| By Jason A. Churchill |  | By 10-17-2012 |
It's been about a season and a third since the Seattle Mariners traded right-handers Doug Fister and David Pauley to the Detroit for three young, unproven players. At the time, it appeared the M's were taking a risk that they had enough starting pitching depth that they could afford to give up such a starting pitcher for the chance to gain value in other areas.
The keys to the trade were third baseman Francisco Martinez and outfielder Casper Wells. Wells was big-league ready, Martinez more of a project. Reliever Chance Ruffin was the player to be named later. The M's also received southpaw Charlie Furbush.
That was July 31, 2011. Since then, Fister has continued to develop into a strong No. 3 starter -- a defacto No. 2 for the Tigers at times -- and the Mariners have received little in return from the two offensive players, which was the main objective of the deal. While it's too early to give up on Martinez and Ruffin, Wells appears to be a platoon option at best -- though he could end up a value in such a role.
Ruffin had what appears to be a lost 2012 when he looked a year ago like he was ready to contribute in the seventh or eighth inning going forward. His stuff was down a bit, but his control and command were both down a full grade. In five games I was in attendance, Ruffin threw just 54 percent strikes and his fastball sat 90-93 mph. Prior to the trade last season, Ruffin was sitting 91-94, touching 96, and showing a plus slider and the occasional useful curveball.
Furbush, at this stage, is the most significant acquisition in the trade for Seattle, as he's settled in nicely as one of the better left-handed relievers in the American League.
Martinez, still just 22, has struggled to hit for any power and now the talk surrounding his value to the organization involves being a bench player who can play third and the outfield. He's below average at the hot corner and has yet to immerse himself in the outfield, and still isn't hitting He does has a solid approach at the plate, draws a solid share of bases on balls and runs well -- probably a 55 or 60 on the 20-80 scale -- and remains a prospect, but he's done very little to date to suggest he'll be of any use in the majors, let alone a regular.
While I expect Ruffin to have some value to the Mariners in 2013 and Wells' defense and ability to handle himself well at the plate against left-handed pitching (.267/.364/.527, 7 HR in 2012), the Tigers have won this deal and there may not be any chance the M's can catch up, especially given the value Fister has given Detroit in 36 regular season starts, not to mention the 30 1/3 innings Fister has pitched in the playoffs thus far.
Martinez could be a late bloomer, but I wouldn’t bet on an average or better regular tag on him at any point and I believe Wells is what he is. The value of relievers Ruffin and Furbush have little to no shot to eclipse or even approach what Fister has produced since the trade.
At the time of the trade, Fister was, in my opinion, a No. 4 starter. I think it's clear now that he's become more than that, though he absolutely does not carry the profile of a true No. 2 -- despite that being his role at times and the mass media calling him such.
Pauley did not pitch well for Detroit and was released prior to the 2012 season.
Despite the results after some time has passed, it's difficult to blame the team for taking such a risk, however, as they knew starting pitching was there organizational strength and they were trying to stab at a bat or two. It hasn't worked out that way, but the net loss isn't making a large impact on the club's win-loss scenarios. If such a trade were made today, however, the criticism, from my point of view, would be warranted. The Seattle Mariners were in the market for prospects, and that's what they received two summers ago.
There is another level to deals that involve so many players, however, particularly with the relievers. Furbush's presence helps allow the Mariners to avoid spending any money or other assets on free agent left-handed relievers as they progress toward contention. We’ve seen contenders spend pretty big money on lefty bullpen arms in recent years, including the three-year, $15 million deal the Angels gave Scott Down before the 2011 season, the two-year and the $8 million contract to which the Yankees signed Pedro Feliciano.
Both contracts can be assessed as failures in many ways, and that is the risk clubs take on relief pitchers. By itself, though, avoiding those deals isn't enough to change the result of this trade for Seattle. Because Fister continued to get better between the day of the transaction and today -- and may have a little bit more left in the projection tank in terms of pitchability, which is his strength -- GM Jack Zduriencik and the M's lost this trade, using 20/20 hindsight.
Things could change -- it's not 100 percent guaranteed that Martinez does not develop the necessary power to play regularly, and it's not impossible that Ruffin bounces back to become a late-inning option as early as next season. Furbush's role isn't likely to change -- he was a starter when he arrived last summer, but is best suited for relief work -- which is the only way his overall value can changed significantly. Sure, Wells could surprise, too, and learn to hit right-handed pitching. Any of the above could change the outlook of the trade. None are very likely, however and in my opinion have only remote chances of occurring.
revisiting-the-doug-fister-trade
Comments
The following 30 comment(s) for this article are shown below:
| 1. By: rjfrik on 10-17-2012 20:49:50 I never liked this trade. When the M's knew they couldn't get their hands on Castellanos they should of held onto Fister and waited till the offseason or waited out another year. He would of commanded a much bigger trade booty over the offseason in 2011 or during the 2012 season. |
| 2. By: Jason A. Churchill on 10-17-2012 21:01:11 "He would of commanded a much bigger trade booty over the offseason in 2011 or during the 2012 season." This is a false statement. |
| 3. By: pwhit44 on 10-17-2012 21:18:28 Why are we talking about Fister's booty anyway? Yep, that joke happened. |
| 4. By: dafix_isin on 10-17-2012 21:26:04 This trade, along with the Brandon Morrow trade makes me sick. Please Jason, please, never revisit the Morrow trade. We get it. Ugh. |
| 5. By: Jason A. Churchill on 10-17-2012 21:34:40 Already did that about a year or so after, so you're safe! We'll hit the Bedard-to-Boston 3-team deal next week and the Pineda-Campos, Montero trade the week after. |
| 6. By: dewey on 10-18-2012 00:07:18 I was at gane todat Zunino Wa past awul but cqn it very simlirar to montero for me.i TINK UNTIL WE CHANGE LEADESHIP WE LOSE |
| 7. By: dewey on 10-18-2012 00:07:25 I was at gane todat Zunino Wa past awul but cqn it very simlirar to montero for me.i TINK UNTIL WE CHANGE LEADESHIP WE LOSE |
| 8. By: dewey on 10-18-2012 00:07:31 I was at gane todat Zunino Wa past awul but cqn it very simlirar to montero for me.i TINK UNTIL WE CHANGE LEADESHIP WE LOSE |
| 9. By: Jerry on 10-18-2012 00:33:45 I think Dewey might have had 9-13 beers at the game. Jason, Do scouts ever get shithoused while watching prospects? Probably not. |
| 10. By: CottonmouthKarl on 10-18-2012 04:36:10 I actually still have quite a bit of hope for Casper Wells. Perhaps, irrationally so... Vs. LHP's he had a 150 wRC+ , vs. RHP's he suffered with a 50 wRC+ this season. Considering he batted against more righties than lefties, wouldn't he have a terrible negative WAR against righties? But he still did decent, just needs to be platooned. My guess is Casper gets traded over the next 14 months. But he would make an awesome platoon mate with a righty masher whose value is lowered by sucking vs lefties. The most realistic example of that I can think of is Shin-Soo Choo who still had a .400 Woba vs. righties this year, despite not being the force he was two years ago. Also wouldn't the Indians most likely be considering trading him soon as he has only 2 years left? Choo is probably a bad example btw, that's why I'm not in charge. In reality I expect Jack Zduriencik to go after a full time outfielder instead, perhaps throwing a bunch of money at Nick Swisher as many have suggested. But I always end up being surprised by in the end by the moves that are made. Anyone think Swisher will come to Seattle if we are the highest bidder? Or will he pick a "contending" team? |
| 11. By: mymrbig on 10-18-2012 09:01:01 Hard to be negative on the trade unless you employ the retrospect-o-scope. I don't remember there being any serious predictions at the time of the trade that Fister would continue to improve to a good #3. The fact that he did so is good for Detroit and bad for Seattle, but shouldn't affect any views of the trade. The development (or lack thereof) of some of the prospects headed to Seattle is worthy analysis. While the trade hasn't worked out great for Seattle so far, there is still hope and I think it was a justifiable (indeed good) trade at the time it was made. |
| 12. By: maqman on 10-18-2012 10:33:13 I agree, at the time I thought it was a reasonable trade. Now it looks like we didn't get as much value as we hoped we would. That happens with trades, draft signings, international and MLB free agent acquisitions. There is risk in every transaction, plus injuries and just bad luck. Nobody gets them all right, although Billy Beane did pretty good this past season. Throwing money at problems didn't do enough for LAAofA, the Texicans or the Dodgers. We could be worse off, just ask the Red Sox. Choo is a free agent after next season and his agent is Boras, he'll cost too much for a platoon partner. |
| 13. By: diderot on 10-18-2012 11:06:52 Wait, are you really categorizing the Bedard and Montero trades as somehow equal? If so, on what basis? |
| 14. By: Klatzy on 10-18-2012 12:00:02 At the time of the trade I thought that it was not a good trade in the sense that Fister was cheap and effective. And he was going to be so for a while. If F. Martinez had turned into a 3b regular then it would have been a good trade. But like Triunfel the performance never really matched the scouting. |
| 15. By: rjfrik on 10-18-2012 12:44:56 To me it seemed like JZ was trying to trade Fister just to infuse the club with some prospects and hope they hit. I'm not sure how hanging on to Fister, letting him continue to dominate in a pitchers park and then finding a suitor over the offseason or early 2012 wouldn't of brought back a better trade partner and better talent for Seattle. Look at what Oakland received over last offseason for Trevor Cahill from Arizona. In my opinion Fister is just as good, if not better then Cahill. Over the last two seasons Fister has had a better ERA by a full run, better K/BB by 2K's, better WHIP and a better FIP. Fister is the better pitcher, IMO. The package of Trevor Cahill and RP Craig Breslow returned SP Jarrod Parker (stud!!!!), OF Collin Cowgill and RP Ryan Cook (great reliever). I would think the Fister and Pauley package that we sent to the Tigers could have netted the same package from the Diamondbacks. Maybe I'm wrong, but it's hard to argue with stats over the last two years between Fister and Cahill. Parker was a prospect that was rated higher then Castellanos in 2011. I just think JZ sold himself short on this particular trade and he should have kept Fister until the offseason at the very least. |
| 16. By: shamus on 10-18-2012 12:59:19 Hi Jason - is Zunino's defence something that we need to be worried about? He had 9 passed balls in less than half a season. |
| 17. By: Edman on 10-18-2012 13:03:41 hindsight is 20/20. As I remember, many were clammoring to trade Fister, "while is stock was high". Dave Cameron didn't think he deserved a place on the roster, and later reversed that position. I get back to my theory that trades are a crapshoot. You can make apparently good trades on paper, that don't net what you hoped, especially for prospects. This trade will hinge on what Ruffin and Martinez will do the next couple seasons. Sometimes, players have bad years. It will be a test of commitment. Are they going to use the off-season to make themselves better ballplayers? Same applies to Wells. He needs to find a way to be consistent. It's about the homework. |
| 18. By: valencia on 10-18-2012 13:08:11 I thought it was a bad trade unless we got Smyly or Castellenos. When we ended up with Ruffin...ugh. Bad job by the MLB scouting team, Doug Fister when we traded him had one of the best fastball values in the league, even if his SIERA was pretty average. I still believe in Casper Wells. I don't think he's as bad against RHP as he was last year. He could be a 2 WAR corner OF, which would be huge for this team and their lack of quality OFers. I wish Wedge would have played him more, but Wedge relies on BA to rate players. Kind of sucks the guy I thought could be our Matt Joyce ended up as our Matt Joyce...only he bats on the wrong side. |
| 19. By: greentunic on 10-18-2012 14:23:51 Sometimes I WISH Wedge would choose only on batting average. Olivo over Jaso... I want to like the manager but the evidence just really stacks against him with his player usage. Id love to keep Olivo just for tough LHPs but unfortunately I think we have to get rid of him to keep him grom playing 3-4 times a week. That's just bad when you have to work around your own manager... Sad face |
| 20. By: rocketdawg31 on 10-19-2012 01:50:32 The Fister deal made total sense at the time. As Edman noted, a lot of us- me included, I'm sure- were CLAMORING for a trade to net more talent (that was almost ML-ready) into the organization. It's not that we got absolutely nothing. Charlie Furbush has found his long-term role. We have a solid lefty reliever that has a chance to be one of the best lefties in the league for a long time. And we're years away from having to start pitchforking him anything close to serious money. If Casper Wells only becomes one of the better 4th outfielders in the league, so be it. I think he can be more, personally. I haven't given up the idea he can be a regular, but oy vey does he have some adjustments to make before that happens. Point blank, though...I like HIS chances more than I like Trayvon Robinson's. Chance Ruffin to me is a crapshoot...a zillion guys make it with his profile. A zillion don't. Could go either way. Won't cry tears of pain or joy no matter which way THAT stone rolls. It's Francisco Martinez who I'd really hoped would swing the deal our way. His 2012 season was- to put it mildly- disappointing for me to see. So it hasn't gone like we hoped up to this point, and Fister is now the likely Game 2 starter in the World Series. Oh, well. Good for him. On to the next moves for us. I am anxiously awaiting the new rabbits out of the hat Zduriencik will give us. |
| 21. By: VikingArthur on 10-19-2012 10:02:59 I was not happy with trading "The Fist" at the time. I think the organization bought into the whole "he is borderline 3-4 starter outside of Safeco" thing. He has proven to be much more than that. We have, under Jack Z (whom I support), traded two 2/3 starting pitchers and gotten little to nothing for them. They were cost controlled and had not reached their ceiling yet. Don't give me the "We got Brandon League"... as Dennis Green said "He was who we thought he was". I have been a huge Jack Z supporter but I am starting to wonder. Outside of the first move (Putz deal) and his trade to acquire Cliff Lee, his deals have questionable. 1. We didn't give up much for Cliff Lee but we didn't get much more back for him... almost a wash at this point. 2. Ackley - solid player but not much more than that. 3. Figgins - Disaster 4. Morrow trade - disaster 5. Fister trade - not a disaster, but not a win by any stretch. I think what we are seeing is that Jack Z and McNamara are great with drafting (Ackley was an obvious pick... he may just not be that great), but average (at best) at evaluating major league or near major league talent. I would say they struggle with this based on the record. If this organization wants to make the next step, we need to bring someone in whose expertise is acquiring ready-to-play now talent. My biggest fear is that the organizaton will get impatient before all of the drafting acumen comes to fruition. I have little doubt that given one or two more drafts that this team will be ready to contend. Will the organization (Lincoln and Dumbstrong) be able to wait until 2014-2015? I don't know. If we don't acquire real talent from outside the organization we won't contend until then. That is my take at least. |
| 22. By: maqman on 10-19-2012 11:33:05 GMZ has his work cut out for him this off-season. There's not much in the way of bargains available in the free agent OF crop. Billy Beane says he's bringing all of his back, says he wants to keep the team together. Victorino might be available if the Dodgers won't commit to letting him play full time and we want to outbid the other teams. Some team will overpay Hamilton and B. J. Upton and Atlanta or the Nats will think Michael Bourn can keep up his speed well into his 30's - he won't. The Nats have Zimmerman at 3B but might move him to 1B to bring in Rendon, who broke his ankle early in the season. He's got a .771 OPS in the AFL in 22 at bats. Thing is they also have another 3B guy in the AFL named Matthew Skole who has a 1.403 OPS so far. Skole hit 27 dingers with a season OPS of .983 at two lower levels of the minors. Nats are deep at 3B, we got arms. They should talk. |
| 23. By: Rudolf on 10-19-2012 14:11:10 I was underwhelmed with the return for Fister at the time. He was a #3/4 pitcher for us with, but there was the hope we could grab a B+ type prospect for him. Furbush was a back-end starter; Wells a 4th OF; Ruffin maybe an 8th inning guy. Those three didn't add up to what Fister was, so a great portion of the value in the deal rested on Francisco Martinez's development. A year or so later we are seeing that w/out Martinez becoming a legit 3B option our end of the bargain looks meager. Furbush being relegated to bullpen duties-- aside from his success there-- has to be viewed as a disappointment. There was always some hope that Furbush could end up being what Fister was and the other three parts would be gravy, (a few of us still hold out for this). It was a trade with limited upside EVEN IN COMPARISON to the seemingly limited upside of the guy we shipped off. Then the upside ended up being on the major league ready end of the deal. We took it in the shorts on that one. |
| 24. By: slamcactus on 10-19-2012 15:00:25 Skole's not much of a 3B. |
| 25. By: Ungnome on 10-19-2012 15:56:16 I'm gonna hold off grading this deal until I see how Casper Wells is used and how the closer fences will help him next year. I think he is more than a 4th outfielder but he does have a bad platoon split and some contact issues which, so far, have held him back. Do the M's need another outfielder? Yes, but I am not convinced they don't already have one. |
| 26. By: sexymarinersfan on 10-19-2012 17:12:47 I could not agree more. I think the jury is still out on Wells too. He plays solid defense and has a cannon for an arm. I think worst case scenario he could be a nice platoon, but lets wait and see. I liked the trade at the time, up until I found out that the PTBNL was Ruffin. I was hoping for much more, like Smyly or Castellanos. I love the fact that Charlie has blossomed well into his new role and even heard whispers of All-Star game surrounding him for awhile. It's too bad about FMart. I was really hoping that 2012 was going to be a year to at least show SOME power. It's looking more and more like the Tigers won this trade. As far as Pineda for Montero is concerned, I was all for it, but when I heard that Jack wanted to get Noesi for Campos I just cringed. At Fanfest he told us that half of the Yankees front office was for letting Noesi go, and the other half wasn't. I personally felt Campos' upside was too high for a pitcher that had a ceiling of Pedro Astacio, but that's just me. |
| 27. By: maqman on 10-20-2012 10:56:04 How come nobody mentions Lueke for Jaso? |
| 28. By: sexymarinersfan on 10-20-2012 11:12:19 Because we're all just trying to piss you off! ;-0 |
| 29. By: Timberwolf on 10-20-2012 16:52:27 Just because it was a great trade for the Tigers, doesn't mean that it was a bad trade for the Mariners. Would Fister have made a difference here, or done something to significantly raise his trade value? I don't think so. If I want to cry over spilled milk, I refer to Adam Jones and Chris Tillman for Bedard. Or Jason Varitek and Derrick Lowe for Slocumb. Those are what terrible trades look like. |
| 30. By: rightwingrick on 10-24-2012 22:02:11 Still too early to call for the M's. Great trade for the Tigers. Francisco Martinez will make it or break it. Getting a nice left-hnaded relief pitcher and a pretty good platoon outfielder isn't bad...but Fister turned out better than almost anyone projected (except someone on the Tigers, obviously). |
Haven't created a Prospect Insider account yet? Sign up!
|
|
| Copyright 2013 Prospect Insider, Inc. | Created by AQ Central Prospect Insider is optimized for Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome |