Image

Jack Wilson & Ian Snell

BlazersDozen
Ballboy
Posts: 20
And1: 0
Joined: Mar 08, 2009

Jack Wilson & Ian Snell 

Post#1 » by BlazersDozen » Wed Jul 29, 2009 5:03 pm

RealGM Staff Report - The Mariners have acquired shortstop Jack Wilson and right-handed pitcher Ian Snell in exchange for first baseman Jeff Clement, shortstop Ronny Cedeno and right-handed pitchers Aaron Pribanic, Brett Lorin and Nathan Adcock.

The announcement was made in a press release by Neal Huntington, Pittsburgh's general manager.

Clement was the third overall selection of the 2005 MLB Draft and was rated by Baseball America as the organization’s number one prospect for both 2006 and 2008.

Wilson has an OPS of .691 this season and has seemingly been on the trading block forever.

Snell has struggled over the past two seasons, but has a 0.96 ERA in six Triple-A starts in 2009.


I think the M's could've got somebody better than Ian Snell but at this point, I already trust the Hell out of JZ. But with Snell, four of his 6 years in the league, his ERA has been over 5, not a good strike out to walk ratio at all, gives up 9-10 hits per nine innings every year of his career and five walks per nine innings for the past two years.

I love Jack Wilson and have wanted him for awhile now, but now I think he may be over the hill. He's basically a Christian Guzman/Adam Kennedy type of player. He's not great at the plate, but he's consistant. You can count on about 8 home runs and 54 RBI every year and the average will more likely go up with the big gaps in Safeco. Do I need to mention his glove?

All in all...I think JZ could've got more for what he sold off but Eh...
User avatar
timd1218
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 2,380
And1: 0
Joined: Mar 24, 2005
Location: I will eat your soul.
Contact:

Re: Jack Wilson & Ian Snell 

Post#2 » by timd1218 » Wed Jul 29, 2009 5:17 pm

Pirate Fan here.

Like you said, you'll love Wilson. He was a fan favorite here. Tremendous in the field. He'll hit around .270 a year maybe higher because of the gaps in Safeco.

With Snell, he is a head case. He has great stuff, but he just can't get his act together. If he doesn't get a call in his favor, he'll just implode and pitch terrible. Hopefully, this will benefit him because if he can get his mental issues taken care of, he can be a very good pitcher.

Can you give me anything about the prospects the Pirates got in return?
Image
I know what you're thinking. We're in the middle of a city, what's a hawk doing there?
Sweezo
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 18,215
And1: 36
Joined: Aug 12, 2001
       

Re: Jack Wilson & Ian Snell 

Post#3 » by Sweezo » Wed Jul 29, 2009 5:30 pm

Sweet Jesus we sold off half the rotation of one of our minor league teams. WTF?
Sweezo
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 18,215
And1: 36
Joined: Aug 12, 2001
       

Re: Jack Wilson & Ian Snell 

Post#4 » by Sweezo » Wed Jul 29, 2009 5:32 pm

This is stupid. This is a move you make if you're a buyer, not a seller. WE'RE NOT A BUYER. We can't overtake the Angels this year. Adding Jack Wilson isn't going to put runs on the board.

If this deal is the only thing we do, I'm upset. If we move tradeable pieces like Washburn, it's a different story. But this team can't think the playoffs are possible this year...they're not.
User avatar
TTown
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,464
And1: 11
Joined: Apr 04, 2009
Location: Oregon

Re: Jack Wilson & Ian Snell 

Post#5 » by TTown » Wed Jul 29, 2009 5:39 pm

Yeah, we can't be done. This move doesn't make a ton of sense by itself.

At the very least, it looks like Z is trying to avoid a full-scale fire sale, and at least remain competitive in 2010.
ImageImageImageImage
jumanji
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,678
And1: 4
Joined: Mar 24, 2004

Re: Jack Wilson & Ian Snell 

Post#6 » by jumanji » Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:20 pm

Sweezo wrote:This is stupid. This is a move you make if you're a buyer, not a seller. WE'RE NOT A BUYER. We can't overtake the Angels this year. Adding Jack Wilson isn't going to put runs on the board.

If this deal is the only thing we do, I'm upset. If we move tradeable pieces like Washburn, it's a different story. But this team can't think the playoffs are possible this year...they're not.


Not sure how adding a great glove and a .270 hitter isnt a major upgrade over a .170 hitter with an average glove. The age of Wilson (31) bothers me a little but they should be set for the next half dozen years at short. Clement i dont think really had a chance to show what he could do. Apparantly he isnt the best catcher around but i think his bat is a little underrated, wish him the best.
BlazersDozen
Ballboy
Posts: 20
And1: 0
Joined: Mar 08, 2009

Re: Jack Wilson & Ian Snell 

Post#7 » by BlazersDozen » Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:41 pm

timd1218 wrote:Pirate Fan here.

Like you said, you'll love Wilson. He was a fan favorite here. Tremendous in the field. He'll hit around .270 a year maybe higher because of the gaps in Safeco.

With Snell, he is a head case. He has great stuff, but he just can't get his act together. If he doesn't get a call in his favor, he'll just implode and pitch terrible. Hopefully, this will benefit him because if he can get his mental issues taken care of, he can be a very good pitcher.

Can you give me anything about the prospects the Pirates got in return?


Ronny Cedeno is a below average hitter and average glove with some speed. He has some potential to become a better hitter...maybe turn into a poor man's Jack Wilson LoL

Jeff Clement hasn't show much whenever he came to the majors but he has always performed great in the minors. He's now a 1st baseman so I'm sure he'll be on the big club right away.
Bulltalk
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 37,842
And1: 9,277
Joined: Jun 25, 2002
Location: Seattle Area
       

Re: Jack Wilson & Ian Snell 

Post#8 » by Bulltalk » Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:44 pm

Hmmm.....the way I see it, Wilson is a guy we can count on at SS for the next 3 years, at which time we'll hopefully have a young player ready to take over the position. (I wish to God when you GOOGLED a player's profile the player's contract status was listed there, at least in terms of length and amount. A small gripe of mine,)

As for Ian Snell....this seems like one of those things where you have to give Z the benefit of a doubt. Obviously, Z sees in Snell a pitcher who under the right conditions might "break out" and become a solid 3rd or 4th starter in the coming years. He's only 27 years old. If Snell pans out in such a way, then it might be hard to argue with it. If we trade Washburn and lose Bedard, it's my contention that our starting rotation would be weak going into next year.

I don't know. We certainly weren't stocking-the-farm with prospects in this trade. If there's one thing about Z that seems to be becoming clear is that he wants to strike a balance between remaining competitive in the near term, while doing his best to keep us having something positive to look forward to in the longer term.

Perhaps in adding Ian Snell and Danny Cortes Z feels that he's strengthened our starting pitching in the future more than some people might think. We'll have to wait and see. One thing I've noticed so far this year with our new regime is that pitchers, generally speaking, seem to be doing well, mostly matching or exceeding our expectations of them.
"I'm a truth teller. All I do is tell the truth."

(Donald Trump - 8/11/16)
Ex-hippie
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,213
And1: 0
Joined: Jun 17, 2003

Re: Jack Wilson & Ian Snell 

Post#9 » by Ex-hippie » Wed Jul 29, 2009 7:11 pm

Bulltalk wrote:Hmmm.....the way I see it, Wilson is a guy we can count on at SS for the next 3 years, at which time we'll hopefully have a young player ready to take over the position. (I wish to God when you GOOGLED a player's profile the player's contract status was listed there, at least in terms of length and amount. A small gripe of mine


He's in the last year of his contract with an $8.4 million club option for 2010. That price is steep, but I understand that Pittsburgh has also included "significant cash" with the deal, so maybe they'll plan to use the money to get one more year from him. After that, they might want to try to re-up him for another 2 years or so, but realistically he's probably getting close to the end of the productive portion of his career (such as it is).
Bulltalk
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 37,842
And1: 9,277
Joined: Jun 25, 2002
Location: Seattle Area
       

Re: Jack Wilson & Ian Snell 

Post#10 » by Bulltalk » Wed Jul 29, 2009 7:25 pm

Ex-hippie wrote:
Bulltalk wrote:Hmmm.....the way I see it, Wilson is a guy we can count on at SS for the next 3 years, at which time we'll hopefully have a young player ready to take over the position. (I wish to God when you GOOGLED a player's profile the player's contract status was listed there, at least in terms of length and amount. A small gripe of mine


He's in the last year of his contract with an $8.4 million club option for 2010. That price is steep, but I understand that Pittsburgh has also included "significant cash" with the deal, so maybe they'll plan to use the money to get one more year from him. After that, they might want to try to re-up him for another 2 years or so, but realistically he's probably getting close to the end of the productive portion of his career (such as it is).


What do you think, hippie? Wait and see? It seems like we'll be trying to resign Branyan this off-season to play 1st base now (and DH), and probably bat 4th or 5th in the lineup where he belongs. His average is coming back down to earth at about .265 now. If it holds in the .265-.275 area, he's basically Buhner playing 1st base. :lol:

Thanks for the contract info on Wilson. It would probably be nice to sign him to a 2-3 year extension at a reasonable price.

Snell is the key in the trade for me. Z is certainly no Ruskell. In Snell and Cortes he's already shown that he's willing to give a headcase a chance to succeed. I don't merely see this as a trade to remain competitive this season, even if that only means going for a winning record. The M's HAVE to be concerned about our 2nd-3rd-and 4th starters going into next season. These guys...

1) Juan Ramirez (21)
2) Michael Pineda (20)
3) Phillipe Aumont (20)
4) Danny Cortes (22)
5) Maikel Cleto (20)

...simply are not-ready-for-prime-time, and RRS seems like a 5th starter, 4th starter at best to me. I'm not sold at all on Vargas being anything more than a 5th starter, and I certainly don't want to see a starting rotation that includes 3 out of the 4 of Olson/RRS/Vargas/Jaka. :nonono:
"I'm a truth teller. All I do is tell the truth."

(Donald Trump - 8/11/16)
Sweezo
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 18,215
And1: 36
Joined: Aug 12, 2001
       

Re: Jack Wilson & Ian Snell 

Post#11 » by Sweezo » Wed Jul 29, 2009 7:29 pm

jumanji wrote:
Not sure how adding a great glove and a .270 hitter isnt a major upgrade over a .170 hitter with an average glove. The age of Wilson (31) bothers me a little but they should be set for the next half dozen years at short. Clement i dont think really had a chance to show what he could do. Apparantly he isnt the best catcher around but i think his bat is a little underrated, wish him the best.


Wilson's not signed for the next half dozen years at short...he's only under club control through next year, and at a very high price I might add.

The M's should be trying to acquire younger players that are under control for a long time, not trade them for veterans for a playoff push.
Bulltalk
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 37,842
And1: 9,277
Joined: Jun 25, 2002
Location: Seattle Area
       

Re: Jack Wilson & Ian Snell 

Post#12 » by Bulltalk » Wed Jul 29, 2009 7:32 pm

Sweezo wrote:
jumanji wrote:
Not sure how adding a great glove and a .270 hitter isnt a major upgrade over a .170 hitter with an average glove. The age of Wilson (31) bothers me a little but they should be set for the next half dozen years at short. Clement i dont think really had a chance to show what he could do. Apparantly he isnt the best catcher around but i think his bat is a little underrated, wish him the best.


Wilson's not signed for the next half dozen years at short...he's only under club control through next year, and at a very high price I might add.

The M's should be trying to acquire younger players that are under control for a long time, not trade them for veterans for a playoff push.


When Wilson shows up in Seattle with the weather we've been having (a little cooler would help), he'll immediately ask to sign an extension at a reasonable price. :lol:
"I'm a truth teller. All I do is tell the truth."

(Donald Trump - 8/11/16)
BlazersDozen
Ballboy
Posts: 20
And1: 0
Joined: Mar 08, 2009

Re: Jack Wilson & Ian Snell 

Post#13 » by BlazersDozen » Wed Jul 29, 2009 7:33 pm

I think this move definitly tells us that the Washburn for Escobar deal is about to go down. It makes perfect sense.

Snell is tearing it up in the minors right now so the M's bring him up to take Washburn's spot in the rotation (not saying I agree with it) then the M's acquire Escobar for Wash and let him play this year in the minors while Jack Wilson plays out the rest of his contract.
jumanji
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,678
And1: 4
Joined: Mar 24, 2004

Re: Jack Wilson & Ian Snell 

Post#14 » by jumanji » Wed Jul 29, 2009 7:35 pm

Sweezo wrote:
jumanji wrote:
Not sure how adding a great glove and a .270 hitter isnt a major upgrade over a .170 hitter with an average glove. The age of Wilson (31) bothers me a little but they should be set for the next half dozen years at short. Clement i dont think really had a chance to show what he could do. Apparantly he isnt the best catcher around but i think his bat is a little underrated, wish him the best.


Wilson's not signed for the next half dozen years at short...he's only under club control through next year, and at a very high price I might add.

The M's should be trying to acquire younger players that are under control for a long time, not trade them for veterans for a playoff push.


If the Pirates were to bring in a Jack Wilson i would agree but Seattle doesnt have a problem spending money. My guess is they dont make this deal if they have doubts they can sign him long term. To the comment that 31 is beyond a player's best years i cant disagree with that more.
User avatar
BlackMamba
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 16,297
And1: 81
Joined: Jun 20, 2004
Location: Cd. de M
         

Re: Jack Wilson & Ian Snell 

Post#15 » by BlackMamba » Wed Jul 29, 2009 7:52 pm

wow... the M's front office is in a hurry or what?
User avatar
timd1218
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 2,380
And1: 0
Joined: Mar 24, 2005
Location: I will eat your soul.
Contact:

Re: Jack Wilson & Ian Snell 

Post#16 » by timd1218 » Wed Jul 29, 2009 8:12 pm

More things from here in Pittsburgh. The Pirates will pay the remaining salaries of Wilson and Snell for this season except for $400,000.

And for those of you who think Wilson will be the SS for the next 3-6 years, you probably shouldn't count on that. He has missed 170 games the past 3 seasons due to injuries. He is starting to break down.
Image
I know what you're thinking. We're in the middle of a city, what's a hawk doing there?
Ex-hippie
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,213
And1: 0
Joined: Jun 17, 2003

Re: Jack Wilson & Ian Snell 

Post#17 » by Ex-hippie » Wed Jul 29, 2009 8:49 pm

timd1218 wrote:More things from here in Pittsburgh. The Pirates will pay the remaining salaries of Wilson and Snell for this season except for $400,000.

And for those of you who think Wilson will be the SS for the next 3-6 years, you probably shouldn't count on that. He has missed 170 games the past 3 seasons due to injuries. He is starting to break down.


Kind of what I figured. That's what 31-year-olds tend to do. It's very hard to project someone like Wilson to stick around until age 37, though stranger things have happened.

The blogosphere consensus seems to be that Pittsburgh won this trade, so congrats. The three pitching prospects weren't in the top tier of the M's prospect lists, but all three of them have some shot at hitting the majors someday, at least a 1-in-3 shot, so you have to figure the odds are that one or more of them will be in the Pirates' rotation eventually. Clement is obviously the biggest name we're sending across, and if he can catch at all then he'll be a steal. Though I guess with Doumit around and Adam LaRoche gone, it looks like he's heading for first base, where he'll be an average hitter. But, hey, when you're a team on a budget, average players who can stick around a while and not cost too much are an asset.
User avatar
HeavyP
Starter
Posts: 2,072
And1: 0
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
Location: Bonney Lake, Washington
Contact:
     

Re: Jack Wilson & Ian Snell 

Post#18 » by HeavyP » Wed Jul 29, 2009 8:54 pm

I absolutely love this trade. Love everything about it.

We gave up 3 minor league arms, Aaron Pribanic who is a 22 year old guy who is at least 3 years away. He has 3 pitches, however his fastball doesn't have enough movement and his other pitches aren't that good for him to be anything other than a reliever in the big leagues.

Nathan Adcock is a 21 year old who pitches in the High Desert, therefore you cannot look at his stats. Luckily, I trust JackieZ to look past his stats and look at his skills. He has one pitch, a curveball. His fastball is below average and he doesn't have a changeup. Also looks to be a reliever in the bigs.

Brett Lorin is a 22 year old who has a plus fastball but not much else. However, if he developed more of a repertoire he could have been an end of the rotation starter.

That being said, when evaluating minor league arms one must be careful because a lot can change in a few years. That's why Dave Cameron is so against this trade, he's from the philosophy stack a bunch of arms with one MLB quality pitch, and HOPE they develop something else to make them into a quality pitcher, more often then not they don't pan out though.

We also traded Clement (who I am higher on then most everyone else I know) and Cedeno. Clement had no home in this organization. We have a lefty 1b who actually can play D and take pitches (Carp), we have a LH DH who can come up if need be (Nelson) and we have a catcher of the future (Moore). That being said, Clement was the odd man out. Trading Cedeno doesn't bother me at all, now that we have a SS we just need a utility player and Woodward is under club control for a long time and cheap.

Who we got:
Jack Wilson, is a defensive stud. He will make us forget about Yuni's mishaps. He's a gap hitter so I think he benefits coming to Safeco (although he is RH). He is 31 so he's not young (However, keep in mind Beltre is 30). He has an 8.4 club option for 2010, however we're only paying him 400k for this year as Pittsburgh pitched in the rest of his salary. He's not the young stud we were all hoping for, however he is a massive massive massive upgrade over Yuni/Cedeno

Ian Snell is massively thought of as a headcase. He was a good SP for the Pirates in 2006 and 2007, now he hasn't been good the last two years. During that time Snell has publicly said how he wanted out of Pittsburgh. Dave Cameron was saying he was a potential buy-low candidate but by reading what Pittsburgh's Gm said, I don't believe that was ever the case. Well, since Snell has been at AAA (After saying he'd rather kill himself than pitch for the pirates [paraphrased]) he's been pitching very well. It's likely he's taking Bedard's spot in the rotation later this week. Pittsburgh also sent us money to cover his contract.

One other thing, Jack Wilson is a type A free agent if we choose to let him become one. Which we've been over a million times, but it means we get two picks if he signs somewhere else. It's completely possible that Zdurienck viewed this as an opportunity to give up two players who were redundant (Clement and Cedeno) to get Wilson (who will either be our SS or he will be turned into two picks that may be able to turn into something useful) and only costs us 400k (what we will pay Wilson).

From there he was able to turn 3 minor league arms (none of which I was very high on) into a pitcher who has flashed #3 starting stuff before, and doesn't have a bad contract.

The Wlad trade is fine by me too. We got a guy who strikes out guys and doesn't walk guys at the AAA level. He may not amount to much, but Wlad was going to be a FA in a week. We improved our team for 2009, and 2010 without paying anything that was going to help us during those years. We still have Washburn and Morrow available so we may not be done trading yet.
slaterbug
Banned User
Posts: 1,497
And1: 1
Joined: Jan 26, 2009
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Jack Wilson & Ian Snell 

Post#19 » by slaterbug » Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:12 pm

I like this trade for the M's. Wilson is a defensive stud and I think Snell will improve at Safeco.

I think there is more trades to come.
Ex-hippie
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,213
And1: 0
Joined: Jun 17, 2003

Re: Jack Wilson & Ian Snell 

Post#20 » by Ex-hippie » Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:12 pm

via Divish:

Ronny Cedeno was red-eyed, emotional and absolutely stunned about being traded, despite hitting just .167 this season.

"I don't have any control over it," Cedeno said. "It's baseball. It's a business. I'm really surprised."

Cedeno was notified this morning at 9 a.m.

"I'm really sad," Cedeno said. "Felix is my best friend. He and Carlos Silva are great guys and I'm going to be miss them."


In related news, the M's haven't put Carlos Silva to sleep yet.

Return to Seattle Mariners