Detroit/New York/Arizona 3-way deal

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/1...to-dbacks.html

Yankees get Curtis Granderson
Diamondbacks get Edwin Jackson and Ian Kennedy
Tigers get Max Scherzer, Daniel Schlereth, Austin Jackson and Phil Coke

Yankees easily got the best of it. They didn't give up much and got an excellent center fielder. Detroit cut payroll and probably worsened the team overall a tiny bit by giving up Granderson but Scherzer is under team control for a while and has a lot of upside and they boosted a weak farm system with Schlereth and Jackson. Arizona...bleh. Don't like this at all for them. Scherzer is Edwin Jackson with more upside, a lower salary and under team control for longer.

FanGraphs' take, which I agree with totally.

friend in indy says it's a done deal

Who's playing where in the outfield?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NYDodgers

Who's playing where in the outfield?

---

Granderson in center, Swisher in right, for now. Offseason's not done yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NYDodgers

Who's playing where in the outfield?

---

What's at First

Granderson is a +4? As I said in the other thread, I have not researched like others, but I didn't see this as a positive for New York.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

Granderson is a +4? As I said in the other thread, I have not researched like others, but I didn't see this as a positive for New York.

---

League average hitter at worst, excellent defense in center field. His WAR over the last 4 years: 3.9, 7.4, 3.8, 3.4

I see the Yankees giving up some good young players and the D'Backs giving up Scherzer and Schelreth.

I would love to have Max back in STL, but Jackson is a solid middle rotation pitcher, and Kennedy could end up in many places in Arizona

Yankees make off pretty nicely, considering that they don't really need Kennedy, Coke, or Jackson.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by haveacigar

Yankees make off pretty nicely, considering that they don't really need Kennedy, Coke, or Jackson.

---

Hehehe...

I think this means New York is probably not making any deals for Halladay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OregonDuck1989

I think this means New York is probably not making any deals for Halladay.

---

I agree. Even if they wanted to I don't think they have the chips to get a deal done after dealing Jackson.

d_a_cameron Arizona should have two press conferences - one to announce the trade, and another to apologize to their fans.

Worst Yankees trade ever recorded.. end of story

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jpz17

Worst Yankees trade ever recorded.. end of story

---

We'll have to wait for HGM to close the thread I guess. He's at school so just give it time.

/thread

I think the Yankees made a good deal and the Tigers have just shown that they are now moving to the future and are willing to go back into a rebuilding phase. The Diamondbacks... I have no idea what they were thinking. They might be rebuilding but they just got rid of Max Scherzer so I don't know how that makes sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 5dodgers5

Tigers have just shown that they are now moving to the future

---

I think they'll probably be ready to compete in 2012 if they can use all that money they have coming off the books effectively.

Also : Can you imagine this rotation in 2/3 years? Verlander/Porcello/Scherzer/Crosby/Turner

5 aces in there if they all perform as expected.

I thnk the Tigers won, but the Yanks did well as well. Arizona is looking ridiculously stupid here

I come out on the side of Detroit. But, I don't hate it from anyone's perspective.

Yankees get another All-Star to add to their lineup. In that ballpark, CG could hit 35 homers and knock in 90+.

D-Backs do give up a couple of promising young players and will have to up payroll a bit, but if they're willing to do it, I don't see how we can accuse them of being negligent. Yes, Scherzer and Schlereth's ceiling is high but so is Edwin Jackson's. This is a guy who was an All-Star in the American League. Put him in the offensively anemic NL West and you could have something. Not to mention that, when healthy, a rotation spearheaded by Brandon Webb, Danny Haren, and Edwin Jackson is probably the best in the NL. With guys like Upton and Drew only getting better, the emergence of guys like Miguel Montero, and Conor Jackson coming back from Valley Fever, who's to say that Arizona, the best team in the NL for the 1st half of 2008, couldn't come back and contend?

Like this for the tigers and yanks. Jackson could do good in the nl and make this good for the dbacks but giving up max egh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ewing6

like this for the tigers and yanks. Jackson could do good in the nl and make this good for the dbacks but giving up max egh

---

listen to this man!!! Hes a former genius!

I personally think it's pretty even all around. The D-Back's may be getting a slightly worse deal than the Yankees and Tigers, but I don't think it's by a whole lot. Plus if Jackson keeps up his performance of last year he'll probably end up being a Type A free agent down the line, and netting the D-Back's a couple of picks.

The problem with the Diamondbacks side is both of the players they received are question marks. Kennedy and Jackson COULD be potential all-stars or they COULD just fall flat on their face and the Diamondbacks gave up a potential ace that they had under contract for 5 years for nothing.

Granderson has been consistent and will add defense and speed to center field. This now puts the pressure that they either trade Cabrera or sign Damon or just not talk to Damon and move Melk to left.

Detroit nets the biggest possible upswing of the trade. If the players they get become all-stars we all know they easily won the trade.

I won't post all of it because it's subscriber content only, but for anyone who doesn't see how Arizona lost this deal :

Quote:

---

So that's what happens when you leave Snakes out in the sun too long—they really do have brains to bake. Maybe I'm overreacting to this, in that I might risk trading Schlereth for Kennedy if I liked the headliners on an exchange. But this, I don't like, even as a past booster for Edwin Jackson. As much as I liked Jackson's unevenly great breakthrough season in 2009, I wouldn't want to trade two years of arbitration with him for Scherzer's future. Jackson's peripherals are nice enough—a 5.9 SNLVAR, .566 SNWP, yes, I want those things. Put him in the National League, and yes, maybe that helps him iron out his hard-earned reputation for inconsistency. But it's just two years, at a steep price, you're putting him in a bandbox of a ballpark, and it still leaves the Snakes waiting to sort out how to fix their offense. Maybe we can accept a casting exchange of Jackson and Brandon Webb in the 2010 rotation as a big step forward from Scherzer and Doug Davis.

Swell, fine, it's a modest cost savings compared to what the free market might get you, for a recently-minted starting pitcher of merit, albeit one whose performance record you'll find alongside the Oxford English Dictionary's definition of "mercurial." Playing for the upside risk isn't the worst idea in the world, especially when you're going to need to take some risks with a team that's now two seasons removed from relevance. The real problem is that this is a gamble based on the proposition that last season's offense had enough going for it to win the NL West—and as we should be used to by now, it wasn't, not in a division that had the Dodgers playing for bigger stakes, and has the Rockies fairly well established as a team that can beat you with pitching and defense in any environment, and scores enough runs to make it play anywhere, home or road. Stephen Drew and Chris B. Young have come up short, Conor Jackson's recovery is far from certain, and I'm not getting on that Brandon Allen bandwagon any time soon. That, I'm not so excited about, and while an improved attack might bank a few more wins from Jackson's contributions than Scherzer's in '09, it's a sandcastle in the sky as likely to go to dust as it is to provide the foundation for a new run of success.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skudplayr

D-Backs do give up a couple of promising young players and will have to up payroll a bit, but if they're willing to do it, I don't see how we can accuse them of being negligent. Yes, Scherzer and Schlereth's ceiling is high but so is Edwin Jackson's. This is a guy who was an All-Star in the American League. Put him in the offensively anemic NL West and you could have something. Not to mention that, when healthy, a rotation spearheaded by Brandon Webb, Danny Haren, and Edwin Jackson is probably the best in the NL.

---

Thing is that Max Scherzer right now is about as good as Edwin Jackson - except he's under team control for five years and Edwin Jackson is under team control for two. If they had the same service time, it'd be a push. But, they don't, and that's the crux of why it's poor for Arizona.

I think the Tigers win this deal if the specs pan out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by metsguy234

I think the Tigers win this deal if the specs pan out.

---

true dat!

If Austin Jackson develops into a 3+ win player, DD is gonna look like a genius in a few years.

I like the deal for the Tigers. Granderson is OK...but the Yanks did give up IMO a fair amount to acquire IMO just an OK slightly above avg player. Coke gave them alot of innings last year, and Kennedy and Jackson have good potential. Granderson is gonna be pricey, but then again its the Yanks so for them dollars mean sh!t. I actually like the Tigers farm, and this isn't exactly a complete overhaul for them, i kind of like what they're doing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

Granderson is gonna be pricey

---

Quote:

---

Curtis Granderson of
5 years/$30.25M (2008-13), plus 2014 club option
5 years/$30.25M (2008-13), plus 2014 club option
signed extension with Detroit 2/4/08
08:$1M, 09:$3.5M, 10:$5.5M, 11:$8.25M, 12:$10M, 13:$13M club option ($2M buyout)
2013 option increases to:
$15M if MVP (1st - 5th) in 2011 or 2012
$14M if All Star in 2011 or 2012
$13.5M if All Star selection in 2011 or 2012
award bonuses: $25,000 each for All Star, Gold Glove; $50,000 for Silver Slugger; $75,000 for LCS MVP; $0.1M for MVP, WS MVP
1 year/$0.41M (2007)
re-signed by Detroit 2/07
1 year/$0.335M (2006)
re-signed by Detroit 2/06
1 year (2005)
re-signed by Detroit 1/05
drafted 2002 (3-80)
$0.469M signing bonus
ML service: 3.077

---

If there's one thing Granderson isn't, it's pricey ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

I like the deal for the Tigers. Granderson is OK...but the Yanks did give up IMO a fair amount to acquire IMO just an OK slightly above avg player. Coke gave them alot of innings last year, and Kennedy and Jackson have good potential. Granderson is gonna be pricey, but then again its the Yanks so for them dollars mean sh!t. I actually like the Tigers farm, and this isn't exactly a complete overhaul for them, i kind of like what they're doing.

---

Granderson is not a "slightly above average player." I don't know why so many people seem to be underrating him so much. He's an above average hitter with plus defense in center field and excellent baserunning. That's an all-star caliber player.

Also, Granderson is signed to a relatively cheap long-term deal:

10:$5.5M
11:$8.25M
12:$10M
13:$13M club option ($2M buyout)

The 2013 option price increases under the following conditions:

$15M if MVP (1st - 5th) in 2011 or 2012
$14M if All Star in 2011 or 2012
$13.5M if All Star selection in 2011 or 2012

For a player of Granderson's caliber, that money is chump change for the Yankees.

In this thread, I see two consistent trends - an underrating of Curtis Granderson and an overrating of the Yankees prospects. Austin Jackson is the only one of any real significance that they gave up, and that's assuming he develops properly. He can't be expected to maintain a .300 batting average because of his high strikeout rate and he does not have the power or walk rate to be a plus offensive player with a low batting average. Curtis Granderson is essentially Jackson's ceiling, and that's if he suddenly sprouts power.

Ian Kennedy isn't anything special. By serious prospect evaluators, he was always seen as a solid #3/4 starter with a high chance of reaching that and a slight chance of being slightly better than that, but it remains to be seen how well Kennedy has recovered from his aneurysm.

Phil Coke is a homer prone lefty reliever. Those guys are plentiful. He's of zero consequence.

The thing about the Yankees is, anything they give up is easily replaced. Coke is pretty expendable with Mike Dunn coming along. They obviously don't need Jackson anymore. And Kennedy hasn't been a factor for a long time anyway. Even if you don't think Granderson is all that great, what do they actually lose?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by haveacigar

The thing about the Yankees is, anything they give up is easily replaced. Coke is pretty expendable with Mike Dunn coming along. They obviously don't need Jackson anymore. And Kennedy hasn't been a factor for a long time anyway. Even if you don't think Granderson is all that great, what do they actually lose?

---

Exactly.

And, plus, the Yankees are in a different position from most other teams. They're a contender every year. Acquiring a player in his prime signed to a cheap deal by giving up a minor leaguer whose absolute best-case scenario is turning into that player they acquired....well, that's something a perennial contender needs to do to maintain that status.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

He can't be expected to maintain a .300 batting average because of his high strikeout rate and he does not have the power or walk rate to be a plus offensive player with a low batting average.

---

You forgot to mention his insane and unrepeatable .39X BABIP

And yeah, I don't know where all this Granderson hate is coming from.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 200tang

You forgot to mention his insane and unrepeatable .39X BABIP

---

That's implied by the "he can't sustain a .300 average." ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

That's implied by the "he can't sustain a .300 average." ;)

---

Not implied very well >:|

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 200tang

I won't post all of it because it's subscriber content only, but for anyone who doesn't see how Arizona lost this deal :

---

I don't think you can say anyone "lost" the deal until the season starts (and with the amount of young players involved), probably a few years down the road. Jackson could be elite in the NL. He could also be a dud.

Scherzer could get hurt or just never progress. Schlereth hasn't shown anything but his ability to give up hits at the big league level.

There's a reason the Mariners balked at Morrow + Kelley for Edwin Jackson. I've heard that JackZ guy is a pretty good scout.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skudplayr

I don't think you can say anyone "lost" the deal until the season starts (and with the amount of young players involved), probably a few years down the road. Jackson could be elite in the NL. He could also be a dud.

Scherzer could get hurt or just never progress. Schlereth hasn't shown anything but his ability to give up hits at the big league level.

---

Obviously any deal can turn out bad or good based on unforeseen circumstances. Just as obviously, though, all we have now to evaluate the deal on is...well....what we currently know. And based on what we currently know, it isn't a good deal for Arizona. Just because there are possible outcomes where it winds up good for Arizona doesn't mean we can't evaluate the trade at the present time.

Curtis Granderson could get hit by a bus tomorrow, resulting in the Yankees having given up three players for nothing - obviously a terrible situation. That doesn't mean that we can't evaluate this deal as a good one for the Yankees.