Monday, June 14, 2010

Jon Heyman assesses the trade market for Roy

So that subject line pretty much takes care of it. What does he say?

Lee should have big value while Oswalt just might be worth close to nothing. That's not an insult to Oswalt, just the reality of the economics of the situation...

..."At the end of the day, I don't think Houston will be able to move the entire (Oswalt) contract and get premium players back,'' sums up one AL exec. That's an opinion that's fairly widely felt, too, based on interviews.


Possibilities:
Dodgers: Oswalt seems completely out of their reach financially."

Cardinals: Offense is their current problem, but Oswalt seems like a logical fit for a team that says they seek a starter and would seem to appeal to a small-town guy like Oswalt. It's hard to imagine them laying out $30 million..."

Braves: As one competing executive points out, "They don't spend at midseason, that's just not their style.'

Twins: Oswalt or Lee could be the leader of a young and solid rotation that lacks a true ace.

Mets: They didn't want to spend the extra money for free agents Joel Piniero or Bengie Molina in the offseason.

Rangers: The bankrupted team would appear to be a poor fit for a player with $30 million remaining on his pact.

Yankees: They appear to have only a passing interest, if that, in Oswalt, but love Lee after seeing him up close in the World Series.

Angels: With Kendry Morales' injury, first base is now their biggest need.

Reds: There's been little suggestion they're involved yet, though they do look like a clear contender at this point.

Red Sox: They do like Lee, but there's no sense chancing an NL switch by getting Oswalt.

Phillies: They surely want to try to retain free-agent-to-be Jayson Werth, so it's tough to see them getting Oswalt.

As with every team, the Astros are going to have to be willing to eat a large portion of his contract - say, $20m - for a deal to be reached that doesn't include a bag of rosin in return.

1 comment:

Andrew said...

I don't get it. Oswalt costs less over the next two years than John Lackey and you could make a very strong case that he's the better pitcher. Lackey just signed his contract this off-season, so the idea that Oswalt is "too expensive" seems ludicrous to me. If I'm Wade, I'd be telling other GMs the only way I'm moving Oswalt is if I get wowed with a deal, and that I don't mind one bit if Oswalt doesn't get traded and doesn't like it.