Willingham, Olsen to... wait, this can't be right

by drjayphd on Nov 10, 2008 8:03 PM EST Comment 68 comments

Josh Willingham and Scott Olsen are, according to Peter Gammons, headed to the Washington Nationals for Emilio Bonifacio, P.J. Dean and Jake Smolinski.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3694827

In three full seasons, as well as bits of two others, Willingham's a career .266/.361/.472 hitter, but he hasn't quite matched his 2006 season (.852 OPS, near-.500 SLG, 26 HR). Meanwhile, Olsen's had a rocky tenure with the Marlins, but still had a 4.20 ERA in 33 starts.

Bonifacio's arrival more'n likely means Uggla's FINALLY moving off 2B, but is that all there is to this deal?

0 recs | Comment 68 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

OF position open in Florida

Hmmmm? John Raynor Anyone?!

by davidsabin on Nov 10, 2008 8:11 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

more likely

FutureFish

by Ramp on Nov 10, 2008 8:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

hehe

more likely…

Hermida, Maybin and Ross in the outfield

FutureFish

by Ramp on Nov 10, 2008 8:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

You and me posted the same thins at the same time. :)

by Orioles77 on Nov 10, 2008 8:13 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Nats

I see this deal as a clear win for the Nats. Yes, it drives up their payroll, but Olsen immediately steps in at the front of the rotation, and Willingham will find a place in the everyday lineup. That Marlins must see something in Dean or Smolinski.

by GuyinNY on Nov 10, 2008 8:18 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

A Gammons rumor that seems unlikely? Say it ain't so!

I love the man, but if he relayed a rumor that penguins can fly, it wouldn’t be out of character.

by aap212 on Nov 10, 2008 8:22 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

They fly

underwater, man. Free your mind.

Now, someone turn up the Pearl Jam and Gin Blossoms.

by gogotabata on Nov 10, 2008 8:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Washington combustibility potential

If this is true, Washington keeps getting more and more combustible. Milledge, Dukes, now adding a proven idiot like Olsen. It may work out in the long run, I’m just sayin they are accumulating some characters.

The Giants need to sign Harry Doyle.

by jrose643 on Nov 10, 2008 8:48 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

What exactly is Milledge's character issue?

High fiving fans in the crowd and loud rap music is hardly on par with a statutory rapist and a dude with DUI problems who fights with his teammates in the dugout.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Nov 10, 2008 10:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

+1

by wobatus on Nov 10, 2008 10:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

But his rap album was really bad

And he, uh, doesn’t carry himself like a ballplayer. Nudge nudge.

by aap212 on Nov 11, 2008 12:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

You sir, have poor music taste

“Bend Ya Knees” is a modern masterpiece

by jibs on Nov 11, 2008 2:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Milledge

Also had a ‘statutory rape’ thing around his neck during the time he was drafted.

by BBFan1 on Nov 11, 2008 1:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

It was his HS GF right?

And she was 17 I believe turning 18 while he had just turned 18?

I know it’s an internet community but I still imagine the majority of the community had some sort of sexual relation before they were 18 here.

by jfish26101 on Nov 11, 2008 8:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

What's a girl?

by Lunkwill Fook on Nov 11, 2008 9:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

lol

That made me laugh.

And +1 on the defenses of Milledge’s character. Utter nonsense.

by scooter on Nov 11, 2008 10:37 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

one version

has the story has Milledge having sex at 17 with a 15 year old and the other, the creepy one, has a 17yo Milledge getting oral from a 12yo and a 13yo. I can’t find a reliable news story that mentions exactly how old the minor was.

I don’t know

by nms on Nov 11, 2008 12:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That last one...

makes the most sense. Not because it’s Milledge, but in a legal sense. Most states have laws that state it’s statutory rape if one or more of the participants is under 18 years of age AND there are three or more years difference in their age. So a 16 year old couldn’t tag a 12 year old… but an 18 year old could nail a 15 year old. This keeps the “18 year old with a 17 year old” problem from happening.

"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile

by Boxkutter on Nov 11, 2008 5:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

insert pedobear here

by GuyinNY on Nov 11, 2008 7:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Sorry.

That’s way bigger than I thought. :/

by GuyinNY on Nov 11, 2008 7:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Most, not all

Florida law:

(4) LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS BATTERY. — A person who:

(a) Engages in sexual activity with a person 12 years of age or older but less than 16 years of age; or

(b) Encourages, forces, or entices any person less than 16 years of age to engage in sadomasochistic abuse, sexual bestiality, prostitution, or any other act involving sexual activity

commits lewd or lascivious battery, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

As far as I can tell, it is always a felony in Florida to have sex with someone under 16.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Nov 11, 2008 9:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

But...

that isn’t statutory rape. All states do have a “minimum age” as far as I know, and it appears that Florida’s is 16. But breaking that law constitutes lewd or lascivious battery… not statutory rape.

"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile

by Boxkutter on Nov 13, 2008 5:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Depends

Is she a 5 tool chick?

by FishHead on Nov 11, 2008 1:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

At first glance

I like this deal for Washington. I won’t be surprised if they put Willingham at first if they can’t land anyone else (Dunn/Teixeira rumored offer). Olsen, as overrated as I think he is, is a decent lefty, and they have value. Typical Bowden – trading for a talented kid with some issues.

I’ve never understood the fascination others have had with Bonifacio. Nice, but I don’t think he’s all that unique. As for Dean and Smolinski, I’m not all that big on them, with the caveat that it is fairly early. Florida has Coghlan too, who I prefer over Bonifacio to be honest.

by toonsterwu on Nov 10, 2008 8:49 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Way to go out on a limb

If this is for real, can anybody explain the motivation for FL?

TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems

by OldProspects on Nov 10, 2008 9:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

At first glance?

At second glance and third glance this looks like a steal for Washington.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Nov 10, 2008 10:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

never thought i would see the day

is it possible jim bowden actually outsmarted another gm in a trade? the guy is awful. there has to be more to the transaction then originally posted.

by RandyKutcherHair on Nov 10, 2008 8:50 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

He makes a lot of steal trades I think

He just often squanders it.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Nov 10, 2008 10:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

What surprises me

is that Florida wasn’t able to find a catcher for Scott Olsen. That seemed like their motivation.

by toonsterwu on Nov 10, 2008 8:58 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Tex didn't want Salty for Olsen, didn't feel Olsen was worht it... Fl didn't want Laird and hispending arbitration

This either means Texas and Fl deal for one of FL better established pitchers or FL goes into the season with Baker or a FA C

by laxtonto on Nov 10, 2008 9:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I had heard

something about the Cardinals trying to deal Bryan Anderson to the Fish.

by The Gottfather on Nov 11, 2008 10:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Uggla...

could either uggla or Cantu (with baker) be going to the Dodgers in some sort of deal for Martin?

by znyfan on Nov 10, 2008 9:18 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

LA won't deal Martin

certainly not without someone to take his place

by count sutton on Nov 10, 2008 10:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

there has been talk about him being on the block

http://rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=MLB&id=105

could pick up Pudge… or get Baker back in a deal.

by znyfan on Nov 10, 2008 10:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Isn't Martin arb eligible?

That would make him too expensive for Florida.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Nov 10, 2008 10:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Wow

Must be more to it, or FL got hosed.

Formerly Uncle Charlie of Minor League Ball

by Yakker on Nov 10, 2008 10:31 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

there is more to it

It is Florida.
It is Jeff Loria.

It isn’t a trade that was made for baseball reasons.

by nms on Nov 10, 2008 10:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

All arbitration eligible players must go

No matter what the return. They kept Hanley, what more do you people want from him!?

by jibs on Nov 10, 2008 10:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Naive

OK, some can label me naive, but what business reason can Loria have for trading away valuable but arbitration-eligible talent? He does eventually need to win some games, right?

Formerly Uncle Charlie of Minor League Ball

by Yakker on Nov 11, 2008 10:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

evidently not

the Marlins payroll last year was 15 or 16 mil, that is only a couple mil away from a league minimum payroll. I guess he can still turn a profit if he keeps payroll so low

by nms on Nov 11, 2008 11:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

This hasn't been confirmed yet, right?

Bonfiacio looks like a simply bad 2B, with any value that he brings from his glove he quickly loses with his bat. Smolinski is a bad OF prospect, years away. Dean is the closest thing there is here to an interesting player, and he isn’t that interesting. There must be some mistake

TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems

by OldProspects on Nov 10, 2008 10:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

i don't see

how Dean is “interesting” but Smolinski is “bad”

by nms on Nov 10, 2008 10:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

These players are interesting?

Okay, slightly sarcastic, but they’re far away and only somewhat projectable… kinda feeling that the Nats got away with a haul here.

by demondeaconsbaseball on Nov 10, 2008 11:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I said

“Dean is the closest thing there is here to an interesting player, and he isn’t that interesting.” I really don’t think this is very strong praise

TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems

by OldProspects on Nov 11, 2008 12:07 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Fair enough

by demondeaconsbaseball on Nov 11, 2008 1:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Smolinski

had had in his two years in pro ball an OPS of .789 and .725. For a corner outfielder this is pretty unexciting. P.J. Dean hasn’t done terribly in his two years in the minor leagues, posting FIPs below 4.00 both times, and an ERA of 1.57 as a 19 year old in short season A ball. Keith Law, for example describes Smolinski as a “fringy regular” at LF. Dean, on the other hand, is described as “an aggressive strike-thrower with a solid-average fastball and a below-average curve that you could see improving to average,” though will likely not be any thing significant in the majors either.

TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems

by OldProspects on Nov 11, 2008 12:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

My favorite part about this deal and the Holliday deal is

No one had any idea this was going to happen before it did. All of those “hot stove watchers” were completely surprised. :-)

by mraver on Nov 11, 2008 8:23 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Well they were Jake Peavy busy watching Manny Ramirez Jake Peavy

And they Jake Peavy Manny Ramirez Jake Peavy Jake Peavy so they Jake Peavy Manny Ramirez another time Jake Peavy understandable Jake Peavy.

That’s why.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Nov 11, 2008 10:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

well are we giving scott olsen and willingham too much credit?

Olsen currently has a career 4.63 era with and hasnt had a K/BB ratio over 2.0 since 2006, Olsen has had personaility issues as well. Now obviously he was a former top level pitching prospect and at age 25 he still has a chance to reach his “potential” but his skills are not showing me anything 113 ks in 201.7 ip to go with 69 bbs. 1.64 k/bb ick.

Willingham when he was a catcher was worth a lot more then he is as a LF, hes a pretty respectable player, but if your not contending, not sure hes worth paying what he would get in arbitration. If he actually plays a full 150 game season you have a .266/.361/.472 with 25 hr and 85 rbis, he’s also going to be 30 so its not like one should expect him to get much better then that.

Check out my baseball analysis blog FANalytics

by jbluestone on Nov 11, 2008 8:25 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

so

an .830 OPS isn’t going to be worth $2mil?

as for Olsen, he was horrendous in 2007, but his other years haven’t been that bad. He’s just going to be 25 also

FutureFish

by Ramp on Nov 11, 2008 1:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Jeremy Bonderman is 25

And has a 4.74 career ERA. I’m not arguing that Olsen is better than Bonderman, but he’s a young pitcher who even at his worst is probably league average, and has already shown the potential to be significantly better than that. Willingham is an above-average hitter even at 1B, let alone LF. The stats you projected for him is pretty much exactly what he did in 2006 and 2007, and what he was on pace for in 2008 – that’s pretty good

TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems

by OldProspects on Nov 11, 2008 2:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

OPS+

Is the only real way to assess Willingham, in my opinion. His OPS+ numbers are at or near 120 for 3 years running. That’s a valuable player. And he made $400k last year and is under club control for 3 more seasons.

That said, I take the point on his age. I was shocked to see he was 29 in 2008. Still, he’s probably got at least 2 or 3 more very fine years before he even is at risk (and I think he is) of a decline based on the dreaded “Old Player Skills Syndrome.”

Formerly Uncle Charlie of Minor League Ball

by Yakker on Nov 11, 2008 10:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

His background

isn’t promising either, since he is an ex-catcher with a history of knee issues.

by nms on Nov 11, 2008 11:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

What's the over-under for felonies in the Nats dugout next year?

They’ll need to hire a full-time security force with Dukes and Olsen in the same dugout…

Vogt early, Vogt often.

by Brickhaus on Nov 11, 2008 8:38 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

If Washington wanted more media and fans...

they would sign a deal for a reality TV show and have cameras follow those two around. It would have to be on a channel that was a little edgier though since you know Dukes is a little promiscuous. How many kids does he have again? I know it’s no where near Kemp/Henry levels, but isn’t it at like three?

Tell me you wouldn’t watch a reality show with those two… especially if they were forced to room together on the road.

"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile

by Boxkutter on Nov 11, 2008 9:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

don't forget

one of those fans to blow Olsen’s cigarette smoke out of the dugout (yes, he smokes cigarettes)

by psugator on Nov 11, 2008 9:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

So do a lot of baseball players

The media doesn’t report it much, but I’d say that 10% smoke on top of the 10% that dip.

Vogt early, Vogt often.

by Brickhaus on Nov 11, 2008 9:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Bonifacio

That was a quick turnaround, being as Bowden went out of his way to overpay for him.

by StickRat on Nov 11, 2008 11:52 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Vintage Bowden

The dude seems to make more lopsided trades – both for him and against him – than anyone else. He’ll trade a good player for pennies on the dollar then turn right around and rip someone else off. He’s a madman on a segway.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Nov 11, 2008 3:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Clearly the Marlins firesale has begun

I’d love to get a piece of that action if this is the kind of price their players are commanding.

I like how they’re not even pretending to be a competitive franchise anymore.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Nov 11, 2008 1:10 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

well...

Kevin Gregg is gone and maaaaybe Dan Uggla, but apparently Uggla has been assured he isn’t going anywhere (have to wait for Opening Day to see if this rings true)

Amezaga is available too. Perhaps Cantu.

FutureFish

by Ramp on Nov 11, 2008 1:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Amezaga

Would make a really nice defensive 4th OF for a lot of contenders

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Nov 11, 2008 3:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I really don't get how this happens

Even if your sole requirement is prospects who will cost absolutely no money, then surely some team could offer more than this. Was Billy Beane, for example, really not willing to offer Vince Mazzarro for Olsen and Willingham? Hell, he’d have the beginning of an almost adequate offense with Willingham and Holliday in the OF (or Willingham at 1B). And Vince Mazzarro is a much better prospect than all three of these guys put together. This simply boggles the mind

TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems

by OldProspects on Nov 11, 2008 2:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe Dean is the guy they wanted

The Marlins do have some history of stealing good unknown pitching prospects from lower levels in deals like this, but I don’t see anything that suggests Dean is that special.

by acerimusdux on Nov 11, 2008 3:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

they do?

my brain is prob shot, but who are these unknown guys they have gotten in deal before?

FutureFish

by Ramp on Nov 11, 2008 5:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

think

he is meaning willis or nolasco? Even though really nolasco was known. Willis I guess he means. I dont know this deal just looks bad.

by Fishfan79 on Nov 11, 2008 6:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm fairly meh about Willingham

He apparently has the defense of a water buffalo and isn’t a truly elite hitter to compensate. Given that he’s already past his prime, he’s not much more than an average player.

That said, I don’t think the Nats paid even the price of 3 cheap years of an average MLB starter to get him.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Nov 11, 2008 9:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs