Winter Meetings Roundup—Willingham, Blake, and Pray for Better Players

by afh4 on Dec 9, 2011 7:01 AM EST in Analysis

The storyline of Cleveland's offseason remains unchanged—with a veteran starter (Derek Lowe) in hand, the Indians are most interested in adding a right-handed bat that can provide a little pop and play either left field or first base. I ran through some of this last Friday, and the situation has continued to evolve since then. According to Hoynes, Derek Lee is unswayed by Cleveland's plaintive courting and the Indians have turned their gaze elsewhere. Carlos Pena is still in the water, searching for the kind of chum he likes (multi-year and high dollar, it seems), but there's been no significant link between Pena and the Indians at any point. Pena and the Tribe is a situation of a few analysts cocking their heads and going, "Well, that could make sense", and, indeed, it does make some sense, but that doesn't mean it'll ever approach consummation (most relationships don't, after all).

So, where does all that overwrought prose leave the fearsome Tribesmen? Free agent wise, the player that the Indians have been most explicitly linked to in the last forty-eight hours is Josh Willingham, the corner outfielder who played in Oakland last season. Willingham's an intriguing bat—he's never OPS'd below 810 in a full season and he seems at least serviceable in left. However, this might end up a protracted process, because Willingham is Plan B for the Twins, contingent on what Michael Cuddyer ends up doing. Cuddyer is apparently mulling over an 3 year, $25M dollar offer from the Twins and if that's the approximate price for Willingham, I'm not sure the Indians ought to take the bait.

Frankly, I'm not really sure if Cuddyer is even the more desirable player for the Twins. Cuddyer's career triple slash is .272/.343/.451, while Willingham is .262/.361/.477. Nothing indicates that either player is going through any changes at this point in his career, and Willingham's generally been the slightly better hitter, although he's also played primarily in the NL. I think Cuddyer might have some kind of Sean Casey, mayor-status thing going in Minnesota—I'm not going to bother to look that up, though.

At any rate, these are the sorts of right-handed bats Indians fans are clamoring for and if the going rate is $8M per over three seasons or, gulp, higher, I'm not sure what I'd do if I were in Antonetti shoes. If you want to read tea leaves, perhaps Hoynsie knows something we don't and that's why he went asking after the mysterious "Casey", likely either Kotchman or Blake—I'm guessing Blake. I think you all know Mr. Blake's Cleveland career well, but it's important to note that Blake is in full-on decline at this point, posting his lowest total for both games played and OPS last season (or, at least his lowest since he established himself in the majors), notching marks of 63 and 713 in those respective categories. Blake could likely trot between first and left when asked, but no one should be particularly shocked if his career is already effectively complete. At any rate, we already knew Cleveland was kicking the tires on its former 3B/2B/1B/SS/OF.

Kotchman might also be in play, at least according to Heyman, but the interest there appears to be more of a casting of wide nets as opposed to a laser like focus on Kotchman and his particular skill set. So, that's the best summary report I can manage, and now I'll take a moment to beat my cockamamie Carlos Beltran drum. The market for Beltran may be "thin", and I hope the Indians are able to take advantage. Beltran could play some corner outfield for a year or two and then DH in the third year of a deal. He'd take over for Hafner, who will no longer be under contract at the conclusion of the 2012 season (it's almost over! it's almost over!).

Poll

Would you pay Josh Willingham $24M over 3 seasons?

Yes

111 votes

No

156 votes

I already spent that imaginary money (explain how)

10 votes

277 votes | Poll has closed

Tweet Comment 58 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I already spent twice that amount of money for the right to bid against the Yankees on Yu Darvish. Are you kidding me?

by ken from alexandria on Dec 9, 2011 9:44 AM EST reply actions

I have had daydreams about the Indians winning the Darvish bid.

by afh4 on Dec 9, 2011 9:53 AM EST via iPhone app up reply actions

3 years $30 million for Beltran and a team option for year 4 with 2 million buyout.

Baseball fans are junkies, and their heroin is the statistic. - Robert S. Wieder

by jerseywahoo on Dec 9, 2011 10:01 AM EST reply actions

Like it. Feels like it might be more like 3/36 though.

by afh4 on Dec 9, 2011 10:04 AM EST via iPhone app up reply actions

Hmm. Instant upgrade in LF and 1B? For only $8 M per year? Yes.

Although Beltran would be way more fun. Maybe 3/30?

by Cols714 on Dec 9, 2011 10:09 AM EST reply actions

Wow, our community is really divided on this issue. We need Jay to tell us what to think or else we’re going to kill each other!

by afh4 on Dec 9, 2011 10:21 AM EST reply actions

I’m surprised that anyone would vote no here. A definite upgrade for a short contract. What’s not to like?

I swear that Lets Go Tribers are more concerned with getting people with upside and at a bargain than just finding a guy who will help you win for the next two or three years and plugging him in.

Sometimes you have to overpay. It’s OK.

by Cols714 on Dec 9, 2011 1:57 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs

Sometimes you have to overpay. And you want us to do it twice this year. This club seems to be OK with overpaying for about 2 years (see Wood, K), but 3 years inhibits their ability to extend young talent when that money is tied up in stopgaps.

Matt LaPorta is the bane of my existence.

by USSChoo on Dec 9, 2011 3:09 PM EST up reply actions

Yeah, a two year deal would be better. I just don’t know if they can get a player for only two years. It would be nice though.

by Cols714 on Dec 9, 2011 3:26 PM EST up reply actions

Unless Willingham’s production significantly falls off a cliff, a three year deal is short enough that he could be traded, perhaps with us eating a chuck of his salary, even if things don’t work out.

I wonder if he would accept a $2mil or so buyout in the third year of the contract.

"sometimes the internet is hard for me." - ClemsonGirl

by world dictator on Dec 10, 2011 12:01 AM EST up reply actions

The trade-ability of player contracts is a given; it’s the default. So it doesn’t change the risk profile.

by Jay on Dec 10, 2011 1:56 PM EST up reply actions

Most of the time you shouldn’t. Then it’s not OK. That said, Willingham is close.

by pdxtribefan on Dec 9, 2011 3:26 PM EST up reply actions

I like him. He had a 1229 OPS in Triple-A last year. Common sense says that’s got to translate.

Granted, it was only two games, but his BABIP was zero, so it’s likely he was hitting into some bad luck.

by Jay on Dec 9, 2011 9:09 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

If I were forced to guess, I think most likely scenarios are:

1: Blake at something like $3M on a one year, as a farewell tour sort of deal.

2: Fukudome at less than $5M annually at one or two years.

3: Nothing.

This other stuff might happen, but I just doubt this is the off-season the Indians make a multi-year FA acquisition and I don’t think most of the guys available are going to come off the multi-year demand. How many of those have they even made in the last 7 years? Dellucci, Michaels, Byrd, Wood…? Those were all “get us over the top” signings, right?

by afh4 on Dec 9, 2011 10:25 AM EST reply actions

I have a crazy hope for the M’s to go battshit crazy, sign Fielder and trade us Smoak, who I think has an intriguing power potential. Lots of dominos in that one, but winter is all about “if, then, then, then” scenarios.

by MTF on Dec 9, 2011 11:19 AM EST up reply actions

Yeah, Smoak with his gorgeous subLaportian second half.

by westbrook on Dec 9, 2011 12:57 PM EST up reply actions

He belongs in Seattle, perfect fit for that fanbase.

by Roger Dorn on Dec 9, 2011 1:49 PM EST up reply actions

Wow. I did not realize he was that bad in the second half. I caught a lot of his highlights going through the radio dial last summer.

by pdxtribefan on Dec 9, 2011 3:27 PM EST up reply actions

I think this is definitely the off-season to make a decent FA signing. This team is built to win over the next couple of years. We just need to upgrade two easily upgraded positions, OF and 1B. It doesn’t have to be a star or a young guy, it can just be a veteran. Willingham would fit, so would Cuddyer, so would Kotchman or Lee or Pena.

This is the year to sign someone so we don’t go into next year with no hitting from two positions.

by Cols714 on Dec 9, 2011 1:54 PM EST up reply actions

Based on absolutely nothing, my belief is that the Tribe would look to trade Carmona for something like $0.40 on the dollar to free up the dollars for the right-handed hitting LF/1B. They’ll be selling low, but it’s not like he’d re-establish his value with us anymore and I wonder if an NL team might take a flier.

by cheech99 on Dec 9, 2011 10:43 AM EST reply actions

The film of Carmona running the bases is out there in the public for any NL team to watch.

by woodsmeister on Dec 9, 2011 10:50 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs

No pictures on the scorecard does not apply here. That was ugly.

Matt LaPorta is the bane of my existence.

by USSChoo on Dec 9, 2011 12:00 PM EST up reply actions

Tribe

Indians still nee a every day LF and a every day 1B not a combo player!
We have plenty of them…..

Grady Sizemore is still a liability to us not a Asset, so we need someone to play for him.
Santana is a libility at 1B, if he is not catching then he should be a DH!
The only improvement the TRIBE has made that is considered a Asset is Lowe.

TYpical Tribe will wait on everyone else to make there moves and sign players, they willbe left with the scrap again.

G-man

by GeorgeS on Dec 9, 2011 12:28 PM EST reply actions

Welcome.

1. Don’t use the subject line.

2. Proofread.

3. Read some other posts before posting anything else. You’re not in line with the vibe.

by afh4 on Dec 9, 2011 12:33 PM EST up reply actions

3. Read some other posts before posting anything else. You’re not in line with the vibe.

Is this necessary? Why does someone have to be in line with the vibe to post here? I think different opinions should be welcome, especially here where there does seem to be a large amount of everyone agreeing with everyone else.

by Cols714 on Dec 9, 2011 2:10 PM EST up reply actions

This website is valued by many for, primarily, its community. That community doesn’t happen spontaneously, it happens because people, both regulars and mods, work to maintain a standard of discourse and a ‘vibe.’ Disagreement of all types is welcome; gratuitous use of hyperbole, exclamation points, and unsupported generalizations are not.

As always, there are plenty of other websites that are filled with those things and that might be a better fit for some fans.

by afh4 on Dec 9, 2011 2:17 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

If you’re interested in reading the clearest distillation of the mods’ guiding philosophy, I’d suggest Jay’s comment from 2006. This site has been working for nearly 6 years to figure out how best to nurture this community. We don’t take this lightly.

by afh4 on Dec 9, 2011 2:29 PM EST up reply actions

Damn right. That you don’t take it lightly is much appreciated. I often take it for granted. It never ceases to amaze how quickly humans (myself included, ugh) interpret a standard for discourse as censorship or dismissal of an argument. If only we applied these standards to political discourse these days.

by pdxtribefan on Dec 9, 2011 3:33 PM EST up reply actions

I’d just like to add that just because a comment is from 5.5 years ago doesn’t mean you can’t “rec” it right now.

by Jay on Dec 9, 2011 9:21 PM EST up reply actions

What if

by Brick. on Dec 9, 2011 10:08 PM EST via mobile up reply actions

TYpical Tribe will wait on everyone else to make there moves and sign players, they willbe left with the scrap again.

There is the meat. I can get that stuff anywhere else on the net.

Matt LaPorta is the bane of my existence.

by USSChoo on Dec 9, 2011 3:11 PM EST up reply actions

Even aside from being “in line with the vibe,” though, it’s important to read other posts because this is a community, not just a place to shout your vile crap at other people. We read each other’s words more than we write our own — even Ryan.

by Jay on Dec 9, 2011 9:21 PM EST up reply actions

Yeah, nobody wants to read new “the angels must want to put pujols in center, hunter, wells, matthews” jokes already made earlier in the thread.

by Brick. on Dec 9, 2011 10:11 PM EST via mobile up reply actions

You are such a good little soldier when you’re not AWOL.

by Jay on Dec 10, 2011 1:57 PM EST up reply actions

Didn’t know signatures used to be faux pas here.

Matt LaPorta is the bane of my existence.

by USSChoo on Dec 9, 2011 11:05 PM EST up reply actions

The software platform was different, everything looked different.

by Jay on Dec 10, 2011 1:57 PM EST up reply actions

That makes sense, couldn’t figure out what the problem would have been. Mystery solved.

Matt LaPorta is the bane of my existence.

by USSChoo on Dec 10, 2011 2:06 PM EST up reply actions

The Rays signed Matt Moore to a Longoria deal:
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/7335303/source-matt-moore-tampa-bay-rays-reach-five-year-14-million-deal

by westbrook on Dec 9, 2011 12:51 PM EST reply actions

what miller could have been

I like ex-Phillies prospects.

by Gradyforpresident on Dec 9, 2011 2:10 PM EST up reply actions

I wouldn’t hate Willingham at 3/24, but I’d really want to know what Beltran would take first.

by westbrook on Dec 9, 2011 12:55 PM EST reply actions

I’m intrigued by Kendry Morales. But Willingham at that rate wouldn’t be bad … Would rather do 2 with a club option for 3 at maybe a little more per annum.

by emd2k3 on Dec 9, 2011 1:12 PM EST reply actions

Woah, the D’Backs are trying to get Trevor Cahill—apparently the cost is much less than GioGone… maybe this is what Antonetti hinted at.

by westbrook on Dec 9, 2011 1:16 PM EST reply actions

dude i would be all about that

I like ex-Phillies prospects.

by Gradyforpresident on Dec 9, 2011 2:11 PM EST up reply actions

me too. but it looks like Arizona’s motivated to get this done:

Gambo620 Any trade with Oakland for Trevor Cahill will not include Trevor Bauer
about 1 hour ago
Gambo620 Tyler Skaggs will not be in any deal with Oakland for Trevor Cahill.
about 3 hours ago
Gambo620 Cahill is 23 years old, went 12-14 with a 4.16 ERA last season and is 40-35with a 3.91 ERA in his 3-year career.
about 3 hours ago
Gambo620 Diamondbacks closing in on trade for Oakland pitcher Trevor Cahill. Will give up a prospect….
about 4 hours ago

by westbrook on Dec 9, 2011 4:57 PM EST up reply actions

I don’t understand how they can get Cahill without surrendering Skaggs or Bauer. I don’t know the system well, or perhaps I’m badly mis-valuing Cahill.

by afh4 on Dec 9, 2011 5:02 PM EST up reply actions

Bauer can’t be traded till June (one year from the draft), right? Or has that changed with the new CBA?

by APV on Dec 9, 2011 5:08 PM EST up reply actions

No clue. They could conceivably PTBNL him and shut him down, I suppose.

by afh4 on Dec 9, 2011 5:21 PM EST up reply actions

Also…“surrendering Skaggs” sounds like something you only do when you’re caught by the police without a viable escape strategy

by APV on Dec 9, 2011 5:09 PM EST up reply actions

I was thinking more that Skaggs is the kind of outlaw never surrenders.

by afh4 on Dec 9, 2011 5:21 PM EST up reply actions

It could also be a “social disease” or something you get from sleeping in NYC hotel rooms

by APV on Dec 9, 2011 5:28 PM EST up reply actions

This is going to make our Ubaldo deal look even worse.

by westbrook on Dec 9, 2011 6:55 PM EST up reply actions

Ubaldo = Cahill?

by Roger Dorn on Dec 12, 2011 1:53 PM EST up reply actions

Then again, maybe Cahill was a bit overvalued b/c of his age and that incredible second season. His big jump forward in 2010 was fueled by a very low BABIP and a really high DP% (23%). That’s not unusual for a GB heavy guy, obviously, but if it’s random fluctuation that makes him either an All-Star or a 100 ERA+ guy, maybe he’s not that valuable.

Year Age Tm G R H 2B 3B HR BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS BAbip GDP
2009 21 OAK 32 99 185 45 6 27 72 90 .270 .339 .471 .810 .274 18
2010 22 OAK 30 73 155 20 1 19 63 118 .220 .287 .332 .619 .237 27
2011 23 OAK 34 102 214 40 3 19 82 147 .269 .340 .398 .738 .306 17
3 Seasons 96 274 554 105 10 65 217 355 .253 .323 .399 .723 .274 62
162 Game Avg. 34 97 196 37 4 23 77 126 .253 .323 .399 .723 .274 22
MLB Averages .258 .326 .407 .733 .297

Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Original Table
Generated 12/9/2011.

In fact…doesn’t that look slightly familiar?

Year Age Tm G R H 2B 3B HR BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS BAbip
2006 22 CLE 38 46 88 15 1 9 31 58 .298 .374 .447 .821 .341
2007 23 CLE 32 78 199 27 4 16 61 137 .248 .309 .352 .661 .281
2008 24 CLE 22 80 126 28 2 7 70 58 .271 .374 .385 .759 .295
2009 25 CLE 24 97 151 33 3 16 70 79 .295 .387 .465 .852 .322
2010 26 CLE 33 98 203 33 6 17 72 124 .258 .323 .380 .703 .284
2011 27 CLE 32 125 205 52 1 22 60 109 .276 .339 .437 .776 .296
6 Seasons 181 524 972 188 17 87 364 565 .270 .344 .404 .748 .297
162 Game Avg. 37 108 200 39 3 18 75 116 .270 .344 .404 .748 .297
MLB Averages .263 .331 .415 .746 .299

Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Original Table
Generated 12/9/2011.

That is our own former groundball wunderkind, Mr. Carmona. Carmona’s control has also really fallen apart at points, but that might be a chicken and egg distraction.

by afh4 on Dec 9, 2011 5:29 PM EST up reply actions