When Great Players Cease To Be Great
There was a time when Miguel Tejada was a terrific shortstop, a decent defender who could hit for both average and exceptional power. That time is not now.
This is what it looks like when the world realizes your superstar isn't a superstar anymore. Tejada turned in three strong years in Baltimore, but he also turned in an unimpressive one, and when that happens with a 31 year old, a lot of times there's no coming back. So, with two years and $26m left on his contract, the Orioles shipped him to another pathetic franchise this morning, landing:
Troy Patton: nominal top prospect in a bad system, control pitcher with a mediocre 88-91 fastball and a low ceiling
Luke Scott: generic corner bat with questionable defense
Matt Albers: 24 year old with declining peripherals and one above-average pitch
Dennis Sarfate: 26 year old minor league reliever with a big time fastball and horrible control
Michael Costanzo: 23 year old AA 3B who came over in the Lidge deal, good power packaged with a huge hole in his swing and crappy glove
Impressed? Me neither. But then, I don't know if you're supposed to be impressed by the return for a declining shortstop. In between tears, Tejada's going to have a lot of fun with that ridiculous porch in left field, but that doesn't make him a great player again - it just makes him a guy with the strength to hit the ball 315 feet. Even the withered remains of Craig Biggio could do that.
To me, at first glance this trade doesn't look like a win for either side. Baltimore gets out from under an unhappy player with a bad contract, but that money doesn't really help them, and they barely got anything useful in return. (Probably regret that whole Oswalt thing, don't you, Angelos?) For Tejada, a guy who just wants to be on a winning team goes from a laughable AL franchise to its NL equivalent. And as for the Astros, if this trade means they get rid of Adam Everett to make room for Tejada, then that means they unloaded six players (Everett included) for what amounts to a 5-10 run improvement. If they keep Everett and move Tejada to third, then that's a different story, but even then we're not talking about a special player, here. Tejada used to be awesome, but he's not anymore, and Ed Wade just swung a deal that won't even come close to making his team a winner.
What does this mean for the Mariners? If this is the beginning of a Baltimore fire sale, then Erik Bedard just became a lot more available, potentially with less competition if LA is less inclined to remain in the race now that it looks like they have Kuroda. But we'll see. For the moment, Baltimore just got even worse, and the Astros barely got better. Here's to watching worse organizations than our own flail around like headless chickens.
49 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Maybe Miguel...
I actually am impressed
Note that "impressed" is a relative term, and I don't really get this deal, but if I had to declare a winner, it'd be the Orioles. Which is the last time I'll probably ever write that.
Okay, I can go along with that
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 12, 2007 11:22 AM PST up reply actions
Agreed
Definitely not an impressive haul
With Costanzo on the team maybe he can push them to switch to cotton uniforms and also celebrate Festivus.
Or Maybe the O's View Costanzo
by JoeyJoJoJuniorShabadoo on Dec 12, 2007 11:28 AM PST up reply actions
and they woudn't have to give up that much
by JI on Dec 12, 2007 8:11 PM PST up reply actions
By the way
Is Luke Scott better or worse than Wlad?
by Edgar for Pres on Dec 12, 2007 11:44 AM PST reply actions
In terms of value, worse
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 12, 2007 12:15 PM PST up reply actions
True, but
Of course, this does always leave the question of who plays at short for the O's. Luis Hernandez and Brandon Fahey do not inspire confidence.
Question about the Dodgers
As it stands:
Brad Penny - $9,500,000
Derek Lowe - $10,000,000
Jason Schmidt - $15,000,000
Chad Billingsley - $500,000
Esteban Loaiza - $7,000,000
Schmidt is still a health risk, and they could flip Loaiza to a real needy team like the Cardinals or Phillies in a flash.
Torre is there to win now right?
Bedard will cost a shitload more
by Edgar for Pres on Dec 12, 2007 12:03 PM PST reply actions
It doesn't tell us what it would take
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 12, 2007 12:14 PM PST up reply actions
and that Tejada didn't fetch much of anything
If LAD bows out, and NYY, TOR and BOS are out because of division, who's our biggest competitor? CIN? CLE? NYM? I cannot think of anyone else that'll be really involved.
Well they don't have to trade him right now
by Edgar for Pres on Dec 12, 2007 12:28 PM PST up reply actions
Miguel Cabrera came with Willis though
True
by Edgar for Pres on Dec 12, 2007 1:00 PM PST up reply actions
I still think that's a big package for Bedard,
Now, is there anyone on the O's worth see?
by mark s @ Lookout Landing on Dec 12, 2007 12:19 PM PST reply actions
Brain Robberts....but he'll probably get dealt....
by SethGrandpa on Dec 12, 2007 12:23 PM PST up reply actions
Brains......
Quantity for quality trade
Bedard
by philip on Dec 12, 2007 12:50 PM PST reply actions
He doesn't want to be on that team.
Because he's flat out said
More importantly, Tejada's contract had nothing to do with Bedard. They both hit free agency at the same time.
Is tejada really 31?
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 12, 2007 12:56 PM PST reply actions
I've read there is some doubt about his
Aaron Rowand to Giants in a 5 year deal
by Slozbury Stouvre on Dec 12, 2007 1:13 PM PST reply actions
Win for Baltimore
Costanzo is fringy, but he can fill a need, as can Scott.
Not saying this is Maybin/Miller II, but as you said, the Orioles had been talking salary dump. This is a nice step up from that.
What could they have gotten for Tejada? And no, you can't say 'trade him last year.' Given that this is December 2007, how could they have done better? It's possible they could've gotten something ridiculous from Sabean, but who knows.
All in all, getting a guy who's got a very good chance to be a successful (but middle of the rotation) starter and some useful-if-flawed parts isn't a bad thing. Given where the market is right now, I'd say #3 starters who don't cost much are one of the most undervalued commodities in baseball. No one cares if they're traded, and GMs are willing to spend $fuckton on Carlos Silva, Jeff Suppan, Kyle 'freakin' Lohse, etc. Why?
I would've called the Angels
If he pans out, then Baltimore can look back on this as being a good day for the organization, but I'm calling it a coin flip as to whether or not that ever happens.
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 12, 2007 4:21 PM PST up reply actions
Although I should add
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 12, 2007 4:32 PM PST up reply actions
What were they gonna get from the Angels?
They could get Santana + stuff
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 12, 2007 5:24 PM PST up reply actions
O's already have a decent pitching staff, though..
5th starter
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 12, 2007 6:15 PM PST up reply actions
No I did not
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 12, 2007 8:19 PM PST up reply actions
I actually like this package better
Santana's true-talent xFIP is right in the 5.00 range, and it's not like he's had a Garland-like string of beating his fielding independent stats.
He's also 25.
If you're not getting anything with him (and getting Nick Gorneault WITH Santana is getting nothing), I don't see why you'd pick the Angels deal over the Astros.
I know, Patton isn't going to strike anyone out. But if his walks stay where they were in the minors (and admittedly, that may take him a while in MLB, and the adjustment period won't be pretty), he'll be a decent #3/#4. Then you've got Scott (who's waaay better than any Angels OF who's on the block) and Costanzo to potentially fill in some holes. Not all will work out, but there's much more potential in that group.
Now, if the Angels wanted to include Morales, that's a different story. But if the center piece was Santana, then the O's made the right decision.
I'm not that big on Scott
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 13, 2007 9:33 AM PST up reply actions
They kinda did, though, didn't they?
Besides, Scott wasn't the centerpiece of the deal. He's a great piece to the trade, esp. given Baltimore played Jay payton and his sub .300 OBP in 131 games last year. Scott right now is better than anyone who played LF for Baltimore last year, and he's probably better than their DHs (if he's used correctly, it's no contest. If he plays every day, it's close).
I'd just say that there are a lot of potential Luke Scotts, but it's nice to get someone who actually HAS put up a 125OPS+ over 660 ABs instead of somebody who might, given his AAA numbers. I thought Hee Seop Choi would be a great platoon slugger when he was 'free' before 2006. That didn't turn out so well - neither did Roberto Petagine or Jeff DaVanon or....
Bad contract?
Bad contract? I have no idea how you could characterize Tejada's contract like that. An excellent hitter who can play at a premium defensive position....that's got to be worth a lot to a Major League team.
Is he worth any less than Beltre?
They play different positions, so you might say it's not an apples to apples thing, but they are both infielders after all, so the comparison should be apt. They're comparable hitters at this point -- Tejada has been a bit better for his career, but he is a few years older...Beltre plays a great defensive third base, but is that more valuable than playing adequate defense at short?
Now you could try to put this under a microscope and break it down and determine absolutely which player is most valuable and all, but really, what we're looking at here is two players that are essentially about the same.
So if you're calling Tejada's contract bad, then how are you viewing Beltre's? I gotta believe that one should be fairly comparable to the other.
by nathaniel dawson on Dec 12, 2007 9:14 PM PST reply actions

by 










