Sean Marshall traded: T Wood +prospects Sappelt &Torreys p21

[davell]

I spent some time looking over the Reds system and think that whoever these prospects are, they'll be guys that don't have to go on the 40 man roster. Yorman Rodriguez is the guy that stands out to me. Ronald Torreyes does as well, although he may be harder to obtain. JC Sulbaran is the only pitcher I see that's kind of interesting. Neftali Soto and Junior Arias are also guys that I wouldn't mind. Rodriguez is 18, played in the MWL last year and held his own. Sloppy approach, bigtime power, bonus baby from Latin America. Probably fills out and moves to a corner OF spot. Torreyes is 140 pounds. Middle infielder, with one of the best hit tools in the minors. Sulbaran is a big guy, throws hard, has command problems and only has 2 pitches. Probable back end bullpen arm. Neftali Soto is a !B who can mash, but also strikes out a ton and is not a good defender, even at 1B. Junior Arias is a SS with power, horrible contact, and probably moves to #B longterm the further up he gets. That's about it, honestly. Rodriguez and Torreyes are far and away my favorites. They have guys ON the 40 man who'd be solid gets, I just doubt we want to add another guy right now.

[toonsterwu]

Well, the one note I would make is that the use of FIP- here assumes that he's able to a pitcher somewhere in b/w his 2010 and 2011 performances. If 2011 is closer to a sign of things to come, then he's in Randy Wells category in terms of total FIP-. To be fair to Wells, he had two years (compared to 1 right now for Wood) of being an above average, relative to FIP-, starter, before bottoming out last year to drag down his overall numbers. Unlike Wood, Wells injuries last year is likely a big factor as to why things bottomed out. That said, whether or not Wells can consistently be the guy he was in 2009/2010 is a fair question.

 

Basically, Wood is Randy Wells if Wells were six years younger, earlier in his service time clock, left-handed, threw a little harder, struck out more batters and didn't have a horrible 2011 on his resume.

 

Sure, I said pretty much the same thing earlier in the thread (albeit not with FIP- and just making a casual mention of Wood essentially replacing Wells role in the rotation).

[BDWeav71]

An arbiter looks at whatever evidence is presented to him.

 

They'll look at and disregard. You honestly think an arbitration award has ever taken FIP into account?

Why wouldn't an arbiter consider advanced metrics?

 

Because the people hearing the cases aren't advanced baseball minds?

 

Incorrect. There is anecdotal evidence of the contrary with Ross Ohlendorf and the Pirates last year. Just in any case, evidence can be used to convince arbitrators of a players value. They may not be advanced baseball minds, but that doesn't mean they are stupid/stubborn.

 

http://www.aolnews.com/2011/02/09/ross-ohlendorf-beats-pirates-in-arbitration/

[TruffleShuffle]

era+ is hardly an advanced metric. it's just era adjusted for park effects and normalized to 100.

[mul21]

era+ is hardly an advanced metric. it's just era adjusted for park effects and normalized to 100.

 

It's certainly more advanced than wins and ERA. I think the point is, introduce the evidence, explain it properly, and it can make a difference in who wins an arby case.

[treebird]

that article doesn't even say they used era+ in the hearing

[BCVM22]

Cincinnati Enquirer beat reporter John Fay says Marshall didn't take his physical for the Reds until this afternoon and the deal will likely be announced officially tomorrow.

[TruffleShuffle]

i am still annoyed that this trade is "sean marshall for travis wood and prospects" while the gio gonzalez trade went down with everyone knowing the names of the prospects involved within like 5 minutes.

[JeffH]

I don't know if this was mentioned on here, but there was a blogger who suggested that the reason that the prospects haven't been named yet is that the Cubs have granted the Reds a window to negotiate an extension with Marshall. If they sign him to an extension, the Cubs get better prospects in return.

[Gilby]

i am still annoyed that this trade is "sean marshall for travis wood and prospects" while the gio gonzalez trade went down with everyone knowing the names of the prospects involved within like 5 minutes.

 

Plus Keith Law broke the Gio deal, and he's been asked on twitter his opinion of the Marshall/Wood deal which he replied that he likes the prospects involved. Yet, he's not giving the names.

[RammyFanny]

Yeah, i've been wondering if the Cubs were choosing from a pool of players before the deal has to be official.

 

But...I thought all 4 players had to take their physicals, so that kind of contradicts itself.

[Brett]

I don't know if this was mentioned on here, but there was a blogger who suggested that the reason that the prospects haven't been named yet is that the Cubs have granted the Reds a window to negotiate an extension with Marshall. If they sign him to an extension, the Cubs get better prospects in return.

 

I'm that blogger. It was just a theory (though the Reds' beat writer for the Enquirer thinks Marshall and the Reds could indeed be negotiating an extension) to explain why the names have been under such a thorough lock and key (relative to other deals like this). The names are unknown, perhaps, because they're undecided pending the extension talks.

 

Makes some sense as an explanation to me. But, just a theory. That's all.

[NonProfitCow]

I don't know if this was mentioned on here, but there was a blogger who suggested that the reason that the prospects haven't been named yet is that the Cubs have granted the Reds a window to negotiate an extension with Marshall. If they sign him to an extension, the Cubs get better prospects in return.

That doesn't make much sense.

[davell]

League offices are closed all next week, right? Meaning no deals whatsoever, right?

[XZero771679666304]

I don't know if this was mentioned on here, but there was a blogger who suggested that the reason that the prospects haven't been named yet is that the Cubs have granted the Reds a window to negotiate an extension with Marshall. If they sign him to an extension, the Cubs get better prospects in return.

 

I'm that blogger. It was just a theory (though the Reds' beat writer for the Enquirer thinks Marshall and the Reds could indeed be negotiating an extension) to explain why the names have been under such a thorough lock and key (relative to other deals like this). The names are unknown, perhaps, because they're undecided pending the extension talks.

 

Makes some sense as an explanation to me. But, just a theory. That's all.

 

The only way I could see the Reds extending Marshall for anywhere near what he would likely get via FA is if they make him the closer. The Reds aren't a team I could see paying 7-8MM+ per year to a set-up man.

[illiniguy]

League offices are closed all next week, right? Meaning no deals whatsoever, right?

I thought in 04 we dealt for Lee around Xmas. Maybe it was before Xmas week.

[davell]

I thought Lee was an immediate move, wasn't it? Like the first move of the entire offseason of MLB.

[XZero771679666304]

I thought Lee was an immediate move, wasn't it? Like the first move of the entire offseason of MLB.

 

I'm pretty sure it was November 25th or 26th, somewhere in there.

[Guest]

I thought Lee was an immediate move, wasn't it? Like the first move of the entire offseason of MLB.

 

I'm pretty sure it was November 25th or 26th, somewhere in there.

 

November 25th, it appears.

[illiniguy]

I thought Lee was an immediate move, wasn't it? Like the first move of the entire offseason of MLB.

 

I'm pretty sure it was November 25th or 26th, somewhere in there.

 

November 25th, it appears.

I remember reading it during the bragging rights game, was that earlier before?

 

Edit: nope I remember wrong.

[dew1679666265]

Yeah, it's the "kind" of move I'd like. A reliever approaching free agency for a younger starting pitcher and prospects. The specific people involved make me a little less enthusiastic, and I would have preferred something. But the moves, for all intents and purposes is solid.

 

I'm beginning to warm up to it. Like you, I'm not thrilled at the specific player we targeted but I like the idea of getting young, MLB ready talent + prospects for a reliever.

 

However, I'm still concerned about that dropoff in K/9 and big rise in BB/9 in similar sample sizes. If he continues to not be able to strike that many guys out and walking too many guys, I'm concerned it'll start affecting his production. If those K and BB rates stay at the 2011 levels, it'll probably limit his upside as well and the more flowery 3-starter predictions will likely not come to fruition.

 

I'll still really like the trade if the prospects turn out to be good, but I'm less critical of it if it's Wood and filler. If we are doing this complete overhaul thing, though, I'd still have preferred a high upside prospect over Wood.

[Little Slide Rooter]

i am still annoyed that this trade is "sean marshall for travis wood and prospects" while the gio gonzalez trade went down with everyone knowing the names of the prospects involved within like 5 minutes.

 

Plus Keith Law broke the Gio deal, and he's been asked on twitter his opinion of the Marshall/Wood deal which he replied that he likes the prospects involved. Yet, he's not giving the names.

 

He wants us to suffer until we accept his Matt Szczur/Juan Pierre comparison.

[17 Seconds]

didn't the cubs sign todd walker on the 23rd or 24th of december?

[El Duderino]

didn't the cubs sign todd walker on the 23rd or 24th of december?

 

December 7, 2004: Signed as a Free Agent with the Chicago Cubs.

 

Todd Walker was so awesome

[Guest]

League offices are closed all next week, right? Meaning no deals whatsoever, right?

I thought in 04 we dealt for Lee around Xmas. Maybe it was before Xmas week.

 

I believe we traded Doug Glanville for Mickey Morandini on like Christmas Eve.