Avlies and Gomes traded in Indians for RHP Esmil Rogers

Post #1 » by **YogiStewart** » Sat Nov 3, 2012 5:04 pm

as per Davidi on twitter

Tyrone Slothrop · Post #2 » by **Tyrone Slothrop** » Sat Nov 3, 2012 5:11 pm

Had pretty good numbers last year as a reliever, after a tough season as a starter in 2011. I think the only way AA makes this deal is if he believes that Rogers can be a solid 5th starter. We will see.

s e n s i · Post #3 » by **s e n s i** » Sat Nov 3, 2012 5:12 pm

damn now i have to be a fan of rogers, who i chirped mercilessly from the RF bleachers the last time the tribe was in town

another bullpen booster i presume. FB sits at 94 with decent tilt on his slider. still fairly young.

oh yeah, in before raps board poster chimes in with "blockbuster!" or "wow AA fleecing the indians with yet another wonder deal...powershift! /green" or something to that variation

dagger · Post #4 » by **dagger** » Sat Nov 3, 2012 5:12 pm

Interesting move that seems to save some money, too, as Rogers is still pre-arb next season, arb eligible in 2014. Very deep bullpen, might we see a couple of relievers added to a package for a starter?

s e n s i · Post #5 » by **s e n s i** » Sat Nov 3, 2012 5:21 pm

so farrell, gomes, carpenter for rogers?

not that gomes or carpenter had much value but i hope this is a precursor to a larger, more significant deal

baulderdash77 · Post #6 » by **baulderdash77** » Sat Nov 3, 2012 5:24 pm

Wow another reliever :roll:

who are we going to play in our infield.

Way to get at it AA

TheMainEvent · Post #7 » by **TheMainEvent** » Sat Nov 3, 2012 5:26 pm

I'd probably like the deal better if it was only one of Aviles or Gomes, but all in all, it really doesn't matter much. I like Aviles a bit and Gomes is an okay bench player, but neither are significant parts of the team/organization. I liked Rogers a bit when he first pitched in the majors in Colorado, but he fell off my radar very quickly. His major league track record is pretty bad, but from what I remember he's got quite the live arm. Maybe he'll fill a Villanueva type of role as Carlos is likely gone.

Raptor_Guy · Post #8 » by **Raptor_Guy** » Sat Nov 3, 2012 5:29 pm

More bullpen pitchers..alrighty then

Secueritae · Post #9 » by **Secueritae** » Sat Nov 3, 2012 5:32 pm

Haven't you heard? We're implementing a new system where we don't have any starters and play 5 relievers a game, pitching 2 innings each and closer pitches 1

Will confuse the hell out of other teams :lol:

Fairview4Life · Post #10 » by **Fairview4Life** » Sat Nov 3, 2012 5:37 pm

baulderdash77 wrote:Wow another reliever :roll: who are we going to play in our infield.

Way to get at it AA

Here are your thoughts on that subject, and on Aviles in particular, from the Farrell traded to Boston thread:

baulderdash77 wrote:Aviles should be the utility infielder IMO. He's going to be a cheap arbitration player and we could use a real MLB player as a backup for once. He's played 2B, SS, 3B.

I still see Hech and Escobar as our starting 2B and SS for next year.

baulderdash77 wrote:15 months and counting for AA to make an impact move. This is another tick in a getting longer list of fails.

baulderdash77 wrote:We helped our division rival get the guy they wanted and let them push us around for months and got essentially nothing for it.

baulderdash77 wrote:The fact is that we didn't get enough compensation for him. Aviles is basically useless. In some ways I'd rather have not made the trade at all.

So, it would seem you think Hech and Escobar should be playing in our infield (along with EE and Lawrie presumably), and Aviles should have been a utility guy. But he's also a guy you felt was 'essentially nothing', and 'useless'. Right up until the Jays traded him when he all of a sudden became useful. Am I getting that right?

s e n s i · Post #11 » by **s e n s i** » Sat Nov 3, 2012 5:37 pm

baulderdash77 wrote:Wow another reliever who are we going to play in our infield.

Way to get at it AA

wut? seriously? oh no, we traded away mike aviles (who no one wanted to be the full-time 2B and rightfully so) and yan gomes, AAAA fodder. lord help us, we now don't have anyone to play in the infield.

Kaizen · Post #12 » by **Kaizen** » Sat Nov 3, 2012 5:40 pm

Fairview4Life wrote:
baulderdash77 wrote:Wow another reliever who are we going to play in our infield.

Way to get at it AA

Here are your thoughts on that subject, and on Aviles in particular, from the Farrell traded to Boston thread:

baulderdash77 wrote:Aviles should be the utility infielder IMO. He's going to be a cheap arbitration player and we could use a real MLB player as a backup for once. He's played 2B, SS, 3B.

I still see Hech and Escobar as our starting 2B and SS for next year.

baulderdash77 wrote:15 months and counting for AA to make an impact move. This is another tick in a getting longer list of fails.

baulderdash77 wrote:We helped our division rival get the guy they wanted and let them push us around for months and got essentially nothing for it.

baulderdash77 wrote:The fact is that we didn't get enough compensation for him. Aviles is basically useless. In some ways I'd rather have not made the trade at all.

So, it would seem you think Hech and Escobar should be playing in our infield (along with EE and Lawrie presumably), and Aviles should have been a utility guy. But he's also a guy you felt was 'essentially nothing', and 'useless'. Right up until the Jays traded him when he all of a sudden became useful. Am I getting that right?

I love posts like this and it could be repeated for several posters. No matter what we do it will be seen as a bad move in their eyes unless it involves spending millions of dollars.

I personally do not care for any of the players given up and know nothing about Rogers so will give AA the benefit of the doubt on this one.

Wo1verine · Post #13 » by **Wo1verine** » Sat Nov 3, 2012 5:41 pm

Seems like all the moves AA has made recently has saved the team $$.

s e n s i · Post #14 » by **s e n s i** » Sat Nov 3, 2012 5:42 pm

Fairview4Life wrote:
baulderdash77 wrote:Wow another reliever who are we going to play in our infield.

Way to get at it AA

Here are your thoughts on that subject, and on Aviles in particular, from the Farrell traded to Boston thread:

baulderdash77 wrote:Aviles should be the utility infielder IMO. He's going to be a cheap arbitration player and we could use a real MLB player as a backup for once. He's played 2B, SS, 3B.

I still see Hech and Escobar as our starting 2B and SS for next year.

baulderdash77 wrote:15 months and counting for AA to make an impact move. This is another tick in a getting longer list of fails.

baulderdash77 wrote:We helped our division rival get the guy they wanted and let them push us around for months and got essentially nothing for it.

baulderdash77 wrote:The fact is that we didn't get enough compensation for him. Aviles is basically useless. In some ways I'd rather have not made the trade at all.

So, it would seem you think Hech and Escobar should be playing in our infield (along with EE and Lawrie presumably), and Aviles should have been a utility guy. But he's also a guy you felt was 'essentially nothing', and 'useless'. Right up until the Jays traded him when he all of a sudden became useful. Am I getting that right?

hahahahahahaha classic realgm contradiction right there

Mad-Eye Moody · Post #15 » by **Mad-Eye Moody** » Sat Nov 3, 2012 5:43 pm

According to my sources Beeston and ownership forced AA to make this trade because of Esmil's last name.

Kaizen · Post #16 » by **Kaizen** » Sat Nov 3, 2012 5:45 pm

Other boards seem to like Rogers and he think he is trending up. Some think this means both Frasor and Lyon are gone though. I will be very happy to say goodbye to Frasor and do not know enough to decide whether we want Lyon back.

Garmfay · Post #17 » by **Garmfay** » Sat Nov 3, 2012 5:48 pm

Why didn't we just take Bailey...Stupid

Fairview4Life · Post #18 » by **Fairview4Life** » Sat Nov 3, 2012 5:49 pm

Garmfay wrote:Why didn't we just take Bailey...Stupid

Because he gets hurt a lot?

baulderdash77 · Post #19 » by **baulderdash77** » Sat Nov 3, 2012 5:55 pm

Fairview4Life wrote:
baulderdash77 wrote:Wow another reliever who are we going to play in our infield.

Way to get at it AA

Here are your thoughts on that subject, and on Aviles in particular, from the Farrell traded to Boston thread:

baulderdash77 wrote:Aviles should be the utility infielder IMO. He's going to be a cheap arbitration player and we could use a real MLB player as a backup for once. He's played 2B, SS, 3B.

I still see Hech and Escobar as our starting 2B and SS for next year.

baulderdash77 wrote:15 months and counting for AA to make an impact move. This is another tick in a getting longer list of fails.

baulderdash77 wrote:We helped our division rival get the guy they wanted and let them push us around for months and got essentially nothing for it.

baulderdash77 wrote:The fact is that we didn't get enough compensation for him. Aviles is basically useless. In some ways I'd rather have not made the trade at all.

So, it would seem you think Hech and Escobar should be playing in our infield (along with EE and Lawrie presumably), and Aviles should have been a utility guy. But he's also a guy you felt was 'essentially nothing', and 'useless'. Right up until the Jays traded him when he all of a sudden became useful. Am I getting that right?

Gomes certainly is a useful player. He would be the primary backup at 3B and a fill in at 1B and C. Aviles was going to be our backup SS/2B. The bullpen looks stacked for for next season.

It's just a lateral move.

Wo1verine · Post #20 » by **Wo1verine** » Sat Nov 3, 2012 6:01 pm

Fairview4Life wrote:
Garmfay wrote:Why didn't we just take Bailey...Stupid

Because he gets hurt a lot?

Probably because he makes 5m this upcoming season compared to Rogers 400k

Anyhow, I don't mind this trade, just hope we aren't going to be running with a poverty bench again next year as Aviles could have been a solid.