Comments on: Letting Ichiro Leave For Nothing

By: DAMellen

DAMellen — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 09:45:36 +0000

Not to say I didn’t like this article. This is actually by far the most compelling argument to keep Ichiro that I’ve heard this season, but I think you left out an important detail. Most draft picks are still going to be a long way from being major league ready. Double and Triple A players are going to be more like a year or two away. I think that’s another reason Ichiro should go.

By: hw1933

hw1933 — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 19:29:14 +0000

To follow up on NTN’s comment the Brewer bullpen at the time of the trade was in complete meltdown. Derrick Turnbow had imploded beyond belief and literally EVERY reliever was suffering from a combination of gopherballitis and walkatosis. Feel free to wander through the game logs in 2006 and see the myriad of ways the Crew was losing games thanks to train wreck of a bullpen. Melvin needed somebody to try and bring some order to a chaotic situation. he GM was trying to salvage the 2006 season not to compete for the division that season but to at least get enough calm for the team to see who might help them in 2007. The bullpen disaster was a total distraction to the team-building exercise. That Cordero has actually excelled long-term (if a year is long-term) is a legit bonus. And I think anyone has to agree that the Brewers are a team looking to win “now” versus 3 years from now. Cordero appears to be helping that effort. So while I disagreed with the trade at the time I understood it.

Also, wasn’t there talk about the compensatory draft picks going away? I thought Melvin mentioned that as an element of the trade when interviewed. Though I could be wrong about the timing…….

By: joser

joser — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 11:02:01 +0000

Something that struck me while watching the Pirates play the M’s tonight: the Pirates have no stars. None.

The M’s have Ichiro. Before that they had ARod, and before that Griffey, and Johnson (and there was Buhner and always Edgar too, of course). Before that, it was the 80s, and the Mariners looked like today’s Pirates. No stars, nobody special. And nobody watched. If the M’s let Ichiro go, who is the M’s? Ibanez? Please. If their multi-hit wonder goes off to greener pastures, and without a star-to-be waiting in the minors, this team is the 80s M’s again. The team that turned me off baseball for a decade.

By: Typical Idiot Fan

Typical Idiot Fan — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 09:43:32 +0000

I find it fascinating that Mariner fans don’t use Alex Rodriguez for justification for trading Ichiro Suzuki. The NET compensation for Alex as of today is Rene Rivera. Period. (for the unenlightened, Garciaparra was claimed off waivers by Philly)

For the unenlightened, that draft was done by incompetant idiots. Also, he was a big contribution to our making the postseason that year. You don’t trade away hall of fame talent when you’re in contention. That’s just stupid.

By: BLYKMYK44

BLYKMYK44 — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 07:24:06 +0000

So…does that mean that the reverse argument would work out as well? We should trade our prospects to try and get as many of the star players as possible??

By: Tim

Tim — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 06:48:18 +0000

Dave,

I’m not sure I buy this analysis. The conclusions you reach are based on a very small sample size. Most of the results of these trades could be just as well attributed to luck. I don’t think you can look at the outcomes to deterimine if the trade was good or not…or help make a decision on if the Mariners should trade Ichiro.

The real measure is what type of prospect you are getting versus the compensation picks. If you can get a top 100-150 prospect for Ichiro, what is the likelihood of this type of player over the years to become an impact player? On the flip side, what is the liklihood a 30 or 40 pick will turn into an impact player? I have no idea what the results of said analysis would be, but I think this approach would be much superior than looking at such a small sample. Thoughts?

By: NTNgod

NTNgod — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 05:55:27 +0000

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.

Most likely, the Brewers will have traded away a half-season of Lee and two 2007 picks, in exchange for a season and a half of Cordero and two 2008 picks.

By: Oly Rainiers Fan

Oly Rainiers Fan — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 05:37:31 +0000

As an addendum to above post, we have poster children. If Morrow never becomes a legit starter, which is what was allegedly the intention when drafting him, it doesn’t mean he wouldn’t have were he drafted by, oh, the Giants, who chose a different strategy of player development for Lincecum.

Also, while Jones has responded well to being aggressively promoted through the minors, Clement has stalled, and Tui actually may have suffered from that philosophy. Drafted players (and international signings) are highly dependent on the player development philosophies of their drafting/signing team. The As are on the list for ‘let the free agent walk’ a lot, but they also have a VERY good farm system that’s good at pumping out players with skill sets that the parent club wants (like good .OBP). Does that not skew the data?

By: Oly Rainiers Fan

Oly Rainiers Fan — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 05:33:12 +0000

Didn’t Ichiro already turn down 3 years/50 mill? This possible factoid is lodged in my brain and I can’t remember how it got there.

Also, while it is interesting work (the initial post), it’s also highly subjective to other influences. whenever you’re talking about player development (which you are, when you’re talking about draft picks, because they don’t go straight to the majors but need time to develop), you’re introducing variables.

In either a trade or draft scenario, you’re relying on your organization’s ability to accurately assess talent. But in a draft scenario, you’re also relying on your organization’s ability to successfully develop that talent.

By: jullberg

jullberg — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 05:06:43 +0000

This is certainly interesting. At first glimpse I was very much willing to jump ship, changing from a “TRADE ICHIRO” to a “KEEP ICHIRO”. The success of compensation picks is something I assumed was much lower than what this shows. Then I noticed that out of the seven guys who are contributors at the major league level right now, 6 of those seven were drafted by the Mets or the A’s. Even if you include the elite prospects, the rate of success for teams that are not the A’s or Mets is pretty darn low. If a guy like Beane or Minaya were running our team, I would have no problem trying to retain Ichiro and getting the picks if we couldn’t resign him, however I think that either way we are screwed. As long as Bavasi is GM, I have no faith in either option because he will either trade away for guys who won’t succeed, or he’ll draft guys who won’t succeed. Either way I think we are screwed. So instead of becoming a huge bandwagoner for either camp, my new bandwagon is the “FIRE BAVASI” wagon. Let’s get a GM with a brain and then we can talk about Ichiro being traded or not.