Prospect Insider - Heilman Traded to Cubs

Heilman Traded to Cubs

By Jason A. Churchill

By 01-28-2009

Don't miss out on your chance at the Premium Notebook - Subscribe Now!

Right-hander Aaron Heilman went undefeated in his tenure with the Seattle Mariners. Sweet.

The M's traded Heilman to the Cubs Wednesday in exchange for left-hander Garrett Olson and middle infielder Ronny Cedeno.

Update: To make room on the 40-man roster, Ichiro and Jarrod Washburn have been traded to Detroit for Justin Verlander. Okay, yeah, no. Instead, Randy Messenger was placed on irrevocable waivers, essentially considered an outright unconditional release.

So what are the M's getting?

Not a lot, but then again, they didn't give up a lot, either.

Cedeno will be 26 next week and has never had more than short stretches of good offensive production, but there's still potential there.

His physical skills suggest average power and contact rates with acceptable on-base skills for a middle infielder. He can handle short and second at satisfactory levels, which makes Cedeno worth Heilman all by himself.

In his minor league career, the right-handed hitting Cedeno never displayed much more than gap power, with the exception of his 75-game stint in Triple-A Iowa where he put up a .959 OPS.

But small sample sizes win out there, as his career totals as a minor leaguer reflect very much what he's done in 977 plate appearances in the big leagues.

If Betancourt or Lopez falter or fail to sustain performance, Cedeno is likely to get a long look at either position, as he's better defensively than both incumbents.

Olson, 25, was just traded from Baltimore to the Cubs for Felix Pie after posting a FIP of 5.20 in 132 2/3 innings last season.

despite standing 6-1 and weighing in at just over 200 pounds, he's shown to be durable, if nothing else, twice tallying more than 160 innings in a season as minor leaguer and doing it again last season.

Olson sits in the 88-91 mph range with his fastball, but has shown a little more velocity in the past. He uses a curve ball and change as his secondary offerings and both flashed as average or better at times in 2008.

At his very best, Olson is a No. 4 starter, but look for him to battle for the fifth spot in Seattle, as he's actually behind Ryan Rowland-Smith on the depth chart.

heilman-traded-to-cubs

Comments
The following 51 comment(s) for this article are shown below:

1. By: ernier on 01-28-2009 12:28:29
Jason - do you know if Olson has any options remaining?

2. By: Blowgun7 on 01-28-2009 12:29:01
What kind of defender is Cedeno at the SS position?

Seems like a good trade. Heilman had no part here and wasn't in the plans passed this year.

What kind of prospect was Olson coming up? Is there still some upside there? Or is he John Halama?

3. By: rocketdawg31 on 01-28-2009 12:31:45
Not a thoroughly intriguing trade by itself, but it does beg a few questions...specifically, what it does for Washburn and Rowland-Smith's status.

Candidates for the rotation seems to stand at: Hernandez, Bedard, Silva (locks); Morrow (should be left there, period); Batista; RRS, Washburn and Olson. Essentially four guys fighting for one spot (I don't see Morrow doing anything to give up his, admittedly).

There might be an outside candidate or two, but I believe that's the gist of it.

So, it seems the primary reason for the deal was to get backup defensive help for the middle infield- a good thing, considering Hulett is both a rookie and considered way below-average with the glove.

My real question, though, Jason...do I still owe you a dollar because Heilman won't be the Mariners' closer? LOL.

4. By: Edman on 01-28-2009 12:43:12
Another savvy move by JZ. Not earth shattering, but brings back someone to compete for the utility infielder position. And, he's still fairly young, so he can grow with the rest of the youth.

Olson, is a great add. Better than I thought we'd get with Cedeno. His minor league numbers show potential. For a throw-in, I the JZ deserves a lot of credit for this deal. Certainly a better return that Bavasi would have gotten.

JZ is showing an ability to wait out deals until he gets what he wants. Yes, Bavasi was under pressure to keep his job. But, so far, Jack knows how to say no, if it doesn't help the M's.

Plus, you can never have too much lefthanded pitching.

5. By: candasharp on 01-28-2009 13:38:03
Jason,

If you could have gotten Felix Pie for Heilman, would you have pulled the trigger on that deal versus the Cedeno/Olson trade?

6. By: randallball on 01-28-2009 13:42:17
I like it. I could actually live with Cedeno starting up the middle short-term if we can move one of the other underperformers and get some value back.

I never liked Heilman - even when he was a "prospect" coming up with the Mets. Just something about him always made me feel "eh" about him.

I'm kinda "eh" on Olson, too...but I'd rather have an "eh" lefty than an "eh" righty everyday.

7. By: randallball on 01-28-2009 13:45:32
1. By: ernier on 01-28-2009 11:28:29
Jason - do you know if Olson has any options remaining?

They are both out of options.

8. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-28-2009 13:56:18
Re: candasharp

No.

9. By: SMariners11 on 01-28-2009 15:01:42
Jason,
Is does Cedeno have enough potential to push Lopez or Betancourt out of Seattle or even Lopez to 1B?

10. By: dewey on 01-28-2009 15:24:52
JZ also saves 1.3 million in pay role here.Gets a good defender to take WFB spot and a back of the rotation starter who is going into a easier division then the AL East and a larger park i think he did very well in this trade.

11. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-28-2009 15:31:44
Cedeno can defend adequately or slightly better at both middle infield spots, yes.

Randallball already answered, and is, of course, correct - both players are optionless.

I think Cedeno could push Betancourt, especially. I hate the idea of Lopez at first base, and that subject might deserve its own post.

12. By: mykillmagnum on 01-28-2009 15:50:19
jason,

does this trade maybe help out other trades that could possibly come? meaning will both players be on the opening day roster? or could either player be used in another trade? i know that jack was talking about adding another outfielder, do you think we will use either one of these players to get an outfielder like swisher, or nady, or any other outfielders availible? i know right now we dont have much to work with via trade, that we are willing to trade. do you know some of the other outfielders we could be going after? thanks jason for the great job

13. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-28-2009 15:59:29
That's very possible, actually. Though it seems like the Yankees wouldn't have much interest in back-end starters after signing CC, AJ and Pettitte to add to Wang and Hughes, and maybe Chamberlain, but there could be something that comes along.

I don't know of any ongoing talks where either player is an obvious fit, but it's only January 28. February and March could bring as many as four or five other moves.

14. By: mykillmagnum on 01-28-2009 16:18:41
thanks jason, do you have a list of other outfielders that the mariners could go after? other than the two yankees that are availible. some thing that intrigues me and i dont really know if it makes sense is rickie weeks. he has all kind of potential and he is a super athlete. i know he really hasnt reached his full potential. what do you think about him? i know there is talk about moving him to the outfield, he might be availible. who else could be availible for left field? thanks again, jason.

15. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-28-2009 16:49:03
Weeks is certainly a player I'd go after, but it's not apparent that the Brewers are ready to give up on him just yet.

They do have Hardy and Escobar that can handle the middle infield, but if I were them, I'd trade Cameron and play weeks in center - as soon as Escobar is ready for full-time duty.

As for other outfielders, well, I've heard the same names everyone else has. Matsui, Dunn, Griffey (all DHs, really) Juan Pierre, Swisher and Nady... guys like that.

One name I've talked about somewhere but haven't heard his name thrown around is Rockies RF Brad Hawpe. They aren't looking to trade him, necessarily, but he's getting a little pricey.

And Hermida isn't safe in Florida long term, so...

Another pair of names to watch out for in the next two months to a year is Chris Duncan and Ryan Ludwick in St. Louis. Not that they both fit in Seattle...

16. By: Slack on 01-28-2009 16:54:41
Now that Heilman is gone, is there any chance at all that Washburn gets dealt or is that just wishful thinking? His contract makes it difficult no doubt. I really want to see RRS and Olson get a chance to start and Washburn is in the way.
Also, this may sound like a dumb question but who would you rate higher, RRS or Olson? They both look very similar being left-handed and having similar FB velocity but I like RRS's breaking ball better.
Either way, depth is important and the addition of Olson adds more of it. Good move by Jack Z.

17. By: Blowgun7 on 01-28-2009 16:59:06
Why would St. Louis be looking to move Ludwick?

18. By: jonbbt on 01-28-2009 17:20:50
both players are optionless

Are you sure? Olson has only been a pro for 3 1/2 seasons, how can he be out of options? I thought that players on the 40-man with less than 5 seasons as a pro have 4 option years..?

Some Cubs sites are saying he has 2 option years, other sites are saying he has at least one. How is it possible that he is out of options?

Thanks in advance.

19. By: littlelinny6 on 01-28-2009 17:22:07
I really like this trade. We had too many want to be starters in the first place. Most important, with Cedeno maybe that can give Betancourt and Lopez a kick in the ass to get going and stop fighting with Silva for a spot in the buffet line after games. Zdurenciek is quoted as saying he will get a shot at a starting job which I think is great. I assume they are talking about Betancourt because when you consider positional adjustments putting Lopez at 1B makes no sense. The same reasoning applies for keeping Clement a catcher for as long as possible. Unrelated, Jason, do you think the M's would take a flyer on Abreau for a 1 year deal? He is said to now be resigned to the fact he may have to get a one year deal. He walks alot, is offensively productive, left-handed, and will be cheaper than Adam Dunn.

P.S. I was hoping for Hinkse to play LF/DH but looks like the Pirates are signing him.

20. By: stickball on 01-28-2009 17:34:41
Re: jonbbt

I think you are right about Olson having a remaining option. Players usually have 3 option years. Wlad had 4 because of some provision in the rule.

21. By: randallball on 01-28-2009 17:48:37
Looking at his draft/playing time frame, I may be wrong, stickball. I got that info from a trusted buddy of mine, so it wasn't from the league office or anything.

22. By: ernier on 01-28-2009 17:53:08
If he does have any options remaining that makes this trade even better. He can then start the season in Tacoma and then be brought up when the time is right.

23. By: stickball on 01-28-2009 18:31:35
Re: jonbbt

Actually looking at his statistics, I think you are right. He might have 2 option years.

Olson had a partial year in 2005. So less than 1 full years after 2005, and less than 4 full years after 2008. After 2009 he will have less than 5 full years, so he will be eligible for a fourth option year like you said. I'm using Wikipedia as a reference for the rules.

24. By: jgstecker on 01-28-2009 18:54:59
Olson has 1 option remaining. His contract was initially purchased in July of 2007 and his fist option was buned later that month. His second was used in March of 2008. In short, he'll have to have a monster Spring to avoid starting the year in Tacoma.

25. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-28-2009 19:02:54
I just called the M's and they say he has one option left, so thanks for the details on that jgstecker.

Can I call ya jgstecker?

26. By: stickball on 01-28-2009 19:22:33
I knew he had at least one option left. This gives the Mariners roster flexibility.

27. By: jonbbt on 01-28-2009 21:04:38
Shouldn't that give him 2 options left then? He should have 4 option years, right?

28. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-28-2009 21:53:05
You only get three option years unless you spend time in rookie-level ball. Olson never did.

Wlad is the example of that, giving him a fourth year of options.

29. By: jonbbt on 01-28-2009 22:11:37
Hmmm...

I was thinking that it had to do with professional experience (less than 5 years = 4 option years), not necessarily rookie ball. Interesting...

30. By: rightwingrick on 01-28-2009 22:35:45
The the pickup of Cedeno and the Rule 5 addition of Reegie Corona, that appears to make Tug Hulett's roster spot the most vulnerable on the M's 40 man roster.

Michael Wilson is probably also vulnerable, but the M's made a point of protecting him this year after a very good minor league season. Looks like a late bloomer (I don't think he played much baseball in his younger years). I'm predicting he may be the surprise of Spring Training.

Jason, the Yankees just dropped a guy (Chad Wright?) from their 40 man roster (after signing Pettite) who was 10-3 with 2.85 ERA in AA last year. They must trade, waive, or outright him to minors within 10 days. Can he refuse a minor league assignment at that point, and sign with anyone? If waived, do the M's have first shot?

31. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-28-2009 22:47:16
well, they did let Messenger go already, so for the time being, Corona and Hulett are safe.

If Wright has gone through the same process before (being removed from the 40-man) then he can refuse the assignment and become a free agent.

Otherwise, yes, the M's have first shot on waivers.

32. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-28-2009 22:50:58
By the way, another way to look at this trade is to simply tack it on to the end of the Putz deal.

Putz, Green and Valbuena for Cleto, Carrera, Chavez, Carp, Gutierrez, Vargas, Cedeno and Olson.

I'd say that's pretty darned good, since Gutierrez has a chance to prove more valuable than Putz would have been as the M's closer all by his lonesome.

33. By: littlelinny6 on 01-28-2009 23:11:04
Jason, how does this change your projected 25 man roster? I assume at the very least Cedeno takes Corona's spot on the roster. Then we have space for one more pitcher, do you project Olson? I am thinking no because Washburn is in the rotation probably (damn) and RRS a LH long relief.

34. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-28-2009 23:27:11
I'll update that tonight, linny.

35. By: SABR Matt on 01-29-2009 00:00:59
I think Jason is wrong about Olsen's upside.

His career K rate at every level) has been sky high. ALl he needs to do is get his major league walk rate to match his minor league walk rate and he's going to be WAY better than Ryan Rowland-Smith. A solid #3. His change-up is very deceptive if used properly off his fastball and he has the curve to throw in a la Zito. Health, decent velocity, good secondary pitches and the ability to miss bats. Those are good things, right?

36. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-29-2009 00:14:42
Without a little bit of a jump in velo and a spike from his breaking ball, Olson isn't going to come close to matching his MiLB K rates, though.

And while he certainly has more upside as a starter than does RSS, I'd bet on the Aussie in 2009.

I think our differences on Olson, Matt, are simply about what we each think a No. 3 really is.

And that really isn't a big difference.

What's great about this trade is, Heilman for Cedeno would have been enough for me. Heilman for Olson would have been enough for me.

Heilman for both? Win.

37. By: SABR Matt on 01-29-2009 00:20:06
A #3 is what the team team has as their #3. Go through the 30 ballclubs and take an average xFIP or DNRA or whatever is your favorite pitching stat and that's what a #3 is. :)

BTW, I agree that RRS is ahead of Olsen in 2009. He's got more experience with this particular franchise. Olsen has to prove himself all over again. But I think by 2010, we're all going to be talking much more about Olsen than RRS...and I think we're going to enjoy Olsen. Jarrod Washburn made a decent career out of a 90 mph fastball and a really lame slurvey thing. Olsen's stuff is WAY better than Washburn even in his prime.

38. By: SABR Matt on 01-29-2009 00:22:54
You're also right that he's not going to fan 9 per game in Seattle...neither is RRS. As a starter, RRS is going to be a 6 K, 3 BB, 1 HR MOR starter. Same for Olsen.

39. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-29-2009 00:25:58
I think that's optimistic for both, a little. Quality lefties, though, either way you look at it.

40. By: jgstecker on 01-29-2009 08:56:45
Any chance Jimenez is one of those 4 option guys? Otherwise, he's a good bet to get claimed on waivers if he doesn't make the club this Spring, which seems like a strong possibility.

I like your new 25 man roster. Seems about right. My feeling is that Cedeno will take over Shelton's job though. He'll platoon with Branyan, shuffling Lopez to 1B vs LHPs. In the end, I think Z brings in a DH to take Shelton's roster spot and Rob Johnson stays in Tacoma while Reegie takes his place on the roster.

41. By: SABR Matt on 01-29-2009 09:28:34
I'll bet good money that Jose Lugo does not make the 25 man and gets offered back to his original team. He was barely adequate in AA last year...there's no way he's a better lefty than Jimenez. Also, Jason should update his figures on Bedard. He has a guaranteed contract worth 7.5 mil this year...that just happened a couple of days ago.

My 25-man would be:

Hernandez
Bedard
Morrow
Washburn
Silva

Batista
RRS
Lowe
Corcoran
Walker
Aardsma
Jimenez

Clement
Johjima

Branyan
Lopez
Betancourt
Beltre
Cedeno
Shelton
Morse

Balentien
Gutierrez
Ichiro
Chavez

42. By: Uncle Al on 01-29-2009 09:45:18
Jason
Zdurenciek is beautiful to watch. I couldn't figure out who they were going to trade next because they needed a pitcher like Heilman for 2010. So he goes out and gets Olson for 2010 and also his infielder in Cedeno for Heilman. Because they still have Corona, there is still the possibility of moving Lopez or Betancourt in a trade. My guess is they still want a LH bat for LF and another LH bat for 1B or DH to put their roster together for 2009. At least one of these trades must get rid of Washburn or Batista in it to get the budget under $100M where it stands today. Chavez and Balentien are both out of options and, if they get a LH bat for LF, then one of them needs to be traded. I think Swisher would work but I think they go in another direction as NY has taken care of their pitching needs. Any ideas?

43. By: SABR Matt on 01-29-2009 10:26:02
I don't think Corona is a serious consideration. Z just took him "just in case" they couldn't find a good option for the utility position...they've now found a good option. Corona will be sent back to the Yankees when the season starts barring injury or trade. Which is a good thing since, at best, Corona would have been a .220 hitter at the big league level.

Balentien is untradeable at this point, having showed essentially no promise last year and being out of options. He either makes the Mariners or is cut.

If I had to guess about any future moves, I would say that Washburn might be moved during spring training to clear a little bit of payroll and that major league roster is more or less set at this point. The only possible move to make from here would be to sign Griffey or trade for someone's scraps. Swisher is off the table (we don't have the CF the Yankees need, nor do we have the MLB catcher they need...somehow I don't think you folks would be happy if we traded Clement and Saunders...and I'm quite certain the Yankees wouldn't accept Saunders and Johnson). I don't really see any other left handed talents we could get in trade.

44. By: StandinPat on 01-29-2009 11:59:49
Re: Corona....There is a very strong chance the M's simply work out a trade with New York in order to keep him and be able to send him to the minors, ala Dickey last year.

45. By: SABR Matt on 01-29-2009 12:41:17
Good point. Corona is good org filler if we cna keep him.

I just don't think he has any chance to make this year's club unless Lopez or (preferably) Betancourt is moved.

46. By: candasharp on 01-29-2009 14:06:27
Mike Sweeney just signed a minor league deal. If he's moderately healthy, Chris Shelton and Mike Morse might have just lost the RH platoon spot at first.

47. By: SABR Matt on 01-29-2009 14:51:16
Sweeney has no power anymore, but if he is healthy, he can still be a productive right handed bench bat. That's a nice acquisition with zero risk.

So...that simplifies my bench quite a bit.

Now the 13 offensive players could be:

Johjima
Clement
Branyan
Lopez
Betancourt
Beltre
Sweeney
Cedeno
Chavez
Balentien
Gutierrez
Ichiro
pick the best hitter out of Hulett, Corona, Tuiasosopoo (we would want that extra bench guy to be able to play third or push Lopez to third).

With talk of us maybe interested in Abreu on a Jose Guillen contract (which I'm all for, BTW despite the defensive downgrade), he would replace Balentien on the roster (who is terrible anyway).

48. By: 01v-dubs on 01-29-2009 16:44:57
I don't understand all of this talk about how Wlad is a bad player. A lot of other players who have turned out to be great struggled badly through their first couple hundred AB's to. Not to mention the fact that he had sporatic playing time last year. Give him a legit shot to succed before you denounce him as a failure.

49. By: SABR Matt on 01-29-2009 17:14:30
I'm not denouncing him for 250 ABs...I'm denouncing him for a bad-looking minor league profile (from a statistical probability of success standpoint). Mammoth power, VERY weak contact hitting skill even in the minors, mostly terrible minor league K/BB (indicating poor skill with pitch recognition, which we saw visually on display last year), very bad defensive fundamentals, limited usefulness of his above average arm (bad aim), and even less usefulness of his average speed (bad routes and average baserunning).

There's exactly one reason Wlad got a serious look in 2008 (well two...one, we were desperate for someone to succeed and help the offense and two, he had a flukishly good year with his BABIP in Tacoma, which made his other surface stats look better than they were).

In the majors, I'll be stunned if he ever turns into anything more than a .240/.290/.460 hitter.

50. By: Slurve on 01-29-2009 18:41:49
There is one problem with Jimenez though SABR he can't get lefties out since his CU is his only real ML pitch I think Thomas has a better shot at the spot then Jimenez does.

51. By: SABR Matt on 01-29-2009 18:58:26
I was never that impressed with Jimenez...but I certainly don't have any interest in Lugo...Thomas is basically a wild version of Matt Thornton...otherwise known as the bad copy of a bad pitcher.

You are not currently logged in. If you'd like to comment on this report, please log in.
Haven't created a Prospect Insider account yet? Sign up!