37 replies to this topic

[Posting In The Clutch]

Yikes, Dayton Moore strikes again. I know the Royals needed SP, but if you're going to give up Myers in a trade you'd better shoot for the moon.

Edited by Posting In The Clutch, 10 December 2012 - 12:38 AM.

[My Dinner With Andre]

Not sure if anyone will get the reference, but I found this one twitter

funny...

http://i.imgur.com/yjzPK.jpg

[damana]

Highway Robbery!!!  The Ray's FO has to be the best in baseball.  And I am disappointed with my Met's, If this was all it took to get all those prospects, the Mets should have offered Neise, Dickey and said forget 2013.

[Thespis721]

I'm not as against this trade. Depends on the PTBNL and Tampa also sent cash. I think Shields and Davis have a chance to thrive in Kansas and if they do, they are in the running. I'd rather have Myers, but I think that's the fantasy farm league hype talking more than any baseball knowledge. If OAK wouldn't send Anderson for Myers, maybe there is something we're missing in the reports.

[jsp2014]

My Dinner With Andre, on 10 December 2012 - 12:40 AM, said:

Not sure if anyone will get the reference, but I found this one twitter

funny...

http://i.imgur.com/yjzPK.jpg

hahaha so awesome

[crazy47larry]

KC was building a really good franchise the proper way. If you build through the draft you always have a strong foundation to help fill weaknesses while maintaining cost effectiveness. Generally in that instance though you trade away mid-level prospects, not top of the line superstar potential prospects, to shore up those weaknesses though. Lets be real here, KCs big weakness has always been pitching. They seemingly have young prospect hitters out the wazoo so they were smart to make a play for Shields. He is a solid professional and maybe not a true ace but he seems like he could be a really good staff leader. They really need to worry as much about culture and professionalism as they do talent.

I agree with everyone else that it is a foolish deal talent wise. I am kind of surprised at Myers value though. For example that possible trade to OAK for Anderson. I would imagine OAK would've taken that and run and I love Anderson. That OAK franchise is starved for offense and always has pitching to deal (seems like a perfect fit for KC to do a deal with actually).

[And Won]

Royals GM should be fired for this trade.

[dzemens]

Clearly everyone is aware by now of the trade sending Myers and some other well thought of prospects to the Rays in exchange for James Shields and Wade Davis. Its a move born of necessity as their rotation has been an abject failure of late. Couple this with the trade for Ervin Santana and the signing of Jeremy Guthrie and it would appear to be an issue they are attempting to address with an eye towards the playoffs this season.

That said it still leaves them with no true ace and a stable of #4 pitchers, maybe some #3 upside but nothing that stands out and involved trading away a highly thought of hitting prospect (albeit one whos K% had gone up at every level 37% in has last stop) who while high on potential was not without flaws. Clearly the majority feeling is that KC got ripped off but the Rays had all the leverage (didnt need to make a trade, multiple teams interested) and KC had been turned down at other options.

The big question here for me is why KC did it this way. Why not simply overpay to bring in a guy like Anibal Sanchez, or a similar starter (unless they tried and were refused) and keep Myers for the next 6 years? Oh well, thats a question for Dayton Moore I guess.

As it stands the Royals have a very solid young lineup (with the exception of Jeff Francouer) and now appear to have at least a respectable pitching staff though the Bullpen could use work.

What say you, will 2013 see them sink or swim?

[jamie]

"The big question here for me is why KC did it this way. Why not simply overpay to bring in a guy like Anibal Sanchez, or a similar starter (unless they tried and were refused) and keep Myers for the next 6 years? Oh well, thats a question for Dayton Moore I guess."

I think orgainizationally, they will stick pretty tight to an annual budget (i.e. they are cheap).  Signing Sanchez would likley have cost them more money than owership would have aproved.

[dzemens]

jamie, on 10 December 2012 - 02:43 PM, said:

"The big question here for me is why KC did it this way. Why not simply overpay to bring in a guy like Anibal Sanchez, or a similar starter (unless they tried and were refused) and keep Myers for the next 6 years? Oh well, thats a question for Dayton Moore I guess."

I think orgainizationally, they will stick pretty tight to an annual budget (i.e. they are cheap).  Signing Sanchez would likley have cost them more money than owership would have aproved.

I get that, but giving up team control of a guy like Myers + 2 years of Shields doesnt seem like a better deal to me. I guess its all up to the team but 6 years of Myers + a guy like Sanchez seems like a better deal than 2 years of Shields + Wade Davis.

[parrothead]

The part I didnt like for the Royals was giving up young pitching and top prospect like Odorizzi as part of the deal, I was OK with it until I started to hear that they gave up young P along with Myers to get the deal done.  When you dont have pitching, it really puts you over a barrel trying to compete.

[Suikoden]

The Royals will continue to be terrible.  Shields replaces Grienke.  Royals still suck.  Nothing to see here.

[RotoRaysfan]

RotoRaysfan, on 06 December 2012 - 07:20 AM, said:

https://twitter.com/...528800693645313

As much as I'd like to believe this, I can't see the Royals giving up 6 years of a prospect ready to help for a top 30 SP booked for only 2 years - I get the Royals see a window opening, but you'd think they'd want a window to extend Shields before considering this move.

If I'm the Rays, I jump all over this - again, much like trading Garza & Kazmir, the Rays have options to replace Shields (Archer being the next one) - while he won't replace Shields, with a limited budget, they can trim payroll & address other areas.  

As unpopular as the Escobar trade is from a PR perspective, another typical budget-conscious value move - Escobar is unlikely to be anything but a mediocre SS, but giving up Dietrich unlikely to cost them in the long run - and at 5M for 2012, and 2014/2015 options for 5M each, getting a league-average SS and Zobrist at 2B allows them to look for 1-2 more bats to improve on last year's dreadful O - and if Escobar suddenly keeps declining or being an idiot, the 2014/2015 options aren't guaranteed, so it's a one-year commitment. While I laud TO for getting rid of the PR mess AND upgrading SS, it makes business sense for TB for filling SS neatly and with no long-term risk or big $, since they need to address multiple needs, with very limited $.

Getting Myers would be huge, as then it would really mean they've upgraded 2 positions from 2012, spent no extra $, acquired more service years of time for their lineup, and would have $$ to upgrade a 3rd (or even a 4th) position on the field (C & 1B are the notable areas, if Myers takes a corner OF/DH spot - Jennings replaces Upton in CF).

http://forums.rotowo...20#entry3218352

Before people think I'm being biased here - that was during the Winter Meetings.   Getting 6+ years of Myers for 2 years of Shields was a no-brainer move for the Rays, especially since they can then use the $ saved on Shields, and shore up other parts of the team (as Archer is ready to join the rotation).  

Now, you lose Davis who is indeed locked in for 2 years, and has 3 additional team-friendly options for 2015-17...assuming he's a starter.  If he's a bullpen arm, that's actually an albatross of a contract for a budget-strapped team like TB or KC.

BUT, you add in both Montgomery (who had an off-year, but he's still only 23 and left-handed) and Odorizzi, who you get for 6+ years, and well, I'm ecstatic for the Rays on this one.   They get another huge bat upgrade, at min. wage, 6+ years of control - plus they get 2 more arms with no service time, who are Double-A level of skill, with SP2-3 ceilings (and Montgomery even higher, but with a lower floor) - and they clear another potentially troublesome contract (7M, 8M & 10M for 2015-17 - very reasonable if you're a SP4 or better - terrible if you a reliever).  

Ironically, it may not be Shields who determines whether this deal works out for KC, but Davis - he can stay in the rotation and be an anchor (SP3-4, not an ace) - then it's a better deal.  He doesn't, and either Myers, Odorizzi or Montgomery remain fixtures on the Rays for 6+ years of control with greater payroll flexilibility, and it's a huge win for the Rays.

I get why the Royals did the deal - but it's a huge gamble.   Dayton Moore is a premier GM at developing players - his record for trades & FA signings has not been stellar, so we'll see (and I will give him a pass on FA's, since his market status as a bottom dweller means he has to overpay).

[baltimore_boy]

parrothead, on 10 December 2012 - 03:43 PM, said:

The part I didnt like for the Royals was giving up young pitching and top prospect like Odorizzi as part of the deal, I was OK with it until I started to hear that they gave up young P along with Myers to get the deal done.  When you dont have pitching, it really puts you over a barrel trying to compete.

I'm with this. I could see why they did it when it was supposed to be only Myers, but when the whole trade came out and they gave up Odorizzi AND Montgomery, the Royals made a mistake. They're trying to improve their rotation, but gave up 2 solid pitching prospects in the process. It just doesn't make much sense for the Royals to give up all 3.

[Timmah!]

FWIW, Montgomery is on a two-year slide.  He wasn't as bad in '11 as he was in '12, and yes, he's still only 23, but he's actually struggled as he's moved up the ladder, even going back into 2010.  His SO/BB has flattened, his BB/9 has increased and his SO/9 have decreased.  He's all of a sudden started giving up home runs.  

Of course, it's too soon to write him off, but at this stage he's a bit more reclamation project than evolving prospect.

[RotoRaysfan]

Timmah!, on 10 December 2012 - 07:05 PM, said:

FWIW, Montgomery is on a two-year slide.  He wasn't as bad in '11 as he was in '12, and yes, he's still only 23, but he's actually struggled as he's moved up the ladder, even going back into 2010.  His SO/BB has flattened, his BB/9 has increased and his SO/9 have decreased.  He's all of a sudden started giving up home runs.  

Of course, it's too soon to write him off, but at this stage he's a bit more reclamation project than evolving prospect.

Fair assessment - but it's still a gamble worth taking, when he's the 3rd piece in the deal.  

And FWIW neither Davis, Odorizzi or Montgomery could pan out to be better than back-rotation/swingmen - and the deal would still be a no-brainer for the Rays.   Given their budget situation, clearing both Davis & Shields and getting a premium elite prospect bat (as unproven as all prospects are, the 6+ years and min. wage cost make this an easy call), plus 2 high-end arms to boot, I'm sure Friedman accepted ASAP.

If the Royals contend, or Davis is a Royals fixture for 5 years, AND both arms traded away don't pan out, then it works out for KC.   But all the other permutations (KC doesn't contend, Davis can't break out beyond swingman / back-end rotation guy), then well, yikes.

[Timmah!]

RotoRaysfan, on 10 December 2012 - 07:37 PM, said:

Timmah!, on 10 December 2012 - 07:05 PM, said:

FWIW, Montgomery is on a two-year slide.  He wasn't as bad in '11 as he was in '12, and yes, he's still only 23, but he's actually struggled as he's moved up the ladder, even going back into 2010.  His SO/BB has flattened, his BB/9 has increased and his SO/9 have decreased.  He's all of a sudden started giving up home runs.  

Of course, it's too soon to write him off, but at this stage he's a bit more reclamation project than evolving prospect.

Fair assessment - but it's still a gamble worth taking, when he's the 3rd piece in the deal.  

And FWIW neither Davis, Odorizzi or Montgomery could pan out to be better than back-rotation/swingmen - and the deal would still be a no-brainer for the Rays.   Given their budget situation, clearing both Davis & Shields and getting a premium elite prospect bat (as unproven as all prospects are, the 6+ years and min. wage cost make this an easy call), plus 2 high-end arms to boot, I'm sure Friedman accepted ASAP.

If the Royals contend, or Davis is a Royals fixture for 5 years, AND both arms traded away don't pan out, then it works out for KC.   But all the other permutations (KC doesn't contend, Davis can't break out beyond swingman / back-end rotation guy), then well, yikes.

Absolutely.  If he's the centerpiece, AND being touted as someone still putting up numbers like he did in A ball, then yeah, there's a disconnect in place.  As a team that's demonstrated an ability to help pitchers rediscover lost success (e.g. Farnsworth, Rodney), getting a shot at turning Montgomery around as a bonus would be right up their alley.  Even if they don't keep him in the long run, simply getting him back on course makes him a valuable trade chip of their own.

It just seemed from what I've read in analysis - and not just here but elsewhere, too - that few people were able to see the 2011 line on his resume, and made the assumption that 2012 was an aberration.

[jsp2014]

there is a big conflict of interest when the owner wants wins now and the GM knows that his "process" will come to an end after another losing season.

[GreenGold74]

The idea is a bold and gutsy call that I feel like is being underrated. They have watched both of their sure fire A prospects for instance(Moustakes and Hosmer) not exactly set the world on fire to this point. So there is absolutely no guarantee Myers or the two pitching prospects they dealt will be any different. Thus they felt rather than roll the dice they panned out they elected to sell them for what they perceived as difference making ML pitching. And given what they still have offensively its a move that could balance out their team as a whole and give them an immediate chance to contend in the Central. The problem I have with the deal is I felt they undersold the prospect package they sent to the Rays and they could of got more. Why did they not call up the Marlins GM during the height of the fire sale and go after Josh Johnson and Buerhle themselves? Surely the price woudln't of been nearly as high prospect wise? But a reality people overlook is that organizations are not keen on trading any starting pitching period of that calibur unless they are dumping salary. So if this was their goal in the offseason and they felt the free agent market wasn't a place they could compete and simply sign someone like Anibal or Lohse then it might of been their only option to obtain their "ace"

Anyway none of us can possibly know what prospects will do at the major league level so its unfair to cast stones on what scouts think players will become. Its likely at the end of the day this will be a devestating trade for the Royals future but if Shields and Davis help add 10 wins and instill some organizational confidence with their younger players not feeling the weight of the world then from the Royals perspective the move won't be as bad as perceived. And if things go absolutely south for KC I can see them simply dealing Shields in July and getting back some decent prospects from a contender as Shields would still have a year left and trade value. All in all the Royals took the most risk witht his deal but only time will tell if was a good or bad one.

[jsp2014]

GreenGold74, on 10 December 2012 - 09:00 PM, said:

The idea is a bold and gutsy call that I feel like is being underrated. They have watched both of their sure fire A prospects for instance(Moustakes and Hosmer) not exactly set the world on fire to this point. So there is absolutely no guarantee Myers or the two pitching prospects they dealt will be any different. Thus they felt rather than roll the dice they panned out they elected to sell them for what they perceived as difference making ML pitching. And given what they still have offensively its a move that could balance out their team as a whole and give them an immediate chance to contend in the Central. The problem I have with the deal is I felt they undersold the prospect package they sent to the Rays and they could of got more. Why did they not call up the Marlins GM during the height of the fire sale and go after Josh Johnson and Buerhle themselves? Surely the price woudln't of been nearly as high prospect wise? But a reality people overlook is that organizations are not keen on trading any starting pitching period of that calibur unless they are dumping salary. So if this was their goal in the offseason and they felt the free agent market wasn't a place they could compete and simply sign someone like Anibal or Lohse then it might of been their only option to obtain their "ace"

Anyway none of us can possibly know what prospects will do at the major league level so its unfair to cast stones on what scouts think players will become. Its likely at the end of the day this will be a devestating trade for the Royals future but if Shields and Davis help add 10 wins and instill some organizational confidence with their younger players not feeling the weight of the world then from the Royals perspective the move won't be as bad as perceived. And if things go absolutely south for KC I can see them simply dealing Shields in July and getting back some decent prospects from a contender as Shields would still have a year left and trade value. All in all the Royals took the most risk witht his deal but only time will tell if was a good or bad one.

no one knows for sure what Myers will do, but if you average out all the outcomes of top 5 prospects over time, they average out to a value that far exceeds 2 years of a moderately underpriced #2 SP. there are always going to be examples for both sides. it doesn't make either side right. look at the big picture.

think about the upside: 6 cheap years (and often 7-8 as teams are increasingly locking their young guys up) for a star player. that's the type of thing that can turn a franchise around. that is why top prospects are so highly regarded. a few top 5 prospects flame out. some have Pat Burrell (useful) type careers and offer solid value to the team (more than 2 years of Shields). others go on to become franchise cornerstones.

Edited by jsp2014, 10 December 2012 - 09:15 PM.