Dropped Third Strike

Here at DTS we go in for our fair share of mockery. We tend to employ a light, but brilliantly satirical, tone, and we have a great fondness for pointing out the absurd. Generally, however, we direct our mighty wit at the men and women of MLB — the execs, the GMs, the owners, the umpires, and above all else, the players. We don’t usually take shots at other bloggers or members of the mainstream media (whatever that means). There are plenty of other brilliant and talented writers who point out the failures and shortcomings of the people who cover the sport we love. Just take a look at someone like King Kaufman. But, on occasion, we’ll come across a premise so laughable, or content so offensive, that we feel compelled to comment. 

Enter  Cory Humes of “Pirate Revolution,” who recently wrote a blog post advising Neal Huntington to trade Nate McLouth for a boatload of prospects, and then turn around and pry Nick Swisher from the Yankees for Zach Duke and John Grabow. Now let’s be fair, Mr. Humes’ piece is not offensive, nor is it truly absurd. The website as a whole seems to be well laid out and full of thoughtful and useful work. In fact, any Pirates fan would be well advised to make regular visits to the site. 

With that said, we must take Mr. Humes to task, somewhat, for this particular proposal. Consider first Mr. Humes’ reasoning for trading McLouth:

In 2008 at age 26, Nate McLouth hit .276/.356/.497 (a 126 OPS+) with 26 HR and 94 RBI in 597 at-bats. In 2006 and 2007, McLouth had posted OPS+ lines of 74 and 110 while being used as a part-time player. He earned the league minimum in all three seasons and is now arbitration-eligible for the first time. The Pirates’ attempt to sign McLouth to a contract extension was reportedly rebuffed when McLouth and his agent felt as if the player wasn’t being valued fairly.

No matter what happens in 2009, the Pirates can’t come out ahead.

If McLouth performs as he did in 2008, then his price almost certainly will skyrocket. He will be two seasons away from free agency and should command an eight-figure average annual salary. If McLouth regresses in 2008, then the Pirates would be right to question whether or not the player was a one-year wonder and would be wise to go season-to-season with McLouth’s contract.”

This line of reasoning is essentially inarguable; if McLouth continues to hit, he will start earning some big paychecks; if he regresses, a long-term contract extension would seem to be an unnecessary risk. The problems come from the conclusion Humes’ draws from all this:

Trade Nate McLouth now for a haul similar to the one Billy Beane received in January of 2008 [from the White Sox in exchange for Nick Swisher].”

This haul, two pretty nifty pitching prospects (Gio Gonzalez and Fautino De Los Santos) and a fourth or fifth outfielder (Ryan Sweeney), seems like a hefty price to expect in return for a poor-fielding CF who has had one full year of duty — albeit a nicely productive year. Moreover, the number of teams willing to part with two young pitching prospects for a player who is soon to be due a sizable raise via arbitration is small indeed. Until recently, young pitching had come to be the most valued commodity in the game. Now, cash is probably the most valued commodity. Humes’ trade proposal demands that a team surrender both of these. 

Finally, at the end of the piece, Humes verges into the entirely implausible. 

Then, replace McLouth’s offensive production in the lineup by acquiring Nick Swisher from the Yankees at a discount.

After signing Mark Teixeira to a monstrous $180 million contract, the Yankees have a surplus of players at first base and in the outfield. Swisher and former Pirate Xavier Nady are believed to be on the trade block.  ESPN’s Rob Neyer feels that the Yankees need another bullpen arm, and Cashman is rumored to have interest in stockpiling pitching depth. Send John Grabow and Zach Duke to New York.

*snip*

The Yankees, though, might feel as other clubs have:  that the Pirates are inept, and their fringe players can be redeveloped.  The Yankees might still see the promise Duke showed as a rookie in 2005.  And in Grabow, they would receive one of the top left-handed relievers in the game in 2008.”

The Yankees already have a player who has been touted as “one of the top left-handed relievers in the game” — in fact, they got him at the trade deadline from the Pirates. As for Zach Duke? He doesn’t represent an upgrade over Ian Kennedy, Al Aceves, Phil Coke, Chase Wright or any number of unproven Yankees minor leaguers. Swisher is a quality player, and the only Yankee outfielder not named Cabrera or Gardner who will be under contract beyond 2009. 

Humes is probably right to suggest that the Pirates would be best served to trade McLouth now, while his value is at its maximum, but — unfortunately for Pirates fans — Humes is probably overestimating what the team could get in exchange, and certainly underestimating Brian Cashman. 

In fairness, Mr. Humes addresses these and other issues in the comments of the piece. And none of this is intended as disrespect towards him or Pirate Revolution — as previously stated, it is our humble opinion that this is a highly admirable blog. Mostly, we just want to point out that when a team has a surplus at a certain position, those players tend to become the focus of some fairly one-sided trades. The Yankees would be best served to hold onto their surplus unless a truly tempting trade proposal comes along, and Brian Cashman assuredly knows this.