Beltran

[overseascardfan]

http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_...s-beltran-turned-down-more-money-from-d-backs

Looks like ARZ was trying to make a splash with that 5.5M but it wasn't enough. NYY is a mess, Beltran could have really made a difference here.

 

[82CardsGrad]

Meh... I'm thrilled he didn't come here! Dude will be 37 in April. The Yankees will be lucky to get 100 or so games out of him...
Whew!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[overseascardfan]

http://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2013/12/7/5185180/mark-trumbo-diamondbacks-mlb-trade-rumors-angels

I give Towers credit for sticking to his plan for a power hitting OF. LAA thinks Trumbo is worth a top of the rotation SP but most teams are offering back of the rotation guys that is why the Halos are not interested in moving him. Trumbo is 27, so he ain't old by any means but he really isn't that great of an OF so is hit bat worth a #1 or #2?

 

[82CardsGrad]

http://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2013/12/7/5185180/mark-trumbo-diamondbacks-mlb-trade-rumors-angels

I give Towers credit for sticking to his plan for a power hitting OF. LAA thinks Trumbo is worth a top of the rotation SP but most teams are offering back of the rotation guys that is why the Halos are not interested in moving him. Trumbo is 27, so he ain't old by any means but he really isn't that great of an OF so is hit bat worth a #1 or #2?

Of course not... Trumbo has had one season with an OPS over .800. He's a strikeout machine and is a marginal at best fielder... I'd give up Delgado for him...or a combo of Delgado with either Cahill or McCarthy... But that's it!

 

[overseascardfan]

Of course not... Trumbo has had one season with an OPS over .800. He's a strikeout machine and is a marginal at best fielder... I'd give up Delgado for him...or a combo of Delgado with either Cahill or McCarthy... But that's it!

Oooohhhh if ARZ could rid themselves of Cahill and his contract I would be all for it, I could live with Delgado being dealt for Trumbo but I don't think LAA will bite. I think LAA will ask for Skaggs back, I am worried Towers will do it though and throw in AJ Pollock to boot.

 

[sundevil04]

Whew. I'm glad we dodged that bullet. 48 million Over three years for a 37, 38, and 39 year old player NO THANK YOU

 

[unseenaz]

Oooohhhh if ARZ could rid themselves of Cahill and his contract I would be all for it, I could live with Delgado being dealt for Trumbo but I don't think LAA will bite. I think LAA will ask for Skaggs back, I am worried Towers will do it though and throw in AJ Pollock to boot.

we offered Skaggs and Pollock for Cespedes already, wouldnt surprise me

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Skaggs is nothing special. I have no idea why people care about trading him. He is between a #5 and a #3 starter.

 

[Diamondback Jay]

Glad Beltran decided to go with the Yankees instead. He's still playing well, but at 37 he is in a race against time. Three years is too risky.

Not crazy about Trumbo. His OPS and OBP are horrid. He's the definition of hit or miss. If they are going that avenue, they're better off saving prospects and getting Reynolds back as a Free Agent on the cheap.

 

[82CardsGrad]

Skaggs is nothing special. I have no idea why people care about trading him. He is between a #5 and a #3 starter.

Agree. He's a young pitcher... Which means he's just another oppty for the KT haters to hate... Did you see them freak out when we traded Holmberg??? LMAO...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ASUCHRIS]

Skaggs is nothing special. I have no idea why people care about trading him. He is between a #5 and a #3 starter.

Maybe because his value is at it's lowest? Skaggs hasn't looked great the last year or so, but his velocity is down. There is a reason he was considered one of the best pitching prospects in baseball, and if he can regain some of that velocity, he'll have a chance to get back there.

Trading him when his value is at it's lowest would be pretty dumb, but not that surprising.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Maybe because his value is at it's lowest? Skaggs hasn't looked great the last year or so, but his velocity is down. There is a reason he was considered one of the best pitching prospects in baseball, and if he can regain some of that velocity, he'll have a chance to get back there.

Trading him when his value is at it's lowest would be pretty dumb, but not that surprising.

Or it is just his real value. Just because a guy is a great prospect doesn't mean he is going to be anything at the major league level...especially with pitching.

You think his value is low. I think in two years we will be talking about how we should have traded him when he had any value at all.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

See also...dumping this guy:

ERA: 3.97 WHIP 1.22 K/9 6.1

Who we got for this guy:

ERA: 3.99 WHIP 1.41 K/9 6.3

Basically the exact same player and everyone ******* endlessly about this trade.

I think we massively over value our prospects based on some magazine. These are also probably the same guys who worship WAR like it is something relevant.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

You think his value is low. I think in two years we will be talking about how we should have traded him when he had any value at all.

You may be right, or he may get his velocity back and turn out to be a decent pitcher. I'd prefer to see if he can recover, as he is pretty young and has shown enough in the minors to make it appear worth the risk.

He's not a 35 year old guy on the down swing, let's give him a chance as opposed to the usual dbacks get impatient mentality.

 

[Phrazbit]

See also...dumping this guy:

ERA: 3.97 WHIP 1.22 K/9 6.1

Who we got for this guy:

ERA: 3.99 WHIP 1.41 K/9 6.3

Basically the exact same player and everyone ******* endlessly about this trade.

I think we massively over value our prospects based on some magazine. These are also probably the same guys who worship WAR like it is something relevant.

Hmm... lets expand those numbers a little.

This guy: Jarrod Parker

ERA: 3.97 WHIP 1.22 K/9 6.1, 197 innings, $495,000

That guy: Trevor Cahill

ERA: 3.99 WHIP 1.41 K/9 6.3, 146 innings, $5,500,000.

And Parker's numbers in 2012 were also superior to Cahill's... so we are paying Cahill more than 10 times what Parker is getting to be an inferior pitcher, and its only going to get worse. We owe Cahill 7 mil next year and 12 million 2014.

Also stupidly thrown into that trade; this guy: Ryan Cook.

2012: 2.09 ERA, .941 whip, 74 innings, (All-Star appearance)

2013: 2.54 ERA, 1.2 whip, 67 innings.

That trade deserves to be bitched about.

I think Towers is the one who has difficulty properly rating the value of young players on small contracts.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

The numbers between Parker and Cahill are basically identical. It is much ado about nothing.

Everyone acts like it was grand theft. It wasn't.

They are both #3 pitchers. Yeah we are paying more for Cahill but that is because we thought Cahill was the better pitcher for our park.

 

[Diamondback Jay]

See also...dumping this guy:

ERA: 3.97 WHIP 1.22 K/9 6.1

Who we got for this guy:

ERA: 3.99 WHIP 1.41 K/9 6.3

Basically the exact same player and everyone ******* endlessly about this trade.

I think we massively over value our prospects based on some magazine. These are also probably the same guys who worship WAR like it is something relevant.

I am on the fence about trading prospects. I'm not married to any of them if the right offer comes along. Case in point, if Chicago calls and offers Chris Sale, there isn't a prospect in the system I would be reluctant to trade; and I include Bradley in that mix. If you can get a young, All Star caliber (or even extremely good) player for a prospect, jump. Its why I never complained about the Cahill for Parker deal. Obviously, everyone is a prospect at one point or another, and there is always the risk a prospect traded becomes better than advertised or as good as expected. To me though, in that circumstances, if the player continues on normal level and prospect develops, its a win-win for both teams.

My issue is when teams start treating prospects like the red headed step-child. Case in point, Pittsburgh trading two top prospects for one month of Marlon Byrd was dumb. So was the trade Detroit made for the renta closer Veres. That kind of deal, I frown at.

 

[82CardsGrad]

Hmm... lets expand those numbers a little.

This guy: Jarrod Parker

ERA: 3.97 WHIP 1.22 K/9 6.1, 197 innings, $495,000

That guy: Trevor Cahill

ERA: 3.99 WHIP 1.41 K/9 6.3, 146 innings, $5,500,000.

And Parker's numbers in 2012 were also superior to Cahill's... so we are paying Cahill more than 10 times what Parker is getting to be an inferior pitcher, and its only going to get worse. We owe Cahill 7 mil next year and 12 million 2014.

Also stupidly thrown into that trade; this guy: Ryan Cook.

2012: 2.09 ERA, .941 whip, 74 innings, (All-Star appearance)

2013: 2.54 ERA, 1.2 whip, 67 innings.

That trade deserves to be bitched about.

I think Towers is the one who has difficulty properly rating the value of young players on small contracts.

Cahill has been with us for 2 seasons... His first season looked like this:

2012: 3.78 ERA, WHIP of 1.29 and 7.0 K/9. He pitched 2-00 innings as well and recorded a 13 & 12 record. He earned $3.5 million in 2012.
In 2013, he struggled, obviously... We'll have to see if he can get back to his 2013 form, or better... He will earn $7.7 million in 2014 and $12 million in 2015. He is still very young (turns 26 next March). There is still a chance he will turn it around. So, while the deal is clearly unfavorable to Arizona at present, it's not as drastic as you are attemting to make it...
That said - if there is ever a trade worth bitching about, this one would fit the bill...

 

[Chris_Sanders]

on normal level and prospect develops, its a win-win for both teams.

My issue is when teams start treating prospects like the red headed step-child. Case in point, Pittsburgh trading two top prospects for one month of Marlon Byrd was dumb. So was the trade Detroit made for the Veres. That kind of deal, I frown at.

Correct. I hate trading for rent a players. That annoys me.

Taking a stab at a buy low like Heath Bell or basically flipping one prospect (Parker) for a similar player (Cahill) just comes down to how you judge the guy for your team.

And I despise Cahill...but it wasn't the trainwreck people here make it out to be.

 

[Phrazbit]

The numbers between Parker and Cahill are basically identical. It is much ado about nothing.

Everyone acts like it was grand theft. It wasn't.

They are both #3 pitchers. Yeah we are paying more for Cahill but that is because we thought Cahill was the better pitcher for our park.

Cahill is due to make ~28 million during his Dbacks tenure... Parker will make 1.5 million over that span and then become arbitration eligible. We shipped off one of the most touted pitching prospects in the league in exchange for a worse player on an ugly contract. And we threw in an all-star reliever!

Yes, I think that was grand theft.

And Parker still has upside, I dont see Chubs Cahill improving much.

 

[Phrazbit]

Cahill has been with us for 2 seasons... His first season looked like this:

2012: 3.78 ERA, WHIP of 1.29 and 7.0 K/9. He pitched 2-00 innings as well and recorded a 13 & 12 record. He earned $3.5 million in 2012.
In 2013, he struggled, obviously... We'll have to see if he can get back to his 2013 form, or better... He will earn $7.7 million in 2014 and $12 million in 2015. He is still very young (turns 26 next March). There is still a chance he will turn it around. So, while the deal is clearly unfavorable to Arizona at present, it's not as drastic as you are attemting to make it...
That said - if there is ever a trade worth bitching about, this one would fit the bill...

I dunno, its pretty bad. As I said in my last post, I think its much more likely that Parker improves than Cahill. Cahill had a career year in 2010 and the A's jumped the gun giving him an extension. Outside of that career year in 2010 you're looking at a dude with an ERA in the low 4s, high 3s and a 1.4 whip. And the long term impact of his contract if he does not turn his career around will be brutal. 12 million for a #3/#4 pitcher is waaaay too much for this franchise.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Cahill is due to make ~28 million during his Dbacks tenure... Parker will make 1.5 million over that span and then become arbitration eligible. We shipped off one of the most touted pitching prospects in the league in exchange for a worse player on an ugly contract. And we threw in an all-star reliever!

Yes, I think that was grand theft.

And Parker still has upside, I dont see Chubs Cahill improving much.

Yet, they are almost the same player with virtually the same impact on their teams.

I know you are the resident ASFN hyperbole king but when you scream "fire" on every post it really tends to lessen the impact of your message

 

[ASUCHRIS]

I know you are the resident ASFN hyperbole king but when you scream "fire" on every post it really tends to lessen the impact of your message

And when you ignore the content of the post (which is completely valid) and attack the poster, you lose credibility.

 

[Phrazbit]

Yet, they are almost the same player with virtually the same impact on their teams.

I know you are the resident ASFN hyperbole king but when you scream "fire" on every post it really tends to lessen the impact of your message

I've gotten fired up about 3 different subjects on these forums where I really let the hyperbole fly... Kevin Kolb, Michael Beasley and Kevin Towers. I think all of those subjects proved worthy of the hyperbole I have bestowed upon them.

And yes, they have similar impacts on the field... but one makes more than 10 times what the other does, and we're a team on a budget... and we flushed a sorely needed reliever along with Parker. It was an abysmal move.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

And when you ignore the content of the post (which is completely valid) and attack the poster, you lose credibility.

Nope. I read it, considered it, didn't really agree, and discounted it. Crazy how that works.