Get Ellsbury & Barmes for Kelly Johnson & dropping somebody

[brooklyn49]

I'm in last place in SB which may be the only category keeping me from a legitimate shot at winning the league. After inquiring about Ellsbury in trade, I was surprised by the offer of Ellsbury and Barmes for Kelly Johnson. To make room on my roster for the 2 for 1 trade, I also have to drop a player from my roster. So, questions:

1. Is Ellsbury on the mend and likely to come back at full strength soon?

2. Power is always at a premium, and power from a middle infielder is even more valuable, but does anyone seriously disagree that this is a great "sell high" opportunity with Kelly Johnson?

3. With, or without Ellsbury, I'm loaded at OF. Starting Tori Hunter, Markakis, Magglio Ordonez, & Swisher with McLouth and Coghlan riding the bench until they caught fire. Between the two, I'm thinking that McLouth is the guy to drop. Agree?

4. The last piece to the trade is who takes Johnson's place as my middle infielder. Immediately Álex González is already on my roster to fill in. Barmes becomes a alternate option, or a FA like Aviles, or maybe go after Starlin Castro.

Any reason to hesitate, rethink or re-evaluate?

[Todd Zola]

1. About to start rehab assignment, should be back in 7-10 days. Other than shaking off some rust, there should be no residual effects.

2. Is he going to continue at this pace? No. But think Aaron Hill last season. Not comparing the players per say. Just saying that he will slow the pace, but the remaining production will still be better than expected and pretty darned good. Let's say Johnson is worth "100" right now. Selling high means you think he is going to be "50" or "60" the rest of the season and you get back someone worth "65" or whatever. My point is Johnson is apt to be a "70" for the rest of the season.

3. Disagree. Coghlan's production in a league of this nature is pretty empty. McLouth is still a potential 20/20 guy.

4. There is little doubt on a "value" basis, regardless of who you use, the dropoff from Johnson to the replacement is larger than the upgrade to Ellsbury. This is based on value, not categorical need. But this early in the season, I feel it is a little too early to sacrifice overall value for categorical need.

That said, I have no issue with addressing a perceived categorical need. My preference would be more of a needs for needs deal, trading from strength. To me, this would be dealing an outfielder with more power straight up for Ellsbury.

This is all just my not so humble opinion, based on the surface info provided.

Your own knowledge of the league, player evaluation, strategy and gut instinct trump the above.