ImageImageImageImageImage

Josh Donaldson traded to [the Indians] for something because Passan says so

Moderators: Rhettmatic, Alfred, Schad

polo007
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,032
And1: 1,097
Joined: Nov 02, 2006

Re: Josh Donaldson traded to [the Indians] for something because Passan says so 

Post#101 » by polo007 » Sat Sep 1, 2018 8:27 pm

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter
User avatar
Schad
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 49,760
And1: 10,920
Joined: Feb 08, 2006
Location: The Goat Rodeo
     

Re: Josh Donaldson traded to [the Indians] for something because Passan says so 

Post#102 » by Schad » Sat Sep 1, 2018 8:27 pm

dagger wrote:This is a timely reminder of the team that AA assembled - good enough then to make the ALCS. It's also a timely reminder of what each of these guys are either costing us, or wanted the Jays to pay, and what they are producing today. Except for Price, who didn't earn his salary in 2016 or 2017 but is covering this year, none of these guys is worth his current salary. Not one.


Bautista is earning his keep for the simple reason that he's getting paid nothing, while providing a bit more than nothing, but yeah. And even with his bounce-back, Price's contract is going to be one of the worst in baseball over its lifespan. No one should fall into the trap of believing that old guys will be good forever.
**** your asterisk.
canguy20m
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,248
And1: 438
Joined: Jul 28, 2004

Re: Josh Donaldson traded to [the Indians] for something because Passan says so 

Post#103 » by canguy20m » Sat Sep 1, 2018 8:29 pm

Schad wrote:
canguy20m wrote:donaldson is donaldson. they'll find a way to fit him in. and yes if he's healthy he's likely to become their franchise player.


This is madness. Dude, Donaldson will be 33 next year. This isn't 2001; 33 year olds are not mid-prime. The (fairly optimistic, IMO) ZIPS projections have him being good but certainly not elite in 2019, above-average in 2020, below-average in 2021, and outright bad thereafter. He's no one's franchise player, particularly a team that already has Jose Ramirez and Francisco Lindor; it'd be downright surprising if Donaldson was one of their five best players.


encarnacion isn't doing too bad. neither is nelson cruz who analysts expected to dropoff 4 years ago. goldschmidt is turning 31 next week better trade him before he drops off. votto is turning 35.
canguy20m
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,248
And1: 438
Joined: Jul 28, 2004

Re: Josh Donaldson traded to [the Indians] for something because Passan says so 

Post#104 » by canguy20m » Sat Sep 1, 2018 8:30 pm

Schad wrote:
dagger wrote:This is a timely reminder of the team that AA assembled - good enough then to make the ALCS. It's also a timely reminder of what each of these guys are either costing us, or wanted the Jays to pay, and what they are producing today. Except for Price, who didn't earn his salary in 2016 or 2017 but is covering this year, none of these guys is worth his current salary. Not one.


Bautista is earning his keep for the simple reason that he's getting paid nothing, while providing a bit more than nothing, but yeah. And even with his bounce-back, Price's contract is going to be one of the worst in baseball over its lifespan. No one should fall into the trap of believing that old guys will be good forever.


32 isn't old.
User avatar
Schad
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 49,760
And1: 10,920
Joined: Feb 08, 2006
Location: The Goat Rodeo
     

Re: Josh Donaldson traded to [the Indians] for something because Passan says so 

Post#105 » by Schad » Sat Sep 1, 2018 8:36 pm

Sounds very much like the return is Merryweather, if he gets a clean bill of health after returning from TJ. He's not totally without upside; was an old draftee that Cleveland didn't rush through the system (with their starters, they didn't have to), which explains his age. Good fastball, solid-enough secondary stuff, solid control, and an alarming tendency last year to surrender home runs that could just be a fluke.

Basically, a guy who (if healthy) could break camp as a #4 or #5 starter. Only problem is that we have a lot of back-end sorts, and not so much high-end talent.
**** your asterisk.
User avatar
Schad
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 49,760
And1: 10,920
Joined: Feb 08, 2006
Location: The Goat Rodeo
     

Re: Josh Donaldson traded to [the Indians] for something because Passan says so 

Post#106 » by Schad » Sat Sep 1, 2018 8:58 pm

canguy20m wrote:encarnacion isn't doing too bad. neither is nelson cruz who analysts expected to dropoff 4 years ago. goldschmidt is turning 31 next week better trade him before he drops off. votto is turning 35.


Encarnacion has posted less fWAR this year than Luke Maile. Votto has seen his production fall off quite a bit this year, to the extent that any hope the Reds had of moving his contract are gone. Nelson Cruz is the rare exception, certainly; there are only three position players 36 years or older who will be at least league average, and he's one of them.


32 isn't old.


Yes, it is. 32 is the tail end of a player's prime these days; great players can continue to be good for a while as they decline, but in the aggregate they do decline quite a bit. Beyond that, Donaldson will be 33 next year, when it actually matters.

Consider last year's age 33 cohort (as they had a full season, whereas this one is ongoing). You had Votto, who was excellent. Gardner and Lowrie were very valuable, and a handful of players who were in the vicinity of average. Go back to their age 29 season and you have a much larger group of players who graded out as well above average (10 vs 3) and way more who reached the 2 WAR level (18 vs 5). You can also see all the players who were good as 29 year olds, but didn't age gracefully at all: Hanley Ramirez, Dustin Pedroia, Alex Gordon, Chase Headley, etc.

That's the norm these days: you can pick out the one or two guys who beat the curve, but they're less common. This argument has come up concerning Bautista, Tulo, Edwin, and now Donaldson, and guess what? In every case, the old guys got old. Exactly when they have gotten old has varied, but Donaldson is very unlikely to ever be in MVP conversation again, and within a couple years he may not be worthy of starting anywhere. That's the aging curve in the modern era.
**** your asterisk.
VanWest82
Head Coach
Posts: 7,497
And1: 8,110
Joined: Dec 05, 2008

Re: Josh Donaldson traded to [the Indians] for something because Passan says so 

Post#107 » by VanWest82 » Sat Sep 1, 2018 9:00 pm

Schad wrote:Sounds very much like the return is Merryweather, if he gets a clean bill of health after returning from TJ. He's not totally without upside; was an old draftee that Cleveland didn't rush through the system (with their starters, they didn't have to), which explains his age. Good fastball, solid-enough secondary stuff, solid control, and an alarming tendency last year to surrender home runs that could just be a fluke.

Basically, a guy who (if healthy) could break camp as a #4 or #5 starter. Only problem is that we have a lot of back-end sorts, and not so much high-end talent.


If this is the case, I might have opted for the draft pick comp instead. I sort of doubt Josh was coming back, 18M or not. Really seems like there's some bad blood between him and the FO. Maybe I'm overestimating his market.
User avatar
Schad
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 49,760
And1: 10,920
Joined: Feb 08, 2006
Location: The Goat Rodeo
     

Re: Josh Donaldson traded to [the Indians] for something because Passan says so 

Post#108 » by Schad » Sat Sep 1, 2018 9:09 pm

VanWest82 wrote:If this is the case, I might have opted for the draft pick comp instead. I sort of doubt Josh was coming back, 18M or not. Really seems like there's some bad blood between him and the FO. Maybe I'm overestimating his market.


Yeah, I'm not terribly enthused about the fact that we've targeted "MLB ready" players in these deals; we need to keep improving our overall talent base, not increasing the number of 5th starters and utility infielders in our suddenly deep pool of both. Maybe they see Merryweather as having mid-rotation upside, but we really need to sort out the logjam of mediocrity, not continually add to it.
**** your asterisk.
VanWest82
Head Coach
Posts: 7,497
And1: 8,110
Joined: Dec 05, 2008

Re: Josh Donaldson traded to [the Indians] for something because Passan says so 

Post#109 » by VanWest82 » Sat Sep 1, 2018 9:32 pm

Schad wrote:
VanWest82 wrote:If this is the case, I might have opted for the draft pick comp instead. I sort of doubt Josh was coming back, 18M or not. Really seems like there's some bad blood between him and the FO. Maybe I'm overestimating his market.


Yeah, I'm not terribly enthused about the fact that we've targeted "MLB ready" players in these deals; we need to keep improving our overall talent base, not increasing the number of 5th starters and utility infielders in our suddenly deep pool of both. Maybe they see Merryweather as having mid-rotation upside, but we really need to sort out the logjam of mediocrity, not continually add to it.


Feels like our trading partners have been the ones doing the targeting. The problem is all these deals have been done from a position of weakness. Some of them (e.g. Osuna) are defensible, but the return is mind-numbingly low in the aggregate, especially when you count the ones that didn't get done but should have.

By my count, we have exactly one pitching prospect (Pearson) who profiles as a top-mid rotation starter but he's at least two years out. Going to need one of our endless average-ish looking young guys (Pardinho, Paulino, Kloffenstein, etc.) to pop. I'm less worried about our position guys. Feels like we have some talent there.
User avatar
Natural11
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,861
And1: 2,296
Joined: Nov 27, 2008

Re: Josh Donaldson traded to [the Indians] for something because Passan says so 

Post#110 » by Natural11 » Sat Sep 1, 2018 9:33 pm

dagger wrote:
Read on Twitter


This is a timely reminder of the team that AA assembled - good enough then to make the ALCS. It's also a timely reminder of what each of these guys are either costing us, or wanted the Jays to pay, and what they are producing today. Except for Price, who didn't earn his salary in 2016 or 2017 but is covering this year, none of these guys is worth his current salary. Not one.


Still worth it in my opinion. Only 2 years from a play-off run and we have an improving farm system with several potential stars in the making along with expiring contracts coming up. Let's not forget the 22 year drought, or being a couple of botched plays away from a 2015 world series. Those 2 play-off runs were the most fun I've ever had watching baseball.
User avatar
Schad
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 49,760
And1: 10,920
Joined: Feb 08, 2006
Location: The Goat Rodeo
     

Re: Josh Donaldson traded to [the Indians] for something because Passan says so 

Post#111 » by Schad » Sat Sep 1, 2018 9:39 pm

VanWest82 wrote:Feels like our trading partners have been the ones doing the targeting. The problem is all these deals have been done from a position of weakness. Some of them (e.g. Osuna) are defensible, but the return is mind-numbingly low in the aggregate, especially when you count the ones that didn't get done but should have.


We seem to have targeted Drury over actual prospects out of a belief that he could be at least league-average, though, and we've stockpiled a lot of other players whose primary selling point was their proximity to the majors. I wouldn't expect this to be a long rebuild; think we're going to start making win-now moves by 2020 at the latest, whether it makes sense or not.

By my count, we have exactly one pitching prospect (Pearson) who profiles as a top-mid rotation starter but he's at least two years out. Going to need one of our endless average-ish looking young guys (Pardinho, Paulino, Kloffenstein, etc.) to pop. I'm less worried about our position guys. Feels like we have some talent there.


We definitely need some of those kids to come good. Given our position prospects, what a difference it'd have made if we could have moved our now-departed players for a couple high-end pitchers.
**** your asterisk.
User avatar
Natural11
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,861
And1: 2,296
Joined: Nov 27, 2008

Re: Josh Donaldson traded to [the Indians] for something because Passan says so 

Post#112 » by Natural11 » Sat Sep 1, 2018 9:49 pm

dagger wrote:
Natural11 wrote:It's a poor case of asset management when you have to pay to get rid of a former MVP for the infamous PTBNL. Shockingly bad.


It was sub-optimal to be sure, but he's three years and a lot of leg injuries removed from being an MVP. And at 32 going on 33 (birthday in December), and with Vlad Jr ticketing for 3B, there just wasn't any sense in sticking with him into next season in the hope he remains healthy enough and good enough to trade, after June, as a rental.


I totally agree that it was pointless to keep him, it's just bittersweet to see it happen now when the return is so low. There was no reason not to trade him during the offseason other than a hopeless effort to keep selling tickets for a fading team. It's also more than a little foolhardy of management to have retained his services with the expectation that they would get a similar return before the July trade deadline than they could have received during the offseason. You can't take that chance with an aging player who had issues the year prior.
VanWest82
Head Coach
Posts: 7,497
And1: 8,110
Joined: Dec 05, 2008

Re: Josh Donaldson traded to [the Indians] for something because Passan says so 

Post#113 » by VanWest82 » Sat Sep 1, 2018 9:54 pm

Schad wrote:We seem to have targeted Drury over actual prospects out of a belief that he could be at least league-average, though, and we've stockpiled a lot of other players whose primary selling point was their proximity to the majors. I wouldn't expect this to be a long rebuild; think we're going to start making win-now moves by 2020 at the latest, whether it makes sense or not.

Oh man. I'd almost rather trade Vlad now and have the front office forced to properly rebuild than trying to jump the gun again like so many failed attempts from years gone by. Rogers would still probably fast track it.

We definitely need some of those kids to come good. Given our position prospects, what a difference it'd have made if we could have moved our now-departed players for a couple high-end pitchers.

Yeah I think that option sailed last July, though I was reminded earlier today how JD's injury situation complicated his trade value then too. It's just so hard to get your hands on high end pitching talent unless you draft it.
polo007
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,032
And1: 1,097
Joined: Nov 02, 2006

Re: Josh Donaldson traded to [the Indians] for something because Passan says so 

Post#114 » by polo007 » Sat Sep 1, 2018 11:13 pm

Read on Twitter

The Blue Jays want Mr. PTBNL, described by general manager Ross Atkins as an already identified “near-term prospect that will impact our major-league team in a significant way,” more than Donaldson.

Reconcile that.

“There’s more to it than the fact that the player hasn’t touched the big-leagues – it’s the years of control, the cost of that player and what that means for potential contributions and efficiency within your roster,” Atkins said on a conference call Saturday afternoon. “I suppose if you want to talk about in that way, is just one year, at whatever value that might be for Josh Donaldson, more valuable than six years of Player X at Cost Y? That’s an equation that anyone could do and figure out and determine which one they’d rather have."

“What lines up for us now, very well, is how well the acquired talent matches with a lot of the upper-level talent in our system.”


Now, obviously, there’s more to it than that. A healthy and productive Donaldson could certainly match well with the upper level talent in the Blue Jays system, too, and a divorce of this magnitude doesn’t take place in spreadsheet cells alone.

There are many layers to this onion.

But at the moment of truth, when the Blue Jays weighed their vision for a future with or without Donaldson, that’s how the math went down.
User avatar
sule
RealGM
Posts: 13,541
And1: 32,325
Joined: Nov 11, 2006
     

Re: Josh Donaldson traded to [the Indians] for something because Passan says so 

Post#115 » by sule » Sun Sep 2, 2018 12:05 am

“There’s more to it than the fact that the player hasn’t touched the big-leagues – it’s the years of control, the cost of that player and what that means for potential contributions and efficiency within your roster,” Atkins said on a conference call Saturday afternoon. “I suppose if you want to talk about in that way, is just one year, at whatever value that might be for Josh Donaldson, more valuable than six years of Player X at Cost Y? That’s an equation that anyone could do and figure out and determine which one they’d rather have."


AKA instead of a guy who can get you 6.0 fWAR in one year, we'd rather have a guy who can get 6.0 fWAR over 6 years.

Obviously the first guy gives you the much, much, much better chance at winning something.

And I understand they want cheap, controllable talent. But it feels like they're just stockpiling AAAA guys who will never be good enough to actually contribute to a winning team. A lot of C-level prospects they are hoping become B-level guys they can sign on the cheap.

The conflict is that they also keep trying to sell the idea of this team competing in a few years and talk about dreams of winning a championship. To actually get your team somewhere, you have to take risks. Maybe you don't have to trade half your farm for a few years of serious runs at the World Series, but you have to target guys who have the potential to become stars. And I don't see this front office targeting those types of players in return deals.

They consistently seem to target underwhelming prospects who other teams can't find room for b/c someone else jumped them in the queue. Or they target Rule 5 players to build up our bullpen. Or they sign 5 guys to $1 million/year, hoping over the course of the season, one of them can actually be a 5th starter. Or they trade for injured prospects or guys who have been in the minors a bit longer than they should've been with low-ceiling and high-floors.

They're getting a lot of praise for the farm system being top 5 or 10 in the majors. But that can quickly change. You can't sell major league wins to the fans by telling them they got guys coming up in 3-4 years that will help compete.

They've taken cars that were around 100,000K and instead of selling them at reasonable value to go buy a better car, they waited until they sold them for scrap metal to the yard.

Sure, they got something rather than nothing. But sometimes just something isn't enough. Especially in sports. And especially if you want to be anything more than a middling franchise treadmilling just below .500.
Image
User avatar
Schad
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 49,760
And1: 10,920
Joined: Feb 08, 2006
Location: The Goat Rodeo
     

Re: Josh Donaldson traded to [the Indians] for something because Passan says so 

Post#117 » by Schad » Sun Sep 2, 2018 12:48 am

sule wrote:AKA instead of a guy who can get you 6.0 fWAR in one year, we'd rather have a guy who can get 6.0 fWAR over 6 years.

Obviously the first guy gives you the much, much, much better chance at winning something.


Except for two things:

- Donaldson will almost definitely never get anyone 6 fWAR in a season again, and;
- Getting 6 fWAR next season would be entirely pointless anyway.
**** your asterisk.
User avatar
sule
RealGM
Posts: 13,541
And1: 32,325
Joined: Nov 11, 2006
     

Re: Josh Donaldson traded to [the Indians] for something because Passan says so 

Post#118 » by sule » Sun Sep 2, 2018 12:56 am

Schad wrote:
sule wrote:AKA instead of a guy who can get you 6.0 fWAR in one year, we'd rather have a guy who can get 6.0 fWAR over 6 years.

Obviously the first guy gives you the much, much, much better chance at winning something.


Except for two things:

- Donaldson will almost definitely never get anyone 6 fWAR in a season again, and;
- Getting 6 fWAR next season would be entirely pointless anyway.


That's why I didn't specifically mention Donaldson. My point is that efficiency can mean a lot of things. But it seems they are going the route where they'd rather pay $1 million for 1.0 fWAR than, say, $10 million for 6.0 fWAR (as an example). You can build a lineup of 1.0 WAR players on the cheap and be happy that you won 75 games, but if your goal is a championship, then overall production should usurp your spending vs. production calculations, within reason.
Image
User avatar
Schad
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 49,760
And1: 10,920
Joined: Feb 08, 2006
Location: The Goat Rodeo
     

Re: Josh Donaldson traded to [the Indians] for something because Passan says so 

Post#119 » by Schad » Sun Sep 2, 2018 1:17 am

sule wrote:That's why I didn't specifically mention Donaldson. My point is that efficiency can mean a lot of things. But it seems they are going the route where they'd rather pay $1 million for 1.0 fWAR than, say, $10 million for 6.0 fWAR (as an example). You can build a lineup of 1.0 WAR players on the cheap and be happy that you won 75 games, but if your goal is a championship, then overall production should usurp your spending vs. production calculations, within reason.


I don't disagree with the logic overall, but we're in the sort of interregnum where players who are good at baseball just aren't our thing. We absolutely should have moved players earlier for guys who have a shot at that, but we're more looking at guys who have a shot at 5 WAR over 4 years versus guys who have a 1 in 8 shot at 5 WAR in a year. I'd take the latter, mind.
**** your asterisk.
User avatar
BramptonYute
Head Coach
Posts: 6,592
And1: 8,211
Joined: Mar 14, 2013
     

Re: Josh Donaldson traded to [the Indians] for something because Passan says so 

Post#120 » by BramptonYute » Sun Sep 2, 2018 1:31 am

Schad wrote:Sounds very much like the return is Merryweather, if he gets a clean bill of health after returning from TJ. He's not totally without upside; was an old draftee that Cleveland didn't rush through the system (with their starters, they didn't have to), which explains his age. Good fastball, solid-enough secondary stuff, solid control, and an alarming tendency last year to surrender home runs that could just be a fluke.

Basically, a guy who (if healthy) could break camp as a #4 or #5 starter. Only problem is that we have a lot of back-end sorts, and not so much high-end talent.

Read on Twitter


would merryweather be on trade waivers and get claimed tho?

Return to Toronto Blue Jays