Jayson Stark's Rumblings/Grumblings
by Maverick05 on Jun 26, 2008 3:31 PM EDT
Email
PrintIndians rumors of the week: Seems as if the only Indians anyone ever talks about hitting the market next month are Sabathia and Paul Byrd. But one NL executive says the Indians have also let teams know they would talk about several of their bullpen arms -- starting with Rafael Betancourt and Rafael Perez -- and enigmatic 25-year-old outfielder Franklin Gutierrez.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&page=rumblings
Anyone think there is some truth to this? if so, thoughts?
89 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Just below that he also says the Brewers are likely to be most aggressive in pursuit of Sabathia.
So if Sabathia winds up somewhere other than Milwaukee, said one baseball man who has spoken with GM Doug Melvin, “it won’t be because they’re afraid to give up their prospects.
I think Gamel is going to be a beast. 22 years old in AA and absolutely reigning down unbridled annihilation in the Southern League. .376/.443/.654 with 14 bombs in and 21 doubles in 264 at bats.
I don’t know much about the Escobar guy. Does he profile as a SS in the bigs?
by gte619n on Jun 26, 2008 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
I gotta say, the way you described him as “reigning down unbridled annihilation” has me wanting to sign up where I can to get this guy on this team right now.
by hans on Jun 26, 2008 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Gamel’s defense at third makes Ryan Braun look like Scott Rolen. LaPorta, by all accounts, is, umm…an “adventure” in the outfield.
Both can probably hit well enough to offset their defensive shortcomings, but it’s still something to consider.
As far as I know, Escobar profiles as a shortstop in the bigs. “I don’t think anybody looks at Alcides Escobar as a power-hitting shortstop by any means, but he will develop some strength,” Brewers scouting director Jack Zduriencik said. “He’s such a great defensive player ɠthat you just want him to become a complete offensive player.
“If any power develops, that will just be a plus to his game.”
http://www.al.com/stars/huntsvilletimes/index.ssf?/base/sports/120946052029760.xml&coll=1
If we decide to trade CC, Milwaukee makes perfect sense for both teams.
by Peter Bendix on Jun 26, 2008 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions
this seems to be an even-handed summary:
http://www.moundtalk.com/prospects/milwaukee-brewers-top-10-prospects-2008/
LaPorta & Gamel both sluggers with severe defensive shortcomings.
Escobar a glove wizard with questionable bat (AA stats: .326 avg., 6hr, 47rbi, .359obp, .794ops, 21sb, but a 18-52 BB-K rate.
Screw it . . . gimme LaPorta and Gallardo and sign the paper.
... unless there was just a silly offer for him. Perez for Billingsly, straight up. GET IT DONE SHAPIRO.
I agree. Why trade Perez? And, for that matter, why trade Betancourt. He’s less valuable now than at any time in the past few years. Unless they think he’s done and want to cut their losses, this makes no sense. If he reverts to form, he’s one of the very best late inning guys in the league.
I’ll be shocked if Betancourt is traded.
I’d be a bit surprised if Perez were traded, but it’s possible some team makes a stupid offer for him — young lefty with great stuff and a very good track record, even did well in the postseason until his arm fell off. He is quite valuable to us, though, and relievers who are better than a crapshoot do not grow on trees at all.
I saw this article before it was posted here any my reaction was “Perez – no way.”
Betancourt wouldn’t surprise me… and neither would Gutz. Although, if I was another GM, I’d go hard after Gutz and watch him turn into an excellent player.
Without having to constantly look over his shoulder, he’d be great., IMO.
The 2008 Cleveland Indians: Home of the Triple Steal, Unassisted Triple Play, and not a heck of a lot more.
Without having to constantly look over his shoulder, he’d be great., IMO.
Is this about Gutz? And our you serious? Are we really dismissing his struggles to the fact that he has a little competition for his job?
Yes it’s about him…
There’s a difference between competition and stupid lineup contruction. The fact that Looch plays at all is not helping us or Gutz.
The 2008 Cleveland Indians: Home of the Triple Steal, Unassisted Triple Play, and not a heck of a lot more.
This is silly. He was more or less handed his job on a silver platter last year, and he was given no real competition not just for a roster spot but for an everyday lineup spot this year — probably a mistake in retrospect.
If having to beat out Trot Nixon and Jason Michaels for a job is too much pressure, then he’s in the wrong business. Next you’ll tell me AbaCab collapsed because of Jamey Carroll.
Another thought… maybe he’s going to position Gutz kind of like he did Coco, a CF on any other team. I’d just hate to see Gutz blossom into a 30 HR guy in the NL playing CF for somebody else.
I think it’s becoming reasonable to doubt that FG will ever become a 30-home run guy in the big leagues.
I don’t know. I’d just remind you than in 271 ABs as a 24-year old last year at the ML level, Gutz hit 13 bombs. Take that to a full season (550 ABs), throw in some age/development, and I wouldn’t have at all been surprised to see 30 HRs. Of course this season is way off his projection.
He’s trending down in virtually every category. He’s 25 years old, has had 597 at bats and is slugging .405 with 17 career HRs. This year he has a 0.76 GB/FB ratio. He certainly isn’t developing this year.
His age has been trending down for years now. PECOTA has him at 27.6 next year.
by dgcambridge on Jun 26, 2008 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
It was always reasonable to doubt it. The allure of Gootz was that there was always a small possibility that he’d develop into a decent contact hitter — and if he did, 30 bombs was pretty likely — and a very high probability that he’d be at least an excellent defender in CF with fringe-starter offense. In other words, worst case scenario, he’s still worth having, and best case is enticing though remote.
No matter how far out of first we are, it’s cool. You know, it keeps us from getting shut out at our favorite hotels and restaurant-type places.
If we can get Gamel or LaPorta, whoa. It makes sense for Milwaukee, obviously. They’ve got hitting for days.
I can construct an argument for trading Perez and Betancourt. It can be inferred that Shapiro is as big a proponent for reliever volatility as anyone in baseball right now. He seems to think that if he can get 11 or 12 live arms he’s got as good a chance as having a good bullpen as anyone outside of those anchored on truly dominant relievers.
He does not think Betancourt or Perez are truly dominant relievers. He thinks they’re live arms that are great sometimes and not great other times. So, if someone values them as any more than just live arms, Shap sees market inefficiency. He’ll happily ship off Betancourt and Perez, find a couple of vets in the offseason, get some of the minor league arms pushed into the bullpen and try to win bullpen roulette again.
This assumes that Shap is staying the course with what we’ve perceived as his method of bullpen construction. At this point, I hope we’re working on a new method.
I’m in agreement that if you can get top talent in return for a bullpen arm you don’t think twice. I was astonished that Jim Bowden didn’t trade Rauch or Colome last year from a last place team. What is the point of holding onto a reliever performing at a top level on a garbage team? I am a huge fan of Perez and would want a haul before we moved him, but if the offer is there, you have to do it
Didn’t we just pick up a Rincon of some description? Let’s trade him for Brian Giles. I’d appreciate the symmetry.
by gte619n on Jun 26, 2008 4:53 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Since we traded Brian for Ricardo, and all we have now is a Juan, I fear that the only Giles we could get back is Marcus
"It's hard to win when you don't score." Cliff Lee, 9/28/05.
by Harry Doyle on Jun 26, 2008 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
The problem with bullpen roulette is, you never know when you will be pointing the barrel at your temple and Julio or Oldberto is sitting in the chamber.
I think the more important point is that he doesn’t want to spend big dollars on the bullpen (preferring to spend his limited resources on more predictable stuff). That’s why Howry was allowed to leave, why they didn’t go after guys like Linebrink, why we have closers like JoBo and Wickie. It’s also why we signed Masa—he wasn’t very expensive, relative to the market for experienced relief pitchers. Neither Raffie is very expensive or is likely to become expensive short term (although I’m not sure about Perez’ contract situation, to be honest). So, that would point to their keeping them, unless they think they’re going to get worse and stay that way.
the case for trading Betancourt is much stronger than the one for trading Perez, simply because of the difference in cost
No, that’s crazy. You can’t get a bag of balls for Betancourt right now, and we still have a good contract on him for 2009 and 2010. By “good contract” I mean that no matter what happens to him this season, you have to consider him to be worth at least an Oldberto deal for 2009, and we’ve got that — 3.35M, with a 2010 option for 5.4M. (And hey, by the way, anybody still arguing we should have guaranteed him a third year?)
Perez is cheaper but also far more valuable to us.
That me arguing for that 3rd guaranteed year before. I did that assuming it would cost around 3.5M. I still wouldn’t have a big problem with a guaranteed 2010 at 3.5M. But at 5.4M it is clearly a bad idea.
Not loving this argument.
You’re basically saying Perez = Oldberto. I don’t think that’s true.
And even if it were true, we’re going to have Perez for another four seasons for about half the cost of four seasons with four different Oldbertos.
Yeah I’m not loving it either.
But, in years like 2006 and 2008 trading somebody like Lewis when he looked good starts to seem like a pretty decent idea. Perez might be in a slightly different category based on his stuff.
I guess what I’m saying is that there seems to be some argument for valuing nearly all relievers at the same level. If somebody disagrees and wants to pay, I could see Shapiro doing it.
That said, it’s not the best idea I’ve ever had.
Joe Sheehan again makes the argument (free content) that the Indians should be buyers right now and not sellers. I still disagree strongly.
Well, that’s what makes 2008 even more maddening … our division is completely winnable. At least in 2006, you had this amazing run by the Tigers where they broke out and never looked back. This year, we are the NL Central.
BTW: Has anyone seen Peter Bendix and Joe Sheehan in the same room together? I’m beginning to get suspicious.
Sheehan also has an interesting comment about the Twins, now half a game out of first:
The strange thing about the Twins’ success comes on the other side of the ball, where a team that ranks ninth in OBP, eighth in slugging, 14th in homers, and 11th in walks is third in the AL in runs scored. The Twins’ performance with runners in scoring position has been outstanding: .314/.386/.465. That’s not necessarily a skill, but it has an enormous amount of value, and it is the single biggest reason the Twins are in contention.
Sheehan is wrong.
He’s overestimating the quality of our options to make improvements this year.
He’s underestimating the quality of our options to make improvements for 2009.
He’s overestimating our ability based on run differential.
He’s underestimating the impact of injuries to Westbrook, Carmona, Martinez and the Pronk, which will not all come bouncing back this season.
He’s overestimating the difference in our core players’ ability to contend in 2009 rather than 2008 — it is not the massive difference he pretends it is.
He’s underestimating the difference in the return we can get for C.C. by trading him June 30 rather than July 31 — possibly as many as six starts earlier for the team receiving him. (He can bookend the All-Star break.)
And as a final thought, if we’re going to win, some unexpected things need to happen — a conservative approach is unlikely to bridge the gap in future run performance and prior W-L results that’s needed to win the division, and you can’t have risks pay off for you if you won’t take risks. So I say, trade Sabathia anyway — and maybe the kids rise up and make the rotation great anyway. What the hell, both Sowers and Laffey have gone on ten-week tears before, and if you really think you have a chance, you can throw David Huff in there, too, see if he can “pull an Asdrubal.” And in the meantime, call up some young guys, maybe the same guys we’re getting for Sabathia.
My point being, we’re just about as likely to win by taking that kind of approach — not very — as we are by standing pat and futilely trying to make win-now upgrades. And the difference in long-term talent assets will be huge.
Sheehan is wrong. C.C. should be traded next week.
by Jay on Jun 27, 2008 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
oh i’m really excited for next week now
by Gradyforpresident on Jun 27, 2008 12:37 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Okay, let’s try out a few …
Here’s a couple of shots of one of my other alter-egos … one ... two ...
Here’s Luke Perry in a Wahoo cap ... kinda random …
Here’s one for AngG and all the other nerds out there.
And a couple of the Dude for good measure … bemused self-importance ... and one smoking a J.
Speaking of Luke Perry, a friend of mine went to high school with Luke Perry in Fredericktown and told me that, before he was famous, he was the Fredericktown Freddie, the high school mascot which dressed in a bird suit and did colorful antics at basketball and football games.
Free Andy Marte!
by woodsmeister on Jun 27, 2008 4:34 PM EDT up reply actions
1 & 2 way too spiritual.
Luke Perry could look more like he’s sniffin coke.
Judging from your selections, I would imagine something between this:
http://www.tvguide.com/images/pgimg/caroll-oconnor1.jpg
and this:
http://www.fluffytails.ca/ritter/graphic.jpg
(if someone could explain posting images to me, I would be most grateful)
He’s underestimating the difference in the return we can get for C.C. by trading him June 30 rather than July 31 — possibly as many as six starts earlier for the team receiving him. (He can bookend the All-Star break.)
This strangely never occurred to me before I read your post – how much does having CC in a Cleveland uniform for the ASG impact the timing of trading him? When exactly are the pitchers finally chosen?
by ganatz on Jun 27, 2008 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions
MIL has the offensive pieces, but I’m not sure I see Shapiro doing this without getting a pitcher in return. Eit I don’t know if names coming into play will be of the Michael Bowden (RHP- BOS) caliber, but if there was a package that consisted of something like Bowden and Jed Lowrie, I’d be all over it. Keith Law threw out Lars Anderson, and that’d be a great 20-year old power bat at High-A to add to the system.
MIL probably doesn’t have an arm to send back, ‘cause I’m not sure Manny Parra is the answer, and Gallardo is done for the year and probably would have been unavailable with Sheets due to leave in the off-season.
The Angels just don’t do it for me, ‘cause they’re not giving up Howie Kendrick. His inability to take a walk scares me, but the guy just hits.
From the Yanks I’d probably start with Austin Jackson, but just say no to Jose Tabata.
Should be interesting if the Indians do pull the trigger.
Certainly seems like if we’ve waited this long, than Shapiro is waiting to see how the next 6 games go. CIN CLE, CLE CWS… CHC CWS, CLE CWS.
One last gasp I guess. I’m totally in the sell camp, but it would make some sense to make the call then.
I can see that. But that sixth game is Sabathia’s next scheduled start (after tonight). If we haven’t made a big run, then I’d just as soon see him start that night for the Brewers. And yes, I am serious.
I’d love to see CC go to the Brewers. It’d give me an excuse to buy that old-school Brewers cap I’ve been wanting for a while.
Burn on, big river, burn on...
by Turkmenbashi on Jun 27, 2008 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions
When I was at a Brewers game in April, the old school Brewers caps outnumbered new caps by at least 2-1 among fans in the section I was sitting in.
Free Andy Marte!
by woodsmeister on Jun 27, 2008 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions
My wife and I caught their opener this year when the Brewers wore the throwback unis and were excited. We were disappointed later to find it was only one game. It’s amazing how much classier their old pinstripes look compared to the horrible new ones.
by ganatz on Jun 27, 2008 5:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Well that logo, along with the Expos old logo, is possibly the greatest sports logo ever conceived.
Burn on, big river, burn on...
by Turkmenbashi on Jun 27, 2008 8:34 PM EDT up reply actions
If I could buy an Eduardo Perez Mariners jersey, I just might.
by Jay on Jun 27, 2008 7:38 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Josh Hamilton on public relapse: ‘It was just wrong. That’s all it comes down to.’
- Photo: The Marlins’ ridiculous-looking home run sculpture is almost complete
- Yankees GM Brian Cashman lures alleged stalker into police dragnet
- Report: Josh Hamilton had a relapse with alcohol
- Happy Birthday Boy! Wes Ferrell, the best-hitting pitcher of all-time, would be 104
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
