If we fall out of contention, this is who I'd try to deal:

[ofahn]

IMO Johnson is worth at least two top prospects. Just remember what Texas paid for Mike Adams last year.

I would demand the same for Hardy.

We MIGHT get a C level prospect for Reynolds but we would have to pay the rest of his salary.

Hammel should be worth at least two top prospects and a mid level prospect. Not because he's the best SP available (he'll probably be the third best) but because he's under control through next year AND he's proven in the A L East.

I would offer Brian Matusz to the Tigers for Rick Porcello. Detroit is just as frustrated with him as we are with Matusz. Porcello is a ground ball pitcher trying to survive with the Tigers infield. Both pitchers could use a fresh start and Porcello might do better he with an (hopefully soon) upgraded infield defense.

If you are a second division team and you only make trades when you believe you have a player of equal value to replace them with then you will remain a second division team. If we could trade Hardy for an A and a B level prospect for him I would make that trade in a minute even though we don't have an equal replacement RIGHT NOW. I'd be willing to sacrifice SS for the opportunity to fix two other holes. The fact that Machado is starting to come on strong is just icing on the cake.

[ofahn]

1. Jim Johnson. Sell high. He's the top closer in MLB. Teams always overpay for closers. He might garner a top prospect in return. We could give Strop a shot at closing.

2. JJ Hardy. As much as it would pain me to see, we could give Flaherty a shot or move Andino over to short. I would part with Hardy only if the return were substantial.

3. Mark Reynolds. I don't think anyone would really want him. I'd gladly take a B level prospect in return.

4. Jason Hammel. This one would hurt, especially since we don't have a lot of options for starting pitching. But he's having a big year and maybe we could "sell high" and garner some young prospects.

5. Nick Markakis. I don't think anyone would take him either. He's way overpaid for his production, has trouble staying healthy, and the bloom seems to have come off his rose....

6. Brian Matusz and Jake Arrieta. I don't think anyone wants them. They stink. A fresh start with a new organization may be needed. They may turn out awesome one day. But probably not. We would definitely be selling low...but maybe they could be packaged in a deal with any of 1-5.

The idea of trading #1, #2, and #5 is the philosophy of a small-market, second division team and ensures that the team stays in the second division for the next few years. If the idea is to get out of the second division, those are the players to be kept. If we fall out of contention, it will be partially due to injuries and not exclusively a lack of talent. The idea should be to keep these as the core and add to them.

Trade Johnson --- back to unnecessary 9th inning drama. Trade Hammel --- make an already shaky staff much more shakier. Trade Hardy --- goodbye steady infield defense up the middle with the potential to hit very well at a relatively inexpensive price.

Do you really like how we've been playing the past few years so that you want to see another half-decade of it? Trade these guys and that's what happens.

If we could have traded Reynolds, we would have a long time ago. We're not going to pick up his option. Why bother trading people for B level prospects? Duquette has no trouble finding those without trading anyone.

As for your idea of trading Matusz and Arrieta, it's hard to discuss because it isn't really coherent, but selling low on starting pitchers with potential isn't really a good idea.

Plus, you want to keep Wieters. Why? Boras's premium clients always get big money and almost always walk. Trade the good players and guarantee last place finishes for the remainder of the years he's under control guarantees he also walks as soon as he can. If you're so hot on trading stars, he should be at the top of the list.

Then you want to keep Avery, who is outperforming everything he did in his minor league career until this year. Doesn't make sense.

I can envision a scenario in which they keep both Avery and Hoes, but I can also envision a scenario in which one gets traded. Avery might have more value now, so it would be him.

Enough of this poor boy thinking!

I can understand your reluctance to trade away some of the few good players we have but have you looked at our farm system lately. This team is playing .500 ball right now and might do better if we had the resources to fill the holes on the roster. We don't.

3B a black hole for defense? NO REPLACEMENT. Shaky defense at 1B? NO REPLACEMENT. Inconsistent SPs? NO REPLACEMENT. The positions we might generate internal replacements for in the near future are SS and Closer. If those players will bring a solid return and we have internal options then why not convert them into solutions for the other problems we have?

Will we suffer a short term degradation at those positions? Yes, but the improvements at the other positions could more than compensate for that.

I think we both want to avoid this team remaining in the second division. I think we see different methods for doing so.

[birdwatcher55]

Arrieta is the only one I see potentially being moved. I think the Orioles are hoping Reynolds finds his groove in the second half

[Ampontan]

3B a black hole for defense? NO REPLACEMENT. Shaky defense at 1B? NO REPLACEMENT. Inconsistent SPs? NO REPLACEMENT.

Yes, for the first, but a single year makeover is impossible. Davis was shaky at first, but I suspect he's better than that and having a fielding slump this year. I don't think a replacement is necessarily needed. He's not playing there now because they had to get Reynolds off of third, and Davis is reasonably athletic enough to play the outfield in an emergency. The inconsistent starting pitching has been replaced with Tillman and Gonzalez. How they work out, time will tell. Pineiro just did four innings at GCL. DD is reportedly talking with everyone about pitching. I suspect the three amigos were yanked from the rotation when they were because they were being given enough rope, and Matusz and Arrieta kept coming up with the occasional dominating performance. Other than Hunter, that situation might have not been much different even if there had been immediate options in the minors.

[birdwatcher55]

I think by unloading JJ Hardy, Johnson and maybe Betemit, we could pick up 4-5 quality prospects

[Ampontan]

I think by unloading JJ Hardy, Johnson and maybe Betemit, we could pick up 4-5 quality prospects

I don't know about the quality, but 4-5. We did with Bedard and Tejada, too. And stayed in last place.

And that's where we'll stay if we trade off our best players --- well, not Betemit, but you know what I mean.

Poor boy philosophy.

[ofahn]

I think by unloading JJ Hardy, Johnson and maybe Betemit, we could pick up 4-5 quality prospects

I don't know about the quality, but 4-5. We did with Bedard and Tejada, too. And stayed in last place.

And that's where we'll stay if we trade off our best players --- well, not Betemit, but you know what I mean.

Poor boy philosophy.

You could also argue that holding on to marketable players is why we've stayed in last place. Trading Johnson and Hardy (the two positions we have the best chance of filling from within) would certainly be a loss short term but the return might allow us to fix 3B with a player like Headley and another position or two in the near future.

Would you agree that this team doesn't hit well enough to overcome the burden of a HORRIBLE defense?