To Move or Not to Move (contest)
(Note: this is a collaborative effort between Brad and me. We took opposing sides of the argument and hashed it out over email until we had each come to our conclusion. Here's what we came up with.)
Me:
If there's one thing I've learned from watching the Indians these 26 years of my life - other than perhaps that this is Dad's passive-aggressive revenge on us for all the stress we caused him - it's that "next year" is never guaranteed. Since the last gasp of the great teams of the nineties, the success of the Tribe has been more or less predicated on two things: the development of young players, and the bullpen. This year is no different.
The problem with building a team around the bullpen is that it is just about the most volatile element of a baseball team. If a bullpen goes bad, a decent ball club can look horrible through little fault of its own. In high-leverage situations, a relatively small number of runs surrendered can have a huge impact on a team's record. We all saw that happen in 2006, when a bad bullpen went a long way towards making our actual records 11 games worse than our pythagorean record and erasing the promise of the 2005 campaign.the team regrouped in 2007 with Raffies L and R carrying the mail, a stunningly effective season from Aaron Fultz, and the 29.1 innings of Jensen Lewis's life.
When the Raffies regressed in 2008, it's little wonder the team underachieved. When the front office brought in Kerry Wood to right the ship in 2009, all we got out of that was more losses and my debut Fan Post. This whole history lesson has been to say this: the bullpen is both vital a volatile, and it can be almost impossible to normalize its performance from year-to-year with either internal or external candidates.
With the bullpen having contributed so much to this campaign (a WPA north of 4 at this point in the year), the Tribe is uniquely positioned to contend this season. While the organization has been more or less constructed to "arrive" sometime next year, there's no guarantee that Pomeranz, White, Kipnis, and Chisenhall will develop any better than Miller, Davis, Phillips, and Garko. The time for Antonetti and his team to make a move is now, and here are the moves they should make.
A big problem with the Tribe right now is that they can't hit. The main thing about Carlos Beltran is that he can hit and field and looks good in blue. The New York Times is reporting that the Mets "won't get a top-40 prospect for [Beltran] even if they eat all the remaining money on the deal." That may well be the case, and the Mets are starving for middle infielders in the high minors. Cord Phelps is a 24-year-old with MLB experience and some upside, and Luis Valbuena can also fill holes in the MI and around the park. We'll take on half of Beltran's remaining salary in the deal, about $3.5 million. You may have heard that Beltran doesn't want to come to the AL, but word filtering around now suggests that's not true. You also may have heard that Beltran nixed a deal to the Tribe already; I'm getting on the horn to him and explaining that we want him in the field because the rest of our OF is either coming off of an injury or Mike Brantley. His presence in the OF allows us to nurse Grady back into the line up on a rotation basis. Obviously, Brantley and Sizemore are going to lose some playing time with this move, with whoever is swinging worse getting more pine time.
I didn't spend the first four paragraphs of this post talking about the bullpen for nothing. Bullpen arms are hard to predict and notoriously pricey in the trade market, so I'm going to do the next best thing and give our Mafia a little rest. I kicked the tires on Ubaldo Jiminez, but the Rocks were asking a ton. They want someone they can slot into the bigs tomorrow, plus another couple of good prospects. Nobody gets that kind of return with Omar Minaya involved, so I'm shipping Jeanmar Gomez, Drew Pomeranz, and a two PTBNL from the list of Gio Soto, Jason Knapp, Nick Weglarz, and Rob Bryson to Colorado in return for Jiminez. To finish things off, I'll send Clayton Cook to San Diego for Aaron Harang, who we all know isn't as good as his current numbers.
To make room, Durbin is DFA, and Huff and Carrera are heading back to Columbus until September. That makes our rotation Masterson, Jiminez, Tomlin, Harang, and Carrasco, with Carmona going to the pen. You can quibble over the order; the point is those are our five guys. C/1B will be occupied by the rotation of Santana/LaPorta/Marson. Kipnis, Asdrubal, and Chiz round out the IF. Brantley and Beltran will be our regular OF for now, with Kearns and Buck sharing time in right. Pronk will continue to DH. When Grady and Choo return, Choo will slot in right and Grady will be eased back in with time in CF and DH. You can't tell me that team doesn't have a chance in the playoffs. Sure, I've taken on salary and moved a ton of prospects, but you don't make breakfast without breaking some eggs.
-----------------------
Brad:
So bullpens being volatile means we should mortgage the future on a mediocre team? Not sure I agree with that. The sheer amount of work your dream scenario would take makes it almost impossible, but this is just a mental exercise so that’s harmless. (Besides, it worked in Triple Play 99. Remember the immortal buttcheeks catch? That’s why he’s in the HoF). My main problem with your thesis is that you assume the utter collapse of our bullpen without stopping to consider why that would happen. Who out there looks likely to implode to you? Chris Perez has to lead the line in that category but other than him, I’m not seeing a huge cause for concern. More than that though, I think we have the arms (waves of arms?) to patch any holes in the ship.
Nick Hagadone, Mitch Talbot, Josh Judy, and Justin Germano can all be recalled from as close as Columbus. Bryson and Burns from Akron could, at some point, make their way into the argument as well. Add in the usual assortment of spare arms that is always around Spring Training, and I feel reasonably confident that we can piece together a solid bullpen again. With White, Barnes, and Pomeranz pushing for rotation spots in 2012, we could flip Fausto and Talbot for parts or see how they work out of the pen. Depth never hurts. Couple that with better starting pitching (More White, less Fausto/Talbot) and I don’t think the potential for relief drop-off is as drastic as you make it sound. That’s why my proposal is so much different than yours.
See, I think the thing to do this year is... nothing. Stand pat. Go down with the ship. Weather the storm. Roll with the punches. Whatever cliché you want. We aren’t just one player away from contention. Look at tonight’s lineup, we’ve got Carrera (.590 OPS) leading off, Buck (.634) playing RF, Chisenhall (.707) at 3B, Kipnis at 2B, and LaPorta (.694) playing at all. And that’s the A team. Other options include Hannahan (.644), who remembered he’s pretty useless, and the ever detestable Orland Cabrera (.589). With The Ghost of Grady Sizemore and Choo both gone, this isn’t an offense that just needs Carlos Beltran to get it going; this is a lost cause.
Look at next year though, and there’s some hope. Chisenhall and Kipnis will both hit, Hafner is healthy, Santana is excellent, Choo will be back, and Grady might be. There’s a lot there to be excited about. True, 1B is a massive hole, but that can either be addressed or simply worked around. The other big piece in that trade doesn’t tear the cover off the ball, but he’s a solid everyday player. This could be the lineup, and tell me you don’t like it.
1. Brantley
2. Asdrubal
3. Choo
4. Hafner
5. Santana
6. Chisenhall
7. Sizemore
8. Kipnis
9. LaPorta
Follow that with:
1. Masterson
2. White
3. Tomlin
4. Carrasco
5. Carmona/Talbot/Pomeranz/Barnes
And we’ve covered the bullpen.
Sitting this year won’t be easy. We clearly aren’t going to contend for much longer, the talent just isn’t there yet. It’s going to be nauseating to get passed by the White Sox and Twins as the Tigers pull away, but it’s better than throwing away prospects to chase a playoff berth. Because that’s what we’re talking about here. Even the team you constructed isn’t winning it all.
43 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I like it, although I actually don’t completely agree with either of you. But the point on bullpen volatility is a valid one even though it’s entirely speculative; we just can’t depend on them being anywhere close to this good next year, for no reason other than it’s a bullpen.
If there’s one thing I’ve learned from watching the Indians these 26 years of my life – other than perhaps that this is Dad’s passive-aggressive revenge on us for all the stress we caused him
Amen.
Steel Nick
I know this is a hard game to play, but the deal for Ubaldo seems laughable. The Yankees package is supposedly built around Jesus Montero, a top 10 prospect. The Indians aren’t sending back a top 100 guy.
I’m not sure we’re sending back a top 300 player in that deal. If the Rockies only get offers like that, they’ll just hold onto Ubaldo.
That’s a fair criticism. I was operating from the point of view that Colorado had to move Ubaldo, but that’s probably not true. I’ve beefed up the deal accordingly, though it may still be a little light.
Trombone/creamy/soda.
I mean, this isn’t a very productive discussion (since we’re both just making it up) but I don’t think we’re anywhere near what’s necessary. Yankees are supposedly talking Montero and “+”, so that probably means Betances and/or Gary Sanchez.
That’s two top 30-50 guys, with one of them top ten, maybe three. The Indians don’t even have those pieces.
Additionally, my point was not so much exatly who we’re moving as the idea that we should be willing to move to capitalize on this year. If we can do that and keep the Big Four, fine. If we’ve gotta move one or two of them, there’s an argument to be made that that’s fine too. Obviously, I stumbled on the finer points of that, but I think the over-arching idea holds.
Trombone/creamy/soda.
I guess my response, per above, is the Indians don’t have the pieces to swing a “big move” unless they’re comfortable moving at least three, realistically three, of the Pom/White/Kip/Chiz plus some other nice pieces.
I think three of them is an overpay. Lee had 1.5 years on his contract, right?
Lou Marson fan.
by Gradyforpresident on Jul 27, 2011 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions
We are really, really not trading for Ubaldo then
Lou Marson fan.
by Gradyforpresident on Jul 27, 2011 11:11 AM EDT up reply actions
Then the Yankees offer has to be like Montero + Betances + ??? There’s no way the Rockies can get good value when he has that much time left on his deal for that little money
Lou Marson fan.
by Gradyforpresident on Jul 27, 2011 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions
I think three is an overpay, but I’m not a GM. I’ve heard the Tribe is in on Jiminez, and I can’t imagine them moving that many of our top guys. More to the point, you’re bang on in saying that we’re all more or less making this up. I don’t need to remind anyone of the rumors of riches we heard while we were selling; I’d imagine that things are just as overstated while we’re on this end. Also, I kind of think we should just stand pat and ride this year out, but that wouldn’t have made a very good contrast to Brad’s position.
Trombone/creamy/soda.
I think a number of things shape the market for Ubaldo in a strange way. The obvious ones are the same as always—the contract, the performance, the heat of pennant races. The odd one is that the Yankees are involved and have prospects to spend. I think that has the potential to elevate his price considerably.
Also, I think we underrate the gap between Chisenhall/Kipnis and an elite player. Those guys are best case sometimes all-stars in most people’s opinions. In contrast, guys in the top 10, like Montero, are best case MVPs. How accurate the prognosticators are is up for debate but I think that perception exists and matters a great deal more in value than I sometimes recognize.
Is there a possibility Montero is overrated? I’d think the Yanks would like to add some production at catcher, but they continue to trot out some really bad bats back there. Are they that committed to bringing him along slowy?
Lost in the Jiminez trade value debate is the larger point: that the Indians are well-served to go all in on this year, even if it means moving some young bodies. What’s your take on that concept?
Trombone/creamy/soda.
Montero can’t catch and only the Yankees are willing to even pretend otherwise at the AAA level (attempting to maintain some additional trade value, apparently). He’s not going to play 1B for them and Jorge Posada can’t catch regularly and will continue to play, especially with a playoff berth virtually assured. And, of course, he very well might be overrated.
I don’t mind the Kemp idea, but, for the most part, I don’t think there’s any realistic way for the Indians to go “all-in” for this year. The only talent that they don’t need to maintain a realistic major league roster is Pomeranz and White. Kipnis and Chiz are by far the best options in 2B/3B in the system and trading either one would probably not bring back enough value to make up for the dropoff to Hannahan or Cabrera. You’d basically be sitting down Buck or Kearns and asking Hannahan to stand up. Net zero 2011, plus huge loss going forward. Or, getting rid of Huff in order to play Orlando Cabrera—again, probably net zero for the season and net negative going forward.
So, that brings us back to players that aren’t net negative going forward (i.e. would be under contract)—Ubaldo, Colby Rasmus, etc. These guys have huge price tags that potentially require you to readdress the 2B problem and the 3B problem next year, I’d think, by trading both Kipnis and Chisenhall, or leave your future rotation in tatters by dealing White and Pomeranz. The rotation issue seems more fixable but I also think Kipnis and Chiz are the ones people would want, and the ones the Indians really can’t afford to trade b/c of their importance on the organizational depth chart.
So, we’re left with the detritus of the farm (Barnes, Gomez, etc) and Pom/White as chips the FO could realistically move—I don’t think that’s enough to bring back the player the Indians need.
If all-in means getting Aaron Harang or whatever, then, sure. Have at it.
Since when is our organizational depth chart so bare at 2nd? Sure, trading Kipnis would immediately lower the ceiling of the position over the next 3-4 yrs, but I still feel reasonably confident that we could get serviceable production from one of Donald or Phelps during that time for next to nothing in cost, which would still be a huge improvement over the last 2 years.
Re: Donald, health is a huge question mark.
Re: Phelps, scouts were always cool on his ability to be more than a utility, and I think it’s going to become clear why.
Sure, I understand all of that, but between the both of them, and maybe even throw Valbuena into the mix, is it not reasonable to think that at least one will pan out to be somewhere between replacement level and average over the next 3 yrs?
And how much better is Kipnis really? 5 wins over the next 3 years if his glove shows it can handle 2nd?
There’s no resolution to this debate for 3 years. If you remember to ask me then, I’ll wager neither Donald, Valbuena, or Phelps has played significant time in the majors as a starter by then.
I agree with everything Andrew said above me. Beyond that, I think this is a bad team to go all-in on. We were expected to be a bad team coming into the year, and for the last two months we have been just as bad as expected. I think there’s legitimate evidence that we are at best a mediocre team, and one that a pretty good player like Carlos Beltran or Hunter Pence isn’t going to fix. If we cash in our chips on those guys, and this year doesn’t work out (and I don’t think it will), we have nothing for the next few years.
I’m more willing to make minor acquisitions, see how this team handles itself down the stretch, and run the risk that we finish one game out of first.
I think I should quickly note that Joel is actually against the argument he espoused. He took that side mostly because I’ve been an advocate of standing pat all along, and an argument between that and a minor move isn’t terribly compelling.
Nice post. Good arguments for both, I think.
I don’t think I’d mind trading Pomeranz for Jimenez, who’s under team control through 2014. I wouldn’t trade White, Kipnis, or Chiz, but Pomz is still in double A with more issues to work out than the other 3.
If we were to get Jimenez and Beltran, I guess in the spirit of going for it all we could get Harang, but we’d probably be fine keeping Cook and going with Fausto or Huff.
"By being the manager and just playing whoever I want." - Acta on how he would choose to split playing time between Kearns and Buck.
How did you change your name? I might have to do that soon.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jul 28, 2011 1:01 PM EDT reply actions
We had ours changed when we started our SBN (Banners on the Parkway). I’m assuming an email to someone up the line could do it.
Thanks, I will do so.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jul 28, 2011 7:37 PM EDT up reply actions

by 














