Nov 20
According to Phil Rogers of the Chicago Tribune:Â Cubs explore Bradley deal that would net Castillo
The Cubs are again exploring a way to dump Bradley and bring in Castillo. In the new deal the 3rd team would be Texas and the Mets would be netting Kevin Millwood. According to the report the Mets and or the Cubs would most likely have to chip in some cash to make it work.
Hat tip to Metsblog for the link.
MLBTradeRumors
How Much Longer Should The Mets Go... { I'm with boomer. I think... } – May 19, 8:03 PMHow Much Longer Should The Mets Go... { 32 HRs last year and... } – May 19, 8:00 PM
How Much Longer Should The Mets Go... { True, but I don't think... } – May 19, 7:48 PM
How Much Longer Should The Mets Go... { The only issue I would... } – May 19, 7:45 PM
How Much Longer Should The Mets Go... { A baseball team trying to... } – May 19, 7:31 PM
117 comments
prismo
11/20/2009-12:05pm at 12:05 pm (UTC -4)
Speaking of Mattsblog, he’s being snippy on twitter again.
“METS: I, too, am ‘hearing of a three-way trade,’ but, unlike some, I cite the original report, here: http://tinyurl.com/yjo94jx”
Lose the ‘tude MC!
trs86
11/20/2009-12:09pm at 12:09 pm (UTC -4)
Who is he even talking about?
prismo
11/20/2009-12:13pm at 12:13 pm (UTC -4)
Do you even have to ask? Bart Hubbuch tweeted about the potential trade without citing a source. Big whoop, it’s twitter.
The daily MC vs NYP fight.
trs86
11/20/2009-12:06pm at 12:06 pm (UTC -4)
Cerrone at it again speaking of Millwood
“left-handed hitters have always been a problem for him, but with the left-field wall and Jeff Francoeur in front of it, he could see an improvement…”
prismo
11/20/2009-12:09pm at 12:09 pm (UTC -4)
LOL oy vey
metsfan4decades
11/20/2009-12:11pm at 12:11 pm (UTC -4)
Left field wall? That’s so obviously wrong it’s a safe bet to assume he writes those posts and doesn’t so much as read it over once….
trs86
11/20/2009-12:13pm at 12:13 pm (UTC -4)
Yeah, I guess he means RF wall but that seemed to be the easiest place to hit HR.
prismo
11/20/2009-12:06pm at 12:06 pm (UTC -4)
But in terms of the trade, I think it would be a good one, as long as Omar wouldn’t call it a day on the starting rotation.
trs86
11/20/2009-12:09pm at 12:09 pm (UTC -4)
It certainly gives them more options on what to do with the rotation.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-12:12pm at 12:12 pm (UTC -4)
Why are we talking about trading Castillo? LOL
trs86
11/20/2009-12:14pm at 12:14 pm (UTC -4)
?
Never said we should not trade or talk about trading Castillo. I am saying that we will not be able to trade him without taking on salary or paying in salary.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-12:38pm at 12:38 pm (UTC -4)
Let’s see. You said:
I find it interesting that so many are now saying lets just trade Castillo because he had a good season. Why do we want to trade him? Ah because he was the worst fielding 2B in baseball last year. Shhhhh Oh wait I was not supposed to say that out loud, I hope the other teams don’t know about UZR and did not hear me say that. Damn, my fault guys.
No one will want to pay him 2/12 and trade any prospects for him when they can just get Hudson, Lopez, Polanco for cheaper.
* * * * * * * * * *
From what I can gather from this:
1. Us Castillo traders are silly to think any team will want to trade for Castillo because it’s no secret he plays bad D.
2. Those teams can just get Hudson, Lopez or Polanco for cheaper.
If all you wanted to say was that we’d have to take on an expensive salary or pay some of Castillo’s, then you should have said that instead of acting as if we’re foolish for possibly thinking someone would want Castillo and his bad D instead of the “cheaper” guys.
wannybackstra
11/20/2009-12:39pm at 12:39 pm (UTC -4)
Don’t forget that UZR is flawed!
trs86
11/20/2009-12:40pm at 12:40 pm (UTC -4)
I DID.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-12:45pm at 12:45 pm (UTC -4)
I guess I have to read between the lines.
trs86
11/20/2009-12:45pm at 12:45 pm (UTC -4)
“I still don’t see any team giving us prospects for Castillo. If we trade him we are either eating at least say 4-6 million or taking on another bad contract.”
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-1:09pm at 1:09 pm (UTC -4)
oh, I had to read down the thread not in your original comment.
trs86
11/20/2009-1:15pm at 1:15 pm (UTC -4)
LOL, actually I had said it earlier and the new post was in response to the old one. But whatever, I think we get the point.
saltygary
11/20/2009-12:15pm at 12:15 pm (UTC -4)
So Millwood makes 12mil in the final year of the contract
Castillo gets 6mil x 2 Years?
But cool guy MattC says they may have to kick in money to offset Bradley?
Then they would have to spend what maybe 4mil > to get Hudson just for this year?
Seems like a lot of money just to upgrade 2nd base and to get another 5th starter. Not opposed to getting Millwood but his record has never been the same since testing began in 2003.
trs86
11/20/2009-12:20pm at 12:20 pm (UTC -4)
I would say last year and his 2005 were pretty dang good. Hardly a 5th starter.
And yes most likely the Mets would have to kick some My idea would be 2-4 million to make Castillo 2/8 and then the Cubs in turn would have to kick in maybe 7-9 million total for Bradley (the 2-4 from the Mets and 5 from them).
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-12:21pm at 12:21 pm (UTC -4)
hmm, not sure how I feel about $12M for Millwood.
He’s borderline on what I described as an avg. pitcher projecting to be 6.48 K/9, 2.83 BB/9, and a 1.24 GB/FB (career)
trs86
11/20/2009-12:23pm at 12:23 pm (UTC -4)
Well you are unloading Castillo so… Millwood would be a great midrotation guy. I would still WANT another top of the rotation guy but he is an upgrade over Pelfrey/Maine/Perez.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-12:41pm at 12:41 pm (UTC -4)
agreed on both points.
metsfan4decades
11/20/2009-12:23pm at 12:23 pm (UTC -4)
According to MLBTR concerning this rumor:
We talked to a source familiar with the situation who said that this deal is not being discussed. Backing that up, MLB.com’s T.R. Sullivan talked to a Rangers official who said it’s “not happening.”
************
Who knows at this point, what is being discussed and what is not…
trs86
11/20/2009-12:24pm at 12:24 pm (UTC -4)
Looks more and more like it maybe the Cubs and Mets just making a deal sending us something in return for Castillo. I think that won’t happen though until the exhaust every way to lose Bradley.
wannybackstra
11/20/2009-12:42pm at 12:42 pm (UTC -4)
Milwood’s 2007-2008 5 ERAs are more like 4.50 in the NL and outside of Texas, particularly.
His 198 IP with an ERA+ of 127 last season was terrific.
But Milwood at this stage in his career relies heavily on his defense. Obviously, 2B would be improved with Castillo part of the deal. But a good defensive LFer would really help guys like Ollie and Johan (fly ball lefties) in addition to Milwood.
Milwood’s downside is as a 4-5 starter. I’d take that for Castillo as long as Polanco is still available.
trs86
11/20/2009-12:47pm at 12:47 pm (UTC -4)
Agree completely. Say we chip in 2 million and get Millwood for 12 and Polanco for 4 we have not really lost anything.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-1:05pm at 1:05 pm (UTC -4)
Not saying I’m against it, but couldn’t we sign Polanco at 4 and Wolf for 8? That’s 12M. Comes out to the same thing.
Your scenario:
-4 Castillo
+4 Polanco
+12 Millwood
Total 12M
My scenario
+4 Polanco
+8 Wolf
Total 12M
trs86
11/20/2009-1:16pm at 1:16 pm (UTC -4)
True but then I guess you just dump Castillo and eat more money or take on more contract.
stickguy
11/20/2009-1:25pm at 1:25 pm (UTC -4)
it makes sense, if you consider wolf and millwood to be equivilant pitchers (and dont mind Wolf for 2 years vs. millwood for 1).
then, anything you get for castillo is truly a bonus!
trs86
11/20/2009-1:27pm at 1:27 pm (UTC -4)
Yeah I guess my point is that you won’t have Polanco if you still have Castillo. So if you don’t unload him there you will have to somewhere and most likely still have to eat that same 4 million.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-1:36pm at 1:36 pm (UTC -4)
don’t have to unload him.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-1:26pm at 1:26 pm (UTC -4)
no, he’s ur backup MI.
trs86
11/20/2009-1:28pm at 1:28 pm (UTC -4)
Castillo or Polanco? How do we get Polanco to come here to be a backup instead of starting somewhere else unless we vastly overpay him? Castillo can’t be a backup MI when he can’t play SS.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-1:35pm at 1:35 pm (UTC -4)
Polanco as backup would defeat the purpose of improving the D.
Re: Castillo, he did play SS for 2 games in the GCL. LOL
Polanco would slide to SS and Castillo at 2B.
trs86
11/20/2009-1:38pm at 1:38 pm (UTC -4)
To me you then have a 6 (12) million dollar waste on the bench. He would not even be as useful as Alex Cora.
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-1:44pm at 1:44 pm (UTC -4)
Case, given your thorough investigation into and support of the Mets going with more of a defensive philosophy, I find it surprising that you recommend Castillo as a backup MI.
Are you pulling a TRS and advocating for the devil?
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-1:47pm at 1:47 pm (UTC -4)
lol, no Grave, I’m saying get rid of him w/o paying his salary or taking on a bad contract.
Would you prefer:
1. Millwood
2. Polanco
3. Cora (which you’ll have to throw in extra money for)
OR
1. Wolf
2. Polanco
3. Castillo
In my scenario, you get a better pitcher and Castillo is better than Cora.
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-1:52pm at 1:52 pm (UTC -4)
Well in your scenario you are counting on Reyes to play about 162 games at SS, since Polanco has only played 1 ML game there since 2002, and Castillo has never played 1 ML game there.
Unless the secret weapon in all this is current FA Fernando Tatis and his total of 5 ML games experience at SS.
trs86
11/20/2009-1:54pm at 1:54 pm (UTC -4)
LOL, as I said you would need Cora again thus Castillo would be worthless. I guess you could then trade him for Pierre.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-2:04pm at 2:04 pm (UTC -4)
Grave, Polanco is a much better fielder than Cora. Do you really think he’d be worse than Cora at SS?
Plus, how many games are we talking about?
10-20 max, not a big deal
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-2:09pm at 2:09 pm (UTC -4)
Case I have no idea since it’s a different side of the bag requiring different abilities in footwork and arm strength and I’ve never seen him do it.
And I wish I were more confident about how few games whoever is the BU MI will be necessary, but I’m not.
Worst “Case” scenario I want a solid defensive SS at Buffalo ready at a moment’s notice as part of your plan.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-2:02pm at 2:02 pm (UTC -4)
We’re talking about a backup. Cora was -1.1 at 2B and -2.6 at SS.
Again, I’m not saying keep Castillo. but if you can’t get rid of him w/o paying his salary or taking on a bad one, then there’s no harm in keeping him on the bench.
Consider him the Juan Pierre of the Mets.
trs86
11/20/2009-2:04pm at 2:04 pm (UTC -4)
I think there is a LOT of harm keeping him on the bench to be a slap hitting Julio Franco. What does he provide on the bench? A backup 2B?
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-1:44pm at 1:44 pm (UTC -4)
right, but:
1. you improve 2B
2. you get a better pitcher than Millwood
3. Add depth
And if you can get rid of him w/o paying, then do it.
trs86
11/20/2009-1:45pm at 1:45 pm (UTC -4)
I just don’t get it. To me keeping Castillo on the bench would be like keeping Julio Franco.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-1:49pm at 1:49 pm (UTC -4)
what’s worse, keeping Castillo on the bench or having Millwood instead of Wolf.
I’d rather have Wolf, try to get rid of Castillo, and if not, then you have depth.
trs86
11/20/2009-1:52pm at 1:52 pm (UTC -4)
Hmmm, don’t know which one is worse. Do we remember Castillo’s pouting attitude? Only way I do your deal is if we cut Castillo or again trade him for something else but that would have to be in place before I sign Polanco.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-2:08pm at 2:08 pm (UTC -4)
I just can’t get that you guys are so worried about the bench players. Right now we have no clue who that would be. Cora at best, or maybe the wiz a. Hern.
In my scenario, at worse you have Polanco backing up Reyes and Castillo backing up Polanco.
Ideally, we get rid of Castillo’s salary and have Wolf instead of Millwood.
Comparatively, my scenario is better.
trs86
11/20/2009-2:18pm at 2:18 pm (UTC -4)
It’s the point of resources. Ideally you will not be able to get rid of Castillo’s salary unless you take on another contract or pay out cash. Again, I ask what value is he on the bench backing up one position and doing that poorly? He would take up a very valuable position.
You scenario is really costing 8-9 for Wolf, 4 for Polanco and 6 for Castillo.
That’s 18 million.
Our scenario cost
12, 4, and 2 (Cora type).
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-2:29pm at 2:29 pm (UTC -4)
so if your premise is true, that Castillo can’t be moved without taking on salary, at worse it’s exactly the same amount of money. (18M)
So same money and:
1. you have a better pitcher in Wolf, who is a lefty (this is key to me).
2. you improve over Cora backing up SS w/ Polanco and Cora at 2B w/ Castillo
3. You still have Castillo’s OBP, bunting and ability to get a hit coming off the bench.
trs86
11/20/2009-2:33pm at 2:33 pm (UTC -4)
Disagree you don’t improve SS with Polanco. He has not played a game there since 2005 (1 game) and has not played more than 20 there since 2001. Thus you would still have to have Cora.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-2:43pm at 2:43 pm (UTC -4)
the guy just won a gold glove at 2B, you don’t think he could be better or similar to Cora who isn’t even good at SS?
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-2:25pm at 2:25 pm (UTC -4)
Case I know that we’re both Met fans who witnessed 2009 so in that context I hope you can understand my concern with backups and their potential playing time, and my concern with their defensive abilities or lack thereof.
I welcome Polanco at 2B over Castillo with open arms. But as part of that scenario I need Castillo on another team, or at worst off this one. Keeping him on the team seems just as impractical to me as the suggestion prior to the 2009 season by some that the Mets “just sign Hudson, Castillo’s presence and contract be damned.”
trs86
11/20/2009-2:28pm at 2:28 pm (UTC -4)
I agree. It would be much different if it were Lopez that we were advocating as he would be able to play other positions. Even then I would much rather have Castillo gone first.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-3:17pm at 3:17 pm (UTC -4)
grave, I hear you but I don’t get it.
You are concerned about injury?
then, wouldn’t you rather have Polanco available to backup Reyes long term? He’s a gold glove 2B. Wouldn’t he be as good if not better than Cora at SS?
Same goes for Castillo. Wouldn’t you want him available to backup Polanco at 2B long term instead of Cora?
Why is it impractical? It costs the same as overpaying for Millwood.
If you think Castillo’s ego wouldn’t allow him to play the bench, fine. But from a money or depth point of view, I don’t get why Polanco and Castillo are impractical.
And again, I’m not arguing to keep him. But if the choices are keep him or do rumored trade, I keep him and sign Polanco and Wolf. and maybe later on, Omar can trade him without having to pay.
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-3:40pm at 3:40 pm (UTC -4)
I jumped in the middle and don’t even truly know the genesis of this discussion so I’m not sure exactly why we’re debating keeping Castillo around as a backup MI.
I guess this is some kind of budget debate between you and TRS that I should’ve stayed out of.
If this is a budget debate between you and TRS, I submit that people complained that $2 mil for Cora was too much in that role, how does $6 mil annually for Castillo work in a role he’s shown no propensity for and has no experience with? It just seems to be more terrible budgeting which I think we all would like to see a lessening of.
My stance, budget discussion or not, is I believe that any Met acquisition of a 2B should be paired with a sending away of Castillo, however that may pan out, whether it be a straight trade, or a trade including some money being sent with him, or his outright release.
I just don’t have the faith that you apparently do that Polanco will smoothly shift to SS if necessary, since he hasn’t done it for so many years. Some middle infielders shift between the two positions flawlessly, Polanco may very well be one of them, I just have no recent evidence of that.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-3:53pm at 3:53 pm (UTC -4)
thanks grave. It’s not really a budget debate and you may be right about Polanco not being able to shift to SS.
I guess I don’t like the Millwood deal.
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-4:06pm at 4:06 pm (UTC -4)
Oh, well if that’s where this is coming from then consider me in your camp, at least on that specific aspect.
With Santana at $21 mil and Perez at $12 mil, I’d prefer to add someone with a more solid recent track record than Millwood if I’m going to spend another $12 mil to do it.
As I said somewhere in this thread, “If nothing else I would trust him (Millwood) to get close to 200 innings more than Maine or Perez, and to do so in a way less damaging than Livan Hernandez. How’s that for an endorsement?”
In case it’s not clear, that’s not much of one. And certainly not for $12 mil.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-4:20pm at 4:20 pm (UTC -4)
ur post got me thiking about why we would pay millwood 12M when we could have wolf for 8m
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-4:55pm at 4:55 pm (UTC -4)
Whoops! I should’ve known this was my fault.
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-1:13pm at 1:13 pm (UTC -4)
When I see the sportspyder headline “Newsday’s Wallace Matthews Trashes the Mets” I think, is that news? It’s all he’s done since I became aware of his existence, and it’s all I assume he’s continued to do since I stopped reading his work a few years ago.
Re: Millwood, I picked him off waivers in April for my fantasy team and he was excellent in the first half. I cut him in July (I needed more Ks) and was glad I did so, his performance dropped off noticeably. Not sure if age, or Texas heat, or what got to him, but he was pretty bad in July and August, with something of a rebound in September.
If nothing else I would trust him to get close to 200 innings more than Maine or Perez, and to do so in a way less damaging than Livan Hernandez. How’s that for an endorsement?
stickguy
11/20/2009-1:24pm at 1:24 pm (UTC -4)
millwood isn’t that exciting of an acquisition, but there are certainly many worse pitchers. He at least falls in with the whole arroyo/garland/wolf/marquis crowd, and he is one year deal.
key of course is losing Castillo, and replacing him with a better player for 2B. Just don’t trust omar to handle the inflow to my liking!
And the Mets should not have to kick in money, since they are taking on the most 2010 salary, and the Cubs are the one desperate to unload their player.
so the Cubs should send 8m to the rangers to even things up.
I could also see this deal expanded to include a few useful parts and prospects. maybe Omar could manage to fill a couple other holes (pen, LF, C) somehow at the same time?
Someone else (hey, TRS!) would have to do the analysis to figure out the right mix!
but, if the mets manage to move castillo and get a respectable Sp for a net wash in $$ (more in2010, but same overall), then I am all for it, and consider it progress!
trs86
11/20/2009-1:30pm at 1:30 pm (UTC -4)
I just think we would have to kick in some cash because regardless Castillo’s contract is above market value and I am not sure Millwood’s is.
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-1:40pm at 1:40 pm (UTC -4)
FWIW, fangraphs suggests Castillo provided $7.2 mil of value last year. Millwood, $10.9 mil. Bradley, $4.7 mil.
Strictly in that context (they say it’s what the person would/should receive on the open market based on their performance and past FA signings) Castillo ($6 mil) was the only one who provided more value than his actual earnings. Millwood ($11 mil) and Bradley ($5 mil) both came up a bit short. And both of them are getting raises this year, Castillo is not.
trs86
11/20/2009-1:37pm at 1:37 pm (UTC -4)
But back to your question the Rangers do have a couple of catchers we could use but not sure how we could convince them to give anything. The Cubs I have no idea. I still like FUDome but his contract is too high for his production.
trs86
11/20/2009-1:44pm at 1:44 pm (UTC -4)
Mattsblog at it again:
“one thing is clear, the Mets do not want bradley and the Cubs do not want castillo, but they are apparently one another’s only shot of getting rid of these people, and so they’re obviously working hard to find a third team to help make it happen…”
I am not so sure that is clear at all? Either it’s backwards or just not true.
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-1:47pm at 1:47 pm (UTC -4)
It wouldn’t seem to work for one of the Cubs or the Mets, because one of them is going to get saddled with a player they don’t want even with a third team involved, unless said third team winds up with Bradley AND Castillo in the deal, which seems unlikely.
trs86
11/20/2009-1:53pm at 1:53 pm (UTC -4)
the Mets do not want bradley and the Cubs do not want castillo,
I just don’t think that is clear at all. I would assume that the Cubs DO want Castillo considering every deal has Castillo going to the Cubs.
stickguy
11/20/2009-1:51pm at 1:51 pm (UTC -4)
I thought the whole point was that the Cubs were one of the teams reported to have interest in castillo?
Heck, I am hoping to trade him there even if Bradley goes elsewhere.
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-1:56pm at 1:56 pm (UTC -4)
Agreed on your first sentence. The Dodgers with both Belliard and Hudson potentially gone as FAs, the Tigers with Polanco potentially gone, and the Cubs with their alleged dissatisfaction with Fontenot/Baker are the ONLY likely destinations for Castillo I can think of.
trs86
11/20/2009-1:55pm at 1:55 pm (UTC -4)
What about Castillo to the Tigers for a pitcher to fill out the back of the rotation?
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-2:06pm at 2:06 pm (UTC -4)
Bonderman $12.5/2010
Willis $12/2010
Robertson $10/2010
Verlander arb eligible coming off $3.75
Jackson arb eligible coming off $2.2
Porcello $1.025
Miner arb eligible? coming off $0.4375
Galarraga arb eligible? coming off $0.435
Bonine not even arb yet
French not even arb yet
All those guys started games for DET last year and are still their property
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-2:16pm at 2:16 pm (UTC -4)
Given the Tigers alleged need for salary relief, only 1 of the 3 guys at the top of the list make any sense for them.
Robertson led the majors in earned runs allowed 2 years ago and his peripherals have declined 2 years in a row. His ability to start or relieve (poorly) I guess give him some value as a lefty.
Willis? Might be time to “Ankiel” him, and I’m not prepared to pay for that transition.
Bonderman, I dont’ know what his health situation is, but when he was healthy he didn’t walk a lot of guys and had a good K/BB ratio. He just turned 27. Of the 3 he’s probably the guy I’d be willing to take a chance on, pending more info on his health.
stickguy
11/20/2009-2:18pm at 2:18 pm (UTC -4)
it would be bonderman or robertson. Unless you want WIllis to play 1B.
trs86
11/20/2009-2:22pm at 2:22 pm (UTC -4)
Bonderman is interesting. If he is healthy then he is a stud but if he is healthy then the Tigers most likely would keep him.
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-2:30pm at 2:30 pm (UTC -4)
I think that depends on how truly interested they are in saving money. They have just over $100,000,000 committed to 10 players for 2010, none of them a 2B (unless they start Ramon Santiago there).
I think they can part with Bonderman and still have a viable rotation of Verlander, Jackson, Porcello and company.
trs86
11/20/2009-2:33pm at 2:33 pm (UTC -4)
No doubt. Could they get more than Castillo though?
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-2:36pm at 2:36 pm (UTC -4)
Excellent question that I surely don’t know the answer to. Good luck with your game, coach.
trs86
11/20/2009-2:07pm at 2:07 pm (UTC -4)
Or perhaps even Castillo for Maggs? Maggs 1 year for 18 million Castillo 2 years for 12? Tigers chip in a few million?
stickguy
11/20/2009-5:30pm at 5:30 pm (UTC -4)
I worry about Ordonez being another giant liability in the field. Really think they need to get the best D as possible, which means upgrading at LF and 2B, the 2 weak spots (murphy does fine stopping balls near him).
also, the option for 2011 can vest:
2011 option guaranteed at $15M if Ordonez has:
135 starts or 540 PAs in 2010, or
270 starts or 1,080 PAs in 2009-10
thankfully, he played in 131 games (don’t know how many starts) and 518 PAs in 2009, do not vested yet. Just have to keep him below 139 starts (at worst), and 561 PAs. Doesnt sound that hard to do!
wannybackstra
11/20/2009-9:09pm at 9:09 pm (UTC -4)
I’ve read in several places that Scott Sizemore will play 2B for the Tigers next season.
trs86
11/20/2009-2:29pm at 2:29 pm (UTC -4)
Have a good afternoon gentlemen and lady (For you MF4D). I am off to go coach some hoops. First game tonight.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-2:45pm at 2:45 pm (UTC -4)
good luck
metsfan4decades
11/20/2009-3:24pm at 3:24 pm (UTC -4)
Nice. Good luck!
saltygary
11/20/2009-2:55pm at 2:55 pm (UTC -4)
I know there aren’t many Buster Olney fans over hear but he threw out some interesting arb. eligible players that might be too pricey for their clubs:
John Lackey and Matt Holliday will get their money no matter what, but other Type A free agents (determined by stats from the past two years) will see their value decline if their previous teams offer them arbitration. Last winter, Orlando Cabrera and Orlando Hudson had to settle for modest one-year deals because teams were reluctant to give up a first- or second-round draft pick, which is the cost of signing a Type A free agent who has declined arbitration. Cabrera and Hudson might face the same predicament this year. Joining them could be Type A’s such as Randy Wolf, Billy Wagner and Placido Polanco. Instead of wading through a flooded market, second baseman Freddy Sanchez passed up free agency and quickly accepted a two-year, $12 million deal to stay with the Giants.
• Kelly Shoppach, C, Indians: The Tribe started their cutbacks last summer, when they swapped Cliff Lee and Victor Martinez for prospects. Now Shoppach, who’s 29 and will make more than $2 million in arbitration, is expendable because Cleveland’s top -prospect is also a catcher. Carlos Santana showed he’s about ready by posting a .943 OPS for Double-A Akron this year.
• Russell Martin, C, Dodgers: With nine arb-eligible players, plus an owner embroiled in a messy divorce, LA is looking to cut costs. Though Martin is only 26, his stats have been trending downward for two seasons. He made $3.9 million this year and had just 26 extra-base hits, so his 2010 salary could outweigh his production.
• Kevin Correia, RHP, Padres: He gave the low-budget Pads what they needed in 2009: quality innings for just $750,000. San Diego will look to sell high on Correia’s 3.91 ERA in 198 IPs rather than pay the 29-year-old -journeyman a few million bucks.
• Jorge Cantu, 1B, Marlins: The Fish have already begun shedding salary, sending Jeremy Hermida to the Red Sox for a couple of mediocre prospects. Scouts respect Cantu for doing whatever it takes to produce runs in close games, and he’s hit 45 homers and 83 doubles over the past two years. Cantu, who’ll be 28 in January, is in line for a big raise after making $3.5 million in ’09.
• Dan Uggla, 2B, Marlins: What, you’re surprised to see another Marlin? Uggla, who’ll turn 30 before Opening Day, has averaged 30 homers in his four seasons in the majors, and that production could take his salary into the $10 million range next year. He’s considered a defensive liability (remember the 2008 All-Star Game?), but his power is enticing.
I would jump all over Russell Martin at 4m a year. His offense may be going down but he also is a good enough field to play 3rd and has a little speed.
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-3:59pm at 3:59 pm (UTC -4)
I think on the surface anyway I’d rather take a chance on Shoppach as opposed to signing Benjie Molina. Shoppach is at least willing to take a base on balls. Can he possibly be more of a base clogger than Molina? He would also seem more amenable to sharing time than Molina, should Thole prove to be ready.
Unfortunately due to the era we are in, when any baseball player suffers a noticeable decline in slugging I have to wonder if somehow PEDs played a role, and both Shoppach and Martin fell off a lot in that category. That’s one thing we can’t really accuse Molina of.
stickguy
11/20/2009-4:08pm at 4:08 pm (UTC -4)
damn, Martin really did fall apart last year. He was never a huge power guy, but this year he had a lower slugging % than Castillo!
still, given his age and defensive abiality, if he comes reasonably, I would certainly take a shot and hope for a bit of a rebound year. Of course PEDs is a suspect, but with a catcher, a relatively minor injury can also sap power.
SHoppach? Can’t remember, but if he is considered to be OK defensively, grab him. If he even rebounds to 1/2 way between 2008 and 2009, that’s a .800 OPS with good pop.
I would rather get Shoppach than Brajas, Molina or Olivo, for sure.
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-5:10pm at 5:10 pm (UTC -4)
I have very little to add about C defense. Fangraphs doesn’t even offer UZR or UZR/150 ratings for catchers.
They have RF/G (range factor per game) which is put outs plus assists divided by games played and RF/9 (range factor per 9 innings) which is put outs plus assists times 9 divided by innings played.
Only 14 C played enough innings to qualify and Benjie Molina was best at RF/9 with a score of 8.8, and Joe Mauer was worst with a score of 7.2.
For comparison Russell Martin had an 8.4, Olivo 8.1, Barajas 8.0, Brian Schneider 7.3, Omir Santos 7.0 and Shoppach 6.8. Josh Thole was the lowest score of 106 C in MLB at 5.3.
My worry is, don’t strikeouts count as putouts for a C? If so, this stat would seem to be dependent on pitchers K totals and therefore I just wasted my and your time writing about it.
stickguy
11/20/2009-5:20pm at 5:20 pm (UTC -4)
I think Lincicum and Cain might have soemthing to do with Molina putting up a good number.
Catcher POs other than Ks is probably a matter of luck anyway 9and bad pitching!) since the only real variable is blocking the plate, and catchers don’t really have to do that very often.
wannybackstra
11/20/2009-9:10pm at 9:10 pm (UTC -4)
Grave: I would take Shoppach in a heartbeat before Molina. And he’d mostly likely be cheaper.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-4:18pm at 4:18 pm (UTC -4)
when is the 40 man deadline?
stickguy
11/20/2009-4:52pm at 4:52 pm (UTC -4)
I was never quite sure how the 40 man worked in the off season, but the non-tender deadline is 12/12 IIRC.
I have to imagine nothing interesting will happen in the FA market before that day.
The big names rarely sign early, and teams will wait to see all the options available, plus they know it will help push down prices.
Maybe though some smart players (like Ibanez) will rush to take a good but not great offer early, just in case?
in any case, I just don’t have confidence that Omar won’t screw it up. Or should I say, Jeffy and his band of merry men!
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-5:26pm at 5:26 pm (UTC -4)
From mlb.com:
Rule 5 Draft: Dec. 8 is the deadline for clubs to outright a player off the 40-man roster prior to the Rule 5 Draft, which gets under way two days later. A player is eligible if he has not been placed on the 40-man roster three or four years after signing his first pro contract
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-5:32pm at 5:32 pm (UTC -4)
thanks
trs86
11/21/2009-10:04am at 10:04 am (UTC -4)
Give me Martin and Cantu for 8M please.
I would try and trade for Martin. Perhaps something involving Castillo?
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-4:28pm at 4:28 pm (UTC -4)
BTW, since it’s the end of the decade. It would be cool if somebody revisited the Mets in the 2000s. I’d volunteer but I’m sure somebody else could do a better job of it.
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-5:15pm at 5:15 pm (UTC -4)
Is it really the end of the decade? I thought there was a pretty good debate going on about whether decades (or centuries for that matter) end with the end of the 9 year or the end of the 0 year.
Let’s discuss that for a few hours instead of backup MI.
stickguy
11/20/2009-5:22pm at 5:22 pm (UTC -4)
well, the first year was year one, not year zero, right? so the 10th year was yer 10, making a decade.
but for simplicity, it makes sense to do a retrospective of the 80s, 90s, etc. SO, 2009 would be the last years of the “naughts” (or whatever we are supposed to call it!)
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-5:28pm at 5:28 pm (UTC -4)
So if I understand correctly, the technical end of the “naughts” will be the end of 2010, but for purposes of decade retrospectives we do those at the end of 2009 because that’s just how we roll?
stickguy
11/20/2009-5:33pm at 5:33 pm (UTC -4)
I think people consider the decades to be what makes sense (like the 80s). It seems to be a much bigger deal figuring out when the millenium ends, not that any of us have to worry about that again.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-5:34pm at 5:34 pm (UTC -4)
speak for yourself
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-5:38pm at 5:38 pm (UTC -4)
Y3K?
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-5:41pm at 5:41 pm (UTC -4)
I’m so there
GravediggerHebner
11/20/2009-5:35pm at 5:35 pm (UTC -4)
so 2009 it is!
That debate didn’t take nearly long enough or get nearly heated enough.
Perhaps if I refer to it as “The Castillo decade…”
stickguy
11/20/2009-6:09pm at 6:09 pm (UTC -4)
now you are just pushing my buttons dude.
As soon as I grab a brew and order the pizza I will be back to roast your arse.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-5:41pm at 5:41 pm (UTC -4)
It’s obviously The Yankee Decade, then again every Decade is The Yankee Decade.
Kingman 26
11/20/2009-6:01pm at 6:01 pm (UTC -4)
Hell no, the 1980s were the Met Decade dammit!!
I suppose the 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, and 90s were Yankee decades…damn, the 80s are the ONLY decade since the 1910s that they have not won a WS.
I don’t like them Sam I Am.
CaseStreet
11/20/2009-5:34pm at 5:34 pm (UTC -4)
maybe we can do backup MIs of the decade
wannybackstra
11/20/2009-9:25pm at 9:25 pm (UTC -4)
The latest news is that Josh Johnson might be made available as both his agent and the Marlins have agreed that now or never has passed to work out an extension. I don’t know whether to believe that but it would make sense for Florida to explore his value before closing the door on negotiations.
Obviously, Johnson would move to my number one pitching target, even ahead of Lackey and Halladay since he figures to be cheaper and better for longer. And he’d probably cost a little less than Halladay in a trade too.
whataputz
11/20/2009-10:06pm at 10:06 pm (UTC -4)
The flaw in your logic: the Marlins have good evaluators of talent….their not gonna want our guys.
wannybackstra
11/21/2009-9:14am at 9:14 am (UTC -4)
The Mets and Marlins have hooked up on trades that have brought the Mets Carlos Delgado, Mike Piazza, Al Leiter, Dennis Cook and Adam Bostick among others.
Okay, I threw the last one in there just for fun.
trs86
11/21/2009-10:10am at 10:10 am (UTC -4)
I can’t imagine that they would trade him to us when they are trying to compete.
wannybackstra
11/21/2009-1:39pm at 1:39 pm (UTC -4)
Perhaps they imagine differently. ESPN.com thinks it’s a possibility:
“ESPN.com’s Jerry Crasnick reports that the contract talks between Florida Marlins right-hander Josh Johnson and the club have broken down, according to his agent, Matt Sosnick.
“Based on our conversations, there’s no chance of doing a long-term deal with the Marlins,” Sosnick said. “We made it clear that it was going to be this year or it wasn’t going to happen. It was now or never. And the Marlins agreed.”
According to today’s Miami Herald, Sosnick said he was expecting the Marlins to offer a contract similar to one the Kansas City Royals give Zack Greinke before the 2009 season: $38 million over four years.
Regardless of the words said and the stances taken by each side, there’s always a chance that the Marlins come back with exactly the offer Sosnick and Johnson were looking for and Johnson remains with the team for the long haul. But until then, it’s difficult not to think Florida may begin attempts to trade the 25-year-old — and there would certainly be a number of interested parties.”
trs86
11/21/2009-10:12am at 10:12 am (UTC -4)
Can you guys think of a package where we send Castillo to the Dodgers and get back Martin? Would it have to involve Pierre? If so is there a bullpen guy they could send to us to make it more worth it?
fongy2
11/21/2009-10:43am at 10:43 am (UTC -4)
Maybe I’m thinking too much of the
past, but I think we could do alot
worse than Kevin Millwood as our
#4. The thing is though that the
upgrade at 2B better be significant
and Omar still has to bring in a
#1 or #2 type SP.
Don’t try and sell us on Millwood
as our #2, Omar.
trs86
11/21/2009-11:12am at 11:12 am (UTC -4)
I agree as long as another pitcher is brought in and Polanco is brought in for Castillo I see nothing wrong with the trade at all.