RSS Twitter Facebook YouTube
Expand Menu

2011-2013: Window of contention?

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

Grady Sizemore?

Postby GeronimoSon » Mon Sep 12, 2011 2:35 pm

Interesting development....while one thing has nothing to do with the other..it's not uncommon for teams to emulate another...In St Louis, the Cardinals have extended the contract of Chris Carpenter:

The Cardinals and ace Chris Carpenter have agreed to a two-year contract extension worth approximately $21MM, reports Joe Strauss of The St. Louis Post-Dispatch. The righty passed a physical required for insurance last week, and the team intends to announce the deal later this week.

Carpenter, 36, was in the final guaranteed year of the five-year, $63.5MM deal he signed before the 2007 season. The team held a $15MM club option for his services next year, but Strauss says the option is rolled into a longer structure that saves the team about $4MM in 2012. This extension includes no appearance-based incentives or options either. Late last month, Ben Nicholson-Smith said Carpenter "may well be a luxury on whom GM John Mozeliak is prepared spend," and he certainly has.


While two years, $ 21 MM is a pretty impressive contract, it's still a pay reduction.. and, as Carpenter was on the DL.. it's no doubt a "fair" deal for him if he wants to stay where he's at.

..And would certainly qualify, when healthy for Grady Sizemore, as a luxury on whom Chris Antonetti should be prepared to spend on.. Does any see the Grady Sizemore situation differently?..
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3920
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Grady Sizemore?

Postby GhostofTedCox » Mon Sep 12, 2011 4:14 pm

GeronimoSon wrote:Interesting development....while one thing has nothing to do with the other..it's not uncommon for teams to emulate another...In St Louis, the Cardinals have extended the contract of Chris Carpenter:

The Cardinals and ace Chris Carpenter have agreed to a two-year contract extension worth approximately $21MM, reports Joe Strauss of The St. Louis Post-Dispatch. The righty passed a physical required for insurance last week, and the team intends to announce the deal later this week.

Carpenter, 36, was in the final guaranteed year of the five-year, $63.5MM deal he signed before the 2007 season. The team held a $15MM club option for his services next year, but Strauss says the option is rolled into a longer structure that saves the team about $4MM in 2012. This extension includes no appearance-based incentives or options either. Late last month, Ben Nicholson-Smith said Carpenter "may well be a luxury on whom GM John Mozeliak is prepared spend," and he certainly has.


While two years, $ 21 MM is a pretty impressive contract, it's still a pay reduction.. and, as Carpenter was on the DL.. it's no doubt a "fair" deal for him if he wants to stay where he's at.

..And would certainly qualify, when healthy for Grady Sizemore, as a luxury on whom Chris Antonetti should be prepared to spend on.. Does any see the Grady Sizemore situation differently?..


The way I understand it, the Indians have a contractual $8.5 million club option on Sizemore for 2012. They either have to pick it up, or decline it. If they decline it, Sizemore becomes a FA, open to all teams including the Indians.

Now if I was Sizemore's agent looking at rosters that might take a gamble with a fragile OF, I might consider the Indians strongly. I'm not sure if the Indians have 3 MLB quality OF available for next season.
User avatar
GhostofTedCox
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 726
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: 2011-2013: Window of contention?

Postby Lloyd Christmas » Mon Sep 12, 2011 4:34 pm

Ideally Id want them to pick up Sizemores option but would it come at the expense of getting a RH power hitting 1B or LF?
Lloyd Christmas
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 248
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 9:18 pm

Re: Grady Sizemore?

Postby Hermie13 » Mon Sep 12, 2011 5:21 pm

GhostofTedCox wrote:The way I understand it, the Indians have a contractual $8.5 million club option on Sizemore for 2012. They either have to pick it up, or decline it. If they decline it, Sizemore becomes a FA, open to all teams including the Indians.

Now if I was Sizemore's agent looking at rosters that might take a gamble with a fragile OF, I might consider the Indians strongly. I'm not sure if the Indians have 3 MLB quality OF available for next season.


Pretty sure it's a $9M club option now. It got bumped up due to Grady meeting the incentives laid out in his deal.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: 2011-2013: Window of contention?

Postby Hermie13 » Mon Sep 12, 2011 5:29 pm

GeronimoSon wrote:
Hermie13 wrote:Would like to hear why the Nats need a catcher when Wilson Ramos has 12 HRs and .756 OPS (106 OPS+) as a rookie (and a former top 100 prospect). Flores is not a bad backup, and they have Derek Norris in AA. Nats need catching the same way the Indians need right-handed relievers.....
Wilson Ramos is a good Catcher and will be the everyday starter for the Nats, question.. but when you look at Flores and Norris.. there isn't much to like.. Flores was promoted to the MLs to cover for the loss of Ivan Rodriguez (injury to his back.. and a Free Agent to be). Ivan Rodriguez wants to continue to play, but, not with the Nats.. and not at his price tag. Flores was rushed. Norris swings hard in AA in the off chance he makes contact.. IF ever there was a reason to create a position called designate fielder, Norris would be the poster boy.. come to think of it.. even when Flores was in the minors prior to his emergency call up, (there's a hint).. he wasn't batting much better than Norris..

But the real reason.. I've never run into a manager or GM who proclaims he has too many good catchers..


Didn't say they had too many good catchers.....but it's not even close to a need for the Nats. If anything they may look to move a catcher. Can never have too many arms in the pen either, but doesn't mean you 'need' them. Big difference.

Basically you're saying the Indians need a catcher too then? I mean, yeah we have Santana and them the light-hitting Maron, plus a guy in AA...but we still 'need' a catcher? Again, Nats don't need a catcher. Have their starter and a decent enough backup already under contract. Suppose you can always add to any position, but that's not a need. And that's the point.

And Norris may only hit around .200 right now but he's got 20 HRs, 13 steals, an OBP over .360 and OPS over .800. Not sure why you'd want to have him as a designated fielder.....
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: 2011-2013: Window of contention?

Postby criznit2009 » Mon Sep 12, 2011 5:54 pm

The real question with Sizemores option is this.... If he was a FA after this season how much could he expect contract-wise on the open market? I highly doubt it is 9 million... Maybe 6-7 max..... So here is what I do - I decline it and match all other teams offers... If it goes past the original 9 mil in his option (yeah right) so be it..... Spend that money on Fukudome and Willingham for example.....
criznit2009
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1188
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 9:27 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: 2011-2013: Window of contention?

Postby GeronimoSon » Mon Sep 12, 2011 6:32 pm

criznit2009 wrote:The real question with Sizemores option is this.... If he was a FA after this season how much could he expect contract-wise on the open market? I highly doubt it is 9 million... Maybe 6-7 max..... So here is what I do - I decline it and match all other teams offers... If it goes past the original 9 mil in his option (yeah right) so be it..... Spend that money on Fukudome and Willingham for example.....

IDK what the actual value Grady could demand on the open market.. but you are correct.. it won't be in the $ 9 MM ballpark.. The concern that comes to pass.. isn't if the Indians should decline the option..it's when they should decline the option.. What I'm saying is the Indians decline the option after the two year $ 10 MM (example) contract extension is signed, sealed and good to go..

...Didn't say they had too many good catchers.....but it's not even close to a need for the Nats. If anything they may look to move a catcher. Can never have too many arms in the pen either, but doesn't mean you 'need' them. Big difference....
Well, if you want to argue semantics (what a shock.. you arguing).. start off with who made the statement that you can never have too many catchers.. it wasn't you.. and it wasn't me.. it was a very wise GM and Manager..

Now, back to the semantics discussion about a guy that's batting .210 in AA or a guy who batted .234 and was rushed to the ML's to cover for an injured Ivan Rodriguez...

You need to define "need" ...

Then you need to define "not even close to a need"..

Then you needs to define "may look"..

Then you need to define.. "too many"..

After you've gone "around the bend" on semantics.. then come back to the conclusion.. No GM will ever tell you he has too many good catchers... Your argument has no voracity without definition.. Concluding that the Nats may move a catcher.. okay.. I'm sure Nats fans are thrilled you're not their GM...
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3920
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: 2011-2013: Window of contention?

Postby Hermie13 » Tue Sep 13, 2011 12:08 pm

criznit2009 wrote:The real question with Sizemores option is this.... If he was a FA after this season how much could he expect contract-wise on the open market? I highly doubt it is 9 million... Maybe 6-7 max..... So here is what I do - I decline it and match all other teams offers... If it goes past the original 9 mil in his option (yeah right) so be it..... Spend that money on Fukudome and Willingham for example.....


Willingham may be a Type A....no thanks on losing a 1st rounder for him (if our 1st becomes protected though I'd consider him). Plus you're assuming he would come here in the first place and/or that Fukudome would re-sign with us. Both are possible but may have to overpay.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: 2011-2013: Window of contention?

Postby Hermie13 » Tue Sep 13, 2011 12:09 pm

GeronimoSon wrote:
...Didn't say they had too many good catchers.....but it's not even close to a need for the Nats. If anything they may look to move a catcher. Can never have too many arms in the pen either, but doesn't mean you 'need' them. Big difference....
Well, if you want to argue semantics (what a shock.. you arguing).. start off with who made the statement that you can never have too many catchers.. it wasn't you.. and it wasn't me.. it was a very wise GM and Manager..

Now, back to the semantics discussion about a guy that's batting .210 in AA or a guy who batted .234 and was rushed to the ML's to cover for an injured Ivan Rodriguez...

You need to define "need" ...

Then you need to define "not even close to a need"..

Then you needs to define "may look"..

Then you need to define.. "too many"..

After you've gone "around the bend" on semantics.. then come back to the conclusion.. No GM will ever tell you he has too many good catchers... Your argument has no voracity without definition.. Concluding that the Nats may move a catcher.. okay.. I'm sure Nats fans are thrilled you're not their GM...


Good grief

Nats don't need a catcher, period. No semantics and no long-ass, irrelevant explantion needed. Have their starting catcher and have options as a backup. But whatever, moving on.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: 2011-2013: Window of contention?

Postby GeronimoSon » Tue Sep 13, 2011 12:33 pm

Good griefer..

Every team needs good catching..

What about that don't you get?...
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3920
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: 2011-2013: Window of contention?

Postby indians1 » Tue Sep 13, 2011 6:58 pm

I would ask if the indians trade looks alot like the matt holiday/carlos gonzales trade, would you be satisfied? The A's gave up gonzales for holiday whom they traded the following year. Holliday is having a good year but he didn't fit into the A's rebuilding plan. The A's traded for holiday so they could try and compete a year early and it bit them. I know we won't trade jimenez next year but we may only have him for an additional year compared to the A's.

The indians made a similar decision to try and compete early and so far it has been mixed. Ubaldo has been better, but his start against detroit where he gave up 7 or 8 runs sealed the season for the tigers. That was a 2 game swing that would have kept us within 2.5 games and instead that got us to 4.5 (2 days later 6.5 back).

Ubaldo was brought in to win and be our justin verlander. You don't give up your top 2 pitching prospects unless you are getting a stopper, an ACE, and guy that will anchor the rotation. We don't know if we have that yet and that is concerning with both pomeranz and white up in the majors.
indians1
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 12:00 am

Re: 2011-2013: Window of contention?

Postby Lloyd Christmas » Tue Sep 13, 2011 8:37 pm

Ubaldo was brought in to win and be our justin verlander. You don't give up your top 2 pitching prospects unless you are getting a stopper, an ACE, and guy that will anchor the rotation. We don't know if we have that yet and that is concerning with both pomeranz and white up in the majors.


Sorry but that was just your perception, not the Indians idea of him. Its on you if you thought he was an ace. He hadnt been for over a year. He is a solid 2 which is still very good. Even though many of us were high on White remember that about 1/2 the league (including the Indians when they drafted him) still had him pegged as a reliever so lets not overstate his value.
Lloyd Christmas
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 248
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 9:18 pm

Re: 2011-2013: Window of contention?

Postby indians1 » Tue Sep 13, 2011 9:47 pm

You don't trade your top 2 prospects for a #2 pitcher. Period!

As much as you want to make a trade, if the asking price is your top 2 prospects (one of whom has #1 FOR stuff) for a #2, then you make the trade.

The reasoning when the trade was made, was that this year has been an aberration because of injuries and we can expect the guy of last season.

It doesn't matter what our expectations are in this deal. It matters what the FO thought and whether they overvalued jimenez. The fact that now people are lowering expectations on him is ridiculous.

This deal was made so that we had a FOR pitcher to go along with masterson to try and make the playoffs and compete with the other teams who have a #1 and #2.

And if you think the indians paid the right price for a #2 pitcher, then i got some land in alaska to sell you buddy.
indians1
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 12:00 am

Re: 2011-2013: Window of contention?

Postby GeronimoSon » Tue Sep 13, 2011 10:12 pm

indians1 wrote:You don't trade your top 2 prospects for a #2 pitcher. Period!

As much as you want to make a trade, if the asking price is your top 2 prospects (one of whom has #1 FOR stuff) for a #2, then you make the trade.

The reasoning when the trade was made, was that this year has been an aberration because of injuries and we can expect the guy of last season.

It doesn't matter what our expectations are in this deal. It matters what the FO thought and whether they overvalued jimenez. The fact that now people are lowering expectations on him is ridiculous.

This deal was made so that we had a FOR pitcher to go along with masterson to try and make the playoffs and compete with the other teams who have a #1 and #2.

And if you think the indians paid the right price for a #2 pitcher, then i got some land in alaska to sell you buddy.
After 8 starts.. making provocative comments about Jimenez's ability to perform sounds like you were the one who purchased that beach front property with no mineral or oil rights in Alaska and are now stuck with it...

Any time a pitcher goes from one league to another.. a certain period of adjustment is necessary.. in Ublado's situation, he seems to have settled into a fairly consistent groove over his last four starts (26 IP, 9 ER 26 K's) 3.11 ERA with a 2-1 record (the Indians won 3 of his 4 starts).. It's a good beginning to his transformation into an American League FOR SP and certainly a good pairing with Masterson..

W/R to Alex White and Drew Pomeranz.. and what they'll become.. you're kidding?.. right?.. Since joining the Rockies, White has to get better to get all the way up to awful (9 HR's allowed in 22 IP's.) In short, he's been terrible!! Drew has 5 innings pitched.. whooop di friggan do.. 45 days after the trade took place is not the time to be evaluating the results of the trade.. :rolleyes:
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3920
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: 2011-2013: Window of contention?

Postby ironmike » Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:06 am

Indians1 how did you arrive at your conclusion? Tell me more.
User avatar
ironmike
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 656
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 5:28 pm

Re: 2011-2013: Window of contention?

Postby GhostofTedCox » Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:14 pm

More thoughts on the Ubaldo trade.

I believe the Indians made the trade for 2 reasons. First, to provide the stimulus to a pennant run in 2011. The other was to control a prime SP for a few more years to contend. The first part was a flop. For that to succeed, Ubaldo would have had to pitch lights out every start. Even then, with the injuries and lack of bats, this might not have been enough.

The second part should succeed. With a concentration on mechanics, and the acquisition of a bat(s), I would pencil him in for 15-20 wins in 2012. How important does a quality SP look now with the injury to Carrasco? Would you rather go through the growing pains with White and Pom in the middle of a pennant race?

As for what we gave up in the trade. The Indians have a recent history of giving up veteran players for prospects. This has produced mixed results at best. The Brewers, on the other hand, seem to have a policy of regularly trading their top prospects for veteran players. They seem to make the playoffs, and move on and draft more good players.

I think being a strong pennant contender in 2012 is worth the gamble. But only if the FO follows through and gets some bats to put in the lineup.
User avatar
GhostofTedCox
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 726
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: 2011-2013: Window of contention?

Postby GeronimoSon » Wed Sep 14, 2011 4:07 pm

GhostofTedCox wrote:More thoughts on the Ubaldo trade.

I believe the Indians made the trade for 2 reasons. First, to provide the stimulus to a pennant run in 2011. The other was to control a prime SP for a few more years to contend. The first part was a flop. For that to succeed, Ubaldo would have had to pitch lights out every start. Even then, with the injuries and lack of bats, this might not have been enough.

The second part should succeed. With a concentration on mechanics, and the acquisition of a bat(s), I would pencil him in for 15-20 wins in 2012. How important does a quality SP look now with the injury to Carrasco? Would you rather go through the growing pains with White and Pom in the middle of a pennant race?

As for what we gave up in the trade. The Indians have a recent history of giving up veteran players for prospects. This has produced mixed results at best. The Brewers, on the other hand, seem to have a policy of regularly trading their top prospects for veteran players. They seem to make the playoffs, and move on and draft more good players.

I think being a strong pennant contender in 2012 is worth the gamble. But only if the FO follows through and gets some bats to put in the lineup.

+1... :good:

The acquisition of a quality FOR SP for a team that is in contention (at the time of the trade) and has designs to contend in the forthcoming season is a good plan. It's only if and when a team knows that their ability to contend is a long shot at best, does a Vet Star for prospects make the most sense...

The Brewers may not be the best example of this (they really don't have much better results as far as playoff appearances as the Indians), but the Yankees are.. so are the Red Sox.. as are the Phillies and Tigers..

As far as drafting good players.. well.. historically, this hasn't been a strong suit of the Indians.. but it appears to be getting better.. or at least we hope so.. The 2011 draft selections of Lindor and Howard could define the Indians for the next four to six years... the rest of the 2011 draft also appears to have some high risk / high reward prep players as well..(too bad Tarpley or Pitts didn't sign).. the jury is clearly still out on that as most have almost zero or no professional experience.. The 2010 draft (excluding Drew Pomeranz) includes Wolters, Washington & Lavisky up the middle to go with arms Cook Goodnight, & Blair (with the pending return of Robbie Aviles, who could be special) are a pretty good group of draftees.. The 2009 draft (excluding Alex White & Joe Gardner) includes position players Jason Kipnis, & Jordan Henry up the middle to go with some pretty impressive looking arms in Austin Adams, Corey Burns, Preston Guilmet, Michael Rayl, Daniel Jimenez, and Matt Packer. The 2008 draft includes position players Lonnie Chisenhall , Cord Phelps, Adam Abraham, and Roberto Perez along with arms Zach Putnam, Eric Berger, Clayton Cook,Trey Haley, T.J. House, Marty Popham, and Bryce Stowell

As far as the front office going and getting a bat or two, sure, sounds like a sound plan..but at the same time, if the guys who are already here are healthy and play to their abilities.. then the Indians will contend, even without an added bat.. It would be a LOT easier if there was a middle of the order KILLER as you've suggested...
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3920
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: 2011-2013: Window of contention?

Postby indians1 » Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:30 pm

My statement does not have to do with what alex white and pomeranz are doing now. My premise was that if you trade your top 2 pitching prospects, it better be for a #1 pitcher or impact hitter.

The tigers did so when they traded for miguel cabrera and gave up andrew miller and cameron maybin. That trade worked out very well for detroit.
Then you look at what the A's did trying to compete and trading a guy not to far away from the majors for matt holiday. Look what the A's have to show for that. The rockies (ironically) have made out like bandits with a guy that has a very good OPS and is an impact player.

I came out in favor of the trade, initially, because i thought they made this trade to compete this year. They saw the holes in the rotation and didn't want to waste the 2011 season and all the goodwill the built up with the city. So they made the trade for this year and the next 2 years.

If Ubaldo comes out and pitches like a #1 the next 2 years, then the trade was worth it. If Ubaldo becomes a guy that can be lights out one day but lets the team down with inconsistencies when the team most needs it, then we have a major problem.

And that was one of the concerns with Jimenez (whether he had the mental makeup to take his game to the next level).

I hope i am wrong in doubting the merits of this trade and how it is looking now. I really do. I love the indians, they are my favorite cleveland team. I I really hope brad grant is the guy that can make up for the loss of your top 2 pitching prospects. I enjoyed this season and hope they can figure out how to keep their stars healthy so they can compete on a consistent basis.

The farm system though has taken a hit and they don't have alot of impact guys right now that will be able to help in the upper levels.

We have to hope they stay healthy next year.
indians1
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 12:00 am

Previous

Return to Beyond The Minors

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest