Choose Your Own Conclusion
It’s not quite an adventure, but the Morrow for League/Chavez trade is certainly a departure from what we have come to expect from the Mariners over the last year. Safe to say, there are not too many Mariner fans who like the return. Whatever you think of Morrow, an arbitration eligible reliever and an A-ball version of Wladimir Balentien is not exactly what we expected his market value to be.
So, I think this trade leads to three possible conclusions. You can pick any of the three.
1. These guys are not fans, at all, of Brandon Morrow, and had no interest beginning the season with him in the starting rotation. They shopped him all winter, and this was the best they could do. They like League as a reliever more than Morrow as a reliever, and since they didn’t see Brandon as a starter, they took the chance to upgrade the bullpen. This also requires us to conclude that no one in baseball sees Morrow as a particularly valuable piece, since this was theoretically the best the team could do during a winter where it was obvious that he was going to be traded.
2. This trade is a setup to another deal. Some yet unnamed third team wanted League or Chavez, and the M’s will use them as chips to get something that they couldn’t use Morrow to get. Or perhaps some team wants Aardsma or Lowe or Kelley, and the Mariners preferred to bring in their replacement before they trade them away.
3. This deal was part of the Cliff Lee trade. It was always weird that the Halladay and Lee portions of the deal were announced together, yet they were essentially two separate transactions, with no players going back and forth between Seattle and Toronto. Remember, we all feel like the Mariners got Lee for significantly less than he should have cost, and the expectation the entire time the rumor was developing was that Morrow was going to be in the deal. Perhaps that portion of the negotiations just couldn’t get finalized before the trade had to be announced (remember, the Phillies only had 72 hours to negotiate with Halladay), so the Mariners and Blue Jays agreed to work out the Morrow aspect of the trade at a later date.
Personally, I think I believe #3. Can I prove it? No, of course not. But it makes the most sense. Does all of baseball not valuing Morrow strike anyone as likely, especially after rumors of Detroit offering up Edwin Jackson for him and the Brewers coveting him for several years now? Does it seem likely that the Mariners would trade Morrow for a less valuable reliever and a mediocre prospect in an effort to make another deal without actually securing that deal at the time? Jack knows how to make a three way deal, so if he was flipping parts to another organization for someone else, why wouldn’t they just do it at the same time?
To me, the last one is the most logical. The M’s didn’t give up enough to get Lee unless you include this as part of that deal, in which case the price is much more fair. This makes the Halladay deal look a lot better for Toronto, and explains why they were willing to kick in $6 million in salary to help Philadelphia be able to make the deal. It also explains why Philadelphia shipped Lee to Seattle, rather than shopping him for a better package somewhere else.
If we conclude that this deal was part of last week’s trade, then it answers a lot of questions. It explains why a team that has made so many good moves inexplicably makes a lousy one. It explains why the Mariners were able to get Cliff Lee for three mediocre prospects. It explains why the Phillies weren’t willing to look for another team who would pay more for Lee in the three way deal.
So, that’s my theory. The M’s actually traded Brandon Morrow, Phillippe Aumont, Tyson Gillies, and JC Ramirez for Cliff Lee, Brandon League, and Johermyn Chavez.
Comments
173 Responses to “Choose Your Own Conclusion”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Commenters. But what does it matter? You said: “I’m in Toronto, and let me tell you that no one here …”.
I didn’t say anything about Drabek, Wallace, Stewart, or Snider. Although, I don’t think Stewart belongs in that group.
Yep misspelled that, my apologies.
I definitely accept that baseball is still a bit of an old boys club. Of course it is it’s a male dominated sport full of the egos that go along with it. Doesn’t mean I think this particular trade was full of the “trades of lore†we read about where Player X gets traded for a bucket of chicken and a tub of double bubble.
It’s also very interesting to me how the title of the thread is “Choose Your Own Conclusion” and then moderator / author of the site takes exception with people who do choose their own conclusions that happen to not agree with their own….
Shannon Drayer on KIRO says this was a “trade for need” simple as that. Jack Z wanted to beef up the bullpen. So no ulterior motives.
Scenario #3 sounds like a perfect fit for this situation.
However, I’m still going to have to go with Scenario #1.
For starters, I’m still wondering how every trade rumor involving Brandon Morrow eventually fell apart or disappeared? If I recall, we were in on Reid Brignac from the Rays, we had the interest from Milwaukee Brewers (involving possibly J.J. Hardy or Prince Fielder), and finally as part of the Edwin Jackson/Curtis Granderson trade. None of those panned out and we wound up with a promising reliever and a prospect. Huh?
As we’ve noted a number of times (and having it confirmed no less), Brandon Morrow’s development was hosed up, setting him back as much as 2 years. If we’re to get anything out of Morrow we would have to spend the patience and time we should’ve taken in the 2008 season in 2010.
And that’s time we suddenly don’t have. Jack Zduriencik is clearly building this team to win right now. The organization believes that Morrow still has plenty of work to do and it doesn’t sound like they can afford a rotation slot for development. They’re looking to get as many wins out of their rotation as possible. If Morrow doesn’t hold up then what? He gets sent down to AAA again? Toronto, on the otherhand, just traded Roy Halladay and are definitely looking to use 2010 to develop talent. That’s what it comes down to for me. The two orgs found a mutually agreeable situation where one player will be better off in another environment.
I wish Morrow all the best and I wish our previous org didn’t screw him up as much as they have.
I’m choosing to believe #3.
There’s simply no way Morrow’s value stood at merely a tick-above-average ML reliever and a boom-or-bust A-ball outfielder any other way.
And I won’t lay odds against Lowe leaving in another transaction….but boy, the 6th-through-9th innings (Kelley, Lowe, League, Aardsma) look pretty nigh-impregnable.
Dave, does this move put our bullpen, IYO, into the upper-tier in the major leagues? By my estimate, yes- top 10 material.
It pains me to see Morrow leave….I’ve been a fan/supporter of him for a couple years. But it’s probably best for him to go.
Now, he stands a chance of doing the best for his career without being constantly reminded that he was selected AHEAD of local-boy He-Wo-Must-Not-Be-Mentioned-Lest-I-Be-Smote.
I choose to conclude that all metacommentary (except for my own of course) is extremely boring..
I think this calls for a haiku:
In the morning dew
metacommentary is
the suckiest thing.
DMZ has already pointed to substantial evidence to the contrary within the baseball world. I just want to add a procedural point about business in general.
There are lots of informal agreements, even when large amounts of money are at stake. Such agreements are more prevalent when the parties know each other well and when it’s a fairly small community.
It’s also true that the details of such agreements are often made in triplicate by squads of lawyers and accountants after the basic deal is in place. This serves the dual purpose of giving maximum flexibility to the decision-maker as well as a period of due diligence to cover everyone’s hiney.
So the issue is one of timing. Eventually, yes, everything gets written down, but not necessarily until a sequence of deals is done.
My experience does not extend to MLB, but this is how business works, when it works well, a lot of the time. For a very good book on this and related subjects, see .
I think there could be bits of truth to all three scenarios. I do think the league (and Jack) value Morrow a bit lower than most Mariner fans do. The optimist in all of us remembers the A’s game from late last year, or the Yankees game from the year before, and thinks we had a developing #2, but the reality is there is a reason Morrow flip-flopped so much between starter and reliever and the stone-cold analysis that other GMs (and Jack) probably made contained a healthy dose of skepticism that Morrow will ever reach his full potential as a starter. And I suspect our FO values League a lot more highly than he is being credit for here.
As for #3, it may have some logic in that Seattle doesn’t quite make out like the bandit it appeared in the Lee trade, the logistics are implausible to me. Furthermore, I don’t think Toronto got hosed in that deal. If any part of the trade needed adjustment, it was the Seattle-Philly end, IMO.
I may be one of the few here who does, but I think there is more #2 in this deal (and no, I did not mean it THAT way) than either of the other scenarios. And, while I think perhaps we could have gotten more for Morrow (the Edwin Jackson failed deal seems to indicate that), I’m inclined to think of this trade as a fair, mostly lateral move that is based on an educated guess about where Morrow was going to end up and the (lack of) fit on the M’s roster.
I definitely sense that yet another shoe is about to drop. Man, how many feet does this guy have?
Wow. Separate deals. Why not wait and see what you have this year with Morrow? If this is actually true, I am not a fan of this move. It just doesn’t make sense.
Put me down for #2. I think more moves are coming, and wouldn’t be shocked at all to see Lowe or Aardsma moved.
Although I’m not a fan of this deal, I can easily wrap my head around the idea that Zduriencik just didn’t see much value from Morrow, and moved him for what he felt was the best offer.
To ignore the cost for just a moment…
I am quite excited to see just how well League might perform going from Toronto to Safeco, from Turf to Grass, from that defense to this defense. He could be quite fun to watch in 2010.
I agree with the others who says Morrow’s value probably wasn’t as high as a lot of M’s fans believed. I also can’t deny that League has fairly similar numbers to Morrow. Having said that, I think Morrow has a much higher ceiling than League. League could be a very good reliever, but Morrow can still be, in my opinion, a very good starter. The first thing Morrow needs is to pitch in an organization that doesn’t shuttle him between the minors and the bigs every time the wind blows 6-8 MPH from the east. Put him in the rotation, leave him there, see what he can do. Period. It’s not rocket science, but somehow is was for the M’s?
Also, and this has already been pointed out, but if Z goes out and gets Sheets or Duch to be our #3, I won’t really mind Morrow getting dealt. A 3-5 of Sheets or Duch/RRS/Snell is pretty good. A 3-5 of RRS/Snell/Fister/Vargas/Olsen/Spoljaric/Charlton/Ayala/Rick the Peanut Guy makes me want to puke.
When this trade first went down I was in disbelief. But I have come around to think of it as a fair deal for both teams. Maybe cause Christmas is around the corner and I am in a forgiving mood. Either way the deal does not look as bas as I first thought.
The bullpen looks like a shutdown-blow-them-away-strike-them-out-playoff bound bullpen. And the Chavez kid might me better than I thought. Check this out.
Marc Hulet over at fangraphs had this to say about the him:
By reading other Websites, such as USSmariner, it’s clear that a lot of people were hoping for a more MLB-ready prospect like right-hander Zach Stewart, or infielder Brett Wallace. They are certainly more desirable prospects at this point, so I understand the disappointment that many felt when it was announced the prospect was going to be a player in the low minors.
However, Chavez was certainly one of the Top 10 prospects (in a weaker system) that I had hoped would not be included in a trade, but he was in the latter half of the list. The outfielder originally signed his first pro contract at the age of 16 in 2005. He’s come a long way since then, and it certainly appears as though the Mariners organization acquired a diamond in the rough.
[see guidelines]
What are you, Glenn Beck? If you want to call someone out just do it. Don’t fart around with this “isn’t it interesting that DMZ has the same initials as the area between South Korea and a TOTALITARIAN STATE WHERE ALL SPEECH IS CONTROLLED?!?!?!?”
There’s also a huge jump between “there are a couple of things that could be happening” of the post and the “no one does handshake deals like that” contention of people which is entirely wrong and contradicted by vast amounts of evidence.
Dave,
I am glad to see you have come around to my way of thinking… 🙂
Whether you like Glenn Beck or not there are times when he makes a lot of sense, but that’s not what this post is about. Z wanted help in the bull pen and got it. Pure and simple. Lets move on.
@seattleslew,
My thoughts exactly. My whole problem with dealing Morrow is that we were dealing from a position of weakness. His value is already very low, so if we had kept him and he completely flailed and destroyed his trade value completely we would lose out on what, League and a prospect who may not even see the majors? Big deal.
The other side of the coin is Morrow putting it together, and his trade value climbing to a much higher level. We could then either keep him in the rotation, or trade him for something much better than League and Chavez.
I guess to put it simply, on a scale of 1-10 (1 being no trade value and 10 being superstar) we traded Morrow at probably a 3, in my opinion. As it stood, his value could still go down a little, but it could also go way up. I think the risk far outweighed the reward in terms of keeping him around and seeing what he could do.
Whatever Z wants Z gets. I think that’s why he will be anming a 3rd starter by the end of the month either through trade or Free agency. He’ll also get a 1st baseman before the end of next month guaranteed.
As Seinfeld noted, sports is cheering for laundry. But this one case where I really hope the cliche “change of scenery” helps Morrow and he does break out. He’s been treated here like a dog at the hands of an animal hoarder. So yeah, we probably got the one who is the better pitcher right now. That could change in the future but it wasn’t going to happen here. Now explain to me again how we have strong pitching? Bullpen, yes. Starters, not so much beyond Cliff-Freaking-Lee and King Felix.
entertaining myself.
“Hendry focused on [Milton] Bradley right out of the box and struck a handshake deal with the controversial player in December, though a final deal couldn’t be completed until Hendry took care of some payroll shuffling.”–Chicago Sun Times, July 2, 2009
“Faced last night with a midnight deadline to reach agreement on a new contract, offer arbitration or lose negotiating rights with the veteran center fielder until May, the Yankees received a handshake deal from Williams’ agent, Scott Boras, which buys them more time to work out a new pact and effectively ensures Williams will return to the Bronx.”–Daily News, Dec 8, 2005
“Wells couldn’t return to New York without controversy. Turns out the Yankees thought they had a handshake deal over the winter to have Wells return in 2004 on a minor-league contract. Wells reportedly backed out when he realized the deal allowed the Yankees to monitor his weight and body-fat percentage. He ditched the Yankees — just like he dumped the Diamondbacks after a handshake deal before the 2002 season — and signed a major-league deal with the Padres.”–Chicago Sun-Times, June 13, 2004
“According to Giants officials, [GM] Sabean, for deeply personal reasons, never signed a contract extension with the Giants last winter and is operating under a handshake deal with owner Peter Magowan.”–Star-Ledger, Apr 20, 2003
So it turns it was #1, with a little bit of #3.
The M’s didn’t place the same value on ‘potential’ as some here do. They saw a talented but inconsistent pitcher would have to fight for the 5th spot in the rotation, where they have a healthy competition, but they needed another strong arm for the bullpen. Toronto may have felt more of a need to develop for the future with the departure of Halladay. Trade makes sense from both teams angles. As Jack Z says, you have to give talent to get talent.
For what it’s worth,Derek- I’ve been to the DMZ (Paju City).
I’ve crawled through the tunnels North Koreans mad e in South Korean territory, heard the broadcasts in Korean that say “come to our side” and even got a gander at the Bridge Of No Return.
It’s creepy and the most tense environment I’ve ever been in.
Your opinions are much more pleasant to digest! I promise.
Felix had 34 starts last year, had a 3.09 FIP and was 19-5. If the bullpen was .500 with the remaining 10 games he started, that’s 24 wins on Felix Day.
Cliff Lee had a 3.11 FIP last year, which should translate to a very similar W-L, if he’d had the same defense behind him. 48 wins in 68 starts.
If the rest of the rotation+bullpen can put up .500 ball, that’s an additional 47 wins out of the remaining 94 games, or a 95-win season for the M’s. 95 wins could have won the division last year, if you assume some of the additional games would have come at the expense of the Angels. And that’s before the positional improvements we’ve already seen, so you’re talking about a league-worst offense there.
So, yeah. Felix+Lee+a bunch of league-average pitchers really is “strong pitching”.
Granted, that’s probably all so far out in speculation-land that it doesn’t really belong on this site. : )
Those would be the times you’re blitzed out of your brain right?
The trade suggests Jack Z is persuaded by facts, not hopes or expectations. I admire that. In his place, I would have had a difficult time letting go of the pitcher I thought Morrow would become, rather than the one he has become.
I am more perplexed about his overall plan, since I was kind of looking forward to a youth movement. Maybe he believes it is more effective to improve incrementally than fill your roster with young studs and watch them mature. Has Jack Z ever discussed his goals for the Mariners over the next few years?
@georgmi Hmmm….interesting. Kinda like having two Randy Johnsons then? Well, I hope they both stay healthy and put up those numbers and our remaining pitchers are indeed league average and not worse. (Oh wait, we turned one of them into Milton Bradley.)
I thought there was a no politics rule?
As Dave has already noted, acquiring Cliff Lee on a short-term deal changes everything. Patience disappears when you’re going for it all right now, so we trade Morrow’s 2011-12 potential for known shutdown innings in 2010.
– Wasn’t there a where the Ben Davis trade was done in a hotel bar on a napkin?? I think I’d actually tend to lean the other way and assume most trades and player decisions are done via hand shake
“there a *story* where
If we’re going to sign another starting pitcher, then there was no room for Morrow in the starting rotation (Lee, Felix, free agent, Rowland-Smith, Snell). We weren’t sending him to the bullpen, and we weren’t sending him to AAA.
So we traded his bullpen-ness for League, and his starter potential for Chavez.
If Jack Zduriencik thinks Yohermyn is a good ballplayer, and Dave and Derek don’t, I’m going with Jack Zduriencik. Dude knows his shit.
(Oh wait, we turned one of them into Milton Bradley.)
We turned one of our worst pitchers into Milton Bradley. Big deal. The M’s right now have Snell, RRS, Vargas, French, Olson and Fister competing for 3 spots in the rotation. 6 guys going for 3 spots, I can live with.
Wasn’t there a deal once between the Rockies and Red Sox that was near completion, and the Rockies pulled out, which led to the Sox to say “Fuck the Rockies, we’ll never work with them again”?
Which is to say, a handshake deal to join this to the Lee deal is pretty much enforceable, in an unofficial way.
Why does anybody think Snell is competing for a starting spot? Does that mean you believe that Zduriencik is only giving a guy he traded for two months to prove his worth? Snell was mediocre, but he wasn’t terrible.
I’m sure his spot isn’t 100% secure, but he’s going to have to blow it or somebody else is going to have to steal it.
I think it was a good deal; that trade made the pitching staff and the offense better.
Oh, Glenn Beck isn’t politics. It’s more like asshattery. See, no rules violated. Move along, folks.
I think the general feeling is that Snell’s multimillion dollar contract pretty much assures him of a rotation spot.
wabbles, I wouldn’t say the contract gets him a rotation spot. The fact that Zduriencik made a trade for him tells me he’s in the rotation.
#3 doesn’t make much sense to me. I’d understand a handshake deal with the Phillies, but a handshake deal with Toronto doesn’t seem to hold water.
We got Cliff Lee from the Phillies, if any additional value needed to be sent out, it would make sense that it would be headed to Philadelphia, and not Toronto.
Sorry, that should have read “it was a *big* deal”.
But that’s what happens when you have an idiot doing your typing.
I’m pretty sure if Snell stunk the joint up to the point where there were three better starters, they’d do to him what they did to Batista or Silva- stick him into garbage relief or send him to the DL with acute suckitis.
Sorry, that should have read “it was a *big* dealâ€.
My point is “who cares if we lost Carlos Silva as a potential starter in 2010?”. I see any of our backend guys as being able to take advantage of good defense + pitcher’s park as much as Silva could. At some point, they are all kind of randomly interchangeable replacement value guys, all as likely to have the random Elmer Dessens/Ryan Franklin “breakout” year as to be horrible.
And, while I am at it, I’d give Snell and RRS slight improvements on being > replacement value… but not big ones.
*sighs*… I give up. IMO – Barring injury, RRS isn’t competing for a spot – he has one. I think he can be a good 3 and is a great 4. He lasted at least 7 innings in 8 of his 15 starts (small sample size I know). But he’s willing to go deep into games, and pitches to contact which is perfect with this defense.
RRS shouldn’t be grouped in with the other pitchers competing. There’s a parking spot in the rotation with his name on it.
This post makes me think that someone needs to create a Mariners based choose your own adventure novel.
Hiring Bill Bavasi could lead to page where you are taken over by evil alien Brain Spiders, while hiring Jack Zduriencik sets you on the course to win the World Series.
Yes, RRS is actually quite good, and is definitely ahead of the group of replacement to just-above replacement level 5th starters we have. (Snell/Vargas/Fister/Olson/etc).
Felix/Lee/RRS followed by whatever 2 of those perform best in spring training is a reasonable picthing lineup, and is cheap as well. If we upgrade one of those back end spots with a trade or free agent signing before the year starts thats good, but its not a requirement at this point.
If this is #3 what would be the harm in presenting this transaction as part of the 3 team deal?
So, after reading Baker’s account of the conference call, in which Z said this was a ‘complete, separate’ transaction, it seems like we’re left with only two options:
a- agreeing that the original conspiracy theory (#3) was dead wrong; or,
b- calling Jack a liar.
Which do we like?