Add new comment

Tom Wilhelmsen as Trade Ammo

Q.  Says who?

A.  Geoff Baker with a well-thought-out argument on the subject.  He, in full-on Pragmatist mode, emphasizes using Wilhelmsen to offload Chone Figgins.  

The article is original, well-supported logically, and initiates an idea that is going to have traction.  I'm sure that if this post occurred, word for word, on any major Seattle blog that it would be followed by about forty Fantastic Post, Dude's.  

;- )

.

Q.  Is Wilhelmsen going to be perceived as a Certified Closer?

A.  In baseball, you're closing when you're closing.   (MAN ALIVE I love tautologies.  That's going to be my next book.  Baseball tautologies.  That or something on Yogi Berra.  Wisdom disguised as piles of dingleberry, that's the best kind of wisdom there is.)

If you're a baseball man?  Tom Wilhelmsen has stepped "into the hot seat," has worked "without a net" and "has not spit the bit."  He has snuffed major teams as closer, including Boston, and has looked imposing while doing it.  He hasn't really shown anybody his keister, even a single time.  Everything is perfect.  (Which is why we want to use him, G will point out ....)

His stuff is Certified Closer, and that is important to the guys sitting at the $500 limit table.  

He's got absolutely everything a contender would want in a guy who was going to do exactly what Baker describes:  back up an expensive closer now, and replace him next year.

It's a "sexy" idea:  you get a younger, actually superior "closer" and wow, he's actually even working the 8th for you.  Twin closers.  The examples don't occur right off, but teams love to do this.  You remember the last time that Zduriencik had a "sexy" commodity to work with, that being Cliff Lee.

.

Q.  What kind of return can you expect?

A.  This is a quickie post on my way out the door, so Google the recent trades for yusself, man... if and when you find dominating relievers, ZERO problems, club controls, being traded, you'll see a whale of a lot coming back.

One trade that occurs:  Andrew Bailey last year, arm thrashed, cutter/slider gone, three (relatively expensive) years left before free agency... for Josh Reddick (five years till FA) and two interesting 20-year-old prospects.

I wouldn't undersell the trade return of Tom Wilhelmsen.  It's going to be quite a bit higher than J.J. Putz' was, when Zduriencik traded him for Gutierrez, Carp, and Vargas et al.

.

Q.  Use Wilhelmsen to offload Figgins?

A.  From a GM's perspective, that's officer thinking there, Geoffy.

From a fan's perspective, it would send me screaming into the night.  That $13M savings, on Figgins, isn't going to change a lot on the field.

Still, we know what he means.  Maybe Wilhelmsen and Figgins for a decent return, and Figgins' leaving is to be considered part of the return...

.

Q.  Can the M's actually afford to lose Wilhelmsen?

A.  It's like a mafia don once told a DEA contact.  Nobody's got a million bucks to spare.  Even if you got it, you don't got it to spare, know what I mean?  Nobody can spare a dominating closer who's making $487,000.

But Furbush has emerged, and the fact is that Capps and Pryor are major league ready, and the fact is that every failed starter is another shot at a reliever.  There are a lot of Victor Sanchezes and Bobby LaFramboises in our system right now.  Billy Beane is a big believer in manufacturing closers, trading them, and then creating the next one.  No guts no glory.

Me personally:  I have an inkling for this idea because (1) I don't believe that Wilhelmsen is correctly cast as a reliever -- name me one other great reliever with his body type -- and (2) there would be a gamble, to a certain extent, in converting him to starter.  Am not saying Wilhelmsen's not doing great.  Am just saying there's an element of awkwardness about his role that is a thumb on the scale for me.

.

Q.  Aiming for what?

A.  Dr. D loathes the idea of dealing Wilhelmsen if --- > Wilhelmsen is going to be the best player in the deal.  

Doug Fister was traded and was the best player in the deal; how'd that work out?  Erik Bedard was the best player in that deal, and now Video Game Chiang is an ex-Chiang.  Seattle might as well have traded Bedard, deadline day, for zero.  On the other hand, Pineda was traded and was not necessarily the best player in that deal....

If Wilhelmsen goes in July, that will be the algorithm freejacked into the mainframe.  Was Wilhelmsen the best player in the deal, or was he not.  If not, if Wilhelmsen + ? brings back a single player commodity that exceeds everything else in the package, yeah.  Bring it on.

Cheers,

Jeff

Interest categories: 
Interest locations: 

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.