I had thought the Clemens to the Yankees trade rumors were omnipresent, but over the last three or four days, the Clemens to the Rangers thing has been everywhere.
I've pretty much already spoken my piece on this, but at the same time, like the Beatles on "Glass Onion," I'm kind of required here to acknowledge the rumor, you know?
This is more or less verbatim from my post over at Speedy's. My bias in wanting to keep Clemens is readily apparent, and good for me . . . .
Apparently there are three or four prospects that are put forth by those who either think a deal could happen, or by those who feel that what it would require wouldn't happen:Clemens' value to a contender the way he is pitching right now is immense. But so is his monetary cost. That monetary cost is what would drive down the player renumeration the Astros could receive. But that player renumeration is the only reason to do the deal. Why would you wanna screw yourself, just to do a deal that doesn't need to be done?
Thomas Diamond, a pitcher in High A ball, and John Danks, a pitcher in AA. Ian Kinsler, a shortstop at AAA, and Adrian Gonzalez, a first baseman at AAA are two others who have received mention. While none of these players are A-rated, they ARE the best the Rangers have to offer. These guys also just happen to take up four of the top five in John Sickels' organizational top 20. Now I like a good pitching prospect in single A as much as the next guy, but what we need most are outfielders--and Texas cannot offer that. Kinsler and Denks are ready to go right now, but unless you're ready to throw out Everett, there's really no place to put them. Berkman is who you want at first, right?Look, the Yankees deal was a joke from the get-go. It was never gonna happen. Texas is a little more realistic, but one side or the other is going to have to be stupid to have it happen. I don't want that side to be the Astros.
And as a bonus, maybe Rocket wins an ERA crown or yet another Cy Young . . even if the team continues to flounder.