SECOND MOST POPULAR BLOG OF THE LAST SEASON PLAYED WITHOUT THE STUPID EXTRA-INNING GHOST RUNNER WORLD CHAMPION WASHINGTON NATIONALS
Friday, December 17, 2010
Wait what?
Huh?
Confusion! Perplexity! Bamboozlement! I am completely without bobulates!
The Nats traded Josh Willingham, early, for a decent reliever prospect and an old OF prospect? I need to look at this closer. Update (and a 68 win season) soon.
I agree with your post, it is a confusing trade for me. I defer to Rizzo on whether the prospects are worth it, but it looks like he traded a productive bat at or slightly past his peak (from a lineup that needs bats), for a reliever and a prospect. So the 2011 value prop is in the A's favor, right? That doesn't make sense to me in the context of the Werth signing. I know that the 7 year contract means that he wants Werth around when they really get good, but it has to mean that they expect to get better immediately, right? This trade goes the other way.
The other conclusion that I draw is that Willingham never had the value that I thought that he should have. To me, he is 95% as good as Bay, yet that isn't how he is valued.
Well it's time to see what Justin Maxwell can do. we simply need to see more K's.
ReplyDeleteBizarre deal as i think Wham would have been worth more in june right?
Either that or not much value in him.
it's a gamble with his age and injury history to wait until sometimes later in the year - but not this much of a gamble, I would think.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your post, it is a confusing trade for me. I defer to Rizzo on whether the prospects are worth it, but it looks like he traded a productive bat at or slightly past his peak (from a lineup that needs bats), for a reliever and a prospect. So the 2011 value prop is in the A's favor, right? That doesn't make sense to me in the context of the Werth signing. I know that the 7 year contract means that he wants Werth around when they really get good, but it has to mean that they expect to get better immediately, right? This trade goes the other way.
ReplyDeleteThe other conclusion that I draw is that Willingham never had the value that I thought that he should have. To me, he is 95% as good as Bay, yet that isn't how he is valued.