Grady Sizemore Query
Hello again. Just your friendly neighborhood muppet dropping by for another chat. The folks over at AthleticsNation have been talking a lot about the A's offense (or lack thereof as the case most certainly be) and various names have been bandied back and forth as possible targets to acquire. One of the more prominent personalities on AN brought up your very own Ryan Garko and that got me thinking about your roster.
So, what would it take to pry Grady Sizemore out of Cleveland's line-up?
Yeah, I know. Spare me the cries that the Indians would never trade Grady. You're telling me the Tribe faithful would be happy if the Front Office turned down a Sizemore trade that could make the franchise better? No one is untouchable... anyone can get traded. Hell, even guys who have full no-trade protection can get traded!
A-Rod got traded.
Therefore Sizemore could get traded, if a team was willing to pay the price. My question to this board is, what is that price?
I only have one stipulation: You cannot ask for someone not readily available. The players have to be in the A's organization today AND they must be eligible to be traded. So don't go asking for Inoa because MLB rules state a player must be with his signing organization for 1 year before he can be traded.
So, gun to your head... you've got to trade Sizemore to Oakland. Who do you get in return?
0 recs |
181
comments
Comments
Flag?
Dear Mr. Sabean, I hear you have a reputation of being stupid. Want to deal Lincecum or Cain? You can pick THREE of these 4 players for either: Borowski, Dellucci, Blake, Byrd.
by westbrook on Jul 25, 2008 7:22 PM EDT 0 recs
You’re telling me the Tribe faithful would be happy if the Front Office turned down a Sizemore trade that could make the franchise better?
That trade doesn’t exist.
by Ryan on Jul 25, 2008 7:27 PM EDT 0 recs
The Indians are 44-56
$44 million tied up in Hafner, which you’ve got to be wondering about.
Blake is on his way out.
Your big league rotation has issues, although if Westbrook and Carmona come back healthy next year they would mitigate some of the problem. But Byrd is a FA-to-be, Laffey (whom I like) needs to grow, Sowers looks like a flop and your top SP prospect is hurt again.
You’ve got some talent in the upper minors (Huff, LaPorta, Hodges) but you’d need them all to be big league ready next year to fill all the holes you have. As Asdrubal Cabrera showed, sometimes young guys can really struggle.
Basically, I see room for improvement.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 25, 2008 9:42 PM EDT
up
0 recs
of course there’s room for improvement. it just happens that trading grady sizemore is a really dumb idea.
by Gradyforpresident on
Jul 25, 2008 9:46 PM EDT
up
0 recs
A really dumb idea...
Like the A’s trading Hudson and Mulder in 2004? Or trading Haren and Swisher prior to this season?
If I was Cleveland’s GM, trading Sizemore would not be the first thing I’d think of to improve the ballclub. But if I had a team call up and offer carte blanche for the chance to acquire him I’d at least go through the motions of looking at their organization to see if maybe there’s a fit.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 25, 2008 9:54 PM EDT
up
0 recs
carte blanche, like, 2 everyday major league players under service for more than 4 years and 2-3 B+/A prospects?
by Gradyforpresident on
Jul 25, 2008 10:57 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Let me put it this way…
The only guys you can’t ask for are the guys who MLB says can’t be traded now. So no 2008 draftees and no Inoa.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 25, 2008 11:06 PM EDT
up
0 recs
can someone give me a read on what hudson and mulder’s contract situations were when they were traded?
by Gradyforpresident on
Jul 25, 2008 11:11 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Hudson was 1 year away (and Beane refused to let anyone talk extension, something I’ve always thought was a mistake but oh well) while Mulder was 2 years away.
For further referrence, Haren was 3 years away from FA and Swisher was 5 years away.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 25, 2008 11:16 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Swisher’s best season to date is 93 RC. Sizemore’s three full seasons: 107, 124, 124. And that’s not counting defense. And age.
by Ryan on
Jul 26, 2008 12:31 AM EDT
up
0 recs
I wasn’t comparing performance. The question was about contract status.
I was just trying to answer the question.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 26, 2008 1:06 AM EDT
up
0 recs
All problems to varying degrees, but trading Sizemore would not improve the club, unless we’re talking a one-for-one for another superstar (David Wright, Chase Utley, etc). And even then, Sizemore has better value than just about any player in the majors.
Sizemore is 25, he’s been consistent, injury-free, and a quasi-MVP candidate for several years already. This year he’s a clear contender for the MVP. He’s signed to a ridiculously team-friendly contract (he won’t make over $8M until 2012!), and he still has some upside.
I hate to be a killjoy, but this is really a pointless exercise. It’s like asking the Lakers what it would take to trade for Kobe Bryant.
by Ryan on
Jul 26, 2008 12:23 AM EDT
up
0 recs
And the Lakers did investigate trading Kobe. They had the conversation… which is pretty much all I’m trying to do here.
If the A’s already had a superstar bat like Sizemore I wouldn’t be here asking the question.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 26, 2008 1:08 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Generally when a team trades a player in the last year or two of his contract, they’re banking on the prospects they receive back to pay back in future value what they’d have the present value. Hence six years of Matt LaPorta, one of baseball’s best prospects, was traded for a half-year of Sabathia, baseball’s best current pitcher. (there were other aspects to the trade, but let’s keep it simple). And let’s face it, the Indians didn’t have a choice; they almost had to trade him.
In trading Sizemore at this juncture, there is essentially no player or group of players that can, even in the long run, match the value the Indians will be getting from him over the next 4.5 years (all, keep in mind for below-market dollars). I doubt six years of any prospect currently in the minors is going to top that.
by Ryan on
Jul 26, 2008 1:37 AM EDT
up
0 recs
The Lakers had conversations about trading Kobe because he demanded a trade. I don’t recall Grady doing that recently. Again, not a good comparison.
You’re really grasping for straws here, grover.
by Buckeye Brad on
Jul 26, 2008 11:36 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Kobe wasn’t my comparison, Brad. Thanks for paying attention.
Snark coming from the guy who goofed on Cabrera’s FA status, thought the Tigers HAD to take Willis and imagines that Shapiro places his public image over building his team.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 26, 2008 11:58 AM EDT
up
0 recs
I know Kobe wasn’t your comparison, but you continued with it. I just pointed out that it wasn’t valid.
You’re right, I was wrong about Cabrera’s FA status. I admitted that, and thanked you for correcting me. And I NEVER said that Shapiro places his public image over building his team, or even implied that! Shapiro has made many trades that have caused most Cleveland fans to call for his firing—the Colon and Sabathia trades to name a couple. And he just traded Blake, which I’m sure is going to piss of a lot of fans. I just said trading Grady would cause a riot, even bigger than those examples I just stated. I’m sure that doesn’t bother him, and it shouldn’t.
by Buckeye Brad on
Jul 26, 2008 4:10 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Actually, the Kobe comp was valid in that the Lakers did have actual conversations about trading him and I am trying to engage in a conversation about Sizemore.
And now that it’s clear that Shapiro doesn’t care about how a trade would rile up the Cleveland faithful, hopefully I won’t have to read any more comments about how a Sizemore deal could never happen because it would piss off the fan base.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 26, 2008 7:31 PM EDT
up
0 recs
You have not been paying attention to Oakland in the last 12 months
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 25, 2008 9:12 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Sizemore could only be traded for one of the top major leaguers who also has a friendly contract.
I don’t think Oakland has anybody that falls in that category.
by palcal on
Jul 25, 2008 10:20 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Is that a special clause in his contract?
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 25, 2008 10:23 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Grady’s contract >>>>> A-Rod’s contract
Grady will not be traded.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 25, 2008 7:59 PM EDT 0 recs
Sizemore is perhap the most valuable player, - in terms of contract status, age and talent - in the entire major leagues. As the above posters have hinted, there is literally nothing that could be more valuable to the Indians than Grady over the next 3-4 years. Nothing. No. Thing.
Burn on, big river, burn on...
by Turkmenbashi on Jul 25, 2008 8:01 PM EDT 0 recs
Really?
Miguel Cabrera, who sported an OPS+ at least 25 points higher then Sizemore in 2006 and 2007, got traded along with Dontrelle Willis for 6 players. You’re telling me that there isn’t a team in baseball that has 6 players worthy of trading for Sizemore?
I’m calling BS on that.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 25, 2008 9:48 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Dude, it’s all about contracts. As Turk stated above, with Grady’s age, skill level, and reasonable contract for the next 4 (?) years, there possibly isn’t a greater asset in baseball. Maybe Evan Longoria, who’s younger and just signed a ridiculous deal with Tampa Bay. But he hasn’t proven himself in the majors for the past few years like Grady has. You could also argue for David Wright, Hanley Ramirez, maybe Chase Utley. Grady is one of the untouchables in baseball.
Cabrera has virtually no defensive value, while Grady is a gold-glove winning centerfielder, so that is not a good comparison. Plus he was about to become a free agent (I think) and they had to take Willis, who sucks.
by Buckeye Brad on
Jul 25, 2008 10:06 PM EDT
up
0 recs
First off, Cabrera was a better hitter and was 2 years away from FA. Second, the Tigers wanted Willis.
There is no such thing as an untouchable player. Anyone can be had for a price. The price for Sizemore would be extremely steep for all the reasons listed.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 25, 2008 10:27 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Yeah, I know Cabrera was the better hitter. I didn’t argue that. But Grady was the better fielder, and at a premium defensive position. Getting one of those who also hits like he does is very, very rare.
OK, so Cabrera was 2 years away from free agency. Grady is 4 years away NOT including this year (including the team option). Huge difference. And if the Tigers wanted Willis then they are dumb.
Maybe there is a price for Sizemore. But it would be so steep that no team would want to give it up, and Shapiro would never consider trading him because of all the backlash it would incite in Cleveland. You think the fans were mad about trading CC—that would be NOTHING!!
by Buckeye Brad on
Jul 25, 2008 10:59 PM EDT
up
0 recs
There is a price for Sizemore, I’d like to know what it is.
As for the Tigers wanting Willis… hey, to each their own.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 25, 2008 11:07 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Dude, this is so ridiculous. How could any of us even begin to come up with a “price” for Sizemore, knowing that there is literally a 0.00% chance he’ll be traded in the next 3 years?
But if you just want some names, sure. How about Pujols + Longoria + oh hell I dunno, Ted Williams and Rickey Henderson.
by mrich on
Jul 26, 2008 12:46 AM EDT
up
0 recs
A year ago I would have told you there was a 0% chance that the A’s would trade Haren in the offseason.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 26, 2008 1:05 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Sizemore > Haren
Dear Mr. Sabean, I hear you have a reputation of being stupid. Want to deal Lincecum or Cain? You can pick THREE of these 4 players for either: Borowski, Dellucci, Blake, Byrd.
by westbrook on
Jul 26, 2008 1:22 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Wasn’t suggesting otherwise.
But when was the last time a mid-level team traded an established SP who was 3 years from FA? And no, the Garza/Young deal doesn’t quite count.
Haren>Garza.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 26, 2008 7:33 PM EDT
up
0 recs
So yeah...
I was expecting some discontent when I posted this diary but I’m a little disappointed in the lack of imagination being shown thus far.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Jul 25, 2008 10:05 PM EDT 0 recs
If you thought Shapiro would seriously consider trading Grady then you don’t understand how to value baseball players.
Also, if you haven’t noticed, we don’t use the subject lines around here. They’re pointless and it make for a much easier read without them.
by Buckeye Brad on
Jul 25, 2008 10:09 PM EDT
up
1 recs
And if you’re telling me there isn’t a single team in baseball that has 6 players that could be traded for Grady Sizemore then you have even less understanding of how to value baseball players.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 25, 2008 10:22 PM EDT
up
0 recs
No, there really isn’t. There are not six tradeable players worth Grady Sizemore now. It’s that simple. Even if such a thing existed, Oakland wouldn’t even be close.
Proud supporter of the Cleveland.
by fwembt on
Jul 25, 2008 11:45 PM EDT
up
0 recs
So you’re saying if Tampa, for example, called up and left a message saying “Price, Davis and Hellickson for Sizemore… gimme a call.” Shapiro wouldn’t even return the call?
Somehow I don’t think so.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 26, 2008 1:02 AM EDT
up
0 recs
He may return the call but that is just because he is polite.
Proud supporter of the Cleveland.
by fwembt on
Jul 26, 2008 10:34 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Then his momma raised him right.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 26, 2008 10:47 AM EDT
up
0 recs
You’re asking us to do the legwork on something that would 1) never happen 2) would not improve the team in 09.
Hit us back up in 2012 when Grady will probably be trade bait.
by Toxicadam on
Jul 25, 2008 10:21 PM EDT
up
1 recs
I’m asking you to think about what you’d want in return if you heard that Sizemore was getting traded. If you’ve got questions about the A’s system then go ahead and ask, but I’m not going to try to divine what it is you want.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 25, 2008 10:28 PM EDT
up
0 recs
As much as everyone hates him here .. it would have to be a guy like Joba Chamberlain. Extremely young, cheap and under (contractual) control for 3-4 years. Lincecuem would be another fine choice. Elite starting pitching would be the only thing I would give up for Grady.
I don’t see anyone in the A’s system that would project or even come close to that. Sorry.
by Toxicadam on
Jul 25, 2008 10:56 PM EDT
up
0 recs
So Brett Anderson and Trevor Cahill don’t even come close to that?
That doesn’t jive with what most folks say about ‘em.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 25, 2008 11:10 PM EDT
up
0 recs
“Most folks” said Andy Marte was going to be a superstar. Prospects are only prospects. Real PROVEN MLB talent still means something.
So, until one of those guys comes in and dominates the league .. they are just names you pin your hopes on for a brighter future.
by Toxicadam on
Jul 25, 2008 11:18 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I completely agree. Which is why the Indians, if they dealt Sizemore for a prospect-heavy package, would insulate themselves from failure by asking for more then 1 guy.
This is like pulling teeth.
Where are the Indians weak? If they were going to make ANY trade, what area would they try to improve first?
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 25, 2008 11:22 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Okay, that’s a fair question. Our biggest needs in 2009 will be:
1. A middle-of-the-rotation starter. We’ve got Fausto and Lee at the top and should be able to put together a 4 and a 5 from from our system, but especially if/until Westbrook comes back from TJ, we’ll need a guy to fit between them. Two of them wouldn’t hurt.
2. A middle infielder. With Barfield looking more and more uncertain, and Cabrera looking away than we may have hoped, and with Peralta’s defense making him a sub-optimal long-term candidate at shortstop, we need a 2B/SS type who can handle a bat. We’re particularly thin here on the farm.
3. A corner outfielder, preferably a right fielder. This may just be me, but I’m not banking on solid contributions from LaPorta until 2010, which is also the optimistic ETA for our only real big-bat prospects, Mills and Weglarz. Dellucci isn’t the answer to anything. So in between now and the arrival of the next wave, somebody’s got to play the outfield corners. Gutierrez, Choo, and Francisco are much more attractive players if they only have to man one position between them.
4. Relievers with options left, as many as we can get. From our current bullpen, only Perez and Mujica look like decent bets to contribute much in 2009.
RE: Pulling teeth… I think several posters have already explained it. Grady is in the top ten in all sorts of offensive categories, plays fine defense at a premium position, and is cost controlled for, what, 4 more years? And flipping him for anything short of another superstar would be public relations suicide. Shapiro himself has said that he doesn’t think equal value exists for Sizemore in the trade market. I don’t know how to parse that anymore. Try Granderson.
by fleerdon on
Jul 26, 2008 10:10 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Screw public relations.
But thanks for the reply.
Here’s what I don’t get… you’ve got a few holes. I knew you guys weren’t too keen on Peralta at SS, you’re pencilling Marte (I guess) to play 3B, 1B isn’t exactly an offensive Mecca (or is Vic Martinez headed there full time after having his arm repaired?) and if Martinez does shift to 1B then who’s catching?
So if you were going to trade Sizemore, why would you be so insistent on getting 1 superstar in return… how does that help fill the holes on your roster? Let’s face it, swapping Sizemore for Wright (as an example) would be 95% of the deal. There might be a AA reliever or a Low-A SS going one way or the other but nothing of immediate significance.
What’s the problem with trading your superstar for 3 or mor good players? Does Shapiro really think he’d get lynched for that?
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 26, 2008 10:20 AM EDT
up
0 recs
I expect a three-way platoon: Shoppach to start at C and Martinez at 1B most games, with Victor catching and a left-handed 1B (we’ve got a couple) playing a game or two a week against tougher righties. We love Peralta at SS, we just don’t think he can do it forever. I won’t get into Marte, but I think he’s a safe bet to turn in a passable 2009 at 3B.
You’re over-stating my post when you call them “holes.” They’re areas I’d like to improve. The only hole I see - defined, at least to me, as having to use a replacement-value guy - is second base, and possibly our 5th starter slot, depending on how our refurbishments in Buffalo come along.
In any event, I think your attachment to the idea that Grady could be moved for “three or more good players” (as opposed to superstars) is misplaced. It’s about the contract, not just the talent. In 2010 or 2011, when Grady will only have a few years left, then we’ll think about using him to plug multiple gaps (including the one that will be created by his departure—yikes). But for four years of him, playing for less than his market value … words are failing me a bit here, grover. He really is THAT GOOD.
If what you really came for was an assessment of the A’s, there are definitely some people who could give you good answers about that. I admire Beane’s vision - there’s no use being mediocre, so let’s cash in our chips and see what we get. As for the guys he picked up, that 2B looks pretty good. What I think these last few years have taught me is that, at least as far as baseball goes, the a-hole Yankees fans have been right about this much. It takes stars. You can’t count on average-ish guys over-performing - you can’t bank on being the ‘06 Cardinals. They run out of talent eventually. Just like in golf, when you can’t assume you’re going to hit miraculous shots the whole round, you have to plan on guys performing at their career average, and the only way average is enough is if it’s higher than everybody else’s average.
Grady Sizemore is exactly that kind of player, that averages-above-average guy, and he is doing it for less than average money - much less - and he will continue to do it for four years. We don’t want to trade him because we don’t want to lose.
by fleerdon on
Jul 26, 2008 11:27 AM EDT
up
1 recs
Solid response except for one point.
Marte turning in a passable 3B next year is a fantasy.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 26, 2008 12:26 PM EDT
up
0 recs
No, just solid. Fleerdon is right that It’s the contract that makes Grady untouchable right now. In a couple of years, he’ll be in the position that Bartolo Colon was in when we dealt him for Grady, Cliff Lee, and Brandon Phillips. I think Colon had 2 years (or less) left on his contract then, not 4. Keeping Sizemore as part of the core gives us a shot at competing in 2010 and maybe 2011. Our FO would probably reassess at the end of the 2010 season. Now if you’ll excuse us, there’s a party going on on another thread.
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on
Jul 26, 2008 2:32 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Enjoy your party.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 26, 2008 7:34 PM EDT
up
0 recs
It’s not discontent or lack of imagination, it’s pragmatism. Turk and Buckeye explained why Sizemore is not going anywhere. Why can’t you accept that?
by LeftyCatcher on
Jul 25, 2008 10:25 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I understand how unlikely this scenario is, but to me this is an intellectual exercise that helps me understand a non-Oakland fan’s view of of the A’s assets.
‘Course it helps if the other guy actually puts out some effort.
What would the Indians want in return? Pitching, hitting, outfielders, infielders, catchers… what? Where do you feel are the gaping holes in the organization. Yes, we’d be creating a new hole in CF if you guys actually traded Sizemore but isn’t it possible that that hole and others could be filled by the return?
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 25, 2008 10:37 PM EDT
up
0 recs
so you come to our blog with an insanely unlikely scenario, that’s not even in the realm of discussion, and then chide us for not putting out some effort? give us a break.
actually. here. read this.
by Gradyforpresident on
Jul 25, 2008 11:00 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Great link. I was trying to find that but forgot where I read it. Do what he says—read that.
I could maybe see a trade for Grady if it involved David Wright or Evan Longoria. But neither of those are going to happen. Definately not anybody Oakland has. If they had someone who matches Grady’s value, the wouldn’t want to trade him. That’s what you’re not realizing grover.
by Buckeye Brad on
Jul 25, 2008 11:05 PM EDT
up
0 recs
nice follow up point. the cost to the A’s would be so high that Beane would never even imagine the thought.
by Gradyforpresident on
Jul 25, 2008 11:08 PM EDT
up
0 recs
See my comment below.
And do not presume to know what I would or would not agree to. I realized when I wrote this we’d be talking high stakes.
I’m perfectly fine with that.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 25, 2008 11:18 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Thanks for the link.
First off, I’m not Billy Beane. Which kinda sucks for me because his job is better then mine.
And I don’t think the A’s have 1 player, or even 2 players in their organization that would make such a deal tempting. 3 players though? Hmm…
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 25, 2008 11:14 PM EDT
up
0 recs
i’m gonna dial it back a bit and say, i didn’t mean to be rude. but really, the real value for grady is far north of what any GM would pay.
by Gradyforpresident on
Jul 25, 2008 11:20 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Again…
I don’t have the power to actually make this deal happen. That said, I have seen deals that made me do a spit take when I saw them.
Cincy traded Austin Kearns and Felipe Lopez for a couple middling bullpen arms. The Nationals just traded Jon Rauch for Emilio Bonifacio. The Yankees traded Soriano for A-Rod when they already had Jeter at SS!
What would the Indians want if they made ANY trade? What are their organizational weaknesses?
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on
Jul 25, 2008 11:27 PM EDT
up
0 recs


