Sunday, July 31, 2011

Trade Deadline Recap

Okay, I could write for three pages about all the trade deadline stuff this year.  No huge blockbusters (except for maybe Jimenez and Pence), but lots of moves (many lateral), silence from the Yankees, and the Red Sox doing exactly what they need to do.  My goal is to discuss the Red Sox' two moves, identify the biggest winners, identify the biggest losers, and figure out if the Yankees can be counted in either of those conversations.  Pat's allegedly returning to the real world this week, so maybe he'll chime in later this week.

Aviles:  One of SoreGloveHand's followers said the Red Sox traded Yamaico Navarro for Yamaico Navarro.  Pretty true.  The only person pumped up about the acquisition of a utility infielder hitting .222 might be Heidi Watney.

Bedard:  Wrote a thesis about it on Friday, and I'm thrilled to have Jason sipping the K.A. flaves with me.  It is a bummer to give up Federowicz, but it's kind of a signification that the team things my boy Jarrod Saltalamacchia is for real.  The Red Sox needed some kind of upgrade even in August and September over Andrew Miller, and having this guy healthy is an upgrade over what Lackey is giving you right now.  Say what you want about his health - we're talking about three months.  And say what you want about his demeanor - this fixes a fatal flaw.

Winners:  Biggest winner is Cleveland.  In acquiring Jimenez, they have all those things that made the player appealing to the Red Sox, Yankees, and Blue Jays.  It fits the need of augmenting their surprise playoff chances, and it also helps rebuild the Indians franchise that everyone assumed would need rebuilding.  Fukudome over Travis Buck is little more than a lateral move, and losing Cabrera to San Francisco is a debatable point.  Other winners include the Braves with Bourn (on this point, how much has Jordan Schaefer's stock fallen since he got busted for roids?), the Phillies with Pence (thanks to ZWeiss for straightening that one out for me), the Tigers with Fister, the Giants with Cabrera and Beltran, and probably in second overall, the Rangers.  Uehara and Mike Adams are huge reinforcements for their bullpen.

Losers:  San Diego:  The 2010 dream is very over.  Colorado:  The dream is over there as well.  Houston:  The dream never started.  Seattle:  What a disaster.  Let's all hope we never talk about "run prevention" ever again.  Toronto:  A net loss, losing Frasor and doing A LOT of paperwork for a guy who has been called "JD Drew 2.0" in St. Louis in Colby Rasmus.  Toronto also lost out on Jimenez, whom would have made a lot of sense toward making them relevant in the East in future years.

Yankees:  Apparently the Yankees are comfortable with the team they have.  They should be okay with their bullpen.  If I were them, I would have gone after Bedard and beaten the Red Sox for them, just to provide Garcia/Colon insurance.  But let's not get it twisted:  They're in a pretty safe spot for the AL wild card, and CC is a beast on the verge of an opt-out.

9 comments:

ZWeiss said...

I'm surprised that the Yankees didn't do anything. Their rotation really isn't that good after C.C. Better for the Sox I guess?

I'd say that the Phillies and Giants definately won out, and they are without a doubt the top two teams in the NL. Pittsburgh also got Derrick Lee which should really help them, and Cleveland getting Ubaldo was shocking to say the least.

Let's hope that Buchholz comes back soon so that we won't have to worry about Bedard JDing on us.

the gm said...

Yes, that is absolutely true on the Phillies and Giants front. My mistake on missing that. The Phillies are an example of the rich getting richer.

It was BOURN to Atlanta and PENCE to Philadelphia. Both won big there. Thank you for pointing that out; I will make the changes tomorrow morning.

As far as the Giants go, I did forget to factor in the part about Beltran, but as you already know, Beltran doesn't really impress me too much in the first place. Fills a need though, for sure.

John said...

Most of what I had read about the Indians and Jimenez seemed to be more about 'why did they do that' as opposed to praising them for getting the deal done. You may have heard all this before, but the Indians are a miserable 23-36 since May 24th. Over the whole year they have given up more runs than the AL average and scored less runs than the AL average, basically owing their record, 2 games over .500, to their amazing 30-15 start. So in terms of sample size, they have a larger(59-45 games, 33% more games) sample size of being a bad team than a good team this year. Also the question arises over why the Rockies were going to trade Jimenez given the very club friendly deal that he has, the extra years of control, etc. I'm not trying to claim that Jimenez will have a terrible season, or won't do well for the Indians in the future. I guess I've just been drinking the kool-aid that the Indians are not that good, and by doing this they aren't really helping their organization in the long run.

The GM said...

John,

Both of your points are very valid. As far as the Indians go, they're probably a sinking ship. But for the good of the franchise that's been really decimated by long-term futility, it's good to make a move like that. Especially given a division like the Central, where the clear front-runner was taken out early, any kind of reinforcement positions them well to at least get into the playoffs. Can they hang with Detroit? Who knows. But Jimenez can help.

Regarding the player himself, and I mentioned this on Friday, the hype around this guy is centered around fourteen starts in 2010. Since then, he's been his regular pre-2010 self. Which is, eh. I looked pretty dumb in my 2010 preview when I said the Rockies would be hurting because they have Ubaldo Jimenez as their ace, but since Start #15, I haven't looked as stupid.

Anonymous said...

DV

Unless the Sox gave up a lot for Bedard you have to consider the trade a good one. From what I've read the minor league guys that went to Seattle were solid players, but none of the top-tier guys. If that's true, then there's really no downside to the trade. If Bedard is the guy he is when healthy he's a legitimate number three guy and certainly a fourth behind Beckett/Lester/Buchholz. If he stinks it up and the guys they traded aren't studs, then no worries.

Also, I saw that Buchholz was moved to the 60 day DL. That doesn't sound good at all. But can that be retroactive to June 17th? What have people heard about his return? All I've heard is that he's in Los Angeles getting a second opinion today.

--the Gunn

the gm at work said...

Gunn,

I hate to say it, but SoreGloveHand is a godsend because of the ease of getting news. The Twitter is blowing up about the Buchholz DL situation. He is on the 60-day retroactive to the last time he pitched in June. I think it was Cafardo who tweeted that Buchholz's return in 2011 is doubtful, but nobody's actually saying it for sure yet.

Anonymous said...

The only additional Red Sox news I am expecting to hear today is that the entire medical staff has been canned, or at the minimum, sent to Pawtucket for additional seasoning.

TimC

Ross Kaplan said...

I'm honestly not too sure what to think of the Yankees failure to make any moves. Ubaldo was the only pitcher available worth giving up good prospects for and Colorado asked the farm for him. After him there was no one else besides maybe Bedard who would have helped the Yankees get to a Game 5 in the ALDS so maybe the non-move for Cashman was the best move to make instead of giving up decent prospects for an ok rental.

Anonymous said...

on rasmus: jd drew never inspired youtube videos like this, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pI8l87uyDXM

Jason