Blue Jays Trade Napoli to Rangers for Francisco

[evilRyu]

Also, Napoli is under team control for 2012. His team would not stand to gain compensation if they lost him in next off-season.

Yes, potential compensation picks in 2012. And two years of Napoli, which will be worth a lot more than one year of Francisco.

Forgot where I read it (may have been Jeff Blair) but they mentioned that with the cba expirig, it's possible that there will be a restructure of how comp picks work. As such, will have impact for Napoli. Whether this should be one of the main reasons to trade him, that's up to AA to decide

[rtcaino]

if they changed the rules, I imagine that Napoli would still qualify for comp. Guys that are just exiting team control are who teams should get comp'ed for. It's the relievers on one year deals, and vetran free agents that signed with big market clubs that are making a mockery of the process.

However, I'm happy my team is taking part in this mockery. AA would agree the rules should be changed. However, until they are, work it sista.

[Rhettmatic]

This is from Buster Olney's column today:

A rival executive on the moves made by the Blue Jays since Aug. 2009, when they unloaded the contract of Alex Rios: "They have a chance to be a real power for years to come. They're getting a ton of talent and draft picks, and they've got a lot of [payroll] flexibility. I've been sitting here watching Alex [Anthopoulos] make one great move after another."

[LBJSeizedMyID]

Just to put it into context how Texas perceives Napoli's role. Ron Washington: "...Napoli as a spot starter at first, designated hitter and the team's No. 3 catcher". Behind Yorvit Torreabala and Mike Treanor.

http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/01/26 ... young.html

Yes this could be preseason banter of a manager not knowing a new player, but clearly most teams don't think very highly of him as a catcher. I think Napoli's return was fair value. Can Napoli's value improve that much more? Highly unlikely unless he vastly improves his defense.

[The_Hater]

i'm also not sure about that brett wallace for anthony gose trade. it looks like we can use a 1B and keep Lind at DH

One could also argue that he sold high on Brett Wallace. He obviously has less value at 1B than he did at 3B and his MLB debut was far from impressive. Terrible plate discipline and very little power. At age 24, you would expect a much better debut. He might not even have a Lyle Overbay upside.

I think it's too quick to judge Wallace in his first year, that's less than half a season. If you say he sucks, then JPA shouldn't be in the league (he was horrible after his debut game).

Unless Gose develops a great batting average +.300 and steals a ton, I dont see him useful at all at the top/mid of the batting lineup.

Yet aren't you doing the exact same thing by writing off Gose? What you're doing is actually worse considering Gose was only 19 last season and Wallace was 23. Wallace was playing 'A' ball at age 21, Gose at age 19.

Either way, if Wallace doesn't acquire both better plate discipline and some sort of power stroke, his value as a 1B will be limited at best. His lack of plate discipline is the worst part. 93 BB in almost 1200 minor league AB's. He's got a long way to go and unlikely to ever get there.

[youreachiteach]

Jays have a righthanded DH/1B/OF they are paying what, 1m a season who they think can hit 25 home runs.

Mike Napoli is, at this stage in his career, a righthanded hitter who might hit 30. Who makes 3 times as much.

The only way he has more of an impact is if he plays 1rst (and blocks Lind) or catches (and blocks JPA).

So, in the Jays eyes, he was an expensive roadblock to all three players (JPA, Lind and E5) and a necessary evil to get rid of Wells. Keeping such a player around just on the off chance he MIGHT get something better than a highly rated reliever (and probable closer) and a supp. pick was pretty unlikely. And not playing him would not be an option.

Bottom line? The Jays aren't a team that is going to allow someone to do a job for three times the money they have already paid someone much cheaper to do. Texas, being a team that is contending, does.

Even Griffin called it the day before it happened--with DJF having to eat as much crow as they could stand on the matter.

[The_Hater]

Jays have a righthanded DH/1B/OF they are paying what, 1m a season who they think can hit 25 home runs.

Mike Napoli is, at this stage in his career, a righthanded hitter who might hit 30. Who makes 3 times as much.

The only way he has more of an impact is if he plays 1rst (and blocks Lind) or catches (and blocks JPA).

So, in the Jays eyes, he was an expensive roadblock to all three players (JPA, Lind and E5) and a necessary evil to get rid of Wells. Keeping such a player around just on the off chance he MIGHT get something better than a highly rated reliever (and probable closer) and a supp. pick was pretty unlikely. And not playing him would not be an option.

Bottom line? The Jays aren't a team that is going to allow someone to do a job for three times the money they have already paid someone much cheaper to do. Texas, being a team that is contending, does.

Even Griffin called it the day before it happened--with DJF having to eat as much crow as they could stand on the matter.

Most of your argument is pretty much on the mark. Problem is, nobody here is especially upset that Napoli was traded (the part your argument is defending) people are primarily unhappy with the somewhat paltry return.

[youreachiteach]

Jays have a righthanded DH/1B/OF they are paying what, 1m a season who they think can hit 25 home runs.

Mike Napoli is, at this stage in his career, a righthanded hitter who might hit 30. Who makes 3 times as much.

The only way he has more of an impact is if he plays 1rst (and blocks Lind) or catches (and blocks JPA).

So, in the Jays eyes, he was an expensive roadblock to all three players (JPA, Lind and E5) and a necessary evil to get rid of Wells. Keeping such a player around just on the off chance he MIGHT get something better than a highly rated reliever (and probable closer) and a supp. pick was pretty unlikely. And not playing him would not be an option.

Bottom line? The Jays aren't a team that is going to allow someone to do a job for three times the money they have already paid someone much cheaper to do. Texas, being a team that is contending, does.

Even Griffin called it the day before it happened--with DJF having to eat as much crow as they could stand on the matter.

Most of your argument is pretty much on the mark. Problem is, nobody here is especially upset that Napoli was traded (the part your argument is defending) people are primarily unhappy with the somewhat paltry return.

That a third string catcher with pop is worth more than a guy who has a chance to be a closer (and hence moved for more talent later?)

I don't know. I think you are all underating the quality of the reliever here. I think fangraphs did an article on how effective he was--and if he gets 35 saves, he'll definitely be worth more down the road than Napoli.

[The_Hater]

That a third string catcher with pop is worth more than a guy who has a chance to be a closer (and hence moved for more talent later?)

I don't know. I think you are all underating the quality of the reliever here. I think fangraphs did an article on how effective he was--and if he gets 35 saves, he'll definitely be worth more down the road than Napoli.

I don't value 55 inning middle relievers very highly, no. They're certainly far easier to find in somewhere in your farm system or even on the waiver wire than potential 30 HR bats.

And having a potential closer might be more important if we didn't already have 2-3 on the roster.

People have also mentioned that Napoli has one more year of team control than Francisco. You mention 'down the road' with Francisco, there is no 'down the road' after 2011. He's a free-agent. That makes future value fairly insignificant.

As I say all of this, remember that I like Francisco better than most. He's inconsistent but he misses a lot of bats.

[youreachiteach]

That a third string catcher with pop is worth more than a guy who has a chance to be a closer (and hence moved for more talent later?)

I don't know. I think you are all underating the quality of the reliever here. I think fangraphs did an article on how effective he was--and if he gets 35 saves, he'll definitely be worth more down the road than Napoli.

I don't value 55 inning middle relievers very highly, no. They're certainly far easier to find in somewhere in your farm system or even on the waiver wire than potential 30 HR bats.

And having a potential closer might be more important if we didn't already have 2-3 on the roster.

People have also mentioned that Napoli has one more year of team control than Francisco. You mention 'down the road' with Francisco, there is no 'down the road' after 2011. He's a free-agent.

That makes future value fairly insignificant.


By "down the road" I meant his trade value at the deadline. If the Jays trade him as the undisputed closer (and, considering the 2-3 other options I'd bet the house on him) at the deadline I think he's worth more than a guy who can't really play in the field any more.

As I say all of this, remember that I like Francisco better than most. He's inconsistent but he misses a lot of bats.

[The_Hater]

By "down the road" I meant his trade value at the deadline. If the Jays trade him as the undisputed closer (and, considering the 2-3 other options I'd bet the house on him) at the deadline I think he's worth more than a guy who can't really play in the field any more.

Fair enough. But Napoli might have more trade value than Francisco at the deadline too.

Either way, that's not overly important to their respective trade values right now. And most people feel that Napoli > Francisco at the time of the deal. That's not to say that it won't work out differently.

[youreachiteach]

By "down the road" I meant his trade value at the deadline. If the Jays trade him as the undisputed closer (and, considering the 2-3 other options I'd bet the house on him) at the deadline I think he's worth more than a guy who can't really play in the field any more.

Fair enough. But Napoli might have more trade value than Francisco at the deadline too.

Either way, that's not overly important to their respective trade values right now. And most people feel that Napoli > Francisco at the time of the deal. That's not to say that it won't work out differently.

I suppose it's true that someone might value the 30 homers at the deadline more...but I don't think mashers are valued much any more.

I think the value for DH's is really low now (unless they are super elite) . You have Manny and Damon taking a paltry 2 mil? Remember how much Shea Hillenbrand used to cost? I know they're near the end but still...It's obvious Anrthopolous likes players who can play mutliple positions and are healthy enough to do so. No knees didn't fit the bill and he's apparently been shopped for quite some time. The Jays actually had to be forced to take him on or the deal would have died (and apparently was dead before the two extra salaries were added).

I suppose I feel, despite their relative trade deadline values, that "ACE" relievers are now worth more than DH's at this time in MLB. I also suspect AA feels the same way.

[wlujaysfan55]

http://www.thestar.com/sports/baseball/ ... er-insists

Moreno insists the Wells deal is no mistake. First, the money: The deal had died before the Jays agreed to take on Napoli and Rivera and send some cash too, essentially relieving the Angels of about $16 million of the Wells contract.

“If you look at the deal as somewhere around $70 million, you’re looking at a $17-plus million deal, on a four-year average,” Moreno said, before referencing the Crawford contract. “That’s a lot more tolerable than $142 million.”

[The_Hater]

http://www.thestar.com/sports/baseball/article/929168--deal-for-wells-is-not-a-mistake-angels-owner-insists

Moreno insists the Wells deal is no mistake. First, the money: The deal had died before the Jays agreed to take on Napoli and Rivera and send some cash too, essentially relieving the Angels of about $16 million of the Wells contract.

“If you look at the deal as somewhere around $70 million, you’re looking at a $17-plus million deal, on a four-year average,” Moreno said, before referencing the Crawford contract. “That’s a lot more tolerable than $142 million.”

The trade is creating so much backlash for the Angels that even their owner is busy trying to justify it through the press. The Angels will be doing damage control on this for the next 4 years.