Paxton, Franklin, Furbush and Pryor?
Q. Paxton*, Franklin, Furbush and Pryor?
A. The DBacks should be DDEEEEEEE-LIGHTED with that return. Man, if I were dealing a problem attitude for a rebuild ... two big time ML-ready blue chippers, one arm and one bat, AND two 10-strikeout ML relievers. KA-CHING baby!
Furbush and Pryor is one thumb to each eye, but can you hold up your blockbuster over middle relievers, when you've got pitchers coming out your ears?
Super impressed if that's what the DBacks did, squeeze the sponge to get those two middle relievers that the M's can't afford to argue about.
.
Q. Earlier you called Franklin your fave trade chip.
A. Nick Franklin has become the single trade chip who was most superfluous, since according to Geoffy the Mariners have Brad Miller pencilled in at SS. He is both (1) hyper-talented and (2) crowded out in Seattle.
And giving up one of the Big Three ... Big Four now, right, with Erasmo? We talk all the time about this: only 25 men go on a roster at once. You have GOT to take into account that players 26-150 are wasted horsepower.
This part of it would be sweet like ice cream, dealing players #25, #26 and #27 for your franchise right fielder. It would be different if you were coughing up Seager and didn't know who was playing 3B, or coughing up Montero and afraid you were losing Pujols.
.
Q. You still don't want to throw out talent.
A. We don't say that you stop worrying about talent if you've got three players all doing the same thing. But you certainly do want to include this variable in your equation. If the talent going out were NOT redundant, then what? It could be that Felix Hernandez' net performance value, going forward and adjusted for salary, is lower than that of [Paxton Franklin Furbush Pryor]. But none of Felix' value is redundant against anybody's.
Acquiring Justin Upton would not be "throwing out" talent, and let's keep in mind that ML-ready prospects have seen their value tumble this offseason. Paxton, Franklin, Furbush, Pryor, that's a whale of a lot of talent, but if you get the guy you want you have not created one hole to fill another.
The point is, this one isn't as simple as "we get 15 WAR and they get 22 WAR." Some of the 22 WAR that the M's give up is redundant performance. It's a complex variable to take into account -- how would player #21 overlap against player #23. The M's give up tons of WAR, but then again, much of that WAR is occurring in places where you wouldn't be able to use it anyway.
.
Q. Bottom line?
A. I'd give the DBacks a golfclap for realizing they had me over a barrel on the relievers. But I guess if I were bullish on Upton, then yeah.
There's the kid I want to build around, and I didn't really hit my 25-man roster to get him. In the big picture, that was my goal.
BABVA,
Dr D