Seattle Sports Insider

Gillies > Saunders? No wayyyy

Posted by

12/24/09

A day after we gave him the golfclap, Baker with an even more fascinating report -- that both the Mariners and Phillies valued Tyson Gillies more highly than they valued Michael Saunders.

The cognitive dissonance is Dr. D's this morning, lads :- ) Is 'cause I believe the following, with high degrees of conviction:

.......

Belief 1. Michael Saunders is one of the 25 best ML-ready prospects in baseball right now

Belief 2. Tyson Gillies is nowhere near the M's top 10, much less baseball's top 100

Belief 3. Veteran ML tools scouts and GM's know what they're doing -- the more so when they unanimously agree across organizations

Belief 4. The M's offered Saunders in a 3-for-1 and were told no thanks, that Tyson Gillies is "the key to the deal" (above Phillippe Aumont)

Rationalization? I haven't got one.

I'll tell you what does NOT ease my cognitive dissonance: the suggestion that Saunders doesn't have a short-term role in Philly -- therefore would burn club-controls time doing nothing. Are you going to pass on Neftali Perez and take a Grade B- player from class A baseball because you already have bullpen arms?

=== Can't Undersell the Mick ===

Michael Saunders was graded the #4 prospect in the PCL by Baseball America this winter.

That's right behind Travis Snider, and right ahead of Alcides Escobar and Brett Wallace.

The only players ahead of Saunders: Snider, and that Neftali Perez guy who smoked about 18 batters per nine innings in the AL, and Buster Posey, "the next Johnny Bench."

.....................

The only rationalization I can conceive: that in his ML trial, Saunders was "exposed" as a player who will never hit.

Tough to believe. Saunders has a snake-tongue bat. He turned around 97 fastballs into his power alley. But...

=== Gillies' Topside Ain't Much ===

I don't say this lightly, but it's not feasible to reconcile it by saying that Tyson Gillies is one of the top 100 prospects in baseball.

Gillies is a slap-hitting leadoff guy. His ceiling is known, and it's not a high one. He is a looonnnnnnng ways from posting .380 OBP's in the American League, and if he ever does, he's still not an impact player.

=== Aumont the #2 Player in the Deal? Wow ===

I don't know what the reconciliation is. I do know I'll bet you a $2 bill that Tyson Gillies does not have the ML career that Michael Saunders has.

It also means, by the way, that from where the MLB teams sit, the Mariners gave a whale of a lot for Cliff Lee's walk year. Phillippe Aumont was the #2 player in the deal, and Juan Ramirez the #3. The first player in the deal was > Saunders.

That means that from their point of view -- not yours, theirs! -- the M's gave up an Erik Bedard package, less two throwins.

> Saunders = Jones
Aumont = Tillman
J.C. Ramirez = Butler... no, Ramirez is better than Butler; = Sherrill
Butler and the big fringe reliever: I'll give you that one

For a guy in his walk year! I take it this means the M's will be v-e-r-y interested in extending Cliff Lee.

=== MENSA Puzzle Dept. ===

Forgetting the cognitive dissonance for me, this presents an amazing contradiction for Baseball America (and every comparable prospects-list site out there).

John Sickels didn't have Gillies in his M's top 20. USS Mariner, currently, has Gillies as a future 1.0 WAR outfielder -- virtually the lowest ranking he could have, and be in their org top 40. It goes on and on.

Yet the best sources -- the M's and Phillies -- treat Gillies as though he's one of the 50 best prospects in baseball.

It's a cool little puzzle. :- )

Cheers,

Dr D

Comments

The time is clocking tic tac

For every prospect the time is clocking.
There are 3 clocks or even more.
Rule 5 clock (must be on 40 man roster)
Options (has only 3 years where he can be on 40 man and not on 25)
MiLB FA.
If a prospect can not be a 2 WAR player till that time he is not valuble to a team who wants to win.(team like phil or M's) I think for KC or Nationals a 1 WAR player may be valuble but we are talking for teams who want to win.
Sure without the clock Saunders is more valuable.

Sounds like a Zduriencik sell

Sounds like a Zduriencik sell job to me. :-)

Be afraid of Gillick

My one concern for this trade is Gillick. If the Phils preferred Gilles over Saunders then I'm pretty certain that Gillick and Benny Looper had a lot to do with it. Does Gilles have a place in Seattle in the near future or for that matter does Saunders? Maybe as a fouth outfielder. Has nothing to do with how good they are but two of the spots are already taken for the near futrue and even with the 2nd base experiment you still have to pencil in Ackley as our left fielder of the very near future. If a club has money, left field is not a difficult position to fill in the short term.
More than anything this just shows how close Z thinks the M's are. Hope he has a better grasp than Bavasi did when he went for it. Although I never really blamed Bavasi for going for it since Lincoln said that Bavasi's job was on the line.
It's a good trade however you look at it. Doesn't mean that the three players we traded away won't turn into fine players but it was calculated for what is to happen in 2010. Z sees an opening and he is going for it. I like it and at the same time I hope for the best when it comes to the traded players.
The only thing that matters at this point is does Lee get us into the playoffs because that is the calculation that the M's have made.

Want more dissonance?

Try thinking of it this way...
What if Saunders was the one Zduriencik wanted to keep from trading all along?
If you look at how they've treated Saunders, it's mysteriously value-dropping, rather than value-plussing plays. Mainly played against lefties, didn't play a lot period, etc.
At the same time, Z knows that the Phillies have the 'in' on the M's with Gillick and Hooper, but at the same time, he has some in to them as well, since it's not as if every scout left the M's for the Phillies either. If Z knew that Gillies was valued higher than Saunders at the highest levels of the previous M's, he could play that up further by 'protecting' Gillies by offering parts like Morrow. What if the initial Lee offer of Morrow and Saunders was sunk by not only Saunders, but also Morrow. After all, neither player were part of the final deal.
The articles on the trade are mostly one-sided accounts, entirely on the Toronto/Philly side of things. We only know that the Brandons Trade was isolated from the Lee Trade and a few knick knacks on the M's farm. We have practically zero solid info on the M's Front Office MO, whereas Toronto and Philly have been gushing to the press.
I think there's a possibility that Jack Z is actually trying to depress the market for some of his own players so he can move his less pliable assets in his trades. The same could be said for Lopez, even. IMO, it makes more sense if we take nothing at face value with regard to the M's and assume that everything is true, but also a lie.

For sure if you don't have PT for a young player

and he's already a major leaguer, you're not going to want him on your team.
It still leaves me wondering why Tyson Gillies (!?) was "the key to the deal." That the Phillies didn't have room for Saunders, I can understand -- why they would view Gillies as a blue-chip prospect, I can't...

Then we're talking true artistry, champ :- )

Ya, we're talking some pretty sofistikated shtick

If he's double-feinting other GM's to that extent.
.............
May I assume you guys think that Capt Jack is 'protecting' Saunders so that he can actually PLAY Saunders in '010?
Guess here is that Saunders moves in another deal... we'll see...

'More than anything it shows how close the M's are'

Ya, and how often has that been commented on, Merks?
The trade for Lee in a walk year is a huge shove all-in to the pot for THIS year, 2010, the next 162 games. Zduriencik is GM'ing as though he wants to win the World Series next year.

Judging newbies

Wonderful thread. What it really points out is the reality that NOBODY -- not USSM -- not Dr. Detecto -- not me -- not ESPN -- not the Snopes.com --- NOBODY knows what Jack is THINKING. He's a newbie GM. And like a newbie guy to your ROTO league, you can only examine each trade or draft pick and "slowly" begin to assemble a profile of the new competition.
As for what he says in public? I treat him as I do 100% of GMs. I don't believe a single word stated publically. Oh, no doubt "some" of the quotes are truth, (or based on truth). But, let's face it -- GMs lie, (or more tactfully phrased: "spin"), all the time. And it is utterly and completely impossible to know what is truth, spin, or posturing intended to make oneself look good - (or nudge open a door someway to some future move you might already be contemplating).
The most revealing trait of Z thus far is likely his fearlessness. At least that is the best word I can find to summarize his actions thus far. And, for a NEWBIE GM, that is especially astounding. The typical error a newbie at anything tends to make is to be more conservative than they would if in a comfortable, familiar situation.
The newb is less likely to open up his ROTO trade discussions offering Mike Morse for Chase Utley, (because he doesn't know the personalities involved - and who he might offend). The resident jerk of a league is much more likely to make that offer to get a read on how Mr. Newb responds.
Me? I'd LOVE to find out Z has been positioning a series of moves that result in the "unfortunate" (nudge, nudge, wink, wink, say-no-more), fallback of Saunders starting in LF, backed up by a combo of Langerhans and Parker Brothers.
The history so far says Z values work ethic and desire to win above almost everything else. But, I think he understands that while you'll find the occasional Pete Rose/Ichiro, who is just going to push themselves to the utmost limit, regardless of what goes around them -- the more typical person REQUIRES external motivations and goals and influences to maintain that work ethic. More importantly, someone with an excellent work ethic today, can have that desire completely crushed with the wrong treatment. (I railed about the Johjima extension coming exactly at the time he was in the midst of the worst slump of his career. That is NOT good for morale -- likely including Johjima).
If Saunders is "handed" the 1B job out of the gate, maybe he starts feeling entitled, and slacks off just that little bit. But, if he knows the club was involved in any number of trade scenarios that would've sent him back to Tacoma, but they all fell through? Well, then he might have a better idea of just how tenuous his position actually might be. Same with Carp. They continue to negotiate with Branyan. There is a different landscape if a team trades away the guy blocking you and says, "The job is yours", versus "Well, we think you might be able to handle the job. Don't disappoint."
Obviously, I cannot know if any psychological games are really being played by anyone. But, it's clear to me that Z is more interested in guys with BASEBALL character -- "just win, baby", then he is that they be camera friendly PR specialists. And he likes hungry players.
As for his trades and acquisitions ... everything I've seen thus far tells me the man is thinking 6 moves ahead. He wants to compete today --- but doesn't want to mortgage the farm to do it. And he doesn't believe he needs to spend 185 million to compete with the Eastern behemoths.
As Doc notes, today he CAN use the "flip-the-farm" perception to his advantage. But, that advantage vanishes soon, (at the rate he's going, there aren't going to be any Bavasi prospects left by 2011). And if he's away that he's using this to his advantage, he also knows that this advantage is fleeting, and he likely already knows what gear he will shift into thereafter.

Maybe the Phillies wanted

Maybe the Phillies wanted Gillies in the trade because with Saunders in the trade the M's were asking for more in return. When I read a story about the events leading up to a trade I think first and foremost that it's a propaganda piece for the team that is getting beaten up by the hometown fans.