Pumpkin Escobar

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 24, 2009 -> 03:24 PM) Key point there is: he won't be pitching until well after the trade deadline. Yea. I doubt he is but I wonder if he is kicking himself over not approving it when he had the chance. He could be in a very nice world series hunt right now - injured or not - and improve his value by pitching well. Instead he is stuck on his couch, not pitching, not winning and minimal hope it turns around.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jul 24, 2009 -> 03:15 PM) How about resurrecting the Peavy deal? One can dream can't they Theyre saying he is still like 6 weeks away from pitching - if he does at all this season.

QUOTE (SHIPPS @ Jul 24, 2009 -> 12:21 PM) The Blackout game was the best by far that I have been to. Ya that was very fun. We got to the stadium at like 1. Parked up against the gate on 35th in lot C i think and just had a blast. That and no one leaving the stadium for like 30 minutes after the game ended. It was intense.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jul 24, 2009 -> 09:31 AM) http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ge-t...o&type=lgns TIFWIW, Tim Brown says the Sox are quietly in pursuit of Holliday I saw that. I think Tim Brown is an idiot but that is for another day. I wonder what the interest is from several standpoints. Where would he play this season? He is a Boras guy. Do we think he'll find his Colorado stroke in another hitter friendly park? If he can - I'm all for getting him in the offseason at a cheap price.

QUOTE (watchtower41 @ Jul 23, 2009 -> 03:47 PM) TELL ME WISE, TELL ME SWEET LITT'L WISE!!!!! Way to work son! I havent stopped laughing in about 20 minutes from that comment.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jul 23, 2009 -> 03:37 PM) I no longer disagree with keeping him over BA. QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ Jul 23, 2009 -> 03:42 PM) I don't know if BA woulda GOTTEN to that ball. Wise went a loooooooong way and BA isn't as fast. BUt, you know what...? WHO GIVES A s***?!?! MARK BUEHRLE GOT A PERFECT GAME!!! QUOTE (The Baconator @ Jul 23, 2009 -> 03:43 PM) ... but he didn't... because he's in AAA. In the post game Ozzie said "We keep him for a reason". Right there. Great catch

QUOTE (YASNY @ Jul 23, 2009 -> 10:24 AM) I have no clue, but I thought it was interesting. I saw they were making a big play for Victor Martinez. not sure if it's been mentioned.

Wow...Incredible.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Jul 22, 2009 -> 04:19 PM) Right now, it's approximately equal to his WHIP form 2005, when you (incorrectly) claim that he was at his best. It's also much better than it was in 2006, what you describe as a "good season." Hmm...His stuff was at it's best. He came in throwing 100 non-stop. And 2006 was a good season but he also gave up his most walks and homers. Sort of like what he is doing this year except in 2006 he still was throwing 99 consistently. I'm out of the conversation. Debating with 14 year olds after I am off work is the last reason I joined the site or wanted to contribute my 2 cents on the matter. Apparently that is a crime and apparently you just dont have a clue about the game of baseball. Now go twist something I said in this or a previous post and ignore how you don't understand trade value when it comes to why KW would ask for 2-3 prospects because of status. Or how you think the Mets signed Putz. Or how Jenks whip has gone up the last 3 seasons and his stuff has gone down but that isnt bad because his 07' was sooooo good. It is bad brainiac. He may not be bad - or even medicore - he is still good but from where he was mixed with signs of arm issues in relation to throwing as hard as he did when he is still only 28 years old is a problem. Wake the ____ up!

[quote name='WCSox' date='Jul 22, 2009 -> 04:02 PM' post='1955222 This is such a silly comment that I don't know where to begin. First of all, Jenks was a high-tier closer for a much longer time than Putz. Secondly, Jenks hasn't been injured since 2004, even with heavy use of a surgically-repaired elbow. Putz, on the other hand, was injured just last season in Seattle. Third, Putz's lack of durability and Omar Minaya's idiotic decision to over-pay him have nothing to do with what other teams will pay for a healthier and more accomplished Bobby Jenks. You're hilarious. I have to leave work. I don't have time keep dealing with you changing and manipulating things like a coward. You said and I am paraphrasing "Look at all the money the Mets through at him". I pointed out you were clueless. Because they traded for him. So your logic was invalid in saying they paid tons of money to sign a setup man. They didn't - they traded for a closer to be a setup man. And you can say Bobby Jenks is healthy all you want. The guy is an out-of-shape, screw in the elbow, closer who came into the league 4-5 years ago throwing 100 mph. He is only 28-29 and has lost his ability to do so. He is without a doubt able to keep being a very good closer - but - for the amount of return his work history deserves and the amount of money he will be paid over the next 2 years in arb and then his contract following. He will have much less interest then you think. He will still have immense value. But there is a risk associated with acquiring him that isn't there if a team wants to spend less on acquiring a closer who hasn't shown signs of a decline physically in his stuff and has a screw in his arm. I'm pretty much done debating it. For whatever reason - in order to act like you have some remote clue on things - you change things around to me saying Jenks isn't a good closer or isnt effective or whatever other nonsense. It's a waste of my time to keep dancing circles around you.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Jul 22, 2009 -> 04:02 PM) No, we can't. Your information about Jenks' "decline over the years" appears to be overly-anecdotal... Year WHIP 2005 1.25 2006 1.39 2007 0.89 2008 1.10 2009 1.29 WHIP is the most statistically-relevant tool for measuring a closer's effectiveness, and there is no obvious pattern of "decline over the years." Jenks was phenomenal in 2007, and he wasn't throwing anywhere near 100 on a regular basis. Ok so his stuff isnt getting worse you're saying but his Whip has gone up the last 2 years? 05' was his first year and he plyed in less games that year then I think he did all of this year. 06' first full season as closer nd had a pretty good season. Similar to this season where he is having a pretty good season. He was also 25 in 2006 so for a closer to be throwing 100mph and 25 - in his 1st full season - no one cared as much. 07' great season - exactly what was expected out of him. Exactly what I was saying interms of where his value was at it's peak. a 26 year old with dominating stuff and even though this may have been the first season of noticible inconsistency with hitting 99-100 - he was still effective. O ya for a team who finished what - 7th/8th worst in baseball. 08' - another great season. 27 y/o closer who still has immense value even with more growing concerns about him only throwing mid-90's now. Most people, myself included still saw no reason he wouldnt be effective but the thought was in the back of your head that there may be some issues. Huge decline in k's but still very good. 09' - more concern over him now. Lack of velocity seems to be evident. Still A VERY GOOD closer. Not worth 10 million next season if his production this season doesnt change. Still has good trade value and should be moved if we can get his value for him. I am more comfortable with a guy (who came into the league throwing 95 with no screw in his arm - that dominates - and i pay 10 million) then a guy who came in throwing 99-100, who is down to 94-95 and has a screw in his arm about to make 10 million who I still have a shot at getting full value for in a trade. That is the whole point of the Bobby Jenks situation.

QUOTE (JorgeFabregas @ Jul 22, 2009 -> 03:47 PM) His K/9 is higher than it was in 2008 or 2007. Ya - I pointed that out already. But last season it was down immensely and this season he is striking guys out again but I think teams are hitting near .260 against him. Which isn't bad at all, for the 100th time, it's just not dominant and statistically not going to be worth the 10 million we will be paying him next season. And he absolutely can turn it around this season. I think a guy throwing with 95mph stuff and a nasty curveball is still a great pitcher. I just think his value was above that of a 95 mph closer and was in an elite level when factoring age, team control, stuff, his history, etc...And now we will only watch his value decline because his $ will go up, his stuff is going down (not bad again for those who don't understand - but it is less then what he was known for), and that he has. a screw. in his arm. That will make teams weary and makes myself weary when I see struggles like right now.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Jul 22, 2009 -> 03:13 PM) So are you claiming that his command, like his velocity, is forever lost now? I hope not. Jenks has been throwing in the mid-90's for over two years now, and I don't believe I ever claimed that he'd be throwing 100 again. My point is that he doesn't need to throw 98-100 mph on a regular basis to be an effective closer. It's also possible that he's going through a "dead arm" period right now. I recall this happening to him in years past, and it didn't exactly doom him to a career of mediocrity. I must've missed the memo about Bobby putting on an extra 40 lbs. this past off-season. He pitched well fat in 2005, he pitched well fat in 2006, he pitched well fat in 2007... I didn't realize that we were shopping him right now. Since we're in contention, my plan would be to shop him in November. I think that he's on a decline as well... but a relatively slow one. But I don't see him losing tremendous value in the foreseeable future. You were doing well until you introduced this weak-ass, childish rhetoric. Who says that Kenny is looking for "2-3 elite prospects" for Jenks? Not me. I'd be satisfied with one, and two other relatively good prospects. Again, nobody is confusing Jenks with Halladay or Nathan. Perhaps you and I just disagree on the point that Jenks will still have significant trade value this off-season. He's one of the Top 5 closers in the AL and he's under team control for two more years. There will be suitors. Look at all of the money that the Mets threw at K-Rod as a FA, after he nearly threw his arm off last season. Hell, look at all of the money that they threw at Putz (coming off of an injury, to boot) to be a freaking setup man. You're telling me that other GMs would be afraid to deal for Jenks and his uber-favorable contract status??? No freaking way. Ok. I'll try and wrap this up because everything I feel like is being twisted. When I write something you'll twist it or if I direct something towards you - it's misinterpeted. Jenks has been in a decline - with his stuff - for a good couple years. We all can agree on that now. Right now - I said his stuff is not the same. It could be a dead arm but the distinct possiblity is there that it is just declining for good. He stil lcan b very effective at 95 mph. There is minimal issue there. In fact 0 issue there with a closer throwing 95. The problem is that he isnt locating his stuff I said. No where in any post did I say it will be forever. I said that is what is contributing to his recent struggles. In the past, people assumed he was just not throwing hard because he didnt have to in order to be effective. Which I agree with the logic of not needing to throw 100 to be effective. I did not agree with that he was doing it intentionally. I just thought he was losing his stuff and could probably run it up there at 97 if he needed to. Still a very very good closer. My problem was - with a guy that has a screw in his arm and seeing him decline in stuff - how much longer will he be a dominant closer? And how much longer do you want to take the risk that he doesnt blow his arm out? He may never blow it out and he may shatter records for saves with a 93-95 heater and gross curveball but there is also a chance that next season he blows his arm out and we werent proactive in avoiding that kind of possibility by dealing him when his value was peaking - about 12-18 months ago. Last season he pitched great but I saw his k's drop to like .5 an inning so his value slipped. Where he was usually around 1 an inning, as I believe he is back to this season but his stuff is noticibly more hittable. Seeing that kind of decline for a closer isn't great. So I was all for moving him this past offseason, as some people are. My point from the very beginning was his value to us. If we keep signing him and let him hit free agency in a few years. He will most likely get TYPE-A status. I have some doubts because his decline isn't going to be overnight or immediate as you stated but if we wait 3-4 years - he may have lost his TYPE - A value if he continues on his slower decline. Right now - he is a TYPE-A status player. Now I know you didn't say the we had to get 2-3 good players for him but it is rare you see a guy who is a type-a dealt for anything less. The reason is because if you just let him walk - you'll get 2 first round compensation picks for him. So no one trades their Type-A players for one pretty good one that often. When they do - they usually get 2-3 pretty solid guys and it isn't for a guy who is still under team control. It usually is because that traded player is a free agent at seasons end. Kenny will be looking to be bringing in that kind of talent for him. You're absolutely right that he isnt Halladay or Nathan. Ricciardi - if you havent been following - is turning down 3-5 very good players for Halladay, who is older, more expensive and has 1.5 years left. Nathan is in the same mold as Jenks though because when a team deals you a couple very good players - they also know when this guy hits FA - if he walks he can draft two good players back with his compensation. Nathan is a better closer but his package wouldn't be insanely more then Jenks. They both can attract nice packages. But in terms of who gets their full value - Nathan has a much more likely shot. And he has a heavier contract, age, and a limited no trade clause to work with - yet still the Twins would get proper value. Jenks - the longer we hold him - will cost us more $, he will lose his trade value unless he rediscovers his fastball, and there is always a huge risk with him for injury or loss of Type-A by the time he is ready to hit FA. Again, for the 30th time, that isnt to say he can't attract a good package or that teams won't be interested - it is to say that we would be silly to move a guy under control - for less then his value (which is a "top 5 closer in the AL" with Type-A status) unless we were well aware that there is an underlying problem with him. And your Putz comment was perfect too. They traded for Putz. They didn't throw money at him. He is making 5 million this season and 8 next season for an option. And he got hurt. So now teams are going to say - "Hey did you see the Mets dealt for Putz to be a setup man and he got hurt - we should go deal for the guy who is showing signs of decline in his stuff and a screw in his arm. That'll be a safe bet. Lets deal 2 top prospects for him and pay him MORE then a guy like Putz. Ya!" Now - I hope that makes more sense and that we can stop debating over his value when he has about a 1% chance of being moved at all in the next 6 months.

QUOTE (Colorado Sox Fan @ Jul 22, 2009 -> 03:03 PM) I don't think this is just a rough patch. I am worried about him.

QUOTE (wilmot825 @ Jul 22, 2009 -> 02:52 PM) Who did the Sox offer to the Jays that Toronto said no No Clue but I am assuming it was the Peavy package with maybe the addition of a Fields.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Jul 22, 2009 -> 02:17 PM) Bobby has been "losing velocity" since October of 2005, yet has been about the 5th best closer in the AL over that time. He still has great stuff and there's nothing to suggest that he's suffering from an injury. Jenks' current problem is not his velocity, but his command. He's walking and hitting batters left and right. You're evaluating Jenks's future on less than a month's worth of baseball. This isn't the first time in his career that he hasn't pitched well and has blown a couple of saves, so your prognostication that he's falling apart is dubious at best. Bobby's "body of work" over the past 3+ seasons is nothing short of excellent and, frankly, there's nothing to suggest that he's going into some sort of Billy Koch-like free-fall. Because of this, there will be considerable interest in Jenks during the off-season. He's year-to-year for the next 2 1/2 seasons, which translates into very little financial risk for an interested GM. Thats very true all of it. If you look back at one of my previous posts or first post in this section I believe I said his velocity has been going down, the problem now is his inability to locate it. The velocity has been going down but for the last couple seasons - the excuse was always - "he is doing it intentionally and he can still bring it at 100 when he needs to". I think even Jenks himself has said that. Now maybe he can. Maybe I am overestimating the value of a save situation in the middle of July against a team you're competing with for the Wild Card when you're also a game back in the division. But I'd assume that is one of the times you reach back for it. My point was that he can't. And he isn't the same player without it because now teams know he can't. They know he can't locate it either. And they for the most part are trying to lay off his still dominating breaking ball. Which I dont care how great it is - it is more hittable coming off a 94 mph pitch then a 100 mph pitch. And I must not have been clear to you when I said "his body of work". I wasn't knocking his body of work. In fact - I noted it was excellent and was simply showing he is going to get a ton of money from an arbitrator because they look at the "body of work". It had nothing to do with what he is doing right now other than with a decline in his stuff. The concerns about his arm. Concerns about his weight. And the fact that an arbitrator doesnt care about those things when he pays out. So if we were looking to trade him now - teams would note that he is "struggling" and would not be able to meet the package where it'd be worht dealing him. Do I think Jenks is headed for a decline. Yes, but I am also only like 60-40 on that. The point is I'd rather hedge my bets now and deal him while he still has value as opposed to keeping him and those "concerns" being correct then getting nothing for him while still having to pay out the rear for him. That is the point. Make all the excuses you want. Pop a viagra if needed to keep the hardon for him. He doesn't have the same stuff as he did before. He still is very good and has good stuff but a continued decline out of him where we weren't proactive would make us look stupid - when we are paying him 10mil+ in two years while the league average will have dropped considerably due to the closers that have and will continue signing via free agency. This isn't some anti-Jenks rocket science here. He has some value you now - I dont know which teams that need closers are willing to pay a premium of 2-3 elite prospects for him when he is showing signs of wearing down. Who cares that he has been great at saving games...His ERA, homers, baa and his WHIP are up. His k's have declined faster then any other "Elite" closer I've seen and guys are starting to hit him because theyre laying off the hammer and forcing him to locate a fastball that he cannot do. It's very simple stuff. Really, it is. And you're right - he'll still draw interest but for a guy who is under control with record setting save numbers, devistating stuff (well whats left of it) and type-A compensation, he wont be getting the package that kind of history deserves. Thats all.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 22, 2009 -> 02:24 PM) It depends on what you would be doing with the guy you dealt. Look at LaPorta. For the Brewers, he was an LF for one, and they have a pretty decent one currently. They're also developing another RF (Gamel). LaPorta's potentially moving to 1b with Cleveland, and they have another 1b in Milwaukee who is pretty good as well. LaPorta's hitting great at AAA but struggled big time when he came up to the tribe as well, so he may be a multi-year development project, which again, is something the Brewers don't have time for right now. Well LaPorta is more ready then Gamel in my opinion. both have great bats but in the pecking order - thats just how I think it is viewed. I don't think he is as long as a project as you think. I think he'll be up this year and playing very next season. Maybe I am wrong but college hitters with his kind of bat shouldn't take much longer if theyre going to figure it out. LaPorta had a small sample and he is still hitting very well in AAA - in fact, I just saw something on him about the Indians looking to bring him back up and "turn him loose" I believe was the quote in the article. Need to find where I saw that though. It was literally today. Regardless of him not being ready or whatever - it could've changed a million things for them this season. They could've moved Hart for pitching or whatever. Just hypothetically speaking of course. I don't fault their efforts or their move so much as I don't know how much Brewers fans are willing to invest in this scenario again - especially with it costing much more then just one prospect this time only to see the club let the guy walk in a year. If they win the Series - all is worth it. But I am sorry - I dont care if its a 50 year draught, making the playoffs is an accomplishment - not the goal.

QUOTE (The Baconator @ Jul 22, 2009 -> 01:09 PM) A few games ago on CSN when Getz was batting they showed a graphic of RBI leaders among rookies, Getz was 2 and Beckham was 3 (I believe), Nix was 2nd for home runs. I was wondering if anyone knows how our rookies stack up amongst all league rookies in all major statistics, mostly in the effort to see how competitive Bacon is getting in the ROY running. Maybe this is something to keep track of in a Diamond Club thread, "ROY Tracker"...? I think Beckham has a great shot at ROY...With Porcello trending down and the lack of confidence I have in Romero or Reimold - I think Becks can do it. Nix was 2nd in homers and beckham was 5th i believe. Reimold is the leader I think but he is like 2-3 rbi's up, like 5 homers and a couple runs. He also has played in like 15 more games though. 50-60 more at bats for Beckham and he is probably ahead of him in everything but home runs.

QUOTE (Stan Bahnsen @ Jul 22, 2009 -> 01:15 PM) They made the playoffs for the first time in 26 YEARS!!! Few Brewer fans would say the Sabbathia deal wasn't worth the cost. Mmm true - definitely at the time they were happy but most people want to actually win the whole thing. I'd imagine moreso when you deal your top prospect and not sign the guy you dealt for who carried you into those same playoffs. I actually have a Brewers fan who is a good college buddy of mine and he loved it. Now they have what? Memories of making the playoffs, no sabathia, no LaPorta and no Brantley. Pretty sure finishing in the final 4 wasnt their main goal.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Jul 22, 2009 -> 12:52 PM) I think that you just answered your own question. I imagine that several teams would be interested in a guy like Jenks, who is still under team control from year-to-year through 2011. Even if arbitration puts him at $8 or $9 million next year and he blows out his elbow, it's not a terribly risky investment for a very good closer with a proven track record. No because teams aren't looking to give up what we would require is the point. He is trending downward, losing velocity, struggling and becoming more expensive by the day. His past performance and present performance from a numbers standpoint would warrant type-A compensation. So in a trade - we would demand that kind of haul. No one is going to want to deal for a closer who could be potentially falling apart. Will cost them potentially an arm and a leg in an economy where we are seeing salaries regress. Arbitration players will not see a decline because I believe they go off what is currently already paid to players. Jenks - I think is the 2nd fastest to 100 saves in his career behind Sasaki from Seattle...So he'll win the arbitration case. They don't care about the economy or his declining stuff. They care about his body of work. All that said - no one is dealing us two first round or top flight talent for a closer. Theyd rather turn to an in house option at that point. Sure he has value and is still performing and teams would love him. They wouldn't pay the price is the point when all things are considered.

QUOTE (Dam8610 @ Jul 22, 2009 -> 12:41 PM) Okay, don't flame me for this, this is not a rumor, this is not something I think will happen (so please spare me the "get off the XBox" comments), this is something I'm looking for advice on. If offered this deal, would you take it (assuming financial constraints were not a concern)? Toronto gets: LHSP Aaron Poreda LHSP Clayton Richard 3B Dayan Viciedo RHSP Dexter Carter 1B Lars Anderson (from Boston) Chicago gets: SP Roy Halladay 3B Mike Lowell (would move to 1B) RF Alex Rios 3B Scott Rolen Boston gets: 1B Paul Konerko OF Tyler Kuhn Outside of us in Chicago - Konerko has minimal respect. Boston gets totally hosed in the deal and somehow we end up with a ridiculous amount. First - I know the Jays are desperate to move salary but they don't need to move all of it. Secondly - we couldnt afford all of that. Thirdly - they wouldn't even take that package for Halladay. Including the random Lars Anderson addition. So to add rios and rolen. Doubt it - dumping salary or not. Fourth - We couldnt get Anderson from them for Konerko + something. Fifth - Lowell would be a silly addition to the Sox to play first because there is no reason to remove Pods from the lineup. He has played very well for us. Which would mean you would be moving Dye to first I'd presume and Quentin or Rios to RF. Lots of wholes in the idea. I'm not flaming you. Just way too lopsided for us. Toronto gives up waaay too much without getting enough in return - even if they are dumping money. Boston gets next to nothing. Although - Kong in their park would be fun but no one thinks he is worth what we do. If they did - we would've had Ervin + Kendrick + Figgins or whatever rumors always swirled with him.

All their doing is reporting what we already had Kenny tell us. They don't even know the package most likely - just taking the headline from whoever posted that thing with kenny williams earlier today.

QUOTE (BearSox @ Jul 22, 2009 -> 12:14 PM) I think the Brewers should definitely trade one of Gamel or Escobar. Both have a ton of value around the league, but I have trouble seeing either of them becoming anything more than just decent ball players. Actually, I can see Escobar becoming a right handed version of Juan Pierre offensively, which isn't bad at all, especially considering he'd be playing good D at a premium position. I think Gamel would be the most logical to trade. He doesn't have a position yet (he's not very good at 3B from what I've heard, LF is occupied, can he play RF?, and is his bat good enough to play 1B?), and he hasn't wowed me when I've seen him at bat. He looks decent up there, but he doesn't look like a dangerous hitter. He kind of reminds me of Teahen. I think Gamel is just taking time. I see a lot of promise in him offensively. The defensive thing is another story. Escobar may not turn into anything more then a 2 category offensive player and a defensive wizard but for a team who would want to keep Fielder, Braun, Gallardo and even Hart - theyll need to save money somewhere. Hardy would be a good starting point to move.

I'd say he could. No doubts the Jays would love that.

I don't know who'd have interest in Jenks right now. He sucks over the last X games, his velocity down is no secret, and teams are afraid to pony up the two prospects we'd likely get since he is and will continue to probably be until he hits FA. He is also becoming very expensive. I'd like to see if we can move a couple prospects to our friends in Atlanta should they fall out for Gonzalez. He has experience as a closer and if we prefer Matty T then so be it. But he seems to have been pushed out of the duties for Soriano down there. Fields + _____ anyone? Then if you can find someone willing to move for Jenks and net two top prospects. I'd do it. It's not so much that he is bad right now - cuz frankly he is still pretty good - its the fear that he keeps getting worse, heavier, more expensive, and closer to the day that screw pops out. ha