Trading JJ
So I've been thinking about this for a little while, now, what with JJ's name being the one that's coming up the most often. I wasn't sure what would go on with him as far as offseason dealings were concerned after last year's injuries and trouble throwing strikes, but the M's have made him available and there appears to be a market, so it's worth discussing the idea.
For the longest time, I've thought that the best thing to do with JJ is to hold out for good value during the offseason and, if no one comes up with a strong offer, let him try to improve his status during the summer so you can attempt to move him again later on. And while I stand by that, after witnessing the Francisco Rodriguez contract and various other deals and rumblings, I think we have to re-consider how we define "good value", at least in terms of what it would take for us to be willing to say goodbye. Because the more I think about it, the lower that "good value" gets.
Let's look at it like this. Let's put JJ's current trade value at X. It doesn't matter what X actually is - it's just a number, or a player, or a group of players, or something.
(A) The Mariners decide X isn't enough, and they hang on to him. JJ pitches well for the first few months, and come July X has increased by 10%. There's less time for him to make an impact, and teams might be less willing to give up a young ML-ready player or two than they were over the winter, but overall his effectiveness elevates his value.
(B) The Mariners decide X isn't enough, and they hang on to him. JJ struggles, or gets hurt, and come July X has decreased by 80%. A team might be willing to take a flier on a guy a year and a half removed from being awesome, but overall JJ has stabbed his value in the nuts.
Faced with those theoretical black-and-white percentages (this is just an example), the breakeven rate for hanging on to JJ is 1 - (.1 / [.1 + .8]) = 89%. In other words, the Mariners would have to be at least 89% certain that JJ would follow path (A) in order to justify keeping him around. Alternatively, they'd have to believe that an effective JJ would be worth more than 1.1*X around deadline time. Whichever the case, were the M's to keep JJ through the winter, they'd be doing so because they believed there was a really good chance that he'd improve his value by pitching well out of the gate.
I don't need to tell you that that's an awful big risk. Relievers are volatile. Particularly the ones coming off disappointing seasons in which they got injured. There's no guarantee that JJ's ever going to get back to what he was in 2006 and 2007, and the downside inherent in giving him the opportunity is enormous. One more rough stretch or DL stint and his value goes through the floor.
While we know that JJ could destroy his value by struggling, what we can't say is whether his value would even increase by that much were he to resume pitching well. I thought that teams might be a little wary around him given his iffy 2008, but from all indications, he's still considered to be an upper-echelon closer with a very affordable price. How much could he possibly improve on that? It doesn't seem like front offices are very concerned by his injuries at all, so I have to wonder just how close his value is to its ceiling. Because the nearer it is, the less sense it makes to hang on to him through the winter. Why take that kind of risk when there's only minimal upside?
(Also, while the list of teams seeking a closer will change mid-season, it's impossible to predict who else will be available.)
The more I think about it, the more I come around to the idea of trading JJ away. I mean, I love everything about the guy, and I'm not saying the M's should deal him if the best they can get in return is Jeff Larish, but if you can get a Matt Joyce from the Tigers or someone equally interesting from the Brewers, I think you have to pull the trigger. For one thing, teams just don't look like they're going to give up much more for a closer, and for another, that's already good value - Joyce, for example, would give us six years of team control over a left-handed league-average outfielder with upside. That's quite a return for a reliever with injury concerns who turns 32 in February. What more could you want?
JJ was a phenomenal closer at his peak, and he may resume pitching at the same level again in 2009. He's a volatile player, though, and holding on to him into the season runs the risk of pulling the rug out from under his value before we get the chance to cash him in for someone who can help this team win a pennant. Zduriencik, if nobody offers anything good then by all means feel free to stand still, but if there's adequate talent to be had, I implore you to seize it without thinking twice. Because for as much as we love JJ, and for as much as he's meant to this organization, it's the right thing to do, and at the end of the day, that's the only thing that matters.
If the Mariners trade JJ and move Morrow back to closing, that would be bad, but we would have to view those as two separate decisions, because the former in no way obligates the latter.
97 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
If he's lights out wouldn't his value rise more than 10%%?
Or do you think that clubs are unconcerned by his poor performance last summer on account of a pretty good 8 innings in September?
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 9, 2008 7:41 PM PST up reply actions
There are a lot of variables in there that are impossible to predict
but I don’t think JJ’s value has all that much room for growth unless he starts pitching incredibly, incredibly well.
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 9, 2008 7:43 PM PST up reply actions
One shouldn't obligate the other
But from Baker’s blog post yesterday it looks like trading JJ definitely increases the possibility of Morrow ending up as closer…
Morrow is a starter until he shows he can't be.
This organization needs a starting pitcher that deserves to be in a rotation more than it would need help in a bullpen if they were to trade Putz. I don’t see Morrow going back to the pen unless he shows that he doesn’t have what’s needed as a starter. This is another case of Baker not being a great analyst and reading too much into Zduriencik’s non-commital responses.
One of the things we’re going to have to get used to with GMZ is that he’s not the sort of guy who makes commitments about what he’s going to do. This is strategy helps manage people’s expectations.
The people at Rotoworld are slowly going insane from all of the crazy rumors.
The Yankees reportedly called an unscheduled meeting late Tuesday to discuss something CC Sabathia related.
Yes, that passes for a rumor these days. Hard to believe, isn’t it?
JJ is third from the top
of the Elias rankings for relievers right now. If the team declines his option in 09, that’s two picks they get, and of course whoever they trade with is getting the rights to those picks. With the reliever market being as good (or bad, depending on which side you’re on) as it is, can it make more sense to hang onto him and wait for those sweet, sweet picks to come around?
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 9, 2008 7:46 PM PST reply actions
Two things
a) another bad year could knock him out of Type A status, and
b) if he doesn’t pitch well, no one will sign him away if it means giving up a pick.
by The Ancient Mariner on Dec 9, 2008 7:49 PM PST up reply actions
That may not be a huge obstacle because if he were to pitch poorly it's unlikely his new team would bother offering him arbitration, either
because coming off a bad season he’d probably be inclined to accept
by seattlebruin on Dec 10, 2008 11:11 AM PST up reply actions
His ranking includes '07
You know, the ’07 where he had a 1.38 ERA, 40 saves, and 82 strikeouts. What are the odds of him doing that again next year? 5% maybe?
The odds of J.J. being a Type A next year are probably 50-50 at best, and just being a Type A doesn’t guarantee picks. If he has a good year but struggles down the stretch or spends any DL time in September, that could talk teams out of giving up a first round pick for him very quickly.
Even as a big-time Putz fan
I’m definately in favor of trading him for some good talent, particularly after the year he’s had. It’s pretty fortunate that even after the season he had he’s being sought after so heavily.
It’s also going to be a while before we have team that contends on a regular basis. This, combine with the uncertainty of Putz’s future performance and the fact that other teams are knocking on our door looking for a closer….well, this is as good a time to sell as any.
Man O Man the mariners hhhh
It feels so horrible seeing my favorite team do so awful, and although i would definitely miss hearing ThunderStruck in the 9th inning while JJ walks on to the field from the bullpen and the crowd going crazy. I feel as if now is the time if they are going to trade him, now is the time to do it. While he still has a little something something left in the tank.
well,
I don’t think we have to worry too much about Morrow being converted back into a closer. I’m pretty sure no one ever said anything about that, it’s just kinda assumed that the Mariners would do that… because they usually do that type of thing. But guess what Bavasi’s gone suckaaaaas.
http://marinersmania.com/forums
by outtathequestion on Dec 9, 2008 8:59 PM PST reply actions
"I’m pretty sure no one ever said anything about that"
Zduriencik said something about it yesterday. Sounds to me like he was just saying he’s going to always keep his options open as a general policy, but that’s why people have mentioned it.
Flipped?
This signature space for rent.
by PositivePaul on Dec 10, 2008 9:34 AM PST up reply actions
uosdɯoɥʇ uɐǝɯ noʎ ʞuıɥʇ ı
I fucking hate you Mariners
by kentroyals5 on Dec 10, 2008 10:33 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Perfect!
This signature space for rent.
by PositivePaul on Dec 10, 2008 10:59 AM PST up reply actions
And your point is what, exactly?
On what basis do you assume that Jeff meant the Cardinals rather than the Brewers when a) the Brewers are known to be interested in Putz, b) Zduriencik knows the Brewers better than anyone and has a high comfort level with his former colleagues there, and c) the Brewers have a lot more pieces to offer than the Cardinals do? The more logical assumption is that Jeff meant what he wrote.
by The Ancient Mariner on Dec 10, 2008 10:31 AM PST up reply actions
What, your comment is a typo?
Because Jeff’s was spot-on.
by The Ancient Mariner on Dec 10, 2008 10:36 AM PST up reply actions
. . . like everyone else.
This isn’t one of them.
by The Ancient Mariner on Dec 10, 2008 2:38 PM PST up reply actions
It's pretty flagrant.
Ben Sheets is only being offered two years? GO GO GO
by JI on Dec 10, 2008 2:46 PM PST up reply actions
I don't actually expect to see anybody on the current roster still with the team in 2 years.
Anybody worth trading anyway. It just feels like Zduriencik is putting together a short term team while seeking out and hording young talent that would be ready for the majors 2 or 3 years down the road. Kind of how the Rays (or Twins) did it, a core of young guys that were all pretty much ready for the bigs at the same time, and still be under team control for a few more years. And stacked up in the minors with replacements. Holy crap I’m excited about this team and Zduriencik.
Yeah, I had to fix that one. Sort of a big oversight.
Is it weird to be excited about Zduriencik, and it’s only the winter meetings? I know he’s yet to make any big time earth shattering moves, but that’s kind of the point. It is exactly why I’m excited about this. No more bullshit smoke up my ass rhetoric from Bavasi about how we’re only a couple of pieces away.
Like his statement keeping the bullpen option open for Morrow. Brilliant! They let him develop, they don’t like what they see, hey the bullpen is an option and they don’t look stupid. I’m so used to hearing hollow promises and feel good/hide the failure type statements from the FO, this new FO feels more in control of things.
What he said about Morrow is almost refreshing in itself (in a scary way).
It’s just nice to not hear something like “We don’t have a right-handed eighth-inning guy, and Brandon is right-handed and throws hard, so he’s that guy.” Or “We need a No. 3 starter, so Brandon’s that guy.”
He not committing himself to anything and waiting to see how things shake out. Whaddya know.
I don't know man, 3 years from now what's he look like?
I’m in the camp of people that think he can change his hitting style if he slows down, but there is probably a lot of false hope love-for-Ichiro in that thinking isn’t there?
Trade for a butt-load of talent then!
I don’t know if you can replace what he brings to the team, on the field and cash wise from his Japanese fanbase. :(
I find it extremely likely that well be able to trade Ichiro
by JI on Dec 9, 2008 10:50 PM PST up reply actions
I don't get the sense that Clement is our future catcher.
Defense (I’m trying to ignore that gif because I’m being serious), knees. Keep working him as catcher, trade him and run Burke out there next year, looking to develop or pick up a long term option? Burke seems easy money as catcher. Reliable and cheap, no drama with the pitchers.
Damn that Johjima contract anyway, it really complicates a few things.
Burke sucks
I like him but come on, if he’s your starting catcher then you might as well just make the tickets free because you aren’t actually trying to field a major league team.
by Edgar for Pres on Dec 9, 2008 11:48 PM PST up reply actions
I've decided to temper my excitement for Zduriencik until he shows something about his approach to the game.
I’m trying to read tea leaves but he just hasn’t shown enough cards yet.
What kind of team does he want? Station to station sluggers? Hit and run small ball? Traditional defense up the middle and sluggers at the corners?
How does he develop pitchers? Branch Rickey style or strict pitch counts?
I don’t believe Burke sucks though, but then I wanted to see where the Dickey experiment was going as well. So there you go. A couple days into winter meeting and I get too excited about what the team may look like opening day. For all I know not a single guy he’s signed may still be with the team opening day.
I’ve decided to temper my excitement for
Crap that post sucked. Opening Day twice and screwed up an edit.
Business closed due to inclement weather.
Will re-open on Friday.
What kind of team does he want?
The most talented one he can build, apparently. That he understands that it’s about putting the best
talent on the field rather than trying to put a particular type
of team on the field seems pretty clear, and is plenty good enough for me.
by The Ancient Mariner on Dec 10, 2008 10:33 AM PST up reply actions
His roster moves aren't showing you anything about his approach?
Seriously, we just got two ~.775 OPS bats at DH/1B for less than what Richie Sexson made in a month last year.
A GM that understands the concept of “freely available talent” is one of the most important things we could have in Seattle.
by eponymous_coward on Dec 10, 2008 12:21 PM PST up reply actions
I get what he means though.
I am not going to buy in completely until I see how he handles bigger-ticket moves. I’m encouraged, and I think he’ll do well, but having an eye for F.A.T. does not a good GM make. It’s just one component.
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 10, 2008 12:30 PM PST up reply actions
You nailed, and used so few words. That's a nice talent to have right there.
A couple good moves, maybe I’m reading too much into his non-moves and presto! I’m projecting too much into what is basically a SSS. I’m only trying to temper my enthusiasm so I don’t identify too strongly with the new FO, this way my feeling don’t get crushed like a 14 year old girl getting dumped on prom night if things go sideways.
Also, I’m just curious as to what his personal vision of a team looks like. He’s signed some good players in his past, yes. And the Mariner’s need to be collecting talent and damn the position, yes. But when things solidify and he’s free of all Bavasi Error contract entanglements, I’m looking forward to seeing his vision on the field. Also Wakamatsu’s managing style, it’s been a revolving door so I’m looking forward to some dependability there.
He hasn’t shot out of the gate swing a wrecking ball in one hand and a checkbook in the other throwing money at the teams’ problems and shooting his mouth off to the press while doing it. This is encouraging.
Why?
Players with his skillset age well, for one; and for another, Ichiro has shown that he can
hit for power. For that matter, he’s shown incredible self-discipline and a very strong competitive streak. Barring serious injury, I’d say it’s actually quite reasonable to project Ichiro to remain productive at the plate for a number of years yet.
Where physical decline will hit him first is in the field; that, I think, is where we’re likely to see the real erosion in his value.
by The Ancient Mariner on Dec 10, 2008 8:41 AM PST up reply actions
The second guy you mentioned will be a perennial All-Star by then
by seattlebruin on Dec 10, 2008 11:13 AM PST up reply actions
Don't know if I would go that far
but Loafie could easily be poart of a winning 2011 M’s team. Possibly even at 2B. He’ll be 27.
by eponymous_coward on Dec 10, 2008 12:23 PM PST up reply actions
I said All-Star
MVP is also a possibility!
by seattlebruin on Dec 10, 2008 12:26 PM PST up reply actions
One suggestion thrown out there...
Was Prince Fielder for Putz and someone else. RRS was the name tossed out there as the secondary piece.
I hate the speculation phase of the offseason.
That would be an interesting deal
Determined, Jonesing Commentor | Proud proprietor of Washingtonhighways.org
we can't have Prince Fielder AND Silva running across the Seattle Fault!
do you want the viaduct to collapse?
Jack Z shot down that any discussions even took place. Also laughed about it.
Did I mention I hate speculation early in the offseason?
And the first dominoe falls says Rotoworld:
New York Post reports that CC Sabathia will sign with the New York Yankees. Contract is believe to be in the neighborhood of 6 years for $140 million.
Devil's Advocate
I am sorta agnostic on this issue, and agree with your main points.
However, there are two main issues that you don’t mention, but could be reasons to hold onto Putz:
First, the market is flooded with closers this offseason. Wood, Rodriguez, and Fuentes are all excellent closers, and guys like Jeremy Affeldt, Juan Cruz, Brandon Lyon, and Trevor Hoffman are other impact relievers available. This isn’t a good market to deal a closer. The demand is likely to be higher mid-season than it is now.
Second, relief pitchers usually are overvalued by contenders as you get closer to the trade deadline. This general tendency might not hold this year, but it has historically been pretty consistent. It is a good bet that a few contenders will be looking for a dominant reliever as that one last piece for the playoffs.
These two factors would at least partially offset the risk involved with holding onto Putz. Really, there are a lot of pros and cons in dealing Putz now:
Pros:
-Putz’s health is in question
-inherent volatility in relievers
-M’s don’t need him next year as much as a contender would
-strong likelihood that his value will plummet
Cons"
-his value could rise significantly with a return to ‘06 and ’07 level of dominance
-trade market and value of closers isn’t good this offseason
-potential of loss of Putz resulting in Morrow as reliever
-‘domino effect’ in bullpen
-potential for Type A status and draft pick compensation if the M’s keep him for two more years
This is a tough decision. I would definitely listen to all offers on him. But, in my opinion, the issue should be maximizing his trade value, not simply deciding whether or not Matt Joyce is a more valuable player to the M’s. There is a good case to be made that he could bring back more value midseason than right now.
Go with certainty, imho
since the odds are a lot better that he lowers his trade value than that he raises it. To raise the return significantly, two things would need to happen: 1) a strong bounceback season from Putz, and 2) a condition of market scarcity. Even if we get the first (and I’ll be honest, I’m not optimistic), the odds that we’d get the second as well aren’t great. If we can get a solid deal for him, best pull the trigger.
by The Ancient Mariner on Dec 10, 2008 8:39 AM PST up reply actions
There's also a good case to be made he wouldn't.
If Putz has a Guardado-style meltdown, and, say, Lowe ends up doing well as a closer, say hello to the 2009 version of Travis Chick come July.
I am fine with getting good value for him now, rather than rolling the dice and trying to get better value come July, and possibly ending up with very little.
by eponymous_coward on Dec 10, 2008 8:43 AM PST up reply actions
Travis Chick is no longer in our system.
Just pointing it out since noone has seemed to notice.
Now back to your originally scheduled discussion.
Especially considering the position the Mariners are in.
This isn’t a good team with a bit of a log jam that can afford to wait it out. They need good, young, cheap, close to MLB talent, and if you can get that + prospects now, I just don’t see how you can take the risk.
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 10, 2008 10:11 AM PST up reply actions
Bingo.
This team needs to be sorting through young players and figuring out how to build a core for contention for the next 3-5 years. JJ’s a great player to have, but even GOOD relievers are fungible.
by eponymous_coward on Dec 10, 2008 12:24 PM PST up reply actions
Who's the last reliever to fetch a high price midseason?
Arthur Rhodes for Gaby Hernandez? Jon Rauch for Emilio Bonifacio? Kyle Farnsworth for Ivan Rodriguez? Teams just aren’t trading that much for relievers anymore, and even Eric Gagne after a string of success only landed David Murphy, a piece of crap, and a teenager.
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 10, 2008 9:17 AM PST up reply actions
I'm with you.
I say trade JJ now if you can get what the Tigers are rumored to be offering. And he’s one of my favorite players.
Man do I love midgets.
Octavio Dotel too
The M’s almost trade Balentien for Dotel.
Dotel ended up netting the Royals Kyle Davies, was a good prospect and has developed into a solid #3 or #4 starter.
1) Balentien isn't that good
2) The guy who almost traded him is out of a job
3) Kyle Davies isn’t that good
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 10, 2008 10:22 AM PST up reply actions
It makes me sad that Wlad hasn't hit like we hoped he would
oh well, he’s still young I guess…
by seattlebruin on Dec 10, 2008 11:15 AM PST up reply actions
Even if he does start to hit, he has to play decent defense to have much value
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 10, 2008 11:33 AM PST up reply actions
I don't think he'll hit much in Seattle
It’s why I’d be fine with shipping him WITH JJ in the hopes of getting a Larish/Joyce package back.
I think Wlad’s a proto-ORPOFSWAD, which means once he hits, he’s valuable if and only if he’s cheap. ONce he starts getting the $30 million/3 years contracts, he’s not.
by eponymous_coward on Dec 10, 2008 12:28 PM PST up reply actions
I'm not opposed to trading Wlad
but if they do it they should get more than Larish+Joyce+prospect.
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 10, 2008 12:32 PM PST up reply actions
Depends on the prospect.
Also, realistically, Putz, in terms of value < Joyce (IOW, straight up, it’s a bad trade for the Tigers).
Wlad+Putz for Larish+Joyce+Prospect is probably pretty balanced as a trade goes (in that it could easily work out well for both teams), plus it would give us decent depth in the system at 1B/DH, with Larish, Branyan AND Shelton all pushing the warm body guys like LaHair and Morse down the depth chart. Granted, none of those 3 guys are very good, but they all are ~.775 OPS guys who collectively wouldn’t break the bank and would be OK upgrades on the carnival of uselessness of last year’s DH/1B combo.
Add in Rocco Baldelli as an FA signing and your only really big problem is a decent defensive middle infield (figuring out what to do with Yuni and Loafie), plus culling some of the rotation.
by eponymous_coward on Dec 10, 2008 12:57 PM PST up reply actions
It bears repeating
Also, he still has a job in MLB, just not the one he had when he almost made that trade.
by eponymous_coward on Dec 10, 2008 1:07 PM PST up reply actions
Not really comparable
Those examples you threw out aren’t exactly comparable. Rhodes and Rauch aren’t closers at all, and Rhodes was a lefty specialist. Rauch hasn’t put up numbers anywhere close to Putz. Those guys aren’t even sorta good comps.
If we are using Gagne as an example, that trade actually demonstrates the value of relievers in midseason trades. Gagne was having a nice comeback year after a few years of injuries, and still landed Kason Gabbard (a young lefty starter who projected as a back of the rotation type), David Murphy (who isn’t all that different than Matt Joyce: good outfielder, average lefty bat, surprisingly good in his ML debut), and Engel Beltre, who is a good prospect with a ton of upside. Calling Beltre nothing more than a teenager is selling him short. The Red Sox gave up a ton for Gagne. That package is better than the rumored Joyce and Larish package.
If Putz is healthy and bounces back to his 2006-2007 levels of play, he would have a lot more value than Gagne did. The health issues aren’t nearly as serious with Putz, and Gagne was only a late season rental. Putz has a very good contract and is under team control for two full seasons. If Gagne brings back that type of value, think of what a healthy Putz would net the M’s.
Again, I am still undecided on this whole issue. If the M’s get a good package, they should take it. But the fact that there isn’t a great comp for Putz doesn’t mean that he wouldn’t have value.
Nobody said he wouldn't have value
The question is whether his value would stand to improve that much if he pitched well into 2009. I don’t think that’s necessarily the case, unless he starts to pitch like a crazy person, of which the odds aren’t very good.
Gabbard blows. Beltre is miles away. The Gagne package is not better than a Joyce/Larish package.
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 10, 2008 10:29 AM PST up reply actions
At least close
That package is at least comparable.
And it was for a clearly less valuable player.
It's a weaker package for a weaker player.
Gagne with Texas wasn’t Putz at his peak, but then Joyce is a good bit better than Murphy, so.
Just how much more value would Putz stand to gain by pitching well? A slightly better position player? Maybe an additional C+/B- prospect? Is that worth the risk?
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 10, 2008 11:13 AM PST up reply actions
Yeah, too true
That is the big risk with relievers. If they wait too long, his value could absolutely plummet.
I hope the M’s are looking for some prospects, even with the Tigers weak system. Joyce and LHP Casey Crosby would be a better haul IMO than Joyce and Larish (Larish doesn’t impress me much).
The Brewers are a great fit, so hopefully something gets done on that front.
From what it sounds like
The M’s do indeed want a prospect or two in addition to the main piece. So I don’t think you have to worry about trading JJ for just Joyce or just Larish. (I wouldn’t even want them to do it for just Larish.)
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 10, 2008 11:39 AM PST up reply actions
Also
You notice how there weren’t too many good relievers who switched sides last summer? That’s not because there weren’t any available.
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 10, 2008 10:33 AM PST up reply actions
Nobody Putz JJ in the corner.
by Phil Hatzenbuehler on Dec 10, 2008 11:14 AM PST reply actions 3 recs
I think I might be alone in this, but I love this comment.
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 10, 2008 12:33 PM PST up reply actions

by 



















