Comments on: Perplexed About Lee

By: Steve C

Steve C — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 15:28:28 +0000

I would not be surprised about collusion against Perez because he backed out of the deal.

Though that may be the budding conspiracy theorist in me talking.

By: Christo P. Ney

Christo P. Ney — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 16:29:39 +0000

Well…you kind of answered your own question there.

Sustained success at a reasonable cost. Why trade that without getting a top of the rotation prospect and good position guy in return.

Cleveland’s attendance numbers are already hovering near the bottom (27th- 22,000/game). What would a Lee deal do?

There have been plenty of reports on Lee but all of them start with the astronomical price Shapiro is asking.

In that division, no team should be completely giving up on this year and next year. Trading Lee would be that.

By: Judy

Judy — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 15:19:48 +0000

I think it’s easier to excuse Rosenthal for the Buchholz mention than it is to understand why it seems to be so difficult for people to spell his name. What is so complicated about HH?

By: Joe Twinsfan

Joe Twinsfan — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 15:16:54 +0000

Yeah I know, but looking at MLBTR, he’s been almost entirely absent even from any rumors for the whole season. I guess I’m just surprised no one’s come calling. Seems like someone would at least attempt to see if he was worth the headache.

By: Jason

Jason — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 13:45:31 +0000

LA sports radio says CLE quickly turned down Dodger offer of 4 pretty good prospects for Lee. The only way something like this happens is if its salary dump situation, which doesn’t appear to be case with Indians, despite DeRosa trade. Or if someone includes a can’t miss like T Hanson or Claytn Kershaw (i wouldn’t include Bucholtz in this category either). But thats not going to happen, because (1) fair or not, no one thinks of Lee in same category as Sabathia or Santana, and (2) in this financial market teams would rather hang onto less expensive youth anyway. So unless things change drastically, I agree with Kyle this may be a 2010 story.

BTW – as Dodger fan I would LOVE to have Lee, who I think is a #1, and especially in weaker hitting NL, and clearly make them NL favorite.

By: Kyle

Kyle — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 05:49:59 +0000

I’m not sure why the author thinks it makes sense to trade Lee for prospects at this point. Perhaps he is studying the situation solely from a buyer perspective and not really considering the roster needs for the Cleveland club. With the Indians’ young, potent offensive core still intact, and their pitching staff only damaged for the short term, they are easily one of the stronger AL Central teams at the beginning of 2010. But the rotation only really works next year with Cliff Lee at the top of it, as there are many question marks (Reyes, Westbrook, Carmona, Lewis…)

I don’t see why it’s so ‘expected’ that a team would want to give up a clear chance to contend the following year for the sake of some risky prospects. If this were June 2010, it would be a different story.

By: MadThinker88

MadThinker88 — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 00:12:59 +0000

As a Tribe follower I can easily tell you the only way Lee gets dealt this season is for a haul that rivals the old Colon to Montreal deal in 2002.

They may revisit that idea come the offseason as Lee is a free agent after 2010 but Lee is guy that prefers the ‘lower’ pressure media situations. I believe it is due to an issue one of his children that local media respects and leaves alone.

People also forget that the Tribe has 3 starters on the DL at this point and a 4th is in the minors getting his ‘head’ and mechanics put back together. With this division, this team could go from last place this season to 1st place next season and no one would be surprised.

By: hans

hans — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 20:23:38 +0000

This is it right here. I think Shapiro listens to offers, but the trade demands will remain high, the Indians are in a position of leverage, they don’t have to trade Lee this season, and it only really makes sense to trade him if they are going to get a player or players that will help them compete next season as well.

By: hans

hans — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 20:20:53 +0000

Can we excuse Rosenthal for making the obligatory Clay Buckholz mention, the Indians wouldn’t trade Cliff Lee for a 24 year old overhyped (not his fault he plays for Boston) good but not great pitching prospect.

By: Matt

Matt — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 17:11:04 +0000

Remember, Perez didn’t reject a minor league contract from DC. He signed it, then refused to report to camp unless he got a better deal. That’s almost certainly why nobody is signing him: nobody wants to deal with those headaches over a fifth starter.