Two Modest Proposals

Also, I don’t want Theo to trade Pimentel, if only because I think any organization is funnier with a guy whose name is “Stolmy Pimentel” in it. And we could all use a laugh nowadays.

The Halladay proposal is a joke, the Gonzalez trade is much more reasonable.
They’d be better off taking their chances with comp draft picks then ending up with Bowden and Masterson.

“In return, the Sox would have the best 1-2-3 rotation for the next season-plus (and two postseasons), as well as one of the game’s best hitters entering his prime and playing at Fenway Park, solidifying both the lineup and the troublesome left-side defense for years to come.”
Right, and you think teams don’t know this? They know exactly what they are giving up, and what it would mean to the Red Sox. What the Sox are giving them in these deals doesn’t even come close to the value they are getting.
And, really? Teams should be ecstatic with two likely bullpen arms as first round picks? Puh and Leeze. The Jays already have plenty of starters who are or project better than Masterson and Bowden. The price for Halladay starts at Buchholz and another high-end piece like Anderson. Starts.

Ditto.
You are dreaming Paul if you think that gets it done. Think about how Jays fans would feel if that was the package they got back for their top gun. Not even a top-level prospect!
Even if you feel that the price goes down in the off-season, its not a 100% thing which is what most of your argument is based on. I can imagine easily a situation where another team gets interested in making a splash over the winter and decides to pony up a few good prospects to instantly transform their team into a contender.

Let me put it this way, regarding Ellsbury. Do you think if the Yankees included Gardner in a deal that didn’t include Hughes or Joba that the Jays would really care?
The Jays, rightly, are looking for a stud, close-as-can-be-to-can’t-miss stud. Buchholz is like that. So is Hughes, or Joba. They asked for Smoak AND Holland from the Rangers. Drabek AND Taylor from the Phillies (who, amusingly, still have both after dealing for Cliff Lee). Not even one of the guys in that proposed deal is at that level. Now, if the Red Sox took on the toxic Vernon Wells contract instead of Rios’, then maybe you’d be on to something.

Agreed, Brad. It’s also a time where everyone feels the need to describe the other teams’ situation as ‘desperate’ and should be ‘glad’ to take on their expendable guys.

Do you think if the Yankees included Gardner in a deal that didn’t include Hughes or Joba that the Jays would really care?
No, because Gardner isn’t as good a player as Ellsbury.

If the Sox take on Wells’ contract I will jump out my office window.

But Jacoby is less valuable than a prospect in some sense since he already has the clock ticking for MLB service time reducing both his minimum wage time and his cost controlled time. The sox trading Halladay effectively says they arent trying to compete next year too. His value to the teams that they are building in the future is thus greatly reduced.

“Except Jacoby Ellsbury, who was the centerpiece of discussions for Johan Santana.”
Also, Paul you are better than this. Just because a guy was the centerpiece of a trade discussion 2 years ago that has little to no effect on his value today. His abilities at the MLB level are much clearer now that he has almost 2 full years under his belt.

But Jacoby is less valuable than a prospect in some sense since he already has the clock ticking for MLB service time reducing both his minimum wage time and his cost controlled time.
But much more valuable to the Jays than Rios, who is older and costs a lot more for longer.
I think we’re obviously looking at this deal in a fundamentally different light. You are assuming Ricciardi has the freedom to not deal Halladay. I believe he must trade him for the best offer, and that his ownership will see the best offer as whatever will cut the most payroll.

Actually, Gardner has been a full win better than Ellsbury this year, and he’s played in 9 fewer games.
yes, this is true, but in reality, Gardner was subbed in several of those games late for defensive abilitites. He hasn’t been a full-time player.
A better argument would be plate appearances which is:
Jacoby:416
Brett: 231
Meaning, that Jacoby has played almost twice as much as Brett Garnder, thus allowing Brett to even be in the same atmosphere.
There is a reason he keeps losing his position, and it’s not becuase he’s as good as Jacoby Ellsbury.

I guess the question would be:
Whos better: The guy who plays nine innings every day, makes great defensive plays, steals a ton of bases and floats around .300 most of the time.
or
A guy who plays half as much, makes great defensive plays, doesn’t hit nearly as well in a much better lineup, and steals a ton of bases.

It would be a HUGE inclusion for any team to get a player like Ellsbury, who in reality, is still very good, still very cheap, and makes the plays in CF that should be made.
It’s not as if it’s “toss in” on any deal whatsoever.

“There is a reason he keeps losing his position, and it’s not becuase he’s as good as Jacoby Ellsbury.”
The Yanks have better outfield depth? Zing!
If the Sox were able to pull off Paul’s proposed deal, let’s just say I wouldn’t be too happy. I’d imagine a Toronto fan would even be less so. That doesn’t mean it’s a bad proposal, I guess. But the question is how desperate are the Jays to shed payroll. If they are indeed desperate and want to cut payroll by next season, then I can see this happening, especially with the inclusion of Rios. But then where are the Yanks on this one if this is just a matter of taking on financial “burdens”?

This is a question I ask sincerely and because I haven’t been tracking his game. Is Ellsbury’s game progressing? Is there a sense that he’s going to be an all-star in a year or 2? Or is he already one. In other words, is there still room for growth.

On what planet is Melky or Gardner the same level of comparison as Jacoby Ellsbury?
One was sent to the minors last year, and the other keeps losing his job to that one this year.
It’s a stretch, and you know it.
Just as you guarantee that other GM’s won’t value our prospects as highly as we do, I can guarantee you that any deal involving Brett, Melky, or Jacoby on the table, Jacoby gets the nod by every single one of them – icluding Cashman.
I know you’d like to think that they’re equal in an attempt to downplay the fact that Jacoby is a solid young player, who’s only getting better at what he does, but that’s not the case Andrew.
Jacoby is the better player in every statistic short of power (Melky) and assists (Melky) when you factor in the issue that he actually plays every game, all game, and isn’t substituted in for anyone. It takes both Melky and Gardner to do what Jacoby does.
I would however take Melky in a final at bat of a big game.
As far as “expendable players” go, that’s a hat tip to Boston’s front office, not the value of the player to the organization. Bowden, and most of the other players being listed here would be playing for lesser run teams. Just as Austin Jackson would probably be starting if he were in Texas or Arizona – it’s not because he’s expendable due to low value, it’s because he’s expendable due to position and the plethora of talent already there.

For the record, I don’t think Paul’s deal would get it done for Halladay either, but that’s due to the JP, not the players involved.

Nick
Jacoby is solid all the way around. He makes good contact, plays excellent defense, plays very good fundamental baseball, but really only has warning track power. Once he starts taking the walks, he’s going to be a very solid player.
No, he doesn’t have the game that Carlos Beltran has, but I think once he starts being more selective, he’s going to put up great numbers. His arm sucks though.

And so go my hopes of landing Washburn…he’s a Tiger.

Nick:
Having seen a lot of Ellsbury this season, and admitting that I am no scout nor anything remotely resembling someone with any high-level baseball experience, I’d say that Ellsbury still has some upside, particularly plate-discipline wise. And I think, no matter what the numbers say, that he’s gotten better at recognizing pitches this year. Last year it was like he was guessing at everything. Honestly, it was like playing PS3 baseball, where you just have to guess right on the spot and hope you get a hit. This year, at least to my eyes, he’s been a bit better at laying off borderline stuff, at hitting pitches that last year he might have let go or swung right through. He’s on a pace to cut his Ks this year, and potentially increase his BBs. Not sure if he’ll develop much more power, but I do think he’ll get on base more often by BB. Is there a statistic that factors in steals on top of singles/walks and adjusts for this?
He’s a wonderful base-stealer, improved over last year in both raw quantity and also efficiency. His fielding – arm is still really crappy, probably never going to improve.
I’d guess that Ellsbury is more likely to become more productive at the plate than less. How much I don’t know.
Repeat disclaimer: I am just an amateur observer.

The problem, SF, is that there are plenty of players who are ‘steals’ at the minimum. Melky and Gardner are, too, but you don’t see teams falling over themselves to acquire them. Lots of teams have them, it’s the nice part of not having to pay major leaguers anything for their first two or three years. Ellsbury is a nice player to be sure, but really, he is not nice enough to replace a stud prospect in a deal.
Look at what they demanded from teams. Hughes and Joba. Smoak and Holland. Drabek and Taylor. Billingsley or Kershaw and others. Those deals are two rungs higher than the one in this post. They’d go back to those guys and say “okay, just include one of those prospects” before they looked at the Sox’s proposal, which includes zero top prospects.
And even Buchholz might not entice JP, who was rumored to not like Clay as much as everyone else. But, that was just a rumor.

Nick, I was looking at career numbers, and it’s really not close, without even considering how much more Cabrera has played (1930PA for MC vs 1153 for Jacoby). Add in service time, upside potential, and I don’t really seem them as close to equal.
But then again I am a Sox fan so nothing I say should be taken seriously.

Ellsbury is a nice player to be sure, but really, he is not nice enough to replace a stud prospect in a deal.
Look at what they demanded from teams.
First, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Some GMs want/need prospects to restock systems, some need ML-ready players. Some are seeking stars, and some are seeking guys playing above their pay-grade. Ellsburys are NOT a dime a dozen, I just do not agree with this, the way you portray him or a player of his type.
Second, look what JP’s (supposed) demands have gotten him: one less suitor. If these demands have been reported accurately, then JP is setting a market for a player that has not and might not be met. One can look at this at least two ways. First, it could be said that JP is not understanding the market. When I played rotisserie baseball my partner was the JP of our league, and I constantly had to have parallel discussions with other teams because he overvalued our players to a comical degree. He wasn’t ever going to consummate a deal on his terms because they were laughable, no matter what any other team needed they couldn’t satisfy his own valuation. So JP might be overestimating the value of his own player, however great he might be. Or, one could conversely say that teams that have a number of high-level prospects value the cumulative value of those prospects more highly than they do the stud player they are pursuing.
So far nobody has discussed a scenario where the Phillies were offering up a player making the major league minimum but contributing several million dollars of value to the team. And I think that is because the Phillies weren’t willing to sacrifice that type of value off their current roster. That would be the comp to including Ellsbury in a deal, along with a slew of prospects. Trades between the Phillies and the Blue Jays almost universally mentioned Phillies minor leaguers.
With regards to Paul’s proposal, I seriously doubt the Sox would want to include Ellsbury in a deal like this for the reasons above: it sacrifices value off their current roster, or nets them very little upside. I don’t believe that stud minor leaguers are, as a rule, more valuable.

Yeah, so, no team is getting Halladay for a below average OF, two bullpen arms, and a pu pu platter. Even Casey Kelly doesn’t get that deal done. Ricciardi would lose his job within a year if he didn’t get Buchholz or, gasp, Lester. They would run him out of town – money saved be damned. You guys, and Jays fans, would be furious if the Yankees were giving up Melky, Coke, and Melancon with Romine and Betances.
I agree that they’ll sooner hold onto him until December or next year. Toronto was competitive earlier this year. They can sell their fans that they can be again if all their young pitchers are healthy and a bat or two bounce back.

“Absolutely not. Remember that if the Jays hold on to him they will have paid another $10M to the player by then.”
I’m saying, he would be more valuable to other teams.

John, they actually have a need for Duncan given Damon’s road and lefty struggles. They have that need even more than Hinske who they rightly haven’t allowed anywhere near 3B.

Brad said, w/r/t Gardner: “There is a reason he keeps losing his position, and it’s not because he’s as good as Jacoby Ellsbury.”
Well, it’s actually because Melky is also
having a nice, statistically-better-than-Jacoby-Ellsbury, year.
I mean, you can just look at the flipside and say Ellsbury wouldn’t play as much if the Sox had another viable CF.
Gardner’s been a win better in limited time this season. That is a LOT.
Also: your argument that Gardner being subbed and having fewer at bats that would diminish his value takes a bit of a hit when you see that Gardner’s a better offensive player, too this year:
Garner 2009 OPS+ – 99*
Ellsbury 2009 OPS+ – 94
Oops. Gardner has been better all around than Jacoby this year, and it’s not Yankee Propaganda, a dream, or an imaginary story.
SF said: “My lying eyes, along with the statistics, don’t favorably compare Ellsbury and Cabrera, remotely.”
Really, SF? Let’s go with the same comps for Melky/Ellsbury OPS+:
Melky: 109
Ellsbury: 94
Throw in Ellsbury’s poorly rated defense this year, and you’re right it’s not remotely close. Melky is MUCH BETTER. Using career comps is fine, but if looking at career context we should also note that Melky is a year younger than Ells.
I think there are some SFs who really, really overvalue Ellsbury as a player. Probably because of his excellent play for two months down in September and October 2007 (also incidentally the likely reason whhy he was discussed in the Johan talks that offseason).
(*also, despite that OPS+ is park adjusted, I checked Gardner’s road stats to make sure he wasn’t getting a huge NYS boost, and wasn’t too surprised to see he’s actually a better hitter – higher overall OPS- on the road, as he is a singles/doubles guy w/o HR power, and NYS actually supresses doubles while boosting HRs – so in Gardner’s case NYS works against him)