One quick note and correction to my Russell Branyan piece from over the weekend, and that is to note that in the comments section I made mention that I did not believe Andy Marte would be the one designated for assignment once the Branyan signing is made official. As announced yesterday, the Indians chose to designate infielder Chris Gimenez. I just wanted to clarify that I misspoke and that the Indians very much value Marte because he is their best defender at both first base and third base, and being right-handed it would allow the Indians to play him and Matt LaPorta almost exclusively against left-handers with Branyan and Travis Hafner sitting.
Anyway, to the inbox we go...
Devin R: In the past couple of days, and seemingly out of nowhere, the Braves have been tied to Edward Salcedo -- most recently, mlbtraderumors.com has them finalizing a deal as soon as he passes a physical. They mention his birthday has "recently" been established as July 30, 1991. Where were the Indians when this happened? We had this guy playing in our DR facilities for at least a year (longer, if I remember correctly). He disappears for a couple years because of concerns about his age, and we completely lose touch?
Me: First off, I see you asked Indians.com beat reporter Anthony Castrovince this same question and he provided a spot on response in his mailbag earlier in the week. To recap what Castrovince said, Salcedo has been trying to sign with a major league team for the past three years but has been unsuccessful in those attempts because of an investigation into his identity. While the Braves appear close to signing him, it doesn't mean the investigations into his identity being conducted by both Major League Baseball and the United States Consulate are in the clear.
Now, as to why the Indians have "lost touch" with Salcedo? It is just one of those things where to my knowledge the Indians interest and contact with him completely flat-lined once the identity issues cropped up three years ago. Whether or not he is cleared and his identity is verified no longer matters as they have apparently moved on. Also, Salcedo was never at the Indians' Dominican Republic facilities for a year as any report on that is inaccurate because by rule teams cannot have a player at their academy for more than 30 days. The Indians did have him in for a few short visits and even saw him play in the USA when he participated in a Perfect Game event, but that's it.
Aaron wrote: When reading your comments you said "this [Branyan] signing in no way is blocking anyone of importance." You don't think this will cut into LaPorta's time? Matt is a "true prospect" that is ready (if no setbacks health wise.) How many starts, when healthy, will LaPorta get? I am not for platooning.
Me: I am not for a platoon either in this case. In the right situation where two role players are used to maximize their strengths and limit their weaknesses, I am fine with it, sort of like the "Benuardo" platoon in 2006 with Ben Broussard and Eduardo Perez. But in the case of LaPorta, he is considered an everyday player so will get everyday at bats. What is likely to happen here is while there is no strict platoon, the Indians are going to be cautious with how they use him this year and not just throw him out to the wolves and play every night come hell or high water. The plan is for him to get around 500 plate appearances, but his performance over the course of the season will dictate whether he gets less or more plate appearances.
From the sounds of it, LaPorta will split time in left field with Michael Brantley and also play first base or designated hitter against lefties so the Indians can sit Branyan and/or Travis Hafner. So, while Branyan is expected to be the “regular” first baseman, he shouldn’t really block anyone other than Andy Marte and Chris Gimenez (who are no longer prospects). Branyan is more an insurance option for the Indians so they can be a little more careful in the use of LaPorta and even Michael Brantley who will both be in their first full big league seasons. Whether or not Branyan is the right fit is certainly debatable, and I subscribe to the belief that he is a wasteful signing, but even without signing Branyan his role is one that would have been filled by "someone" this year to help lessen LaPorta's burden, so make of that what you will.
Brian wrote: How in the world are we going to give any of the trio of Ambriz, Sowers, and Talbot a chance if we only have a 6-man bullpen?
Me: This question is in response to my note last week that the Indians may go with a 14-position player and 11-man pitching staff alignment for the 25-man opening day roster. I’ve since changed my stance on that as it appears the Indians may instead go without a true 4th outfielder, so they could still have a 13-position player and 12-man pitching staff alignment.
But, to answer the question, whether they go with a six or seven man bullpen I think the either scenario makes sense and still allows Talbot, Sowers and Ambriz to battle it out for the final spot. The only locks in the bullpen are Kerry Wood, Tony Sipp, Raffy Perez, Chris Perez and Joe Smith. That's five guys. Jensen Lewis is by no means a lock for a spot and has an option left, so he could open the season at Triple-A Columbus. The same goes for Jess Todd, who is all but certain to open the year in Columbus unless several injuries crop up this spring.
With a six man bullpen and Lewis/Todd in Columbus, the last bullpen spot would come down to one of Hector Ambriz, Mitch Talbot, Jeremy Sowers, and Aaron Laffey, with one of Laffey, Talbot, and Sowers being the fifth starter. Ambriz to me is a non-factor as I don't see any way he cracks the bullpen in a long man role over the other three, so to me Ambriz either is sent back to the Diamondbacks or if he impresses the Indians will work out a trade to acquire his full rights and send him to Columbus.
Talbot is the odds on favorite to me to be the 5th starter seeing how the Indians just completed a trade for him this offseason when they sent catcher Kelly Shoppach to the Rays. I actually think Laffey in the short term best fits in the long man role because of his versatility, and we sure are going to need someone reliable in the role to help in the first two months of the season while the rotation hashes itself out. I think Laffey could be in for a role similar to Jake Westbrook's in 2004 where he went in as the long man in the pen, but provided nice insurance for when a starter couldn't go long and eventually he found his way into the rotation full time that year by mid-May. Sowers looks to be the odd man out, though there is a chance he could open the year on the disabled list as the seeds have already been plated for that to occur based on reports he has had some arm discomfort this spring.
If they go with a seven man bullpen, which is likely, then the other spot should be a battle between Lewis, Todd and Ambriz. In this scenario if the Indians really like Ambriz and they can’t complete a fair trade with the Diamondbacks for his full rights, you could see him open in the big league bullpen with both Todd and Lewis in Columbus.
Ken Y. wrote: Will the Indians convert Rafael Perez into a starter?
Me: The Indians have hinted during the offseason that Perez could be moved back into a starter's role at some point this season. While I happen to think it is very unlikely to occur, in the chance it does it would not happen until at least the second half of the season as he needs to be built back up to handle a starter's role, something he has not done since the early part of 2006 in the minor leagues.
Quite frankly, I don't think Perez has the pitches to be a successful starter, so I don't know what the Indians are thinking here other than that they are just keeping their options open. With Perez being out of options they may look at every alternative to keep him on the roster if his bullpen struggles continue well into the coming season. His best pitch is his slider, a pitch which plays up in short stints out of the bullpen, but his fastball is barely average and he lacks any real quality third pitch. So, it doesn't appear starting him makes any sense other than pure desperation in a last ditch attempt to salvage his career with the Indians if he continues to struggle in the bullpen to where maybe stretching him out in the rotation for awhile can fix some of his consistency and command issues.
Eric T. wrote: Tony how far away are [Josh Judy and Zach Putnam] from contributing to the big league team? Could we see them at some point this year?
Me: With both in big league camp, they are most definitely considered big league options at some point this year. Both have vaulted to the top of the Indians depth chart among relief prospects yet to make their major league debut, and both could get that chance this year if things go right.
That said, unless the Indians find themselves in contention which would pressure them to promote them quicker, both will likely not be in Cleveland this year. The Indians just have too many other bullpen options to sort through this season as they look to build some semblance of a bullpen for 2011 and beyond. Anything can happen, but there are roster implications to consider too since Putnam does not need to be "rostered" until after the 2011 season, while Judy will need to be rostered after this season to protect him from the Rule 5 Draft.
With that in mind, and considering there are only 40 major league roster spots, it seems very unlikely Putnam is added to the 40-man until sometime in 2011 unless he is just lights out and the Indians have an urgent need for bullpen help this season. Since Judy needs to be added to the roster anyway this coming offseason, he really could be added at anytime this year. I think in order to avoid possibly wasting an option on either player this year they would not be added to the big league roster until near the end of August or early September, much like what the Indians did with outfielder Michael Brantley last year.
Bruce C.: Does [the Indians GM change] mean anything except new titles?
Me: Shapiro is a good GM. This team was very good from a talent standpoint from 2005-2008, but two of those years they bombed because of a hellacious bullpen. He has surely made his mistakes, but I don't see very many other current GMs doing a better job with the limited resources he has to work with. And anyone that thinks Antonetti will simply be Shapiro clone may want to rethink their position a little bit. Yes, they seem alike in a lot of ways, but so is the case when the understudy is working for his "boss" and really can't open up and do as he chooses until he has control. I mean, Shapiro was viewed as a "Hart Clone" back when he was handpicked to succeed John Hart when Hart stepped down in 2001. Look how different Shapiro turned out to be. So, while it may seem like more of the same, I think we need to see Antonetti in the GM chair first before we can accurately assess whether it will just be business as usual like under Shapiro, or if he may bring something different to the table.
Salcedo photo courtesy of Perfect Game USA
Everything on this site is free, but for those interested in making any monetary contributions to help support the stability and growth of this site please click on the "Donate" button below.
2 comments:
From a developmental standpoint, the Branyan signing is puzzling, certainly. LaPorta, Brown, Brantley, and Marte will all receive fewer ABs and for LaPorta and Brantley this is lost time adjusting to big league pitching. For Marte and Brown this is lost time figuring out if they are worthwhile and/or lost time piling up some stats so we can spin them off for at least something.
But another thing worth considering is Branyan's organizational value. If Branyan puts up another monster first-half from a counting-stats persepctive, the Indians could certainly spin him (and his very friendly contract) for a prospect. If he simply goes about his career averages, he hits a fair share of HR's, strikes out a ton and OBPs around .360. There is still some value to this; Jack Cust keeping his job is proof of that.
Simply put, the Indians saw an underpriced asset (a Major League HR producer available for $2mm) and pounced on it. Assuming that Acta gives a reasonable rotation to the missed-ABs among the group, you are taking only 100 or so away from each of the guys listed above, fewer if/when he is dealt.
I would be surprised if Branyan isn't dealt at the deadline and paying approx $1mm for half a season of TTO upside potential and a prospect of our choice or $2mm for a full season of TTO and a shot at a supplemental pick (he has an outside chance of being Type B FA due to his counting stats from the past year) sounds like a reasonable signing to me.
Regardless, I can't help but feel sorry for Jordan Brown. He is projected to EQA perfectly evenly with Branyan, he is younger and still has that "what if?" breakout potential. It's a shame that the Indians are looking at everything he can't do when they should be focusing on everything he can.
I'm curious, I keep seeing that Laporta and Marte would take the place of Hafner and Branyan in the lineup against left handers, when it looks like Laporta's stats against lefties have been awful. Hafner's were as well last year, though historically he's fared well. Branyan of course strikes out nearly 50% of the time against lefties. Should we disregard Laporta's past performance, and assume he'll even out or eventually hit LHP better than RHP? Otherwise you're talking about "platooning" with 3 guys who based on past performance could all be expected to hit around .210 against LHP
Post a Comment