Lets talk Trade Deadline

[BigRapidsJackass]

OK, less than a week till the trading deadline.

Keep Fuentes.

I know I pronounced the Rockies dead again, but they're 6 games back, the Padres are completely out of the way, and the Dodgers and Dbacks seem hellbent on letting the Rox back in.

Main reason, though: pathetic returns for the established players who've been traded. Jon Rauch to the Dbacks for Emilio Bonifacio? That's a worse prospect than, for example, Eric Young Jr.

It seems like clubs just aren't willing to give up anything decent this year. Again, you might be better letting Fuentes walk and taking the draft picks.

[GerryInCS]

The Rox have a road trip coming up. If they lose four of the next six, I can see them trading Fuentes at the wire. According to what I read on the Rumors thread at Yahoo, the rox wanted Ian Kennedy (Yankees) or Buchholtz (Red sox) in exchange for Fuentes. If they ask for similat talent from the Rays, Angels, Cards or whomever then I don't see a deal getting done for Fuentes and we lose him in FA along with trading Hiolliday during the coming offseason.

[BigRapidsJackass]

They're not getting Buchholz from the Red Sox. No way.

Kennedy from the Yanks is still a possibility, and I'd take that.

[Dante Bichette]

Okay, so I may be obsessed with David Price and Carl Crawford, but here is a deal that I think really works for both sides. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems fair and realistic.

Rocks trade Holliday, Fuentes, Vizcaino, and Morales to the Rays for Crawford, Price, and Wade Hendrickson.

The Rays become the favorite to win the AL East with the addition of Holliday to their lineup and Fuentes and Vizcaino to the bullpen. They also keep both Holliday and Fuentes away from the Red Sox and Yankees, and get a legitimate pitching prospect in Morales. Worst case scenario for them: They have a legitimate two year window to make a world series run, and pick up four draft picks after losing Holliday and Fuentes as well as Morales.

For the Rockies, they get good value for Holliday and Fuentes and save money. Crawford is a five tool young player who can play center, which allows them to move Stewart to left field and become an every day player when Helton returns. They also pick up two very good young pitchers, especially Price, who can immediately step into the rotation and has the ability to be a legite ace. They can then lock up Atkins and Crawford long term with the money they save by not signing Holliday.

Thoughts?

[Dante Bichette]

Originally Posted by BigRapidsJackass

They're not getting Buchholz from the Red Sox. No way.

Kennedy from the Yanks is still a possibility, and I'd take that.

I agree on both fronts.

[BigRapidsJackass]

Yankees get the (really) poor man's version of the Holliday-Fuentes combo:

Xavier Nady + Damaso Marte.

Making it less likely still that Fuentes will be traded.

EDIT: And a pretty crappy haul for them, too. Not that either of them is exactly a huge difference maker. Best thing is we play the Pirates next, and the loss of Nady will hurt. Plus maybe they'll call up some Cedrick Bowers/Micah Bowie LOOGY for us to beat up on.

BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: FOX: Rosenthal - Yanks strike deal for Pirates’ Nady

[HoyaRoxFan]

I'm in agreement that I doubt Fuentes gets traded at this point. I would have thought Yankees for Kennedy would have been our best bet, and with the acquisition of Marte, that's out. I don't suppose the draft picks are a bad thing, as this organization seems to be pretty good at drafting; better at that than free agency.

These murmurs about whether we're buyers or sellers, however, are frightening. Yes, a Washburn type might be helpful, but can they be had for, say, Barmes and/or Taveras? I don't think I'd be selling the farm for anything this year...

[BigRapidsJackass]

I agree, Hoya. "Neither a buyer nor a seller be" at this point.

Other than, of course, clearing out the players who don't really help us, either now or in the future (Taveras is example # 1, whose production could be replaced with Podsednik + Spilly when he's back)

[wolf213]

Lets think about this for a seconded. Weren't the D'Rays interested in both Nady and Marte? I doubt they like the fact that they went to the Yankees and I think there is a very solid chance that they cave into our demands with Fuentes, to sort of counter the Yankees move...

Wade Davis, here we come.

[TheIncredibleRox]

I like Wade Davis a fair amount, and he's regarded as an even better prospect than merely the numbers would indicate. Young pitchers are always risky, but it's not at all unreasonable to see his value being 3x Fuentes two years from now.

But what we'd be trading to the Rays is something close to ~1 win (depending on how you value leverage, between about .7 and 1.1) and two supplemental first rounders. Simply put, that's far more valuable to them (and us) than Wade Davis.

The Rays are a smart team, and certainly won't get fleeced. But understanding the nature of their position (and ours), I don't think it would be a big deal to ask for Ruggiano along with Davis. We could totally throw in an Omar Quintanilla to be named later as well.

[Heltonfan]

But what we'd be trading to the Rays is something close to ~1 win (depending on how you value leverage, between about .7 and 1.1) and two supplemental first rounders.

What I do to account for leverage, in the abstract (i.e. for putting win values on relievers), is to give them double credit for all performance below the 3.80 ERC mark. This yields leverage values as follows for different ERCs:
2.09 ERC - 1.71 LEV (Papelbon)
2.40 ERC - 1.66 LEV (Rivera)
2.83 ERC - 1.58 LEV (Soria)
3.14 ERC - 1.49 LEV (Fuentes)
3.45 ERC - 1.33 LEV (Rauch)
3.69 ERC - 1.13 LEV (Qualls)

Anyway, I'm having an awfully hard time trying to imagine how you get Fuentes as being worth so much to the Rays. A 3.14 ERC over 22 innings (one third of a "relief season" by my definition) is worth .51 WAR (replacement level being 4.50). Alternatively, we can do it the less abstract way, and plug Fuentes into the Rays bullpen and move everyone else down a notch. If we do that, we find that Fuentes only adds .27 WAR, because a) the Rays' bullpen as currently constructed is deeper than most and b) adding Fuentes would reduce the leverage of their best reliever's innings (Balfour). However, if you put Fuentes on a team with a bad bullpen, like MIL or STL, he adds .49 WAR.

Of course, given Fuentes' salary, even if he adds half a win, he's not especially valuable. The dirty little secret about deadline deals is that, in most cases, the prospects/draft picks account for the great majority of the value exchanged, and the MLBers involved are largely irrelevant. So the real question here is, are Davis/Ruggiano more valuable than the draft picks? My thoroughly unscientific guess is that it's about even.

But, at the same time, one thing is clear: Tampa Bay is not the ideal destination for Fuentes.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Casey Blake for Carlos Santana and Jon Meloan? The mind boggles. Meloan is a top-150 prospect, maybe top 100 (ProspectBot puts him at #105 at the moment). And Santana... a 22-year-old catcher putting up a .264 ABR? If he can stick behind the plate, he's a top-20 prospect. This is a better package than what Beane got for Joe Blanton, or than what he would have gotten for Harden if Gaudin weren't involved. Hell, there's a reasonable chance that this package turns out to be more valuable than what they got for Sabathia. All this for Casey Blake... seriously, Casey Blake... and, to top it off, the team making the deal has a better, younger 3B rotting away on the bench. Ned Colletti continues to amaze me.

[hiaspire]

Originally Posted by Heltonfan

The dirty little secret about deadline deals is that, in most cases, the prospects/draft picks account for the great majority of the value exchanged, and the MLBers involved are largely irrelevant.

Irrelevant? You've got to be kidding. Not to teams trying to make the playoffs THIS YEAR and wanting immediate MLB help now that drives almost all these transactions.

[HoyaRoxFan]

HF means irrelevant in terms of the big picture, not in terms of newsworthiness and flash and dazzle. The stars, naturally, are perceived as being the "final piece" to a team's championship run wherein aspire is right. But count up the players traded at the deadline without whom a team wouldn't have made the playoffs / won a championship. Now that you've got one hand counted off, count the number of prospects that changed hands at the deadline that ended up changing the face of a franchise. This could take a while, wherein HF is right.

A team may want Fuentes, but if they're smart, what they'd really want is the draft picks. I think O'Dowd sees it this way. But it's harder to sell. "Yeah, we got a lefty reliever that will give us 20-odd innings in our playoff run, but man, wait till you see what we get next year!' Does that make the prospects and picks irrelevant?

[BigRapidsJackass]

Aspire, the acquisition of Casey Blake is indeed pretty much irrelevant. I think Meloan will help immediately, probably as a Taylor Buchholz type. I really like his stuff, and I think he was mishandled by the Dodgers.

On another front: didn't we have something better to offer for Anthony Reyes than what the Indians gave up? Reyes's stock has fallen a lot, but even right now isn't he a better option as a 5th starter than Kip Wells?

[indianadrew]

Originally Posted by BigRapidsJackass

Aspire, the acquisition of Casey Blake is indeed pretty much irrelevant. I think Meloan will help immediately, probably as a Taylor Buchholz type. I really like his stuff, and I think he was mishandled by the Dodgers.

On another front: didn't we have something better to offer for Anthony Reyes than what the Indians gave up? Reyes's stock has fallen a lot, but even right now isn't he a better option as a 5th starter than Kip Wells?

not to mention the indians get carlos santana!