Quick Take on Holliday Deal

by John Sickels on Jul 24, 2009 12:36 PM EDT Comment 44 comments

I'll have more detailed analysis for each player at Rotowire.com, but I like the Matt Holliday deal for both teams.Holliday is a very good player, but he's not a long-term asset for a team in Oakland's position, and I think they got a good haul in the deal.

Brett Wallace has adapted well to the high minors just one year out of college, hitting .293/.346/.423 this year for Triple-A Memphis. His strike zone judgment has actually been a bit worse than expected and he hasn't fully unleashed his power, but I think that will come. Although I'm more optimistic than some about Wallace's ability to play third base in the short run, Oakland can simply move him to first base now to replace or supplement the disappointing Daric Barton. If the Cardinals concluded that Wallace couldn't play third, obviously they had no room for him behind Albert Pujols.

Peterson is hitting a combined .295/.361/.423 with 12 steals between Class A Palm Beach and Double-A Springfield. I see him as an effective line drive hitter who can play the outfield and first base if needed, though he won't have big power. He should make a nice fourth outfielder.

Mortensen gets lots of ground balls and throws strikes, though he's not overpowering and his 4.37 ERA with a 82/34 K/BB in 105 innings for Memphis is decent rather than excellent. He could make a nice fourth starter, though.

So, in exchange for a 29 year old pending free agent outfielder, Oakland gets a top third base/first base prospect, a guy who should be a good fourth outfielder, and a guy who could be a useful inning-eater. That's a better than what they would get would likely get from the draft picks if they'd kept Holliday and let him leave as a free agent.

From the Cardinals perspective, you exchange some of your surplus in corner bats and pick up a guy who is ready to help you win now. So basically I think this deal is good for both teams in the short run, though in the long run the balance should help Oakland more.

0 recs | Comment 44 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

The Real Question

Carlos Gonzalez, Street & Smith or Wallace, Peterson & Mortensen.

Probably depends on your thoughts on Carlos more than anyone else. Did the A’s do better than the Rockies when trading Holliday?

by sg8335aa on Jul 24, 2009 1:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Carlos Gonzalez

At this point, the A’s side of Holliday deal (on both ends) looks fairly good. I don’t believe that the A’s can be considered amazing on either ends, but I think both lean towards the A’s. To this point Carlos Gonzalez is all tools and no skills except on defense. His batting has been downright horrific, even in Coors. How long will it take for him to find his swing? How long would it take in Oakland? That second question will always be theoretical even if he becomes an impact at any point down the road in Colorado, but it’s just as important when considering the trade.

The A’s ended up trading a very good reliever who is getting expensive, a toolsy OF who needs a lot more time and a smoke-and-mirrors lefty starter for a few months of Holliday, a 3B/1B/DH who looks almost ready to make in impact in the Oakland lineup, a starter who may be as good or better than Smith and a 4th OF. Wallace alone is worth Gonzalez and Street IMO and Smith/Mortensen seem to pretty much be a wash and then the A’s got Peterson on top of it.

The real thing to consider is the time it would take for Gonzalez to become effective at the major league level. Even if he becomes an impact offensive talent in 2012 (arbitrary and theoretical number(, the A’s can’t really wait that long. So they traded the 3 years of time to wait for Gonzalez in exchange for Holliday and then flipped Holliday for someone who they expect (at least we assume) to contribute to the offense next year. I think it’s worth it.

by nobodyinparticular on Jul 24, 2009 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Couldn't possibly have stated it any better -- with one sizable, easily omitted exception

One that can’t be quantified: The A’s, in Holliday, got a player around whom they could build a contender, or so they thought. Sure, it was a total lottery ticket, but the team was rebuilding anyhow. Why not take a flier, sign another couple vets and see if you can’t catch lightning in a bottle?

That plan, of course, failed in terms of contending, but that was before the team’s ace (Duchscherer) and closer (Devine) went down, and you can even throw Eric Chavez in that mix, if you ever believed he’d be healthy.

As it turns out, the grand scheme of things didn’t exactly fit into Beane’s plan of “contending while rebuilding,” but it did in theory. Sure, maybe that theory is flawed in terms of banking on oft-injured players, but, on paper, the team was a contender in a weak division. Contending failed, but the 2009 A’s weren’t going to win with Carlos Gonzalez, Huston Street & Greg Smith. So, while trying to contend, the A’s also got a bat around which lineups for the next six years will be built, further aiding the rebuilding efforts.

http://www.myspace.com/ryanmac10

by RyanFromBonas on Jul 25, 2009 1:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The problem wasn't the Holliday deal

But signing vets that nobody in their right mind could’ve thought would actually be good (Cabrera/Giambi).

by thejd44 on Jul 25, 2009 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

the giambi signing looked like wishcasting

from the very start. But the A’s were going hard after Furcal at the time they acquired Holliday, Cabrera was clearly not the primary target, and seemed even at the time like a signing that the A’s could afford and that perhaps could be be better than Crosby/Petit/Pennington. But there weren’t many good ss options anywhere last off-season. At AN we spent countless threads trying to find a SS upgrade.

I didn’t mind Cabrera. I never saw the point of Nomar (I know, I know RH hitting). Giambi…I don’t know, wish casting that Holliday, Cust, Giambi, Chavez would be a formidable core.

by jakarta on Jul 25, 2009 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Correct, but who were Cabrera & Giambi blocking at AAA?

After 2008, Barton needed time in Sacramento to figure things out, and Petit/Pennington weren’t exactly blowing down the door at SS. That said, I’d definitely sign Cabrera and possibly Giambi, I guess, to cheap, one-year deals.

http://www.myspace.com/ryanmac10

by RyanFromBonas on Jul 25, 2009 4:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

2008 Barton > 2009 Giambi

And until a few days ago, Cabrera was a below-replacement player (about 3 weeks ago he was around a full win below replacement).

Those were bad deals, and sometimes it seems I was the only person saying that Giambi and Cabrera were, at best, a win better than the other options (Barton, Crosby, Pennington, whoever).

by thejd44 on Jul 26, 2009 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Cardinals overpaid

Elvis Andrus - 2009 AL Rookie of the Year
Mitch Moreland - 2009 Rangers Minor League POY

by RangerMad on Jul 24, 2009 1:56 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Maybe on pure talent

but John is right when you consider everything. Also, don’t forget STL is in the playoff mix AND their outfield has underpeformed quite a bit.

I'm no commie, but the Reds shall be the best again!

by RedHopeful on Jul 24, 2009 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Aside from that

I think there’s something to be said for the affect it’ll have on Pujols. A GM wants to keep the best hitter in baseball, who happens to being signed at a discount, as happy as possible; Pujols has made it clear that he wanted some help offensively and that he was getting frustrated.

by JayWise on Jul 24, 2009 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

For a second I thought this was going to be a BS "protection" argument

But I wonder if a 2 month Holliday rental is enough to appease Pujols. Do the Cards have to make a serious effort to extend him (or sign him after he files free agency) for this trade to accomplish the goal of making Pujols happy?

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2009 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sometimes the appearance of effort...

…is more important than actual help. “See Albert Pujols? We tried our best to get you some help!! It’s not our fault that his agent is Scott Boras and he decided to leave to play for the New York Yankees/ Boston Red Sox!! Now you know that we’re doing our best, and you shouldn’t abandon us when you become a free agent in a few years.”

by JayWise on Jul 24, 2009 4:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, I think there's something to that

Of course if New York or Boston offers him twice as much, it won’t matter, but I agree the appearance of effort is worth something.

by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2009 7:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

After his experiences in the AL I wouldn't be surprised if Holliday signed

an extension with the Cards.

Some motherfcukers are always trying to ice skate uphill - Blade.

by OldhamA on Jul 25, 2009 5:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You know the Beane bandwagon is laughably overcrowded

when people are trying to spin this as an overall “win” for the A’s.

Brett Wallace was the only good prospect included in the deal, and his value lies almost exclusively in the hope that he sticks at 3rd base. If he doesn’t, you’re getting a .750 OPS at 1st base – whoopty doo. I’ll take the upside of Carlos Gonzalez over that any day of the week.

Plus, let’s not forget that the draft picks from Holliday walking this offseason are now transferred to STL – that’s a significant point that should not be discarded.

So for Brett Wallace and a couple meh prospects, the Cards received a half season of Matt Holliday hitting right next to Pujols in the lineup to help them in their WS chances, and if he leaves at the end of the season they pick up two draft picks. Great move.

Founder of the Rowdy Hardy Fan Club

by eazyb81 on Jul 24, 2009 3:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Gonzalez? C'mon eazyb...

I’ll paraphrase Bill Parcells: Potential means you ain’t done s*** yet.

And so far what Gonzalez has done has pretty much been just that—poop. And over 100 of those PAs have been with the Rockies.

Over the course of 421 PAs in the majors, Gonzalez has 22 BBs, 109 Ks (that’s K% over 25%) and a line of .238/.278/.361

That’s absolutely horrendous. How long is it going to take for him to actually do something with his tools? He doesn’t know how to be patient, he still strikes out over 25% of the time and he can’t hit a breaking ball.

by nobodyinparticular on Jul 24, 2009 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Parcells Stole The Line

It was either Frank Broyles or Darrell Royal who said potential meant “he ain’t done it yet” sometime in the window of late ’60’s to early ’70’s.

by Toad on Jul 24, 2009 9:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

he's also a bitch

he didn’t take any instruction while he was in Oakland. Not a good sign for a struggling 22-year-old. He had every reason to be humble and listen and he didn’t. That’s a character flaw.

Batting 4th for the 2014 San Jose A's: 26-year-old RF Justin Upton, in the 1st season of a nine year, $250M deal.

by notsellingjeans on Jul 25, 2009 4:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Just laughed out loud at the "bitch" line ...

While I’m not sure denying instruction makes him a bitch, it sure hasn’t turned Carlos and his bundle o’ tools into a big league regular, which was the jist of the above post.

The over/under on organizations that have given up on Carlos Gonzalez is at about 2.4. I’ll take the over by 2011, at the latest.

http://www.myspace.com/ryanmac10

by RyanFromBonas on Jul 25, 2009 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wallace with a .750 OPS

Is underselling his projection.

Don't believe the lies Bill!!!! look at the sparkly ERA!!! Sparkly, Sparkly!!! - McCovey Chronicles

by Trenchtown on Jul 24, 2009 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

read keith laws info on wallace

i disagree with his takes, but surprisingly he calls him a top 10 overall mlb prospect…those are considered elite guys

by Asfan4ever723 on Jul 24, 2009 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ah, well if Keith Law says it then it must be true

Founder of the Rowdy Hardy Fan Club

by eazyb81 on Jul 24, 2009 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

And if you're sarcastic about it

then it must be false.

I say this, not to disagree with you, but rather because I’m curious as to what you base your distaste of Wallace on.

by JayWise on Jul 24, 2009 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

So lemmie get this straight.

a 750 OPS at 3rd is good… but not good at 1st. Id argue its not good at either. Nor do I believe he performs that poorly.

"Their Triple-A rotation, led by Trevor Cahill and Brett Anderson, could be better than some big-league rotations; Michael Ynoa is the best Latin American prospect of the decade; 2008 draftees Jemile Weeks and Rashun Dixon bring much-needed tools to an advanced group of hitters." - BaseballProspectus.com

by Syphon on Jul 24, 2009 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

So what are you basing that on?

Certainly not his Milb production to date. And someone else in the other thread made a good point in calling out those who call Wallace an OBP machine – the numbers don’t back it up.

I’m not impressed at all by him, especially if he ends up at 1st.

Founder of the Rowdy Hardy Fan Club

by eazyb81 on Jul 24, 2009 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah but you like the KC Chiefs

So why should your opinion count? ;-) (totally just messing with you eazy)

by nobodyinparticular on Jul 24, 2009 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hes not a OBP machine..

but he certainly has good OB skills. He does a career MiLB OBP of .390. He will hit for power. Hes also been rushed by the cards, so his AAA numbers are a bit suppressed but not bad.

by Syphon on Jul 24, 2009 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

wallace

I mentioned above that Wallace has underperformed this year. I still believe in his projection however.

by John Sickels on Jul 24, 2009 4:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I think this trade is awesome for both sides

The Cards pick up a proven bat to give their offense some more oomph. The acquisition gives them some nice long-term flexibillity as well . . .either keep Holliday around via arbitration or a new contract to maintain the offense, or let him go for a couple of draft picks. Wallace is a nice prospect, but he really didn’t have a MLB future with this team. The other guys are solid adds for Oakland but certainly not irreplaceable. Short-term gains + long-term gains = win.

For Oakland, they get a better idea of their finances for the remainder of this season and next offseason. They don’t have to worry about Holliday potentially crippling their 2010 payroll by accepting arbitration, which would make him a must-move and kill their trade leverage. Also, Oakland probably loved Wallace heading into the draft last year, so I imagine they’ve got to be thrilled about bringing him in as the key piece for Holliday.

It’s the rare trade where I don’t see much to talk about, because it just makes so much sense. It’s entirely reasonable for both sides, giving each side a generous return that they won’t have to lose sleep about, and giving them the flexibility they need to think about contending.

by mrkupe on Jul 24, 2009 4:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I think Wallace is a good player that can help a good team

he is not, however, going to be a cornerstone. An above average player, yes, but his defensive ability will hurt his overall value.

by Daniel Berlyn on Jul 24, 2009 4:13 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

how is this comparable return to other rentals?

teixiera for kotchman/reliever
dunn for buck/owings
cc for laporta/brantley/bryson/jackson

by Asfan4ever723 on Jul 24, 2009 4:17 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

This is better than the first two you mentioned and arguably better than the CC package.

Depends on LaPorta and Wallace’s outcome. Whatever happened to Bryson, btw?

by Daniel Berlyn on Jul 24, 2009 4:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

think he had TJ

baseball rules.

by doublestix on Jul 24, 2009 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

worse return than CC

but better than Tex and Dunn

by dcfcblues on Jul 24, 2009 9:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good idea to post your analysis of deadlne deals involving prospects

Certainly should bring in a lot of extra eyeballs to the site in the coming week

by jibs on Jul 24, 2009 5:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

A's lineup

can someone do a rundown on the A’s 2013 lineup? off the top of my head i can see an incredibly solid infield and a sick pitching staff.

by mjr20 on Jul 24, 2009 11:14 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

2011

C – Suzuki
1B – Wallace
2B – Weeks
SS – Green
3B – Cardenas
LF – Buck
CF – Cunningham/Hairston
RF – Doolittle
DH – Carter

That’s assuming Wallace can’t play 3rd.

Solace: Law says he's a fourth OFer
PaulThomas: I think Keith Law is only a fourth analyst

by hero66 on Jul 25, 2009 12:07 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I don't see Buck in the lineup as long as Geren is manager

Of course, I don’t see the team winning as long as he’s manager either.

by thejd44 on Jul 25, 2009 3:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

I’ll take that lineup, too. Who even knows where vets like Barton, Cust and Sweeney, prospects like Grant Desme, Josh Donaldson and Corey Brown, or, God forbid, any free agent bat fit in the mix. Possibly nowhere, but it feels pretty darn good having a lineup, barring injuries, penciled in for years to come. A lot can change, but this looks all right, especially on top of a rotation centered around Anderson, Cahill & Mazzaro.

http://www.myspace.com/ryanmac10

by RyanFromBonas on Jul 25, 2009 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Donaldson will be in LMB

Donaldson will be in MLB by 2011. That was an amazing pickup.
Donaldson is having one heck of a break out season with an .829 OPS, 32 2B and 73 BB! in 415 PAs. Definitely going to make it to the majors. I think he deserves B+ or higher prospect status.

by apilgrim on Aug 2, 2009 1:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Plus the A's save money, right?

They had to kick in $1.5 million to cover some of Holliday’s salary, but they don’t have to pay bonuses to the incoming prospects like they would for the two compensatory picks they would have gotten otherwise. Maybe it’s close to a wash, but these Cardinals prospects are also closer to the majors. Or am I misunderstanding the situation?

by Flynn Blake on Jul 25, 2009 12:12 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I don't believe any of the 3 have to even go on the 40 man.

by Future Ed on Jul 25, 2009 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nope, they're all recent draftees

Linda's in the cold ground, won't see her anymore
Somewhere out on the highway tonight, the drunken engines roar
It's just one of those things, one of those things
-- Al Stewart, "Accident on 3rd St."
In memory of Nick Adenhart and all victims of drunk driving

by PaulThomas on Jul 25, 2009 2:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs