So if Carl Crawford is 1a.) we better lower our standards...

[Fatter than Joey]

If the Brewers feel that they will not be able to sign Sheets after this season - it certainly helps us in the long run.

 

Well -- There is no doubt Crawford is a player that would be an asset -- and I am all for getting value for Sheets -- but I think it has to include SP.

 

It seems to me that if we traded Sheets for Crawford, we'd end up trading Crawford in 2009 for SP.

 

If the Brewers are 15 games out in July, I'd change my opinion -- right now I'd rather roll the dice with Ben and take picks (unless a trade with the Brewers getting SP comes along)

[Bert55]

My fear is that if, and I don't think this will be the case, we are 15 games back and have to trade Sheets or loose him to FA, we would not get much value. Very much like Sexson, it is no better time to get value NOW. That may mean a quality OF like Crawford. Prospects are a thing of the past. We need timely hitting and it seems CC is a possible answer.

[rluzinski]

Half the players in MLB are below average, so don't get too excited.

 

Half the starters sure aren't. If you want to argue that he's a decent utility infielder, fine. How much trade value does a guy like that have, though?

[splitterpfj]

I have no idea what the price would be, and it could turn me off, but right now this is the player I want playing left-field and batting second.

[endaround]

Crawford batting 2nd would be terrible-he would never get a chance to steal.