Life In The Fast Lane
Posted by ubelmann on Thursday, November 29th, 2007 at 2:59 am
I know what you're thinking. "Did he fire six shots or only five?" Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself. But being as this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself a question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?
I'm not much of a risk taker. Whether it's just force of habit, or real fear that something bad could happen, I buckle my safety belt even if I'm moving the car six feet. If there's not a crosswalk, I'm not crossing. Not because I think I'm going to get hit by a car--I'm probably overconfident in my car avoidance abilities--but more because I'm worried that I'll be ticketed for jaywalking. I had a high school trip to Detroit. Four of us were walking around downtown. Two girls in the group wanted to take a shortcut through an alley. I was obviously having none of that. One of those girls told me that I needed to live more on the edge. That could be true, but I'm still not taking shortcuts through alleys in downtown Detroit.
Keeping that in mind, I'm not very comfortable with the Twins' recent blockbuster trade. Having poked around, it seems like some people like the trade for the Twins and some people like the trade for the Rays. And while I would be quicker to pull the trigger from the Rays' end, I can see the allure of Delmon Young. He's young, apparently has "unquestionable" talent and "limitless" potential, but to me he represents a gigantic risk. He's already a corner outfielder, and his offensive game needs a lot of improving. Sure, the potential is there, but if there is a long way to go before that potential is realized. And you have to be a really, really good hitter to be an especially valuable corner outfielder.
On the other hand, Garza is essentially a finished product. Sure, the secondary offerings might improve some, but he's already an above average starting pitcher. Bartlett is also more or less a finished product. He's about average offensively as a shortstop, and he's above average defensively. He's also cheap, and he was one of the few places in the lineup I wasn't too worried about going into next year. I don't see much risk with either of those players, but there's still plenty to like about each of them.
Perhaps what worries me most is that I've never liked the Twins' attitude towards Garza and Bartlett. With Garza, it was the constant emphasis on his secondary offerings. It was something that needed to be addressed, but not to the point that we rarely heard anything good about him. With Bartlett it was the errors. The Twins don't like errors, and I think they really let them cloud their vision when it comes to evaluating defense. Errors are part of the puzzle--much like GIDP is part of the puzzle when evaluating a player's offensive game--but it's not the only part of the puzzle. Bartlett also has a very strong arm and good range. He's one of the best defensive shortstops in the AL, errors and all.
I get the impression that the Twins were ecstatic with the possibility of getting Young, Harris, and Pridie for Garza, Bartlett, and Rincon. I think they do value Morlan much more highly than Rincon, but thought they were getting such a good deal in the first place that they could afford the additional cost. And that seems entirely plausible to me because in 2006 the organization valued Castro over Bartlett, and in 2007 the organization valued Sidmon Pontiz over Garza. For whatever reason, I don't see eye-to-eye with the Twins when it comes to Garza and Bartlett.
One aspect of this trade that intrigues me is that it seems practically impossible that Delmon Young would have advanced so quickly through the Twins' farm system. The only players the Twins ever let advance that quickly are the players who they feel are great defensive players, and Delmon is not a great defensive player. If Young was a Twins farmhand, I get the feeling we would hear about how he needs to cut down on his strikeouts and how he needs to learn to control his emotions. Or something. It seems like the Twins just can't be happy with their own prospects anymore.
Maybe I would like this trade more if the roster wasn't such a mess right now. The Twins have no CF, Punto might be put at SS, which is a stretch for him, there's still no 3B, and Santana/Nathan are on their way out the door. There are a lot of moves to be made, and maybe I'll be happier about this in two months. But this punk isn't feeling too lucky, and for now I'm not too excited about being a Twins fan in 2008.
Loading ...
I agree in the fact that I'm not a fan of this trade from the Twins end. I knew we'd have to get rid of one of our pitchers to get help, but I don't think this was a fabulous deal. First of all, I don't like Young's history. Some reports say he's a good player, but that bat incident leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Second, I really hate seeing Bartlett go. I think that was a mistake. I was really starting to like Bartlett, and he fit in well at SS. Getting rid of him doesn't really help our offensive situation, it just opens up another hole. Can Harris really fill the gap, I don't know.
It really makes me wonder what we're going to get if we trade Santana. It's one thing to get the top prospects, but it's even better to get some guys that are a little more finished (like Garza and Bartlett).
So let Moss get this straight...
So far this offseason, the Twins have:
-- severely downgraded at CF (in exchange for possible players years from now)
-- made a possibly even swap at LF (based on DY's numbers from last year) with a slight uptick at DH
-- severely downgraded the starting rotation (and are preparing to do even more harm)
-- downgraded the defense at a defensive position, with a possible but not huge offensive uptick
-- downgraded the minor-league pitching depth (unless Morlan would have been ML-ready this year, and then you can count it as a downgrade in the bullpen)
-- threw away a low-level player on a guy who is way too expensive
Did Moss miss anything??
Oh yeah, they'll face Garza 1-2x per season now.
We've upgraded at DH. Oh boy.
I'm going to miss Garza. Bartlett too, for that matter.
threw away a low-level player on a guy who is way too expensive
If you're referring to the Craig Monroe situation, the PTBNL is very likely dependent upon whether or not Monroe is signed, which looks less likely by the day, so the PTBNL will probably be nothing. (Just like there never wound up being an actual PTBNL for Bret Boone.)
made a possibly even swap at LF (based on DY's numbers from last year) with a slight uptick at DH
As you can tell, I'm not especially high on Delmon going into next year, but without him, the Twins were likely to get something around replacement level (because all off-season the Twins have been planning for Kubel to be the DH next year), and Delmon should be above replacement level. So I think it's unfair to call it an even swap at LF.
Couple of points... This is a huge uptick at DH, as you now have Young/Kubel as your DH. Pridie can become a 4th OF immediately (and a big upgrade there), and if 2007 isn't an outlier, then he may have been a steal. I suspect I'd move Harris over to 2B, where his defense won't be as much of a liability and his offense will still make him valuable. Tolbert, Punto, and Casilla will vie for SS... I think Tolbert will not be too much of a drop off from Bartlett (at least in year 2)... That's me. I'm more skeptical now that Morlan is gone, but I do not think this is a bad deal for 2008... yet... If this means we ship Santana to the Mets for Reyes and somethign else, then I'll hang myself. Reyes is good, dont' get me wrong, but he isn't the difference maker they need.
If this means we ship Santana to the Mets for Reyes and somethign else, then I'll hang myself
That's dying hard.
My thought is that the Twins either still have hopes of signing Santana or are confident that they will get a starting pitcher in return if they trade him. I don't see them going into next year with a rotation of Liriano, Baker, Bonser, Slowey, and ?. I realize they could sign another Ortiz/Ponson-type pitcher, but my guess is they will have something better than that for the rotation next year.
I'm just confused by this move. I don't know if I like it or not. It reminds me of the Lawton-Reed trade where the Twins traded their lead-off hitter while in a pennant race. The Twins just traded young, cheap talent at a time when they are in rebuilding mode. They traded two players that would have contributed heavily in 2008 for one player that will contribute heavily in 2008.
I would have liked this trade a lot more if it would have been Rincon instead of Morlan. I viewed getting Rincon's $3MM off the books as a positive no matter what they got back. Not that Rincon is worthless but I thought he could be replaced by a cheaper option from within.
I guess it all comes down to how good Delmon Young will be and how good Garza will be.
This trade does leave me quite unsettled as well. Even if Delmon Young's power does improve, I am hesitant that his patience would improve so much that it would become an asset, or, at the very least, not a liability. Delmon's K/BB ratio in the minors was 3-1 while Justin Upton's, who was similarly rushed, K/BB ratio was a much more modest 1.7-1 including a 5-3 ratio in AA as a 19 year old. Delmon never came close to that rate in his time at AA.
In my opinion, a best case scenario would be Young turning into Vladimir Guerrero who is also reputed as a tremendously talented hacker. But even as a 20 year old, Guerrero had a 2-1 K/BB ratio (in half the at bats), while the 21 year old Young had a 5-1 ratio last year. That is an absolutely atrocious rate.
Maybe I had too much faith in Garza, and I am glad I didn't buy a 21 Garza jersey, but his age 23 numbers as a pitcher were pretty darn good. A 4.52 xFIP isn't great but it is certainly average and he decreased his walks and increased his strikeouts from the year prior while also decreasing his HR/G ratio.
The centerpiece of the trade is a net loss for the Twins and the remainder of the trade are replacement level prospects coming our way with us giving up above average players or prospects.
We probably could have gotten the equivalent or better production from Luke Scott or other prospects for a far lower cost. Judging by the press, Bill Smith is being lionized for this deal but we basically have to hope for Garza or Morlan to get injured for this trade to have been worth it. That isn't how you should feel coming out of a trade. To me, we bought reputation and sold production.
We probably could have gotten the equivalent or better production from Luke Scott or other prospects for a far lower cost.
For 2008, perhaps. Past 2008, there is no way that Luke Scott will be in the ballpark of Delmon Young.
I don't get why Delmon Young is so frowned upon. He had a decent season in the majors at age 21. He was rated the #1 overall minor league prospect in 2006. He still projects at worst to be around a Jeff Francouer, who is a solid player. That seems to be about his floor.
Garza is a solid pitcher, but
1) He is 2 years older than Young. (About the same service time though)
2) His 3.69 ERA last year was quite misleading. His WHIP was over 1.5, and his peripherals suggest his ERA should have been a whole run or so higher. He's not significantly different than Slowey or Baker in my mind.
Clearly, with only 1 year to go on, baseball-references comparisons are early and suspect. However, top 3 comparisons (based on age) for Garza are Jason Davis, Mark Portugal, and Jim Lonborg.
Comparisons for Delmon Young are Tris Speaker, Rocco Baldelli, and Roberto Clemente.
You make a good point. A 21-year-old who can play in the majors without appearing completely overwhelmed would seem like someone who is going to go on to have a good career "at the major-league level".
I'm not so entirely down on the Garza/Young swap as I am with the rest of the trade.
I agree. If this trade had been Garza for Young straight up, I think it would have been a good deal for the Twins. They would be trading similar prospects and getting a player where the lack depth for a player at a position where they have tons of it. Young has a tremendous upside and his plate discipline wasn't always as bad as it is now. This would suggest that he can probably improve his walk rate somewhat.
Trading Bartlett was pretty bad, but we can probably move Harris to third or second and put a get a hitting upgrade at one of those two positions and move someone else to shortstop (Please, let it not be Punto!).
Clearly, with only 1 year to go on, baseball-references comparisons are early and suspect.
The baseball-reference comparisons suck anyway, because they don't adjust for park, era, and use only major league stats (and throw in some really crappy major league stats for good measure.)
He is 2 years older than Young.
But Garza is still really young. I think people in general overrate the difference between major league success at 21 and 23.
My concerns with Young are that a) no one has to improve just because they are young, b) his OBP could be a real problem in a corner spot, and c) he hasn't hit for all that much power (for a corner OF) in a couple of years.
You mention Franceour as Young's floor. Well, Francoeur was worth a mere 17.9 VORP last year, and Jason Bartlett was arguably a more valuable player than Jeff Francoeur was last year. Garza had an 11.3 VORP and only made 15 starts. (Also, Garza's not exactly Julio Franco. By the same age reasoning, one could expect Garza to improve going forward.) When you're a corner outfielder, the bar for success is set very high, and Young has a long way to go to be an especially productive player. Thus, he's a risk.
Delmon's K/BB ratio in the minors was 3-1...
The Twins sure as hell don't have anyone in the system who can coach him to improvement in this area either. The system for years seems to ignore the value of a walk while being strikeout-averse.
With this acquisition, they get the strikeouts but not the corresponding power (yet anyway) as well as a guy who may get on base less often than Torii.
Also, keep in mind that with regards to Young, he
1) Played in all 162 games.
2) His OPS by months were .672, .707, .762, .806, .820, .690. This may or may not represent anything, but I think that given #1, you could argue that his improvement in every month is legit and that the drop in Sept/Oct was due to getting worn down in his first 162 game season.
One other thought on Rincon. I am disappointed that he was replaced in the deal by Morlan. However, if I am understanding his situation properly, this is his last year in arbitration and he will be a free agent after this season, and there should be at least a decent chance he could remain a Type B free agent (he is 45 right now and B ratings go down to #50), which could return a sandwich pick next season.
Rob Neyer did an analysis over at espn.com but you have to be an insider to read it. He basically said it is difficult to tell who got the better deal since they are all such young players but that Young has the best chance to develop into an all-star so he gives the Twins a slight edge.
Right now Neyer's article is listed as a free preview of content behind the ESPN subscriber wall. For those interested, here's a link.
+ 5 or 6 for the Dirty Harry reference, ubes.
From my Cubs insider, Adam (you may remember him from such stories as my trip to Comiskey back in August):
Yeah, it hasn't been mentioned yet, but this trade increases the Twins' Cubs Factor. Great.
I like Garza, but we also know that the Twins have a pitching surplus and need more talent in the batting order. And how often can you get a prospect like Young w/out trading proven talent? Young may or may not become an All-Star, but predicting the fortunes of young pitchers like Garza is an even dicier game. If the club can trade some volatile, surplus pitching prospects for a prized young hitter or two, especially when it addresses a serious problem for the club, then I'm OK with the effort. I'd like it more if the return had been BJ Upton, but maybe that was never a realistic possibility, anyway.
I think that moving Bartlett shouldn't have been a priority, and it probably was done for the wrong reasons, but I do expect that Harris will be a better hitter than Bartlett next year--and I hope that he can still improve his fielding. Players often can get better in the field just with experience and continued drilling. Or sometimes wild things happen just with changes in scenery--different pitchers producing different kinds of opportunities on balls in play, a different home surface, or a different position, etc., could have a big effect on his fielding performance.
It would be nice if we all could jump up and down like kids on Christmas because it looked like the Twins made a slam-dunk deal. " BJ Upton for Boof Bonser and Juan Rincon! What were the Rays thinking?!?!" But I'll accept this, hope Young reaches his potential, and hope that Smith still makes more moves to upgrade the infield and get Punto out of the regular lineup.
I said this last night over at Twins Geek's blog, but I'll repeat it here. No matter how many deals Smith makes or how good they are, if we go into next year with Punto in the starting lineup then this offseason will be a failure for Bill Smith, IMO. For the record, we still need a CF, 3B, 2B, and now a SS. Casilla is not yet ready for prime time, nor is Buscher nor any of our other minor league infield options. To see just how much work Trader Smith still has to do before spring, go check out the Twins depth chart on their official site. When I see Punto now listed as the #1 SS and Tyner listed as the #1 CF, it makes we want to follow a pack of lemmings over the cliff.
Players often can get better in the field just with experience and continued drilling.
Harris played 12 games at shortstop his first two years in the minors (mainly playing 3B and 2B.) The history of players moving from 3B/2B to SS is not promising. On top of that, his advanced fielding numbers are bad across the board. (In addition to the UZR/PMR numbers from yesterday, John Dewan's +/- system has him as exceptionally poor, and he has the same RZR as Derek Jeter. The Rays had one of the very worst defenses in the league last year, and Harris was a part of that.) You can't even find scouts or coaches that liked Harris' defense at SS or praise his potential as a fielder there. I just don't see any chance of him being a league average fielder at SS, and I see a good chance at him being a really poor fielder at SS. (So poor, in fact, that I find it unlikely the Twins will keep Harris at SS for a full season.)
Young may or may not become an All-Star, but predicting the fortunes of young pitchers like Garza is an even dicier game.
I disagree with that. Garza is already a league average to above league-average starter. Delmon Young is currently a below league-average corner outfielder. I think there's more risk when it comes to Delmon Young, because he's much farther away from his potential, and his all-or-nothing approach at the plate doesn't work for very many hitters.
If the club can trade some volatile, surplus pitching prospects for a prized young hitter or two, especially when it addresses a serious problem for the club, then I'm OK with the effort.
Do the Twins really have a pitching surplus? Let's go through Aaron's list from the ZiPS projections. Santana won't pitch another game for the Twins. Liriano is great, but a big question mark coming off of surgery in terms of risk of re-injury and not performing at the same level. I think ZiPS is overly optimistic when it comes to Slowey, but can buy that he'll be an average to slightly above league average starter. Garza won't pitch any more for the Twins. The rest of the starters on the list are below league average.
With Santana gone, in my view, Garza was the second-best pitcher on the staff for 2008. I didn't view Garza as a surplus guy. Baker, Blackburn, Swarzak, Bonser, Duensing, Perkins--those were the surplus guys in the rotation. Now the Twins are looking at a starting rotation with just two pitchers above league average--and one of them is a big injury risk. Baker is close enough that maybe he could be above league average. Of the guys coming up from the minors, Manship and maybe Swarzak are the only two I really believe have the potential to be above league average, but not in 2008. I don't really think the rotation is in such great shape right now.
It would be nice if we all could jump up and down like kids on Christmas because it looked like the Twins made a slam-dunk deal.
Of course it would be nice if that happened, but that's not what I was looking for, either.
J Upton for Boof Bonser and Juan Rincon! What were the Rays thinking?!?!"
And I would be the first to tell you that wasn't going to happen. I don't see why the Twins really felt like they needed to get such a high risk/high reward guy. The biggest problem with the lineup last year was the sub-replacement level dead weight. If the Twins were going to deal pitching, I would rather have seen them deal one of their many 4-5th starters for a mediocre-average corner OF rather than worrying about having a superstar corner OF in 2011. Dealing Morlan was annoying, but I'm not worried about them coming up with bullpen arms.
But I'll accept this, hope Young reaches his potential, and hope that Smith still makes more moves to upgrade the infield and get Punto out of the regular lineup.
Punto will be in the starting lineup on opening day, barring injury. The Twins will need to add at least two infielders to keep him out of the starting lineup, and that's not going to happen when they also still need to fill CF and Punto is making $2M next year. The Twins view him as an everyday player because they vastly overrate his fielding abilities.
Garza is already a league average to above league-average starter.
Sure, in 133 IP. But baseball history is loaded with pitching phenoms who either struggled after going around the league a few times, developed control problems or some psychological block that hadn't been previously apparent, or were ruined by a sudden arm injury. It's why they say, there's no such thing as a pitching prospect, right?
Delmon Young isn't the perfect prospect, but when a hitter has already hit .293/.319/.419 in his first 819 PA's, through age 21, I think there's a good chance that he will develop into a good player, maybe even a special one if he can polish his flaws. And there isn't as much of the risk of some weird factor derailing his career as there is with a young pitcher.
I just don't see any chance of him being a league average fielder at SS, and I see a good chance at him being a really poor fielder at SS. (So poor, in fact, that I find it unlikely the Twins will keep Harris at SS for a full season.)
We'll see. I'm not going to write off the possibility of him playing adequate SS just because one John Dewan has a system that rates him poorly or you can't find any scouts and coaches who have praised his defense in a publication. He's played 92 games at the position in the majors; he might still improve. If there's one area in which a young player can show dramatic improvement by applying himself and just playing more games, I think it's fielding. If Harris doesn't work out at SS, he could be fine at another infield spot.
With Santana gone, in my view, Garza was the second-best pitcher on the staff for 2008. I didn't view Garza as a surplus guy. Baker, Blackburn, Swarzak, Bonser, Duensing, Perkins--those were the surplus guys in the rotation.
But we don't know whether any of those guys have comparable trade value right now.
If Santana really is gone, 2008 is almost certainly a rebuilding year for the Twins, anyway. So if Smith also wants to trade the potential #2 SP out of his 2008 rotation (and maybe his ace closer) in order to improve the longterm prospects of his lineup, while hoping that some of the other young pitchers you named (plus anyone acquired in exchange for Johan or Nathan) will grow to anchor the rotation in '09 and beyond, I think that's a reasonable choice.
Punto will be in the starting lineup on opening day, barring injury.
This wouldn't surprise me. Shame if it happens, but I'm still hoping for better.
Sure, in 133 IP. But baseball history is loaded with pitching phenoms who either struggled after going around the league a few times, developed control problems or some psychological block that hadn't been previously apparent, or were ruined by a sudden arm injury. It's why they say, there's no such thing as a pitching prospect, right?
TINSTAAPP is the biggest line of bullshit (or at least the most misapplied) ever to come out of sabermetrics. If you look at those pitchers who struggled after early success, you'll see that the vast majority of them don't have the track record that Garza has. Garza has a very good track record to go with his major league innings pitched. This isn't about 133 IP, it's about his entire track record. When ZiPS, or PECOTA, or wherever you look, has Garza forecasted as an above average starter next year, it's because they are looking at his major league and minor league statistics. The TINSAAPP issue went especially FUBAR in the early, pre-Voros McCracken days of sabermetrics because analysts attached way too much credit to a pitcher for his ERA. ERA fluctuated a lot, therefore pitching performance must have fluctuated a lot, but it turns out that a lot of that has to do with the defense.
Garza's not a prospect anymore. He's already a good pitcher.
And there isn't as much of the risk of some weird factor derailing his career as there is with a young pitcher.
Don't forget that we're talking about a guy who has been suspended for 50 games in the minors for throwing a bat at an ump. He's not necessarily going to be a problem, but I'd say that the "some weird factor" for Delmon is higher than for your typical hitting prospect.
We'll see. I'm not going to write off the possibility of him playing adequate SS just because one John Dewan has a system that rates him poorly or you can't find any scouts and coaches who have praised his defense in a publication. He's played 92 games at the position in the majors; he might still improve. If there's one area in which a young player can show dramatic improvement by applying himself and just playing more games, I think it's fielding. If Harris doesn't work out at SS, he could be fine at another infield spot.
You have no evidence that Harris can be a good fielder. I have UZR, PMR, Dewan's +/-, RZR, ZR all telling me that Harris is not just a bad fielder, but a really, really bad fielder. And unlike Derek Jeter, no scouts or managers think that Harris is a good fielder. There's no more reason to believe that Harris can be an adequate fielding SS than you have to believe that Luis Rodriguez could be a adequate fielding SS. It's not going to happen.
If Harris doesn't work out at SS, he could be fine at another infield spot.
Maybe there's some hope for him at 2B, but there's already some evidence that he's been a disaster there, too. At 3B, well:
.268/.330/.409 -- Harris, 2008 ZiPS projection
.274/.343/.445 -- AL average 3B
I can hardly contain my enthusiasm.
I'm willing to concede that Delmon has a higher ceiling than Garza, and as such, the Twins needed to lose out on the Bartlett/Morlan/Harris/Pridie part of the deal to make it even. I just want to be clear that the Twins did lose value on that part of the deal. The only way I see Harris/Bartlett as a remotely even swap is if you really think that Bartlett is a big injury risk going forward and Harris isn't.
But we don't know whether any of those guys have comparable trade value right now.
I'm sure they don't, but I don't need as much value as Garza to get someone with a lower ceiling than Delmon Young. My argument is mainly that it seems like they'd be better off swapping a lower value pitcher for a lower ceiling, lower risk LF'er and keeping Garza (and Bartlett) around than they are by rolling the dice on DY. It's not an awful trade, but I really do think it's risky. BS expects DY to be big bat in the middle of the order right away, and I don't think that's a realistic expectation.
So if Smith also wants to trade the potential #2 SP out of his 2008 rotation (and maybe his ace closer) in order to improve the longterm prospects of his lineup, while hoping that some of the other young pitchers you named (plus anyone acquired in exchange for Johan or Nathan) will grow to anchor the rotation in '09 and beyond, I think that's a reasonable choice.
So let's consider the rotation situation in 2010. Assuming everyone stays healthy, you have Liriano, Slowey, and Manship above league average, Baker and Swarzak around league average, with Blackburn, Duensing, Perkins, and maybe Mullins or Robertson rounding out the rotation. (Boof could still be around then, but I'd guess the Twins will ditch him before he reaches his third year of arb. eligibility.) Out of those top five pitchers, one or two of them will have a serious injury between now and then. As far as rotations go, it wouldn't be the worst in the world, but even adding a prospect in a Santana trade, I wouldn't project the rotation as a strength for the 2010 Twins unless they get lucky, but I'd feel better about it with Garza around.
Isn't there a better than decent chance a Santana trade will land a decent young starter (Lester, Hughes, etc.) back? I don't know if we can adequately discuss the merits of this trade before the Santana trade happens. If we land something like Crisp, Lester, and Jed Lowrie, this trade doesn't look so bad as we land a nearly major-league ready prospect (his OBP has been fairly consistently high throughout the minors, though I don't know whether the leagues he has played in inflate his stats). If we end up with Hughes/Kennedy and Melky Cabrera, this trade looks worse because we're still stuck with a large gap in the infield no matter where we stick Harris.
I admit that I could feel somewhat differently about this trade after I look more closely into Delmon Young (given his quick ascent through the minors, it's difficult to come up with good comparable players, so I think he's an intrinsically interesting player to analyze) and after Bill Smith makes the rest of his moves so that I know how this fits in with the master plan (if there is one.) And to be clear, I don't think the Twins got hoodwinked here, it's more that the current state of the roster makes me uneasy.
Additionally, re: Harris
I remember making a lot of arguments about how Tony Batista could still be a decent fielder because, well, who knows how much credit you should give to the anonymous scouting reports, and that Batista used to be a decent fielder, etc., but sometimes (perhaps most of the time) where there's smoke, there's fire.
The key there is "unless the Twins trade for one". As has been mentioned, we don't know what other deals may be coming along. I would be surprised if Punto isn't in the lineup on opening day, but I was surprised that they traded Bartlett, too. There are still a lot of things that could happen, and we don't necessarily have much of an idea what they are.
Santana for Cap'n Dreamboat!
You heard it hear first. A-Rod moves back to SS, crushes Ernie Banks' SS HR mark (if he hasn't already).
I will now go make myself throw up.
regarding Delmon: I dont know how one could judge such things, but maybe putting him a lineup him with more seasoned hitters like Cuddyer, Mauer, and Morneau help him out?
Here is a very funny take on the Garza/Young deal.
I think both teams came out well in the deal and I think that's why you're getting complaints from fans, etc., on both sides. You're not supposed to come out "even" or let the other guy come away with a good deal. You're supposed to win the trade! Screw the other guy! None of this win-win crap. Of course, the Pierzynski trade looked like a win-win deal at the time as well. The Twins got a good setup reliever and a couple pitching prospects and the Giants got a good, young catcher that wasn't expensive and they had control of for several years, if they chose to keep him.
If Garza pulls a Pierzynski, Young becomes a perennial All-Star and Pridie becomes an everyday outfielder, you only need Harris to become an infielder/hitter's equivalent of Boof Bonser to have Steal of the Century II.
You also need Bartlett to turn into Punto and Morlan have his arm fall off. No, there's a reason why Steal of the Century I was the steal of the century. Deals like that don't happen that often.
Even the shape of the Steal of the Century I seems to be still evolving. First, the Twins were trading an All-Star catcher for a package of promising but unproven pitching talent; there were questions about how Nathan might handle the closer role, about Boof's mental makeup and his progress in the high minors, and about Liriano's injury history. Then, A.J. didn't work out in SF, while Nathan proved to be a stud closer, Liriano looked brilliant for half a season, and Boof became a fan favorite and Dick n' Bert's darling; and so it was TSOTC-I. Now, Joe Nathan may be on the trading block again, while there are questions about Boof's progress of late and Liriano's future after another arm injury... so, who knows, maybe it will just be a Good Trade for the Twins that still falls short of What Might Have Been, after all.
But the SOTC-1 could still bring a future return for the Twins if Nathan gets dealt this offseason or before the deadline in 2008.
I also think fans have heard so much about their own prospects that they've fallen in love with them and already projected them for their best case scenario.
I think of all I've read, I like Neyer's analysis the best. Since it is basically all prospects, you can't really know how the trade will turn out.
The only thing that makes me uncomfortable is the swap of shortstops but I get a feeling that Smith has something in mind to fill that hole.
I also think fans have heard so much about their own prospects that they've fallen in love with them and already projected them for their best case scenario.
I think that's certainly true of Matt Garza. He was our latest Can't-Miss Golden Boy, and people are bound to be upset if that sort of prospect is traded without getting an All-Star or another reputed Can't Miss Golden Boy in return.