Early 22 GM Thread! (Trade Ideas here)

[CDAV45]

I know what you are feeling with that last part.

I value Palacios a lot as a prospect, but I value prospects generally lower than most do...simply because they fail more often than fans will admit to.

My point was that Palacios is a kid that many fans don't want to trade, even for a significant immediate upgrade, but at the same time those same fans think that Yepez can be had for a song.

Yepez has a much better chance to be an impact player this year than Palacios.

***********

You can't on one hand suggest that we should trade Plesac for hitting, because we have Morgan to immediately take his place, and then on the other hand deny it.

*****

I have no interest in merely making the offense better. I am interested in making the TEAM better, and trading a quality SP for offense doesn't do that. Its just robbing Peter to pay Paul. If you want to make this team better, trade some of the excess prospect capital to make the offense better.

The drop in production from Plesac to Morgan is so great that we would have to get a player like Reynolds for such a trade to improve the team. By mid season, we may have a SP prospect good enough to do such a thing...but not before then...

Unless...

The FO views Allen as a legit SP.

Because, if Plesac is traded now, Allen...not Morgan....will get first shot. The FO didn't keep Allen, just to cut him in March.

*********

Lord knows how Arrietta and Harvey got into this conversation, but they were both very effective pitchers at one time. Arrieta was pitching out a multi year contract. SD picked him up for nothing on a flyer, because their rotation was decimated in the middle of the stretch run. Harvey was paid $1 mil to eat innings and provide veteran presence for a bottom feeder.

If SD or Baltimore thought Morgan would have been better for their respective situations, they could have called our FO and made a decent offer.

******

I've spent a lot of time...others have, too....looking at various trade scenarios. Many of the others are seemingly interested in stockpiling more prospects by trading away or better players and much of our pitching staff, including the pen.

I obviously have no such focus...lol. For me, prospects equal money, not wins.

I have found only two reasonable scenarios in which trading Plesac as part of a package would make us a better team. Both involve receiving a vet SP in return, to go along with a multi year offensive upgrade.

*******

My view is that we tend to way over value our prospects, prospects in general, and our fringe players...while we seriously under value the good players/pitchers we already have.

******

The trick for the FO is to find the players undervalued by other teams, the spare parts....not necessarily high end prospects. The ones that can produce now.

The Casey Blakes. The Choos. The Asdrubals. The Scrabbles. The Gomeses. The Pronks. They dont necessarily have to be stars...just good, solid, dependable everyday players.

And stick them behind a very good rotation.

The org has been very good at finding them. All of those above were buried in their original orgs. All of them were picked up for almost nothing of value.

While its fun to speculate on the big names on our various shopping lists, it will probably be the lesser deals that make or break this season.

Because of the roster crunch, which still exists...at least half the roster with little or no MLB experience...there is likely a three/four for one deal coming. But watch for the smaller deals....involving a name like Yepez or Ward.

And root for StL to sign Schwarber, which would mean that Yepez becomes totally expendable.

Cleveland doesn't build a core to win a division title let alone compete for a WS unless they either draft them or trade for them. Once that core is established then they spend money on FA. So to me, prospects do not solely equal money. They are the life blood of this organization and are exactly what has kept us competitive over the last several years. Now, in no way, shape or form am I suggesting we trade all of our good, established players for more prospects. At some point the kids that "cut the mustard" need to perform and be supported where needed. We have kids that are going to "cut the mustard" even if we don't know exactly which ones yet. We have a surplus of MIF and very good lower level prospects that can be used to trade. We have 5 prospects in most top 100 lists and I'm not totally convinced that's even our best 5. I also understand that about 70% of top 100 prospects have decent or better MLB careers. Factoring in organizational filler does not contribute accurate dialogue when discussing the likelihood of prospects "making it". Our core is already in the organization, it just needs to be exposed.

I support a 4 for 1 deal, but they also may just cut ties with Zimmer, Mercado, Chang, Clement or any other marginal player. Reality suggests that both will probably happen. Naylor will be placed back on the IL so there's another spot. I fully expect Rosario to be dealt. I don't know that I like it right now, but I think it will happen due to the MIF depth and teams missing out on one of the FA SS. He has some value and the Guardians have depth. I'm willing to deal Plesac not because we solely have Morgan. I listed 5 guys that could easily step in at any point. As good as this organization is at finding and developing SP, I'll take the chance that 1 out of 5 performs better than most expect. It seems to happen every damn year in Cleveland.

I still believe that CA and MC have positioned themselves to be players for at least 1 FA. Trading Rosario would free up another $5M as well. I can see either Schwarber or Rizzo being presented fair contracts to come to Cleveland, but we'll see.

I brought Arrietta and Harvey into the conversation because they are terrible and they still end up pitching on an MLB team. I believe that Morgan is better than either of those 2 at this point in time which suggests that he could be useful in different capacities for many MLB teams including the Guardians. No, he's not going to bring back anything but a low level lottery ticket at best if he were traded individually. Does packaging him with Amed and another prospect change the outcome? I believe it would.

 

[Gson]

Cleveland.... I'm willing to deal Plesac not because we solely have Morgan .... Cleveland.

Exactly.. the other guys mentioned are all possible replacements..

The return from an expanded Plesac deal could include Plesac's replacement .. etc..

..and if in the opinion of MC/CA/Tito these "returns" or these" in system minor leaguers" are ML ready.. THEY CAN PLAY !!...

 

[CATS44]

70% of upper level prospects do NOT become productive MLB players, not the other way around.

Our fringe players...the Zimmers and Changs...won't bring back return, but if you cut them all, you have a lineup full of rookies....and you can't win with a lineup full of rookies.

Trading lesser prospects is far less likely to buy us major long term upgrades.

It is doubtful that Amed will be traded, because he is a good, young veteran which any true rookie is unlikely to equal in production.

How many true position rookies have we had lately that were worth 2.7 fWAR in their first look at MLB?

One.

And yet, some fans insist that Amed is easily replaceable.

***********

The White Sox may now have the most barren farm system in baseball...but most of their position roster is set for at least three years. The fact that their farm system is poor won't mean diddly squat, if we don't make a series of major moves. In three years they can rebuild the system, and it would take three years for all our better prospects to get up to speed.

We could trade half our top ten prospects for two additional long term upgrades that would make us just as good as the White Sox for the next three years on the position side, have a deeper pitching staff...and still have a much better farm system than Chicago.

 

[sportscoach]

70% of upper level prospects do NOT become productive MLB players, not the other way around.

Our fringe players...the Zimmers and Changs...won't bring back return, but if you cut them all, you have a lineup full of rookies....and you can't win with a lineup full of rookies.

Trading lesser prospects is far less likely to buy us major long term upgrades.

It is doubtful that Amed will be traded, because he is a good, young veteran which any true rookie is unlikely to equal in production.

How many true position rookies have we had lately that were worth 2.7 fWAR in their first look at MLB?

One.

And yet, some fans insist that Amed is easily replaceable.

***********

The White Sox may now have the most barren farm system in baseball...but most of their position roster is set for at least three years. The fact that their farm system is poor won't mean diddly squat, if we don't make a series of major moves. In three years they can rebuild the system, and it would take three years for all our better prospects to get up to speed.

We could trade half our top ten prospects for two additional long term upgrades that would make us just as good as the White Sox for the next three years on the position side, have a deeper pitching staff...and still have a much better farm system than Chicago.

Guardians in my mind will make a trade. I don't think we will have Arias or Rocchio to start the season. I think one will be dealt in a deal for an OF bat to help solidify this roster... that will also allow room to sign/acquire a catcher, veteran reliever as well...

White Soxs actually have a disadvantage long term and that's the age of their starters since they are essentially near regression years while Cleveland are going into their prime years. If we can get close to the White Soxs offensively I think we definitely are going to compete.

Also if Plesac gets moved, I really do think it would be to Toronto... I feel like it's going to be a good fit overall between the two teams...

 

[CATS44]

I did a little research on the production we can expect...or at least should expect...from our upper level prospects. I'm looking at 50FV prospects that have at least seen some AA ball.

At the beginning of 2015...seven years ago...fangraphs listed 61 50FV prospects.

Of the 61, 35 were at least in AA, and debuted either in 2015 or 2016...equivalent to all of our 50Fv prospects, except Espino.

Of those 35, 20 busted. They either never made it to MLB, or produced less than 3 fWAR in the last seven years. (To be fair, I put relievers in a different category, because a decent reliever may not create a bunch of WAR)

Of the 15 left, ten have produced at least 3 fWAR, or been relievers...but none put up a 2 fWAR season in their first three MLB seasons.

Of the other five, two put up one 2 fWAR season within their first three seasons. Three did it twice.

There are two others that put up a freak 2 fWAR season, then busted....in addition to the other 20 busts.

Of the 26 that were not yet at AA, six have busted. Ten are now in MLB. Ten are now old prospects that have yet to make it.

We at the moment have six 50FV prospects that are at least to AA.

Rocchio
Freeman
Valera
Arias
Jones
Naylor

An argument can be made whatever way you want that there may be more or less.

But the odds, going by the results from seven years ago say that...

57% will bust...which means between 3 and 4.

14% will have at least one 2 WAR season within three years of his debut....which means one of the six.

There's a 6% chance that any one of them could have a freak season and then disappear. He would get the Pat Listach award.

So, if you decide you want to become the GM, you had better plan on seeing no more than three of your top MLB ready prospects become productive players, and only one be a productive player in the next three years.

IF your goal is to win the division this year or within the next three years, you simply cannot COUNT on your prospects to carry you.

You can't COUNT on any of your prospects to be more productive this year than Amed, and you certainly shouldn't expect it.

The same goes for Plesac and Civale.

 

[sportscoach]

I did a little research on the production we can expect...or at least should expect...from our upper level prospects. I'm looking at 50FV prospects that have at least seen some AA ball.

At the beginning of 2015...seven years ago...fangraphs listed 61 50FV prospects.

Of the 61, 35 were at least in AA, and debuted either in 2015 or 2016...equivalent to all of our 50Fv prospects, except Espino.

Of those 35, 20 busted. They either never made it to MLB, or produced less than 3 fWAR in the last seven years. (To be fair, I put relievers in a different category, because a decent reliever may not create a bunch of WAR)

Of the 15 left, ten have produced at least 3 fWAR, or been relievers...but none put up a 2 fWAR season in their first three MLB seasons.

Of the other five, two put up one 2 fWAR season within their first three seasons. Three did it twice.

There are two others that put up a freak 2 fWAR season, then busted....in addition to the other 20 busts.

Of the 26 that were not yet at AA, six have busted. Ten are now in MLB. Ten are now old prospects that have yet to make it.

We at the moment have six 50FV prospects that are at least to AA.

Rocchio
Freeman
Valera
Arias
Jones
Naylor

An argument can be made whatever way you want that there may be more or less.

But the odds, going by the results from seven years ago say that...

57% will bust...which means between 3 and 4.

14% will have at least one 2 WAR season within three years of his debut....which means one of the six.

There's a 6% chance that any one of them could have a freak season and then disappear. He would get the Pat Listach award.

So, if you decide you want to become the GM, you had better plan on seeing no more than three of your top MLB ready prospects become productive players, and only one be a productive player in the next three years.

IF your goal is to win the division this year or within the next three years, you simply cannot COUNT on your prospects to carry you.

You can't COUNT on any of your prospects to be more productive this year than Amed, and you certainly shouldn't expect it.

The same goes for Plesac and Civale.

What would be cool is to see that list and what values they gave to their individual skill rating like contact, command etc... I am curious to see if there is a certain rating that actually had a greater success in the bigs. I have a hunch that most of them who actually succeeded had certain skills above a certain grade...

In OOTP I only draft and acquire players who have numbers above certain ratings. Sadly we cannot see that in real life, but people who do rate them, likely may be able to say if someone has a skill rated this way, he has a greater chance of success into the bigs and succeeding...

 

[CATS44]

What would be cool is to see that list and what values they gave to their individual skill rating like contact, command etc... I am curious to see if there is a certain rating that actually had a greater success in the bigs. I have a hunch that most of them who actually succeeded had certain skills above a certain grade...

In OOTP I only draft and acquire players who have numbers above certain ratings. Sadly we cannot see that in real life, but people who do rate them, likely may be able to say if someone has a skill rated this way, he has a greater chance of success into the bigs and succeeding...

Thats a great question.

 

[Gson]

Guardians in my mind will make a trade. I don't think we will have Arias or Rocchio to start the season. I think one will be dealt in a deal for an OF bat to help solidify this roster... that will also allow room to sign/acquire a catcher, veteran reliever as well...

White Soxs actually have a disadvantage long term and that's the age of their starters since they are essentially near regression years while Cleveland are going into their prime years. If we can get close to the White Soxs offensively I think we definitely are going to compete.

Also if Plesac gets moved, I really do think it would be to Toronto... I feel like it's going to be a good fit overall between the two teams...

It's a pretty good wager that the Guardians look for one OF bat and a catcher between the end of the lock out and the first pitch of the 2022 season..

Toronto Blue Jays...
Seattle Mariners....
LA Dodgers...
St Louis Cardinals....

perhaps in this order.. are good candidates for trades..

The CWSox have the advantage of being able to buy out their mistakes.. compete, we will.. but the playing field is uneven..

Plesac only gets moved if the return plus what the CleFO believes is an aggregate better team results.. E.G. Plesac is replaced in the startng rotation with an internal candidate (Morgan/Morris/Other) plus the ML ready return > Plesac and the current roster..

A suggestion was made for Seattle similar to the Rocchio / Arias departure.. It would be a two step deal: The Guardians trade one of the two middle infielders (not both) "one for one" to the A's for Chapman.. Chapman is then flipped to either the Blue Jays or the Mariners for an OF bat plus a couple of secondaries. The primary bats were Teoscar Hernandez and Mitch Haniger, respectively. Each included at least one other "prospect".. For seattle, it was more..

Thoughts?..

 

[sportscoach]

It's a pretty good wager that the Guardians look for one OF bat and a catcher between the end of the lock out and the first pitch of the 2022 season..

Toronto Blue Jays...
Seattle Mariners....
LA Dodgers...
St Louis Cardinals....

perhaps in this order.. are good candidates for trades..

The CWSox have the advantage of being able to buy out their mistakes.. compete, we will.. but the playing field is uneven..

Plesac only gets moved if the return plus what the CleFO believes is an aggregate better team results.. E.G. Plesac is replaced in the startng rotation with an internal candidate (Morgan/Morris/Other) plus the ML ready return > Plesac and the current roster..

A suggestion was made for Seattle similar to the Rocchio / Arias departure.. It would be a two step deal: The Guardians trade one of the two middle infielders (not both) "one for one" to the A's for Chapman.. Chapman is then flipped to either the Blue Jays or the Mariners for an OF bat plus a couple of secondaries. The primary bats were Teoscar Hernandez and Mitch Haniger, respectively. Each included at least one other "prospect".. For seattle, it was more..

Thoughts?..

Well the Guardians have been known for three way trades... The A's, Blue Jays and Guardians make a deal?

I can look later to see what I can think up with those three teams involved. If I am the Blue Jays I am not trading Hernandez btw...

 

[Gson]

Well the Guardians have been known for three way trades... The A's, Blue Jays and Guardians make a deal?

I can look later to see what I can think up with those three teams involved. If I am the Blue Jays I am not trading Hernandez btw...

agreeed... I like Lourdes Gurriel Jr as a corner OF'er in place of Teoscar.. Secondaries would include Smith/Lopez/Espinal.. and one of the Jays catchers not named kirk...

 

[KluberSociety]

agreeed... I like Lourdes Gurriel Jr as a corner OF'er in place of Teoscar.. Secondaries would include Smith/Lopez/Espinal.. and one of the Jays catchers not named kirk...

Why not Kirk? Long term he's a DH, yes (he'd probably make even a worse 1B than C), but he can complement Hedges pretty well in the short term and is a great right handed bat. This would kind of require trading Reyes at some point though, but he's a "prospect" who has already sort of proven his ability to hit and Toronto doesn't have much of a place for him... If Franmil could play 1B though. Has this topic been brought up?

 

[Criznit]

Why not Kirk? Long term he's a DH, yes (he'd probably make even a worse 1B than C), but he can complement Hedges pretty well in the short term and is a great right handed bat. This would kind of require trading Reyes at some point though, but he's a "prospect" who has already sort of proven his ability to hit and Toronto doesn't have much of a place for him... If Franmil could play 1B though. Has this topic been brought up?

For me the thing with Kirk is this... His body type screams once the wheels start rattling they will be coming off at warp speed. He is a much better fit for an NL team that will probably start him DHing from the onset.

 

[Gson]

Why not Kirk? Long term he's a DH, yes (he'd probably make even a worse 1B than C), but he can complement Hedges pretty well in the short term and is a great right handed bat. This would kind of require trading Reyes at some point though, but he's a "prospect" who has already sort of proven his ability to hit and Toronto doesn't have much of a place for him... If Franmil could play 1B though. Has this topic been brought up?

You sort of answered your own question.. if you trade for a catcher who has to be moved from being a catcher.. then why trade for him????... Kirk is a poor catcher.. W/R to the bat.. proven ?? might be stronger than you mean.. Using the SSS we have, .333/.375 to .273/.333 to .200/.313 are his BA/OBP for July, August and September, respectively for Corporal Kirk.. He was figured out.. throw in poor defense.. and he's not someone that makes much sense for the Guardians..

 

[CATS44]

Three way trades are very complicated and take time...and involve literally dozens of people in the decision making process. The lack of time between a CBA and opening day will make that even more difficult, even if the parameters of such a deal are already in place.

IMO its easier to envision a three way deal from our point of view, but eminently more difficult in actual practice.

The three way deal involving Bauer took eight months to consumate, began with San Diego coveting a high end SP and Cleveland wanting Franmil and close to MLB SP prospects. It ended with Cincinnati getting the high end SP, SD getting an elite prospect, and Cleveland getting exactly what it wanted at the beginning. A story entailing the day by day evolution of this trade from all three points of view would make fascinating reading. How did San Diego go from wanting a FOR to getting an elite prospect?

*********

In re the 2015 prospect list I cited:

Using a list from any one year provides an uneven view. Far better to have a ten year study, and there is on done about ten years ago on ten years of BAs top 100 lists. Its readily available on line.

A complaint was made that top 100 lists usually contain a bunch of kids not nearly close to MLB...a complaint I deem as valid. So I made an effort to compare apples to apples...upper level 50 FVs that match up with our present group of upper level prospects.

The answers were just as ugly as the answers in the ten year study.

A few things SEEM to be different since that 2015 list.

1) Fangraphs seems to have become more hesitant in handing out high FVs. The 2017 list had 79 prospects rated above 50 FV. The 2021 list had only 50.

2) The failure rate for pitching prospects is so high that Fangraphs has taken that into consideration, and become even more hesitant to rank them.

Out of the 63 50 FVs listed in 2017, 33 were pitchers. Out of 83 listed on the 2021 list, only 33 were listed.

*********

I dont much pay attention to the MLB draft or intl FA signings, like many of you do. The draft being such a crap shoot, my focus begins when kids reach AA, which means generally two years until MLB.

This somewhat coincides to what I know much better, which is college football recruiting. A kid who signs a letter of intent can be expected to get playing time within two years. Even then college recruiting is less than a crap shoot than baseball.

I personally knew several college football recruiting gurus...some that show up now on TV...lol.

Something I saw in college football rankings that I'm wondering if I will begin to see in the baseball ranking services....

If an elite program like OSU or Alabama offers a three star HS player, often the ranking services immediately raise his ranking, wondering what they missed. This began with one now well known recruiting commentator, who did that to almost every kid Notre Dame signed.

Will a pitcher drafted, traded for, or otherwise acquired by Cleveland get a sudden boost in the rankings or an upgrade in his FV? Is Williams high initial ratings partly due to Cleveland picking Him? And what about Battenfield?

I'm intrigued by Kwan. As I've said before, his profile is right up my alley. BUT not one (what I view as) legit ranking service has had him listed highly. What is everybody missing on this kid?

Kwan is like Tom in only one way....both produced in the minors without getting any love from the ranking services. But their profiles are completely different. Tom does not have the profile that ends up being productive against MLB pitching. Kwans profile gives him a chance. The ONLY reason I'm intrigued by, but not high on Kwan, is that nobody in the business (that know a lot more than me) has ever been enamored with him.

Of all the newcomers I'm interested in seeing in ST, Kwan is the one I look forward to the most. I want to see for myself. I hope he gets to face some real MLB pitchers. I want to see if they can knock the bat out of his hands.

 

[sportscoach]

Why not Kirk? Long term he's a DH, yes (he'd probably make even a worse 1B than C), but he can complement Hedges pretty well in the short term and is a great right handed bat. This would kind of require trading Reyes at some point though, but he's a "prospect" who has already sort of proven his ability to hit and Toronto doesn't have much of a place for him... If Franmil could play 1B though. Has this topic been brought up?

Blue jays a tree not going to move Kirk at least at a reasonable price right now plus we value defense at that position which Kirk, wouldn't be good for... at least in my mind thats why Kirk would be a bad fit...