Daniel Nava?

[sharksrog]

I myself haven't made up my mind whether I would do this, but at least it's an idea.

Would you trade a minor leaguer and cash to the Red Sox for Daniel Nava? The idea would be that Nava could fill left field for the Giants, while the Red Sox would get a prospect and some money to help them re-sign Jacoby Ellsbury. (I'm not sure, by the way, if such a deal would be legal.)

Although he's played more center field than any other outfield position, I think Nava is at best an average outfielder, and he's hit far better at Fenway than on the road. He's not a base stealer at all.

He does have some positives though.

. He's just 30 years old and is a Bay Area native (Mountain View).

. He has a career 113 OPS+ and a career OBP of .369.

. He hit a career-high .303 last season, during which he was a 3-win player.

. He's under team control for four more seasons.

. He's a switch hitter, although he hits right-handers far better than southpaws. He's actually been a very good hitter against righties (.833 OPS), although he's struggled like heck against southpaws (.634).

Just a thought: Perhaps he's a candidate to bat strictly left-handed, like J.T. Snow eventually did. Or perhaps the Giants could pick up a right-handed hitter to platoon with him. Maybe some kind of a poor man's Cody Ross.

By the way, Cody's making $9.5 million this season. That's quite a bit for a short-sided platoon player. (Cody's OPS against right-handers last season was .603).

[Islandboagie]

That's not a bad idea. But it would depend on who the Redsox would want in return. Which would probably be a player we wouldn't want to give up, like Crick.

[sharksrog]

Boagie -- That's not a bad idea. But it would depend on who the Redsox would want in return. Which would probably be a player we wouldn't want to give up, like Crick.

Rog -- I have mixed feelings about such a deal, but I certainly wouldn't give up Crick or Escobar. I might give up one of the other pitching prospects.

The idea in a trade is to make it a potential win/win situation. That helps the trade get done. This has the potential to be such a deal, but from the Giants' standpoint, it would depend on their evaluation of Nava, how much money and which prospect(s) they had to give up, what the other alternatives are, and if the Giants could pick up a decent right-handed hitting complement for Nava.

I've been having a hard time coming up with good outfielders the teams most in need of prospects would be willing to trade. So I just thought I would strike out in another direction with Nava.

I'm hoping others have better ideas than I currently have.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=2116&page=1#17185#ixzz2m4W4afnu

[rxmeister]

Pretty good idea, Rog, and I agree I would do it as long as it's a prospect that's not too high. Would you say "Bye Bye Blackburn" for him?

[allenreed]

I'd give them Blanco, cash, and any minor leaguer they wanted not named Crick or Escobar.

[sharksrog]

Mark -- Pretty good idea, Rog, and I agree I would do it as long as it's a prospect that's not too high. Would you say "Bye Bye Blackburn" for him?

Rog -- You know, Mark, I just don't know enough about Blackburn to know. I do know that he relies on a mature approach to pitching more than on pure stuff and that because of that, his ceiling is considered to be well below that of Kyle Crick. My initial instinct would be yes, but I'm really short on knowledge here.

I would be curious to see what Randy thinks. I'm guessing he's seen Blackburn pitch a few times.

Nice job on the "Bye Bye to Blackburn," by the way. Would that be a play on a title kind of like saying the Red Sox owner who traded Babe Ruth to the Yankees should have said "No, No" to Nanette?

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=2116&page=1#17189#ixzz2m5I3OWlq

[sharksrog]

Allen -- I'd give them Blanco, cash, and any minor leaguer they wanted not named Crick or Escobar.

Rog -- In order for the deal to work for them (in adding to their chances of retaining Jacoby Ellsbury), I would think the cash would need to be substantial, and even then the Red Sox would need to consider the implications of the luxury tax.

But I like the idea of including Blanco in the deal in order to give them some kind of replacement for Nava. If the cash were fairly substantial, I would think the Red Sox would be all over this one. Blanco has some value (especially defensively), and the opportunity to pick anything but the top two Giants prospects would be very nice.

Which makes it intriguing to think which prospect they would choose.

The most forward look would seem to be Christian Arroyo, the Giants' #1 draft pick in 2013. I'm not sure a draft pick can be traded for a year, but I would think he could be acquired as the infamous "player to be named" (with later being redundant).

Blackburn could be another candidate to, as Mark said, go "bye, bye." The Giants have a few other pitchers who would be considered good candidates, including Heath Hembree, who immediately could make a nice bullpen addition for the Red Sox. Hembree might actually make the most sense.

Andrew Susac is another candidate who clearly improved his standing this past year.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=2116&page=1#ixzz2m5K1toCK

[sharksrog]

By the way, I wouldn't give up Blanco, cash and the pick of prospects for Nava -- depending on the amount of cash involved.

Blanco is a decent asset who is team contolled for three more seasons. The cash would likely need to be considerable for the Red Sox to benefit in their (presumed) desire to keep Ellsbury or to pursue another outfield option. And I don't think I would want to give up Arroyo or Hembree.

Incidentally, my thought in the Giants' being able to include some cash in the deal is that they would control Nava for four years, which this pre-arbitration year especially would help keep the payroll down. If the Giants fill the 5th starter with Vogelsong for $4 million or less guaranteed, putting Nava in left field would be another cost-saving measure that might improve the club along with the savings.

My initial idea -- which as I stated, I wasn't even sure I would recommend -- was to have the money be the biggest factor for the Red Sox in the deal. Putting Blanco in the deal seems like a good idea (from the standpoint of the Red Sox, and as I say, the most efficient trades are win/win). Putting Blanco in the deal would make me want to clearly limit the cash involved.

Think how shallow Blanco could play as a left fielder in Fenway. That would help offset about the only defensive weakness he has, his so-so arm. Of course, he might also lose some left field hits if he played there.

By the way, when Angel Pagan was injured, he was hitting about the same as Pagan, and based on his defense, had likely been at least as good a player to that point. Pagan did hit extremely well upon returning in late August, taking off on September 3rd.

Even so, based on his much better fielding, Blanco was rated one and a half games higher than Pagan based on WAR.

Was Blanco better than Pagan, let alone THAT much better? It depends on how much one values fielding and how accurately one thinks it can be measured. Pagan's hitting was considered to have twice the value Blanco's did, but the difference in their fielding was considered to be substantial.

I don't think any of us considers Blanco to be as good a player as Pagan is, but perhaps Blanco is better than we think, and the difference isn't as big as we would assume.

I'm on the fence on that one. Certainly the Giants played much better this past season with Pagan than they played without him. That doesn't necessarily indicate a cause-and-effect relationship though.

[allenreed]

Susac may work here, especially if the Sox end up losing Saltalamacchia, or maybe we could throw Hector Sanchez in there. I can't imagine that money is that big issue to the Red Sox.

[rxmeister]

"Bye Bye Blackburn" was a play on the song, "Bye Bye Blackbird." I wouldn't think of trading Christian Arroyo for him though. Number one pick, teenager, who was the MVP of the rookie league for Daniel Nava? No way! To top it off, he's a rare offensive prospect in an organization full of pitching prospects. If they want Arroyo, they can toss in Jon Lester!

[Islandboagie]

I wouldn't trade any of our solid bench players for a player because last season the lack of bench depth was also an issue. Torres and Blanco made a decent platoon in LF. It went wrong when Pagan got hurt and Torres and Blanco had to start everyday. The lack of depth was also exposed when Scutaro and Sandoval went down. The talk right now is landing a left fielder and adding bullpen help, but just as important to me is adding a few bench pieces to ensure a decent patch job if something does go wrong.

Arias is very good in limited roles, but when he's asked to start for an extended amount of time he starts to falter. Uribe would be a nice addition.

Blanco can sustain some time in the starting lineup, but after a while he is exposed as well. He's a perfectly good 4th outfielder if the first 3 stay healthy. But if that were the case we wouldn't really need a deep bench. So let's assume everything will go wrong. In addition to Blanco I think we need a bat that can sustain a slot in the lineup for an extended amount of time. Ignoring all the bigger names, Nate Mclouth seems like a solid option. Reed Johnson or Juan Pierre would also add some depth. I think the assumption is the Giants will go after a bona fide starting left fielder, but I might like them adding 2 decent bench players instead and having them play for time.

For instance, if we got Mclouth and Reed Johnson, I think I would prefer that over someone like Nava and a rotation of Fresno players as our 5th outfielder.

Tyler Colvin is also a name that sticks out to me. Sign him to a minor league deal, see what happens.

[allenreed]

Boagie, I'd take Nava over every player you named. McClouth, Reed Johnson, Pierre, Colvin, and especially Uribe. All these guys are just hangers on. Nava's a little older. but I see his star as on the rise.

[sharksrog]

Boagie -- The talk right now is landing a left fielder and adding bullpen help, but just as important to me is adding a few bench pieces to ensure a decent patch job if something does go wrong.


Rog -- You make a good point, although I think Arias is a good backup on the infield. The outfield is extremely thin though, and even with the addition of a starting left fielder would be in need of a second backup there. Fortunately fifth outfielders and sixth infielders can often be addressed fairly inexpensively, and that is the type of signing Brian Sabean often excels at.

That said, he didn't do very well last season. But he has added Arias, Juan Uribe, Pat Burrell and Cody Ross in recent years.
Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=2116&page=1#17206#ixzz2mAGCucIl

[sharksrog]

Boagie -- Arias is very good in limited roles, but when he's asked to start for an extended amount of time he starts to falter.

Rog -- I know that's the reputation, but I wonder about that. Last season he hit .280 as a starter; .233 as a sub.

He had two streaks in which he started for a while. From June 9 though June 21, he raised his average from .222 to .275. He started most of the games from July 27-August 25 and saw his average fall only from .282 to .272.

In 2011 he hit .272 as a starter; .240 as a sub. He saw his average drop from .364 to .235 between May 2 and July 8. That is probably where the reputation began.

But if we look more deeply, the first month is where his average dropped, from .364 to .228 on June 2. His 2nd month as a starter he stabilized, building back to the .255 mark on June 19, the final day of his starting streak.

Where Arias' hitting died was near the beginning of his starting streak. From May 8 through May 20, he went just 4 for 34, dropping his average from .344 to .227. Clearly he bounced back nicely from that.

Primarily a starter in August, he hit .417. Primarily coming off the bench in September, he hit .200.

As we dig deeper, we see that Arias actually does his best hitting when he gets a chance to start for an extended period. And that the one time he got to start for over a month and a half, he hit much better the second half of that time than he did the first half of the period.


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=2116&page=1#ixzz2mAIJREhJ

[sharksrog]

Boagie -- Blanco can sustain some time in the starting lineup, but after a while he is exposed as well.

Rog -- I'm not entirely convinced of that, either. In 2012 he started almost every game from May through July 8. He began the period hitting .217 and came out of it hitting .252. He was hitting .236 when Melky Cabrera was suspended, and wound up the season at .244.

Last season Gregor got enough plate appearances to qualify for the batting title. He wasn't a great hitter, but it wasn't as if he fell off when pitchers began to figure him out. In fact, he hit .373 in September, easily his best month of the season.

I think in the cases of Blanco and Arias, they're just not great hitters -- not that pitchers figure them out when they start "x" number of games in a row.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=2116&page=1#ixzz2mAOTvKvA

[sharksrog]

Mark -- "Bye Bye Blackburn" was a play on the song, "Bye Bye Blackbird."

Rog -- Saying "no,no" to Nanette was a similar word play (no pun). The word is that the owner of the Red Sox traded Babe Ruth for $100,000 in order to fund the Broadway play, "No, No, Nanette."

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=2116&page=1#ixzz2mASYK3k3

[rxmeister]

Started "The Curse of the Bambino," which has obviously worn off, with the Red Sox winning three recent WS.