Michael Pineda traded for Jesus Montero; Yankees sign Kuroda

[TheCrew07]

Isn't that the same reasoning many fans used to resign Fielder, the good ole "attendance will go down" argument? I still firmly believe that good baseball puts fans in the seats, obviously good players help, but winning teams fill the stands.

 

I was happy for Z when he got a chance to be a GM, but he seems to be pretty much a Melvin clone, looking to build around veterans. I'm not sure he has enough payroll to make it work. I thought he'd be a guy who built around young players given what a good scouting director he was, though I guess he was never very good with pitching.

[brettac1]

I definitely agree that winning puts butts in the seats, not players. We all cheer for laundry to begin with.

[TooLiveBrew]

We don't know if the Mariners preferred to trade Hernandez over Pineda, but it's entirely possible that the Yankees wanted Pineda because Felix's contract is so big. And yes, I know I'm talking about the Yankees here.

[StearnsFTW]

I wouldn't downgrade from Felix to Pineda just to get Banuelos or Betances. Wouldn't even consider it. Contracts notwithstanding.

 

Hernandez is one of the 3 best pitchers in baseball. Even if Pineda becomes a #2 type guy, that's a big downgrade.

[EdgarDiazRocks]

I definitely agree that winning puts butts in the seats, not players. We all cheer for laundry to begin with.

I really think that this is in degrees. Cubs, Cards and Dodgers don't need to win to have attendance. A's can win the division and not sell out playoff games. It's really a team by team thing.

And here, if they traded THIS guy (while he's still good mind you)? There would be riots in the streets.

http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/y0nSYwHAkAclKvhZKYo.iw--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en/blogs/sptusfantasyexperts/mlb_hernandez_blog_big_011312.jpg

http://media.komonews.com/images/110827_Larry_Bernandez_g_3.jpg

With the Mariners they have REALLY built a personality driven fan base (that ALSO likes winning) so that having Junior, Edgar, Buhner, Randy Johnson, Lou Piniella and Ichiro (and on the flip side, Carl Everett, Milton Bradley and Scott Spezio) has really affected how they go about business.

[HiAndTight]

Funny how much it makes you think of the Garza-Young swap, since that was a hot topic of discussion on the ML forum not too long ago.

 

And I agree, more trades like this would be really fun to see.

So does this make Hughes expendable while his value is down

I'd have to guess Brian Cashman has already been contacted about Hughes. Because, yes, I don't see where he fits with the Yankees at this point. I should say that I don't know if he has any option years remaining; Cot's lists him with 4.113 years of total MLB service time.

I see Hughes going back into their bullpen and giving them an incredibly dominant pen to go with their starting staff.

 

As for the trade, I think history will look back on this one in favor of the M's big-BIG time. I think Montero's a superstar offensively, a #1 type prospect in most years(referring to the lat two) if not for guys like Harper, Trout and Strausburg.

 

I like Pineda, but I think he overperformed, and while it's certainly to be expected, did struggle down the stretch. I don't see him as being a #1 type pitcher. I think he's going to eventually struggle with command and be a bit up and down.

 

 

I'd have liked to have taken a swing at Hughes a couple months ago, but now he's a luxury a team that's already looking at 104-105 in terms of payroll if they bring up the usual # of players and add ANYTHING mid-season for a couple million. But Hughes shouldn't be left for dead. He strikes me as the type who could thrive in the NL for a team that still has some money. Washington might be a perfect landing spot for him. What do they have to lose? Make him their #4/5?

[HiAndTight]

That's weird since Felix only played in 14 of their 81 home games last year. They did average 1,973 more fans in games that he pitched but that doesn't seem like a big enough difference to keep him just because he "draws fans."

I can't believe anyone who take the time to break that down, and still miss the point that there are a lot of ways for a player to be a draw to a team than simply ticket sales. Merchandising, TV, etc..etc...

 

 

It's amazing how many people are on here saying definitively this cost Jack Z about his job. Amazing how often people forget about the long list of young pitchers who become a fraction of what they were expected to be as a result of arm injuries.

 

The M's have a very nice looking pitching staff, they've got money, and they've got one of the games true and most durable aces.

[sveumrules]

With reports today that Jack Z approached Toronto about Lawrie before going after Montero it would only seem to increase the likelihood that we could have gotten Pineda instead of Marcum for Lawrie last offseason. Would be really curious to know how much, if at all, Doug explored that avenue.

[RightFieldCoder]

I don't know if he could have said he was "going for it this year" by trading for a guy that had never seen the majors before. I'm also not sure if that signing would have been enough to convince ZG to waive his no trade clause.

[Warning Track Power]

Hindsight will always be 20-20 but I don't think we make the playoffs in 2011 without the Shaun Marcum-Brett Lawrie deal. Plus there is a very good chance the Brewers compete for the playoffs again in 2012. You open the playoff window every time when it's there to open, just like when we dealt LaPorta and Brantley for a half season of CC in 2008.

 

While Lawrie could turn into Mike Schmidt at 3B, I won't lose one wink of sleep thinking of what could have been if we hadn't dealt him for Marcum. Nor will I worry that this offseason we could have had Pineda for him, because a divison championship, NLDS victory and NLCS appearance in 2011 likely doesn't happen without Marcum.

[nate82]

With reports today that Jack Z approached Toronto about Lawrie before going after Montero it would only seem to increase the likelihood that we could have gotten Pineda instead of Marcum for Lawrie last offseason. Would be really curious to know how much, if at all, Doug explored that avenue.

I doubt that Lawrie would have gotten Pineda last off season. Maybe this off season you could have made that case but with Fielder leaving and there would be a vacancy at 3B I don't see how Melvin would have traded Lawrie for Pineda. Maybe if he had a deal in place with Ramirez. I also believe the Brewers do not make the playoffs without Marcum and Greinke.

[TooLiveBrew]

NLC title was absolutely owed in large part to Marcum, but no success in the postseason was. Kinda funny that one knock on Pineda in this thread is that he ran out of gas towards the end of the season... sounds familiar, right?

 

I like that you (WTP) focused on hindsight being 20-20, though. I'll lead here by saying it certainly applies to both sides of this coin, but I'd still rather have seen the Brewers either keep Lawrie or move him for a young & cost-controlled player like Pineda. I wouldn't have cared whether or not they went 'all-in', because it would have been good long-term planning & moving towards a longer window of contention instead of panicking because Fielder was leaving.

 

Am I happy with the 2011 Brewers' run? You bet! But it doesn't mean the the Brewers made the best decision. I just can't bring myself to believe that either Jack Z never asked Melvin about Lawrie, or that Pineda somehow wouldn't have been available for him prior to 2011. But this is a longstanding complaint with Melvin, he seemingly has zero faith in prospects (especially pitchers) translating their success when the MLB team is trying to contend. Even though every year there are guys like Pineda, or Jamie Garcia, or whoever, that break through & help their teams right away. For as good as he is at identifying veterans or non-young players who should be expected to produce well (from a Marcum to a Morgan or a Narveson), I scratch my head about how bear-ish he is on young players as a general policy. Fortunately for his job security, the Brewers' fans have stepped up in a huge way to completely bankroll the expensive add-with-veterans approach. It's just not good long-term planning.

 

And, ironically, I'm rambling on about the Brewers not making the best or most cost-effective solutions in a thread about the Yankees, of all teams, trading for a young, projectable, & cost-controlled player.

[RockCoCougars]

The thing about Lawrie is that he padded his value big time last year. Due to his ties with the organization, Zdurincik may have put a premium on Lawrie last winter, but who knows. Would I prefer Pineda to Marcum at this point? Sure, due to the fact that he's locked in for years, but there are legit questions with both due to how they pitched down the stretch last season. Both seemed to hit a wall physically. Both are probably not as good as they were in the first half, but no where near as bad as they were at the end of the season.

[Warning Track Power]

NLC title was absolutely owed in large part to Marcum, but no success in the postseason was. Kinda funny that one knock on Pineda in this thread is that he ran out of gas towards the end of the season... sounds familiar, right?

 

I like that you (WTP) focused on hindsight being 20-20, though. I'll lead here by saying it certainly applies to both sides of this coin, but I'd still rather have seen the Brewers either keep Lawrie or move him for a young & cost-controlled player like Pineda. I wouldn't have cared whether or not they went 'all-in', because it would have been good long-term planning & moving towards a longer window of contention instead of panicking because Fielder was leaving.

 

Am I happy with the 2011 Brewers' run? You bet! But it doesn't mean the the Brewers made the best decision. I just can't bring myself to believe that either Jack Z never asked Melvin about Lawrie, or that Pineda somehow wouldn't have been available for him prior to 2011. But this is a longstanding complaint with Melvin, he seemingly has zero faith in prospects (especially pitchers) translating their success when the MLB team is trying to contend. Even though every year there are guys like Pineda, or Jamie Garcia, or whoever, that break through & help their teams right away. For as good as he is at identifying veterans or non-young players who should be expected to produce well (from a Marcum to a Morgan or a Narveson), I scratch my head about how bear-ish he is on young players as a general policy. Fortunately for his job security, the Brewers' fans have stepped up in a huge way to completely bankroll the expensive add-with-veterans approach. It's just not good long-term planning.

 

And, ironically, I'm rambling on about the Brewers not making the best or most cost-effective solutions in a thread about the Yankees, of all teams, trading for a young, projectable, & cost-controlled player.

100% agree with you TLB. Until there is a salary cap, I don't believe the Brewers can operate in trading the Lawries of the world for the Marcums of the world. Like you mentioned, last year was a special circumstance with it being Prince's last season. Long term, that deal will likely be looked at as having been won by Toronto. Pineda is obviously a better long term option than Marcum and should have been targeted had he been available prior to 2011. However, I tend to believe that (maybe because it is more convenient to my argument) Pineda was not available prior to 2011 and if he had been it would have cost the Brewers more than a Lawrie.

[fondybrewfan]

Lawrie 2011 Offseason >>>>>>>>>> Lawrie 2010 Offseason

 

Lawrie dramatically increased his value this past year; Melvin would have gotten laughed at if he asked for someone like Pineda during the 2010 offseason. Yeah maybe if we would have held onto Lawrie we could have just traded for Pineda; but no one really knows the answer to that and no one knows how much differently our 2011 team would have looked if we kept Lawrie. Hell we probably would have traded him for Grienke anyways.

[sveumrules]

Pineda incresed his value just as much over the course of the 2011 season as Lawrie did, though. Both had questions coming into the season which they both answered and then some.

 

As for not making the playoffs with Pineda versus Marcum, their production was pretty close to identical. Pineda had slightly less innings but was slightly more effective in the innings he threw. And as TooLive pointed out, they both tired towards the end of the season so that's a wash.

 

My preference all along would have been to (one) not trade Lawrie since he was the last impact bat we had on the farm, (two) trade him for a pitcher with comparable talent/service time, (three) what happened. Don't get me wrong, last year was a blast all the way around but I think it could have all still happened with Pineda in place of Marcum and we'd be better off for the future.

[HiAndTight]

NLC title was absolutely owed in large part to Marcum, but no success in the postseason was. Kinda funny that one knock on Pineda in this thread is that he ran out of gas towards the end of the season... sounds familiar, right?

 

I like that you (WTP) focused on hindsight being 20-20, though. I'll lead here by saying it certainly applies to both sides of this coin, but I'd still rather have seen the Brewers either keep Lawrie or move him for a young & cost-controlled player like Pineda. I wouldn't have cared whether or not they went 'all-in', because it would have been good long-term planning & moving towards a longer window of contention instead of panicking because Fielder was leaving.

 

Am I happy with the 2011 Brewers' run? You bet! But it doesn't mean the the Brewers made the best decision. I just can't bring myself to believe that either Jack Z never asked Melvin about Lawrie, or that Pineda somehow wouldn't have been available for him prior to 2011. But this is a longstanding complaint with Melvin, he seemingly has zero faith in prospects (especially pitchers) translating their success when the MLB team is trying to contend. Even though every year there are guys like Pineda, or Jamie Garcia, or whoever, that break through & help their teams right away. For as good as he is at identifying veterans or non-young players who should be expected to produce well (from a Marcum to a Morgan or a Narveson), I scratch my head about how bear-ish he is on young players as a general policy. Fortunately for his job security, the Brewers' fans have stepped up in a huge way to completely bankroll the expensive add-with-veterans approach. It's just not good long-term planning.

 

And, ironically, I'm rambling on about the Brewers not making the best or most cost-effective solutions in a thread about the Yankees, of all teams, trading for a young, projectable, & cost-controlled player.

 

I absolutely despised the Lawrie trade, and that was before he made a mockery of AAA pitching at 21 and big league pitching as well, though in a much smaller sample size, all while showing that his awful defense was greatly exaggerated. I'd always been a proponent of him playing 3rd given his body type, strong arm, and quickness which is good, but lacking for a 2nd basemen.

 

Right now we could have him playing 3rd base, saved 36 on Aram and go after Oswalt or Edwin Jackson. Jackson in particular. I just wouldn't have traded someone I believe can be as valuable a player as Ryan Braun in the near future(with his defense included, I don't believe he hits quite like Braun, though not that much worse).

 

I hated that trade about a year before it happened when it was suggested it, when it actually happened, and I think it looks even worse now.

 

 

But, I also loved the 2011 season and Marcum was good. But 2 years of good doesn't equal 6 years of potentially great, and perhaps more if we locked him up like we did Braun/Yo.

[Ennder]

Marcum was a pretty important part of the roster last year for sure and if he hadn't messed his pants in the post season he could have easily been the reason we went to the World Series, he gave us the depth in the rotation to have a chance and Pineda wouldn't have done that. I didn't have a big problem with the trade largely because I didn't think Lawrie would stick at 3B, if he ends up being an ok defensive 3B then my valuation was completely off and he is more valuable than I expected.

[sveumrules]

he gave us the depth in the rotation to have a chance and Pineda wouldn't have done that.

The two provided essentially equal value last year. fWAR had Pineda 0.7 higher and bWAR had Marcum 0.5 higher.

[Ennder]

he gave us the depth in the rotation to have a chance and Pineda wouldn't have done that.

The two provided essentially equal value last year. fWAR had Pineda 0.7 higher and bWAR had Marcum 0.5 higher.

Pineda just does not have the innings built up on his arm to be expected to pitch deep into the playoffs after a full season in the majors. Most likely we would have either wrecked his arm or have to go into the bullpen for part of the year and hope that he adjusts to it ok to get him into the rotation for the playoffs.