Carl Crawford

[frostwyrm]

Gallagher, Mateo/Marmol/Marshall, Cedeno/Moore should be able to net us Crawford.

If you were running the DRays would you accept that deal? I sure as hell wouldn't.

[RockTheIvy]

Gallagher, Mateo/Marmol/Marshall, Cedeno/Moore should be able to net us Crawford.

If you were running the DRays would you accept that deal? I sure as hell wouldn't.

 

Seriously! We're talking about the best player on another team. Cedeno's first full season was a disaster, and Mateo/Marshall/Marmol, while promising, are by no means good. Gallagher is someone who would be a better chip, but with some other parts that were safer bets to produce.

[frostwyrm]

Just looking at his numbers, what is so great about Gallagher? At AA he has 55 BB in 86 innings, 1.49 WHIP. His K/BB is well under 2. It hardly looks like he's dominating down there. I don't see how he could possibly be a centerpiece of a deal for someone like Crawford.

[Rob]

Just looking at his numbers, what is so great about Gallagher? At AA he has 55 BB in 86 innings, 1.49 WHIP. His K/BB is well under 2. It hardly looks like he's dominating down there. I don't see how he could possibly be a centerpiece of a deal for someone like Crawford.

 

Kevin Goldstein just did an article on BP where he put Gallagher in the same five man group as Homer Bailey, Scott Elbert, Yovani Gallardo, and Phillip Hughes.

 

He does conceed that Gallagher is a step behind those guys, but the mere fact he can be mentioned in the same group means you're underestimating him a bit.

 

That being said, "baseball men" don't seem to value Gallagher all that much, despite the results he continues to get. His stuff is obviously better than Yusmeiro Petit's was... but he seems to get lumped in his class, for better or worse.

 

Gallagher has very little value in a trade, and can't be the centerpiece of a deal for an elite talent. Considering his status in the eyes of GMs with his actual potential to produce, it's sheer folly to even suggest he be included in any trades. We'd be selling him for fifty cents on the dollar.

[Laura]

He dominated in high-A, his BB rate went through the ceiling in AA, but he kept his K rate up and was able to improve on the BB rate (still too high) by the end of the season. He was young for the league, as in the 3rd youngest pitcher after Bailey and Gallardo. That said, I'm a Gallagher fan but would swap him in a Crawford deal. However, as Rob said, I'm not sure he has much value on his own and unlike some of the other pitchers mentioned, he was a 12th round pick.

[CubinNY]

Just looking at his numbers, what is so great about Gallagher? At AA he has 55 BB in 86 innings, 1.49 WHIP. His K/BB is well under 2. It hardly looks like he's dominating down there. I don't see how he could possibly be a centerpiece of a deal for someone like Crawford.

 

Kevin Goldstein just did an article on BP where he put Gallagher in the same five man group as Homer Bailey, Scott Elbert, Yovani Gallardo, and Phillip Hughes.

 

He does conceed that Gallagher is a step behind those guys, but the mere fact he can be mentioned in the same group means you're underestimating him a bit.

 

That being said, "baseball men" don't seem to value Gallagher all that much, despite the results he continues to get. His stuff is obviously better than Yusmeiro Petit's was... but he seems to get lumped in his class, for better or worse.

 

Gallagher has very little value in a trade, and can't be the centerpiece of a deal for an elite talent. Considering his status in the eyes of GMs with his actual potential to produce, it's sheer folly to even suggest he be included in any trades. We'd be selling him for fifty cents on the dollar.

 

Gallagher completely dominated his competiton at two levels. He did suffer from control problems at times, but he was a man amongst boys for most of the season. I also think he was young for AA.

[Rob]

Gallagher completely dominated his competiton at two levels. He did suffer from control problems at times, but he was a man amongst boys for most of the season. I also think he was young for AA.

 

I wish he had completely dominated his competition at AA, but that's simply not the case.

 

86.1 IP 74 H 55 BB 91 K

 

A 1.49 WHIP doesn't usually translate to a 2.71 ERA, even if the strikeout rate is over one an inning. He got lucky on his AA ERA, no two ways about it.

 

That's not to say it wasn't a solid showing for a young kid. Holding your own when you're young for the league is enough to make you a good prospect in my eyes. But he wasn't nearly so dominating as you're making him out to be.

 

Don't let any of this make you think that I somehow don't like Gallagher. He's one of my favorite prospects. But he didn't dominate AA, and he isn't seen that highly in the eyes of other GMs around the league (as far as I've heard, anyways). That's all I'm saying.

[mg420]

i think you have to take into account that sean is only 20 years old (he will be 21 in december). for him to have those kind of #'s in a & aa already speaks volumes about his talent. you are not talking about a 23 years old with 4 years of college ball under his belt.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Gallagher completely dominated his competiton at two levels. He did suffer from control problems at times, but he was a man amongst boys for most of the season. I also think he was young for AA.

 

I wish he had completely dominated his competition at AA, but that's simply not the case.

 

86.1 IP 74 H 55 BB 91 K

 

A 1.49 WHIP doesn't usually translate to a 2.71 ERA, even if the strikeout rate is over one an inning. He got lucky on his AA ERA, no two ways about it.

 

That's not to say it wasn't a solid showing for a young kid. Holding your own when you're young for the league is enough to make you a good prospect in my eyes. But he wasn't nearly so dominating as you're making him out to be.

 

Don't let any of this make you think that I somehow don't like Gallagher. He's one of my favorite prospects. But he didn't dominate AA, and he isn't seen that highly in the eyes of other GMs around the league (as far as I've heard, anyways). That's all I'm saying.

 

To be fair though, the only thing out of the ordinary is the walks. He actually gave up fewer hits(probably because he was walking people who did so before), and his K/9 and HR rate were as good as they've ever been.

[Rob]

i think you have to take into account that sean is only 20 years old (he will be 21 in december). for him to have those kind of #'s in a & aa already speaks volumes about his talent. you are not talking about a 23 years old with 4 years of college ball under his belt.

 

I did take all of that into account.

 

That's not to say it wasn't a solid showing for a young kid. Holding your own when you're young for the league is enough to make you a good prospect in my eyes.

 

:P

[Laura]

Gallagher's West Tenn/AA pitching splits show that he walked LHBs at double the rate of RHBs. This wasn't the case in Daytona or in Peoria. Reports indicate that his changeup has come a long way since last season and he's working on a cutter -- so I tend to think he'll settle on a workable out pitch to the more advanced LHBs he'll be facing from here on out. And yeah, he's one of my faves, too.

 

And now back to the scheduled Carl Crawford discussion.

[frostwyrm]

Regardless of how you want to project Gallagher based on tools/stuff/age, his unimpressive numbers above single-A ball mean his market value is only a fraction of what Crawford's is at the current time.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

His numbers are much more impressive when you take into account that he was a 20 year old pitching in AA. That said, I would tend to think the DRays would want pitchers who could help in 07 (Hill, Marshall, etc), not those like Veal and Gallagher who may or many not be ready in a year or two.

[Laura]

Regardless of how you want to project Gallagher based on tools/stuff/age, his unimpressive numbers above single-A ball mean his market value is only a fraction of what Crawford's is at the current time.

 

I figure that's why I haven't read any posts suggesting they would be traded for each other straight up.

[mg420]

if prior could be counted on to be healthy what about doing a z for crawford & kazimer trade? i'm sure it would never happen but would those 2 be worth zambrano?

[TheDude]

Gallagher, Mateo/Marmol/Marshall, Cedeno/Moore should be able to net us Crawford.

If you were running the DRays would you accept that deal? I sure as hell wouldn't.

 

There's no way that deal even gets into the door. Suggesting Hill is even a stretch IMO.

[CubsWin]

Regardless of how you want to project Gallagher based on tools/stuff/age, his unimpressive numbers above single-A ball mean his market value is only a fraction of what Crawford's is at the current time.

That is true only if you are a stone cold, current production only, don't care how young for your league you are, can't project a player's future value worth a darn, kind of GM.

 

I'm not saying that Gallagher alone should be able to get Crawford. But, given that Crawford is about to get expensive (in Devil Ray dollars that is) and the wealth of young talented OFers they've got pushing him, Tampa's leverage in this situation isn't the greatest. And it isn't much of a stretch to see that Gallagher has the ability to be a good starting pitcher for years to come.

[beowulf28]

How is Crawford going to improve his OBP? He's going to magically start drawing more walks? He's going to do this as a Cub?

 

The only way Crawford is going to boost his OBP is by hitting over .300, which, hey, he could do. But he's not going to consistently put up OBPs over .350 from year to year.

 

You don't know that, either. His OBP has steadily gone up since he's been on the D'Rays: .290 in 2002; .309 in 2003; .331 in '04 and '05; and .346 this year. It hasn't gone up dramatically, I guess, but with the exception of '04 and '05, it has gone up.

 

IMO, that's a good trend.

 

Thanks. I thought so too, but I'm new at paying attention to stats. I wish Hendry would learn! :x

[NorthsideAvenger]

Gallagher, Mateo/Marmol/Marshall, Cedeno/Moore should be able to net us Crawford.

If you were running the DRays would you accept that deal? I sure as hell wouldn't.

 

Then again, you don't get too many "Kazmir for V. Zambrano" type offers everyday.

 

The Cubs screwed themselves, because if they were willing to give up three young, solid pitchers (nothing special, but solid arms) for Pierre, now imagine what the DRays could/should ask for, for the immensely more talented/better player in Carl Crawford. They should ask for both Gallagher and one of Pawelek/Veal/Hill/Marhsall.

[RockTheIvy]

Gallagher, Mateo/Marmol/Marshall, Cedeno/Moore should be able to net us Crawford.

If you were running the DRays would you accept that deal? I sure as hell wouldn't.

 

Then again, you don't get too many "Kazmir for V. Zambrano" type offers everyday.

 

The Cubs screwed themselves, because if they were willing to give up three young, solid pitchers (nothing special, but solid arms) for Pierre, now imagine what the DRays could/should ask for, for the immensely more talented/better player in Carl Crawford. They should ask for both Gallagher and one of Pawelek/Veal/Hill/Marhsall.

 

IMO Marshall is a throw in type pitcher. I don't think he's very good. Certainly not as good as Hill.

[CubsWin]

Gallagher, Mateo/Marmol/Marshall, Cedeno/Moore should be able to net us Crawford.

If you were running the DRays would you accept that deal? I sure as hell wouldn't.

 

Then again, you don't get too many "Kazmir for V. Zambrano" type offers everyday.

 

The Cubs screwed themselves, because if they were willing to give up three young, solid pitchers (nothing special, but solid arms) for Pierre, now imagine what the DRays could/should ask for, for the immensely more talented/better player in Carl Crawford. They should ask for both Gallagher and one of Pawelek/Veal/Hill/Marhsall.

Every trade is different. A team's leverage/need to trade or acquire a certain type of player can change from moment to moment. For instance, lets say Delmon Young slips on a banana peel and breaks his leg. All of a sudden, its going to take a lot more to get Carl Crawford than the day before. So looking at what a team was willing to give up for Pierre and expecting the conditions to be exactly the same as they were then for this trade now doesn't really work.

 

Yes, Crawford is good and young. So was Aramis Ramirez. He was acquired for next to nothing. Now the D-Rays GM Chuck LaMar has a much tougher trading reputation than does Pirates GM Dave Littlefield, but the fact remains that Crawford is about to get expensive (for the D-Rays that is) and there are several young, talented, league minimum OFers pushing him out of town.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Le Mar is no longer the Rays GM.

[HoopsCubs]

http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/beatwriters.asp?column=gregor&id=232863

 

Crawford seems to be on the White Sox radar as well; difficult to see at this stage whether Gregor knows Kenny is looking at Carl, or whether Gregor thinks Kenny should look at Carl.

 

We do know that over the last few years, Kenny has been much bolder than Hendry when it comes to making trades.

[soccer10k]

http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/beatwriters.asp?column=gregor&id=232863

 

Crawford seems to be on the White Sox radar as well; difficult to see at this stage whether Gregor knows Kenny is looking at Carl, or whether Gregor thinks Kenny should look at Carl.

 

We do know that over the last few years, Kenny has been much bolder than Hendry when it comes to making trades.

 

The White Sox should be focusing on Juan Pierre instead.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/beatwriters.asp?column=gregor&id=232863

 

Crawford seems to be on the White Sox radar as well; difficult to see at this stage whether Gregor knows Kenny is looking at Carl, or whether Gregor thinks Kenny should look at Carl.

 

We do know that over the last few years, Kenny has been much bolder than Hendry when it comes to making trades.

 

The White Sox should be focusing on Juan Pierre instead.

 

Seconded.