The Alarm Clock is Beeping

[10xWSChamps]

anyway sorry to derail this thread. I didn't think I was saying anything controversial that would cause an argument...

[LegallyMinded]

Actually, you specifically stated that it was a "big loss," or rather that you would classify it as a big loss. So yes, following your own evaluation, it was binary.

I'm not sure you understand the distinction between binary and non-binary. Calling something a big loss or a big win, or otherwise qualifying the degree of the win or loss, necessarily indicates that we're not discussing the transaction in binary terms. Instead, we're evaluating the transaction over a wide spectrum of beneficial outcomes for one team vs. beneficial outcomes for the other team. In this case, 10xWSChamps said the Cards "won huge," indicating he thought the trade was highly skewed towards being beneficial for the Cards, while I said it was a "poor" deal, indicating I thought it was slightly less than beneficial for the Cards.

And, given what they got in exchange for a single season of JD Drew, you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone (aside from yourself) who doesn't think they came out well ahead. Certainly, no one has ever come forth stating "Can you believe the Cardinals only got Wainwright, when Team XYZ had offered Player(s) ABC.

The truth is that we don't know what else may have been available. Obviously, no GM has an incentive to come out and say "I would have offered this great package of players for Drew," because that just reflects poorly on that GM's own skills.

Sorry man, but again, you called it a "huge loss." Classifying something as a "huge loss" is not the same as saying "well, it's not really clear." In fact, you're saying that it's very clear that the Cardinals lost the trade.

Yes, it's true that Wainwright's future is murky. That being said, given what they have already gotten from him, and given that (again) they were only giving up 1 year of Drew, in my opinion, they have already won--even if they get nothing else from Wainwright. Of course, even that would be a worst-case scenario for them. Given how routine Tommy John is, and the long list of pitchers who have come back from it, it's much more likely that he comes back as at least a serviceable #3 or better, which is about commensurate with the money he'll make over the next two years. If he happens to return to #2 or #1 form, he will again be outperforming his contract.

Actually, I never called the Wainwright deal a huge loss. In fact, I said it was much closer to being beneficial than the Haren deal, and was at worst "poor." As for Wainwright's future, that's something we obviously can't evaluate at this point. Maybe he comes back strong from TJ, or maybe he pulls an Edison Volquez and actively detracts from his team's performance.

Finally, regarding King and Marquis, I'm not sure I'd bring them into the discussion to defend the deal: If anything, for instance, the Cards won the 2006 WS despite the "contribution" of Marquis and his 200 innings of 5.90-FIP baseball.

Anyway, I admit that I probably exaggerated the case that could be made against the trade. I just don't think it was quite as great as people may think just looking at the face of it.