Sheffield

by crackaddictwhit @ Let's Go Tribe! on Aug 2, 2006 1:46 AM EDT

Would you be interested in a bringing in a free agent like this next year? He made just over 10 mil this year. He coming off a much injured season. Would you consider him? If not who else? If so, what kind of money? How much would be guaranteed? What kind of draft pick would we lose? We're not going after a Carlos Lee but we need a bat behind Hafner. Any other ideas?

Tweet Comment 47 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Re: Sheffield

I actually kind of like this idea. The three strikes against him are:

He's old (going to be 38)
Coming off an year of an injury (although he is not considered an injury risk generally)
He's been a steroid user in the past.

The reason I kind of like this idea, is because I completely agree that we need a bat behind Hafner and I've always seen Martinez as someone who should hit two spots behind Hafner following another dangerous HR/RBI threat (Which Sheffield has been).

by hans on Aug 2, 2006 2:09 AM EDT reply actions

Re: Sheffield

Although I'd love to get a bat, my guess is they go after a pitcher first. But, that is just a hunch.

by talonk on Aug 2, 2006 2:18 AM EDT reply actions

Re: Sheffield

Sounds like Juan Gonzalez, part 3. No thanks. I'd rather see them shovel a pile of money at Carlos Lee, who is young and healthy and in his prime.

July 28, 2006 - The Andy Marte Era officially begins.

by woodsmeister on Aug 2, 2006 10:07 AM EDT reply actions

Re: Sheffield

That's an interesting comparison. You say that Lee is hitting his prime, but Sheffield has been a significantly better bat. The question is, who will hit better in 2007? It's not an easy question, given the age difference.

But for Lee you would have to offer a huge multiyear deal. Yuck. With Sheffield you might get by on a one year deal, probably two. So it would be Juan Gonzalez part 3. And we're batting .500 so far.

by dgcambridge on Aug 2, 2006 10:25 AM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

We need pitching, pitching, and pitching!

The Tribe hit .291 (267-for-918) and averaged 5.5 runs per game in July, but still went 10-16.

Get starting help AND bullpen help before worrying about bats (but corner OF should be the top priority among hitters).

by JulioBernazard on Aug 2, 2006 10:57 AM EDT reply actions

Re: Sheffield

Yeah, and there are some depth overlap issues. I personally think we should be looking at signing a top closer (again) and possibly kicking Carmona back to the rotation, where his value will be greatest.

That would also enable us to trade either Lee or Westbrook, whom I believe won't be much if any better than Carmona. If we can also acquire a front-of-rotation starter, then we get that much deeper.

by Jay on Aug 2, 2006 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

Just which closer are we going to try and sign? Gagne-injured, Wickman-retiring, Borowski-is he really a closer?, Rivera-$treinbrenner would never let that happen. I don't see any others available. The only semi big name that could be through trade is Lidge, but we'll have to give up a lot to get him. I guess we could try Turnbow, but I think he was a one year wonder. There's always Mesa and that kind of ilk ... yuck.

And if Carmona goes back to the rotation, who gets bumped? Byrd-I think the FO wants him in the #5 spot, Westbrook/Lee if they get dealt, Sowers? My guess is if we deal Lee/Westbrook, Guthrie gets first shot at the rotation. Also, if we target a Schmidt in the offseason, there is no room for Carmona either. I really don't see how moving him back to the rotation helps.

By the way, there is one guy I'd love to see the Tribe sign and make into a closer, and that would be Kerry Wood. Give him an incentive laden deal, make him the closer and see how it pans out. If it doesn't so what, but I think he'd be better at it than anyone else we could get (save Lidge).

by talonk on Aug 2, 2006 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

Re: Sheffield

I'd love to sign Wood to a deal like that, but I'd bet everything that some team will overpay to sign him hopeing he can be healthy for a year.

by tyler083 on Aug 2, 2006 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

Sorry, I did mean "acquire" rather than sign.

I'd be willing to take fliers on Lidge or Wood, probably any number of others.

At some point, we have to start talking about reducing our risk of not winning a pennant.

by Jay on Aug 2, 2006 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

Cool, I didn't think you had backtracked ;)

What other relievers would you target in a trade other than Lidge? Maybe one the Anaheim set-up guys?

I still think we should go after Wood. Give him a $6M deal with certain incentives based on whether or not he is a SP or closer. If he's healthy as a starter, he and CC at 1 and 2 are very nice (although I'd bet they get split up by Lee/Westbrook). Then we could deal Lee/Westbrook and something to get Lidge and something (OF?). They could use a 1B like Garko (unless Berkman stays at first). Or make Wood the closer and have Carmona, Betancourt, and Cabrera all set up for him, sign a LOOGY and we're looking good.

by talonk on Aug 2, 2006 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

The only beef I have with Kerry Wood as closer is that you're committing $6M to a guy who has never closed before. If he's healthy, he clearly has the stuff to be a dominant starter. Would closing increase or decrease his health risks? Is he mentally prepared to close? Would he want the job?

by mkwng @ Let's Go Tribe! on Aug 2, 2006 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

Not sure if he'd want to close, but he has had these talks with the Cubs before.

And yes he can be a very dominant starter, but I think if he only threw an inning a day, rather than 6-8 every fifth, he'd probably stay healthier, but that is just my opinion.

Plus, he's got nasty closer like stuff. That is why he was virtually unhittable in those early years. I just think he never learned how to "pitch" effectiviely as a starter. This way he just come in and throw, and not think too much. I may just be crazy, but I'd rather take a shot at him rather than Borowski, Mesa, etc.

by talonk on Aug 2, 2006 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

I don't think it's crazy. I see the argument, but in my opinion throwing $6 million at an unproven closer (and it would probably take more like $7-9M, I think) is a mistake, no matter how talented he is.

Unfortunately we will have to overpay if we wanna go get a closer, even if we think outside the box - that's just the way it is.

by mkwng @ Let's Go Tribe! on Aug 2, 2006 8:46 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

Haven't looked into the market extensively, but you have to assume that the NL will be easier to trade with. It also stands to reason that the recent track records of NL relievers are less suspect than those of NL starters. (This is to the extent you can rely upon the recent track records of relievers at all.)

A friend last night said he expects Tom Gordon will be available in the offseason, if the price is right, and while he's old, I can't see how you can hope for a better track record. Mike Gonzalez will be hitting arbitration, though it's hard to picture the Pirates trading him unless it was straight up for a guy like Cliff Lee. On the surface, that would look crazy.

Joe Borowski (Marlins) will be a free agent. Track record is spotty, but if he's healthy, he seems a likely target for a strong first-strike signing. Making the minimum, I'm not sure why he wasn't traded. His K rate is way up this year, and he's consistently gotten the Save or Hold in about 85% of his chances.

Seems to me that our tradeable depth is in young and talented but unproven bullpen arms -- Mujica, Perez, Mastny, Davis, Brown, Cabrera, Sikorski, Slocum, possibly Sipp and Guthrie. We have more of those guys than we can use, and I think they can be trading chips of some value, touting their major-league readiness, raw tools and total dirt-cheap-ness.

by Jay on Aug 2, 2006 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

I guess Borowski would be ok, especially if we want to groom Carmona, Betancourt, etc. for another year. But for some reason, I have a nervous feeling about him.

by talonk on Aug 2, 2006 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

What about Braden Looper not great but a good closer, STL should still owe us a little from the Ronnie Belliard trade, maybe if we kick in a Brown or Dittler or Slocum and Guthrie

Fan in Texas

by fanintexas on Aug 2, 2006 5:42 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

What is it that you think they owe us? I've read several articles that say that Shapiro stole this one.

by Jay on Aug 2, 2006 5:51 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

Stole what, they got a starting 2nd baseman for the division run, and we got a utility player, maybe a good utility player that can play a lot positions and hit LH pitching but still a utility player.

Fan in Texas

by fanintexas on Aug 2, 2006 6:07 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

What is it you don't like:

the comparable OPS to Belliard?
the minimum league salary he will command next year?
the comparable advanced defensive rating metrics?
the money saved on Belliard's remaining 06 salary?
the flexibility it gives us to spend free agent dollars elsewhere?

by cheech99 on Aug 2, 2006 6:44 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

With Belliards stats we would have received a 1st or at least a 2nd round pick. And I'm still waiting on us to spend money on FA, and I do not think 1 million will buy us that much.

Fan in Texas

by fanintexas on Aug 2, 2006 6:56 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

And that draft pick would have done what exactly for 2007? Nothing. The draft is in June and that player drafted would at best be ready by 2009.

by talonk on Aug 2, 2006 7:10 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

And what do you think we got for 2007 other than Choo that will help us, I hope Luna is not playing in more than 25 to 30 games at best.

Fan in Texas

by fanintexas on Aug 2, 2006 8:10 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

what? 25-30 games? even if he's just super utility you can probably expect to see more of him than that, and rightfully so.

Even if you think everything the Indians do is terrible, it's hard to deny that Luna has a lot of value especially when considered within financial constraints.

by afh4 on Aug 2, 2006 8:46 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

Hector Luna is a far more valuable player than most second round picks turn out to be. If you take all of our sandwich-round and second-round picks this century, the only one who has made the majors is Brian Tallet.

Adam Miller -- the highest possible sandwich pick at 31st overall -- hopefully will be a great player, but he won't be here until, at minimum, 4-5 years after he was drafted. Based on that timetable, the theoretical Miller-type player that we might have gotten would be arriving in 2011 or 2012.

Are you seriously suggesting you'd rather have a prospect set to arrive five years from now rather than a totally decent player right now?

by Jay on Aug 2, 2006 8:35 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

You are correct. And I'm away wrong so I guess I'll stop responding on this site. Have a good night, and love to all.

Fan in Texas

by fanintexas on Aug 2, 2006 9:13 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

Hector Luna is a far more valuable player than most second round picks turn out to be.

Well, yeah, but I don't think that necessarily means it was the best decision. How difficult is it to grab a totally decent player? I could see choosing the raffle ticket instead (Type A - two chances to win!).

On the other hand, we suck.

by dgcambridge on Aug 2, 2006 11:11 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

At the same time, relying on the Indians' inability to develop players seems counter-intuitive.

If Hector Luna can be an everyday second baseman, then it's certainly worth two months of Belliard. But if he's simply a better fielding Joe Inglett, then I'd rather take a chance with a draft pick.

by Ryan on Aug 3, 2006 8:33 AM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

"Success" in player development means that you succeed less than ten percent of the time. We do have very good player development, but one or two prospects outside the first round -- even inside the first round -- are still, as individuals, not very valuable.

Then you have the whole "time value of money" aspect, or "time value of major league talent" in this case, which is just as valid if not moreso.

Also, signing a free agent 2B who would be better than Luna (or Inglett/Luna if you like) would force us to give up at least one draft pick. Trading for one would force us to give up more than a draft pick is worth.

Not to mention the salary differences, which would be at least $10 million over the next three years.

by Jay on Aug 3, 2006 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

our team is too cheap to do that
. they enjoy the misery of a losing season

by Gladiator on Aug 2, 2006 12:15 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Sheffield

I was actually thinking about Sheffield too.

Imagine if we could land Sheff and Schmidt. We could probably get them both for around 19 million or so.

We could use the money we saved this year on bullpen help. So, 19 million would only be about 10 million more than the Indians were willing to spend during this trade deadline. And, if you add in the natural increase of this year to next it would be more like 7-8 million.

Plus, if we could get Schmidt we could trade Lee or Westbrook for bullpen help and save about 4-5 million...

Make sense???

by Tribe Alive on Aug 2, 2006 12:37 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Sheffield

Rotation - Schmidt, Sabathia, Lee/Westbrook, Sowers, Byrd

Lineup -
CF Sizemore
2B Inglett/Luna
DH Hafner
RF Sheffield
C Martinez
1B Blake
SS Peralta
3B Marte
LF Choo/Michaels/Gutierrez

OF would be Sizemore, Sheff, Michaels, Choo, Gutierrez
IF would be Luna, Inglett, Blake, Marte, Martinez, Shoppach, Peralta

One spot open for a Garko or cheap veteran...this would give us 7 in the bullpen.

And, if we wanted we could package Michaels and Lee or Westbrook for something nice...

by Tribe Alive on Aug 2, 2006 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

I want to say (potential injuries aside) that looks like a pretty good team. And would have me pretty excited.

by hans on Aug 2, 2006 8:31 PM EDT up reply actions

Question about Lidge!

Hello everyone,

If we could straighten out Brad Lidge, that wouldn't be a bad trade.

The question is though, would Lee/Westbrook, Michaels, and a prospect or two be enough to get him? Especially a few of the bullpen arms? I'd hate to give up Miller, Lofgren, or Crowe, especially for a guy who has all of a sudden lost it - starting to wonder if that Pujols HR did more damage than first realized.

Go Tribe! :-)

by indiansfan on Aug 2, 2006 5:15 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Question about Lidge!

If we had a history of straightening out pitchers in the bullpen, then I see how this works out. As it is, I see a bullpen that continues to implode, with no one really getting straightened out. If Lidge can fix himself, then great, but I wouldn't count on our current pitching coaches having much of an impact.

-Erik

by drerikbrady on Aug 8, 2006 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions

That's probably why I wouldn't trade for him!

Hello drerikbrady,

That's all the more reason why I wouldn't trade for him; I'm not sure our coaches are that good in turning questionable pitchers into good pitchers. Right now, Lidge is more of a question mark than the dominator he has been for the last few years, and unless he does find himself, I'm not sure our coaches, with little knowledge of what Lidge did when he was going well, will help him find himself again.

Go Tribe! :-)

by indiansfan on Aug 10, 2006 12:44 AM EDT up reply actions

Re: That's probably why I wouldn't trade for him!

Then we are of like mind.

-Erik

by drerikbrady on Aug 10, 2006 8:39 AM EDT up reply actions

Re: That's probably why I wouldn't trade for him!

Hello drerikbrady,

Agreed! :-)

Go Tribe! :-)

by indiansfan on Aug 10, 2006 6:03 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

NO WAY. Despite his talent, Sheffield is one major pain in the butt disruption. He's a self-centered whining baby. You want that on a young team?

I remember a story of him making errors on purpose to get out of Milwaukee years ago.

He'll be sulking for months now that the yankees got Abreu.

by DixonCayne on Aug 3, 2006 6:40 AM EDT reply actions

Re: Sheffield

As an interesting sidenote...

Sheffield did claim he made errors on purpose when he played with the Brewers, in the heat of a pennant race no less. However, I read n article that actually looked for errors in the box scores during the time frame that Sheff claims he was tanking and there isn't substantial evidence. So, it seems he really just wants even more attention even if he has to get it by making up a story about committing errors on purpose. Strange.

by afh4 on Aug 3, 2006 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

Sheffield hated the time he was with the Brewers, he said that the rookie hazing he endured was far and beyond anything he has ever seen since than.

I can see him saying something extreme like that he made errors on purpose there.

But, you know what, I can care less if the guy is a whinner and complainer...I want talent! no more mister nice guys, give me Albert Belle and his "running over kids on Holloween night" and his "corked bats and Jason Steroid Grimsely climbing through air ducts to switch the evidence", Give me Omar and his "sleeping with all the single mom's in cleveland", Roberto "I spit in the face of an umpire" Alomar. Heck, I'd take old' man Harris from the movie Major League with all that vasoline and "snot" that he put on the ball.

Other than the fact that he is old and coming off an injury, I'd sign him in a second and stick him right Behind Hafner and in front of Martinez in the lineup.

by hans on Aug 3, 2006 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

You can deal with a veteran complainer on some teams but not a young team like this. Its just not a good idea.

by DixonCayne on Aug 3, 2006 7:20 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

We're talking about the same guy that agreed to play 1B the rest of this season. What he's done in the past is relevant but it is in the past. My thoughts are if the Yanks don't bring him back, would he be worth the risk at say 6 mil guaranteed and additional 6 mil in incentives. However, this guy has made a killing based upon his exceptional wrists, that he hurt this year at age 37. Danger Will Robinson!!!

Cory Snyder is my hero!!!

by crackaddictwhit @ Let's Go Tribe! on Aug 3, 2006 2:22 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Sheffield

Not the past - the present! I'm in the NY area and read his quotes all year. I am surprised he agreed to play first without a fuss.

by DixonCayne on Aug 3, 2006 7:16 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Sheffield

Albert Belle was a real a-hole and look what he did before the hip injury. Gary likes his ego stroked. He's going to be 38. What will be more important, playing part time for the Yanks or bigger role in a mid to small market team with a chance at the playoffs?

Here's another thought about this character crap. Stop listening or buying in to this Shapiro idea. "We want character guys." Good guys finish last. I'd have David Wells or Barry Bonds on this team if I thought it would get me a ring.

Heck, I'd draft a bunch of Wolverines and Hurricanes if I thought if it would get a Super Bowl. Wait, the Browns already tried that, darn it!!!

Cory Snyder is my hero!!!

by crackaddictwhit @ Let's Go Tribe! on Aug 3, 2006 11:56 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Sheffield

I don't know, look what happened the last time we got a former Yankee...

All kidding aside, I'd love to have a bat of Sheffield's caliber, but his health worries me. I'd rather have Soriano or Lee, personally. What I'd really rather have, though, is a leadoff hitter, so we can put Grady where he belongs: in front of Pronk. Even somebody like Kevin Youkilis, a guy who gets on base at a .400 clip but can't run to save him life, would be an asset if it gets Grady out of the leadoff spot.

Tribe fan trapped in Illinois

by Avindian on Aug 5, 2006 12:07 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Sheffield

Grady is never going to bat in front of Pronk, just because they're both lefties.

Yes, I know Pronk is crushing lefties. The odds are against that continuing at such an extreme level. Few if any trends are as consistent across baseball history than the platoon split.

This obsession with dropping Grady in the order is just bizarre. Our best two hitters are both in the top three in the lineup. Few managers manage to get that right, whether intentionally or accidentally.

by Jay on Aug 5, 2006 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions

Crowe is likely the guy to move Grady down!

Hello Avindian,

Trevor Crowe is likely the guy to move Grady down at some point in the future (say within a few years.) Otherwise, I don't see who else, in or outside the system, who would be a better option than Grady to lead off at this point.

Of course, it would help if Grady did better against lefties and didn't strike out quite as much, though those strikeout numbers might be tolerated more in the #3 spot, not the leadoff spot. That might be why most people think he should be dropped in the order, plus it would arguably give him more RBI opportunities and take more advantage of his power because there would likely be more guys on base if you had good OBP guys in front of him if he's in the 3 spot.

Go Tribe! :-)

by indiansfan on Aug 5, 2006 4:54 PM EDT reply actions