sportscoach
RD's Guardians PR Man!
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2016
- Messages
- 20,885
- Reaction score
- 9,621
- Points
- 113
Uhhhhh Marsh does not and has not played 1B to my knowledge. He's a plus defender in CF of that I'm sure. If they need a replacement for Pujols then let them choose between Bauers and Bradley. If they don't want Carrasco then offer them one of Civale/McKenzie for Marsh and Detmers. Sorry, but they don't have the prospect assets to even come close to getting Plesac. Do you realize how good he's been? If they need an OF then send them Naquin. He's serviceable and has produced recently. There you have it, Civale/McKenzie, Bauers/Bradley, Naquin for Marsh, Detmers, and a low level prospect. Most analysts would say the Angels won that trade.
Woops that was my bad, I accidentally looked at Walsh's page when I meant to look at Marsh's so my bad on that one! Disadvantage of doing everything from your phone.
Well either way I stand to be corrected, but even more of a reason to keep Marsh then to be honest. I just cannot see the Angels making a move for Carrasco and giving up Marsh and Detmers at all. Its not a good match for the Angels at all.
Now that trade i think is even worse for the Angels. Marsh and Detmers aren't going anywhere from their team unless it's trading an all star starter with little injury history. They have no depth at either position to be honest.
Angels would start offers from there 2B/Middle INF prospects not with Detmers or Marsh for someone unproven like a McKenzie. It wouldn't be smart in my mind to trade Plesac since I think he is turning out to be the real deal.