Indians Prospect Insider - Covering the Cleveland Indians from the Minors to the Big Leagues

Wil Ohman?

Talk about the Cleveland Indians, Major League Baseball, and other sports.

Wil Ohman?

Postby Hermie13 » Wed Dec 17, 2008 6:05 pm

According to ESPN, the Tribe has inquired on Wil Ohman since the Winter Meetings. We could definately use another lefty in the pen (not sold on Jackson or Rundles just yet). Is said to want a 2 yr deal at least though (I'd prefer Shouse at 1yr), but wouldn't be a bad add.

He'd be a solid LOOGY for the pen. Lefties only hit .200 off him last year. He did struggle in the second half, but also saw his workload go up by about 20 innings from the previous year, may have been fatigue setting in.

In any case, his workload likely would be less being the #2 lefty behind Perez keeping him (and Perez) fresher.


He'd be a nice guy to bring in against Mauer, Morneu, or Thome late in a game.....

Before all the moves we started making, I felt that a lefty reliever was our biggest need (even more than closer, though that was definately high on the list as well). With the addition of Wood and Smith, the need isn't there as much though....
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7096
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Wil Ohman?

Postby npc29 » Wed Dec 17, 2008 6:56 pm

I was interested, but after both Wood and Smith being added, I'm not really sure I'd like to see money funneled into a position that is pretty well taken care of. It would be nice to have Miller, Stevens, Meloan, Rundles, Jackson and Sipp on stand by instead of one starting the year in the pen, but if the Indians are really pressed in terms of spending money the rest of the offseason, I'd like to see that coin be dealt somewhere else.
npc29
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 625
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 4:59 pm
Location: Kent, OH

Re: Wil Ohman?

Postby indianinkslinger » Wed Dec 17, 2008 8:33 pm

I believe things will happen and Shapiro is not done in the pen. I am not sure Rundles is realy but Jackson can probably do duel duty as a longman/loogy. No objection except for cost.
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: Wil Ohman?

Postby carnegie44115 » Wed Dec 17, 2008 10:06 pm

I hope things are only going to change in the pen if Shapiro deals one of our young guys in a trade. I really don't see the point in signing a guy like Ohman especially a two year deal, I think they like Rundles enough to give him a shot at being a LH specialist and Jackson would be serviceable enough to come in against a LH batter, if the situation is high pressure, then you bring in Perez.
carnegie44115
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:12 pm

Re: Wil Ohman?

Postby cardiackidz » Wed Dec 17, 2008 10:35 pm

ohman makes no sense.
cardiackidz
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 397
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 2:25 pm

Re: Wil Ohman?

Postby jellis » Wed Dec 17, 2008 10:36 pm

I just dont see any point to it and I think the indians just considered it before the deals, after the deals I bet there is little interest
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: Wil Ohman?

Postby Hermie13 » Thu Dec 18, 2008 9:30 am

Well according to the source, we inquired on him after the winter meetings.....which would have been after both the Wood and Smith deals....


I don't think we'll sign him, but no harm in inquiring. My guess is they were seeing how pricey he'd be. If he'd be decently cheap for 2 years it'd be a good move. He was bad in 2007 and just 'ok' in 2006. He isn't worth a lot of money even with how well he did last year.

Shapiro does love depth in the pen. Signed 4 guys before the 2007 season (though one was Foulke who retired soon after...the others beign Fultz, Hernandez, and Borowski).


Not really sure how "ohman makes no sense".....as things stand now, we very well may only have one lefty in our pen (perez). Wood, Perez, Lewis, Betancourt, Kobaysashi, Smith, and Mujica (out of options) could very well be the pen on opening day as things stand now. Jackson is also out of options so could force himself in there.....but if he doesn't, there's only 1 lefty. Perez was a starter so can throw some innings.....but I'd really like to see someone else in there to take some innings off his arm to help keep him fresh and on top of his game....
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7096
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Wil Ohman?

Postby dnosco » Thu Dec 18, 2008 2:45 pm

No harm in inquiring. If we have a done deal with him in our back pocket we are free to trade Raffy Perez. In my opinion this Raffy is the one who should be traded. He is looking like he is not closer material but the thought that he could be has just enough legs that he might bring us a pretty good return.

I can only imagine the thoughts of some fans if we trade one of our "good" relievers and keep one of our "bad" relievers like Betancourt. For me, however, I would rather trade a guy on his upswing given that relievers go up and down like a stormy ocean. Given his workload last year I am thinking Perez may be the most likely to have a dip in performance, if not this year then next. So, if you are going to trade him now would be the time. Not that I want to trade him, but....

...if we are looking at Ohman for a two year deal AND we are not trading Raffy Perez, then I am incensed. It would mean, once again, the ML team is nixing potential options in Rundles, Jackson and MAYBE Sipp, even though his lack of participation in the winter is a potential red flag to me, no matter how we hear it spun. We can't keep bringing in vets when we have young guys with the stuff to do the job.
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: Wil Ohman?

Postby Hermie13 » Thu Dec 18, 2008 3:06 pm

Perez I wouldn't trade.....Jensen Lewis though I'd consider. We are just too think with lefties to really trade our best reliever in Perez....

None of the guys you mention (Rundles, Jackson, and Sipp) are better than Perez or even Ohman though (well Sipp could be but isn't yet).....so why would you be 'incensed' at 'nixing potential options'? Our club would be better....isn't that what we should be doing?
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7096
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Wil Ohman?

Postby dnosco » Thu Dec 18, 2008 4:15 pm

Hermie13 wrote:Perez I wouldn't trade.....Jensen Lewis though I'd consider. We are just too think with lefties to really trade our best reliever in Perez....

None of the guys you mention (Rundles, Jackson, and Sipp) are better than Perez or even Ohman though (well Sipp could be but isn't yet).....so why would you be 'incensed' at 'nixing potential options'? Our club would be better....isn't that what we should be doing?


Hermie,

That is ABSOLUTELY the issue. Our club would be better if we replaced each and every young guy who isn't a core piece on our team with a veteran who is currently as good or better. But you just don't do that, especially as a small market club. It creates three issues: (a) you have stymied the development of your young players (b) you have (maybe needlessly) raised your payroll and (c) you have created a roster situation that may result in you losing a guy who you have to DFA to allow the new guy to be rostered. This latter point is often overlooked but remember that is the reason we lost Guthrie when we did, we needed a roster spot. If you want you can even add a (d) wind up trading your prospects before they have reached top value because you have no place for them. I can't tell you how many people, at the time, said trading Giles for Rincon made sense because 'where as Giles going to play?'. While it was a legitimate question the question should have been "Why did we sign Justice to an extension when Giles was clearly ready?'

Again, if you want the sure thing always sign the overpriced or even market-value priced veteran. Unfortunately, that is an expensive and short-term fix. Having faith in your farm system and not using them as your 2nd or, in some cases, even 3rd option (2nd option being some retread AAAA guy) is the best way for small market teams to operate, IMHO.

You guys know that I am a curmuddgeon about a lot of these moves but this is the one that really rots my socks. I am still stinging over the two draft choices we lost for Dellucci and Hernandez when neither was a needed signing (nor was Fultz, for that matter). If Shapiro can't learn by his mistakes we will have to continually eat the results and I, for one, want to push back from that table as I have had it up to my ears with that, failed approach.
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: Wil Ohman?

Postby Hermie13 » Thu Dec 18, 2008 4:54 pm

Well one thing needs to be said, Rundles is NOT a young guy. He'll be 28 next year....

We lost a 2nd and 3rd round picks for those two. Would have been nice to have them....but you never know what would have happened with those players (for the record, the guy Philly took with our third round pick went to college and is still there today). Tribe needed Dellucci at the time as well (and Hernandez to a point). We needed someone in the OF. We had talks with Lofton (who I said at the time would have been a perfect fit) but he took way more money and the ability to play CF to go to Texas. Gut was still raw and Francisco wasn't ready (nor was Choo really who ended up needed TJ surgery anyways).

We lost Guthrie (at the time we lost him....he was likely not gonna make the team out of ST anyways) when we signed Nixon and needed a roster spot. Was it worth it in the long run? Definatley not.....but without Nixon, we don't make the playoffs in 2007. He was the glue that brought team together and even performed well when needed. The power lacked but the OBP was still there.


So would you rather of had the 2 draft picks and 'maybe' Guthrie on the team now but not have made the 2007 playoffs? Personally I wouldn't.....but others have their own feelings.

Guthrie likely wouldn't have made the rotation out of ST and the team decided that Cabrera and Davis were more valuable in the pen than Guthrie.....obviously they were wrong there, but they gave the young guys shots like you want.


Also, trading Giles had nothing to do with 'he had no position'. Justice could have easily stayed at DH where he played most of the year prior to Giles getting traded. The team desperately needed a lefty (and Rincon actually really helped the club in 1999 have one of their best years yet). Justice moved from DH to LF and after the trade of Giles we signed Cordero to DH and brought up Sexon to DH some (had a few games the prior year as well). Brian Giles was going on 28 when we traded him....again, not like he was some great 'young' guy at the time (only 5 years younger than Justice).



You could go round and round with 'what if's'....had we not resigned Justice we'd never have gotten Westbrook either (another big part of us making the playoffs in 2007). Tribe does tend to lean towards the older guys, but they do give younger guys chances more often than you give them credit for.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7096
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Wil Ohman?

Postby cardiackidz » Thu Dec 18, 2008 5:44 pm

why would you want to trade one of the premier left handed relief pitchers in baseball? we finally have what looks to be a pretty good bullpen and people want to start trading guys. who are we going to trade next sizemore?
cardiackidz
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 397
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 2:25 pm

Re: Wil Ohman?

Postby carnegie44115 » Thu Dec 18, 2008 6:11 pm

cardiackidz wrote:why would you want to trade one of the premier left handed relief pitchers in baseball? we finally have what looks to be a pretty good bullpen and people want to start trading guys. who are we going to trade next sizemore?



But when you have a strength and a surplus you can afford to trade one or two of them. I wouldn't trade Sipp though that guy could be a closer in the future and I would hope we would try to deal Betancourt first.
carnegie44115
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:12 pm

Re: Wil Ohman?

Postby dnosco » Thu Dec 18, 2008 7:09 pm

cardiackidz wrote:why would you want to trade one of the premier left handed relief pitchers in baseball? we finally have what looks to be a pretty good bullpen and people want to start trading guys. who are we going to trade next sizemore?


The point of this discussion is that we might sign Ohman. Why? We have a bunch of left handers, just not guys with a lot of ML experience. So, you sign Ohman and you now push those guys down once more instead of giving them their chance. It's the Indians' way and I don't like it and, in my opinion, in most cases they try to fill with veterans and only if they can't fill with veterans or if those veterans fail do they give young guys a chance. Yeah, they give them chances but in most if not all cases it is because they can't find a veteran option. Then they go on and dis and tick off, trade or lose young guys after they have signed the older guys. To me, that's just not right and not the way to build a team that is competitive for the long-term.
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: Wil Ohman?

Postby cardiackidz » Thu Dec 18, 2008 10:09 pm

the point is you dont trade a premier lefthanded relief pitcher and replace him with a very average one.
cardiackidz
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 397
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 2:25 pm

Re: Wil Ohman?

Postby Hermie13 » Fri Dec 19, 2008 10:02 am

dnosco wrote:The point of this discussion is that we might sign Ohman. Why? We have a bunch of left handers, just not guys with a lot of ML experience. So, you sign Ohman and you now push those guys down once more instead of giving them their chance. It's the Indians' way and I don't like it and, in my opinion, in most cases they try to fill with veterans and only if they can't fill with veterans or if those veterans fail do they give young guys a chance. Yeah, they give them chances but in most if not all cases it is because they can't find a veteran option. Then they go on and dis and tick off, trade or lose young guys after they have signed the older guys. To me, that's just not right and not the way to build a team that is competitive for the long-term.


We do have some lefties.....but are any of them any good? Jackson is really a starter. He could turn into a Brian Tallet type and have an ok career in the pen.....but being out of option, he may not even make this club without signing ohman (Mujica may get the spot over him now). Rundles is going on 28 already. He did ok in his 5 innings with us last year (though a very high WHIP). He needs more time at AAA IMO. Sipp is the only one that looks to have much value. Coming off TJ surgery still. Starting in AAA then coming up when there's an injury would be in his best interest (and the team's). He has yet to throw a pitch in AAA, and wan't 'great' at Akron this past year coming back from injury (though about as good as you could expect for missing all that time with injury).


Personally I'd look at trading Sipp (at least before Perez). Yeah he could be a closer.....but his stuff really isn't any better than Perez's. Perez has the stuff to be a closer just as much if not more than Sipp (who is fairly old for his experience level as well). Perez will be 27 in May.....Sipp will be 26 in July.....but Perez is a proven ML backend of the bullpen guy. Sipp so far has proven he's a very good AA pitcher.....

If you want to trade Perez over Sipp cause you know you'll get way more, then that's one thing....but assuming Sipp will be hands above better than Perez is a bit much IMO....



I remember last winter some people talking about this......but one idea could be to move Perez to the rotation.....

He was a good starter in the minors (even AAA). I was adamently against him going to the rotation last year.....but this year it could make some sense depending on if we can add someone to the rotation via trade/free agency. Perez's stuff definately appears to play out better in the pen (that fastball/slider combo is dynamite).....but does have a changeup that he can throw (doesn't need it in the pen), and does have a 2 variations of his fastball. Not a move I'd trully like to see......but a remote possibility....

Wouldn't be the first time a dominate reliever has moved to the rotation....
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7096
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Wil Ohman?

Postby dnosco » Fri Dec 19, 2008 10:46 am

Never really said that Sipp was better Perez. Sipp has proven nothing which is why he is worth nothing. Perez is worth a lot but, IMHO, has had a pretty heavy, though not extreme, workload. Hey, I am all for keeping Perez if we don't get Ohman. However, if we get Ohman then I trade Perez instead of Sipp because you have too many lefties (counting the prospects). Hey, I admit it is a chance but it is a chance that, as a small market team you have to take. You can't keep dissing, giving away on waivers or trading for little value prospects just to have a veteran in position in case you are quality enough to make a run. You have to trust the kids. The Indians do not do that as their first choice in any situation, again, in my opinion. However, if we want to take the discussion down that path the examples are legion and infamous of the times they didn't do that...much to my dismay almost every time when they made the decision to go with the veteran.
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: Wil Ohman?

Postby dnosco » Fri Dec 19, 2008 10:47 am

cardiackidz wrote:the point is you dont trade a premier lefthanded relief pitcher and replace him with a very average one.


Agreed. But I guess that means that you are not a fan of signing Ohman, right?
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: Wil Ohman?

Postby Hermie13 » Fri Dec 19, 2008 11:20 am

dnosco wrote:Never really said that Sipp was better Perez. Sipp has proven nothing which is why he is worth nothing. Perez is worth a lot but, IMHO, has had a pretty heavy, though not extreme, workload. Hey, I am all for keeping Perez if we don't get Ohman. However, if we get Ohman then I trade Perez instead of Sipp because you have too many lefties (counting the prospects). Hey, I admit it is a chance but it is a chance that, as a small market team you have to take. You can't keep dissing, giving away on waivers or trading for little value prospects just to have a veteran in position in case you are quality enough to make a run. You have to trust the kids. The Indians do not do that as their first choice in any situation, again, in my opinion. However, if we want to take the discussion down that path the examples are legion and infamous of the times they didn't do that...much to my dismay almost every time when they made the decision to go with the veteran.


Strongly disagree here. We still only have ONE lefty on the ML roster and really only 2 in the minros (Sipp and Rundles). Rundles isn't likely to get much better at his age (though possible)....so you're banking on Sipp being a stud.....which could happen.....


Sipp does have value too. Obviously not as much as Perez, but teams still view him as a very nice prospect.


I disagree too that these are chances you have to take as a small market club. Ohman won't break the bank even for a small market club like us. And NOT having a lot of viable lefties in the minors makes the signing make a lot of sense.


Kinda a moot point probably as I really don't see Ohman signing with us (He'll likely go to a club not as deep in the pen where he'd be the primary lefty and not playing second fiddle to Perez). Though if we do sign him, I gurantee Perez doesn't get traded and rightfully so.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7096
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Wil Ohman?

Postby dnosco » Fri Dec 19, 2008 1:18 pm

Just a basic, philosophic point where we have to agree to disagree. I have seen it too many times for my liking where the Indians have signed a veteran for a lot of money when a prospect could have done just as well. So we would be paying Ohman, say, $3 million a year for a couple of years and Carroll $2.3 million for a total of over $5 million a year for niche jobs which should be able to be handled by some prospect or, in the case of a utility infielder, some guy making the ML minimum for his experience level.

For a small market team it does all add up. You simply don't spend money on guys when there are multiple, albeit less certain, in-house options. In my opinion you just don't do that.

Add to that the backup this causes with prospects, the lowering of morale that Tony has already pointed out due to that backup, our history (Phillips, for example) of how that can muddy your prospect evaluation, and, finally, the necessity of either waiving, exposing to the Rule 5 or trading prospects you never give a chance to, means, to me, you DO take the gamble with the young guys.

Ohman, though he may never be an Indian, instantly, for me, becomes the poster child for this.

I mean, c'mon Indians!. Take a freakin' chance on a young player for once as your first choice!

I mean, look for example on Breslow. We gave him a couple of weeks and then let him go and, bam, he is picked up by Minnesota and immediately becomes one of their top relievers...just because we didn't give him enough time to settle in here before doing a knee-jerk decision on the guy.
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: Wil Ohman?

Postby Hermie13 » Fri Dec 19, 2008 2:29 pm

dnosco wrote:Just a basic, philosophic point where we have to agree to disagree. I have seen it too many times for my liking where the Indians have signed a veteran for a lot of money when a prospect could have done just as well. So we would be paying Ohman, say, $3 million a year for a couple of years and Carroll $2.3 million for a total of over $5 million a year for niche jobs which should be able to be handled by some prospect or, in the case of a utility infielder, some guy making the ML minimum for his experience level.

For a small market team it does all add up. You simply don't spend money on guys when there are multiple, albeit less certain, in-house options. In my opinion you just don't do that.

Add to that the backup this causes with prospects, the lowering of morale that Tony has already pointed out due to that backup, our history (Phillips, for example) of how that can muddy your prospect evaluation, and, finally, the necessity of either waiving, exposing to the Rule 5 or trading prospects you never give a chance to, means, to me, you DO take the gamble with the young guys.

Ohman, though he may never be an Indian, instantly, for me, becomes the poster child for this.

I mean, c'mon Indians!. Take a freakin' chance on a young player for once as your first choice!

I mean, look for example on Breslow. We gave him a couple of weeks and then let him go and, bam, he is picked up by Minnesota and immediately becomes one of their top relievers...just because we didn't give him enough time to settle in here before doing a knee-jerk decision on the guy.


Well I get we're not gonna agree.....

But how do you know a prospect would have done just as well? In some cases maybe, but others they wouldn't have. And Carroll could easily be starting 60-80 games next year for the ML club. He's worth the $2.5M he's gonna make next year if that's the case. I agree, as a guy only on the bench it's a bit much (though not really)....but unless we land a viable starter on the IF, he's likely to be the guy (he's had some success as a starting 2B with the Rockies).

And why do you want prospects filling the utility infielder role? I think that's one of the worst ideas for a team like the Indians (or any team really). You want those guys playing everyday to keep their skills up, not having them waste on the bench only getting a few at-bats a week. This is the worst thing a team can do with their young players IMHO. Even worse than bringing them up too slow and supposively 'hurting' them.


And not sure Breslow is a good example for you to use. We gave a younger guy a chance when we let him go. Bad choice, but doesn't fit your motto that we don't give young guys chances in favor of vets. Breslow was desinated to allow Aubrey to stay up. Breslow was 27 (turned 28 in the summer). He's not a 'young' guy really.

And are you gonna blame all the other teams that let Breslow go? Only reason we had him was because he was designated by another club at the end of spring training. The Tribe actually CUT a veteran in Fultz to make room for Breslow.


I do agree, that there are times I'd like to see the Tribe use their young guys.....but none of the guys have have been mentioned that Ohman would take the spot of seem like guys that'll impact this bullpen this year and possibly not even 2010. Jackson is a starter. Rundles has already become a minor league free agent before and signed a minor league deal because he hasn't shown enough to be a ML (ironically...he was once traded with Tomo Ohka in his career...and will be pitching with him again in columbus). Sipp needs to show he can get AAA pitchers out. He's the one guy that might get held back....but consdiering in 2010 guys like Betancourt and Kobayashi could be gone. There will be room for him in the bullpen even if Ohman were signed.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7096
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH


Return to Beyond The Minors

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest