Lookout Landing: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: Spencer Hall's Sports Meme Power Rankings

Reviewing The Jeff Clement/Jack Wilson/Ian Snell/Others Semi-Blockbuster

Ian Snell made Carlos Delgado do this.

More photos » by Kathy Willens - AP

Ian Snell made Carlos Delgado do this.

Going Away

Jeff Clement: You should all be familiar with the Clement story by now. Promising lefty power bat capable of drawing a walk who didn't hit in his extended big league audition. Drafted as a catcher but doesn't have the knees for the job. It's no coincidence that the reports on this trade are calling him a first baseman - that's his realistic long-term position. Clement has taken a marked step back at the plate in AAA this year, his OPS dropping by 260 points and his contact rate falling by nearly 8%, and at nearly 26 years old, his stock is the lowest it's ever been. Even so, there remains a good bit of potential in his bat, and a change of scenery that gets him out from behind the dish could be just what he needs to arrive as a sort of approximation of, I dunno, Ryan Garko. He very clearly didn't have a place here, which made him eminently tradeable, but he should get a shot with the Pirates.

Ronny :(edeno: If Ronny hadn't turned into a pile of crap overnight then we wouldn't have needed to make this trade in the first place. Cedeno has been as advertised in the field, but in all seriousness, his swing is the worst I've ever seen in the Major Leagues from a position player. The worst. His at bats have been painful to watch from the beginning, and he needed to get out of here and get a fresh start somewhere else in the worst way. Just a miserable four months with but a scattered handful of that-just-happened home runs.

Aaron Pribanic: 22 year old college arm struggling to miss bats in A-ball. He has a full repertoire, but it isn't fully developed, and his big asset at the moment is a heavy low-90s fastball that's allowed him to keep two-thirds of batted balls on the ground. Probable reliever long-term.

Nathan Adcock: 21 year old who will be judged unfairly by the nightmarish numbers he's put up in High Desert. Not much of a fastball - hangs out around 87-90 - but Baseball America has had good things to say about his curveball, which he used to great effect a year ago against both righties and lefties. The big question will be whether or not his breaking ball is able to sustain its success against more advanced competition. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure Adcock doesn't have much of a changeup yet, without which he is also a probable reliever long-term. But there's upside.

Brett Lorin: The prize of the three-headed pitching bounty, although you wouldn't know that from Neal Huntington's assessment.


"Brett has been noted by our scouts for his plus makeup, competitive nature and desire to win and succeed," said Huntington.

A 22 year old college arm having good success in the same A-ball rotation as Pribanic, Lorin has a live fastball that touches the mid-90s and what's been billed as a pretty tight and sharp curveball. As is the case with pretty much everyone at his level, his change is a work in progress, but his heater gives him an advantage over Adcock in terms of sticking in the rotation in the upper levels. Though by no means a top prospect, Lorin's a decent one, and the right sort of guy for a rebuilding organization to stockpile.

Coming Back

Jack Wilson: Aesthetic foil to Franklin Gutierrez, Wilson's a below-average bat with a glove that's a good bit above-average by any worthwhile measure. He is not a star, and at 31 there aren't a whole lot of useful years left in his career, but he's the sort of player I thought Ronny Cedeno was going to be, in that his offense/defense combination makes him a somewhat unappealing but still all-around average asset. He has an $8.4m club option for 2010, and while that isn't cheap, it isn't unreasonable, Pittsburgh is throwing in money, and this gives us a good 1+ season stopgap while the front office searches for a longer-term solution. It's worth considering, though, that we could just as easily turn around and sell him again. Wilson gives us security without tying our hands. He's a better player than people think he is, and a massive upgrade for as long as he's here.

Ian Snell: How this trade looks five years down the road will depend on how Snell handles the change. Snell was a good starting pitcher in 2006 and 2007, but he has since taken a huge step back despite no evident decline in repertoire. Between 2007 and 2009, Snell's strike rate dropped from 65% to 59% and his swinging strike rate dropped from 11% to 8%. Those are really significant red flags, but the factor you have to consider here is how much of that was due to Snell and the Pirates wanting little to do with each other. The Pirates famously called Snell's contract extension "a mistake", and for Snell's part, he asked to be demoted to AAA and then publicly stated his reluctance to be recalled. Snell was obviously unhappy in the Pittsburgh organization, which makes him both an intriguing acquisition and an enormous risk.

What's encouraging is that, upon ending up in AAA, Snell has gone on to recover his ability to throw strikes and miss bats. There is still a lot of talent in there, which is why so many teams were interested in his services. The only issue is that it's hard to depend on a full recovery for psychological reasons when the statistics look so bad. I am cautiously optimistic, but there is no guarantee that Snell will be able to get back to being a good starting pitcher in the Major Leagues. If he does, the team has club options for both 2011 and 2012. If he doesn't, he'll be gone by next fall at the latest. We'll see. Big gamble with big upside.

Money: I love money. Money can be exchanged for anything! Willie Ballgame could only dream of being so versatile.

Overall

Of the various possibilities, this was not the trade I was expecting, and my immediate reaction was that we gave up a lot for two potentially helpful but by no means spectacular players. And I still think that's true. Like Dave has said, Snell was most interesting as a buy-low candidate, but we didn't really buy low, and Wilson shouldn't have had too high of a cost. But while I'm surprised by the price we paid, and while I thought Zduriencik would be able to do better (now we have to wonder what happens with Wlad and Washburn), I want to make clear that nobody ripped anyone off here. We didn't take advantage of the Pirates, but at the same time they also didn't rob us blind, and both Wilson and Snell could occupy important roles in our run at the playoffs in 2010. Don't be misled by Wilson's mediocre bat. He's a decent player and a big upgrade. And Snell, though risky, was perhaps the most attractive change-of-scenery option in the league. Three years ago he had a better tRA+ than Felix.

An interesting trade that's going to be hotly debated, I'm sure. At the end of the day, though, we upgraded our team without giving up any potential stars, and while it's weird to see a team in our position trade prospects for veterans, that's an oversimplification. This isn't so much buying for 2009 as it is buying for 2010 and beyond, and it's by keeping that in mind that I'm able to keep from being particularly disappointed. Our organizational pitching depth is now even thinner than it was last night, but we've also improved at the upper levels, and that's worth a whole lot.

0 recs  |  Comment 142 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

One too many arms sent packing in my opinion. However, if Wallace, Adair, and Wak

can get Snell to reach his potential, he’s easily the best arm of the bunch.

I think we all had dreams of Hardy or Brignac, so the Wilson pickup is somewhat disappointing, but this is a significant upgrade over what we’ve been seeing at SS.

Overall, I don’t love the deal, but find it hard to believe the players we gave up are going to, in any way, damage the system or organization.

by Rudy4three on Jul 29, 2009 11:52 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

By the way

Snell last threw on the 26th, so his next scheduled start would be this Friday, a slot currently occupied by Vargas. If the team is serious about keeping Vargas’ innings down, they could always just bump him a turn and then have him assume Olson’s place the next week.

by Jeff on Jul 29, 2009 11:54 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Money

I like that we are getting Wilson and Snell for free this year (basically).

I had a chance to go run for a few miles, and the deal sits a little better now. We shouldn’t forget how bad we were at SS. Wilson makes that go away, even if he’s average at best.

Once again, the team is better for now and, if Snell pans out, the future.

by tait644 on Jul 29, 2009 11:54 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I know they were trade pieces with some value

but Clement and :(edeno were personas non grata in the M’s organization. They were basically throw-ins. I don’t know the pitchers we gave up, but if you look at it as two empty uniforms and three minor league arms for Wilson and Snell, plus cash, then it looks pretty decent.

by lemonverbena on Jul 29, 2009 12:09 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I also hear the Yanks are still interested.

Just blather from the radio, so take that for it’s worth.

Awaiting the day I catch a Russell Branyan foul ball. I will make love to it.
Preserved In All His Greatness - R.I.P. The Reignman 1989 to 1997

by JLProck on Jul 29, 2009 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Do the Yanks have anything that we want?

Do they have a good second basemen that will be ready soon?

Racer X. You have to love those amarillo hops.

p.s. fuck you angels

p.p.s. geoff baker is an idiot

by InSpokane on Jul 29, 2009 12:02 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

In a moral sense,

less so in a baseball sense.

De Gutibus non disputandum est

by Bearskin Rugburn on Jul 29, 2009 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Jose Lopez is not in any way a problem.

2B could be upgraded, but seriously. There are bigger fish to fry.

by acblue on Jul 29, 2009 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You're absolutely right on the last point

but a sub-.300 OBP is pretty sad to see in the middle of our lineup. I know he’s getting boned by BABIP this year… I guess it’s a matter of how much growth you think he has left in him.

De Gutibus non disputandum est

by Bearskin Rugburn on Jul 29, 2009 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yankees

And could we offer Washburn to the Rays? For Kazmir – eating all of his salary?

by tait644 on Jul 29, 2009 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

We could make that offer, sure

that offer would then be laughed out the door faster than the Rays could pronounce Z’s full name.

Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.

by pdb on Jul 29, 2009 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I am happy...

Never again will I have to watch the abomination that is Ronny Cedeno swinging a baseball bat.

I previously posted as "Man From Nantucket"

by mem on Jul 29, 2009 12:01 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

My initial reaction was this sucks, mostly because it was painful to see so much starting pitching go away for the second year in a row

and after not drafting any college arms.

But looking at it again, in Snell and Morrow we have two righties who are back end starters right now and have 2/3 starter upside that seems just around the corner. This rotation could be formidable again next year if paired with a solid defense. And the defense will be good, the only real question mark at this point being 3B.

As far as Snell’s decline is concerned, I have complete faith that Zduriencik’s stat people saw the red flags and their concerns were addressed by scouts. If you see a 3% decline in StrSw, it must be either a) loss of stuff, b)loss of comand or c) loss of interest. Apparently jack’s people looked into it and decided it was c). Let’s hope this sleep-dep driven optimism is justified.

De Gutibus non disputandum est

by Bearskin Rugburn on Jul 29, 2009 12:09 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Z has watched the guy a bunch of times

Snell is probably not on the path of the Buddda but Pirates are a screwy organization.

by JetSam on Jul 29, 2009 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

If it was Bavasi who'd made this trade, there would be wailing and gnashing of teeth

…saying we’d thinned the farm system and gave up on Clement to get back a vet and a question mark. But because we trust Z’s ability to proven ability to evaluate talent, he’s being given the benefit of the doubt.

by Spoomeister on Jul 29, 2009 12:20 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Z has a better track record than Bavasi.

2009 Safeco Field Record: 5-0 ; Overall Safeco Field Record: 9-4

by Fin on Jul 29, 2009 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

So Dave Cameron thinks this is an overpay because Snell was done in Pittsbrgh and everyone knew it

but can’t the same thing be said about Clement? And if you forget that Clement was a 3rd overall pick and until reently our best and brightest hope for a hitting catcher, but just look at his numbers, age, and lack of position he’s doesn’t seem like he’d be real valuable.

De Gutibus non disputandum est

by Bearskin Rugburn on Jul 29, 2009 12:21 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Snell can be here for a while

but you don’t need me to tell you that. I guess I draw solace from the fact that all three pitchers were in low minors, where we have younger guys with higher upside.

De Gutibus non disputandum est

by Bearskin Rugburn on Jul 29, 2009 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

And now we have fewer young guys with upside in the low minors

significantly fewer, though as JY pointed out in his entry, young guys emerge in the low minors all the time

by seattlebruin on Jul 29, 2009 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Right

you also have to consider, I think, that we’re going to need five big league arms next year and so far we’ve got Felix, Silva, Morrow and the three lefties. We give up some A/AA depth for AAA/ML depth, which is a greater need at this point. Besides, as Jeff points out Snell was very recently a great asset.

De Gutibus non disputandum est

by Bearskin Rugburn on Jul 29, 2009 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Stop taking threads off-topic.

I don’t understand what the hell is wrong with you.

by Jeff on Jul 29, 2009 12:26 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I understand you don't want to single people out and have better things to do

but maybe the mods could reply directly to off topic comments so as to give everyone a clearer idea of how narrow a given topic is (at least, for a little while). For instance, there are comments about the Yuni trade that aren’t really relevant here but are about trades in general so they’re not as far off topic as you can get. Or Washburn speculation for another example, which again isn’t the Clement trade but is affected by it. Just as suggestion, to give us a better idea of what the new standards are.

De Gutibus non disputandum est

by Bearskin Rugburn on Jul 29, 2009 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Johnson, obviously

He still has that certain “je ne sais pas” quality about him.
And by that I mean, “je ne sais what the hell I’m doing with un bat”.

by Spoomeister on Jul 29, 2009 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

It's weird, I still don't know how I feel about this trade.

I think I was hoping for Kazmir/Brignac and this is a bit of a letdown.

by drm1125 on Jul 29, 2009 12:31 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Well I prefer Snell to Kazmir.

It just sucks the Rays wouldn’t give up on Brignac, they have so many good shortstops and we have so FEW!

by Kenny Knows Sports on Jul 29, 2009 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Still have Morrow and Washburn to trade.

But yeah, would be nice to pick up Escobar or Brignac.

by Wilder. on Jul 29, 2009 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I hope we don't trade Morrow.

His value is not nearly as low as Clement’s, yet he keeps getting perceived that way.

by Kenny Knows Sports on Jul 29, 2009 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

i like the trade

Wilson can keep the spot warm next year until (hopefully) Carlos is ready to take over in 2011.. Snell adds depth to help for the holes washburn and bedard will leave, add in the money? I don’t see any way we lost this trade unless one of those minor leaguers wins a cy young

Too close for missles, switching to guns.

by Paseman on Jul 29, 2009 12:42 PM PDT via mobile reply actions   0 recs

Please Explain

Too close for missles, switching to guns.

by Paseman on Jul 29, 2009 1:58 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It doesn't matter if one of the kids we gave up wins a Cy Young award

what matters is their talent level at the time of the trade and how we project them going forward. There’s no way for GMZ to know if Brett Lorin will suddenly add four mph to his fastball and be the next Brandon Webb – we can only judge them based on how they’re projected as of right now.

by seattlebruin on Jul 29, 2009 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Anyone else think that Lincoln and/or Armstrong may have had a slight hand in this?

I know they claimed that they were going to pretty much let Z do whatever he wanted but I would assume that Z knows that we don’t have a very good chance of making the playoffs. But with the bigger crowds they’ve had this season and the “promise” of contention, I kind of think that Lincoln and Armstrong insisted that Z wouldn’t make a move that made it look like we were giving up. Maybe it’s just me.

by Coach Owens on Jul 29, 2009 12:54 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I dont get why a lot of M's fans or media members have to break everything down into 'Buyers or Sellers'

I dont think this trade is about that. It’s about improving the club going forward. If Jack sees something that makes sense and improves the team or system he’s going to make a deal regardless of where the team sits in the standings or what point in the season it is.

by Rudy4three on Jul 29, 2009 1:02 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed.

Why can’t the Mariners try to do things to win this season, even if they don’t have a realistic shot at the playoffs? You’ll have a lot easier time signing free agents with an 85-win season than with a 75-win season. (Not that this trade improved us by ten wins of course, just that you should always be trying to do things to win.)

by Kenny Knows Sports on Jul 29, 2009 1:08 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The only way the'd be involved

is if they requested that GMZ still try to make a team that can win games this year, even if we are not playoff bound. Otherwise, I don’t see why they’d care about who we get or how.

...and now I'm here

by Librocrat on Jul 29, 2009 2:59 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Can I just say that I like what the Pirates are doing over the past season and a half?

For over 15 years they were probably the worst run franchise in baseball. But now they seem to be re-stocking the farm system in a good way and if they follow the Rays model, and sign their young players early to long-term contracts, they could perhaps start to build a core that they won’t have to trade away the year before they become free agents.

Losing Jason Bay is tough but if Pedro Alvarez and Jose Tabata develop like they hope and if even one of these guys they got from the Mariners becomes a good player, then it will have been a success as Snell was clearly done in Pitt.

by Kenny Knows Sports on Jul 29, 2009 1:06 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I'm hoping Zduriencik and his team of scouts know more about these pitchers than the Pirates do.

He doesn’t seem to be a big fan of Fontaine’s drafts at all. Clement and this trio of pitchers (and maybe Morrow) gone, Aumont moved to relief. He did sign Fields, which was weird.

by Manzanillos Cup on Jul 29, 2009 1:33 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I'm pretty sure there were some strategic reasons that made signing Fields a decent idea.

Unfortunately I cannot relate what they were, as I did not retain any of that information in long term memory.

by Kermit. on Jul 29, 2009 1:49 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Essentially Jack Z decided that Fields was worth more than the 22nd selection in this years draft

unfortunately, that selection turned out to be Kyle Gibson, but there was no way to know he would slip that far in May

by seattlebruin on Jul 29, 2009 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

There also might have been budget issues.

In which Fields came out of the 2008 budget and the 22nd this year would come out of 2009.

by Matthew on Jul 29, 2009 2:10 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

This is one thing I took from this trade

Zduriencik doesn’t seem to think much of the Fontaine-drafted pitchers. 3 gone in one sweep.

by edgar is good on Jul 29, 2009 4:11 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

So umm...

Yeah.

I do like Snell though, I just think he could have been had for less.

by SethGrandpa on Jul 29, 2009 2:27 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

The whole "He could have been had for less" phrase gets used a lot around here.

Not to single you out specifically, but there is a fundamental problem with saying that when in fact reality shows it to not be true. What we gave up is in fact exactly what it took to get him.

If we do not offer what we did there is a very real chance no trade gets made. Just because we may wish there was less given up in a trade does not mean we can say “He could have been had for less.”

by Sec 108 on Jul 29, 2009 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You gave it up for nothing

Pretty sure it doesn’t get any less than that.

by Kermit. on Jul 29, 2009 5:29 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Why did you all have to get Snell with your Pirates middle infielder?!!!

It’s not like our rotation is very good after the 1-2.

/shakes fist

Aaron King is still my homeboy... iffy mechanics and all

If Dustin Pedroia played in Seattle, not many people would be talking about him.

GET THAT VORP SH!T OUTTA HERE!!!

by baetown415 on Jul 29, 2009 3:25 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

There's nothing wrong with analyzing pitcher's mechanics

and Kyle Boddy actually does a very good job.

It’s when you try to apply mechanics to injury prevention that you get into trouble. We understand what kinds of things are repeatable and deceptive already.

by seattlebruin on Jul 29, 2009 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think VORP is inferior to RARP

And since you can find RARP on BP’s site, is there any point of using VORP?

Aaron King is still my homeboy... iffy mechanics and all

If Dustin Pedroia played in Seattle, not many people would be talking about him.

GET THAT VORP SH!T OUTTA HERE!!!

by baetown415 on Jul 29, 2009 3:50 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I know

I guess my “iffy” is kind of ambiguous too, but it’s nicer than “aesthetically unpleasing” and “slow-ass”.

Aaron King is still my homeboy... iffy mechanics and all

If Dustin Pedroia played in Seattle, not many people would be talking about him.

GET THAT VORP SH!T OUTTA HERE!!!

by baetown415 on Jul 29, 2009 3:55 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I like this trade a lot.

Snell is awesome and none of the pitchers we gave up are anything to write home about. I like that we gave up a few low-ceiling pitchers instead of one top-5 prospect.

by lailaihei on Jul 29, 2009 4:59 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Agree, almost

The saber metric community has rightly deplored wasting prospects for middling veterans, but the real value of prospects seems to be smaller than we often let on. Does any one of these pitchers have more than a 50% chance to make a major league appearance? If so, what is their expected WAR? We can do the expected utility calculation on these guys, and it doesn’t add up to much. Three fifth round-ish draft picks, none with a substantial enough minor league career to significantly change that assessment.

Clement has no place in the organization and his trade value is that of a guy who might be an MLB average 1B some day. Cedeno is basically replacement level.

In exchange for that we get an average SS for $8M (not a deal, not a bust—basically market value) and a pitcher who should be at least 1 WAR, may be 3 WAR, who is owed a mere 4.25 million and who, if he is three WAR, can be retained for a very reasonable cost. Those options are worth about $3 million each, I think. (25% chance that Snell becomes a 3WAR pitcher again, at which point he’s worth about $12M, which gives $3M.) And we’re paying him just about what his current performance is worth. Worst case scenario on Snell, he whines about not wanting to leave Tacoma because he sucked in Seattle and doesn’t want to go back.

The almost part of this agreement goes like this “I like this trade a lot”; it’s fine, but no steal.

by philosofool on Jul 29, 2009 9:18 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

By reading a game thread of your own volition you agree to accept all liability for any and all damage done to your delicate sensibilities.
Start posting about the Mariners »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Max_small
FootbaLL IV (Nov 21st)
Small
The Sabermetrics of Cats

Recent FanPosts

Small
WAR gains major exposure
Laughing_man_elmex_small
AFL Championship game thread
Smell-the-glove_small
OFFTOP 11/19 - The Hand of Fraud
Small
Tony Blengino interview on 710 AM ESPN Seattle's Hot Stove League
Ichirocameron_small
OTFPOTD 11/16: Recipes Edition
Small
Lookout Landing as a communtiy
Small
Royals determined to unload Callaspo...
Ichiro_small
Ackley and Triunfel on MLB TV right now

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Sexy People

1_small Graham

Small Matthew

Small Jeff