Comments on: Royals Sign Juan Cruz

By: Polanco_Fan

Polanco_Fan — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 22:32:28 +0000

Bill Simmons used that little line a bunch of times in his book about hte Red Sox finally winning it all.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 18:50:19 +0000

This is what I’d do. Soria could always return to the closer role, but if he is a viable starter then he’d have a lot more value. A rotation that starts w/ Soria, Meche, and Grienke is pretty decent.

By: JJ Hardy

JJ Hardy — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 04:45:27 +0000

JH has got the right idea. I don’t see what Moneyball has to do with it.

By: NickP

NickP — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 04:23:26 +0000

Put him in the rotation and let Cruz close.

By: JH

JH — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 03:57:57 +0000

Really? Closers don’t change hands all that often, but it still seems like teams are willing to give up a lot for them when they do get traded.

This offseason, the Mariners turned JJ Putz and a B- prospect into a +2-win center fielder with upside, 3 intriguing prospects, and a veteran reliever they were able to flip for 2 more young guys with upside this past offseason.

The A’s were able to get one of the best players in baseball for a mediocre closer, an overrated prospect who doesn’t have the glove for center or the bat for a corner spot, and a soft-tossing lefty with extreme flyball rates who’s going to get absolutely murdered in his new park.

In 2007, Eric Gagne netted Texas a pre-arbitration 2-WAR outfielder (David Murphy) and a top-100 prospect (Engel Beltre).

In 2006, the Indians traded the very non-elite Bob Wickman to Atlanta for Max Ramirez (who they then repackaged to Texas), a “catcher” (likely 1B/DH in the near future) who hit ~.350/.450/.600 in Double-A this year.

Omar Minaya, Dan O’Dowd, Theo Epstein, and John Schuerholz aren’t exactly a who’s who of dumb general managers, either.

Even mediocre closers still return a disproportionate amount of value compared with mere relief pitchers. As a truly elite closer with a friendly contract, Soria could command a lot in trade.

By: JD

JD — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 03:28:43 +0000

I’m so glad somebody else pointed this out. I popped for R.J.’s somewhat obscure allusion.

By: Darren

Darren — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 03:24:53 +0000

Forget “flipping the closer,” just deal him now that you he’s getting expensive, you have another decent one, and you have other needs.

By: Levski

Levski — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 03:05:07 +0000

Well, maybe, if he had signed with the Twins, for example… but that really seemed to be the only team with unprotected 1st rounder that even made an offer to Cruz, as far as I can tell. No other team with a first rounder to give up made an offer to Cruz. So maybe the argument here is that “The Dbacks really got screwed because the Twins didn’t sign Cruz”… which is a fairly weak argument. Looking at it from a different angle, it could’ve been a lot worse for AZ if a team like the Mets or Yankees had signed Cruz…

My point is that it was fairly unrealistic to expect in the first place that any team was going to sacrifice a first round pick for Juan Cruz. The most likely scenario has always been a second round pick, either from a team that gave up its first rounder for a better free agent (e.g. the Mets) or a team with a protected first rounder (e.g. the Royals). And as far as second rounders go, the Royals’ pick isn’t a bad one, as it’s one of the earlier ones in the second round…

By: marcello

marcello — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 22:10:57 +0000

Agreed, I think the era of flipping the closer is over.

By: marcello

marcello — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 22:08:04 +0000

Because they could have gotten a better pick if he’d signed with a different team? That’s all he was saying, at least as I understood it.