Worse Trade?
The Bedard Trade or last years Soriano Trade?
As for the Bedard Trade, at least we're getting something in return. But at the cost of 5 players which could be a big help to the club for a number of years.
As for the Soriano Trade, we gave up Soriano but that trade had less total impact(detriment?) to the club than the Bedard trade.
0 recs |
44 comments
Comments
Who are these people of which you speak.
by Librocrat on Feb 4, 2008 11:44 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
The Soriano deal is worse
by SethGrandpa on Feb 4, 2008 11:52 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Soriano
We basically gave a good closer away for free in that trade.
But fuck if this fucking Bedard trade doesn't fucking suck.
by JLC on Feb 5, 2008 1:02 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Soriano
I would venture to say the Soriano was the worst in franchise history. We all knew what we were getting and it made it much, much worse. Only argument against it would be Soriano's head 'injury'.
Still, Ho sucked in the NL, had no stuff, no power pitching, and injury prone. Hell, at least Foppert had upside.
Of course, the Lowe/Varitek deal would be the rival.
by Slica on Feb 5, 2008 1:13 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
hmm
by etowncoug on Feb 5, 2008 1:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well...
They might not've needed to make the trade for Slocumb had they kept Nelson around in 97...
by PositivePaul on Feb 5, 2008 8:05 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Lowe/Varitek
We traded for two closers with three of our best prospects all because Bobby Ayala was the worst closer in the history of baseball
by tkballer22 on Feb 5, 2008 8:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Imagine LL if the Ho trade took as long as the
by Robert on Feb 5, 2008 11:06 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This deal is worse
This trade is predicated on the false idea that adding two starters this winter makes the team an instant WS contender. We're sending away the first exciting position player to come out of our system since, well, since Lopez I guess, our best starter prospect, and then some. These are exactly the kind of players we've been unable to develop and need to in a bad way.
This trade improves the M's more than the Soriano trade did, but this one is also worse because it showcases the shortsightedness and ineptitude of the FO (and I don't mean Bavasi, who is doing what he can, I mean tweedle-armstrong and tweedle-lincoln).
by Mere Tantalisers on Feb 5, 2008 5:31 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
Fontaine and Engle have the future on their shoulders now. We better have a real good draft and pull a Salcedo or two out of their asses.
by Double06 on Feb 5, 2008 8:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This is worse
Here, I DO have the "Well, Bedard every 5 days will be freaking sweet" line running, and it's true. Not worth the price, but hey......Bedard.
by Limerickx on Feb 5, 2008 5:59 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
As of right now...
However, it's clear this deal has MUCH MUCH MUCH more risk. Yes, the M's are going to overpay for Bedard. But. Provided he stays healthy, he should be a legit contender for the Cy Young.
The key question is his health, obviously. He's super awesome when he's pitching, and I have no worries about his performance going forward.
I am, though, extremely worried that this is Bavasi's Mo Vaughn deal with the Mariners...
by PositivePaul on Feb 5, 2008 8:03 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Paul
by G_ on Feb 5, 2008 10:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I wondered that too...
by Phildopip on Feb 5, 2008 10:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I was just being silly...
by PositivePaul on Feb 5, 2008 11:15 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
think you're being clever, dept.
by pdb on Feb 5, 2008 11:16 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What is a "DOV"?
by G_ on Feb 5, 2008 12:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, it's probably better
by pdb on Feb 5, 2008 12:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This is a real site?
by G_ on Feb 5, 2008 1:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Nope, it's real
by pdb on Feb 5, 2008 1:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
So...um
by marc w on Feb 5, 2008 1:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No, I have never been to that site before
Somebody over there uses the same username?
by G_ on Feb 5, 2008 1:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
There's someone in the M's blogs
by PositivePaul on Feb 5, 2008 2:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
They are the ying to
by Edgar for Pres on Feb 5, 2008 5:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's a popular M's blog
by Librocrat on Feb 5, 2008 12:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
DOV is anti-stats and anti-sabr?
The site that has a long article extolling TTO, high OBP players?
And an extensive article on pythag, ie PythagenPat?
by rfloh on Feb 5, 2008 2:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't say they're anti-stat
by pdb on Feb 5, 2008 2:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
They still think the Mariners were an 88 win team.
by Librocrat on Feb 5, 2008 2:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Bedard deal is worse
Tillman was the only starter above A ball who projected to be anything more than a 5th starter. Butler had a higher upside and even with the lost year, was not too far behind Tillman. Mickolio was the best bet as a near-ready power RHP who could bump Morrow to the rotation.
When the Washburn and Batista contracts expire in two years, there is going to be nobody to replace them. The M's will be lucky if Juan Ramirez is ready in three years.
by G_ on Feb 5, 2008 9:11 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
My thoughts:
So obviously that means that this trade is better, yes?
No, actually. I would argue that, in this unusual case, this trade CANNOT be judged until we see how it turns out. For the following reasons:
- Bedard is an injury risk. When he is not injured, he is the best pitcher in baseball. Now, in a lot of ways every pitcher or player is an injury risk, but in this particular instance, we know he is a risk going into this trade, so we need to see if he gets injured.
- The trade is based off the idea that we are not far away from the playoffs. While we on LL all disagree, if the Mariners get to the playoffs after this trade, then he actually was an important piece. If they don't, then he was useless.
- Five prospects for 1 player. The Soriano trade was a 1 for 1, a bad for a good, and thus it was a terrible trade. Even if Ho Ram had done well, and Rafi was injured, it was still a bad trade. This trade, on the other hand, is a 5 for 1 - all of them question marks. If a majority of the prospects in the trade turn out to lead successful major league careers, and Bedard turns out to be a bust either from injury risk or not playoff shot anyway, then this was a bad trade.
I'm rambling because I'm typing quickly, I apologize, but in essence I'd say that due to the circumstances of this trade, we can't call this a worse trade than Soriano until we know how it turns out, even though normally a trade must be judged on what we know at the time.
by Librocrat on Feb 5, 2008 10:16 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I sort of agree with you, but for a diff. reason
In most cases, I think we do know pretty much everything that the teams know, or at least everything that really matters (prior stats, contracts). In this case, however, there could be one major piece of information that the M's know but we don't: an extension for Bedard.
If Bavasi and Co. have gotten no more indication than we have that Bedard would sign an extension, then I think this trade sucks. But if it turns out all along that they'd been talking about a reasonable extension from the beginning then I'd upgrade it to 'okay'.
by Zack on Feb 5, 2008 1:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I could agree with that.
by Librocrat on Feb 5, 2008 2:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The Bedard trade
by Robert on Feb 5, 2008 11:09 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
sorry Robert
more like trading a new accord for some cancer. curable cancer. except you won't get it treated. and give it $2.75 million to come back.
by seattlebruin on Feb 5, 2008 12:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Did the dented head gasket ...
by Robert on Feb 5, 2008 12:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
One leading to the other?
by niko on Feb 5, 2008 1:49 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
How about this terrible trade...
by MarinerintheDistrict on Feb 7, 2008 3:41 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

by 













