From Mark Feinsand of the New York Daily News (surprisingly enough):
"Source: Dodgers shopping Andre Ethier. If they deal him, they could be in the mix for Nick Swisher."Mike Petriello said he also heard the team is shopping Ethier, as did Ken Rosenthal. However, neither mentioned Swisher (yet).
It makes sense to move Ethier -- in some ways -- but it doesn't make a lot of sense to replace him with Swisher, even on a short-term deal.
The logic behind such a deal would seemingly be flexibility and hopefully to improve the farm system. The Dodgers didn't give Yasiel Puig $42 million to be a fourth outfielder.
Some teams that could logically be interested in Ethier's services include Seattle, Texas and Atlanta (maybe). My best guess is there could be a match with Seattle.
Time is short and I have to go to work, so I'll do another post tonight or tomorrow with a lot more depth.
Photo credit: McD22, Flickr
OK, Seattle guy here. What would it take for Seattle to acquire Ethier?
ReplyDeleteNot 100 percent sure. I'd want Nick Franklin and Franklin Gutierrez as a starting point. Would also like to get Kyle Seager, but not sure how interested Seattle would be in moving both Seager and Franklin.
ReplyDeleteDustin Ackley would be outstanding, but I don't see the M's giving up on him just yet.
Did you have anything in mind?
Going to do a post looking at possible destinations tonight or tomorrow. Thanks for stopping by.
Dustin, I replied to you but made it a separate post. 12/18 1:41P >
Delete....gman
Bucco fan here......
ReplyDeleteWhat are the chances the Pirates package Hanrahan, T.Snider, and a few others in a deal for Ethier and maybe Capuano? I know the Dodgers were interested in Hanrahan and we could use a sold right fielder. An outfield of Marte, McCutchen, & Ethier would be nasty!
Sorry, but there's no way I do that deal unless one of those "few others" happens to be Cole, Taillon, Hanson, or Polanco, and if it's one of those first 2, then I don't think you do the deal either. Honestly, the Buccos don't seem to be a match for Ethier. Capuano-for-Hanrahan has already been reported as possible, so your deal would add on Ethier for Snider. Snider is a good player and all, but you got him for Brad Lincoln, and I think Ethier is worth a lot more than Snider or Lincoln. The other matter is money, and I don't know if the Pirates would absorb that much money or if it's worth it for the Dodgers to kick in that much money rather than trading him to a team with more flexibility or just keeping him. Plus, the Dodgers seem to be more interested in "proven" players rather than prospects. The only deal that could work would be an Ethier-for-Neil Walker deal, but that wouldn't make sense to trade a fan favorite in LA for a fan favorite hometown boy in Pitt. Ethier to the Buccos just doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.
DeleteHow you feel about getting Bourn, sliding Kemp to RF, Bourn to CF. Trading Dre for a 3B? im sure you have thought of this already, just wondering what you are thinking. Also if we signed Bourn wouldn't that immediately drop Dre's vaule knowing that we have to get rid of somebody?
ReplyDeleteNot a fan of it. Bourn isn't that good on offense and would cost a draft pick to sign.
DeleteWell we could rebuild your farm system, although Jack Z's official stance is we are not going to trade our prospects unless we get full value for them.
ReplyDeleteI would think that Kyle Seager would never be traded, because as you know there are not a lot of quality 3Bmen out there for a replacement. No way we sell low now on Ackley, we expect him to turn it around. A lot of our fans were hoping for a trade to bring in Alex Gordon, another 1st round #2 pick. Gordon didn't hit above .260 until his 5th year in the majors, so I think we can give Ackley some more time.
I am surprised you mention Guti because with his injury history and moderately high dollar contract most around here feel that no one would want him in a trade, or at least not give us much in return. This may be the year Guti stays healthy and if he does then he would be a very valuable player for us, and his trade value would then be much greater next year.
Mike Carp 1B/OF is a decent left handed bat and would be available.
We do have a lot of relief pitching, but so do you. Our strength is pitching, as long as it's not King Felix take your pick from our 40 man roster, we have several hard throwing relievers. We would be willing to trade 1 of our 'Big 4' pitching prospects plus we have a surplus of prospect infielders, which includes Franklin of course.
I would like to add Chris Capuano and Scott Van Slyke into the deal also, man am I greedy.
I'm not Dustin. But no, you're not being greedy. You can have Van Slyke almost for free. We've been wanting to trade Capuano for Hanrahan, but if you include a reliever as dominating as Hanrahan, your currency is just as good. But unfortunately, you (Seattle) don't match up too well because LA is looking for relievers that have been in the show for a little while. I personally would love Capps or Pryor, but the Dodgers would prefer someone more "proven". Unless, that is, you are willing to give up Wilhelmsen and his 5 more years of team control. Then Cap is all yours.
DeleteUnlike Dustin, I wouldn't want Gutierrez as anything more than a throw-in. As far as prospects go, I don't think a deal is that realistic without Seager because the Dodgers don't seem to be in the market for minor leaguers. But if we're talking hypothetically, Seattle's system is loaded; there is so much to choose from. I assume Taijuan Walker is off the table in any deal? If not, I take him and Wilhelmsen for Ethier, Capuano, and you can even take Dee.
If he's not, how about a deal of Ethier for Franklin, Brandon Maurer, Brad Miller, and Gutierrez with LA kicking in some money ($5mil a year, total of $25mil)? Or take out Maurer and the money? Is this realistic or heavily skewed?
There is much speculation that Z will move one of Pryor or Capps, with Pryor being the first choice of the 2 to go (the Pryority you might say-!) For the right deal 'the bartender' would also be available, Z likes to get a lot for his closers. In my mind Wilhelmsen for Capuano+Van Slyke would be a go, but it's hard to say if Cap is Z's priority. With the trade yesterday, we are going to have to pick up a SP somewhere.
DeleteYou say you don't want Guti and yet you want him thrown in for Ethier, see this is what I meant by we wouldn't get much value for him. It's best for us to see if Guti can remain healthy for a fill year, he is doing very well right now in Venezuela. Seager to me is an absolute NO TRADE, there are just no good 3Bmen that are available to fill in.
If there were 1 minor leaguer that we would not want to part with it would Taijuan!
Hultzen maybe, Paxton and Maurer yes.
We could only trade one of Brad Miller, Nick Franklin since one will be our SS of the future.
SS prospect, Maurer, a #6-20 prospect, 1B/OF Mike Carp would do the deal for me. M's don't need money, but they are cheap...so?
Luetge Ruffin Triunfel Thames Wells and Peguero are also all available off our 40 man. Andrew Carraway is AAA SP who is also interesting.
Thanks for the conversation...gman
I think the Dodgers *are* interested in prospects. Who says they are not? The FO says they are. So Ethier for prospects just before they sign Swisher makes some sense. I'm not saying I'd do it, because there's enough clubhouse turmoil already, for one thing. But Ethier is actually a pretty good player, and maybe Mark McGwire can get him to some success against LHers. That's what I'd do.
ReplyDeleteIt's not that the Dodgers are flat-out not interested in prospects, because no team would say "no" to prospects. But I think if the Dodgers are trading away assets that could bring back a significant return, like possibly Ethier, they would much prefer proven Major Leaguers. This isn't my preference, but it's what I believe the Dodgers want. They've already shown in deals so far that they are trading away prospects for Major Leaguers (like in the Boston deal), not the other way around. Therefore, I think they would trade a quality MLer only for other quality MLers. But who knows, maybe they will trade for someone who fits as a "prospect" (upside, still improving, many cheap years of team control) and who has produced in the Majors like a Kyle Seager?
DeleteI could imagine the Yankees grabbing him, I think Dodgers would be smart to keep him.
ReplyDelete