Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Sheldon Ocker mentions Laffey's short outing, although there is some plausible deniability at play:
``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:
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 |
169 comments
Comments
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by GermanysTribeFan on
Jul 23, 2007 10:09 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by nctribefan on
Jul 23, 2007 10:11 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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.
by jdudas on
Jul 23, 2007 10:13 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by zempf on
Jul 23, 2007 10:15 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by GermanysTribeFan on
Jul 23, 2007 11:08 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by jdudas on
Jul 23, 2007 11:13 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by zempf on
Jul 23, 2007 11:26 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by mcrose on
Jul 23, 2007 11:18 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by BoDiaz1974 on
Jul 23, 2007 2:16 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Mark Shapiro on
Jul 23, 2007 2:58 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by nctribefan on
Jul 23, 2007 10:11 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by jdudas on
Jul 23, 2007 10:14 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by zempf on
Jul 23, 2007 10:17 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by jdudas on
Jul 23, 2007 10:20 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by jdudas on
Jul 23, 2007 10:45 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by supermarioelia on
Jul 23, 2007 11:20 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by afh4 on
Jul 23, 2007 11:22 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
(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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Luis (Tribe Fan in London) on
Jul 23, 2007 10:15 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by GermanysTribeFan on
Jul 23, 2007 10:42 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by emil minty on
Jul 23, 2007 10:54 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by zempf on
Jul 23, 2007 10:55 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by afh4 on
Jul 23, 2007 10:56 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by jdudas on
Jul 23, 2007 10:57 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by GermanysTribeFan on
Jul 23, 2007 10:57 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by GermanysTribeFan on
Jul 23, 2007 11:20 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by afh4 on
Jul 23, 2007 11:22 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by supermarioelia on
Jul 23, 2007 11:24 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by one size more on
Jul 23, 2007 11:27 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
IMO.
by nickjs21 on
Jul 23, 2007 11:34 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by nickjs21 on
Jul 23, 2007 11:42 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by nickjs21 on
Jul 23, 2007 11:45 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by rolub on
Jul 23, 2007 11:54 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by one size more on
Jul 23, 2007 12:01 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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.
by jakesinger777 on
Jul 23, 2007 11:50 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by zempf on
Jul 23, 2007 11:34 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by AngG on
Jul 23, 2007 11:03 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by mcrose on
Jul 23, 2007 10:53 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Ryan on
Jul 23, 2007 10:54 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by supermarioelia on
Jul 23, 2007 11:21 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by one size more on
Jul 23, 2007 11:29 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by mcrose on
Jul 23, 2007 11:39 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by jdudas on
Jul 23, 2007 10:56 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by GermanysTribeFan on
Jul 23, 2007 10:49 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by GermanysTribeFan on
Jul 23, 2007 10:53 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by MikeCP on
Jul 23, 2007 10:53 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by GermanysTribeFan on
Jul 23, 2007 10:55 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by GermanysTribeFan on
Jul 23, 2007 11:03 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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.
by CarnegieAndOntario on
Jul 23, 2007 11:32 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Joe. on
Jul 23, 2007 11:36 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by GermanysTribeFan on
Jul 23, 2007 11:41 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by supermarioelia on
Jul 23, 2007 11:37 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Roger Dorn on
Jul 23, 2007 12:19 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by world dictator on
Jul 23, 2007 11:26 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Roger Dorn on
Jul 23, 2007 11:27 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by jdudas on
Jul 23, 2007 11:29 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by MikeCP on
Jul 23, 2007 11:31 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Jay on
Jul 23, 2007 11:36 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Thommy on
Jul 23, 2007 11:46 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
Then again, who's available that can play 2nd?
by one size more on
Jul 23, 2007 11:52 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
- 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
Full disclosure: I think Octavio Dotel is awesome.
by mrich on
Jul 23, 2007 12:06 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by fleerdon on
Jul 23, 2007 2:27 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by fwembt on
Jul 23, 2007 3:06 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by mrich on
Jul 23, 2007 3:13 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by fwembt on
Jul 23, 2007 3:16 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
- We have a limited number of resources with which to complete a trade.
- As we have limited resources, you have to prioritize where help is most needed.
- In the opinion of some observers, offense is where help is least needed.
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
news page
by drodd1039 on
Jul 23, 2007 11:42 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by jdudas on
Jul 23, 2007 11:48 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I know that is illogical, but you know how the media/fans can be. It's the Phillips situation (though that is certainly different).
by jakesinger777 on
Jul 23, 2007 11:55 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by one size more on
Jul 23, 2007 11:56 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
*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?
by CarnegieAndOntario on
Jul 23, 2007 11:47 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Ryan on
Jul 23, 2007 12:07 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For 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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
I agree with this. Perhaps we're talking past each other.
by Ryan on
Jul 23, 2007 1:36 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by The DiaTriber on
Jul 23, 2007 2:42 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by emil minty on
Jul 23, 2007 12:05 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by zempf on
Jul 23, 2007 12:14 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Thommy on
Jul 23, 2007 12:27 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by emil minty on
Jul 23, 2007 12:35 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by jakesinger777 on
Jul 23, 2007 12:33 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Jay on
Jul 23, 2007 12:35 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by zempf on
Jul 23, 2007 12:42 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Roger Dorn on
Jul 23, 2007 12:44 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Jackdaw on
Jul 23, 2007 12:57 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by supermarioelia on
Jul 23, 2007 12:51 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by zempf on
Jul 23, 2007 1:39 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by jdudas on
Jul 23, 2007 1:47 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Roger Dorn on
Jul 23, 2007 12:43 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by emil minty on
Jul 23, 2007 12:50 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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!
by CarnegieAndOntario on
Jul 23, 2007 12:58 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by macasson on
Jul 23, 2007 1:02 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by homelytourist on
Jul 23, 2007 1:11 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by afh4 on
Jul 23, 2007 1:16 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by supermarioelia on
Jul 23, 2007 1:33 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Roger Dorn on
Jul 23, 2007 1:20 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by fleerdon on
Jul 23, 2007 2:48 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by fwembt on
Jul 23, 2007 3:11 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Roger Dorn on
Jul 23, 2007 1:27 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by ASP on
Jul 23, 2007 1:57 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Gradyforpresident on
Jul 23, 2007 2:33 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by ASP on
Jul 23, 2007 2:48 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Roger Dorn on
Jul 23, 2007 2:38 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
http://buffalonews.typepad.com/insidepitch/2007/07/no-word-yet-on-.html
Turns out Laffey didn't warm up on Sat - nobody did.
by mcrose on
Jul 23, 2007 2:41 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by GermanysTribeFan on
Jul 23, 2007 3:06 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
...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
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by ASP on
Jul 23, 2007 3:14 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by supermarioelia on
Jul 23, 2007 3:24 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by fwembt on
Jul 23, 2007 4:03 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by BoDiaz1974 on
Jul 23, 2007 3:55 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Ryan on
Jul 23, 2007 3:57 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by tobytobytoby on
Jul 23, 2007 4:07 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by cheech99 on
Jul 23, 2007 4:11 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by GermanysTribeFan on
Jul 23, 2007 4:15 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by oxforddave on
Jul 23, 2007 4:18 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by ASP on
Jul 23, 2007 4:22 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by JK in CBus on
Jul 23, 2007 4:28 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by supermarioelia on
Jul 23, 2007 4:42 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Jay on
Jul 23, 2007 4:58 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by oxforddave on
Jul 23, 2007 5:16 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Jay on
Jul 23, 2007 5:31 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by BoDiaz1974 on
Jul 23, 2007 4:35 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
"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
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by mauichuck on
Jul 23, 2007 6:34 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by GermanysTribeFan on
Jul 23, 2007 8:02 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by Fundamentals on
Jul 23, 2007 8:09 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
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
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Laffey Staying in Buffalo (For Now)
by GermanysTribeFan on
Jul 24, 2007 4:53 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
















