Let's Go Tribe!: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: Backing the Pack for NC State Fans!


Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)

Sheldon Ocker mentions Laffey's short outing, although there is some plausible deniability at play:

``We had him on a pitch count of 50,'' Bisons manager Torey Lovullo told the Buffalo News. ``I know it's going to set off smoke alarms for you guys, but he's been throwing the ball well. He's got some consideration.

``Cleveland or trade? Not out of the organization. Aaron Laffey is a Cleveland Indian, and he's deserving of consideration (callup). I really don't know much about it. I just know we were told to keep him to 50.''

Paul Hoynes says that even if Laffey is coming up, it won't be immediately:

The Indians said Laffey is on their radar but isn't Cleveland bound.

Laffey was scheduled to start Saturday in the first game of a doubleheader against Syracuse. A water pipe burst and flooded the field, and the doubleheader was postponed. Laffey, however, had gone through his full warm-up before the postponement, so the Indians put him on a 50-pitch limit for Sunday's start.

He's also scheduled to make his next start Thursday on short rest.

So this takes any Lee rumors out of play, since Laffey was scheduled to go 50 pitches even before Saturday's Indians game even started. Sheldon Ocker offered up the possibility of Laffey replacing Fernando Cabrera on the roster, with the promotion taking place if Cabrera passes through waivers. Whatever the case, it doesn't appear that any roster move is taking place in the next day or two.

0 recs | Comment 169 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Dont mean to continue to fan the flames but Im not sure that Hoynes is right on with this one.

From Ocker article:

"Laffey didn't know much, either.

``(Lovullo) came out and told me I threw the ball well and there's a situation going on right now,'' he said."

I dont think Laffey would call a pipe bursting & flooding the field the day before 'a situation' but who knows. I suppose well have to be patient.

by bigbrabbs on Jul 23, 2007 9:24 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Just to continue the idle speculation, it doesn't make any sense that Laffey would go to the pen to replace Cabrera or anyone else. Replacing him on the  roster is a slightly different question, as a trade can open up spots in other roles.

It's also clear that there was pretty strong scuttlebutt amongst the players, both in Cleveland and in Buffalo, that Laffey was Cleveland bound, even before Cliff's last outing. Not only did the Buffalo players give him a congratulatory sendoff celebration as he walked off the mound in the third, but Torey Lovullo mentioned that the "considerations" which could result in Laffey being moved have been present for a few days.

Lovullo also said something fairly telling in his postgame, when asked if Laffey was being moved, whether it would be to Cleveland or outside the organization. Lovullo was emphatic (loose quote): "Aaron Laffey is a Cleveland Indian, and he will stay with the organization. I'll leave it to you to... I don't want to spell it out for you..."

Any Sherlock wannabe would have to make an initial deduction that a trade involving one of the Tribe's starting pitchers is in the works, and that "plausible deniability" is indeed a good characterization of the press releases at this point.

by mcrose on Jul 23, 2007 9:33 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
yeah hoynes's story doesn't really add up.

So if they're calling him up, what are they waiting for?  My wild guess is the tribe agreed to a deal in principle that would necessitate filling a hole in our rotation with laffey (be it lee, westbrook) and they're still ironing out the details.  When it goes through, laffey gets the call.

by MikeCP on Jul 23, 2007 9:55 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Someone brought up Occam recently (simplest explanation), and I'd say that's his Razor, applied.

Would have to be Lee or Byrd in that order, can't see the other 3 being touched, for different reasons.

by mcrose on Jul 23, 2007 10:07 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
did you see kouz being touchable?
GermanysTribeFan

by GermanysTribeFan on Jul 23, 2007 10:09 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I don't think that there is any way that Paul Byrd is traded right now.  He has been the only reliable starter (after CC & Carmona, of course); he's effectively the #3 starter right now.  I'm actually starting to think that his option might just get picked up for next year, particularly with Lee's future up in the air.  

Also, I don't see Westbrook going anywhere.  The Indians made a big commitment to him; I don't expect that a mediocre 6 weeks is going to lead them to cut bait.

To me, this smells like a trade of Lee is likely.

Railing against the sacrifice bunt since 2000.

by jdudas on Jul 23, 2007 10:13 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I figured at the end of last year that he was super tradeable. He's always put up really good numbers though he's been kind of old for his leagues and we have a better/younger prospect in Marte at the same position. That's pretty much the death knell for a guy like Kouz & the same reason someone like Gutierrez is tradeable - he has more value to another team than he would to us.

by zempf on Jul 23, 2007 10:15 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Sure - Marte was effectively ahead of him on the 3B depth chart. What I don't think anyone saw is what he got in return. At the time. Now the trade looks more even. For now. Howzzat?

I'm trying to think - the only truly unexpected trade of any consequence in the last few years has got to be Colon.

by mcrose on Jul 23, 2007 10:50 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
i think your forgetting an Allstar-Gold Glove-HOF 2nd baseman.....i still wanna slam shapiros balls in a car door for that trade...the only thing we got was the bragging rights to a one-hit shutout v.s. the yankees....
GermanysTribeFan

by GermanysTribeFan on Jul 23, 2007 11:08 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Of course, Alomar was pretty terrible after he left the Indians.  Not really to defend the trade, but Shap. was clearly correct to trade Alomar; he just didn't get the right package of talent in return.
Railing against the sacrifice bunt since 2000.

by jdudas on Jul 23, 2007 11:13 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I still don't think the return on that trade was too bad. Sometimes prospects pan out, sometimes they don't, & that happened to be a trade where we took an 0-fer (and I wonder how much of that might be attributed to Escobar blowing out his knee in spring training).

by zempf on Jul 23, 2007 11:26 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
(Quickly nailing shut that particular coffin)

That may have been a mistake, but it was not unexpected. Hey, look over there! A dry ice factory!

by mcrose on Jul 23, 2007 11:16 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Whups, I read that wayyy to quick - thought you were referring to another 2B.

by mcrose on Jul 23, 2007 11:18 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
And what did we give up?

That was a good trade.  It didn't work out for either side, but as in the Colon deal, we got their best outfield prospect and their best lefty starter prospect.

If you're going to argue against it, explain how we could have gotten more for Alomar, or how we contend in 2002 without trading him.

You have not really thought this one through.

by Jay on Jul 23, 2007 11:27 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
LOL. That hurts thinking about it. And how would you go about doing that without his compliance. I could understand head in the car door a la Pesci, but balls?

by BoDiaz1974 on Jul 23, 2007 2:16 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Remind me to never go to Germany.

by Mark Shapiro on Jul 23, 2007 2:58 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I definitely saw Kouzmanoff as touchable.  Either he or Garko were going to get moved, and Kouzmanoff was more attractive to trading partners.

I can honestly say, I don't remember the last time we traded someone that I would have thought was untouchable.  Maybe Kenny Lofton prior to 1997.  Trading Colon was not surprising in the least -- every contending team was circling the Indians by late June, trying to pry loose Colon and Thome.

mcrose has it right -- Sabathia, Westbrook and Carmona are essentially untouchable, for different reasons.  It is Lee, and Byrd, in that order, and why would a noncontending team want Byrd?

by Jay on Jul 23, 2007 11:12 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
just to play devil's advocate: why not Fausto?

by nctribefan on Jul 23, 2007 10:11 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
He's cheap and under the Indians' control until 2011.
Railing against the sacrifice bunt since 2000.

by jdudas on Jul 23, 2007 10:14 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Plus we're looking to get better, not rebuild. You don't trade your #2 starter in the middle of a pennant race to pick up some relief help.

by zempf on Jul 23, 2007 10:17 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Yep; the other stuff wouldn't matter if he wasn't pitching so well.
Railing against the sacrifice bunt since 2000.

by jdudas on Jul 23, 2007 10:20 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
i thought he'd been struggling of late, but i just looked and even over the past month his ERA's 4.61, which really isn't too shabby.

my devil's advocating was kind of based on remembering how we all felt about Sowers at the end of last year.

by nctribefan on Jul 23, 2007 10:28 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I think that most of that 4.61 ERA comes from his one blow-up against the A's (where he couldn't get out of the 2nd inning).  Otherwise, he's been terrific.
Railing against the sacrifice bunt since 2000.

by jdudas on Jul 23, 2007 10:45 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
No one ever said they felt hung over facing Jeremy Sowers. This kid is special.

by supermarioelia on Jul 23, 2007 11:20 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I think facing Sowers is more like being on acid. As in "what the hell is going on here?"

by afh4 on Jul 23, 2007 11:22 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
people had a lot of nice things to say about Sowers, too. i'm not necessarily inclined to take Torii Hunter's word for it.

don't get me wrong, i like both of these guys, but i wonder whether Carmona is actually as good as he seems right now.

by nctribefan on Jul 23, 2007 12:09 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Carmona always had crazy stuff, and was even more advanced at a younger age than Sowers.  Carmona started ahead of Sowers on the depth chart in 2006, and Sowers got the first opportunity to start in the majors only because Carmona was already dominating in the bullpen.

The mainstream press has gushed about Sowers, but interestingly, it's both the players and the statheads who gush more about Carmona.  The mainstream press is very impressed by ERA, even moreso by "Wins."

by Jay on Jul 23, 2007 12:24 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Okay, I managed not to get to my main point ... which is that the buzz around Carmona is not as superficial as the buzz around Sowers was.  Carmona always had problematic K rates, but not as problematic as Sowers.  Moreover, he appears to be addressing that, where Sowers never did.

Carmona is the real deal.  Sowers is exactly what we thought he'd be -- probably a good #4 starter for several years, hopefully starting very soon.

by Jay on Jul 23, 2007 12:27 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
i think you got it across in the first one... perhaps i've been resisting thinking of Carmona as the "Real Deal" and have instead tried to think of him as yet another guy having a very successful first full season in the majors... unfortunately my untrained eye can't tell the difference between the guys who go on to do well and the guys who don't.

(whereas Torii Hunter's trained eye can't tell the difference between trying to hit against Fausto and trying to hit with a half-functional brain. and if that's the consensus among scouts, i'll have to take their word for it.)

don't get me wrong -- i've got Fausto on my fantasy team and everything, so my loyalty can't be questioned -- but i guess i've been trying to shield myself from potential disappointment.

by nctribefan on Jul 23, 2007 1:45 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Been catching up on all this today...one thing I haven't really seen mentioned, anyone have any idea if Laffey would be a success if called up? His minor league numbers seem to look good but I don't know much about projecting to the big leagues

by Luis (Tribe Fan in London) on Jul 23, 2007 10:15 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Definitely not a sure thing. Prior to this season, he's had a Westbrook-like groundball ratio, but a rather low strikeout rate. This season in Buffalo, his strikeout has jumped and he's kept the groundball ratio at previous levels: both good signs.

But this isn't Jeremy Sowers vs. Jason Johnson. Cliff Lee, for all the criticism he's taken, can still be a decent starting pitcher. He's extremely affordable (he'll be making at most $5.75M a season through 2009), and he has the ability to be worth much more than that to the Indians. Even as bad as Lee's been pitching, he's much more likely to be a more valuable pitcher than Laffey the rest of this season.

Now if Lee's being shopped around as part of "lateral" trade (another player with a similar level or talent and afforability), then fine. But this allusion to trading Lee for a couple of prospects just to be rid of him is ridiculous.

by Ryan on Jul 23, 2007 10:27 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
One of the things I look for is the K rates, and it did seem a little low, but hopefully the groundball thing will translate, Jake and Fausto seem to manage alright.

I do agree that if Lee can find some consistency he'd be worth keeping and we can't assume Laffey will be any better. I guess it'll be interesting to see which 4th outfielder we can throw in that will mean an upgrade. I'd imagine it's got to be another bullpen arm, all the indications from the FO seem to be that this is the main perceived area of weakness

by Luis (Tribe Fan in London) on Jul 23, 2007 10:36 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
id rather aquire another powerbat...im thinking along the lines of carmona and a package for miguel cabrera + a mediocre reliever....thats what id do...
GermanysTribeFan

by GermanysTribeFan on Jul 23, 2007 10:42 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
We have the third-most runs scored in the AL, behind only the Yankees and the Tigers. Why does everyone always want to get another bat?

by zempf on Jul 23, 2007 10:55 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
YoU dO not undersTAND how much we NEEd corner POWER

by afh4 on Jul 23, 2007 10:56 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Enough to be held ransom for it?
Railing against the sacrifice bunt since 2000.

by jdudas on Jul 23, 2007 10:57 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
because for some reason were still stuggeling and K'ing too much and grounding into to many DPs ...and we can also get rid of marte that old bum...
GermanysTribeFan

by GermanysTribeFan on Jul 23, 2007 10:57 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
The Ks are particularly high, but we do lead the league in HRs (118) so I'm not sure I buy this thought that we're short on power, also 3rd in the league for slugging (.442), 4th in OPS (.793). And to answer you're other point, we're bottom in the league for GIDP by a long way...in conclusion, I think our offense is looking pretty good. I know there are some shortcomings, but I'm concerned by the 'pen

NB This is my first time trying to get stats off mlb.com so apologies if any of those are wrong and blow my argument outta the water!

by Luis (Tribe Fan in London) on Jul 23, 2007 11:17 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
im talking about CLUTCH HITTING...a guy who can produce with 2 outs or with RISP....it should be the pitchers balls shrinking, not the hitters in a situation like that....
GermanysTribeFan

by GermanysTribeFan on Jul 23, 2007 11:20 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Haha I can hear the vultures flying overhead to swoop down on this poor kid. Maybe we should refer him to the clutchness diary.

by supermarioelia on Jul 23, 2007 11:24 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Clutchiness is overrated, but its the only reason that Josh Barfield hasn't taken away like 15 runs from the offense this year. He's actually some pretty well in RBI-producing situations (and been god awful in every other type of situation).

by one size more on Jul 23, 2007 11:27 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Yes but him doing well in RBI situations doesn't mean he performs differently in said situations.  That's the mistake people make.  Baseball is divided into so many sample sizes that we can easily fool ourselves into thinking Player A really does raise his performance on Wednesdays just because his numbers are better, or Pitcher B feels different on night games.  RISP is just another sample size that doesn't matter.  I believe that because of the importance we heap on it a player can psyche themselves out, but no one can raise their level of play.  If they weren't already playing at their peak effort, they wouldn't be a major leaguer.

IMO.

by nickjs21 on Jul 23, 2007 11:34 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
So lefty/righty splits and home/road splits don't matter?

There are important sample sizes in baseball, even if they don't include "tuesday day games" or "7th inning and beyond."

And no, maybe players don't change their mindset, but the general approach at the dish is different when the bases are empty than when there's guys on 2nd and 3rd.

by one size more on Jul 23, 2007 11:39 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Yes, what I left out of all that is the fact that we tend to think a lot more splits matter when there are really a handful.  Everything can be broken down into a sample size, but only a few really change the way a player performs.

by nickjs21 on Jul 23, 2007 11:42 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Clutch, for the most part, exists in retrospect. For instance, if a player hits .400 with RISP in a given year, then he was indeed clutch for that year.

The problem is that it doesn't, for the most part, translate or project from one year to the next. Any attempt to acquire a "clutch power bat" that hits well with "2-outs and RISP" is a fool's errand. What you're really saying is you want to acquire a good hitter; it's a good hitter who's going to get a hit in that situation more often than not.

Just as an example, here is Miguel Cabrera's splits for almost all situations. If you go down to the clutch area you'll find that he basically hits just like Miguel Cabrera, maybe a little worse in some instances maybe a little better in others, no matter the situation. This is going to be true of nearly all players over a significant sample and you're better off trying to acquire a player who can hit, period, then you are trying to acquire some paragon of 'clutch.'

The problem, of course, is that trading for players like Miguel Cabrera, of which there are maybe 10 in all of baseball, is nearly impossible. When it does happen, it's hardly ever in the middle of the season. And it requires you to give back major parts, which doesn't make any sense if you're team is actively in the hunt.

Any talk of "balls-shriveling" is going to be ignored until someone has some stats on that. Maybe cubic volume per inning. Or VORB.

by afh4 on Jul 23, 2007 11:36 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Exactly, so why is everyone so opposed to getting a good hitter if its at a reasonable price?

I don't want to look for a guy who has done well with 2 outs and RISP or 7th inning and beyond, I want a guy who has done well in general, enough that he can help the team. Because Barfield is too important of a piece for the future to sit down, we know that almost every night we have a potential hole in our lineup.

The answer isn't that it isn't worth getting more offense even if you're the #3 or #4 offense in the league. It's just that there aren't many bats out there. You're saying you wouldn't like to have a better offense than the Tigers if we could? I sure would, but there aren't any players out there who would boost our offense to that level.

by one size more on Jul 23, 2007 11:42 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
So you would sacrifice bullpen help to make a trade for more offense, simply so we can be the best in the league?  You have to realize there are only so many trading chips the Indians have.  Prioritize.

by nickjs21 on Jul 23, 2007 11:45 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
is there a better way to read this blog?  i imagine that this post is going to be one word stacked on top of each other.

by rolub on Jul 23, 2007 11:54 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I don't want to trade Asdrubal Cabrera or Ben Francisco for Octavio Dotel, but I wouldn't mind trading lesser talent for Kenny Lofton. I don't think we'd be using the same chips to get pitching compared to hitting.

by one size more on Jul 23, 2007 12:01 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I don't really understand your point. You basically said that you don't want to overpay for offense because it's not really necessary.

I think that's how people feel when they say "Don't trade for offense." In that statement, they're assuming the help won't be free, it will in fact be overpriced. So don't do it.

I don't really see the value of speculating on "Wouldn't you want more offense if it was reasonably priced?" Well, yeah. Wouldn't we all want everything if every deal was robbery for the Indians?

But it's not. So what are we talking about?

by afh4 on Jul 23, 2007 11:51 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Because the chips that it would take to get offense would be less valuable than the chips it would take to get pitching. Pitching is inherently more valuable, so it takes more to pry it away.

I didn't say there isn't offense out there; certainly, there are guys better than Trot Nixon who could be acquired reasonably, ala Lofton.

by one size more on Jul 23, 2007 12:00 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
As I said below, I'm not convinced that's true. The variables in play go way too far for me to just accept "Pitching = inherently more valuable."

Different teams are forced to value different things; if a team is rich in pitching and has to have hitting to move forward, that's going to affect the value of the players involved.

Different GMs are seduced by different things and are also of varying degrees of shrewdness or intelligence.

And like a million other factors, notably the individual players being discussed.

by afh4 on Jul 23, 2007 12:03 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
That's exactly right, and the only way to answer all these "clutch hitting" weirdos.

If you look at the statistics they show for the top clutch hitters in baseball, are you not struck by the fact that the list is comprised of..the best hitters in baseball, period?

I remember when Ortiz was hitting all those walkoffs, and there was a game on ESPN (might have been one of the Fausto games) in which they showed the following statistic: Most Game Winning Hits in 8th or 9th innings since 2004 (or something like this).  The list went something like this:

Ortiz
Pujols
Vlad
Bonds
Manny

You think these guys are good because they're clutch?  They are clutch because they are good.  

- Jake

by jakesinger777 on Jul 23, 2007 11:50 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I actually started looking up stats for a rebuttal & then realized it wasn't worth the effort. In summary: we do not need to trade for a "clutch" hitter.

by zempf on Jul 23, 2007 11:34 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Everyone's still freaking out about Bizarro Pronk?
Disclaimer: this post doesn't mean what you think it means.

by AngG on Jul 23, 2007 11:03 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Is anyone under the illusion that Lee would be traded for anything other than big league help right now?

by mcrose on Jul 23, 2007 10:53 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
No, but if they do trade him, it better not for a rental.

by Ryan on Jul 23, 2007 10:54 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
A guy who is under 30 that once won 17 games and is still on a reasonable contract should be worth more than a rental.

by one size more on Jul 23, 2007 11:29 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I agree completely. But the only rental we've speculated on is Lofton, and I think the consensus is that it would take more than Lofton straight up for Lee for us to do that deal, as in  relief help.

by mcrose on Jul 23, 2007 11:39 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I agree that you don't dump Lee unless the return makes the big league team better right now.  There is really no need to trade him for prospects, unless, I suppose, he's really become a cancer in the clubhouse.  In any event, if the Indians think that Laffey can perform at Lee's level for the remainder of the year, and if they can improve the big league team by doing so, I have little problem with trading Lee.  His long-term declining K rates (though they appear to be rebounding a bit this year) and typically high fly ball rates do not inspire confidence for turning things around.
Railing against the sacrifice bunt since 2000.

by jdudas on Jul 23, 2007 10:56 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
man i do hope that we keep lee....just imagine in a couple of years having CC as our staff ace, fausto going second, miller 3rd, lofgren fourth and lee 5th....heck everybody in that rotation could win at least 15 games...with the murdrs row of a lineup we have...
GermanysTribeFan

by GermanysTribeFan on Jul 23, 2007 10:49 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
oh yeah, not to forget sowers and huff....
GermanysTribeFan

by GermanysTribeFan on Jul 23, 2007 10:53 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I don't think we should be considering dealing Carmona.  His low K rate was a concern originally, and led some of us to speculate that he'd fall down to earth soon, but over his last couple starts those k's have been rising quite a bit and he's getting that slider going.  He's got some room to grow and could develop into a consistent force for this team.

by MikeCP on Jul 23, 2007 10:53 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
it also seems like his velocity is on the rise too....didnt he throw a 97 mph sinking fastball? can you say unhittable?
GermanysTribeFan

by GermanysTribeFan on Jul 23, 2007 10:55 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Lee has the ability to be at least a league average starting pitcher, which (at that price) would be OK with me if he was just the "fifth starter."  

The confusing part for me is how to get him to pitch consistently.  Look at last night: horrible in the first couple of innings, but good the rest of the time.  Does he really need someone in his face all the time so he doesn't forget how to pitch effectively?  

Lee may have the physical ability, but he must be pretty dense to keep going through the same erratic cycle like this.  I wouldn't be surprised if a trade or a demotion woke him up, but by that time it probably wouldn't help the team too much.  

This is an ugly situation in my opinion, I don't see how the Tribe can win here.  A package trade might help the bullpen or the offense, but I'd be very concerned about the state of the rotation if he left (strange, I know).

by Pronk33 on Jul 23, 2007 11:00 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
if there realy is a trade going down (which I do think, because why all the secrecy???) im confident shapiro will do the right thing because he knows were playing for october, i dont think hed jepordise the season by trading a starter for a reliever.....
GermanysTribeFan

by GermanysTribeFan on Jul 23, 2007 11:03 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Even though, earlier in the thread, you said: "id rather aquire another powerbat...im thinking along the lines of carmona and a package for miguel cabrera + a mediocre reliever....thats what id do..." ?

Here's my take... for the most part, I'd like the Indians to stand pat. I think if we took what we had now, we are most certainly contenders.

Do we need a power bat? I wouldn't think so... we are 3rd in runs scored, 3rd in OBP, 3rd in SLG, 4th in OPS... seems like the offense is just fine to me (this is with a "struggling" Travis Hafner too).

Do we need more bullpen help? More than likely not. Our bullpen's ERA is 3.98, which is 8th in the AL; our WHIP is 1.39, good for 9th; most reliever stats are at or better than MLB averages... so what's keeping us afloat? Perhaps it's the 4.54 runs we support the 'pen with (good for 4th in the league). Our bullpen is good to above-average, and if this is our weakest link so far, I'll take it.

Is our starting pitching broken? Probably not. We have 55 quality starts (3rd in AL), a 1.36 WHIP (7th in AL, but leader is at 1.29), and we lead the league in K/BB, along with over 5 and a half K/9. How are we winning games again? Oh yeah, that 5.79 run support for starters (4th in AL).

Let's look at it this way... do we really need to trade anyone on the big club's roster to upgrade this team?
*Trot Nixon? Who wants him?
*Mike Rouse? Can't hit, but brings great defense and gives the middle infield a rest every now and then.
*Name your platooned outfielder... we're not going to get anything for Michaels or Dellucci, and I don't think Francisco or Gutierrez are hot commodities that would headline a trade- plus they are young and the future, why move them?
*Cliff Lee? Might bring some trade value, but he can be serviced as a reliable 4th/5th starter, and isn't that really all we want anyway?

When we're thinking trade... we gotta look for good value. I don't expect Shapiro to be a big buyer, and I hope he isn't. Our team is good where it is, if we want to add a bullpen arm... fine, but don't send pieces of the puzzle that we need.

"We've talked about it so many times," Wedge said, "but this is a special group."

by CarnegieAndOntario on Jul 23, 2007 11:32 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Some people really think we're getting Miguel Cabrera?

by Joe. on Jul 23, 2007 11:36 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
nah....im just saying, thats how id go about it if i were doing a high-impact, non predictable trade.
GermanysTribeFan

by GermanysTribeFan on Jul 23, 2007 11:41 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
bottom line is you make a trade if you get good value and aren't trading away top young talent. shapiro knows this and will act accordingly

by Roger Dorn on Jul 23, 2007 12:19 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Thats Lee's MO from what I've seen. He'll pitch 7  innings but one of those innings,usually out of nowhere, will be an erratic Lee inning where he'll give up like 5 runs.

by world dictator on Jul 23, 2007 11:26 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
If it's true that Hoynes's story doesn't add up, are we to assume that he is helping out the front office here with some sort of coverup so that trade details don't leak and potentially ruin a trade? I'd be very interested to see if the Tribe's beat writers are in on what's going on behind the scenes.

by Roger Dorn on Jul 23, 2007 11:27 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I bet he's just reporting what he's being told.  Hoynes doesn't strike me as the type for duplicity.
Railing against the sacrifice bunt since 2000.

by jdudas on Jul 23, 2007 11:29 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I doubt Hoynes is "in on it", its more likely he's just repeating what some FO official said (whether its true or a cover up)

by MikeCP on Jul 23, 2007 11:31 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I think Shap is under a lot of self-imposed pressure to maximize the chances of this team being in the playoffs this year and next while not sacrificing the future beyond it at the same time. Isn't 2007 the year he initially pointed to as "the year of fruition" for The Plan?

A larger influence than simply backing up his own words is the reality that CC is likely to be here only this year and next, and this is the time to go for it rather than husband resources for a different target year.

That doesn't mean dramatic moves are a sure thing, but he's certainly got to be putting more on the table for potential deals than he has for the least few years.

by mcrose on Jul 23, 2007 11:29 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Why is everyone always opposed to getting more offense? If its at a reasonable price, then I don't see the downside.

No one ever lost or won a playoff series because of a utility man, but I know I'm not the only one who has to hold back vomit when Mike Rouse comes to the plate.

by one size more on Jul 23, 2007 11:35 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
If we upgrade Rouse, it won't be because of Rouse's shortcomings.  It'll be because of Barfield's.

by Jay on Jul 23, 2007 11:36 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Indeed - a truth that hasn't been discussed yet.

by Thommy on Jul 23, 2007 11:46 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
That's the point; Rouse isn't going to cut it if we need to sit Barfield more often than we have to date.

Then again, who's available that can play 2nd?

by one size more on Jul 23, 2007 11:52 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I'm not opposed to more offense for a "reasonable price" but I keep seeing people saying we should trade pitching for hitting, which makes no sense. If someone came along & said they'd take Cabrera for a quality bat I'd be all over it. But it seems like all of the trade rumors I hear about indicate that the sellers are looking for ridiculous prices & I don't think it's worth it for us to pay ridiculous prices for hitting when our hitting is good already.

Also, if we make the playoffs, I can pretty much guarantee you that Mike Rouse will not be getting any at-bats. In fact, once rosters expand in September I have a feeling that his at-bats will be pretty minimal.

by zempf on Jul 23, 2007 11:39 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Case in point:

The Indians also want Dotel, but apparently are not willing to meet the Royals' price; outfielders Franklin Gutierrez and outfielder Ben Francisco likely are among the players who have been discussed.

Keep in mind there's probably more interest in relievers than there were last year, but you better believe the Indians know how valuable six years' worth of Franklin Gutierrez is, and it isn't equal to two months of Dotel.

by Ryan on Jul 23, 2007 11:44 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
True, but:
  • Francisco, being older than Gutierrez and not quite as projectable or as good defensively, is probably very available
  • the Indians have pursued Dotel in the past, and seem to really like him
  • Dotel, alongside the Rafis and JoeBo, would give us a bullpen worthy of a contender
  • A player could be included by the Royals to even things out; although I doubt they'd be willing to do this, since they need all the young players they can get and we're not interested in any of their other vets
  • With a good shot at the playoffs this season, sometimes you just gotta overpay
Francisco ain't Brian Giles, and Dotel ain't a loogy like Rincon. If I were Shapiro I'd find a way to make this deal work, and if I can't talk Dayton Moore down from demanding Francisco straight up, I think I'd pull the trigger.

Full disclosure: I think Octavio Dotel is awesome.

by mrich on Jul 23, 2007 12:06 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I imagine the asking price is more like Francisco and Gutierrez, not "or."

by fleerdon on Jul 23, 2007 2:27 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
At the end of this year we would have the same roster, minus both Franklin and Dotel. Does that still sound like a good plan?
Cleveland: It's like punching yourself in the face.

by fwembt on Jul 23, 2007 3:06 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
If it gets us to the World Series, hell yeah!! Besides, we could re-sign Dotel.

by mrich on Jul 23, 2007 3:13 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
That is a rather large "could." I just don't see Dotel being a large enough need for us to part with someone like Franklin. I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on this one.
Cleveland: It's like punching yourself in the face.

by fwembt on Jul 23, 2007 3:16 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Don't get me wrong, I'd rather give up Francisco than Gutierrez. To me, though, the cost/benefit sweet spot for this team is in the bullpen, since our offense doesn't need much help and it's been next to impossible to improve the rotation via mid-season trades over the last few years. And looking at the bullpen pieces available (Otsuka, Gagne, Dotel, maybe Wheeler or Lidge, Chad Cordero, who knows who else), it is a much better buyers market and if Dotel -- who's having a very nice year in KC -- can be had for a 25-year-old tweener outfielder, I'd do it.

You have to admit, it sure would be nice to have another reliable righty reliever besides Betancourt and Borowski.

by mrich on Jul 23, 2007 3:23 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
It's this logic chain:

  1. We have a limited number of resources with which to complete a trade.

  2. As we have limited resources, you have to prioritize where help is most needed.

  3. In the opinion of some observers, offense is where help is least needed.

That said, I don't think the sentiment here is overwhelmingly against acquiring position players. There is a lot of enthusiasm for acquiring an additional outfielder, like Lofton.

I think most people, if forced to it, would like a platoon partner to replace Nixon and a reliever who will be able to handle some high leverage innings. That's the vibe I get.

What most people don't want, and don't want to waste any more time talking about, is acquiring a CORNER POWER BAT. I think a lot of people are sick of having to explain why guys are either unacquirable (M. Cabrera) or a bad idea (S. Sosa).

And on Rouse, he's here for defense. After last year, I don't think many people are willing to give him away for additional hitting unless the defense is there. Plus, he's about as good a bet as anyone to turn it around; he's surely not this bad.

And I know he's made some errors, etc, but he's also made more than a handful of truly spectacular plays at this point.

by afh4 on Jul 23, 2007 11:41 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
But that assumes you're giving up the same resources to get pitching and hitting, which isn't really true. Pitching is more highly valued, which means it would take better trading chips to pry away a guy like Dotel than it would to pry away a guy like Lofton.

I'd like Dotel, and I'd also like Lofton. But if the choice is between giving up Asdrubal Cabrera or some low-A pitcher and a mid-level OFer, I'll take door #2.

Like someone above said, we don't really NEED a bullpen piece. Borowski, Betancourt and Perez are solid, Mastny is a bit inconsistent but genrally reliable, Fultz has been generally useful, and we have a lot of guys to fillt he last two spots: Lewis, Matt Miller, Adam Miller possibly, Stanford has certainly been a pretty good long man, etc.

by one size more on Jul 23, 2007 11:50 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I don't totally follow.

First off, the post somewhere else in this thread put Dotel's value as starting with either Gootz or Francisco. I don't know what Lofton's is. So, if you were saying Dotel's value was Asrubal, I'm not sure that's true.

But, on a larger level, it's hard to say that pitching is across the board overvalued in the trade market. That kind of thing sounds good but I'm not sure it's actually true. I'm just not willing to assume that.

And, finally, I didn't say we needed a bullpen piece. I don't really think we need anything.

by afh4 on Jul 23, 2007 12:00 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Well, on rotoworld the name used to acquire Dotel was Cabrera. Even if its Gutierrez or Francisco, I don't know, I like both of those guys as well.

What's the going rate for Lofton, though? I don't it's any of those guys, especially dealing with Daniels.

by one size more on Jul 23, 2007 12:02 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

news page
if anyone is interested, I found this page that has up to date Indians news feeds

http://www.dcdeal.com/indians/

by drodd1039 on Jul 23, 2007 11:42 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Oh, what the heck...

Cliff looks like a guy who is going to have a league average strikeout and walk rate but who will give up close to 30 HR a year.  His #3 starter ceiling is in the distant rear-view mirror.

Quite simply, Cliff, with his 0.7 (and dropping?) GB/FB ratio may not bee a good match for the Jake.  It's not that Jake really is a bad HR park, just that it's not a HR suppressing park.  Anyway, the value of a players skill is sometimes different given the ballpark they play in, and it wouldn't surprise me to see him go somewhere flyball pitchers are a little more likely to succeed.  

Honestly, would we really miss him?  The risk in trading him is relatively minor, IMHO, as long as we get a decent return.  While a #4 or #5 starter is certainly of value, he's also not the kind of guy you lose sleep over trading if the deal does not quite work out like you wanted it to.

Put another way - if we make it to the playoffs...would he even pitch?

by Thommy on Jul 23, 2007 11:45 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I guess that we can't say +1 anymore, but I'm with you anyway.
Railing against the sacrifice bunt since 2000.

by jdudas on Jul 23, 2007 11:48 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Nevertheless, if we trade him and he flourishes elsewhere, you'll always have those fans that look to his 18 (or was it 19) win season of 2 years ago and say that we should have known to keep him.

I know that is illogical, but you know how the media/fans can be.  It's the Phillips situation (though that is certainly different).

- Jake

by jakesinger777 on Jul 23, 2007 11:55 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Problem: Everyone we could trade with knows all of that. Still, he might bring a decent return.

by one size more on Jul 23, 2007 11:56 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
If you're a VORP believer, and assume we don't want players with negative VORP, let's take a look at the offenders:
*Shin-Soo Choo -0.7
*David Dellucci -1.1
*Fernando Cabrera -1.2
*Trot Nixon -1.6
*Andy Marte -4.1
*Jake Westbrook -4.1
*Edward Mujica -4.3
*Roberto Hernandez -4.4
*Cliff Lee -5.5
*Josh Barfield -6.6
*Jeremy Sowers -8.6
*Mike Rouse -10.0

Do any of these numbers make a cause for concern enough to swing a deal? Doubtful. The only negative VORP from the lineup is your starting 2nd baseman (read: that's 8 of out 9 regular starters in positive VORP land), and part of your outfield platoon. Most of the negative bullpen VORP players have been dealt with (Hernandez released, Mujica demoted, Cabrera on the brink) and Sowers has been sent to Buffalo to work on his stuff too. I'll give Westbrook a pass because of the injury, plus the only glaringly bad statistic is his K/BB ratio. Who's left? Cliff Lee. Is a trade worth it to bring in someone to replace him or have him leave to get prospects and have someone in AAA replace him?

"We've talked about it so many times," Wedge said, "but this is a special group."

by CarnegieAndOntario on Jul 23, 2007 11:47 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
The question essentially boils down to whether Laffey is a replacement-level pitcher right now. Because finding this out means in effect trading Cliff Lee, this is a question I'd rather not answer.

by Ryan on Jul 23, 2007 12:07 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Its not just how close Laffey can be to replacing Lee, its that plus the replacement value of whoever we get in return.

Crude example: Is Lee+Cabrera > Laffey+Dotel

(BTW, I'm not suggesting that trade, its just a fer instance)

by mcrose on Jul 23, 2007 12:32 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I understand what you're saying, but I still think trading Lee is a bad idea.*

I guess one reason I'm getting rolling-eye syndrome is that Lee's perceived value is probably at its nadir, even if Lee's still a valuable commodity in a pitching-starved league. We had similar conversations about Peralta last year: a player that's fairly young, has talent, has been a very valuable player in the past, and signed to a below-market contract. The Indians should be expending their energy trying to fix whatever's wrong with Lee, not trying to trade him.

Crude example: Is Lee+Cabrera > Laffey+Dotel

No. The Indians already have Laffey in their organization, and given enough time, circumstances will create an opportunity for him to pitch without having to deal Lee. I'd be fine with dealing (Fernando) Cabrera for Dotel, though.

*Yes, a Cliff Lee for Miguel Cabrera trade would always be a good one. But in this instance, let's stick to real-world scenarios.

by Ryan on Jul 23, 2007 12:46 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I would agree, all years being equal. But this year, as opposed to last year, we are in a playoff hunt. And have just spent all this money to sign core players and coaches, effectively announcing "the time is right" and the real pursuit of championships begins now.

Even the best crystal ball or stats projection can't bring more than this year into focus. If someone offers you a good deal for Lee that answers an immediate need (let's say one that fulfills that need beyond this year), and you have some confidence that Lee's replacement(s) will not sink the ship, that might overcome the fact that you might be able to get more fromfor him next year.

by mcrose on Jul 23, 2007 1:03 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
If someone offers you a good deal for Lee that answers an immediate need (let's say one that fulfills that need beyond this year), and you have some confidence that Lee's replacement(s) will not sink the ship, that might overcome the fact that you might be able to get more fromfor him next year.

I agree with this. Perhaps we're talking past each other.

by Ryan on Jul 23, 2007 1:36 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
mcrose wasn't looking for an answer to the question -- he was just proposing that that's the right format for questions, to look at the total balance sheet from the point of view of the big-league club.

And how soon you forget ... some of us were talking about trading Cliff Lee a long time ago.

by Jay on Jul 23, 2007 1:10 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
this thread is quickly getting hi-larious

by emil minty on Jul 23, 2007 12:05 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I find the key to any thread involving trade speculation is to ignore any post that's a variant of "I'd trade player X for player Y" because unless Mark Shapiro shows up and starts posting here, none of us has any clue what type of trade proposals are going on out there & speculating on that sort of thing is completely & totally valueless.

by zempf on Jul 23, 2007 12:14 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I disagree entirely.  Entertainment is valuable.

by Thommy on Jul 23, 2007 12:27 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
i'm with you.  who do we have to give up for langerhans?

by emil minty on Jul 23, 2007 12:35 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
By that logic, we could just stop at the "Shapiro knows best" level and not even bother posting at all.
- Jake

by jakesinger777 on Jul 23, 2007 12:33 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Mike, what exactly is the tremendous value that we usually are creating here?

by Jay on Jul 23, 2007 12:35 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Ok, I shouldn't say valueless. I should just say that it's annoying me that every fifth post is along the lines of "we should trade Cliff Lee and Casey Blake for Miguel Cabrera!!!!" This may also be hangover from the Laffey thread & yesterday's game thread.

by zempf on Jul 23, 2007 12:42 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
i will also say this seems to me to be a bit of an overstatement. i haven't seen anything too ridiculous yet, i only remember seeing miguel cabrera's name mentioned once

by Roger Dorn on Jul 23, 2007 12:44 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
We should cut Lee in half and trade him for both Johan Santana and Alex Rodriguez.

by Jackdaw on Jul 23, 2007 12:57 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I was accused of being the Speculation Grinch yesterday, so I'll let you take care of this stuff today.

by supermarioelia on Jul 23, 2007 12:51 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Looks like somebody (ie, me) has a case of the Mondays. Sorry if that first post came off meaner than I intended.

by zempf on Jul 23, 2007 1:39 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Nicely played.
Railing against the sacrifice bunt since 2000.

by jdudas on Jul 23, 2007 1:47 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
yea, what good what a comments board be if trade speculation isn't allowed? just so long as it doesn't get absurd, i suppose

by Roger Dorn on Jul 23, 2007 12:43 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
All our ingenuity lavished on getting into danger legitimately so that we may be genuinely rescued.

by emil minty on Jul 23, 2007 12:50 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Steve Phillips weighing in on why the Mariners will make the playoffs instead of the Indians (grammatical and spelling errors are Steve's): "I just have some conerns over the Indians defense, bullpen, and baseball instincts. They seem to make base running mistakes and mental errors more than winning teams can get away with. They have a relentless offense and pretty good starting pitching. Lee and Westbrook have been disappoiting since their return, and if they are a playoff team those two guys are going to have to step up. I think the Indians will be there to the end, but unless they clean up their game they will finish out of the money. The Mariners have one of the best bullpens in baseball and they are very strong up the middle, defensively. I may be underestimating the Indians, but you may be underestimating the Mariners. I would not be shocked if the Indians make the playoffs, but they need to improve."

See? All we need to do is trade a guy who has good instincts and does not make mental errors. It's so darned simple!

"We've talked about it so many times," Wedge said, "but this is a special group."

by CarnegieAndOntario on Jul 23, 2007 12:58 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
What a tool.  I'd be more worried if he felt the Indians were better than the Mariners  . . .

by macasson on Jul 23, 2007 1:02 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Seriously.  This is a good sign, if anything.

by homelytourist on Jul 23, 2007 1:11 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I can remember like less than 5 baserunning errors all year. Is that really a problem we have?

by afh4 on Jul 23, 2007 1:16 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
No, it's not that we've got too many errors, it's that the Mariners have earned 16 Steve Phillips Baseball Instincts Gold Stars (TM)  

That is WAY more than we've managed to accrue so far this year, mostly because he's usually busy watching the Mets and crying while the Indians are playing and therefore doesn't feel like affixing the gold stars to his TV.

by NickFantana on Jul 23, 2007 1:35 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
So he highlights the two most important things in baseball as things the Indians do well: starting pitching and offense. However! the Mariners are better in the bullpen and with baseball instincts and that therefore trumps the Tribe. Sorry Shapiro, Steve Phillips thinks the Plan sucks

by Roger Dorn on Jul 23, 2007 1:20 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I don't really see how he is off-base with his limited view of the team.

He's probably only watched a handful of Indians baseball games and maybe he caught a few baserunning gaffes in those limited viewings.

But, he is right about our defense and bullpen. They are not of playoff caliber. Our superior hitting and starting pitching goes a long way in masking those flaws.

by Toxicadam on Jul 23, 2007 1:48 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I hear "playoff caliber defense," and I can't help but think of Chris Duncan swatting at that fly ball during the Series last year.

by fleerdon on Jul 23, 2007 2:48 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
J-Barf for Eckstein. Championship
Cleveland: It's like punching yourself in the face.

by fwembt on Jul 23, 2007 3:11 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Another view from Buffalo:

http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/bisons/story/125280.html

Apparently he hasn't gotten the word to get in the car yet, but he's packed.

by mcrose on Jul 23, 2007 1:22 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Reading Hoynes's section again, it doesn't really make any sense to me what a water pipe burst has to do with Laffey's pitch count at all. The fact that Lovullo said there was "a situation" when he pulled Laffey is far more telling than anything else

by Roger Dorn on Jul 23, 2007 1:27 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Yeah, he used the words "situation" and "considerations" as euphemisms for FO activity, not plumbing.

Interestingly, he also used it in ref to Mulhern, who apparently has had a lot of scouts looking at him. Lovullo admitted that the clubhouse might look a lot different after the trade deadline.

by mcrose on Jul 23, 2007 1:33 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
just looking ahead since today's GDT isn't up, but Santana is pitching for Minny today, so we'll see him this weekend. When was the last time we played a series against the Twins and missed his turn in the rotation? We face him EVERY time.

by ASP on Jul 23, 2007 1:57 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Does anyone believe that the tanning booth has added to Phillips' lack of baseball knowledge?

I bet he's got an agent in Hollywood, a script he's shopping and a S.A.G. card. He wants in the acting game.

by BoDiaz1974 on Jul 23, 2007 2:20 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Where is E5? I've been waiting to hear the latest from his source.

by Roger Dorn on Jul 23, 2007 2:38 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
This has been said in various places before, but I'm trying to get my head around it.

Why would they bring Laffey up as a middle reliever? The only way that makes sense is if one of the other lefties (Stanford, Perez, Lee, or Fultz) is going somewhere. The obvious one to trade is Stanford, but can he really being anything back? Perez is not going anywhere, and Fultz is the only veteran lefty so he is also staying put. If Lee is going to be traded it has to be in a big deal, as you don't trade starting pitching when you are in a race.  

by oxforddave on Jul 23, 2007 2:54 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
this is almost like the cold war....
GermanysTribeFan

by GermanysTribeFan on Jul 23, 2007 3:06 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Here's another interesting comment regarding Laffey...

...Bisons PR director Brad Bisbing cleared the mystery up down in the clubhouse after the game with just one sentence: "Yeah his (Laffey's) locker is all cleaned out."

http://thesportsroadtrip.wnymedia.net/blogs/2007/07/23/drama-and-intrigue-at-dunn-tire-park/

by tobytobytoby on Jul 23, 2007 3:10 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Almost more than anything I'm surprised there's an actual Buffalo Bisons blog.

by ASP on Jul 23, 2007 3:14 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
And this is why I hate speculation. The idiot doing the ticker on WKNR just announced that part of the reason Vic was upset on Saturday night was that Lee didn't come to check on Sosa. Call me crazy, but hasn't that only been given as a theory up to this point? Thank goodness this all seems to have died out already.

by supermarioelia on Jul 23, 2007 3:24 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
part of the reason Vic was upset on Saturday night was that Lee didn't come to check on Sosa.

It's possible, but since no one's talking, there's no way to confirm it.

My theory is that Lee was going to pick Victor up a copy of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, but forgot about it. And then told him the ending.  

by Ryan on Jul 23, 2007 3:48 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Now that is being a cancer in the clubhouse.
Cleveland: It's like punching yourself in the face.

by fwembt on Jul 23, 2007 4:03 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I don't think there's a Spanish translation yet, so I don't think I believe that. Any sources?

by BoDiaz1974 on Jul 23, 2007 3:55 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Actually, Lee found out that he was being traded to the Rangers for Sosa...Wedge, desperately trying to stop this deal, orders Lee to hit Sosa. Deal dead.

by tobytobytoby on Jul 23, 2007 4:07 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
If Fernando Cabrera had been placed on waivers, we'd know about it, right?  

by cheech99 on Jul 23, 2007 4:11 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
probably they would have made an announcement by now....
GermanysTribeFan

by GermanysTribeFan on Jul 23, 2007 4:15 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Is placing Cabrera on wavers and bringing up Laffey as a middle reliever (and using up one of his options) really a good use of resources? It just does not make sense to me.

by oxforddave on Jul 23, 2007 4:18 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
One option no one has mentioned, and it doesn't make much sense to me either, but could a move of Cabrera DFA'd, Lee to the pen and Laffey to the rotation be considered?

by JK in CBus on Jul 23, 2007 4:28 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Considering it takes Lee 1-2 innings to get going as it is, I hope to God they don't move him to the pen.

by supermarioelia on Jul 23, 2007 4:42 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
For a player who's being added to the 40-man as he's promoted to the majors, you don't use up an option until and unless you send the player back down.  Considering that rosters expand to 40 in just five weeks, there's a good chance that the option wouldn't be used.

by Jay on Jul 23, 2007 4:58 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
No problem.  I find that helps to remember that in the official language, the player is on "optional assignment" to the minor leagues.  You've got minor league players on minor league contracts.  You've got major league player on major league contracts.  It's only when you've got a minor league player on a major league contract (i.e., the 40-man roster) that he needs to be "optionally assigned" to the minors.

by Jay on Jul 23, 2007 5:31 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I swear I read somewhere (I thought this thread) that we WOULDN'T know if Cabrera was on waivers until he passed through or was claimed. Too much work to look it up but is there anyone knowledgable about the whole waiver thing?

by BoDiaz1974 on Jul 23, 2007 4:35 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Latest from that Buffalo Blog:

"UPDATE #3: Not too much to report but I was just down on the field for the Bisons game and no sign of Laffey anywhere. Word out of Cleveland is that he isn't there either which would make sense if they're waiting to activate him until Cabrera clears waivers or if a trade happens."

The Buffalo Bisons stringers are really into this!

by mcrose on Jul 23, 2007 6:32 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Hi Ryan, does this thread make your promised "who's available" piece irrelevent?
Sometimes you just gotta be lucky

by mauichuck on Jul 23, 2007 6:34 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
(Hey all, longtime reader ~ rarely a poster but...)

Ok, I just read this entire thing and I cant believe something missed all of you for so long... Waivers ~ and the problem we will have with them!

Unfortunately the Tribe is in a bad situation right now with player options. These players will need to clear waivers (very unlikely) if we want them off the 25man roster:
Frankie Gutierrez
Francisco Cabrera
Jason Stanford

... Now that being the case, things become real screwy!

IF we trade for someone like Lofton (played LF, hits Righties better) then we are fine, he would replace BenFran ~ but is he really an upgrade there?

IF we trade for a big bat ~ he better play LF and hit Rhighties to still allow for Michaels to get ABs OR we are planning on DFAing Nixon. If he only plays RF then either FrankieG or Nixon would need to be let loose. Frankie could be moved to LF in that situation, but since he and Michaels both only hit Lefties then it would mean Jason would need to go...

(Our OF is just too limited in what can be done to allow for much of an upgrade... it's a Rightie hitting LFer or nothing really.)

IF we trade for bullpen help, where do we put him? Sure, we have the spot currently being used by Lewis, but that only solves the problem until Fultz/Miller comes back. Stanford and/or Cabrera would almost certainly need to be dealt if we took on a reliever now.

Also not mentioned; if we are trading Lee it would almost certainly be for another starter possibly in a similar `needs a change of scenery' type situation ~ or someone the other team thinks they will lose soon anyway. Why, because trading a starter when our starting depth isn't extreme right now anyway just doesn't make sense... But why would we need to call up Laffey to make a spot start in that case? Well, maybe the starter isn't on the same rotation spot as Lee is right now and we don't want to move guys up a couple starts. Oh, and Lee's spot on the roster would be taken by Laffey meaning we would still need to drop Stanford/Cabrera/Gutierrez or include them in the deal...

Purely for the fun of it-speculation based off those situations:
What kind of pitcher could be on a different schedule, need a change of scenery, be expected to leave his current team before too long and be worth at least Lee + Stanford/Cabrera/Gutierrez? Dontrelle Willis maybe?

Lee + Guiterrez + ??? might be just what the Fish ordered; it fills their CF need, they don't lose too much in the rotation and wouldn't have to worry about not being able to afford his arbitration. As far as the Indians are concerned, D-Train might be a good replacement for CC if we cant keep him and a 07-08 rotation of CC - Willis - Westbrook - Carmona - Byrd(07)/Miller(08?) would look mighty fine. If we think we can fix Willis, it could be fun :)

by darkstar on Jul 23, 2007 7:58 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
the marlins were rumored to have interest in gutz, but if we trade for willis, whats laffey doing with a cleaned out locker at buffalo????
GermanysTribeFan

by GermanysTribeFan on Jul 23, 2007 8:02 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I believe Gutz has an option year left.  It was used when he was sent to Buffalo at the start of the season, but the option is good for the entire year.  You're right on Stanford and Cabrera, but if Gutz got sent down earlier in the year, he can get sent down again this year if needed.

by Fundamentals on Jul 23, 2007 8:09 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Huh, yeah I guess FrankieG was sent down this year for something other than a rehabilitation stint... NM on him :D ~ problem still kinda stands though as someone would need to be sent down and who would that be since Frankie and Ben are both showing they deserve to be here?

As far as Laffey cleaning out his locker because of a possible Willis accusation? Well he would need to take Lee's place on Thursday so we don't have to move everyone up a start in the rotation. We would also be in a situation were we would need to be keeping CC and Willis split in the rotation to keep the Lefties from going back-to-back. If we gave D-Train 7 days off (from tomorrow) to work with the staff and skip Carmona once through giving him 9 Days off it mean no one else is effected in the rotation

Im thinking:
Today ~ Westbrook (Willis for Fla)
Tues ~ CC
Wed ~ Carmona
Thu ~ Laffey (spot start)
Fri ~ Byrd
Sat ~ Westy
Sun ~ CC
Mon ~ Off
Tues ~ Willis (7 days rest)
Wed ~ Byrd
Thu ~ Westy
Fri ~ CC
Sat ~ Carmona (9 days rest)
Sun ~ Willis
Mon ~ Byrd
~ or we could not even skip Carmona and it would just push everyone back a day, but he's young and could probably use the rest with just a BP session or something...

Like I said, its just fun speculation based off some situations ~ it just kinda made sense for everyone involved ya know... who knows whats really going on though!

by darkstar on Jul 23, 2007 9:39 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
if the price is right for willis ok, but man his herky jerky pitching style makes him injury prone....and i doubt shapiro would would gamble on something like that during this last stretch....
GermanysTribeFan

by GermanysTribeFan on Jul 24, 2007 4:53 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Constantly updated CHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Start posting about the Indians »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Dv-pabst_small
Your 2009 American League All-Stars
Hansonnnnn_small
In regards to Victor Martinez and Ryan Garko
Junkballer_small
The Struggles of Uncle Jhonny
Burgandy_1__small
Is Our Fans Learning?
Indiansfan-possibleavatarforlgt_minorleagueball__small
It's Time to Begin Working Toward 2010!
Hand_small
Shapiro's Latin American Endeavors
Junkballer_small
Anatomy of a Wasted Season
Small
Seeking Jamie Moyer
Jaketaylor_small
Start it with Shapiro
Jaret_small
Kerry Wood - 3 and out?

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini

Featured Poll

Poll
Biggest 2009 Breakout
Asdrubal Cabrera
84 votes
Jhonny Peralta
63 votes
Anthony Reyes
51 votes
Jensen Lewis
4 votes
Matt LaPorta
70 votes
David Huff
25 votes
Scott Lewis
14 votes
Aaron Laffey
12 votes
Tony Sipp
13 votes
Ben Francisco
28 votes
Travis Hafner
96 votes

460 votes | Poll has closed

BUY THE BOOK

Indians Annual 2009 from Maple Street Press

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recent FanShots

Rondon to AAA
Wedge Won't be Fired Midseason
Martin Shines at AAA Syracuse
Gotta love the media
Herges DFA, Abreu Up
Independence Day Rumor Rundown
View From the Booth: Carmona to the Clippers
Meloan dealt to Rays
Newsflash: Zombie Marte Sighted by Fangraphs
Nyjer Morgan is a Valuable Asset...

Post_icon New FanShot All FanShots Carrot-mini

SweetBabooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Sweet Baboo, now with glitter


Managers

Seagull_on_sale_pier_small Ryan

Walter_small Jay

Authors

3444ant_black_small APV

47b8dd28b3127cceb64839d9746800000026102bauwjrq3za_small afh4

Official Partner of Yahoo! Sports