PDA

View Full Version : Indians Struggling: Looking for Shake-Ups



Scrap Irony
05-05-2009, 10:41 PM
At least according to manager Eric Wedge. THeir pen is the worst in baseball despite adding Wood. Starting pitching also can't seem to find the plate.

How about a blockbuster deal, sending minor leaguers Homer Bailey, Alonso, Josh Roenicke, and Fisher to the Indians for Matt LaPorta and Asdrubal Cabrera?

Cabrera could then play SS, while LaPorta mans up in LF. The Indians grab three arms to help right now and in the future and a young, solid first baseman/ DH as Hafner and Garko get older and more expensive. (Respectively)

Too much?
Too little?
Pipe dream?

M2
05-05-2009, 10:50 PM
Pipe dream, but I like it. And it's not a pipe dream because it's a bad deal for anyone involved, just that it's too intriguing an idea to ever go anywhere. I can't imagine the organizations involved would be able to embrace that degree of creativity.

RedEye
05-05-2009, 11:06 PM
It actually seems like a pretty balanced deal at first glance. I'd love to add LaPorta to this lineup and Cabrera to this defense (not to mention Asdrubal swings a pretty competent bat himself). I seem to remember that LaPorta is no ace defender though, so I wonder if his specs match with Walt's vision for this team.

LoganBuck
05-05-2009, 11:23 PM
Alonso can't be the player to be included until August 15.

*BaseClogger*
05-05-2009, 11:30 PM
I actually don't think it is a pipe dream but I agree with M2 that its far too creative and risky for any GM to sign off on...

HumnHilghtFreel
05-06-2009, 12:08 AM
Without having looked at any stats, is Alonso to LaPorta a lateral move or an upgrade, outside of the fact that LaPorta could play LF for us right now?

I wouldn't mind having Cabrera one bit though.

Mario-Rijo
05-06-2009, 02:01 AM
Problem is what do we do with with all these great SS's we would have then? :rolleyes:

Interesting idea but the Reds wouldn't do it IMO. They probably should mind ya but they wouldn't. Of course most of my desire to make a deal like that would be in acquiring Cabrera. LaPorta IDK enough about defensively but his bat would certainly be welcome. It sure would have been nice to have gotten Nelson Cruz in the offseason he is beating the crap out of the ball as expected. I bet we could still get him if we offered the right pitching, how about he and Andrus? ;)

nate
05-06-2009, 08:43 AM
I think M2 nailed it: it's just too creative to get done. It would be a nice deal though. How would both teams "backfill" their rosters? In other words, who would fill those "traded" spots for the Indians and the Reds?

lollipopcurve
05-06-2009, 09:00 AM
Nope, don't like it. Don't like dealing our #6 starter, Bailey, without getting an arm back. And I think Alonso might be every bit as good as Laporta in a year or two -- maybe better.

Scrap Irony
05-06-2009, 09:11 AM
Cleveland wouldn't have a problem, as they have many prospects that ride that train (the Erie Canal Ferry?) between Buffalo and C-Town. They could easily get rid of everyone, save Wood in that pen. They also have starters with options.

For Cincinnati, I'd send McDonald down (easy call there) and probably also send down Janish to play everyday. Hairston has experience as 25th man and has played that PH role before as well. Too, Dickerson could then play a bit more in CF, spelling Taveras. (And I really think Baker would do just that.)

Cincinnati loses a lot of pitching depth, particularly in the pen, but the emergence of AAA starters and Viola mean it may not hurt so much.

HokieRed
05-06-2009, 09:25 AM
The trade is really interesting. Doing it would, for me, depend on a number of other factors. If I thought EE and BP were a sure thing to return to career levels, I might be tempted because filling LF with LaPorta and SS with Cabrera would solidify the whole starting 8 and really give us a chance, right now, which in today's game is pretty much when you better go for it if you've even the slightest chance. But, like lollipop, I don't like giving up our #6 starter, especially when I think the gap between 6 and 7 is very large. If one of our guys goes down, and we have to turn to Maloney, we've undone what we were trying to accomplish with the trade. Also, I don't like giving up a high ceiling starter like Bailey together with the guy who I think is already in the process of putting a good bit of distance between himself and the next best prospect we have. Alonso is showing already he is a run-producer of the highest order; my guess is he'll be a better player than LaPorta.

bucksfan2
05-06-2009, 09:29 AM
Without having looked at any stats, is Alonso to LaPorta a lateral move or an upgrade, outside of the fact that LaPorta could play LF for us right now?

I wouldn't mind having Cabrera one bit though.

LaPorta playing LF would be much more important to the Reds than the Indians. LaPorta as a Red would have the ability to play 2 positions. Alonso in the NL will have the ability to play 1. It would actually be a very good trade for the Reds if they could swap Alonso for LaPorta.

HokieRed
05-06-2009, 09:46 AM
How many positions does Pujols play?

Scrap Irony
05-06-2009, 09:51 AM
If you're thinking Alonso is Pujols then you obviously don't make the deal. That said, Pujols-level production has only come around twice-- once out of Columbia and once out of the Dominican. Ever.

HokieRed
05-06-2009, 10:08 AM
Not suggesting that Alonso is Pujols over again, just that there are players you simply make space for and that LaPorta's being able to play two positions is a minor factor in evaluating him vis-a-vis a possibly elite player like Alonso. I think there's every reason to be confident that Joey Votto can play left field. Given this team's offensive weaknesses, I'd evaluate something like Alonso versus LaPorta simply on offensive possibility. And while it's strictly my personal opinion based on watching Alonso in last year's super-regionals and NCAA finals, I think Alonso should be regarded untouchable. I think we absolutely got the right guy in last year's draft.

Scrap Irony
05-06-2009, 10:10 AM
I don't. I like Smoak better.

And I like LaPorta an awful lot, too. I think he's what Alonso wants to be-- high obp, high slugging, feared cleanup hitter of the future.

bucksfan2
05-06-2009, 10:30 AM
How many positions does Pujols play?

IIRC he has played LF, RF, 3B, and 1B.

If Votto keeps up the way he is playing Alonso will have one heck of a time bumping him off 1b. That is why LaPorta would have more value to the Reds than Alonso.

Benihana
05-06-2009, 10:39 AM
If Votto keeps up the way he is playing Alonso will have one heck of a time bumping him off 1b. That is why LaPorta would have more value to the Reds than Alonso.

Agreed.

RANDY IN INDY
05-06-2009, 10:56 AM
I don't. I like Smoak better.

And I like LaPorta an awful lot, too. I think he's what Alonso wants to be-- high obp, high slugging, feared cleanup hitter of the future.

I like Smoak better, too, Scrap.

LincolnparkRed
05-06-2009, 10:57 AM
Maybe we should forget Cabrera and try for Roenicke, Bailey and one of the SS/?? prospects we have just for LaPorta.

Mario-Rijo
05-06-2009, 10:58 AM
IIRC he has played LF, RF, 3B, and 1B.

If Votto keeps up the way he is playing Alonso will have one heck of a time bumping him off 1b. That is why LaPorta would have more value to the Reds than Alonso.

That and LaPorta helps us right now, theoretically at least. As does Cabrera obviously.

But this is a deal that is likely discussed once Cleveland realizes it cannot compete this year, if the Indians would discuss those 2 players at all. The more I think about it the more I think the Reds if offered might consider it, heck they might jump all over it. But I just don't feel like the Tribe would.

Big Klu
05-06-2009, 12:10 PM
Cleveland wouldn't have a problem, as they have many prospects that ride that train (the Erie Canal Ferry?) between Buffalo and C-Town. They could easily get rid of everyone, save Wood in that pen. They also have starters with options.

Their AAA team isn't in Buffalo anymore; it's in Columbus.

REDREAD
05-06-2009, 12:14 PM
I don't think the Indians would consider that offer.

If you are a team like the Indians, trying to contend, you don't bolster your pen by picking up two AAA tweeners that the Reds have no confidence in. The Indians certainly don't have the patience to develop Homer at the ML level either.

From the Indians' point of view, they are giving up two ML starters for 4 maybes, and they are trying to contend.

I think if you made that offer, the Indians would counter that they are more interested in Burton, Ceuto and maybe Rhodes to bolster their staff.

Benihana
05-06-2009, 12:34 PM
I don't think the Indians would consider that offer.

If you are a team like the Indians, trying to contend, you don't bolster your pen by picking up two AAA tweeners that the Reds have no confidence in. The Indians certainly don't have the patience to develop Homer at the ML level either.

From the Indians' point of view, they are giving up two ML starters for 4 maybes, and they are trying to contend.

I think if you made that offer, the Indians would counter that they are more interested in Burton, Ceuto and maybe Rhodes to bolster their staff.

In that case, I would do Weathers and Alonso for LaPorta. Weathers would help them right now. LaPorta would help us right now.

However, I'm not sure if the Indians would be interested in trading LaPorta (who is a rookie) just because they are struggling this year.

OnBaseMachine
05-06-2009, 12:36 PM
I don't. I like Smoak better.

And I like LaPorta an awful lot, too. I think he's what Alonso wants to be-- high obp, high slugging, feared cleanup hitter of the future.

That's exactly what Alonso projects to be. Both Baseball America and Baseball Prospectus project him to be a .300/.400/.550 type of hitter.

OnBaseMachine
05-06-2009, 12:37 PM
I don't think the Indians would consider that offer.

If you are a team like the Indians, trying to contend, you don't bolster your pen by picking up two AAA tweeners that the Reds have no confidence in. The Indians certainly don't have the patience to develop Homer at the ML level either.


Except Fisher and Roenicke aren't tweeners. :thumbup:

Where did you hear that the Reds have no confidence in Fisher or Roenicke? Do you have a link?

Benihana
05-06-2009, 12:41 PM
That's exactly what Alonso projects to be. Both Baseball America and Baseball Prospectus project him to be a .300/.400/.550 type of hitter.

That may be true, but LaPorta is ready to be that now. Furthermore, LaPorta is a LF, whereas Alonso and Votto play the same position.

Scrap Irony
05-06-2009, 12:48 PM
And the Indians aren't set up to compete right now. They'd be better served to go young. And, since they have few options either in the rotation or in the minors (Columbus now, didn't know that), they need arms in the worst way.

They also don't really need the LaPorta bat now, since Hafner is entrenched at DH and can't be dealt, Martinez and Garko are set and unlikely to be dealt, and the three OF spots are all fairly solid. (Choo and Sizemore in particular.) For God's sake, Kelly Shoppach, he of the 20 dingers in 350 ABs last season, rides the pine for that team four days out of seven.

In short, they've got the offense to dangle, but not the arms.

_Sir_Charles_
05-06-2009, 12:52 PM
That may be true, but LaPorta is ready to be that now. Furthermore, LaPorta is a LF, whereas Alonso and Votto play the same position.

Gotta agree with Benihana here. I like Alonso's ceiling too, but LaPorta is a much better FIT for our club. I've never been a fan of us moving Votto off of first. IMO Yonder is perfect trade bait. LaPorta's also a righty.

OnBaseMachine
05-06-2009, 12:54 PM
FWIW, I would trade Alonso for LaPorta because LaPorta is major league ready and he's a left fielder, but in the long run I think they have comparable ceilings.

PuffyPig
05-06-2009, 01:01 PM
That and LaPorta helps us right now, theoretically at least. As does Cabrera obviously.

But this is a deal that is likely discussed once Cleveland realizes it cannot compete this year, if the Indians would discuss those 2 players at all. The more I think about it the more I think the Reds if offered might consider it, heck they might jump all over it. But I just don't feel like the Tribe would.


Why would the indians want to move these types of players just becuase they might not contend this year?

They might move them for better, more established players if they were contending, but even that is doubtful.

If we fall out of the race, is it likely we would be looking to move Volquez, Cueto, Bruce and Votto? The same applies to Cleveland.

Scrap Irony
05-06-2009, 01:03 PM
They're like Cincinnati has been in year's past. Why did Cincinnati get rid of Hamilton? They had a surplus of OFs and needed pitching. One for the other.

jojo
05-06-2009, 01:04 PM
I don't think the Indians would go for it.

Mario-Rijo
05-06-2009, 01:07 PM
Why would the indians want to move these types of players just becuase they might not contend this year?

They might move them for better, more established players if they were contending, but even that is doubtful.

If we fall out of the race, is it likely we would be looking to move Volquez, Cueto, Bruce and Votto? The same applies to Cleveland.

I agree, it was my intial thought but after taking a step back I realized we were discussing core players here. But in all fairness not all teams know the real value of what they have or others for that matter. Homer Bailey might look really great to them right about now.

HokieRed
05-06-2009, 02:12 PM
They're like Cincinnati has been in year's past. Why did Cincinnati get rid of Hamilton? They had a surplus of OFs and needed pitching. One for the other.

Did we have a surplus of outfielders? Doesn't look so now. Depends on your time-frame. [Not in any way meant as a criticism of the trade, just as observation that time must be in this, as in all things, a factor.]

Homer Bailey
05-06-2009, 02:42 PM
Did we have a surplus of outfielders? Doesn't look so now. Depends on your time-frame. [Not in any way meant as a criticism of the trade, just as observation that time must be in this, as in all things, a factor.]

With Bruce barking up the tree, Dunn in left, and Jr. in right, at the time, yes we did have a surplus. I believe that Krivsky would have re-signed Dunn, which is why he made the trade.

But the main reason was we had a SHORTAGE in pitching, (which the Indians also clearly have) so we gave up something of value that wasn't a huge need for us, and got something of outstanding value. A trade that worked out great for the Reds.

REDREAD
05-06-2009, 02:44 PM
Except Fisher and Roenicke aren't tweeners. :thumbup:

Where did you hear that the Reds have no confidence in Fisher or Roenicke? Do you have a link?

It's just an assumption. Herrara and Masset won the last two bullpen spots.
The Reds signed/resigned 3 veteran relief pitchers this past winter.
If Walt really thought that Fisher/Roenicke were ML ready now, why aren't they on the roster?

If the Reds truly think Fisher or Roenicke can contribute at the ML level, they should deal Burton (who will bring a higher return) and call up the rookie. Does you see my resasoning here?

I'm guessing that most of this board would be willing to trade Fisher and/or Roenocke without any hesitation, but would probably balk at trading Burton in the same deal. That's because Burton is the proven performer.

But maybe I'm wrong.. Would you be willing to put Burton on the table? I would, but curious what the rest of the board thinks.

Homer Bailey
05-06-2009, 02:49 PM
It's just an assumption. Herrara and Masset won the last two bullpen spots.
The Reds signed/resigned 3 veteran relief pitchers this past winter.
If Walt really thought that Fisher/Roenicke were ML ready now, why aren't they on the roster?

If the Reds truly think Fisher or Roenicke can contribute at the ML level, they should deal Burton (who will bring a higher return) and call up the rookie. Does you see my resasoning here?

I'm guessing that most of this board would be willing to trade Fisher and/or Roenocke without any hesitation, but would probably balk at trading Burton in the same deal. That's because Burton is the proven performer.

But maybe I'm wrong.. Would you be willing to put Burton on the table? I would, but curious what the rest of the board thinks.

They signed veteran relievers to help build depth so we weren't relying on so many young talents. It doesn't mean they aren't talented or aren't MLB ready. That way, when a bullpen arm gets injured, we have some talent ready to come up immediately, rather than going with a Pettyjohn type.

OnBaseMachine
05-06-2009, 02:52 PM
It's just an assumption. Herrara and Masset won the last two bullpen spots.
The Reds signed/resigned 3 veteran relief pitchers this past winter.
If Walt really thought that Fisher/Roenicke were ML ready now, why aren't they on the roster?

If the Reds truly think Fisher or Roenicke can contribute at the ML level, they should deal Burton (who will bring a higher return) and call up the rookie. Does you see my resasoning here?

I'm guessing that most of this board would be willing to trade Fisher and/or Roenocke without any hesitation, but would probably balk at trading Burton in the same deal. That's because Burton is the proven performer.

But maybe I'm wrong.. Would you be willing to put Burton on the table? I would, but curious what the rest of the board thinks.

Herrera made the team because he's a lefty and Masset was out of options. Walt resigning Lincoln was a big mistake.

Why would the Reds have to deal Burton? Why not hang onto him and bringup Fisher/Roenicke to make the bullpen stronger? Release Lincoln and bring up one of those two.

Mario-Rijo
05-06-2009, 02:52 PM
It's just an assumption. Herrara and Masset won the last two bullpen spots.
The Reds signed/resigned 3 veteran relief pitchers this past winter.
If Walt really thought that Fisher/Roenicke were ML ready now, why aren't they on the roster?

If the Reds truly think Fisher or Roenicke can contribute at the ML level, they should deal Burton (who will bring a higher return) and call up the rookie. Does you see my resasoning here?

I'm guessing that most of this board would be willing to trade Fisher and/or Roenocke without any hesitation, but would probably balk at trading Burton in the same deal. That's because Burton is the proven performer.

But maybe I'm wrong.. Would you be willing to put Burton on the table? I would, but curious what the rest of the board thinks.

Umm, probably would prefer to keep Burton. Which goes to your point those guys might be fairly close but there is no substitue for experience.

nate
05-06-2009, 03:23 PM
It's just an assumption. Herrara and Masset won the last two bullpen spots.
The Reds signed/resigned 3 veteran relief pitchers this past winter.
If Walt really thought that Fisher/Roenicke were ML ready now, why aren't they on the roster?

You make it sound as if there are only two choices: they're "ML ready now" or they're "tweeners."

Is it possible there's some other explanation?

HokieRed
05-06-2009, 04:24 PM
My own hope is that Lincoln puts it back together, which last night's showing suggests is more likely than I might have thought, and that we keep Roenicke and Fisher, as I think we'll need as many arms as we can get even before this season is over, if we are to contend.

HokieRed
05-06-2009, 04:24 PM
Correction: Lincoln's showing of two nights ago.

*BaseClogger*
05-06-2009, 04:30 PM
I don't think the Indians would go for it.

Why not? I'm curious to hear your thoughts...

Homer Bailey
05-06-2009, 04:48 PM
Why not? I'm curious to hear your thoughts...

Probably for reasons said. They are young, cheap players, and are not the type of players you want to deal if you are building for the long term. I understand that the Reds are also dealing the same types of players, but there seems to be more risk for the Indians, as they are trading players that are currently playing in the majors, while the Reds are dealing farmhands (talented ones at that, I will admit).

(Didn't mean to hijack what I think JoJo is thinking, just my opinion).

TRF
05-06-2009, 04:49 PM
I think the trade proposed in the initial post is OUTSTANDING for both teams. It set the Tribe back a year at least in LF, but Alonso will make that a wash. 3 pitcher for AC is great for cleveland, and Bailey gets a fresh start, and likely a rotation spot now.

No way this ever gets discussed, but as message board trades go, this is one of the better ones.

TRF
05-06-2009, 04:51 PM
I'd actually throw in their choice of Nix/Dickerson/Stubbs as the Reds seem committed to WT in CF.

*BaseClogger*
05-06-2009, 04:51 PM
Probably for reasons said. They are young, cheap players, and are not the type of players you want to deal if you are building for the long term. I understand that the Reds are also dealing the same types of players, but there seems to be more risk for the Indians, as they are trading players that are currently playing in the majors, while the Reds are dealing farmhands (talented ones at that, I will admit).

(Didn't mean to hijack what I think JoJo is thinking, just my opinion).

Perhaps, but LaPorta hasn't proven himself in the Majors yet either and I figure there is less risk involved with four players than only receiving two...

*BaseClogger*
05-06-2009, 04:52 PM
I'd actually throw in their choice of Nix/Dickerson/Stubbs as the Reds seem committed to WT in CF.

I would too, but I would take out one of Roenicke/Fisher since they are somewhat repetitive and replace them with a different prospect, perhaps a Maloney or Thompson type...