| By Jason A. Churchill |  | By 07-31-2011 |
The Seattle Mariners completed a buzzer-beating three-team trade with the Boston Red Sox and Los Angeles Dodgers Sunday afternoon, sending left-hander Erik Bedard and right-hander Josh Fields to the American League East leaders.
In return, the M's received two outfielders in Chih-Hsien Chiang from the Red Sox and Trayvon Robinson from the Dodgers.
Subscribers can check out the scouting reports and MLB ETAs on both by clicking here.
Become a subscriber by clicking here.
The only other place you will find any of my in-depth analysis without becoming a subscriber is on the air with Ian Furness Monday afternoon on 950 KJR. If you want the details, subscribe now.
scouting-the-haul-for-bedard
Comments
The following 35 comment(s) for this article are shown below:
| 1. By: Marlin Man on 07-31-2011 18:50:43 Thank God we finally dumped "the Albatross", before he stubbed his toe in the shower and needed another month on DL. M. M. |
| 2. By: rjfrik on 07-31-2011 18:54:39 Great haul for Bedard and Fields. Nice work JZ. As I live in LA and have grown a fondness of the Dodgers because of living here for so long I really like Robinson and was excited to see him in Dodger Blue, now I'm over the moon to see him in Mariner Teal. So Rad!! Go M's |
| 3. By: Mackie on 07-31-2011 20:00:41 This looks pretty good, what the Mariners got in total for Fister, Pauley and Bedard... and it looks better when we consider there will be another player coming from the Tigers. Thanks for the scouting reports, Jason. It sounds like these kids could end up being helpful to the Mariners! |
| 4. By: mjkleko on 07-31-2011 20:54:02 People tend to harp for quality over quantity, and usually I'd agree. However when you consider the pieces that we lost and their long term viability with the franchise (Fister in my opinion reached his peak, see some of Jason's scouting from a year or two ago, Fields may never put together the command, Pauley a reliever playing over his head perhaps had a chance to be a 5th starter, and Bedard, who may yet return, isn't of much immediate use given the losing streak) the players we received provide a pretty good boost to the upper levels of the minors in positions of need. Given their levels of progress as well, we should know what we have fairly quickly. |
| 5. By: nighthawk180 on 07-31-2011 22:56:15 Would you compare Chiang at his current stage to what Choo was when he was the same age? I cant really remember how old he was when at double-a. |
| 6. By: nighthawk180 on 07-31-2011 22:58:23 I know he is a great player now but I was just wondering if everything maxed out could we get something similar. Ive read his defense is a work in process and he has diabetes that he is starting to get the hang of. So just curious and sry for the double post. nighthawk180 |
| 7. By: Oregon1986 on 08-01-2011 01:20:28 Thanks for the reports. Realistically, how much, if at all, would a better start from Bedard on Friday improve the package we got for him? |
| 8. By: nighthawk180 on 08-01-2011 01:38:26 Thx for the feedback I thought he was younger but couldnt remember. Thats good to know. |
| 9. By: baseballman on 08-01-2011 01:44:56 Pretty exciting stuff the past couple of days. Great work JAC! Jack Z did it again. He just gets it and it's so very refreshing. I don't how he's constantly able to maximize value, but I don't really because he just keeps doing it! I really exciting to see a couple of these new prospects play and see where they become rated in our system. |
| 10. By: rotoenquire on 08-01-2011 01:46:12 1 Walker 2 Hultzen 3 Franklin 4 Robinson 5 Pimentel 6 Paxton 7 Martinez 8 Smyly 9 Triunfel 10 Campos 11 Chiang 12 Catricala Think that is a more fair assessment.. I am REALLY HIGH on Chiang, BUT overall talent it lays out more like this.. And that includes signing Hultzen and getting Smyly as the PTBNL.. |
| 11. By: dawgncarolina on 08-01-2011 03:54:29 You like your list better, I like mine. No real shocker there. I can tell you you are way too low on Campos and a bit too high on Pimentel. I'm comfortable with your different assessment of Chiang, I know his rankings are going to be all over the board. |
| 12. By: Lailoken on 08-01-2011 13:00:05 Choo was 21 during the season he spent in AA. In 3100 at-bats Choo averaged around 1 homer per 50 at-bats. He's a classic example of power developing last. Chiang is a different player this year than he's ever been before. If he makes further adjustments by shortening his swing & continues to improve his pitch recognition & selection he could make another significant jump. A +.300 ISO is nothin to sneeze at even in a 90 game sample size. Out of Wells, Robinson, Chiang, Chavez, Peguero, Carp, Halman, Saunders, Pimentel, Castillo, Morales, Zamarripa, Nunez, Blash, Morban, Romero, Tenbrink, & maybe Helsin Martinez & Jose Leal there has to be a starting OF in a couple years worth fielding. With Guti & Ichiro maybe on the outs during 2012 having depth is a major priority. |
| 13. By: maqman on 08-01-2011 13:33:31 Anyone notice what Saunders is doing lately? |
| 14. By: jsmitty on 08-01-2011 13:39:30 #10 Where's Seager on that list? He's still a prospect. |
| 15. By: Jerry on 08-01-2011 13:57:24 Yeah, I don't really like that list either. Paxton is way too low. I'd rank them: Walker Hultzen Paxton Franklin Robinson Campos Martinez Chiang Pimentel Catricala Morales Littlewood, Peguero, and Castillo are in the conversation for those last few places too. |
| 16. By: Marco on 08-01-2011 13:58:16 "Where's Seager on that list? He's still a prospect." Not anymore interesting for playing at the "Prospects Amusement" |
| 17. By: jsmitty on 08-01-2011 14:12:27 #16 What? |
| 18. By: Lailoken on 08-01-2011 15:33:37 The walks for Saunders have been incredible lately. It's not sapping his power either. Saunders post all-star break in Tacoma: Post All-Star .371 AVG 18 G 62 AB 17 R 23 H 6 2B 2 3B 3 HR 12 RBI 22 BB 20 SO 2 SB 1 CS .536 OBP .677 SLG 1.213 OPS Link |
| 19. By: randallball on 08-01-2011 16:15:08 Saunders has been hitting the ball the other way more often and with more authority of late, too. But the strikeouts are still there. |
| 20. By: zackr on 08-01-2011 16:28:10 Does MiLB track swinging misses? I wonder if he is still being too selective at the plate. |
| 21. By: baseballfan on 08-01-2011 16:36:01 Speaking of Saunders - it may be time for both He and the organisation to part ways, especially with the 2 new outfielders acquired - Seems like a classic change of scenery guy - I look for him to be moved this winter. |
| 22. By: DMac33 on 08-01-2011 17:43:14 Few things here since I haven't ranted in a while ... 1) Congrats on getting some kids into the organization that look like they have a chance to potentially be guys that if everything go right could play at a reasonable level in the big leagues. 2) I think it is very, very sad to think that you could make an argument that the pickup of Wells makes him arguably the 3rd most dangerous hitter in the Mariner lineup. 3) Over the better part of the last two years, the Mariners have been leading the parade of being the pitching and defense club. Can we now all agree that you can have the best pitching and defense in the world but that doesn't do anything for you if you can't hit? 4) There are still tons of issues with this organization and it starts at the top. This is an organization that to me worries more about not losing money than they worry about winning. For example, let's say that we're in the middle of July and the Mariners are a leading contender to win the World Series. Does the front office make the move to go get the impact player (i.e. what the Rangers did last year for Cliff Lee) even though it may cost them a potential loss in the wallet? 5) Can anybody name me the last minor league hitter that the Mariners developed internally through their system that turned out to be a high caliber MLB hitter with the Mariners (before leaving to another organization) that wasn't a #1 or #2 overall pick? This is still a fundamental problem with this organization. 6) What is the organization's identity? It's great that you have Felix and Pineda at the top of the rotation. And, you should have strong pitching if you want to ultimately be a contender. But what is the offensive identity? 7) At what point do the Mariners thank Ichiro for his contributions and move on for the betterment of all? The reality is that he's no longer an elite player. His OPS is downright laughable (it's in Brendan Ryan territory - which isn't a complement to Ryan). I think you could make the argument that Ichiro will not be around when this team is a contender again. So if he's not, then aren't you at this point just taking ABs away from kids that COULD be contributors when you are a contender? But then again, without Ichiro being an option for the casual fan to come watch play, how much lower would attendance drop? 8) Which leads to my final point ... if the Mariner organization wonders why attendance is down ... it's because the product is crap. You can't put out a .225 hitting team and think that that is entertainment. You want fans in the park, the solution is simple ... WIN!!! End of rant ... |
| 23. By: Edman on 08-01-2011 18:37:46 On DMac's rant: 1. Agreed 2. Agreed 3. I don't recall anyone who said that those to elements alone, are enough to win consistently. It can be argued that without pitching and defense, it would take a monsterous offense to create a winning ballclub. 4. Since we weren't in that position, it's impossible to know. Would they be willing to spend if they were? There is nothing to suggest they wouldn't, except by the skeptics who still wish to find blame the front office. And, you're leaving out one important element. It's not just money, but a willingness to trade important pieces from your farm system. Since Jack traded Fister, I would have to assume he'd deal some of his minor league talent. 5. I could go back and research it, but don't care to. You could apply the same reasoning to a lot of ballclubs. It's not like the league is awash with middle round draft picks that get to the majors. Yes, the M's have been poor at developing lower round draft picks, but some of it is just bad luck too. 6. My guess is that it's going to start with Ackley, for the next generation, For the last nine years, it's been Ichiro. I could care less about identity. That's just PR crap. The offensive identity should the eight position players who take the field on any given day. 7. Nothing is going to happen to Ichiro this season. He's in question for the record for most consecutive years with 200 or more hits. He's not going to lose time in the outfield until it's mathmatically impossible for him to achieve it. And, that's the way it should be, wheither you or any other fans disagree. It's not like a few more games under a kid's belt are going to mean much. 8. You don't think that the Mariners understand the the relationship to winning and attendance? That's a bit silly. At the moment, they're trying to keep the organization's head above the water. Spending big right now makes no sense. There isn't a good enough core to invest in yet. They have to clear some bad payroll debt and acquire more talent. Investing in free agents and trading some of the kids are what is going to push them over the top. It's not as simple as just saying WIN. If it was, they'd be doing it. |
| 24. By: Edman on 08-01-2011 18:40:33 Geez, please excuse the typos....I'm tired. |
| 25. By: nater on 08-01-2011 18:53:19 To add to Edman's response to #22: 3. The M's front office has never said they were going to win on pitching and defense alone. They HAVE said there were inefficiencies in the market place that allowed them to get top defensive players for less than market value. That's not the same thing as making it a strategy to try to win only on defense alone. 4. Edman had the same thought as me -- we have no recent history to judge that on. 5. You can't really judge the "Mariners" on their development of mid-level prospects at this point because the mid-level prospects the current GM and his staff have acquired are still developing, and if you read this site with any regularity, you would know that there are several mid-level prospects out-pacing their draft position. 6-8. From this point forward in your rant, it's clear you either aren't from Seattle or aren't attentive to the pulse of Seattle fans. Do you really think it's a conscious decision to have a crappy team? Do you not realize that many fans have been pleading for Ichiro to be traded for several years? Don't make us recap the whole tutorial on the Bill Bavasi era yet one more time: the stripping of the farm system, the terrible free agent signings, the awful use of high draft picks. That's not to say you don't have valid points, it's just that your rant seems pretty out of touch with everything people Seattle fans have been crying about for years, including on this site. |
| 26. By: dawgncarolina on 08-01-2011 19:00:02 DMac 1) That's one hell of a backhanded compliment. 2) Agreed, although I definitely think Carp is better and probably Ichiro too (still think he's better than he's shown this year). 3) The Mariners defense has actually been pretty poor this season. But the plan was to be great pitching and great defense and average offensively, not great pitching, poor defense and terrible offense. No one ever argued that you could have the worst offense in baseball and get away with it, and that definitely wasn't the FO vision. 4) I agree there are issues at the top, but I definitely disagree with your hypothetical. 5) You can't just ignore Choo, Jones and Cabrera since they were traded. They were developed internally, Bavasi was just an idiot to give them away. 6) The offensive identity is terrible right now. Stupid question. 7) Interesting question. I think there's a decent argument that he's just been unlucky this year, but there's also a real chance he's fallen off of a cliff. I think you keep him around until next season to see if he can put it back together, but I wouldn't be committed to him beyond the All Star break unless things turn around. 8) No shit, sherlock |
| 27. By: dawgncarolina on 08-01-2011 19:01:31 25 nailed it, the ranter is totally out of touch |
| 28. By: DMac33 on 08-02-2011 02:29:56 When talking in short bullet points, it's impossible to convey as much depth to certain subjects as they may require for full discussion ... Edman, People may be happy to disagree with me on this, and that's fine, but I do think that there is a huge difference between hitting and fielding. There are only so many great hitters. If it was easy to be a great hitter, there'd be more of them. It'd be easy to teach. But in a lot of ways it's a natural skill ... you either have it or you don't have it. Defensively though, a lot of that is athleticism, effort, and some instinct. I'm confident that you can teach someone how to play passable defense. Further, I think that there is a far greater gap between a great and average hitter versus a great and average defensive player. To me Exhibit A on this is a guy like Manny Ramirez. I think we'd all agree that he's a horrible defensive player. But at the same time, if you have a hitter like that in his prime, you gleefully work around his defensive issues. I firmly believe that to win at a high level in baseball, particularly in October, you have to have front line starting pitching that has the ability to control the game (i.e. can dominate your average hitter thereby limiting the number of opportunities for the opposition) and hitters that can change the dynamic of the game just by their presence in the lineup. It's not a guarantee for success, but you will find those trends with most champions. My point on the front office is simply that you have the same people heading the ship (i.e. Howard and Chuck) that have always been there. For the most part, they've been more likely to stand pat. Great example would be what happened in 2001-2002. After falling short in 2001 (and in 2000 as well), you'd think that the ownership would have recognized that they may have been missing a piece here or there to get over the hump. They rarely make bold moves that make you go WOW. On the minor league development level, I hear often (and agree with) that you need to have kids in your system that can contribute while under club control. The problem that the Mariners have had with guys like Choo, Ibanez, etc. is that they never gave said players the opportunity to play on any kind of a consistent basis to get their legs in the bigs. There comes a point where if you believe that a kid has the chance to be a player for you, you have to run him out there often enough to allow him to learn on the job ... regardless of the numbers. When I talk about identity, I'm talking about a standard to which can be identified. When I think of Boston, I think of a team that works the opposing pitchers and takes advantage of mistakes. Historically when I've thought of Tampa, I think of a team that utilizes their speed. Texas is a club that is prepared to mash. The Royals of the past with George Brett would gap you to death. When the Mariners signed Figgins, my opinion on the move was that it was a fine concept provided that that meant that him and Ichiro would run, run and run ... but that never happened. I think we all know that looking for a steady stream of right handed hitting power at Safeco isn't a great idea. I agree that in some ways it is PR BS to talk about ... but on the other hand, you do have to look at players and how they fit into the park that you play 81 games at. I obviously know that you can't turn a roster over overnight. I'm talking more about signing guys like Jack Cust ... a guy that couldn't even crack the lineup of the offensively challenged Oakland A's (and as we found, there was a reason for it). Of looking at contracts that are "bad" and instead of just looking at them as sunk costs keeping them on the roster at the potential expense of others. If the plan is to go young, then go young. Give people a reason to get behind the young guys and give them the support. They will understand the losing as long as the product is exciting. But if/when you are running multiple guys in your lineup who have OPS in the .300's ... you aren't giving anybody a reason to get excited. |
| 29. By: DMac33 on 08-02-2011 02:43:00 Nater, Regarding market inefficiencies, sometimes there is a reason that that is the case. I think it is obvious that provided you have two players with comparable offensive abilities you would want the guy with the better defensive abilities. However, at this point, would you say that an above average offensive player who is average defensively is an equivalent player to an average offensive player but above average defensive player? I've argued in the past that the makeup of a club needs to have elements of all components to be good (ideally with players that do all aspects at a high level) ... but there is a diminishing return element where if you have too much offense at the expense of your defense or vice versa that the results could be turn into a disaster. BTW, I'm not talking about mid-level prospects currently. I'm talking more from a historical standpoint. I could be wrong, but I really do believe that the last home grown player that the Mariners developed as a hitter that was not traded to the organization or taken with a 1st round pick AND became an above average, or better, hitter would be Edgar. That's pathetic. Regarding your last point, I do live in Seattle and listen to what people have to say. I observe what I see and hear when I go to Safeco. To me, the the people that call Ichiro out are the astute fan that understands the nuances of the game. I'd welcome more people to be critical of the organization. I'd welcome more people to demand greater returns. I'd welcome more people to take the approach that it's not ok to pat someone on the back for trying their best ... it's professional sports ... if your best isn't good enough, then too bad ... it's just business. |
| 30. By: DMac33 on 08-02-2011 02:53:03 DNC, I could argue with you that my hypothetical has been played out over time by Howard and Chuck. Other than '95 (which had additional reasons for going out and making a reasonably big move at the deadline) and maybe '97 (although that was some brutal trading in hindsight), the front office has shown an unwillingness to spend (in whatever manner that requires) to play the game at the highest levels. Whether it was the limited moves made at the deadline in '00 and '01, the historical unwillingness to enter into the market for elite level free agents (including some of their own) due to their unwillingness to sign contracts for more than 4 years, etc. My issue with Ichrio is that I think he's a great litmus test for the organization. Both his OBP and Slugging % are in the low .300's ... he's definitely a below average leadoff hitter at this point. Yes, it could be an outlier of a season and he's earned enough of a pass in his career to be entitled to redeem himself. But what concerns me is that he's got to reinvent himself almost. He's lost some of his speed ... which takes away some of his slap game. He's not as quick as he used to be either which is allowing him to be over matched at times at the plate. His range in RF also has regressed. In a lot of ways, I think it is fair to say that if Ichiro's legs are gone, he's done since that's his game. But, what I think will be interesting is whether the Mariners will treat him as 1 of the 25 or how he's been treated historically as somewhat separate from the 25. If they keep running him out there in the face of continuing evidence that he's done (which will be shown one way or the other next year), then what does that say about the organization? |
| 31. By: nater on 08-02-2011 18:14:37 DMac, in response to your rebuttal... I'd say you misunderstand what I mean by market inefficiencies. In your scenario where you have two players with skewed skillsets, what I am saying is the defense-strong player was much cheaper than the offense-strong player a couple years ago when a lot of this was happening -- cheaper than a normal discount for lack of offense would demand -- because people were paying crazy prices for big bat, no defense types of players. We actually have had several mid-level prospects do quite well at the major league level, JUST NOT FOR OUR TEAM! Look at the Indians roster as an example. Then refer back to my point about the Bavasi era. Glad to hear you're not just some lurker. Like I said, your points are valid, but you're kinda preaching to the choir here. |
| 32. By: nater on 08-02-2011 18:28:08 DMac, Just read your last couple posts, and I completely agree with you... I guess what doesn't sit well with me is it sounds like you are indicting us as fans for accepting this situation. it sounds like you are a Boston or Yankee fan telling us ignorant little Mariners fans what a real professional baseball team should look like. Believe me, there is much angst among M's fans at Lincoln/Armstrong. There is much dismay over Ichiro's regression. There is a lot of frustration at the signings of light-hitters like Figgins and Jack Wilson. Unfortunately, we have the unique and maybe unprecedented situation of a majority owner who doesn't even live in this hemisphere. Frankly, in my opinion, that is the biggest drag on our team. Yes, Lincoln and Armstrong have meddled too much in the past, but the real problem is that the owner is afraid to put any money at risk but he's completely insulated from any backlash from the fans. |
| 33. By: DMac33 on 08-02-2011 19:22:19 Couple items Nater, 1) I absolutely know what you meant by market inefficiencies. What I was getting at is that there may be a reason that those inefficiencies existed. 2) I grew up in Seattle and moved away for a bit before returning. I've watched the Mariners for as long as I can remember. I've been a Boston fan for as long as I can remember because as a kid I found myself reading a lot about baseball history and found their history and Ted Williams to be very fascinating. 3) I firmly believe that there are 2 different parts of the baseball season. The 162 game season requires the depth of a 25+ man roster. The playoffs for the most part require on an 18-20 man roster (particularly in the AL). The importance of players performing at an elite level is far more necessary in the playoffs. 4) Where you'll hear me criticize the high spending teams is when they just go out into the market and buy players. It's why I hate the Yankees. But you will never hear me criticize a team that uses its resources to build the minor league system. For instance, if you look at Boston's roster right now, you'd find that it is highly composed of players developed internally or via trades: Varitek (acquired from Seattle), Salty (acquired from Texas), Gonzalez (acquired from San Diego), Pedroia (drafted), Lowrie (internal), Youk (drafted), Crawford (free agent), Ellsbury (drafted), Ortiz (acquired from Twins before he was anything) Beckett (acquired from Florida in Hanley Ramirez deal), Lester (drafted), Bucholz (drafted), Papelbon (farm), Bard (farm), etc. That's a lot of guys that came internally. When you think back to the Yankees run in the 1996 - 2003 era, look at the number of key contributors that they had that came either through their system or via trades utilizing assets in their system. Those are the truths of baseball to me. You win by having elite pitchers/hitters when they are needed and you have to develop your roster through your system. |
| 34. By: nater on 08-03-2011 12:35:18 I don't disagree with anything you've said. I just find it odd you are posting all this when that is exactly what Jack Z has been consistently on the record as trying to do, so much so that the message is starting to get numb. And we have seen a lot of success with that in the development of our farm system already. We haven't seen that at the MLB level because Jack hasn't had any significant money to spend since he was hired. All his budget has allowed him to do is patch the numerous holes with short-term, cheap solutions. I can only hope with the Bradley and Wilson contracts off the books after this season that maybe he'll have some financial latitude to go out and get an impact bat or two. If that's the case, then I think we can judge him on how those acquisitions work out. |
| 35. By: kinnikinik on 08-05-2011 11:03:45 Hey Jason, Long time lurker, first time poster... Thanks for a great site... Quick question: I heard somewhere the other day that Chiang has been struggling with controlling his diabetes over the last few years. Apparently, he finally got in touch with and MD that spoke Chinese and has been more successful this year. The implication was that his reputation for laziness and mental lapses (and for a slow bat???) may have had a physical root that was FIXABLE. Have you heard anything about this??? Again, thanks for the great site. |
Haven't created a Prospect Insider account yet? Sign up!
|
|
 |
|
|
| Copyright 2010 Prospect Insider | Created by AQ Central Prospect Insider is optimized for Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome |