RSS Twitter Facebook YouTube
Expand Menu

Question Regarding Strategy for Tribe Going Forward

Talk shop about the various prospects and teams that make up the Cleveland Indians organization.

Question Regarding Strategy for Tribe Going Forward

Postby elrod enchilada » Thu Sep 23, 2010 9:41 am

Many of you know that I am relatively new to the board. I was a Tribe fanatic growing up in Cleveland in the 1960s, during what were generally terrible years to be a Tribe fanatic, and I followed the team closely deep into the 1990s. When the farm system was effectively abandoned and all the young talent was traded away in the late 90s my interest began to weaken and I had other pressing matters in my life. I also developed my love of professional basketball and have been an active blogger in that area.

In the past year I have rejuvenated my interest in the Tribe and this website has been a Godsend. Thank you Tony and everyone else who contributes.

I write this so you will understand that I am somewhat ignorant of recent trends in the game, and I have a lot to learn. I ask the following question in earnest.

I read in Tony's twitter account I believe that we might expect to see Kipnis, Weglarz and Chisenhall in Cleveland as early as June 2011.

Isn't that a stupid idea for Tribe management?

It seems that in the current economics of baseball, the Tribe should not bring a legitimate star prospect to the major leagues until the player is almost past due. We only get six seasons with the player until we lose them to free agency, so it is in our interest to let the players get as much on-the-job training as possible at AAA, and then only bring them to the majors when they are more than ready. If it adds one more season to their Cleveland experience, it will be that 6th season when they are in their utter prime.

In the old days we would rush a great talent to the majors becuae we did not have to worry about free agency. Hence Buddy Bell came to Cleveland as a 20 year old in 1972. In today's environment, he would better off playing one or even two more years in the minors and coming to Cleveland more fully formed at age 22.

Logically, therefore, let our position players go station-to-station through the minors and maybe even do 1 1/2 seasons in AAA. So, by this logic, let Chizz and Kip and Wegz have a full season in Columbus in 2011. Let them come to Cleveland in September 2011 and play as regulars in 2012.

Why speed along our star players transition to becoming members of the Yankees or the Phillies or the Red Sox?

Does this make sense?
elrod enchilada
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: Question Regarding Strategy for Tribe Going Forward

Postby TonyIBI » Thu Sep 23, 2010 10:11 am

elrod enchilada wrote:I read in Tony's twitter account I believe that we might expect to see Kipnis, Weglarz and Chisenhall in Cleveland as early as June 2011.

Isn't that a stupid idea for Tribe management?

It seems that in the current economics of baseball, the Tribe should not bring a legitimate star prospect to the major leagues until the player is almost past due. We only get six seasons with the player until we lose them to free agency, so it is in our interest to let the players get as much on-the-job training as possible at AAA, and then only bring them to the majors when they are more than ready. If it adds one more season to their Cleveland experience, it will be that 6th season when they are in their utter prime.


Thanks for the nice comments.

Actually, bringing up your "big guns" mid-season makes a lot of sense. By doing so, you essentially get a free year of service time. If Kipnis for example were called up in June next year and never went back to the minors, he would be a free agent after the 2017 season. If Kipnis were called up to start the 2012 season and never went back to the minors...he would be a free agent after the 2017 season.

Remember, it is six FULL years of service time...not actual years. So, by spending a half season in Cleveland next year, by the end of the 2016 season he would have around 5.090 days of service (5 years 90 days). 6.000 years or service (or 5.172) would be required to be a free agent.

So, it makes a lot of sense to use that one free half season to get the player acclimated to the big league level so long as they are deemed ready to compete at the big league level. I agree you hold back and don't rush guys, but when they are deemed ready the key is timing their arrival at the end of April or later to get that extra year of control or after about the first week of June to avoid Super 2 (controlling cost with arbitration).
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: Question Regarding Strategy for Tribe Going Forward

Postby A.Zajac » Thu Sep 23, 2010 10:56 am

elrod enchilada wrote:Many of you know that I am relatively new to the board. I was a Tribe fanatic growing up in Cleveland in the 1960s, during what were generally terrible years to be a Tribe fanatic, and I followed the team closely deep into the 1990s. When the farm system was effectively abandoned and all the young talent was traded away in the late 90s my interest began to weaken and I had other pressing matters in my life. I also developed my love of professional basketball and have been an active blogger in that area.

In the past year I have rejuvenated my interest in the Tribe and this website has been a Godsend. Thank you Tony and everyone else who contributes.

I write this so you will understand that I am somewhat ignorant of recent trends in the game, and I have a lot to learn. I ask the following question in earnest.

I read in Tony's twitter account I believe that we might expect to see Kipnis, Weglarz and Chisenhall in Cleveland as early as June 2011.

Isn't that a stupid idea for Tribe management?

It seems that in the current economics of baseball, the Tribe should not bring a legitimate star prospect to the major leagues until the player is almost past due. We only get six seasons with the player until we lose them to free agency, so it is in our interest to let the players get as much on-the-job training as possible at AAA, and then only bring them to the majors when they are more than ready. If it adds one more season to their Cleveland experience, it will be that 6th season when they are in their utter prime.

In the old days we would rush a great talent to the majors becuae we did not have to worry about free agency. Hence Buddy Bell came to Cleveland as a 20 year old in 1972. In today's environment, he would better off playing one or even two more years in the minors and coming to Cleveland more fully formed at age 22.

Logically, therefore, let our position players go station-to-station through the minors and maybe even do 1 1/2 seasons in AAA. So, by this logic, let Chizz and Kip and Wegz have a full season in Columbus in 2011. Let them come to Cleveland in September 2011 and play as regulars in 2012.

Why speed along our star players transition to becoming members of the Yankees or the Phillies or the Red Sox?

Does this make sense?


You have to keep in mind that we may also not lose these guys after their first six years, anyway. Often times, they'll sign a three or four year contract, then leave us. Sometimes, this contract just cuts into the arbitration years. It all depends. But, Tony summed it up quite nicely.
Follow me on Twitter!
@AndrewIPI
User avatar
A.Zajac
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3141
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:31 am
Location: Struthers, OH

Re: Question Regarding Strategy for Tribe Going Forward

Postby Hermie13 » Thu Sep 23, 2010 12:20 pm

A.Zajac wrote:You have to keep in mind that we may also not lose these guys after their first six years, anyway. Often times, they'll sign a three or four year contract, then leave us. Sometimes, this contract just cuts into the arbitration years. It all depends. But, Tony summed it up quite nicely.


I've had this conversation elsewhere....but when was the last time the Indians lost a player after just their full 6 year service time (other than trade or cutting them)?

I mean, Victor, Lee, CC, Westbrook, Hafner, Sizemore, etc.....they all signed deals that took them past their arby years. CC should have been a free agent after 2006, Lee last year, Grady after this season, etc.

Going to be interesting to see if we can keep it going with Choo.....Boras has me a little worried there.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Question Regarding Strategy for Tribe Going Forward

Postby A.Zajac » Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:42 pm

Hermie13 wrote:
A.Zajac wrote:You have to keep in mind that we may also not lose these guys after their first six years, anyway. Often times, they'll sign a three or four year contract, then leave us. Sometimes, this contract just cuts into the arbitration years. It all depends. But, Tony summed it up quite nicely.


I've had this conversation elsewhere....but when was the last time the Indians lost a player after just their full 6 year service time (other than trade or cutting them)?

I mean, Victor, Lee, CC, Westbrook, Hafner, Sizemore, etc.....they all signed deals that took them past their arby years. CC should have been a free agent after 2006, Lee last year, Grady after this season, etc.

Going to be interesting to see if we can keep it going with Choo.....Boras has me a little worried there.


Exactly what I'm saying. Choo I'm a bit concerned about, but quite honestly, I think we can resign ACab, FWIW. And IMO, I believe Chisenhall will be a solid player, but certainly not ELITE. What makes you think he may not resign?
Follow me on Twitter!
@AndrewIPI
User avatar
A.Zajac
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3141
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:31 am
Location: Struthers, OH

Re: Question Regarding Strategy for Tribe Going Forward

Postby Hermie13 » Thu Sep 23, 2010 7:12 pm

A.Zajac wrote:Exactly what I'm saying. Choo I'm a bit concerned about, but quite honestly, I think we can resign ACab, FWIW. And IMO, I believe Chisenhall will be a solid player, but certainly not ELITE. What makes you think he may not resign?


Yeah Antonetti is going to have his ands full here.....not only Choo this year, but in a couple years he'll have LaPorta and Donald as Boras clients.

When was the last time we had 3 Boras clients on the same team? Milwood is the only one I can really think of off the top of my head and that was only 1 season.


One sign of hope is that Boras has mentioned an extention.....something he really never even mentions, let alone does. Maybe he's only talking 3 years (all the arbies).....but Carlos Pena is a Boras guy and he should have been a free agent after the 2009 season but signed that 3 year extension after his monster 2007 season. Different type of players.....but Pena gave up a free agent year after hitting 46 HRs and an OPS over 1.000.....for a World Series team.

I think 4 years is doable......I'm personally hoping for a 5 year $45.5M deal with an option for 6 (taking it to $57M).......

That's probably way too optimistic though...but I can dream :drinks:
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Question Regarding Strategy for Tribe Going Forward

Postby elrod enchilada » Thu Sep 23, 2010 10:09 pm

Thanks for the replies, guys.

Tony, if a player has to have six full seasons before he can enter free agency, then could the Tribe just keep Chisenhall at AAA for all of 2011 and then call up Chisenhall on April 15, 2012, two weeks into the season, and keep him safely through the 2018 season? Could the Tribe send him down for one week in May 2013 and May 2014 and extend his clock another two years so he would be Tribe property through 2010?
elrod enchilada
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: Question Regarding Strategy for Tribe Going Forward

Postby martyinnewyork » Thu Sep 23, 2010 10:31 pm

Elrod... that would be sweet...
martyinnewyork
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 8:16 pm

Re: Question Regarding Strategy for Tribe Going Forward

Postby TonyIBI » Fri Sep 24, 2010 10:45 am

elrod enchilada wrote:Thanks for the replies, guys.

Tony, if a player has to have six full seasons before he can enter free agency, then could the Tribe just keep Chisenhall at AAA for all of 2011 and then call up Chisenhall on April 15, 2012, two weeks into the season, and keep him safely through the 2018 season? Could the Tribe send him down for one week in May 2013 and May 2014 and extend his clock another two years so he would be Tribe property through 2010?


No. Six full seasons mean a player accrued 172 days of service (a full season) six times. It is revolving. So if he gets say 132 days of service one season and then 120 the next season, that is 252 days of service, or otherwise 1.080 days of service. Would still need 92 more days to reach "two" full seasons. Bascially, unless a guy is on the constant AAA-ML shuttle, you can only push out the 6-year window one year to 7 years.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: Question Regarding Strategy for Tribe Going Forward

Postby elrod enchilada » Fri Sep 24, 2010 12:13 pm

that makes sense. we shoudl push it with our top prospects wehebver possible.

Do september call-ups count?
elrod enchilada
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: Question Regarding Strategy for Tribe Going Forward

Postby TonyIBI » Fri Sep 24, 2010 12:16 pm

elrod enchilada wrote:that makes sense. we shoudl push it with our top prospects wehebver possible.

Do september call-ups count?


Any time in the big leagues counts. One day on the 25-man roster is one day of service time no matter when in the season.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: Question Regarding Strategy for Tribe Going Forward

Postby GeronimoSon » Sun Oct 31, 2010 9:52 am

...Why speed along our star players transition to becoming members of the Yankees or the Phillies or the Red Sox...
The interesting situation that relates to this topic are the Cliff Lee & Victor Martinez trades. While Ben Francisco (for the Phillies), Carlos Carrasco, Jason Donald and Lou Marson have contributed to the Indians, albeit, with varying degrees of success, the principle target in this trade, Jason Knapp has, for all intents and purposes, just begun to make strides toward becoming a MLB pitcher. Indian fans will, no doubt, be hearing his name over and over as Knapp progresses through the system.. but, back to the subject at hand

Cliff Lee, through his agent, made it crystal clear that he would become a free agent. No extensions were in the offing. The Indians front office, looking at the potential loss of their second defending AL Cy Young winner who had a year a half left on his contract, decided.. time to strike while the gettin is good ! But was it good?. Optimistic Indian fans think so.. The Indians garnered at least one, and possibly two middle to front of the rotation starting pitchers (Knapp & Carrasco) along with their starting second baseman (puh-lease send Val-malo away !) in Donald and a "gamer" for a catcher with the ability to call a decent game, throw accurately and hit some (still alleged on that case.. but have hope !.. he's hit every where he's ever played). Pessimists view the trade as three pieces of garbage along with a guy with a busted flipper who won't amount to anything.. hmm...

But was the Cliff Lee trade really needed at the time? How about the Victor Martinez trade?. Was it really in the club's best interest? An argument can and should be made that the Indians were not going to "resign" their star players as the resources aren't there and both players were at their peak value. So, what is better?. letting a Type A free agent go elsewhere while retaining that players services thoughout the life of the contract or trading that player prior to the contract's end for the Optimistic or Pessimistic returns as listed above?

The same situation existed for Vmart.. who, like Lee had a reasonable contract for the following year and a half (at the time of the trade)? Would the Indians be a better team WITH these two players..the simple answer is yes.. In future "salary dumps" or trades, it will be the Indinas course to trade these guys for the purpose of continually stocking the farm system or the MLB roster with MLB ready talent.

The nagging question that remains...Did the Indians sell their "present" for what could have been?
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3949
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Question Regarding Strategy for Tribe Going Forward

Postby indianinkslinger » Sun Oct 31, 2010 11:12 am

GeronimoSon wrote:
...Why speed along our star players transition to becoming members of the Yankees or the Phillies or the Red Sox...
The interesting situation that relates to this topic are the Cliff Lee & Victor Martinez trades. While Ben Francisco (for the Phillies), Carlos Carrasco, Jason Donald and Lou Marson have contributed to the Indians, albeit, with varying degrees of success, the principle target in this trade, Jason Knapp has, for all intents and purposes, just begun to make strides toward becoming a MLB pitcher. Indian fans will, no doubt, be hearing his name over and over as Knapp progresses through the system.. but, back to the subject at hand

Cliff Lee, through his agent, made it crystal clear that he would become a free agent. No extensions were in the offing. The Indians front office, looking at the potential loss of their second defending AL Cy Young winner who had a year a half left on his contract, decided.. time to strike while the gettin is good ! But was it good?. Optimistic Indian fans think so.. The Indians garnered at least one, and possibly two middle to front of the rotation starting pitchers (Knapp & Carrasco) along with their starting second baseman (puh-lease send Val-malo away !) in Donald and a "gamer" for a catcher with the ability to call a decent game, throw accurately and hit some (still alleged on that case.. but have hope !.. he's hit every where he's ever played). Pessimists view the trade as three pieces of garbage along with a guy with a busted flipper who won't amount to anything.. hmm...

But was the Cliff Lee trade really needed at the time? How about the Victor Martinez trade?. Was it really in the club's best interest? An argument can and should be made that the Indians were not going to "resign" their star players as the resources aren't there and both players were at their peak value. So, what is better?. letting a Type A free agent go elsewhere while retaining that players services thoughout the life of the contract or trading that player prior to the contract's end for the Optimistic or Pessimistic returns as listed above?

The same situation existed for Vmart.. who, like Lee had a reasonable contract for the following year and a half (at the time of the trade)? Would the Indians be a better team WITH these two players..the simple answer is yes.. In future "salary dumps" or trades, it will be the Indinas course to trade these guys for the purpose of continually stocking the farm system or the MLB roster with MLB ready talent.

The nagging question that remains...Did the Indians sell their "present" for what could have been?

Is this Nosco under a different name?
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: Question Regarding Strategy for Tribe Going Forward

Postby A.Zajac » Sun Oct 31, 2010 12:14 pm

indianinkslinger wrote:
GeronimoSon wrote:
...Why speed along our star players transition to becoming members of the Yankees or the Phillies or the Red Sox...
The interesting situation that relates to this topic are the Cliff Lee & Victor Martinez trades. While Ben Francisco (for the Phillies), Carlos Carrasco, Jason Donald and Lou Marson have contributed to the Indians, albeit, with varying degrees of success, the principle target in this trade, Jason Knapp has, for all intents and purposes, just begun to make strides toward becoming a MLB pitcher. Indian fans will, no doubt, be hearing his name over and over as Knapp progresses through the system.. but, back to the subject at hand

Cliff Lee, through his agent, made it crystal clear that he would become a free agent. No extensions were in the offing. The Indians front office, looking at the potential loss of their second defending AL Cy Young winner who had a year a half left on his contract, decided.. time to strike while the gettin is good ! But was it good?. Optimistic Indian fans think so.. The Indians garnered at least one, and possibly two middle to front of the rotation starting pitchers (Knapp & Carrasco) along with their starting second baseman (puh-lease send Val-malo away !) in Donald and a "gamer" for a catcher with the ability to call a decent game, throw accurately and hit some (still alleged on that case.. but have hope !.. he's hit every where he's ever played). Pessimists view the trade as three pieces of garbage along with a guy with a busted flipper who won't amount to anything.. hmm...

But was the Cliff Lee trade really needed at the time? How about the Victor Martinez trade?. Was it really in the club's best interest? An argument can and should be made that the Indians were not going to "resign" their star players as the resources aren't there and both players were at their peak value. So, what is better?. letting a Type A free agent go elsewhere while retaining that players services thoughout the life of the contract or trading that player prior to the contract's end for the Optimistic or Pessimistic returns as listed above?

The same situation existed for Vmart.. who, like Lee had a reasonable contract for the following year and a half (at the time of the trade)? Would the Indians be a better team WITH these two players..the simple answer is yes.. In future "salary dumps" or trades, it will be the Indinas course to trade these guys for the purpose of continually stocking the farm system or the MLB roster with MLB ready talent.

The nagging question that remains...Did the Indians sell their "present" for what could have been?

Is this Nosco under a different name?


Gotta wonder....
Follow me on Twitter!
@AndrewIPI
User avatar
A.Zajac
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3141
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:31 am
Location: Struthers, OH

Re: Question Regarding Strategy for Tribe Going Forward

Postby GeronimoSon » Sun Oct 31, 2010 3:48 pm

What's a "nosco"?
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3949
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Question Regarding Strategy for Tribe Going Forward

Postby theshow » Sun Oct 31, 2010 5:00 pm

Why did Nosco give up these boards? He isn't coming back this time? Kind of miss him. While it often lead to ridiculous over-debating, he always kept it interesting.
theshow
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 372
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 12:00 am

Re: Question Regarding Strategy for Tribe Going Forward

Postby GoTribe028 » Sun Oct 31, 2010 5:44 pm

theshow wrote:Why did Nosco give up these boards? He isn't coming back this time? Kind of miss him. While it often lead to ridiculous over-debating, he always kept it interesting.


Seriously, I couldn't care less if he gave up this board or was given the boot. He needs to stay hell away. I'm not the type of person that tries to find the silver lining in effort to defend any moves made by this teams front office, but he is the type or person that would split atoms if it meant he could find the slightest fault in any and every move. As you put it, it was ridiculous over debating. His posts really made this place less enjoyable for me.

IMO, he was nothing more than a common troll. He is a freaking punk.
Follow me on Twitter @GoTribe028 for useless and random tweets.
GoTribe028
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1165
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 5:44 pm

Re: Question Regarding Strategy for Tribe Going Forward

Postby TonyIBI » Sun Oct 31, 2010 10:48 pm

theshow wrote:Why did Nosco give up these boards? He isn't coming back this time? Kind of miss him. While it often lead to ridiculous over-debating, he always kept it interesting.


He quit, and I took him up on the offer and banned him. He ain't coming back. And no, Geronimo is not him.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: Question Regarding Strategy for Tribe Going Forward

Postby indianinkslinger » Mon Nov 01, 2010 6:27 pm

theshow wrote:Why did Nosco give up these boards? He isn't coming back this time? Kind of miss him. While it often lead to ridiculous over-debating, he always kept it interesting.

Maybe you and Nosco should start your own blog? You seem to be a good match! :good:
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm


Return to Indians Prospect Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest