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

If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

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

If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby dnosco » Sun Oct 12, 2008 12:39 am

...you are going to get him again in 2008.

http://www.cleveland.com/tribe/index.ss ... se_to.html

I wonder how many utility infielders in baseball earned that kind of salary in 2008 and what was the production of utility infielders compared to their salary.
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby TonyIBI » Sun Oct 12, 2008 12:48 am

I could care less honestly. I thought Carroll did a good job this year and was valuable and I want him back for another season.

That said, the Indians do need to try and develop and start using some guys in the system for this kind of role in the future. Josh Rodriguez looks like someone who may ultimately fill it....
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5053
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby dnosco » Mon Oct 13, 2008 6:24 pm

It is a dollar for dollar thing. Everyone made such a big deal about dumping Byrd's salary and how it was such a great thing we got cash from that so that we could sign some draft choices. Same thing applies here. If you can get the same production at a much lower cost you can use the money somewhere else.

That is what I don't get: It is OK to give Byrd away for cash but it is not an issue to overpay a utility guy.

Hey, not a big deal but it seems the two positions are incongruous, if I have spelled that correctly.
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby TonyIBI » Mon Oct 13, 2008 6:36 pm

Is a proven veteran utility guy who makes $2.3M really overpaid? I don't really think so. It would be one thing if he made $5-7M.....but the thing is the Indians have had problems going the cheap route with this position in the past (Rouse, Vazquez, Cora, etc).
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5053
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby jellis » Mon Oct 13, 2008 6:57 pm

dnosco wrote:It is a dollar for dollar thing. Everyone made such a big deal about dumping Byrd's salary and how it was such a great thing we got cash from that so that we could sign some draft choices. Same thing applies here. If you can get the same production at a much lower cost you can use the money somewhere else.

That is what I don't get: It is OK to give Byrd away for cash but it is not an issue to overpay a utility guy.

Hey, not a big deal but it seems the two positions are incongruous, if I have spelled that correctly.


I think the reason is obvious we had a ton of people to replace bryd and give the same production so why pay him, 4 mil more. Who does this team have on hand who is capable of stepping up and taking carrol's spot I don't see anyone in the near future
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby npc29 » Tue Oct 14, 2008 9:11 am

Consigliere wrote:Is a proven veteran utility guy who makes $2.3M really overpaid? I don't really think so. It would be one thing if he made $5-7M.....but the thing is the Indians have had problems going the cheap route with this position in the past (Rouse, Vazquez, Cora, etc).


I agree with that.. It's nice to have a guy like Carroll off the bench.. Someone we can depend on to get a hit every week. It got to a point with Rouse that he was rarely used because he couldn't hit work a lick.

If we are going to contend, we need a Jamey Carroll off the bench, not a Mike Rouse.
npc29
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 625
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 4:59 pm
Location: Kent, OH

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby dnosco » Tue Oct 14, 2008 9:58 am

Here is what I could find in the AL for utility infielders and their BAs and salary

Baltimore: Alex Cintron .286 $2 million; Juan Castro .205 $900,000
Boston: Alex Cora .270, $2 million; Jed Lowrie .258 $600,000
Chicago: Pablo Ozuna .281 $1 million; Juan Uribe .247 $4.2 million
Detroit: Ramon Santiago .282, $575,000
Kansas City: Estaban German .245 $1 million; Alberto Callaspo .305 $400,000
LAA: Macier Izturis .269, $1.2 million
Minnesota: NIck Punto .284 $2.4 million; Brendan Harris .265 $430,000
New York: Wilson Betemit: .265 $1.17 million
Oakland: Cliff Pennington .242 $400,000; Donnie Murphy .184 $400,000
Seattle: Miguel Cairo .249, $850,000
Tampa Bay: Willie Aybar .253 $400,000; Ben Zobrist .253 $400,000
Texas: Ramon Vazquez .290 $810,000
Toronto: Marco Scutaro .263 $1.55 million; John McDonald $1.9 million

First, I couldn't necessarily find a true utility guy on all teams as including Betemit and Cairo indicates. Also we should consider that Uribe and Punto were scheduled to be starters when they signed and only became utility players after the fact.

All that being said, we have one of the highest if not THE highest paid pure utility infielder in the American League. This from a position on the team that historically worth close to zero win-shares. Also, look at the number of young players who break in in that role. Sorry, while I like Jamey Carroll he is overpaid and, when you have to trade Paul Byrd, apparently, to be able to sign your draft picks, every dollar helps.
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby TonyIBI » Tue Oct 14, 2008 10:22 am

Of course, the difference with Byrd is he was expendable. We had 3-4 starters who could give the exact same performance or better for 1/10th the cost. If you dump Carroll, who is in line to replace him? That's the crux of the issue. If there were 3-4 utility options who would be deemed able to perform as good as Carroll, he would be shown the door. A complete non-issue to me. YMMV.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5053
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby dnosco » Tue Oct 14, 2008 11:44 pm

The point about the win-shares comment is that there are probably several options in terms of replacing Carroll as utility guys are not worth much. Again, how can it be a non-issue when you can save over $1 million and have the same result on your win-loss record?

Hey, money is money. If you can not lose games by taking a cheaper player like a utility player, why not do it. The difference between trading Byrd for cash to sign players and signing a cheaper utility guy than Carroll to save money is small, if even existent.
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby jellis » Tue Oct 14, 2008 11:58 pm

dnosco wrote:The point about the win-shares comment is that there are probably several options in terms of replacing Carroll as utility guys are not worth much. Again, how can it be a non-issue when you can save over $1 million and have the same result on your win-loss record?

Hey, money is money. If you can not lose games by taking a cheaper player like a utility player, why not do it. The difference between trading Byrd for cash to sign players and signing a cheaper utility guy than Carroll to save money is small, if even existent.



its not a fair comparison as has been stated many times. bryd had many in house replacements that were younger and better. If we try and replace carroll we have zero in house options they are paying to secure him since there is no one else who they can count on unless you want to go with graffanino who we know carroll is better than. I really think its a non argument to compare bryd and Carroll since the situations are totally different
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby TonyIBI » Wed Oct 15, 2008 12:26 am

I get the win shares point. But, I also know this bench is a lot better with Carroll on it than Rouse. It may be a zero sum effect in the win shares column, but anyone watching the games this year saw Carroll's value. He is night and day better than what we have had before and is one of the top utility players in the game. His salary is top third, which is right in line with his standing. Again, I ain't gonna worry about a guy getting $2.3M as long as he has value, and to me Carroll clearly does.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5053
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby dnosco » Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:55 pm

The only comparison of Byrd and Carroll I am trying to make is that replacing them saves us some money without damaging the season (this year Byrd, next year Carroll).

Regarding Carroll, he is, actually, for a pure utility guy, the top of the class in terms of salary unless you want to include, as I said above, guys who were paid to be starters but ended up as utility guys and guys I included just to show that I wasn't cherrypicking.

Also, to say that we have in-house replacments for Byrd, on the surface, is like saying that Rouse is a replacement for Carroll, based on what we saw at the end of this year. No one has stepped up to replace Byrd...although we could get a warm body with potential in there...just like we could, in the worst scenario, for Carroll.

I am not trying to be cheap here. Carroll is fine except he is overpaid. Instead of looking at the top of the list of guys I presented maybe we should look at the rest of the list to see who we could get for a lot less who would have been a lot better to somewhat better as a utility guy for next year. As I said, any discussion of keeping Carroll in case he has to start at 3B is the same as when people said that we needed to keep Vazquez over Phillips because (at the time!) Vazquez represented a left-handed pinch hitter.

As you guys said, not a huge deal. I just think it is wrong. I would rather spend the money on the next Tim Lincecum.

Regarding the Carroll is night and day better than what we had before argument, that means primarily that what we had before stunk. It doesn't read on Carroll's worth at all.
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby jhonny » Wed Oct 22, 2008 6:04 am

dnosco wrote:As I said, any discussion of keeping Carroll in case he has to start at 3B is the same as when people said that we needed to keep Vazquez over Phillips because (at the time!) Vazquez represented a left-handed pinch hitter.


Why? As far as I can see, Carroll isn't blocking anyone. The problem was not Vazquez himself (as shown in Texas, he's not a bad player), the idiotic part was trading BP to keep Vazquez (as shown in Cincinnati, he's a very good player). Sure he's overpaid. But aside from that, no big deal, except he;s blocking what's left of Barfield.
jhonny
Undrafted Free Agent
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 3:38 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby carnegie44115 » Wed Oct 22, 2008 10:14 am

I think we could stand to have a 2B combo of Carroll and Barfield, I haven't given up on Barfield yet, I think you let the two of them duke it out in ST and possibly bring in a NRI and see what he could do.


Edit:

Or how about someone up for David Eckstein?
carnegie44115
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:12 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby jellis » Wed Oct 22, 2008 12:48 pm

carnegie44115 wrote:I think we could stand to have a 2B combo of Carroll and Barfield, I haven't given up on Barfield yet, I think you let the two of them duke it out in ST and possibly bring in a NRI and see what he could do.


Edit:

Or how about someone up for David Eckstein?



yuck Barfield has shown noting in 2 years and I remember when the trade was made everyone was wary about it because Towers never trades good young players and it looks like all the experts were right, and Eckstein is not the answer if we are going to acquire a player should aim for a player who has one plus skill our best route is still using a package of specs to acquire some one who can help now not just fill a space
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby TonyIBI » Wed Oct 22, 2008 1:35 pm

carnegie44115 wrote:I think we could stand to have a 2B combo of Carroll and Barfield, I haven't given up on Barfield yet, I think you let the two of them duke it out in ST and possibly bring in a NRI and see what he could do.


Edit:

Or how about someone up for David Eckstein?


Indians absolutely will not go into spring training with Barfield/Carroll at 2B. They will find a better solution. And no thanks on Eckstein, as I'd rather just go with Carroll then.

Barfield also very well may be traded this offseason. If he remains in the org, he'll start 2009 in Columbus.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5053
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby Hermie13 » Wed Oct 22, 2008 1:46 pm

I could see Carroll getting packaged and traded this winter. He'd be a good stopgap for a team in need of a 2B or 3B next year as a starter (non-contenders obviously).

Carroll was great this year in his role (solid stint as a starter as well as nice OBP). But we could find someone with close to that kind of production for cheaper on the open market. Aaron Boone is a free agent and had a decent year as a utility man (plays 1B as well). Has familiarity with the club and was a great clubhouse leader even after losing his job to Andy Marte (man that's gotta hurt your ego, lol).

Even Ronnie Belliard made less than Carroll this year while putting up an even better OBP (.372)...and is a former All-Star with Cleveland.


That all being said.....if Carroll is our utility guy next year, it's definately not a bad thing....even at $2.5M....
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7092
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby TonyIBI » Wed Oct 22, 2008 1:57 pm

While your point is noted, this team in no way is trading Carroll and then replacing him with a Boone/Belliard at the utility position. He's about as much a lock to return with this club in his current role as Grady Sizemore. :D
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5053
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby Hermie13 » Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:17 pm

I disagree that he's a 'lock' in any way.

Belliard was better and played more IF positions this year than Carroll. And Boone is a better leader than Carroll.


There were reports that the Tribe tried working out some deal where they wouldn't have to pay Carroll as much this year (not sure if they were adding years or what).....didn't work out, so I could see the Tribe moving him. Oakland could use him possibly, I'd part with him (and a prospect) for Streets. Florida could use him (if we ate about $1M of his salary)...I'd trade him and others for Uggla.


Not trading him for just anyone....but in the right deal, anyone not named Victor, Grady, or Fausto is able to be dealt....
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7092
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby dazindiansfanuk » Wed Oct 22, 2008 4:54 pm

Carroll and a prospect for Street? What???

Carroll has next to no value to anyone else.... he's good enough to start as a stop-gap for a short period of time and he's a versitile guy you want on your bench.

Baring injury he is 100% guaranteed to be on this roster next year..... no doubt.
dazindiansfanuk
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:51 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby TonyIBI » Wed Oct 22, 2008 5:32 pm

Anyone on this roster can be dealt if the right deal comes along. Even Grady. No one is untouchable.

That said, the Indians flat out love Carroll and are thrilled with what he did this past year. They couldn't be more excited to have him back for next season and to fill a role that up until this year had always been tough to fill.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5053
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby Hermie13 » Thu Oct 23, 2008 9:47 am

dazindiansfanuk wrote:Carroll and a prospect for Street? What???

Carroll has next to no value to anyone else.... he's good enough to start as a stop-gap for a short period of time and he's a versitile guy you want on your bench.

Baring injury he is 100% guaranteed to be on this roster next year..... no doubt.


He's got no value to anyone else, yet you say he's good enough to start as a stop-gap?

Sounds like value to me. And if you part with a top prospect and Carroll for a Street (a guy who lost his closers job and velocity on his fastball), it'd be a pretty fair deal. Maybe throw in a guy like Mujica or Mastny as well.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7092
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby dazindiansfanuk » Thu Oct 23, 2008 11:04 am

By stop-gap I mean for a week or two - he has no trade value, but that doesn't mean he doesn't have Baseball value.

His value to this team is his versatility in filling a role (UINF) that has been historically difficult to fill.

His value in a trade is next to nothing - teams aren't prepared to give up talent for 35 year old utility players making $2.5m. This is not me downplaying Carrolls usefulness due to his versatility, but the fact is the Indians gave up a AAAA pitcher to get him (Sean Smith) and would likely get no more if they wanted to trade him.

Yeah you could get Street for a top prospect and a bullpen arm regardless of whether you offered up Carroll too.... in fact adding Carroll to the deal would probably make it a less appealing offer to a team like the A's as they wouldn't want to take on his salary.

Still, it's all moot..... Carrolls going nowhere.
dazindiansfanuk
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:51 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby Hermie13 » Thu Oct 23, 2008 1:34 pm

He's more than a 1-2 week stopgap. He WAS the starting 2B for Colorado in 2006 and the start of 2007. He can still start in this league....just not really for a contender.....but even then, he'd be an improvement over what the Cards may have next year at 2B....or what the Marlins would use there if they trade Uggla.

I agree, Sean Smith is what we gave up....so we can expect to get a guy like Street who's value is down a lot for him and a high prospect. Carroll wouldn't be the main piece in any trade, but still has some good trade value. $2.5M for a guy that would start on Oakland is not a big deal in salary.....Street is gonna make about $4M in arbitration, so they're saving money.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7092
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby TheWord » Thu Oct 23, 2008 2:17 pm

I'm not sure you understand the idea of value Hermie.

35 year old Carrol has absolutely ZERO value in a trade involving 20 something Street.

The A's are looking toward the future, why would they acquire a 35 year old utility guy for one year at the price of a closer. Come on, you have to think about it realistically.

You can't just lump players together and call it value.
TheWord
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 317
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 7:06 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby Hermie13 » Thu Oct 23, 2008 2:31 pm

Please point out where I said straight up Carroll for Street? Hard to do since I didn't. But the A's (even after resigning Ellis) need help on the IF til their young guys are ready. Carroll would be a solid addition to that team. Ellis may need some breaks at 2B. Chavez likely won't be able to play 3B, leaving it to Hannahan....who I'd take Carroll over. And Crosby struggled mightily and Carroll could step in for him til Cardenas is ready.

You guys are sorely undervaluing this guy. Did you see the contract that Kaz Matsui got last year? Carroll would likely garner $3M a year on the open market with a team that could use him as a starter.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7092
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby dazindiansfanuk » Thu Oct 23, 2008 2:33 pm

Hermie13 wrote:Please point out where I said straight up Carroll for Street? Hard to do since I didn't. But the A's (even after resigning Ellis) need help on the IF til their young guys are ready. Carroll would be a solid addition to that team. Ellis may need some breaks at 2B. Chavez likely won't be able to play 3B, leaving it to Hannahan....who I'd take Carroll over. And Crosby struggled mightily and Carroll could step in for him til Cardenas is ready.

You guys are sorely undervaluing this guy. Did you see the contract that Kaz Matsui got last year? Carroll would likely garner $3M a year on the open market with a team that could use him as a starter.



We're not undervaluing Carroll, he just doesn't have trade value.

Yeah, he'd get $~3m on the open market, but no one would give up a closer for him and a prospect, unless that prospect was of the ilk of LaPorta.
dazindiansfanuk
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:51 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby Hermie13 » Thu Oct 23, 2008 2:39 pm

The prospect would only have to be of the Josh Rodriguez caliber or 'maybe' Huff (but probably too much). Street's value is down a lot. I don't think he'll get moved this winter because of it unless he makes such a stink about losing his job that he'll sorta force one. Health issues and poor stuff this year rate him only slightly more valueble than Kevin Gregg....and that's only because of age and his 1 extra year of arbritration before free agency.

LaPorta straight up for Street is too much on our part.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7092
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby dazindiansfanuk » Thu Oct 23, 2008 2:40 pm

Streets value might be down to us, but I doubt it is in Billy Beanes mind.
dazindiansfanuk
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:51 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby Hermie13 » Thu Oct 23, 2008 2:51 pm

Depends.....I think Beane sold kinda low on Harden (a starter so should have more value). When healthy, Harden is an Ace. When Street is healthy...he's an above average closer, but nothing spectacular. Harden (and Guadin) got 4 prospects....but nothing that truly jumps out at you. Donaldson the catcher is nice, but only at A ball (though still highly regarded, probably the best of the bunch). Gallagher should be a nice #4-5 starter in the bigs; a very nice talent. And Patterson is likely to be a utility guy when all is said and done. And Matt Murton is a Francisco clone...he's a 4th OFer.


Not the greatest of hauls for a guy with Ace-like stuff and not eligible for free agency for over a year.....
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7092
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby jellis » Thu Oct 23, 2008 6:06 pm

Hermie13 wrote:Depends.....I think Beane sold kinda low on Harden (a starter so should have more value). When healthy, Harden is an Ace. When Street is healthy...he's an above average closer, but nothing spectacular. Harden (and Guadin) got 4 prospects....but nothing that truly jumps out at you. Donaldson the catcher is nice, but only at A ball (though still highly regarded, probably the best of the bunch). Gallagher should be a nice #4-5 starter in the bigs; a very nice talent. And Patterson is likely to be a utility guy when all is said and done. And Matt Murton is a Francisco clone...he's a 4th OFer.


Not the greatest of hauls for a guy with Ace-like stuff and not eligible for free agency for over a year.....


Hardin was Russian Roulette and he just wanted to be done with him and get value before he blew up again
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby Hermie13 » Fri Oct 24, 2008 8:45 am

I agree with that.....but Street has been demoted from the closers role....hard to pay a guy $4-5M if he's setup man (which is what he'll get in arbitration this year)....

Can see Beane just wanting to get rid of him for that reason......would you rather pay a utility man/spot starter on the infield $2.5M or a 7th inning setup man $4.5M?
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7092
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby dazindiansfanuk » Fri Oct 24, 2008 9:05 am

Hermie13 wrote:I agree with that.....but Street has been demoted from the closers role....hard to pay a guy $4-5M if he's setup man (which is what he'll get in arbitration this year)....

Can see Beane just wanting to get rid of him for that reason......would you rather pay a utility man/spot starter on the infield $2.5M or a 7th inning setup man $4.5M?


Billy Beane would rather pay neither of them..... that's the point.

Street will likely get traded, but he'll be traded as a closer and the A's won't take back any salary to move him - 100% prospects.
dazindiansfanuk
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:51 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby Hermie13 » Fri Oct 24, 2008 9:13 am

If he's trading him as a closer, he'd be willing to take some salary back. He's gone after guys like Thomas and may go after Giambi....two guys that have no business on a rebuilding team.....Carroll is a better fit than both of them and waaay cheaper. Again, doubt this happens, but showing a place where Carroll could potentially get traded to.

Baltimore also makes sense (Garko, Carroll, Laffey, and a prospect or two for Roberts and Sherrill helps both teams out).
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7092
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby TheWord » Fri Oct 24, 2008 3:18 pm

If he's trading him as a closer, he'd be willing to take some salary back. He's gone after guys like Thomas and may go after Giambi....two guys that have no business on a rebuilding team.....Carroll is a better fit than both of them and waaay cheaper. Again, doubt this happens, but showing a place where Carroll could potentially get traded to.



Are you comparing signing Jason Giambi to trading a 20 something closer for a utility player who is gone after this year?

Come on, that doesn't even make sense.

Jamey Carroll has no value to the A's when talking about Huston Street, signing him to a small contract for one/two years (ala Thomas, Giambi) to fill a need is one thing. Trading him for Huston Street just makes ZERO sense for Beane, when he would be looking toward the future in a trade.

Jamey Carroll has NO trade value, unless you ship him to a contender for a low level minor leaguer. But if you think Beane is going to take him on when trading his 20 something closer, you might be out of your mind.
TheWord
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 317
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 7:06 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby Hermie13 » Fri Oct 24, 2008 3:24 pm

Carroll, Rodriguez, and Jackson or minor league pitcher would get Street. That's what I've been saying all along. Even with that trade, the A's are saving money, plus getting a young middle infielder with upside (what they really need) and a younger pitcher to help out.

No, I was comparing Carroll's salary to Giambi's. Giambi is gonna get over $10M...way more than Carroll, that's my point. They'd be throwing all that money at a guy that's not gonna put them in the playoffs. You can find anyone to play 1B or DH (they have Barton and Cust already). They need infielders. And Carroll is a perfect fit for them.

Again, don't see Carroll being traded, but he does have trade value thanks to his solid 2006 and 2008 seaons, plus cheap, short term contract.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7092
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby dazindiansfanuk » Fri Oct 24, 2008 3:33 pm

Hermie13 wrote:Carroll, Rodriguez, and Jackson or minor league pitcher would get Street.


No it wouldn't.

Maybe the A's would be saving some money.... but wouldn't they be saving more by trading Street solely for prospects?

I expect Street will be traded, but it will be for significantly more than the package you've proposed.

Utility infielder, future utility infielder and Long reliever for a young, relatively inexpensive closer? Not happening.

Say what you want about Street losing his closers role, Beane is going to trade him with the value of a closer whether you choose to believe it or not.
dazindiansfanuk
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:51 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby TheWord » Fri Oct 24, 2008 3:50 pm

WHAT?


Jackson, Rodriguez and Carroll for Street?

Why would the A's not laugh you out of the room for that? Jackson is a non prospect, and Rodriguez is a mediocre season away from the same status. Carroll is an expensive utility man, and they don't need infielders with the likes of Petit, Pennington, Crosby, Ellis, Cardenas all close to the majors.

Jamey Carroll.doesn't.have.trade.value.

There is only so many ways you can say it, but Billy Beane isn't interested in taking on non prospects and 35 year old utility infielders for Huston Street. If you can't understand that, it's pretty much useless to continue the conversation...no offense.
TheWord
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 317
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 7:06 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby Hermie13 » Fri Oct 24, 2008 4:00 pm

I guess Beane and all the other A's personel saying they want young IFers are wrong and you are right that they don't need infield help. Did you see Crosby's season? Or the injury that Ellis had? Neither can be counted on in the future. Cardenas is a nice prospect and should take over SS or 2B by 2010. But the other spot is still up in the air for them. Rodriguez would be a nice fit for them.

Rodriguez is a top 15 prospect in our organization and Jackson can slide right into their #5 slot in the rotation til the guys like Anderson and Cahill are ready.

You're vastly overvaluing Street. He's not that good. That's the max I'd offer, and more than enough. You don't lose your job to 2 young guys and have as high a WHIP as he had and still bring back top prospects.


I don't see Rodriguez being a utility man....maybe that's where we differ. 20-20 season just a year ago is nice (even if this year was a down year), and his ability to play both SS and 2B well is also a plus.

They'd save about $1.5-2M more by adding a prospect instead of Carroll. Not a deal breaker really.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7092
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby dazindiansfanuk » Fri Oct 24, 2008 4:08 pm

Rodriguez is not a top 15 prospect in this system.... he's probably borderline top 50, not 15.

The A's would not want Carroll in a trade..... as a free agent, they might have borderline interest, but they'd never give up anything of value for him.

No one is over-valuing Street.... just stating what we believe the A's will want for him (not what we'd personally give up)..... if I'm wrong I'll quite happily eat crow if/when he is traded.
dazindiansfanuk
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:51 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby jellis » Fri Oct 24, 2008 4:35 pm

dazindiansfanuk wrote:Rodriguez is not a top 15 prospect in this system.... he's probably borderline top 50, not 15.

The A's would not want Carroll in a trade..... as a free agent, they might have borderline interest, but they'd never give up anything of value for him.

No one is over-valuing Street.... just stating what we believe the A's will want for him (not what we'd personally give up)..... if I'm wrong I'll quite happily eat crow if/when he is traded.



yeah carroll was a salary dump for a reason, and I think josh slots in the late 20's its a down year but anything hire than 18 would be a major reach at least to me
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby jellis » Fri Oct 24, 2008 4:36 pm

Hermie13 wrote:I guess Beane and all the other A's personel saying they want young IFers are wrong and you are right that they don't need infield help. Did you see Crosby's season? Or the injury that Ellis had? Neither can be counted on in the future. Cardenas is a nice prospect and should take over SS or 2B by 2010. But the other spot is still up in the air for them. Rodriguez would be a nice fit for them.

Rodriguez is a top 15 prospect in our organization and Jackson can slide right into their #5 slot in the rotation til the guys like Anderson and Cahill are ready.

You're vastly overvaluing Street. He's not that good. That's the max I'd offer, and more than enough. You don't lose your job to 2 young guys and have as high a WHIP as he had and still bring back top prospects.


I don't see Rodriguez being a utility man....maybe that's where we differ. 20-20 season just a year ago is nice (even if this year was a down year), and his ability to play both SS and 2B well is also a plus.

They'd save about $1.5-2M more by adding a prospect instead of Carroll. Not a deal breaker really.


the other issue is they added a ton of young IF last season in all there deals and cardenas and patterson are much closer than Rodriguez who will more than likely repeat AA
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby TheWord » Fri Oct 24, 2008 6:56 pm

You're vastly overvaluing Street. He's not that good. That's the max I'd offer, and more than enough. You don't lose your job to 2 young guys and have as high a WHIP as he had and still bring back top prospects.


A career 2.88 ERA and a WHIP of 1.07 is hardly overrated. Just because he fought through some injuries this year doesn't mean they're going to dump him for 2 non prospects and a 35 year old utility IF.

Jackson shouldn't be starting on any major league team, and he wouldn't start in Oakland. As jellis pointed out, Rodriguez is barely considered a prospect anymore.
TheWord
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 317
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 7:06 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby carnegie44115 » Sat Oct 25, 2008 2:43 pm

I dont see how Rodriguez is not a prospect anymore, he is only finishing his 3rd year and it was Akron, so he may have been a little ahead of himself being there, He will be 24 next year, which is not bad considering he did go the full length of college. I think he will start at Akron again and then will move to Columbus some time down the line.
carnegie44115
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:12 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby Hermie13 » Sat Oct 25, 2008 4:53 pm

Rodriguez was a top 10 prospect going into this year. He didn't slip out of the top 50, that's just insane.

He's easily top 20. A 20-20 season just 1 year ago will keep him in the top 15 IMO.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7092
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby TonyIBI » Sat Oct 25, 2008 5:08 pm

J-Rod is certainly a prospect still. Not a Top 30 guy anymore however, not because of his talent really, but more because of the 6-8 excellent prospects we brought in the 2008 Draft and also all the trade pickups last year plus some good progression by others who leaped him. Same thing happened to Jordan Brown who is a fringe Top 20 guy now.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5053
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: If you liked your $2.3 million utility infielder in 2007...

Postby Hermie13 » Sat Oct 25, 2008 5:27 pm

man...if Rodriguez isn't a top 30 guy anymore then we have to have the best farm system in baseball......

He was no worse than a guy like Crowe was his first stint with Akron and he never dropped that low.....
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7092
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