My Theory to Why We Traded Mike Napoli for Frank Francisco

Wally West · Post #1 » by **Wally West** » Sat May 14, 2011 8:54 pm

The reason why I think we traded Mike Napoli for Frank Francisco was because of his Type A status and the fact that Alex Anthopoulos goal has been to build for the long term. I'm guessing that when he envisioned trading for Frankie, he'd have a great year for our ball club ala Kevin Gregg last year and line up teams like Philadaphia, St. Louis, Detroit and even the Boston Red Sox to give up a first rounder just to sign him. AA is high on obtaining as many picks as possible in these drafts. First rounder are just a plus. What are everyone else's thoughts to why he pulled off such a trade even though we had guys like Rauch on Dotel already on the books?

Post #2 » by **Schad** » Sat May 14, 2011 9:10 pm

There isn't a bigger fan of stockpiling comp picks than myself, but it has to be remembered that Type-A for a reliever can be as much curse as blessing. Teams have caught on that decent relievers are somewhat interchangeable and subject to serious swings in performance; as such, they have become much more hesitant to give up a draft pick in order to sign them to multi-year deals. The result is that such players can find a rather barren market, and their arbitration figure starts to look a heck of a lot better...we saw that with Frasor this past off-season.

It's for that reason that I'm hoping that most of our transient relievers hit Type-B rather than Type-A (which means that the signing team does not surrender a pick)...I doubt that any would be valued as highly as Downs was a year ago, so our best bet would be to extract just the one pick, but have a much higher likelihood of actually getting that return, as was the case with Gregg. Alternatively, there's the hope that they're absolutely lights-out and convince a team that they are a True Closer, but the odds of that are slimmer.

luenell · Post #3 » by **luenell** » Sun May 15, 2011 3:25 pm

im sure thats one of the reasons they signed dotel too since he'll be a type b free agent

Ong_dynasty · Post #4 » by **Ong_dynasty** » Sun May 15, 2011 5:58 pm

If we are stockpiling picks this year and next.
does that mean we will probably not see major league investment until the year after?

FreeAgent · Post #5 » by **FreeAgent** » Sun May 15, 2011 6:25 pm

Ong_dynasty wrote:If we are stockpiling picks this year and next.
does that mean we will probably not see major league investment until the year after?

Yep. Good news is we stockpiled picks last year so we'll start seeing those next year...hopefully.

Post #6 » by **Schad** » Sun May 15, 2011 7:52 pm

Ong_dynasty wrote:If we are stockpiling picks this year and next.
does that mean we will probably not see major league investment until the year after?

But what it does provide is a cushion...we have considerable depth already with more coming, and thus can be extremely aggressive in the trade market without going broke. As such, I'd expect us to start making splashes this off-season; heck, we better start making them then.

Michael Bradley · Post #7 » by **Michael Bradley** » Sun May 15, 2011 8:18 pm

Schadenfreude wrote:
Ong_dynasty wrote:If we are stockpiling picks this year and next.
does that mean we will probably not see major league investment until the year after?

But what it does provide is a cushion...we have considerable depth already with more coming, and thus can be extremely aggressive in the trade market without going broke. As such, I'd expect us to start making splashes this off-season; heck, we better start making them then.

Agreed. The Jays, after this upcoming draft, will be in a position where they can (if they wanted to) start moving players like Snider, or Thames, or Stewart, or whoever, for MLB help because there will be prospects at a level or two under them that could filter the system to replace them. The Jays don't have to bank on their draft picks to pan out like the Rays do. They can afford to trade them in order to add legit MLB pieces and keep them around. Remains to be seen whether they will do that.

evilRyu · Post #8 » by **evilRyu** » Mon May 16, 2011 12:23 am

I imagine given the depth at the catcher position, that we might see some movement there?

flatjacket1 · Post #9 » by **flatjacket1** » Mon May 16, 2011 1:37 am

evilRyu wrote:I imagine given the depth at the catcher position, that we might see some movement there?

I would move JPA right now to free up space for next years prospects.

Post #10 » by **Schad** » Mon May 16, 2011 1:45 am

flatjacket1 wrote:
evilRyu wrote:I imagine given the depth at the catcher position, that we might see some movement there?

I would move JPA right now to free up space for next years prospects.

That would be a very bad idea, as none of our catcher prospects are likely to arrive by next season.

number15 · Post #11 » by **number15** » Mon May 16, 2011 3:34 am

Mike Napoli was young, talented and exactly what the JAYS needed at the DH spot..... Chances are Francisco will NOT be a Type-A and any pick will be lucky to be nearly as good as Napoli. Plus wasent Napoli also a FA soon. AA bet on a reliever`s FA status rather than a hitter.... risky

Also Edwin Encarnaccion was also signed for future picks. Thats why the JAYS put an option on his second year like the relievers we signed. AA figured he would break out as it seemed at end of last season and JAYS would get Type-A status. I doubt AA had him in the long term plans...... Napoli or EE at DH, who is better

Relentless88 · Post #12 » by **Relentless88** » Mon May 16, 2011 5:11 am

Wow Napoli has a .197 batting average, but also has an OPS of .867.