Transactions: The Big Trade, Part I
by Ryan on Jul 6, 2008 11:00 PM EDT
in Transactions
151 comments
Traded LHP CC Sabathia to the Milwaukee Brewers for 1B/OF Matt LaPorta (AA), two unnamed prospects, and a PTBNL
Trading Sabathia was not a difficult decision to make. Sabathia has been pretty steadfast in his willingness to test the free agent market, and even if the Indians are still interested in signing him, there was no point in keeping him around to pitch for a last-place team when there were impact prospects to be had. The one real advantage to keeping a free agent through the end of the season is that you can get early-round draft picks, but if you're out of the race and the player's good enough, you might as well deal him for a more advanced prospect or three. Keep in mind that Brad Snyder and Adam Miller, the prospects the indians drafted with the compensatory picks from losing Jim Thome, still haven't spent one day on the major-league roster; they were drafted five years ago.
Those who've followed the Indians know how valuable a pitcher CC Sabathia is. He's always been a durable pitcher (at least 28 starts every season since 2001), but in the past 3-4 seasons, he's become a dominant one. Last season, he refined his command, which did two things: it allowed him to go deeper into games, and upped his strikeout rates. He's a godsend for a team with a shallow bullpen, and makes a team with a good bullpen almost unbeatable on that given day. He's had zero arm problems in his career, and is now well past the injury nexus for young pitchers. Unlike Barry Zito, Sabathia is getting better heading into free agency. Whoever signs him will be getting four or five seasons of the best pitcher in baseball.
But even with such a valuable player to trade, you still have to find a team with both the motivation to deal and the prospects you want. Unlike the Dodgers, who had prospects but other priorities, or Philadelphia, who wanted Sabathia but didn't have the prospects, the Brewers filled both requirements. Brewers GM Doug Melvin has made it perfectly clear that he views 2008 as a real opportunity for his team to win it all. Staff ace and oft-injured Ben Sheets is healthy, but in the last year of his contract. For a small-market team, it's difficult to gather and keep a talented core together, and Melvin has decided to use his deep farm system to win now.
But even a team with a deep system would normally be reluctant to trade a prospect like Matt LaPorta. The Brewers drafted LaPorta in the first round (7th overall) of the 2007 draft, and Matt's done nothing but hit, and hit, and hit. He started his first full professional season in AA Huntsville, and he's put up a .988 OPS with 43 extra-base hits in 296 at-bats. Keep in mind he ended 2007 in the South Atlantic League. The way I see it, he looks like he'll be ready for the majors by early 2009 at the latest. The major reason an advanced hitting prospect like LaPorta was even made available is the logjam ahead of him. The Brewers (and probably the Indians as well) view him as a first baseman, and in the Brewer organization, that means he's blocked by Prince Fielder. The Indians' organization is deep on pitching prospects but very thin in high-level hitting prospects. And there's more of speed bump (Ryan Garko) than a road block at first base. If the Indians feel that LaPorta is really an outfielder, there is effectively nothing preventing him playing in the majors this season.
Now that these crucial pieces were in place, just the details remained in order to complete the deal. The Brewers understandably wanted to finalize the trade as soon as possible in order to get as many starts for Sabathia possible before the end of the year. And with Sabathia due to pitch on Tuesday, Sunday night became a de facto deadline for both teams: for the Indians, to maximize the return on the deal, and for the Brewers, to get two Sabathia starts in before the All-Star Break.
So, in review, how did this trade get done so quickly?
The Indians were committed to trading CC Sabathia
The Brewers were committed to winning now, and had position prospects to trade.
The Indians need position prospects.
Top prospect Matt LaPorta was very close to the majors, but blocked at first base by Prince Fielder.
A de facto deadline of Sunday evening was in place because of Sabathia's pitching schedule.
1 recs |
151 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Jay is reporting that we traded CC for 3 baseball cards and a baseball card to be named later.
by elsandito on Jul 6, 2008 11:13 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
What series and year are we talking about? That makes all the difference.
by Ryan on Jul 6, 2008 11:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Billy Dee Williams was PTBNL.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Jul 6, 2008 11:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The brewers are stacked in that department too. 1989 Upper Deck.
by KevinV on Jul 7, 2008 8:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ryan, excellent write-up on short turn-around. As always
by Roger Dorn on Jul 6, 2008 11:15 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah good stuff. But Christ, Ryan. Like I don’t have enough to read right now.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Jul 6, 2008 11:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Well, there’s plenty of garbage time left in the season – you don’t have to cram it in in one night.
by Ryan on Jul 6, 2008 11:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t know if this has already been reported elsewhere, but Haudricourt has the other players as Zach Jackson, Rob Bryson, and the Indians are still scouting Taylor Green as the 4th.
by APV on Jul 6, 2008 11:30 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Hello APV,
I mentioned this in the other thread, but did not realize you had posted it here first – sorry about that.
As I mentioned there, if it’s true Jackson was included, I’ll be disappointed – realize that this guy in his first AAA season at age 23 (same age as Sowers) had a LOWER K rate than Sowers’ 4.99 K/9 IP rate – it was 4.88 K/9 IP. Never mind that the H/9 IP and BB/9 IP rate were considerably worse than Sowers’ rates.
I thought the idea was to get young, useful talent for CC – Jackson doesn’t seem to qualify to me – to me, he reminds me a lot of LHP Jeriome Robertson, who was virtually worthless (and threw maybe 1-2 decent to good starts for us, at most) after a brief period with us, went back to AAA for a brief period, and then disappeared entirely from baseball. I could see a similar thing happening with Jackson.
Just my 2 cents – no offense.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
by indiansfan on Jul 7, 2008 1:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was under the impression that Jackon was included to fill out the AAA rotation? Basically, he’s a warm body with little-to-zero chance of helping the MLB club.
by gte619n on Jul 7, 2008 9:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jackson’s a lefty (soft-tossing? I don’t actually know) who’s pitched mostly in relief this year (only 6 starts inn 22 or so appearances). Maybe the Indians see him as a possible lefty out of the pen? He’s struggled this year, according to the Milwaukee media, so he’s obviously not the key to the deal.
by peter m on Jul 7, 2008 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
by maledicta on Jul 6, 2008 11:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Favorite comment: “CC could hit 65-70 homers a year if they moved him to first base.”
by maledicta on Jul 6, 2008 11:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
On a more “serious” note – over/under on the number of additional homeruns C.C. hits this year: 2
by Voltaire on Jul 6, 2008 11:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like that people are calling for Crowe, or worried that we won’t have room for him. I mean, we’re all very excited about his big jump, but how can a person be both aware of his current numbers and yet unaware of how inconsistent he’s been??
Speaking of which, where was the guy this weekend?
by dgcambridge on Jul 7, 2008 12:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hello Ryan,
I’m mourning the fact that Jackson may be included in this deal – I was expecting all the pieces to have some promise, something I really don’t see for Jackson. He very much reminds me of a Jeriome Robertson, who really did nothing for us when we acquired him for Taveras and Scott (but at least, they were unknown prospects; we are currently trading the reigning AL Cy Young pitcher and one of the best pitchers in baseball – shouldn’t all the pieces have some potential, something Jackson does not have?)
Just my 2 cents.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
by indiansfan on Jul 7, 2008 1:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And now I’ve got to stick up for Jackson, eh? Grant me a little time to build a case. Rest assumed we’re not taking him in the place of an Escobar or whoever.
Like you say, Indiansfan, the “cream of the crop [don’t] always rise to the top.”
by jhon on Jul 7, 2008 1:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hello jhon,
Like I said, Jackson just doesn’t do much for me – while he improved his K/9 IP rate in his second season at AAA, Sowers also did (though not as much as Jackson, who was over 6.5 K/9 IP, compared to Sowers’ 5.5 K/9 IP). Plus, Jackson faltered again at AAA this season (57.1 IP/81 H/54 R/50 ER/10 HR/18 BB/34 K, 1.82 GO/AO, .329 BAA).
If Jackson was just a throw-in, and the other three guys were the main parts of the deal, I guess it’s okay (especially if Green is the PTBNL), but I’m guessing that Jackson was the third guy in the deal, with the PTBNL to be identified later. I just thought the third guy in the deal would be more useful or have more upside than Jackson (Bryson would fit as a third guy, as would have Lucroy, Brantley, or Cain), but Jackson is not what I had in mind for trading our #1 pitcher, even with a super-prospect like LaPorta coming back in the deal.
Just my 2 cents – no offense.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
by indiansfan on Jul 7, 2008 2:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hello again Ryan,
Mind you and everyone else, I’m NOT disappointed with the other three pieces in the deal (presumably LaPorta, Green, and Bryson), but unless this was a salary dump (and I don’t think Jackson is making that much like a Lee Stevens, is he?) I don’t see why we would take Jackson over a young, no-name prospect who has a higher ceiling, but may not have much chance of reaching it.
I would think we’d want to gain potentially useful players from trading our #1 starter, not guys who probably won’t be better than AAAA starters at best, even if he’s only the third guy in the deal. I was thinking they’d all be young and have a moderate to high-ceiling, with varying degrees of reaching it, but not someone who is virtually another Sowers or even worse than Sowers. That’s the part I’m not fond of regarding this trade.
Just my 2 cents – no offense.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
by indiansfan on Jul 7, 2008 2:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Jackson is a throw-in even if he isn’t a salary dump.
The deal is one elite prospect and two other good prospects — and while you’re at it, why don’t you throw in a depth starter for our Triple-A club?
You shouldn’t look at Jackson as downgrading the quality of the deal — if it were just the other three guys, you’d like it, right?
by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 9:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We are just going to analyze this thing to death. And then keep right on analyzing it.
by Jay on Jul 6, 2008 11:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think its also fair to note that this trade is essential CC for the LaPorta package PLUS whatever we might be able to fetch for Garko, and to a lesser extend Brown. This is of course based on the assumption that Garko is likely out of the door this year or next year at sometime.
Fair assumption?
by world dictator on Jul 6, 2008 11:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yes. But it’s more about Garko playing himself off the team.
by dgcambridge on Jul 7, 2008 12:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can’t see us getting anything for Garko at the moment.
Frankly, he should be in the minors by now. He’s become this year’s Barfield.
by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 12:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
what is with the sophomore slump? Garko, Barfield, Cabrera, Gutz, Sowers,
by Ryan Kelsey on Jul 7, 2008 12:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m still holding with the traumatic roommate separation anxiety. Garko can be good, but he needs Barfield as his roommate. For the Indians to get a good Garko, they need to put up with a bad Barfield.
In games in which Barfield played in Cleveland this year, Garko put up a .300/.417/.600 line.
by APV on Jul 7, 2008 8:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good Garko is not good enough to put up with Bad Barfield.
by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 9:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can’t Barfield just room in Cleveland and commute to Buffalo? That would show the FO he’s willing to do what it takes to help the team.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Jul 7, 2008 10:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t know. Garko’s value is at its lowest in a couple years and he is still under control for some time. I think he has the rest of the year to be analyzed by Wedge/Shapiro… I think Shapiro said as much a few days ago.
It will be interesting to see what we do with LaPorta too. Does he go straight to Buffalo or to Akron? Does he start playing 1B every day or stay in the OF?
by Ryan Kelsey on Jul 7, 2008 12:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Screw that. Demote his ass.
636 OPS for the past three months, something like 404 over the last three weeks. I need to see more of this?
by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 12:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’d agree—- but who would you rather get a long look at? You don’t think they’ll throw LaPorta in there, do you?? Maybe Brown or Aubrey? I think Garko is still the better prospect of the three.
by Ryan Kelsey on Jul 7, 2008 12:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Aubrey is the no-brainer. He’s an upgrade defensively too (not that it really matters for this season).
by Toxicadam on Jul 7, 2008 12:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Isn’t Aubrey hurt again? It’s hard to keep up, though I think it’s a safe assumption.
Railing against the sacrifice bunt since 2000.
by jdudas on Jul 7, 2008 9:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol, I don’t think so. I believe I saw his name in a few Bison box scores this weekend.
by Toxicadam on Jul 7, 2008 9:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Does it matter?
Going to the minors might be the best thing for Garko.
by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 10:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m thinking that this pretty much ends Garko’s run as the Indians first baseman.
by Cols714 on Jul 7, 2008 12:04 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
In the short term, that would be because of Blake, not LaPorta. He still get some ABs in July and August depending
on the next trades. If Blake gets traded first, Garko might play more in the short term.
by palcal on Jul 7, 2008 12:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not to repeat myself, but it’s because of Garko.
by dgcambridge on Jul 7, 2008 12:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ryan, I’m soliciting opinions here. What do you see in Garko’s tea leaves these days?
by fleerdon on Jul 7, 2008 12:05 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
He has a month or two to get back on track. If that doesn’t happen, and LaPorta progresses as hoped, he’ll be back riding the bus next year.
by Ryan on Jul 7, 2008 12:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really? He gets the rest of the summer?
by fleerdon on Jul 7, 2008 12:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah why wouldn’t he?
It costs us nothing, other than possible production. At this point I’d rather see prorgress from players, but consistent losing from the team until say September. If we tank hard enough we get a higher draft pick and thus another high level prospects next June.
Besides with LaPorta’s MLB experience clock sittign firmly at zero, Shapiro will be very careful to manage it properly. I think he could even start off 2009 in AAA until early June or so to avoid the whole Super-Two thing.
by KevinV on Jul 7, 2008 8:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I doubt that, I think Shapiro is much more interested in winning next year than in managing someone’s service time. Look at what the Indians have at 1B. LaPorta could out hit Garko right now.
by Cols714 on Jul 7, 2008 9:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If LaPorta makes it clear-cut with his Triple-A performance, then he’ll be in the majors right away.
If it’s a close call, he’ll be in the minors.
They won’t prioritize service time, and LaPorta will turn 24 in January. Service time considerations might save us a few million in 2012 and allow us to keep him for his age 30 season in 2015 — but in both cases, that’s only if he plays well, and 2015 is a long way off.
by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, in this case, the Indians are probably getting the best years of his career even if they call him up tomorrow.
by Ryan on Jul 7, 2008 10:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly. It’s especially pertinent for 21- and 22-year-old position players, less so for pitchers because of attrition, and less so for guys at 23+. You’re in damned good shape getting those age 25-29 seasons.
by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Shapiro is much more interested in winning next year than in managing someone’s service time.
you are way under-estimating how much shapiro loves managing someone’s service time.
by Brick. on Jul 7, 2008 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
yeah. he plays that game better and more than probably anyone, but he never does it as a first priority, obviously.
by Brick. on Jul 7, 2008 12:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Look, I don’t really care if he does or he doesn’t.
But if Phillips only got three months in 2003, I don’t see why Garko gets more than three months in 2008.
by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 10:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve really enjoyed your glee tonight.
by fleerdon on Jul 7, 2008 12:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Man, Brewers fans have a right to be excited. They get to really go for it in 2008, then (potentially) get 5 draft picks (in the first 35 picks) next year as compensation, regardless of the outcome.
by Toxicadam on Jul 7, 2008 12:19 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
In a way, it’s a Beane-type move – go for it this year, but at the same time, re-stock the minors in preparation for the next mini-rebuild.
by Ryan on Jul 7, 2008 12:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It is a fascinating situation really. They have have a great chance to win this year. At the same time, they might have an even better farm system a year from now. Besides the 5 draft picks, there is plenty of speculation that they will try to move Prince Fielder for a variety of reasons. I kinda envy them.
by Ryan Kelsey on Jul 7, 2008 12:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not to mention a pretty good crop of AA guys that should all be in AAA/ML next year, plus a team with a lot of young talent at the ML level both in the rotation and position players (Braun, Hardy, Weeks, Hall, Hart)... man, I don’t know which NL Central team I like better, the Reds (I’ve lived in southern ohio for 7 years now so I haven’t had much choice but to hear about them and they have some sick young talent themselves), the Pirates (I grew up with them as my NL team and now they have a guy running things with a clue… and I know one of their players personally), or the Brewers.
by Ryan Kelsey on Jul 7, 2008 12:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Keith Law has a post up now, thinks that Bryson has the potential to be a dominant closer. Surprised that we didn’t wait until the trade deadline to drive up the price further (which is debatable)
by Roger Dorn on Jul 7, 2008 12:31 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Showing again why Law has a lot of great info and insight and yet is not employed by a major league team.
by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 12:34 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
He really is maddening. Outstanding scouting insight, yet always manages to throw out some puzzling comments
by Roger Dorn on Jul 7, 2008 12:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think that comment shows that at all.
by TonyH on Jul 7, 2008 2:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, we disagree.
Trade value pivots around on-field value and off-field leverage. Sabathia’s on-field value would have diminished every five days, and our off-field leverage was AT LEAST as likely to diminish (with teams dropping out) as it was to increase (with teams coming in).
The idea that there was this big pot to stir is just soap opera drama. Any team that would want him at the end of July was already on the phone to Shapiro at the start of June.
And oh-by-the-way … C.C. could have sustained a minor injury at any time — end of deal, we’re settling for draft picks. That alone is reason enough to strike early.
by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 10:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes. For example, Erik Bedard had his next start moved back due to some vague ailment. I’m sure that will do wonders for his trade value!!
by peter m on Jul 7, 2008 10:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yea, because in 3 weeks the Brewers could fall out of the race, then we are stuck with whatever dregs the Phillies have left.
by Toxicadam on Jul 7, 2008 12:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Law compares this swap to the Colon trade:
... the Colon deal, at the time it was made, had more probability … this trade has significantly more risk for Cleveland.
Seems like a poor comparison, if for no other reason than Colon had a full year and a half left on his deal.
by scripteye on Jul 7, 2008 1:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Despite the hefty draft bonus he took to sign w/ Montreal, Sizemore was pretty far from a sure thing at the time of the trade, and Lee looked like he had a little way to go. Sizemore was the “intrigue” piece. Phillips was the surefire MajorLeaguer w/ upside in much the same way as Laporta. If the fourth player in this deal is Green or some other player with significant upside / intrigue, the returns (from the perspective of the moment of the deal, not in the results) for Colon vs. Sabathia are comparable. I think we’ve made out very well here, and that we’ve acquired a well hedged cluster of talent for the Big Guy.
I’m not sure what Law is getting at. Is there something I’m missing? Isn’t Laporta a close n’ safe prospect? We got a AAAA starter, a potential relief ace, and an exciting 4th guy——I dunno about Law, but I see an intelligent risk / return structure in this package.
by jhon on Jul 7, 2008 1:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
LaPorta is considered close’n’safe. I think he’s comparable to Phillips at the time of that deal.
by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So, who’s up for a Lookout Landing style raid of BrewCrew whatever on Tuesday night?
by Roger Dorn on Jul 7, 2008 1:02 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Kind of redundant, no? Us and BCB at this point, it’s like finding out your bunkmate at camp is actually that neighbor kid you’ve never hung out with, and it turns out he’s got a Nerf armory in his basement that you get to share when you go home.
by fleerdon on Jul 7, 2008 1:07 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Well if anything I will be reading to share in their excitement of having The Man on the roster
by Roger Dorn on Jul 7, 2008 1:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, I think we should just have a game thread here and only talk about the Brewers. It’s certainly the game I’ll be watching.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Jul 7, 2008 6:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So how do we feel about these two pitchers? I can understand the young flamethrower but this Zach Jackson guy has me all confused.
by NickFantana on Jul 7, 2008 1:31 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
And you’ve gotta like this AAAA guy better than Stevens (and Jeff Weaver, for that matter). And I’m a Lee Stevens fan going back to his Texas days.
by jhon on Jul 7, 2008 1:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hello Tox,
No offense, but I don’t think Jackson is being paid that much like a Stevens, is he? If he is, then I guess I can see why he was included in the deal, but as mentioned above, I’m not expecting much from him, and am a bit disappointed by the fact that we took him instead of another prospect with some upside, even if he was a bit raw, far-away, or a long-shot.
Just my 2 cents. :-)
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
by indiansfan on Jul 7, 2008 1:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Jackson is involved, he probably wasn’t Shapiro’s first choice. He’s a space filler, a throw-in. It wasn’t as if Melvin said, “We have this shortstop, Escobar,” and Shapiro said, “Forget him, what about this Zack guy?”
by odradek on Jul 7, 2008 2:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hello odradek,
I trust Shapiro didn’t pass us Escobar for Jackson, but at the same time, I thought all the pieces he’d get back would have at least a moderate ceiling and a reasonable chance of being effective at the ML level. I don’t see Jackson being that, as I don’t think he’s even the pitcher Sowers is, and Sowers is probably only a #4-#5 guy at best.
As mentioned above, if Jackson was a throw-in and the other three players, including the PTBNL, are the main pieces (especially if Green is included in the deal), it’s acceptable I guess. It just was a little surprising that a pitcher like Jackson would be included in the deal, since I really don’t see where he fits in with our organization, nor do I give him much chance of contributing – I see him very much like LHP Jeriome Robertson, who turned out to give us next-to-nothing when we acquired him for Taveras and Scott (who were decent prospects at best, but not a #1-pitcher like Sabathia – that’s why I thought we should have gotten a player with more upside than Jackson, even if he’s only the 3rd player in the deal).
Just my 2 cents – no offense.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
by indiansfan on Jul 7, 2008 2:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No problem, indiansfan. Jeriome Robertson is a name to avoid, eh?
Let’s hope Sowers can be a four guy. He hasn’t shown enough to be that this year.
by odradek on Jul 7, 2008 10:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also, the Indians had to scout Jackson, and weren’t frightened by what they saw.
From what Hoynes writes this morning, the PTBNL is the number two player in the deal for the Tribe.
by odradek on Jul 7, 2008 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yea, I wasn’t meaning that Stevens and Jackson are 1:1 comparisons. But he will (probably) be someone you forget about when you look back on the trade 3 years from now.
Who knows… Jeremy Guthrie was a “prospect” at one time and performed horribly until he was 27. This kid is still only 25 (?) ... so maybe something nice will happen for us. It always seems to happen for the “other” guys.
by Toxicadam on Jul 7, 2008 2:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope you’re right, but I’m not optimistic, as he’s arguably struggled more at AAA than Sowers has, plus he reminds me a lot of Jeriome Robertson – I just hope Jackson turns out more useful than Robertson did.
Just my 2 cents.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
by indiansfan on Jul 7, 2008 2:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Joe, it is great to have you back.
Having said that … you are officially cut off on Zach Jackson! For your own good!
by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That means: Do not reply to this by explaining your concerns about Zach Jackson!
by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And Joe, no offense, but why are you offering 2000 words on Jackson, but not answering my question on where Crowe was this weekend? Right up your alley.
Am I missing something obvious here?
by dgcambridge on Jul 7, 2008 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think of Zack Jackson as the last bit of peanut butter in the jar. You scrape it out on principle.
by jhon on Jul 7, 2008 1:49 AM EDT up reply actions 6 recs
Agreed. Do people not understand the term “throw-in”? It’s plently likely that we just wanted someone to fill in immediately at Buffalo, and maybe a spot starter in Cleveland. It’s nothing, just balancing everything out at the end.
by dgcambridge on Jul 7, 2008 2:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps the real problem is that usually the second player announced is the second best. In this case, the second player announced in the articles has been Zach Jackson, pretty much across the board.
by NickFantana on Jul 7, 2008 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Probably because he has some major-league experience. As in, the Indians traded Bartolo Colon for Lee Stevens, Brandon Phillips, Cliff Lee and a prospect.
by Ryan on Jul 7, 2008 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree. As I stated (below, I guess), he fills the roll of a serviceable spot-starter we can stash in Buffalo or convert to the pen as a long-man if necessary. There’s no guarantee we have either Slocum or Stanford around next season. At worst, he fills that slot.
by APV on Jul 7, 2008 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
view him as a replacement for Brian Slocum/Jason Stanford for 2009
by APV on Jul 7, 2008 9:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So are we viewing this trade as a win? Is there any other way to view it?
by mjschaefer on Jul 7, 2008 2:46 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
You always view trades as a win until proven otherwise. Gotta be optomistic here.
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Jul 7, 2008 9:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We have traded a player that was worthless to us for someone who will slot out to be our #1 (or two) prospect in the minors.
If LaPorta fails, then you have 2 other guys that could end up being something special down the road. With Shapiro’s history of what he gets in return for these type of tertiary players .. you have to expect one to become a major leaguer too.
Something for nothing is a beautiful thing.
by Toxicadam on Jul 7, 2008 9:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well to be fair it wasn’t nothing we gave up. Granted the 3 months of CC was worth very little to us (possibly even being a negative by dropping our 2009 draft position) but was also gave up our 2 compesatory draft picks. That while clearly not as good as getting a LaPorta, are not nothing.
by KevinV on Jul 7, 2008 9:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not to differ, I’m still catching up on everything from last night, but ESPN is saying that it is LaPorta, Cain, Green and a PTBNL still.
by Fundamentals on Jul 7, 2008 7:47 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
And they changed it. Nevermind, probably.
by Fundamentals on Jul 7, 2008 8:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So we all seem to know at this point that Taylor Green is the odds on favorite to be the PTBNL if he successfully makes the transition from 3B to 2B (however we make that assessment). Who else could the PTBNL be? Typically the pool of players that can be the PTBNL are more closely guarded than the nuclear launch codes, right?
by cheech99 on Jul 7, 2008 10:06 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Plain Dealer reporting that either Michael Brantley or Taylor Green will be the PTBNL.
by tobytobytoby on Jul 7, 2008 10:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m done with Paul Hoynes as he slept through everything yesterday. I’ll believe it when someone else reports it.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Jul 7, 2008 10:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He’s not paid for a non-stop news cycle. Not his job.
by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 10:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dammit man, I know that. We’ve been over this. I just don’t like him. Let me not like him.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Jul 7, 2008 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Milwaukee papers are saying it is most likely Green, but that the Indians may want to scout him more to see if he can play 2B. If they’re right, the Indians are the ones who will determine if it’s Green, not the Brewers.
by peter m on Jul 7, 2008 10:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No one else other than Hoynes mentioned Brantley right?
by cheech99 on Jul 7, 2008 10:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There used to be a relief pitcher named JEFF Brantley. Maybe Hoynes is thinking of him?
by peter m on Jul 7, 2008 10:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jackson’s a lefty (soft-tossing? I don’t actually know) who’s pitched mostly in relief this year (only 6 starts inn 22 or so appearances). Maybe the Indians see him as a possible lefty out of the pen? He’s struggled this year, according to the Milwaukee media, so he’s obviously not the key to the deal.
by peter m on Jul 7, 2008 10:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry. This got posted in the wrong place, somehow. I reposted it above, where I’d meant it to be in the first place.
by peter m on Jul 7, 2008 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If it’s Green, Tony Lastoria has this quote about him, sure to illicit joy from a few loyal LGT members:
It sounds like Green is being moved to 2B, and everything I have read on him so far with his approach, size, and ability screams Dustin Pedroia.
by APV on Jul 7, 2008 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
One can only hope.
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Jul 7, 2008 10:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
On the other hand, Baseball America says he has a body like Ron Cey, aka “Penguin.”
by ken from alexandria on Jul 7, 2008 11:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Illicit joy is the best kind, by far.
"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself."
by Fiddlesticks on Jul 7, 2008 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I like the Rizzo show for the most part, but these callers are idiotic. Honestly, its what I expected, but I keep expecting more from Cleveland fans.
by Fundamentals on Jul 7, 2008 10:20 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
“think of how dumb the average person is…then recognize that by definition, half of the people out there are dumber than that”
RIP
by APV on Jul 7, 2008 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Source?
In mild defense of the callers, it’s hard to focus on this as a three-player package (Jackson does not count!) when we only know one player.
by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 10:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve heard that credited to George Carlin, hence the RIP
by APV on Jul 7, 2008 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No. Around half of the callers are calling for Shapiro to be fired. Another large portion are saying that trading this early was a bad move, because some other team would have come in and wowed Shapiro at the deadline. Now, they don’t know who that team was, or what they’d offer, but some team would.
by Fundamentals on Jul 7, 2008 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I listened for about 12 minutes. It was awful. Awful I tell ya.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Jul 7, 2008 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And, consider how dumb you have to be to wait hours on a cell phone (paying many dollars for the privilege) to talk on a radio show that has a very small audience. It’s cheaper (and less dumb) to stand in your front yard and shout your opinions to passing cars!!
by peter m on Jul 7, 2008 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you can be arrested for that.
by Toxicadam on Jul 7, 2008 11:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe that should apply to stupid callers to talk radio too?
by peter m on Jul 7, 2008 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The problem with talk radio is that only the stupid people care to call. The smart people listen, disagree, and refuse to lower themselves to the discourse. I’m not sure if the solution is less dumb people with phones or more smart people who care to call (I sure don’t), but talk radio isn’t going anywhere.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Jul 7, 2008 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Which is why I’m so mean to stupid (or willfully ignorant) people. I don’t want any person who might relaly contribute something to ever feel — even for a moment — that he or she would have to be lowering themselves into the discourse.
by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The rub is that I like to hear about sports in my car. I sit through it far more often than I should. If the Jays and Ryans of the world would just call occasionally, this is exactly what would happen: You’d get one thought out, embarrass the host, he’ll say “Thanks for the call,” hang up on you, and go off on a little commentary that by the end is not at all what you were talking about.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Jul 7, 2008 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just offered to exchange nuclear launch codes for knowing the PTBNL and the Indians FO turned me down.
by elsandito on Jul 7, 2008 10:52 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
And yes, I have the codes, don’t press me on this.
by elsandito on Jul 7, 2008 10:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, Castrovince on his blog CastroTurf, just reported that the PTBNL is “believed to be either A prospect Taylor Green or AA prospect Michael Brantley’.
by cheech99 on Jul 7, 2008 11:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So it’s Green if he can hang at second, Brantley if Green looks like a fat Ronnie Belliard?
by NickFantana on Jul 7, 2008 11:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wish Brantley had just a little more pop
by APV on Jul 7, 2008 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can see the press release now:
Cleveland (AP): The Cleveland Indians launched a nuclear attack on the Bronx, pulverizing Yankees Stadium. When asked why, Cleveland Indians General Manager Mark Shapiro replied, “We’re out of the race and everyone outside New York hates the Yankees anyway. Plus, we had the launch codes just sitting around and not generating any additional long-term value for us as a small-market team. The fact that they were playing the Boston Red Sox was just added incentive. We feel that the collateral damage was an acceptable loss to rid the world of the scourges that are the New York Yankees and the Boston Red Sox so the rest of MLB can compete.”
Free Andy Marte!
by woodsmeister on Jul 7, 2008 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
For what it’s worth, over the winter Baseball America projected Rob Bryson to be the Brewers’ closer in 2111. Yes, it’s a silly exercise (they also projected Ryan Braun to be the Brewers’ 2111 centerfielder), but it says something about how they see Bryson.
by ken from alexandria on Jul 7, 2008 11:15 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Dang, those guys have some serious longevity
by Roger Dorn on Jul 7, 2008 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not sure how you managed to make that typo twice. that takes some serious distraction.
by MikeCP on Jul 7, 2008 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bryson’s numbers look a lot like Mike Pontius’s likely would, had the Indians kept Pontius in Lake County a while longer. Without knowing what the scouting reports on him are, I make this comparison as a favorable one not a negative one. Having two guys who might potentially be “closer material” greatly increases the odds that the Indians will actually develop one guy with “closer material”.
by APV on Jul 7, 2008 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
he’s been freed and the early results are positive. i haven’t heard any scouting reports about his velocity/movement, but the numbers are good
by APV on Jul 7, 2008 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well that’s good. I didn’t know he was back.
Positive development… I like.
by gte619n on Jul 7, 2008 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It would be great to have a healthy Sipp from the left side along with guys like Pontius and Bryson, who both seem to have the Jeff Stevens starter kit, from the right. Still, sometimes I wonder if we’re just going to have to pony up for a legitimate closer, a la Tampa Bay.
by ken from alexandria on Jul 9, 2008 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Let's Go Tribe!
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Sweet Baboo
Certain photos copyright © 2010 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.
