david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin) (01/28/85)
Three trades have recently been or are about to be consummated.
(1) The Phillies send Al Oliver to the Dodgers for Pat Zachry. In my
opinion, this is a bargain for the Dodgers, as Oliver is still a
productive player and Zachry is mediocrity incarnate. I suspect
that, as Oliver would like to reach 3,000 career hits, is near the
end of his career, and didn't figure to start this season, Oliver
may have expressed a desire to move on.
(2) The Giants send Gary Lavelle to the Blue Jays for some guys I'm
unfamiliar with. I don't know enough to comment intelliengtly on
this one, except to say that Toronto continues its bullpen
renovation.
(3) The Giants will send Jack Clark to the Cards for David Green, Dave
LaPointe, Gary Rajsich, and a minor league infielder. Best trade
Herzog has made in years. Not that its a big steal, but anytime
St. Louis can make a trade without getting burned these days, it's
got to be considered a plus. Clark is top-quality player: good
defensive outfielder with plenty of power and a high average. To
get him, the Cardinals give up two first-basemen outfielders who
haven't quite lived up to their advance notices. Green shows
signs of being an exiciting offensive player, but is very
inconsistent. Rajsich has a solid record in AAA as a power
hitter, but has failed so far to do the same against major-league
pitching. LaPointe is good enough to help the Giants' rotation,
but not terribly much. Still, neither the Cards nor the Giants
have that much to lose in making a trade...
David Rubinschneider@vlnvax.DEC (02/01/85)
(1) Oliver for Zachry. I don't quite agree with the Dodgers being the
beneficiaries here. Oliver once had noteriety for being so
underrated, but these days he's known for his selfishness, as
his output has been declining for the last few years. Don't
look for him to help LA; his drive for 3000 hits notwithstanding,
the man couldn't drive in a (NL) shortstop's number of runs when'
he was in the middle of the Expos' powerful lineup a few years ago.
If Zachry does anything, the trades a win for the Phils.
(3) Clark for Green et al. It was mentioned that the Cards have made a
trade without getting burnt. And I agree getting Clark is a
can't-miss in almost any trade. But I can't resist bringing up
this piece of trivia to make people think twice before giving
up on Dave LaPointe (or resigning him to mediocrity). Since
1970 or so, the Cards have traded away three pitchers who have
totalled over 500 wins, and one of the best if not the best
player they got in return was Spicio Spinks!! Send replies to
me or over the net (baseball can use the activity). After all
even though its snowing as I type spring training opens in
less than a month.
Daniel Schneider
{...decvax}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-vlnvax!schneidercjsgro@watrose.UUCP (cjsgro) (02/08/85)
In article <508@fisher.UUCP> david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin) writes: >(2) The Giants send Gary Lavelle to the Blue Jays for some guys I'm > unfamiliar with. I don't know enough to comment intelliengtly on > this one, except to say that Toronto continues its bullpen > renovation. A steal for the Blue Jays. Lavelle is the lefthander that they so desperately need and will showcase Caudill (if they ever get him signed!) fabulously. The Jays sent the Giants Jim Gott and some minor leaguers whose names I don't remember right now. All I can say about Jim Gott is that he was an OK starter if you have a team that isn't going anywhere. Gott had his good games but he also tended to get blasted at times. He was an adequate fourth or fifth starter for the Jays and he could have developed into something good but he was definitely expendable. Of course, if Jim Clancy has another bum season, with ERA flirting with 5.00, it may be panic time for the Jays' starting staff. What I can't figure out was why Lavelle was so cheaply got(t)? -- Carlo Sgro ...{ihnp4||allegra}!watmath!watrose!cjsgro "I told you not to do that!"
jeff@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) (02/14/85)
Regarding the Giants' trade of Gary Lavelle to the Blue Jays for Jim Gott and a minor-leaguer or two, Carlo Sgro (watrose!cjsgro) writes: > What I can't figure out was why Lavelle was so cheaply got(t)? The reason is because of his age. He's 36. However, this makes it a great deal for both teams. Lavelle may only have a couple of good years left, but that's all the Jays need because, now that the Jays have turned their only big weakness (the bullpen) into a strength (theoretically of course; we'll have to wait a few months before we know for sure), they have an excellent chance of winning the world series in the time that Lavelle is still dependable. However, he is much less valuable to the Giants, because by the time the Giants can develop into a contender, Lavelle will be ready to retire, so they're much better off getting a couple of younger players who can help them out a few years down the road. -- Jeff Richardson, DCIEM, Toronto (416) 635-2073 {linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd}!utcsrgv!dciem!jeff {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!dciem!jeff
newman@bgsuvax.UUCP (Tim Newman) (02/14/85)
How could the Blue Jays get Gary LaVelle so cheaply? Simple, the guy's 36 years old (or thereabouts). They gave up Jim Gott, a young guy with a lot of talent and also those minor leaguers. I'm not so sure if that is a cheap rate or not. The trade helps the Jays now, but what about three years down the road when LaVelle is done and the Giants have all those players right in the prime of their careers? Tim Newman