Verdict on Trade for Cabrera
by 3strikes on Nov 14, 2010 9:26 AM EST
Email
PrintThe Marlins this weekend traded Andrew Miller to the Red Sox for a less than stellar relief pitcher and Cameron Maybin to the Padres for two good (not great) relief pitchers. Neither player has lived up to their potential or to expectations. Andrew Miller in particular is a major disappointment. In case there was any doubt, this shows the Tigers well ahead in the big trade for Cabrera even when considering the epic failure of acquiring Dontelle Willis.
This also argues strongly against putting too much stock in young minor league players. None of the potential players we have today is held in more esteem or has higher expectations than Maybin or Miller had before they were traded. We need to keep this in mind as the Tigers start considering trades of potential talent for major league players.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Bless You Boys writing staff.
23 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Burke Badenhop is the only guy left in the Marlins organization that they received in that trade.
Miguel Cabrera is the only guy left in our organization that we received in that trade. That says it all.
they got the better name, we got the better player
isn’t that what trading is all about?
by Kurt Mensching on Nov 14, 2010 10:31 AM EST up reply actions
I stil think Maybin has potential.
I think Fla gave up on him way to quick. However yes we won this trade from day 1. I dont think anyone was upset when we made this trade.
by BennieBladesFan on Nov 14, 2010 11:51 AM EST reply actions
I think his chances of reaching the expectations put upon him is near nil
Too many problems at the plate that were not corrected. Florida didn’t give up on him too soon. Whether because of him or their staff he was not going to develop. Maybe San Diego will see and change something and he will.
by Kurt Mensching on Nov 14, 2010 12:25 PM EST up reply actions
So the Question is ...
… Does this change anyone’s perspective on trades this winter? Are any of our young players untouchable when it comes to acquiring the kind of hitter who can help Cabrera? Should any of the youngsters (like Turner, Oliver or Fields) be protected from trade consideration/
"I have seen the future, and it is much like the present, only longer" - Dan Quisenberry
the big thing for me
is that you take the players on an individual basis.
what made moving miller and maybin so palatable is that we knew they both have problems and were not the perfect first rounders we thought. Maybin struggled and couldn’t hit the breaking pitch. Miller showed a serious lack of control.
Turner I think is proving to be a serious frontline starter candidate right now. The positional guys, I personally do not know enough about quite yet.
In general, prospects for proven veterans is fine by me though. Prospects are not playeres. They’re just potential to be players. So trading potential for actual makes sense as long as money isn’t a big issue.
by Kurt Mensching on Nov 14, 2010 1:16 PM EST up reply actions
Yet DD would not trade both Miller and Maybin for Cabrera alone.
Only when Willis was included was he willing to part with both- plus four more.
If you survived 2003, you can get through this!
Do you blame him?
Yes, Willis was struggling but there was the potential to gain a former Cy Young winner. Had it worked out DD would look like a genius. I can’t fault him for taking that chance, especially since he knows much more about this stuff than I do.
Yes, I blame him, and said so at the time
Willis was on a two year decline when the Tigers acquired him. That’s rarely reversed.
He led the National League in runs allowed, had a 5.10 ERA and a 1.60 WHIP in the previous season- and he was apparently healthy. They totally whiffed the scouting report, and signed Willis to a three year, $ 29 million extension before he ever threw a pitch in the American League. Other GM’s would not touch him. Apparently, they knew a whole lot more than DD did.
If you survived 2003, you can get through this!
Actually, it's only the contract to Willis that's the problem
If the price for acquiring Miggy was to take on Willis (along with conveying the 6 youngsters), I wouldn’t think twice. The problem was the 3 yr contract to Willis which was not necessary. Without that, Willis would have left the organization after showing he really was sliding downhill.
That's a huge fallacy- the Tigers didn't have to take Willis to get Cabrera
If the Marlins wanted to get rid of Willis, they only had to release him, or trade him at a reduced value.
When the Tigers made their initial offer, and the Marlins couldn’t get what they wanted from any club initially, they pulled him back, hoping that they’d get more if he had a decent start to the next season, but his stock was very low because he was no good. The problem was that DD said they scouted him all September and decided that his issues were in the past. He bet $ 29 million on that scouting report and completely blew it.
My take is that Dontrelle’s delivery could not be sustained as his once slender but large frame naturally filled out. But whatever the reason, he was nowhere near the young stud pitcher that won 22 games by the time the Tigers traded for him.
If you survived 2003, you can get through this!
Obviously they did exactly what we needed them to do
What happened with Miller and Maybin? Bad player evaluation in the draft (lots of skills, few actual tools), bad/rushed player development, or just a couple prospects that didn’t pan out?
They weren’t Hayward/Wood/Strasburg/Mauer “can’t miss if they stay healthy” types, but they seem like they were generally though of as the next level down.
Willis, Maybin, Miller ....
What does it say about the Tigers scouting and is there reason to believe it is any better now? This is not rhetorical. I know so little about that aspect of the game and there is too little coverage of it so I’m looking to the folk here to fill in the gaps.
"I have seen the future, and it is much like the present, only longer" - Dan Quisenberry
Couple problems with your arguments
1) Maybin was always rated very highly- as far back as 2008, Baseball America had Cameron Maybin as the top prospect in Florida’s farm system. He was also in the top 5-10 on every single expert list that year (at least every one in the BA manual- Sickels had him at 16). In 2009, BA still had Maybin at #1 in the Marlins system and all three of their experts had him in their top 20- Will Lingo even had him 4 and John Manuel had him 8. Hell, there’s some reason to believe that Maybin is a quick fix away from being a decent starting CF.
2) Miller always had high pedigree. He was rated about as highly as Turner is now- which isn’t a knock on Turner. That spot was in the 20’s on most prospect rankings. The consensus is that Miller needed more time in AA or AAA in order to work on his secondary stuff (which was promising). He obviously wasn’t a guarantee, but he wasn’t a sure bust either.
Look, I get that prospects don’t work out. But just because these two didn’t doesn’t mean that Turner or Oliver won’t.
Deputy Editor, Bless You Boys
Free Scott Sizemore!
by David Tokarz on Nov 15, 2010 12:17 PM EST up reply actions
What argument are we talking about?
… I didn’t think I was presenting an argument so much as asking a question, albeit with enough scepticism to merit consideration as an argument. Still, you seem to be bolstering this very scepticism but widening the net. Questioning the Tigers scouts doesn’t let other scouts off the hook. Journalism experts in particular have a strong track record in missing the mark, especially in sports and politics.
But I hesitate to extend my scepticism to all scouts. Some teams seem much better than others at finding and developing talent. The Yankees, Red Sox, A’s, Twins and now the Ray’s seem to be in that group. The Rangers and Marlins might be as well (they develop talent but give up on it too soon).
These teams are not that much better than others as all teams have hits and misses. It’s more like having a higher batting average – even the best still make a lot of outs. Other teams like the Tigers seem to more consistently miss the mark with their prospects (as in a lower batting average?). Don’t know if it’s the scouting or the player development but I suspect a little of both (reflecting less than optimal emphasis by the leadership).
"I have seen the future, and it is much like the present, only longer" - Dan Quisenberry
I think it's fair to say that Florida has some excellent scouts
Larry Beinfest and Michael Hill do an excellent job down there on a very small budget. If they were willing to take that deal with the amount of teams that were available to deal with, it should say a lot about the value of the package.
This is a team that has acquired Anibal Sanchez, Ricky Nolasco, Dontrelle Willis, Hanley Ramirez, and Dan Uggla (through the Rule 5 Draft). That’s just off the top of my head, and I’m sure there are many more. The point is, it’s a very shrewd front office, and they were willing to trade Miguel Cabrera for these players straight up. I think that says a ton about Miller and Maybin’s value at the time.
The draft is a really inexact science (especially in baseball, because prospects have to go through so many levels to make it to the majors, there are rarely immediate impacts), and I think overall Dombrowski and crew have been pretty decent. He may give out bone-headed contracts, but I think his talent evaluation is pretty close to where it should be (just don’t draft college relievers so high, please).
by ozymandius1024 on Nov 15, 2010 3:16 PM EST up reply actions
Actually ... I take that back.
It is an accepted spelling (although not necessarily in the US). This from the Free Dictionary (on-line) for “Sceptic”:
scep·ti·cal (skpt-kl)
adj.
Variant of skeptical.
sceptical archaic and US, skeptical [ˈskɛptɪkəl]
adj
1. not convinced that something is true; doubtful
2. tending to mistrust people, ideas, etc., in general
3. (Philosophy) of or relating to sceptics; sceptic
sceptically archaic and US, skeptically adv
It so happens a lot of “continental” spelling creeps into my writing (like flipping “er” suffix in center and theater or adding “u” to words like color and behavior).
"I have seen the future, and it is much like the present, only longer" - Dan Quisenberry
Your argument
This also argues strongly against putting too much stock in young minor league players.
No it doesn’t. They’ve always been a risk and you’re working off of an assumption you shouldn’t have had in the first place.
Deputy Editor, Bless You Boys
Free Scott Sizemore!
by David Tokarz on Nov 15, 2010 6:40 PM EST up reply actions
Is There a Way to Send you a non-public Message?
I looked on your web-page and didn’t see any link I could use.
"I have seen the future, and it is much like the present, only longer" - Dan Quisenberry
It is confirming , that our draft picks was bad.
Ok , Maybin has still chance to be a average hitter and OF.
Others ??
DD should send more moeny to minors instead of sign players like J.Jones , Everett.
Trading prospects for young Stars.
Any day that you can trade young prospects for proven young major league stars i think you have to pull the trigger and make the trades.Look every year at the top prospects list of each team and a lot of these guys never make it or make it as average players.How many Caberra’s come along and we knew what we where getting.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bless You Boys
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
