Shaun Marcum Traded to the Brewers for Brett Lawrie

[Komodo]

Just finished reading through all 23 pages. So let me get this straight; it's a good trade if Lawrie can develop into a 30 HR player, but not it he turns out be a 20 HR player, due to his defensive shortcomings and basically being a guy without a position.

Definitely some risk.

No, its' a good trade if the Jays are in rebuild mode, which we are. We're one year removed from Trading Roy Halladay and it doesn't take one year to rebuild a team. Ask any Leaf fan and they'll tell you the same thing. The Jays get a top prospect in return for Marcum.

The debate really is more at which direction the team is going then anything else.

You sidestepped my question. I never said it wasn't a good trade; from what I can gather it was a "fair" trade for both teams.

My uncertainty revolves around Lawrie; he has the potential to be a 30 HR guy, but he could also top out as a 20 HR guy. The only reason I'm bringing it up is because it's been mentioned throughout the course of this thread, but if his power doesn't develop the way most here hope that it does, then a 20 HR guy who's poor defensively and is already classified as a tweener is nothing special at all.

I'm not trying to go all Mustard here. I think it's a fair trade (but what do I know), and i'll be fun to track his development.

So what was he officially ranked at as an overall prospect? 25th?

[Komodo]

No, its' a good trade if the Jays are in rebuild mode, which we are. We're one year removed from Trading Roy Halladay and it doesn't take one year to rebuild a team. Ask any Leaf fan and they'll tell you the same thing. The Jays get a top prospect in return for Marcum.

The debate really is more at which direction the team is going then anything else.

Indeed. So, if AA is willing to deal Marcum, at his peak, before his big raise, because he is too old to fit the core during contention, why won't he do the same with say, Bautista, who is also at peak value, is just before a big raise, and is older than Marcum. If we are really rebuilding, deal Bautista for a young OF prospect. I keep getting mixed messages from AA. He seems to be rebuiding, then he gives up our prospects for 30 year old Rajai Davis, or 28 year old Escobar.

I see where you're coming from, but we don't know what goes on behind closed doors. Ownership might disapprove of totally stripping it down because this is a business after all. If you trade Bautista for prospects, the casual fan will be less inclined to spend money on tickets. I don't know if that's the case, but it certainly could be.

[LBJSeizedMyID]

But was there a question in your original post?

- He has 20 HR potential if I were to predict anything. Scouts say power is his best asset and can reach 30.
- Drafted as a catcher, immediately converted to second baseman. This is only his second year playing this position.
- He just finished AA at age 20. Right now he's playing against older competition. He only hit 8 HR, but also hit 36 doubles and a crazy 16 triples.

I agree it's a fair trade for both sides. It addresses needs for both clubs. Ranked last year #37 on MLB.com.

[Schad]

So what was he officially ranked at as an overall prospect? 25th?

Dunno yet...BA hasn't released their top 100 yet. They had him 15th in their mid-season rankings, though.

[LBJSeizedMyID]

No, its' a good trade if the Jays are in rebuild mode, which we are. We're one year removed from Trading Roy Halladay and it doesn't take one year to rebuild a team. Ask any Leaf fan and they'll tell you the same thing. The Jays get a top prospect in return for Marcum.

The debate really is more at which direction the team is going then anything else.

Indeed. So, if AA is willing to deal Marcum, at his peak, before his big raise, because he is too old to fit the core during contention, why won't he do the same with say, Bautista, who is also at peak value, is just before a big raise, and is older than Marcum. If we are really rebuilding, deal Bautista for a young OF prospect. I keep getting mixed messages from AA. He seems to be rebuiding, then he gives up our prospects for 30 year old Rajai Davis, or 28 year old Escobar.

I agree, and I'm pretty sure AA would agree with you as well. However, I don't think Atlanta would give Jason Heyward or Washington would give up Bryce Harper for Jose Bautista, and that's what his worth is. So you hold on to Bautista and field as competitive team as possible, because Bautista was the one player that brought back some of the casual fans.

Not sure what was so mind boggling about the Escobar trade. We traded a 30 something year old Alex Gonzalez for a younger, cheaper version of him. Rajai Davis was brought in to address speed. It's not like they broke the vault for him.

All this argument might be moot if the one rumour I read about Marcum declining an extension to move closer to home in the Midwest is true. Than we know the real reason behind the trade.

[kelso]

They inferred as much on the FAN590 this morning, that Marcum was not going to resign with the team so trading him makes complete sense. They also dont feel this deal is a pre-cursor to a Grienke deal.

[SharoneWright]

So, if AA is willing to deal Marcum, at his peak, before his big raise, because he is too old to fit the core during contention, why won't he do the same with say, Bautista, who is also at peak value, is just before a big raise, and is older than Marcum.

Well we do have other pitchers.

We've got exactly 1 50HR hitter versatile enough in the field to play 3rd base.

Perhaps you can try to compete now, but also pay attention to the future - or at least 2 years down the road. Not sure that's quite as impossible as its made out to be.

[ItsDanger]

This Lawrie sounds more and more like a LF of which there are plenty to be had. Still wish we could trade for a legit 1B. I wasnt impressed by Lind's short performance there.

[Sister]

Geesh, the kid is 20 years old playing way above his age in AA.

This is only his second year playing 2B after being drafted as a catcher. Can we, um, maybe, um give him a year or two before we start critiquing him as being a poor second-baseman or as an underwhelming LF prospect.

Let the Jays system work with him and evaluate him to see what they have. Maybe he sticks at 2B and lets Hill slide to third; maybe he slides over to 3B. And maybe, if all else fails he moves to the OF...but give the kid a bit of time people.

Jeff Kent was a marginal 2B from a defensive standpoint but he turned out alright in the end.

At age 23 in AA, Kent hit .256 .379 .418 .797, with 29 errors at 2B, range factor of 4.63, field % 957
At age 20 in AA Lawrie hit .285 .346 .451 .797 with 25 errors at 2B, range factor of 4.66, fielding % 961.

[SharoneWright]

This Lawrie sounds more and more like a LF of which there are plenty to be had. Still wish we could trade for a legit 1B. I wasnt impressed by Lind's short performance there.

I disagree.

I think at 20 he is young enough to be taught 3rd base. If he's athletic enough to attempt 2nd, he's gonna have enough dexterity to hold down the corner. The key will be his motivation/attitude, about which we've heard varying reports. On the plus side, the kid was a catcher for years, and having a guy on the infield who thinks like a catcher will be a bonus - at the very least his head will be in the game.

[WpgPage]

I would like to give him a try at 3rd his arm strength is reported as strong I would not be surprised to see him tried at 3rd for at least a season before moving him to a OF position. Anyone have any info on his FB% and LD% i cant seam to find any while at 350 BABIP would seam unsustainable if his LD% is high we can look at his numbers with a little more certainty. His BB% was fine at 7.7 and while his K% was high at 21.3 it wasn't red flag scary high ether, a repeat of AA might do him some good letting him catch up age wise with other prospects at AA then move him up to AAA for his age 23 season.

[LBJSeizedMyID]

FB% 33.5% and LD -13.7% Still needs work.

[Raptorsrock]

So what was he officially ranked at as an overall prospect? 25th?

Dunno yet...BA hasn't released their top 100 yet. They had him 15th in their mid-season rankings, though.

This is what makes me wonder why ppl are crying over losing Marcum. He's a good pitcher, no doubt. But he's coming off a huge injury and all he's going to be doing for the next 2 years is to help us finish 3rd or 4th in the East. In return for him we received one of the top 20 best prospects in baseball. For a rebuilding team this is exactly what you want to be doing.

[andyo]

So what was he officially ranked at as an overall prospect? 25th?

Dunno yet...BA hasn't released their top 100 yet. They had him 15th in their mid-season rankings, though.

This is what makes me wonder why ppl are crying over losing Marcum. He's a good pitcher, no doubt. But he's coming off a huge injury and all he's going to be doing for the next 2 years is to help us finish 3rd or 4th in the East. In return for him we received one of the top 20 best prospects in baseball. For a rebuilding team this is exactly what you want to be doing.

Agreed, I said this earlier. What calibre of a player did people expect from Marcum, it's not viable to get a "proven" yet young talent with him. Some of you guys way overrate his value. He's a warrior and it's easy to get emotionally attached to players like himself. At the end of the day, he's coming off a huge injury and his stuff is worthy of a mid rotation starter at best. Not to mention it's looking like he wanted out/wasn't gonna resign anyways.

We got the Brewer's best prospect for a player that was completely expendable. This wasn't Romero, Morrow, or Drabek. Think rationally for a few seconds, you'll realize we just traded a huge overachiever, who was looking at not resigning (gone after 2 years?), has had major arm surgery, and has mediocre stuff to boot for a top 15-20 prospect in baseball.

[Pchu]

I like Marcum, but people are overrating him.

He is #3 pitcher in this league, who had injuries issues. He has 1 complete game in his career, and has never pitched over 200 innings. Needless to say, he is not exactly a work horse. So you are giving up a #3 pitcher, for a young prospect who can be an all-star for a team that doesn't have a lot of position players with upside. Why the hate?

[s e n s i]

Some of you guys can spin this trade anyway you want to make yourself feel better but this is an absolutely HORRIBLE trade

Oh, the irony.

[Denisaur9]

Brett Kawrie is a great Prospect, Im not sure what people were expecting to get from Marcum who arguably overachieved last year and you never know after a TJ surgery.

Here are some of Lawrie's Rankings

MLB.com #26 (also a video if you click on him)

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd ... id=7983130

#57

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_INKEWmMOqmc/S ... +51-79.png

Sportscity has him as the #2 in the Brewers System

http://www.sportscity.com/MLB/Milwaukee ... -Prospects

Baseball America #59

http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/?p=7539

Cardboard Connection #57

http://www.cardboardconnection.com/base ... by-version

Good Value AA, and its never a bad Idea to pick up prospects, will be handy when we decide to compete and are a player away and can package some up.

[Michael Bradley]

As someone who is not thrilled with the deal (assuming it is straight 1-for-1), I don't think it is fair to say "Marcum fans" are upset with the move. A year ago we traded Roy Halladay - a pitcher that no franchise should ever trade - so Shaun Marcum is certainly not untouchable by any stretch of the imagination. If they had to move him or wanted to move him for whatever reason, fine. However, you have to attach value to a player when trading him, and I think the Jays shortchanged the asset they had. They should have gotten more back. A #2-3 calibre starter (in the AL East no less) with two years of service time remaining should hold significantly more value than a 20-year old prospect whose positional value is not known yet (is he a LF, 2B, 3B?) and who is a few years away. This wasn't a case of trading a deflating prospect like Brett Wallace for a potentially underdeveloped prospect like Gose; this was trading an established MLB starter with three years of very good performance under his belt for a lottery ticket.

Marcum's injury history, unless I am missing something from his minor league days, consists of Tommy John Surgery. That's all. He is not injury prone, he didn't miss time for nagging arm injuries. He missed time in 2008 due to problems related to TJS. Then he missed all of 2009 due to the surgery. His IP total was low in 2007 because the team started him in relief before moving him into the rotation in May. Sure his delivery might be a problem in the future, and he will never be a 200+ IP horse, but that shouldn't hinder the return for him today since we are dealing with a healthy Marcum coming off a very good season, and not one with warning flags all over him like he may have in the future if the "inverted W" comes back to haunt him.

I like Lawrie as a prospect, assuming he can stay at 2B or 3B, so I'm not denying that the Jays got a top prospect in return, but that doesn't mean it was necessarily equal value.

[torontoaces04]

Drabek, after the season he put together last year in New Hampshire, has to be considered at this point to be the undisputed #1 in our organization.

I for one am a fan of this move. Is it a move that comes with a fair bit of risk? Yes. Does the potential upside of this deal (if Lawrie stays on track and at 2nd) outweight the risk? That is for each of us to decide, today and for years to come. I am going on the record of being in favour of this move.

Who knows what the future may hold... Heck, Marcum could go to Milwaukee and become an absolute monster for them, creating a huge 1-2 punch alonge side Gallardo. As well, Lawrie could keep developing, and be the starting 2nd baseman for the Blue Jays in 2012. He could go on to hit upwards of 25+ homeruns per season. In this scenario, I'd say that it would be a win-win for both sides. Sometimes these types of trades are the best kind... *cough* Mcgriff + Fernandez for Alomar + Carter *cough*

With all of that being said, this deal could also go the exact opposite way. Marcum could struggle in Milwaukee, and Lawrie could potentially never pan out at 2nd or in general. Essentially, this is one of those deals which will have to be reevaluated year after year to see how each player developes.

[YogiStewart]

A year ago we traded Roy Halladay - a pitcher that no franchise should ever trade -

unless that pitcher walks into the GM's office and says he wants to be traded to a contender or will sign as a FA with a contender, which Halladay did. but go on.