Would an Ack:Erasmo:Maurer:Pike/Sanchez/Diaz package get it done? I wouldn't imagine so, but I also wouldn't be comfortable including more.
Maybe Ackley has greater value to a team in need of a 2B. Z swings one of these crazy three-team trades and usually comes out with the best player in the deal.
A nice article exploring Price's potential trade cost:http://mlb.si.com/2013/02/15/david-price-rays-clayton-kershaw-justin-ver...
If the M's could extend Price past his arb years I wouldn't have as big a problem including Paxton in the deal. The M's can afford what in effect becomes the Price (heh!) of guaranteeing a 90th percentile outcome of Paxton. That's a page torn out of the Yankees' play book!
A Price acquisition would fit with the org's clear desire to avoid handing out lengthy contracts, too. Z probably by now has a very clear understanding of what ownership is willing to committ, contract-wise. So it would not surprise me at all if our big splash over the winter comes as a result of swapping resources.
Shields got Wil Myers. I would expect Price fetches more. But what a fun rotation that would be!
.
Q. Wouldn't SSI prefer an offseason that improved the hitting?
A. SSI would prefer an offseason in which the Mariners were sold to somebody who cared. Preferably the guy who owns the Angels, or the other guy who owns the Rangers. Then we could go get Stanton, Ellsbury AND Choo and ... baseball would be the new football.
Failing such an offseason, it would be a lot of fun to see a David Price press conference in Seattle, even if his career SLG is a Brendan Ryan-like .083.
.
Q. Is Seattle linked to Price?
A. More than they were linked to that Cuban guy who signed with the White Sox. I succeeded in forgetting his name.
.
Q. When was the last team to do good with a great rotation and a dubious offense?
A. They weren't the last team to do good with only pitching, but the 2012 Tampa Rays are an example:
- 99 offense (OPS+)
- 121 pitching (ERA+)
- David Price was on their team
- They won 90
Also, the 2012 Oakland A's had a 99 offense and won the AL West. The 2012 A's had one (1) full time player, that being Josh Reddick. He hit .240 with a .305 OBP and gap power.
Yes, you could find mucho beisbol equipos with dubious offenses, great pitching, and mucho success. The Royals, this year, had an 89 offense (!) and yet won 86 games, contending for a lot of the season.
Texas' offense was only 99 this year. (You do realize that the Mariners' offense was 98, right.) Baltimore's offense was 98 last year, 2012, when they went to the playoffs. When the Angels won 100 games in 2008, their offense was 95 OPS+.
The point is, yeah, we're all sick to the gut of boring offenses. But you don't need a plus offense to contend.
.
Q. What would Price cost, in trade talent?
A. If he'd cost Taijuan or K-Pax, that would defeat our poi-pose. Let's get that out of the way right now.
But I'm sure he wouldn't. ... with two years before free agency, and Tampa under the gun to deal him, you're not talking a Stanton ransom. No way no HOW.
Price's #1 comparable, on b-ref.com, is Gio Gonzalez. In all baseball history, Gonzalez is the most-comparable. So, that's weird.
Gonzalez, when he was traded, brought four prospects back:
- A.J. Cole, who was ranked #57 by BBA and #88 by MLB.com
- Tommy Milone, who was pretty much Erasmo Ramirez
- Derek Norris, an org top-10 prospect who shared catcher duties with John Jaso
- Brad Peacock, who was about comparable then to Maurer now
Gio had 3 years of arb left at the time; Price has 2. Gonzalez didn't bring any major leaguers back. Well, Milone had a couple innings in September or something. Billy Beane likes to hand-pick other org's good-but-not-great prospects.
Fans get on the chat boards and they laser-focus on the other team's very best prospect, the names with familiarity. GM's simply don't. They are aware that there are future major league players up and down the other orgs' rosters.
.
Q. Is Price healthy?
A. He had a strained triceps, which may be somewhat less worrisome than a shredded labrum.
His velocity has dipped from 95 to 92-93, as has Felix'. The velo dropoff is par for the course at this point in his career arc.
.
Q. Is he really that good?
A. He is, yes. He's a bona fide #1 starter, one of about 10 AL pitchers who goes on your yellow sticky note on draft day (Felix, Verlander, Sale, ...., Price).
Jeff Sullivan wrote two or three superb articles this year about Price's evolution into Cliff Lee. All the links are collected on this Fangraphs page.
Long story short, David Price now ...
- Goes 4 starts at a time with no walks
- Frequently goes a game without a 3-ball count
- Throws 70% fastballs into a teacup, but the curve and change keep hitters off balance
- Repeats his game on a night-in, night-out basis
This is a very typical evolution ... pitchers come into the league throwing 95, and that buys them time to refine their command. Roger Clemens did it, Felix did, a ton of guys do. You might say that Price IS the 90th-percentile James Paxton scenario.
Price is just about as bankable as it gets. He's not quite Cliff Lee (check Lee's K rates) but he's a perfectly reasonable facsimile.
.
Q. Leaving the Mariners where?
A. It is perfectly feasible that Taijuan Walker, in 2014, will reprise Michael Pineda's rookie year. The prospect of four legit #1 starters, plus James Paxton, would be a very realistic possibility... aside from that, you'd have a delicious stylistic mix in the rotation. :- ) One good representative for every HOF pitcher family there is. HEH!
- Tom Seaver family
- Greg Maddux family
- Sandy Koufax family
- Bob Feller family
- Sandy Koufax family (whoops)
And then you'd be left with an offense that was (nominally) 98 last year, and with very young hitters who have room for upside.
I'd rather have Giancarlo Stanton, but if I'm GM, I'm not turning up my nose at the Price market.
BABVA,
Dr D
Comments
We are all tired of boring offenses...and I realize that our best hitter for the first half of the season was Raul Ibanez (gone)...and that our second best hitter was Kendrys Morales (also likely gone). But Our pitching was horrendous this year. Even if you believe that Walker and Paxton are slam dunk sure bets (I don't on Paxton) to run sub-3.50 ERAs...we still need to fill the fifth rotation spot. Lots of interesting candidates for that job...but no guarantees. What if Paxton is erratic again in the first half next year? What if he walks 6 per game? What if Maurer/Erasmo continue to be too hittable? Now you have two rotation problems (this year we had three). What if someone gets hurt?
Locking in your rotation would go a long way toward fixing the biggest problem with this team. A Price/Ellsbury offseason would fix two HUGE problems...outfield defense and rotation.
What if Erasmo and Maurer take plateau leaps, Paxton continues to do want he's done in the majors to date, suppose Ackley reverts to rookie form (as he did in the second half of 2013), and suppose a combination made up of of Zunino, Miller, Franklin. Smoak, Almonte, Saunders, improve their offensive games, and the Mariners sign some splashy free agants.
I remain in the "don't trade anybody" mode. With a team in this kind of flux (See Hultzen), you cannot move young pieces for the next Eric Bedard. We don't know who will emerge next season. Crazy, I know. We should know at this point. BUT...dang these pieces we have are good, they are a year older, and there is a lot of them. ADD. Do not subtract - yet. Wait until the surplus is truly evident. Then we'll make some killer trades for Price, or whoever we want.
Two dominant LHP starters on the trade market. Lee is older and will cost more $$. Price is younger and will cost more talent. Interesting.
I'm also not that thrilled with Zs trade history. By my count he has two no doubter great trades (Putz and aquiring Lee). The rest are either just barely ok or are disasters (Fister).
And Price is among the best 4 possibly available, probably best 2. I agree that the 4+ to make 3 at the back end of the rotation (Walker, Paxton, Ramirez, Maurer, a few realistic dark Horse candidates) isn't very certain. The possibility that all 4 of those are guys you'd want in the rotation at the end of spring does exist. The possibility that we'd be happy with our #4 hitter coming out of spring without an added bat doesn't seem possible. We're not in position that we need an ace where we are in position that we need a cleanup hitter.
The Athletics had Cespedes hitting 289/.356/.469/.825 in 427 PA at cleanup. The Rays had Longoria with 231 PA of .282/.359/.480/.840 at #4 while basically platooning their top 7 hitters in that spot. Maybe it was hot hand/matchups. The Royals had Butler only hit 283/.360/.391/.751 in 408 PA.
The 2013 mariners had 487 PA of Kendrys going .280/.333/.460/.793, 43 PA of Raul at .317/.349/.707/1.056 and 161 PA of Morse going .207/.255/.433/.688. That's 691 PA at #4 that are all gone. If they don't replace that first the offense will struggle to be 98 next year.
Also none of those teams equal the income of the Mariners. I'm not saying that's any reason not to learn from what they've done. The Mariners should be able to add a couple bats to propel their offense to above average AND pick up a SP like Price.
I like Price but the possibility he's not as much of an upgrade as one of the top bats available would be seems pretty good. I'm happy to think of Price and a couple legitimate bats being added. Just not instead of.
I like Price, but I would really like to make sure we land Stanton in an aggressive package 1st. I can't see Walker or Paxton getting moved in a Price scenario! E-Ram and Mauer + a few others. I think the 1st order of business is getting a couple of moves completed 1st:
1. Sign Ellsbury ($18-20M)
2. Sign Lincecum ($10-$12M)
3. Trade or Stanton (Send Walker/Paxton/Franklin/Saunders/+ in this package for Stanton...WHATEVER it takes!)
THEN...
4. Trade for Price $12-$14M arbitration salary approx
5. Trade for Braun (I'm hearing it's only gonna take a couple B level prospects for him, and Brewers will still need to cover some of the backloaded contract. Braun's 2014 salary is only $10M)
6. Re-Sign Morales $10M
7. Restructure Gutz Contract after a buyout, on an incentive laden deal ($2.5M approx)
Rotation
1. Felix
2. Price
3 Iwakuma
4. Lincecum OR Tanaka
5. Whatever prospect is the best
OFFENSE
CF Ellsbury
SS Miller
RF Stanton
LF Braun
DH/1B Morales (Replacing Smoak against LHPs with Gutz DHing with LHPs)
1B Smoak
3B Seager
2B Ackley
C Zunino
BENCH
IF Truinfel
DH/OF Gutz
OF/CF Almonte (4th OFER)
DH/1B Morales
C/DH Montero (Backup Catcher only)
That's approximately a $100m payroll with all those additions, considering right now we only have $32.5M in committed contracts for 2014.
YES, our farm would be hit hard after the Stanton and Price trades, but considering our Farm System was ranked 26th in MLB in 2008 right before Z took over...and now in the top 3...I have confidence over the next 3-4 years we can have a TOP farm system once again after these trades. Also with the TV deal in place there is NO REASON Seattle can't get this aggressive with the above moves! Just my thoughts is all.
As a good trade. I liked the trade for Morse regardless of the extra year of Jaso or the outcome. It was a good gamble on acquiring something that remains a big need of this team.
How about the Almonte acquisition? May be his best move to date.
Vargas for Morales? In retrospect it's hard to say which would have been more valuable to the M's, even with Vargas only making 24 starts. Vargas left a big hole but I think Kendrys would have too.
Fabian Williamson for Aardsma?
Leuke and cash for Jaso?
League for Leon Landry and Logan Bawcom.
The Morse/ Langerhans deal was initially lauded by many, even suggested by DC before it happened.
Silva for Bradley still looks plus to me.
Cleto for Brendan Ryan?
Jack Wilson for Luis Caballero could still pay dividends.
Did anyone know Fister was about to leap another plateau in about a week? Maybe Detroits scouting saw something and their coaching was able to help Fister implement it. Even that is on the coaching and scouting, not the GM except that he presumably hired many of the scouts and coaches. I get not liking the Fister deal at the time, though. It didn't look all that good to me then to the point where I thought I needed to wait and see. That did only make things look worse. But that's the big bad move.
Morrow deal was bad, but not looking as bad as it did then.
Carp trade was necessitated by preferring other options while Carp had a lack of options remaining.
Bedard and Fields for Chiang and Robinson looks pretty bad, though it didn't much affect either team.
The Washburn return looked decent at the time but didn't work out.
Delebar for Thames not so good but Thames later traded for Ty Kelly which does look good.
Many deals that are kind of "whatever" to look at otherwise where the affect on either team is minimal. Still waiting for actual impact for either team from the Pineda/Montero deal, though it's not looking good for the Mariners at this point. All 4 players involved have a chance to be positive in the future, just seems Pineda's is the biggest chance if not Campos.
The overall trade history doesn't look as bad as many make it out to be. Looks to me an overall plus with more minor upgrades that get ignored in focusing on a couple major downgrades.
history. I don't have any trepidation regarding Z trading this offseason.
Though the word was, that Kansas City was not nearly as sold on Wil Myers as the rest of the industry was. They seemed to view Myers as about ready to do a Dustin Ackley, and shopped him, and Shields came back in the deal.
Fans reacted to this as proof positive of Dayton Moore's 75 IQ, but Shields (and Wade Davis) did in fact lead the Royals to a 120 team ERA+, which gave their starving fans a crumb of success to taste. I don't recall anybody moderating their criticism at all, after the Royals' pitching staff became dominant. But, hey, what's major league success matter, as opposed to a sky's-the-limit AAA lottery ticket?
But yeah. Billy Beane is much more likely to have the confidence to pick his own favorites, as opposed to glamor prospects. Good post.
There are specific situations in which it applies. This looks like one of them. Agreed.
Some teams develop situations in which --- > their #6 starter would be some other team's #2 starter. That could happen, say with Erasmo Ramirez, and that would be fine. It tends to sort itself out pretty quickly. And having a TOR spare tire in the trunk isn't such a terrible thing...
It just hit me! You want Price out of your division! :- O
Again, the Mariners have virtually ZERO payroll money committed after Felix. A Price + Ellsbury offseason would be fairly easy to execute. Or Choo. Or whatever.
...........
I noticed today that I got the HOF pitcher families wrong :- ) in the Price = #3 SP scenario...
Tom Seaver family (precision power RHP)
Greg Maddux family
Sandy Koufax Jim Bunning Warren Spahn family (LHP with awesome command who never throw a ball)
Bob Feller/Nolan Ryan family (RHP who will give you the walk)
Sandy Koufax family (blow-em-away LHP's who give you the walk)
That rotation really would be a 3-ring circus of baseball fun. And, ya, the perfect evening would be to watch Jacoby Ellsbury run down the one hard-hit ball during the game...
No trading of Walker or Paxton! None! Nope! Nada! It's a Moe rule. Beyond that, go get Price. Keep Franklin and Miller and Zunino......anybody else is good to go (excepting Felix and 'Kuma).
By the way, Garry, there is noooooooooo chance that Ellsbury, Stanton, Braun, Price AND Lincecum are all ours. It's probably even money, at best, that any one of them are ours.
Interesting that Braun is available. I would gladly swap some B guys for him.
I will grant that the Ryan trade (one of my favorite players ever despite the sad hitting) was a great trade.
I don't mean to imply that Z sucks at trading, just that he doesn't deserve some sort of trading savant rep. His tem does seem to be adept at picking up value talent in the draft, but the trades are underwhelming. I'm not sure i want him trading away our youth unless its for a major high percentage addition.
I'm coming around on Ellsburry. Mainly b/c of his ability to hit good pitching.
Dr. D would reach for a Braun/Stanton lineup like a hungry man reaching for bread. Thanks for the info-taining post Garry.
.............
One thing I like about your radical plan... who's worried about the farm system when we are FIELDING a dominant team?
.............
First question that occurs: what is the payroll in two or three years? You going to be able to hold on to those Stars?
Lizard was stingy with walks alright, but was right-handed. May I suggest Spahn. With 2.5 BB/9 career and some years at 1.7, he's Bunning's closest LH comparable. Although he did throw hard when younger, he always pitched to contact, with a low K/9 even for the times. Actually, I think Price will be in the Lefty Grove / Carl Hubbell / Whitey Ford family before it's over - low WHIP, great win pct., command, and the ability to throw it by the hitter, in a place he doesn't expect it, any dang time he needs to. He and Kershaw are close now, with Kershaw not quite having the command.
Wouldn't be surprised if Taylor and Ramirez could get Braun if the Ms took the contract, from what I've read. They have some good prospects at A/A+, and some decent pitching at AA, but they need some help in the IF (Yuniesky Betancourt? really?) and their pitching is young, so the attrition will be an issue. An ML-ready starter and decent infielder might be the ticket.
But, then again, I doubt Lincoln/Armstrong would take on the PR issues that would come with Braun. Look for him in Texas soon. Braun in left and Cruz in right, if they hit, will be forgiven there.
I did that with James Shields too - kept thinking of him as left handed :- ) even though I'd seen him several times.
I'm confident that the dementia will make for a better blog, though.
There are MLB teams that are less susceptible to PC pressure than others. Seattle ain't one of 'em. I like your interpretation of the sitch in Tejas.
Everything I read indicates that, if Milwaukee is interested in moving him (which very few people seem to think is true) the yield will involve at least one top 10 MLB prospect.
This is a pretty weird defense of the Shields/Myers trade. Yeah, the Royals wound up with a 120 ERA+, but (to use a sentence structure you bring up a lot when discussing efficiency) the award at the end of the season is for wins, not for ERA+ (or $/WAR). If you're arguing that people should've moderated criticism after the Royals' staff became dominant, shouldn't you also be arguing that people should've intensified criticism after Wil Myers went over to Tampa Bay and 131 wRC+'ed it up? Especially given that the Royals were running out an RF combo of Jeff Francouer, weak-hitting CF Lorenzo Cain, short-side platooner David Lough, and deadline pickup Justin Maxwell?
http://onmilwaukee.com/sports/articles/begelbrewerstraderyanbraun.html
also a Miwaukee Journal-Sentinel Editorial Board editorial urging the Brewers to trade him.
No mention of a top-10 prospect (if you take his contract, that would be laughable). Even the Brewer homers say a ML-ready pitcher and a quality IF or IF prospect, plus some other prospects (some say 2, others 3). No mention of ranking or standing. If they want somebody to take the risk, they're selling at discount - Cafardo of the Boston Globe mentions JackZ as a guy that might try.
People in baseball who know what they're doing don't trade top 10 prospects unless, as with Montero and now Profar, their performance does not match the hype, or they are trading for a proven performer with no risks. Even then, it's liable to be a Phillipe Aumont or Justin Smoak or Colby Rasmus or Trevor Bauer, rather than a Wil Myers, i.e. someone the team really DOESN'T consider a can't-miss prospect. I suggest you look at the trades that have ACTUALLY been made in different circumstances, rather than employ the same DC-inspired formula to every trade of a top player that gets discussed. RARELY is a trade made with more than two of a TEAM's top 10 prospects, let alone a top 10 in baseball. Teams trade to fill needs (we're NOT talking drafting HS players here - we're talking ML trades). and make a trade when they can best meet their needs from the offer. Some GMs have exquisite judgement here (e.g., Billy Beane). Others (e.g., Ruben Amaro, jr.) do not seem to. But ALL GMs trade to get something they need, NOT the most top 10 prospects they can get - unless those guys HAPPEN to play positions of need.
The guy is talking about dealing Braun as a franchise-rebuilding move, like dealing Felix two years ago would've been for the Mariners. He's asking for the following:
1) One quality MLB starter: at least Erasmo, probably more like Paxton.
2) One quality MLB infielder: at least Franklin, maybe Miller.
3) Three MiLB SP prospects: say Diaz, Pike, and Fernandez.
Guys in the comments here re throwing around statements like "a couple of B prospects", which is basically #3 without including #1 and #2. I haven't seen any article, anywhere, suggesting that Braun'll come anywhere near that cheap.
You're right: people in baseball who know what they're doing don't trade top 10 prospects (except, as you point out, when they do). People in baseball who know what they're doing also don't trade Ryan Braun for peanuts. When was the last time a superstar with 6+ years left on his contract, including two cheap early ones, got moved? PED suspension didn't tank Melky Cabrera's market value, and it won't tank Ryan Braun's.
Exactly. If they put Braun on the market, there will be a lot of interest and that will drive the price. Anyone think Texas wouldn't part with Profar in a Braun trade?
At least now we're talking names and needs NOT rankings -- thank you for that! And yes, I agree that my suggestion is the low end of what MIGHT get the Brewers interested - but much like the first Lee trade with Philadelphia, it would depend on other bids, and how they compare CONSIDERING their needs, as Griz rightly points out, NOT a numerical formula of the offers. In short, teams trade a "top prospect" only when they can get something they NEED MORE in return. Kansas City felt they needed a reliable starting staff; they traded a top prospect to get just that. I would say that, in the short term at least, they succeeded.
If Texas offered just filler with Profar, and the Ms offered Diaz, Pike, and Fernandez along with Erasmo and Taylor, the Ms offer might well be considered superior. Now the rankings may yet catch up to the performance of these young lads (especially Pike and Diaz) - but every GM worth his salt knows how good those guys are and can (might) be RIGHT NOW, and would weigh the offer accordingly. The Ms may not be one of the top 5 Farm systems anymore, but it is because of a mass of graduations, not a mass of failures. The "ranked" quality of the remaining prospects is somewhat depressed by the Zunino/Miller/Franklin/Walker/Hultzen/Paxton layer that was on top, but they, too, shall rise. Meanwhile, they are NOT worthless in trades because they haven't appeared on someone's list - they have the worth of their performance and talent, which is considerable. And, to the extent they, when grouped, fill some other team's needs better than any other offer in toto, they may yet fill our need for a power-hitting, good-fielding corner outfielder. And, if not, there is a layer of Peterson, Wilson, O'Neill, Blash, Jones, and more just below that may yet be the answer. It's all about whether the fans will stick with the Ms while they wait for that layer to surface. But I would hazard a guess right now that close to half the teams who picked from about 15th to 48th last year wish they had picked Austin Wilson instead. And I think that number is going to grow.
Melky Cabrera's market value probably SHOULD have tanked, knowing now a bit more of the effects of steroids. If there is ANY possibility that tumors on the spine, or degenerative hip problems a la A-Roid are the result of steroid use, teams are going to be MUCH more careful with long-term contracts OR with assuming six-year contracts of a known user.
Screwing with the human growth and healing process is an invitation to cancer or immune system disorders or degenerative disorders. While HGH can have wonderful uses at a place like the Hutch, getting it at a storefront doesn't seem like a behavior that can lead to good long-term health. And teams are going to take care accordingly.