11-18-2009, 11:48 PM
<!--quoteo(post=69397:date=Nov 18 2009, 09:34 AM:name=Dirk)-->QUOTE (Dirk @ Nov 18 2009, 09:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Ace- I'm calling you out for the article you wrote on BN, your more recent one. Refusing to trade Castro no matter what is nuts. Trading Castro and only getting Granderson in return is nuts-er. Here's my reasoning- whether or not you think Castro is going to fill out and hit for more power (from what I've seen he looks like he's 12 and if he projects for more power the Hanley Ramirez comparisons are right on) his stock is only getting higher. He could have a crappy year at a higher level of competition and still be a valuable trading chip just because he's so young and has yet to have a bad season. Secondly, Granderson. Dude, I can't tell you how lukewarm I am on this guy. He's had four full seasons, two of which were good, two of which were mediocre. In all four seasons he struckout a shit-ton and did absolutely nothing against LH pitching (.210 career). Considering that he'll invariably be misused as a leadoff hitter and should really have a RH counterpart to platoon with- ugh. He'd be a nice complimentary piece if he were to bat 5th so if we're able to get him for lesser prospects I'm all for it. But, if the Tigers insist on Castro, thanks but no thanks. The Cubs can get more for him.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
1.) You make good points.
2.) Take it up with Baseball Prospectus ("Baseball Prospectus’ minor league expert Kevin Goldstein told me yesterday that he believes that Castro is the most over hyped prospect he has seen in a while. 'Castro is a good prospect with excellent skills but for people to think he is on the verge of super stardom is ludicrous,' Goldstein said. 'He has good athletic ability, a solid bat but limited power and to hear him compared by some observers to Hanley Ramirez is nuts.'")
3.) My words: "Am I saying the Cubs should necessarily trade Castro in a deal for Granderson? No. But neither should they necessarily exclude the idea." I can accept that you disagree, but my position is not by any stretch of the imagination ludicrous.
How many Corey Pattersons, Felix Pies, and Brooks Kieschnicks does it take?
"Studly" prospects - particularly those who have exactly one year of solid (not incredible, mind you) performance - do not always pan out. That's all I'm saying.
Is Granderson the right target for employing the Castro bomb? Maybe not. I'll concede that. But if the offseason plays out as it could (i.e., Bradley gone, chasm opens in center field when Fuk slides to right), wouldn't someone like Granderson be an ideal target?
1.) You make good points.
2.) Take it up with Baseball Prospectus ("Baseball Prospectus’ minor league expert Kevin Goldstein told me yesterday that he believes that Castro is the most over hyped prospect he has seen in a while. 'Castro is a good prospect with excellent skills but for people to think he is on the verge of super stardom is ludicrous,' Goldstein said. 'He has good athletic ability, a solid bat but limited power and to hear him compared by some observers to Hanley Ramirez is nuts.'")
3.) My words: "Am I saying the Cubs should necessarily trade Castro in a deal for Granderson? No. But neither should they necessarily exclude the idea." I can accept that you disagree, but my position is not by any stretch of the imagination ludicrous.
How many Corey Pattersons, Felix Pies, and Brooks Kieschnicks does it take?
"Studly" prospects - particularly those who have exactly one year of solid (not incredible, mind you) performance - do not always pan out. That's all I'm saying.
Is Granderson the right target for employing the Castro bomb? Maybe not. I'll concede that. But if the offseason plays out as it could (i.e., Bradley gone, chasm opens in center field when Fuk slides to right), wouldn't someone like Granderson be an ideal target?
Cubs News and Rumors at Bleacher Nation.