To all of you drafting 2012 Blue Jay projected lineups with Carlos Beltran hitting cleanup, wrong color bird. So today's lesson is simple:
That's a great fit for Beltran, and I think he'll help the Cardinals a lot. It won't be easy to step in as the de facto Pujols replacement, but he did beat Pujols in wOBA this past season (.389 for Beltran, .385 for Pujols). So, um, yeah. :P
The combination of the Jays playing on turf and Beltran's knee problems always made a marriage a tough sell - good deal for the Cardinals
With quality available starting pitchers gone and Jays unlikely to sign Jackson - it's time to "batten down the hatches" and try to revive the careers of Brett Cecil and Kyle Drabek and hope for a miracle in Dustin McGowan.
Why is everyone writing off this offseason as being done? This wasn't going to be about signing Free Agents (you make your offers on those you'd like, at your price) unless Prince Fielder comes at a better cost. A.A. has been clear all offseason. Before a Starter is acquired, before a Big Bat is acquired, the Bullpen will be fixed.
The MLSE acquisition by Rogers and Bell ($1.32 Billion - $660.0 Million each - I don't know where the $533.0 MM figure came from) was not much of a surprise to A.A. His "Big Offseason" was shut down almost immediately (Mid-November I think, that's when the Big Offseason talk was toned down / disappeared.) and that's when, I think, Yu Darvish was re-evaluated.
My biggest surprise is how much A.A. is over-evaluating his own prospects. That may bite him in the butt, before too long. 1) I am surprised Mat Latos wasn't acquired by A.A. - did he 'low-ball' the offer? 2) I am surprised he didn't get Yu Darvish, because it's only money, not prospects lost, not Draft Picks lost.
Is this offseason over for A.A.? No, not a chance.
http://mynorthwest.com/374/598422/Why-you-do-not-trade-Felix-Hernandez-right-now
"If I am trading pitching, I am trading Pineda. Why? Because he is replaceable. There is a very good chance that by the end of next season Danny Hultzen could be Michael Pineda on the hill in regards to development, path, and what he brings to the rotation. If you trade Felix no one is close to being what he is, an established ace who has suffered through the growing pains, who has learned the league and is committed to his team and community. That is what he is now and what he should be for some time to come."
I didn't even think of Pineda until now. A very good 22 year old pitcher with 5 years of control is worth a lot. Looking at the Mariners roster and farm system, they really need help at C and CF. I would flip D'Arnaud and Gose for Pineda without hesitation although I don't know if Jack Z would go for it.
Pineda is a fun pitcher to watch although you really wouldn't know it from his 2 starts against the Jays where he got knocked around.
"If I am trading pitching, I am trading Pineda. Why? Because he is replaceable. There is a very good chance that by the end of next season Danny Hultzen could be Michael Pineda on the hill in regards to development, path, and what he brings to the rotation. If you trade Felix no one is close to being what he is, an established ace who has suffered through the growing pains, who has learned the league and is committed to his team and community. That is what he is now and what he should be for some time to come."
I didn't even think of Pineda until now. A very good 22 year old pitcher with 5 years of control is worth a lot. Looking at the Mariners roster and farm system, they really need help at C and CF. I would flip D'Arnaud and Gose for Pineda without hesitation although I don't know if Jack Z would go for it.
Pineda is a fun pitcher to watch although you really wouldn't know it from his 2 starts against the Jays where he got knocked around.
Pineda is a fun pitcher to watch although you really wouldn't know it
from his 2 starts against the Jays where he got knocked around.
Wasn't he no-hitting the Jays through 6 in the first start? I saw him pitch in Toronto, and I think he got touched by Lind for an HR, then was absolutely dominant til the 7th. I think his problem was that he just tired in the 7th and on. There is no way the Mariners would give him up for just d'Arnaud and Gose.
Wasn't he no-hitting the Jays through 6 in the first start? I saw him pitch in Toronto, and I think he got touched by Lind for an HR, then was absolutely dominant til the 7th. I think his problem was that he just tired in the 7th and on. There is no way the Mariners would give him up for just d'Arnaud and Gose.
"Wasn't he no-hitting the Jays through 6 in the first start? I saw him pitch in Toronto, and I think he got touched by Lind for an HR, then was absolutely dominant til the 7th. I think his problem was that he just tired in the 7th and on. There is no way the Mariners would give him up for just d'Arnaud and Gose."
I just looked at the game log and I forgot about his start against the Jays in April where he had a shutout into the 8th inning.
In the game you are talking about, he gave up a 2 run HR to Lind in the 1st inning and than didn't give up another run until the 7th inning.
I just looked at the game log and I forgot about his start against the Jays in April where he had a shutout into the 8th inning.
In the game you are talking about, he gave up a 2 run HR to Lind in the 1st inning and than didn't give up another run until the 7th inning.
Why would the M's trade Pineda and not Felix? If they're not going to contend in the next few years, Jack Z might as well trade both. If he is planning on assembling a pitching-strong team within that timeframe, he's going to need both - along with Paxton, Hultzen and perhaps Walker.
I personally think the M's should trade King Felix but I think the logic behind only dealing Pineda is that it would still leave them with a proven front line starter. The Ms would be able to upgrade their bats by trading Pineda. It would be a hard sell to the fans by saying you're trying to win now (or in the near future) while trading away a young proven ace that is still under control for 3 more seasons.
Well, optics aside, if you trade Pineda for a bat or two, how does that help you contend? So you've downgraded your rotation significantly (removing your #2 starter) and upgraded your offense. You're still well behind your AL West rivals.
That Felix Hernandez article is awful. The Yankees would leap at the opportunity to trade Teixeira for Felix as opposed to having to give up a Montero, Betances, and Banuelos package, and it makes little sense to keep a guy making 25% of your payroll when you have no hope of contending.
"Well, optics aside, if you trade Pineda for a bat or two, how does that help you contend? So you've downgraded your rotation significantly (removing your #2 starter) and upgraded your offense. You're still well behind your AL West rivals."
You're likely going to see Hultzen and Paxton sometime in 2012 . I imagine the year for playoff contention would be 2013/2014 if they're going to trade Pineda for prospects (D'Arnaud/Gose).
You're likely going to see Hultzen and Paxton sometime in 2012 . I imagine the year for playoff contention would be 2013/2014 if they're going to trade Pineda for prospects (D'Arnaud/Gose).
It doesn't make any sense for the M's to trade Pineda. He's cheap and under control for a long time. That Hultzen might become "the next Pineda" is not at all a reason to trade him. You know, because major league rotations have, um, more than one pitcher.
I did a little bit of digging and found this:
Dave Cameron suggested the M's should consider trading Pineda all the way back in June
http://mynorthwest.com/?nid=422&sid=506991
He also briefly talks about it at USS Mariner on Dec 17th
http://www.ussmariner.com/2011/12/17/mat-latos-trade-opens-opportunity-for-mariners/
Dave Cameron suggested the M's should consider trading Pineda all the way back in June
http://mynorthwest.com/?nid=422&sid=506991
He also briefly talks about it at USS Mariner on Dec 17th
http://www.ussmariner.com/2011/12/17/mat-latos-trade-opens-opportunity-for-mariners/
I think Cameron's argument for trading Pineda makes some sense (or did, back in June). Basically, he wrote that if Jack Z can get a huge haul of positional prospects in return for him, it might provide a better foundation for success (given that flamethrowing starters like Pineda often, well, flame out).
But think about what's happened since then in the AL West. In Anaheim, you have the addition of Pujols, Wilson, Iannetta and the Weaver extension. In Texas: Adams, Uehara, Nathan, likely Darvish. And consider the GM power that now exists across the division: Dipoto, Daniels, Beane, Luhnow. Plus the financial resources that go with the new Anaheim and Texas TV mega-deals. The competition is getting a lot tougher.
And would Cameron's proposal really transform the M's into a competitive team within the next couple of years? Consider just how bad the offense is up and down the lineup. Also consider that Hultzen, Paxton and Walker are just prospects, and that even if two of three of them work out, it will probably be at least a couple of years before they've adjusted to the competition and are firing on all cylinders (Walker in particular - he's only 19). Remove Pineda and your rotation consists of an ace and a few prospects (albeit good ones). Of course, the prospects acquired for Pineda would have to succeed as well.
Trading Pineda for positional upgrades with a view to competing in the next few years is an interesting idea but to me it seems like a bridge too far. Of course, if Seattle can extend Felix's contract (say, by adding five years to it), the GM's time horizon would change dramatically.
But think about what's happened since then in the AL West. In Anaheim, you have the addition of Pujols, Wilson, Iannetta and the Weaver extension. In Texas: Adams, Uehara, Nathan, likely Darvish. And consider the GM power that now exists across the division: Dipoto, Daniels, Beane, Luhnow. Plus the financial resources that go with the new Anaheim and Texas TV mega-deals. The competition is getting a lot tougher.
And would Cameron's proposal really transform the M's into a competitive team within the next couple of years? Consider just how bad the offense is up and down the lineup. Also consider that Hultzen, Paxton and Walker are just prospects, and that even if two of three of them work out, it will probably be at least a couple of years before they've adjusted to the competition and are firing on all cylinders (Walker in particular - he's only 19). Remove Pineda and your rotation consists of an ace and a few prospects (albeit good ones). Of course, the prospects acquired for Pineda would have to succeed as well.
Trading Pineda for positional upgrades with a view to competing in the next few years is an interesting idea but to me it seems like a bridge too far. Of course, if Seattle can extend Felix's contract (say, by adding five years to it), the GM's time horizon would change dramatically.
Pineda would be super-sweet to get out of Seattle but I cannot see it.
He had 9.1 K/9 vs 2.9 BB/9 last year and 0.9 HR/9 over 28 ML starts - that is a very, very talented pitcher. Looking at his minor league record you see more impressive stats including 11 K/9 in AAA vs 2.5 BB/9 in the PCL.
If Seattle is crazy enough to trade him at this point (2 years of team picking his salary left plus 3 years of arbitration after that) then I'd send pretty much any prospect back. Assuming the stats tell the story of course :)
He had 9.1 K/9 vs 2.9 BB/9 last year and 0.9 HR/9 over 28 ML starts - that is a very, very talented pitcher. Looking at his minor league record you see more impressive stats including 11 K/9 in AAA vs 2.5 BB/9 in the PCL.
If Seattle is crazy enough to trade him at this point (2 years of team picking his salary left plus 3 years of arbitration after that) then I'd send pretty much any prospect back. Assuming the stats tell the story of course :)
Jack Z also has to think of keeping his job. There is the fear factor that will motivate him to do big things. He may or may not have the luxury of patience. This would apply to all GMs. If that makes sense then through dialogue AA would know what is happening.
"It doesn't make any sense for the M's to trade Pineda. He's cheap and under control for a long time. That Hultzen might become "the next Pineda" is not at all a reason to trade him. You know, because major league rotations have, um, more than one pitcher."
+1
"Basically, he wrote that if Jack Z can get a huge haul of positional prospects in return for him, it might provide a better foundation for success (given that flamethrowing starters like Pineda often, well, flame out)."
Well, it always makes sense to consider trading any player. If the Jays got an offer of Heyward, Minor and Teheren, they'd trade Lawrie but it's not going to happen. On a rebuilding team like the Mariners, Pineda is possibly the last player (apart from Ackley) I'd trade.
+1
"Basically, he wrote that if Jack Z can get a huge haul of positional prospects in return for him, it might provide a better foundation for success (given that flamethrowing starters like Pineda often, well, flame out)."
Well, it always makes sense to consider trading any player. If the Jays got an offer of Heyward, Minor and Teheren, they'd trade Lawrie but it's not going to happen. On a rebuilding team like the Mariners, Pineda is possibly the last player (apart from Ackley) I'd trade.
Merry Christmas to all the people who come to this place, and thanks for the entertainment and information you share all year.
And, of course, have a happy Batter's Boxing Day.
Gammons reporting that Fielder may accept a 3year/$26 per contract. If that's the case, Jays would be in the running. Also, very fun link here. http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/homegrown
No way that happens. Prince is getting at least six years.
"No way that happens. Prince is getting at least six years."
I don't know. There really isn't a huge market left for Fielder and he's not going to get anything close to what Pujols got. 3 years/78 million is a very nice contract and he would almost certainly be able to get another large 3-5 year deal after that as he'd still only be 30.
I don't know. There really isn't a huge market left for Fielder and he's not going to get anything close to what Pujols got. 3 years/78 million is a very nice contract and he would almost certainly be able to get another large 3-5 year deal after that as he'd still only be 30.
Rumors here in North texas speculate Texas will still step up (again) on Prince at something like 6/126. That'd mean coutnering the Angels with Darvish for Wilson (draw) and Fielder for Pujols (advantage Angels).
That would be a good deal for Texas and would obviously make them a very strong team for the next few years. I'm guessing he does a bit better, though - something like 6 years/$144M ($24M AAV) or 7 years/$161M ($23M AAV).
I am starting to believe that Texas & LAA are almost the equal of NYY, Boston & TB.
Hasn't Texas been to consecutive World Series?
The Hot Stove seems to have cooled a fair bit. I'm not sure we'll be players going forward and I'm not sure I want us to be. There was a tweet yesterday saying the Cubs were looking at Marisnick, which would imply that Garza may be in play for us. At the prices we've seen on the trade market, I'd rather stay out of the action until July or next offseason.
Fielder aside, anything still worth pursuing out there on trade or FA front? I could see a year of Oswalt, but not 3-4 of Edwin Jackson.
I would give up Marisnick for Garza, but I wouldn't start putting together a Latos-like package for him.
Texas & LAA play in a weaker division the AL West. NYY, Boston & TB play in the tougher AL East. If Texas & LAA have a 500 record against NYY, Boston & TB then they are equal IMO.