Transactions: Shoppach Traded
by Ryan on Dec 2, 2009 10:18 AM EST
in Transactions
117 comments
Traded C Kelly Shoppach to Tampa Bay for a Player to be Named Later
Kelly's career stats:
There are several factors that contributed up to this trade. First, and most importantly, the Indians have two young catchers (Lou Marson, and later Carlos Santana) that they'd like to get a good look at this year. They could have waited until they thought Santana was ready to handle a major league staff to trade him, but there was little chance that he would remain with the team through the 2010 season.
Shoppach is also in his second year of arbitration, and is due for a small raise from his $1.95M 2009 salary. Kelly's offense fell off dramatically in 2009, though he still managed a 98 OPS+, still very good for a catcher. Shoppach's offensive game is always going to be an amended Three True Outcomes (home runs, strikeouts, and, in hit by pitches), but last season the strikeouts were up and the power was down. I don't see 2009 as part of a downward trend for Kelly, though. Finally, Kelly was very critical of organization after the Victor Martinez trade, and while that criticism probably had little to do with the trade, it also made dealing him in the offseason an easier call than if he had embraced his opportunity after the trade. I still think he was going to be dealt sooner or later, but it would have made more sense to wait until during the 2010 season to do it, since his value might have gone up with better offensive production.
The trade means that Lou Marson will be the Indians' Opening Day catcher, and most likely that Wyatt Toregas will be his backup. Carlos Santana is slated to spend some time in AAA until the Indians feel he's ready defensively.
The Indians, as is often their tactic, will choose a player from an agreed-to list. The deadline for making the pick is December 20th, so I'll comment on the player then.
0 recs |
117 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
I’m not particularly happy about this whole Shoppach thing. I think Shoppach is another example of good talent acquisition, followed by poor asset utilization. We already had Santana in the system following the 2008 season and should have looked to trade Shoppach then….or not traded for Marson and kept him for the first half of this season and played him regularly. I think we wasted Shoppach.
What I really wonder about the whole thing is his utilization at the end of last year, post-Victor trade. Checking http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CLE/2009-lineups.shtml I don’t really understand why they (Wedge, I guess) would basically shut him down after 9/9 — I understand that at that point you’re trying to manage playing time between 3 catchers (insert Gimenez joke here), but it seems like you’d want to see what you have in Shoppach to either showcase him for a potential offseason trade or verify that you’re OK in just non-tendering him.
*sigh*
by zempf on Dec 2, 2009 11:39 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Didn’t he and Wedgie get into a dugout confrontation around that time?
by JulioBernazard on Dec 2, 2009 11:45 AM EST up reply actions
Even in August, it seems like Toregas and Gimenez started way too many games.
"Nobody ever thinks, 'Hey, maybe I’m actually an idiot.'" - Jay
by woodsmeister on Dec 2, 2009 11:55 AM EST up reply actions
By virtue of the fact that they started any.
by fwembt on Dec 2, 2009 6:05 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I think it’s pretty obvious now. I think when they acquired Marson, they basically decided they would move Shoppach in the winter. They wanted to get good looks at Marson and Toregas. Gimenez only caught three games in the last two months. I doubt Shoppach could have done much in the last couple of months to swing his trade value considerably in either direction.
I think it took a little longer – they had to at least do some evaluation of how Marson would handle himself behind the plate and in the lineup, to make sure he was minimally ready for major league duty. Apart from basic performance, I’d guess their most important evaluation was getting feedback on how well he handled his pitchers. Seems he got a passing grade.
I actually liked what I saw of him behind the plate, and the fact that was able to draw walks right away was a nice sign. Considering the general overhaul of the team, and the fact that Santana is their surest prospect, no reason not to save some money on Shoppach.
I agree with this assuming the trade market for a catcher hasn’t improved since then (which I guess we’ll know when we find out what we actually got in return for Shoppach). But your larger point about the Indians not dealing “not all that young” players when they are coming off of a career year stands. I think Raffy B would have been a player despite the situation of the team that should have been moved at peak value. I think its the way she goes as far as how small market teams are going to survive as contenders. Whenever an asset looks to reach its probable peak value we should be looking to cash it in (understanding its not exactly as clear cut as this, but as a general key to a decision model, I think it should hold true.)
meh, i can’t really agree with this principle. you get value from your assets in other ways than just cashing them in. sure, it’s always great to cash in on guys like sabathia because the probable cost of doing so (in that case, losing him for the rest of 2008, an already lost season) is low, the expected gain from cashing in (getting a blue chip prospect like laporta) is high, and the next best alternative (letting sabathia walk and getting draft pick compensation) isn’t all that appealing. but by your proposed philosophy (trade players when they near their peak value), wouldn’t we be looking to move grady as soon as he bounces back this season? certainly he’d bring in a bigger haul now than he would if we moved him in one or two seasons, given equal levels of performance.
i guess my thinking is that, in order to capture the most productive years of a guy’s career, you have to, by definition, hold on to him “too long.” in order for a small market team to win, you have to keep hoping that you get peak seasons from a couple of guys like shoppach and garko to go along with the already great production you get from the sizemores and martinezes on your team. as long as you are reasonably well-informed about the guy’s true abilities/talent level, if you hold onto him too long because you keep “rolling the dice” in hopes of winning a championship, i think it’s the right move.
if not moving shoppach at peak value (after 2008) is a failure at all, it is a failure of talent evaluation—i mean, if that year was really such an outlier, you’d hope that the scouts would be able to see why he wouldn’t be able to sustain that kind of production going forward.
If you don't respect Aaron Laffey, I will fight you.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on Dec 2, 2009 12:39 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
you get value from your assets in other ways than just cashing them in
Certainly. And I am sure the Indians expected to contend this season and therefore did not want to part with Shoppach. But Shoppach was always going to be a part-time catcher on this team, and I really hesitate to call your part-time catcher an essential part of your team. Especially given the big red flag related to Shoppach’s contact skills and the presence of a perfectly acceptable back-up catcher in the organization (Toregas).
if not moving shoppach at peak value (after 2008) is a failure at all, it is a failure of talent evaluation
I’m not sure on this point.
I think the part-time aspect is key and why I was in favor of trading him last year even if we couldn’t get what was perceived to be fair value in a trade return for him.
The Indians at this point last year had good system depth at catcher and would have stood to benefit from moving a player like Shoppach, given that we had what I felt were adequate replacements as a backup, and a long-term plan in Santana.
The trade-off would have meant more playing time for Garko, and a little more behind the plate time for Victor. Ultimately, I think two factors prevented the front office from pulling the trigger: a. they weren’t liking the offeres they were getting and b. They expected to contend in 2009.
i think you understate how important the FO might have deemed shoppach to be for 2009. nobody knew how vic would bounce back after his injury-plagued 2008; i think they expected shoppach to, at minimum, catch about half the games and be one of the go-to right handed pinch hitters. i think that it was a distinct possibility that he’d end up doing much more than that, because of the victor situation. was he “essential”? i don’t know. . . for a playoff run, almost everybody who logs significant playing time is essential.
the reason i say that there might have been a failure in talent evaluation is because shoppach’s 2008 made it difficult for us to know what kind of player he was going to be in the future. in my view, he used to be seen as a defense-first player who had shown some of that power and plate discipline, but since his early days with the team we’ve seen a combination of downward-trending defense and a huge 2008 spike in power numbers. it seems like the ups and downs of his career, as well as a relatively small sample size of major league ABs prior to 2008, made some good subjective talent evaluation all the more important in figuring out what kind of player shoppach was going to be.
i’m not saying that not trading shoppach WAS a failure; i’m saying that if it was a failure, it didn’t have to do with the organization’s philosophy in keeping him, it had to do with the organization’s failure to get an accurate picture of what kind of player he really was. hopefully that makes sense.
If you don't respect Aaron Laffey, I will fight you.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on Dec 2, 2009 1:22 PM EST up reply actions
If Sizemore bounces back I wouldn’t call that a peak season. I’m specifically pointing to players roughly 28 years old and older having years that when you look at it they’re isn’t much chance of them achieving such a level again (Raffy B, Shoppach’s 2008), much less performing better than that level. I think you look to move these guys with the caveat that there is a plan in place where a decent replacement player exists (Toregas as APV mentions for example).
While I agree that trading Shoppach last year would have been the right move (frankly, I saw it as the “obvious” move at the time), we must recall that the seller-side of the catcher market was perhaps not all that hot. I recall the Rangers having roughly 9 major-league ready catchers, so extracting fair value for Shoppach may have been difficult. No, the Rangers didn’t end up trading any of their catchers, but that doesn’t mean they didn’t drastically affect the trade market…
I agree with this. I think the Indians made an effort to trade Shoppach—people here were calling for it, as I remember, so it’s not hard to imagine the thought occurring to Shapiro—and didn’t find the return worth the cost of giving him up. Plus, there was hope he would bloom into one of the most feared power-hitting catchers in the AL, so there would be some reluctance to trade him unless you were clearly getting value in return.
I didn’t notice this mentioned in any of the previous discussions, so I’m including it from the PD article:
“This falls in line with everything else that’s gone on around here for the last two years,” said Shoppach.
and
Shapiro said the Indians are considering two players to complete the Shoppach deal.
Steel Nick
I kind of figured the latter. They worked it down to two players with the Rays, the Rays were okay swapping either guy, so they asked for a few weeks to figure it out.
Frankly, given the apparent quality of their scouting, I’m not sure why they always need so much time to figure this stuff out.
If I had their track record, I would take longer each time. Not for the sake of decision making, but smoke and mirrors, make it look like we’re still clueless. Obviously I’m not being serious, I just love the idea of Shapiro playing mental games with other GMs on trades.
Welcome back, Sandy! ATALECG...
Frankly, given the apparent quality of their scouting, I’m not sure why they always need so much time to figure this stuff out.
It can’t hurt. What’s your hurry?
It’s an extra bit of lemon juice in the eye of the fans every time they pull this stunt.
by Jay on Dec 3, 2009 2:39 AM EST up reply actions
This seems like it should be sarcasm, but it seems an odd place for it, and I can’t see any signs. If you consider it “lemon juice,” so be it, but it doesn’t matter one bit, does it? After all, it’s resulted in good players so far, with or without this waiting period.
I like the waiting. We sit and talk about it, see nobody for weeks and resign ourselves to slightly lower expectations. Then when it has slipped near the back of our minds, there he is. A brand new shiny baseball player. It’s like waking up on your birthday and forgetting what day it is for the first few hours. That is if you like your birthday.
Welcome back, Sandy! ATALECG...
It’s more like paying for something and then having to wait two weeks to see what you get. And, invariably, being disappointed.
But the mystery box could be anything!
by cleveland teamer on Dec 4, 2009 2:35 PM EST up reply actions
Shapiro claims we’ve gotten better returns this way, and maybe we should give him the benefit of the doubt. I’m not all that certain. Who were the players we passed up? Would it really have been that hard to pick out the right guy at the time of the deal?
The lemon juice thing wasn’t sarcasm. When the Indians make these deals, it’s always tough on the fans. We seek some small comfort in the quality of players coming back, even though, inevitably, whoever we get back is going to seem a lot smaller than who we gave up.
The PTBNL habit makes this significantly worse. A PTBNL registers in the psyche as “zero.” We trade Sabathia, and this is who we get back:
- SLUGGER — possibly a future star! = some consolation
- Some pitchers who’s been kicking around up and down = whatever
- A reliever who’s years away = zero
- PTBNL = zero
Now if there’s no delay in naming Brantley, here’s what that looks like:
- SLUGGER — possibly a future star! = some consolation
- SPEEDSTER — possibly a future leadoff hitter! = some consolation
- Some pitchers who’s been kicking around up and down = whatever
- A reliever who’s years away = zero
Being able to say that we might have gotten back our future cleanup and leadoff hitters would have made a difference to fans. It transforms the package. Finding out two months later does nothing for the original injury. The damage is done.
by Jay on Dec 3, 2009 8:58 PM EST up reply actions
Now, I realize that this trade is not a great example to use. The two GMs basically admitted that they had a gentleman’s agreement that the Indians would get the better player if the Brewers made the playoffs. We can only assume that the Indians absolutely, positively, could not have pried Brantley loose from them (along with LaPorta) without agreeing to this weird provision, so I can’t fault them for this.
Still, the general point stands, which is that public outrage at these trades is made incrementally worse by not knowing all the significant ameliorating elements on the day the trade is announced.
by Jay on Dec 3, 2009 9:00 PM EST up reply actions
This is all well and true, but so what? If Shapiro truly valued micromanaging fan reaction to this extent, I think the club would be pretty royally screwed, because he’d use fan reaction to make some pretty poor decisions.
PTBNL = 0 is no longer true for Shapiro, and if the average fan hasn’t adjusted to that, it’s their fault. I know we here at LGT have picked up on that. If cle.com never does, it’s not like it’s out of character for them to fail to understand how a front office works.
haha, no offense, but i think you might suck at customer service
seriously. . . so many on here act like shapiro should give no thought whatsoever as to whether he alienates the fan base. that’s just not a good way to run a business. your customers’ feelings are relevant, no matter how ill-informed they may be.
If you don't respect Aaron Laffey, I will fight you.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on Dec 4, 2009 10:57 AM EST up reply actions
i might add that this is especially true in a market like cleveland, where the demand for baseball is quite elastic
If you don't respect Aaron Laffey, I will fight you.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on Dec 4, 2009 11:00 AM EST up reply actions
I think Shapiro understands that the only thing that will create a substantial uptick in attendance is winning. Breeding goodwill by avoiding PTBNL might have some marginal effect on how quickly fans return once a winner is in town but I’m not convinced.
In other words, I’m not convinced that Shapiro’s best plan isn’t just to ignore breeding goodwill until he’s got another winner. People who complain about the PTBNL weren’t going to buy tickets to come see Brantley anyway. At least not until Brantley is part of a playoff team.
I dunno… in a deal for Shoppach, a PTBNL isn’t such an issue. In deals for you best pitcher or best position player, a PTBNL is huge. People tend to think, no matter who we eventually get, that we traded our best players for nothing. That’s a sentiment that sticks around in people’s minds.
"You are an LGT success story" -- Jay
by Turkmenbashi on Dec 4, 2009 11:48 AM EST up reply actions
I don’t agree. The negative sentiment is created, in the extreme, as soon as Sabathia or Lee is traded. The negative sentiment is not reduced or changed until the team is a contender.
I don’t see the point of a sliding scale of fan displeasure. It’s an either/or proposition when related to the gate receipts, and the only thing that makes it ‘or’ is wins.
Jay’s point about Shapiro’s PTBNL angering fans is well-taken: I’m sure it does. But, again, they won’t be angry once the team makes the playoffs and, again, what small-market team is still drawing despite not winning because of “goodwill created”?
I just thought of this:
Jay’s right that it’s more lemon juice the fans’ eyes. But, then again, the fans are already lying on the ground with their chest torn open, still beating heart a couple of feet away near the wastebasket.
Who cares about the lemon juice?
That’s a fair point.
To be clear, also, I am not saying the PTBNL “angers” the fans. They hardly even register it.
What I’m saying is that the fan anger is eased just a bit by the perceived return, and the PTBNL dramatically reduces the perceived return.
by Jay on Dec 4, 2009 2:22 PM EST up reply actions
it doesn’t matter unless the guys are major leaguers.
sizemore, phillips, and lee where not PTBNL and it was still COLON FOR NOTHING!
I think, with that trade in the rear view mirror, that even the rank-and-file Indians fan is just a tad more sophisticated now.
by Jay on Dec 4, 2009 2:22 PM EST up reply actions
sure. i can’t say i remember the reaction for some recent moves..
Ryan Garko sucks for Scott Nobody Barnes?
Who do you think was less significant, Nobody Barnes or Cracker Graham?
by Jay on Dec 4, 2009 4:21 PM EST up reply actions
only time will tell. it’s impossible to know if nicknames like this will stick. gm’s trade players birth names. Nobody, Cracker and Sucks can only be evaluated from the point of the trades going forward. You can’t really count their time as Scott, Connor and David Huff’s Personal Left Fielder
by Brick. on Dec 7, 2009 11:03 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
If Ryan Garko has a business card, I hope “David Huff’s Personal Left Fielder” is on it.
"Nobody ever thinks, 'Hey, maybe I’m actually an idiot.'" - Jay
by woodsmeister on Dec 7, 2009 12:13 PM EST up reply actions
I’ve actually spent two summers working customer service, where my job was to apologize to customers and give them free things, no matter how stupid their complaint. That’s the attitude I think Shapiro should take, if we’re advocating he change his behavior (which I don’t really agree with). Go out of his way to stress how great his PTBNL are, talk about the advantages, sympathize with the fan’s concerns – and roll his eyes at them afterward and keep doing what he’s doing.
Because that’s going to put the winning team on the field sooner.
If Shapiro truly valued micromanaging fan reaction to this extent, I think the club would be pretty royally screwed
No doubt, but we’re talking about the finest details of a trade. I’m not sure what difference it really has made.
Also, the question is more like this: Does Shapiro really have to go and innovate new, awful ways for the fans to feel screwed?
PTBNL = 0 is no longer true for Shapiro, and if the average fan hasn’t adjusted to that, it’s their fault.
Epic fail. The subject is PR. You don’t blame the customer.
by Jay on Dec 4, 2009 2:25 PM EST up reply actions
I just don’t get why you’re stressing this whole issue. As Andrew said,
But, then again, the fans are already lying on the ground with their chest torn open, still beating heart a couple of feet away near the wastebasket.
Who cares about the lemon juice?
I don’t see how the story doesn’t end there.
I’m not stressing it. It’s just one small part of a very large picture.
by Jay on Dec 4, 2009 4:31 PM EST up reply actions
I mean, I have always thought this, and I’ve never even really mentioned it before. That’s how important I think it is.
by Jay on Dec 4, 2009 5:12 PM EST up reply actions
Isn’t it equally likely that the choice will based on other transactions that may occur before Dec. 20? In other words, maybe not entirely about indecision or analysis of the prospects?
I remember at least a little talk about LaCruy in the CC deal, then Santana came along and made such speculation pointless. There could be a minor deal in the works or something that happens around Rule 5 that would impact the selection.
Actually, that is not presumed at all. They may simply want a couple weeks to evaluate the two players in winter league ball or based on studying tapes and numbers.
Two rookie mistakes. How can I presume anything, especially under Jay’s watchful eye. “Perhaps” is the better word. I’ll go grab some pine now.
I also need to grab a pine, Christmas is coming up soon.
Is this the whale section?
by sarcasmdave on Dec 4, 2009 3:11 AM EST up reply actions 3 recs
Don’t take it so hard, rook, it wasn’t a big deal. Welcome to the site.
by Jay on Dec 3, 2009 8:43 PM EST up reply actions
Grab a teacup, we have a hazing ritual.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Dec 3, 2009 10:37 PM EST up reply actions 6 recs
I am consistently startled by the way players are completely ignorant of the economic factors that drive baseball. As if Cleveland was just dealing away players to upset Kelly Shoppach.
by afh4 on Dec 2, 2009 12:54 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
The economic factors that drive baseball are the union’s problem, I suspect, as far as most baseball players are concerned, and the union says that we’re living in the best possible baseball economic world.
"Nobody ever thinks, 'Hey, maybe I’m actually an idiot.'" - Jay
Interesting. I think Kelly would have honestly preferred that Cleveland had the money to keep all the guys from 2007 around.
Bottom line, if these guys won some games instead of continual disappointment, it doesn’t shake out this way. As Neal Huntingon likes to say, “We aren’t breaking up the ’27 Yankees.”
yes, this
If you don't respect Aaron Laffey, I will fight you.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on Dec 2, 2009 1:30 PM EST up reply actions
You could take his statement to mean that he understand the economic factors, and expected to be traded because of them.
by dgcambridge on Dec 2, 2009 2:12 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
This is what Tony Lastoria posted on his message boards:
No surprise, but got confirmation that Aybar is indeed not in consideration. In an attempt to clear the matter up more, I am now even more confused as I was told there is a reason December 20th was chosen and it ties in with arbitration somehow (but was told I cannot be told why). Also was told ANY player is available.
Anyone care to venture a guess?
What does he mean, ANY player?
As in, any one of our players are available for right price this winter? Because he certainly can’t mean that any player on the Rays is available.
Steel Nick
obviously not ANYONE. and probably not ANYONE in the minors. doubt we are getting desmond jennings or wade davis here.
however, i’d like to add nick barnese to our stable of young arms in the minor leagues.
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=pa407002&position=P
wow, I’d be okay with him. Like the whip and walk numbers.
by MooneysRebellion on Dec 4, 2009 8:38 AM EST up reply actions
“whip and walk numbers” sounds like a very bizarre vaudeville act.
by FredOx on Dec 4, 2009 10:43 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
That would be nice, but I don’t think the Rays would trade him for Shoppach.
I’d actually be pretty interested in Jacob McGee — Lefty with a mid 90’s fastball (was touching 98 MPH before TJ surgery) and pretty solid secondary stuff. Has had TJ surgery, so is still on the way back and has to improve his command.
That said, McGee is probably too high profile as well.
I’d think Barnese is more realistic than McGee.
I don’t know Shoppach’s value at all but the fact that people are bringing up Talbot, McGee and Aybar is baffling to me. These guys don’t represent equivalent values.
No as in they represent totally different values from each other. Talbot and McGee, for instance-Talbot is a near Zackson like quantity. McGee is like Miller if he were healthy all the sudden or something, right? I mean, how can it be “could be zackson, could be potential top prospect”?
Well, i guess you’re right. That’s why it’s so difficult to guess what type of caliber prospect we get in return. I mean we went from Rodriguez to Aybar to Barnese to McGee. Perhaps we, or maybe it’s just me, are hoping for too much.
I do think however that guys like McGee, essentially damaged goods who may get lost in the shuffle of Tampa Bay’s vast amount of pitching prospects, are the best case scenario and maybe not too unrealistic.
Tampa Bay is speculated to be offering an infestation of the injury bug and a few buckets of balls due to the fact that Shoppach only struck out 98 times. If he would have had 100 then they may have included a few pairs of cleats and possibly some sunglasses.
by ClevelandCrazy29 on Dec 4, 2009 11:36 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Well, first off it was sarcastic. And secondly, I was basically voicing my opinion that this PTBNL will not contribute to the overall success of this franchise in the near future. We need immediate help and another prospect is not capable of that.
by ClevelandCrazy29 on Dec 5, 2009 10:27 AM EST up reply actions
Your right we need long-term help, I was in no way suggesting that we would win it this year and we needed the help this year. I was simply saying that another PTBNL has the possibility of turning out a AAAA player and nothing more. For the sake of the franchise I hope he turns into a key piece in returning this team to the World Series.
by ClevelandCrazy29 on Dec 6, 2009 9:06 AM EST up reply actions
And there is nothing saying that a PTBNL won’t be helping the club sooner rather than later. Brantley and Todd will more than likely be helping out in 2010 and if Pino survives Rule 5 he could even have a role. What did you seriously expect for Shoppach?
What did you seriously expect for Shoppach?
That was my point. I didn’t expect anything from him, thats why I don’t see why trading him was that vital for the ultimate success of this franchise or even a step in the right direction. I think it was a neutral move with may to many “if’s” and “coulds” about the PTBNL’s future. And when your bringing up the likes of Brantley and Todd and Pino, but you are including more than likley and could, that doesn’t mean anything is for certain, that is just purely your speculation.
by ClevelandCrazy29 on Dec 6, 2009 9:02 AM EST up reply actions
Sorry, I don’t know how to use the quoting tool but that shouldn’t matter in the overall point of my answer.
by ClevelandCrazy29 on Dec 6, 2009 9:04 AM EST up reply actions
that is just purely your speculation
It’s actually the track record that Shapiro has established. Pure speculation would be if someone were to say “this PTBNL will not contribute to the overall success of this franchise in the near future.” That is pure speculation.
Coco Crisp was the prototype ShaPBN. He certainly contributed.
by Jay on Dec 7, 2009 1:12 PM EST up reply actions
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
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
- Nyjer Morgan builds on bad reputation in brawl with Marlins
- The Juice: Rookie Danny Valencia comes through again for Twins
- Slumpbot .200: Cliff Lee's struggles continue down in Texas
- Ryan Howard beats ailing ankle, smacks first homer since July 27
- Reds' Chapman throws 102 mph in 1-2-3 major league debut
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.
