Shaun Marcum Traded to the Brewers for Brett Lawrie

[-MetA4-]

Depends entirely on who is doing the trading.

Doesn't matter who is doing the trading; the market is set, and in the current market a young player of that ability AND "MLB readiness" does not get traded for a "good" major league pitcher. A Drabek package nets you a Greinke; no one is going to give you Drabek for Shaun Marcum.

[Randle McMurphy]

Depends entirely on who is doing the trading.

Doesn't matter who is doing the trading; the market is set, and in the current market a young player of that ability AND "MLB readiness" does not get traded for a "good" major league pitcher. A Drabek package nets you a Greinke; no one is going to give you Drabek for Shaun Marcum.

We live in a world where Dan Uggla just got traded for Omar Infante and a reliever. You can't simply assume that every trade a team makes was the best that they could do.

And really, if this was the market for a 3.5 WAR pitcher in the AL East with two more years of control, they shouldn't have made the deal in the first place.

Now that they have, they should go about trading Bautista, Hill, Lind, Escobar, Frasor, and Camp as well. Enough of the mediocrity...rebuild the right way.

[-MetA4-]

We live in a world where Dan Uggla just got traded for Omar Infante and a reliever.

Doesn't that prove my point? An all-star type player getting traded and not bringing back a single stud, MLB-ready prospect.

LIke I said; the MLB-ready stud prospects are almost all off limits unless you are talking a trade for a true star player, which Marcum obviously isn't. Roy Oswalt brought back a backage headlined by Happ and Anthony Gose. Dan Haren Brought back Saunders, an A+ ball pitcher, and an A-ball pitcher. Victor Martinez got traded for Hagadone/Masterson.

[guvernator]

Depends entirely on who is doing the trading.

Doesn't matter who is doing the trading; the market is set, and in the current market a young player of that ability AND "MLB readiness" does not get traded for a "good" major league pitcher. A Drabek package nets you a Greinke; no one is going to give you Drabek for Shaun Marcum.

Now that they have, they should go about trading Bautista, Hill, Lind, Escobar, Frasor, and Camp as well. Enough of the mediocrity...rebuild the right way.

That's not necessary at all. AA is collecting assets that could potentially become the core of this team. Hill and Lind were supposed to be the core (could still be if they bounce back). Escobar was acquired to be part of the core, if he bounces back next season. These 3 are heading into their prime, so I dont see the need to trade them as they are not that expensive. Besides, if AA is not going after Greinke, Lawrie is a good player to have as he will probably be starting in Vegas and should be a September Callup.

[Randle McMurphy]

That's not necessary at all. AA is collecting assets that could potentially become the core of this team. Hill and Lind were supposed to be the core (could still be if they bounce back). Escobar was acquired to be part of the core, if he bounces back next season. These 3 are heading into their prime, so I dont see the need to trade them as they are not that expensive. Besides, if AA is not going after Greinke, Lawrie is a good player to have as he will probably be starting in Vegas and should be a September Callup.

If we're trading a good, inexpensive 29 year old pitcher in his prime for a prospect, then we should also trade all of those guys too. By the time this team is apparently ready to contend (and actually spend money on their major league roster), Lind, Hill, Bautista, and Escobar will be past their primes. There's no point in waffling around at 80-85 wins, which is what they are going to do if they keep those guys.

[guvernator]

That's not necessary at all. AA is collecting assets that could potentially become the core of this team. Hill and Lind were supposed to be the core (could still be if they bounce back). Escobar was acquired to be part of the core, if he bounces back next season. These 3 are heading into their prime, so I dont see the need to trade them as they are not that expensive. Besides, if AA is not going after Greinke, Lawrie is a good player to have as he will probably be starting in Vegas and should be a September Callup.

If we're trading a good, inexpensive 29 year old pitcher in his prime for a prospect, then we should also trade all of those guys too. By the time this team is apparently ready to contend (and actually spend money on their major league roster), Lind, Hill, Bautista, and Escobar will be past their primes.

That inexpensive 29 year old is a replaceable commodity since there are several other pitchers higher them him on the ceiling chart. Is that so hard to understand?

[Randle McMurphy]

Doesn't that prove my point? An all-star type player getting traded and not bringing back a single stud, MLB-ready prospect.

No, it proves that the Florida Marlins have poor management that made a terrible trade simply to save money. It happens all the time. Markets are never set, they are always fluctuating.

Unless they felt forced to do it to save money, there was no reason for the Jays to trade him straight-up for a prospect like Brett Lawrie. It's a major loss in value.

[spykelee]

Now that they have, they should go about trading Bautista, Hill, Lind, Escobar, Frasor, and Camp as well. Enough of the mediocrity...rebuild the right way.

Just because we traded from a position of strength to acquire a prospect who is generally forcast to become a solid major league hitter, doesn't mean we need to gut the team. This isn't an all or nothing scenario. I feel that our team has the depth to withstand Marcum's loss as is, and I also have faith that if we need more pitching, AA will pull the trigger with our prospects to get the job done. But for me, I have no issues with acquiring somebody who projects to be a pretty good hitter, as that's where the jays can't compete with the big market guys... we'll never be able to sign the established big league mashers, we need to find those. But our pitching, can, and has held there own in the AL east Marcum or not.

[Randle McMurphy]

That's not necessary at all. AA is collecting assets that could potentially become the core of this team. Hill and Lind were supposed to be the core (could still be if they bounce back). Escobar was acquired to be part of the core, if he bounces back next season. These 3 are heading into their prime, so I dont see the need to trade them as they are not that expensive. Besides, if AA is not going after Greinke, Lawrie is a good player to have as he will probably be starting in Vegas and should be a September Callup.

If we're trading a good, inexpensive 29 year old pitcher in his prime for a prospect, then we should also trade all of those guys too. By the time this team is apparently ready to contend (and actually spend money on their major league roster), Lind, Hill, Bautista, and Escobar will be past their primes.

That inexpensive 29 year old is a replaceable commodity since there are several other pitchers higher them him on the ceiling chart. Is that so hard to understand?

How is a 3.5 WAR pitcher like Marcum replaceable? There are two pitchers higher than him on the depth chart, and one of them (Morrow) has literally no experience. There is no way around this...moving him is a significant hit to the 2011 roster and essentially prevents (or at least, it should prevent) any attempt at contending next year . That's why trading guys like Bautista, Hill, Lind, etc makes sense at this point.

[Randle McMurphy]

Now that they have, they should go about trading Bautista, Hill, Lind, Escobar, Frasor, and Camp as well. Enough of the mediocrity...rebuild the right way.

Just because we traded from a position of strength to acquire a prospect who is generally forcast to become a solid major league hitter, doesn't mean we need to gut the team. This isn't an all or nothing scenario. I feel that our team has the depth to withstand Marcum's loss as is, and I also have faith that if we need more pitching, AA will pull the trigger with our prospects to get the job done. But for me, I have no issues with acquiring somebody who projects to be a pretty good hitter, as that's where the jays can't compete with the big market guys... we'll never be able to sign the established big league mashers, we need to find those. But our pitching, can, and has held there own in the AL east Marcum or not.

If you never make a real decision between contending and rebuilding, the only thing you'll find is mediocrity. Leafs, Raptors, and Jays fans should know this feeling well by now.

If the decision is to contend in 2011, Marcum should have been kept, and the team should have been built up with him on it. If it isn't, Bautista's (and the others) presence is quite redundant.

[guvernator]

If we're trading a good, inexpensive 29 year old pitcher in his prime for a prospect, then we should also trade all of those guys too. By the time this team is apparently ready to contend (and actually spend money on their major league roster), Lind, Hill, Bautista, and Escobar will be past their primes.

That inexpensive 29 year old is a replaceable commodity since there are several other pitchers higher them him on the ceiling chart. Is that so hard to understand?

How is a 3.5 WAR pitcher like Marcum replaceable? There are two pitchers higher than him on the depth chart, and one of them (Morrow) has literally no experience. There is no way around this...moving him is a significant hit to the 2011 roster and essentially prevents (or at least, it should prevent) any attempt at contending next year . That's why trading guys like Bautista, Hill, Lind, etc makes sense at this point.

Deck Mcguire, Wojo, Stewart ( in addition to Drabek and Cecil). These could all be in the mix at the beginning of next season. So Marcum is 8th in terms of ceiling but also has significant injury history and chances are he'll hit the DL for a lengthy period of time again in his career. Its called selling high and selling from a position of strength.

If you discard prospects so easily then there is no point in having a scouting department. May as well go by Baseball America and BP.

[Kurtz]

That inexpensive 29 year old is a replaceable commodity since there are several other pitchers higher them him on the ceiling chart. Is that so hard to understand?

Are you serious with this?

We're not talking about trading away a 1B who is blocking a stud 1B we have ready in the minors.

We're talking about a high quality starting bloody pitcher! Replaceable commodity?! You do realize that even if we're the luckiest team in the world and avoid all injuries, we'll still need at least 5 of those guys to preform well!? You mean to tell me we have 5 guys in the organization who can be expected to put up an ERA in the mid 3's and a WAR better than 3.6 over the next 2-5 years?

There has never been and never will be such a thing as "too much" good starting pitching. It doesn't happen. If we had 5 guys who put up numbers like Marcum, we'd be the AL East favourite every year.

[-MetA4-]

No, it proves that the Florida Marlins have poor management that made a terrible trade simply to save money. It happens all the time. Markets are never set, they are always fluctuating.

Why has no player that wasn't a true superstar been traded for a package built around a "current Kyle Drabek" type prospect in at least the past 3 years then?

Markets dont fluctuate from a month to month basis. Major league ready stud prospects have been valued extremely highly for a while now; which is why I brought up all of those trades involving very good major league players who didn't bring back a single "current Kyle Drabek" type prospect.

there was no reason for the Jays to trade him straight-up for a prospect like Brett Lawrie. It's a major loss in value.

Is that why the initial expert reports are fairly positive? Callis says it was about equal value, Piliere obviously seems to like the trade, and Goldstein is hit or miss as of now (his writeup comes out tomorrow).

[Randle McMurphy]

Deck Mcguire, Wojo, Stewart ( in addition to Drabek and Cecil). These could all be in the mix at the beginning of next season. So Marcum is 8th in terms of ceiling but also has significant injury history and chances are he'll hit the DL for a lengthy period of time again in his career. Its called selling high and selling from a position of strength.

None of those three are likely to match Marcum's production next season, in fact, it's pretty unlikely that they will even start in the majors. If they have a plan to contend in the next two seasons, the best option undoubtedly would have been to keep him (especially judging by this relatively weak return).

Selling high only makes sense if you are getting good value. The Jays didn't.

[guvernator]

That inexpensive 29 year old is a replaceable commodity since there are several other pitchers higher them him on the ceiling chart. Is that so hard to understand?

Are you serious with this?

We're not talking about trading away a 1B who is blocking a stud 1B we have ready in the minors.

We're talking about a high quality starting bloody pitcher! Replaceable commodity?! You do realize that even if we're the luckiest team in the world and avoid all injuries, we'll still need at least 5 of those guys to preform well!? You mean to tell me we have 5 guys in the organization who can be expected to put up an ERA in the mid 3's and a WAR better than 3.6 over the next 2-5 years?

There has never been and never will be such a thing as "too much" good starting pitching. It doesn't happen. If we had 5 guys who put up numbers like Marcum, we'd be the AL East favourite every year.

Pat Gillick's biggest trait was taking calculated risks. Mediocre players do not win you AL East. So if you can deal from a position of strength to shore up a position of weakness, you do it.

[-MetA4-]

As a general overview of the trade; Anthopolous recently made comments about a "power pitching staff" being the key to competing in the AL East. My opinion is that Marcum wasn't as highly regarded by this front office as he clearly is by the general fanbase, and in combination with them maybe having hit some snags in negotiating an extension with him plus some durability concerns; they decided to ship him out after a very successful season in which he stayed healthy. There are more than a few people who believe that we are "selling high" on Marcum.

[-MetA4-]

Selling high only makes sense if you are getting good value. The Jays didn't.

As I said above, there are several baseball experts who will and have already disagreed with this statement.

[Randle McMurphy]

Why has no player that wasn't a true superstar been traded for a package built around a "current Kyle Drabek" type prospect in at least the past 3 years then?

Marcum didn't have to be traded for the equivalent of Kyle Drabek for it to be a good value deal for the Jays.

Markets dont fluctuate from a month to month basis. Major league ready stud prospects have been valued extremely highly for a while now; which is why I brought up all of those trades involving very good major league players who didn't bring back a single "current Kyle Drabek" type prospect.

Markets fluctuate every hour and every day. If a risky "tweener" (your words, not mine) was the best they could get for a 3.5 WAR pitcher in the AL East, they should have just kept him and his production.

Is that why the initial expert reports are fairly positive? Callis says it was about equal value, Piliere obviously seems to like the trade, and Goldstein is hit or miss as of now (his writeup comes out tomorrow).

Ah yes, you're always good for an appeal to authority. You see, unlike you, I don't rely on prospect evaluators to form my opinions either way. That said, I'm not surprised that two prospect evaluators are in favor of the Blue Jays receiving a top prospect.

[Schad]

How is a 3.5 WAR pitcher like Marcum replaceable? There are two pitchers higher than him on the depth chart, and one of them (Morrow) has literally no experience. There is no way around this...moving him is a significant hit to the 2011 roster and essentially prevents (or at least, it should prevent) any attempt at contending next year.

I don't think that we ever had much of a shot at contending next year; 2012 and beyond is where we will have a legitimate chance, in no small part because of Bud's gimmicky playoff expansion. But we now have the minor league depth that we can make a run at not one, but multiple stars via trade and free agency and still have the talent to fill roster spots on the cheap and provide trade fodder.

And while I'm not 100% sold on Lawrie, he adds a potential young offensive star with a good shot at reaching that potential...something that we haven't had for some time, and something that we'll need if we're to make runs without matching the Yanks and Sox dollar-for-dollar.

Next off-season is going to be the one to watch, I suspect. All of the 2010 kiddies become trade-eligible, and we'll know where we stand with the pitching staff. If AA keeps dumping players for kiddies then I might question him, but for the moment I quite like where we stand.

[Kurtz]

Pat Gillick's biggest trait was taking calculated risks. Mediocre players do not win you AL East. So if you can deal from a position of strength to shore up a position of weakness, you do it.

The irrelevant Gillick anecdote aside, your argument is that Marcum is a mediocre player?

He had a WAR of 3.6. If every single player on our team had the same relative performance, we'd be the best team in baseball.

So yes, a team full of those kind of players will certainly get it done.