Miller's trade value is low right now.  You keep him  hoping he stays healthy and becomes that stud pitcher you thought he would be.  Now if he fails and you never traded him for anything, I don't see a real loss there.

they could ask for a package like laffey/sowers and garko/cabrera/guti. That wouldn't indicate a fire sale type rebuild.

True enough. I guess I just meant that I knew something had to sort of be going on.

Coco Crisp/Andy Marte was all over the news, and speculated for days, but that was because of the Boston side of things and it pissed Shapiro off.

Wow, that's hilarious.

Too giddy.

Its not like every team comes to the same conclusions about every player. Guthrie and Phillips weren't thought of highly by the Indians, but proved to have some value. I'm sure there are other candidates in our farm system who Indians mistakenly place little value in.

Of course I want Haren. I just don't see a way to justify the cost. He's coming off a career year, one that appears unlikely to repeat.

I'm not saying don't trade Miller. I'm saying a trade involving Miller wouldn't be worth it.

Haren is going to carry high price because...

1. ... of that 3.07 ERA
   
2. ... he's had three years of 200+ IP
   
3. ... he's signed to a non-insane contract

We all agree on this. The Indians had the best rotation in AL, by ERA, last year. Our starters threw the most innings by any AL rotation last year. C.C and Westbrook have averaged 180 innings the last three years. Carmona looks like another workhorse. We have ML-ready depth at starting pitcher. My point is that we need Haren a heck of a lot less than other teams do. They, understandably, will be willing to part with a lot more than we will.

Unless the A's favor players that we aren't crazy about, I don't think its worth meeting the price the Yankees and Diamdondbacks are willing to pay.

lee stevens, baby.  lee.  stevens.

FYI, that makes Detroit 8th in Baseball; Cleveland 17th

I would be more impressed with those financial numbers if it weren't a fact that you make the big money the year AFTER you go to the playoffs/World Series, because the city is into the team from the beginning of the season and you have a much more viable product to sell to advertisers for your TV prduct.

I would in a heart beat give up 8 terrible years for two championship seasons.  I understand the Indians risk aversion but as a fan I would rather see them go for the gold then be passivities.  I think just as the Tigers were in a good position to take a risk so are the Indians.  Some people here say the Tigers have mortgaged the future but I disagree.  

Cabrera and Willis are both young enough they can still make an impact for at least the next 5 years.  Any future needs can be filled through free agency if the chose to.  If they don't want to they can simply rebuild by trading their tradeable pieces like a Cabrera for  prospect much like they traded away for him.  Mean while they improve their aging but still very competitive baseball team.  By trading for Cabrera they have created an opportunity to trade Inge for the bullpen help they need.  

This was the perfect opportunity and timing to make this type of trade for the Tigers.  If they didn't make this trade they would become a team that was stuck between rebuilding and contenting.  As constructed before these trades they would not be good enough to win the division much less win a World Series.  But by taking a risk here the Tigers have avoided becoming a team stuck in the middle. Yes, they take the risk if things don't work out but if it does they could win the World Series. The  few years that they might struggling because of this trade the fans will not leave totally and they still have the ability to trade Cabrera and other marketable players for prospect to rebuild.  

Unless the Indians are sure they can resign C.C I think they need to go all in or risk becoming a struggling contender with some years being very competitive and some years struggling to maintain a .500 record.  Maybe, Shapiro feels that risk aversion is the best policy as the fan base has recently suffered through a period of rebuilding and distrust of ownership and management and I can see the point of that but I would rather see them make a run at it.  I don't want to see them trade all their prospect to improve the major league team but they do have some minor and major league pieces that they can trade and still have a good minor league system to pull from.

different!

Hello crazymoloh,

No offense, but I think the Marte and Pedroia situations were more different than you are implying:

• Marte has had 221 ABs/74 Gs of experience coming into the 2007 season, Pedroia has had 89 ABs/31 Gs of experience, yet Pedroia is showing the consistency of performing at an acceptable or above-average level, whereas Marte hasn't to this point.  (And, they're only a few months apart in age, Marte being slightly younger.)

• Blake is a more accomplished hitter than Cora is, as Blake has had OPSs of over 800 twice in 5 seasons as a starter, and over 700 in his other 3 seasons.  Cora, who does play at less-demanding offensive positions, only posted an over .800 OPS once in 5 seasons as a starter and an over .700 OPS once in 5 seasons as a starter.  The other three seasons, he posted twice over .600 and once under .600.  Combine that with the fact that Blake has started in the last 5 seasons, whereas Cora hasn't been a starter since his last season in the NL with the Dodgers in 2004, and it's probable that the Indians felt Blake could provide more consistent offense than Marte, while the Red Sox probably felt that Pedroia's worst wouldn't be much worse than Cora's best, and with the rest of their potent offense, they could afford to keep Pedroia in the lineup even with his bad April stats.

• In addition, while it was a SSS, Marte didn't force the issue when he returned from the DL, only going 2-11 (.182.)  Plus, his defensive problems didn't help (4 Es in 47 TCs) - combine that with the fact that the other corner INF was a rookie who was questionable defensively at the start of the season (Garko,) but was hitting considerably better than Marte, the Indians probably felt that Garko's presence in the lineup was more vital to the Indians winning than Marte's was, combined with Blake's presence in the lineup.  That's why the idea of Blake shifting back to 1B really became an afterthought as the season progressed, since Garko's bat and glove were both doing so well for the Indians that Garko became the everyday player the Indians were expecting from Marte.  Being though that Marte only hit .154 against RHP, as compared to .278 against LHP, the Indians couldn't let him face too many right-handers.  The Indians soon concluded that Marte would benefit better in his last likely season with an option to be playing everyday at AAA Buffalo rather than just playing sparingly at the ML level, especially since he hasn't been able to show the consistency the Indians are expecting from him.

So, while the situations may seem similar on the surface, they weren't that similar in my opinion.

Just my 2 cents - no offense.

Hello again crazymoloh,

Regarding this point:

"The Tigers completely mortgaged their future. I'd rather make the playoffs ten years in a row rather than win two championships in a decade and suck in the other 8 years."

I agree with this - you give yourself more chances to win a WS making the postseason 8-10 times out of 10 than you do making the postseason 2 times out of 10, regardless of how strong your team is.  As we all know, the postseason is essentially a crapshoot - the best or strongest team does not always win; in fact, outside of the 2007 Red Sox and the 1998 Yankees, the team with the best record in the league has NOT won the WS since at least 1995 (perhaps longer.)

And, if I recall correctly, the Tigers made almost as big of a splash after the 2006 postseason, acquiring Gary Sheffield in a trade for three pitching prospects, including highly-touted prospect RHP Humberto Sanchez.  Around that time, many were thinking that the Tigers were going to win the WS after narrowly missing in 2006.  I believe the Indians' biggest deal in the 2006 offseason was signing David Dellucci to a 3-year agreement (could make an argument for Borowski or Foulke, I suppose, but the main point is, not a deal nearly as big as the Sheffield trade.)

Yet, the Indians won the AL Central with a 96-66 record in 2007, while the Tigers finished 2nd out of the playoff race with an 88-74 record, even with Sheffield.  This is just another example where getting a marquee name does not guarantee anything, and which is why I'm glad to see Shapiro is not making a knee-jerk countermove to the Tigers' trade just to make a countermove.  As was mentioned elsewhere in this thread, making up 8 wins, even after adding 2 players like Cabrera and Willis, won't be easy.  

And while it's possible the Indians could have players who did well in 2007 struggle more in 2008 and they finish with less than 96 wins, keep in mind the following:

• We got far less production from Hafner than we expected;
  
• We got virtually no production from LF (Dellucci);
  
• We got very little from Cliff Lee and Jeremy Sowers, two expected mainstays in the 2007 rotation;
  
• We got limited production from Jake Westbrook until late in the season due to his abdominal injury and the recovery time it took him to get back to his usual form.

Therefore, it's not like the Indians all overachieved for us to win 96 games in 2007, so even if some of the Indians' hitters don't perform at the same level in 2008 as they did in 2007, if some of those guys bounce back to or closer to previous levels, this team could still win around 95-96 games and be right in the hunt, without making any additional moves or any countermoves to the Cabrera/Willis trade.  

And being "right in the hunt" is really all anyone can expect, so I think the Indians are in good position right now as is - if they can improve themselves at a price that doesn't hurt their future prospects (something the Cabrera/Willis trade could do to the Tigers' chances in the near future, especially since guys like Ordonez and Sheffield are 34 and 39 in 2008,) then it's likely the Indians will explore and make the move, but not if they feel the cost will outweigh the benefits, and so far, it seems that in their estimation (and they know the situation better than anyone else does, no offense,) the costs have outweighed the benefits, outside of the Kobayashi signing and Carroll trade.

Just my 2 cents - no offense to anyone.

I'd rather make the playoffs ten years in a row rather than win two championships in a decade and suck in the other 8 years.

I wouldn't.

That's pretty much what we did in the '90s, and I would have given it all up for a WS championship in '95 or '97. There's only so much you can take of always being the best runner up.

Baits or challenges to think? I don't come here to anger people although that happens sometimes.  I come here to challenge the typical LGT theories and beliefs.  When you only see one side of a coin you get blinded from all the options.

I can only imagine.

Sorry... that didn't make a lot of sense.

I meant to say ...  market size correlates to how big a budge the owner sets...

Several people, including me, talked earlier about how Oakland has a statistics-based approach to player evaluation.  In thinking about the Indians, and their approach to their roster, we need to consider that they, too, have an "approach" that informs everything they do (which I don't think is the case for Detroit -- Dombrowski, after all, was the Florida GM at one point, methinks).  Detroit is going for it, gambling (as they did with Ordonez) and they seem prepared to flame out.  That may or may not work.  Boston is different -- they combine statistics with tons of money -- so they can both gamble AND be calculating.  The Indians are like Oakland.  They don't trade FOR big names, they trade them away.  They have an approach that emphasizes pitching and not over-paying for players.  Part of that is Dolan, for sure, but it's also a theory about what works.  I don't know if they're right or wrong, but don't expect them to spend a lot of money on a new bat and don't expect them to sign pitchers to more than a 3 year deal.  They never have under Shapiro, who clearly thinks this is how you play the game in a resource- limited environment.

Looking at it again it is Laffey, not Sowers.

The thought of Billy Beane getting his gresy little palms on pure, sweet Asdrubal is an unbearable thought.

I'd do it.  I'd ask for a small non-impact piece (low level prospect/ptbnl) and say done deal.  

Sabathia
Haren
Carmona
Westbrook
Byrd
-----
Lee
Sowers
Smith (hopefully)
(that's still depth folks)

Sizemore
Dellucci/Michaels
Hafner
Martinez
Garko
Peralta
Gutz
last two spots for 3rd/2nd are taken by some combination of Blake, Barfield, Carroll, and Marte.

Our team is stronger. Cabrera > Barfield + Carroll, but barely.  Haren >>>>> Laffey + Miller. (especially considering contracts and injury risk.

But he doesn't play in the same league as the real men.

I think the whole thing has been exaggerated by certain beat reporters.  No reason Huntington should have an interest in Cliff Lee -- in paying him millions to pitch for a team that won't be contending by 2010.  If the Pirates had Cliff Lee, people would be saying they should trade him.

I would just have trouble seriously considering a guy for a Cy Young award who was completely marginal for half the year.  First half, sure, he was the Cy Young.

Crazy.

I'm a fan of Fausto, maybe not enough to say I'd rather him than ANY other pitcher.  But he's up there.  Grady and Vic are my two favs for CF and C.  But to say you'd rather have AstroCab than Reyes is just insanity.  Give me Reyes.

I'm with you Victor, even though I think Mauer might be better.  I like our team and I like Victor being the leader of it, though, so I'm staying with him.

But Curtis Granderson might beat out Grady for me.  Maybe.  It would basically be a fantastic decision to have to make, and I think the two will be the best CFers in baseball for some time.  Grady's contract status gives him the edge, I think.  Does anyone know Curtis's contract off hand?  I can justify not studying for finals to be on LGT, but I'm not quite desperate enough to go hunting for random players' quite yet.  If Granderson had Grady's contract, he might be ahead of Grady on my list.

Are you serious? Blanton and Haren's non BIP numbers aren't that close.

Blanton xFIP   K/G BB/G
2005 = 4.79    5.3  3.1
2006 = 5.07    5.8  2.6
2007 = 4.13    4.7  1.6

2005 = 3.81    7.0  2.3
2006 = 4.06    7.3  1.9
2007 = 3.99    7.9  2.3

Blanton has had one good year out of the last three (I know you said last two, but I added it because it highlights Haren's consistency and Blanton's inconsistency) and it was highly contingent on his full one less BB/G jump from '06 to '07. Blanton's numbers are closer to Paul Byrd than they are to Dan Haren.

Yeah - I second that, The Nats?  You'd think they'd be a lot better if they got the better end of most trades.

My Barfield Prediction: He will NEVER become a top-5 second baseman in the American League. Worst pitch selection. EVER.

p.s: I didn't just jump on the Barfield sucks bandwagon. Go through the 2007 preseason predictions on this blog. I pegged Barfield as having a terrible year before the season started.

Alright, I didn't discount his 2007 AA year, that is included in his minor league career OPS, which he outperformed in his 45 games in Cleveland. I agree, and I said, that the jump from A to AAA to AA to MLB makes it difficult to read his numbers.  

Re: Barfield- we agree he sucked in 07.  Maybe he was overrated in 06.  But lets not fool ourselves by saying he wasn't a good prospect.  His 05 season, the only one in AAA was a full year, he had .310/.370/.450/.820 line as a 22 year old in AAA complete with 25 2B's, 15 HRs, 20 SB (I don't know if Cabrera could put up that line that in 08 in Buffalo- but this is not the point).  He sucked for a year in AA, but put up very good numbers in A ball.  

Now, I'm not trying to ignore the 2007 season where Barfield totally sucked, and Cabrera had a solid AA year with a strong 45 game performance for in the majors, in a stretch run.  What I still don't get is how Cabrera deserves to be in the untouchable class.  He is a solid and terribly young prospect, I really like him, I thought I was high on him, but compared to some of the posts in this thread, I apparently am the only one that thinks there is a chance for a below league average major league output this season and lots of question marks after that.

see, i just get all excited reading stuff like this.

i also love that the guy can bounce between SS and 2B without batting an eye.  He also plays with all 12 peices of flair, making it look so fun.  It's that stuff people fell in love with Omar, only he's like a billion years younger and can hit.

How fair is it to compare Cabrera just to Sizemore? Isn't Sizemore the ideal example of a player reaching his ability? Don't we have someone else on the roster who ripped up AA and AAA at age 20 and 21?

I'll also point out that Cabrera's 21 y/o Akron season is about 130 ABs shorter than Sizemore's 20 y/o Akron season. I don't know why I left that out initially. Point being, you could extrapolate Drubs' counting numbers to be even more similar to Grady's.

June 30, 2006: Traded by the Seattle Mariners to the Cleveland Indians for Eduardo Perez.

hahahahahaha...

other than the indicator that when you grows up, you gets muscles?

I'm fully aware that I'm not capable of giving you an A-ball slugging percentage to predict anything one way or the other.

His doubles. His ISO. His homeruns at AA.

People act like his ISO was under .070 or something.  At AA it was higher than Brian Barton's. About the same as Jordan Brown's. No, those guys aren't stalwarts but they are 2 and 4 years older than Astro, respectively.  

Sheesh. I don't know how this became the hobby house for Cabrera but he's not exactly swinging a fungo bat.

Not sure which way it cuts... They could be the type of team that values Lee a lot more than we do (or the A's would).  Still, I dont' know what the O's are looking for for Bedard.

Sorry about that - I took information about Haren's FA status from a webpage discussing the new contract he signed, which was before he turned 26 in September.  Whoops!  :-)

I'd do a Miller/Brown/Francisco deal in a heartbeat for Bedard.  Heck I'd even toss in Lee to give them depth, (then again, I'd toss Lee into just about any deal).  We'd still have CC, Carmona, Bedard, Westbrook and Byrd with Laffy, Sowers and Lofgren as depth at SP.

I'd also talk about an extension for Bedard - maybe a total 4 year deal (with the Shapiro trademark 5th year club option if Bedard would go for it).  I've read, although I can't find the link right now, that Bedard is open for a contract extension - just not with the Orioles.  And since Angelos won't trade him with the division, that limits his options.

All in all, I don't think we make any trade for a pitcher unless we get CC signed to an extension.  Let's hope that situation resolves itself fairly quickly (knock on wood).

That may be the single worst one year deal in the history of baseball.

Hello Pronk33,

"I still don't like the idea of Cleveland making a trade like Detroit did because of the long-term consequences and the fact Cleveland is much younger, cheaper, and is already on a solid track (read, playoffs).  I certainly wouldn't jump on anyone for thinking such a trade would be wise though, because I've read a lot of good arguments for both options.  I guess I'm just indecisive on the whole big trade thing with names like Asdrubal and Laffey being tossed around."

I agree with you - I too am not fond of just making a "knee-jerk" reactionary move just because Detroit made a "blockbuster" move.  The Tigers were 8 games behind us last year, and while some of the Indians who performed well in 2007 might drop off a bit in 2008, there were also guys who didn't perform as well as expected in 2007 who could also bounce back to previous levels in 2008 - namely Hafner and Dellucci.  Plus, Lee and Sowers gave next-to-nothing in the starting rotation; if one or both (depending on whether one or both are still here to begin 2008) bounce back, that too would be an improvement on last year's team that won 96 games, which could help offset any dropoff we get from some of the other players.  Plus, young players like Gutierrez and Cabrera were not up here the whole season in 2007; depending on how quickly they adapt to a full season in the MLs, it's not out of the question for this 2008 team to improve without making any blockbuster changes like the Tigers did (perhaps a major reason why the Tigers felt they had to pull the trigger on the Cabrera/Willis deal - their team overall is older than ours, I believe, especially their main core, so they probably already feel like their window of opportunity will never be as wide open as it is right now, and to try to make up ground and combat us, they felt they had to pull the trigger, even if it hurts them depth-wise in the farm system going into the next decade.)

I'm glad Shapiro and the Indians' FO is one that does not make a move just to make a countermove to someone else's move when the move would make little to no sense and little to no overall improvement for us.

(And, according to Yahoo Sports, the Pirates were not thrilled with C Ronny Paulino's effort behind home plate in 2007 and will hold him accountable for his play behind the plate in 2008 if he remains with them.  Presuming that is true, that's all the more reason why I'm glad that that Bay & Paulino/Lee & Shoppach trade rumor was just a rumor, as Shoppach's work ethic behind the plate is a lot better than that.)

And like you, I too would be very hesitant to include Cabrera in any deal, and to a bit lesser extent, Laffey as well.  Very good to excellent MI prospects don't grow on trees (look at our farm system right now for some proof on that) and LH-GO pitchers that handle AA and AAA pretty much their first time around the league and win 17 games between AA, AAA, and the MLs combined is also pretty rare, so I too wouldn't be that eager to trade either, even for a solid pitcher who has struggled considerably in the second half of the last two seasons and whose trade value has arguably been jacked up because of a great first half in 2007, one that I'm not sure Haren will duplicate to that extent, and especially moving into more of a hitter's ballpark, certainly moreso than McAfee Coliseum.

Just my 2 cents.  :-)

Bedard has pitched 196.1 IP and 182.0 IP in the last two seasons, so it's not like he missed by that much.

Hello Jay,

As mentioned, I think his past injury history with TJ surgery is a concern, but as someone (don't remember who) here mentioned either last offseason or early this 2007 season about CC not pitching 200 IP in a season (though CC did back in 2002, something that the poster didn't realize at the time,) they were pretty close to reaching 200 IP (like 1-3 decent to good starts from doing so.)

If I scanned the search engine results correctly, Bedard's season ended early last season due to an oblique strain - chances are, he probably would have reached 200 IP last season if he had stayed healthy.

Therefore, while I think his health overall is a concern, I'm not that concerned about that "200 IP" number - it's almost like a magical number, but really, are 197.2 IP and 200.0 IP in reality all that really different?  I don't think so.  As for 182.0 IP, that's a little further away, but similar to the 188.0 IP that CC pitched back in 2004 and that was brought up by that poster who mentioned that CC's never pitched 200 IP was a concern.  

I think Bedard's being able to go just a whisker or two under 200 IP the last two seasons has to be a bit encouraging, especially being that it's been 4 years (2003) I believe since he had TJ surgery.  I agree that I wouldn't "overpay" for Bedard either, but if it was a reasonable price, I think I'd explore it, and I think he is more dominating than Haren is, especially when it comes to a similar HR rate (but in a hitter's park) and better H and K ratios.  Plus, you do have him for the next 2 years, which is one year less than Haren, but if it came at a cheaper price than what Oakland is asking for Haren, I'd probably would consider it.

Just my 2 cents - no offense.

Love the profile line, I wonder where you ever got that from. LOL

most definitely - and in all lower case.

so, is andrew the prettiest girl at the prom or vaguely unattractive?