i feel like we’ll know by the end of the whitesox series upcomming. if after that we have lost ground we sell while shapiro can still peddle an extra month of CC. if we have made up ground we stand pat – at least until closer to the deadline. if we stay at 6.5, maybe they just trade byrd. i’m sure it’s not all that clear cut, but i feel like the team has till then before shapiro steps in.

I agree with your thoughts for the most part, but I think Shapiro will be targeting guys who can contribute immediately and be productuve in 2009. I think players like LaRoche, Billingsly and Kemp from the LAD are what he should and will be targeting. We are largely out of things this year because of injuries, not a poorly built team (assuming Hafner comes back to some semblance of himself). Shapiro will expect to contend in 2009, not wait until 2011. So I think he will look to add future “core” guys that can hopefully be relied on for years to come.

I think it would be a mistake to trade CC for non-core type assets. The market for CC will be fiercely competitive. Shapiro should be able to make someone pay dearly. The Indians do not often get the chance add high level core type talent. Shapiro needs to make this one count.

I’ve been impressed enough by CC’s recovery from the early season to say that I’d almost be willing to overpay him to stay (i.e., give him something approaching Santana’s deal). I think we’re contenders with him as the no. 1 plus the team we’ve got (contenders, but not a great team). I don’t think we can or will sign him, though; CC is acting in ways that are consistent with his leaving (he’s saying the right things, but he’s playing out his deal). So, it makes sense to explore trading him.

Then, the question becomes, for what. Are we contenders next year without him? Starters would be Carmona, Laffey, Lee, probably Sowers. —I don’t know that you can count on Westbrook, at least not right away, so you need at least one more (I’d let Byrd go right away if they can get something worthwhile in exchange). The hitting, as we know, is iffy. The bullpen has been bad this year, but that’s always a crap shoot. At the very least, we need a closer, no matter what.

Given all of that, I’m not sure we’re contenders next year. Can we find at least one more starter, a closer and someone to upgrade the offense in a combination of a trade for CC (and/or others on our roster) plus free agents? My fear is that we’re in the A’s position—we’re not reloading, we’re rebuilding. So, that makes it really important to get good prospects in exchange, not a Shane Victorino plus marginal guys deal. I’d prefer guys who aren’t two years away; but, if we’re not going to be in the hunt next year, maybe really good prospects (like Grady was) might be worth exploring.

So, if we fall much further behind, I’d be in favor of dealing CC, but only for good prospects, not for additions to the supporting cast.

Why do none of these ‘trade CC’ talks revolve around getting back bullpen help. This team cannot win it all in 2008 or 2009 with the bullpen we currently have. Period. Relying on your 1-5 to give you a quality start every night is not a rational expectation.

Also, you might want to remind the writer at BTBS that our recent history of compensatory picks has not been that great. In fact, our FO’s greatest strength seems to be mid-season deals since many of our current players have a lineage from these types of deals.

I really can’t believe that part of the argument for holding onto CC is compensatory picks. It is so much harder to project guys that have yet to play minor league baseball, yet there are supporters who see the success of some of the recent Red Sox compensatory picks and think this is how it will turn out for the Tribe.

There are only two reasons to hold onto CC, because you think you sign him or because you think there is a chance this team can make the playoffs. As Adam detailed, there is a strong case for thinking that the injuries to 4 of our best players will be too much to overcome, and as Jay has detailed at many points in the past, CC is all but gone as a free agent.

As for trade partners, we are all drooling over the Dodgers prospects, and rightfully so, but I just really don’t see them feeling strongly enough about their team at this point in the season to trade with us. Your most likely bets have to be the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Phillies. Potential sleepers would be the Angels, Rangers, Cardinals, and Rays.

For some reason, it hadn’t clicked with me yet just how serious all these injuries have been. Ever since C.C. released that lame announcement on his website, I knew he wasn’t coming back and the main reason for holding on to him was to make one last playoff run. I can’t help but think that this team won’t be able to overcome all the injuries and the various issues (inconsistent offense, bullpen) that have popped up already, so it’s safe to say I’m firmly in the “trade C.C.” camp now (APV’s argument didn’t hurt either, well said).

Also! if the trade deadline is July 31, is that our last opportunity to get this trade done? MLB always seems to have a loophole when it comes to trades, waivers, etc., so just wondering.

I think the valuation of compensatory picks has actually swung too far to the worthless side on this site. And I don’t think our most recent history using them, or the Red Sox’ history, is relevant.

That being said, I have to agree that they’re pretty much an insignificant part of the decision here. No way do I do an all-out fire sale trade today. But check back in two weeks.

As much as we’ve struggled, there’ s not a clear consensus about where we should upgrade, beyond 1b and 3b. I mean, what to do with a guy like Gutz? On one hand, his current OPS+ is 80 (and he has a bad haircut). On the other hand, to get a guy who is clearly going to be better in 09-10 is going to be really expensive. Do we want to blow CC on that?

CC+Peralta+Hafner for Hughes+Cano

I’ve been holding off on saying something about this — out of courtesy to an SBN colleague — but this Bendix guy has been making a total ass of himself since he arrived at BtBS. About 30% of his pieces seem to be about the Indians, and he yet doesn’t seem to be familiar with this site — where he would not be considered one of the more astute contributors. I frankly am not sure he’s made one really good point since he started writing there — and you will note, by clicking on his name, that he has not even joined even one other SBN blog. Apparently he can’t be bothered to read anyone else’s analysis — God forbid he should learn something.

Basically, there is no need to call attention to anything he writes, ever.

The idea of holding on to CC is not simply for the compensatory picks, but rather for those picks coupled with other reasons, namely

1) The Indians are unlikely to get any major contributing pieces by trading CC. Sabathia should have less value now than Johan Santana did before the season, and even a package similar to what the Twins received may very well not be worthwhile

2) If the Indians do not trade CC, they get compensatory picks. BUT, they also give this season a chance. Currently, as terribly as they are playing, they still have a decent shot at the post-season. Certainly, this could change, but as of now the likely package they would receive would not outweigh the potential of making the playoffs (and then receiving compensatory picks).

Most important to this argument is an assumption of what the Indians could get for Sabathia. If the market has changed to the point where they can receive a substantial haul for the big lefty (meaning significantly more than the Twins received for Santana), then it is probably worth raising the white flag on the season.