CC Sabathia

[brewswinga2]

From Rotoworld: "The Cleveland Plain Dealer speculates that Johan Santana signing a massive long-term contract with the Mets could make it less likely that C.C. Sabathia will remain with the Indians beyond this season."

 

My question is if the Indians fall out of contention by the trade deadline and are looking to deal Sabathia, what would you be willing to offer to get Sabathia for a half a year. Would a package of Gamel, Jeffress, Rogers and a couple other prospects get it done? I think that if the Brewers are still in the race and Sabathia is on the block they would absolutely have to go for him with any prospects necessary outside of LaPorta . If Sheets were still healthy at that point (big if) we would have the best rotation in the NL hands down.

 

Sabathia

Sheets

Gallardo

Suppan

Villanueva

[KCBrewerfan34]

If it's at the deadline the price will be far less because it would be highly unlikely Sabathia would sign a FA contract that close to being a FA.

[RU Rah Rah]

I think that if the Brewers are still in the race and Sabathia is on the block they would absolutely have to go for him with any prospects necessary outside of LaPorta .

How many prospects, and how good? I wouldn't want to pillage the farm system for a half-season rental.

 

[Big Reed]

I think a thing to remember is that the brewers have all those high level draft picks to replace any we trade away. And if we did make a trade for Sabathia or any other quality pitcher, we will have another 4 high draft picks next year as both Sabathia 0r whomever and Sheets both file for free agency. the 7 that we draft this yea r could probably be better tha n wha t we give away as could the 4 next year.

 

This is really how the rich stay rich and how oakland stay so good for so long. forget the moneyball book. The key to success is to trade for a quality rental player and then allow him to walk at the end of the year to acquire additional draft picks. if you look at the Braves, you will notice they have had their fair share of additional supplemental first round picks. Saltimachia was one of those supplemental first round picks. I have to believe once brewer fans see who the brewers pick with the picks they received for losing Linebrink to free agency, they will be pleasantly pleased with that trade and may look forward to the brewers making more trades for rental players.

 

I highly doubt that cleveland will allow CC Sabathia to leave or would trade him away. but i'm quite sure there will be several other quality pitchers available both Garland and Vazquez were available last year.

[sbrylski]

It took Inman, Thatcher, and Garrison to get Scott Linebrink last deadline. We are going to have to pay more on the top end than a B 1B prospect and a suspended low A-ball SPer.

[MoneyballMan]

It took Inman, Thatcher, and Garrison to get Scott Linebrink last deadline. We are going to have to pay more on the top end than a B 1B prospect and a suspended low A-ball SPer.

Agree completely. If people seriously believe we're going to get Sabathia at the trade deadline, they better come to grips that we're going to have to give up some pretty good players to get him. Not going to happen.

[Oldcity]

Not to nitpick, but the odds of Cleveland being out of the running by the deadline are extremely low. Much lower than the odds of the Brewers being out of it.

[Invader3K]

Yeah, I mean, they were in the ALCS last year. I doubt they're looking to dump their best pitcher.

[DrWood]

It took Inman, Thatcher, and Garrison to get Scott Linebrink last deadline. We are going to have to pay more on the top end than a B 1B prospect and a suspended low A-ball SPer.

 

"gamel, jeffress, rogers, and a couple other prospects" is a pretty big haul, Particularly if Rogers comes back and shows any promise at all.

[brewswinga2]

Agree completely. If people seriously believe we're going to get Sabathia at the trade deadline, they better come to grips that we're going to have to give up some pretty good players to get him. Not going to happen.

My original statement was IF the Indians are out of the running, I never said it was likely, but for a half year rental I highly doubt that anyone would offer a package better than that. Look at what the Mets just traded to get Santana and tell me that a package of Gamel, Jeffress, and Rogers wouldnt be more appealing. The only advantage that those Mets prospects have over our package is that they are closer to the Majors. We would be selling the farm, but again we can restock in this years draft and then we would get even more picks when we lost Sabathia and Sheets (especially if Sheets can stay healthy and get himself an A ranking). All of this is unlikely but I'm merely throwing it out there as a hypothetical question.

[sbrylski]

Look at what the Mets just traded to get Santana and tell me that a package of Gamel, Jeffress, and Rogers wouldnt be more appealing.

 

It wouldn't be more appealing.

[brewswinga2]

It wouldn't be more appealing.

I'm not saying that the Twins would take a package of Gamel, Jeffress, and Rogers and someone like Brantley over what they got back, but keep in mind its for a lesser valued pitcher and its a deadline deal for a pitcher that they aren't going to re-sign so they have less leverage.

[sbrylski]

It wouldn't be more appealing.

I'm not saying that the Twins would take a package of Gamel, Jeffress, and Rogers and someone like Brantley over what they got back, but keep in mind its for a lesser valued pitcher and its a deadline deal for a pitcher that they aren't going to re-sign so they have less leverage.

Rogers is worthless. Jeffress has huge red flags, little track record, and years away from the bigs. Gamel has a decent bat, but has not shown that he knows what a glove is and almost surely would be moved to 1B. As a 1B prospect, he's just another guy.

 

I just don't think that package has trade value.

 

[DrWood]

wow, you don't value our guys much. Jeffress and Rogers have much higher ceiling than the pitchers the twins are getting. While Gamel might not have a position, Gomez doesn't have a bat yet and doesn't project to ever hit for much power.

[hauser42]

wow, you don't value our guys much. Jeffress and Rogers have much higher ceiling than the pitchers the twins are getting. While Gamel might not have a position, Gomez doesn't have a bat yet and doesn't project to ever hit for much power.

 

Rodgers has to prove he can stay healthy and put up numbers before he gets back to a top end prospect. Jeffress has some huge off the field issues that have to be corrected. Just because Gomez doesn't have a lot of power doesn't mean he will not be a good player.

 

I dont think the package would get C.C. anyways, and not sure Brewers would be looking to get him.

[Gopher74]

It took Inman, Thatcher, and Garrison to get Scott Linebrink last deadline. We are going to have to pay more on the top end than a B 1B prospect and a suspended low A-ball SPer.

Well I guess it's good that nobody suggested we'd get CC for a B 1B prospect and a low A-ball suspended SP'er.

Since the only trade that was suggested was Gamel, Jeffress, Rogers PLUS a couple other prospects, I guess I'm not certain what you think is the "B" 1B prospect. Not to mention that Jeffress obviously wouldn't be suspended by the time we'd trade him.

 

And who are Inman, Thatcher and Garrison? A SP'er who struggle in AA with average stuff, a loogy and a throw in in Garrison. At least at the time.

 

I guess I don't get the point of trying to intentionally make this trade look worse by skewing the reality of it.

Gamel's not a 1B prospect, regardless of what you think he may become, Jeffress is a Low A prospect, but he's also a guy with great talent and a top 100 prospect despite being suspended, Rogers has half a season to show he's healthy, and he was a top 40 prospect, and he said other prospects, so in fact your post doesn't really represent anything even CLOSE to what was actually suggested.

[sbrylski]

I guess I don't get the point of trying to intentionally make this trade look worse by skewing the reality of it.

Gamel's not a 1B prospect, regardless of what you think he may become, Jeffress is a Low A prospect, but he's also a guy with great talent and a top 100 prospect despite being suspended, Rogers has half a season to show he's healthy, and he was a top 40 prospect, and he said other prospects, so in fact your post doesn't really represent anything even CLOSE to what was actually suggested.

 

Gamel's either a bad fielding 3B prospect, which doesn't help his value, or he moves to 1B, which doesn't help his value.

 

Not sure how anyone can have any confidence in Mark Rogers anymore. Two or three months of health is not going to erase the previous years of surguries and restore him to prospect status. If he was in a different organization, would you want him?

 

I'm not saying he's quite got Jeffress's potential, but Garrison had the same low A results at the same age. Factor in the potential, subtract for multiple substance abuse infractions and a suspension, I don't think you're talking too much more trade value than what Garrison might of had. Low A-ball prospects in general do not have much trade value.

 

"Plus other prospects" means fodder.

 

To win a guy like Sabathia off the trade block, its going to take someone better than Gamel, plus Gamel. Then possibly "plus other prospects". Show me some examples of similar trades and prove me wrong.

[brewswinga2]

Randy Johnson for John Halama, Freddy Garcia, and Carlos Guillen. All three were prospects and none of them made the BA top 100 list (granted Garcia and Guillen went on to good careers, but they weren't top prospects at the time.) It's not that common but it has happened.

[Gopher74]

Gamel's either a bad fielding 3B prospect, which doesn't help his value, or he moves to 1B, which doesn't help his value.

Well and again, whatever you may think he'll end up as, calling him a 1B prospect simply isn't true. My point wasn't so much with his value, but your misrepresentation of him.

Not to mention that his biggest problem is footwork, definitely fixable, or that he could well end up in LF/RF. Either way, he's a very good looking left handed prospect.

 

Not sure how anyone can have any confidence in Mark Rogers anymore. Two or three months of health is not going to erase the previous years of surguries and restore him to prospect status. If he was in a different organization, would you want him?

 

Again, your confidence in him aside, to discard him and say that he's got zero value, even assuming a healthy first half is a little ridiculous IMO. He's most definitely still a prospect. One injury and you discount a 21 year old kid who can be dominant? Drastically overstating the case IMO.

 

He's got a long way to go, but to say he's not even a prospect any longer?

 

"Plus other prospects" means fodder.

 

No, it means other prospects. This is exactly my point. You're coming up you're own definitions and skewing the initial suggestion in order to chastise the initial trade.

 

Factor in the potential, subtract for multiple substance abuse infractions and a suspension, I don't think you're talking too much more trade value than what Garrison might of had.

 

We'll have to agree to disagree. I'm quite certain Jeffress has FAR more value.

 

To win a guy like Sabathia off the trade block, its going to take someone better than Gamel, plus Gamel. Then possibly "plus other prospects". Show me some examples of similar trades and prove me wrong.

 

Well, I believe the last poster did, but I never said it was. I said you mis-represented the suggested trade significantly.

Gamel+Jeffress+Rogers+Other Prospects turned into a "B" 1B prospect and a suspended Low A pitcher which really serves little point when trying to discuss the idea. In fact I thought it was a bit snide and sarcastic.

[danzig6767]

Whenever most people bring up Rogers and what limits his value or prospect status, almost always it's injuries being the red flag. For me, the health factor would obviously be be a big concern, but i'd also be pretty as concerned by how he has pitched. Granted Mark was a high school kid and in three years only has 200 innings under his belt to evaluate, but the only thing at all impressive is the 235 strikeouts. On the other hand, Rogers served up a terrible 139 walks and for a guy who throws so hard, 190 hits allowed over those 200 innings isn't anything to get excited about.

 

Mix both the health and performance concerns together and the deck looks pretty stacked against Rogers becoming anywhere near what the team hoped for they they drafted him.

[DrWood]

Stuff trumps production for low-minor pitchers, and several folks seem to be forgetting that Rogers had as good stuff as anyone in the minors in 2006. gees, you guys would have thrown out Nolan Ryan with the bathwater.

I've never been that high on Rogers, but his high ceiling makes him very valuable.

[twobrewers]

Rogers' value is is pretty low. He has barely been healthy. And he has had significant control problems. Yes, stuff does trump production in the minors. But he it isn't just his lack of control - it is also that he is hurt. You combine those two...

 

Jeffress is overrated by this board. He throws hard. He has no real secondary pitch at this point. And has been busted twice(!) for smoking dope.

 

Look what the Mets got for Milledge. While not on the same level, Jeffress definately has some character issues that drive down his value. (And Milledge was/is significantly better than Jeffress)

 

Gamel is great.

 

Onto the original topic...the Indians will be close enough to make a run at the playoffs. So this is completely moot. However, your offer would have to be significantly better than two 1st round draft picks to get Sabithia.

[sbrylski]

Gamel+Jeffress+Rogers+Other Prospects turned into a "B" 1B prospect and a suspended Low A pitcher which really serves little point when trying to discuss the idea. In fact I thought it was a bit snide and sarcastic.

 

I apologize for being a little "short," but I stand by my comments. I think its a fairly blatant overvaluing of our guys.

 

In regards to misrepresenting the trade...

Gamel hasn't really improved his fielding in 3 seasons, and its pretty autrocious. We may not move him yet, but other teams aren't going to see a 3B prospect, I don't think. At 1B, I would estimate there's about 4-6 prospects ahead of him, hence the "B" status.

"Other prospects" almost always means guys lower than the lowest guy listed. So lower than Rogers or Brantley is not going to sway them without a top end guy in the deal.

 

And like TwoBrewers said, Jeffress is overrated on this board. He's a prep pitcher who throw's hard. In terms of trade value, I would say he's the prospect you add to the end of a deal to balance it out right now - low A ballers just don't have too much value. Or he's at least closer to that than being a key piece in getting a Cy Young candidate.

 

Hey, its just my opinion. I'm usually the optimist, but I've learned to tone down my trade value projections.

[danzig6767]

Stuff trumps production for low-minor pitchers, and several folks seem to be forgetting that Rogers had as good stuff as anyone in the minors in 2006. gees, you guys would have thrown out Nolan Ryan with the bathwater.

I've never been that high on Rogers, but his high ceiling makes him very valuable.

You act like some us want to waive Rogers. All we are saying is pro baseball history is littered with pitchers who threw very hard, but had serious control and command issues that never allowed for those pitchers to either make the big leagues or if they made the big show, to be very effective while up in the bigs, like our own Seth McClung. Mix in his injuries and right now Rogers wouldn't fetch much at all if we tried to trade him.

That's why it would make little sense for the Brewers to include Rogers in any trade that they might try to make. If i'm the GM for another team, a young pitcher that only has one attribute, the ability to throw hard, but has massive control/command issues along with major health risks, i'd never consider Rogers as any sort of center piece in a trade for one of my players.

 

The only way i'd consider Rogers as a big piece in a trade offer would be if he can show much much better command and that he can be healthy, but by that point, then the Brewers would be much less inclined to trade him. Rogers value is so low right now that IMO the only thing that makes sense for the Brewers would be to keep him and hope both his command/health improve.

[Oldcity]

You act like some us want to waive Rogers.

Well one post did call him "worthless." If he's worthless wouldn't that mean you'd waive him?