Let's Go Tribe!: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Around SBN: Myers, Phillies Top Dodgers Bar-right-arrows

The Big Trade — waiting for clarity

8zrhqvdi_tiny by Jay on in Transactions

"The player to be named component is a very important part of the value equation for us ... I know it's hard to get your arms around it when you see that PTBNL in there, but that's an advantage for us that we negotiated, to give us a little more time ... we'd probably have gone in a different direction if that player wasn't included."

If you came here looking for info on Sabathia and LaPorta — see below.

Ryan reported heavy trade talks on Friday night.

Andrew said farewell to C.C. on Sunday morning.

Ryan linked to reports of an imminent deal Sunday afternoon.

I wrote up the basic deal a few hours later.

Ryan summarized the reasons for the deal late last night.

Our buddy The Diatriber posted a nice intro to LaPorta last night.

Despite that little flurry of content, however ... we still don't know quite what to make of this deal, because we don't have all the details.  As of this moment, the Brewers have concluded their press conference and Shapiro is speaking live on TV right now, including the quote above.  We can talk about Sabathia and LaPorta, but we can't really assess this deal until all the players are known.

The talks initially were reported as involving our getting three prospects — one impact guy, one potential impact guy, and another solid prospect from the lower levels, akin to Phillips, Lee and Sizemore from the Colon deal.  It quickly became apparent that that second "potential impact guy" was two much to ask.

The deal then became one major prospect and two other good prospects — and that's where it remained.  But a confusing twist emerged when a fourth player was added to the deal — Triple-A pitcher Zach Jackson — and the insertion of those letters "PTBNL" in place of an actual.

While potentially useful, Jackson is not a prospect, and there is every indication that he is the fourth guy — the throw-in — rather than one of the main three guys who are key to the deal.  And in contrast, the PTBNL, almost always a throw-in, in this case apparently is a significant prospect — reportedly a choice of three prospects that includes 3B/2B Taylor Green, the Brewers' minor league player of the year last season.  So from what we understand ...

THE DEAL IS NOT:

1. Impact prospect OF Matt LaPorta
2. Lower-level prospect RHP Rob Bryson
3. Scrub minor leaguer LHP Zach Jackson
4. Throw-in PTBNL

THE DEAL IS:

1. Impact prospect OF Matt LaPorta
2. Quality prospect PTBNL (such as 3B/2B Green)
3. Lower-level prospect RHP Rob Bryson
4. Throw-in LHP Zach Jackson

LaPorta is comparable to Phillips (as a 2002 prospect).  The PTBNL, as we understand it, may not be at the level of Cliff Lee (2002) but is still a significant talent to add.  Bryson likewise is not quite comparable to Sizemore (2002) but isn't too far off.  Jackson isn't Lee Stevens at all, but the needs were different — at that time, the Expos needed us to take Stevens' contract; at this time, we need another warm body — any warm body — to throw the ball at the plate in Buffalo and possibly Cleveland.

As for the PTBNL, aside from Green, the most commonly cited name is CF Michael Brantley — a potential leadoff hitter who may not have enough pop to make his patience and contact-hitting work in the majors — and RF Lorenzo Cain — a five-tools guy who skipped Double-A but has yet to put up impressive numbers at any level.  None of these names can be reported officially, and the only name that has been reported consistently as being on the Indians' pick list is Green.

As Shapiro acknowledged, this is hard to get a handle on — it is, in a sense, a tremendously clumsy bit of PR, adding insult to Indians fans' injury on already bruising day.  But give Shapiro credit for consistency — ever since the Colon deal, he's always been willing to take a PR black-eye when he thinks he can get better value for the team.  A few voices within the industry are saying they think the Indians could have done better — and that may well be the case.  But it's hard to really make a judgment on that until the Indians pick that second guy, and according to Shapiro, they have a ful two months (the end of the minor league season) to do that.

We'll have more on Bryson and Jackson later today.

0 recs | Comment 282 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

I think you mean Phillips, not Bradley

by APV on Jul 7, 2008 1:09 PM EDT   0 recs

Yeah, although Bradley works, too.

by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 1:21 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

What is the structure of the PTBNL? Do we just have a deadline to pick one of the three? Is it somehow performance driven, where we get Green if CC does X, but settle for less if he doesn’t? When will we know?

LeCavs!
If you were good enough, maybe we'd name it after you.

by Matt in LA on Jul 7, 2008 1:11 PM EDT   0 recs

we have a list and till the end of the season to choose one of the players on the list

by APV on Jul 7, 2008 1:12 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

...regardless of what CC does or does not do while in a Brewers Uni.

You have no idea the physical toll that three vasectomies have on a person

by jakesinger777 on Jul 7, 2008 1:17 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Shapiro said that directly and forthrightly. Melvin was much more evasive in his press conference, suggesting that there are multiple dates and complications involved. FWIW.

"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself."

by Fiddlesticks on Jul 7, 2008 1:18 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Shapiro also used words like “incremental value”...Melvin had to be told how to pronounce Sabathia’s name. For the time being, I’m going with Shapiro’s interpretation.

by APV on Jul 7, 2008 1:25 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

And is the list officially Green, Brantley and Lucroy? And only them?

LeCavs!
If you were good enough, maybe we'd name it after you.

by Matt in LA on Jul 7, 2008 1:25 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The list is “officially” undisclosed—and undisclosable. It’s all speculation, some more informed than others.

"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself."

by Fiddlesticks on Jul 7, 2008 1:27 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Where did Lucroy’s name even come from? I think it was from the JS Online forums, in which case, you might as well cite bathroom stall graffiti.

He's extremely quick and good.

by battlekow on Jul 7, 2008 1:31 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Perhaps this applies?

Players taken in the Rule 4 Draft cannot be traded until a year after they sign their first pro contract. However, teams can work around this rule with the player to be named later rule.

Trading Rules

It seems more likely that the Indians are using the PTBNL move as a way to reduce their risk, we will see I suppose.

by Ohiokie on Jul 7, 2008 2:34 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

It can’t be disclosed. Remember the trouble that ensued when Ted Turner acknowledged that Brett Butler was the PTBNL in the Barker trade.

by SuddenSam on Jul 7, 2008 1:36 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I guess the longer Shapiro waits the better, but don’t you think fans/media will put a ton of pressure on to have PTBNL be a PTBN really soon? What do you think the unofficial fan PR deadline will be?

proverbial "moron in a hurry"

by 94neverout on Jul 7, 2008 1:32 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Shapiro doesn’t care.

by ASP on Jul 7, 2008 1:35 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

But I wanna know noooowwww!

<>

proverbial "moron in a hurry"

by 94neverout on Jul 7, 2008 2:25 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

ok, gotta learn how to insert pictures.

Veruca Salt was supposed to be inserted there.

proverbial "moron in a hurry"

by 94neverout on Jul 7, 2008 2:26 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself."

by Fiddlesticks on Jul 7, 2008 2:29 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Thank you!

proverbial "moron in a hurry"

by 94neverout on Jul 7, 2008 2:31 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I’m surprisingly tempted to make that my new avatar.

Hard truth: Your eyes lie.

by AngG on Jul 7, 2008 3:58 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I wonder how much Sabathia is going to miss having Carl Willis around to correct the kinks that occasionally infect him. If I recall correctly, Sabathia himself has acknowledged a big debt to Willis.

by FranklinScott on Jul 7, 2008 1:25 PM EDT   0 recs

Castrovince is reporting that Willis has been dealt to Milwaukee for Bernie Brewer.

Slider has been DFA’d.

You know Selig? Ombudsman.

by rolub on Jul 7, 2008 1:29 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Now there is a deal I can get behind. The slide attached to a beer vat better be included in this.

by Toxicadam on Jul 7, 2008 1:30 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

trade francisco!

by Gradyforpresident on Jul 7, 2008 1:32 PM EDT   0 recs

The face of the trade:

He's extremely quick and good.

by battlekow on Jul 7, 2008 1:41 PM EDT   1 recs

ESPN News going to Paul Hoynes for analysis of the Cleveland viewpoint

“no one here likes it but we’ve been through it before”

by palcal on Jul 7, 2008 1:53 PM EDT   0 recs

i’m hoping by “it” he means “losing”, and not the trade itself.

although he probably is referring to the latter.

You know Selig? Ombudsman.

by rolub on Jul 7, 2008 1:56 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I was driving back, listening to Baseball Beat with Charlie Steiner on XM175. He was, of course, talking about the trade. He brought on Hadricourt from Milwaukee. He was smart, articulate, sarcastic and well spoken. Following a break, he had on Paul Hoynes who was, and is, an idiot. Hoynes was given his “woe is me” speech about the franchise and Steiner was ending the interview and said something to the degree of, “We’ll talk in the future, hopefully when there is better news to report about the Indians”. To which, Hoynes replied, “You better call back in 2012.”. What a freaking moron.

by Fundamentals on Jul 7, 2008 3:26 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

the guys over at BrewcrewBall (the Brewers SBN site) hate Hadricourt for some reason. they refer to him as “he who shall not be named”. And here I thought we had trademarked that phrase for He Who Shall Not be Named.

by APV on Jul 7, 2008 3:34 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

well, I’d rather have the articulate and capable GM with the idiot beat writer than visa versa.

by DaytonDogg on Jul 7, 2008 3:48 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I haven’t listened to local talk radio yet, but shame on me for thinking Indians fans would handle this better than the Colon trade. lol

by Toxicadam on Jul 7, 2008 1:55 PM EDT   0 recs

We live in a bubble here.

by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 2:05 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

ok…who farted in the bubble?

by APV on Jul 7, 2008 2:13 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

It’s called “jacuzzi,” sir.

by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 2:14 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

“How dare you pass wind before me.”

“I’m sorry baby, I didn’t know it was your turn.”

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Jul 7, 2008 6:54 PM EDT to parent up   1 recs

I can’t help remembering how, when CC was going poorly at the beginning of the year, guys down at the ballpark were mercilessly all over him for being greedy, picking on him for being heavy, and basically wishing out loud that he’d go away.

On the issue of whether the Indians got enough, I have a feeling they got what was possible. It doesn’t sound as if there were enormous numbers of other clubs actively in the running (and it sounds from the reports I’ve read as if some of the interested ones backed off), so that limited Shapiro’s ability to get Milwaukee to up the ante. Getting LaPorta is great, just what the team needs, and if the PTBNL is Green, I think Shapiro did all right.

by peter m on Jul 7, 2008 2:02 PM EDT   0 recs

The most popular theory is that the team that got the most talented player won. Well, the most talented player in this deal is Sabathia — but in four months, the most talented player either team will still have is LaPorta.

Just as one possible scenario, the Indians figured out pretty early on that the most talented player they were going to get was LaPorta — certainly in an immediate trade and (they figured) probably at any point. At that point, the goal was get as much as they could added onto the LaPorta deal, while daring the other teams to pile up the sub-LaPorta guys they were offering in such an impressive way that it would capsize the most-talented-guy theory.

Based on that scenario, seems like they did okay. Ironically, I’m sure they fought for the right to BNTPL (be naming the player later), which the Brewers probably didn’t like much, but it was, as I think zempf said of Zach Jackson, just the last scrape at the bottom of the peanut butter jar — adding value to the deal even while annoying all of us.

by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 2:13 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I think you’re right. I also think Milwaukee was the one team they really had some leverage with. They’ve obviously decided their real window is now and to “go for it”; getting CC really makes them stronger. The other teams in the hunt either didn’t have the prospects (hence LaPorta is the best guy available) or weren’t willing to give them up (I think that’s the LA situation—the guys we really wanted are important parts of the major league club). I’ll be really interested to see what Seattle gets for Bedard (admittedly, not the pitcher CC is) if they deal him. I bet it’s not close.

by peter m on Jul 7, 2008 2:20 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I think that’s about right. It’s interesting that the Indians are getting to watch the players for the rest of the season before picking out who they want. It definitely rids the Tribe of some risk, but at the same time, most organizations probably prefer to have the guy they want in their own system. Overall, though, I like this idea a lot.

And in LaPorta, the Indians get someone who will contribute probably as soon as next year. Which is what they needed in order to keep contending as soon as next year.

by Cols714 on Jul 7, 2008 2:21 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

That last point is a good one, especially if Hafner doesn’t recover.

by peter m on Jul 7, 2008 2:24 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

If I’m not mistaken, don’t the Brewers get two compensatory draft picks once Sabathia signs with another team this off season ? If that’s true, then the Brewers got the best of this trade by a good deal.

Shapiro acted too slowly or too hastily (depending on how you look at it), IMO. I’ve said earlier that the time to trade Sabathia was before the season started so that the team he was traded to would have a better chance at signing him to a long term deal. If C.C. wasn’t willing to make a deal during the offseason and prior to spring training, then it was obvious that he was hellbent on going to the highest bidder.

Shapiro could have waited until the middle of the month to see if more teams could be lured in to the bidding process – maybe a team or two gets hot and gets back into the race. The notion that Melvin dictated that the deal had to be completed by Sunday night indicates that he had the upper hand over Shapiro, and that is not the usual position that Shapiro finds himself.

This is what happens when you roll the dice (Indians brass hoping that this was THE year) and that Sabathia would help get them to a championship; knowing that he was unwilling to sign an extension.

The package they got from the Brewers is in no way comparable to the Colon deal – not even close, IMO.

by SpringTrainingFun on Jul 7, 2008 3:48 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Misnomer alert!

We can’t say for sure that Shapiro got the best deal. But so much of what you say makes no sense.

You think there’s a big difference in value because the acquiring team would have had 6 months instead of 3 months to convince him to sign? Huh?

You think another bidder might have risen up after a couple of hot weeks? Sure. Or a team or two may drop out of the race with a couple of cold weeks. At best, they are equal possibilities. And you ignore the fact that every start the CC makes in the mean time is one he’s not making for his new team.

There was an incentive to get the deal done before Sabathia’s next start. Each start makes him a little less valuable. That has nothing to do with who was making demands, or who had the upper hand.

To the extent that it isn’t the Colon deal, well, Colon had a whole additional year. And that deal turned out to be spectacular. It’s not the norm.

As for your rolling the dice comment, I agree completely. They traded the additional value they could have received by trading CC in March for a chance this year. It’s a trade I make 100 times out of 100. It didn’t sink us for next year.

by dgcambridge on Jul 7, 2008 4:07 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Plus, I think we got more than the Twins got out of Santana. The market was actually better now.

by DaytonDogg on Jul 7, 2008 4:10 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

To review the collected wisdom of LGT and how it applies to your post:

CC Sabathia will test the market regardless. Milwaukee has no better chance at signing CC than we do just because he’s playing for them now. If we trade him before the season he’s still going to test the market. Period.

Compensatory draft picks may help your team in 4 or 5 years – we want to compete in 2009 when everyone we have hurt right now is theoretically healthy again.

The Colon deal was an aberration and comparing every deal with the Colon deal is, frankly, unfair.

Free Andy Marte!

Pronk Needs You

by woodsmeister on Jul 7, 2008 4:23 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I commend you guys on wasting your time trying to reason with someone who thinks the Sabathia/Colon deals are somehow comparable.

by Toxicadam on Jul 7, 2008 4:25 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Ya know what Adam? I’m not sure this deal won’t be as good as the Colon deal – not yet. This is Shapiro’s game – I doubt that anybody can out play him. Time will tell.

Resident LGT beer kinda sewer

by mauichuck on Jul 7, 2008 9:12 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

you need to just change your signature to “time will tell” to save you some typing. or “time will tell. trust me, i’m older than time”

by Brick. on Jul 7, 2008 10:36 PM EDT to parent up   1 recs

Come on, now. Didn’t you know that all trades are comparable? Thus, any trade for prospects that doesn’t turn out like the Amos Rusie for Christy Mathewson deal is a Bad Trade.

by FredOx on Jul 8, 2008 10:12 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

FWIW, Dolan said on the radio that there were 7 teams in the running. Probably not on Sunday, but total.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Jul 7, 2008 6:58 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I really wish I had time to make a road trip to Akron to watch a couple of games in the next few weeks…

by APV on Jul 7, 2008 2:15 PM EDT   0 recs

I’m really weighing this. Watching CC on Tuesday, and trying to make it to the Aeros game on Wednesday.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Jul 7, 2008 7:02 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Castroturf has an update to his earlier piece that Shapiro confirmed that there are only 2 players candidates for the PTBNL, and that “the agent for Brantley and Green posted in a blog that Brantley is not part of this deal in any way, shape, or form”.

He’s not reporting that Brantley is out as fact though, because he further writes “if that were true, it would be a shame”

Keeps getting more interesting.

by cheech99 on Jul 7, 2008 2:31 PM EDT   0 recs

could someone tell me what’s so great about Brantley? I have the 2008 BA Handbook and it seems like he’s bad outfielder defensively and has absolutely no power. The avg and OBP are definately sexy, but we already have a speedy outfielder with good playe discipline (Crowe) and he has more power and a better glove.

I like Green alot more and Lucroy is also very interesting.

by JP_Frost on Jul 7, 2008 2:46 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Crowe’s like 4 years older than Brantley. And that’s significant.

by APV on Jul 7, 2008 2:48 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Well, he’s younger than all but two players on the team a level below him, and has a 39/18 BB/K. He has very little power and isn’t great in center, but there’s still time for him to improve both of those things and become a quality CF/leadoff hitter. FWIW, he as many HR in June as he had in his entire professional career up until that point.

He's extremely quick and good.

by battlekow on Jul 7, 2008 2:59 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Brantley has already passed Crowe. He could reasonably be at AAA by the end of the year and is younger. OBP is better consistently, AVG is better consistently, SB% is better consistently.

by DaytonDogg on Jul 7, 2008 3:56 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Rosenthal reporting that LA offered a bigger deal, but wanted Blake and CC, and the Indians backed off:

“In winning the Sabathia sweepstakes, the Brewers outbid at least six teams, including the Los Angeles Dodgers, who could have offered a stronger overall package than Milwaukee and expanded the deal to include Indians infielder/outfielder Casey Blake.”

I’d like to hear more about that deal as well.

by mcrose on Jul 7, 2008 2:41 PM EDT   0 recs

Yes indeed. If this is true, it may mean the Indians think they’ll be able to get more for Blake in a separate trade nearer the deadline. But, I’m also skeptical. If there really was a “stronger package,” then you’d assume Shapiro would go to Milwaukee and try to get them to include Gamel or someone else. They balk, so you trade with LA. The Indians evidently preferred the Brewer deal, so either the LA deal wasn’t good enough or it wasn’t there.

by peter m on Jul 7, 2008 2:47 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

This may have been a case of only one of those teams having LaPorta.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Jul 7, 2008 7:04 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

And that’s not meant in a snide way. Just that it’s possible Shapiro really wanted him.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Jul 7, 2008 7:04 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

isn’t Rosenthal merely saying that the Dodgers COULD have offered a stronger package? Obviously, LA has more pieces to work with than Milwaukee in terms of young talent, but I think they found the Tribe’s asking price for CC too high. Perhaps they said that we could get that package if Shapiro included Blake, but that would sort of rape us since Blake is a very tradeable player.

ah well, I’m pretty satisfied with what we got.

by JP_Frost on Jul 7, 2008 2:50 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yes … “bigger” doesn’t mean “stronger,” and as peter m alludes, it may not have been better enough to justify including Blake. The Indians probably already know what they can get from Tampa for Blake.

by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 2:51 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Shapiro did say they have no active talks ongoing. I’m not sure what his definition of “active” is.

by APV on Jul 7, 2008 2:57 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

It means he wasn’t talking to someone else while he was sitting, answering questions at the press conference. When he returned to his office, however, he had 11 different GMs on hold and immediately resumed wheeling and dealing.

by Nat on Jul 7, 2008 3:35 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Similar to the definition of “is” perhaps?

There are no active trade talks.

I am not actively talking to any teams about a trade, right here at this moment, while I am sitting here answering your questions.

by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 4:10 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I’m just talkin’ ‘bout Shap.

Hard truth: Your eyes lie.

by AngG on Jul 7, 2008 4:40 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Just would like to find out more – I thought LA had potentially a better balance of hitting and pitching to give. You could read Rosenthal’s comment a few deifferent ways – I just hope it wasn’t a case of us not wanting to give up Blake that held it back. Whatever “it” was.

by mcrose on Jul 7, 2008 3:37 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I’d really like to see Blake traded (his value seems to have peaked lately and we really don’t need him anymore, IMO), but this seems a little far fetched as far as rumors go. Would Blake even be a good fit for LA? I see Nomar (3b), LaRoche (3b), Loney (1b), a crowded outfield, and various other utility infielder types. I’m not sure what a team would offer for Blake’s expiring contract either. Maybe a quality AAA reliever or A position player?

by Pronk33 on Jul 7, 2008 4:55 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

They don’t seem to want to throw LaRoche in there, so in that sense Blake would feel right at home.

Blakes gives them a cheap replacement for Furcal, as long as they feel Nomar can handle shortstop.

by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 5:57 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

But Jay, I thought Blake was a natural shortstop.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Jul 7, 2008 7:06 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Close — he’s a natural stopgap.

by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 7:20 PM EDT to parent up   1 recs

including the Los Angeles Dodgers, who could have offered a stronger overall package than Milwaukee and expanded the deal to include Indians infielder/outfielder Casey Blake."

Far be it from me to speculate, but this smacks of a GM temper tantrum. Oh well, Dodgers, Casey Blake is still available.

by Ryan on Jul 7, 2008 2:55 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Hm.

by Jay on Jul 7, 2008 3:01 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Gotta agree with that. In a deal of top prospect-anchored package for half-season of Cy Young award winner, I find it doubtful that the sticking point was a half-season of well-bearded 35-year-old corner infielder.

by fleerdon on Jul 7, 2008 8:44 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs