The 2012 Offseason Thread

[Clem Fandango]

Rick Porcello turned 24 in December, was a 3 win starter last year, has 3 years of team control, and has improved each of his years in MLB.

 

Mike Olt turned 24 in August, fell on his face in his MLB debut, and has struck out in 25% of his professional PAs(40 of which have come above AA).

 

If by "fell on his face in his MLB debut" you mean they used him sporadically as a pinch hitter/occasional fill in to give some folks a rest during the last month of the season and never got consistent playing time over his WHOPPING 33 AT-BATS, well then yeah, he fell on his face.

 

You know who else fell on their face in their MLB debut? Jurickson Profar. What kind of [expletive] puts up a .176 batting average over 17AB's AND EXPECTS TO GET AWAY WITH IT WITHOUT ANYONE NOTICING?!?!?!

 

Jurickson Profar? More like Jerkison Sofar, amirite?

 

He had a .432 OPS and struck out once every three times to the plate in his only exposure above AA. The point is not that 40 sporadic PA's make Olt a failure, the point is that he didn't do anything at the MLB level, which is important considering his age, zero AAA plate appearances, and his 25% K rate as a professional(which is higher than Jackson's through AA, since you brought him up).

 

When it's over 33 at-bats, no it's not important. At all. Like AT ALL. Especially when everyone and his mother knew he was rushed to the majors for no reason whatsoever. They brought him up at the beginning of August when there was still one more month of minor league ball left to play, skipping AAA all together, and they had zero place for him to play. For all intents and purposes it appeared to be an opportunity to showcase him for trade, and he didn't succeed, because he wasn't ready. It made zero sense for him to be called up prior to roster expansions, and everyone knew it.

 

Also, Brett Jackson's K% through AA was 27%. Olt's was 29%. That's some nitpicky ish. Also, Brett's AA K% was 28.9%, Olt's was 28.5%. So they had roughly the same K% at AA... except Olt had an OPS .154 points higher than Brett Jackson. And played above average defense at a position of extreme need and shallow depth in the Cubs organization.

 

And really? 33 AB's? Since when does this board try and use that small of a sample size to determine the future worth of a players ability? That's some Cubs.com level lunacy.

[Guest]

Again, no one is saying that Olt's MLB plate appearances make him bad. The point is that he has a near complete absence of playing time above AA, and rather than lying and saying that he'd never played above AA, I pointed out he had a brief stint in MLB where he was worthless with the bat. Olt's MLB numbers show that the "he's an unknown at high levels" is not false, not that "he's bad in MLB" is true.

 

The comparison to Jackson isn't really relevant, because the best case scenario here is that Olt is better than a guy we're hoping changed his swing because otherwise he's a flame out. As others pointed out, Jackson's K rate is at similar levels despite playing in those levels at a younger age than Olt(his leagues were more pitcher friendly as well). But even without Jackson as a point of reference at all, Olt's K rate is a red flag, and his lack of experience/success at higher levels makes him a pretty significant question mark. Especially if you're giving up a successful MLB starter that's three months younger than Olt plus another prospect just to acquire him.

[MSG T]

AZ Phil threw out this trade on PSD (not actually a 3 team trade, just Cubs making two separate trades and using parts to make both)

 

Tigers get:

Marmol (pay salary)

Zych

 

Cubs get:

Porcello

 

Rangers get:

Porcello

Villanueva or Candelario

 

Cubs get:

Olt

 

I'd love the first one, not so much the second. I'd love to get Olt, but not for what the Cubs would give up in that deal.

[Cubswin11]

Sox extend Sale. I don't like extending him now when they had him under control for 2 more years seems like he is considerable injury risk as he had elbow issues last year despite putting up good numbers. Either way seems like a decent framework for a new Samardzija contract.

 

GLENDALE, Ariz. -- The Chicago White Sox and left-handed pitcher Chris Sale have agreed in principle on a five-year contract extension worth as much as $60 million, according to a league source.

 

Sale will receive $35 million guaranteed over the first three years of the deal with club options for the final two that could add $25 million, according to the source.

[jersey cubs fan]

3/35 is good value for a good pitcher. It's neither expensive nor egregiously long-term. And 2/25 in options is pretty team friendly.

[Guest]

The trade package for Olt is just brutal.

[davell]

The trade package for Olt is just brutal.

Really? I'm not even THAT high on him, but I do think he's got a very solid chance of being an .800ish OPS, good glove type, at 3rd. Personally, I see little trade value in Marmol, Zych has 8th inning potential, and Porcello is a mid rotation guy at most. Adding Villanueva or Candelario(preferrably Villanueva) would hurt somewhat, but I think we'd fill a position longterm and not deplete much of anything in the process. The K rate is alarming, but it doesn't appear to be talked about with him as much as Brett's was(is), so maybe it's an easier correction?

[Guest]

Again, Porcello was a 3 win starter last year. In the Major Leagues. And he's three months younger than Olt. If Olt can still develop from overmatched in a trivial MLB sample to all star caliber 3B, why is Porcello at his ceiling with his pedigree and continued improvement?

[davell]

Will Porcello start K'ing more guys all of a sudden? If not, I think he basically is what he is. A decent GB pitcher. That is already pricey and only has 2 years of control left, before he'll be getting 10+ mill a year. I don't want to invest that in him, I prefer someone better. Olt has warts, but also has 6 years of control of likely the same positional value Porcello has. We have a true need at 3B currently as well. To me, he's a better longterm possible fit than Porcello is.

[Guest]

Will Porcello start K'ing more guys all of a sudden? If not, I think he basically is what he is. A decent GB pitcher. That is already pricey and only has 2 years of control left, before he'll be getting 10+ mill a year. I don't want to invest that in him, I prefer someone better. Olt has warts, but also has 6 years of control of likely the same positional value Porcello has. We have a true need at 3B currently as well. To me, he's a better longterm possible fit than Porcello is.

 

Porcello has 3 years of control left, he was a Super 2.

 

The point here is that players improve because they gain experience and they physically mature. All the reasons you would think Olt may get better apply just the same to Porcello, he isn't less likely to improve because he reached MLB quicker, that's backwards. The performance bears that out too, with him having improved numbers every year of his career. Is Olt going to start striking out less? If not, then he may not even be a major league hitter, and he still has to climb two rungs on the ladder to show he can do the other stuff too.

[davell]

My main point is the years of control, the future salary of Porcello(especially in years we truly expect to contend), makes Olt more attractive for us moving forward. To me, even after you acknowledge Olts' warts.

[Little Slide Rooter]

To me, what it comes down to is what we need more. Porcello may be a safer bet to be a big league regular, probably a 4 starter. But is that enough to put him above a guy with the ceiling of Olt?

 

We have a handful of intriguing 3B options throughout the system: Vitters, Villanueva, Canderlerio, maybe Lake, but none are a sure thing to be anything, unless you consider either Baez or Castro as the long term answer at 3rd.

 

As far as starting pitching goes, we have Jackson, Shark and Wood for several years. There's also Baker and Feldman if they're viewed as extension candidates rather than guys to flip in the Summer and Vizcaino, Cabrera, and Bowden who could be 2013-2014 rotation candidates. I'd love to add something in a front end starter, but I'm not thinking that Porcello's ever going to be that.

 

If we could get either guy for 1 year of Carlos Marmol, I'd jump at it, but if given my choice, I'd got with Olt.

[Guest]

Back on the topic of the Tigers and what they'll do, they said today that Porcello and Smyly are fighting for the 5th spot and neither are going to the bullpen. I wonder which of those two they value more? It's tough to find a fit because outside of that closer role there aren't a lot of easy upgrade spots, and I wouldn't think one year of Marmol is enough for either of those two, but it'd be fun to see.

[davell]

I would value Smyly more than Porcello personally. That said, if I were them, I wouldn't trade either. Its not like you won't need a 6th SP. I would trade Crosby, maybe Jake Thompson, maybe the comp pick that they have(not neccessarily all 3) for the best reliever it'd buy. They're definitely in win-now mode.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I agree that you need rotation depth, but when you have as deep a rotation as the Tigers have, and a guy like Porcello who could likely step in as a 4 or even 3 starter in a lot of big league rotations, I say that you shop him for the best possible return, be it a reliever or otherwise. Even if they did lose a starter, the Tigers are deep enough overall that they could survive with some sort of Rodrigo Lopez type at the back of the rotation until something better comes along.

[NewUserName]

I agree that you need rotation depth, but when you have as deep a rotation as the Tigers have, and a guy like Porcello who could likely step in as a 4 or even 3 starter in a lot of big league rotations, I say that you shop him for the best possible return, be it a reliever or otherwise. Even if they did lose a starter, the Tigers are deep enough overall that they could survive with some sort of Rodrigo Lopez type at the back of the rotation until something better comes along.

 

What I do not understand about the Tigers is why not just use Porcello in the bullpen.

[bhogg]

Marmol for campana. Make it happen.

[imb]

so we trade marmol, pay his entire salary, zych, candelario and porcello for olt? wtf

[Guest]

so we trade marmol, pay his entire salary, zych, candelario and porcello for olt? wtf

 

would you like to try that again

[imb]

what did i get wrong? the suggestion was that we trade marmol and zych for porcello, then flip porcello and villanueva/candelario for olt, right? that's a lot of pieces to move for one old prospect

[RynoRules]

what did i get wrong? the suggestion was that we trade marmol and zych for porcello, then flip porcello and villanueva/candelario for olt, right? that's a lot of pieces to move for one old prospect

 

I think the intent was that the Tigers pay Marmol's salary, but I could be wrong.

[imb]

either way, id rather have porcello and villanueva/candelario than olt

[SouthSideRyan]

I would value Smyly more than Porcello personally.

 

Yeah and I value a danish more than a doorstop.

[Guest]

what did i get wrong? the suggestion was that we trade marmol and zych for porcello, then flip porcello and villanueva/candelario for olt, right? that's a lot of pieces to move for one old prospect

 

you kind of counted porcello twice in your post. it's not marmol, zych, porcello, and candelario for olt. it's marmol, zych, and candelario. or porcello and candelario.

[Warpticon]

what did i get wrong? the suggestion was that we trade marmol and zych for porcello, then flip porcello and villanueva/candelario for olt, right? that's a lot of pieces to move for one old prospect

 

you kind of counted porcello twice in your post. it's not marmol, zych, porcello, and candelario for olt. it's marmol, zych, and candelario. or porcello and candelario.

 

uh, read that again.