C.C. Sabathia traded to Brewers
by Jay on Jul 6, 2008 7:36 PM EDT
in News
Email
PrintBoth ESPN and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel are now reporting that the Indians have reached an agreement to trade C.C. Sabathia to the Brewers. The Indians will receive OF/1B Matt LaPorta, the seventh overall pick in the draft just one year ago, along with two other players, both presumably lower-level prospects.
The Brewers, loaded with talent at the Double-A and Advanced-A levels and eager to make a big move for the 2008 postseason, always appeared to be the most logical and likely trade partner for the Indians, and they reportedly pushed the Indians to complete a deal tonight so that Sabathia can make a Tuesday night start in Milwaukee. Starting on Tuesday, rather than Thursday, means that the Brewers will get two starts out of Sabathia prior to the All-Star break, in addition to 15 starts in the second half.
LaPorta was a consensus Top 25 prospect in the offseason, rated as Milwaukee's best prospect by Baseball America and a five-star prospect by Baseball Prospectus. Three months into the 2008 season, he has done nothing to dispel those high ratings, putting up a .288/.408/.576 line and leading all of Double-A with 20 home runs. The other two players the Indians are getting are not yet known, but the package is believed not to include 3B Mat Gamel or SS Alicedes Escobar. Advanced-A 3B Taylor Green and Double-A CF Michael Brantley have been mentioned in some reports.
LaPorta immediately becomes the best prospect in the Indians organization, or at worst a very close second to Triple-A LHP David Huff, another first-rounder having an outstanding season.
Sabathia was drafted by the Indians out of high school in 1998, weeks before his 18th birthday, and he was summoned to the majors to start the 2000 season at age 19 with barely more than a year of professional experience under his already sizable belt. Sabathia spent 8.5 seasons with the Indians, and more than any other one player, he led last year's squad to the best record in baseball, winning the Cy Young for his efforts.
For Indians fans under 40, Sabathia is simply the best Indians pitcher of our lifetime.
560 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The big moment arrives…and I’m numb to the whole thing. Just like with Colon, and Justice and other players I really liked. Good move for the future, just hated that it had to happen.
heard this guy is in the deal Jonathan Lucroy
this was over at the brewers’ reporters blog and simply by a poster…who claimed that he, Laporta, and Green were in the deal.
I wonder if this season will end up as a blessing in disguise. The team was obviously flawed and probably would have had a hard time against a strong playoff field this season. No way we trade Sabathia without falling out of contention first. Maybe Hafner will even fix whatever’s ailing him with the time off and we’ll have him back next year as well.
I’ve always kinda liked the Brewers, but especially since they rented out their stadium/fans for us at the start of 2007. I hope they get some good dividends from C.C. for the next few months.
A total and absolute collapse is far more tolerable. Think how agonizing this would have been had there been hitting and starting pitching, and the bullpen sucked as bad as it has. Or if we had to agonize through Sowers and Byrd while trailing the White Sox by two games. Or if we continued to lose great starting pitching with 2-0 and 2-1 scores. This season is like losing an 11-0 game. Far easier to stomach than a 3-2 loss when the other team score twice in the eighth inning.
I had a similar thought. This roster never quite reached its potential and just kind of ran out of gas.
by fleerdon on Jul 6, 2008 8:06 PM EDT up reply actions
it’s … wow. i feel all grown up now.
by Gradyforpresident on Jul 6, 2008 7:51 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Here’s another possibility that we can’t rule out either: We sign Sabathia at the end of THIS year.
We all know that CC is a very emotional person. That being said, I think it’s perfectly possible that he gets “homesick” while he is with the Brewers, and comes back to the Indians for next year. Maybe he’ll take less money or years to work it out.
Of course, there are a million other possible outcomes from this and where he eventually does sign for next year and beyond. But wouldn’t it be awesome to have aquired 3 of the Brewers top prospects AND have CC back next year? Come on, I can dream can’t I…
Either way, I hope CC wins a ring with the Brewers this year, and that LaPorta is the next A-Rod.
I know this is well-intentioned and all but I have to take issue with this again:
C.C. is all over the record talking about the Vallejo, CA as his home, even going as far as to say things to the effect of, I love Cleveland, but Vallejo is my home.
If given his choice of being anywhere in the world, all other factors being similar, he’s not choosing Cleveland. That doens’t mean he won’t re-sign here (there are a dozen other reasons for that) but it means that if he does it won’t mean because he misses Cleveland.
I agree with you, but I think when most people talk about him missing Cleveland, it’s more to the effect of him missing the Indians as an organization.
I don’t think the Indians have a realistic chance at signing him in the off season, but I think any chance we have is because of the organization and the fact that CC does seem to like it and his teammates. Otherwise, it’d be more akin to the Santana sweepstakes last year, which Shapiro mentioned as being the only free agent/trade bait out there the Indians didn’t even make a phone call about. The Tribe will be involved in talks with CC, at the very least at the beginning of the process, simply because we’re Cleveland and nobody else is.
Il faut d'abord durer.
I can halfway get on board with that but I just think if you believe there’s an emotional component involved here with Cleveland you have to believe that it’s overwhelmed by the emotional component associated with NorCal.
That may be true. But I definitely feel like whatever CC feels for the Indians will be enough to get Shapiro a meeting with his people in November.
Il faut d'abord durer.
Word from Olney was that they made a big jump in their offer and told him, if you don’t want to make a deal now, that’s okay, we understand. We’re going to trade you, but we’ll talk again in the offseason.
Could the Indians actually pull off an anti-Thome, where they (1) refuse to give a player trade veto rights in a contract extension, (2) trade the player for good stuff before he can walk, and then (3) sign him in the offseason anyway?
It’s highly unlikely, but you have to commend Shapiro for just making it possible. He got #1 and #2 done, which is more than John Hart ever did.
by Jay on Jul 6, 2008 8:33 PM EDT up reply actions
Isn’t the ‘97 Lofton to Atlanta for Grissom et al. trade a precedent for this?
by ganatz on Jul 6, 2008 8:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Sure, it’s a precedent, but that’s not the point. Trading a player away surely doesn’t make a team more likely to sign that same guy in the offseason. We were never all that likely to get C.C. to agree to an extension, and it became extremely unlikely when he cut off contract talks in the offseason.
It remains extremely unlikely now — not because of this trade, but not in spite of this trade either.
by Jay on Jul 6, 2008 8:41 PM EDT up reply actions
I guess we just have to commend Shapiro for just making it possible – which is more than John Hart ever did…
by ganatz on Jul 6, 2008 9:00 PM EDT up reply actions
I sent out a mass text about 45 minutes ago to any friends that would care to hear the news.
My friend in Chicago’s response: F*CK!
My friend in St. Louis’ response: This is not good.
Tremble, NL Central.
Steel Nick
John Perrotto over at Baseball prospectus is saying that Green is indeed in the deal, but the third prospect hasn’t been announced.
I would guess that “hasn’t been announced” = Brantley, with more due diligence needed due to his recent minor injury.
by Jay on Jul 6, 2008 8:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Do you think LaPorta will be moved back to his original position, 1B? He was only moved because Prince Fielder is the Brewers long term 1B. The Indians don’t have that problem and LaPorta can probably start at 1B the rest of the year if the Indians were so inclined.
Good luck, CC. Get good wood on the ball, and don’t get hurt running the bases, ‘cause I want to watch your 200th victory. And maybe #300.
by InfiniteMonkeyTypists on Jul 6, 2008 8:37 PM EDT reply actions
While all this outpouring of emotion is quaint, realize that there is no longer room for it from the participants’ side. Even CC’s agent stands to clear over $10mil from this upcoming FA transaction. GMs cannot afford to allow emotion enter into these discussions if they care to keep their jobs. From the moment a phenom turns into a productive star, the days are numbered until a big market team scoops him up. It doesn’t have to be this way. But it is this way. CC gets his guaranteed $130mil and we get to pray for the next phenom.
Aw, crap. Rotoworld is reporting that A-Rod’s wife is going to file for divorce on Monday.
The Sabathia trade will be something like the 4th most talked about event tomorrow on ESPN.
Steel Nick
I listened to the “baseball show” on ESPN radio for 3 hours and they mentioned the Sabathia trade one time. Of course, once the official news broke they called in Olney to talk about it. But still …
There will be more talk about it once the other players are reported, and once it becomes official.
And who cares?
by Jay on Jul 6, 2008 9:52 PM EDT up reply actions
as a life long brewers fan and indians fan as well I appreciate all of the following and cheering you seem to be doing for the brewers now! you guys got a great player and future all star in laporta! hopefully cc gets us over the hump, into the playoffs, and maybe to the series! he will be loved in milwaukee just as much as he was in cleveland!
I appreciate the sentiment, but unless CC wins game 7 over the Red Sox for you guys, I have a hard time believing Milwaukee will like CC as much as we have for the past 8 years. I definitely will be rooting for that to happen, though.
Il faut d'abord durer.
haha well maybe not the love fest you have had since you’ve lived and died with the guy for so long…but if he gets the brewers deep into the playoffs and into the WS…you don’t understand how passionate the brewers fans are and how they attach themselves to players…
hell look at how high we got ryan braun in the all star voting…not to mention corey hart will probably get in the last vote too
by Baseball Card on Jul 6, 2008 9:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Someone will loose their job for this trade. The last time I heard a prospect was “guaranteed” was Marte. How is that turning out? I’d rather see Cleveland suck it up and sign CC than give him to Milwaukee for a player who is hitting well in AA ball. CC IS the greatest pitcher I’ve ever seen in an Indians uniform and now the team just gives him away. This is a very sad day indeed. Just when I thought this season couldn’t get any worse, my team goes ahead and trades my favorite player and its best pitcher for a guy in AA. Wow, I don’t think I could more disappointed with this team and its management. CC you were a great player and person to root for and I will always be a fan.
Thank god someone here sees the issue clearly.
by afh4 on Jul 6, 2008 9:07 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
What hard hitting analysis would you like? I do not think this is the end of the world, but you are kidding yourself if you think some kid in AA who can make up for the talent lost in CC.
But that’s a false choice, Conso. It’s not about trading CC for LaPorta (and others), it’s about the ability to re-sign Sabathia. If we can sign him, we get one outstanding prospect plus two (or three?) other prospects in exchange for not having CC around for 3 months of a lost season—something for nothing, in essence. If we were not going to be able to resign him, which I think is far more likely, then we got a top prospect plus two (or three?) other prospects in exchange for two draft choices. In either case, it’s a no-brainer, and the only question would be did we get the most we could?
Your analysis only makes sense if you assume that we would have re-signed CC had we not traded him, and that having traded him he is un-signable.
"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself."
by Fiddlesticks on Jul 6, 2008 10:14 PM EDT up reply actions
don’t let the AA thing fool ya…Laporta would be on almost any other AAA roster right now but the brewers have a system of keeping players together as they bring them up…and they had 10 all stars on the AA team…so I’m pretty sure a few of them could be up at AAA…I think you will be happy with this deal when you see how much CC signs for in the offseason and the success Laporta will bring…Here’s to hoping it works out for the Indians as well as the Brewers…my two favorite teams!
by Baseball Card on Jul 6, 2008 9:10 PM EDT up reply actions
I completely disagree. CC is the ace of the team and he is better than Colon was in this situation. Name me a pitcher on the Tribe that is/was better than CC over the past 15 years. Name me a player that has more experience on this team than CC. Shapiro, Wedge, and the management do not have the best track record in analyzing players over the past 3 years and I’m not sold on the great Brewers farm system either. Are any of these prospects established? No. Because they are prospects. If the Brewers have all these can’t loose prospects, then why haven’t they at least made the playoffs in the past 2-3 years? I’m sure this kid is a great minor league talent; however, I know for a fact that CC is a great major league, left-handed fast ball pitcher who will be worth the money is is going to be paid. Also, I don’t have to dig a little deeper on this one. Colon, Ramirez, Thome all left when Cleveland was headed into “rebuilding” mode. I understood that. However, the time is now to try and win a championship and keeping CC can only be a part of that equation. I will not be an apologist and the only way this situation can be reconciled is if the team goes out and signs CC in the off season.
I can’t begin to analyze this post..
Name me a player that has more experience on this team than CC.
Does not reflect on LaPorta.
Are any of these prospects established? No. Because they are prospects.
Did you just shoot your own observation down?
If the Brewers have all these can’t loose prospects, then why haven’t they at least made the playoffs in the past 2-3 years?
Because prospects are players that haven’t been in the majors in the last 2-3 years. E5, is that you? Have I been baited?
Steel Nick
Exactly, prospects = unproven talent. Marte was a can’t miss prospect and this kid could turn out the same way. You made my point for me. This is about what the team is losing as much as who this LaPorta kid could be in the future. Feel free to give your end of why this is a great trade for the tema though, I’m not going to stand in your way
So because Andy Marte has not yet panned out, we should never add a young player to the team? We should even ask MLB to let us pass on the draft picks when he leaves, right? Or just sign him through magic and hope?
This team sucks this year. What’s your suggestion for improving the overall quality of this team for years to come without adding young talent?
Steel Nick
I don’t have one because I believed in how the management evaluated talent. Now, I’m not sure they are still on their game that brought them Grady, Carmona, Lee, Cabrera, Francisco, etc. There are 1 of 2 ways to go I guess. Either this is one really bad anomaly of a year and all the current players will work out next year plus a kid like this prospect or all these good players/prospects Cleveland had are in fact pretenders and some serious rebuilding needs to happen. I’m choosing the former rather than the latter, but I don’t believe allowing CC to go gives the team the pitching staff needed to win in the American League.
Ah yes, I’m a retarded ape who may have just tried to type a little too fast and misspelled a word. Why don’t you check the syntax of that sentence and see if I’m smart enough to play in your genius world.
On that note, having “loost” interest in this argument, I’m off to bed.
"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself."
by Fiddlesticks on Jul 6, 2008 11:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Conso, my friend.
Let me first say that I commend you on learning the “reply” button so quickly. I’m serious, way to go. I didn’t get it right away myself.
Anyway, here’s the thing.
You’re looking at this like we’re trading baseball cards. Here’s C.C. — awesome, best Tribe pitcher of the past 35 years, Cy Young, etc. And here’s LaPorta — he doesn’t even have a card, and if he did, it would be empty. Hasn’t done a damned thing. How can the two even be compared? It’s ridiculous.
But we’re not trading baseball cards, and we’re not even trading players — like Pat Gillick used to say, “Teams don’t trade players, they trade contracts.”
Unlike a C.C. baseball card, C.C. was not ours to have forever and ever. He was under contract to us for eleven short weeks, and that’s it. LaPorta, on the other hand, is under contract for roughly eleven weeks plus seven years.
So we did not trade C.C. the Cy Young for LaPorta the Never Done Nothing. We traded our 11-week contract with C.C. for an eight-year contract with LaPorta … plus two other guys and their eight-year contracts.
You must look at it that way — you must! — because that’s the truth of the situation. Looking at it like baseball cards will not only aggravate you without end, and it isn’t even truthful.
And that’s why the other folks here aren’t furious, but rather just resigned — and relieved that we did a lot better with C.C. than with Belle, Ramirez and Thome.
Wow, thanks for belittling me like that. You must feel very proud of yourself up there on that high throne of yours. Did I say that Cleveland should let him go? I think that they should pay him the money and keep him on this team. That is my take on the situation and I’ve felt that way all year. However, feel free to tell me how these players aren’t baseball cards b/c I’m having a hard time understanding that concept (and analogy)
That was belittling? Sorry man, that was downright coddling. How much do you think they should offered CC?
Feel free to “destroy” me because I forgot that having an opinion on a team that one has lived with for 30 years is a bad thing.
It’s not. It’s just that you are a bit misinformed and probably came to the wrong place to vent.
Proud supporter of the Cleveland.
I agree with dc. Dude, that wasn’t belittling. Jay is being nice. He could’ve destroyed you if he really wanted to.
Dude, no one’s arguing CC isn’t awesome. He is. The issue is whether 3 months of CC is worth more than 5-10 years of controlling LaPorta and the other two. Shapiro chose the latter, and the general mood here seems to be pretty excited about it. Yes, it sucks we had to lose CC. But we’re the rule here, not the exception. Very few teams can afford to pay their superstars whatever they want once they hit the market.
“If the Brewers have all these can’t loose prospects, then why haven’t they at least made the playoffs in the past 2-3 years?”
Are you serious about this? At best, this is a reflection on the prospects they had in their system 5-6 years ago, who made up the teams you’re talking about. LaPorta isn’t responsible for the failures of a major league club he’s never even played for. Don’t confuse not having any major league accomplishments to date with being worthless.
Your defending this kid like he is the second coming. He’s not responsible, however I think evaluating talent in baseball is a very tricky business and I’ll take proven talent over a prospect any day. Please explain to me why that is such a bad train of thought.
I’m not arguing with you whether attaining prospects is a necessary thing in baseball. It is. I get that. That is not my point. And only time will tell if this kid was worth the trade. However, if he is a bust then this day will be even more disappointing. If it turns out well, then I’ll be the first to eat my crow and be the happiest man alive if he can help bring a title to my beloved Indians.
Then I guess I don’t get the complaint. You recognize that we don’t need CC, you recognize that we need prospects and you recognize this does nothing to damage the (miniscule) chance we have to resign him after the year. So what is the hangup?
Proud supporter of the Cleveland.
No, I believe we need him and no prospect will/can replace his talent on this team. And I believe that he would sign with Cleveland if given the contract he deserves.
I read somewhere that no team has ever made the World Series with one player taking up more than 20% of its payroll (or something like that). Is that what you want to do with CC…..pay him $20 Million a year on a payroll of $80 Million?
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 6, 2008 10:32 PM EDT up reply actions
If I had the money, yes I would. And some other team would as well and if they could pay the money they would be a fool not to pay it.
because I would sign CC. Not Hampton or Zito. I didn’t think they were worth it, however I think CC is worth the money. Just like Santana or Manny or Clemens or Pujols (will be). Certain players are the exception to the rule for me.
Thats fine
Where does Cleveland get the money to sign him?
by world dictator on Jul 6, 2008 10:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Without spending a ridiculous amount of time searching for specific numbers, I’d say they get the money from ad revenue, tix sales, merchandise, cable contract that they just inked, and the fact that they are millionaires and can afford to spend the dough.
Total lack of understanding of the game’s economics.
There are a half-dozen teams that make $100 million plus in additional revenue, above and beyond what the Indians make.
Other people actually have looked up the specific numbers. None of them generally think the Indians can, or should, pay market value for Sabathia, or anyone.
I am not arguing that Cleveland has the same revenue stream as LA, NY, Boston, but I still think they have the ability to pay for CC.
Wasn’t the new cable deal supposed to help with these sort of transactions? They were willing to give him $18 million a year in earlier trade talks. That would lead me to believe they can afford to spend big money on him.
Also, please send me to those people who don’t think Cleveland can afford to sign him. I’d be interested in hearing what they have to say and it’ll help me to see where you are coming from. I’ve read that they don’t want to spend the money and that they want to cap their roster at a certain amount and not that they cannot afford to spend more.
So you’re the expert on this then? Is that a fair assumption? I’d like to see your articles outside of this blog that you maintain (which you do a very good job of by the way) Don’t think that I don’t appreciate the opportunity to debate sports with people, but I’m not just going to agree with you because you say you are the expert.
1. He never said he was “the expert.”
2. Surely you can see that almost a dozen other people are also presenting you with opinions supported by facts.
Of course there are 10 people ganging up on me. People join groups to like to be a part of groups with people of the same opinion as them. I expect 100 people to have the same opinion as Jay, however, I imagine there is a slight possibility that a few people have the same opinion as myself. What I do realize from watching this website for the past year or so is that people who argue against the “norm” aren’t well received or treated very well and that has been very apparent today. I’ll check out the esquire article. Thank you for mentioning that to me. What specifically do you want me to refute? At this point I’ve tried to maintain about 10 different conversations and I’ve lost track of the forest and only see the trees at this point since I’ve gotten caught up in the attacks instead of just focusing on the actual arguments. Unlike every person I’ve had the fortune to argue with or be attacked by, admitted when someone made a decent to good point and I have given a reply some with my opinion and some with facts I could remember off the top of my head. However, every single one of you is also giving an opinion regardless of your attempt to back it up with statistics. The real thing that is going on here is that (A) I’m pissed that my favorite player is now going to be in Milwaukee and that the team is not currently going to be better without him. and (B) I imagine many of you feel the same way about CC, but just have a different opinion about his worth to this ball club.
I disagree. It happens when someone refuses to fall in line lock step with this vocal minority of veteran posters on this site. My opinion may not be popular with you, but it is still a valid opinion and you are not going to change my mind by telling me that you are all wise and I’m just off-base because I don’t agree with you. Are you happy CC is gone? Is there a stat out there that says the team will be better off without him? There isn’t. And there isn’t one that proves the opposite either. It’s all opinion.
I will say that there is a little problem with group think around here sometimes.
But, there are plenty of disagreements. The bottom line- posts that are strong on feelings and opinions without strong analytical and statistical backing is going to get ripped apart.
What analytical statistics would you like me to start citing. I’ve seen some people throw out stats here and there, but in the end it is all opinion and I do not have a problem throwing out stats about his career ERA, SO, WHIPP, ERA+ and what tables may say about his production over the next few years, but in this instance it is an opinion (to me) about a player’s worth to this team and some of that cannot be addressed in a statistic.
well, in this situation the relevant analysis or numbers would include
- what % of team salary one player can makeup for a competitive team
- how long of a contract is reasonable for a star pitcher
- what part of today’s events makes it less likely that the CC is a Indian in 09
These are some of the questions that have subjective answers, but can be backed up by facts and evidence and research. You haven’t given any.
For CC, whatever would get him to sign with the team. I’ve all ready said 5-6 year contract is reasonable for CC and CC only in my mind (I would say the same for Santana, Webb, and a few others). CC is less likely to be with Cleveland last year because they just traded him and that lowers the possibility that they want to or will make a move to sign him at whatever the market will demand in the off season.
Here is the fundamental problem:
My question- what % of team salary one player can make for a competitve team?
your answer- whatever would get him to sign.
My question- what part of today’s events (CC being traded) makes it less like that CC is an Indian in 09?
Your answer- because they just traded him and that lowers the possibility that they will sign him.
Do you not see why your “answers” are frustrating to read? They don’t answer anything. They just re-state the question in the form of an answer.
A better answer would be something like this:
No team has ever had one player make up 20% of their team’s salary and led the team to the championship. However, CC could because he is better than every other player in such a situation. If we had him DH in his off days, we would actually be getting two players.
The answer is that the club has all ready shown that they are not going to offer him a contact for 5-6 years because a team has never traded their #1 ace player who is the exact same caliber of talent as CC during the season and then signed them the next off season and not when the team doesn’t want to go above the 75-80 million in team salary.
Also, no team had ever come back from an 0-3 deficit to win the world series, however it eventually happened. CC is the exception to the rule and this team will be close to contending for the pennant next year if it can keep its starting rotation in tact. Why is that important to me, because pitching, especially great pitching, is increasingly hard to come by and a line up of Carmona (currently injured), Westbrook (TJ surgery) Lee Laffey, and others cannot possibly be as likely to do as well as the same sort of line up with CC in the mix. This year has been horrible, however the one bright spot, for the most part, has been the starting pitching, which includes CC (minus the first 4 starts). Take him out of that line up, and who knows how much worse this team can and will be in the future. Also, how about having a pitcher that eats up innings like CC has more value than the sort of AA or AAA player they can get in return considering the horrible mess of a bullpen Cleveland is currently dealing with. At his best, with a good to great bullpen, CC is a year in and year out possible 17-20+ game winner with the ability to take over a game on the mound if needed and most position player prospects cannot guarantee the same thing. Also, he is an elite top of the rotation pitcher that has had zero arm problems.
You’ve got it all wrong though. We’re all very sad to see CC go. I’m just as pissed as you are that he’s no longer an Indian. At the same time you have to be realistic about the situation. We certainly won’t be a better team without him…tomorrow. Who knows a couple years down the line though. Maybe LaPorta develops into a legitimate MLB slugger, maybe we end up with this Green kid and he and Cabrera end up manning a stellar middle infield for years to come.
The bottom line is CC had to go, and by trading him today the organization did the best they could to maximize his value. It was the best option.
See and that is where some things get lost in the translation. I do not actually think that people frequenting this site want to see him go. IF you did, then you aren’t a fan of this team. I understand that many people don’t think keeping him on the team is realistic, but I think it is necessary for this team to have a chance of winning a title next year. See, for me, I’d take a title in 2009 or 2010 with some over spending. But that is me, and maybe I will have a clearer head once this horrible season is behind me.
It is, in fact, possible to be a fan of the Indians and want to see Sabathia go if the alternative is paying him $20 million a year for six years.
If you take the money out of it, do you want to see him go because you dislike him as a player and think that he doesn’t add any value to this team? If answer is no, then so be it.
This is a moronic comment. If money wasn’t a part of it, Manny Ramirez would still be here.
Your comment is akin to saying, if I take all sense out of my statement, then so be it. There.
Actually, I can’t stand CC. He’s fat and doesn’t do enough calisthenics. And he blew the Indians’ chance at the Series lat year. Good riddance!
Okay, since you’re intent on just attacking me. Here is the thread to get to this. I comment that I don’t think people really want CC to go, but they believe it is inevitable and those who want him to go are really not true fans. Mr. Argumentative says he wants CC to go because of the cost. This is off the point of the previous comment so I try, but I then clarify that if money were not the issue, then people really wouldn’t want to see him go which goes back to the original comment by not by me that most people really don’t want him to go but it is unavoidable. So I’ll restate my belief for those of you who cannot resist to make an argument at every occasion. Feel free to think CC sucks and doesn’t deserve your team, but I think you’re pretty off in left field and the only thing you’re showing is how childish you really can be by calling him fat and not recognizing his true value to this team. And since we’re into calling names, quit being a douchebag and go bother someone else with your petulance and misguided resentment for what happened last year.
My contention from the start has been that if we want to sign him, we are in the same position to do so at the end of the season. You may be upset that we should be offering more money, but the decision to trade him is the correct one right now, because of the likelihood that he doesn’t take our offer.
Even if you think we should be offering more money (which you do and thats fine), there is still a very good chance he doesn’t sign with us and with this season down the tubes, we have to take the certainty of getting established prospects.
Again, you seem to think that trading him now is shoving him out the door, it’s not at all. He turned down multiple offers, and if we offered him the right amount this winter, he would sign with us, I promise you. If you want to debate offering him more, than I would suggest getting off the we shouldn’t have traded him at all opinion.
I understand your argument but in the past, the team has offered him what it believes is reasonable and not what the market will actually bring or what his actual market value is. I don’t think trading him is a good idea, they should have offered him more and kept him on this team and in this clubhouse. I know the team is horrible, but I do not think that prospects are going to help this team this year (and I know that is not the point), but it won’t help them in the next year or two and I see a very narrow window of opportunity of contending for a title with this team.
the offer from this past off season was very fair and was on par with some other extensions of top 10 pitchers in this league.
Yes, this year. Which is the last year we have him under contract. And I am sure this is not news to you, but we are not making the postseason this year
I agree this team is horseshit and I’ve never been as disappointed with a Cleveland team as I am with this one. But I don’t think trading/letting CC go is the answer. But, as I’ve said many many times, I have no doubt that it could turn out to be an okay deal in the long run. Though I don’t think that will actually happen.
Okay, give him 22 million per year for six years. Give him Santana money in a Cleveland market, rather than a New York market.
Enjoy the even-more crappy Indians teams for the last 3 seasons of that deal, when we can’t afford the pieces required to even contend within the division because we are paying a probably past-his-prime out of shape starting pitcher too much money for the return we’re getting.
I did a Google image search for "Andy Marte." It turned up zero results.
Yes, I’d like to hear an answer to this question. In case you’re not aware, Cleveland isn’t New York or LA.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 6, 2008 10:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Think of the trade in these terms, Conso: We can always pay CC at the end of the year, whatever we were going to pay him right now. In essence, we gave CC away for only 11 weeks in exchange for a number of decent prospects that may help us later. We didn’t give up our future, we only gave up 2008. And only because we have a number of our stars injured and need to pass too many teams to get to the playoffs. So, nothing prevents Shapiro from paying CC whatever he wants at the end of the season.
So then he does sign with Cleveland, and he gets to play for the next six years with Matt LaPorta, who may or may not be good but in either case would not be around without this trade. I don’t see your objection, I really don’t.
"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself."
by Fiddlesticks on Jul 6, 2008 10:31 PM EDT up reply actions
but the point is you have to judge a trade from what is known when it is made. we all know a whole bundle of information about the situation the indians, the brewers, sabathia, laporta and everyone else who may be involved is in, and that is ALL we have now.
dude – we were never gonna sign him, don’t you get that?
You have no idea the physical toll that three vasectomies have on a person
by jakesinger777 on Jul 6, 2008 10:27 PM EDT up reply actions
You are right, it does happen. However, I do not believe that CC and Zito copies of each other. And neither is Hampton for that matter.
They don’t have to be copies. They’re all proven talent — elite lefty starters — where you’d have been a lot smarter to take any prospect at all rather than paying $100 million for “proven talent.”
Every goddam day of the week.
Ok. So CC is no different than any other player at his age. So be it. I disagree. I thought the Santana was a good signing. I thought, and still think, Manny is/was worth the money. I think that many players are not worth $100 million, but I think some players are worth the market price, and CC is worth it because he still has at least 4-5 good to great years left in him and he has proven himself to be an elite pitcher. Both scenarios are gambles. This is a gamble, and keeping him is a gamble. I’m just choosing the latter and I think it is a big mistake to let him go.
The average free agent is not at all worth his market price. Winner’s curse — look into it.
You can’t be sure how many good years C.C. has left — nobody can.
You might feel it was a gamble worth taking — that’s fine, that’s your opinion. But since you understand that there is significant risk, you should recognize that just because you’d take that gamble doesn’t make it a “huge mistake” if the Indians felt otherwise.
And by the way, they might not feel otherwise!
Anyway, I’d like to know your price. Tell me exactly how many years and how much money C.C. is worth — how much would be too much? $150 million? $250 million? $350 million?
If you don’t have a pretty specific answer to that question, then you really have no basis for saying what the Indians “should” and “shouldn’t” do — and that anything that deviates even slightly from your expert judgment is a “bid mistake.”
What I’m getting is — and I really want you consider this seriously — you might just be talking out your ass on this. I’m serious — please think about — you might be.
You are right, it doesn’t make it a huge mistake. I just believe that it is a huge mistake, and I’m actually hoping that I will be proven wrong in the future. I am sure they feel like this is the best idea, just like every other trade, free agent signing, and contract extension they have made over the past several years. Well, so long as I can preface this with the fact that I don’t think any MLB player is “worth” the money they get. Having said that, I don’t set the market and so I think a 6 year $110-120 million would be fine by me.
Once again though, what exactly is the huge mistake? Why do you think we should keep CC in a Tribe uniform for the remainder of this season?
I think he should be in a Tribe uniform for this season and 5-6 seasons to come. That is/always has been my point.
But trading him today doesn’t determine if he will be in a tribe uniform next year or the following years. I don’t get what you don’t understand about that. Our chances of re-signing did not change by trading him. It’s not a difficult concept to grasp.
I think it does. I think it lowers the chances that he’ll re-sign with Cleveland because I don’t think that the team is serious in trying to keep him here and it would also appear that everyone on this site believes that he should go and the team shouldn’t try and sign him because of how much it will cost the team.
Honestly man…Do you think they’re shoving him out the door or something? Do you think Shapiro and the front office enjoyed trading him today? If they could afford to sign him they would sign him.
I think that they are not happy about the idea of trading him. I don’t think they are shoving him out the door in a mean-spirited way. But, in fact, they did just shove him out the door. I think they can afford to sign him, but I do not think that is possible under how they currently manage the overall spending because they would need to go higher than what they have offered in the past.
Castro is reporting that they just threw all his locker crap out on the field – socks, ointments, signed Schilling cards – everything.
by dgcambridge on Jul 7, 2008 12:06 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
You’re right, I don’t since you are a blip on an internet chat room that isn’t really contributing anything to my conversations except a dig here and there.
If they never intended to resign him, then there was a 0% he was going to be an Indian past this year. So we basically just got the #1 prospect in Milwaukee’s organization for nothing.
If they do intend to resign him, that determination will be made after this season ends either way. So again, we lose nothing.
I think C.C. knows exactly how much the team and Shapiro specifically thinks of him.
I think he’s sophisticated enough to know that even though he loves playing for the Indians, he also wants to cut the best deal possible, and that means listening to all offers.
And I think that if he can understand that, he surely understands why we’ve traded him — and he understands that on the off-chance he does decide to come back, he’ll be coming back to a stronger organization for that trade.
let’s just consider this fact (and it is a fact): the indians would not have and will not now offer CC a $120mm contract. whether you like it or not (you clearly don’t) or they have the money to do so or not (they clearly don’t) it’s simply not happening. with that in mind, you can’t possibly upset that they went out a got a top-10-in-baseball prospect, plus 2-3 more players, instead of sitting on their thumbs for the duration of a lost season waiting to collect 2 first round picks.
by DontCallMeJoey on Jul 7, 2008 12:02 AM EDT up reply actions
I can argue that I think they can afford him. And I will do my best over the next week to try and give a more statistical analysis on that belief if I can find the time. You believe that they cannot afford to resign him and that this is the next best option. If I thought that, then I would agree with you. But I think that they could afford him if they wanted to.
Actually, I think that is the rub and I will respectfully disagree that the team cannot sign him. I think they could. So there is the disagreement. Feel free to tell me how off that map I am. And yes, you found me out. I’m an “old troll” from back in those days when you guys had all the right answers.
You can’t belittle a prospect just for being a prospect per se. Would you take Gary Sheffield over Jay Bruce just being Sheffield is “proven talent”?
So you do recognize that a player’s value correlates to his age. Now imagine Sheff was 23, and we were offered him for a free agent pitcher we knew was headed out the door. Would you take that deal?
I would. But I stand on the belief that the team could resign CC. I also realize to do so would take them out of their current practice. But, I don’t believe that practice is well suited for this situation.
Aren’t you making a big assumption, namely that CC WANTS to stay in Cleveland? No doubt he loves Cleveland but its a very real possibility that he would love playing near his home in California more.
Also, I think someone summed it up best above. If Cleveland really has the ability to sign CC then there’s no reason why we can’t sign him after the season. He’s probably not going to sign with the Brewers so unless you can explain why trading him makes him less likely to sign with the Cleveland, your point is defeated even using your own flawed logic.
by world dictator on Jul 6, 2008 10:57 PM EDT up reply actions
I am. Your right. I haven’t seen or heard anything to say he wouldn’t stay here if given a contact at the current market value. If he says “I don’t want to stay here, and I would like to move on” Then my argument is moot, and I will agree whole-heartedly that a trade makes sense.
1. The lack of negative information does not prove positive information. I’ve never read anything saying flying pigs don’t come out of my butt, but that doesn’t mean its going to happen.
2. I have heard of lots of people saying he’d like to play closer to home and perhaps play in the national league where he would be able to bat. So at the very least it seems like CC is seriously considering other options outside of Cleveland.
by world dictator on Jul 6, 2008 11:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Okay then smart ass, I’ll put it another way. If Cleveland pays him the most money, I bet he would stay. Can you prove that wrong? And using rumors to defend an argument is a little weak as well don’t you think?
Okay then not-smart ass. How does Cleveland win a bidding war with the Yankees and their peers?
Steel Nick
The answer to that is easy. Out bid them. However, I don’t think the Yankees will spend the money on him in their current situation.
You are chasing the tail. Just because the Yankees ( or Boston or LA for that matter) can out spend Cleveland on an entire roster doesn’t mean Cleveland cannot compete for this one player.
So we should make it all about this one player?
Not about the best possible roster, for 2009 and for all future years?
Not about winning?
Just saw this. As of right now, yes it should be about this one player because I believe this team had the potential that all the analysis programs predicted and I think this is a fluke season and the team only needs 1-3 players to win the pennant and winning in all future years is not more important than winning a title in the next 2-3 years.
Now, if you argue that the current roster is full of perennial under-producing players and it will take 4-7 new players for them to contend, then I think this is a good deal. But I’m choosing the former rather than the latter and I think spending money for CC and a power bat in the off season (and possibly a closer) will put Cleveland in a spot to contend with anyone for the pennant over the next 2-3 years. After that, I think the window of opportunity will have closed and Grady, Carmona, Victor and the rest will all be out the door.
Do you think there is any way that the Indians could possible extend CC on his terms and then add any sort of power bat and a closer?? There are finite resources whether you want to accept that or not. A Cleveland baseball team is not going to crack the top 15 in player salary. It just won’t happen.
so only condone trading stars for prospects only if the prospects end up becoming stars? hmm, he may be on to something – we should trade for future stars! I get it now..
You have no idea the physical toll that three vasectomies have on a person
by jakesinger777 on Jul 6, 2008 10:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Nope. I’m saying if you can flat out say to me this kid is going to be an all-star, then I may come around. I’m not saying that trading for prospects is a bad thing, I’m saying that trading CC for prospects is a bad idea.
I can’t even flat out tell you CC is going to pitch well next year
by world dictator on Jul 6, 2008 11:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah?
What was your prediction for Betancourt this year?
How about Cliff Lee?
How about Josh Hamilton before he got picked up by the Reds?
Well considering I have no record on this site of any predictions I can’t imagine that anyone would take me seriously. I thought Lee would do very well, not this lights out, but very well. I thought Bentancourt was still problematic because of what he did/failed to do in 2007. I thought Perez would do well though and I thought Hafner would have gotten out of his funk. I also thought Hamilton would be so so with the Rangers and that the Mariners would compete for the AL West. I did think the Blowasaveski would be horrendous and that the bullpen would be the down fall of this years team. However, I did think they would win 90+ games and have a shot at winning it all. I surely do not think that I have some great power of predicting everything correctly and I will admit my mistakes. Just like I will do if this trade brings in some great players and Sabathia goes on to have a Zito-like career.
I would say the jury is still out on the Crisp trade. Shoppach has been pretty handy. Check back in five years.
I think Shoppach was a nice addition, but I think it is a wash between he and Bard though. And I think Crisp was a good player who, outside of battling injuries in Boston, has been more productive than Delucci, Michaels ever was over in LF.
Crisp hasn’t been very good in Boston. See below…his OBP the last three years, .317, .330, .314.
So Marte didn’t work out like we expected—does that mean we should never trade for a prospect again?
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 6, 2008 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions
OBP…isn’t that one of those weird stats Bill James invented working on a computer in his mother’s basement?
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 6, 2008 10:49 PM EDT up reply actions
I believe it was brought over by Gammons after the Civil War ended when he was covering the Valley Forge League.
And yes, I know Valley Forge was occurred during the Rev War.
by Conso on Jul 6, 2008 10:52 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Odd that Amy K Nelson of all people within the stable of ESPN’s baseball beat writers is the person that has CC’s cell phone and happens to be the one that he texts back to say “It’s weird to be leaving these guys”. She should be getting a higher byline than Olney and company if she’s getting those quotes.
I agree with you, and I happen to think Amy K. Nelson is just criminally underused by ESPN in general. Anyone who hasn’t read her story on Devern Hansack should check it out.
“You have to have faith. Everyone here knows how I feel about this place and how much it means to me. I’ve been here since I was 17 years old. We’ll have plenty of time after the season to get it done.”
Come November/December, we’ll see. Have faith. Not cash.
Hey it gives us something to talk about besides where Grady hits in the order and whether or not Wedge should be fired and whether or not Marte is worthless.
by Cols714 on Jul 6, 2008 9:19 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
You know, as much as I was expecting this and as much as it kind of had to happen, I’m still sort of, like, upset about it. It’s a little weird. Like, it went pretty well, but man. I’m gonna miss that guy.
Hard truth: Your eyes lie.
“So Matt, welcome to our organization. And what position will you be playing?”
“Uh, you mean left field or first?”
“No, anywhere”
“Well, in Milwaukee they moved me to the OF because they were ‘established’ at first base.”
“Yeah, we’re not so much established at any positions here, except CF, obviously. And maybe catcher. Otherwise, your choice.”
“I do suck with the glove, so I was thinking about DH. You’ve probably got some masher there”
“You would think so, but….”
“I’m still young though, how about first base. Who’s there now?”
“Gonnie”
by dgcambridge on Jul 6, 2008 9:33 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Heh.
That’s ten total bases … it’s like a hurry-up cycle.
by Jay on Jul 6, 2008 9:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, I think the casual fan (like Conso, up there) will have a pretty bad reaction to this trade. Most of us here have been girding ourselves for this since Mid-May, when the season began to quickly unravel.
I had a similar reaction to Coco Crisp being traded a few years ago. I followed the Tribe at a very superficial level and couldn’t understand why they would get rid of a guy that really grew with the club, was successful and so damned likeable. CC is that times 100.
So, go easy on those that are stunned by this news. Not everyone are diehards like us.
I am not stunned, just extremely disappointed in the team’s decision on this one. By the way, how is that Coco trade looking now? Also, for the record, I’m not a “casual” fan, and feel free to test me on that one if you’d like. Just because you know something is probably going to happen, doesn’t mean you should just be okay with it. Feel free to call yourself a die hard, but I’ll take my chances with my love for this team.
I have absolutely no problem with the Coco trade. It was a smart deal. Even if Marte never hits another RBI, we can still get fair value out of Shoppach and Newsom.
So, out of curiousity, what would you feel would be “fair value” for CC? Or rather, what price do you feel is “too high” for a CC Sabathia?
By the way, how is that Coco trade looking now?
Coco’s OBP the last three years: .317, .330, .314.
Feel free to call yourself a die hard, but I’ll take my chances with my love for this team.
With all due respect, I think when he said that everyone isn’t a die hard like most of us, he meant intelligent and well-reasoned die hards. I’m sure you love the team. I’m not sure you fit the description he was going for.
Steel Nick
There are die-hards, and there are LGT die-hards..you’re gonna have to learn to live with it.
You have no idea the physical toll that three vasectomies have on a person
by jakesinger777 on Jul 6, 2008 10:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Well please show me the errors of my ways then if you have the answer. Unlike many people on this page, I’m willing to listen to other people’s opinions.
Conso, here is the error of your ways:
Today’s decision to trade CC has 0 impact on our ability to sign CC to an extension. If we have the money or not, we can still do so in the offseason. The only reason to be upset about it is if you think that with CC this year, the Tribe can get back into contention. Otherwise, it was absolutely the correct decision
I understand that. I said earlier that if they go out and sign him in the off season then this is just fine by me. However, I don’t think there is a snowballs chance in hell that will happen because of the decision made to trade him at this point.
When has a team traded its star away to then resign him in the next off season? I’d suggest that a team says to a player, thanks but no thanks by trading away the player before the season is over.
Kenny was traded on March 25, played the entire season with Atlanta, then re-signed in December with the Indians.
Except that it was actually C.C. who said thanks but no thanks — to the Indians’ offer to keep him beyond 2008. The way for him to not get traded was to sign a damned extension. The Indians offered, he said he’d rather not even talk about it.
You could look it up!
I’m not going to fault the guy to want a long-term deal that will pay him the “fair market value” (in quotes because that term is definitely relative). He’s been here since he was 19 and he deserves a long-term contract with this team.
At this point in his career, he deserves a 5-6 year deal with a team. I hear and understand the argument that is not worth it for Cleveland. I just disagree with that point because I think he is worth the money and he is the type of player who can/will win a title for a team.
Deserves?
Deserves why, exactly?
You want to pay players based on what they “deserve” rather than based on how much they’re worth to the team?
Wake up, man, this is a business!
Exactly, it is a business. And this business says that you have so spend a little money to win. The market dictates long-term contracts for big money for a player of CC’s stature. If you can always do it cheap, then great. But pitching wins titles and CC is the type of pitcher who can help you win a title. Sometimes the money is worth the title.
No.
The business says you have to do things smart, including spending money.
The business says you don’t pay for “stature” you pay for value.
Dude, it’s not like I care about the money. I just want us to win, and if we’re reckless with money, we can’t win.
Even teams that have $150 million more than we have — like the Mets — generally do badly when they’re reckless with money.
You’re being literal, and I appreciate that. Stature is the wrong word, and I’d argue that CC’s value is worth the money Santana rec’d from the Mets. I do no think it is reckless to sign someone who has a career stats of CC. I think he is a great pitcher and will be for the next 3-4 years to come. Maybe he won’t be and I’ll have egg on my face, but I’m not going to believe that until I see it.
i’m with you in that CC is great, honestly. i love the guy and he’s a fantastic pitcher…
but if he’s worth $150mm, and he’s the type of guy who wins you rings, then what happened this year? if we pay CC $150mm, then you’re likely to see the same roster for the foreseeable future, which is in last place even with CC on the team.
i’m bummed he’s gone, but i think the indians have done a damn good job of making the most of that departure.
by DontCallMeJoey on Jul 7, 2008 12:42 AM EDT up reply actions
You know what, that is a great point and my only argument is that I think this year is the worst fluke year and that management could not have been this wrong about all of the players having horrible years and that this team is more akin to the result posted by the 2007 team and it really only needs 1 or 2 players to put it over the top next year and I think CC is one of those players.
However, if this team is actually as bad as it is this year’s record would indicate, then I would agree that CC should go and more the merrier as far as trading for prospects.
i’m hopeful that you’re right about it being a fluke…but i would say that even in the event that it is the all-time fluke year, improving organizational depth is one of the keys to avoiding fluke years, especially for a non-huge market team like us, and adding 4 players in exchange for one is nothing if not positive for organizational depth.
by DontCallMeJoey on Jul 7, 2008 1:02 AM EDT up reply actions
see, i disagree with you here. organizational depth is enhanced by adding players, capable players of course, to the system who create a competitive environment for the balance of the people in the system. whether these players turn into ML studs is almost irrelevant to the benefits to organizational depth. if green is in this deal, for example, josh rodriguez just pooped his pants and went straight to the batting cage (skipped the bathroom for clean up)
by DontCallMeJoey on Jul 7, 2008 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions
But you’d have thought that about Zito entering his age 28 season as well. At that point his numbers were even better than CC’s. How did that work? There is not a single starting pitcher worth that risk. Too much can happen.
Proud supporter of the Cleveland.
Right, because you are clairvoyant. There wasn’t just hype. He was just fantastic. No hype, no Yankeeism. He was better than CC for those years. Like it or not. You see now what happened. What is to say that the Dodgers aren’t saying this about CC in three years? Nothing.
Proud supporter of the Cleveland.
I dunno, after having watch the guy pitch in the AL West and the fact that there were those who doubted his ability, I’d say he wasn’t better than CC.
The fact is, whether you were right about Zito or not, it’s the Greater Fool theory. Somebody was willing to pay him an insane amount of money, and someone will be willing to pay even more money for CC. Assuming he would be willing to negotiate—which he wasn’t—do you think an offer of $150 million over six years would have signed him this past offseason?
You think he will be a great player for 3 to 4 years, but you insist that we should pay him greatness rates for 6 years? That’s economic suicide. And that’s what will happen to Santana.
And if we did, in 5 years you’d be back complaining about the albatross around the Tribe’s neck that is CC’s contract.
Free Andy Marte!
I’d argue that we’re more likely to sign him now (albeit still tiny probabilities.) As an Indian, CC re-signs if and only if he takes a hometown discount before he declares for free agency. Not likely, IMO. He will instead test the market, regardless of the size of the Indians’ (now Brewers’) offer. Now as I understand it, and I could be wrong, the free agent can NOT negotiate with his former team for a certain (lengthy) period after he declares free agency. (If that’s not right, I hope someone will correct me.)
So Indian Sabathia either takes the hometown discount or puts himself up for auction to the highest bidder among the other 29 teams, while Brewer Sabathia who declares free agency can negotiate with the Tribe immediately.
"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself."
by Fiddlesticks on Jul 6, 2008 11:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Frankly I don’t care. I’m all jacked up from the trade and a rabble rabble might focus me.
Steel Nick
Also! Will Carroll has sort of an abbreviated Will’s Mill up. Says there’s some rumor that Tampa Bay has interest in Blake.
Uhhh… OK. He’s be taking Hinske’s spot as Will says.
I think Blake is going to be a last minute deadline deal. There are too many other potential big bats out there that could go before him (Texiera, Holliday, etc).
Blake won’t be dealt as a big-bat prize, he’s a complementary piece.
I love the idea of his going to Tampa, because they’re one organization whose 10th best prospect is still probably a damned good prospect.
by Jay on Jul 6, 2008 9:57 PM EDT up reply actions
I wasn’t comparing Blake to those guys, but rather we would be smarter to wait to trade for Blake AFTER those guys get traded so we can see where the market is at. (Similar to what teams have done waiting for Sabathia to get traded).
Well, just because teams have done it doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.
I’m in the camp that says trading sooner is almost always better.
Well, I believe you have said you wanted a “Max Ram-type” of player in return. Those kinds of trades only happen when a team is under the gun at deadline time.
Frequently you get them at the deadline, yes, but that doesn’t mean you can’t get them earlier.
There are fewer deals July 1-25 than July 26-31, but I bet the 1-25 deals are better if you looked at them globally.
Let’s agree to disagree, and let’s further agree not to do any research on it. There’s far too much research out there, why spoil a good argument with facts?
I’m very excited to get LaPorta. All he has ever done is mash, and boy does the tribe need someone to mash. I’ll miss CC, but I’ll miss more having a playoff team in 08. I still cannot get over that the 08 season is over already. Maybe Jay should have written a piece along the lines of “Why we will finish last in 08.”
I don’t think we need that piece now. It is a nightmare we are all living.
As for LaPorta, I just checked out his last year at Florida, a team that plays against some of the best college pitching. It is ridiculous.
AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO HBP AVG OBP SLG OPS
169 60 68 10 0 20 52 55 16 19 .402 .582 .817 1399
I just posted a more detailed link in the old thread (didn’t see the new one) but Castro had a new piece up that talks about LaPorta. His two cents is that Escobar IS INVOLVED.
was just over at the Brewers equivalent of LGT. The comment subject for every post is too much. Sickening, really.
USA Today has this very odd quote that I haven’t been able to confirm:
According to the Tom Haudricourt, each team will swap two lower level prospects in addition to the big names involved
“the Tom Haudricourt” error in writing is theirs. This words it as if we also had to give up multiple players.
Again, I have not found this anywhere else, including Haudricourt’s own blog.
Steel Nick
Gammons just reported on the Evil Empires game that it is CC for LaPorta, 2 minor leaguers and a player to be named later. 4 for 1.
Official announcement in morning
I believe that you cannot trade a player for the first year after he signs a pro contract, so they are often the PTBNL. So for someone drafted last June, then signed sometime after that, once the clock ticks to a year they can be included in a trade as the PTBN.
I never completely understood the rule, but I suppose it’s a way to prevent teams from “trading” draft picks like other sports allow.
by ganatz on Jul 6, 2008 11:15 PM EDT up reply actions
For those still holding out hope that CC will re-sign with the Tribe after the season, this should be good news. The team he finishes the season with will have an exclusive negotiating window before the other 29 teams (including us) can make offers. It seems unlikely that Milwaukee will sign him during that period, while the Dodgers or Cubs or whoever might have been able to make that happen.
Not that I think we have any chance to re-sign him, but still…
"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself."
Interesting point.
Fact is, every trade we make, starting with this one, makes us more likely to sign C.C. — or anyone — simply because it makes us richer — not with cash per se, but in overall resources. The more good stuff we’ve got, the more we don’t have to buy on the free agent market.
That’s what I’m hoping.
Gaining a few guys who will be cheap for a # of years to come is worth offering CC an extra couple million over 5 years or so.
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.
The Brewers will give up outfielder Matt LaPorta, left-hander Zach Jackson, right-hander Rob Bryson and a player to be determined in the deal.
I’m in the process of falling in love with Bryson, so hopefully he’s at least included.
It does. It looks like they moved him to the bullpen after five starts, and he’s been pitching between one and three innings per appearance. His ‘pen splits are especially filthy. Goldstein said in his MIL Top 11 last winter that Bryson “offers plenty to dream on”.
Brewers fan here
Jackson is a nonentity. Bryson is a promising A-ball pitcher who touches 95 and has a developing slider that’s his out pitch. His peripherals are better than his ERA this year, so don’t underrate him based on that one stat alone. That said, all the usual caveats about A-ball pitchers with inconsistent secondary offerings apply.
He's extremely quick and good.
We got him as a PTBNL from Toronto
in the Overbay trade. He was a good prospect- first round pick, bk? – and he made some starts in 2006. He only throws about 89 and doesn’t have much off-speed stuff. We had fun with his old funky windup, but he changed it. He made an appearance with the Brewers this year and wasn’t too great.
And neck size to baby eating ratio.
Yeah, he was a first-round pick
Zackson’s best Brewers moment came in his first start, when he almost hit a HR on the first pitch he saw, only to have Brian Giles rob him. As a pitcher, he’s pretty useless, though I guess he could become a LOOGY and hang around for awhile.
He's extremely quick and good.
When the Brewers were slumping bad
he reported that Ned Yost was going to be fired after a couple of pathetic losses. His scoop was from “Badgerblogger”- whatever that is- and it was totally false. Then he ripped on blogs credability.
And neck size to baby eating ratio.
Geez, I hope it’s not LaPorta and these two pitchers. Pitching prospects flame out so freaking often. I’d much rather have the position prospects in this case. Especially since the Indians have some decent pitching prospects.
If this is the trade, I’m not happy.
A source familiar with the Brewers’ trade for Cleveland lefty C.C. Sabathia just told me that the other players going to the Indians with Matt LaPorta are minor-league pitchers Zach Jackson and Rob Bryson and a fourth player, perhaps minor-league third baseman Taylor Green.The fourth player currently is listed as “to be named later” but it is believed the Indians want to look more at Green, with the idea of moving him to second base.
Steel Nick
This is not as good as LaPorta, Green, and either Brantley or the high A catcher. I’m not really that into A-ball relief pitchers.
I really really had my hopes on Brantley as a part of this deal. I thought the talk of a second stud was a little far fetched, it was waaayy beyond what a guy like Santana went for and beyond what any of else would have expeted before the rumors of this deal started. Still, Bryson has some serious upside, or so it seems. And if Green or someone of his caliber (BRANTLEY?!- maybe they are waiting for his ankle to heal?!) is the 4th player, I will be very very happy.
if the 2 guys are Jackson and Bryson, Green had better be that PTBNL
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.
I agree.
If they get Green and move him to 2nd, I wonder how quickly he can get to the majors. Is 2010 realistic? If so, it could be Cabrera and Green up the middle.
“Cabrera and Green”: sounds like a housing project.
"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself."
by Fiddlesticks on Jul 6, 2008 10:35 PM EDT up reply actions
That's weird because Green is a natural 2B
He’s been playing 3B because the Brewers didn’t really have a for-sure guy there (Braun and Gamel both being what could charitably be described as “offense-first” players). He’s supposedly quite good at second.
He's extremely quick and good.
This makes sense as the Tribe’s best hitting prospect (prior to this trade) is Wes Hodges, 3B in AA.
Now that the Indians have LaPorta, Mills is kind of redundant. And he’s not even hitting all that great.
It seems like the Indians probably should have grabbed Jason Heyward, the OF the Braves took with the pick after (I think) the Indians.
I disagree. There’s no such thing as talent redundancy until two players of the same position are both healthy and of Major League quality. Though with Mills and LaPorta I’d call that more likely than not (maybe in 2010), it’s still far from a sure shot.
Anyway, Mills is reportedly a fine defensive first baseman, while LaPorta is, what, average at best? I think we’ll be able to work something out, and by “work something out,” I mean “jump for joy that the Indians brought up two position player prospects who actually hit.”
by fleerdon on Jul 6, 2008 11:47 PM EDT up reply actions
bye bye and thanks, cc
sadly, we only got 1 dominating season out of him. he didn’t really seem to put it all together until ‘07…he seemed to flirt with it every year, but never before (or since!) did we get the consistency of last year. it was a nice one, too bad he lost it in the playoffs. here’s hoping Lee can keep performing like the first half, that Fausto gets it back and Laffey keeps building on what he’s done. if we still have those 3 we have a solid chance going forward. We just need some more hitters around Sizemore (is Pronk done? move Martinez to 1B?), hopefuly we got some of that that out of this trade. it’s hard to believe that the hitting machine we had a few years ago has evaporated (remember ‘04 when they could score at will but so could the other team?)
i see what you mean. his counting numbers were marred mainly by his DL stint (6 starts worth?) and the weak offense
Brewer fan visiting
For those of you not sold on LaPorta, he’s a stud. There are plenty of Brewer fans that aren’t happy with having to give him up. I think almost all of us are thrilled about landing CC, but you guys are going to have 6 years of a corner outfielder or first basemen that can mash. He can put up .280/.360 with 40 homers for you folks for as long as he’s there, and that’s no exaggeration.
And neck size to baby eating ratio.
Haudricourt just posted again, and he’s speculating that Taylor Green could be the PTBNL, but the Tribe might want to see how he does at 2B. Shaps does it again!!!
Green is really good at 2nd
He was moved to third to provide a safety net in case Mat Gamel couldn’t make it, and because we have Weeks at second. He has 10 homers in one of the worst hitters parks in the minors at Brevard County, and he’s hitting better than Braun or Gamel did when they were there. Just so you folks know.
And neck size to baby eating ratio.
by Jordan M on Jul 6, 2008 10:30 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
That’s awesome, because we’re really bad at second.
by fleerdon on Jul 6, 2008 11:53 PM EDT up reply actions
I was just thinking, if Green’s coming over to play second, Josh had better get his game face on. I was referring more to the fact that he’s our only legit 2B prospect than making a comment on his quality as a prospect, which is quite good right now and getting better. I dig competition.
by fleerdon on Jul 7, 2008 12:02 AM EDT up reply actions
Or what if he stays in the outfield? Lots of luck, Ben.
by fleerdon on Jul 7, 2008 12:10 AM EDT up reply actions
http://www.theclevelandfan.com/article_detail.php?blgId=3414
Diatriber has a nice write-up of LaPorta. I’m officially excited.
Also- another thing about LaPorta
LaPorta’s a great guy who seems to have a plus character. I’m sure all of you will like him. He writes some minor league diaries for Milb.com and some other site, answers questions, and is a pretty religous guy.
And neck size to baby eating ratio.
I know that most of us understand this, but Conso and perhaps others don’t, so I want to take a moment to clarify the situation as I see it.
First, two things are givens:
1. Whether Sabathia pitches for Cleveland or someone else for the remainder of this season is a matter of indifference.
2. Milwaukee will not resign Sabathia after the season; he will “test the market.”
With those two givens, and regardless of whether you think we will be able to sign Sabathia the free agent, the only question is “did we get enough?” If you are comparing Matt LaPorta et alia to CC Sabathia, you are making an analytical mistake. You need to compare LaPorta & co. to whoever else you (credibly) think we could have gotten for the Big Lefty. Not trading him was an option only for the foolish; he is what economists call a “sunk cost” and is properly excluded from the analysis.
If you believe, as Conso evidently does, that we have the ability to sign Sabathia as a free agent, then this is a wonderful, practically orgasmic deal, as it gives us at least one and perhaps two highly rated prospects while at the same time improving our chances to sign Sabathia, at a cost of….nothing.
If you believe, as I do, that we were not and are not going to sign Sabathia, we get one and perhaps two highly rated prospects in exchange for two draft choices who, even if they turn out to be a good after a year or two of pro ball as LaPorta and Green, would be a year or two further away from contributing at the major league level.
The only basis for legitimate objection is “we could have gotten more from so-and-so.” And that’s pure speculation.
"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself."
I would like to add this. We have not lost CC’s services for next year and beyond YET. Acutally, CC’s contracted to play only until the end of this year. Nobody has the rights to him beyond that. Any criticism surrounding our “losing” CC is misplaced. We would lose CC when someone persuades him to sign a contract for the future which he hasn’t yet done. We have exchanged 11 weeks of CC for several prospects.
It is also speculation that the team cannot sign him. The team may believe his value is not worth the market price, but that doesn’t mean that they cannot sign him. I’m not comparing LaPorta to CC in today’s terms, but I am comparing them in terms of the next couple years and I think a top of the rotation pitcher who can eat up innings and has zero, zilch, no arm problems is more valuable than any set of prospects for this team over the next 1-2 years (not including this season). If the team can sign him in the off season and these prospects turn out then the trade is no big deal. However, no Cleveland team has traded their #1 pitcher during a season and then signed that pitcher in the next off season. Also, the team has expressed in previous deals that it is unwilling to pay the market value for someone in CC’s position. Also, I understand that this deal cannot really realistically be evaluated until 2-4 years from now and those who think it is great cannot actually start to assess it until LaPorta and the others have a chance to make it into the MLB line-up. However, the one thing I would assert is that it is more likely than not that CC will still be a top of the rotation pitcher who throws heat, eats up innings, and has the ability to shut a team down when his offense is anemic.
Boy, the Brewers fans are all of a sudden falling all over themselves in Haudricourt’s blog thinking they now have a steal… I’m like, hey assuming Taylor Green is the PTBNL, are those 2 pitching prospects that much worse than Lorenzo Cain?
The two pitchers are entirely different creatures. One is a 20 year old blowing away hitters in relief in low A. The other is a classic AAAA depth starter, a throw-in we might use this year.
Bryson isn't a reliever
He’s pitched mostly in relief because of his innings restriction. That said, he’s been projected as a future closer, but he hasn’t done anything yet to indicate he can’t have success as a starter.
He's extremely quick and good.
Regardless, it’s about how the Indians want to use him, not the Brewers. Bryson was Kevin Goldstein’s “I Like Him Better Than Most” for the Brewers. “Don’t Believe The Hype” was Escobar.
I started to not believe the hype over the past couple of days. What was the defensive reputation of Brantley, by the way?
Steel Nick
Honestly, not great. He’s a pretty good athlete but there are a lot of questions about his ability to handle CF at the Major League level, and the Brewers haven’t helped by letting him start at 1B (?!) 21 times this year. Further complicating the picture is that Lorenzo Cain just got promoted to Huntsville, and he’s better in center than Brantley is, but might hit enough to man a corner spot, while Brantley almost certainly will not.
He's extremely quick and good.
Please, I beg of you
Do not take the JS Online trolls to be representative of the Brewers online fan community.
He's extremely quick and good.
And even on SBN generally, nobody should assume the dumbest two guys are representative of the whole cohort.
Hey, don’t knock yourself and Ryan like that. You guys are pretty smart.
I did a Google image search for "Andy Marte." It turned up zero results.
by emd2k3 on Jul 7, 2008 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Man, I was so conflicted. Papelbon blows the game .. but the Yankees won.
I think I will need some bipolar medication to even myself out.
I was having trouble watching that too. The good news is The Rays lead becomes larger after that game.
Wow. Went running for an hour and I missed the return of E5. Good to see some old fashioned trolling. And I’m stunned nobody told our visiting Brew Crewers not to use subject lines.
Il faut d'abord durer.
It’d be cool if SBN had joint threads for times like these.
by FranklinScott on Jul 6, 2008 11:38 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Good point. If I were to make a list of the 29 other ML teams ranked in order from the team that would frustrate me least to watch CC help win a World Series to most frustrating (that was poorly written, but you know what I mean), the Brewers would have been #1. Yankees/Red Sox/White Sox would have tied for #263, just behind the Florida Gators.
Il faut d'abord durer.
If I were to make a list of the 29 other ML teams ranked in order from the team that would frustrate me least to watch CC help win a World Series to most frustrating (that was poorly written, but you know what I mean), the Brewers would have been #1.
There must have been a better way to word this.
You have no idea the physical toll that three vasectomies have on a person
by jakesinger777 on Jul 7, 2008 12:28 AM EDT up reply actions
brewers fan here
and i’m just curious, why no use of subject lines?
"If there is a more reactionary blog with idiotic commentary out there I'd be surprised." -On Bleed Cubbie Blue
Partly tradition, mostly aesthetics. Doesn’t it read easier?
Look at your own post. What does bolding the first three words and the line break do for you?
by fleerdon on Jul 6, 2008 11:55 PM EDT up reply actions
it’s funny i’m used to the bolding part, so without it it looks funny. though, i suppose, if i frequented here i’d be used to it the other way.
"If there is a more reactionary blog with idiotic commentary out there I'd be surprised." -On Bleed Cubbie Blue
It is true that whatever you’re used to looks better.
So you’ll just have to trust me, what you’re used to aside, this way really is better.
I use it to summarize the post. Without the subject line, it all runs together. I suspect it’s just whatever we’re each used to reads easier.
He's extremely quick and good.
That post was, like, 20 words. Did it really need a summary?
It all runs together because it should run together. These discussions are more like threaded chats than exchanges of long letters in the 18th century.
In this application, the subject field is antiquated, like a vestigial tail. There’s no reason for it.
I actually use my vestigial tail to track wild game, but I get where you’re coming from.
by fleerdon on Jul 7, 2008 12:03 AM EDT up reply actions
Wait I’ve been treating this like an exchange of long letters.
Tyler, did you get my latest epistle? Were the wax seal broked you shan’t read it, yes?
Nay. My heart leap’d too high at its Coming, and I’ve yet to detach it from thy carrier Pigeon.
by fleerdon on Jul 7, 2008 12:22 AM EDT up reply actions
Man. I have little to say that hasn’t already been said, except to ask a question that I’m too lazy to look up myself—what’s LaPorta’s contract status like? He’s not one of those early draft picks who had to be guaranteed a spot on the 40 to sign or anything stupid like that, right?
Despite all of my best intentions, I have not, in fact, grown up to be a debaser.
Right. Which means that he doesn’t need to be added to the 40-man (for Rule 5 draft purposes) until the end of 2010.
Based on their past actions, my guess is that the Indians will save the 40-man spot over the offseason — remember they’ve got Westbrook on the 60-day DL — even if that means not giving LaPorta the September callup. Same with David Huff, if they can avoid it.
About your PTBNL-
Taylor Greeen’s agent had this to say on Brewerfan.net:
Green will not be a ptbnl. Green would just be in the trade, if its a ptbnl its going to be someone from the 07 or 08 draft.
And neck size to baby eating ratio.
Actually, if it was to be a 2008 draftee, that WOULD be a reason to make it a ptbnl. Just not the only reason.
And Green’s agent posts on brewerfan.net? I call bs.
Green’s agent is legitimate- but he might have phrased that too matter-of-factly. That’s not certain or anything. I think it decreases the chances that Green is involved, though…
And neck size to baby eating ratio.
Green’s agent is now saying that it is possible that Green is on a list of potential PTBNL. So it’s not Green for sure, but it could be him, I guess.
And neck size to baby eating ratio.
Green’s agent definitely posts on brewerfan.net. He’s Lorenzo Cain’s and Michael Brantley’s agent also, among other players. Link to his blog post on the Green/PTBNL subject.
He's extremely quick and good.
Not really. The Brewers would have to wait almost a whole year to consummate the trade, which is not realistic. More realistic is that it’s being used to cover a late-signing 2007 draftee, but I can’t think of one that fits, off the top of my head. Could be used for a player currently on the DL.
He's extremely quick and good.
If he’s right, I guess that puts Lucroy back on the map, but this … this just doesn’t make any sense.
by fleerdon on Jul 7, 2008 12:57 AM EDT up reply actions
And Cain and Brantley are not on the list. We know that for sure.
And neck size to baby eating ratio.
I don’t see how the agent could know this. Like he said, anyone could be on that list. The player and his representation don’t need to know anything until they are actually traded.
He may or may not be half a dumbass
But he did say “I was told by good sources that I trust that [Brantley] was not ever up for discussion.”
He's extremely quick and good.
On the about CC page, the title is:
Baseball is his passion. Family is his Life. The Brewers are his team.
I just teared up.
they haven’t changed all of the references in the verbiage below
this line still works
When all is said and done, there’s no reason not believe that CC can continue to pile up the wins in front of the amazing fans on the lake.
but the following sentences need to be changed
Sabathia is spearheading the Indians’ resurgence in one of America’s great baseball cities. CC knows what’s at stake for the city and for his team and yearns to be a part of a championship with the organization where he started his career. So he puts every bit of his 6’7", 290 pound frame into every pitch that he throws.
I must say, thats some impressive photoshopping. Topps should hire whoever did it.
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.
conso’s probably one of those “climate change isn’t caused by humans” guys
by Gradyforpresident on Jul 7, 2008 12:14 PM EDT reply actions 3 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
- Five tips for Showtime’s second season of ‘The Franchise’
- 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.
