M's trade for Jason Davis
No word yet on what the M's gave up to get him.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/d/davisja02.shtml
I know Davis throws really hard and based on his 9BB in 11.3 IP it would seem that he has little to no control. I would also guess that this is the end of our wife beating, human concession speech.
Bye Bye Mateo!Bye Bye Mateo!Bye Bye Mateo!Bye Bye Mateo!Bye Bye Mateo!Bye Bye Mateo!Bye Bye Mateo!Bye Bye Mateo!Bye Bye Mateo!Bye Bye Mateo!Bye Bye Mateo!Bye Bye Mateo!
82 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
He's crazily
Geoff Baker says it's for a PTBNL
Either
Lol
they're also wondering about chris tillman. if bavasi gave up tillman for davis, i'm going to flip my shit. i don't mind trading medium-talent prospects for medium-talent current major leaguers, but that'd be an awful trade.
why'd we pick up davis in the first place? uck.
by jimmimoose1 on May 13, 2007 3:54 PM PDT reply actions
Not a good sign
Fingers crossed...
Davis's repetoire
- 92 mph sinker in the dirt
- 92 mph sinker over the catchers head
- 92 mph sinker on the inside corner
- 92 mph sinker in the seats
Roster crunch
Is Davis really any better than any of the random shuttle guys who have options left? If the team gives up anything of more value than a bucket of balls, they're even dumber than I thought. Maybe he stays around for a few months, then we send him back as the PTBNL.
I thought
Clement and Jones should be safe. Feirabend, Tillman, Butler should all be safe. Tui, Jones, Clement should be. Triunfel, Liddi should be. I have no idea about Wlad. Huber either. Rob Johnson maybe?
Wait wait
If the 40 man is safe, he is that:
http://seattle.mariners.mlb.com/team/roster_40man.jsp?c_id=sea
Holy crap, how do I not remember this? Brainfart. This basic stuff.
It has nothing to do with 40 man
Cleveland already has the list of players to choose from. From everything I have read it is usually a list of 5-10 players.
Also there is 6 months to complete the transaction. If the teams can't come to a decision the player can be traded back n(essentially voiding the transaction) or cash considerations can be given.
I am worried as hell...
PTBNL named by Sunday
The Indians' blogs are rolling about Shapiro getting the chance to take Bavasi to the woodshed one last time before Bavasi gets fired....
Indian's Fan
Im just curious
Do I think the Indians got the better deal in the Cabrera/Perez and Broussard/Choo trades?? Yes I do, but I wouldn't call it a robbery in any way.
Cabrera was blocked, Lopez and Betancourt are going to be here for many years..so I don't see where he was going to play? I think we could of gotten more than Eduardo Perez, but I also doubt that Cabrera was ever going to break through in Seattle.
What has Choo done? He's been back and forth from the big leauge club to the minors a few times already. I doubt he's really even considered a prospect anymore to be honest. If Choo ever becomes more than a league average hitter/outfielder I'll be surprised.
I do think the Indians got the better end of the deals, but I would not call them steals by any means, however I have been wrong before, so I could easily be wrong here.
not really a close call
Perez wasn't more valuable than Sean Casey, who cost the Tigers much less than a Cabrera. Cabrera being blocked is a good reason to trade him, but no excuse for not getting maximum value for him. And if Choo is "only" a league average outfielder for the Indians through 2013, that would make him ten to 20 times more valuable than Ben Broussard. Not to mention Nottingham as a throw-in.
Choo isn't a league average outfielder, though
by Graham MacAree on May 14, 2007 8:22 AM PDT up reply actions
well ...
Um
Choo's pretty good at getting on base, but his power is waaaay below what you want of a corner outfielder. Basically he's your classic tweener, rather than a league average outfielder.
by Graham MacAree on May 14, 2007 8:43 AM PDT up reply actions
reality
AL corner outfielders collectively had an 802 OPS last season. It may seem like it's much higher than that, but that's just because the great players (naturally) draw more attention than the others. Choo can be better than that.
Heh
Jay, I don't mean to sound rude (but it'll happen anyway), but telling me things that I know, then acting as though this will be a major revelation to me is not a great way to convince me of anything.
That aside, from Choo's swing and track record I don't see how he'll slug much over .450, and to hit league average his OBP will have to be .350. I'm just not seeing that.
by Graham MacAree on May 14, 2007 10:10 AM PDT up reply actions
Choo = Korean Todd Hollandsworth
Todd Hollandsworth had a decent MLB career, but he was hardly an above-average OF. Decent bench player, valuable as part of a platoon...but not above average, and your classic "tweener".
by eponymous coward on May 14, 2007 10:38 AM PDT up reply actions
Also...
http://www.baseball-reference.com/h/hollato01.shtml
Another good comp would be Darren Bragg (former Mariner).
by eponymous coward on May 14, 2007 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions
I saw him
Another thing is he can't hit LHP. Last year in AAA he had a OPS vs LHP of .474 and a OPS vs RHP of 1.011. He might be a useful platoon player but this really isn't that valuable. There are plenty of lefthanders out there that are just like him and hopeless against LHP.
by Edgar for Pres on May 14, 2007 10:19 AM PDT up reply actions
I don't think Bavasi is going to trade anything
Shawn Nottingham
by JY on May 13, 2007 8:06 PM PDT up reply actions
exactly
Seriously, reading LTG and their ridic thread they started at Sickels blog. Fuck indians fans. They're climbing up the most despised fans list.
Eugh...
Part of me is afraid that we may indeed be giving them something of value.
by JY on May 13, 2007 8:17 PM PDT up reply actions
When it comes through that we are giving the
by Edgar for Pres on May 13, 2007 8:23 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree 100%
Yep
They seem to have it in their heads that it's
The only sane suggestion in that entire thread is Jeremy Reed. Now that I could maybe see happening.
Reed I could see
I honestly think it's just going to be another Sean Nottingham type player.
Kinda like when we thought
by Edgar for Pres on May 13, 2007 8:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah but the difference is, Soriano has alot of
Indian fans are saying they're gonna get great value, while we're getting very little in Davis.
Well I guess my point is that
by Edgar for Pres on May 13, 2007 9:13 PM PDT up reply actions
My theory
Uh oh's.Deanna won't be happy if it's Fister.
Goddamnit
If only the M's still had Hunter Brown, they could trade him, and maybe he'd actually have a future in baseball...
What are the odds
I officially hate Let's Go Trive commenters
Indians fans
Yes those foolish Indian fans...
Keep in mind
Yeah, but I sure in the hell wouldn't be expecting
Hell for Mateo, I wouldn't be expecting to get somebody who actually knows how to play baseball.
It feels good to read this thread, hearing
I used to have a lot of respect for Indians fans, but if the kids at LGT and Sickel's blog are any indication, they're idiots.
Right, Indian Fans, Bavasi is not a good GM. That doesn't mean you're getting Jones or Tillman.
btw, like another poster said, I saw what you wrote at Sickel's site, Goose. Way to represent.
Indians fans
Like any team, we're going to have some very knowledgable fans, many deeply ignorant fans, quite a few who know just enough to be dangerous, a few overly optimistic fans and a small nation of fans who are deeply, deeply pessimistic to a degree that, frankly, a Mariners fan can't really even imagine. (Joey Cora crying in the dugout, are you kidding me? That's your big heartbreak moment? That wouldn't crack a Cleveland fan's top 20.)
In any event, don't bother to paint a broad brush based on one or two posts on a blog. Adam Jones, of course not. But given last year's trades, there is little else that either you or we could put past Bavasi. And that is what has got everyone's panties in a bunch, and that is the frustration a few of you are misdirecting at Indians fans.
Jason Davis actually is a lot like Ben Broussard, in that they're both "the kind of player that can get a manager fired." That is, a lot of talent is visible to the eye, but the results tend not to ever show up. I personally would rate Davis higher -- Broussard's "sweet swing" I think has bamboozled evaluators (ours and yours) more than Davis' raw stuff. Davis could still be a very effective player, whereas nobody really believed that about Broussard a year ago.
Davis is held in high regard personally by both Wedge and Shapiro, and that's the reason he lasted this long. He essentially was squeezed out by an overrun of K-popping relief prospects in Triple-A, and a panic-induced raft of offseason veteran reliever signings in Cleveland. Lacking Fernando Cabrera's tools and Rafael Betancourt's track record, Davis was on a short rope, and it went quickly. That doesn't mean he doesn't have talent.
Bottom line, if Bavasi confused the above attributes with being worthy of a top low-minors prospect, well, it wouldn't make the list of dumbest things he's ever done. And you know that.
Two trades
Hmmm.
*And if you -are- talking about the Indians ones, A-Cab and Choo aren't anything more than marginal major leaguers. Which is actually less than Broussard, if a bit more cost-effective.
by Graham MacAree on May 14, 2007 8:34 AM PDT up reply actions
again
And I know a lot more about Bavasi than just those two trades.
Is there actually a debate on Bavasi? Or are you just looking for something to pick a fight about?
Well, here's the thing
If you think this is picking a fight, then, uh. Ok. I'd like to call things like this 'talking', myself.
by Graham MacAree on May 14, 2007 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions
It'll be some low level prospect
by JoeyJoJoJuniorShabadoo on May 14, 2007 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions
I will admit
Joey - you are embarassing yourself. Anyone halfway intelligent reading this knows that you had to dig deep to come up with a four-year-old hindsight-is-20/20 trade for Shapiro. The man was voted Exec of the Year by his peers just one year ago, and his trades for prospects were the main reason why.
Well...
The package of talent he got on his unlucky trades was fair- it's just that it didn't pan out very well- for instance, on the Garcia trade, people thought we were getting an everyday starting OF in Reed with good minor league numbers, a decent backup C/fill-in starter in Olivo, and an interesting tossin in Morse. What happened was Reed turned into a giant bust, Olivo had a hundred of the of the worst games offensively by a C ever and got DFA'ed, and bounced back to being an "eh" player, and Morse has been a semi-interesting fill-in.
by eponymous coward on May 14, 2007 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions
The Guillen trade
Jay, I'd hold up the Garcia, Moyer, Villone, Guardado, Winn, and Torrealba trades as examples of Bavasi's normal sorts of deals. Out of those, at the time of trades, I thought they were great, meh, good, meh, good, and great respectively.
None of them has worked out particularly well, however. Do we blame this on Bavasi? It's a hard call - he could have been outscouted but could just as easily have been amazingly unlucky. I'm certainly not going to rip a guy for making a trade I liked at the time, though.
This is the main problem with trade evaluations, really - it's real rare you get the Kazmir-Zambrano deals, ones which everyone can see the clear winner from the beginning. It's more often far closer to the Perez-Broussard trades of last summer, with either position defensible until a few years later when we can look back on them.
Bavasi has made two terrible trades last winter, I agree. I just think that any opinion on his trading aptitude should take everything into account rather than just the fiascos.
by Graham MacAree on May 14, 2007 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions
It's still a bad trade.
Guillen (gets injured, DUI, "party reputation")
Snelling (gets injuted a LOT)
Soriano (get injured, can't start)
is traded for a "proven veteran" mediocrity who fits into a perceived role:
Aurilia (veteran SS)
Vidro (veteran DH)
Ramirez (veteran starter)
Cirillo falls into that general pattern as well.
Basically, Bavasi fits right in with the organizational groupthink of "we prefer proven veterans to taking chances". If he didn't, we wouldn't keep seeing these shitty trades.
by eponymous coward on May 14, 2007 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions
And to add on to my remarks...
The problem is if you give away the talent for crappy veterans, or block it with with crappy free agents, you're still not going to win. All you end up doing is becoming a farm system for other teams.
by eponymous coward on May 14, 2007 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions
I don't accept this line of thought
I haven't said he's a great GM. My point is just that you can't expect him to fuck up the whole franchise with every deal he makes.
by Graham MacAree on May 14, 2007 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions
Where did I say I expect that?
You're really quibbling over semantics, because I suspect we have the same basic evaluation of his tenure here. My basic assesment is that Bavasi's a bad GM as a whole tenure as an Angel and Mariner, with some upsides, and a lot of downsides, and he fits in perfectly with Mariner groupthink in the front office OUTSIDE of Bavasi and the people he brought in:
- we emphasize old-school evaluation of players (ERA, batting average, scouting)
- we discount minor league performance and newer statistical measures
- we prefer "proven veterans" over 30 from the free agent market over kids or freely available talent (not only did Bavasi do the contracts you cited as a Mariner GM, let's not forget Mo Vaughn)
- we consider character issues (Guillen, Garcia) except when we don't (Martin, Morse, Everett).
- we're not really going to re-evaluate all of this based on 3 years of spending almost 300 million on three last place clubs
by eponymous coward on May 14, 2007 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions
My excuse by proxy has never been
But that aside, you're right, we pretty much agree so there's not much point arguing.
by Graham MacAree on May 14, 2007 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, well...
Um, no
Snelling, Fruto, and Soriano were desperation moves to get a player that the organisation overrated - Vidro as a starting DH, Ho as a #3-4 pitcher. They we terrible moves, but terrible moves in a different way to Guillen. As far as I'm aware, the first deal went something like 'ship him off for the first offer'.
by Graham MacAree on May 14, 2007 11:49 AM PDT up reply actions
Jeebus
Cabrera was a good prospect who needed to be flipped for something much better than a declining RH DH platoon guy.
And really, which of Bavasi's trades have worked out at all well?
I'll give him credit for the Chick for Guardado deal, despite the fact that Chick's been hurt. And clearly the Jon Huber deal worked out about as well as it could've. And we all liked the Freddy Garcia trade, but if that's supposed to go in his 'good trade' ledger, um, yeeeesh.
Other than that, we're looking at the Soriano deal, the Snelling/Fruto deal, the Cabrera and Choo deals, Carlos Guillen, and the Garcia trade.
Out of those, nearly all of them have worked out remarkably poorly for us. You can say that extenuating circumstances apply in many/most of them, but is it really too much to ask that ONE PLAYER acquired through trade really give the team some value? For an extended period of time?
Bavasi's been fine in the drafts, and he's made the occasional solid FA pickup (J. Guillen). But trades? C'mon.
You're overrating Cabrera
And for the record, before last winter, I'd have said Bavasi was pretty good at trades, just unlucky in the big ones. These days... I don't trust him to do it particularly well, I just don't assume he'll blow up the organisation whenever he picks up the phone with another team. Which was my whole point, really.
by Graham MacAree on May 14, 2007 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions
Really?
I may be overrating Cabrera, but there's the possibility that you're underrating him. He's the same age as Matt Tuiasosopo, but has a higher ISO than Matt despite playing MLB-quality SS as opposed to meh-quality 3B. To me, he's clearly a better prospect than Tui or, I don't know, most any IF guys we have.
But I think we're getting somewhere: you were simply saying that Bavasi doesn't 'blow up the organization' when he makes a trade. So...what was your disagreement with the Indians fans again? They said he's not exactly Terry Ryan/Schuerholtz, and your response is that he's not utterly destroying the franchise. There's an awful lot of room for agreement in there.
Can't we all just get along?
My disagreement
And why on earth would you think that the outcome of the Huber trade matters to me?
by Graham MacAree on May 14, 2007 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions
And looking at Cabrera's numbers,
by Graham MacAree on May 14, 2007 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Let me ask you this...
What's your reaction to that bit of news?
Hopeful? Eager?
Me, I'm reaching for a bottle of vodka, and just hoping it's not going to be as bad as I think...
I assume it's not a big trade
If you want to be melodramatic about it, that's a valid choice - Bavasi has screwed us. I think my approach is more rational, but then again I'm biased.
by Graham MacAree on May 14, 2007 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions
The trade
The Player To Be Named Later Will Be . . .
by JoeyJoJoJuniorShabadoo on May 14, 2007 8:29 AM PDT reply actions
Or . . .
Whichever one is funnier.
by JoeyJoJoJuniorShabadoo on May 14, 2007 8:30 AM PDT up reply actions
Just popping in from LGT
I think part of the reason the commenters at LGT thought/hoped we might get some sort of prime prospect is based on the injuries and general lack of pitching some teams are suffering from throughout the league. We don't have to look back that far to remember when Davis made some spot starts for the Indians, so I think some of us may have either overestimated Davis, or at least overestimated his market value.
That said, I have to back up what Jay said re: Davis's talent, which is that he has some. I'll be at least mildly surprised if the Indians don't get something out of this trade, although the PTBNL will probably not be any of the names we were throwing around (mostly as pipe dreams) at LGT. Davis is not without value, especially given all the pitching-poor teams out there this year. This isn't just a matter of how badly Seattle wants Davis, it's also keeping in mind that Seattle had to have outbid other teams that might also have looked at Davis and said, "Well, he's better than this other spare part we have right now." Or at least that he could take the place of an injured player.
In any case, I'm fairly sure that yesterday, our TV guys said that the PTBNL is expected to be named by May 20, so hopefully we'll find out which side of the Davis debate is right more quickly than not. :) (And really, that close of a "later" makes me wonder what all is really going on that makes the player not to be named right now. Just indecisiveness on Shapiro's part, or is there something going on in your farm system that might explain the need for a delay? I'm genuinely curious here.)
Honestly, since the PTBNL
Normally the PTBNL just means take him, but we have to get something too. It doesn't have to be much, just something.
I shouldn't be surprised
Look, first off, as a acquirer of MLB ready talent, Bavasi is a failure. But that does not mean that every move he makes is an instant failure. Let's at least see who the PTBNL is first before we melt down about how Bavasi has fucked this team over again and how every GM has his number.
Secondly, remember that PsTBNL in trades are by and large marginal prospects at best but more like minor leaguers of little consequence. Those of you flipping because LGT even fathomed for two seconds that they might get Adam Jones or WLAD need to calm the fuck down, because that doesn't even make sense. Even our anointed moron GM has enough sense not to include Adam Jones or WLAD on a PTBNL list without at least getting something like Casey Blake or Paul Byrd in return. Bavasi has made horrible MLB player for MLB player moves but he's not functionally retarded. Good lord.
Thirdly, lay off the LGT guys already. They're just speculating, and if they want to think they might get a high end prospect or call our GM an idiot, let them. Time and actual circumstances will tell if they are right, though this trade is not going to be the make-or-break factor. They're not gonna call Mark Shapiro and Bill Bavasi up, put guns to their heads and demand the Mariners ship over Jeff Clement and WLAD. They're just trying to make sense of the move, just as we are.
Also, get over AsCab and Shin Soo Choo already. They're gone and maybe Bavasi could have gotten something better for them, MAYBE. But he got what he got, Choo is a AAAA who MAYBE has a future as a 4th OF and AsCab bit it so hard in AAA that he's repeating AA right now. MAYBE he has a future, but they're prospects. Most prospect don't pan out.
A_Cab...
I'm not as attached to A_Cab as several others were, but I'm smart enough to recognize that his shoddy 2006 performance in AAA should have no bearing on his level of prospect-ness. He's a solid player, fantastic defensively, and could pan out to be an everyday shortstop with the ability to get on base and play spectacular defense there.
I thought we gave up too much for Perez by himself, but at a composite level, A-Cab, Choo and Doc Livingston for Benuardo didn't look too completely horrible as a composite trade. I thought we could've patched our DH hole much differently (hello Carlos Pena, Roberto Petagine, etc...) and used those trade pieces to patch a real hole in the rotation.
by PositivePaul on May 14, 2007 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, certainly
The duo deals didn't net results (though given Benuardo's performance in Cleveland to date, it looked like a decent move at the time), but in the end, the chances of any of the above prospects surrendered becoming productive major league regulars isn't too great. And looking at the big picture, none of those three really had a long term future with the org anyway. We need more from the corners than Choo could have ever given us, AsCab was blocked by Betancourt and Lopez for the next 10 years, and Livingston will always be hard pressed to reincarnate Jamie Moyer, because it takes a rare breed of pitcher to do what Moyer and Kenny Rogers do over a career.
As for the argument that we could have gotten something better: And any team who could have desperate used any of the three enough to return a better haul... probably is so thin in depth as an organization that they probably didn't have anyone useful they were willing to part with anyway. The Indians, sadly, represented the best combination of MLB level talent offered and willingness to see the three as valuable pieces worthy of surrendering MLB level talent for. And this assumes that any team was willing to talk turkey in exchange for any of the players we would deem worthy... and that is never the case. Deals we as fans like to see happen on paper may not be at all feasible in real life.
And of course this goes back to the original point: what does all this have to do with Jason David for a PTBNL, aside from involving the same teams?
Let me rephrase this part a bit
Any team who could have desperately used any of the three prospects enough to be willing to offer the Mariners a better haul... is probably so thin in depth as an organization that they probably didn't have anyone useful that they were willing to part with anyway. The Indians, sadly, represented the best combination of MLB level talent offered, and willingness to consider the three as valuable pieces, worthy of surrendering MLB level talent for.
It has to do with
The idea that AsCab is a crappy prospect because he didn't hit well in AAA at age 20 is ridiculous. I can see the argument made by many that he's a fringy bat at the MLB level, but let's remember that he's got an ISO of over .150 while playing great defense in a pitcher's league. What we got in return was actually WORSE than Carl Everett. And if many (like me) overrate Cabrera, I think the M's fanbase just decided he was worthless because he was blocked by Yuni. I have no idea why. I'm not saying he projects better, but let's just say he's hitting better than Reid Brignac at the same age/league. Add in defense and league, and he's clearly having a better season than many top 100 'spect SS.
Choo was a fringy-COF guy, it's true. I think that specific deal was somewhat understandable, but that's the best you can hope for in dealing 'spects for a platoon DH/bench bat. I mean, I hope I'm preaching to the choir here, but you should not trade prospects for platoon DHs/bench bats. And yet Bavasi's now traded half of the 2006 BA top 10 in an effort to grab a two-headed DH (a spot that's still not giving the team league average performance). Oh, and Jack Cust's OPS is like 3,000.
We can all see what Bavasi wanted to do there; the hole he needed to fill. But hey, results matter. And when you've got division rivals who understand how to find freely available DH/bench bats, it's just that much more frustrating.

by 










