| By PI Staff |  | By 11-08-2010 |
The Seattle Mariners aren't likely to have enough payroll flexibility this winter to pick up four or five impact players and thrust themselves into the same contention category as the Texas Rangers, Los Angeles Angels or even the Oakland Athletics. So they'll have to acquire said talent -- or at least as much as they can before the start of the 2011 schedule -- via the trade route.
Jack Zduriencik's track record in trades has been pretty solid -- Adam P. Boyd tackled that here and here -- and includes two separate Cliff Lee transactions that each came out in favor of the M's.
What's in store for the M's this offseason? After last year, would anything shock you?
Chris Crawford and Jason A. Churchill take a look at just a few of the possibilities, despite them all fitting somewhere between long shot and not very likely.
Zack Greinke, RHP -- Kansas City Royals
Greinke is only going to be dealt if a club empties their chamber -- and an extra clip or two -- in a trade package for the 2009 AL Cy Young Award winner, and the Mariners probably have less than zero chance of making such a deal.
Even if Michael Pineda and Dustin Ackley were packaged together, there's a good chance Royals GM Dayton Moore holds out for more, which probably means he's not getting traded at all, since that's a hefty price to pay for two years of any player.
Besides, the Texas Rangers, especially if they lose Cliff to the New York Yankees, actually have the inventory to get such a deal done if they pass Greinke's no-trade test.
James Shields, RHP -- Tampa Bay Rays
Shields had a bit of a tough year, but his stuff doesn't seem to have taken much of a step back. It does appear his delivery needs a tweak or two, as his fastball-change combo, his bread and butter, lost some separation -- almost a full mph -- and his cutter was ineffective most of the year, which partially explains why right-handed batters torched him.
He's still viewed as a quality starting pitcher, perhaps somewhere between a No. 2 and No. 3, and is signed through 2011 with three options years to follow. He'll make just $4.25 million next season, so the Rays don't have to deal him this winter to make payroll, but they could get tons of value out of him by shopping him now, and they do have Jeremy Hellickson ready to take a spot in the rotation.
At last check, however, the Rays were considering a role change for Jeff Niemann to make room for Hellickson and soften the blow of the free agency of Rafael Soriano, Joaquin Benoit and Grant Balfour.
Matt Garza is another candidate, but like Shields, it may be a little early to expect the Rays to put him on the market.
Wandy Rodriguez, LHP -- Houston Astros
Rodriguez and his agent Barry Praver have made it known they'd like a multi-year contract extension, but as he hits his final year of arbitration he could be awarded as much as $9 million before he qualifies for free agency this time next year.
The left-hander is a quality mid-rotation arm in the American League, but he's getting pricey and might simply be a one-year solution. The Astros don't seem to be in a hurry to extend his contract, so a trade between now and next August seems plausible.
Other possibilities
Fausto Carmona, RHP -- Cleveland; Josh Willingham, OF -- Washington; Anibal Sanchez, RHP -- Florida; Jair Jurrjens, RHP -- Atlanta; Scott Baker, RHP -- Minnesota; Armando Gallaraga, RHP -- Detroit; Ricky Nolasco, RHP -- Florida; Andy LaRoche, 3B -- Pittsburgh; Andrew Miller, LHP -- Florida; Dioner Navarro, C -- Tampa Bay.
The problem with another mega-deal occurring this winter is that there are only so many suckers out there running other clubs and the M's don't have the blue chip depth in their farm system to deal with the typical front office and land a high-impact talent.
We'd be shocked if Michael Pineda was made available in trade this winter, and even more surprised if Nick Franklin and Dustin Ackley weren't placed on the unmentionable list.
After that, the system lacks a headliner name, which leaves Zduriencik to deal from the current 25-man roster members. We'll tackle that thought Tuesday.
trade-ideas
Comments
The following 77 comment(s) for this article are shown below:
| 1. By: rosterbatorextraordinaire on 11-08-2010 00:10:53 BOSTON/SEATTLE Jed Lowrie for Brandon League and Matt Mangini. Mangini can be a utility guy/bench bat and League could move into a setup role, we get Lowrie who is a man without a position. ATLANTA/SEATTLE Chone Figgins, David Aardsma, Josh Lueke for Omar Infante, Craig Kimbrel, and Michael Dunn. (maybe some cash needs to move hands also) The Braves get the better relievers, which should keep Seattle from having to add much if any money. Aardsma can become the closer with Wagner retiring. Who better to deal with a PR nightmare of a reliever than the Braves, they survived Rocker. SAN FRANCISCO/SEATTLE Jack Wilson, Alex Liddi, Tyler Blandford for Pablo Sandoval. If they spend $9MM a season on Renteria, they won't have a problem with $5MM for Wilson. I don't see Liddi or Blandford fitting into the future of the Mariners, but still could be successful major leaguers, especially in the NL. Sandoval has ate his way into mediocrity with SF and for that reason the price tag probably isn't too much. FLORIDA/SEATTLE Ryan Rowland-Smith, Garrett Olson, and Matt Tuiasosopo for Andrew Miller Since he's a non-tender candidate, chances are we can get him for a couple low priced lefties and a utility player with some pop. KANSAS CITY/SEATTLE Doug Fister, Jason Vargas, Carlos Triunfel, Greg Halman, Nate Tenbrink, Rich Poythress, and the rights to Jose Lopez for Zack Greinke, Alex Gordon, Kila Ka'aihue. Greinke is a solid #2 pitcher but he's not Hernandez, Halladay, Lee, or Lincecum. Yes he's a great pitcher, but he has a GB rate of around 40%, a LD rate of around 20%, and as a result his BABIP is .315 for his career, that's not the stuff of aces. The Royals are desperately in need of starting pitching, and more so with Meche going to the bullpen. Getting two starters who posted a combined WAR of 5.5 along with a handful of solid prospects sounds like a good deal for KC. They also get to reinvest the $13.5MM a year from Greinke into other team needs. Gordon and Ka'aihue are 27 and 26, both could be good players but have fallen out of favor with the Royals, while guys like Hosmer and Moustakas are taking their positions in 2012. Poythress is a younger right handed version of Ka'aihue, Lopez fills the gap at 3B until 2012 when Moustakas is ready, Triunfel and Tenbrink could become the middle infield of the future for them and if there's a team that is willing to look past the strikeouts and inability to draw walks that defines Halman's minor league career, it's the Royals. The 2011 Mariners Ichiro RF Ackley 2B Martinez C Smoak 1B Sandoval DH Gordon 3B Gutierrez CF Saunders LF Lowrie SS Moore C Infante UT Bradley OF Ka'aihue 1B/PH Hernandez Greinke Bedard Iwakuma Miller If we miss on Iwakuma than we could look at Bonderman for probably $4-5MM since he wants to play for either Detroit, Seattle, or retire. Money doesn't seem to be his motivation. Bedard on another incentive based deal sounds realistic. As for the bullpen, put Cortes at closer, Dunn and Kimbrel at setup, Fields, Varvaro, Paredes, and Hill in middle/long relief. A bullpen for less than $3MM would make thisteam a lot better and Kelley can take over the closer role when he's healthy if Cortes can't handle it. I don't see the point of a valid closer on a rebuilding team, throw a bunch of young guys in the pen and see who takes what role when the dust settles. |
| 2. By: bpj23 on 11-08-2010 00:57:39 With our weak offense I like the idea of: Pineda for Colby Rasmus or Poythress/Triunfel/Saunders for Rasmus We need some major league bats. |
| 3. By: JohnMcD on 11-08-2010 01:35:57 Personally I would like to keep Pineda. Don't you think we could get a better player than Rasmus(not saying he's bad) with a package and Pineda being the center piece. I would love to have Rasmus though. Another thing isn't Triunfels stock pretty low right now? |
| 4. By: Bionic_ben23 on 11-08-2010 01:45:40 #1... that KC/ Sea deal... too many names. you have too much time on your hands. |
| 5. By: Bionic_ben23 on 11-08-2010 01:51:24 And, at this point what are the chances that the Mariners take on a project such as Pablo and his weight issues instead of holding on to they're own prospects and hoping that they turn out to be better then him or flipping them for a much more well known chips? Stacking the farm is what seems to be the better idea these days. Especially when you know that a strong farm is the better way to compete in the next few years |
| 6. By: Bionic_ben23 on 11-08-2010 01:53:08 Let the stock of Bavasi's players run out on they're own. I'm looking forwards to these past two drafts. sorry bout' the continuous posts. |
| 7. By: AntsInIn on 11-08-2010 06:55:00 Wow roster, there isn't a single feasible, well-balanced trade in that list. Congrats! It really seems like the $14 million devoted to Figgins and Wilson are the biggest problems in terms of flexibility. If Figgins can be dealt for even a middling return (even if Seattle has to eat a bit of cash), and Wilson plus, say, $2 million to literally anyone for anything (San Fran? Minnesota?), there's a lot more interesting moves that can be made. Like, Leuke to KC for Mike Aviles for SS and Aardsma+ to AZ for Mark Reynolds. Those moves still leave around $3 million left to play with which can go towards a Berkman fund. |
| 8. By: jgstecker on 11-08-2010 07:23:56 I'm not too worried about moving Figgins. He's overpaid, but for the amount of cash Seattle would have to eat they'd be looking at giving some team a great bargain. Seattle has a hole at 3B for a few years, might as well let Figgins fill it. As long as he plays above average defense and gets on base at a .360 pace (he managed a .340 last year despite a terrible BABIP), he's a useful piece. 2011 may not offer a lot of wiggle room financially, but going into to 2012 the M's are only on the hook for $50 million (Ichrio, Felix, Gutierrez, and Figgins). And the arbitration eligibles after next year are mostly insignificant - Vargas, Aardsma, League, Kelley, RRS. A lot of them will be long gone by then. Any trades Seattle makes should be geared toward to keeping that future payroll number as small as possible. A trade I'd like to see happen is Jack Wilson and Luke French for Paul Maholm and Ryan Doumit. That deal would save Pittsburgh about $5 million and give them a SS who is a fan favorite at the expense of a backup C/platoon RF and an erratic SP. Both Maholm and Doumit are FAs after 2011. Maholm is a guy who could build up some Washburn-like trade value in Seattle and Doumit as a platoon C/DH could force his way into Type A status. Yes, Doumit is bad defensively. It just means he won't be holding Moore back too much. He can still hit from the left side enough to make up for it. |
| 9. By: on 11-08-2010 08:48:03 I'd like to see the M's make a play for Grady Sizemore. His value is down after two sub-par seasons, so he probably could be acquired without giving up Pineda... He is good defensively - would be especially good in left field. He hits left-handed with power and, as a bonus, is a WA native. |
| 10. By: John_S on 11-08-2010 09:11:04 First thing I would do is offer Ichiro to the Red Sox for Jacoby Ellsbury, Jed Lowrie and prospects. If I have a new manager coming in I want to have players who's going to buy in and not have to accomodate to a certain player. If Rasmus is available, offer Jason Vargas, Matt Mangini and Triunfel for Rasmus. Then offer League or Aardsma to TB for Bartlet and Jake McGee. Maybe McGee can regain his form and be a starting pitcher and if not you got a high 90's Lefty out of the pen. Whichever one out or League or Aardsma who I don't trade, I would keep to close games until one of the young guys is ready then consider a mid year trade for them. I would also sign Magglio Ordonez for the DH spot. 1) Ellsbury - LF / Figgins - 3B 2) Bartlet - SS 3) Ordonez - DH 4) Rasmus - RF 5) Smoak - 1B 6) Guti - CF 7) Lowrie - 2B 8) Moore - C 9) Figgins - 3B / Ellsbury - LF |
| 11. By: furlong on 11-08-2010 09:18:12 I can't imagine Cleveland trading the crown jewel of their franchise. What I would like to see is John Olerud sitting down with Mike Saunders and explain the art of hitting low pitches because if he doesn't get some help he will fail in Seattle. |
| 12. By: mymrbig on 11-08-2010 09:24:01 I'd like to see the M's move both Aardsma and League. Both are getting expensive, both have some trade value, and the M's have a decent stable of young relievers. Despite all the bad press, I'd hold Lueke. The PR damage has been done and dumping him for a bag of magic beans doesn't really undo anything. Heck, maybe they get even more negative PR for not giving a guy a 2nd chance, bringing the whole thing to light again when it has already been through the wringers onece, etc. The PR damage has been done. Time to just live with and use him as an effective reliever (so long as he doesn't step out of line again). After trading Aardsma and League, I'd look to get an experience reliever to add some depth. I think they M's could find someone making similar money to Aardsma and/or League as a replacement. Specifically, I'd look at Koji Uehara, Joaquin Benoit, and JJ Putz. Fallbacks if those guys end up too expensive would be Jose Contreras, Chad Qualls, and Hisanori Takahashi. Common thoughts on these guys: (1) not Type A; (2) not guaranteed to be looked at as closers, so might take slightly less in salary to close; (3) recent success in set-up role. Uehara and Putz are by far my favorite options. |
| 13. By: Edman on 11-08-2010 09:30:57 John, why not stay within the arena of reality? Ichiro will not be traded, so why even mess with fantasy stuff that can't happen. Why not dream that we have the Yankee's budget, then Seattle could do all kinds of things. In regard to Sizemore, I doubt that Cleveland sees Grady as their jewel. But it is likely that they realize that for what it would cost to unload him, it's not worth it. He's worth holding onto with the hope that he'll return to his former valuable. Right now, he's a risk. I wouldn't at all assume that he'll return to his previous value. Cleveland would be selling damaged goods. And, honestly, Seattle has to stop looking for replacement players at the Dollar Store. They have to do a better job of acquiring at least players with some amount of dependable return. High risk, high reward players aren't going to fix anything, if the gamble doesn't work out. That's small market thinking. |
| 14. By: Edman on 11-08-2010 09:37:49 mymrbig, I'm not sure of the value of trading Aardma and League because they're getting expensive, then going out and signing replacements for the same money. There needs to be some stability, even in building a team. Swapping out players generally does not suddenly make a team where there wasn't one before. Wouldn't both Aardsma and League be more valuable to a playoff team at the deadline, than in the winter? Why would teams trade for these two, when they can go get guys you'd be happy to replace them with? They wouldn't have to give up any of their own minor league talent to accomplish the same thing? |
| 15. By: mymrbig on 11-08-2010 09:38:17 I've been rosterbating around the internets for a few years now, and I truly hope my early rosterbations weren't as laughable as some of the ones in these comments. Come on folks! The only exception to making outrageous trade offers is if you can point to a specific weakness in the opposing GM for making such a trade. Like offering relievers to Ed Wade, toolsy outfieders to Jim Bowden (when he was a GM), offering players with fluky success (BABIP usually) to GM's who didn't believe in advanced stats (though that seems increasingly harder), or GM's who are on the hot seat and in job-saving mode (Dave Littlefield in Pittsburgh a few years ago, Tim Purpura in Houston a few years ago, . Looking around right now, there just aren't many laughably bad GM's to take advantage of. GM's in Boston, St. Louis, etc. certainly don't fall into that category. While Drayton Moore sometimes does, I can't imagine that being true for Greinke. This wasn't meant toward all rosterbation suggestions above and I wasn't trying to single anything specific out (some were very well thought out). But some were just plain fantasy, and almost as much of a waste of time to read as this long rambling comment was. |
| 16. By: mymrbig on 11-08-2010 09:46:37 Edman - I agree that most folks and teams don't agree with my bullpen philosophy. I think most teams out there still overvalue the traditional late-inning relievers like Aardsma and League who are youngish and throw hard. So I think most teams value them more in that role than less traditional guys like Uehara. Some of the other guys I mentioned have had injury issues that decrease their cost (Putz, Benoit). Others are just old (Contreras, Takahashi). Qualls was freakishly ineffective. I don't think any team seriously hoping for the playoffs would look at any of those guys (other than maybe Putz) as a closer. All might prefer to close for the M's for less money instead of working as a set-up man elsewhere. But for a team like the M's who are looking for a quick rebuild, one or two of those guys might be an effective stop-gap until the team has confidence in Cortes, Lueke, et al. I don't think trading Aardsma and League will have any effect on team chemistry (or such). Both are close to free agency anyway and are clearly not core guys. Which would you rather have, closer that makes $3+ million, or different closer who makes about the same amount plus a prospect? That's why I think we should look to trade both. |
| 17. By: slamcactus on 11-08-2010 09:47:34 "I'd like to see the M's make a play for Grady Sizemore. His value is down after two sub-par seasons, so he probably could be acquired without giving up Pineda... He is good defensively - would be especially good in left field. He hits left-handed with power and, as a bonus, is a WA native." The Indians aren't going to trade Grady Sizemore at the absolute lowest trade value he's had in years. He's been injured, and the Tribe will give him a shot to get back on track. For $16 million over the next 2 years, the Indians will hold onto him and hope for a return to form. |
| 18. By: Edman on 11-08-2010 10:03:59 Why would a team in need give up a prospect, when they can go get a FA? They don't give up any of their own talent and end up paying about the same money as they would a FA. Why worry about free agency now, with either of them? Let's say that both are better this coming year, which is fairly likely. Both could become type A or B free agents, which at the worse, gets you a draft pick. And, at best, if Seattle is still struggling this season, and a team thinks they're the next San Francisco Giants but need a closer, might they be willing to give up more? It's always a gamble, but constantly trading guys is no way to build a team, unless you like the Pittsburgh role model. Who says that Aardsma and League can't be core guys? Are they nearing 35? Nope. Don't base your decisions on a bad year. That's how mistakes are made. You clear out the rubbish. |
| 19. By: Mr. Durden on 11-08-2010 10:04:18 http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/articles/2010/11/07/checking_out_the_offseason_marketplace/?page=full "6. Grady Sizemore, OF, Indians — This is a player who bears watching as trade bait. Could be this offseason, but more likely at the trading deadline. The very talented Sizemore is coming off two injury-plagued seasons, but has reached the point where most Indians depart: a year before free agency. Happened to Cliff Lee and Martinez." Unlikely? Yes. Out of the question? No. |
| 20. By: StandinPat on 11-08-2010 10:40:09 "Why would a team in need give up a prospect, when they can go get a FA? They don't give up any of their own talent and end up paying about the same money as they would a FA." Take a closer look at the FA closer list. There's not a ton there, and only one Jon Rauch, isn't a type A or B FA. Basically, if you want an Aardsma level reliever, you're gonna pay more than what he'd get in arby, AND have to give them more years, AND give up a draft pick, which in essence is a prospect. Teams still like the idea of "proven" closers, and Aardsma has 69 saves over the past two years, will only cost $4-5 mil, and require just a one year commitment. There's plenty there for a team to want to make a trade. |
| 21. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-08-2010 10:56:39 Except Sizemore isn't going to be given away -- his value is at its lowest right now and the Tribe don't have to trade him. That means to get him, you have to give up a lot, and he's just not good enough -- can't play CF anymore, can't stay healthy -- to warrant a package that includes any of the top 3, and maybe not even anything of value at all if you are Seattle. Any team trading for him would pay him 8.25 million in 2011 with a 500k buyout on 9.35 mil in 2012. If you buy him out, you just gave up young talent for one year of a player you paid 8.75 million to, and if you pick it up you are praying he stays healthy enough and competes for the MVP, because that is how expensive he's going to be to get. Sizemore is much more likely to dealt at the deadline or next winter, so the Tribe can see if he reestablishes some value. |
| 22. By: slamcactus on 11-08-2010 11:42:01 Is Cots off on Sizemore's contract, Jason? They have him at $7.5 million next year and $8.5 million in '12. |
| 23. By: slamcactus on 11-08-2010 11:49:23 19: A Boston beat writer with zero inside information pointing out that the Tribe often trade their players with free agency pending establishes absolutely nothing. Cleveland traded Victor Martinez and Cliff Lee a year and a half away from free agency because they had more trade value if they did so. Teams had to pay for 1.5 years of each player in those deals, and each player was playing pretty much at career-high levels. Now, I'm not a huge fan of the talent they brought back in either deal, but they at least traded those players at a time when it made sense to do so. Sizemore's trade value literally could not be lower. Cleveland won't trade him this offseason unless a team overpays considerably. |
| 24. By: chrisd on 11-08-2010 12:01:36 The two likely positions where the M's need to get their power are LF and DH. Other positions are already taken. I think they will trade Saunders and other prospects or Aardsma to fill these 2 spots. |
| 25. By: Edman on 11-08-2010 12:07:35 Okay Pat, and just what teams are so in need of a closer, that they'd trade for one? I only see one, and that's Tampa Bay. Why should they give up prospects, when they can go sign JJ Putz, who also has a history as a closer, and wouldn't cost them a prospect to get? There are a ton of relievers, many with experience as a closer, available on the market this year. This is probably the worse time to try to get value out of Aardsma and League. Teams will not show desparation to trade and will use the glut of relievers to drive down the market value. Here's some reading material for you on the subject. http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/11/closing-jobs-hard-to-come-by.html |
| 26. By: slamcactus on 11-08-2010 12:30:12 A fair number of teams place a pretty big value on 8th-inning guys too, Edman. J.J. Putz was acquired to be the set-up man in 2009. Aardsma won't get anywhere near the haul Putz brought back. That's clear. But he's still more valuable to a handful of other teams than he is to the Mariners at his price tag. "It's always a gamble, but constantly trading guys is no way to build a team, unless you like the Pittsburgh role model." It's a way to build a team if you make good trades. Pittsburgh made some awful trades. Texas, though, has been one of the most active teams in baseball in the trade market the past few years and it's paid dividends. David Aardsma isn't a building block. He's a perfectly adequate but not elite late-inning closer who's in line to cost something around $4.5 million next year. Trading him is a no-brainer. |
| 27. By: rosterbatorextraordinaire on 11-08-2010 12:34:37 "7. By: AntsInIn on 11-08-2010 08:55:00 Wow roster, there isn't a single feasible, well-balanced trade in that list. Congrats!" Okay, so you talk crap about my trade ideas, but think the Mariners will trade Lueke a PR nightmare straight up for a SS who is a year removed from arbitration and has hit over .300 in the two times he played more than 100 games in the majors. Yeah, that's likely! My trade idea with Lueke involved a proven closer a guy 1 year removed from a 6 WAR season, and one of the best relief prospects in the game for a utility guy and two middle relievers. None of the guys I would target in a Lueke trade would be a starter (pitcher or position player). That's where your logic failed because Aviles as a starting SS is worth more than just about any closer in baseball when healthy. A good closer gets you 1.5-2.0 WAR a SS like Aviles hitting .300 would be worth minimum 2 WAR over a full season and he's making the league minimum. Lowrie has no position on the field, since the future SS of the Red Sox will be ready to replace Scutaro when his contract ends, 2B need not be explained, and the Red Sox are going to want a proven bat like Beltre or Adrian Gonzalez to pair with Youkilis in the corners. The Mariners would be receiving a utility player for a proven setup guy making peanuts ($2MM) and a utility guy who is from MA, hit .300 in AAA with power, and who was at one point a 1st rounder. There's enough there to like about it if you're Boston and even if Lowrie could be a starter for Seattle, he only has the value of a utility infielder to Boston. Someone asked why bother with Sandoval if he has weight problems. First, the Mariners have one of the best weight programs in the majors. Second, he's still fairly young and with a guy like Wedge who demands hard work, he won't be able to drag butt. Third, his position flexibility adds a player who gives flexibility at 1B/3B/C/DH, just what we need. If SF is prepared to play Sandoval at AAA all next year (as was reported), then it would be a nice return getting a starting SS, a reliever with a 100mph arm, and a 3B prospect who was ranked highly in an organization with one of the best crops of talent. Remember Liddi was 21 and succeeding in AA this year with guys who were both older and more experienced in professional baseball. Andrew Miller is a non-tender candidate and based on production and not projection, Rowland-Smith offers a lower risk (half the salary in arbitration) with potentially a similar upside at this point. I and probably the Mariners front office would be willing to gamble a couple low priced lefty arms and a utility player with questionable defense for a guy that if he reaches his potential as a late bloomer, might be the lefty we need to pencil in between Felix and Pineda. The Greinke trade made be a little much, but then again realize that when the Marlins traded Cabrera and Willis it was a six for two trade. My deal idea involves six for three and two of those guys going to Seattle could be non-tendered players sooner than later, but who could also turn into strong producers with regular playing time. Coming off a season where his ERA was 2 runs higher, his FIP 1 run higher, and his xFIP .60 runs higher than his Cy Young season, there's enough back tracking combined with his anxiety issues to make the Royals consider this trade, especially when he's due $13.5MM for both 2011 and 2012. Greinke is a #2 and getting paid like it. Greinke is a perfect fit for Seattle, Felix loves stardom and Greinke likes to go unnoticed just like Bedard. Few teams probably entice Greinke like Seattle as we are the polar opposite of NY while still fielding a $90-100MM team every year. To be very clear, most of these trades I suggested are gambles and that's why the other teams would consider it, because we wouldn't be getting any guaranteed production like you get with Pujols, Ichiro, and A. Dunn. We wouldn't be trading for any stars except Greinke and I'll cover that in a second. Lowrie might not be so good when exposed to a full season as opposed to the sample sized success he had in 2010. Kimbrel and M. Dunn might have been lucky and the small sample sizes that comes with relief pitching could have hidden weaknesses in their game. Infante could be a great bench player, but might fold as the everyday 2B until Ackley is ready. Sandoval has weight issues and slumped for much of last season. Greinke has anxiety problems and his unwillingness to go to places like NY, LA, and Chicago could limit the return that the Royals can expect, especially when you look at his regression in 2010. Kila and Gordon are close to being considered AAAA players and may never recover from the mismanagement of their careers by the Royals. There is a lot of risk, but there is also a lot of reward with these trades, but I would say that none of them are ridiculous, maybe unlikely, but I didn't recommend something stupid like an unproven reliever for a 3 WAR shortstop. It's the type of deals that Zduriencik has been making since coming to Seattle and I don't think it's impossible at all that some if not all of these players are acquired. |
| 28. By: rosterbatorextraordinaire on 11-08-2010 12:56:35 25. What teams need a closer? NL East Atlanta - Wagner retired New York - Bullpen sucks, they don't want Rodriguez anymore NL Central St. Louis - Ryan Franklin is talking about retirement Houston - Lindstrom was terrible and Lyons was only ok Pittsburgh - Hanrahan led the team with 6 saves NL West Arizona - Gutierrez, Heilman, and Qualls were horrible AL East Toronto - All of their late inning guys hit free agency Tampa Bay - Like the Jays, they need 8th and 9th inning guys AL Central Chicago - Putz and Jenks are free agents Minnesota - Needs an alternative if Nathan isn't ready AL West Anaheim - The bullpen got 2 saves not from Rodney and he sucks |
| 29. By: Edman on 11-08-2010 13:36:39 Slam, I suggest that you go look at the trades that Texas made. One trade reformed the Rangers, the one that sent Tex to Atlanta. Only one player on the roster could even come close to getting that kind of return, and his first name starts with Felix, not David or Brandon. There was a ton of luck involved in how that trade worked out. Congrats to the Ranger scouts who made sure they got back value. But, those kind of returns are extremely rare. How much better did the Indians get by trading two aces....Sabbathia and Lee? That's the more probable outcome. Trading Aardsma is a no-brainer to an outsider who has no idea what would be offered, and who speculates higher than perceived value. I disagree tht he's not an important building block. He provides several young arms the ability to learn their craft, while League and he close up games. Perhaps after next season, or possibly near the trading deadline, they could move one of the younger arms into the role. Or, more logically, make League the closer while moving someone up into Brandon's role. You don't take a kid out of college and make him your principle Engineer. No matter how brilliant, you give him time to adjust and accumulate skills until he's ready. |
| 30. By: Blowgun7 on 11-08-2010 14:02:11 rosterbator.. those trades are absurd.. they are so one-sided in favor of Seattle it's ridiculous. You show no ability whatsoever to be objective... or you really have an incredibly inflated view of the M's personnel.. I couldn't even read the rest of the comments after reading your post, cause I figured it would just be a ton of crazy trade ideas like you threw out.. |
| 31. By: slamcactus on 11-08-2010 14:49:55 "Slam, I suggest that you go look at the trades that Texas made. One trade reformed the Rangers, the one that sent Tex to Atlanta." You're right, and for generations people will sing of how the 2010 Texas Rangers made the world series entirely on the backs of Elvis Andrus, Neftali Feliz, and Jarrod Saltalamacchia. The rest of the roster barely even played a part in the Rangers' run. In all seriousness, the Teix trade got them a nice everyday SS and a good closer with the potential to start, and a talented C who's underachieved ever since and got a total of 30 MLB PA's this year. In other trades, the Rangers have acquired their best player (Hamilton, for Volquez), several other nice role players (David Murphy, Dustin Nippert, Bengie Molina, Jeff Franceour, etc.). Michael Young was also a trade acquisition back in the day, acquired in 2000 for Esteban Loaiza, who just like Aardsma was a 2nd-year arbitration guy when they dealt him. "You don't take a kid out of college and make him your principle Engineer." Um, you realize Aardsma was a trade acquisition who had no prior closing experience when he came to Seattle, right? "Proven closers" are ridiculously overrated. |
| 32. By: slamcactus on 11-08-2010 14:50:34 that should have read got their best player and several other nice role players through trade.* |
| 33. By: slamcactus on 11-08-2010 15:02:04 "Trading Aardsma is a no-brainer to an outsider who has no idea what would be offered, and who speculates higher than perceived value." I don't know what it means to "speculate higher than perceived value," but yes, trading Aardsma is a no-brainer. The Mariners don't have a lot of financial flexibility, and there are dozens of better ways for a rebuilding/retooling team to spend $3-4.5 million than on a mediocre closer. I don't really care what the return is, honestly. I expect Aardsma to go for a B-/C+ prospect and/or a quality bench bat who can offer the team some positional flexibility. The best thing to do is take whatever the team can get for him while he still has some value, because after next year he won't. Either he'll pitch well, and his 3rd year arbitration award will be around $7 million, or he'll take a step backwards, and his award will be around $5.5 million. Either way, his value will be significantly less than it is this offseason. "How much better did the Indians get by trading two aces....Sabbathia and Lee? That's the more probable outcome." The Indians got a bad haul for Lee. Matt LaPorta has disappointed so far, but the Indians also have him for 5 more years. There's a lot of time for them to recoup value for him. Staying on the Indians, though, they got a pretty damn good haul for Casey Blake. Aardsma's a lot closer to Blake in value than Sabathia or Lee. Both were useful pieces who were starting to become expensive, making their value pretty limited to the non-contending teams they played for. Franchises aren't built around mediocre, expensive relief pitchers who have earned the "closer" label. They're built around everyday players and starting pitchers. Trading Aardsma allows the team to roll the dice on a prospect and also gives them millions more in financial flexibility to acquire a core piece either in free agency or through trade. |
| 34. By: Edman on 11-08-2010 15:09:31 Yeah slam, I realize Aardsma had no prior experience closing. At the time, they had no other choice. Don't you think if they'd have had another option with closing experience, they'd have gone that direction? They have choices now that they didn't have then. Proven closers are ridculously overrated by some, not all. I believe that if you can avoid throwing a kid into the fire, you should make every effort to do so. There are several young arms coming up who need time to get their feet wet, before you throw them out there to earn their stripes, underfire. They're too valuable to risk throwing them into failure. Not all deal well with that kind of baptism. |
| 35. By: Edman on 11-08-2010 15:33:59 Stop thinking about money, slam. This franchise isn't going to be saved by not paying Aardsma. The problems are much deeper than that. You only see value in dollars and cents. So, let's say we do clear out Aardsma or League. Is that monetary savings going to be more value to the overall health of the franchise for the next four years, or might the value of having one of Robles, Varvarro, Lueke or Cleto ease into a closer's role? The money thta matters comes off the books next year. There's enough financial flexibility in moving Aardsma to take them from f'ing sucks to really sucks, with what that extra money will buy. Personally, I don't care. But then again, I'm not the one taking a stance that I know what the francise needs to do. Jack ultimately will decide. And I'm saying that it may not be the same view that you share. He deals with real-world baseball on a daily basis. He's playing several moves ahead of all of us. How good a chess player he is will determine his fate. But I doubt he has checkmate planned in three moves. |
| 36. By: rosterbatorextraordinaire on 11-08-2010 16:47:52 "30. By: Blowgun7 on 11-08-2010 16:02:11 rosterbator.. those trades are absurd.. they are so one-sided in favor of Seattle it's ridiculous. You show no ability whatsoever to be objective... or you really have an incredibly inflated view of the M's personnel.." Okay, let's break it down for you. The Mariners have a better minor league system than (in no specific order) all but Texas, Kansas City, Tampa Bay, Pittsburgh, Atlanta, Florida, and maybe Oakland. That gives them the 7th or 8th best farm in baseball. The rest of the teams have depleted their systems through trades, injuries, or simply players were overrated. As it stands right now, if the Mariners were to sign Paxton, they would probably move up to 6th solidly. Assuming that Ackley stays in AAA, the Mariners have possibly the best 2B (Ackley), SS (Franklin), SP (Pineda), CP (Lueke) prospects in all of baseball and if Smoak wasn't rushed to the majors last year, he'd be battling Hosmer and Freeman for title of best 1B prospect in all of baseball. Triunfel, Liddi, Poythress, and Halman could all make a case for being in the top 10 prospects Seattle has to offer. Which makes them increasingly more valuable to other teams who don't have the rich crop of talent the Mariners have now. Mangini would become a top 15 prospect in Boston and they would get two years of setup from one of the better relievers in the game. Atlanta would be getting a previous All-Star who can produce 3 WAR at 5 different positions and who solves their leadoff problem, while adding much needed speed to a team that plays far too much station-to-station baseball. Along with Figgins, they be getting a proven closer, and possibly the best relief prospect in baseball. San Francisco paid NINE MILLIONS DOLLARS PER YEAR FOR TWO YEARS TO EDGAR RENTERIA, when he was coming off a season where he produced 1.4 WAR and was only worth $6.1MM at 33 years old. They did it at the time to improve their defense. If Sabean justified the contract to Renteria, he'll have no problem paying the $5MM to Wilson. In the NL, Jack Wilson could be worth 1.5 WAR and out produce the final year of his contract. Also, he's played his whole life (select baseball leagues, college, and pros) with Freddy Sanchez and would feel very at home alongside his best friend. A 2B/SS combination feeling comfortable together is very important, it's one of the reasons Figgins has looked so lost at 2B in 2010. Liddi would be a top 10 prospect in the Giants system and even as a reliever Blandford would fall somewhere between 10 and 15 in their system. To get two decent prospects and a starting SS for a guy that was worth less than 2 WAR (Sandoval had a 1.9 WAR in '10) and who registered a below-league average wOBA of .314 is fair value. Bottomline, if you think those prospects are crap than you forget what we had in our system 10 years ago. Triunfel, Halman, Tenbrink, and Poythress, even with their flaws all project to be worth 2 WAR a year or better. Add in two starters that are both 2.5-3.0 WAR a year middle of the rotation to back of the rotation starters and that's pretty good value for a guy who is a #2 starter getting paid what he's worth and a couple AAAA prospects. For the record Triunfel was only 20, Poythress and Halman 22, and Tenbrink 23, when the season started this year. Plus they are getting 5 years of Fister and 3 years of Vargas. The value justifies the trade. If you don't like the values I assume, then go look at the rest of baseball. Haren who is very similar to Greinke in a lot of ways was traded with a similar contract for Saunders (a poor man's Vargas) and a mediocre player (Skaggs) and two pieces of crap. Kazmir was traded for a utility infielder (Sean Rodriguez) and two pieces of crap. People remember how badly the press criticized the Mariners after the Bedard trade, but even with that trade we gave up a league average outfielder, a couple middle relievers, a starting prospect who is out of baseball, and Tillman who looks to be overrated. Prospects don't usually pan out and what I'm suggesting is actually a lot more than what most teams would expect back. Too many times we see what Jack Z. gets us and forget that there are people out there taking our crap for good players. We gave up two relievers (one with a hip condition) and a 4th OF for the best lefty in the game from 2009 (Lee) coming off two WS wins and who was due to make 67% of what Greinke will make in 2011. You need to gain some perspective because poo-pooing suggestions is childish, and it makes you look like an idiot when more trades that do happen, support my logic. If you'll notice the trades I suggested are with teams that historically overpay in trades. Boston is known to overpay just look at the price they paid for Martinez (Masterson, Hagadone, Price). San Francisco gave away their 2nd best pitching prospect for a marginally good 2B (Sanchez), they sent away a Cy Young candidate, one of the best closers in baseball, and a back of the rotation starters for one year of a guy (Pierzynski) who grounded into more DPs than anyone in the league and who managed a very generous 1.6 WAR led by his .729 OPS, .314 wOBA, and 90 wRC+. Plus he's managed to field a team with three of the worst contracts in baseball (Zito, Rowand, Renteria). The Royals traded one of their best pitching prospects for a SS rated as one of the worst offensive and one of the worst defensive players in the last 10 years. Betancourt made Neifi Perez look like an All-Star bound for Cooperstown. He signed Willie F-ing Bloomquist for around $5MM over two years, and failed to bring in much of anything in the way of talent as he has watched superstar after superstar walk out the revolving door that is The Kansas City Royals. Atlanta is the only savvy front office on the list and they are getting far more talent than they are giving away. It's just that we can't play Lueke or I'd take him over Kimbrel, we need the extra capital from trading Figgins and Aardsma, because of the $19.5MM we are paying Bradley, Silva, and Betancourt in 2011, otherwise I'd rather keep Figgins and Aardsma over acquiring Infante and Dunn. This really shouldn't be this hard to figure out, relievers are worth .5 to 1 WAR each, utility players can max out around 2 WAR. that means that they are giving up 4 WAR if Infante, Kimbrel, and Dunn hit their ceilings. The Mariners didn't use Aardsma because we sucked, if used like League (70 games), he would have been worth about 1.5-2 WAR, Lueke is worth 1 WAR, and Figgins should be a guaranteed 2.5-3.0 WAR in the NL. The Braves would be getting 6 WAR for 4 WAR, and Figgins has a ceiling of about 4.5 WAR, so there's much more upside for Atlanta. Even with a 2 WAR difference, that's approximately worth $10MM ($5MM per 1 WAR) this year, and with Figgins and Aardsma due to make $13MM and the three from Atlanta due to make $3.5MM, that's a push. For those of you who don't get trade value, we'd basically have to pay $3MM-$4MM ($1MM/yr.) extra to Atlanta, for them to jump at this deal. |
| 37. By: slamcactus on 11-08-2010 17:11:37 "Stop thinking about money, slam. This franchise isn't going to be saved by not paying Aardsma. The problems are much deeper than that." This franchise will be in a much better position to explore options for the next 2-3 years if they don't have to sink $4.5 million into a mediocre closer. "There's enough financial flexibility in moving Aardsma to take them from f'ing sucks to really sucks, with what that extra money will buy." The following players were all acquired for $4.5 million or under during recent off-seasons: Kelly Johnson (2010, $2.35 million) Russell Branyan (2010 - $2million, 2009 - $1.5 million) John Buck (2010 - $2 million) Alex Gonzalez (2010 - $2.75 million) Aubrey Huff (2010 - $3 million) Miguel Olivo (2010 - $2.5 million) Jim Thome (2010 - $1.5 million) Orlando Hudson (2009 - $3.8 million) Carl Pavano (2009 - $1.5 million) Mark DeRosa (2007 - $4.33 million/year, 3 years) Akinori Iwamura (2007 - ~$2.6 million/year over 3 years) Carlos Pena (2007 - $800,000 - when asked why he didn't go after Pena at that price, Bill Bavasi said "because I didn't have any money left"). And that's not even getting into what an extra $4.5 million could do on the trade market. There are always deals to be had in free agency for teams smart enough to go out and find them. Some of these players are one-year guys, others like Johnson and Pena still had multiple years of club-control left. In order to compete for those good free agent deals, though, you need a little bit of financial flexibility. Without Aardsma's $4.5 million coming off the books we're looking at an offseason where the team has under $10 million to spend this winter. That $4.5 million is the difference between having a little financial flexibility to look for good buys who could contribute for a couple years and only having barely enough money to plug the existing holes on the team with stop-gaps. $4.5 million won't bring us Carl Crawford. It does give the team a chance to uncover and unappreciated asset. With names like Jeff Francis, Hiroyuki Nakajima, possibly J.J. Hardy, and countless others out there that we don't know about yet, I'd rather our front office have the money to spend on a player with actual upside rather than a middle of the order closer. |
| 38. By: Blowgun7 on 11-08-2010 18:10:59 Franklin is not the best SS prospect in the sport... Pineda isn't the #1 SP prospect.. although he is very good.. Lueke is not the best relief prospect in the sport.. Triunfel, Liddi, Halman Tenbrink, and Poythress are so far from 2-3 WAR players I should stop even responding to you right now... The Mariners do not have the #7 system in the sport.. You pretty much are overvaluing every player (sans Ackley and Pineda) and the system as a whole.. Your Greinke trade is downright comical.. Nobody is gonna bother inquiring about Figgin unless we're gonna hit a ton of money.. Not to mention you talking about him being a 4 WAR player is hilarious.. if he's going to be that, how about we just keep him? SF isn't taking Jack Wison's contract |
| 39. By: slamcactus on 11-08-2010 18:50:03 Tenbrink's really not that far from being a 2-WAR player. Everything else you said is probably true, although I haven't really thought about how the Ms system stacks up against others. Having two top-25 guys (arguably two top-15 guys) and another guy in the top-50 really helps, but the system drops off really quickly after Franklin. |
| 40. By: StandinPat on 11-08-2010 19:02:41 "Okay Pat, and just what teams are so in need of a closer, that they'd trade for one? I only see one, and that's Tampa Bay." Then look harder, there's plenty more than Tampa. But really, what does it matter? Just because a team has a closer, that somehow means they won't be looking to upgrade their bullpen? Teams know relievers are volotile, in both health and performance. When creating depth in the pen, why wouldn't previously closing experience be a plus? Remember last M's closer to be traded? He wound up in to NYM setting up their closer. "There are a ton of relievers, many with experience as a closer, available on the market this year." "Here's some reading material for you on the subject" And here's some for you. Note the names, and the Elias Ranking next to them. Then tell me how many you'd actually put ahead of Aardsma. http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/09/2011-mlb-free-agents.html |
| 41. By: Edman on 11-08-2010 19:25:07 Hey slam, and of those names you listed, how many of them are the "building block" kinda players, that you seem to think Aardsma can't be? Yes, we might get a little improvment with the offsense with a player like that. But, you argue that Aardsma has no value to the future. Neither but a couple that you listed do either. Maybe they can make next year less painful to watch, but certainly to build around two years or more from today. Just fess up and admit you want more offense this coming year, and stop using the building block theory. I at least admit I'm sick of watching a crappy offense. But, I don't justify my position by using the "build to the future" war cry. Pat, Here's a list of some similar free agent pitchers who have put up similar numbers to Aardsma, especially last year, who have had experience as closers. Frank Francisco Brian Fuentes Kevin Gregg Jesse Crain (wants to be a closer) J.J. Putz Jon Rauch Takashi Saito Arthur Rhodes There are more quality relievers available this year, than in most years. It's not going to be easy to find a suitor, with so much competition. |
| 42. By: Edman on 11-08-2010 19:26:30 rosterbator.....can you please keep it to under a novel? Way more content than you need. |
| 43. By: randallball on 11-08-2010 19:49:33 Anyone have anything more than internet reports on Tsuyoshi Nishioka? |
| 44. By: micahjr on 11-08-2010 20:14:31 How is a closer at all valuable on a non-competitive team? Aardsma is a no-brainer to trade. Especially since you have Lueke, Cortez, Robles, Cleto, Fields, Wilhelmsen, and League all as potential closers at a tenth of the cost for all of them, except League. You could probably come up with more. Also, Lueke has been nails as a AAA and fall-league closer. While competition from other quality relievers might change the amount received for Aardsma, it doesn't change the calculus on whether he should be traded. Even if all we get back is someone like Cortes, Robles, or Cleto, that is better than paying to hold onto a guy that might give you 1 win for 4.5 million, a rate that doesn't beat the value of a win for a free agent acquisition. If someone wants him, we should trade him. I think you might be arguing just to argue, again. |
| 45. By: StandinPat on 11-08-2010 20:23:56 Ed, That is just an awful, awful comp list. A collection of guys who are well past their prime, have a history of injuries, or just plain aren't as good as Aardsma. Some are even all of the above, and again, many of them Type A free agents, meaning that not only could they cost more monetarily, but also in terms of prospect(draft pick) loss. |
| 46. By: Lailoken on 11-08-2010 20:34:07 What teams need a closer? NL East Atlanta - Wagner retired Response: Craig Kimbrel looks like the guy after striking out 47 in 25 MLB innings counting the postseason. New York - Bullpen sucks, they don't want Rodriguez anymore Response: They may not want K-Rod but they're stuck with him, that contract is untradeable. NL Central St. Louis - Ryan Franklin is talking about retirement Response: Motte looks like the in-house candidate. Houston - Lindstrom was terrible and Lyons was only ok Response: If Gervacio is healthy then he immediately gets in the mix. Pittsburgh - Hanrahan led the team with 6 saves Response: Dotel was their closer before they sent him to the Dodgers after the trade deadline. Hanrahan & Meek are both fine closer candidates. NL West Arizona - Gutierrez, Heilman, and Qualls were horrible Response: Yeah, this is a mess. They need someone. AL East Toronto - All of their late inning guys hit free agency Response: Wouldn't surprise at all if one or more of their free agents sign or accept arbitration (Downs, Frasor, & Gregg) & Purcey is no slouch. Frasor is the most likely of the three to return since his arbitration cost won't be as high as the other two. Jays definitely need somebody. Tampa Bay - Like the Jays, they need 8th and 9th inning guys Response: The Jays can reasonably project that they'll be in contention. The Rays have no doubt, they need someone. AL Central Chicago - Putz and Jenks are free agents Response: Thornton is a strong candidate to close & Chris Sale can take over the lefty setup role if not the closer role. Sergio Santos has the fastball to be a candidate too. Man that bullpen threw gas. Minnesota - Needs an alternative if Nathan isn't ready Response: Besides Nathan, the Twins have Matt Capps. AL West Anaheim - The bullpen got 2 saves not from Rodney and he sucks Response: Jordan Walden sure looked good late in the year but the Angels likely want a closer. The FAs: Soriano, Francisco, Fuentes, Jenks, Putz, Rauch, Wood, Hoffman, Gregg, Dotel, Benoit, Saito, & Contreras. |
| 47. By: FWBrodie on 11-08-2010 22:00:04 #38, yes to everything until FIggins. I think his contract is tradeable. |
| 48. By: Chris Crawford on 11-08-2010 22:00:48 I'm hoping everyone is getting this out of their system :) |
| 49. By: slamcactus on 11-08-2010 22:03:32 Kelly Johnson was a 6-win player last year (as in, almost MVP-level), and the Diamondbacks have him for another club-controlled year. The Rays got Pena for 4 years of club control for their flier. Iwamura was an above average player for the 2.5 healthy seasons he gave the Rays over the duration of his contract. DeRosa was worth just under 3 WAR per year over the 3 years of his deal. Huff was a 1-year rental, but he helped a team with a solid core win the world series. So, 4 of those guys were pickups that contributed for multiple years. One of them gave the team an underpaid all-star for a year who helped them win a championship. A closer is only a "building block" if he's the best of the best. Beyond that, relievers, even pretty good ones, are just too fungible. The whole idea of the closer role as these guys with mythical intangibles who are born of fire is just ridiculous. Aardsma got the job because it fell to him. Becoming a "proven closer" is as much opportunity as ability. |
| 50. By: rosterbatorextraordinaire on 11-08-2010 22:47:24 "38. By: Blowgun7 on 11-08-2010 20:10:59 Franklin is not the best SS prospect in the sport..." Yes he is, Alcides Escobar, Starlin Castro, and Reid Brignac are in the majors, they're no longer prospects. Dee Gordon, Grant Green, Jiovanni Mier, Wilmer Flores, Miguel Sano, Tim Beckham, Jose Iglesias, and Adeiny Hechavarria are all lower ranked shortstops. "Pineda isn't the #1 SP prospect.. although he is very good.." Strasburg, Matusz, Feliz, Bumgarner, Hellickson, Chapman, and Drabek are all in the majors, the rest don't have the combined age and production of Pineda. Most respected experts say that they would have a hard time trading Pineda for any minor league pitcher in baseball outside of Strasburg and that was before his injury. "Lueke is not the best relief prospect in the sport.." Actually throwing 96-97 mph with advanced control and three out pitches makes you one of the best closers in the minors, and for all he lacks in social intelligence, he makes up for in baseball I.Q. The guy knows how to pitch and you would have a hard time finding an expert to pick a better relief arm in all the minor leagues. If not for his history, he'd be getting far more praise. "Triunfel, Liddi, Halman, Tenbrink, and Poythress are so far from 2-3 WAR players I should stop even responding to you right now..." Triunfel and Halman are going to be 2.5-3.0 WAR guys because of their bat speed and playing positions that start you off at 1.25 WAR (SS and CF), Tenbrink has a 2.0-2.5 WAR potential because of his OBP and offensive skills, Poythress can ride his power to 2.0 WAR, and Liddi is at minimum a 1.5 WAR player but could also become a 3.0 WAR player if he can learn to play a solid 3B. "The Mariners do not have the #7 system in the sport.." Why?? Because you say so? Boston has a decent farm system, but losing Westmoreland due to a medical condition that could end his career, other guys under performing, and some guys graduating to the majors have knocked their system down a couple pegs. Aside from the teams I named as having better systems, you tell me which ones are better and remember all the players who have graduated to the majors, and all the top prospects who have fallen off the radar. "You pretty much are overvaluing every player (sans Ackley and Pineda) and the system as a whole.." Actually Dave Cameron gave the bad spin on the Mariners organization when he did his franchise reviews on fangraphs.com and they still finished in the top 10 of baseball, largely due to the farm system. Let's also realize that ONE team out of ELEVEN didn't make the post season this year. You don't send 10 of 11 teams to the postseason and win TWO championships unless you have a lot of talent. "Your Greinke trade is downright comical.." Your arguing without statistics or evidence is downright comical. "Nobody is gonna bother inquiring about Figgin unless we're gonna hit a ton of money.. Not to mention you talking about him being a 4 WAR player is hilarious.. if he's going to be that, how about we just keep him?" Hit a ton of money? How do you suppose we should "hit" money? I said he's a 3 WAR player, and that's after he is only 1 year removed from a 5.9 WAR season. Figuring that he could be 1/2 that good over the next few years is far from ridiculous. I said, he MIGHT be able to be worth as much as 4.5 WAR, but I also realize that he'll probably never put together a 6 WAR season again. Your cynicism is niether appreciated or well placed. "SF isn't taking Jack Wison's contract" Yeah because Jhonny Peralta is worth SO MUCH more than Wilson and the Tigers are paying him $11.25MM over two years to be a equally valuable player. So getting the Giants who love overpaying veterans to shell out $5MM on a one year deal to Wilson is so improbable, right? I mean they paid Renteria at the same age, almost twice as much, with a 2nd year guarantee for the same amount, but they won't pay Wilson a mere $5MM for 1 year? What the hell have you been smoking? |
| 51. By: rosterbatorextraordinaire on 11-08-2010 23:34:01 As for your idea to keep Figgins if he's really a 3-4 WAR player, well that would be good, but I don't think he's a good fit for Seattle because he likes leading off and his $9MM could be better spent on other needs like Victor Martinez, a better SP like Greinke, or something else more pressing. In a perfect world, we could keep Figgins, and not have to pay Betancourt $1MM, Silva $5.5MM, and unload Bradley's $12MM, but that's not going to happen. Since we owe Ichiro $18MM, $19.5MM to Bradley/Silva/Betancourt, and $10MM to Felix, that doesn't leave a lot of room for adding talent and $30MM in table setters is ridiculous. If we didn't have Ichiro or were paying him only $10MM, it wouldn't be a problem. But how are we supposed to pay $27MM to our leadoff and #2 hitter, esentially $18.5MM to our backup outfielder, and then field a #3, #4, and #5 of Gutierrez, Smoak, and Saunders, making a combined $4.4MM?? No wonder we had the worst offense in baseball. --------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm going to get on my soap box and say very clearly, not all WAR is created equal. If you have a +30 WAR lineup that gets all their value from fielding and a micro-scrunch from offense, you are going to lose 120 games. The best pitching team in baseball allowed a mere 546 ER with a team ERA of 3.36 (SF Giants), while the Mariners scored only 513 runs. In other words, if we had the SF pitching staff with our offense, we're going to lose 90 games. The best pitching staff in baseball couldn't out pitch our horrible offense. You need both WAR from offense and WAR from defense. Ichiro, Figgins, Saunders, Gutierrez, and Wilson get most of their value from their defense, even when they start hitting better. We need offensive WAR results and as much as Dave Cameron and the other baseball nerds will swear that 1 WAR is 1 WAR, it's not true. There was time when people liked counting stats and fielding % also, but baseball moves on with or without you. Eventually people will realize that you need a minimum of offensive WAR, no matter how good the defense is on your team, and more importantly, offensive WAR doesn't cancel out other offensive WAR, however defensive WAR does cancel out other defensive WAR. As an example, say that there are three outs, first a flyball to LF, 2nd a strikeout, then a groundout to 3B turns into an error, and the third out is a lineout to 2B. The guy at 2B will see his UZR go up because of the error by the 3B the play before, which created the opportunity to record another assist, but had the 3B made the play, then the 3B would gain the tick of UZR, while the 2B, would lose a notch as UZR is calculated by innings played, and as such, each additional out recorded by another player, lowers the UZR of players not involved in recording said out. To take all of this back to Figgins, we need offensive WAR, like Victor Martinez, Pablo Sandoval, Jed Lowrie, and Alex Gordon, not defensive WAR. To really drive this one home, only Milwaukee (12th) and Florida (15th) finished in the top half of the league in runs scored and recorded a losing record, they combined to finish only 10 games under .500, or more simply, they could have won 5 more games total and combined to finish at .500. As for the other side of the coin. San Francisco (17th), San Diego (22nd), and Oakland (23rd), finished in the bottom half of the league for runs scored and had a winning record. San Francisco (3.36 ERA - 1st), San Diego (3.39 ERA - 2nd), and Oakland (3.56 ERA - 3rd), also led the league in team ERA. Unless the Mariners can manage to score a minimum of 150 runs more next season and drop their team ERA by .37 or more (not includin making up for losing Cliff Lee), than we are going to be hard pressed to finish at .500. We need a lot of offense and we are going to have to play some questionable fielders to get there. That may mean trading a 3-4 WAR 3B in Figgins, so we can get a 2 WAR 2B in Infante and acquire a 2 WAR 3B in Lowrie, while it's still 4 WAR, it's 4 WAR from two combined positions, AND the money saved on Figgins goes towards another 4 WAR at catcher in Victor Martinez. Anyone that thinks this team can just go bargain shopping for 2 WAR defenders and put together a 75-80 win team is dreaming, plain and simple. We are going to have to trade Figgins and Wilson to make space in payroll for some sticks, plain and simple. Hopefully that succesfully answers your pompous qustion, blowgun. |
| 52. By: rosterbatorextraordinaire on 11-09-2010 00:03:09 To cover the WAR thing briefly... Offensive WAR doesn't cancel out offensive WAR because anything that adds to your WAR total offensively, will also continue the inning and increase the number of opportunities for other players on your team to increase their WAR total. For instance Holliday hitting behind Pujols gets more opportunities to increase his WAR batting behind Pujols than he would hitting behind Kouzmanoff. Defensive WAR takes the same logic and applies it in reverse. There are 24-27 outs in a game depending on home/away, winning/losing, and not including extra innings and rain shortened games. Let's pretend it's a guaranteed 27 outs. The only way to increase the number of opportunities you have to record increase your defensive WAR is by someone else on the team lowering their WAR by not fielding a ball hit into their zone, or by making an error. If you are on a good defensive team, then fewer errors will be made, and as a result, less extra opportunities to lower your WAR will be created. To illustrate this point, Gutierrez made many more plays last year and Ichiro's UZR dropped, this year Ichiro had one of his best UZR seasons and Gutierrez had his UZR drop, despite making ZERO errors. The 2003 Mariners had 4 GG fielders combine for a UZR of 60+, however the rest of the team was league average except for Winn who posted a 5+ UZR in LF. They needed to score 795 runs to win 93 games and that's with 4 legitimate Gold Glove fielders, a 21 game winner, and only only allowing 637 runs to cross the plate that year. If Felix = Moyer, Gutierrez = Cameron, Ichiro = Ichiro, Figgins = Boone, and Wilson = Olerud in terms of run prevention, than we only need to score 160 more runs to equal that team. |
| 53. By: on 11-09-2010 06:26:52 "Mangini would become a top 15 prospect in Boston" This is one of the most untrue things ever written. |
| 54. By: masonb on 11-09-2010 07:36:06 Rosterbator, Do you think you could provide link to back up the statement that most experts wouldn't trade Pineda for any arm besides Strasburg? I'm not trying to be snarky but I want to see where that was written. I for one though can think of a half dozen pitchers I would trade Pineda for right now: Kershaw, Halladay, Lincecum, Price, Lester, Jimenez, but that's just me. Also, while Franklin is a very very good shortstop, I don't think he's the best shortstop prospect in baseball. I hope he is, but I really think Iglesias, Profar and Manny Machado would be ranked ahead of him. But that's just me |
| 55. By: rosterbatorextraordinaire on 11-09-2010 07:57:31 Mangini would be a top 15 prospect in Boston, depending on 2011, he could fall to 15-20 or go close to the top 10. All that talent yo remember from two years ago has been sent off or been moved up to the show. Hagadone, Masterson, Price, are all gone. Westmoreland is still suffering from vision problems related to his successful brain surgery. At this point nobody knows if he'll ever be the player he was before. If he doesn't make it back, it'll be like losing Ackley from our system. Reddick, Kalish, Bowden, Tazawa, Anderson, Doubront, Navarro, and Nava have all graduated to the majors. The only top prospects still in the minors are Kelly, who took a huge hit in his value with a very pedestrian showing in AA, Iglesias who was solid at short, Rizzo who showed some power, and whatever they drafted this year. The performance by Mangini at AAA in 2010 would move him ahead of almost all the guys I listed above who are in the majors now for Boston, as many of them are more hype than substance. I think you need to realize that it only takes a season or two of trades, injuries, and under-performing to dilute the talent of a farm system. |
| 56. By: slamcactus on 11-09-2010 08:34:07 Your opinion of Matt Mangini and scouts opinion of Matt Mangini could not be more different. Mangini not even a top-15 prospect on the Mariners, and Boston has a much, much deeper system than we do. I'm actually very familiar with Boston's system. Their talent pool goes 15-20 deep with potential impact guys. Matt Mangini isn't a good prospect. He doesn't profile well defensively at any position, doesn't have plus power, and doesn't know how to take a walk. He's a marginal bench bat in the majors at best. And that's how he's seen around the league. His only trade value is as a throw-in in a deal to an NL team who wants their own version of Greg Dobbs. |
| 57. By: slamcactus on 11-09-2010 08:40:08 "Triunfel and Halman are going to be 2.5-3.0 WAR guys because of their bat speed and playing positions that start you off at 1.25 WAR (SS and CF)" There are so many things wrong with this statement that I'm not sure how to begin. First of all, the positional adjustment for SS is +7.5, not +15. For CF, it's +2.5 Second, Triunfel and Halman are both really bad at baseball. The chances that both of them bust and never produce anything at the major league level are approximately 90-95%. You seem to conflate simply being in the high minors with being close to achieving a major league career. It doesn't work that way. Neither of these guys have the skills to be major league regulars, and they're both running out of time to develop them. They're not good prospects. The Mariners system has an enviable top-3. After that, the cupboard isn't entirely bare, but the quality of prospects drops off in a big, big way. |
| 58. By: Blowgun7 on 11-09-2010 08:52:13 If Triunfel, Halman, Poythress, Tenbrink, and Liddi are all 2-3 win players... why the heck would you even be advocating trading them?? You realize you would be getting tremendous value if that were the case? Anyway, since it's make believe and not the case, I'm no even going to "provide stats" to back up my argument.. That Greinke deal is so far beyond the realm of objective analysis that I'm not spending 10-20 minutes researching the topic. If you really think a package of Doug Fister and Jason Vargas is going to headline a deal for Zach Greinke, then god bless you.. The Matt Mangini top 15 prospect is also funny. As pointed out above, he isn't even a Top 15 prospect in our system.. Also Triunfel will likely never play SS at the ML level, if he evens get there.. Liddi can't play 3B, so that's a big "if" you threw in there with him.. Mangini can't play any position well... and Tenbrink is a likely utility guy, platoon bat.. Good luck getting an elite SP, Alex Gordon, and Kila for that group of players... Here is the bottomline, if you want to play rosterbator, you better start including names like Ackley, Franklin, Pineda, Gutierrez, and Saunders in there because those are the only real trade assets this team has. |
| 59. By: slamcactus on 11-09-2010 08:55:18 The one thing I disagree with you on, Blowgun, is Tenbrink. He's really overlooked in this system, but he had a great year last year. He definitely has league average regular ceiling, and potentially more. |
| 60. By: Blowgun7 on 11-09-2010 09:09:04 If Tenbrink could play LF or a competent 3B I'd be higher on him.. |
| 61. By: slamcactus on 11-09-2010 09:16:03 He can. He's a really good athlete. He's improved at 3B quite a bit, and I think he'd probably be an above average defensive LF. His problems were always mental lapses on routine plays. He has more than enough tools to handle himself defensively. |
| 62. By: Edman on 11-09-2010 10:56:38 Now I remember why I was implementing a "non-rosterbation" policy this year. Some people get so emotional about it, that it becomes a debate over opinions. Facts are a funny thing, having watch DC over the years, they are either a pat o the back, or a sword in the gut, depending on how you use them. Here's what I know, that for all of the rosterbation, most of us will be wrong, most of the time. Jack is likely to see things much different that many of us. As he should, because he should be looking at far more than WAR, BA, HR, etc. I'm sure we'll be surprised at what he does. And, most of the rosterbators will gripe because Jack didn't do as they believed he should. And, the cries of failure will begin. |
| 63. By: micahjr on 11-09-2010 11:54:41 I think rosterbatorextraordinaire needs his own blog. Either that, or to figure out how to pick his own battles. Did I really just see Mangini as a top 15 prospect in Boston? If he hadn't had a good year this year, he might've been out of our system. |
| 64. By: rocketdawg31 on 11-09-2010 21:13:07 The Mariners system has an enviable top-3. After that, the cupboard isn't entirely bare, but the quality of prospects drops off in a big, big way. Well put, slam. Although I'd like to mention that if James Paxton signs and is in the system next year- and some guys like Guillermo Pimentel, Phillips Castillo, Julio Morban, Ji-Man Choi, Brandol Perez do well- the potential exists for the overall quality to be buoyed in a hurry. Let me please put a couple things to bed. Matt Mangini is not a top-15 prospect, unless MAYBE we're talking a wretched system like Houston's. He's a guy who did produce more than what he had before- and he deserves a spring training to try and land a job, accordingly. But nobody in baseball- NOBODY- thinks of this guy as a player you can build around for years. The guy has too many holes in his game, he'd have to maximize every single tool he has to be an average-production major-leaguer. And incidentally, Westmoreland is still suffering from vision problems related to his successful brain surgery. At this point nobody knows if he'll ever be the player he was before. If he doesn't make it back, it'll be like losing Ackley from our system. Ryan Westmoreland- even at his highest hype as a player- has NEVER been held in the same regard by scouts as what Ackley currently is. And I hope Westmoreland plays again one day. But that statement was just flat-out wrong. If I had to give us a number, I'd say we're middle-of-the-pack in farm strength, somewhere around 14th-16th. 2011 is a rebuild year in which we'll have to be content to see young talents start to assert themselves in the big leagues. This is virtually unavoidable. We can rosterbate all we want, the fact of the matter is there's no magic trade out there that rips away the sludge of 2010. |
| 65. By: rosterbatorextraordinaire on 11-09-2010 23:19:07 rocketdawg, Westmoreland is their best prospect and is a Top 20 prospect in all of baseball before he had his brain surgery. The guy is like a poor man's version of Mike Trout. Seriously, that was a big hit to them and even if he's not Dustin Ackley, he's their BEST prospect, and I compared the loss of a #1 prospect, not equating Ackley and Westmoreland as equals. You're a cynical person because our farm system is one of the deepest in baseball. Seriously, saying we have the 7th or 8th best farm system in baseball is no exageration. micahjr, Mangini was drafted as a 1st rounder, that means his production this year was expected. Just because he looked lost for a couple years, doesn't mitigate the fact that he hit well over .300 with close to 20 HR at the highest minor league level while only being 24 years old. He's an older prospect, but it's not like he's 27 and repeating AAA for the third time. Repeating AAA, you'd probably see him hit 25+ HR, raise his BB% to 8-9% and lower his K% to around 17%, that's a fine player, especially if he's hitting .300 and playing a decent 3B. When he was drafted, he was rated to have 60-65 power on the 20-80 scale. I wish people would stop acting like he wasn't a highly desired player coming out of college. blowgun, I advocate trading them because they are blocked. I also realize that not all prospects pan out. Just because they are very capable of being 2-3 WAR players, doesn't mean I want to roll the dice on them and many of them are blocked. Triunfel is the only one I don't want to trade, but you don't get something for nothing. I don't like all that Jack Z. does, but I also realize that if we have to waste a couple good prospects, so that we can get him off the hot seat, our organization will be better for it. Halman is blocked, Poythress and Liddi are righties without defensive value, which means they aren't a good fit for Safeco Field, and Tenbrink is a guy who I believe in a lot ever since he did good stuff in Everett his first year, but I don't see him fitting into our plans long term. Actually our system is better than the Red Sox and Mangini is a top 15 prospect for us, probably around 12 or 13 after this last season. Yeah, it's so laughable about my Greinke idea because 5 years of a 2.5+ WAR pitcher who isn't arb. eligible for 2 more years, and 3 years of a 2.5+ WAR pitcher making peanuts is so improbable to headline a package, right? I guess you missed the part where Kazmir was trade for Sean Rodriguez and crap with similar career stats and a similar contract to Greinke, right? Then less than a year later, the Diamondbacks traded Haren, probably the closest comparable player to Greinke in all of baseball, with the same exact contract for Joe Saunders (a crappy version of Vargas who throws a little harder), Tyler Skaggs, a meh prospect, and two pieces of crap. Bottomline, prospects are more valuable than SPs with mental problems who are making $13.5MM a year. Getting 5 WAR from two pitchers for 800K is better than 5 WAR from one pitcher making $13.5MM, especially when you have no chance of winning anything, your rotation is thin, and you are getting a handful of other prospects. Read more scouting reports on the Mariners like here or at marinerminors.com and see way Jay has to say, it was covered this year that Triunfel has learned the positon well enough to hold down SS for at least a few years before having to move off the position and that gives him a strong chance to be a 2.5-3 WAR player until he's ready to go to arbitration. Actually Triunfel (20 y.o.) and Liddi (21 y.o.) still have a lot of time to gain value defensively. My problem is Safeco Field and having offensive minded right-handed hitting prospects. Playing in Seattle is a quick way for them to lose value. good point that I need to include those names to make a deal happen if I'm the Mariners, since almost all those guys were available for trade when they got Lee and they didn't have to part with any of them. In fact Aumont and Ramirez were the best players we traded for Lee and they weren't even in our top 5 prospects. So telling me we have to give away our best players to make a deal happen makes you look uninformed and I have to wonder if you haven't watched the crap we've traded away over the last couple years and the talent we've got back. slamcactus, Halman and Triunfel are both bad at baseball? Really? How do you figure? They rose to the top of our farm system and have been highly valued players every year by accident? The fact that Triunfel is 20 and Halman 22, doesn't give you pause before making ridiculous assertions? Wow, what the hell are you smoking. Also, let's give Triunfel a break, he missed almost a full year, if this was his bounce back year, next season will be his breakout year. He's got the best arm in our minors defensively, he's solid with the glove, and he has one of the fastest bats in our system, hardly a crap player who is "bad at baseball", Halman meanwhile is a legit 5-tool player and can offer value defensively and with his power, much like an outfield version of Mark Reynolds. Just because Halman doesn't fit into your normal mold of baseball player, doesn't mean there wouldn't be a place for him somewhere in the majors. |
| 66. By: rocketdawg31 on 11-10-2010 02:31:40 Rosterbator- Ryan Westmoreland was not the Bosox' best crown-jewel-type prospect before injury. That distinction belonged to Casey Kelly. As it still does. Westmoreland, IIRC, was basically called a "poor man's Grady Sizemore"- and his loss was certainly significant to their system. I'm not cynical and I read Jay Yencich's first-rate reports pretty regularly. And I don't think Jay would look at your assessments and nod his head, "yep". I just don't overvalue players like you do, rosterbator. Look. Ackley,Pineda,Franklin- many teams in baseball would love to have 3 best-prospects like that. You're right about that. But you're placing very high hopes on talents like Mangini and Halman that are inadvisable. Mangini was an overdraft who's scratching and clawing uphill- every step of the way. Halman is a tool box with zero baseball instincts, getting by on those tools. But when you get to the major leagues, you find out who has skills- and not just tools- soon enough. And any major league pitcher with even a reasonable facsimile of dependable off-speed stuff will own Halman. If Halman makes the team in 2010? It'll take maybe three days in the season before Halman NEVER sees a fastball mistake that he can hit. As a farm system, we do have a lot of higher-level arms that have some decent upside- Mauricio Robles, Blake Beavan, Dan Cortes, Josh Lueke (if not traded), Stephen Pryor, Anthony Vasquez, Josh Fields, Maikel Cleto. And I haven't given up on the likes of Nick Hill and Anthony Varvaro at all. But after Ackley and Franklin, you're really straining to find bats with any proven blue-chip quality. Triunfel, maybe. Poythress, maybe. But both have serious questions to answer, I think, before you can put them in the mix as future foundation pieces. They don't automatically get penciled in. But, like I said before, breakout performances by previous-season bonus babies (or one of the 38 out of 50 players we signed from the '10 draft) could certainly come and change the landscape dramatically. And whoever we draft at #2 this year will likely also be a boost to the system as well. You think we're "7th or 8th".... in a totally subjective numbering system measuring "farm strength". Fine, might even be true. But let's look at who's ahead of us. Texas, Tampa Bay, Oakland at least. And we're nowhere near as deep as Texas and Tampa Bay, I'm sure of that. I'll defer to what Jason and Chris think, but I'd say lack of a lot of bats make us somewhere just around the top dozen farm systems. |
| 67. By: slamcactus on 11-10-2010 09:18:54 "Well put, slam. Although I'd like to mention that if James Paxton signs and is in the system next year- and some guys like Guillermo Pimentel, Phillips Castillo, Julio Morban, Ji-Man Choi, Brandol Perez do well- the potential exists for the overall quality to be buoyed in a hurry." That's true for virtually every system. Also, I'd take Brandol Perez out of that list. He currently sits in the mid-80s. He'll need a huge velocity jump to become a high upside prospect. The upside guys in the system I think are much better bets to become excellent prospects are James Jones, Marcus Littlewood, Taijuan Walker, and to a lesser extent Shipers. The international guys you listed are all huge long shots other than Choi. "You're a cynical person because our farm system is one of the deepest in baseball. Seriously, saying we have the 7th or 8th best farm system in baseball is no exageration." This system is not one of the deepest in baseball, and its depth pales in comparison to Boston's, where quality prospects like Will Middlebrooks and Brandon Workman don't crack the top-10 (both far better prospects than Mangini). "slamcactus, Halman and Triunfel are both bad at baseball? Really? How do you figure?" "Bad at baseball" in that they don't have a major league future without MAJOR steps forward in skills. Halman's the worst free-swinger in the minors. By far. With his approach it doesn't matter how young he is, he'll never be a major league regular. Triunfel came in with one big skill (a great swing), and he hasn't taken a single step forward in 3 years. He didn't crack Goldstein's top-20 in the system when it came out today, and at this point he's pretty much a bust. He doesn't have much value at all, either as a future major leaguer or as a trade chip. "Also, let's give Triunfel a break, he missed almost a full year, if this was his bounce back year, next season will be his breakout year." We've been waiting for next season to be his breakout year for a long time. At some point you have to stop waiting around for it. If Triunfel breaks out next year, we can start talking, but for now his tools are just average and he hasn't improved in the entire time he's been in the system. He has little to no trade value. "Halman meanwhile is a legit 5-tool player and can offer value defensively and with his power, much like an outfield version of Mark Reynolds." Mark Reynolds's K% in the minors the years before he made the majors was about 30%. Halman's the last two years has been 40%. Halman's significantly worse at making contact than the worst guy in the major leagues. Halman's not a 5-tool player. His hit tool is about a 25. "Actually Triunfel (20 y.o.) and Liddi (21 y.o.) still have a lot of time to gain value defensively." Players don't "gain value defensively" as they age. They grow out of premium positions. Nobody seriously considers Triunfel a SS. He doesn't have the lateral range for it, he never has, and he never will. Liddi's a stretch to stick at 3B, and his chances of doing so get worse as he ages, not better. |
| 68. By: slamcactus on 11-10-2010 09:25:25 "Read more scouting reports on the Mariners like here or at marinerminors.com and see way Jay has to say, it was covered this year that Triunfel has learned the positon well enough to hold down SS for at least a few years" Link? I'm pretty sure neither Jason or Jay have ever called Triunfel a legitimate everyday shortstop. I know BA and BP haven't. "and that gives him a strong chance to be a 2.5-3 WAR player until he's ready to go to arbitration."" If we calculated replacement level for Double-A, Triunfel's bat would have been about 10 runs below it last year. With the positional adjustment as long as he wasn't an absolute butcher, he probably would have performed right at that fictional double-a replacement level. Let's see if the guy can even claw his way up to being an average minor leaguer before we talk about him becoming an above-average major leaguer. |
| 69. By: sexymarinersfan on 11-10-2010 10:55:29 I can give you a list of 15 better prospects in the Mariners system right now who are better than Mangini, hell why not make it 20! Ready? Here goes... 1. SP-Michael Pineda 2. 2B-Dustin Ackley 3. SS-Nick Franklin 4. SP-Mauricio Robles 5. RP-Josh Lueke 6. SS/3B-Carlos Triunfel 7. 1B/DH-Rich Poythress 8. OF-Greg Halman 9. RP-Dan Cortes 10. 1B/OF-Dennis Raben 11. SP-Maikel Cleto 12. 3B-Alex Liddi 13. OF-Johermyn Chavez 14. 3B/OF-Nate Tenbrink 15. SP-Anthony Vasquez 16. SP-George Mieses 17. INF-Kyle Seager 18. 1B/OF-Mike Carp 19. SP-Anthony Fernandez 20. SP-Blake Beaven! And here's another group of guys that I have rated higher than Mangini as well. Mario Martinez, Nick Hill, Gabriel Noriega, Julio Morban, Josh Fields, Guillermo Pimentel and Steve Hensley Mathew Lawson, Stephen Pryor, Andrew Carraway, Ji-Man Choi, James Gillheeney, Taijuan Walker and Jordan Shipers. The fact is that Mangini had a prodcutive year down in AAA last season. But that does not translate in anyway to what his line will be in the major leagues. I've checked a lot of other sites and I've not seen one with Mangini anywhere on the M's list of top prospects. So sorry dude. You can argue all you want to but you are wrong, and stop with all the WAR novels. It's giving me a head ache. Slow your roll and relax. Trying to sway optimism and pop a blood artery isn't gonna do you any good. Z isn't listening to you and the franchise is gonna do what they do. Deal with it. |
| 70. By: sexymarinersfan on 11-10-2010 11:07:39 Here are some scouting reports for you on Mangini. These are guys who are actual scouts. This article was written by: Jon Shields. Enjoy! JON: Matt Mangini, I’ve long given up on Mangini, but I’ll give him one final courtesy mention. Terrible uppercut swing and resistance to coaching have doomed him thus far, but someone may have changed as his numbers picked up a bit down the stretch. Brandon Haveman: He’s tiny but he hits and hits and hits. Being moved from the OF to 2B this offseason, hopefully it works out. Vinnie Catricala: Some intriguing tools and power potential. Good debut in Pulaski. Will likely struggle against better breaking balls. Pedro Okuda: Half Brazilian, half Japanese, played Japanese high school ball. Passed up in Japan’s draft. Some say because of racism, some because of skill. Seems like an interesting blend of tools and polish, but he’s being described as a “middling prospect.” There you go, a "middling prospect." I for one am going to listen to a scout's advice and someone who does this kind of thing for a living than take your word for it. My point is simply this. It's a blog. No need to get all Top Gun on us with stats and facts. We all follow the M's. We hear your opinions. But do not try to skew them in such a way as to make it seem like our prospects are more valuable than they really are. "It is what it is!" |
| 71. By: sexymarinersfan on 11-10-2010 11:10:13 Woops, please disregard this last post. I thought these were actual scouts and not players. Here is the link of the article that you can read from about the only list I've seen on Mangini thus far. http://www.proballnw.com/01-2010/2010-seattle-mariners-prospect-report-inf/ So sorry for the misinformation. My bad! |
| 72. By: rosterbatorextraordinaire on 11-10-2010 17:15:00 Brandon Haveman: He’s tiny but he hits and hits and hits. Being moved from the OF to 2B this offseason, hopefully it works out. You really should know enough about prospects to not be fooled by all that... Especially the part I just highlighted. Mangini is 6'4 and 230 lbs., which you should know if you are going to throw your hat in the ring about criticizing me. Minimum you should know his stature, he was drafted less than 5 years ago and was a supplemental 1st rounder. Really not knowing enough about him to distinguish him from the other guys on the list is pretty much unforgiveable on a propsect blog. As for your list of 20... 1. SP-Michael Pineda 2. 2B-Dustin Ackley 3. SS-Nick Franklin 4. SP-Mauricio Robles 5. RP-Josh Lueke 6. SS/3B-Carlos Triunfel 7. 1B/DH-Rich Poythress 8. OF-Greg Halman 9. RP-Dan Cortes 10. 1B/OF-Dennis Raben (not higher rated) 11. SP-Maikel Cleto (not higher rated) 12. 3B-Alex Liddi 13. OF-Johermyn Chavez 14. 3B/OF-Nate Tenbrink 15. SP-Anthony Vasquez (not higher rated) 16. SP-George Mieses (not higher rated) 17. INF-Kyle Seager (not higher rated) 18. 1B/OF-Mike Carp (not higher rated) 19. SP-Anthony Fernandez (not higher rated) 20. SP-Blake Beaven! And some of those that are "better prospects" are not a ton better, some could go either way, but I'm giving the benefit of the doubt because of strong 2010s, like Tenbrink, Beaven, Poythress, and Cortes. |
| 73. By: rosterbatorextraordinaire on 11-10-2010 17:17:56 By the way, my Greinke trade was so ridiculous, right? The Royals just traded DeJesus who has had a combined 8.5 WAR over the last three years, even with missing part of last year. They sent him to the Athletics for Mazzaro, a pitcher who registered only 124+ IP of .7 WAR baseball and a marginal pitching prospect. So expect the Royals to ask for x3 the return for Greinke, which is less than what I suggested for him. |
| 74. By: rocketdawg31 on 11-10-2010 19:45:53 Doug Fister, Jason Vargas, Carlos Triunfel, Greg Halman, Nate Tenbrink, Rich Poythress, and the rights to Jose Lopez for Zack Greinke, Alex Gordon, Kila Ka'aihue. ..By the way, my Greinke trade was so ridiculous, right? It doesn't work, rosterbator. Brief overview of who you're sending away: Fister- solid #4 SP, doesn't beat himself. The definition of "average stuff". He's Ryan Franklin, five inches taller. Vargas- #4-#5 SP type, he'll keep us in games because he's tailor-made for OUR ballpark. I don't know how he'd do at Kauffman Stadium, but right now he has more value to us than he does in most other places. Halman- every GM in baseball knows what his weaknesses are. What he brings back in any trade will be quite limited. Tenbrink- one good year does not a solid prospect make, with his sort of tool-kit. Think Matt Lawson. Triunfel- value is at its lowest ebb, he has major questions to answer. He CANNOT centerpiece a deal like this. And as the youngest player involved, he'd HAVE to. Poythress- would probably garner some lukewarm interest throughout the league. But you are not going to get a stud like Greinke for five pieces of comparative poop. Let alone "throw-ins" like Ka'aihue and Gordon. It does NOT work that way in major-league baseball. I know Dayton Moore is capable of some daffy things (TRADE for Mike Jacobs? seriously?!)...but he gets ROASTED and hung in effigy if he takes this deal. And he's not dumb enough to not know that. Think about it, roster. If this is what he settles for in dealing Greinke, don't you think he'd be fielding the same questions from his fan base as what Phillies GM Ruben Amaro did in 2010 for dealing Cliff Lee? Make no mistake, that trade got the attention of GMs throughout baseball. As Exhibit A of the kind of deal you don't make. YOURS is worse- Aumont and Ramirez had more pull as legit prospects at the time of that Lee trade than what any of Tenbrink, Halman and Triunfel currently do. If you think Moore pulls the trigger on this, then you've sadly underestimated the tsunami of public outrage he'd face- from a fan base he's trying to KEEP- over the deal. If Moore gets a trade proposal like this, there's got to be a dozen teams that he'd call and who would say "Hey, we can beat that for Greinke!". And they can. Which brings me to my next point. You're completely correct about Fister and Vargas' value being tied in the fact that they are years away from making any serious money. But that's the same reason why they're most valuable to us! Exactly who do we get to take those BEOTR starts? Rookies that aren't ready? Free agents that cost millions and we stand a good chance of NOT having in-house replacements for when those inflated 1-year deals run out? Free agents that stand a real good chance of giving us the mostly the SAME results that we'd've gotten from Fister and Vargas? Why would we pay millions more- as well as lose the benefit of two cheap, young pieces- to achieve the same results for one year? I'm sure you could have some WAR-oriented answer at the ready...but please don't. This thread has seen enough of that. WAR can be very helpful, and I like it. But I don't like it enough to read another blasted novel of it. |
| 75. By: FWBrodie on 11-11-2010 16:07:55 Jason, what's up with Alex Gordon these days? Is he only a LF now or can he still hold it down at 3B? |
| 76. By: LCHFC on 11-12-2010 12:52:25 @rosterbatorextraordinaire The trade of DeJesus to Oakland for Vin Mazzaro and Justin Marks is way different, and more evenly balanced than your Grienke trade scenario. Mazzaro, who in 2009 was the A's No.8 top prospect according to BA has incredible stuff to be a No.3,4 pitcher depending on the team he's with. He's only 24, and has a lot of upside while DeJesus is a good OBP outfielder but nothing even close to Grienke. The last time Zduriencik traded with KC it was Betancourt for Dan Cortes and a marginal prospect. Same thing here with the A's-KC trade. Mazzaro is a good No.3 or 4 pitcher and DeJesus is a good outfielder. It's an evenly balanced trade. Your Greinke trade: Doug Fister, Jason Vargas, Carlos Triunfel, Greg Halman, Nate Tenbrink, Rich Poythress, and the rights to Jose Lopez for Zack Greinke, Alex Gordon, Kila Ka'aihue. Fister had 3-6 good starts this season but tailed off. Vargas, I don't see why you would want to trade him considering what he did this year, he's a solid No.3 SP. Triunfel has fallen from the heavens as a top prospect and there have been several questions raised about where he can play, and how well he can hit. Halman is a top prospect on a fastball hitting machine, nothing else. Tenbrink is good, but he needs to find a position to gain value. Poythress is a solid hitter who could be a fair piece in a possible Grienke trade. The rights to Jose Lopez made me laugh, this isn't basketball where you trade his rights. Seattle will either let him walk or bring him back, but I'm not sure he'll come back with Ackley in AAA (2B) and Figgins moving back to 3B. Either way Lopez wouldn't have much value either. So you have to takeout Gordon, and Kila to make Moore even talk to you. Then start from scratch. If you want to talk Grienke trade scenarios have it be like this, or include these players. Michael Saunders, Alex Liddi, Poythress, James Gillheeney, Nate Tenbrink and Fister plus maybe a bench player. But the untouchables would be: Justin Smoak, Dustin Ackley, Adam Moore, Jason Vargas, Michael Pineda, Kyle Seager, Johermyn Chavez, Nick Franklin, and Robles among a few others. The core can't be hit if Seattle wants to get Grienke. And because I don't see a Michael Saunders, Rich Poythree, Jason Vargas, Nate Tenbrink and Doug Fister trade for Grienke passing the laugh test Greinke won't be in an M's uni. Now you can trade Saunders and someone else for maybe a No.3 or 2 not named Grienke then it's possible. |
| 77. By: slamcactus on 11-13-2010 13:21:41 "If you want to talk Grienke trade scenarios have it be like this, or include these players. Michael Saunders, Alex Liddi, Poythress, James Gillheeney, Nate Tenbrink and Fister plus maybe a bench player." Change Saunders to Pineda and Dayton Moore may not hang up on the idea immediately, but it still wouldn't cut it. Change Liddi to Pineda and now we're talking. Either way, it's not something the Ms should be entertaining. This team needs core players, not two-year rentals. |
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 |