It is Official: Marcum for Lawrie
by Tom Dakers on Dec 6, 2010 6:14 PM EST
in Toronto Blue Jays News
Email
PrintPress release:
BLUE JAYS ACQUIRE CANADIAN BRETT LAWRIE
The TORONTO BLUE JAYS have acquired 2B BRETT LAWRIE from the Milwaukee Brewers, in exchange for RHP SHAUN MARCUM.
LAWRIE, 20, was drafted in the first round (16th overall) by the Brewers in the June 2008 First Year Player Draft and has spent the past two seasons in the Milwaukee minor league system. The Burnaby, British Columbia native was the second youngest player in the Southern League (AA) last season with Huntsville, hitting .285 with 36 doubles, 16 triples, eight home runs and 63 RBI in 135 games. The performance earned the right-handed hitting second basemen a Southern League Post-Season All-Star selection. The 6-0, 210 lb. Lawrie has also represented his country with Team Canada at the 2008 World Junior Championships, the 2008 Summer Olympics and the 2009 World Baseball Classic.
MARCUM, 28, posted a 13-8 record with a team leading 3.64 ERA in 31 starts for the Blue Jays last season. The Kansas City, Missouri native has been with Toronto for his entire five year Major League career after being selected in 3rd round of the 2003 Entry Draft. The right-hander has recorded a 37-25 mark with a 3.85 ERA in 120 career games, including 95 starts.
Tom: They will have the press conference on BlueJays.com at 4:30 6:30 Eastern.
133 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
its supposed to be up at 6:15 according to chisholm
but i cant find it
Good luck in Milwaukee Shaun.
I’m assuming of course that Marcum reads BBB.
Who is/was a Jay longer, Michael Taylor or Brett Lawrie?
by craig in calgary on Dec 6, 2010 6:21 PM EST reply actions
well technically how long was michael taylor a jay?
and i really dont think we’re trading lawrie…i think we’re keeping him, but we’ll see
man they are going to love Marcum in Milwaukee
great pitcher and he’ll be even better in the NL Central. Little bonus, they get another of the league’s better hitting pitchers (to go along with Gallardo).
I’m really going to miss Shaun. Watching him work every 5th day was really a treat and he always batteled and seemed to bring his best against the toughest AL teams. And one of the better fielders on the mound I’ve seen.
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
by hugo on Dec 6, 2010 6:25 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Why? Greinke is a costly starter with one great season, and a number of average ones. Last year he was distinctly mediocre.
by Defense Counts! on Dec 6, 2010 7:16 PM EST up reply actions
not by WAR
(which is calculated by FIP, which I agree with). he had a 5 WAR season by FanGraphs, which is very good
How does this work?
I don’t understand WAR. Greinke had an ERA of 4.17, ERA+ of 100.
by Defense Counts! on Dec 6, 2010 8:11 PM EST up reply actions
WAR is wins above replacement
measured by pitching independent factors (FIP) over which a pitcher actually has substantial control – walks, strikeouts, and home runs.
ERA is very context dependent – it depends largely on defense, luck on runners left on, and bullpen (one guy comes out with a runner on first and two out and the bullpen lets him in, the next guy leaves with the bases loaded and one out and the pen gets out of it).
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
not that FIP is the end-all and be-all
I’m more of a tRA guy, myself
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
there are way too many stats
i like any stat where i dont need a calculator and a set of instructions to figure it out
it sounds like you like really terrible stats
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
haha which ones would those be?
in general thats why i find baseball stats way too confusing. other sports arent nearly as complex with their statistics…except qb rating. i dont know if theres a man alive who knows what thats about. im pretty confident they just toss up numbers on the tv screen sometimes figuring noone would know if they made it up anyway
baseball
is really the only stat where pretty much everything can be quantized (except on defense). as a result, it’s easy(-er) to create very advanced and telling statistics whereas it’s harder to do for other sports, though they’re catching up. you don’t need to use them, but they’re much more useful than traditional stats
baseball is like any other complex system
if you fall for simple explanations or easy correlation=causation type analysis, you miss a lot. But that doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy the system without fully understanding it.
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
I don't want Greinke
Why? Because we are still in rebuilding mode and while we do have the depth, moving forward I just don’t see giving up surpluses in our system to justify trading for a win now situation. Besides, I like Lawrie as a prospect and I trust AA in ripping off people it doesn’t sound like the Jays will get a great trade if they trade for KC’s hurler.
AWmusic - mp3 blog.
http://twitter.com/awmusicblog
I am sad to see Marcum go, but if he really wasn’t interested in staying in TO long term as the media has been saying, then good on AA for trading him now when his value is probably as high as it will ever be.
No legitimate sources have said that he was refusing to stay long term.
In fact during the press conference it came out that part of the reason for the trade was that he’s looking for an extension, and the jays weren’t open to giving him one. But the brewers are.
i dont know where anyone's getting this
thats not at all what was said by anyone connected with the team. the media’s making up stories. according to AA, marcum wanted an extension with Toronto, and we werent prepared to give it, but Milwaukee was willing to extend him longterm, so they traded him to milwaukee
I thought AA said a while back that he was working on extending him
Maybe I’m just talking off the top of my ass here.
I read somewhere that Marcum didn’t want an extension. I’m trying to find the source now …
by Defense Counts! on Dec 6, 2010 7:21 PM EST up reply actions
Check out that gruesome inverted W.
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
Isn't an inverted W just a normal M
by KWJAYS on Dec 6, 2010 7:07 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
It is.
I guess ‘Inverted W’ just sounds cooler.
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Dec 6, 2010 7:23 PM EST up reply actions
TERRIBLE TRADE
OUR NUMBER 1 PITCHER AND THIS IS ALL WE GET..AA’S FIRST MISTAKE.WOULD OF GOT MORE AT THE DEADLINE SINCE THIS PLAYER IS YEARS AWAY FROM PLAYING.IF ADDING 2 OTHER PROSPECTS IN DEAL THEN YES BUT SWAPPING STRAIGHT UP.NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.. LOOK AT THE RECORD/ERA OF MARCUM IN PITCHING IN THE TOUGHEST DIVISION IS BASEBALL..THIS KID BETTER BE GOOD
agreed...firstly calm down
i dont know how you can take such a committal negative stance on the deal. it will be a few years before it can be truly judged. but if the jays didnt plan on extending marcum, then they got good value for him for the 2 years left on his contract. lawrie is rated as one of the league’s top prospects. if he plays out as hoped, are you still against the deal? because thats clearly the risk that AA is taking, but hes trading from a position of strength to one of weakness.
i actually disagree
with the statement that you can’t judge this deal until Lawrie makes the Majors/flames out/becomes Roberto Alomar. in fact, now is the only fair time to judge it. it seems to me that it is a fair deal; trading a good and proven but not fantastic pitcher for a young guy with the chance to be a top-flight Major Leaguer but also the chance to flame out (all prospects can). hindsight is 20/20…
I agree with you
we won’t know if the deal worked out for a little while, but in terms of judging it, the only fair time to do that is now. Marcum wasn’t traded for the player that Lawrie will eventually be (good or bad), he was traded for the potential that he has as of now – both his ceiling and the probability he’ll reach it.
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
exactly
trading established players for prospects is really just gambling; you trade something you have and presumably know, whose output fluctuations are also presumably lower than a prospect, for the chance at something more and the chance at something less. it’s not a science or else everyone would be good at it
Don't use all caps....it doesn't make your argument any better.
by Tom Dakers on Dec 6, 2010 7:54 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
WHAT ABOUT ALL CAPS, BOLD, ITALICS, AND A BLOCKQUOTE?!!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?
by craig in calgary on Dec 6, 2010 8:08 PM EST up reply actions 6 recs
rec'd for being such a cmputer wizz
Festina Lente
by HESS2479 on Dec 6, 2010 8:20 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
anthony bell this link is for you:
http://largeletters.ytmnd.com/
Everyone else please ignore above link.
Even a mistake may turn out to be the one thing necessary to a worthwhile achievement
by TonyFernandezSavedMyLife on Dec 6, 2010 8:15 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Agree
Big time mistake. Marcum is NOT old nor is he too expensive. AA was trying to be too flashy with this one. He got beaten in the Halladay trade but he had no choice (and it was 3 prospects for one starter). This one was inexcusable. A very good starter (and a leader) for one prospect. The Brewers did not regret sending Laporta to the Indians and they won’t likely regret this. As for the Jays, this is not a move that the other teams in the AL East would make. This is a trade that a team like the Royals make.
He got beaten in the Halladay trade
I don’t think you can say that definitively, yet. You have to give the prospects a chance to mature and then see where they end up.
FWIW, I believe that in the end, both teams will benefit massively from this trade. The Phillies are far more in the position to take advantage of having an elite ace pitcher than the Jays are. The Jays need top notch prospects so that they have the players to compete in a year or two.
no, you can't
then you have the benefit of hindsight. the only fair time to evaluate a trade is when it’s made; you make a gamble. you spend something you know the approximate value of (Halladay for one year) for prospects with some chance to be good or bad (or an All-Star or never make the Majors). with regards to Marcum, yes he is a solid pitcher, but the guy put up 3.5 WAR – he didn’t have an MVP season, “first starter” or not. getting Lawrie means giving us a shot at a tremendoes player while giving up an admittedly good player, but one whose position we can relatively easily fill, seeing as we have great pitching depth. I think it was a good trade, and the Halladay one was too (though we don’t know the other offers, of course)
With Halladay, he had no choice.
With this trade, he should have gotten one definite mlb player or two top prospects at least (for Marcum). Don’t forget, the losers in the Cliff Lee sweepstakes would be happy to get a good starter going into the season (or at the trade deadline).
Or even better, Milwaukee was in their best case scenario a beggar. Their pitching depth is terrible. Let them gamble on Scrabble or Drabek (yes he’s still a gamble) while we gamble on the positionless Lawrie and keep the sure thing, Marcum.
Remember the Twins traded Matt Garza for Delmon Young? Even though young was good this year, I think they’d take that trade back anyway. And remember Young was considered pretty close to a sure thing.
You think the Brewers were going to trade Lowrie for Scrabble?
I’d have shot Alex myself if he traded Drabek for Lowrie. The unfortunate part about baseball is you have to give something up to get something, I’m not at all unhappy about getting Lowrie, sorry to see Marcum go but to get a guy like Lowrie, that’s one you ought to try.
I don't know what the Brewers were willing to do
I know that Marcum was ridiculously underrated as a player and the Brewers were dealing from a position of weakness. They are about to head into another season with a terrific offence and terrible starting pitching. To top that off, one of their irreplaceable players (Fielder) is about to start his walk year.
The Jays on the other hand have something that nearly all other organizations covet – depth at starter. Also, AA is building for the long haul, so they had time. They are dealing from a position of strength.
Let Milwaukee take the risk. Don’t throw away one in the hand for one in the bush.
It seems like way way too much assuming
to guess that Alex didn’t offer other things first. Seems like people always think the other team isn’t trying in trades, they should take what we want to give them. Alex wanted that particular player, I’d want him too. I’ll miss Marcum but that is what it took to get the player Alex wanted. I don’t see Marcum being ‘ridiculously underrated’ at all. We gave up a good player to get a good player. That’s the way these things work.
We didn't get a good player. . .
We got a prospect. . .
that Marcum was underrated
seemed true until the Brewers gave up Lawrie for him.
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
the only fair time to evaluate a trade is when it’s made
So the Jays won the Esteban Loaiza/Michael Young trade then? Judging at the time, the Jays acquired a proven starter for a couple of prospects.
I think the only way you can judge the trade is to look at the trade after some time has passed and then ask, knowing the results, would you make the trade again? Of course I know that had the Jays kept Young, he might not have developed into the great player he became, but 10 years after the fact, I think the Jays would love to have a redo on that one. I also recognize that you have to take into account the team goals. Yes, you might want to give up a really good prospect to get a decent fill in on your major league team. You can still judge the trade on its results. Did the fill in help the team significantly and what happened next vs what did the prospect do?
what? no
that’s precisely what I’m saying is wrong about hindsight judging trades. you can’t say “well look at what this player has become” because at the time you don’t know what the player will become. trading players for prospects is gambling. you give something you know (like Marcum) for another player whose payoff is unclear, because you have the chance for something great (like a top 3B or 2B in baseball) but he could get injured and flame out or something. looking at a trade in hindsight is useful, but there’s a reason GMs make mistakes – baseball is not a science. if it was, and there was an easy way to do it, then everyone would. if, on the other hand, a trade looks awful from the get-go (see the Pau Gasol trade to the Lakers a few years ago) then that’s easy to judge. most trades aren’t so easy
I’m not arguing that you shouldn’t apply some of the “at the time” context to the trade. That context provides the reason for the trade and helps you judge the result. If I trade a top prospect who be becomes an HOFer for a fourth outfielder who happens to help the team win the championship once, then the at the time context might mean that the trade was even as far as value goes. But you also cannot say that just because you won the world series that you “won” the trade because the value that the prospect gains in later years might more than balance the trade.
So, for me, hindsight does play an important role in judging a trade. But I also try and balance the hindsight with the context of the trade at the time.
well
there’s a difference between whether it was a good trade and whether it worked out (which involves a lot of luck). If I trade Jason Marquis for Albert Pujols and Pujols gets hit by a garbage truck and never plays a game for my team, that was a good trade, it just didn’t work out. I think whether a trade is good or bad move depends on the information available at the time, not information only available later.
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
true but there are hidden considerations
For one, if your team has great scouts who can judge prospects and have a great track record with their predictions while the other team does not, you may make a great trade and outsiders may not know it is a great trade.
by leonard euler on Dec 7, 2010 6:46 PM EST up reply actions
it's true
just like gambling, skill can have an effect on the outcome. but other teams (probably) have their own great scouts, so it’s unlikely that one team is going to make a bunch of really amazing trades in a row, unless they completely change the rules of the game (the A’s in the Moneyball era sort of did that, because they were pretty much dealing in a different market than the rest of baseball)
restate my point
I should have said maybe the GM of your team has a great scouting department and the GM from the other team fired most of his scouts because he thinks he can predict how prospects will develop based on statistics.
by leonard euler on Dec 7, 2010 9:01 PM EST up reply actions
that is definitely possible
but what makes it a great trade is still the player’s potential, it’s just that you were uniquely able to see it and others weren’t.
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
Yes, to me luck plays a large role in whether a trade works. I also don’t think a GM should be judged on one trade for that reason.
In your Pujols scenario, I’d say it was a bad trade because that you didn’t get any value out of Pujols. I also wouldn’t hold it against the GM because it made sense at the time.
actually, still not a "bad" trade!
decline the option on Pujols (cost you $5M for 2011) . . . Marquis was below replacement-level last season and the Nats on the hook for him for $7.5M
"Look at me! I'm Tomokazu Ohka of the Montreal Expos!"
fair enough
that’s a semantical difference, though.
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
definitely not a fan of this trade
Tom, i told you to give me good news. this isnt good news. we got nothing but potential while Marcum was an experienced solid pro. this hurts, a little
Might be an exercise in restraint
Could AA be looking at a run this year as premature? Instead counting on one more year of develpment for Drabek, Arencibia, Snider, Scrabble and some of our more progressive prospects. Maybe he is planning for one more year of development for the Jays, and one more year of aging for the Yankees prior to putting together a legit contender in the following season.
I'm happy with it
It shows AA’s commitment to winning in 2012, 2013, 2014 and beyond. Marcum’s great, but we can’t be sure he’ll be around through all that. The Jays have one of the best scouting systems in the Majors, and so far they haven’t failed us yet. Let’s show some trust in AA and the organization he’s pieced together.
I'm just tired of every year being "one year away"
I like that we are building a strong foundation for the future, but at some point I’m ready to stop trading for prospects.
I do trust AA, but I guess I’m just ready to win now and hope this is just part of a bigger move….that being said I was sure Wallace for Gose was also part of a larger deal.
by craig in calgary on Dec 6, 2010 7:54 PM EST up reply actions
You people are hilarious. Anthopolous has been the GM for all of 1 year and 1 month and you’re already tired of “trading for prospects” and are “ready to win now”?
It has nothing to do with Anthopolous
It seems like we’ve been a year away for about 19 years and 4 administrations.
by craig in calgary on Dec 6, 2010 8:06 PM EST up reply actions
So because other GMs failed Anthopolous should be looking to put another 5+ years in jeopardy by trying to rush a playoff team together after 1 year of him being in power?
I dont see what 19 years has to do with anything. Anthopolous never said this team was “1 year away” either so I’m not sure why you are throwing that around; it seems like you are being persuaded by hack Canadian baseball writer into believing that this team is actually a legitimate playoff contender after an obviously flukish season. The moved made by Anthopolous clearly show that they in no way believe this team is “one year away”.
Again
I am speaking as a fan, not a personel director…..and AGAIN I do trust AA and I like the direction the team is going, but as a fan I don’t like to see proven MLB talent being traded for prospects especially when the Yanks and Sox are continuing to use the other 28 teams as their own personal minor league system.
I’m not saying I’m right, I’m just saying I’m ready for the foundation to be set, and the winning to commence.
by craig in calgary on Dec 6, 2010 8:17 PM EST up reply actions
that's fair, but if you deal from your strength
you can improve your future without sacrificing too much of the present. When the Jays traded Doc their pitching actually improved and of course things got much better down the road. I think that’s what the Jays did here. They dealt from their strength (quality starting pitching) and acquired something they really need (impact position player talent in the high minors)
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
We have been
and it’s all been because of mismanagement. Basically, no previous manager has had the patience to build from the ground up, always trading away the future for some slim shot at the present. AA’s doing it differently, and it shows. People are excited about the Jays once again. People have hope, and are looking forward to the future. It may be just a small core group right now, but it’ll definitely grow once AA pulls the trigger and they end up having a real shot at the title!
i’m a season ticket holder and i’m ok with the direction and the trade. what pisses me off is the one for one ..should of been 3 for one as this kid is a prospect and that’s all he is.Lots of players do well in the lower league but the cream only comes to the top.In short everyone likes the trade but most feel short changed.
If you wanted a 3 for 1 you weren’t going to get a prospect as good Lawrie back. Marcum isn’t a guy thats going to net you a legit top prospect + more prospects. Sticking with Anthopolous’ drive to acquire big-upside players; they chose to target a top guy with big upside that they liked instead of a few “pretty good” prospects.
High ceiling prospects is the key
It’s tough watching Anthoupoulos trade away guys who are good contributors now (like Marcum) or ready to be (like Wallace) for guys are several rungs down the minor-league ladder (like Gose and now Lawrie).
But what makes this all bearable is his emphasis on going for high-ceiling prospects. It seems like over recent years we’ve had an abundance of good prospects and players, but not enough great ones.
So even if just some of these guys Anthopoulos brings pan out as really great players it will be worthwhile as our future will be built on a much stronger foundation.
So while it seems like a big gamble to trade Marcum one-for-one for a prospect, it’s not everyday you get a team’s number one prospect overall. With the pitching we have and Marcum’s injury history, it’s a good risk/reward trade I think.
Plus
As the guy is already smashing AA pitching at 20 years old, he’s about as much of a 100% guaranteed success as you are going to find in the minors.
Barring injury, the guy is going to be in the majors soon. The real question is what he will do when he gets there.
yeah
same feeling here
the team has to get competitive in order for fans to get to the games.
if they’re are continuing rebuilding then then how are you going to make profit when you dont show anything compromise to the fans
you may have one shot
to “make your move” and transition into a contender…if you misjudge your opportunity like jp did, then you have to start all over. lets not rush things this time around
Agreed
This is especially true because they play in the AL East. With the competition they’re up against, they have to be absolutely sure they’re ready, otherwise the other teams with deep pockets will just buy better players than the Jays have, and that’ll be the end of it.
I don’t think Anthopoulos’ plan and winning now are mutually exclusive – this past season’s good result on the field showed that. If we make the playoffs this year fantastic, but I’m not bothered if we don’t. To my mind real fans ought to want to come see this team play – I’d love to watch guys like Arencibia and Drabek get going, along with Snider and our young pitchers. To me bringing young players is exciting to watch. That said, there are a lot of fans who frankly are just bandwagon jumpers and it may be that Toronto won’t get a real boost in attendance until the season after it next makes the playoffs. That’s often the way it goes and I don’t want to see the team try shortcircuit the plan just to get there faster to bring back those fans faster. If you build it (properly) and win, they will come. Just need to give it a little time.
i think we have to have a little faith in the plan
sure it would be great to win now, but we’re not ready to do that yet. as AA made quite plain in the press conference today, we’re trying to build a team that can’t just win tomorrow, but can win every year and can sustain its success and the way to do that is by building a young core
Can someone
Can someone please tell Brewers fans that even though Marcum had a 3.64 ERA, he had very poor numbers against the Rays, Yankees and Red Sox. They all seem to be jumping on the wagon that Marcum conquered the Beasts of the AL East, but he hardly did that. Not trying to take away anything from Marcum though. He had a great year last year, but his numbers aren’t reflective of him owning the AL East
not really so
Marcum’s peripherals against the Yankees, Red Sox, and Rays in 2010 were excellent (5.00 K/BB, 3.29 K/BB, and 3.6 K/BB respectively) He gave up a ton of home runs to the Sox, but only three to New York and Tampa combined. Mostly he just had bad luck in a small sample size. Over his career, he has poor numbers against the Yankees but his numbers against the Sox and Rays are really quite good.
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
marcum always felt like an injury waiting to happen
Lawrie’s gonna be a good freakin player. i hope he starts in AAA and plays for the jays soon. hes not far off. him and hech and yunel and a good 1st base will be sick. i dont want to see it happen to marcum though.
into the mashed potateos
said it before, will say it again
throwing a baseball at 90 miles per hour thousands of times per year is an injury waiting to happen
Marcum was good, but starting pitchers are always a crapshoot. They can be great one year, then awful the next, and all are just one injury away from early retirement. I don’t agree with trading a lot of good position players to get one ‘ace’. After all, we had one of the best pitchers in baseball for many years, yet we never got past 88 wins. A starter, no matter how good, can only influence one in every five games. It’s better to build up a solid-if-unspectacular rotation.
For anyone who thinks the Jays should try and compete in 2011..
explain how they’ll make it to the post-season if both Hill and Lind continue to perform as badly as they did in 2010. Do they give up on the pair and completely and make costly trades for high-performing fill-ins? Or do they keep the pair and somehow get everyone else to suddenly perform 40% better? IMHO, the Jays can’t make any attempt at the World Series until they know they can count on Hill and Lind to perform, and that’s not right now.
(Yes, I know this is a little off topic, but it does factor into the reasoning behind the trade)
they won't
it’s just incredibly unlikely that they’ll be as bad as they were this season. look at their previous numbers, how can you assume that last year was their true talent level if they had so many good seasons before (especially including the Minors)? maybe neither is as good as they played in 2009, but they’re undeniably Major League talent – they were both excellent players in 2009, Hill was Major League-capable before that, and Lind raked the Minors before 2009 (though he did struggle somewhat in the Majors before 2009)
I'm not saying we should assume they'll be that bad
I’m saying that we can’t be absolutely certain they’ll both be good enough to make a run at it next year. Let them use next year to try and bounce back. If things are going great around the trade deadline, maybe then the Jays will be in a position to decide to commit to an all out push. If not, then we won’t have wasted our valuable prospects getting a hot shot for nothing.
you can't be certain
anyone will be good. players have bad seasons and good seasons. you can only make assumptions, and i think it’s fair to assume they will be fairly good Major League players
Agreed,
We’re sticking to the game plan which happens to be a very good and well thought out on at that.
Myself, like all of you, didn’t see the trade coming but find comfort in knowing it was for the best and will eventually make us an even stronger team.
2012, I love you.
MLB trade rumors now reporting that the royals are stuck on getting both drabek and snider for grienke. I would not do that deal.
I wouldn't either.
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Dec 6, 2010 8:39 PM EST up reply actions
thats ridiculous and KC is seriously overvaluing its player. No deal.
Toronto Maple Leafs: Colby Armstrong bringeth the TRUCULENCE!
They’re on a fishing expedition. When the hook comes up empty, they’ll try different bait.
by Defense Counts! on Dec 6, 2010 8:49 PM EST up reply actions
Agreed, they want an arm and a leg for him and no GM in their right mind should do that for anyone other than Halladay or Lee. Plus with Snider’s potential and Drabek’s potential, both these players in a few short years could easily be the equivalent of Greinke and if we’re playing for the win in 2-3 years, why throw that away for someone who was relatively unknown up until 2009?
by Qd6 on Dec 6, 2010 9:38 PM EST up reply actions
Me neither
And I will be apoplectic if we trade Drabek. I want to see him pitch for us this year and for a long time.
Does anyone have a video or audio link of AA discussing the deal?
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
enjoy
http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=13060695
Toronto Maple Leafs: Colby Armstrong bringeth the TRUCULENCE!
Thank you good sir.
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Dec 6, 2010 8:59 PM EST up reply actions
Listening to Anthopoulos comments at the press conference, I really doubt Lawrie gets flipped:
A player we’ve been after for quite some time now. Someone that we’ve been talking about internally and been trying to acquire for the past year or so.
More quotes here in this National Post article.
Doesn't mean he won't trade him if the right deal comes along
I seem to remember him saying that about another Brett that’s no longer with us.
he says that bout everyone, he said that about gose too
Toronto Maple Leafs: Colby Armstrong bringeth the TRUCULENCE!
just the nature of sports
no one should be untouchable. and really I like that about AA – he’s not afraid to take calculated risks. this is of course me talking out my ass, but it seems like he is thinking “I have one shot at the job of my dreams and I’ll be damned if I’m going to waste it on mediocrity”
This could all only happen just before the Top Ten list comes out. Guess there is going to be 11 players in the top ten. 10A and 10B, lol.
2nd behind
Drabek. I am guessing. Just based on the mid season rankings and that according to something I read, Drabek would likely leapfrog him.
When do players stop being prosepcts?
Are Arencibia and Drabek still prospects even though they played in the Majors last season? Is it a games played thing? Does Snider still qualify as a prospect?
There She Gooooooes!
Well, Snider isn’t a prospect anymore but Drabek and Arencibia are. I dunno the specifics but I think it revolves around playing time and how long they’ve been in the majors for to unqualify as a prospect.
by Qd6 on Dec 6, 2010 9:44 PM EST up reply actions
"prospect" is subjective
“rookie” is not. from MLB.com:
must not have over 130 at-bats or 50 innings pitched or over 45 days on the 25-man roster (so September doesn’t count)
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bluebird Banter
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Citi Field All-Star game has finally been made official for 2013
- Brett Lawrie receives four-game suspension, fined for ‘aggressive actions’ toward umpire
- PNC Park security guard loses finger in struggle with fan during Pirates game
- Create-a-Caption: Partying like it’s 1988
- The Ron Washington puppet is watching you while you sleep — and has possibly jinxed the Rangers
