Simply put, the Indians stink and the Cavs rule – WFNY Podcast – 2015-07-27
July 28, 2015Tragic Tribe, Bad Brady, and a Touch of Hip-Hop: While We’re Waiting…
July 29, 2015On the heels of a five-game losing streak, and with talk of possible trades circulating for days, the Indians made a move Tuesday evening, sending left-handed outfielder David Murphy, as well as cash considerations, to the Los Angeles Angels in exchange for Double-A shortstop Eric Stamets.
Twenty-three-year-old Stamets is a native of Dublin, Ohio who bats and throws right-handed. He was ranked as the No. 22 prospect in the Angels’ farm system by @MLBPipeline, who reports that Stamets built a reputation as a strong shortstop in college (University of Evansville), with tremendous defensive tools, good instincts and game awareness. He also possesses above-average speed, which adds to his defensive range. Behind the plate, Stamets leaves the Arkansas Travelers batting .248 with 53 hits, three homeruns and 23 RBIs in 214 at-bats. He was the Angels’ sixth-round selection in the 2012 amateur draft.
Murphy was pulled from the Indians’ lineup shortly before Tuesday night’s game against Kansas City, but remained in the team’s dugout at game time. The team made the announcement official around 8:30 p.m. that evening. Murphy, known affectionately to teammates and fans as “Good Guy David Murphy,” leaves the Indians batting .296 with a .344 on-base percentage, .437 slugging percentage, five homers and 27 RBIs in 84 games, with 192 of his 206 at-bats coming against right-handed pitchers.
With the MLB’s trade deadline quickly approaching — it’s this Friday, July 31 at 4 p.m. EST — all eyes are back on the Indians to see if the team makes any other roster moves.
Here’s Cleveland Indians’ GM Chris Antonetti discussing the disappointing position the Tribe find themselves trading veteran players.
26 Comments
Don’t see this trade helping the Indians. They traded a dependable veteran in Murphy for a double A shortstop. Even though we already have our shortstop of the future in Lindor. Our problem has been offense. Or lack there of. This is the trade that will improve it? Sorry, but this is another poor trade by our FO once again. It’s obvious they have given up on this season and our now just looking to dump our veterans to free up money.
Can someone sprinkle just a little logic on this whole thing for me?
Less $$ to pay Murphy??
Well, you see…..
Nope, got nothing….
They sent cash too. Wow.
Yeah, it’s actually pretty simple. Think of this trade the same way as the Cavs trading Haywood for a trade exception. They traded an expiring asset (Murphy would be worth nearly nothing at the trade deadline next year if that came to pass) for a longer-term asset (Stamets is considered MLB-ready defensively – think Didi Gregorius).
So, while Stamets value in MLB is likely greater than his value to the Indians specifically (Lindor + SS organizational depth), it doesn’t matter as he is an asset for future trades (or potentially allows us to trade one of those other SS).
Hate to say “typical Indians”, but typical Indians.
AND we had to send cash? Well…. I guess….
Is it a smart move? Yeah, probably. We traded a guy that most likely wouldn’t be here next season for a middling prospect who, if you believe the scouting reports, can help the major league club sooner rather than later (albeit most likely as an Aviles style bench player). Keeping Murphy would have maybe got us half a win. And hopefully this indicates that we’ll be moving away from a platoon right field next season and find a real, full-time solution. But still, this move does hurt our chances in the ever-deteriorating 2015 campaign, albeit only slightly.
I will say, I do find it funny how many people are lamenting the loss of the great, reliable veteran David Murphy. That’s not what people were calling him when he was struggling a year ago.
Why shouldn’t they give up on this season? It’s over. They’re awful, and I’m fine with them trying to get something for guys that aren’t long-term solutions.
One fairly minor point – I disagree that Murphy would be worth nearly nothing at the trade deadline next year. Granted, it’s probably unlikely, but if we picked up his contract and if Murphy was having the same season he is now, the situation would be pretty much identical to the situation now…
Now: owed the remainder of $6M plus a $500K buyout on a $7M option
Then: owed the remainder of $7M
I’m assuming the Angels aren’t picking up that option. So, in theory, the Tribe would basically be trading the same thing: an aging vet who can contribute as a platoon player owed about $3M.
Oh, and I read somewhere that the hope is that Stamets will be able to play all over the field. Everybody wants the new Ben Zobrist. Except the Royals. Who wanted the old one.
Yes, this trade isn’t about improving our offense (or team) in 2015. As with every trade I can think of, minus the Jimenez trade, this is about trading guys who are leaving to get guys who might help in the future.
Well, Zobrist hits much, much better than Stamets likely ever will. If he does end up a super-utility guy (quite possible), then Alexei Amarista is the more apt comparison (despite the larger stature).
You could be quite right, but I actually think the Angels pick up that option. $7mil for a good platoon bat off the bench is pretty cheap and I don’t see them finding a better guy for that money.
True… I guess it depends who is available in free agency next season, but I don’t know if I’d call Murphy’s contract a deal though. I think I’d categorize it more as fair, to both player and club. Especially considering Raburn-esque inconsistency from year to year.
I posted an MLB video of a scout breaking down Stamets over in the other thread. Granted it was before the start of this season, but he actually felt there was a real possibility (aka reasons to think) that his bat could still come around.
But yeah, seems like a high floor guy. Worse case, a defensive specialist.
It’s still July. How is it over? The idea when you trade is to get something of equal value for the player you are trading. Not even close with this deal. Angels got the better of this deal.
Thank you for that, mgbode (et al). Genuinely helpful for me. My brain was formulating something that wanted to sound like what you said, but just couldn’t pull it off.
For real? Because they’d have to go 42-20 to close the season to get to 88 wins, which is a pretty reasonable estimate of what it would take to make the playoffs. Given that this team isn’t capable of doing that (seriously, they’re not – the offense alone will prevent it), it’s best to at least try to get something for your non-core pieces.
Trades are really not designed “to get something of equal value for the player you are trading.” (However you’d determine that, I guess). Trades are designed to get rid of something you can’t use properly to try to get something that may be of use to you. Whether you like the trade or not is up to you, but at the very least the front office had realized that they’re not making the playoffs, and it’s time to look to next year and forward (again, regardless of your feelings about that strategy).
We had to send cash because no one wanted to pick up his buyout next year, so we had to pay for it. That’s how lowly Murphy is thought of around the league.
Feelings has nothing to do with it. Most teams make trades to help improve the team. In our case, it’s dump salaries. Your argument makes as much sense as these trades. I have no issue with trades themselves. It’s who we get for them. Now Moss is gone, although he wasn’t earning his keep anyway. But, we dump two veterans for a double A shortstop with a bum shoulder and a single A pitcher. These two trades so far are nothing more than salary dumps. And you say the FO is looking to next year. Neither of these two players we have got will be major league ready next year. You sound exactly like someone who works for our FO.
Salary dumps for smaller budget teams are really important, especially when you dump under-performing assets. It does set things up for next year in that it frees up that money to potentially add a piece that will be productive (looks like they dropped about $13mm in payroll for next year with these moves). Forgive me if I’m not that concerned with trading away a total of a 0.5 WAR in a throwaway season for whatever we could get.
How are those rose colored glasses? This sets us up for nothing. While other teams are trading for players who will help them “now”, we trade for players who might help us in a couple years. Forgive me me if I don’t fall for all the bs the FO feeds us. Never did, never will.
They’re wonderful, and it makes it easier to realize that budget management is a real thing on this team We traded away guys that are playing at a replacement-level, so I’m not too concerned with the notion of getting guys who help us “now.” Statistically speaking, anyone could replace them and be as productive. Too bad you can’t see it – maybe you need a pair of glasses, as well.
I see just fine, thank you.
Moss was the only one playing below his potential. Murphy and Rezp were doing just fine. Clean your lens
I’ll need to so I can see through the tears of trading a platoon outfielder. Boo hoo.
No need to cry. You will be okay.
Very mature reply. How old are you? 10?