Letting Ichiro Leave For Nothing
As we’ve talked about before, there is a large contingent of Mariner fans that want to see Ichiro get traded in July. With the team falling out of contention (yep, I’m pretty much ready to throw in the towel), I expect these people to get louder as the next month and a half progresses. The rallying cry of the Trade Ichiro brigade is that he’s going to leave at the end of the season and the M’s cannot risk letting their superstar center fielder walk out the door without getting anything in return.
I’d done some research on the issue of trade deadline deals a few years ago, but with the issue being relevant to the Mariners right now, I decided to update the data and look at the decisions made by organizations in similar situations over the past seven years. I found 34 players that I deemed to be in comparable situations to what the Mariners and Ichiro now face. These players were all all-star talents in the midst of a highly productive season, were free agents at the end of the year, and were unlikely to re-sign with the club they were on at the time, and would be classified as Type A Free Agents for compensation purposes, meaning that the organization would get two high draft choices if the player left via free agency.
This gives us a tangible, real basis for what rent-a-player all-stars command in trade, as well as giving us a breakdown of whether the teams who traded their stars fared better than the teams who let their stars walk away at seasons end.
As it turns out, 16 of the 34 stars were traded, and 18 were retained, only to leave at the end of the year for greener pastures, giving us a pretty even comparison across the board. Here is the list of stars who were sent packing.
| Stars Traded | Date Of Trade | Players Received |
|---|---|---|
| Carlos Lee | 7/28/2006 | Laynce Nix, Kevin Mench, and Francisco Cordero |
| Carlos Beltran | 6/24/2004 | John Buck, Mark Teahen, and Mike Wood |
| Freddy Garcia | 6/27/2004 | Jeremy Reed, Miguel Olivo, and Mike Morse |
| Shannon Stewart | 7/16/2003 | Bobby Kielty and Dave Gassner |
| Aramis Ramirez | 7/23/2003 | Jose Hernandez, Matt Bruback, and Bobby Hill |
| Jose Guillen | 7/30/2003 | Aaron Harang, Joe Valentine, and Jeff Bruksch |
| Sidney Ponson | 7/31/2003 | Kurt Ainsworth, Damian Moss, and Ryan Hannaman |
| Bartolo Colon | 6/27/2002 | Brandon Phillips, Cliff Lee, and Grady Sizemore |
| Ray Durham | 7/25/2002 | Jon Adkins |
| Kenny Lofton | 7/27/2002 | Felix Diaz and Ryan Meaux |
| Scott Rolen | 7/29/2002 | Placido Polanco, Mike Timlin, and Bud Smith |
| Jermaine Dye | 7/25/2001 | Todd Belitz, Mario Encarnacion, and Jose Ortiz |
| Matt Lawton | 7/30/2001 | Rick Reed |
| Jason Schmidt | 7/30/2001 | Armando Rios and John Vander Wal |
| Dave Justice | 6/29/2000 | Ricky Ledee, Jake Westbrook, and Zach Day |
| Denny Neagle | 7/12/2000 | Ed Yarnall, Jackson Melian, and Drew Henson |
None of these guys are a perfect comparison for Ichiro, but they were all highly coveted players who were significant contributors to their teams. Scott Rolen and Carlos Beltran were two of the best young players in the game at the time of their trades, so while they’re the most comparable players in on field value, they were also a decade younger than Ichiro is, which had a significant impact on their trade value. Kenny Lofton, Shannon Stewart, and Ray Durham are the closest matches to Ichiro in terms of offensive skillset, but none of them were as good as Ichiro is today. Carlos Lee, Jermaine Dye, Jose Guillen, and Dave Justice were middle-of-the-order sluggers, which are generally valued higher than leadoff guys by most major league clubs. And then, of course, Freddy Garcia, Sidney Ponson, Bartolo Colon, Jason Schmidt, and Denny Neagle were all pitchers.
So there’s not one guy on this list that you can point to and say “see, that’s an Ichiro type player, and that’s what he’ll bring in return”. You have to look at the list as a whole. So, when we do that, what do we see?
Of the 16 trades, three resulted in obvious net gains for the team who received some young prospects in return. The Indians reloaded with the Bartolo Colon deal, the Royals got a pair of productive hitters for Carlos Beltran, and the Reds got Aaron Harang in the Jose Guillen trade.
3 times, out of 16, you can look back and say that the team that traded it’s all-star away clearly improved the future of the franchise. And, to boot, there’s a giant asterisk next to the Colon trade, as it was made by a franchise that was literally making moves trying to keep themselves in existance - no one was sure the Expos would even be a franchise beyond 2002, and Omar Minaya and his staff were simply trying to save baseball in Montreal, or at the very least, go out with a bang. The circumstances that caused the Indians to receive a king’s ransom for Colon aren’t in play this year, and probably won’t be ever again.
There are a few other trades in there that have worked out okay for the trading team. Jake Westbrook has been a solid pitcher, and getting him for a few months of Dave Justice was a good move for the Indians. The Brewers are pretty happy with Francisco Cordero this year, although I’d argue that they’d have been better off just offering Lee arbitration and picking up the two draft picks, rather than settling for Role Player Soup from Texas.
But, the other 11 deals… there’s not much to show for the loss of a star player. It’s a collection of busted prospects and mediocre role players. Out of the 41 players received in return for the 16 traded all-stars, two have turned into all-stars (Grady Sizemore and Aaron Harang), several more are good everyday players or mid-rotation starters (Mark Teahen, John Buck, Brandon Phillips, Placido Polanco, Cliff Lee, Jake Westbrook), and the other 33 aren’t in baseball anymore or have little to no value.
Over the last seven years, the prospects coming back for rental players have had a 1 in 20 chance of turning into an all-star, a 1 in 5 chance of being a solid player, and a 4 in 5 chance of flaming out
How about the teams who decided to play out the string, let their free-agents-to-be stick around through the end of the year, and then collect a couple of draft picks after they walked during the winter?
| Free Agents | Compensation |
|---|---|
| A. Soriano | 31st and 67th picks in 2007 draft (Smoker, Zimmerman) |
| Jason Giambi | 24th and 35th picks in 2002 draft (Blanton, Brown) |
| J. Isringhausen | 30th and 37th picks in 2002 draft (Fritz, Obenchain) |
| Johnny Damon | 16th and 39th picks in 2002 draft (Swisher, Teahen) |
| Miguel Tejada | 40th and 49th picks in 2004 draft (Street, Rogers) |
| Manny Ramirez | 17th and 35th picks in 2001 draft (Denham, Martin) |
| Alex Rodriguez | 36th and 49th picks in 2001 draft (Garciaparra, Rivera) |
| Mike Hampton | 18th and 38th picks in 2001 draft (Heilman, Wright) |
| Mike Mussina | 19th and 31st picks in 2001 draft (Fontenot, Bass) |
| Chan Ho Park | 31st and 51st picks in 2002 draft (Miller, Hammes) |
| Juan Gonzalez | 33rd and 82nd picks in 2002 draft (Whitney, Cooper) |
| Jim Thome | 18th and 31st picks in 2003 draft (Snyder, Miller) |
| Jeff Kent | 22nd and 33rd picks in 2003 draft (Aardsma, Whitaker) |
| Tom Glavine | 35th and 79th picks in 2003 draft (Atilano, Stevens) |
| Mike Remlinger | 36th and 43rd picks in 2003 draft (Salty, Reyes) |
| Andy Pettitte | 23rd and 37th picks in 2004 draft (Hughes, Poterson) |
| Keith Foulke | 24th and 36th picks in 2004 draft (Powell, Putnam) |
| Bartolo Colon | 34th and 53rd picks in 2004 draft (Lumsden, Whisler) |
| Carlos Lee | 17th and 35th picks in 2007 draft (Beaven, Borbon) |
| Carlos Beltran | 38th and 89th picks in 2005 draft (Iorg, Manzella) |
| Ray Durham | 26th and 33rd picks in 2003 draft (Snyder, Quintanilla) |
You’ll see a few duplicate names on here, as Carlos Beltran, Carlos Lee, and Ray Durham were all traded to a club as a rental player, who got the benefit of the compensation picks after the player left as a free agent. Tip of the hat to Billy Beane for the Ray Durham coup in 2003, when he picked up two months of Ray Durham for non-prospect Jon Adkins, then offered Durham arbitration at the end of the year and got two of the top 33 picks in the 2003 draft for losing Durham two months later.
Anyways, as you can see, there have been a lot of teams who have decided to simply hang onto their free agents to be and sort it all out in the winter. The A’s, especially, have eschewed mid-season dealing. How has it worked out?
Of the 42 compensation selections on the list, three have become all-stars - David Wright, Nick Swisher, and Huston Street. Several more have become solid contributors - Joe Blanton, Mark Teahen, David Aardsma, and Aaron Heilman. And, a few others have become the elite prospects in baseball today - Philip Hughes, Jarrod Saltalamacchia, and Adam Miller, while JoJo Reyes is just a good pitching prospect instead of an elite one, and ‘07 draft picks Beaven, Borbon, Smoker, and Zimmerman are far too young to determine their value at this point.
27 of the picks could be labeled as busts, even though a couple still have a shot to turn into major league role players down the road. Three have been big successes, four have been good enough, and three others are among the most valuable young players in the game today, while we’ll have to wait a few years to figure out the fate of the other four.
Recent history shows us the compensation picks are returning better value to the teams than the prospects teams have acquired by moving their free-agents-to-be. Yes, if you trade Ichiro, you might Grady Sizemore, but you might also get Drew Henson. If you let him walk, you might get Rene Rivera (ugh, that draft sucked), but you might also get David Wright. The odds are about the same either way.
Now, this isn’t a completely thorough cost/benefit analysis. By trading for prospects, you’re not incurring the costs of signing the players, as you are with compensation picks, so the financial outlay is several million dollars higher by going with the draft picks. The payoffs are going to happen a year or two later by taking the draft picks versus taking the prospects in most cases.
But, the evidence is clear - the expected return by trading an all-star in the last year of his contract is not any higher than the expected return of letting that player walk at the end of the season and collecting two draft picks as compensation. The Trade Ichiro brigade are living on a false premise. The organization will not be any better off by dealing Ichiro in July than they would be if he left in October of his own free will.
When you factor in the added value of still having Ichiro on the team in August and September, the exclusive two week negotiating window that the team would have with him at the end of the season, and the actual chance (no matter how slim you think it is) that he might re-sign with the team, and the best path is astoundingly clear.
The ideal scenario is keeping him around, but even if you think he’s going to leave, you still shouldn’t trade Ichiro. It’s just not worth it.
Could one of you put the following style rule in the CSS please?
pre {overflow:auto;}
Otherwise, you’re cutting off the trade lists.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:16 amWow. Thank you. I will be linking to this post frequently over the next few months I’m sure.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:17 amThe trouble is that fans don’t seem to make the connection between compensatory picks and free-agent losses. They only recognize that “our guy walked, and we got nothing.” So it probably places more pressure on the GM to make a trade where the return is published in the same article as the announcement, despite the fact that trades don’t tend to yield a decent return.
And our GM is probably very concerned with public opinion.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:18 amI know next to nothing about CSS, dw - if you email me the coding, I’ll update it. I tried adding (overflow: auto,) into the pre tags, and it doesn’t appear to have had an effect.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:19 amAnd our GM is probably very concerned with public opinion.
Actually, I’d say this is one of Bavasi’s strengths - he really doesn’t care what anyone outside the organization thinks.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:20 amI don’t think I want to tinker in the CSS itself lest I incur the wrath of DMZ.
But change the two <pre> tags to:
<pre style=”overflow: auto;”>
and that should put in the slider bars.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:24 amReally? I gave Bavasi the benefit of the doubt and assumed he traded for Vidro in order to appease fans who wanted a name (a former all-star). There’s just no way that Bavasi could have paid so steep a price for Vidro based solely on his skillset.
And if Bavasi is fearing for his job, wouldn’t he want public opinion in his favor?
June 20th, 2007 at 10:24 amReally? I gave Bavasi the benefit of the doubt and assumed he traded for Vidro in order to appease fans who wanted a name (a former all-star).
No, he traded for Vidro because the organization determined that they needed a contact hitter in the line-up. They had a bunch of aggressive free swingers who struck out a lot, and they settled on needing a guy who put the ball in play and had bat control.
And if Bavasi is fearing for his job, wouldn’t he want public opinion in his favor?
Trading Ichiro wouldn’t turn public opinion in his favor, and he wouldn’t do so anyways.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:26 amSorry dw, I put that in there, and it doesn’t look any different.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:27 amCall me your first convert. The rub will be in making a strong push to re-sign him rather than just assuming he’ll walk, not making a winning-caliber offer, and assuming we will get something out of the compensatory picks (as the team that took Clement and Mayberry, I say unlikely). Bottom line, we have to re-sign him to be competitive in the near-term, and we need to add talent beyond that to become a first class team. Will the Mariners do that? Or do they think they can make Ichiro their highest paid player, surround him with 2-tool guys, and still have a realistic shot at a World Series?
June 20th, 2007 at 10:28 amDave, great analysis. I too have come to the conclusion the M’s would be better off letting Ichiro leave rather than trading him. Not only do they receive compensatory picks but they also free up payroll that can be used to sign or trade for other potential impact players. We’ve seen this work before with A-Rod. Add to that the fact we get to watch Ichiro the entire year and I’m good with it.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:28 amFair enough. It just stinks to hear that the organization values contact hitting over OBP. Guess that goes back to your psychology theory about positive/negative outcomes.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:29 amoooh! Mahler & Fain take on the subject as we speak!
The Mariners don’t have the guts to trade Ichiro.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:31 amAdam Jones’ numbers won’t translate to the major leagues.
I’m in the give him $20M/yr camp. There is no sin in paying a guy what he’s worth-especially when he’s goiing to be really hard to replace. I want to see Jones and Ichiro in the outfield.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:34 amGood write-up Dave. I agree 100% that dealing Ichiro mid-season isn’t a good decision, nor is it very likely. I also believe that Ichiro’s likeliness of returning to the M’s after this season is pretty slim (unless the M’s just throw insane money at him, fire Hargrove, etc.).
On those two points, what if a team, let’s use the Dodgers as an example (as Colletti seems to undervalue young talent), offers a Matt Kemp/James Loney/Chad Billingsley/Adam LaRoche type player in return for Ichiro. In Bavasi’s shoes, would it not be more beneficial, for public perception and for the now, to add a young player who can contribute immediately?
June 20th, 2007 at 10:38 amAnybody gunning to trade Ichiro mid-season should also consider that Bavasi has a horrid track record with trades (Soriano for Ho-Ram, anyone?), while one of the few redeeming aspects of his tenure as GM has been the draft picks. If he’s going to be in charge, I’d rather not have him trying to get value for Ichiro in a deadline trade.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:38 amOn those two points, what if a team, let’s use the Dodgers as an example (as Colletti seems to undervalue young talent), offers a Matt Kemp/James Loney/Chad Billingsley/Adam LaRoche type player in return for Ichiro. In Bavasi’s shoes, would it not be more beneficial, for public perception and for the now, to add a young player who can contribute immediately?
No, it wouldn’t. Matt Kemp’s a fine talent, but he’s a right-handed corner outfielder with power and terrible plate discipline who isn’t particularly good defensively. So, we’re going to replace Ichiro with Adam Jones, Guillen with Matt Kemp, and Ibanez with Wladimir Balentien, to go along with the infield of Johjima, Sexson, Lopez, Betancourt, and Beltre?
If you thought this year’s line-up was too aggressive and overly right-handed, you’ll hate that one.
Billingsley, LaRoche, and Loney just aren’t any better than what you’d expect to get with a high draft pick. Loney’s awesome run at the end of last year in L.A. aside, he’s probably a league average first baseman at best. Billingsley is a guy with bad command and arm problems, and LaRoche isn’t much of a third baseman and his bat might not be good enoughto play in the outfield.
So, no, I wouldn’t trade Ichiro for any of those four.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:43 amGreat post. The type that signifies why USSM is one of the best baseball blogs period.
Obviously you advocate holding onto Ichiro, and the evidence you’ve presented supports that thought as well. But if an offer came along that featured one or two top-rated “can’t miss” prospects, would you pull the trigger then?
June 20th, 2007 at 10:43 amI’m with ducky on that one. I was also interested to note how successful the “trade for rent-a-player and collect the draft picks” game has been; it’s not only Oakland, but I’d say Texas came out ahead with Carlos Lee, given that they got other players back for Cordero et al. as well (though as Dave notes, it’s too early on those players to say for sure)
June 20th, 2007 at 10:44 amTeams don’t trade the “can’t miss” guys. Philip Hughes isn’t going anywhere. Neither is Justin Upton, Evan Longoria, or Cameron Maybin. These elite talents just don’t get traded for rent-a-players, and they almost never get traded anyways
Drew Henson, Jackson Melian, Jose Ortiz, Bud Smith, Ed Yarnall, and Kurt Ainsworth were all big name prospects. They missed.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:46 amDave here’s a hypothetical. Would you trade Ichiro for Adam Jones (if AJ wasn’t in the Ms system)?
June 20th, 2007 at 10:47 amMaybe. Probably not, but I’d think about it.
But teams don’t trade their versions of Adam Jones, and they certainly don’t do it for rent-a-players. I’m sure we could all invent packages where it would make sense to trade Ichiro (send him to Boston for Lester, Buchholz, Ellsbury, Bowden, and Bill James!), but in the view of reality, those types of offers aren’t going to come.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:51 amIf Ichiro is traded or leaves at the end of this season, I don’t think I could ever forgive Bavasi. Ichiro is a one-of-a-kind, hall of fame player - how can an organization ever be better off losing someone like that? That we can’t build a competitive team around him, with our payroll, is really a slap in the face to all the fans of the team.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:52 amAssuming all things equal and holding on to him or trading him have roughly the same chance of acquiring legitimate talent, shouldn’t we also consider that Bavasi would be more heavily involved in a trade than he would in the picking of amateur players in the draft? Maybe that’s not true, but if it is, based on the outcomes of his past trades, its probably a safer option to go with the draft.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:53 amAlright, here’s another one. Assuming Ichiro is gone at the end of the year and the Ms are out of it, do you trade him for Scott Baker and another youngster from the Twin’s organization? I guess it comes down to how valuable those draft picks are…..
June 20th, 2007 at 11:00 amNo way.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:00 amYour reasoning seems to be partly based on the fact that other teams would only be “renting” Ichiro, and therefore won’t sell the farm for him. However, is there a scenario where a big market team with a history of winning would trade for Ichiro having a strong belief that Ichiro will resign with them and become a fixture in their outfield for the next 5 years, and therefore give up an elite prospect for Ichiro?
June 20th, 2007 at 11:06 amI was under the impression Scott Baker is Ryan Feierabend sans the control.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:07 amA right handed Ryan Feierabend
June 20th, 2007 at 11:07 amNope. Bobby Abreu got the Phillies nothing last year, even though he was under contract for 2007 as well. Curt Schilling to the Phillies nothing, even though he was under contract beyond when he was traded. Scott Rolen got the Phillies (they suck at this, if you can’t tell) a decent player and some scraps, despite St. Louis knowing they could get him signed to a long term extension.
It just doesn’t happen. Teams do not trade their elite can’t miss prospects.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:07 amI’ll be convert #2. The analysis is truly “astoundingly clear”.
How do we value, however, the particular problem that the Ms front office will not pay to sign premium picks? So much so in fact that the Ms particular perception of “signability” prejudices draft pick skill evaluation?
June 20th, 2007 at 11:08 amOr at least his control (which was his supposed asset) went on vacation.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:09 amHow do we value, however, the particular problem that the Ms front office will not pay to sign premium picks? So much so in fact that the Ms particular perception of “signability” prejudices draft pick skill evaluation?
None of the guys selected with the compensation picks were tough-sign guys who fell and then signed for way over slot. There are good players to be had in the 20-40 range of the draft simply by scouting well, which the Mariners do.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:10 amThis is excellent analysis, Dave.
My only problem is that I disagree with your conclusion.
Given that the outcome is about equal either way, the M’s would both save several millions of dollars in signing bonuses and get a substantially earlier return by trading Ichiro mid-season.
When I weigh that against an exclusive negotiating window with a player who I know isn’t coming back, the midseason trade comes out clearly ahead.
Now, if I highly value watching the half-season of Ichiro toiling at MVP-level for a noncontender, that would probably tip the scales the other way. I personally would also enjoying watching Ichiro go to the playoffs with someone else…
June 20th, 2007 at 11:11 amIt seems to me that the ‘average fan’ is still about 5-10 years behind the times when it comes to looking at this sort of ‘trade him/let him walk’ scenario. In the late 1990s teams in general seemed to value their prospects less in these situations and were more willing to trade them for a player they thought would put them over the top. Now thinking for most teams has changed and the value on prospects (especially pitching) is much higher, seeing the value in the lower amounts they need to play these players. Therefore they are less likely to trade these players for short-term help.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:12 amThis is a concept that the owners and most of the frequenters of USS Mariner understand very well, but not the ‘talk radio’ type of fan.
Given that the outcome is about equal either way, the M’s would both save several millions of dollars in signing bonuses and get a substantially earlier return by trading Ichiro mid-season.
You won’t get a substantially earlier return. The guys who have paid off big in the trade route, Sizemore and Harang, took just as long to develop as the draft picks who paid off big, such as Wright, Swisher, and Street.
You can get a role player who might be able to help you next year, but you’re not getting a guy who can join the team in 2008 and be an above average player right away while also turning into a star down the road.
When I weigh that against an exclusive negotiating window with a player who I know isn’t coming back, the midseason trade comes out clearly ahead.
You don’t know he’s not coming back. The Mariners don’t know he’s not coming back. Ichiro doesn’t know he’s not coming back. You need to understand what you don’t know.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:13 am34. You know he isn’t coming back? Really? Cause I’d be willing to bet even Ichiro doesn’t know that yet.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:14 amSo, if Ichiro does walk, then does the money they would’ve spent on Ichiro go back into the overall pot, or do they eat most of that and recognize that this team w/o Ichiro will not be able to generate the revenue that it’s generated w/him (thereby allowing them to put a little more money into signing Ichiro)?
Or, in plain English: If the M’s budget, say, $20 million a year for 4-5 years to keep Ichiro around, and he signs elsewhere, would that $20 million be available to sign other players?
Probably the wrong time to ask this, but I’m curious how much that decision factors into what they’re going to do with Ichiro in 2007…
June 20th, 2007 at 11:15 amWell we do know Ichiro won’t be signing in Cleveland….
June 20th, 2007 at 11:16 am[quote]You need to understand what you don’t know.[/quote]
This is absolutely an essential point both for GMs and us fans.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:18 amIll hit the “buy a beer for the author” button if quicktags make a come back….
June 20th, 2007 at 11:20 amDave,
Is there a realistic trade possibility that you would do for Ichiro?
June 20th, 2007 at 11:22 amIf the all-dave-all-the-time posting spree hadn’t given it away, Derek’s basically out of the loop for the next 6 weeks, and I know nothing about site coding, so any requests like that are going on the shelf until August at the earliest.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:23 amIs there a realistic trade possibility that you would do for Ichiro?
No. I want to keep Ichiro.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:23 amI mean, if he came to you and said, “I won’t be back next year”, and you were faced with the choice presented in your post. I want him to stay as well, I am just curious as to what you think his value is outside of Seattle.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:25 amHello, I’ve lurked for a long time, but this is my first post.
What are the conditions that 51 will resign? It seems to me the team would have to be able to compete, therefore we need to upgrade the talent. The best way to do this is promote Jones and bench vidro and let Feierabend start in front of Weaver. However, both are unlikely to be done if Hargrove is managing. With Hargrove still at the helm Vidro and Weaver would have to be cut/dealt. While Weaver might get cut, it seems unlikely with Vidro.
Therefore the only way to improve the team is to fire Hargrove, which the FO wont do while there is a chance to stay in the race. So we need to lose games to get Grover fired but then we face the same problem. Ichiro doesn’t want to stay on a losing team.
If Ichiro walks, I think you can blame not firing Hargrove over the winter (along with bad trades over the winter).
June 20th, 2007 at 11:25 amI made this point yesterday, but I think it bears repeating: Ichiro has more value to Seattle than just about any team in baseball. Baseball value, not marketing value.
His hitting style produces similar numbers in a lot of parks. Given that The Safe is a tough place to hit in general, it means he produces more vcalue for the M’s than most other teams. Between that and the huge amount of outfield ground he covers (also important at Safeco, and doubly so with the flyball pitching staff) then Ichiro has more value to the M’s than most other clubs.
Given those constraints, then it is worth it for the M’s to offer more to keep Ichiro than other teams. The M’s would be smart to offer Ichiro the best offer on the market so as to accomodate his talent.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:26 amAt the risk of trying your patience, how about Ichiro for Manny or Arod (I know he’s not willing) type production in a rent-a-player/salary dump type transaction?
June 20th, 2007 at 11:27 amI mean, if he came to you and said, “I won’t be back next year”, and you were faced with the choice presented in your post. I want him to stay as well, I am just curious as to what you think his value is outside of Seattle.
I don’t think its as high as everyone thinks it is, and I don’t anticipate anyone putting together an offer that makes me think “yea, that’s better than two months of Ichiro, the chance that he changes his mind, and two high draft picks”.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:27 amNice research. I’m in the trade Ichiro camp but you’ve made me sway my opinion. I think you still trade him if the right deal is there. Call me crazy but I like the Dodger prospects (namely Kemp/Loney) in #15 or a Boston deal if we could pry John Lester away. Jacoby Ellsbury is their CF of the future but if they resign Ichiro, he could play RF, Drew to LF and they could finally trade Manny. Or if they fail to resign Ichiro then they get the picks.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:28 amAt the risk of trying your patience, how about Ichiro for Manny or Arod (I know he’s not willing) type production in a rent-a-player/salary dump type transaction?
Nope.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:29 amIf you can’t read the full list, but would like to, click “entries RSS” for a source view!
June 20th, 2007 at 11:34 amWhen I weigh that against an exclusive negotiating window with a player who I know isn’t coming back
You have astounding extrasensory powers. Shouldn’t you be using them to, I don’t know, pick stocks? Or find criminals?
June 20th, 2007 at 11:35 amand thanks, Dave, for keeping the site going, so that we can all get our fixes …
June 20th, 2007 at 11:36 amDave,
Excellent, detailed analysis, as always. I’d like to add a variable, though, to the equation; the M’s ability to judge talent vs. their ability to spend money. I think your conclusions make even more sense when you stop to consider how poorly they’ve done evaluating talent, either on the free-agent market or as part of a trade deal. Given that, I’d far rather have them try to overspend on a known player in Ichiro! than risk them trying to get some compensatory talent in a draft or trade.
If you’ve got a poor track record for bringing in good talent, why let good talent you have go? Okay, if he doesn’t sign and they’re forced into it, sure, but it’s still better IMHO to focus on keeping him rather than getting the most they can for him, now or later. Not their strong suit.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:47 amThe only way it’d be worth trading him is if the stars aligned just right. You’d need a contender, who needs a CF, who has a prospect or prosepects who are good enough for us to give Ichiro up for, who are also blocked by other players, who we have a need for and aren’t blocked, and for the team to be desperate enough to pull the trigger. I think Bavasi should listen to offers, but things would have to be JUST right to pull the trigger on a trade, and shouldn’t trade him jist to trade him. We need starting pitching, nobody is giving us enough major league ready starting pitching to make up for losing Ichiro, nor are they giving us any high ceiling/high projection guys. Also, you think our defense is bad now.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:53 amConspicuous by its absense is the Randy Johnson for Garcia and Guillen trade.
None the less including it does not invalidate your point.
Talent evaluation, free agents, own minor leaguers, for the draft is the critical element for this team or any team. Letting Jones sit in Tacoma, signing Vidro, letting Broussard rot, drafting Clement and Morrow and subsequent “handling” of their development does not speak well for this team going forward.
Do you think that their discernment is better around major league players or unsigned amateurs?
June 20th, 2007 at 11:57 am#57 Dave said:
I’d done some research on the issue of trade deadline deals a few years ago, but with the issue being relevant to the Mariners right now, I decided to update the data and look at the decisions made by organizations in similar situations over the past seven years.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:00 pmConspicuous by its absense is the Randy Johnson for Garcia and Guillen trade.
I only went back 7 years, because that’s how far Baseball America has compensatory selection information. I also didn’t include Mark McGwire for T.J. Matthews, Blake Stein, and Eric Ludwick either, not because I was trying to prove a point, but because I wanted to use data where I had apples-to-appples comparisons.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:00 pmis there a scenario where a big market team with a history of winning would trade for Ichiro having a strong belief that Ichiro will resign with them and become a fixture in their outfield for the next 5 years, and therefore give up an elite prospect for Ichiro?
Why would they have such a belief? Anyway, look at it from their point of view: They can do that trade, give up an elite prospect, and then pay whatever is necessary to resign him (which will turn into a bidding war). Or they can wait, hope Ichiro shows up on the market, and again pay whatever is necessary. Either way they pay through the nose at market rate; the only difference is that they give up an elite prospect merely to ensure that Ichiro actually ends up on the open market. Unless you assume they can sign a new contract with Ichiro in those couple of months he’s in their uniform, which seems unlikely to me — at that point, having cut ties with the M’s and having no particular loyalty to this new team, why would Ichiro not want to wait for the offseason to entertain other offers?
Now, the team does get 3 months of Ichiro so if they’re already in the hunt and they think that’s enough to take them to the WS, maybe it makes sense. But I’m not sure that’s even worth giving up a truly elite prospect, though there might be a GM who thinks it is — or who sees less value in that prospect than the M’s do. But now you’re in the game of assuming some other GM is less savvy than Bavasi when it comes to trades, which is not a bet a lot of people here would take.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:00 pmGreat analysis, Dave. Thanks.
My only concern with the “hold Ichiro, try to resign, or at least get draft picks” strategy is this: What if the M’s pull the “we can’t offer him Arbitration because he might accept it and we’d be screwed” bs? Bone-headed, I know, but I can’t label anything as “too dumb” for the current braintrust.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:01 pm#61, they’re gonna offer him arbitration because they’re gonna try to re-sign him, and even if they weren’t, they’d still offer him arbitration, because of the draft picks. I suspect the FO is getting a blank check to keep him.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:07 pm#62 - I agree, but I bet that he’d be more interested in a blank FO than an blank check.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:13 pmWould a team trading for Ichiro get the draft picks if he walked at the end of the year? If so, that should make him more valuable to a contender.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:13 pmWould a team trading for Ichiro get the draft picks if he walked at the end of the year? If so, that should make him more valuable to a contender.
Right - Billy Beane’s been exploiting this hole in the system for years, flipping prospects for free-agents-to-be, then letting the free agents walk and restocking his system with prospects acquired by the draft picks that he got for losing the free agents. See Johnny Damon, Ray Durham, and Keith Foulke.
However, history clearly shows that teams are still not willing to part with enough talent in trade to make it worthwhile to deal Ichiro.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:17 pm62 - yes, it would be completely idiotic to not offer arbitration. However, I have yet to see someting too idiotic for the current FO. Thus, what is the chance that they are dumb enough to do it?
(ie, I agree with Dave that we *should* keep him, I just worry about the “they’re gonna offer” assumption…)
June 20th, 2007 at 12:19 pmWow, I wish we had Billy Beane!
That actually makes me think that at least a few contending teams, especially big payroll teams who hope they could sign Ichiro during end of the season or the exclusive period, will probably put together some pretty tempting proposals if we keep losing. Even if we never hear about them.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:20 pmIt’s not an assumption - it’s a mortal lock.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:21 pm[nitpick]
June 20th, 2007 at 12:21 pmThe Freddy Garcia trade was on June 27th, I remember because it was my birthday.
[/nitpick]
That actually makes me think that at least a few contending teams, especially big payroll teams who hope they could sign Ichiro during end of the season or the exclusive period, will probably put together some pretty tempting proposals if we keep losing. Even if we never hear about them.
I’m not sure why you’re willing to ignore the fact that no one did this with Alfonso Soriano last year.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:22 pmDo we know that teams didn’t put together packages with top prospects for Soriano?
June 20th, 2007 at 12:24 pmDave, how about Ichiro for- LOL, I’m just kidding.
I’m glad you wrote this, as while the external factors that give Ichiro value over other top OFers has been made clear, people didn’t quite realize that keeping Ichiro with the risk of letting him walk also makes sense from an on-the-field team-building standpoint… countering the big misconception people have about trading Ichiro (that it’ll net more talent).
And even now, after you have outlined to the letter why trading Ichiro is not the best move for the team from a baseball standpoint, people are still arguing the point with you. Some of your readers are ridiculously stubborn (yes, I have enough self-awareness to realize that I probably fit with that group). But any retort at this point is a rehash of points you’ve already made. You’re dead on.
Excellent piece in what’s been a week and change of excellent pieces. Keep up the great work.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:24 pmDo we know that teams didn’t put together packages with top prospects for Soriano?
Yes. From an interview with Stan Kasten, the Nationals president:
June 20th, 2007 at 12:25 pmThat is strange then, although I don’t know how you could know that. I just don’t get why at least one big market GM doesn’t understand your analysis today from the opposite side of the fence
June 20th, 2007 at 12:29 pmThe two appearances of the Ms in these tables are kind of sad (draft picks for A-Rod, return for Freddy Garcia).
June 20th, 2007 at 12:29 pmSomebody remind me: the A’s got a pick for Zito, right?
June 20th, 2007 at 12:30 pmYep. The A’s get picks for everybody. They got the 41st and 74th picks in this years draft as compensation for losing Zito.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:31 pmThere was nothing wrong with the Freddy trade. We might have gotten better return letting him walk, but we got two high upside guys for him, and his value was way less than Ichiro’s. Those draft picks were awful.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:33 pmThe Garcia trade was a good deal gone bad. In a lot of respects, its kind of the opposite of the Beltran deal, where the Royals got a couple of marginal prospects who have turned out better than anyone expected at the time. That was a bad deal turned good.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:35 pmTo restate what many, many others have said:
Your posts over the past week or so have been really amazing Dave. M’s fans may not be happy with the team on the field, but between you, DMZ, Jeff Sullivan, and, now, Geoff Baker, I have a hard time believing any other fanbase has a greater wealth of quality writing and analysis than ours.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:36 pmWow. This is why I keep coming back to this site. Why is history such a mystery to so many when some digging and analysis results in a revelation like this? Excellent!
Keep Ichiro.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:36 pmI wasn’t critizising the trade, just lamenting the result.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:39 pmDave,
You said in your post that you’re making the comparison to players that were unlikely to re-sign with their then current teams. Is that too strong a qualifier given your stance that we don’t know what Ichiro is going to do? That is, do you now think his re-signing is unlikely? Or were you using that as an easy way to filter the other players?
Also, will we see a future post on what you think the M’s ought to do to improve the team this year, or would you just ride it out with who we have (seeing that there are very few with trade value whom we don’t want to see in our uniform next year)?
Also also, how big of an issue is the M’s manager to Ichiro, in your opinion? If it’s significant and Hargrove gets axed, how much input do you see Ichiro having in that hire?
June 20th, 2007 at 12:51 pmThat was great analysis Dave. Keep up the good work!
June 20th, 2007 at 12:51 pmA fantastic research piece, and satisfies my three conditions:
- takes alot of effort to do,
- gives you great insight,
- is presented in a clear manner.
Can’t ask for more.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:55 pmYou said in your post that you’re making the comparison to players that were unlikely to re-sign with their then current teams. Is that too strong a qualifier given your stance that we don’t know what Ichiro is going to do? That is, do you now think his re-signing is unlikely? Or were you using that as an easy way to filter the other players?
Well, the concept behind this post was to create an historical comparison between free agent compensation and prospects received in trades. Looking at guys who weren’t traded, re-signed with their orginal clubs, and didn’t fetch any compensation wouldn’t have done us much good.
I have no idea what Ichiro is going to do. I don’t think anyone does.
Also, will we see a future post on what you think the M’s ought to do to improve the team this year, or would you just ride it out with who we have (seeing that there are very few with trade value whom we don’t want to see in our uniform next year)?
I did that on Monday - callup Adam Jones, give Feierabend a spot in the rotation, and take Morrow out of high leverage relief situations.
Also also, how big of an issue is the M’s manager to Ichiro, in your opinion? If it’s significant and Hargrove gets axed, how much input do you see Ichiro having in that hire?
I don’t know. I think people read way too much into Ichiro’s bizarre quotes about his feelings for Hargrove, including putting their own personal feelings onto him because they like Ichiro and want to believe that he thinks like they do.
I have no idea what he thinks of Hargrove, or, really, anything. He’s a strange dude from another culture who speaks a different language, and a guy I’ve never had any personal interaction with. I’m not sure why any of us feel we’re qualified to speculate on his opinions on just about anything.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:56 pmThe next six weeks will be a good test of the “teams don’t trade their versions of Adam Jones” theory.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:59 pmI’ll be stunned if we see Philip Hughes going anywhere.
June 20th, 2007 at 1:01 pmWhy do I have an irrational fear that the M’s will be the ones to trade their version of Adam Jones, who, of course, is Adam Jones? I pray that this is only my irrational mind at work.
June 20th, 2007 at 1:04 pmI think another argument against trading Ichiro is that the idea that he is overrated has become so firmly entrenched, he is in fact underrated. Even in normal circumstances, we would be unlikely to get adequate return for him. When you compound that with the unadvantageous circumstances and the fact that he’s more valuable in Safeco than he would be just about anywhere else, it adds up to a recipe for a terrible trade.
June 20th, 2007 at 1:04 pmthe rumoring last July in the papers was that Bowden had asked for the moon, and that no one would give it to him:
“Bowden, who negotiated with the Angels, the Astros, the Florida Marlins, the Seattle Mariners and other teams, remained firm about the hefty price tag.”
“He had a price in mind, at least two top prospects, and he never relented. He went right down to the wire with the Twins, but they wouldn’t part with Matt Garza, the hard-throwing prospect who’s knocking on the door at Triple A. There was even talk he was holding out for Ichiro Suzuki with the Mariners, who were in it until the final moments before the deadline.”
“The Nationals originally asked for one of the Angels’ top young pitchers, Ervin Santana or Jered Weaver, and one of their top two position prospects, Howie Kendrick or Brandon Wood, but were quickly rejected.”
June 20th, 2007 at 1:07 pmAnd another thing: Ichiro’s age will work against our getting fair value, though he is in fact the type of player likely to age very well.
June 20th, 2007 at 1:09 pmBowden made the right move. There’s no reason to settle for less than two good prospects if you’re going to get two high draft picks by not moving him. The “trade him or get nothing” mindset leads to things like Kenny Williams turning Ray Durham into Jon Adkins.
June 20th, 2007 at 1:14 pmmsb: any stuff about what the Nationals were offered and turned down?
June 20th, 2007 at 1:16 pm#92 — You are ablsolutely correct. I hear this all the time from Spokane sports guy Dennis Patchin. There is no evidence that “speed” players deteriorate faster than “power” guys, but such a notion has become so common place that people repeat it again and again.
June 20th, 2007 at 1:16 pmIt seems like there’s an inefficiency in the market, here. Billy Beane has successfully flipped prospects for vets, and then let the vets walk for draft picks. If that’s the case, then one would think that the value of a rent-a-player would rise to include the cost of the draft picks.
In other words: I think teams may have tightened up too much in what they’re willing to give for a rent-a-player. I forsee, in the near future, teams lightening up a little and being willing to spend a little more in prospects to rent a vet for three months knowing that the draft picks will help compensate.
Not this year, though. It’ll take a couple years for that notion to sink in. And I don’t think we’ll ever return to the glory days of Buhner for Phelps, or Bagwell for Andersen.
June 20th, 2007 at 1:26 pmI think the trade for Freddie Garcia was great but but a top 3 prospect in the game didn’t pan out. If we could get a top 40 prospect in the game I would deal Ichiro. What would you rather have the 20th or so pick or a top prospect who could help us by 2009. 2009 is the year we could win a title if we are smart with ichirio.
starters;Felix, Washburn, Canada, Feirbrand,
pen:morrow, putz
outfield:Jones, Balentin
infield:Current
DH:Clement
It could happen but wee need another pitcher hmm heilman, jon lester, billingsly, sowers or some other young pitcher
June 20th, 2007 at 1:28 pmI think the trade for Freddie Garcia was great but but a top 3 prospect in the game didn’t pan out.
Jeremy Reed was never a top 3 prospect in the game. Baseball Prospectus stuck him there because they sucked at prospect evaluation.
June 20th, 2007 at 1:29 pmDave, living in New York both Mets and Yankees fans are aware of the talent of Ichiro both as a true leadoff hitter and someone who can play D better then Damon or Shawn Green. We must trade Ichiro to a New York team and get some kids in return. Seattle stinks and Bravsi is awful. I am rooting for them to loose. Just hoping Felix pitches and Clement continues to hit.
June 20th, 2007 at 1:35 pm99: To reiterate my point above, if you think Bavasi sucks, WHY would you to see him try to trade Ichiro? That’s SUICIDE.
June 20th, 2007 at 1:38 pmWfan,
If you want anyone to take you seriously, you might want to work on your spelling and punctuation.
June 20th, 2007 at 1:40 pmDave,
June 20th, 2007 at 1:48 pmHow does the determination of what type of free agent (A or B) take place? Only A and B agents get picks as comp, correct?
The Elias Sports Bureau has a pretty worthless formula that they use that is based on a two year performance average that slants heavily towards playing time. Basically, if you’re any good at all and you stay healthy two years in a row while playing everyday, you’re probably a Type A free agent. If you’re only a mediocre player and you avoid any major injuries, you’ll be a Type B free agent.
Type A free agents give you two draft picks - a 1st rounder if the signing team is selecting no higher than 16th (their 2nd rounder if they pick #1-#15) and a compensation pick in the supplemental round. Type B free agents only give you the supplemental round selection.
Once the M’s do determine that they’re out of it, for instance, Jose Guillen should be traded, as his miserable 2006 season could easily make him a Type C free agent. He’s going to have to hit really well this year to get into the Type B class.
June 20th, 2007 at 1:50 pmDave, ESPN.com has this up today in an article about great outfield arms:
“Although Ichiro is well above average in center field, he no longer casts the same shadow over a game defensively. And while his arm is still top-notch, he doesn’t generate nearly as many “oohs” and “ahhs” as he did in right.”
Curious to know what you think about that.
June 20th, 2007 at 1:51 pmHey Dave, just saw the Stan Kasten post follow up, thanks! Still frustrating that we don’t know what “nothing” they turned down, but oh well.
Also, if there is one troubling thing there, it’s when baseball people talk about untradeable draft picks like Kasten did. It’s as if he feels that the sum of having 5 picks is somehow greater than the individual picks themselves. If they had made a trade, he could also have said “we have 3 top draft picks and 2 good prospects drafted recently by another organization” and it would be just as valuable (depending of course on who those prospects were).
June 20th, 2007 at 1:51 pmIchiro’s arm has always been overrated. I think the aura of “The Throw” that nailed Terrance Long is finally wearing off.
June 20th, 2007 at 1:52 pm+You don’t know he’s not coming back. The Mariners don’t know he’s not coming back. Ichiro doesn’t know he’s not coming back. You need to understand what you don’t know.+
Okay. Good point. I have felt since the beginning of this year that Ichiro was strongly implying he wouldn’t be back. If there’s a real chance of keeping him, my original point is largely invalid.
I also misunderstood, thinking the traded prospects in midseason trades were further along than players just drafted. (I thought at least a year closer to realizing their potential, because they aren’t eligible to be traded for that long.)
The M’s are paying an extra $5 million or so in Ichiro’s salary plus an extra $2-4 million in signing bonuses for prospects drafted rather than traded for. If that money was definitely going to be dedicated to making the team more competitive on the field (it wouldn’t) and one were 90% sure that Ichiro wouldn’t come back for what the M’s are going to offer (about right), then trading him at the deadline would have been the right move.
June 20th, 2007 at 1:53 pmSo, by letting Ichiro stay, and you know the Mariners will continue ot play Ibanez and Guillen in the OF, what about trading him just to get Jones into the bigs and into the everyday line up to be ready for next season?
June 20th, 2007 at 1:56 pmDave this is just a fantastic post. The best I’ve ever seen from you and one of (if not the) best that I’ve seen on any blog. Thanks a lot. Kudos to exposing the trade-Ichiro contingent as a bunch of misguided folks.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:01 pmIf they keep Ichiro and fall out of the race, Jose Guillen’s a goner. With he and Balentien on the horizen, the team won’t be interested in exercising his $9 million option for 2008, making him a decently attractive asset for someone else. With Guillen off the roster, at-bats for Jones would be easy to find.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:06 pm109: Yes, it is a fantastic post, but I don’t think it is fair to say that the trade-Ichiro contingent is misguided.
I totally buy all of Dave’s analysis, but I still would trade him if the M’s fall out of it and if it was the right offer (such as what Bowden demanded). And there is no way to judge a hypothetical offer for Ichiro until it is made, whereas we can pretty easily approximate the value of Ichiro and draft picks right now.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:08 pmThanks for doing all of this work, Dave. Your last two long coffee-sized posts have been much appreciated in fact.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:08 pmSo, by letting Ichiro stay, and you know the Mariners will continue ot play Ibanez and Guillen in the OF, what about trading him just to get Jones into the bigs and into the everyday line up to be ready for next season?
What about trading Guillen (for whatever you can get) just to get Jones into the bigs?
June 20th, 2007 at 2:08 pmIf they keep Ichiro and fall out of the race, Jose Guillen’s a goner.
How do you think the organization defines “out of the race”?
June 20th, 2007 at 2:09 pmDave-
The general consensus seems to be (true or not) that it’s harder to trade Ichico-type players now because you’re not getting value — teams don’t want to give up two or more top prospects for a guy they may only have for two months.
But based on the data that you provided, wouldn’t it make sense for a team with a deep farm system to aggressively seek out that kind of trade? Wouldn’t a team like the Dodgers, Red Sox or Angels be well-served by trading a couple of good but blocked prospects for a guy who they see as a difference-maker who’s a pending free agent? That seems like it would be a low-risk move with a high potential payoff — you’re trading two good prospects for two draft picks that (if you do your job right) will also be two good prospects, plus you get the player for the stretch run.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:11 pmThe Angels massively overvalue their own prospects, so I doubt they would ever pursue that type of deal. At least not with Stoneman around.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:13 pmDave, ESPN.com has this up today in an article about great outfield arms:
“Although Ichiro is well above average in center field, he no longer casts the same shadow over a game defensively. And while his arm is still top-notch, he doesn’t generate nearly as many “oohs” and “ahhs” as he did in right.”
I’d like to know how ESPN came to that conclusion. According to my figures, Ichiro still has one of the highest OohsAhhs Over Replacement Player value in the American League.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:16 pmDefinitely not par for the course, but there’s always A.J. Pierzynski for Joe Nathan, Francisco Liriano, and Boof Bonser.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:17 pm118: Yep. That’s why you have to wait and see before summarily rejecting the trade idea. I just have a strange feeling that NYY and Boston will both be calling, and Bavasi will be able to play them off of each other if we wants to.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:20 pmLetting Ichiro for nothing and ending up with just the draft picks,Trading Ichiro and getting prospects and maybe a young SP etc…….are at best nothing but lesser of two evils.
Only good option is to quit mucking about and resign the guy for say 3 yrs and 60 mil if that’s what it’ll take.Fire Hargrove and Bavasi then make every effort to recoup the pen and correct the rotation.
If Ichiro leaves Seattle wheither via July deadline trade or via FA after the season and in my mind if he doesn’t resign by July 15th he gone for sure which method is mute.
The M’s will lose the one player who actually to a large extent help to pay his salary by the # of fans he bring to Safecoand fans who come to see Ichiro play not the M’s.
I have asbolutely no doult that if Ichiro leaves Seattle.I can safely predict a reduction of attendance and revenues of no less than 40% next season and season ticket sales down 30% with a 25% cancellation of renewals of same.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:24 pmThinking that Boston will be calling is a very strange feeling indeed, given that they’re the best team in baseball and any dealing they need to do will be from strength. If we make a trade with Boston, we’ll get hosed.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:26 pmwell yeah, but this is more of a worst case scenario post. Ideally he’d re-sign yesterday.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:26 pm121: If you don’t think the Sox hear footsteps right now you are kidding yourself.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:27 pmcan u tell me why the teams are getting 2 draft picks? i thought they only recieve 1 for loosing an A-Type player?
June 20th, 2007 at 2:33 pmGreg08,
I’ll be corrected if I’m wrong, but you receive the team’s that signed him unprotected pick, plus a supplemental pick. If the team’s pick is protected you get two supplemental picks.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:36 pmDefinitely not par for the course, but there’s always A.J. Pierzynski for Joe Nathan, Francisco Liriano, and Boof Bonser.
At the time of the deal, Liriano was still battling arm problems, Nathan was a failed starter, and Bonser was a back-end rotation guy.
Just like the Beltran deal for the Royals, everything went completely in the Twins favor, but if a team called the Mariners and offered a broken down A-ball prospect, a failed starter, and another Cha Seung Baek, would you get excited?
Despite Mr. Slider’s desire to believe that it happens, teams just don’t offer the kinds of packages he wants in return for Ichiro.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:37 pmwfan’s spelling troubles have been contagious
June 20th, 2007 at 2:38 pmOne of the best, most insightful and informative articles I’ve read in years, Dave. I’ll be quoting from it liberally in the near future. Terrific stuff.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:38 pmI do not in fact believe the Red Sox hear footsteps. The fans and media, sure; a few of the players, maybe; the front office, no way.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:40 pmBut based on the data that you provided, wouldn’t it make sense for a team with a deep farm system to aggressively seek out that kind of trade?
Yep - if the Mariners hadn’t gotten owned by the NL central the last week and had kept themselves in the playoff race, I’d have been on board for sending a couple of guys like Balentien, Clement, and Feierabend to Chicago for Mark Buehrle.
Now, it’s not worth exploring, but a team like the A’s would do well to offer a couple of good young players to Kenny Williams for Buehrle with no intention of re-signing him this winter, taking the value he provides for the stretch run, and pocketing the draft picks for next summer.
And, honestly, I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s exactly what Beane does.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:41 pmDave, doesn’t your own article suggest that teams sometimes (but infreaquently) DO offer such packages? How highly were guys like Sizemore, Phillips and Lee rated when they were traded? Or the guys the Royals got for Beltran?
June 20th, 2007 at 2:52 pm93MPH,
Dave already said that those guys weren’t that highly thought of at the time. None were considered can’t miss big leaguers.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:55 pmaha, sorry i missed that.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:56 pmAs noted in the post, the Colon trade was a massive exception to the rule - the Expos were going out of business, Omar Minaya knew that he wasn’t going to keep that job, and he had no desire to protect the future of a franchise that might not even exist at the end of the season. That trade isn’t any kind of real basis for comparison.
And, as noted multiple times throughout the comments, Teahen and Buck were mediocre prospects who have developed far better than expected at the time of the deal. If the Mariners made an equivalent deal of Ichiro for prospects of Teahen/Buck type, you’d see people in an outrage.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:57 pmSlider:
No, this article doesn’t suggest what you suggest it suggests:
“…there’s a giant asterisk next to the Colon trade, as it was made by a franchise that was literally making moves trying to keep themselves in existence…The circumstances that caused the Indians to receive a king’s ransom for Colon aren’t in play this year, and probably won’t be ever again.”
“…its kind of the opposite of the Beltran deal, where the Royals got a couple of marginal prospects who have turned out better than anyone expected at the time.”
June 20th, 2007 at 2:59 pmOk, thanks. I still think you underestimate what the AL East big boys might offer for him. But I hope you are completely correct and he stays all year.
June 20th, 2007 at 3:01 pm135: see 133
June 20th, 2007 at 3:02 pmYou think that history is wrong and your wishes are true? What is anyone supposed to say to that?
June 20th, 2007 at 3:03 pm“your wishes”.
sigh
June 20th, 2007 at 3:04 pmRegarding draft picks under the new CBA, the team that loses a Type A free agent receives a supplemental 1st round pick and either the signing team’s 1st round pick (if no. 16-30) or its 2nd round pick (if no. 1-15). For Type B, the signing team receives only a supplemental 1st round pick.
June 20th, 2007 at 3:07 pmAt what point are players designated with their “Type”?
June 20th, 2007 at 3:11 pm