Author Topic: Nats Aggressively Shopping Lannan (Read 21675 times)

Slateman · « **Reply #325:** February 06, 2012, 12:24:12 PM »

Well, we can't get something good for crap, Linty.

And its Clippard or Lidge in that trade. I'd offer up Desmond but that just subtracts from the trade package.

I think we'd be better off moving Detwiler, but Rizzo seems loath to do that.

Tyler Durden · « **Reply #326:** February 06, 2012, 12:25:15 PM »

Quote from: wpa2629 on February 06, 2012, 12:15:38 PM

FanGraphs Baseball @fangraphs

FanGraphs: Bourjos for Lannan? Surely You Jest. bit.ly/wEMnle

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/bourjos-for-lannan-surely-you-jest/

That article brought up a good point - the Guthrie trade is a good inidcator of what Lannan's value might be in a trade. Lannan is worth a bit more because he's paid 5 mil this year against 8 or so for Guthrie. But I think Guthrie is the better pitcher between the two.

wpa2629 · « **Reply #327:** February 06, 2012, 12:26:56 PM »

David Cameron @d_a_cameron
Dissecting the worst trade proposal of the winter. RT @fangraphs: FanGraphs: Bourjos for Lannan? Surely You Jest. bit.ly/wEMnle

JCA-CrystalCity · « **Reply #328:** February 06, 2012, 12:41:29 PM »

Quote from: Slateman on February 06, 2012, 12:18:21 PM

Hmmm ...

Lannan, Clippard/Lidge, Lombardozzi and .... Solis? Could that be enough?

Perhaps if we took Lannan out of the deal and put in something of value.

BrandonK · « **Reply #329:** February 06, 2012, 12:50:30 PM »

Still hoping for Hunter

comish4lif · « **Reply #330:** February 06, 2012, 12:57:10 PM »

Quote from: BrandonK on February 06, 2012, 12:50:30 PM

Still hoping for Hunter

Torii? To the Nats?

Slateman · « **Reply #331:** February 06, 2012, 12:58:18 PM »

Quote from: JCA-CrystalCity on February 06, 2012, 12:41:29 PM

Perhaps if we took Lannan out of the deal and put in something of value.

lol, like what?

zoom · « **Reply #332:** February 06, 2012, 01:01:03 PM »

I would think we would need to do something like Solis, Skole and Taylor. No thanks.

Tyler Durden · « **Reply #333:** February 06, 2012, 01:14:05 PM »

http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2012/2/2/2766641/lannan-available

Here's is a discussion on a Cubs website regarding a potential fit for Lannan in Chicago.

A lot of their fans have a hard time believing we'd take Byrd in exchange for Lannan. I'd probably make that trade, even if Lannan is a bit more valuable than Byrd. It fills the CF hole for us nicely and still sets us up nicely to fill the slot next year in free agency.

Minty Fresh · « **Reply #334:** February 06, 2012, 01:16:26 PM »

Quote from: BrandonK on February 06, 2012, 12:50:30 PM

Still hoping for Hunter

I would assume he's a 10/5 and, as such, has a full NTC.

Slateman · « **Reply #335:** February 06, 2012, 01:17:48 PM »

Quote from: Tyler Durden on February 06, 2012, 01:14:05 PM

http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2012/2/2/2766641/lannan-available

Here's is a discussion on a Cubs website regarding a potential fit for Lannan in Chicago.

A lot of their fans have a hard time believing we'd take Byrd in exchange for Lannan. I'd probably make that trade, even if Lannan is a bit more valuable than Byrd. It fills the CF hole for us nicely and still sets us up nicely to fill the slot next year in free agency.

But then why bother signing Ankiel and Cameron?

cmdterps44 · « **Reply #336:** February 06, 2012, 01:18:29 PM »

Quote from: Minty Fresh on February 06, 2012, 01:16:26 PM

I would assume he's a 10/5 and, as such, has a full NTC.

And I know he wants to stay there. When the angels signed pujols and wilson he was interviewed on hot stove and he looked like a giddy school boy. He was all smiles.

UMDNats · « **Reply #337:** February 06, 2012, 01:19:29 PM »

Quote from: Slateman on February 06, 2012, 01:17:48 PM

But then why bother signing Ankiel and Cameron?

Because depth is important, too?

BrandonK · « **Reply #338:** February 06, 2012, 01:24:22 PM »

Quote from: Minty Fresh on February 06, 2012, 01:16:26 PM

I would assume he's a 10/5 and, as such, has a full NTC.

So he'd rather be benched than lead a playoff push here? Trout is going to force his way onto the team

Minty Fresh · « **Reply #339:** February 06, 2012, 01:27:05 PM »

Quote from: BrandonK on February 06, 2012, 01:24:22 PM

So he'd rather be benched than lead a playoff push here? Trout is going to force his way onto the team

Ummmmm......

Quote from: cmdterps44 on February 06, 2012, 01:18:29 PM

And I know he wants to stay there. When the angels signed pujols and wilson he was interviewed on hot stove and he looked like a giddy school boy. He was all smiles.

Yep.

I'm reasonably certain he'd rather be as close to a guarantee at a playoff spot than "lead a playoff push here" where we probably wouldn't make the playoffs anyway. At his age, I'd assume it's about winning a WS since he doesn't have one yet.

Slateman · « **Reply #340:** February 06, 2012, 01:27:10 PM »

Quote from: UMDNats on February 06, 2012, 01:19:29 PM

Because depth is important, too?

Okay. I get Cameron. But between Cameron and Bernadina, we'd have lots of depth.

I don't think they're going to be trading for Byrd. Why give up something now when you can sign for it next year? Its not like Byrd is going to cost a ton.

And, frankly, I think Lannan becomes more valuable at the trade deadline.

imref · « **Reply #341:** February 06, 2012, 01:33:23 PM »

Agreed, with Ankiel in the mix there's really no need to trade for Byrd. It looks like we're locked in until next year at CF.

So my guess is that we trade one of Lannan, Detwiler, or Gorzy for a AA-level prospect.

comish4lif · « **Reply #342:** February 06, 2012, 01:37:58 PM »

Quote from: Minty Fresh on February 06, 2012, 01:16:26 PM

I would assume he's a 10/5 and, as such, has a full NTC.

Don't assume (ASS/U/ME).

He's only been with the Angels 4 seasons...

Lintyfresh85 · « **Reply #343:** February 06, 2012, 01:42:44 PM »

Quote from: imref on February 06, 2012, 01:33:23 PM

Agreed, with Ankiel in the mix there's really no need to trade for Byrd. It looks like we're locked in until next year at CF.

You'd rather have Ankiel/Cameron sub .700 OPS in CF over a possible upgrade like Byrd with potential for .750+ OPS?

imref · « **Reply #344:** February 06, 2012, 01:43:17 PM »

Quote from: Lintyfresh85 on February 06, 2012, 01:42:44 PM

You'd rather have Ankiel/Cameron sub .700 OPS in CF over a possible upgrade like Byrd with potential for .750+ OPS?

no, but i just don't think they'll trade for a CF after signing Ankiel.

Lintyfresh85 · « **Reply #345:** February 06, 2012, 01:46:25 PM »

Quote from: imref on February 06, 2012, 01:43:17 PM

no, but i just don't think they'll trade for a CF after signing Ankiel.

You said there was no need. As in, that's what you wanted... unless I read your intentions wrong.

Slateman · « **Reply #346:** February 06, 2012, 01:48:04 PM »

Linty, I don't care. I really doesn't matter. Byrd is a free agent at the end of the year. Why not trade Lannan for someone with potential and sign Byrd next season?

We trade for Byrd and we're right back where we started this same time next year. But we have one less trading chip.

imref · « **Reply #347:** February 06, 2012, 01:51:37 PM »

Quote from: Lintyfresh85 on February 06, 2012, 01:46:25 PM

You said there was no need. As in, that's what you wanted... unless I read your intentions wrong.

sorry. meant from the perspective of the Nats management.

Tyler Durden · « **Reply #348:** February 06, 2012, 01:54:21 PM »

Quote from: Slateman on February 06, 2012, 01:48:04 PM

Linty, I don't care. I really doesn't matter. Byrd is a free agent at the end of the year. Why not trade Lannan for someone with potential and sign Byrd next season?

We trade for Byrd and we're right back where we started this same time next year. But we have one less trading chip.

What kind of player do you think we'll get back for Lannan?

Byrd is probably better than Ankiel/Bernie and he would fit nicely as the 4th OF when Harper comes up. Or he could stay in CF and they could trade LaRoche and move Morse to 1B.

We probably only would have held on to Lannan for this year alone, anyway, so this would be a straight one-year-of-Byrd for one-year-of-Lannan type of deal.

Tyler Durden · « **Reply #349:** February 06, 2012, 01:56:04 PM »

Quote from: imref on February 06, 2012, 01:33:23 PM

Agreed, with Ankiel in the mix there's really no need to trade for Byrd. It looks like we're locked in until next year at CF.

So my guess is that we trade one of Lannan, Detwiler, or Gorzy for a AA-level prospect.

It does seem like they've settled on Ankiel or Bernadina. I'll be disappointed if that's the case, even if it's only for a month or two until Harper comes up.