While perhaps taking another IF would be more likely, I wouldn't totally rule out the fact that if Marte were traded and Blake is inserted at 3B, perhaps Ben Francisco would have a greater chance of making this ballclub out of ST (and especially if Michaels were included as part of the deal) - after all, Blake would no longer be an option for the OF if he's playing everyday at 3B.  While we'd have the matter of Choo coming back and being out of options (I'm not sure if Francisco still has an option left or not,) Choo likely won't be available until May or June - the OF picture will likely shake itself out by then (Francisco or Gutierrez - is Gutz out of options or not? Not sure - being sent back to AAA Buffalo or Michaels or Dellucci being traded, etc.,) so I could see Francisco being part of the OF picture to start the season if Marte is traded and Blake replaces him at 3B, and being that Blake replaced Marte quite admirably last year, I could see the Indians going to him again if they feel Marte won't contribute as expected here.  Plus, you do have Carroll to back up Blake at 3B if need be - it may not be the "ideal" approach in terms of having enough IF depth, but I think it's a reasonable possibility, since Blake's insertion at 3B essentially takes him away from being an OFer, and thereby, would have the Indians add another OFer to the roster (i.e. Francisco.)

Just my 2 cents.  :-)

All of this gets back to people treating players like pegs and the field like a pegboard.  Peralta "seems like" a 3B-shaped peg -- allegedly -- and Barfield "seems like" a 2B-shaped peg -- also allegedly -- and AstroCab really and truly is a SS-shaped peg.

Here's the thing, though.

1. The first allegedly.
   
2. The second allegedly.
   
3. Putting the right pegs in the right holes doesn't win ballgames, even if it "feels right."

There is serious debate over whether Pelfrey will ever become that top-of-the-rotation or at least very good mid-rotation starter, as he's been torched often at AAA and has had some serious problems at the ML level, supposedly from his command being out-of-whack at times and his stuff being too hittable.

I don't know - would the Mets consider a Marte for Pelfrey trade - two prospects that haven't lived up to their billing?  What if Michaels were included in the deal with Marte - would they give up Pelfrey?

I know Pelfrey is no "sure thing," but being that Marte is no "sure thing" either, that probably would be the best type of prospect you could get for Marte without it being a very young, unknown prospect - getting a prospect who was highly regarded, but hasn't lived up to expectations - someone like Pelfrey.

Just a thought and my 2 cents.  :-)

Well, I imagine Corey Smith is available.

But that presupposes that we have a more reasonable option for second base than Marte is for third base.  I don't believe that's true.  After all of this, Marte is still 14 months younger than Barfield and was a better hitter at every age and every level in the minors.  Barfield hangs his hat solely on a single major league season with a 741 OPS, and that ain't that much when it comes right down to it.

Look at it another way ... in his only extended exposure to AL pitching, Barfield put up 594 OPS in 444 PA.  Marte's AL career, brief and scattered and poor as it has been, is better:  667 OPS in 238 PA.

Barfield may turn out to be the better hitter, but we sure as hell don't know that yet by a long stretch.  Marte, once again, has just never gotten a real shot.