Mark Buehrle
The will-he-or-won’t-he saga of Mark Buehrle being traded appears about ready to end. The White Sox refusal to give him a no-trade clause in return for signing a vastly below market contract has reportedly killed the chances of Buehrle re-signing with Chicago. The impasse makes it likely that GM Kenny Williams will move Buehrle at some point after tonight’s game, and probably very soon. He likes to make deals quickly, and he won’t hesitate to pull the trigger on a trade if he’s offered the players in return he is looking for.
Buehrle won’t come cheaply. The White Sox reportedly want 22-year-old outfielder Matt Kemp in any deal with the Dodgers, and to put that in Mariner terms, Kemp is essentially Adam Jones with less defensive value, or a somewhat better version of Wladimir Balentien. Balentien’s performance in the PCL this year matches that of Kemp’s, but he doesn’t have the same track record of success or raw athletic skills.
So, if the Mariners were to get into the Mark Buehrle sweepstakes while not trading Adam Jones (the White Sox would almost certainly make that one-for-one trade immediately, but the M’s are pretty much dead set against trading Jones), they’re looking at giving up a multi-prospect package that certainly include Balentien. Depending on who else the White Sox were interested in, you’re probably looking at having to include one or two of Jeff Clement, Ryan Feierabend, Justin Thomas, Chris Tillman, Rob Johnson, or Greg Halman as well.
So, my guess is that the cost for Mark Buehrle would be something like one of the following packages:
Wladimir Balentien and Jeff Clement
Wladimir Balentien, Ryan Feierabend, and Rob Johnson
Wladimir Balentien, Chris Tillman, and Greg Halman
The specific names aren’t going to be right, as I’m speculating on what the offers are, and haven’t heard any specific rumors of a Mariner package going to Chicago. The point is to try to give you an idea of what the cost would be.
So, now, the big question - is he worth it?
First, let’s do away with the myth that Mark Buerhle isn’t a frontline starting pitcher. He clearly is. His command is impeccable, and he throws strikes with average to above average stuff. He’s not a guy who is just throwing hittable pitches over the plate and hoping that batters get themselves out. His stuff is legitimate, major league quality. He doesn’t strikeout as many guys as the typical Cy Young winners, but he’s not Horacio Ramirez. Command and movement are valuable weapons, and Buehrle has both in spades.
After a poor season last year, he’s bounced back quite well, posting numbers right in line with his usual performance from his career marks. He’s not quite as good as his current ERA would have you believe, but his 4.16 xFIP is still well above average, and a full run better than the xFIPs being posted by Miguel Batista (5.03), Jarrod Washburn (5.07), Jeff Weaver (5.13), or Ryan Feierabend (5.59).
Mark Buehrle would become an instant significant upgrade in the rotation. His skillset is perfectly matched for Safeco Field’s dimensions, as he’s an LHP with a slight home run problem. He’s extremely durable and is among the lowest risk tier of pitcher you can possibly find. A potential rotation of Buehrle-Felix-Washburn-Batista, when combined with the Mariners bullpen, is good enough to give the team a legitimate chance of winning a playoff series.
The main sticking point for most people is the contract. He’s a free agent at years-end, and numerous reports have him stating a strong desire to pitch in St. Louis, where he grew up. Odds are pretty good that Mark Buehrle would simply be a three month rental, bolting for another team this winter. You know what? Not only am I okay with that, but I actually prefer that. As I showed a few weeks ago, the rate of return from players taken with compensatory draft picks is essentially equal to that of players traded in rent-a-player deals, while the rate of return of pitchers given long term contracts is disastrously horrible.
The Mariners wouldn’t be trading a package of prospects for three months of Mark Buehrle. The Mariners would be trading a package of prospects for three months of Mark Buehrle and another package of prospects. Yes, you push the timetable for the return back a year or two, as no one the Mariners would draft next summer will be major league ready as quickly as a guy like Balentien or Feierabend. But you cannot ignore the significant value returned by the compensation picks. Deals like this are not mortgaging the future - it’s more like a home equity line of credit. You’re borrowing from the future, but you’re paying the debt off very quickly.
Mark Buehrle makes the Mariners better in a hurry. Good enough to catch Detroit for the wild card? I don’t know. Detroit’s an awfully good team. But Buerhle gives the Mariners a real shot. He makes the Mariners legitimate contenders. Mark Buehrle makes the second half of the season a playoff race.
The team has won 8 in a row. They essentially eliminated the Blue Jays from playoff contention this weekend, and now they head to Kansas City and Oakland with a chance to head into the all-star break on a significant high. The team has earned the right to fight for a playoff spot. Let’s hope the Mariners are able to make a move for the only pitcher available this summer who resembles anything like reinforcements.
I was hoping you would make a post about this. I had been making the argument to friends who would listen the last few weeks that you might as well buy at the deadline after reading your analysis of deadline deals.
I would do anyone of those three deals in a heartbeat. Unless, of course, Al Martin is available.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:09 amThe key is to buy the right thing. Mark Buehrle’s about the only guy that is going to be available this summer that I have any real interest in. This isn’t a post encouraging the M’s to thrust themselves into the bidding for marginal players like Matt Morris and his unwanted contract.
But Buehrle’s the guy who makes sense. The lack of long term financial commitment, his durability, his quality, and his fit for the team’s weakness and ballpark make him the guy to go after.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:14 amHi Dave, thanks for the post. Nothing like moving forward from yesterday’s events and focusing on the immediate future. I’ve been out of the loop, but have you heard of any specific interests the M’s have for upgrades going into the ASB? We might all agree that Buehrle would be good, but is that the only pan in the fire that might actually come about?
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:15 amAlso, with contract inflation running rampant for pitching, trading for Buerhle isn’t going to break the M’s real budget — around $4M for the rest of the year.
This is still a terrible team built on an old hitter, poor starting pitching, and an overachieving bullpen. They won’t have a shot next year. If they can swing something for Buerhle, might as well go for it.
Of course, there are a lot of pitchers out there better than the M’s 3-4-5 pitchers. Dontrelle Willis may be losing it, but he’s still better than HoRam.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:17 amDave, do you think we could toss in someone from our current roster to help the deal?
Otherwise it seems like Clement may be the one to lose, if he ends up being a 1B/DH type. It’s not like we have a shortage of those.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:20 amIf you think this team is terrible, I don’t know what to tell you. They just swept the Red Sox and Blue Jays - they’re 12 games over .500, have a positive run differential, and they’re doing it without anything resembling Good Felix.
They’re the 5th or 6th best team in the American League. By that standard, there are about 23 or 24 terrible teams in baseball.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:21 amThe real question is whether the demand for Buehrle will be great enough that the Sox can hold out for Adam Jones or deal him elsewhere for a better package than the M’s can otherwise offer.
I would do any of those non-Jones deals, but I don’t know that Kenny Williams would. I would think he’s want someone who’s more of a sure thing than Balentin as the centerpiece, or at least someone who won’t be out of options next spring — unless his scouts really like Clement and feel like he’ll wind up justifying his high draft pick.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:23 amWe might all agree that Buehrle would be good, but is that the only pan in the fire that might actually come about?
Adam Jones will be a Mariner before too long, and beyond that, I don’t see them doing much with the position players. Mark Lowe heads to Tacoma to begin his rehab assignment tomorrow, and if he shows that his arm strength is back, he could re-join the team in a couple of weeks.
Beyond Buehrle, I think most of the M’s upgrades will come from within.
Dave, do you think we could toss in someone from our current roster to help the deal?
Well, Feierabend’s on the current roster. But if you’re hoping to include someone like Broussard or Guillen or something, no, those aren’t the kinds of guys Kenny Williams is going to want in return.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:23 amDave, do you have short list of “second” tier players that you would make a move for. A player that would also be low risk, and cost little.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:24 amThanks Dave. I agree that Buehrle is the only SP worth pursuing. I hope that the M’s don’t panic and make some bad move for a Matt Morris (or possibly worse) just to make a move. Making a move that would both fail to improve this year’s team while simultaneously damaging the chances of future teams would be a real buzzkill.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:36 amBuehrle would be a perfect fit in Seattle…It would be a wonderfull pick up. If Balantien was our only of prospect it might give me pause, but with A. Jones waiting in the wings I have no hesitation..Pull the trigger. Buehrle is built for Safeco.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:37 amOh, I forgot to ask. Would Williams be interested in any of the M’s plethora of decent young relievers currently on the 25 man? If Lowe and/or Reitsma come back and pitch effectively, Green, who has had a nice season, could be part of a package as well.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:38 amIf you think this team is terrible, I don’t know what to tell you.
I think this team is being driven by an all-league CF in a contract year, a really streaky 1B, and the bullpen. And this win streak has come during WFB’s best week since he first came up from Tacoma.
There’s no consistency, except in the pen and CF. This is a .500 club that’s way overachieving.
I want to believe. I just can’t.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:43 amThanks for the post Dave. That is exactly what I wanted to hear.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:43 amDw…What kind of miserable world are you living in? How dare you call this team terrible have you watched them play this year? Who is a terrible player on the team? They have a solid lineup 1-9, the best pen in the game, and a pitching staff that is hot right now. Why bother being a fan if you consider this team “terrible.” They might not be the best team ever assembled, but they are a heck of a team after the sixth inning and are very fun to watch.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:44 amProblem is, if Buehrle does bolt to St. Louis at season’s end, the draft picks you get are kinda eh. St. Louis is going to keep their 1st round pick because of how bad they are so you’re looking at a 1st round compensation pick (probably somewhere around 35) and their 2nd rounder (around 50).
I think I would rather keep Buehrle at 4Y/52M or so, in other words, not do the deal unless you get a window for an extension and get one signed.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:45 amYou can build a team full of good players and not all-stars. Its true that they only have 2 all stars, but they also have a ton of above average players. Look at every position, they are almost all in the top 40% of the league..One or two guys in the top 40% is no big deal, but when everyone is in the top 40% the team is very good.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:46 amIf the Mariners trade for Buehrle and want to resign him, how will that affect their ability to resign Ichiro?
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:50 amIt would take a lot more than 4/52 to sign Buehrle beyond this year.
Dave, I agree with the reasoning and I’d love to see the M’s take a shot at him. I’m also comfortable knowing they won’t part with Jones. WLAD + a couple of second tier prospects seems perfectly reasonable for three months of Buehrle with either getting some more high draft picks or resigning him beyond this year.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:51 amDave, do you have short list of “second” tier players that you would make a move for. A player that would also be low risk, and cost little.
Nope. Buehrle is the guy, and if they don’t get him, pass.
If Lowe and/or Reitsma come back and pitch effectively, Green, who has had a nice season, could be part of a package as well.
Guys like Green are evidence of freely available talent. He has next to no trade value.
There’s no consistency, except in the pen and CF. This is a .500 club that’s way overachieving.
A .500 club isn’t terrible. A .500 club with potential upside hanging on easy fixes, such as Felix mixing his pitches, sticking Adam Jones in left field, and adding Mark Buehrle is far, far from terrible.
Problem is, if Buehrle does bolt to St. Louis at season’s end, the draft picks you get are kinda eh.
The Cardinals are currently slotted in at 11th, a half game behind the Marlins for 12th. They’re not the Pirates.
I think I would rather keep Buehrle at 4Y/52M or so, in other words, not do the deal unless you get a window for an extension and get one signed.
4/52 is a pipe dream. He’s not signing 4/56 with Chicago, the team he’s spent his entire career with, because they won’t give him a no-trade clause. To get him to re-sign in Seattle, you’re probably looking at 5/80 at minimum.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:52 amI still feel that no-hitter of his is going to inflate his perceived value too much for us. I would rather play Russian Roulette and rotate Baek, Weaver, Feierabend, and then HoRam and ride the hot hand and matchups for 4-5 spots. I don’t know, I guess I am used to praying for no moves at all as long as Bavasi is deciding.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:54 am#4- i don’t know how you can call this team terrible…maybe flawed, but every team is…
and i’ve been shouting for Buehrle now for months…i hope this happens…
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:58 amFirst, let’s do away with the myth that Mark Buerhle isn’t a frontline starting pitcher. He clearly is…Mark Buehrle would become an instant significant upgrade in the rotation.
I agree with the second part — it’s hard not to — but not sure that makes the first part true. Dave, what do you think about his resurgence in strikeouts? His K/G (per HardballTimes) went from 6.3 in 2004 to 5.9 to 4.3 last year, which is a bad trend, but has jumped back to 6.3. Was he hurt last year and not telling anyone? Are there good reasons to believe last year was the fluke and not this year’s bounce back? To me, the real Mark Buehrle is somewhere between 2006 and the first half of 2007 and that’s a guy with a 4.50 park neutral ERA which seems like a #3 starter or a poor #2.
That said, the backend of the Mariners rotation is so awful, I’d still consider getting Buehrle and I’d probably make the Balentin and Clement deal because we’re selling high on both players. I haven’t given up on Clement but have some doubt that he’ll hit enough to be a productive major leaguer, especially if he can’t play catcher.
July 2nd, 2007 at 8:03 amMaybe they’ll take Reed
July 2nd, 2007 at 8:08 amAre there good reasons to believe last year was the fluke and not this year’s bounce back?
His HR/FB% was the highest of his career, and not suprisingly, his LOB% was the second lowest of his career. When you give up home runs, it’s hard to strand runners. Both of those have regressed back towards his real ability.
To me, the real Mark Buehrle is somewhere between 2006 and the first half of 2007 and that’s a guy with a 4.50 park neutral ERA which seems like a #3 starter or a poor #2.
Buehrle’s xFIP, by year: 4.14, 3.95, 5.01, 4.16. While pitching in a hitter friendly park. At worst, you’ve got to project him as a 4.25 to 4.30 guy. There’s no way to view him as a 4.50 guy.
July 2nd, 2007 at 8:09 amYes, you push back the return on the prospects by a year or two when you trade prospects for a rent-a-player. Isn’t that exactly my point that was rebuffed about trading Ichiro?
Or is Buehrle commanding a stronger package than Ichiro would?
July 2nd, 2007 at 8:14 amWhat are the rules regarding which draft picks a team gets if they lose a free agent? Are they always at the end of the first round? Are they ever -in- the first round? I know it’s dependent on the quality of the player lost, but I don’t know the specific picks for top-tier and second-tier. Thanks–
July 2nd, 2007 at 8:23 amdave, with all the hargrove drama, the Buehrle watch and the win streak, have you had time to get us the future forty update, or are we going to have to wait?
July 2nd, 2007 at 8:27 amIf not traded - do you see Adam Jones finally getting called up now that Grover is out of the way?
(and, for that matter, can we hope to start seeing less of Vidro?)
July 2nd, 2007 at 8:29 ami’m hoping that not seeing vidro yesterday was the beginning of a nice trend…
July 2nd, 2007 at 8:33 amboth these quotes were before the extension discussions fell through, so who knows if that alters what Williams asks, but:
from Stark:
“Judging by what he asked from us, he’s been asking for every team’s two best prospects — or at least two out of their best three,” an official of one interested club grumbled Wednesday. So if we use that logic, that means Williams asked the Mets for Mike Pelfrey and Carlos Gomez, asked the Braves for Jarrod Saltalamacchia and/or Yunel Escobar/Brent Lillibridge, asked the Cardinals for Colby Rasmus and Jaime Garcia, and asked the Red Sox for Clay Buchholz and Jacoby Ellsbury. …. One more complication the White Sox were running into was their lack of interest in granting teams a 72-hour window to get Buehrle signed.
and from Heyman:
July 2nd, 2007 at 8:51 amVeteran left-hander Mark Buehrle surely will be the selloff centerpiece, but thanks to his status as a rental pitcher and seeker of a five-year deal, even White Sox people can’t expect big prospects such as the Mets’ Mike Pelfrey or Phil Humber in return. Though, that doesn’t mean the Sox won’t try. Sources indicate the three names the Sox have sought for Buehrle from the Yankees are Phil Hughes, Ian Kennedy and Joba Chamberlain, by coincidence exactly the three the Yankees won’t surrender. The first contender to blink and offer a bona fide Grade A prospect likely will be the one to land Buehrle. But that’s assuming that one does.
A guy with three months left in the season, millions on the table and a league to impress is going to pitch like a champion. Sounds like a great way for the Mariners to give us a shot in the second half.
I’ve called this team a stitched together Frankenstein, but I’ve never thought they were horrible. There’s no way a team can be 12 over .500 half way through the season and be horrible. Are the retreads the FO stuck on this jalopy better than expected, or maybe it wasn’t a jalopy to begin with?
July 2nd, 2007 at 8:55 amLet us not even speak the name Matt Morris for fear it comes true. I travel to the Bay Area for work, and listen to KNBR a lot. There’s been a great deal of speculation about the possible fire sale, and inclination is strong to keep the young pitchers.
So they say things like, “If we could just find some sucker to take Morris off our hands…” and a cold knife goes into my heart.
July 2nd, 2007 at 8:57 am#1 - Would anyone like to explain why the ChiSox would even want Clement if he can’t catch and would only be a 1B/DH type. The last time I checked the Sox didn’t need either of those positions (Konerko and Thome) or catcher (Pierzynski).
#2 - Balentien is not a piece to build around when another team would give more and I would tend to think Kenny Williams knows that.
#3 - How much value does Halman really have? A guy that can’t make it past Low A doesn’t have major league value.
#4 - Tillman has a decent ceiling and not enough value being in A ball.
Besides that the M’s should make the trade. We don’t have too much to offer though.
The M’s are a .500 team that has been playing well over their heads. While they are solid throughout they are unspectacular. Our pitching has kept in enough ball games to allow us to pull out late wins against weak middle relief.
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:05 amWould anyone like to explain why the ChiSox would even want Clement if he can’t catch and would only be a 1B/DH type.
Because organizations differ on player evaluations, and it is quite possible that the White Sox don’t agree that he’s a 1B/DH.
Balentien is not a piece to build around when another team would give more and I would tend to think Kenny Williams knows that.
You know what other teams are offering? Awesome. Maybe you should share that.
How much value does Halman really have? A guy that can’t make it past Low A doesn’t have major league value.
He’s 20.
#4 - Tillman has a decent ceiling and not enough value being in A ball.
Can I suggest doing a bit of research to see just how many “A ball” players are traded in deadline deals? You’ll be surprised.
We don’t have too much to offer though.
That’s just not true.
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:09 am34- they may want to totally clean house and save money, so by replacing thome, konerko or AJ with clement, they will take a lot of money off the books…they might also want to move dye, so wlad would fit nicely there…there are also rumors they might want reed back, since they probbly won’t get rowand back…
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:09 am# 31 writes what I’m worried about for the M’s.
It’s all well and good to hope that the Mariners can get Buehrle without including their top prospect, but what’s the benefit for the White Sox for taking that deal. Why would the Sox take that deal if they do wind up getting offered Saltalamacchia, or Buchholz, by other teams?
It sounds like right now, the asking price would be too rich for Seattle to match unless they made Jones the centerpiece, and I don’t think that will happen.
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:10 am34 - please stop with the “The M’s are a .500 team.”
Their RS-RA is 395-380, which makes it seem like they’re overachieving, but in reality, they gave up 30 runs over the odds in the first six Weaver starts which skews the numbers horribly.
Even though Dave downplays it, there was a study a few years ago (done by BP and reported on ESPN IIRC) that showed that a killer bullpen increases the win rate in tight games (i.e. one run affairs). I think it was an article trying to show how Mariano Rivera was even more valuable than people realized.
Pythag is OK if you don’t have any other info, but in this case we do.
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:22 amDave,
Would you make a deal for Jason Jennings?
RE draft picks/ Cardinals: Keep in mind that the Cardinals will likely improve in the second half, Carpenter is returning sometimes in July, they also figure to get more out of Pujols and Edmonds in the second half too. They should finish 8th/9th in the NL.
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:26 amWould you make a deal for Jason Jennings?
Only if I could get him for guys I deemed less valuable than what I could get compensation picks for letting him walk at years end. And, considering the Astros gave up their best pitching prospect to get him last winter, that’s pretty unlikely.
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:28 amWell, I just don’t see the Cardinals making into the top half of the league, so I don’t really care where they finish in the bottom 15, the end result is the same, no first round pick.
As for 5/80, I didn’t see that 4/56 was considered below market rate, I thought they were talking 4/48 or so w/Chicago. Yeesh.
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:31 amHey Dave - given what you said a few days ago about Clement (AAA resurgence d/t feasting on poor pitching), how likely do you think it is that Balentien’s stats look better than his skill level?
I look at him and see a young Carlos Lee - a good player, but not irreplaceable. Do you have upside / downside guesses?
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:37 amOk, someone correct me if I’m wrong, but under the new agreement don’t teams no longer receive draft pick directly from the team they lost their free agent to, so it would be irrelevant where the Cardinals finish?
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:38 amI look at him and see a young Carlos Lee - a good player, but not irreplaceable. Do you have upside / downside guesses?
Downside is probably Jose Guillen, Carlos Lee is a solid comparison for his mid-size (?), and Magglio Ordonez is probably his upside. Thanks to the leap he’s taken this year, he projects as a solid corner outfielder, a league average guy who might have an all-star season or two.
Ok, someone correct me if I’m wrong, but under the new agreement don’t teams no longer receive draft pick directly from the team they lost their free agent to, so it would be irrelevant where the Cardinals finish?
That’s not true.
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:41 amDave,
I know odds on this as a move are impossible to put out there with reasonable certainty, but I’m wondering if you think the M’s organization views the pitching situation as you do.
Do they hang their hat on Felix improving, Washburn giving us continued effectiveness, Weaver mixing it up enough to stay one step ahead of the scouting report, Batista being Batista and some mix of AAAA talent filling in the gap to keep us going?
Does a Buehrle move register with the team as a reasonable solution to a need or as a pipe dream? As a follow-on, do the M’s evaluate draft picks as highly as we might in terms of stocking the fridge for the future - in this context, that is? It seems like losing guys who are closer to contributing to the team for draft picks might not be viewed by all in the show as a good thing, even if you get a rent-a-player for the stretch.
You can imagine my desire NOT to get my hopes up for a pre-deadline deal for Seattle. Getting excited about a move has rarely paid off -though, admittedly, I shouldn’t have been all that excited about what the M’s were trying to do some years, and trade deadline deals for big names just for the sake of it is never wise. Here, a good fit is a good fit.
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:44 am“You know what other teams are offering? Awesome. Maybe you should share that.”
I know what the ChiSox are asking by #31 post and what the M’s have to offer.
Greg Halman is 20 sure, but he is repeating the same level for the second or third time if I’m not mistaken. (I heard that from a friend and don’t have the time to verify).
The M’s weren’t supposed to have a quality bullpen. The contributions from Green and Morrow, aside from his control issues, have been above expectations.
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:46 amI know what the ChiSox are asking by #31 post and what the M’s have to offer.
You know what they’re asking and not getting, considering he hasn’t been traded. Williams can ask for Saltalamacchia and Buchholz and Adam Jones all he wants - he’s not getting them.
Greg Halman is 20 sure, but he is repeating the same level for the second or third time if I’m not mistaken. (I heard that from a friend and don’t have the time to verify).
He’s spending his second summer in Everett. He’s still young for the league, however, considering the M’s pushed him aggressively to Everett last year and Wisconsin earlier this year. He has value - you don’t have to think so for it to be true.
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:49 amWhere do you think the Cubs are on Zambrano? I’m a little scared about giving a guy who pitched for Dusty a 5 year deal, but he’d make a great rental. He’s a good fit with the defensive nature of this team (good infield), and he’d eat some innings. I think the Cubs still see themselves as in it at 6.5 back, but a bad week could change that.
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:50 amOk, you’re right. I looked it up, it’s only changed for Type B free agents. So, feel free to continue speculating on where the Cardinals will finish.
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:50 amDave: in post 44, did you mean that Clement projects to the equivalent offensive production of a solid corner outfielder? I’m confused because he doesn’t actually play those positions.
I’m wondering also if the Angels will stand pat, or will they make a run for Buerle to block?
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:51 am50- i assume he meant that wlad is going to be a solid outfielder…
the angels won’t give up stud prospects to block us…they don’t need pitching and they need a power bat…they won’t be in this at all…
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:53 am“You know what they’re asking and not getting, considering he hasn’t been traded. Williams can ask for Saltalamacchia and Buchholz and Adam Jones all he wants - he’s not getting them.”
And you know this … how?
For someone who is calling other people for speculating on what other teams may be offering, you seem to be doing the same thing.
If Kenny Williams places that high of a value on Mark Buehrle and this is what he’s publicly (or at least semi-publicly) asking for, he’ll have a tough time justifying settling for much less.
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:54 am“And you know this … how?”
Bermanator, Dave doesn’t need defending, but he knows more than you or I do about who the team highly values and is not willing to part with. He has more organization and scout contacts than you or I. You can argue with the probability of what he says - i.e., “Buehrle may be enough of a get to justify Guy A or Guy B, and you can’t be 100% sure they won’t part with those guys” - but you just look silly arguing that your level of knowledge on this is equal to his. If you have team/scout contacts, let us know, but without that your opinion won’t automatically carry the same weight as Dave’s around here.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:02 am“You know what they’re asking and not getting, considering he hasn’t been traded. Williams can ask for Saltalamacchia and Buchholz and Adam Jones all he wants - he’s not getting them.”
And you know this … how?
Set a price too high, and no one will pay it. If Kenny Williams REALLY wants to get rid of Buehrle, and no one wants to meet his demands… he’ll bring the price down.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:03 amFans and media say stuff like this, but there’s no evidence that the “contract year effect” is either very large or reliable. Most athletes have reached this level because they’re already doing as well as they can. If they could be better by wanting to be better, they’d already be better. Professional athletics are the elite; on the whole, they have already maxed out what they can get from desire.
Look at it from another direction: If pressure is a real effect on major leaguers, and can drag people down in situations where they badly want to do well, why wouldn’t pressure apply to a contract year, too? Why isn’t it just as reasonable to assume that a player in a contract year will do worse, because they feel more pressure?
I don’t think we can predict the psychological effect of things on players.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:07 am“At worst, you’ve got to project him as a 4.25 to 4.30 guy. There’s no way to view him as a 4.50 guy.”
Well, he’s at 4.26 now, in what’s been one of his better seasons for a while. His K’s are up, for one thing, and he’s coming off a year of 5+ FIP. So I don’t know why 4.50 is some sort of red line.
More than that though, he’s a guy who’s value is clearly at its peak due to some luck on stranding runners and on balls in play. He’s better than Washburn, no doubt, but we’re dealing with a very similar pitcher. Buehrle’s been the beneficiary of some good team defense (look at the Sox DER, and their fielding stats on THT. The Sox are a +23 fielding team, while the M’s are at -38. Whatever benefit Buehrle might derive from the park (and it’s there, I’m not discounting it) will be eaten up by his defenders. I don’t know why the M’s are struggling to turn balls in play into outs, but the data are awfully strong, and it makes me hesitate to add another medium-k guy to the rotation.
At this point, pretty much the only thing separating Washburn from Buehrle has been Wash’s HR/FB rate and Buehrle’s strand/BABIP rates. Their FIPs are virtually identical.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:09 amWe’d also need to project exactly how many added wins Buehrle might add in half a season. Buehrle’s an upgrade over Baek/Feierabend, but the M’s have actually WON 9 of Baek’s 12 starts and 2 of Ryan’s 4. This isn’t to say Baek has some weird talent for making the team win, but it shows that FIP and wins don’t magically go together -that’s sort of the point. If Buehrle’s starts result in a 70% winning percentage the rest of the way, and Baek/Feier go for 50%, what does that get us? 2-3 wins or so? And that’s with some fairly positive assumptions.
To me, the move doesn’t add nearly as much (and costs waaay more) than simply installing Adam Jones in LF.
53-
I agree, if that team is Seattle. If he says the M’s won’t deal Jones, I believe it.
I don’t think that is true when he speculates about other teams. Projecting what other teams are willing to do, and how much they value players, is a fruitless exercise, and I don’t know that Dave’s track record in that regard approaches perfection.
Because the M’s don’t view Buehrle as being worth their top prospect doesn’t mean that other teams will follow suit, and it doesn’t mean that teams with deeper farm systems won’t be able to offer better packages than Seattle can. Because Seattle won’t offer anyone better than Balentien doesn’t mean the other contenders take all of their prospects better than Balentien off the table.
Seattle could well offer every package of players that Dave suggests. I just don’t think Kenny Williams will find that to be enough when he looks at what other teams offer.
But I guess we’ll all know for sure soon enough.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:18 amDave, any information on what the Sox think of Clement, and whether they’d actually be interested in him? At this point, I’d rather move Clement and plug Balentien into the lineup next year in place of Guillen (a Jones/Ichiro/Wlad OF looks pretty good to me).
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:19 amWell, he’s at 4.26 now, in what’s been one of his better seasons for a while. His K’s are up, for one thing, and he’s coming off a year of 5+ FIP. So I don’t know why 4.50 is some sort of red line.
He’s at 4.16 xFIP right now. Last year is the only season in recent history he’s been anywhere near 4.50, and he’s rebounded right back to previously established levels.
He’s better than Washburn, no doubt, but we’re dealing with a very similar pitcher.
Washburn, xFIP, by year: 5.06, 5.01, 5.35, 5.07
Buherle, xFIP, by year: 4.14, 3.95, 5.01, 4.16
Buehrle is very similar to Washburn as Daniel Cabrera is very similar to Carlos Zambrano. Buehrle’s down year last year was as good as Washburn’s best year, by peripherals.
You can evaluate Washburn by FIP if you want to, but I’ve had the “Washburn has a mythical home run prevention skill” argument too many times before. I think it’s pretty obvious he doesn’t.
To me, the move doesn’t add nearly as much (and costs waaay more) than simply installing Adam Jones in LF.
This isn’t an either/or case. They can trade for Buehrle and stick Jones in LF.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:25 amBecause the M’s don’t view Buehrle as being worth their top prospect doesn’t mean that other teams will follow suit.
Go find me an example of a team trading its best prospect, a true elite major league ready talent, for a rent-a-player.
Or, save yourself a few hours, and just believe me - I’ve done the research. It doesn’t happen.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:31 amDoes a Buehrle move register with the team as a reasonable solution to a need or as a pipe dream? As a follow-on, do the M’s evaluate draft picks as highly as we might in terms of stocking the fridge for the future - in this context, that is?
The M’s have called about Mark Buehrle. I don’t know where that call went, what was discussed, or how serious they plan on being in this mini-auction, but they’d expressed interest.
And yes, I think the organization does value draft picks as high, maybe higher, than we do. Bavasi has always chased free agents who won’t cost him a pick to sign, and has done as much as he can to preseve the team’s high draft choices during his tenure as GM.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:36 am60-
Even assuming that’s true, in looking at the other teams on the market it looks like there are several that can take their top prospect off the table and still offer someone better than Balentien.
So you tell me — why does Kenny Williams make this trade, for any of the packages you suggest? It sounds like one of your big arguments is that maybe Chicago likes these guys better than Seattle does. Is that forecasting or simply wishcasting?
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:40 amDave, any information on what the Sox think of Clement, and whether they’d actually be interested in him? At this point, I’d rather move Clement and plug Balentien into the lineup next year in place of Guillen (a Jones/Ichiro/Wlad OF looks pretty good to me).
I think it’s highly unlikely that the M’s would be willing to go with two right-handed rookie corner outfielders next year. If you stick Jones and Wlad in the line-up, you’ve now got one spot for Ibanez, Vidro, and Broussard, and the already RH heavy line-up just got even more right-handed.
Ideally, they’d move Sexson, stick Broussard at first, and shift Ibanez to DH with Vidro going to the bench, but the odds of that happening are about 1%. Really, Jones/Wlad is an either/or situation for this team next year. It’s next to impossible to imagine the team going with both on opening day next year.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:42 amEven assuming that’s true, in looking at the other teams on the market it looks like there are several that can take their top prospect off the table and still offer someone better than Balentien.
Honestly, I doubt Williams will be able to do any better than Balentien/Clement.
So you tell me — why does Kenny Williams make this trade, for any of the packages you suggest?
Kenny Williams doesn’t want to re-build. He wants to re-load for 2008, and getting major league ready talent is his top priority. Balentien steps in perfectly as the low-cost Jermaine Dye replacement in right field, and Clement gives them a real option if they decide to move Pierzynski.
He’d be getting two guys that are both having significant success in Triple-A at positions that the White Sox lack any real organizational depth.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:46 amI do not make this trade, period.
Buehrle would be nice but not at the cost of Balentien, sorry. Wlad has a monster power upside. I want to see Wlad and Adam side-by-side in this outfield for 10-12 years, especially if Ichiro walks.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:59 amDave –
If the Sox work out a contract extension with Buehrle, would you be at all interested in acquiring Javier Vazquez, who is also rumored to be on the block?
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:02 am“but I’ve had the “Washburn has a mythical home run prevention skill” argument too many times before. I think it’s pretty obvious he doesn’t.”
Well that’s a fairly shocking misread.
I said at the outset that Buehrle’s better, and the bit about Wash’s HR/FB rate was pointing out that it was somewhat flukish. I was merely comparing it to two measures by which Buehrle’s been rather fortunate: his BABIP and his strand rate. Yes, Washburn’s been lucky, but so has Buehrle.
What do you expect Buehrle’s RA to be in Seattle? That’s what counts, and there are a few reasons to expect he’ll be worse in Seattle than he’s been in Chicago. That’s got to matter, esp. in only half a season. If Buehrle gives up 5r/g, but still puts up a lovely xFIP, that won’t help.
I’m just worried that Buerhle is going to command a package similar to that which the M’s received from Houston in ‘98, and Randy Johnson>>>>>>> Mark Buehrle.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:10 amI don’t see any chance of Vazquez being moved - he’s signed through 2010 at $10M+ per year. He’d be a great upgrade, but there’s no way the M’s are going to take on that kind of salary. Also, unless the Sox are in fire sale mode, he’s the anchor of their rotation for a few years to come.
Dave - what would you think of the D-train? Yeah, he’s got some Zito-like trends over the last couple of years, but he’d also probably be cheaper and might benefit from the change of leagues with that deceptive motion of his.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:16 am67. One thing to think about that’s been surprisingly undermentioned in this discussion… Doesn’t Buehrle pitch half his games in a hitter’s park? Sharing a division with Minnesota, another hitters park, certainly doesn’t help him either.
I can’t imagine moving to a division where 3 of the 4 teams play in pitcher-friendly environs, and to a team whose home park is very pitcher friendly, would do anything but help Buehrle’s performance.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:18 amYes, Washburn’s been lucky, but so has Buehrle.
And their ERAs are still a full run different, despite the fact that Washburn pitches in the pitchers park and Buehrle in the hitters park.
They’re both going to regress somewhat from their current performance, but the gap between the two (about a run per start) should remain. It’s a huge difference. They aren’t very similar, beyond the fact that both are left-handed. Buehrle is a good arm, while Washburn is an innings-eater.
If Buehrle gives up 5r/g, but still puts up a lovely xFIP, that won’t help.
Well, the reasons pitchers give up runs that are far out of line with their xFIP are basically out of their control, so trying to predict luck isn’t something I feel any of us are capable of. Yes, he might give up 5 R/G. He might also give up 2 R/G. That is the nature of picher variability, especially over a two month period. It’s far more likely, however, that he’ll give up runs at a similar rate to his established career norms.
I’m just worried that Buerhle is going to command a package similar to that which the M’s received from Houston in ‘98, and Randy Johnson>>>>>>> Mark Buehrle.
The M’s got something like the Astros 4th and 7th best prospects (Garcia/Guillen) and a low-upside throw-in (Halama). All three prospects panned out exceptionally well, but that’s obviously not the norm. If we could get Buehrle for our 4th and 7th best prospects (Balentien + Feierabend, I’d argue), plus a low-upside throw-in (Baek works well), I’d do back-flips.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:19 amany thoughts on if and when this will happen?
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:21 amI think Buehrle would be a perfect fit for Safeco. If we move Jones to left, shoring up the OF defense, I think the chances of Buehrle outperforming (a safeco adjusted) FIP are higher than an underperformance. Bavasi needs to do everything possible to make this happen, at least at a price similar to what Dave is talking (Two B prospects + Filler).
Just say no to Dontrelle Willis.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:31 amIs there any reason that the White Sox aren’t wanting to keep him and then letting him walk at the end of the year and take the draft picks?
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:31 amIf the Sox work out a contract extension with Buehrle, would you be at all interested in acquiring Javier Vazquez, who is also rumored to be on the block?
He wouldn’t come here - he’s been clear that he wants to play on the east coast, or at least in a city that has direct flights to his home in Puerto Rico.
Dave - what would you think of the D-train?
The most overrated pitcher in baseball, and it’s not close. I have no interest - none whatsoever - in acquiring him.
Is there any reason that the White Sox aren’t wanting to keep him and then letting him walk at the end of the year and take the draft picks?
Kenny Williams has spent a boatload of money on guys like Thome, Contreras, Vazquez, and Garland. They’re not in rebuilding mode. They’re in win in 2008 mode.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:34 amSharing a division with Minnesota, another hitters park…
The Metrodome has been essentially neutral for 5-6 years now according to the baseball reference park factors, and the Retrosheet park factors say basically the same thing, with the Dome playing as a pitcher’s park, if anything, last year.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:36 amTime and again, you’ve pointed out that team defense has a huuuge effect on a pitcher’s R/G, which is in part why stats like FIP were invented. You’ve not touched on that at all in this discussion. It won’t do to say, “Well, the reasons pitchers give up runs that are far out of line with their xFIP are basically out of their control, so trying to predict luck isn’t something I feel any of us are capable of.”
We have some actual data, from team DER (CHA- .700, SEA - .674) to plus/minus (CHA +23, SEA -38). They seem to indicate Seattle’s a bad place to go if you put the ball in play a lot. It’s based on data, so it’s not a ‘oh well, can’t predict it’ sort of situation. Either he has some ability to affect the nature of balls in play, or the M’s defense is not as bad as it appears statistically and the team DER will quickly regress to average, or Buehrle may be in trouble (meaning his RA may exceed his FIP) in Seattle.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:43 am“It’s far more likely, however, that he’ll give up runs at a similar rate to his established career norms.”
And exactly what does this give us, again? Quantitatively, this saves us what? Using his established career norms, he gives up 47 runs. If he’s a full run better than Baek+Feier, that saves a total of 10-11 runs, which is a lot. But what, a win+, maybe 1.5, assuming he’s one full run better? Not sure it’s worth it.
Time and again, you’ve pointed out that team defense has a huuuge effect on a pitcher’s R/G, which is in part why stats like FIP were invented. You’ve not touched on that at all in this discussion.
That’s because this discussion stemmed from your “Washburn is a very similar pitcher” to Buehrle comment. So, I’ve simply been debunking that.
They seem to indicate Seattle’s a bad place to go if you put the ball in play a lot.
Buehrle’s strikeout rate is higher than all Mariner non-Felix starters. So, we’d be getting a guy who puts less balls in play than no matter who he replaced. That’s an upgrade.
And, of course, Adam Jones to left/Ibanez to DH fixes an awful lot of the Mariners defensive problems. It’s something that may or may not happen, but the possibility that it does cannot be discounted.
And exactly what does this give us, again? Quantitatively, this saves us what?
15-20 runs over the rest of the year, which could easily make the difference between a playoff spot and sitting at home. It could also make the difference between Ichiro re-signing or leaving. And, if they make the playoffs, it gives them a significantly enhanced chance of winning a short series.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:50 amdave, do you see it happening? what are the odds?
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:51 amWho were Houston’s #1, #2, and #3 prospects the year we got Freddy and Carlos?
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:56 am75. Interesting. Given those factors vary from year to year, you think the Twins having a weak lineup compared to past seasons, with slap-bats like Nick Punto and their black hole rotation of DHs, might have a little something to do with that? Not that I have any data in front of me at the moment, but I’d think with an offense like the Twins’ that the park factor would start to slide backward.
Also, don’t forget the Field Turf conversion. You don’t get those Astroturf bounces turning routine grounders into bouncing, laser-fast base hits.
All that said, by Retrosheet’s definitions, Kauffman Stadium is a hitter’s park. So whether or not my claim with the Metrodome is dubious, the general point still stands: Buehrle, in taking a trade to Seattle, would be moving into a generally pitching friendlier situation.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:59 amI’m as happy as anyone to be 12 games over .500, and legitimately contending, but in a way I wish we weren’t in the buyer’s position here. Buyers always give up too much. Giving up too much is OK if it works, but if it doesn’t, and we fail to make the playoffs, this trade will have been a bad gamble. Still, I can see the logic of it. Tough call!
I guess I’d ask “will Balentien + Clement be worth more later if we wait?”
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:00 pmHey Dave,
Cut to the chase are we wasting our time discussing something that probably isn’t going to happen? Plain and simple what our are chances vs what other teams have to offer the ChiSox? Ideally the Mets, Yankees, and Braves since those are the only names I heard/read that have a serious chance of making this trade.
Also do you think the Padres are looking to trade any pitching for some offense? Namely someone like Germano?
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:02 pmBuehrle is right now the best SP the faulting ChiSox have however they are looking to sell some players to make room for a fresh approach in the second half.
While Zambrano would be the best of the best the M’s could aquire.The Cubs would ask the farm for him and then there’s the problem of resigning him.
Any Zambrano deal would have to have the 72 hr signing clause included to protect the M’s from losing prospects/players offered.
Buehrle is next best choice and will be less diffcult to resign.His trade price will not be as outrageous or as high suggest either in the prior comments or in the above article.
The ChiSox are the sellers here not a contending team looking to upgrade by trading a lesser piece or a hard to resign FA to be.
The trade value needed to aquire Buehrle would more likely bullpen help and maybe a catcher say Mateo/Green/Tillman/Clement or Rivera/maybe throwin Baek or Halman.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:03 pmWilliams may want a better deal but if salary is a concern here look for him to deal Buehele for players in total making no more but hopefully less than the remaining salary for the SP alone.
dave, do you see it happening? what are the odds?
I honestly don’t know.
Who were Houston’s #1, #2, and #3 prospects the year we got Freddy and Carlos?
Lance Berkman, Scott Elarton, and Mitch Meluskey. They also had a 23-year-old Richard Hidalgo that was just breaking into the major leagues. They didn’t give up any of those guys for Randy Johnson.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:03 pmOkay then… if trading away Jones would be the equivalent of Houston trading us Berkman for the rent-a-Unit, well I’m not for that. Hopefully Mariner management can see that parallel, as well.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:06 pmDave, if you were charge, which of those packages would you be most willing to part with? Who among those players would you avoid letting go unless you had to?
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:10 pmDeadling Wlad kind of makes sense, given that he’ll have to be in the bigs next year and perhaps our roster isn’t ready for that. I hate to see him go, but we need Buehrle more than we need Wlad.
I’d be hesitant to move Clement, but I have to assume Johjima has at least a few years ahead of him, including under contract for 2008. It’s not like we needed a catcher the same way we do when we drafted him.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:11 pmSo what risk is there really in getting Buerhle, even if its only for 3 months, for some prospects that aren’t playing? There already is crowding on the roster, as Jones can’t even get playing time, and that doesn’t seem to be changing any time soon. What difference then is there that we’d have to wait another 2 years for more prospects to get ready?
As much as I like Wladmir’s game, I’d rather have Buerhle in an M’s uniform for 3 months than have another top flight prospect burning away a summer in Tacoma.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:11 pmDave, if you were charge, which of those packages would you be most willing to part with? Who among those players would you avoid letting go unless you had to?
I’d probably do the Balentien/Feierabend/Johnson package first. I’m not much of a Rob Johnson fan (there are some scouts who love him tnough, and he probably has value to a team that values defense/leadership behind the plate very highly), and Feierabend is a decent arm that isn’t too terribly hard to replace.
Clement’s the guy who I actually wince about dealing, even with the post I put up last week about the questions surrounding his bat speed. This organization has 150 right-handed guys with power who play corner spots and don’t walk, but in terms of LH bats with power and patience, it’s Jeff Clement and then nothing.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:16 pm#84– Astros’ minor-league prospects, Houston Chronicle, July 27, 1997
The Big Three:
Daryle Ward, Scott Elarton, Mitch Meluskey
Players who could make it to the majors next season:
Richard Hidalgo, Russ Johnson, John Halama, Manuel Barrios
Players who probably have a future in the majors:
Lance Berkman, Oscar Henriquez, Mark Johnson, Ramon Castro,
Carlos Guillen, Carlos Hernandez.
Players who may make it to the majors:
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:17 pmRyan Creek, Mike Grzanich, Bronswell Patrick, Brian Sikorski, Trever Miller, C.J. Nitkowski, Edgar Ramos, Mark Small, Mike Walter, Chad Alexander, Nelson Samboy, Alberto Blanco, Freddy Garcia, Wade Miller, Kevin Burns
Wrong year, msb. The trade happened in 1998. By then, Berkman had supplanted Ward, and Hidalgo was already in the majors.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:23 pmsorry, meant to say that was the only propect list I could find pre-trade.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:27 pmThe point is the same, though. The Astros didn’t give up any of the guys that they really wanted to hang onto in the Johnson deal. They deemed Berkman, Elarton, Meluskey, and Hidalgo off-limits, and found another way to get the deal done.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:31 pmHow much merit to the argument that the M’s are getting 2-3 new additions to their staff already? (a new Weaver , Lowe , Reitsma (??). ) So ‘Standing Pat’ is an upgrade.
Also, is Tui sought after by others?
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:32 pmHow much merit to the argument that the M’s are getting 2-3 new additions to their staff already? (a new Weaver , Lowe , Reitsma (??). ) So ‘Standing Pat’ is an upgrade.
None. Weaver’s resurgence is just as unsustainable as his horrible April and May. He wasn’t that bad, and he’s not this good. He’s a #5 starter without an out pitch and who depends on the opponents to get themselves out.
No one knows how Lowe is going to do, even Mark Lowe. Counting on him is a huge mistake. If he helps, bonus. Reitsma just isn’t any good.
Also, is Tui sought after by others?
He’d have some value, but not much. Most teams still see a guy without defensive value or power, and that’s a tough sell.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:39 pm#93– yup.
it will come down to who Williams gets to blink.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:40 pmIs parting with Feierabend for a three month rental of Buehrle a good idea? He’s a young cheap starter with a decent amount of upside. Those are hard to replace, and lord knows our rotation is going to have some holes next year.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:49 pmTalk about a guy with NO out pitch… Feierabend is it.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:56 pm#77: What would you estimate the magnitude of increased revenue resulting from the Ms making the playoffs?
I’m thinking that in the Ms case the potential financial payoff would make a move like you’re suggesting almost an imperative-especially since the loss of Wlad and JC would be somewhat mitigated by draft picks if the Ms would let Buehrle walk.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:57 pm#77: What would you estimate the magnitude of increased revenue resulting from the Ms making the playoffs?
Most estimates have home playoff games worth approximately $1 million each, and playoff teams see significant next-year ticket sale increases compared to non-playoff teams. It’s a not-insignificant source of revenue.
That said, the M’s have a very loose revenue/payroll connection, so I’m not all that concerned with the organization making a larger profit. They’ve clearly shown that they’re simply willing to take big profits and not roll the money over to future year payrolls.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:59 pmIs parting with Feierabend for a three month rental of Buehrle a good idea? He’s a young cheap starter with a decent amount of upside. Those are hard to replace, and lord knows our rotation is going to have some holes next year.
Justin Thomas, Cha Baek, Robert Rohrbaugh - the organization is not running low on cheap young #5 starter-types with low to moderate upside. These guys are a lot easier to find than you think.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:01 pmI don’t think several of us were aware of how low Feieraband’s ceiling is.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:03 pmFeierabend has more upside than Baek and Rohrbaugh, and probably a little less than Thomas. He’s more moderate upside than low upside. I was more just pointing out to Corco how the organization has its share of cheap arms for the back-end of the rotation, and losing Feierabend wouldn’t be a crushing blow to the 2008 team.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:04 pmGetting back to the playoffs, and showing they’re willing to do what it takes to do that, has to factor into getting another contract with Ichiro, which in turn has to be a factor in their business plans.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:05 pmI always thought Feieraband was sold as a pitcher with Washburn potential, a flyball-heavy, no strikeout innings eater in his prime (once he learns to effectively pitch). Which for his salary is not a bad deal to have. That said, I wouldn’t cry tears if he was used in part of a larger trade.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:06 pmI always thought Feieraband was sold as a pitcher with Washburn potential, a flyball-heavy, no strikeout innings eater in his prime (once he learns to effectively pitch).
Right - and on a playoff team, that guy is a #5 starter.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:09 pmAll these are interdependent, you know. Getting into the playoffs is a BIG help to resigning Ichiro, and it’s a BIG help to the bottom line, etc.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:10 pmI’d love to see a ‘If Dave were the GM’ second-half plan over the All-Star Break.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:20 pm“Buehrle’s strikeout rate is higher than all Mariner non-Felix starters. So, we’d be getting a guy who puts less balls in play than no matter who he replaced. That’s an upgrade.”
There’s no doubt it’s an upgrade, but that’s damning with faint praise.
Buehrle’s currently running a K rate far above his career average, and he does have a noticeable pre/post ASB split in his career. His K/BF dips about a percentage point over his career in the second half. This isn’t all that surprising, really. IF he maintains his K/rate above his historical ave, and IF the park knocks out some HRs, and IF the M’s defense improves, he’ll be key. That just seems like a lot to ask for Balentien+. I mean, I’m thinking Buehrle runs a K/9 of around 5.5, tops, the rest of the way. I think his K/BF regresses to around 13.5% or maybe 14%, from the dizzying heights of 16.5% now. Is that fair, Dave? Too much discounting/too little?
What do you think of the M’s team defense, Dave? I think Buehrle may be better positioned to work around some of the deficiencies with the M’s than other potential trade targets (with the exception of Carlos Z), but is that really saying much?
I know I’m in the minority here, so I’ll leave it at that.
In the spirit of concord, I’d echo your sentiments on Feierabend. I like how he competes, but he’s a middling K guy with so-so command and league average HR rates. The M’s and many other teams have guys like that. Love the pickoff move, though.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:24 pmBuehrle’s currently running a K rate far above his career average, and he does have a noticeable pre/post ASB split in his career.
Buehrle’s K/G, by year: 6.3, 5.9, 4.3, 6.3.
Last year looks like the big outlier to me. At worst, if we ran a regression on his expected K rate for the rest of the year, I don’t think we could come up with anything lower than 5.7 K/G.
What do you think of the M’s team defense, Dave?
It’s not good, especially in the outfield corners. Ibanez is horrible, Guillen isn’t nearly as good as we thought he’d be (his ankles may have something to do with that), Sexson is bad, and Betancourt’s having a rough year with the glove. Adam Jones to left/Ibanez to DH fixes the biggest hole, though, so there’s real reason to believe that the second half defense could be much, much better than the first half defense.
I think Buehrle may be better positioned to work around some of the deficiencies with the M’s than other potential trade targets (with the exception of Carlos Z), but is that really saying much?
Mark Buehrle is the only available pitcher who I’d have any interest in. Matt Morris? Dontrelle Willis? Double Pass.
So, really, the options are Buehrle or no upgrade at all. Considering I think Buehrle’s a 15-20 runs improvement over the rest of the season, that makes it a move worth making. Unfortunately, there don’t appear to be any solid buy-low options instead. Too bad they didn’t trade for Scott Baker a month ago…
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:34 pmAll these are interdependent, you know. Getting into the playoffs is a BIG help to resigning Ichiro, and it’s a BIG help to the bottom line, etc.
That’s what I was trying to say.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:37 pmHow concerned are you about Betancourt’s defense, Dave? Is there precedent for a young guy who looks like a world-beating defender getting the yips like this and then returning to world-beating form? Betancourt ought to be in his peak defensive years right now.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:40 pmI’m actually a little more concerned with his range than his arm, honestly. The throwing errors, ehh, those happen. That’s fixable.
However, I just haven’t been as impressed with his ability to get to balls in the hole this year as I have in the past. There have been a significant number of plays this year that looked like outs off the bat that he didn’t convert, far more than either of the past two years.
The throwing errors don’t help, but his defensive value is in turning those balls in deep short and up the middle into outs. If he’s not getting to those anymore, that’s a problem.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:43 pmIf the M’s can make a trade like Dave proposes, by all means, do it. Adding a quality starter could push us over the top for the wild card, or who knows…maybe catch the Angels. And if we make the playoffs, at the very least have a good chance of moving on. I used to think the M’s plan for “long term sustained quality” wasn’t such a bad idea — stay competitive, and see what happens — but look at 2002 and 2003. Yes, back-to-back 93 win seasons was nice, but no post-season. Really not much memorable about that. The ‘95, ‘00, and ‘01 post-season runs were pretty exciting. As for ‘97, that was a series we just seemed destined to lose. Which got me to thinking:
Dave, as the ‘97 season was finishing up, Lou plugged Randy Johnson in on the last Saturday of the regular season for 2 innings to get (a cheap) 20th win for him. He had pitched 8 innings (141 pitches!) on Tuesday of that week, and then the two innings (28 pitches) on Saturday. Do you think that wore hime out and/or threw him off for game 1? He seemed pretty solid in game 4, but our offense ran out of gas, and that was that.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:43 pmFor all the talk about whether or not it’s worth it to lose Wlad to gain Buehrle, shouldn’t market scarcity be part of the discussion? Wlad is still the second-best outfielder in the M’s system to Jones (and anywhere from third to sixth best OF in the whole organization?) and Buehrle would be the second-best starting pitcher in the organization. If you’re like me, and terrified that Felix’s elbow is going to fall off — he might be the best. Starters are simply worth way way more than corner OFers. That makes any of the proposed deals a no brainer to the “is it worth the cost” question. Not to mention the fact that Buehrle is a proven starter and Wlad has never tasted major league clubhouse catering.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:53 pmDave –
I agree with your point that replacing Ibanez with Jones in LF solves the biggest defense problem the M’s have. But, given how well the M’s are playing, do you think the club management will make that move and send Vidro to the bench? Or are they more apt to take the “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” approach (as absurd as that may be) and keep writing in Vidro as DH and Ibanez as LF? I hope they can see that Vidro is not the reason they’ve won 8 straight!
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:55 pmFrom Buster Olney’s chat today:
Matt (VA): Hey Buster, how about a Braves question! When are the Braves going to make a move? Who might they bring in? Is Buehrle still a possibility?
SportsNation Buster Olney: Matt: I’m sure Schuerholz will ask, but everybody who deals with Kenny Williams says that he basically targets a player in your system and asks — how can we get this done? Or, if he doesn’t see a player he likes, he just won’t get serious. Really, the Buehrle trade talks will come down to who KW really covets.
=========================
I just don’t see Williams looking at Balentien or Clement with that kind of ardor.
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:00 pmThey probabaly will leave vidro alone, since you know, he’s batitng .295 and all. I’m hope Bavasi realizes he’s below average DH though, so now that Hargrove is gone, I wonder if they might release him or something. I doubt it though.
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:01 pmWilliams is posturing, trying to maximize his haul. I think Wlad + Clement would be a big haul, relative to what teams are going to be willing to give up. That is unless someone get’s really stupid or something.
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:03 pmThe article predominately mentions the Mets as a trading partner. The Mets, now that I think of it, have a pretty solid big club and could probably afford to sacrifice a top prospect to add Buehrle. I’m led to believe they eventually crack and surrender Pelfrey, Carlos Gomez and/or Humber to bring Buehrle in.
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:08 pmI con