Colby Rasmus Deal ... E don't = MC2 for SSI

Q.  Leaving us where?

A.  Hey, let's say you believe in Colby Rasmus, and think you can get him back onto a Grady Sizemore track before too long.

You're still giving up -- in talent wattage -- Erik Bedard, Brandon League, David Pauley, and change to get there.  You going to do that?

 

It could work out well provided that Rasmus gets back on track and gives you a near-Smoak bat from CF, for a couple of years.  

***

But in my view, Capt Jack wisely stepped around a chance to pay top dollar for Rasmus' best-case scenario.  

Supposing that a guy has a 20% chance to star, a 60% chance to be okay, and a 20% chance to Figgins.  Are you going to pay for the star?  That, herr Einstein, is called Return On Investment analysis.  You use it every time you pay $0 for a dice roll on that morning's SSI article.

***

Suppose that Rasmus not only continues his decline from his current 4.8 RC/27 status ... but that the AL transition hurts him?  And/or, suppose that Safeco Field exacerbates his 150 strikeout rate?  In my view, there was a real Figgins disaster scenario here in Safeco, in the AL.  

That Rasmus has been trending down, for an identifiable and scary reason, is a given.  The only question is whether the NL-AL transition could add weight to a balloon that is losing altitude, and whether Safeco Field could termite-attack his already-unbalanced mind.

***

Hey, nobody has the "correct" forward projection for Rasmus, because there isn't one.  What was Adrian Beltre's "correct" forward projection at age 24?  At age 28?  ...maybe the change of scenery, the getting away from Tony Larussa, is the key factor here.  

You're bullish, and you want to push in all our trade chips (Erikkkk, League etc) then provided that the Cards were among Bedard's fans, then you coulda bid and maybe taken the Jays' place at equal value.

My bottom line:  if Erikkk and Brandon League are going out, I'd like make it part of a blockbuster that reels in a guy you know will love you back.  Because I'm thinkin' Erikkk will give us a whale of a deal in 2012.

.

Or not,

Dr D

Comments

1

Danny Hultzen is Z's poster child for that (new) philosophy. Not the flahiest guy in the draft...but a very solid bet to be a very solid #3 guy in the bigs, relatively soon.
In my Rasmus comments way above I almost referenced Joe Charboneau, myself, btw.
Z is perhaps learning.  Let's invest in guaranteed securities.  Figgy has him gun shy, which is a very good thing.
Ducking and covering on any Rasmus for the house deal was a very good thing.
Now, is Span really available?

2
Taro's picture

I thought the Jays did an excellent job of buying low here. Worse-case scenario you got a cheap young 3 WAR player. Best-case scenario you did better than that.
I guess the actual worst-case scenario is that Rasmus suffers decline, but the Blue Jays gave up almost nothing for him beyond Stewart.
I would have traded Bedard+League for sure, but maybe Z has something better up his sleaves.

3

I agree, Rasmus is a scary addition.  He can play a glove position though, which makes him less so.  I like him better than Hunter Pence, for instance, who I think would lose all his power and crash and burn eye-wise upon arrival in Seattle.
Maybe I'm wrong, and if we trade for him in the off-season then I definitely hope I'm wrong.
But we need SOMEbody's young stud hitter.  The only reason Rasmus was available was because he got his common sense from a crackerjack box.
Josh Hamilton was like that too, so the question with Rasmus is:  is it fixable, or pathological?
If you make a list of the top ten trade options for the Mariners to help fix their offense, coming from a team that has enough bats/is tired of the club-controlled kid they have and one that needs pitching returned to them, then Rasmus makes that top 10.  Maybe top 5.
For OF types, we're probably looking at, off the top of my head:
- Rasmus (now off the table)
- Pence
- Butler/Gordon (whichever KC would part with)
- Upton (more expensive, but beggars can't be choosers)
- DH Goldschmidt (if Upton is not available and the AZ GM Towers has a stroke)
- Alonso (if he can play LF AND thump, neither of which I believe)
- Ethier/Kemp (again, whichever the Dodgers would give up)
- Quentin
- Sizemore
- Gardner
There are others, I'm sure, but that's a quick round-the-league look.  I mean, I'd love to get Matt Joyce out of Tampa Bay, for instance, but he's not a FA til 2016 and is still making minimum wage - they have no need to move him.  Domonic Brown would be good fun, but the Phillies are looking for RH hitters that we don't have in return.
The above guys are all within a couple years of FA or are kids who haven't yet gotten started.  In a perfect world you get another Smoak-style trade for a guy with all his club years intact but who can produce NOW.
Trading for a prospect in the OF is tough, though - there is a gap in the minors in great corner OF prospects right now.  I'd be interested in getting in on a Domonic Brown trade if the Phils really ARE willing to give him up and the Astros DO want a "really-front-line pitching prospect" in return.  Paxton and Walker are sitting there waiting to be used, if we wanted to use them that way.
Brown to us, Paxton to Houston and Pence to the Phillies works.  We lose 6 years of Paxton but gain 6 years of Brown, so it's a wash there - and Brown is more likely to stay healthy the whole time.
*shrugs*  Like I said, we have options we can work.  But Rasmus coming off the list does reduce those options.  Not necessarily the worst thing if he's not the right guy...but we still have to find the right guy.
~G

5
glmuskie's picture

Looks to me like Saunders but with a little more pop.  Really their stats and career arc are awfully similar.  I think I like Saunders better, a bit more patient and a bigger frame so maybe the power develops more.

6
glmuskie's picture

Didn't see Reddick's MLB line this year, that looks very nice. : )

7

He's got Ibanez-level power, and he's a young kid with a lot of club control.  His eye was poor before this year, but his Ks were good - he just never ever walked.  You'd think he was a Latin player or something.  And his BA was/is lower than you'd expect.
He figured out how to hit bendy pitches this year, it looks like, or at least when to swing and how to not ground em out weakly all the time, which is when his walks jumped.
He's still a FB hitter though, which is not bad.  Not a slider-speed FB either.  Watch him take a swing for the Bo Sox - he definitely strokes it with authority. 
I like Josh fine - better than Peguero, that's for sure.  I wouldn't say he's a better option than Carp, but he can also play CF in a pinch which Carp, uh, cannot do.
And he's also a lefty so all his power won't go die in the LCF canyon.  He's trying to turn into Trot Nixon/Raul Ibanez, which is not a bad thing to have.  He's got the batspeed I like, and he's coming around with his pitch recognition.
I would take 6 years of a Trot Nixon type for 3 months of Erik Bedard.  I could get behind a Josh Reddick package.  He WON'T be this hot for much longer - his BABIP is like 4 million percent right now - but he's as talented as any upper minors hitter we currently have (in AAA at 22) and plays a position of need.
And he's about all the Red Sox have that would be a decent fit for us and our current needs, so he's pretty much the only main piece that works in a trade with them.
~G 

8

If you feel that Rasmus' current performance is his floor...
Three quality ML short men, and a good ML-ready starting pitcher, seems like a lot to me -- after all, two of the four players were deemed equal to a rental TOR-plus. e.g. Bedard.
But if you think RP's are fungible, I unnerstand.

9

(or is that an antiquado expresione...)
Given those two (probably true) premises, the conclusion follows:
P1 - the M's need to select one of the available offensive players
P2 - the available offensive players ain't that overwhelming
C - in the M's context, a Rasmus trade would have been appealing relative to the choices
/cosign
But... could be that premise 2 is shakier than we think...

10

Saunders needs to read pitches better to take advantage of that frame.  Josh can get the bat around on anything.  That's one reason his K numbers are much better than Mike's (16% vs 25% for Saunders).  Saunders has walked more in the past than Josh, giving them the same eye ratio of .5, but Josh is much better than that this season while we saw Saunders lose his ability to take a walk while in the bigs.
Reddick was looking stupid against breakers, but he fixed that this year.  Maybe it's small sample size, but he looks like he's putting it together and even after he cools off will still be a decent hitter.  Saunders may be too, but they each need different areas of improvement to get there.
~G

12

My assumption is that the Ms with their laser focus on pretty OF defense and sprinters in CF would play Reddick in a corner.  If they're willing to let him play CF then his positional bat value goes WAY up - and we'll see what it does to the staff.  Rauuul in CF is worth a metric ton, and then at that point his value is comparable to some of the stars in CF.  
Now, Ackley shows that they're willing to let a great bat work out the kinks in the field at a glove position to maximize his positional value with the lumber.
I don't think we're willing to give up on Guti yet, but nothing says he can't play LF for a year while we figure out if Franklin can recover and then have 4 more years of Reddick manning CF if he can't.
As a corner OF, I think Reddick has good value.  As a CF I think he can be a star bat.  We'll see - Bedard lays down the law on Friday and maybe we'll find out where the Ms would like him to play.
~G

Add comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><p><br>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

shout_filter

  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.