I'm hearing [the Shoppach PTBNL] will be one of two right-handed pitchers -- Mitch Talbot or Joseph Cruz.
Castrovince, confirming (sort of) the earlier Indians-Rays trade news. Talbot's a 25-year-old in AAA who's out of options; Cruz is a 20-year-old in A-ball.
UPDATE: Per Lastoria's Twitter, the list of potential PTBNLs is >2, and the finalization of the pick has been delayed at the Rays' request til Monday the 21st. Follow all the fresh, hot PTBNL action over at Tony's place.
about 2 years ago
fleerdon
102 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
hope it’s cruz
If you don't respect Aaron Laffey, I will fight you.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on Dec 15, 2009 11:11 PM EST reply actions
Many of you saw this yesterday, I’m sure. Just curious — is there a compelling case to be made for Talbot over Cruz? I think Talbot’s an intriguing talent, but don’t we already have Pino and some other guys as upper-level depth starters? I don’t see any reason not to try to max out our upside here.
The DRaysBay crew has wanted it to be Talbot all along, which — whatever they may say about wanting him to have his opportunity — makes me suspicious.
by fleerdon on Dec 15, 2009 11:14 PM EST reply actions
It’s not the Indians’ job to provide Talbot with an opportunity so that his seven fans in the greater Tampa area can feel good about it. Anyone who thinks the Indians would ever give a rat’s ass about something like that should give Jordan Brown a call.
Saw this on Castro’s blog a few days ago. I can’t imagine the Indians not taking Cruz and add another arm to the stockpile, but perhaps the team is waiting for Westbrook to make his final start in the winter league (which is tonight) to get another report on his progress before selecting.
What was great is today Rotoworld listed him as “Joseph Castrovince”
Obviously an old report, I think Talbot is 26 now, right? If he had a “low-mid 90’s” sinker with his supposedly solid change up, wouldn’t we have heard a lot more of him?
Clearly old but there’s still a lot to be gleaned.
Essentially, Astros draftee, came over with Zorbist, trhows a lot of junk.
But his father let him throw righthanded…
by stuart dean on Dec 16, 2009 11:37 AM EST up reply actions
So, it’s been Shoppach for Cruz all along, and Shapiro negotiated Talbot as an emergency fallback in the event of … alien abduction or something, I’m not really sure.
by fleerdon on Dec 16, 2009 9:45 AM EST up reply actions
I just actually clicked on the link; everyone should go there to see Acta in the still shot from the accompanying video clip.
Me too!
"Nobody ever thinks, 'Hey, maybe I’m actually an idiot.'" - Jay
by woodsmeister on Dec 16, 2009 2:41 PM EST up reply actions
The accompanying caption should read: "Manny Acta looks ahead to the end of prohibition. "
Wait 'til next millennium!
by emd2k3 on Dec 16, 2009 11:44 AM EST up reply actions 3 recs
Cruz is really good, no doubt, but he’s going to be in High A next year. I would rather have the guy who would actually pitch for us next year.
LGT's resident moderate Yankee hating fan.
Obviously there is no way to know that.
Do we not have enough guys that are already on the 40 man roster that are options to start? Besides that….who of those arms we currently have that Talbot is an improvement over? Sowers…Maybe. Who does he offer more upside than? Sowers and Pino…maybe. Thats it really. At least in my opinion. I suppose he might be on par with Huff/Laffey is everything clicks, but not likely.
Taking a rookie pitcher thats 26 years old without options left wouldn’t be smart for a club to do when it already has so many question marks.
No worries, I got you. But the short answer is because we already have these guys:
Westbrook
Fausto
Huff
Laffey
Masterson
Sowers
Carrasco
Pino
Rondon
if he had an option, fine, throw his name in the mix. i’m sure the rays would be the ones to claim him if we waived him, too. who was that dude anyway this year?
Winston Abreu?…who by the way, while old, was striking out 40% of the guys he faced in AAA this year prior to his arrival in Cleveland. And yet I don’t think we miss him. Minor league bullpen arms are a total mystery to me.
Most of those guys are huge question marks. You make a good point, though. We have enough high level people where going with the riskier dude is probably the better option.
LGT's resident moderate Yankee hating fan.
My problem with Talbot isn’t that he is old or that he is out of options. It is that he is old AND out of options. I just have a hard time imagining a scenario where he would have an impact beyond a portion of the 2010 season.
+1 – I have to think it’s Cruz, for all the reasons mentioned.
Talbot had an intriguing scouting report at one time (low- to mid-90s), but that report is old – from what I heard, his fastball is more 87-91 now. His changeup is his best pitch, but he’s struggled to make the adaptation to MLB over the past 2 seasons (albeit in a limited sample size).
While potentially, he MAY be a bit better than Sowers, Sowers has accomplished more than him while being just 6 months older, and from most reports, Talbot sounds like an “opposite-mirror” image of Sowers, and like Sowers, I believe, is out of options, so why would we add him when we have a more accomplished pitcher like him (Sowers) already?
I can’t see where we wouldn’t take Cruz – he fits the recent profile of adding young, power arms with some upside. In my mind, it makes perfect sense (although that doesn’t guarantee it will be the choice they make, but you’d think Cruz would be the choice. Why Shapiro and company are adding to the suspense by waiting to announce it, I’m not sure? Maybe they just want to add some excitement for Christmas week? :-)
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
Skimmed some numbers in greater detail. Cruz is really good. The H/9 is — I don’t know, what’s the word for a 20-year-old pitcher’s flaws? “Worrisome”? But he’s young, and his BABIP was really high. I actually like him better than Alex Cobb or that Nick Barnese guy that the prospectarazzi are all Lady Ga-Ga over. Looks like a sneaky-good get.
by fleerdon on Dec 18, 2009 3:55 PM EST reply actions
Agreed…so why is Mitch Talbot still even considered an option?
Why are they waiting until the 20th to make the decision?
by The DiaTriber on Dec 18, 2009 4:08 PM EST up reply actions
Why are they waiting until the 20th to make the decision?
If Shapiro were to tell you, he’d have to send Agent M to kill you.
"Nobody ever thinks, 'Hey, maybe I’m actually an idiot.'" - Jay
by woodsmeister on Dec 18, 2009 5:52 PM EST up reply actions
Agent M only gets brought out if the weather makes it too difficult for Santa to fly his sleigh on Christmas
I invested a solid four minutes into figuring out the significance of the date, Dec. 20. I came up with nothing.
403rd anniversary of the Virginia Company leaving for Jamestown. 13th anniversary of the merger of NeXT and Apple Computer.
I know you’re avoiding mention of Hitler’s release from prison in 1924, as that would mean that you automatically lost the argument.
by Jay on Dec 19, 2009 12:24 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Maybe under the Julian Calendar it is.
"Nobody ever thinks, 'Hey, maybe I’m actually an idiot.'" - Jay
by woodsmeister on Dec 19, 2009 12:02 PM EST up reply actions
According to TheClevelandFan.com, Dec. 20, 1993 was the date that we traded Felix Fermin and Reggie Jefferson to Seattle for Omar Vizquel – that’s why Shapiro waited until the 20th. :-)
Although, unless I missed something, I still haven’t heard who it officially is (although for all the reasons mentioned above, it has to be Cruz, right?), and it’s 7:25 P.M. EST.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
Right, in the event that Joe Cruz loses his arm in a freak gasoline fighting accident at 23:53.
by fleerdon on Dec 20, 2009 3:49 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, for serious. Can somebody just come out with it so I can get back to not caring already?
by fleerdon on Dec 20, 2009 3:44 PM EST up reply actions
No PTBNL for you. Lastoria’s tweet:
Announcement of PTBNL in Shoppach trade delayed until Monday 12/21. Indians already made their pick, but need to get in touch with player.
Steel Nick
His updated tweet:
Impeccable source says Indians have NOT made PTBNL selection and that more players are being considered than the reported two player list.
Okay, it had better be somebody flippin’ sweet at this point. I did not mildly inconvenience myself two or three times today so we could end up with the same 20-year-old starter we were supposed to get all along.
by fleerdon on Dec 20, 2009 10:24 PM EST up reply actions
and we can trade someone to Seattle for Morrow! Other (fake, right?) Nick, you see where I’m going with this?
"I'm a baseball lifer. It's what I do." —Manny Acta
This is probably the wrong place to put this, but I was looking at Carlos Carrasco’s “disappointing” 2009 numbers, in light of the Lee and Halladay trades and thought this little comparison is interesting:
Carlos Carrasco – 2009 in AAA
3.71 FIP, 1.21 WHIP, 8.32 K/9, 2.53 BB/9 in 160 IP
Wade Davis – 2009 in AAA
3.82 FIP, 1.21 WHIP, 7.64 K/9, 3.27 BB/9 in 165 IP
Wade Davis just turned 24 in September, Carlos Carrasco is turning 23 in March.
by The DiaTriber on Dec 21, 2009 10:34 AM EST up reply actions
Of all the causes Paul’s championing this off-season, CarCar’s gotta be my favorite.
by fleerdon on Dec 21, 2009 1:05 PM EST up reply actions
Because not every player needs a contrived nickname?
by Brad D on Dec 22, 2009 7:52 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Lastoria saying Mitch Talbot for sure, with the possibility of another player in the deal. Color me unimpressed.
Actually, he’s not saying that at all. He’s saying that Talbot was on the original list, but he’s not reporting that Talbot has been chosen.
"Nobody ever thinks, 'Hey, maybe I’m actually an idiot.'" - Jay
by woodsmeister on Dec 21, 2009 11:38 AM EST up reply actions
Let’s hope that “other player” is a little more significant – maybe Joseph Cruz, perhaps?
In fact, wasn’t there a report that mentioned that Shapiro and company think that the player we were to get in this deal would be helpful and be on the roster (i.e. be impactful on this 2010 team), or am I mixing this trade up with another one?
If I’m correct, I don’t see how Talbot is that guy, unless he’s in the bullpen and his fastball improves (especially velocity-wise and late movement), along with his changeup.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
I’ll try to catch up. :-)
The one thing I was not aware of was the elbow strain – is this the reasoning behind picking him? I would think with an elbow strain, it would be less likely that he would be picked up off waivers if he’s removed off the 40-man, which means we could send him down to the Minors (and I presume he hasn’t been in baseball long enough to refuse the assignment – correct me if I’m wrong).
If that’s the case, the trade makes a little (emphasize “little”) more sense, only in that we might be able to keep him beyond ST if he doesn’t stick in ST, though I still would have rather had Cruz and taken my chances with him based on projection and the fact that we have quite a few starting candidates for the 5th spot and most of the bullpen spots already filled in in the bullpen. I just don’t see how Talbot fits long term – if we can keep him beyond ST in the Minors, the deal makes a little more sense; otherwise, it doesn’t make any sense to me, since I can’t see Talbot being a clearly better option for the #5 spot or for a spot in the bullpen for 2010.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
Reading through Lastoria’s update again (via Indians.com), the report suggests that Talbot finished 2009 healthy, making two starts in the IL playoffs.
Whether he would be picked off waivers would depend on whether teams see him as being fully recovered from the elbow strain or not. If they do see him as healthy, then I must think that the Indians think he’ll stick on the 2010 team – otherwise, why pick him? It makes no sense to me otherwise, especially when compared to Cruz who could have been kept in the Minors and have him develop further over the next few years.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
::tyler takes large bite out of wtf sandwich::
Well, watch him be awesome, now.
by fleerdon on Dec 21, 2009 1:03 PM EST up reply actions
Can you say, “what?”
Seriously, I seen on Lastoria’s Twitter site Mitch Talbot’s name, and my thoughts turned to the following:
1. What are they (Indians’ FO and/or Shapiro, whichever you prefer to put in this blank) thinking?
2. Why did I have a feeling when I was listing some logical reasons in my post from yesterday why it should be Cruz that, somehow, it would be Talbot? Just a sneaky suspicion in the back of my mind that, somehow, it would be Talbot.
Regarding point #1:
- Talbot is out of options, so either he has to stick or, essentially, we traded Shoppach away for nothing. I don’t just mean a “weak” player or non-prospect – I mean nothing. I know that it was analyzed and debated on this site that we may have held onto Shoppach a year too long after Shoppach essentially collapsed in 2009, offensively and even defensively, but still, you wanted something for him – if Talbot doesn’t stick, we don’t have anything to show for him.
Now, if the scouting report Andrew mentioned above related to today’s Talbot, he’d be worth selecting, but if the other reports that suggest he’s only hitting 87-91 with his fastball, and the fact that he’s failed to make the transition over the past 2 years (though I only discovered yesterday that he’s only made 3 appearances at the ML level, in 2009, I think), then this pick makes virtually no sense in my opinion.
Especially in light of the fact that we had been taking young, power-arm pitchers in most of our trades of late. Talbot is certainly not that guy, especially when compared to Cruz.
If we wanted another starter to compete for the last spot in the rotation, why not just put Ambriz in that mix – after all, he’s started virtually his entire career, and while he might project better as a bullpen guy, he has more experience as a a starter right now, plus his stuff probably grades out as well or better than Talbot’s.
As mentioned, Sowers is more accomplished than Talbot, and I think most here would label Sowers as a disappointment, being he was the #6 overall pick in 2004. As I said yesterday, Talbot is more like an “opposite mirror image” of Sowers, and Sowers has hardly excelled with a similar repertoire (though Talbot does have a better changeup, granted, but similar FB velocity and similar struggles adapting to the MLs, albeit with a smaller sample size).
Let’s hope the Indians see something in him that the reports are not picking up on. Maybe they plan to put Talbot in the bullpen and think his fastball will play up and his changeup will excel there. That’s about the only way I see Talbot perhaps being more than just “another guy” and sticking on this team for 2010 – I don’t see him making any significant contribution in 2010 otherwise (as Adam, I think, mentioned above).
Overall, let’s hope this works out for the Indians, even though at this point, I’m scratching my head and am bewildered by it. Maybe Shapiro wanted to throw a brain teaser at us for Christmas. :-)
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
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
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
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.
