The Other Pending Free Agents
by Ryan on Jul 15, 2008 6:25 PM EDT
in Transactions
Email
PrintWe've given much attention, deservedly so, to the implications of trading CC Sabathia. And the final decision to trade Sabathia seemed clear-cut, as the talent, especially if you consider proximity to the majors, the Indians received back from Milwaukee far exceeds the talent the Indians would have gotten from 2009 compensatory draft picks.
But for the Indians' other pending free agents, the trade-offs are murkier.
Casey Blake. I'm assuming that the Indians don't know if they'll make an effort to bring Blake back - if they do, then ignore whatever follows. As much as we like to rag on Blake (though it's really more about how he's been used than his abilities), he's been a nice player for the Indians. You could even make the argument that he's the best signing Mark Shapiro's made in his tenure as General Manager; for roughly $10M, the Indians have gotten six seasons of mostly above-average offense along with positional flexibility. And to top it off, if a couple things fall correctly, the Indians could get two high draft picks to boot.
Based on last year's Elias Rankings, Casey's a good bet to be a Type A free agent; he was rated the top Type B player in his position grouping (2B, SS, 3B) last November. That means if the Indians offer Blake arbitration, he refuses, and then signs with another team, the Indians will be getting a first round pick (with restrictions) and a sandwich pick in next year's draft. What we don't know is whether the Indians want to keep Blake or not, though how Andy Marte does the rest of this year should have a lot to say about that.
But while these internal discussions take place, teams will be interested in trading for Blake, if not as a starting third baseman, then as a first baseman, outfielder, or a combination of the three. Enough value where "giving up" the draft picks may be palatable. The trade would free up third base for Andy Marte the rest of the season, something that should be very high on the Indians' list of goals for the rest of 2008. If the trade value doesn't reach that imaginary tipping point, then the Indians should keep Blake around, but move him to the outfield if need be so that the requisite infield auditions can take place.
Paul Byrd. Byrd looks like a borderline Type B free agent, which means that the Indians would receive a sandwich pick if certain things happen. The Indians probably aren't bringing him back at market rate, so if someone offers Cleveland a decent prospect and picks up his salary, he'll be dealt. Dealing him would make the rotation even shakier, but unfortunately short-term success isn't a priority now.
Jamey Carroll. The Indians have a $2.5M club option on him, which I wouldn't recommend picking up. But the option could be useful to entice someone to give up a low-level prospect for him. At some point the Indians are going to bring back Asdrubal Cabrera, and Josh Barfield should be off the DL sometime in August. Again, unless the Indians think that spending $2.5M on a backup second baseman is a good deal, they should actively try to trade him.
Scott Elarton, Sal Fasano. No trade value.
76 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Cabrera I think can stick in the majors next season, but as of right now and probably as of next year, Jamey Carrol will out OBP the hell out of Barfield. Its pretty much the only offensive category that Carrol can contribute at, but its pretty important on this team. Now of course if the choice was paying Carrol or offering a contract to a free agent reliever/closer i think I go with the closer. But I hope the financial situation of the Indians isn’t as bad that it comes down to 2.5 million being the deciding factor on FA signings.
i don’t think barfield will ever be a contributor
by Gradyforpresident on Jul 15, 2008 9:34 PM EDT up reply actions
I think we would be better served using the roster spot and the money on somebody else. I’d have , two catchers, four outfielders, dh, four infielders, with Barfield as the fifth infielder, flipping Cabrera to short when needed, and a eric hinske type player as my 13 position players. The difference between Carroll and Barfield, if any, isn’t worth the two million price difference or losing out on the potential that Barfield still has.
uh, carroll can play SS and 3B, neither of which barfield can do, and is a better hitter and defender than barfield, and barfield really doesn’t have much potential left
by Gradyforpresident on Jul 16, 2008 1:09 AM EDT up reply actions
Who cares if Jamey Carroll can play short when we have two shortstops already on the roster. Carroll has played a grand total of 0 games at short this year. As to Carroll playing third, I don’t see that as all that important as I imagine even if we keep Carroll over Barfield, we would have someone else beside our starting thirdbaseman who can play third.
As to Carroll being a better hitter next year, I’m not sure that’s really a slam dunk. Carroll’s OPS+ since 2006: 94 (519 PA), 56 (255 PA), and 84 (233 PA). Barfield: 96 (569 PA), 54 (434 PA), and Barfield’s AAA OPS .679. Barfield will be 26 next year and Carroll will be 35.
As to the defense, according to The Hardball Times, Carroll has the higher RZR, but Barfield makes more out of zone plays. Carroll is likely to increasingly lose athleticsm next year.
You need to look at longer track records. Carroll has been a very fine defender at both SS and 2B for many years.
Barfield also still has an option remaining.
Yes, but $2.5M fine?
Carroll’s not been a consistent offensive player – he’s alternated awful offensive seasons with decent ones. If Asdrubal Cabrera is your starting second baseman, you don’t need a backup shortstop, and the ability his ability to play third has been used more as a late-game strategy than as a viable backup. So he’s going to be used as a backup second baseman, and the Indians have a guy who can do that on their roster.
Assuming no injuries, an infield of Marte, Peralta, AsCab, whoever plays 1B and Barfield could work – put Barfield at 2B and rotate the rest of the infield counter-clockwise. That’s a plan with little margin for error, as you have a utility-less utility infielder.
The bigger issue is the assumption that Barfield has enough bat. He’s got one year of adequate performance, one crappy year and one in Buffalo. Of the years he had more than 200 PAs, he’s had three seasons similar to Good Barfield, one like Bad Barfield and two in between. Barfield’s AAA numbers don’t impress me at all – Carroll was every bit as good at Ottawa, and I don’t think those numbers matter either.
For 2009, I’d rather see Carroll in Cleveland and Barfield in Columbus (damn minor league relocation has assaulted my alliteration), but only marginally. Adeqaute big league performance by Barfield in 2008 may change that.
Yes, it is — and in fact you’d have trouble getting any useful player as a free agent for that money — on a one-year deal, which is what a team option becomes.
Blake get $6 million, Michaels gets $2 million … these are the going rates.
Well, we’re not comparing Carroll with Random Veteran Utility Infielder, we’re comparing him with a guy who (1) once upon a time was a starting second baseman for the Padres, and (2) will be probably be making less than $500K next season.
So, it’s a 2 million dollar insurance policy that we don’t have to carry 2006 or 2007 Barfield on the roster if we don’t want to.
I think Carroll’s contract is a win-win. If we can get something of value for him, great…he’s not an essential commodity. If we can’t, $2.5M is not so much of a cost as to make him a drag even if we have to jettison him May 1st.
Hm, it seems to be getting overlooked here that Carroll might simply be a better player than Barfield next year.
We don’t know that Barfield can hit any better than Carroll, or even as well.
Defensively, Carroll is a major upgrade — i.e., Barfield’s upside is about the same as what we’d get out of Carroll if he had a significant decline. I see the $2 million as a cheap price for a player who may well be 1-2 wins better, and who also provides depth.
Josh Rodriguez seems to be at least another year away, so is 2009 not a logical season to hang onto a middle infielder?
by Jay on Jul 16, 2008 11:11 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I don’t think $2.08M ($2.5M – $0.42M [league minimum]) is really a huge consideration for Shapiro. We might have $20M+ to play with in the off season. The depth and flexibility that Carrol affords us is easily worth the cost. We need a true ultility infielder and Barfield is not one.
We need a true ultility infielder and Barfield is not one.
Any flexibility is going to be provided by Cabrera, because he’s the better shortstop. Every one of Carroll’s starts this season have been at second base. That will continue if Cabrera is on the roster next season. Whatever you feel about Carroll’s offense, he’s not going to be utilized as a utility guy with the Indians.
In a Marte/Peralta/Cabrera/Barfield rotation, Peralta backs up Marte. It’s kind of like volleyball – Barfield goes into 2B and everyone shifts as far to the left as necessary. That’s assuming Peralta can play third, which we all seem to assume he can.
which we all seem to assume he can
that’s the part i can’t get past. in other words, till we see him over there this season or in goodyear, we can’t really have this conversation.
Moreover, you need a fifth guy anyway — you’re not going to go with just four guys for those three specific positions. Who’s going to give better value as that fifth guy than Carroll?
This is assuming Blake is gone.
i meant to post something earlier about blake in regards to this. his versatility swayed a lot the way people think about depth. he was a starter that provided depth eslewhere – allowing us to have barfield be our utility infielder the last quarter of the season last year, have marte eat up a roster spot this year and carry 5 out fielders all the freaking time. with him gone, you need a carroll even more.
That’s what the “up” button does. It jumps directly to the replied-to comment.
by Jay on Jul 16, 2008 10:26 AM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
Any chance the Indians try to sign Carroll to an extension….say 3 years, $5 million? That’s not too much in annual salary for the Indians, and he’s a good utility player who has shown he is capable of holding down a starting job when necessary. I think Carroll would jump at the chance to guarentee that much in salary given that it’s twice his option for next year.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 15, 2008 7:56 PM EDT up reply actions
he’s 35 next year. we don’t want 3 more years of him, trust me
by Gradyforpresident on Jul 15, 2008 8:16 PM EDT up reply actions
OK, I didn’t check his age before I made this comment. Maybe 2 years then?
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 15, 2008 8:56 PM EDT up reply actions
he’s insurance, and we need that. he stays.
by Gradyforpresident on Jul 15, 2008 9:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Ehh, I would definitely take my chances on a decent prospect in return for Jamey Carroll right now, if only not to have to watch him bat second anymore. We flipped Sean Smith for him; if we get back somebody better than Sean Smith, I call that progress.
by fleerdon on Jul 16, 2008 1:08 AM EDT up reply actions
There’s an internet rumor floating around that has as much chance of being true as the Tribe signing me to be hitting coach that calls for Blake and Laffey to go to Pittsburgh in exchange for McCutchen, Marte and a PTBNL. Don’t bother debunking the rumor; I know it’s not true. The question is would you make the trade? I’d say Hell No.
So what are the chances of another team signing Byrd (if he’s a class B) or Blake (if he’s a class A) knowing what they would have to give up (assuming the Indians do what they have to do – tender offers?)? Would a team (other than the Giants), really want to give up a 1st round pick to sign Casey Blake?
I’d have to think yes to Blake. 2 years of a decent third basemen is more valuable than the 27th pick in the draft, unequivocally, no? And Blake, for all his faults, doesn’t seem like a great bet to fall off the face of the earth.
Byrd is a different story because there’s a chance you give away something (a second rounder or whatever) for nothing (a self-immolating Byrd)..
Um, I think we would.
I don’t think he’d accept just to accept — and screw us — and it’s at most an $8 million risk.
More likely, before accepting, he’d just work out a cheap little one-year deal with the team.
He wouldn’t because of his relationship with Shapiro. He’s going to explore free agency a little bit first. If there’s mutual interest in a cheap one-year deal with Shapiro, then they’ll do that. If not, then he’ll agree informally not to accept arbitration, so that Shapiro can feel free to offer it and get the draft pick, strictly as a favor to Shapiro — an old friend who stuck by him and picked up that 2008 club option amid all the hGH hubbub.
Agreeing to decline arbitration is a nice favor that Byrd can do at absolutely no cost to himself. It requires only that Shapiro be willing to take him at his word, and I don’t think that is a problem in this particular case. It will be clear between the two men that the club can’t afford to offer him arbitration unless he makes clear his intent to turn it down.
i guess i’m conditioned to be skeptical regarding teams and players doing each other favors. :)
but i get it now. either there will be a pre-existing gentlemen’s agreement that arbitration will not be accepted, or it simply won’t be offered. that hadn’t occurred to me for some reason.
That’s not how this is going to play out.
It’s unlikely any team will give up a first-round pick to sign Blake. However …
1. If they have a bottom-15 regular season record for 2008, their first round pick is protected, so it’s a second-round pick.
2. If they have a top-15 record but are also signing another Type A, then they’ve already lost their first-round pick, so they’d only be giving up a second-round pick.
3. If they’ve signed two other Type A guys, then it’s the third round.
4. If both #1 and #2 are true, then it’s the third round.
5. If both #1 and #3 are true, then it’s the fourth round.
In other words … the only way a team would be giving up a first-round pick … and the only way the Indians would get one … is if the team has a top-15 record and also isn’t signing any other Type A free agents.
An accurate description of the the potential compensation for Blake is:
1. A sandwich round pick, approx. #40 overall.
2. Probably a 2nd round pick, approx. #60, but possibly 3rd round, with an outside chance of 1st or 4th round.
Just out of sheer boredom, I looked up the #40 and #60 picks since 2000:
40: Aaron Herr, Richard Lewis, Mark Schramek, John Sborz, Huston Street, Luke Hochevar, Kristofer Johnson, Kellen Kulbacki, Brett DeVall#60: Freddy Bynum, Garrett Berger, Jonathan Broxton, Anthony Whittington, Michael Ferris, Travis Wood, Brent Brewer, Joey Hamilton, Tyler Ladendorf
Your #40 pick Hall of Fame candidates are Kevin Tapani, Mike Matthews and Milton Bradley
To be fair, this really doesn’t mean anything.
That being said I’ll be happy with a Broxton.
Steel Nick
Of course it doesn’t mean anything. Wednesday of All-Star week is the worst day of the year to be a baseball fan, and the sheer boredom of it makes one do stupid and pointless things. Kinda like winter in Alaska.
I’m not so sure that’d be an issue. Most of that intradivision stuff is just pure ego. But even so, this is not Delmon Young for Matt Garza. Neither team is really taking a huge stance in the future of its franchise. Blake is a complementary piece who can platoon with Mike Lamb. Brian Buscher will not hit .313 in his next 83 ABs, as he has in his first 83. And Blake will not be exchanged for anything of significant or immediate value.
If anything, it would be the Indians rightfully restoring Blake to the Twins.
Other than the Twins, I think Blake makes all kinds of sense for the Angels. Maybe they have another Alexi Casilla or Bobby Jenks hiding over there, waiting to join the Indians.
Maybe we can use Blake to pry that stud Breslow away from the unsuspecting Twins.
by ganatz on Jul 17, 2008 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions
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
- Five tips for Showtime’s second season of ‘The Franchise,’ featuring the Miami Marlins
- The 10 best things about being a Detroit Tigers fan
- Surprise! A’s finally end the Yoenis Cespedes derby with $36 million deal for Cuban star
- The time Whitney Houston sang to Jim Bowden
- Pitchers and catchers! Mariners get early start in Arizona
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.
