dak
Well-known member
I would be more concerned with the quality of the overall package rather than focus on specific needs or the players ETA to the majors. That's secondary to value. The exception I might make would be for a catcher who is already in the majors or is near major league ready. We have a big need there. But I think we can fill that need without moving Teheran or any top prospect.
I don't think the immediate need will be the only factor, but we've entered a stage in the rebuild where they won't move a piece like Teheran without filling a need at the MLB level for 2017 . . . unless the prospect pool offered is just ridiculous. This is what I meant with the leverage comment. Quite understandably, we'll be looking for 2017 contributors and will be very stearn in our negotiating posture to get that. So if a trade partner doesn't want to make an offer like that, they'll have to pay out the wazoo with non-MLB-ready assets. I'd be okay with either of those outcomes.