Question which is probably Old News to you Folks...

by the Dragon on Mar 29, 2007 12:01 PM EDT Comment 13 comments

There was an interesting article in yesterday's Washington Post "BaseBall 2007" special edition, on the apparent change in philosophy of trading "top" prospects for Big Players at the trading deadline.

First, at last years trading deadline, I had not found the Twins Blogosphere, so while the following is new to me, it is probably well known to you folks.

The example that interested me was an analysis of the Alfonso Soriano dance at the trade deadline. The article states that the Twins were probably the most ardent suitor (I'm reading a bit between the lines there). The Nationals demanded prospects headed by either Garza or Perkins. I was interested that the Twins offered prospects headed by Slowey.

What struck me most was when Stan Kasten, National's President, long with the Braves, was asked his thoughts on that offer now, he stated flatly that he would do the same thing today. Basically, give up Soriano for 2 draft picks, rather than someone who would possibly be #2 in this years rotation.

Any thoughts?

Regards,

0 recs | Comment 13 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

It varies

Some teams prefer to draft and develop their own prospects rather than acquire near finished products from other organizations. Apparently, the Nationals are in this camp.

Other teams (e.g. the Giants) hate draft choices and will only take veterans for the few prospects they actually develop. They would rather not spend the money on signing bonuses because they view it as riskier than signing free agents (kind of a self-fulfilling prophesy when you don't draft or develop well).

Most teams are somewhere in between. But there is no one philosophy out there. There are about 20 as near as I can tell. The philosophies also change with changes in the CBA. This year I expect more movement because even the top free agents will only return one first-round draft choice to their former teams, and many players who would have returned draft choices in the past no longer will.

On the Soriano deal, only time will tell. But they would be hard-pressed to draft better than Slowey and Moses (as was rumored) with a first rounder and a sandwich pick. And they'll have to wait longer for the results. So I certainly don't agree with the Nationals on that deal.

Free Matt Garza.

by cmathewson on Mar 29, 2007 12:51 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

And then......

Sometimes, there's just no room at the inn for the prospect. Eric Milton is a somewhat good example. Yes, he would have made the Yankees, but probably not for 2-3 years and then as the odd guy in the bullpen. He was a worthy enough prospect for the Twins to rgab and throw into the mix right away.

The evils of trading prospects is that a prospect may be cheaper in the long run than the one-time superstar, who may also conflict with the "team chemistry" (discussed elsewhere).

And, yes, some teams are tiring of making high school and college guys millionaires when they will (probably) never pan out.

Look at rosters, especially with competitive teams. One rookie would be likely to crash the main roster each season. 2-3 promising guys might make a call. 2-3 make the call, but just to be a rotating part in the system. And teams tend to draft 30-50 guys and maybe sign half.

Look at the Twins this season. Where are the rookies? Neshek cracked the bullpen (maybe at the expense of Durbin, who could've been trade bait (better than Pat) a couple of eyars back. Kubel is there, but he's not exactly a rookie. Did the Twins take a chance with a newcomer for the numebr 5 spot, usually reserved for that "tryout" job. Naw, went with the overpaid grizzled veteran (times 3).

But now next year. Will the Twins find room for rookies Span and Casilla in the starting lineup (and just sign a back-up, a la Crillo) for the positions. Will they have three near rookies in the rotation (Perkins, Garza, Slowey) to join Liriano. And what about Boof. Now Baker is the odd man out, bigtime.

Who will be on the bench in the infield and outfield (doubt it will be Ford/Tyner/Rodriguez again).

Is there a hole to fill in the bullpen with Mijares/Miller/Barrett -- lefties all that need to come...or go.

The toughest part of a general managers job is to know what to do with all the talent in the minors -- looking good oen season, tanking the next.

And come July, the Twins do have the talent to trade prospects for salary, if they wish. Just a matter of who...almsot reday (Baker, Slowey, Perkins, Garza) or the promising unknowns (Rainville, Waldrop, Duensing, Swarzak, Sawataski, Smit).

www.Twinscards.com

by twintown on Mar 29, 2007 1:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Thanks

I was most interested in the Twins part, because I never heard what the Twins had on offer.

The thrust of the article, was that the change in the Yankee's trade/prospect approach had changed the market (since they had been the big buyers in the past). Also, that last year at trade deadline only 2 top 5 prospects (I believe as ranked by Baseball America) changed hands. Another conclusion was that this change had led to Cordero staying in Washington as closer, because Boston was unwilling to trade top prospects.

In a sort of backhanded way, saying that baseball executives seemed to notice the way Oakland & Minnesota succeed with a thriving farm system, rather than Big Ticket free agents.

Thanks again,

I don't suffer from insanity...I relish every moment of it!

by the Dragon on Mar 29, 2007 1:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

It is changing some

I think more and more teams are recognizing that you have to build within. The Yankees and Red Sox are two good examples of teams that are now very reluctant to deal prospects. Even the White Sox are starting to try to stockpile young players. Teams like the Giants will have to hit rock bottom and change GMs before they change their philosophy. But there are more Billy Beane proteges out there who have some admiration for Terry Ryan's approach.

The case in point with the Nationals is puzzling because whether you deal Soriano for prospects who are close to the majors or let him go for draft picks, you're still building for the future. Many of the Yankees prospects came from other organizations, such as in the Sheffield trade. They would still consider that building for the future, even if they didn't draft the player.

If you look at the Twins, they have built a big chunk of their team with prospects from other organizations (Santana, Bonser, Liriano, Bartlett, Casilla, etc.). They like A ball players because they are not overhyped yet and you still have time to mold them into the Twins' image. I don't know of another organization that is as narrowly focused on one level when acquiring prospects. In part because they are that way, they seem to have no trouble getting value from cast-offs like JC Romero (Casilla), Juan Castro (Brandon Roberts) and Kyle Lohse (Zach Ward). I expect when it's time to trade Durbin, Silva, Ponson, or Ortiz, they'll be able to get A-ball players who were top five draft choices for their teams. They've also let a lot of free agents go for draft picks. In 2004, for example, they had five first-round draft choices because of the Guardado and Hawkins signings.

The 2002 team has been dismantled, but the players they got in return will continue the winning tradition:

Buchanon: Jason Bartlett
Guardado: Glen Perkins and Jay Rainville
Hawkins: Trevor Plouffe and Matt Fox
Milton: Silva and Punto
Pierzinski: Nathan, Bonser, Liriano
Kielty: Stewart (gone), Bobby Korecky, Dave Gassner
Mientkieviecz: Justin Jones (gone)
Koskie: Henry Sanchez and Kevin Slowey
Guzman: Andrew Thompson
Blanco: Brian Duensing
Jones: Whit Robbins
Romero: Alexi Casilla
Castro: Brian Roberts
Lohse: Zach Ward

Free Matt Garza.

by cmathewson on Mar 29, 2007 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Plouffe

Plouffe was the Twins own first round draft choice. Waldrop was a compensation pick first rounder that year. Korecky came from the Phillies in the Milton trade, not in the Stewart deal. And I think you have Thompson and Duensing switched, but I am not sure.

by TT on Mar 29, 2007 8:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You may be right.

I thought the Twins record was better than the Cubs or Mariners in 03.

Free Matt Garza.

by cmathewson on Mar 30, 2007 1:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Corrections

In 2003, the Cubs finished with 88 wins, the Twins with 90 and the Mariners with 93. So the would put the 2004 draft order as the Cubs at number 20, the Twins at 24 and the Mariners at 26 in the draft.

According to the Twins Draft site, they picked Plouffe with number 20, Perkins with number 24 and Waldrop with number 26. So the got Plouffe for Hawkins, Perkins was the Twins own pick and they got Waldrop for Guardado.

You are right about Korecky.

The Twins had three second-round picks in 2005. The first one came from the Nationals as compensation for Guzman. With that, they drafted Thompson. The second came from Torono as compensation for Koskie. With that they drafted Slowey.

They also had two third-round picks. The first came as compensation from the Cubs for Blanco. With that they drafted Duensing.

Free Matt Garza.

by cmathewson on Mar 30, 2007 10:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Draft Order

That wasn't the way it worked. The Twins had the 20th round pick that year. Teams alternated by league with the AL always ending up with the 29th and 30th picks. So it didn't matter what the relative number of wins the Cubs and Twins had.

by TT on Mar 30, 2007 10:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

2005

Baseball America 2004 Draft Order

You will notice the Twins got a third round choice (Duensing) from the Nationals for Guzman. They got Thompson as a supplemental second round choice for Blanco.

Baseball America 2005 Draft Order

Perkins(22) came for Guardado and Waldrop(25) for Hawkins. They also got Fox for Guardado and Rainville for Hawkins as supplementary first round picks.

by TT on Mar 30, 2007 10:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Another correction.

The Twins got Kelly in the second round for Koskie, not Slowey. Slowey was the Twins own pick.

by TT on Mar 30, 2007 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Another joy......

Thw Twins have been pretty good getting fringe prospects for fringe vets.

It's nice to see a player in a system for a season or two, and then get them for little or nothing.

Often we forget that major league rosters are full of just good solid players for a year or two. You can't fill a roster with 25 stars/starters...need significant defense guys, speed, pinh-hitters and just solid guys who paid their dues.

Take Rabe for example. Or Dustin Mohr. Or Mike Ryan. They fulfill a need. May never shine (or get the opportunity).

Let otehr teams pay the bonus dollars and them swoop in and grab the prospect/s later.

Just hope the Twins don't get the tables turned on them in the next couple of seasons.

www.Twinscards.com -- check out ROSTERS

by twintown on Mar 29, 2007 5:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

trends

The trends of the bigger teamns building from within is quite fearful to me. Basically because smarts + cheep talent + $$$ = unbeatable for a small market team.

I'm guessing though that the big budget teams that are trying to build from within now will start the cycle over again once the lose. They'll just start signing more and more free agents, just like they all did (read, Yankees) a few years ago when their own guys didn't win once.

But it COULD mean a couple rough years for the little guys.

Baseball is great because you cant take a knee or kill the clock. You gotta put the ball over the plate and give the other guy his damn shot E Weaver abridged

by AdamOnFirst on Mar 30, 2007 3:44 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Fans

Deadline deals do not happen in hermetically sealed containers. I'm surprised Bowden did not make the Soriano deal because he built it up as a chance to land some prime prospects that could help soon. Instead he got draft picks that are years away from contributing. Nationals fans are not pleased.

by wcooley on Mar 30, 2007 1:32 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs