Bedard to Seattle, Jones and ??? to O's Seems Done

by NHZ on Jan 27, 2008 8:11 PM EST

As the title says. Not that this looks to affect the Royals much, but Bedard is one of the best starters in baseball so his moving to the Mariners is big news for all concerned. Especially since I think this would signal an actual, honest-to-Buddha rebuilding program finally taking off in Baltimore.

Adam Jones, a consensus excellent OF prospect, is the centerpiece of the trade. I'll be hunting for updates as soon as we get more info.

http://blog.seattletimes.nwsource.com/mariners/2008/01/bedardjones_deal_going_down.html

Tweet Comment 48 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

lookout landing is blowing up

http://www.lookoutlanding.com/

by Freneau on Jan 27, 2008 8:18 PM EST reply actions

Yeah, you'd think the world was ending in Seattle.

But the thing is, it kinda is. Bavasi is mortgaging the future for two years of "win now" without actually having a team built to "win now." Depending on who else goes to Baltimore, it could get bloody.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jan 27, 2008 8:21 PM EST up reply actions

but....

with the A's tearing down and the Rangers sucking, its not a bad play

I wanna know what love is, I want you to show me

by LeoBloom on Jan 27, 2008 8:27 PM EST up reply actions

Maybe not "bad"

but it's exactly the kind of trade that Baltimore fans would be willing to kill for, whereas I think the consensus at Lookout Landing was that they were hoping to keep Jones.

And LeoBloom, the real problem is that pythagorean had Seattle as a sub-.500 team. Now, I know that's not "real," but beating your pythagorean record normally doesn't happen by that much two years in a row. Once luck goes back to the norm, Seattle is going to have to fight to be as good as they were last year, from what I can see.

AND it's not Oakland and the Rangers they need to beat. They have to beat the Angels, who are still very, very good. Or the wild card team, and we all know the Royals are taking the wild card this year.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jan 27, 2008 8:31 PM EST up reply actions

Maybe I am missing something,

but it doesn't seem like that insane of a deal if the Mariners think they can lock up Bedard. And the Mariners should be able to do this as they have a ton of money.

Jones is a good prospect, but not one to protect with one's last dying breath. And Bedard is really really good.

I think this might be a case of the Mariners over-valuing a prospect.

Maybe now that Seattle is an outfielder short we can trade Jose Guillen to them? Oh, that's right. They already know they do not want him.

Rock Chalk Talk for pretty good KU College Baseball Coverage

by James Quinn on Jan 27, 2008 9:06 PM EST up reply actions

Locking up Bedard

Bedard would be pretty silly not to test the market in two years. I doubt that happened (I have been wrong before, of course).

Jones is going to be a S-T-U-D, JQ, and the Orioles get six years of him. That alone would be a good payoff for a rebuilding team that only stood to get two more years of Bedard. And the consensus is that at least one other good prospect is headed to Baltimore.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jan 27, 2008 9:12 PM EST up reply actions

Not to be argumentative,

But I think Jones has already burnt one year of control. And looking over his cube numbers (here they are) he looks like a good bet to be a pretty good outfielder. But he has no outstanding skills. And he does not exactly have a solid track record in the minors. And he has not looked good in his first 73 major league games. I think he might have a moderate ceiling and still runs a risk of stagnating at the MLB level at the "okay" level. Not to pretend I am more negative on Jones than I really am, but he is far from a can't miss superstar in waiting. Jones is actually comparable to Shane Costa only four years younger (which is a big "only" of course.)

Anyway, it looks to me to be a reasonable trade if the Mariners think they can win in 2008/2009 and if they are willing to pay to extend Bedard's time in Seattle. And it looks like a good rebuilding trade for Baltimore.

Rock Chalk Talk for pretty good KU College Baseball Coverage

by James Quinn on Jan 27, 2008 9:29 PM EST up reply actions

Of course, people are entitled to their own

opinions. But Jones is going to be 22 this year and OPSed ~900 in AAA. He's got a lot of room for growth as a player, has all five tools, and plays defense at a level not seen among that many young outfielders. He's one of my favorite prospects in baseball--waaap waap bias alert--to tell you the truth. Can you imagine having Markakis and Jones patrolling the same outfield?

Anyways, he won't be the only good player going to Baltimore either.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jan 27, 2008 9:35 PM EST up reply actions

Great point

If they made this trade committed to signing Bedard long-term (and I think they did), then this is a good deal. Bedard is one of the best young starting pitchers in baseball. He's the kind of genuine ace that you build a rotation around. And top prospects are great, but many top prospects fail. Bedard will not.

The real question is what could we offer the Cubs to pry Fukudome away from them. I'd start with Gordon, Butler and Soria and hope that it won't take much more than that.

I probably disagree with you.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 27, 2008 9:14 PM EST up reply actions

But the thing is,

from the O's standpoint, they really don't care what happens with Bedard after he leaves. They get the prospects they need, and they get them for six years.

IF Bedard was extended, which is far from a certainly given the money he'd stand to make in two years--I'm well aware that sometimes people take the sure thing, but hear me out--then you do need to factor in the money spent by the Mariners on the extension. The actual trade gets them Bedard for two years for a good price, beyond that it's between the FO and Bedard, and has little to do with the trade other than being a condition, of course, if they indeed got the extension worked out for the trade to be consummated.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jan 27, 2008 9:21 PM EST up reply actions

I hear what you're saying

...and you might be right, but I see it as a fairly close call. While Jones is a great prospect, he's just a prospect. And many top prospects fail or become merely above average players. No prospect is a lock. Bedard, on the other hand, is a known great pitcher. If you're willing to invest the money on him long-term, then I think the definitely great player, even for big money is worth at least as much as the cheap, young prospect you may end up being great...or maybe not.

I probably disagree with you.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 27, 2008 9:24 PM EST up reply actions

See,

I really, really think that Jones is as close to being a can't-miss prospect as you can get. I think if you play Jones's career out 100 times, 99 times he ends up a quality major league and 90 times he ends up a significantly above average corner outfielder/even more above average center fielder. That's where I'm coming from when weighing the value gained for Baltimore on this deal.

Then, when you consider that Baltimore should get at least another quality prospect out of this--the rumor mill has two many names to list--that tips the scale even further.

What I'm see here is that this is a classic "win now" trade for the Mariners that will benefit them greatly over two years, whereas it will give Baltimore the kick start that they need to get back towards the great franchise they used to be. People will come to the park to watch Jones and whoever comes with him, because in a way this trade will signal the end of Angelos screwing up the team for a lot people (in addition to the talent of the new players).

Now, it's relevant, of course, if the trade could only go through with a Bedard extension. It's just that if Seattle is paying him top dollar for, say, three years after his current contract is up, that's on them. Once you get to the extended part of the contract, you need to treat that as a free agent signing by Seattle, not value lost by Baltimore because:

Sources seem to indicate he was not going to re-sign with the O's after 2009 even if not traded
The Mariners won't be able to extend this guy for some amazing discount. They'll need to shell out major moolah to keep him the fold. Just as if he were a free agent.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jan 27, 2008 9:32 PM EST up reply actions

All I can say is

...that no prospect is can't-miss. While you have a great feeling about him, not everyone says he's a can't-miss prospect. He might become a star. It wouldn't surprise me if he became a league average corner OFer. I could give you a pretty long list of can't-miss top prospects who missed. It happens. That has to figure into the analysis.

I don't know if Bedard will sign a long-term deal with Seattle. But I think money talks and if they make him the right offer, I think he'd take it. At least 3 teams are lining up to give the Twins many of their top prospects for one year of Santana because they want exclusive negotiating rights with him for a year. Each of those teams thinks they can extend Santana and get him to avoid going to free agency. I don't think all of those teams are stupid. I think it can be done. And if it can be done for Santana, it can be done for Bedard.

This is definitely a win-now strategy and I'm not going to argue that a win-now strategy is the right move at this point for the Mariners. I'm just saying that a top young ace for a top prospect (and another prospect) is a fairly even trade.

I probably disagree with you.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 27, 2008 9:42 PM EST up reply actions

I think

A frontline starter for a frontline prospect is also a good trade, if you're in the right situation. And I don't think Seattle is in that situation. They're like the Chiefs, deluding themselves into thinking their mediocre team is just one piece away from going to a Super Bowl. Even with Bedard, the Mariners are not going to be serious contenders this year and probably not next year, and they just sent away a guy that might have been a big part of the future.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 27, 2008 9:48 PM EST up reply actions

I think the disagreement

stems from the fact that we're not on the same page with the extension issue. I'm saying that even if the extension is included, Seattle is trading Jones and _ and _ for two years of Bedard from there on out, if they pay him to stay, that's not his Baltimore contract anyway. So you cannot, IMO, take the extension years and count that against the long term value of this trade for Baltimore.

And I understand, NYRoyal, better than most, I think, that no prospect is a guarentee. I'm just saying that in my considered opinion, Jones will be a big asset. Maybe not a superstar, but well above average on both sides of the ball for six years. In fact, I think he profiles a lot like Nick Markakis, who is a very good player who still has potential for growth.

And that is, of course, without knowing who else is headed to Baltimore.

The long and short of it is that Seattle will probably win in terms of overall value by a considerable margin for the first two years, and then Baltimore will end up getting four more years of Jones and whoever else they collect. I think that'll have the Orioles comfortably winning the deal by the end of Jones's contract, but Bavasi probably knew that already...they're definitely going for "win now."

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jan 27, 2008 9:48 PM EST up reply actions

Here is an argument

How many top-tier starting pitchers hit the FA market each year? Not that many. Most get locked up before they go on the market. So if Seattle really wants an ace, they cannot count on finding one on the FA market for any price. Maybe trades like this are the best way to find top-tier pitching in the current MLB talent market. It is much much easier to sign an extension with a player than to woo him on the FA market.

Plus, signing a Bedard-level pitcher as a free agent will cost Seattle something like 5/100. They might be able to extend him for a fair bit less. Just pulling numbers out of my "Jose Guillen" here but maybe if they dangled 5/75 now they could close the deal.

Rock Chalk Talk for pretty good KU College Baseball Coverage

by James Quinn on Jan 27, 2008 9:48 PM EST up reply actions

Good point

Aces don't hit the FA market very often. Buehrle and Zambrano were poised to hit the FA market this year and they were both locked down by midseason. I think usually just one ace hits the FA market each year and many years, none at all.

I probably disagree with you.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 27, 2008 9:51 PM EST up reply actions

But then, if they're giving him an extension,

it's still a new contract. $15 million a year is a lot to commit to any one player, though I'm not saying it wouldn't sign Bedard if they offered.

What I AM saying is that the extension really should be looked at as a FA contract. They're trading for two years and buying the rest.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jan 27, 2008 9:52 PM EST up reply actions

and....

acquiring a key player they might not be able to acquire otherwise. This is not just a money debate, talent is part of the equation as well. And Seattle certainly got the better end of that equation. I don't think you would strongly disagree if I characterized this deal as Seattle acquiring a rare "elite" talent by trading away an unproven player with lingering question marks if he will ever even reach the "very good" level.

Rock Chalk Talk for pretty good KU College Baseball Coverage

by James Quinn on Jan 27, 2008 10:02 PM EST up reply actions

No...

I never said Bedard wasn't an elite pitcher. He's a total badass. Thing is, two years of him is what the Mariners get in the trade. Jones will be in Baltimore for six, and I'm optimistic about his abilities to turn his tools into results. He also destroyed AAA at age 21.

AND if this trade is consummated, then it won't just be Jones headed to Baltimore.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jan 27, 2008 10:04 PM EST up reply actions

One more thing

Thing is, two years of him is what the Mariners get in the trade.

Actually they get one more important thing in the trade. They get exclusive negotiating rights with him for two years. Many teams have spun this kind of trade into a long-term deal.

I probably disagree with you.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 27, 2008 10:11 PM EST up reply actions

Yep, I know.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jan 27, 2008 10:28 PM EST up reply actions

and they get to trade him for more prospects

if he doesn't work out.

AJ is a big guy to give up, but they're pretty well set at OF, as it is. I'd even go so far to say that Balentien may end up being the better hitter. (But that's mainly because I developed a man-crush on him when he was being dangled for Dotel.)

Assuming they don't give up too much with the second or third prospects, I think this is a good deal for the Mariners, really.

You're much better off with a guy you know can play baseball than one you think will be able to. If this were the Royals, I'd be willing to give up 3 of our top 5 prospects for this guy
(the only one being untouchable would be Moustakas, but only because we have no offensive prospects in the system.)

by marbotty on Jan 28, 2008 2:24 AM EST up reply actions

Balentien

FWIW, Goldstein at BP didn't seem incredibly high on Balentien. He rated him as only a 3-star prospect, which is roughly the same level as Billy Buckner and Daniel Duffy.

I probably disagree with you.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 28, 2008 4:15 AM EST up reply actions

like I said, I'm biased

I also wonder how much other stuff they factor in to the prospect rankings... defense, speed, age, etc.

I doubt Balentien's a better overall player than Jones. I think he may possibly hit as well, though.

Basically, if you're able to get a staff ace, I think Balentien's presence can help Jones look more expendable. There's a drop off, but not so much that your team isn't better off with out Jones and with Bedard. In the short term, anyway.

by marbotty on Jan 28, 2008 4:53 AM EST up reply actions

From what I've heard

Balentien is not included in the deal.

I probably disagree with you.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 28, 2008 12:08 PM EST up reply actions

Wha?

I hope you're joking.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 27, 2008 9:22 PM EST up reply actions

About Fukudome?

Definitely. Just poking a little fun at JQ and his Fukudome fetish, because he never misses an opportunity to take an anti-Guillen tangent. I swear, Guillen must have donkey punched his grandmother or something.

I probably disagree with you.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 27, 2008 9:25 PM EST up reply actions

Guillan was rough with grandma,

while Fukudome was nothing but a considerate gentleman.

Rock Chalk Talk for pretty good KU College Baseball Coverage

by James Quinn on Jan 27, 2008 9:34 PM EST up reply actions

I will agree with you

...that I'd rather have Fukudome meet my grandmother than Guillen. But I'd rather have Guillen play on my baseball team.

I probably disagree with you.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 27, 2008 9:36 PM EST up reply actions

Maybe we need a permanent

"JQ vs. NYRoyal" thread for the Fukudome-Guillen issue. :P

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jan 27, 2008 9:38 PM EST up reply actions

Even I have tired of it

But JQ clearly has not. He's so frustrated that we signed Guillen and not Fukudome that he has to bring it up semi-daily.

By the way, do you know that Fukudome has said that the White Sox offered him more than the 4/48 he got from the Cubs because he wanted to play for the Cubs? So it would have taken more than a little more than 4/48 for the Royals to get him. I think it is laughable to argue that the complete unknown quantity of Fukudome is the risk of a massive contract like 5/60.

I probably disagree with you.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 27, 2008 9:46 PM EST up reply actions

Why offer Gordon, Butler and Soria?

Just offer the Cubs Guillen straight-up for Fukudome. Do you think they would make that trade? No, of course not. Which really pretty well makes my point right there.

Rock Chalk Talk for pretty good KU College Baseball Coverage

by James Quinn on Jan 27, 2008 9:38 PM EST up reply actions

Uh, yes,

because no team signs someone to a contract like that just to trade them that off-season.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jan 27, 2008 9:39 PM EST up reply actions

Your point is made?

Because the Cubs value Fukudome over Guillen? The opinion of one GM makes your point? That's pretty silly, isn't it?

I probably disagree with you.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 27, 2008 9:43 PM EST up reply actions

I could be wrong

But I think Bedard has let it be known that he wants to play in Toronto, his home and native land.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 27, 2008 9:21 PM EST up reply actions

I agree with NYRoyal here (hedges in parentheses)

Pitching is a premium these days, and for an ace pitcher who can (potentially) anchor a rotation for years to come, trading Jones and a couple of high risk prospects for him is a steal to my mind. As far as an extension goes, I have little doubt that the M's can lock him up if they so choose.

Look at it this way, Jones (probable) ceiling is a Mike Cameron type. Plus speed, better than average power, and a lot of strikeouts.

Bedard when healthy has proven to be a bonafide ace. Considering how much top of the market teams are considering tossing at Santana, this trade is a great trade for Seattle in my mind.

"I'm tired of all these stupid a$$ questions every day. Why the f**k would I hit Brett for Miller?" The rest is history.

by DC Royal on Jan 27, 2008 10:15 PM EST reply actions

I'm just more optimistic on Jones

than you are, I suppose.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jan 27, 2008 10:27 PM EST up reply actions

I hear

When people talk trades (particularly fan boys not mired in reality on other Royals boards), I often hear them bring up trading for a guy and signing him to an extension.

Does this happen very often? I'm struggling to think of a top tier-guy that was traded and then signed an extension before he reached free agency. I'm sure there are example, but my mind is fried right now. Can anyone recall such examples?

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 27, 2008 10:26 PM EST reply actions

Off the top of my head

The White Sox traded Jeremy Reed (a great top prospect who has been mediocre in the majors) and Miguel Olivo to Seattle for Freddy Garcia back when he was an ace and then signed him to a long-term deal in June of that season.

I probably disagree with you.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 27, 2008 10:29 PM EST up reply actions

Does this happen very often?

Let's ask the Astros.

by marbotty on Jan 28, 2008 2:27 AM EST up reply actions

Retro,

This was sorta the M.O. for the good Cardinal teams of the last decade or so. Mark McGwire and Scott Rolen come to mind.

I can recall reading articles where they even said things like this - once a player gets here, we'll think he'll like it enough to sign an extension with us, etc. etc.

by loyal2s dad on Jan 28, 2008 5:05 PM EST reply actions

Good examples.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 29, 2008 9:34 AM EST up reply actions

Hold on a moment...

Jayson Stark is now reporting the following over at espn.com:

"Orioles owner Peter Angelos hasn't yet signed off on the proposed deal that would send Erik Bedard to Seattle, according to a source familiar with the Orioles' internal discussions.

The same source also indicated that Angelos wasn't informed of the particulars of this latest proposal until late Sunday and that he won't be available Monday to confer with the Orioles' baseball officials because of a personal matter.

Given Angelos' long history of vetoing trades, one baseball man who has dealt extensively with Angelos predicted that "this could get more interesting as it goes along" if Angelos has yet to approve this deal."

Full story: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3218624

by cookierojas73 on Jan 28, 2008 7:47 PM EST reply actions

Good lord

Glad the Glasses no longer interfere.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 29, 2008 9:33 AM EST up reply actions

Perhaps Jones isn't a can't miss guy.

Via MLBTR:

UPDATE, 1-29-08 at 3:45pm: The Baltimore Sun's Roch Kubatko weighs in on a radio rumor going around. The radio rumor says that the O's are holding up the deal over a possible degenerative hip condition with Adam Jones. Kubatko could only confirm that the Orioles "became concerned with something related to Jones."

by Skirra on Jan 29, 2008 6:21 PM EST reply actions