Scott White

Not to get repetitive, but so many good e-mails have come in and gotten me thinking lately that I couldn't help but field a couple more today.

Knock it off, you guys.

This first one addresses a couple of issues that have become themes of this blog recently: trading and Justin Verlander.

"How long do I hold on to Justin Verlander? I’ve been offered a ton of trades for him and have passed on them all so far. Check out this one: Jason Bay, Bobby Crosby and Josh Beckett for Mike Cameron, Miguel Tejada and Verlander. Should I execute this trade, try to get more out of the deal or keep holding on to Verlander?" -- Jack DeFillip, McKees Rocks, Penn.

Verlander nearly crossed a line for me with his last start. I've talked him up since his first shaky performance against the Royals and assured countless Fantasy owners he'll turn it around soon enough.

And then I traded for him in a couple leagues. Let me tell you, owning him gives you a whole new perspective.

Not that I'm suggesting I regret my trades or that anyone should sell on Verlander before it's too late. He still probably will turn it around. I'm just saying his eighth straight mediocre start dropped me from confident to nervous.

How nervous? Well, enough that I'd probably accept that trade, provided I had a contingency plan in place for shortstop if Crosby didn't pan out. See, Beckett has given us no reason to doubt his standing as a Fantasy ace. Verlander has, and Verlander at his best is no better than Beckett at his right now. Easy call there. Same with the Bay-for-Cameron part of the swap. Bay at his worst is essentially Cameron at his best, minus a few stolen bases.

So this deal really comes down to giving up Tejada for Crosby, which is obviously a significant step backward. Not to put words in his mouth, but I think Emack would probably accept this deal without hesitation, for what it's worth. He has a lot more confidence in Crosby, who has slowed down in recent weeks and doesn't have much of a track record other than injuries, than I do. Because I don't think this deal is worth debilitating yourself at one position, I'd make sure I had a Plan B at shortstop before pulling the trigger, but then I'd pull it because of those ever-so-slight doubts creeping in over Verlander.

BUT I WANT TO MAKE THIS CLEAR: It's not that I want anyone to sell low on Verlander. It's just that I don't think this specific deal qualifies as a low sell.

"Here's a possible future topic: outfielders. Specifically, I receive trade offers almost daily in my 10-team Head-to-Head league for Grady Sizemore, but I haven't received a single offer for Nate McLouth." -- Bob Mercer

Yeah, outfielders. They play out ... in the field. And the infielders all turn their backs to them ... and whisper behind their gloves about them ... and laugh.

I'm not totally sure where you wanted me to go with the rather broad topic of outfielders, but I do have a few thoughts on your specific topic: McLouth.

We could have called his April a hot start, a fluke or any number of unfavorable terms that suggest he won't keep it going. We could have, but he just won't slow down. He had another two-homer game Tuesday and, with nine this season, is behind only Chase Utley, Lance Berkman and Chipper Jones for the league lead. He obviously won't continue his pace of 42 home runs, but might he hit 25? 30? He certainly won't peter out at 14, as some people might have suggested two weeks ago. And we haven't even talked about his stolen-base potential or the statistic that most echoes his performance in the minor leagues, his .324 batting average.

So McLouth is in kind of an awkward place for Fantasy participants -- the ones who have him and the ones who don't. He's been so good that, as an owner, you can't afford to assume it won't continue. You might end up trading one of your best players for a bag of beans. Then again, as a non-owner, you can't afford to assume it will continue. You'd have to give up too much to get a guy who, not long ago, projected as a fourth outfielder.

In one of my leagues, I made several attempts to pry Carlos Quentin away from one of my competitors. He spurned each of my proposals and finally said if I needed an outfielder so badly, I could make an offer for McLouth. Well, I thought about it, and thought, and finally decided I'd have to give up too much for McLouth to take the chance of him coming back down to earth. I mean, I couldn't offer more for him than I did for Quentin, could I?

So if you want your opponents to make offers for McLouth, Bob, you might want to assure them you'll take a much less offer for him than you would for Sizemore. Then again, depending on how low you go, I might have no choice but to describe you as crazy.

That's all for now.