*** Official 2012-13 Hot Stove Thread (1 Viewer)

[proninja]

Wait, there are people who don't think this was awful for the Royals? Really?

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Wait, there are people who don't think this was awful for the Royals? Really?

Thanks as always for your stunning contributions to the baseball forum, you make it what it is.

 

[Encyclopedia Brown]

Jeremy Hermida (#4 prospect in 2006) .975 OPS in AA in 2005, currently without a teamBrandon Wood (#3 prospect in '06 and #8 in '07) Very good minor league hitter, many .900 OPS seasonsAndy Marte (#9 prospect in 2005) Power, high walks and the ability to go the other way. "Can't miss"Delmon Young Ranked in top five including #1 prospect, has not exactly become a cornerstone Sean Burroughs (top ten 2000-2002) Consistent minor league hitter, future batting champ according to many scoutsCarlos Pena (#5 in 2002) Killed minor league pitching, solid MLB player but nothing close to spectacularCasey Kotchman (#6 in 2005) .323/.406/.491/.897 career minor league numbers

Add Ben Grieve to that list. I have never seen two guys lose it as fast as he and Burroughs.

 

[Guest]

I agree with DrD here.

Even if this turns into a terrible trade, eventually you have to give your fanbase something other than hope. Ever since Alex Gordon was being pimped in the minors, and especially the last 2-4 years when scouts have been talking about their stocked minor league system, Royals fans have been told that the next good team is right around the corner. Any year now. But then as a fan you get tired of seeing the same pattern of, "have good prospects; start good prospects; trade good prospects after they have 3 years of MLB seasoning for more future prospects since your old ones will be too expensive to sign" and living in a continuous rebuilding year. I watched the Twins do that for a decade. So it's nice to have your team finally take a stand and say, "You know what, we're tired of saying next year every year. We're going to say this year this year."

 

[TobiasFunke]

I agree with DrD here.

Even if this turns into a terrible trade, eventually you have to give your fanbase something other than hope. Ever since Alex Gordon was being pimped in the minors, and especially the last 2-4 years when scouts have been talking about their stocked minor league system, Royals fans have been told that the next good team is right around the corner. Any year now. But then as a fan you get tired of seeing the same pattern of, "have good prospects; start good prospects; trade good prospects after they have 3 years of MLB seasoning for more future prospects since your old ones will be too expensive to sign" and living in a continuous rebuilding year. I watched the Twins do that for a decade. So it's nice to have your team finally take a stand and say, "You know what, we're tired of saying next year every year. We're going to say this year this year."

Here's the problem: they only won 72 games last year. Even in the AL Central they'll need at least 85 wins to compete. Where are the 13 wins gonna come from? Certainly not Shields, he's worth maybe 3-4 wins tops. Guys like Perez and Hosmer probably will get better, but it's hard to say how much. So I understand the logic, but only if they're not done. They need to go out and get some power. Maybe take a run at Swisher or something?

 

[shadyridr]

Rany Jazayerli is on suicide watch tonight

A Royal BlunderWhy it made no sense for the Kansas City Royals to trade star prospect Wil MyersBy Rany Jazayerli on December 10, 2012PRINTDayton Moore, the general manager of the Kansas City Royals, has been far from perfect at his job. He has made bad trades (Melky Cabrera for Jonathan Sanchez), he has made terrible free-agent signings ($36 million for Jose Guillen), and he has signed Jeff Francoeur not once, but twice.But two years ago, he was able to deliver something to Royals fans that they hadn't felt for a quarter-century: hope. After the 2010 season, the Royals had fashioned the greatest farm system in baseball, the greatest anyone had seen in years. People were talking about the Royals, and not as a punchline. After 25 years without so much as a pennant race, fans of the team could realistically dream about the playoffs — not just a fluky, 2012-Orioles-style appearance, but a legitimate mini-dynasty atop the weak AL Central.Last night, that dream was ripped apart like a cheap piñata. Frustrated by the inability to develop a starting rotation to pair with the team's young, talented offense, Moore traded Baseball America's Minor League Player of the Year, right fielder Wil Myers, and three other solid prospects to the Tampa Bay Rays for James Shields and Wade Davis.The Royals got a terrific starting pitcher in Shields, and Davis was a solid back-end starter for the Rays in 2010 and 2011 before they moved him to the bullpen in 2012, where he excelled. But Kansas City gave up an astonishing amount of talent, rivaling the Atlanta Braves' regrettable payment for Mark Teixeira1 in 2007 as the largest collection of prospects traded in the past decade.This is a terrible trade for the Royals, deeply flawed in both its theory and execution, and while it might make the Royals marginally more likely to make the playoffs in 2013, it does irreparable damage to their chances of building a perennial winner.Let's start here: Wil Myers is not a good prospect. He is not a very good prospect. He is one of the best prospects in baseball, almost certain to be among the top five of every prospect list that is published this offseason. Good prospects fail all the time. Very good prospects fail more often than not. But the very best prospects — especially hitting prospects, whose risk of injury is dramatically lower than their counterparts on the mound — turn into above-average regulars, if not stars, well over 50 percent of the time.Myers, as mentioned, was named Minor League Player of the Year. In the past 20 years, 14 position players won the same award. Here are their names:1992: Tim Salmon1993: Manny Ramirez1994: Derek Jeter1995: Andruw Jones1996: Andruw Jones1997: Paul Konerko1998: Eric Chavez2002: Rocco Baldelli2003: Joe Mauer2005: Delmon Young2006: Alex Gordon2007: Jay Bruce2008: Matt Wieters2009: Jason Heyward2011: Mike TroutYes, Delmon Young was once the Minor League Player of the Year, and if you want to spin this trade for the Royals, you can bring up Young's name as a cautionary tale. And after a promising start to his career, Rocco Baldelli was ravaged by injuries and his career ended at age 28. But every other player on that list has gone on to become a well-above-average player at his position. Most of them became stars. At least a few will go into the Hall of Fame.Based on the list above, Wil Myers has about an 86 percent chance of becoming a true impact player in the major leagues. Yes, that's based on a small sample size, but that's just the point: Myers is a special player, and there are precious few players that you can compare him to. In 2012, he hit .314/.387/.600 between Double-A and Triple-A while playing the entire season at age 21. He hit 37 home runs, the most by any 21-year-old in the high minors (Double-A and Triple-A) since 1963.Myers wasn't just one of the best prospects in baseball. He also perfectly fit the one glaring hole in the Royals lineup. The fantastic farm system from two years ago has already supplied the Royals with young talent at first base (Eric Hosmer), third base (Mike Moustakas), and catcher (Salvador Perez) to go along with earlier farm system products in left field (Alex Gordon) and at DH (Billy Butler). The Zack Greinke trade brought in starters at shortstop (Alcides Escobar) and center field (Lorenzo Cain).But in right field, the Royals committed to Jeff Francoeur, who in 2012 was arguably the worst everyday player in the major leagues. (This continues a long tradition of a Commitment to Execrableness in Kansas City. Yuniesky Betancourt would have once again contended for the worst everyday player honor had he played more.) Francoeur hit .235/.287/.378, which would be atrocious for a shortstop, and despite his cannon arm in right field, he had such poor range that defensive metrics estimate he cost the Royals about 10 runs on defense.Instead of replacing Francoeur with Myers in 2013, a switch that would be worth around four wins, they're stuck with the game's worst right fielder for another season. The downgrade from Myers to Francoeur is almost enough to cancel out the benefit from acquiring Shields.Shields is an excellent pitcher who has thrown more innings over the past two seasons than anyone except Justin Verlander. But he's not an ace, and if you're going to give up a prospect as good as Wil Myers, you need to get an ace.Shields has a 3.89 career ERA, and a 3.15 ERA over the past two years. (Mind you, three years ago he had a 5.18 ERA and led the AL in hits, earned runs, and home runs allowed.) But here's the thing: In Tampa Bay, he played in one of the best pitchers' parks in baseball, in front of one of the best defenses in baseball, for one of the best managers in baseball. He brings none of those things with him to Kansas City.Ballpark? For his career, Shields has a 3.33 ERA when pitching at Tropicana Field. When pitching anywhere else, he has a 4.54 ERA.Defense? By defensive efficiency — a measure of what percentage of the time a defense turns a ball in play into an out — the Rays have had the best or second-best defense in the major leagues for each of the past three years. By comparison, over the past three seasons the Royals have ranked 28th, 24th, and 26th in defensive efficiency.Manager? Joe Maddon's record speaks for itself.These factors are intertwined to some extent; one thing that makes Maddon great is that he's so aggressive about using defensive shifts, which improves the team's defensive efficiency, as does the ballpark. Overall, it's fair to say that Shields is a good pitcher who was put in position to look like a very good pitcher.In terms of pure baseball value, Shields has the edge in 2013. But of course, the Royals and Rays didn't trade players — they traded contracts, and the difference between the two is staggering. The Rays have control of Myers for at least the next six years — and given their knack for signing star players to long-term deals as soon as they reach the majors (Evan Longoria, Matt Moore), it wouldn't be a surprise if they soon have Myers under club control into the next decade. The Royals have control of James Shields for two years.Myers will be making the major league minimum, more or less, for the next three years. Shields will get paid $10.5 million in 2013, and the Royals have an option for him at $12 million in 2014.That's the most inexplicable part of this trade — that a team that plays in a tiny market, whose owner has a history of (to be kind) penuriousness, and who has already indicated that they've reached their payroll cap, would trade a potential star making minimum wage for a pitcher who earns eight figures in each of the next two seasons. You can't simply evaluate this trade by comparing Myers to Shields — you have to compare what the Royals could have done with Myers and all that money they're going to spend on Shields. For $22 million over the next two seasons, the Royals could sign Shaun Marcum. They could come close to signing Edwin Jackson. Hell, Brandon McCarthy, who can't stay healthy but who has a 3.29 ERA over the past two years, just signed with the Diamondbacks for two years and $15.5 million.James Shields makes the Royals' rotation much better in 2013. But so would a lot of pitchers who would have signed for the money Kansas City is committing to him. The difference between Shields and any of those pitchers amounts to one more win in 2013, two at the most. And all they would have cost is money — not one of the best prospects in baseball.Wade Davis, the other pitcher the Royals acquired, may also help their rotation in 2013, which says more about the state of their rotation than about him. Davis was a marginal starter for Tampa Bay in 2010 and 2011, primarily because he couldn't put batters away. He struck out only 5.6 batters per nine innings, well below average. The Rays had the depth in their rotation to move Davis to the bullpen for 2012, and there he improved dramatically — his fastball velocity jumped from 91.8 mph to 93.7 mph, his slider was sharper, and his strikeout rate literally doubled to 11.1 per nine innings.Davis can be a dominant reliever, but the Royals have a stacked bullpen, and they have announced that Davis will go into spring training with a chance to reestablish himself in the rotation. Given that their bullpen is stacked, this is a rare glimpse of wisdom in the insanity that is this deal. If Davis can maintain his extra juice, he would be a very valuable no. 3 starter — particularly since Davis is signed to a contract that gives the Royals club options to keep him at a reasonable salary through 2017.It's unlikely that this trade will work out for the Royals, but if it does, Davis — not Shields — will be the key to the trade. And if the Royals traded six-plus years of Wil Myers for seven combined years of control of Shields and Davis, this would almost be a fair deal. It would still favor the Rays, given that Myers is years away from making serious money, while Shields and Davis are already making it. But at least it wouldn't be Grand Theft Farm System.Ah, but the Royals also threw in three other prospects!Jake Odorizzi, whom the Royals acquired when they traded Zack Greinke two years ago, is a major league–ready starter with four average to above-average pitches. In 145 innings between Double-A and Triple-A, he struck out 135, walked 50, and had a 3.03 ERA. He's probably not more than a no. 3 starter in the end, but he's already a finished prospect — you don't have to dream on him. He was ranked the no. 69 prospect by Baseball America two years ago, the no. 68 prospect last year, and will probably be in that range again. Basically, he's Wade Davis, only four years younger and with three years' less service time.Mike Montgomery was one of the best left-handed pitchers in the minors two years ago, back when everything was coming up 7's for the Royals. Even a year ago, he was ranked above Myers as the Royals' best prospect, thanks to a fastball in the mid-90s and an excellent changeup. He has mysteriously lost the ability to get hitters out, however, with an ERA over 5 in the minors in each of the past two seasons. He's a lottery ticket for Tampa Bay, but one that could pay off very, very big.Patrick Leonard just turned 20 years old, and he hit 14 homers in 62 games in rookie ball this year. He could be just about anything. He's not a top prospect, and probably never will be, but he's just the safety-deposit box the Rays snatched up on their way out of the bank vault.So if you want to read this trade as charitably as possible from the Royals' perspective, you can say that they almost got fair value for Wil Myers … and then flushed Odorizzi, Montgomery, and Leonard down the toilet.It's a terrible trade, and for it to work out at all for the Royals, they have to go to the playoffs next season. If they do, then the tradeoff might be worth it, the way it was for the Milwaukee Brewers two years ago when they traded Brett Lawrie for Shaun Marcum, and four young players for Zack Greinke.But as they're presently constructed, the Royals still aren't good enough to win the AL Central. Their top four starters, none of whom were with the team as recently as July, are Shields, Jeremy Guthrie, Ervin Santana, and Davis. Aside from Shields, that's a lot of league-average talent. If they're going to the playoffs, their offense will have to carry them there.Only here's the thing: The Royals' offense was worse than their pitching staff last season. Thanks to their fine bullpen, the Royals ranked 10th in the AL in runs allowed in 2012. They ranked 12th in runs scored.If the Royals do make the playoffs in 2013, it will be because their offense took a huge step forward. It will be because Eric Hosmer, who struggled to hit .232/.304/.359 as a sophomore, returns to being the Will Clark clone that everyone expects him to be. It will be because Salvador Perez doesn't get hurt and miss half the season, and because Mike Moustakas improves his batting average, and — most of all — because the Royals get production out of right field.By making this trade, the Royals gave away the most obvious source of an offensive upgrade. There is no better example of robbing Peter to pay Paul.There is also no better example of moral hazard, the term that applies to the dangers of having a decision maker (like, say, a GM) whose self-interests are not aligned with those he's making decisions for (like, say, a baseball team). Prior to this trade, the Royals were well set up to win 85-90 games in 2014, when a wave of pitching talent in their farm system was expected to catch up with the hitters who have already arrived. They seemed poised to be competitive through the rest of the decade. Wil Myers would have been in the middle of their lineup the entire time.But winning 90 games in 2014 does Dayton Moore no good if the Royals struggle again in 2013, because after six consecutive losing seasons to start Moore's tenure, a seventh in 2013 would probably mean he'd be out of a job. This trade hurts the Royals significantly in the long term, but it might help Moore keep his job in the short term.If the Royals reach the postseason in 2013, ending the longest playoff drought in American sports, Moore will keep his job, and he might even deserve to. It was the work of his front office that led the Royals to draft players like Myers2 in the first place. Even if Moore gutted his farm system for a playoff appearance, by Kansas City standards that qualifies as an unbridled success.And if they don't win, well, at least there won't be any doubt about whom to blame. It's not owner David Glass, not with the Royals poised to have a payroll north of $80 million. Moore didn't just push all his chips into the pot — he pushed in his job security as well. If his gamble fails, and if it turns out that Moore sacrificed the Royals' future for an illusory present, Royals fans can only hope that someone else will be able to pick up the pieces

 

[Guest]

I agree with DrD here.

Even if this turns into a terrible trade, eventually you have to give your fanbase something other than hope. Ever since Alex Gordon was being pimped in the minors, and especially the last 2-4 years when scouts have been talking about their stocked minor league system, Royals fans have been told that the next good team is right around the corner. Any year now. But then as a fan you get tired of seeing the same pattern of, "have good prospects; start good prospects; trade good prospects after they have 3 years of MLB seasoning for more future prospects since your old ones will be too expensive to sign" and living in a continuous rebuilding year. I watched the Twins do that for a decade. So it's nice to have your team finally take a stand and say, "You know what, we're tired of saying next year every year. We're going to say this year this year."

Here's the problem: they only won 72 games last year. Even in the AL Central they'll need at least 85 wins to compete. Where are the 13 wins gonna come from? Certainly not Shields, he's worth maybe 3-4 wins tops. Guys like Perez and Hosmer probably will get better, but it's hard to say how much. So I understand the logic, but only if they're not done. They need to go out and get some power. Maybe take a run at Swisher or something?

You don't have to make the playoffs to generate buzz. In a franchise as mordibund as the Royals all you have to do is make it look like you're serious about winning.

 

[Brady Marino]

I agree with DrD here.

Even if this turns into a terrible trade, eventually you have to give your fanbase something other than hope. Ever since Alex Gordon was being pimped in the minors, and especially the last 2-4 years when scouts have been talking about their stocked minor league system, Royals fans have been told that the next good team is right around the corner. Any year now. But then as a fan you get tired of seeing the same pattern of, "have good prospects; start good prospects; trade good prospects after they have 3 years of MLB seasoning for more future prospects since your old ones will be too expensive to sign" and living in a continuous rebuilding year. I watched the Twins do that for a decade. So it's nice to have your team finally take a stand and say, "You know what, we're tired of saying next year every year. We're going to say this year this year."

Here's the problem: they only won 72 games last year. Even in the AL Central they'll need at least 85 wins to compete. Where are the 13 wins gonna come from? Certainly not Shields, he's worth maybe 3-4 wins tops. Guys like Perez and Hosmer probably will get better, but it's hard to say how much. So I understand the logic, but only if they're not done. They need to go out and get some power. Maybe take a run at Swisher or something?

You don't have to make the playoffs to generate buzz. In a franchise as mordibund as the Royals all you have to do is make it look like you're serious about winning.

They don't just need to convince their fans that they're serious about winning. Anything near or above .500 tells free agents that you're serious, too.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I agree with DrD here.

Even if this turns into a terrible trade, eventually you have to give your fanbase something other than hope. Ever since Alex Gordon was being pimped in the minors, and especially the last 2-4 years when scouts have been talking about their stocked minor league system, Royals fans have been told that the next good team is right around the corner. Any year now. But then as a fan you get tired of seeing the same pattern of, "have good prospects; start good prospects; trade good prospects after they have 3 years of MLB seasoning for more future prospects since your old ones will be too expensive to sign" and living in a continuous rebuilding year. I watched the Twins do that for a decade. So it's nice to have your team finally take a stand and say, "You know what, we're tired of saying next year every year. We're going to say this year this year."

Here's the problem: they only won 72 games last year. Even in the AL Central they'll need at least 85 wins to compete. Where are the 13 wins gonna come from? Certainly not Shields, he's worth maybe 3-4 wins tops. Guys like Perez and Hosmer probably will get better, but it's hard to say how much. So I understand the logic, but only if they're not done. They need to go out and get some power. Maybe take a run at Swisher or something?

You don't have to make the playoffs to generate buzz. In a franchise as mordibund as the Royals all you have to do is make it look like you're serious about winning.

Does jumping from 72 to 77 wins or so create buzz and make it look like you're serious about winning? Is that kind of jump worth the minor league player of the year? JMO, but the only way I see it as worthwhile is if they can find a way to give the Tigers a run for their money over the next two years. Might happen if the kids all take off, but more likely they're gonna need to add more pieces.

 

[Guest]

Rany Jazayerli is on suicide watch tonight

A Royal BlunderLet's start here: Wil Myers is not a good prospect. He is not a very good prospect. He is one of the best prospects in baseball, almost certain to be among the top five of every prospect list that is published this offseason. Good prospects fail all the time. Very good prospects fail more often than not. But the very best prospects — especially hitting prospects, whose risk of injury is dramatically lower than their counterparts on the mound — turn into above-average regulars, if not stars, well over 50 percent of the time.

Myers, as mentioned, was named Minor League Player of the Year. In the past 20 years, 14 position players won the same award. Here are their names:

1992: Tim Salmon

1993: Manny Ramirez

1994: Derek Jeter

1995: Andruw Jones

1996: Andruw Jones

1997: Paul Konerko

1998: Eric Chavez

2002: Rocco Baldelli

2003: Joe Mauer

2005: Delmon Young

2006: Alex Gordon

2007: Jay Bruce

2008: Matt Wieters

2009: Jason Heyward

2011: Mike Trout

Yes, Delmon Young was once the Minor League Player of the Year, and if you want to spin this trade for the Royals, you can bring up Young's name as a cautionary tale. And after a promising start to his career, Rocco Baldelli was ravaged by injuries and his career ended at age 28. But every other player on that list has gone on to become a well-above-average player at his position. Most of them became stars. At least a few will go into the Hall of Fame.

Here's the other bit.Baseball America's Top 100 Prospects for 2011

1. Bryce Harper, of, Nationals

2. Mike Trout, of, Angels

3. Jesus Montero, c, Yankees

4. Domonic Brown, of, Phillies

5. Julio Teheran, rhp, Braves

6. Jeremy Hellickson, rhp, Rays

7. Aroldis Chapman, lhp, Reds

8. Eric Hosmer, 1b, Royals

9. Mike Moustakas, 3b, Royals

10. Wil Myers, of/c, Royals

They still have Hosmer and Moustakas. They still have Alex Gordon who is on your list for 2006. They still have Billy Butler who was a top prospect. They have hitting prospects.

 

[the moops]

1992: Tim Salmon1993: Manny Ramirez1994: Derek Jeter1995: Andruw Jones1996: Andruw Jones1997: Paul Konerko1998: Eric Chavez2002: Rocco Baldelli2003: Joe Mauer2005: Delmon Young2006: Alex Gordon2007: Jay Bruce2008: Matt Wieters2009: Jason Heyward2011: Mike Trout

That is a pretty damn impressive list.

 

[scrumptrulescent]

I agree with DrD here.

Even if this turns into a terrible trade, eventually you have to give your fanbase something other than hope. Ever since Alex Gordon was being pimped in the minors, and especially the last 2-4 years when scouts have been talking about their stocked minor league system, Royals fans have been told that the next good team is right around the corner. Any year now. But then as a fan you get tired of seeing the same pattern of, "have good prospects; start good prospects; trade good prospects after they have 3 years of MLB seasoning for more future prospects since your old ones will be too expensive to sign" and living in a continuous rebuilding year. I watched the Twins do that for a decade. So it's nice to have your team finally take a stand and say, "You know what, we're tired of saying next year every year. We're going to say this year this year."

Here's the problem: they only won 72 games last year. Even in the AL Central they'll need at least 85 wins to compete. Where are the 13 wins gonna come from? Certainly not Shields, he's worth maybe 3-4 wins tops. Guys like Perez and Hosmer probably will get better, but it's hard to say how much. So I understand the logic, but only if they're not done. They need to go out and get some power. Maybe take a run at Swisher or something?

You don't have to make the playoffs to generate buzz. In a franchise as mordibund as the Royals all you have to do is make it look like you're serious about winning.

Does jumping from 72 to 77 wins or so create buzz and make it look like you're serious about winning? Is that kind of jump worth the minor league player of the year? JMO, but the only way I see it as worthwhile is if they can find a way to give the Tigers a run for their money over the next two years. Might happen if the kids all take off, but more likely they're gonna need to add more pieces.

Aren't you a Nats fan? They traded for Gio after a below .500 season in 2011. They went from 80 W's in 2011 to 98 in 2012.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I agree with DrD here.

Even if this turns into a terrible trade, eventually you have to give your fanbase something other than hope. Ever since Alex Gordon was being pimped in the minors, and especially the last 2-4 years when scouts have been talking about their stocked minor league system, Royals fans have been told that the next good team is right around the corner. Any year now. But then as a fan you get tired of seeing the same pattern of, "have good prospects; start good prospects; trade good prospects after they have 3 years of MLB seasoning for more future prospects since your old ones will be too expensive to sign" and living in a continuous rebuilding year. I watched the Twins do that for a decade. So it's nice to have your team finally take a stand and say, "You know what, we're tired of saying next year every year. We're going to say this year this year."

Here's the problem: they only won 72 games last year. Even in the AL Central they'll need at least 85 wins to compete. Where are the 13 wins gonna come from? Certainly not Shields, he's worth maybe 3-4 wins tops. Guys like Perez and Hosmer probably will get better, but it's hard to say how much. So I understand the logic, but only if they're not done. They need to go out and get some power. Maybe take a run at Swisher or something?

You don't have to make the playoffs to generate buzz. In a franchise as mordibund as the Royals all you have to do is make it look like you're serious about winning.

Does jumping from 72 to 77 wins or so create buzz and make it look like you're serious about winning? Is that kind of jump worth the minor league player of the year? JMO, but the only way I see it as worthwhile is if they can find a way to give the Tigers a run for their money over the next two years. Might happen if the kids all take off, but more likely they're gonna need to add more pieces.

Aren't you a Nats fan? They traded for Gio after a below .500 season in 2011. They went from 80 W's in 2011 to 98 in 2012.

So Shields is their Gio. I can buy that. And Ervin Santana is their Edwin Jackson. That works too. OK, so far I'm on board.

However, among the other 2012 Nats who did not really contribute to the 80-81 2011 Nats: Stephen Strasburg, Adam LaRoche, Bryce Harper. Find me their Strasburg, LaRoche and Harper for 2013 and I'm sold. And the argument that "they have young guys who played in 2012 but will be better in 2013" doesn't count. The Nats also had Ian Desmond, Jordan Zimmermann and Ross Detwiler who fell into that category.

 

[boubucarow]

Rany Jazayerli is on suicide watch tonight

A Royal BlunderLet's start here: Wil Myers is not a good prospect. He is not a very good prospect. He is one of the best prospects in baseball, almost certain to be among the top five of every prospect list that is published this offseason. Good prospects fail all the time. Very good prospects fail more often than not. But the very best prospects — especially hitting prospects, whose risk of injury is dramatically lower than their counterparts on the mound — turn into above-average regulars, if not stars, well over 50 percent of the time.

Myers, as mentioned, was named Minor League Player of the Year. In the past 20 years, 14 position players won the same award. Here are their names:

1992: Tim Salmon

1993: Manny Ramirez

1994: Derek Jeter

1995: Andruw Jones

1996: Andruw Jones

1997: Paul Konerko

1998: Eric Chavez

2002: Rocco Baldelli

2003: Joe Mauer

2005: Delmon Young

2006: Alex Gordon

2007: Jay Bruce

2008: Matt Wieters

2009: Jason Heyward

2011: Mike Trout

Yes, Delmon Young was once the Minor League Player of the Year, and if you want to spin this trade for the Royals, you can bring up Young's name as a cautionary tale. And after a promising start to his career, Rocco Baldelli was ravaged by injuries and his career ended at age 28. But every other player on that list has gone on to become a well-above-average player at his position. Most of them became stars. At least a few will go into the Hall of Fame.

Here's the other bit.Baseball America's Top 100 Prospects for 2011

1. Bryce Harper, of, Nationals

2. Mike Trout, of, Angels

3. Jesus Montero, c, Yankees

4. Domonic Brown, of, Phillies

5. Julio Teheran, rhp, Braves

6. Jeremy Hellickson, rhp, Rays

7. Aroldis Chapman, lhp, Reds

8. Eric Hosmer, 1b, Royals

9. Mike Moustakas, 3b, Royals

10. Wil Myers, of/c, Royals

They still have Hosmer and Moustakas. They still have Alex Gordon who is on your list for 2006. They still have Billy Butler who was a top prospect. They have hitting prospects.

None of whom play RF so it doesn't matter they have hitters. I don't know if they could have built a rotation of 3 average pitchers and 1 above average work horse without trading Myers. Maybe they tried to sign pitchers that would have nothing to do with KC. The major gripe is that they didn't trade from a position of strength or non-importance to 2013/14. They traded their in house 2013/14 upgrade over one of the worst RFers in baseball. I hope it works out for the Royals like the Orioles last year. It would be a great story. But I think it is easy to understand why many criticize the trade.

 

[scrumptrulescent]

I agree with DrD here.

Even if this turns into a terrible trade, eventually you have to give your fanbase something other than hope. Ever since Alex Gordon was being pimped in the minors, and especially the last 2-4 years when scouts have been talking about their stocked minor league system, Royals fans have been told that the next good team is right around the corner. Any year now. But then as a fan you get tired of seeing the same pattern of, "have good prospects; start good prospects; trade good prospects after they have 3 years of MLB seasoning for more future prospects since your old ones will be too expensive to sign" and living in a continuous rebuilding year. I watched the Twins do that for a decade. So it's nice to have your team finally take a stand and say, "You know what, we're tired of saying next year every year. We're going to say this year this year."

Here's the problem: they only won 72 games last year. Even in the AL Central they'll need at least 85 wins to compete. Where are the 13 wins gonna come from? Certainly not Shields, he's worth maybe 3-4 wins tops. Guys like Perez and Hosmer probably will get better, but it's hard to say how much. So I understand the logic, but only if they're not done. They need to go out and get some power. Maybe take a run at Swisher or something?

You don't have to make the playoffs to generate buzz. In a franchise as mordibund as the Royals all you have to do is make it look like you're serious about winning.

Does jumping from 72 to 77 wins or so create buzz and make it look like you're serious about winning? Is that kind of jump worth the minor league player of the year? JMO, but the only way I see it as worthwhile is if they can find a way to give the Tigers a run for their money over the next two years. Might happen if the kids all take off, but more likely they're gonna need to add more pieces.

Aren't you a Nats fan? They traded for Gio after a below .500 season in 2011. They went from 80 W's in 2011 to 98 in 2012.

So Shields is their Gio. I can buy that. And Ervin Santana is their Edwin Jackson. That works too. OK, so far I'm on board.

However, among the other 2012 Nats who did not really contribute to the 80-81 2011 Nats: Stephen Strasburg, Adam LaRoche, Bryce Harper. Find me their Strasburg, LaRoche and Harper for 2013 and I'm sold. And the argument that "they have young guys who played in 2012 but will be better in 2013" doesn't count. The Nats also had Ian Desmond, Jordan Zimmermann and Ross Detwiler who fell into that category.

Well, some of that comes from crystal clear hindsight. I know Strasburg came back late in 2011 after TJ but I think what he did in 2012 was more than the team and fans could have hoped for after surgery. LaRoche is a journeyman who exceeded expectations in 2012. And Bryce could have fallen on his face and been sent back to the minors like Trout did the year before. Those guys all exceeded expectations. There are plenty to pick from on KC's roster who could exceed expectations in 2013, but none of them were starting pitchers until they made their offseason moves. They gave themselves a chance to be great.

 

[Eephus]

Great?

 

[scrumptrulescent]

Great?

Yes, according to my fangraphs.com WAR calculator.Dictionary.com

great/greɪt/ Show Spelled [greyt] Show IPA adjective, great·er, great·est, adverb, noun, plural greats ( especially collectively ) great, interjection. adjective 4. wonderful; first-rate; very good: We had a great time. That's great!

 

[Doctor Detroit]

ool

 

[TobiasFunke]

Well, some of that comes from crystal clear hindsight. I know Strasburg came back late in 2011 after TJ but I think what he did in 2012 was more than the team and fans could have hoped for after surgery. LaRoche is a journeyman who exceeded expectations in 2012. And Bryce could have fallen on his face and been sent back to the minors like Trout did the year before. Those guys all exceeded expectations. There are plenty to pick from on KC's roster who could exceed expectations in 2013, but none of them were starting pitchers until they made their offseason moves. They gave themselves a chance to be great.

Sure, things worked out great for them. But the Nats weren't building just to win for 2012-2013 with the Gio trade like people are saying the Royals are doing with the Shields trade. Gio was already under contract for like four more years and the Nats immediately inked him to a club-friendly deal through 2018.In any event, you weren't really comparing the two deals, I don't think. I thought you were trying to say that it could work out because KC could make a huge leap like the Nats did. And what I was saying was that for it to happen, you need to have the players on your roster who can make that leap along with the improvement that comes with Shields/Gio. Who are those players for the Royals? Hosmer and Moustakas, definitely, but who else? The Nats had like 7-8 guys who were primed to make much bigger contributions in 2012 than 2011.

 

[oso diablo]

However, among the other 2012 Nats who did not really contribute to the 80-81 2011 Nats: Stephen Strasburg, Adam LaRoche, Bryce Harper. Find me their Strasburg, LaRoche and Harper for 2013 and I'm sold. And the argument that "they have young guys who played in 2012 but will be better in 2013" doesn't count. The Nats also had Ian Desmond, Jordan Zimmermann and Ross Detwiler who fell into that category.

the Royals just traded their Bryce Harper

 

[Eephus]

Well, some of that comes from crystal clear hindsight. I know Strasburg came back late in 2011 after TJ but I think what he did in 2012 was more than the team and fans could have hoped for after surgery. LaRoche is a journeyman who exceeded expectations in 2012. And Bryce could have fallen on his face and been sent back to the minors like Trout did the year before. Those guys all exceeded expectations. There are plenty to pick from on KC's roster who could exceed expectations in 2013, but none of them were starting pitchers until they made their offseason moves. They gave themselves a chance to be great.

Sure, things worked out great for them. But the Nats weren't building just to win for 2012-2013 with the Gio trade like people are saying the Royals are doing with the Shields trade. Gio was already under contract for like four more years and the Nats immediately inked him to a club-friendly deal through 2018.In any event, you weren't really comparing the two deals, I don't think. I thought you were trying to say that it could work out because KC could make a huge leap like the Nats did. And what I was saying was that for it to happen, you need to have the players on your roster who can make that leap along with the improvement that comes with Shields/Gio. Who are those players for the Royals? Hosmer and Moustakas, definitely, but who else? The Nats had like 7-8 guys who were primed to make much bigger contributions in 2012 than 2011.

Cain, Perez, the second baseman, Wade Davis, Kelvin Herrera It's possible but it would take a lot for all the planets to align

 

[Eephus]

Great?

Yes, according to my fangraphs.com WAR calculator.Dictionary.com

great/greɪt/ Show Spelled [greyt] Show IPA adjective, great·er, great·est, adverb, noun, plural greats ( especially collectively ) great, interjection. adjective 4. wonderful; first-rate; very good: We had a great time. That's great!

KC traded the guy with the best shot at greatness.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Well, some of that comes from crystal clear hindsight. I know Strasburg came back late in 2011 after TJ but I think what he did in 2012 was more than the team and fans could have hoped for after surgery. LaRoche is a journeyman who exceeded expectations in 2012. And Bryce could have fallen on his face and been sent back to the minors like Trout did the year before. Those guys all exceeded expectations. There are plenty to pick from on KC's roster who could exceed expectations in 2013, but none of them were starting pitchers until they made their offseason moves. They gave themselves a chance to be great.

Sure, things worked out great for them. But the Nats weren't building just to win for 2012-2013 with the Gio trade like people are saying the Royals are doing with the Shields trade. Gio was already under contract for like four more years and the Nats immediately inked him to a club-friendly deal through 2018.In any event, you weren't really comparing the two deals, I don't think. I thought you were trying to say that it could work out because KC could make a huge leap like the Nats did. And what I was saying was that for it to happen, you need to have the players on your roster who can make that leap along with the improvement that comes with Shields/Gio. Who are those players for the Royals? Hosmer and Moustakas, definitely, but who else? The Nats had like 7-8 guys who were primed to make much bigger contributions in 2012 than 2011.

Cain, Perez, the second baseman, Wade Davis, Kelvin Herrera It's possible but it would take a lot for all the planets to align

Right. That's why the Nats move and their 2011 to 2012 leap is a bad comparison. Nats were doing it for the next 5-7 years, just happened to get lucky in Year 1. KC is doing this for 2013. Or at least that's the argument I'm hearing. If they wanted to make a move for the next 5-7 years they certainly shouldn't have dealt Myers for Shields.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Well, some of that comes from crystal clear hindsight. I know Strasburg came back late in 2011 after TJ but I think what he did in 2012 was more than the team and fans could have hoped for after surgery. LaRoche is a journeyman who exceeded expectations in 2012. And Bryce could have fallen on his face and been sent back to the minors like Trout did the year before. Those guys all exceeded expectations.

There are plenty to pick from on KC's roster who could exceed expectations in 2013, but none of them were starting pitchers until they made their offseason moves. They gave themselves a chance to be great.

Sure, things worked out great for them. But the Nats weren't building just to win for 2012-2013 with the Gio trade like people are saying the Royals are doing with the Shields trade. Gio was already under contract for like four more years and the Nats immediately inked him to a club-friendly deal through 2018.In any event, you weren't really comparing the two deals, I don't think. I thought you were trying to say that it could work out because KC could make a huge leap like the Nats did. And what I was saying was that for it to happen, you need to have the players on your roster who can make that leap along with the improvement that comes with Shields/Gio. Who are those players for the Royals? Hosmer and Moustakas, definitely, but who else? The Nats had like 7-8 guys who were primed to make much bigger contributions in 2012 than 2011.

Cain, Perez, the second baseman, Wade Davis, Kelvin Herrera It's possible but it would take a lot for all the planets to align

Right. That's why the Nats move and their 2011 to 2012 leap is a bad comparison. Nats were doing it for the next 5-7 years, just happened to get lucky in Year 1. KC is doing this for 2013. Or at least that's the argument I'm hearing. If they wanted to make a move for the next 5-7 years they certainly shouldn't have dealt Myers for Shields.

The Royals have enough young talent to enhance the present and maximize the future. The Royals are just as capable as the Nats on offense IMO, where they lack is in starting pitching. It's a bad comparison to the Nats only because the Nats were loaded with organizational pitching depth and the Royals have about as much pitching depth as the 1907 St Louis Browns (no offense to Barney Pelty). The Royals also can't afford a Jason Werth or other fat FA contracts the Nats can offer.

I wonder what Proninja's thoughts are on this?

 

[Premier]

Scrimp has some really odd opinions.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Well, some of that comes from crystal clear hindsight. I know Strasburg came back late in 2011 after TJ but I think what he did in 2012 was more than the team and fans could have hoped for after surgery. LaRoche is a journeyman who exceeded expectations in 2012. And Bryce could have fallen on his face and been sent back to the minors like Trout did the year before. Those guys all exceeded expectations.

There are plenty to pick from on KC's roster who could exceed expectations in 2013, but none of them were starting pitchers until they made their offseason moves. They gave themselves a chance to be great.

Sure, things worked out great for them. But the Nats weren't building just to win for 2012-2013 with the Gio trade like people are saying the Royals are doing with the Shields trade. Gio was already under contract for like four more years and the Nats immediately inked him to a club-friendly deal through 2018.In any event, you weren't really comparing the two deals, I don't think. I thought you were trying to say that it could work out because KC could make a huge leap like the Nats did. And what I was saying was that for it to happen, you need to have the players on your roster who can make that leap along with the improvement that comes with Shields/Gio. Who are those players for the Royals? Hosmer and Moustakas, definitely, but who else? The Nats had like 7-8 guys who were primed to make much bigger contributions in 2012 than 2011.

Cain, Perez, the second baseman, Wade Davis, Kelvin Herrera It's possible but it would take a lot for all the planets to align

Right. That's why the Nats move and their 2011 to 2012 leap is a bad comparison. Nats were doing it for the next 5-7 years, just happened to get lucky in Year 1. KC is doing this for 2013. Or at least that's the argument I'm hearing. If they wanted to make a move for the next 5-7 years they certainly shouldn't have dealt Myers for Shields.

The Royals have enough young talent to enhance the present and maximize the future. The Royals are just as capable as the Nats on offense IMO, where they lack is in starting pitching. It's a bad comparison to the Nats only because the Nats were loaded with organizational pitching depth and the Royals have about as much pitching depth as the 1907 St Louis Browns (no offense to Barney Pelty). The Royals also can't afford a Jason Werth or other fat FA contracts the Nats can offer.

I wonder what Proninja's thoughts are on this?

Hey, I hope it works out, at least to the point that those poor fans have something to be excited about and a reason to go to the park in August and September. I get the value of that, even if you ultimately end up with 82 wins or something. But it's hard to shake the notion that if they wanted to trade Myers and Odorizzi for "win now" players they could have done better than they did.

 

[scrumptrulescent]

Great?

Yes, according to my fangraphs.com WAR calculator.Dictionary.com

great/greɪt/ Show Spelled [greyt] Show IPA adjective, great·er, great·est, adverb, noun, plural greats ( especially collectively ) great, interjection. adjective 4. wonderful; first-rate; very good: We had a great time. That's great!

KC traded the guy with the best shot at greatness.

I was talking about a Major League Baseball Team, not a minor league player.

 

[Michael Brown]

Keep hearing that the Royals trading Myers was okay because they have hitters with high ceilings who should improve. But if you had a million dollars, wouldn't you want two million dollars?

 

[cheese]

Keep hearing that the Royals trading Myers was okay because they have hitters with high ceilings who should improve. But if you had a million dollars, wouldn't you want two million dollars?

I will stop short of agreeing with the trade in terms of value, but KC was never going to be good until they fixed their starting pitching. It doesn't matter to me if they have 1,3, or 20 stud hitters they had to do something. Getting a very good SP who pitches a ton of innings is a great start and it will have an impact on the other starters IMO. How often do you see a team with a trainwreck rotation mash their way to success because their young hitters were that good? Maybe the 90s Rockies in that park? When you have very limited budget/assets, you are usually not able to be great in an area because it leaves you completely inept in another area. This trade balances their resources a little bit to make their pitching competitive.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Keep hearing that the Royals trading Myers was okay because they have hitters with high ceilings who should improve. But if you had a million dollars, wouldn't you want two million dollars?

I will stop short of agreeing with the trade in terms of value, but KC was never going to be good until they fixed their starting pitching. It doesn't matter to me if they have 1,3, or 20 stud hitters they had to do something. Getting a very good SP who pitches a ton of innings is a great start and it will have an impact on the other starters IMO. How often do you see a team with a trainwreck rotation mash their way to success because their young hitters were that good? Maybe the 90s Rockies in that park? When you have very limited budget/assets, you are usually not able to be great in an area because it leaves you completely inept in another area. This trade balances their resources a little bit to make their pitching competitive.

I did a quick search of the teams ranked by starter ERA for the last two seasons expecting to find some useful counterexamples, but I didn't. This year Texas was 20th, maybe the best counterexample in the last few years. Baltimore was 21st, but they were lucky, not good. Not a good model to follow. The rest of the teams in the bottom 10 in starter ERA were all terrible. None of the bottom 10 in starter ERA in 2011 made the playoffs. In 2010 only the Yankees pulled it off. So yeah, pretty solid argument.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Dodgers not getting nearly enough love here. We have three pages of Royals and nary a mention of the Goliath that has overtaken the mighty Yankees.

 

[oso diablo]

I did a quick search of the teams ranked by starter ERA for the last two seasons expecting to find some useful counterexamples, but I didn't. This year Texas was 20th, maybe the best counterexample in the last few years. Baltimore was 21st, but they were lucky, not good. Not a good model to follow. The rest of the teams in the bottom 10 in starter ERA were all terrible. None of the bottom 10 in starter ERA in 2011 made the playoffs. In 2010 only the Yankees pulled it off. So yeah, pretty solid argument.

that could be looking at the question from the wrong angle. My view is that it is much more likely that a pitching staff "over-achieve" than a batting lineup. Collect a bunch of arms - up & comers, cast-offs, rule 5s, what-have-you - and see if a few don't put it together at one time. The 2012 Athletics are the best example of this i can think of.So, while it's a truism that you won't be competitive without a quality set of IPs, that doesn't answer the question of how those quality IPs could come about.

 

[Bogart]

Dodgers not getting nearly enough love here. We have three pages of Royals and nary a mention of the Goliath that has overtaken the mighty Yankees.

There hasn't been this much talk about KC since the Pine Tar Incident.

 

[oso diablo]

Dodgers not getting nearly enough love here. We have three pages of Royals and nary a mention of the Goliath that has overtaken the mighty Yankees.

Large payrolls, like strikeouts, are fascist and boring.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Dodgers not getting nearly enough love here. We have three pages of Royals and nary a mention of the Goliath that has overtaken the mighty Yankees.

There hasn't been this much talk about KC since the Pine Tar Incident.

Money going to the NL is not a bad thing though is it?

 

[Bogart]

Dodgers not getting nearly enough love here. We have three pages of Royals and nary a mention of the Goliath that has overtaken the mighty Yankees.

There hasn't been this much talk about KC since the Pine Tar Incident.

Money going to the NL is not a bad thing though is it?

Amen to that.

 

[Eephus]

Dodgers not getting nearly enough love here. We have three pages of Royals and nary a mention of the Goliath that has overtaken the mighty Yankees.

Large payrolls, like strikeouts, are fascist and boring.

200,000,000 more reasons to hate the Dodgers

 

[Dr. Awesome]

Dodgers not getting nearly enough love here. We have three pages of Royals and nary a mention of the Goliath that has overtaken the mighty Yankees.

I'm curious to see what they'll do with their 8 man rotation. Who will they ship out and who will they get in return? Are they still looking for a 3rd baseman? They reportedly have Youkilis on the backburner.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I did a quick search of the teams ranked by starter ERA for the last two seasons expecting to find some useful counterexamples, but I didn't. This year Texas was 20th, maybe the best counterexample in the last few years. Baltimore was 21st, but they were lucky, not good. Not a good model to follow. The rest of the teams in the bottom 10 in starter ERA were all terrible. None of the bottom 10 in starter ERA in 2011 made the playoffs. In 2010 only the Yankees pulled it off. So yeah, pretty solid argument.

that could be looking at the question from the wrong angle. My view is that it is much more likely that a pitching staff "over-achieve" than a batting lineup. Collect a bunch of arms - up & comers, cast-offs, rule 5s, what-have-you - and see if a few don't put it together at one time. The 2012 Athletics are the best example of this i can think of.So, while it's a truism that you won't be competitive without a quality set of IPs, that doesn't answer the question of how those quality IPs could come about.

Good counterpoint. I've always thought that if you can only have one assured and have to roll the dice on the other, you're better off with good hitting than good pitching, because it's just a lot more more predictable and consistent. Still, for whatever reason (talent, scouting, defense, whatever), KC wasn't getting it done from a run prevention standpoint for the first 5-6 innings of games. Shields is a good candidate to help them in that respect. Like most people I think the cost was way too high, but at least he should help them plug a huge hole.Side note: this thread is a tremendous place to come to shoot the #### about offseason transactions. Wish I'd been hanging out here more in previous seasons.

 

[Billy Bats]

Rumors flying have Soo-Choo headed to Cincy for Gregorius+ then Clev would flip him or Asdrubal to Ariz.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Rumors flying have Soo-Choo headed to Cincy for Gregorius+ then Clev would flip him or Asdrubal to Ariz.

Reds are gonna ship Stubbs and Gregorious for Choo and put Choo in CF where he has only played 10 career games? Also...Choo is an FA after the season.Why would they do that? Cleveland can't wait to get rid of Assdribble.

 

[Wrigley]

Rumors flying have Soo-Choo headed to Cincy for Gregorius+ then Clev would flip him or Asdrubal to Ariz.

Reds are gonna ship Stubbs and Gregorious for Choo and put Choo in CF where he has only played 10 career games? Also...Choo is an FA after the season.Why would they do that? Cleveland can't wait to get rid of Assdribble.

Hamilton in CF, right?

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Rumors flying have Soo-Choo headed to Cincy for Gregorius+ then Clev would flip him or Asdrubal to Ariz.

Reds are gonna ship Stubbs and Gregorious for Choo and put Choo in CF where he has only played 10 career games? Also...Choo is an FA after the season.Why would they do that? Cleveland can't wait to get rid of Assdribble.

Hamilton in CF, right?

Billy? Seems like most think he's about a year away, but I guess that's why they'd plan to put Choo there if Hamilton isn't ready. Reds are close, very close to being awesome.

 

[Wrigley]

Rumors flying have Soo-Choo headed to Cincy for Gregorius+ then Clev would flip him or Asdrubal to Ariz.

Reds are gonna ship Stubbs and Gregorious for Choo and put Choo in CF where he has only played 10 career games? Also...Choo is an FA after the season.Why would they do that? Cleveland can't wait to get rid of Assdribble.

Hamilton in CF, right?

Billy? Seems like most think he's about a year away, but I guess that's why they'd plan to put Choo there if Hamilton isn't ready. Reds are close, very close to being awesome.

God I hate Dusty.

 

[Michael Brown]

Youk is a yank

 

[scoobus]

Can someone who knows about him talk about Gregorius a little bit. His minor league numbers certainly don't pop off the page, nor does his speed. He must project as a plus fielder at SS then?

 

[MAC_32]

Rumors flying have Soo-Choo headed to Cincy for Gregorius+ then Clev would flip him or Asdrubal to Ariz.

Reds are gonna ship Stubbs and Gregorious for Choo and put Choo in CF where he has only played 10 career games? Also...Choo is an FA after the season.Why would they do that? Cleveland can't wait to get rid of Assdribble.

Hamilton in CF, right?

Billy? Seems like most think he's about a year away, but I guess that's why they'd plan to put Choo there if Hamilton isn't ready. Reds are close, very close to being awesome.

This is what I see, thought is Choo can play center in GABP because it's smaller. Obvious upgrade at the plate too. Indians want two future starters for Choo and Asdrubal, so this deal would make sense - then flip Asdrubal to Arizona or somebody else obviously. Slide Aviles in at SS while the kids develop. No idea what they do in RF though, cupboard is bare. If the $ is there Swisher is the answer, but is there $?

 

[MAC_32]

Can someone who knows about him talk about Gregorius a little bit. His minor league numbers certainly don't pop off the page, nor does his speed. He must project as a plus fielder at SS then?

Yes, plus fielder, hope would be to make his bat passable in the bottom of the order.

 

[Eephus]

Can someone who knows about him talk about Gregorius a little bit. His minor league numbers certainly don't pop off the page, nor does his speed. He must project as a plus fielder at SS then?

Yes, plus fielder, hope would be to make his bat passable in the bottom of the order.

Seems like a decent enough bridge from Asdrubal/Aviles to Lindor/Wolters.This wasn't a good offense with Choo and Pronk. Reynolds and Stubbs don't help it much.

 

[Billy Bats]

You have some good sources DD:

Ken Rosethal:

Three-team trade, per source, will look like this: Choo, Jason Donald to #Reds, Gregorius to #Diamondbacks, Stubbs, AZ pitcher to #Indians.

7:46pm - 11 Dec 12