As much as I like Cain and Lincecum, this guy is absolutely right. You are entering a difficult rebuilding period with this team, and the hard cold reality is that most likely, one of these guys is going to be seriously hurt before your lineup is ready to contend again, and maybe both of them will be. Its just the way it is with young pitchers.

If we were talking about building around hitters like Miguel Cabrera and Hanley Ramirez, and you had the resources to keep them into free agency years, then you keep them. But you can't build from the ground up around two pitchers like that.

Maybe they should work one of these guys into a package to get Cabrera.

It still amazes me that a starter with 200 IP could have a 7-16 record with a 122 ERA+, as Matt Cain did this season. Take out August and he was 3-15 for the rest of the season.

File Cain's 2007 season away in the mental file for the next time you get into a discussion about using pitcher W-L records as a measure of pitcher quality.

Naw, I think they need to hold onto both. One hitter isn't going to change their fortunes anyway. Cain and Lincecum are the guys they should build around. They're going to stink next year no matter what, so there's no need to go flailing about trying to change it. Trade the vets for anything you can get and then hold your nose for the next couple of seasons.

Considering his defensive limitations and the fact that Cabrera is likely to earn somewhere in excess of $20 million over his final two years of arbitration eligibility, I can't imagine they would actually need to build a package around either Cain or Lincecum to acquire him. In a straight up trade for either, I'd say the Marlins came out well ahead.

Wow, what could you possibly trade for Cain? Like 2-3 A prospects? That seems like a tough deal to get done, the way GMs seem to be valuing top prospects these days.

Naw, I think they need to hold onto both. One hitter isn't going to change their fortunes anyway. Cain and Lincecum are the guys they should build around. They're going to stink next year no matter what, so there's no need to go flailing about trying to change it. Trade the vets for anything you can get and then hold your nose for the next couple of seasons.

In principle I agree. That said, they shouldn't be completely inflexible, if someone comes along with an extremely generous offer for Cain and/or Lincecum, the Giants should listen; young pitchers are, as has been pointed out, the very least reliable commodity in existence.

But to go into the trading market with the abiding goal of trading one or the other would be a dumb plan.

#1

So why not spend those resources on good FA hitters? The likes of Dave Roberts and Rich Aurilia don't count.

Giants should sacrifice an arm

Must...not...make...joke...about...Dave Dravecky...

Examiner: Dickey: Giants should sacrifice an arm

Dave Dravecky's been there, done that.

I just want to say that, with three minutes' reflection, Craig K's cruel remark in #8 was disgusting. Shame on him!

Sacrificing arms can be an addictive habit, just look at the Aztecs. One day arms the next they were building great pyramids and performing open heart surgery at the top of them.

It still amazes me that a starter with 200 IP could have a 7-16 record with a 122 ERA+, as Matt Cain did this season. Take out August and he was 3-15 for the rest of the season.

File Cain's 2007 season away in the mental file for the next time you get into a discussion about using pitcher W-L records as a measure of pitcher quality.

Hi there.

Cain and Lincecum are the guys they should build around.

My point is that's a very bad gamble. I'm not sure what the chances are of Matt and Tim turning into Prior and Wood, but its a realistic possibility. Even if they stay healthy and improve a bit, it will take 3-4 years to build a lineup here, and by then Cain is heading towards free agency and Tim will be deep into arbitration.

I don't worry about Cabrera's defensive limitations because the first thing I do if I can get him for Cain is move him to first base, then work on locking him up long term. There's a much lesser chance of injuries ruining Cabrera, he's very likely to give you 10 years or so being close to the best hitter in the league.

Hm... If people think one of these two pitchers by themselves is enough for, or even overpaying, for Cabrera, then the Angels should see if the Marlins want Jered Weaver.

I don't worry about Cabrera's defensive limitations because the first thing I do if I can get him for Cain is move him to first base

If the Marlins offerred Cabrera for Cain, the Giants should take it. The issue is that I think such an offer is highly unlikely to be made.

And if the first thing you do is move Cabrera to first base, then the first thing you've done is reduce his value. You're far better off accepting the defensive issues at 3B and leaving room for another good bat at 1B.

Young starting pitchers are gold in this market. If Lowry is even a #3 guy, I'd think they could come up with a decent position player or near-top prospect for him, though no All-Star. Call Bill Bavasi; he's hurting for SP's and has given away the likes of Asdrubal Cabrera and others for piddly-squat.

You are entering a difficult rebuilding period with this team, and the hard cold reality is that most likely, one of these guys is going to be seriously hurt before your lineup is ready to contend again, and maybe both of them will be. Its just the way it is with young pitchers.

It is precisely because one of them might get hurt, and you don't know which one, that I don't think you can trade one of them. What if you guess wrong? You're left with squat to build your rotation of the future around. Having both of them gives you at least a decent chance that your ace for the next 5-7 years is already on hand. It's no guarantee, but it's a good head start. Trading one away leaves you just with a wing and a prayer.

Of course, you always listen. If someone offers you the earth, the moon and the stars, then maybe you alter that stance. But that's what it would take.

My point is that's a very bad gamble. I'm not sure what the chances are of Matt and Tim turning into Prior and Wood, but its a realistic possibility. Even if they stay healthy and improve a bit, it will take 3-4 years to build a lineup here, and by then Cain is heading towards free agency and Tim will be deep into arbitration.

They don't only have Cain and Lincecum to trade. Lowry might be only a #3 or #4 on a good staff, but look at what a #3 is getting as an FA these days. Dangle him in front of team that needs pitching but doesn't want to pay ~$40-$50M for Carlos Silva or worse Kyle Lohse.

Jonathan Sanchez is considered to be an intriguing prospect with great stuff. There was a rumour a while back that Omar Minaya offered Carlos Gomez for him, a trade which Sabean turned down.

Young starting pitchers are gold in this market. If Lowry is even a #3 guy, I'd think they could come up with a decent position player or near-top prospect for him, though no All-Star.

I would bet that you could get Edgar Renteria for Noah Lowry.

It is precisely because one of them might get hurt, and you don't know which one, that I don't think you can trade one of them. What if you guess wrong? You're left with squat to build your rotation of the future around.

Therefore the solution is to trade both of them, so the one who doesn't get hurt is cancelled out by the one who does get hurt. This seemed to work for the A's.

And if the first thing you do is move Cabrera to first base, then the first thing you've done is reduce his value. You're far better off accepting the defensive issues at 3B and leaving room for another good bat at 1B.

The average 1B is 10 runs better than 3B, offensively. Cabrera, at least by my numbers, is -15 runs at third base, so if he can play average defense at an easier position, you've increased his value, and if he's 5 runs below average there you break even.

MGL had him as the worst third baseman in the league, at -28 runs. Sure, that's a one year sample and should be regressed to some extent, but he's been poor at third base ever since he moved back there and I'm sure his projection will be bad. If he really is a -28 defender at third, then you increase his value with a move to first unless he's MoVaughn bad at the new position.

Cabrera's personal value might be higher at 1B, but his value to the team might be lower if he were playing 1B. I don't think it's cut and dried that a move to 1B makes Florida better unless they have a better replacement at 3B than Cabrera is replacing at 1B.

Solution: Acquire Ryan Braun and Miguel Cabrera, and have them alternate third and first base every other game.

Cabrera's personal value might be higher at 1B, but his value to the team might be lower if he were playing 1B. I don't think it's cut and dried that a move to 1B makes Florida better unless they have a better replacement at 3B than Cabrera is replacing at 1B.

Yeah, Jacobs is at least a decent hitter, and the alternative at third is...Aaron F Boone.

If the Giants got him they have nobody else worthy of starting at 1st or 3rd, so its not a big issue.

If Cabrera moved to first its reasonable to think he could be average, or just slightly below. I looked at Tangotiger's scouting reports, and his position neutral rating would be worse than these (8) guys:

Teixiera, Pujols, Lee, LaRoche, Berkman, Loney, Helton, Gonzalez

about the same as Scott Hatteberg, and better than these (6):

Howard, Delgado, Jacobs, Young, Fielder, Jackson

Yeah, Jacobs is at least a decent hitter, and the alternative at third is...Aaron F Boone.

No way, man. Dan Uggla is the alternative at third.

This might be a fun study:

1. Look at losing teams that are terrible at hitting but above average pitching
2. Where what little offense exists is due to hitters over 30
3. Good pitching is at least partially due to 2 or more young starters, age 25 or less

And find this out:

The next time this franchise became successful, were those pitchers a part of it? If not, why not? Were they traded, did they get hurt, did it take too long for the team to rebuild success?

What are the Giants looking for? Frank Wren will be shopping for starting pitching all offseason. They are already rumors about Lowry for some of the middle infield glut (Renteria would be the obvious choice.)

The next time this franchise became successful, were those pitchers a part of it? If not, why not? Were they traded, did they get hurt, did it take too long for the team to rebuild success?

And restrict it to the free agency era?

ONe team is obviously the mid 80s Braves, and they stunk for a good long time. Glavine and Smoltz came up in 88-89. Avery a bit later. So 2-3 yr turnaround

Why would the Giants want Renteria apart from their veteran fetish? If they want a middle infielder from the Braves, it has to be Escobar or Lillibridge.

I am wagering on Renteria heading to Detroit.

The next time this franchise became successful, were those pitchers a part of it? If not, why not? Were they traded, did they get hurt, did it take too long for the team to rebuild success?

That would be an excellent study. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that bad hitting teams sometimes lucked into a good season by riding young starting pitchers for a year, though. I also wouldn't be surprised to find the opposite. I want to say the 1983 Phillies come close to this, but their pitchers were older and their offense was pretty good because of Schmidt and Joe Morgan. (Also, holy crap! How did that team win with Pete Rose playing first base all year. Ugly ugly ugly!)

The 83 Phillies were a good hitting team, they were third in the league in runs. I'm thinking of teams like the 84 Pirates, who led the league in ERA but finished in last place, but their good starters were a bunch of 30 year olds.

I thought of the '84 Pirates, but all of their good pitchers were 30 or 31. (De Leon was young but not good.) The '03 Dodgers were the same way: Gagne at 27 was the youngest good pitcher (apart from Edwin Jackson's 22 innings); Alvarez at 33 and Nomo at 34 were having improbable late revivals and Brown at 38 was nearing the end of the line.

Edit: posted before I saw AROM's comment. Thinking alike, I guess.

I followed no. 12'stherelink.

2-12 with an ERA around 3, 49 total runs scored by his team in 24 starts, in one stretch he received 13 runs total over 12 straight starts.

Ouch, he obviously did not know how to win, so obviously his team did not waste time trying to score for him, but rather sored runs for more deserving starters

I agree with Treder: why even think about moving Lincecum or Cain unless you're blown away by the offer?

The team isn't good. They aren't going to be good for a while. Saying that Bonds was the reason they couldn't sign good players or use youngsters is ridiculous, but if Bonds truly isn't coming back, then maybe Sabean can make good use of FA signings. We all want to see the team play the kids, but Nate Schierholtz, Fred Lewis, and Kevin Frandsen aren't exactly superstars in the making. Sabean needs to realize that the team sucks, and make some wise trades.

Sabean waited too long, but Matt Morris for Rajai Davis and a PTBNL was a good start. Sabean needs his FA signings to be better, and not just with regard to on-field value. STOP signing mediocre, old, prone-to-breakdown veterans to 3 year backloaded contracts! How can you flip Dave Roberts at the deadline when the other team is going to be stuck with him forever? If you are going to sign someone who isn't a real star, then make the contract a Kenny Lofton/Reggie Sanders-easytrade special. I hate to suggest that my team employ strategies that I associate with the Kansas City Royals, but that's how crappy the Giants are without Bonds.

I'm not sure I'd trade Lincecum under any circumstances. He could easily flame out, but he appears to have a real shot at becoming a very, very special pitcher. As for Cain, I can't imagine they could get Cabrera straight up for him, and it wouldn't make sense to send Cain+ for Cabrera. Then they'd just be treading water. If they could get 2-3 good young position players for Cain (Lillibridge and a couple other prospects?) they should consider it.

I see Cabrera as similar to Bonds since his defensive "value" is so low. I'd hate to see Cabrera get walked as much as Bonds did because nobody else on the team can hit. I think if they trade Cain or Lincecum they need to do it for multiple high upside prospects and improve multiple positions at once since they have so many holes. Cain + bullpen part + some OF prospect for Milledge + Gomez + B pitching prospect or something to that effect would make more sense to me, then try and sign a CF this offseason and you've got a good start.

Cain + bullpen part + some OF prospect for Milledge + Gomez + B pitching prospect or something to that effect would make more sense to me, then try and sign a CF this offseason and you've got a good start.

Why would you trade for two young outfielders like Milledge and Gomez, and then also sign a center fielder? Maybe you'd put Milledge in LF, have Gomez spend a year in AAA before taking over CF in 2009. So I could see a true one year stop-gap signing, if that's what you mean. But if you acquired Gomez (especially along with Milledge), he's your CF of the future.

And I think the "some OF prospect" part of the deal from the Giants end would be tough to come up with.

Ya you're right, maybe get Adam Dunn or some other corner position. My point was to try and get multiple guys who are young cheap and improving and base the future of the franchise on that. Trading Cain + a bullpen part to a team on the cusp like the Mets for young players such as Gomez and Milledge would make at least some sense for both teams since the pitcher FA market is so crazy.

Or invent a time machine and use Zito's money for something more useful than Zito :)

Cain + bullpen part + some OF prospect for Milledge + Gomez + B pitching prospect or something to that effect would make more sense to me, then try and sign a CF this offseason and you've got a good start.

That would improve the talent base, but it still leaves the Giants fairly powerless overall. The Giants do have some young OF talent in Schierholtz, Davis, Lewis, Bowker, and possibly Ortmeier. None of those guys are superstars in the making, but I would think that there is a passable starting OFer or platoon in the bunch. That would keep at least one position in-house (two if Winn is dealt) and prevent Sabean from signing yet another mediocre, expensive FA.

Getting Milledge and Gomez, even if both work out, basically eliminates the value of the aforementioned guys. If Cain were to be dealt, it would have to be for slugging corner types.

One problem with the whole premise of what AROM is saying is that the actual performance of young pitchers is much less correlated to their later performance than is true for young hitters.

Take the 1990 Braves. They were a bad team - below average hitting and below average pitching, both. Their best young player (either way) was a 24-year-old David Justice. Smoltz and Glavine both took regular turns in the rotation but their respective ERA+'s were 104 and 94. Avery looked good, but in 99 innings and he was very young. They had some other young pitchers around, like Smith, Lilliquist, and Mercker. As it happened, Glavine, Smoltz, and Avery all took large steps forward in the next two years, (and an already-great pitcher became available as a free agent) but could you have seen that from their 1990 performances?

As it happened, Glavine, Smoltz, and Avery all took large steps forward in the next two years, (and an already-great pitcher became available as a free agent) but could you have seen that from their 1990 performances?

Smoltz and Glavine had put in better years in 1989, they were 22-23 years of age, and had been in AAA by 20-21. That's pretty impressive, and they need to be viewed through that lens, not just through their 1990 stats.

Why would the Giants want Renteria apart from their veteran fetish? If they want a middle infielder from the Braves, it has to be Escobar or Lillibridge.

1. Because the Braves will want to move Renteria's salary more than they will want to lose Escobar or Lillibridge.

2. Because Sabean DOES HAVE a veteran fetish. It's not like he's going to become someone completely different this offseason.

I'd take Lowry or Nate Robertson for Edgar.

Because Sabean DOES HAVE a veteran fetish. It's not like he's going to become someone completely different this offseason.

He might, without Barry Bonds around. It'll be interesting to see.

There is no doubt whatsoever that the Braves considered Glavine and Smoltz the future in 1990. Bobby Cox' five year plan, implemented in 1986, was all about building a pitching core. Glavine was drafted, Smoltz traded for. The organization viewed Glavine and Smoltz as more untouchable in 1990 than Justice although you'd have been hard pressed to get any of those guys away form Atlanta. Or Gant or Avery or Mercker or Pete Smith. The Braves simply were not dealing young talent in 1990.

1. Because the Braves will want to move Renteria's salary more than they will want to lose Escobar or Lillibridge.

2. Because Sabean DOES HAVE a veteran fetish. It's not like he's going to become someone completely different this offseason.

That's exactly the kind of move that the Giants shouldn't be making. If Lowry goes, ensure that it's for young hitting.

The organization viewed Glavine and Smoltz as more untouchable in 1990 than Justice although you'd have been hard pressed to get any of those guys away form Atlanta. Or Gant or Avery or Mercker or Pete Smith. The Braves simply were not dealing young talent in 1990.

Just to make it clear, young players traded by the Braves in 1990:
(link)

Derek Lilliquist
Tommy Greene
Some minor-leaguers I've never heard of
Joe Boever and Gerald Perry (both age 29, so sort of young, I guess)

Side note - I had no idea that Dale Murphy ever played for the Phillies, or that Tommy Greene ever played for the Braves. They were both traded together from the Braves to the Phillies, for three people I've never heard of.

If the Giants give the Braves any young pitching for Edgar Renteria, Brian Sabean will move up to # 1 on my list of the worst General Managers in the game, all the way from . . . um, well, # 1.

Damn the Pirates for firing Littlefield and leaving me no room to maneuver here!

Side note - I had no idea that Dale Murphy ever played for the Phillies, or that Tommy Greene ever played for the Braves. They were both traded together from the Braves to the Phillies, for three people I've never heard of.

Then it's even less likely you know that Dale Murphy also played for the Rockies where he was teammates with a promising young shortstop named Vinny Castilla.

Jonathan Sanchez is considered to be an intriguing prospect with great stuff. There was a rumour a while back that Omar Minaya offered Carlos Gomez for him, a trade which Sabean turned down.

I remember that rumor. I wanted that to happen but I was somewhat skeptical simply because Omar absolutely hearts Gomez. Maybe he loves Sanchez too but I'm pretty sure he thinks Gomez is going to be a star. He talks about Gomez being in the Met lineup for the next decade or so.

Getting Milledge and Gomez, even if both work out, basically eliminates the value of the aforementioned guys. If Cain were to be dealt, it would have to be for slugging corner types.

Milledge did slug .446 in ~200 plate appearances as a 22 year old, with an ISO of .174. He's got a super quick bat, already mashes lefties, and looks like he's going to end up around 220 pounds when he fills out. Milledge certainly has the upside to be a corner slugging type.

The thing that surprised me the most about Milledge this year was how much bigger he was. He looks like he could play safety in the NFL.

If the Giants give the Braves any young pitching for Edgar Renteria, Brian Sabean will move up to # 1 on my list of the worst General Managers in the game, all the way from . . . um, well, # 1.

Roger that.

And the saddest part of it is that Sabean didn't use to be as dunderheaded as he's been over the past few seasons. In his first 5-7 years in the job in SF, he showed a good eye for picking up talent at bargain prices. Since then he's just completely lost it.

Sabean is the Zoilo Versalles of GMs.

Cain + bullpen part + some OF prospect for Milledge + Gomez + B pitching prospect or something to that effect would make more sense to me, then try and sign a CF this offseason and you've got a good start.

Uh, pass. Gomez hasn't shown anything suggesting he's anything more than a decent starter type at best- we turned down Sanchez for Gomez, and we would again. Cain is 23 years old, with an ERA+ of 119, and great stuff - Milledge and bit parts are not going to get it done (and no, Pelfrey doesn't count as something).

Gomez hasn't shown anything suggesting he's anything more than a decent bit part- we turned down Sanchez for Gomez, and we would again.

You're entitled to your opinion. "A decent bit part," huh? Here's another view . . . This is what BA had to say about Gomez in ranking him the # 7 prospect in the PCL:

With plus speed and a cannon for an arm, Gomez was one of the league's rangiest center fielders and perhaps its most disruptive baserunner. His natural swing path and quick bat enable him to make consistent hard contact, but his in-game hitting and power are still raw. Because Gomez can get wild with his swing at times, he's susceptible to pitchers who can change speeds.

A high-energy player, Gomez makes adjustments in time and has the kind of strength and athleticism to develop into a power-speed threat in center field.

I'd say that packaged with Milledge, that would be one hell of a tempting offer for any team to have to mull over, even for a pitcher as outstanding as Cain. That said, if I had Cain, I don't know that I'd give him up, either. That would be a trade that would be very, very hard for either team to pull the trigger on, because that's a lot of regrets you might have if things went wrong . . . .

EDIT: Hey! After I quoted "decent bit part" it got changed to "decent starter type." He pulled the old bait and switch on me! Either way, I think a 22 year old with Gomez's numbers and tools is a lot better trade bait than you make it sound.

Uh, pass. Gomez hasn't shown anything suggesting he's anything more than a decent starter type at best- we turned down Sanchez for Gomez, and we would again. Cain is 23 years old, with an ERA+ of 119, and great stuff - Milledge and bit parts are not going to get it done (and no, Pelfrey doesn't count as something).

I understand the argument about keeping Cain but I think you are being a bit harsh on Gomez. He put a .777 OPS as a 21 year old in the PCL. He has awesome tools, is already a superior defender at CF, and is already an excellent baserunner and basestealer.

Cain is a huge trading chip right now but his value might never be higher. He's a proven commodity and still has a year to go before arbitration. If they can get two above average position players without a full year of service time they can align their position prospects (which are their biggest weakness right now) with their pitching prospects (Lincecum and Sanchez). The goal here should be to compete for the division in the 2 to 5 year range rather than try and play .500 next year.

You're entitled to your opinion. "A decent bit part," huh? Here's another view . . . This is what BA had to say about Gomez in ranking him the # 7 prospect in the PCL:

In my defense, I updated it to a decent starter before your post- but he's not a guy you trade Matt Cain for. At his age, Matt Cain was amongst the better pitchers in major league baseball.

Here's my quickfire trade test -

1)are any of the players better than Cain now? No, I don't think even you or any other Mets fans would argue that these guys are as good as Cain now.
2) Are any of them likely to be better than Cain in the future? Again, pass - Cain hasn't come close to reaching his ceiling, and his ceiling is significantly higher than either of the two prospects mentioned. I think Milledge can be a poor man's Grady Sizemore, and Gomez is probably slightly lower than that - but neither of those are worth Matt Cain.
3) Is the quantity so high that it justifies a failure on 1) and 2)? No. Cain is signed cheaply for 3 years (with an option for year 4) - trading him for a couple of guys without a high ceiling does nothing.

Gomez has never had an OPS over .777 at any level, and I don't think anyone envisions him turning into a star. Any deal for Cain would have to be a robbery - and that includes Fernando Martinez as part of any package.

#51

And Sanchez is what, exactly? The pitching equivalent of Gomez perhaps?

Cain is a huge trading chip right now but his value might never be higher. He's a proven commodity and still has a year to go before arbitration. If they can get two above average position players without a full year of service time they can align their position prospects (which are their biggest weakness right now) with their pitching prospects (Lincecum and Sanchez). The goal here should be to compete for the division in the 2 to 5 year range rather than try and play .500 next year.


If Carlos Gomez was offered and rejected for Jonathon Sanchez (who is a clear 3rd to Cain and Lincecum), why on earth would we assume Milledge has enough marginal value to make the deal happen? As a neutral, I wouldn't trade Cain for Sanchez + Milledge - yet that is roughly what is being offered.

Also, Cain is signed for at least the next 3 years - I believe there's an option for the 4th. Dirt cheap.

If Carlos Gomez was offered and rejected for Jonathon Sanchez (who is a clear 3rd to Cain and Lincecum), why on earth would we assume Milledge has enough marginal value to make the deal happen? As a neutral, I wouldn't trade Cain for Sanchez + Milledge - yet that is roughly what is being offered.

I'm not saying you should, but you might, for two reasons. First, the Giants are in a different position now, after the dismal season they had in 2007. If they think they are now further from returning to contention than they were before, they might see young pitching as less of a worthwhile asset than young hitting because it depreciates quicker.

And second, they might value Lastings Milledge that highly.

To me, the problem in that deal is not the value of the individual parts, but the shape of the package. If you were being offered the equivalent value, but a middle infield prospect the quality of Gomez along with Milledge, instead of another outfielder who is really more like Milledge than is ideal, it would be much more tempting. Milledge's highest, best value if he hits his ceiling is as a mashing center fielder who is good enough at the position (IMO, he'll never be as good as Gomez in CF, but he could be solid). If you acquire Gomez, you're consigning Milledge to LF or RF. Which is to say, reducing the value of the overall package.

Sam, as a Giants fan, would you make the deal? I think the answer is pretty clearly no - (and I think the positional value is important if the talent was more overwhelmingly on what the Mets were offering - the transaction costs in baseball are higher, so you can't just flip Milledge to anyone short of Billy Beane... and the idea of Beane trading with Sabean just terrifies me.)

I fully admit an emotional attachement to Cain, but Cain and Lincecum are potentially the best young (under 23) duo in baseball - Kazmir/Price might have a similar ceiling, but Price has still to pitch in the major leagues, and Hughes/Chamberlain is a tick below.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/askba/264748.html


What kind of Cain deal would I want? Honestly, for Cain, I'd want a guy with the potential to be just as good (obviously risk on this regard)- and the Mets don't have any such guy.

If Carlos Gomez was offered and rejected for Jonathon Sanchez (who is a clear 3rd to Cain and Lincecum), why on earth would we assume Milledge has enough marginal value to make the deal happen?

Again, are we sure Omar made this offer? I wouldn't be surprised if Omar had offered Milledge for Sanchez but the way he gushes over Gomez makes me skeptical.

Sam, as a Giants fan, would you make the deal?

I wouldn't if it were Milledge and Gomez, no -- for the reason I pointed out in # 58. But IF it were Milledge and a middle infield prospect who is the exact equivalent of Carlos Gomez in terms of age, ceiling, and established minor league performance? That would be a very, very had deal to turn down, because you'd be getting tremendous young, up-the-middle talent back for a single pitcher. Given how fragile pitchers are, that is a lot of return for even one as good as Cain is.

I love me some young pitching, no doubt . . . . I don't want to trade Mike Pelfrey, who isn't nearly as good a young 'un as Cain, so I get where you're coming from. But I don't want to trade Milledge and Gomez even more, so that tells me something, too.

If it's "SS Gomez" + Milledge, I think I make that deal for Cain. If it's the real-life Gomez + Milledge, I don't.

One thing about Cain that might worry me a little bit is that his hr/9 has been lower than his g/f ratio suggests it should be. That said, Cain has the stuff to compensate for a spike in hr/9 as he is certainly capable of posting a better k/9 and is young enough to improve his control.

I'd be sad if the Mets traded Milledge, even for Cain. I think he's going to be a star.

Saw a stat at the end of the year saying in 22 of Cain's 32 starts, he allowed 2 runs or fewer.

Don't trade the guy.

Also, is it the worst thing in the world for the Giants to miss the playoffs the next year or two? The hound thinks a year or two of seasoning on Cain & Lincecum would be good before they took on all those extra October innings.