leroy** » July 6 06, 8:15 am

heyzeus wrote:If we're going to unload one of our struggling starters, what could we realistically expect to get in return?

Nothing. I always said at you know what at you know where, when the 'Marquis sucks...trade him' stuff came up...don't you think that if he is bad other teams might know this?

vinsanity · Post by **vinsanity** » July 6 06, 8:16 am

Seems like a lot of cash and players (AW). He's pretty good, but I doubt he'll clear 25 HR again (still better than we got).

If we are going to give up Wainright or Reyes I want Carl Crawford.

Fat Strat · Post by **Fat Strat** » July 6 06, 8:16 am

That last paragraph was primarily for the benefit of OK. I enjoy impressing him with my ability to work this theme into every post. But ya gotta admit -- Weaver's early career workload, promising start, and change in performance could all be unrelated . . . or . . .

That's just three times in 15 pages. You're losing your edge. 8)

vinsanity · Post by **vinsanity** » July 6 06, 8:20 am

heyzeus wrote:Totally correct. What could we get for marquis/suppan/ponson right now? Consider that the Angels had to offer cash along with Weaver and all they got was a low-level prospect. If we're going to unload one of our struggling starters, what could we realistically expect to get in return?

I think Marquis has more upside than Weaver though. He's got good stuff, just no head. A big spender in the AL might look to add him and turn him around. More likely to move in the NL though, good hitting pitcher. I can't really see any one but the Mets having an interest in a player like Marquis. And I dont' know why STL would deal to them

He's not worthless, just ahrd to find the right buyer. Suppan and Ponson are worthless. Mulder as a lefty as a similar upside as Marquis.

Leroy · Post by **Leroy** » July 6 06, 8:22 am

vinsanity wrote:
heyzeus wrote:Totally correct. What could we get for marquis/suppan/ponson right now? Consider that the Angels had to offer cash along with Weaver and all they got was a low-level prospect. If we're going to unload one of our struggling starters, what could we realistically expect to get in return?
I think Marquis has more upside than Weaver though. He's got good stuff, just no head. A big spender in the AL might look to add him and turn him around. More likely to move in the NL though, good hitting pitcher. I can't really see any one but the Mets having an interest in a player like Marquis. And I dont' know why STL would deal to them

He's not worthless, just ahrd to find the right buyer. Suppan and Ponson are worthless. Mulder as a lefty as a similar upside as Marquis.

Plus Ponson has a no-trade clause. :slugasaurus:

vinsanity · Post by **vinsanity** » July 6 06, 8:22 am

But not a no-release Clause

Fat Strat · Post by **Fat Strat** » July 6 06, 8:23 am

I'm interested in Green. I'm interested to know where his power disappeared to too, but it's good to know that he at least can still hit HR's.

I'm not sure his trade value is as high as you say though. He still makes more than his production suggests. LA traded him to AZ for peanuts. His production hasn't gone up much since then. To ask for more than peanuts now for a 33 year old would be a coup for the D'backs.

I'm not interested in sending them anyone that negatively affects our future (like AW or AR). If they want Marquis and a fringe prospect for him (for payroll relief in 2007), I say go for it.

The power is still there, it's just not what it was when he was 27-29. Over the last 4 years his slugging has been very consistent at around .460-.480. His OBP has been remarkably consistent, and just fine for the 2 hole in our lineup.

He's money for 30+ doubles in a season.

Basically, he's a poor man's Larry Walker or Brian Giles.

I hope that you're right about AW or Reyes. But I still don't see them being interested in Marquis. I wouldn't hesitate to give them a collection of prospects including Lambert.