Brewers land Greinke(?)
by at022482 on Dec 19, 2010 12:59 AM EST
Email
PrintThe MLB player is, supposedly, Yuniesky Betancourt.
--------------------
The Brewers have reached a deal with Kansas City for right-hander Zack Greinke Saturday, agreeing to send four players for the former Cy Young Award winner.
According to a source with knowledge of the situation, the Brewers would send the Royals outfielder Lorenzo Cain, shortstop Alcides Escobar and prospect pitchers Jake Odorizzi and Jeremy Jeffress for Greinke, who went 10-14 with a 4.17 ERA last season with Kansas City.
The Brewers are expected to receive another "major league" player in the deal, according to the source.
The Brewers were in desperate need of frontline starting pitching and went into the offseason with that in mind, but have paid a fairly steep price to upgrade the rotation.
Cain was considered the front-runner to earn the starting job in centerfield after impressing down the stretch in 2010 while Carlos Gomez, acquired last winter for shortstop J.J. Hardy, struggled to get on base.
Escobar was the "shortstop of the future," and paved the way for Hardy's move to Minnesota for Gomez.
Jeffress finally made it to the big leagues in 2010, his minor league career stalled at times by suspensions for violating baseball's drug policy. He went 1-0 with a 2.70 ERA in 10 outings for the Brewers.
Odorizzi was one of the Brewers few pitching prospects and went 7-3 with a 3.43 ERA in 23 appearances (20 starts) for Class A Wisconsin this season. He combined with reliever Adrian Rosario to throw a no-hitter against Cedar Rapids in August, striking out 10 in eight innings.
Just before the winter meetings, general manager Doug Melvin shipped top minor league prospect Brett Lawrie to Toronto for right-hander Shaun Marcum.
273 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
If this is true
Good move for Milwaukee. They’ve stripped an already thin system but I can’t say I truly blame them. NL Central favorites?
by CaptainCanuck on Dec 19, 2010 1:09 AM EST via mobile reply actions
Milk is on Greinke's NTC
and it seems a tad light in comparison to what other teams could offer unless they are completely sold on Escobar.
Not sure if the to SP prospects would even brake the Royals top 6…
JD’s like, "you want some fucking pitching? Here’s all the pitching you can stand. Now choke on it, bitches!"- RCCook
Agreed
His bat it solid but he needs a team that will let him play 1st or DH.
by King Billy Royal on Dec 19, 2010 1:40 AM EST up reply actions
I agree 100%
Although I would rather have Gamel then Kila. Kila is a pretty shitty baseball player.
by King Billy Royal on Dec 19, 2010 7:09 PM EST up reply actions
can't agree at all
Kila made a mockery of the PCL last year and made strides down the stretch in 2010. if Gamel can’t play 3B/LF/RF, i’d take Kila over him in a heartbeat. and it looks like he can’t.
R.I.P. cwhitman412, Frederick0220, & Mets2k9
http://twitter.com/doublestix
Thoughts on Kila
The guy takes way too long to adjust at every level. It was his 3rd year in AAA and as a 26 year old 1B I would hope he tears it up. After he was promoted to the majors his flaws, which many experts noted, were exposed. Kila won’t be more then a platoon guy in my opinion.
by King Billy Royal on Dec 19, 2010 7:56 PM EST up reply actions
Once Fielder leaves after '11, I wouldn't be surprised if Gamel is slotted as the Brewers 1B.
Chris Dickerson for CF '11!
braun
"If you hit .440 with 20 bombs, you don't have to do s---. You don't have to bring a glove to practice, just hit and leave whenever you want. You can bring a 40 and smoke a cigarette and call me from the parking lot asking me what time the game is, and I'll tell you. You can even say 'F--- you, Steve!' Actually, don't say that, that wouldn't be very nice." -Steve Friend, Head Coach, Chabot College Gladiators Baseball
Extremely disappointing, if true. It’s quantity over quality, even if it fits their so-called needs.
http://mvn.com/mlb-tossingtherosin/
quantity over quality
+1.
As I said to someone else, having a system as good as KC’s means you DON’T have to sacrifice impact for depth in trades, right? Better one blue chip guy and a couple of role players than a SS who may may never hit, a talented CF whoe hasn’t demonstrated that he can handle major league breaking pitches, a good-looking but unproven (yet to pitch above Low-A) RHP and an unknown fourth player (Jeffress is only a rumor, and his inclusion would help).
by blackoutyears on Dec 19, 2010 3:28 PM EST up reply actions
This would strip the Brewers farm system almost naked
Definitely did not expect them to do this
…they should send down Huntington & Nutting, because they aren’t ready, either. - royshowell
Yeah
but when you’re down to a Speedo, why not just go all the way? lol
by blackoutyears on Dec 19, 2010 3:29 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Solid Return for KC
They have filled in the gaps of their future lineup with Alcides Escobar(SS) and Lorenzo Cain(CF). Escobar will be great in the field and a few adjustments at the plate could turn him into a very good leadoff hitter. Cain, with his speed, will fit nicely in the 9th spot as a second leadoff hitter or at the leadoff spot if Escobar doesn’t improve.
Jeffress is low risk, high reward pickup for the bullpen. IIRC he was drawing rave reviews in the AFL.
Odorizzi has mid rotation potential and is coming off a great year. He may actually turn out to be the best of this group in time. He’s very underrated.
Milwaukee will be a dangerous team. They are right up there with St. Louis and Cincinnati for sure. I like them more than the Reds.
Odorizzi is the star piece of that deal in my mind. He throws 5 pitches and shows advanced command/control of all of them
and there is some projectibility left in him..
by Navi's_Navy on Dec 19, 2010 2:04 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Escobar - Star Piece IMO
I have to give the star piece title to Escobar. Remember this kid was a top 15 MLB prospect a year ago. He has gold glove potential in the field and plus speed on the bases. His bat was underwhelming this year but he was solid in AA and AAA at a young age. He just needs to make a few adjustments and he’ll be a very good leadoff hitter for Kansas City. Escobar really fits in nicely with the group that Kansas City is looking to build around.
Meh.
He’s a good way to (maybe) guarantee you don’t have a replacement level SS for a few years… which is, you know, a huge step forward for KC. Still don’t see him turning into much. Said this a year+ back… few so-so years as a starter then knocks around the league as a utility guy. That’s my Alcides Escobar crystal ball. I just don’t think he can really hit or ever will. Next few years he should hit enough to be a valuable piece at SS. I think he’s always going to walk a fine line.
If I could only have one guy from the deal I’d definitely take Odorrizi over Escobar.
Escobar
sounds like Dayton Moore’s kind of player.
When you're drowning, you don't say 'I would be incredibly pleased if someone would have the foresight to notice me drowning and come and help me,' you just scream.
agreed...
The only thing he does offensively is hit for average and I wouldn’t call him a guy that can rake. If he doesn’t hit for average, he’s an anchor on your line-up and if he doesn’t get on base, he can’t utilize his speed.
by Alex Eisenberg on Dec 19, 2010 2:00 PM EST up reply actions
Hitting for average is all he needs to do
I feel he can be a +10 run defender at shortstop. If you can do that and hit .280 with 30 SB, that’s star-level production basically no matter how much you walk or how much power you have.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
Here's an example I'm fond of giving as an Astros fan
In 2009, Michael Bourn batted .285/.354/.384 with 10 run defense in center field and 61 SB. He was worth 4.4 WAR that year. If you want to consider a star player to be worth 5 WAR that gives you some idea of the value we’re talking about here.
Now, maybe you think Escobar is not likely to walk as much or steal as many bases as Bourn. That’s fine. But remember that just playing shortstop is worth five runs, or half a win, more than playing center field.
And I feel that Escobar has the potential to post similar offensive numbers to Bourn’s, if he manages to reach his ceiling. That would be like 5 WAR right there.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
I am far from convinced he's a +10 SS.
far from convinced. Not basing this off his SSS UZR, either, before anyone starts. That’s a pretty strong projection to hang on a kid.
I've seen him play a pretty good amount
He’s a special, special defender.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
I've seen him a lot too
and I don’t know if I’d go two specials on him. I’ll concede that he has a chance to be a special (just one) defender. lol
by blackoutyears on Dec 19, 2010 11:15 PM EST up reply actions
IDK
Hadn’t thought of a scale. Do you think he has a chance to be the best defender in the league? Someone at Fangraphs was taking a look at Vizquel to temper some of the Escobar backlash, but is Escobar 11 GGs worth of specialness?
by blackoutyears on Dec 20, 2010 1:29 PM EST up reply actions
I do think he has a chance to be a perennial gold glover
Some of the plays I’ve seen him make are simply jawdropping, up there among the best plays I’ve ever seen made by a shortstop. I guess the question is whether he has the positioning and consistency to match his tools. But the tools are there, no question in my mind.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
But that's not true
Once his BABIP returns to normal levels, he’ll be a somewhat above average offensive SS and a highly above average defensive SS
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Dec 19, 2010 8:36 AM EST up reply actions
How do you know that they'll return to "normal"?
You can’t base a guys ML stats off mL numbers. There have been tons of guys that hit well in the minors and couldn’t cut it in the ML. I really like Escobar, he’s very talented but he was terrible offensively last season.
Well, by using stats
His xBABIP was .310
His BABIP was .266
Seems to be a discrepancy there.
Well watching him hit
The kid was overmatched! Hopefully he has a better showing this season but he wasn’t all he was hyped up to be.
Don't konw what confirmation bias is?
It means if you have a theory, your eyes will only see those things that back up your theory.. and not register those things that do not support your theory.
The question is what are you expecting
I see a really good defensive SS who only struck out 13.8% of PA while walking 6.5% of the time, with a lot of speed. At the very least, that’s the makings of a slightly above average SS who will be cost-controlled for 5 years. If his power goes up a touch, or his BABIP gets closer to this minor league data than his xBABIP from his rookie year, and he could be a top-5 SS
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Dec 19, 2010 12:37 PM EST up reply actions
Escobar's Hype
It was mostly based around his plus defense and speed.
His bat doesn’t have to evolve into anything special if he turns out to be as good as advertised in the field. But we’ll have to see if that happens.
I’m a big Odorizzi fan and think he has great potential but if I’m only taking one guy from this deal then it is Escobar. I’d take Odorizzi if it were 2-3 years in the future and he was going strong but a Low A pitcher shouldn’t be the centerpiece of a deal for your ace major league pitcher.
I thought he'd be a lot better offensively than he was in 2010
And I think most others that called him a top 15 guy did as well.
http://bullpenbanter.com/
Just want to uh... point out I feel good about ranking him #87 on my 2010 preseason top 100
#fistpump
Haha
I saw Escobar several times last year and he left me completely cold at the plate. I know we’re expecting less and less offense from SS, but even by today’s diminished standards he looks poor. No power and no plan at the plate that I could discern. He’s a good defender but his (lack of) on-base ability relegates him to hitting 8th or 9th in most orders, especially if his contact improve drastically. OTOH, indubitable upgrade over Betancourt!
by blackoutyears on Dec 19, 2010 3:38 PM EST up reply actions
Oops
that should read “if his contact doesn’t improve drastically”.
by blackoutyears on Dec 19, 2010 3:39 PM EST up reply actions
It's an interesting deal
KC could come out of this with very solid D at two positions where they don’t have any obvious options, a lot of speed where they didn’t have any, a potential closer and a very interesting pitching prospect. There’s no star power in this deal, but it might actually improve them
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Dec 19, 2010 2:28 AM EST up reply actions
That seems presumptuous
Considering every team in baseball knew KC was trying to trade him, and had ample time to put in a good offer.
Maybe the market was nor quite as frothy as Moore let on. If so, this is a decent return considering Escobar’s value 12 months ago.
Exactly.
-Every team knew he badly wanted out of KC and KC apparently had concluded they had to trade him
-He had 15 teams (half the league!) on his NTC… including most of the teams that could afford him or are in contention and would like him.
-While he will represent a significant value over what he’s paid, he still makes a pretty large sum of money the next two years. Not every team can afford to fit that $13.5m.
-Its only 2 years of team control
-His well documented (and overstated IMO) personal issues are viewed as a risk factor by other teams that don’t know him personally.
This all painted Dayton Moore in a corner to some degree. I think he did pretty well.
for a guy with anxiety issues, even though he stated it made no difference,
milwaukee is slightly different than new york.
Thanks.
That’s pretty tempting.
Seems like the Royals were focused on getting a MLB ready relief arm… Storen, Jeffress… is a Soria trade on the horizon?
at first i was opposed to this
but not now. i hope Soria is traded if royals can get a haul. difference here is that Soria has been on the record of not wanting to be traded, so there is no pressure to deal him if DM can’t get what he wants.
R.I.P. cwhitman412, Frederick0220, & Mets2k9
http://twitter.com/doublestix
Soria
has options through like 2014 or something. My theory is that they hang on to both and in the event that Jeffress shows he can close then they consider a trade. I think KC would also have to believe that they truly weren’t going to contend within that time frame, as having Jeffress setting up Soria is potentially devastating. Still, I agree that a trade just became much more likely.
by blackoutyears on Dec 19, 2010 11:18 PM EST up reply actions
not just Jeffress for me
it’s Louis Coleman, Tim Collins, Blake Wood, and a few others that i think can all be very good relief pitchers.
now i do agree that a combo of Collins/Jeffress/Soria would be absurd at the end of a game, but i think it’d just be better at this point to keep stockpiling talent.
R.I.P. cwhitman412, Frederick0220, & Mets2k9
http://twitter.com/doublestix
Those guys
are all interesting, but I’m not sure they’re the same caliber as Jeffress/Soria. I’m a big Louis Coleman fan though.
by blackoutyears on Dec 19, 2010 11:59 PM EST up reply actions
A Derek Norris based package would have been fun to see.
Exactly what I thought when I saw the rumor of a Nats deal being quashed. According to Olney it was a J. ZImmerman, Espinosa, Storen package — pretty much what larry’s Heyman link says — which is roughly in line with this I guess. Hard to tell if this is a result of Moore wanting depth or other teams not wanting to deal top shelf prospects. The industry seems (rightly or not) wary of Greinke due to his past medical issues and last year’s dip. Even if you buy the meme that Greinke was “bored”, that’s not exactly an endearing excuse.
by blackoutyears on Dec 19, 2010 3:54 PM EST up reply actions
that sure sounds like a far better package
than what they eventually got. I like Zimmerman quite a bit and still believe he could be a solid “2” type arm. Too bad Greinke quashed Washington.
Really? I think the opposite
Espinosa is far from a lock to stick at SS, and even if he does he won’t provide the defensive value of Escobar.
Jeffress and Storen basically cancel each other out as a power relievers with 5+ years of team control.
Zimmerman is nice, not sure I would put a #2 starter label on him though. I think Odorizzi has as much upside or more.
Cain seems to be an afterthought in this trade but I can definitely see an Austin Jackson-type comp for him.
I think
Espinosa’s defense is good enough that his hitting (especially power) makes him potentially far more valuabel than Escobar.
Storen has very good stuff and excellent command. I like Jeffress’ raw stuff but Storen is probably the safer bet.
Zimmerman is an excellent pitcher whose injury gives pause.
I don’t think Cain is a comparable defender to Jackson but they are similar in that both are due for BABIP regression. lol
by blackoutyears on Dec 20, 2010 1:35 PM EST up reply actions
sort of the same as the comments below by blackout
I think Espinosa will stick at short through his cost-controlled years. I could see him moving down the line, but unless a team has a stud shortstop, I think he’ll get every chance to be there.
I like Storen far more than I like Jeffress. Better control, better overall arsenal. Granted, there’s limited value to having a deep arsenal out of the pen, but it’s not like Storen’s raw arm is that far behind Jeffress (no doubt Jeffress has an edge in raw arm). Storen can, out of the pen, run the fastball in the upper 90’s with relative ease.
I really like Odorizzi, but I think Zimmermann has sort of been … underrated. It’s easy to forget how impressive Zimmermann’s 09 was, and how it wasn’t that far out of line with his minor league stats. It’s not like he doesn’t have the arsenal – low-mid 90’s 4-seamer (granted, a bit straight at times), good to plus slider, decent-solid curve. He does need to work on the change, but he throws strikes and has a solid enough arsenal. If the change develops, I think he could be a “2” type arm.
Could you make the case that the upsides for Jeffress and Odorizzi are higher, individually, than Storen and Zimmermann? Sure, but I don’t think it’s by that much, and Storen and Zimmermann, IMO, are far safer.
I’m also not sure I see Austin Jackson. I fully acknowledge that I haven’t pondered Cain all that deeply, but offensively, I was thinking that Randy Winn was a positive case for him.
Anyone else
see Law’s comment that the Nats’ offer is supposed to have been Zimmerman, Storen and Norris? If that’s true then Moore s/b a bit ticked at Greinke’s trade block imo.
by blackoutyears on Dec 24, 2010 7:17 PM EST up reply actions
I don't know about this
I pretty much agree with Uncle Buck’s various analyses here. The Royals got three young, MLB-ready players whose costs are controlled for awhile yet, and that fill some key holes for them and allow other future pieces to better fall into place. They get a 4th player with upside (Odorizzi).
Don’t forget that Escobar’s defense will also theoretically pay dividends for an up-and-coming rotation of young starters in the farm system. At first blush, it feels like the Royals got a bunch of players that will help both now and in the future, even if they are not all A-grade prospects.
I dont see how the Royals ran their mouths for weeks with ridiculous proposals (Toronto needing to send more than both Snider and Drabek?) and then concluded that this was the best offer.
Poker
Ever heard of it?
Did you expect the Royals to announce to the world the legit offers they were getting? They obviously were trying to get teams to up their offers and bid against themselves.
When you deal a guy like Greinke you need major impact talent(s) back
I don’t see it here.
Escobar is the top dog in the package and while I agree he’s more valuable than some think, his upside is limited by the bat and he’ll never be a star.
Odorizzi probably has a #3 ceiling. Jeffress’ ceiling is as a closer/setup guy, but one more toke and he’s gone for good. Cain is nothing special either.
Four solid pieces, sure, but to trade Greinke you need to get real upside in return.
wow, you sound very bitter
None of that talk had any real substance. They weren’t trading Greinke before Lee signed, so they just threw out a bunch of smoke to wait it out.
Brewers top 10 prospects
Just looking over their old list and from what I can tell the only prospects from last year’s top 10 that are still in their system are:
Mat Gamel(losing luster)
Eric Arnett(awful)
Kentrail Davis
Kyle Heckathorn
And the Brewers failed to sign their 1st round pick, Dylan Covey.
Looks like we have a new contender for the worst farm system in baseball. It might not even be much of a contest.
White Sox are still worse
I’d take Gamel and Scarpetta over anyone in their system (Mitchell and Morel pretty much), and with guys like Wily Peralta, Kyle Heckathorn, and Kentrail Davis I wouldn’t say this system is worse than that one, even now.
Is he still a prospect?
23.1 IP but 21 games. What’s the rule for relievers?
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Dec 19, 2010 12:39 PM EST up reply actions
Apparently, MORE than 30 RELIEF appearances
Why it matters when the guy entered the game is a complete mystery to me.
http://bullpenbanter.com/
Makes sense
It’s about amount of time in the game. Batters don’t get charged for 4 AB’s if they come into a game a defensive replacement / pinch hit. Pitchers shouldn’t lose a full game’s worth of eligibility to work out of the pen.
?
That’s precisely what happens. What I was alluding to is that Mejia’s 3 games where he started the game did not count against his eligibility, so:
Player A: 35G 5GS 48IP
Player B: 31G 0GS 25IP
Player A is still a prospect, while Player B is a graduate.
http://bullpenbanter.com/
I don't see how you could take Gamel over Mitchell.
One’s got a chance to be an above-average MLB player, and it ain’t Gamel. I think I’d even rather have Morel. What is it Gamel does well again?
Well, Gamel doesn't count
He’s over the 130 AB limit now. Scarpetta is probably the #1 in that system, as a B grade prospect at best. It’s pretty ugly there now.
http://bullpenbanter.com
No way
Milwaukee’s system was worse BEFORE this deal. I’d take Mitchell and Sale over anyone they had in their system. Now I would like to see their system stack up to the 09 Houston system.
'09 Astros had Castro, Lyles, Mier
Three top 100 prospects at the time. (If you’re talking about end of season evaluations.) Does Milwaukee have any top 100 prospects anymore?
Neither Mitchell nor Sale are top 100 prospects for me, by the way. Too many questions about how Mitchell will come back from injury and I feel that Sale is, or at least in the long term will be, a relief pitcher, even if they give him a chance to try starting. Relief pitchers don’t get to be in the top 100.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
Sounds like
Sale is one of the finalists for the closer position. I’d go with Thornton and try Sale as a starter, but it seems like his org does like him as a reliever. For argument’s sake, would you ever have a closer in a Top 100?
by blackoutyears on Dec 19, 2010 11:20 PM EST up reply actions
Not unless I felt he had a real shot to be a SP
So basically, if he was strictly a closer, no. There’s just too low of a ceiling on a closer’s baseball value. Maybe that’s “not fair” or whatever, but I look at things in terms of contribution to the team, not performance relative to others in the same role.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
I never say never
I could find a place for a guy in a Top 100 if I strongly felt he could be a Mo Rivera, Trevor Hoffman caliber closer. Considering the floor of some guys who make Top 100s I might take an elite closer. The problem isn’t with that philosophy so much as with trying to figure out if a prospect can be that guy. I’m trying to think of the last relief prospect who was worth considering.
by blackoutyears on Dec 20, 2010 1:38 PM EST up reply actions
When you look at the volatility of "elite closers" in MLB
It’s hard to justify it. I mean, look at Broxton last year. He appeared to have emerged as an elite closer capable of reliably putting out 2+ WAR seasons and suddenly his performance “craters” (I doubt it really did, it’s just that nothing is reliable in that sample size) and he gets removed from his closer’s role. Just random fluctuation and luck can result in a guy apparently having 1/3 of the value he did a matter of months ago.
And I mean, managers take these momentary fluctuations in performance seriously. It’s just part of the game and you have to account for it when evaluating prospects.
Plus realistically you’re talking about a guy whose value tops out around 3 WAR even if he’s the number one closer in the league, and what are the chances of that even happening? If you think there’s even a chance that a guy can be the best shortstop in baseball that’s huge, you can build a franchise around that if it happens. A closer doesn’t get you very far even if he’s incredible at his job.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
of course
People are way too harsh on high-end relief prospects. They can play roles of major importance just the same as any other player.
Best case, they should be graded and ranked just the same as any other player. Even if you’re anti-reliever, I’d argue the compromise should be to grade the players appropriately, and simply rank them with players two grades lower (i.e. a Grade A relief prospect goes in with the B+ prospects). The standards are obviously high, but players who can make an impact at the end of the game are still impact players.
How many grade A *anything* are there?
I can’t really see the argument for Chris Sale being that elite to justify grade A as a relief pitcher, or even A-. Using your system, I’d give him a strong B+ and dock him to strong B-. Thus, not a top 100 prospect.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
i'm sure i'll be accused of being a white sox homer
but if chris sale didn’t perform like a grade A relief prospect in 2010, i’d like to see who has.
SSS, etc.
I mean he was impressive but you’re asking me to base things off of 10 minor league innings and 23 major league innings. The scouting prospects are B+ worthy, sure, but I can only lean toward another notch from such a small sample. 33 innings is so incredibly unreliable of a sample size no matter how impressive those innings are.
It’s the same thing as people giving up on Chris Carter because he started out ofer 20 or whatever it was. I just can’t draw conclusions until we get closer to reasonable sample sizes. For a RP because of the natural volatility and small sample sizes of the role I guess I’d want to see a full season before I start to really award significant brownie points based on performance.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
It doesn't take many innings to see whether a pitcher is electric.
Chris Sale has great stuff. It’s the durability that’s the question.
by Daniel Berlyn on Dec 20, 2010 5:17 PM EST up reply actions
your standard would make it impossible to ever be a grade A relief prospect.
and i frankly have no idea how his scouting reports would result in a B+ ranking. he has a filthy slider and a 96 MPH fastball. from the left side. you’re nuts.
It should be really, really, REALLY difficult
To get grade A, especially as a pitcher of any kind. Are there even any grade A prospects in the minors right now? I mean I would be hesitant to give higher than a strong A- to the top ten guys including Harper, Trout, etc. Last year I would have given it to Heyward but I don’t feel any of the current guys are quite as strong as he was.
Maybe Chapman could get a grade A compared to other relievers. But he’s a stronger relief prospect than Sale in my opinion (ignoring the possibility that he starts, which I feel is stronger than Sale’s given Sale’s frame and wonky mechanics).
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
To clarify
I’m not saying I feel Chapman is a grade A prospect, but if you were using some system where you’re not measuring by strict baseball value but by comparison to others in the role, I suppose he would be as compared to other relief prospects.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
It feels like...
…grade A should be reserved for a guy with a very high floor who also has superstar/ace/franchise player type upside. It’s not that I’d never give out that grade, I’m just not sure the current prospects in the minors are quite at that level
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
I agree
that an A should be exceedingly rare, if it even makes sense to try and grade prospects considering vagaries of player development.
by blackoutyears on Dec 24, 2010 7:21 PM EST up reply actions
the other thing is, though
You’re suggesting he has no chance of being a starting pitcher. It seems REALLY early to believe that. He has three quality pitches, including 2 potential 70s. He’s barely out of college. He might pitch this year as a reliever, but it’s hardly condemning him to the pen for all time. There’s more reason to believe he’ll be a starter than there was to believe that Neftali Feliz would be a starter last year. You seem to be projecting your own opinion of what you’d do with Sale into a foregone conclusion that other people will certainly buy into.
Personally, I tend to be rather discriminating when it comes to relief prospects, but the best of the best are guys who will find themselves in a position to make an impact, sometimes in extremely high leverage situations. The best playoff teams always have a money guy at the back of the pen, for good reason.
Well, obviously it's my opinion
I’ve always been down on Sale due to his frame and mechanics since well before the draft, I’ve been open about that and it hasn’t changed. I understand some people feel differently, but I feel like the injury risks are too glaring for me to buy him as a starting pitcher.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
I was thinking more beginning of the year
The system looked at that point like Castro and a bunch of question marks – with a couple guys with upside.
I think you are being a lot harder on Mitchell and Sale than most people will be. Both will make my top 100. Sale has some minor version of Tim Lincecum disease – people hate him because of his delivery and ignore the results and the stuff. The Sox will likely give him a legit shot to make the rotation this year, and I think he could excel given the opportunity.
As for Mitchell, he was top 50 for me before the injury, so he will likely slide into the lower half of my personal top 100. The tools are still outstanding.
Sale has some minor version of Tim Lincecum disease
People keep saying this, but I don’t think they’re similar cases at all. Sale has a lot more funk in his delivery and a low arm slot, and also has different (but equally compelling) physical issues in that he’s perilously thin. There’s a legitimate worry about his withstanding a starter’s workload over the long haul, just as there is, despite success so far, with Lincecum.
by blackoutyears on Dec 20, 2010 1:44 PM EST up reply actions
I completley blanked on Sale, but that being said, I still take the Brewers
even guys like Amaury Rivas and Mark Rogers are guys I’d put right with someone like Morel at this point.
by Navi's_Navy on Dec 19, 2010 11:51 PM EST up reply actions
Hmm
Doesn’t seem like it would be enough.
Let me ask the objective, unbiased crowd here: Does a package of Derek Holland, Alexi Ogando and Engel Beltre exceed that one in value?
"By MLB.TV, we can see J. Hamilton's homer, M. Young's clutch, and N. Feliz's explosive. All about Rangers things can be our interest"
--South Korean Rangers fan
I say no
Beltre is enough of a long shot lottery ticket that I think it really boils down to Holland and Ogando here….and I think the package the Royals got from MIL fits their needs a lot better.
OK
Interesting. I guess I’m more down on Escobar and his .288 OBP than most people.
What about Holland, Scheppers, Beltre? Hunter, Scheppers, Profar?
"By MLB.TV, we can see J. Hamilton's homer, M. Young's clutch, and N. Feliz's explosive. All about Rangers things can be our interest"
--South Korean Rangers fan
Escobar had a weird year
He’ll never have a .288 OBP again
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Dec 19, 2010 8:37 AM EST up reply actions
I think you're undervaluing the value of Escobar's defense
On what promises to be a very questionable infield of young bat-first guys AND a developing crew of Montgomery, Lamb, et al. that begins to arrive very soon.
I'd agree
The Royals are set at 1B, 3B, C/RF with Hosmer, Moose, and Myers. They needed SS and CF more than the other positions
I'd call it a push
But the Rangers can easily go higher than that without feeling too much pain. MIL is basically tapped out, having already dealt Lowrie.
No, because Beltre is still a wild card
KC was reportedly targeting guys like Escobar, though and the Rangers don’t have any major league ready SS or 2B.
When you're drowning, you don't say 'I would be incredibly pleased if someone would have the foresight to notice me drowning and come and help me,' you just scream.
and Profar is even more of a wildcard
If they are wanting a major league ready shortstop for a 2012 or 2013 run, Profar isn’t the guy to do that. Despite questions about the bat, Escobar at least might be.
I’d personally prefer Holland to anyone in the Milwaukee package, but I think Dayton Moore would beg to differ. And Milwaukee’s package is deeper in any case.
this
I’d take Holland over anyone in the Mil group. I’d rather have Beltre than Escobar, Cain, or Jeffress, lottery ticket or not. I think I’d prefer this Texas package, but like you said, Dayton apparently wouldn’t.
by PrincetonCubs on Dec 19, 2010 9:24 AM EST up reply actions
Serious question
What is it that people love about Beltre? He seems crazy overrated by Rangers fans and some in the minor league community.
What am I missing? His stats don’t sat too much (his lack of walks, consistent contact is alarming), he’s relatively young and the scouting reports are mixed?
by TheQuestforMerlin on Dec 19, 2010 9:52 AM EST up reply actions
This:
Potential impact: First-division starter in centerfield
Present value: Top 100 prospect in baseball; secondary piece in a trade
Attributes: Projects to have above-average defensive tools at position, with plus range, solid glove and a strong arm; plus speed; plus projections on the hit tool, with excellent contact ability; swing mechanics and hit tool look conducive for some power potential; above-average overall athleticism; faux hawk and dynamic attire.
Potential red flags: Still transitioning from athlete with raw tools to baseball player with on-the-field skills; lacks mature approach at the plate and is overly aggressive; needs refinement with routes in centerfield; needs overall maturity; has yet to produce at Double-A level.
http://bullpenbanter.com/
Hmm
I don’t see the present value as being so high. But Rangers fans do seem to love him as per the above. I just don’t get it. Toolsy, yes, but not unique in that. And he’s done far less to translate those tools from what I can see.
I don’t know, I need to be convinced, I liked Sickels B- rating of him, but it seems that some people rate him far higher, B/B+ type.
by TheQuestforMerlin on Dec 19, 2010 10:09 AM EST up reply actions
I think he's got the combination of tools/ARL
with a couple things you don’t always see in tools/projectable guys: he doesn’t strike out all that much (19% across the minors, 13% last season in A+/AA), and he’s already a plus defender at a premium position. Seems like a solid B type prospect, and I definitely prefer him over Cain, who appears to be his counterpart in the two (alleged) packages
by PrincetonCubs on Dec 19, 2010 10:18 AM EST up reply actions
With tools and ARL alone I could see Beltre as a better prospect over Cain
But then I really don’t know too much about Cain, never looked at him in any meaningful capacity.
I would expect that it would have to be Andrus/Beltre, a SP (Erlin?) and PTBNL for the KC Royals, for them to take the Rangers deal. I would imagine the Rangers were just very reluctant to include Andrus in any deal.
by TheQuestforMerlin on Dec 19, 2010 10:29 AM EST up reply actions
that covers it nicely, I'd just add one extra thing
Swing mechanics are inconsistent from pitch to pitch. But fun player. Tons to dream on.
I'm not sure I buy this yet
All the reports have been about how much KC has been asking and how they’re patiently waiting for the right offer. This just doesn’t seem like the kind of offer that would make them suddenly move. At the very least it’s the kind of offer you’d expect them to shop around and see if another team can beat it.
One version of the rumor even has cash going to Milwaukee, which would really tip the value of the deal heavily in their favor in my opinion. I’m skeptical.
When you're drowning, you don't say 'I would be incredibly pleased if someone would have the foresight to notice me drowning and come and help me,' you just scream.
olney's reporting the same thing now as well
looks legit enough. I’m fairly stunned at the return, but that’s because I’m not huge on Escobar or Cain. I do like Odorizzi a lot, though.
Very good might be an exaggeration
He has the upside to be a solid regular at 2B, which is why the hope was always that he’d be good enough to play shortstop, since that’s the only way his bat would really play up. Still, I think he can be a 2-3 WAR player at second base, which is a good player to have around cost-controlled.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
I think he can be better than that
And I just don’t think that hope was well placed.
http://bullpenbanter.com/
but still you don't take a 2nd baseman with the 4th pick
They should have drafted McGuire or something like that as he has more value than a .290 12 60 2nd baseman. Colon is basically the next Belliard.
I think people on this site dramatically underrate the importance of solid players
A solid defensive, solid offensive 2B is not an easy thing to get, especially if he’s cost-controlled for 6 years
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Dec 19, 2010 12:41 PM EST up reply actions
I think solid offensive is underselling his upside
I certainly am not a Colon fan, but let’s not over do it here. The bat looks like it could be pretty damn good.
http://bullpenbanter.com/
It could be, but it likely won't be
He’s a solid player but I’ve never heard anybody suggest that he’s a potential superstar
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Dec 19, 2010 12:58 PM EST up reply actions
No, not a superstar
But he has a plus hit tool, average power, and excellent defensive instincts. He also is a prospect who “plays above his tools.”
http://bullpenbanter.com/
The problem isn't that Colon is a bad player
its that there are lots of guys who would have given the Royals more value. Just imagine if they Sale along with their current crop of guys. That would give them 6 in my top 20 and 9 in my top 45. Colon is fine, a back end of the top 100 guy for someone who values floor a lot (which I do), but I’d rather have Sale, Pomeranz, Choice, McGuire, Whitson, Grandal, J. Sale, A.J. Cole, Harvey, Covey, etc. etc. etc. etc. over him at this point. He was a mid-back end of the 1st round guy for me coming in, obviously there hasn’t been much of anything to prove if he was a good choice or not, but I think most people feel he was a fairly significant overdraft.
by Navi's_Navy on Dec 20, 2010 12:16 AM EST up reply actions
I think you are a minority with your love of Sale
I think most still view him as a future reliever, and I would definitely rather have a middle infielder that can hit over that.
I’d rather have Sale, Pomeranz, Choice, McGuire, Whitson, Grandal, J. Sale, A.J. Cole, Harvey, Covey,
Wait, you’d rather have two guys who failed to sign (Whitson and Covey), a guy who’s incredibly risky (Cole) and a likely #3/4 starter (McGuire)? And while there are some who feel he was an overdraft, I don’t think i’d characterize it as “most”, at least not if you’re talking about people who actually evaluate players for a living. Of the guys you listed, I’d consider both Sales, Pommy, and Grandal, remembering that Grandal was strongly linked to KC right up until the draft. I consider Harvey’s risk to make him a push with Colon’s safer profile and Colon has added value over Harvey or Choice as a guy who, at worst, probably sticks at 2B.
by blackoutyears on Dec 20, 2010 1:49 PM EST up reply actions
yeah I don't know about a"pipe dream"
but SS was not very likely since his very second year in college.
to me
I called it - Joe Mauer's first career Home-Run at Target Field !!!
Why Oh Why did the D'Backs select A.J. Pollock over Mike Trout?
I hate Hunter Wendelstedt, you hate Hunter Wendelstedt we all hate hunter w
by SteveHoffmanSlowey on Dec 19, 2010 6:42 PM EST up reply actions
Love Escobar
Even if his most likely outcome is Adam Everett, and I think it’s too early to write off the bat that much, that’s a very nice piece to have considering the offensive power KC has coming up from the farm.
KC’s haul looks a little bit light overall, since I’m not as impressed with the other pieces involved as I am Escobar, but overall, not too bad.
Milwaukee are now the favorites to win the NL Central in my opinion.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
Bettancourt.
Seeing that the Brewers also get Yunesk to play ss for the season, looks like they are playing for 2010….
Escobar and Jeffress
It is amazing to see how opinions on Escobar have done a virtual 180 since 12 months ago. There were always some questions about his bat, but I am surprised so many think he will never hit. There are enough outliers in last year’s numbers to make me optimistic last year was his floor.
Any chance Jeffress can convert back to a starting role? I don’t know enough about his repertoire. Did Milwaukee put him in the MLB pen just to avoid another piss test?
+1 on Escobar
It’s as easy to jump off the bandwagon as it is to jump on. He was never a guy who was going to jump all over major league pitching right away.IMO, he’s still a good bet to be an ok bat with great wheels and a great glove- pretty much exactly what most teams want in a SS. And I have a hunch the Royals won’t need any help putting runs on the board over the next few years. He’s there to catch it. And with Jeffress and Odorizzi, this trade looks like a fantastic fit for KC.
by my dixie wrecked on Dec 19, 2010 11:53 AM EST up reply actions
+1
I think that’s Cain’s job too. A very good defensive CF makes it a lot easier to fill your corner OF slots with people like Gordon, Hosmer and Myers
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Dec 19, 2010 12:41 PM EST up reply actions
Jeffress
Primary pitch is a 4 seemer, which is very fast but also very straight. Last year he added a 2 seemer which has decent run and tail, but he has trouble commanding. He throws a power curve at 79-83 that is nasty, but has trouble controlling as well. He has never been able to develop a change, Zero feel for it, slows his arm considerably and even changes his arm angle on it somewhat.
He’s a guy that throws 97-101 and has a 60-65 #2 pitch in the curve. Basically the typical profile for a closer
If he can keep that FB at all for a number of IP, though
then he might work better as a SP. I seem to remember that a number of pitchers with control problems have had success moving from the bullpen to the rotation.
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Dec 19, 2010 12:43 PM EST up reply actions
I doubt Jeffress could ever be as durable as Jackson.
by Daniel Berlyn on Dec 19, 2010 8:49 PM EST up reply actions
yes yes
the comp is about his durability
by matthewmafa on Dec 19, 2010 11:44 PM EST up reply actions
You can't compare him as a starter if he isn't capable of being a starter.
If he’s a starter, he probably won’t be able to maintain his stuff and control as well as Jackson, in no small part due to durability.
by Daniel Berlyn on Dec 20, 2010 1:25 AM EST up reply actions
Purely on stuff
very similar players.
Both have a 97+ fastball that are relatively straight.
Both have eratic power breaking balls that can make the best hitters look foolish on one pitch and end up in the dirt the next
Neither have been able to develop a usable changeup to this point
Both are extremely athletic pitchers that could maybe have played CF if they were not pitchers.
Both may never reach their full potential based off command and lack of changeup
Jackson is a lot closer to having reached his potential.
Most pitchers never get to the point he has gotten to, where they’ve put up over 7 WAR in two years. He’s going to be 27 next year. Anyway, the comparison between them is limited to throwing hard and being erratic sometimes. Jackson also has a frame that lends itself to starting more. I don’t think anyone would ever compare Roger Clemens and Jonathan Papelbon even though they have similar repertoires.
by Daniel Berlyn on Dec 20, 2010 4:54 PM EST up reply actions
Which is why Jeffress really isn't a similar pitcher to Jackson,
nor is he likely to be.
by Daniel Berlyn on Dec 20, 2010 5:09 PM EST up reply actions
is that the dry air?
it was solid in Chicago. The arm action is solid and nice fade but not a lot of tumble. Enough though. What did it look like in AZ?
fwiw – his biggest problem is when he lost confidence he tried to steer his pitches. And his control never has been that good to do that. And never will be. But when he let it fly the kid had dominant stuff.
never seemed comfortable
really struggled with control and command.
I split season tickets and sit directly behind homeplate to specifically watch pitch movement.
He mostly stuck to the fastball and even that he had trouble with. He threw a hard curve/power slider as his #2 pitch. He then went with a cutter/nickel slider as his #3. There were games that he didn’t even throw a change. He had so much trouble just getting the fastball/curve over the plate that I guess he thought never mind with the change.
Wish him luck in Chicago though. Its rare for a pitcher to find more success in the AL than in the NL West, but hia results with Det and now Chi show that for some reason, he’s an AL pitcher. Waste of his athleticism though, you should see him swing the stick. About the most natural pitcher I’ve ever seen in the batters box outside of Micah Owings
his biggest problem
is how straight his FB is and how it gets pounded when he doesn’t have his good slider, something that occurred regularly when he was in AZ. His slider improved almost immediately in CHW under Don Cooper. It’ll be worth following him this year to see if it took.
by blackoutyears on Dec 24, 2010 7:25 PM EST up reply actions
he will never hit
Have you seen him? I think a lot of the negative opinion stems from people who previously judged him on minor league performance data actually laying eyes on him. I’m not saying he’ll never hit, but he looked absolutely godawful at the plate every time I saw him play the Reds.
I don’t think Jeffress makes it as a starter. The FB is already plus and has great movement when he’s on, but he’s still working on the curve, which flashed plus a few times when I saw him at the end of the year but which he also struggled to control the rest of the time. I don’t recall seeing a third pitch, but that’s not surprising as he was relieving. Personally I don’t see him having anywhere near enough command to start, but he’s got the makings of an excellent reliever.
by blackoutyears on Dec 19, 2010 11:29 PM EST up reply actions
Jeffress to KC sets up Soria being dealt next year
This one has Atlanta all over it if Kimbrel or Vetters fail to pitch like they did this year.
Who the heck is Vetters lol!
But I agree the Braves need to be all over trying to get Soria! I say Beachy, Marek and Hyde for Soria
Nice work for Brewers
Considering the rumors of KC’s asking price. As an Orioles fan, I won’t underrate the importance of having a young SS in your system to play in the bigs for the next 5 years and be great on defense at least. Solid hole-filling deal for KC. I’d want more star potential if I just dealt Grienke though.
Great Deal for Both Teams
I think this is a very strong move for both organizations. I would say the Brewers are declaring that they are going for it all this year before they lose Fielder. I would like to see them try to make a move to get an upgrade at ss. I don’t think betencourt is the answer for this or any year.
From the Royals perspective they may not have gotten the star power but how much star power can they really afford. Escobar and Cain will provide good defensive value and speed on the bases. Jeffress is a good bullpen arm with potential closer ability and odorizzi has some upside.
The best part is that none of this guys will probably have to cost them much money to keep them. WIth all of the potential STUD prospects coming, someday they will have to pony up some major cash to keep them. The guys they just acquired will fill holes and allow them the ability to sign some of their own guys to the big money deals it is going to take. Granted they will be under control for a few years but at some point down the road all of these “stud” prospects are going to need to get paid if they pan out like it is expected of them.
Does anyone dare give Dayton Moore credit for thinking about the team 3-5 years down the road and setting it up for the best chance to sign the guys they need to sign for the long term success of the Royals? LOL…I don’t think I want to go that far.
agreed.
everyone not-liking this deal for KC is undervaluing middle-of-the-field defensive value. for KC to get both Escobar and Cain is impressive, imo.
Escobar was compared to Adam Everett
who was signed to a low risk 1 year 1.55 million contract. Guys like him are always available for fairly cheap contracts on the open market. I don’t see him as a main piece in a deal.
Trading Greinke for a defensive specialist, a bullpen arm, an OF that isn’t that good, and one SP that has at least a high upside → to me that is a terrible deal.
Who has compared his entire game to Everett?
Defense is obviously comparable but he provides more offensive upside than Everett.
Ironically, Escobar’s closest comp is probably Andrus.
Ironically, Escobar’s closest comp is probably Andrus
How would two guys who were relentlessly comped to each other as prospects still being comped be ironic? lol
I agree that they’re close in some important ways (solid strikeout rates, very good defenders), but where Escobar boosters here talk about his SB potential, Andrus actually is stealing bases. Andrus is over two years younger but has performed as well or better across the board. Andrus’ makeup is also off the charts, whereas Escobar’s reportedly borders on negative. Escobar has the edge in power at the moment, but considering the age of each player I wouldn’t be surprised if Andrus narrowed that gap as well.
by blackoutyears on Dec 19, 2010 11:39 PM EST up reply actions
Escobar's lack of SB is hardly due to ability
Macha’s disdain for steals is well known. Escobar stole 76 bases at an 81% clip in AA and AAA over 08-09, so the talent is there. KC is a team that likes to run, so I have no doubt both Escobar and Cain will have the opportunity to steal 30+ bases.
Haven’t heard the multiple negative reports on Escobar’s makeup. Considering both Ned Yost and Dean Taylor have a long history with Escobar, it seems odd they would make him the centerpiece of a deal if they weren’t sold on his makeup.
Escobar's makeup
Snipped from KLaw:
Both Jeffress and Escobar have serious makeup concerns that bleed over into the field….Escobar wore out his welcome with coaches in Milwaukee’s system and in winter ball and had some family concerns that contributed to his falling out of favor.
It’s interesting that the Royals would go after these two guys after making such a big deal about acquiring good-makeup players and ridding themselves of bad seeds. They traded Dan Cortes and Danny Gutierrez for character issues, only to see Cortes reach the majors for Seattle at 23 this year. How do you reconcile those moves and statements with the fact that half of the return for Greinke comes with serious baggage of its own?
Escobar's lack of SB
Well, you can’t steal first as the increasingly cheesy cliche goes. I’d say his lack of SBs had as much to do with his rarely being on base as it did with Macha’s Moneyball residue.
Research the makeup. Drwmsu1 has given you a nice start. One of my chief concerns with Escobar is that his makeup may prevent him from realizing his potential any time in the near future. I’m rooting for him, but he is night to Andrus’ day in this regard.
by blackoutyears on Dec 20, 2010 1:55 PM EST up reply actions
Also like Andrus the fact he was caught 4 times in his 14 attempts probably doesn't instill the coaching staff with confidence to send him.
As a major leaguer he has 14 SB and 6 CS.
As a minor leaguer he has 176 SB and 61 (!) CS.
He may be fast, but I’ve yet to see any indication he’s good at stealing bases. All I see is a kid who runs a lot. Same way he looks like a good defender. God… I just can’t believe people thought this kid was a top 10 prospect last year. I never saw it at all.
I think a lot of Ackley's upside is being measured the same way
Ackley’s walk to K ratios are good enough that many are hoping his solid speed turns into 30 or 40 bags.
"I didn't really say everything I said."-Yogi ism
Thanks...yeah, I buthered that now that I look at it
I was agreeing with you and meant that Escobar was being over-rated mostly on the stolen base potential. Really, the only parallel here with Ackley is that it’s easy to hope the speed translates to more steals in the future.
I failed to address all the CS and defensive perceptions – Escobar is often described as dramatic in the field! If he is indeed show-boating the attitude rumors make more sense and you can understand why Milwaukee was willing to trade him at all.
"I didn't really say everything I said."-Yogi ism
I just can’t believe people thought this kid was a top 10 prospect last year.
I didn’t see it either, but there’s a powerful lobby out there for MIF prospects having value based on defense, and I don’t even bother arguing anymore.
by blackoutyears on Dec 24, 2010 7:27 PM EST up reply actions
I meant the Adam Everett in his prime
Not the Adam Everett of last year. In his prime, Everett was consistently a ~2 WAR player for five years (although he got hurt in the fifth).
And I agree with Deezle that Escobar has more offensive upside than Everett. I think Everett is a slightly pessimistic “most likely outcome” comparison.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
+1
I’m also not sure where the Royals would even have put somebody like Jesus Montero. Of course Montero’s a much better player than any of these guys, and normally need should be ignored, but practically speaking, what would they have done with him? It would have forced Butler to move to 1B full-time, and they would have had to immediately teach Hosmer how to play the OF, which limits their options there. Meanwhile, they’d still need somebody to shore up the defense
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Dec 19, 2010 12:45 PM EST up reply actions
did Moore screw this one up by asking too much?
It seems that Moore asked for the Moon and totally rebuffed solid offers. Contrary to what many say on here this is definitely not a way to get teams competing and raising their offer. This potentially scared away two of the best suitors in Toronto and Texas.
Also, this ridiculous “RH CF” request baffles me. Does he also have to be brown haired and speak 3 foreign languages?
I get the feeling Moore makes far too many requests (ie positional, amount/quality of players to come back, etc.) that most of the serious suitors were waiting until reality set it. And then teams like the Nationals and Milwaukee ignored this and just offered quantity over quality and might be landing their player.
why would anyone think toronto would be a serious suitor for greinke.
yeah. i’ll give up prospects and pay a guy $13.5 million so my team can still be fourth place.
uh huh. sure.
makes perfect sense. trade marcum. then trade for greinke. winning strategy there.
if the jays were the serious suitors you indicate, they should immediately fire their GM because he wouldn’t have the faintest clue how to build a team to compete in the AL east. the jays were a moore concoction.
Don't undersell the Jays. They were one of the top 5 teams in the AL last year.
Marcum was clearly just a long term move, selling him off while they had the chance.
by Kenneth Arthur on Dec 19, 2010 1:04 PM EST up reply actions
then it's too bad that three of the teams better than the jays are in their division.
and zach greinke. there’s a long-term move.
Is Alex Anthopoulos really building a 4th place team?
AA traded Halladay under similar circumstances almost exactly a year ago when he was hired…..
so it just seems appropriate to make a list and check it twice before demanding he be fired:
- Traded Halladay for Drabek, d’Arnaud and Gose(via Taylor,via Wallace)
- Traded League for Morrow
- Signed Hechavarria
- Traded Alex Gonzalez and Tim Collins for Yunel Escobar
- Traded Marcum for Lawrie
Hmmmm
- got a solid ss and a prospect to boot…check
- got a catcher, an outfielder (man can he scoot)….check
- got two possible aces to make Halladay moot….check
- got the nice Canadian kid for whom fans can root…..check
- if this was poker then Jays have made off with the loot…..check
Greinke or not, 3rd place or 4th, Anthopoulos is still Santa Claus to Jays fans.
Merry Christmas everyone
"I didn't really say everything I said."-Yogi ism
AA has been the most impressiveGM in baseball since he took over
He is making me a Blue Jays fan.
http://bullpenbanter.com/
AA has been the most impressiveGM
I think Jon Daniels has been pretty strong in the same time frame, and that’s with the protracted sale of the team, but Anthopoulos has a good argument.
by blackoutyears on Dec 20, 2010 1:57 PM EST up reply actions
It's not like E5 was the primary piece in that deal or anything
Zach Stewart was a good return for Rolen.
http://bullpenbanter.com/
Really like that Epstein is holding on to Cameron
despite heavy interest out there but didn’t Anthopoulos supposedly save a couple of mil by cutting EE and then re-signing him? Besides the money saved AA now has an opening at 1B/DH and won’t let EE sniff 3B anymore so it looks like the same sort of gamble he took on Wallace before peddling him off when he wasn’t thrilled at what he saw.
"I didn't really say everything I said."-Yogi ism
i imagine he's building a better than fourth place team.
but i’m not sure that’s before 2013. which is what is relevant regarding greinke.
IMO it would have made sense to the Jays
If they were given a negotiating window to extend Greinke. The Jays have money. They would have to pay a little more in prospects. But they could easily have matched that offer. Take hechavarria, Gose, one of the catchers, and drabek/lawrie/snider.
i'm not signing an extension with the blue jays if i'm greinke.
he nixed the nationals because he didn’t think they were competitive. i don’t see why he wouldn’t have done the same with the jays.
Greinke will probably get more money and a more competitive team
in the long run if he just rides out the current contract. I don’t see why he wouldn’t given that no top-tier teams were in on him.
by Daniel Berlyn on Dec 20, 2010 5:16 PM EST up reply actions
funny you should say that
Supposedly Greinke waived his ntc when he found out they had acquired Marcum and would not trade Fielder in 2011.
- Marcum was probably the third best pitcher in Toronto but on Milwaukee he’s a #2?!?!?
- Fielder was out homered (54 to 32) by Bautista while being twice as distracting and half as useful defensively.
Face it, it’s not that Milwaukee was more competitive than Toronto it’s just that after playing for a team with a Mexicutioner the only cooler thing would be to play with a Hebrew Hammer. (Toronto does have a Moonraker but Dayton wanted him included in any deal, sigh).
"I didn't really say everything I said."-Yogi ism
If the Blue Jays switched divisions with the Brewers, I'm sure it would be different.
The Blue Jays are in a tough spot.
by Daniel Berlyn on Dec 20, 2010 6:54 PM EST up reply actions
there is a very good chance he wouldnt extend
but it would be worth it to make the attempt. He might have been lured with a 2 or 3 year extension where he could reenter as a free agent while still relatively young.
I'm thinking the Royals created some of the Toronto interest
via the media to try to increase interest. It was a worthwhile strategy but maybe the mega deals that people dreamed up just were not realistic.
Deal
Taking an unbias view from both sides. As I think the Royals went for more quantity than quality they did get 2 MLB starters at premium positions out of the deal and a guy I LOVE in Odorizzi but still multiple years away. Here’s the breakdown for me:
Royals perspective:
1) Greinke wanted out of KC
2) Made sense to deal Greinke (you can argue the timing) to get more young, cost controlled talent to go along with their already unreal talented system.
3) Looking at the major gaps in the Royals system it was OF and SS IMO. Obviously you can never have enough pitching. I don’t buy into Colon being a SS long term so he plays better at 2B. Moust at 3B, Myers at C (maybe), Hosmer at 1B and only Eibner in the mix at OF IMO. Then the slew of pitchers lead by Montgomery, Lamb, Duffy, Dwyer, Crow and Melville. As you can’t expect all those guys to pan out that is a TON of talent. Now you put a RHP in Odorizzi to go along with the LHP and that is a nice complement.
4) They are banking on Escobar to bounceback and be their SS for many years. I believe he will improve and he is a solid D SS. Might never see the ASG but he will be in the discussion just after the ALG SS’s
5) The best system in the majors just got better and deeper. Be curious to see who the PTBNL is…just a depth piece or someone with upside like Jeffress?
Brewers Perspective:
1) Their window is closing on making a run with Fielder
2) You saw the Brewers staff last year right? WOW
3) Huge upgrades with Grienke and Marcum (but at a big cost to the system)
4) They got Betancourt to be their SS to fill that hole
5) They have Gomez to take over CF full time.
6) They were never going to outbid the big market teams for top tier pitching talent on the FA market…so the only way to get that talent for them is via trade
7) Big ?? for Brewers fans is what happens in a few years when some of these players are in walking years and they have no system to backfill the talent? Could be some ugly years.
Overall I would say a win-win deal for both sides…though the philosophy is different for both teams. Royals are continue to load up for 2013 and beyond and the BrewCrew is going all in now.
I pretty much agree with all of this, I think the Royals win the deal just a little bit.
Royals are playing for 2012 and beyond, and with little likelihood that they’ll really compete in 2012, they would have had probably been forced to deal Grienke anyway, and perhaps at a much smaller value.
The Royals are still going into 2011 as one of the worst teams in baseball. But now instead of Betancourt as your starting SS, you’ve got Escobar. I’m not as high on Escobar as most, but he’s a clear upgrade over Betancourt – still one of the league’s worst players. And there’s money to be saved there on top of it all.
Instead of Mitch Maier in centerfield, you’ve got Cain. High upside, lots of long term value.
They’re going to have one of the worst pitching staffs in baseball, but they’ll have better defense behind them.
I won’t be surprised to see the Royals wait until September to call up any of their top prospects, knowing that they’ll still lose 90+ games this year and hold onto their service time as long as possible.
But by mid-2012 an infield of Hosmer, Moustakas, Escobar, (Aviles? Colon?) and some catcher. An outfield of Gordon(?), Cain, and (?) plus Butler at DH. The lineup has huge potential, adding Myers in at either catcher or outfielder by late 2012, early 2013.
Won’t be surprised to see Soria and/or Gordon dealt this year for a defensive-minded catcher or a power-hitting corner outfielder or more pitching depth.
Royals are set to have a 3-4 year window of very talented players all over the field all before hitting free agency for the first time.
Brewers are good, but they’ll regret starting Betancourt.
by Kenneth Arthur on Dec 19, 2010 1:02 PM EST up reply actions
Maybe they won't start him
It’s always possible they could be laying plans to acquire a better shortstop and use Betancourt as a utility man (all he’s good for anyway). Although it’s admittedly hard to see where they could find the pieces to trade for one, and I don’t know that any on the market are clear upgrades.
I wonder how much Scutaro would cost to acquire from the Red Sox?
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
Clarification:
I don’t know that any shortstops on the free agent market are clear upgrades. Obviously some trade candidates would be if they can convince anyone to bite with what little they have left to trade.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
I don’t know that any shortstops on the free agent market are clear upgrades
My initial thought was, who can they get to replace Betancourt? Considering that Bartlett is a “good” SS by this market’s standards, pickings will be slim. I did wonder if Orlando Cabrera was suddenly attractive to them. He’s still homeless, right?
by blackoutyears on Dec 19, 2010 11:56 PM EST up reply actions
4) They got Betancourt to be their SS to fill that hole 5) They have Gomez to take over CF full time.
Yea, that actually hurts them imo. Both those guys are among the worst at their respective positions either with the bat (Gomez) or the glove (Betancourt). Someone over at PP mentioned Dickerson as the best CF option, which just about says it all. lol
So, yeah, the pitching is much improved, but at the expense of some premium defense and the necessity of penciling a black hole into your batting order.
My feeling is that in some ways it’s almost a slight lose-lose for both teams. KC missed a chance to get a true impact guy and settled for depth while the pieces MIL gave up (how many teams can afford to give up their SS, CF and set-up man) may offset what Greinke brings and be their undoing.
by blackoutyears on Dec 19, 2010 11:50 PM EST up reply actions
up the middle talent
Seems to me that DM really effed himself by insisting on getting up-the-middle talent in return. No need to be fixated on filling a need, especially when you’re rebuilding. Very poor negotiating.
why?
Looks like a balanced deal to me. They got the up-the-middle talent they wanted (and desperately needed truth be told), a power arm, and a relatively high floor arm in Odorizzi. Three players with MLB experience. This is a very hefty package.
I suppose they could have gotten other, more hyped players in a deal if they were so inclined. But a deal isn’t evaluated by where the respective players rank on the Baseball America top 100.
Did I say this?
But a deal isn’t evaluated by where the respective players rank on the Baseball America top 100.
Nope. I said they seem to have focused up the middle players, which limited their options…and the options were already limited considering Greinke’s NTC.
You can't say with any certainty what Moore turned down.
If the Nationals were offering Storen and Espinosa, then Moore took the better deal. He got pitching depth and major league players at two positions they needed to upgrade right now.
If they turned down a deal for Montero and pitching depth, then you could say they took the positional need over talent, but we don’t know what they turned down other than the supposed Nationals deal, in which the Royals understandably wanted J Zimmerman involved instead.
They didn’t get any guys who look like MVP or Cy Young type talent, but 3-4 WAR players at SS and CF and pitching depth.
by Kenneth Arthur on Dec 19, 2010 2:38 PM EST up reply actions
You're right that I don't know what Moore turned down.
I do know that many reports said he wanted to get MI and a CF, and that’s what he got here.
The package isn’t terrible, and I don’t mean to suggest it is. I’m saying they limited their options by targeting specific players and not just trying to get the best package. As a result they ended up with a batch of solid players but no stars, which I find a bit underwhelming, considering the value of Greinke, especially post-Lee signing.
I'm confused what you thought they should have gotten
So you’re saying that they shouldn’t have tried to get players that filled their needs?
Clearly the Royals thought that this was the “best package” available to them. Getting higher end prospects would have meant concessions elsewhere. Maybe it would have meant fewer prospects, or prospects with no MLB experience, or prospects that didn’t fill needs.
No one knows what their offers were, it's all spitballing. But...
So you’re saying that they shouldn’t have tried to get players that filled their needs?
I think this should have been a secondary consideration.
Clearly the Royals thought that this was the "best package" available to them.
Looks like they went for need and quantity. Not what I would have done.
you still haven't laid out what you would have done, or outlined your thoughts as to appropriate packages that could be had
Still, this isn’t the MLB draft. You need a place to play these guys. You can’t have 3 guys playing first base and 4 guys in the outfield corners. Getting A ballers back and having them all bomb means you get nothing for Greinke. This package WILL get a return, as all 4 players in the trade seem like solid bets to make meaningful contributions to the major league team. That’s huge, and this sort of return just doesn’t happen these days.
Don't know what was being offered. So can't say what I would have done.
In general I would have sought higher ceiling talent. Keith Law basically summed up my thoughts on the deal.
What Kansas City got back is bulk, and fit, but not impact. There’s no single anchor prospect in this deal, a player who’d be a top-15 pick in a draft or who’d be a top-5 prospect in the Royals’ stacked system. And three of the four guys the Royals got back (assuming for now that Jeremy Jeffress is the fourth piece) have some major concern around them that impacts their projected long-term value. When you’re trading a once-a-decade franchise player with two years left on a reasonable contract, you have a rare opportunity to add one top-shelf, impact prospect to your system, and the Royals employed a different philosophy entirely.
this seems like a lot of mumbo jumbo.
maybe there’s more context to it in the article. the question to be answered is whether the royals got back adequate value. adequate value can be in “bulk and fit” as well as “impact”. oversimplifying things a bit, four players can equal 20 WAR just like 1 player can equal 20 WAR.
okay
And what if that prospect fails? You’ve blown it. This is a team that has lots of holes and this trade provides answers for some of those holes. And these aren’t low ceiling players – all have the ability to be significant contributors to a quality major league team.
The Royals took a different philosophy from what Keith Law would have done. It doesn’t make it a bad philosophy.
No top-15 pick?
I question Law’s assertion here. If team the team picking #15 next June had a shot at the 2010 version of Escobar, I think they’d probably take him. A ML-ready SS at age 23, with plus defense and offensive upside? That’s a top-15 pick.
okay
So what COULD they have gotten if they hadn’t “limited their options”, and why would such a trade make more so than the one that they got?
obviously snider and drabek.
one person accusing them of asking for too little. another accusing them of asking for too much.
I just don't know about this.
In a vacuum, Snider’s probably more valuable than Escobar. On the Royals for 2011-2014, given the parts the Royals already have (lots of redundancy with Snider) and the uncertainty in their development arcs? Not certain about that.
As for Drabek, is he really any improvement over the combo of Odorizzi, Cain, and Jeffress? He’s a good prospect, but he’s yet to translate the scouting report into any exceptional performance, and once again he’s fairly redundant with what the Royals have in the minors. The likelihood that he becomes substantially better than Odorizzi is an open question, IMO. It’s nice that he’s farther along and farther thru the injury nexus, but do the Royals need an SP prospect ready for 2011?
Drabek
I think he’s gone from underrated in 2008/2009 to overrated in 2010/2011. To me, he’s clearly in that Chris Tillman group of guys whose scouting reports have not translated into results…still quality prospects, but at some point you want to start seeing dominance in A/AA ball to label them truly elite. Drabek’s 9 starts at A+ in 2009 is the kind of thing I’m talking about – but that’s a pretty short run.
his post all-star break numbers in AA is pretty good
2.76 49.0 IP 35 H 22 BB 47 SO. More small sample size, but its pretty good numbers
To Infinity. And BEYOND!!!
by YunelTheLazyLatino on Dec 19, 2010 7:55 PM EST up reply actions
K:BB barely 2:1 isn't fantastic
i guess I agree with pretty-good, but I suspect (and I might be over-reading your post) that you’re trying to imply it’s more
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Dec 20, 2010 12:14 AM EST up reply actions
YunelTheLazyLatino
Could have done without the “Latino” in that username. YunelTheLazy probably works as well and is less offensive.
by blackoutyears on Dec 20, 2010 1:59 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Right
But a deal isn’t evaluated by where the respective players rank on the Baseball America top 100.
Exactly.
Escobar and Jeffress were both top-100 prospects in their day anyhow. They’ve lost some luster, but are by no means failed prospects…other names thrown about (Beltre, Drabek) don’t have any better prospect pedigrees and have just as much uncertainty (if not more).
I actually like this deal for KC. Greinke wanted out, so keeping him wasn’t an option. Odorizzi is a solid arm (whoever was saying that he was equivalent to Gibson is mad though), Jeffress is a live arm and profiles at least as a solid, cost-controlled reliever, and Alcides is exactly what this team needs, a cost-controlled defensive-minded player up the middle. The Royals’ defense has been awful for years; this is the first step to recovery, and I think it’s a good one.
K.C.'s imaginary 2013 lineup:
Alex Gordon Lorenzo Cain Wil Myers
Mike Moustakas Alicedes Escobar Jhonny Giovetella Eric Hosmer
Billy Butler (DH)
I called it - Joe Mauer's first career Home-Run at Target Field !!!
Why Oh Why did the D'Backs select A.J. Pollock over Mike Trout?
I hate Hunter Wendelstedt, you hate Hunter Wendelstedt we all hate hunter w
by SteveHoffmanSlowey on Dec 19, 2010 6:46 PM EST reply actions
Salvador Perez, Lucas May, Manny Pina, or a FA
Perez is the leading candidate if he develops.
Myers
Should we expect Myers to be MLB ready by 2013? Not saying I disagree, but was just curious as to his ETA.
The one constant through all the years, Ray, has been baseball. It reminds us of all that once was good, and that could be again.
i don't see why not
some say September 2012
I called it - Joe Mauer's first career Home-Run at Target Field !!!
Why Oh Why did the D'Backs select A.J. Pollock over Mike Trout?
I hate Hunter Wendelstedt, you hate Hunter Wendelstedt we all hate hunter w
by SteveHoffmanSlowey on Dec 19, 2010 8:33 PM EST up reply actions
If he's moved to OF
I wouldn’t be surprised to see him fast tracked to an MLB debut at some point in 2012.
if we are future rosterbating on the Royals right now
C – Wil Myers (I’m allowed to dream god damnit!)
1B – Kila Kaiahue (he proves he can it at the major league level)
2B – Christian Colon
SS – Alcides Escobar
3B – Mike Moustakas
LF – Eric Hosmer (might as well give it a shot)
CF – Lorenzo Cain
RF – Alex Gordon (why he isn’t at 3B and Moustakas here, I don’t know)
DH – Billy Butler
SP1 – Mike Montgomery
SP2 – John Lamb
SP3 – Danny Duffy
SP4 – Jacob Odorizzi
SP5 – Luke Hochevar/Chris Dwyer
CL – Chris Dwyer?? idk, I like Hochevar and would be surprised if he isn’t in their rotation in 2013, but if all of these guys get close to their potential, he wont be, so I didn’t know what to do with him.
Lineup
1 – Lorenzo Cain – CF
2 – Kila Kaiahue – 1B
3 – Eric Hosmer – LF
4 – Mike Moustakas – 3B
5 – Billy Butler – DH
6 – Wil Myers – C
7 – Alex Gordon – RF
8 – Christian Colon – 2B
9 – Alcides Escobar – SS
If everything pans out, I don’t think that looks too bad in any sense. The infield is strong defensively up the middle with Alcides and Colon, and I really don’t think Moustakas will be a terrible MLB 3B. Kila at 1B is ugh, but its better than Butler and I’d trust Hosmer more in the outfield. Cain is good in center, and Gordon may be average in a corner, and maybe Hosmer can be serviceable out there. Its probably not an average defensive team, but it isn’t atrocious by any stretch IMO. There are always free agent moves and obvious surprises to consider as well. I’m sure Hochevar is going to be better than ONE of these Royals starters (whether they get derailed by injuries, general innefectiveness, whatever), but I don’t know what to do with him if one of these pitchers doesn’t fail.
by Navi's_Navy on Dec 20, 2010 12:31 AM EST up reply actions
Kaiahue on the bench
with Hosmer at 1B and likely a FA or college draft pick in LF.
by Havok1517 on Dec 20, 2010 5:35 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I think
Gordon makes more sense at 3B too, but it sounds like he requested the change to the OF. Will he be in RF or LF though? I think Myers is the future RF and C becomes a question mark. Hosmer is a 1B, Butler is a DH, Kila is a bench piece.
I think that not only is Odorizzi a better prospect than Duffy, but that he’d slot behind Monty and Lamb in order to break up the string of lefties. Has any team ever put themselves in a position where they threw all lefties in a three game series? And Dwyer would make four LHPs in one rotation. Attrition will take care of that anyway as you say…
by blackoutyears on Dec 20, 2010 2:12 PM EST up reply actions
3 southpaws in a 3 game series
The 2011 Yankees were certainly hoping/counting on being able to do that with Sabathia, Lee, Pettitte. If it’s good enough for a 200M payroll then it should be ok for the 2013 Royals to try that strategy.
by two fishsticks on Dec 20, 2010 4:46 PM EST up reply actions
Should clarify
that I’m referring to a regular season series, not post season.
by blackoutyears on Dec 24, 2010 7:30 PM EST up reply actions
Realistic lineup
C – Salvador Perez or a FA
1B – Hosmer (they are not going to risk moving him to another position for anyone, let alone Kaaihue)
2B – Colon/Giavotella/Bianchi (Moore hinted Colon would be moved with the Escobar signing to fast track him to the bigs. Colon will get every opportunity here, but I won’t count out Giavotella or Bianchi)
SS – Escobar
3B – Moustakas
LF – Gordon/Eibner/Lough/FA (wouldn’t be surprised to see Gordon traded. Depending on if Eibner develops he could slot in here)
CF – Cain/Dyson (Dyson will start 2011 in AAA. Similar tools profile to Cain, weaker hit tool though)
RF – Myers (I have no doubt he gets moved to OF this year to let his bat lead his development)
SP – Hochevar, Montgomer, Lamb, Dwyer, Odorizzi (Crow, Duffy, Teaford, Mazzaro, Melville, Arguelles, etc are also candidates. Kind of silly to try and guess which five make it, but KC should have some nice options).
RP – Soria, Jeffress, Coleman, Collins, etc.
Butler's the DH?
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Dec 20, 2010 11:46 AM EST up reply actions
Dominican winter league playoffs - anyone know when they start? Or have a link?
I checked all the websites. Only information I can get is it’s in January. I plan to see a game or two but will be there only until Jan 5 or 6th. The regular season ends Tuesday or Wednesday this week so I can’t make that.
thanks
if you or others have any links it would be appreciated. I doubt I need to purchase tickets beforehand, but it would be nice to know cities/dates.
they'll eventually get around to it on the league website.
don’t expect to see it until after at least christmas, though.
sure feels like that this was the best package left
I understand the move, still don’t like it that much for the Royals, but it sure feels like this was the last one standing, with reports that Greinke wasn’t going to go to the Nats before, and today, reports that he wasn’t going to approve going to Toronto.
As a total side note, what I found mildly interesting in that piece was the blurb that the cost of trading for Ellsbury was going to be too high. It could just be commentary from Rosenthal, but makes me wonder if teams have asked on Ellsbury this offseason and were given a “price”.
I'm sure they did
Boston is notorious for asking for the world for any of their players, for better or for worse.
Thanks for that toonsterwu
had not seen that and things make a lot more sense if it’s all true
"I didn't really say everything I said."-Yogi ism
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Minor League Ball
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
