Wednesday, December 16, 2009

A For Reals Letter to Mr. Griffin

Few people can really move you.  When someone can express their thoughts in a manner that changes the better part of your day, you know that something squishy has just happened.  And though he's moved me several times before, something clearly reached into the narrowest sub-cockle of my heart today.  So instead of jumping on the ever-so-slightly less-trendy trend of Griff Bashing, I went ahead and wrote a nice little letter to Tricky Dick himself:

UPDATE: It appears Griffin exercised his whiteout pen and rewrote almost the entire post.  You can piece the original post together by reading the early commenters' posts or from ketchup packets.

"In that scenario, the Jays look like losers. If it goes down that way I will be surprised and the Jays should be embarrassed."

In this scenario, (1) Halladay is moved to another league and, most importantly, is not a Yankee or Red Sock; (2) The Jays receive the Phillies best prospect (Drabek - I'll agree with you that Happ is a marginal player at best and thus undesirable) whom projects as a top-of-the-rotation starter. Will he be Halladay? Of course not, but then again, who is? (3) Taylor is only slightly less regarded than Brown, and projects as upper-tier five-tool centerfielder, in the mold of Adam Jones, Sizemore, Pence, with a floor of at least Mike Cameron. Add in the fact that Taylor bats right-handed, and you have a perfect compliment to lefties Lind and Snider. Valuable indeed, and I think we can all agree (and the metrics dictate) that this team needs a new centerfielder, or one that can at least handle centerfield defensively at a replacement level. (4) A solid catching prospect.

"The problem here is that since Jays' GM Alex Anthopoulos is so tight-lipped about his dealings with other clubs, all of the jigsaw puzzles of prospects that are being put together are being put together through other teams' sources."

I'm fairly certain that AA's manner in which he conducts his business has absolutely nothing to do with the actual chips being traded. Where do you see a problem in this?

"But a three-way needs to be a three-way with players from at least one of the teams going to two other teams -- otherwise it's just two trades. "

I think you are getting caught up on semantics, Richard. Again, how in any way does this impact the end results of all three parties involved?

"The Roy Halladay deal, if it goes down as outlined by, is not enough of a return for the Jays and the best pitcher in baseball to make it worthwhile."

The only manner in which we can evaluate the return for Halladay is to measure it against recent and similar trades:

1) Sabathia - Cleveland received LaPorta, Bryson, and Jackson
Granted, this was only for a half-season for CC, but the overall return is essentially one (potential) impact bat from a guy without a position.

2) Beckett/Lowell - The Marlins received Ramirez and some potential players that never realized their modest ceilings. Lowell was at his lowest value, and due to his salary, had negative value, thus increasing the cost for Beckett, whom this deal was all about.

3) Santana - Self-explanatory. Almost zero value realized.

4) Cliff Lee - the Indians received quantity in this trade, but no potential franchise-caliber players.

5) Randy Johnson - the M's got Garcia (dependable #2-type starter), Halama (four years of league-average starting with a 103 ERA+), and defensively challenged shortstop (Guillen) that never panned out for them (92 OPS+).

6) Hudson/Mulder - Oakland received virtually nothing for arguably the best starting pitcher in the league (Hudson), but picked up a gem with Haren for Mulder.

On paper, Drabek/Taylor/d'Arnaud for Halladay looks like a well-brokered transaction from rookie GM Anthopoulos. I have high hopes that you will respond. Thank you.

1 comment: