Undervalued Pitcher #2
The Mark Mulder for Dan Haren trade probably stands as Billy Beane’s most recent heist of talent, where he turned an expensive, aging, and injured star into a cheap, healthy, and more effective hurler, and got the Cardinals to chip in their best prospect and a quality reliever to boot. Dan Haren has been a big part of the A’s success the past two years, and stands as an example of how to build a pitching staff.
There’s another potential Dan Haren who will almost certainly be available in trade this winter. He turns 25 this winter, has experienced significant success in the minor leagues with good command of three above average pitches, but has been inconsistent during his major league trials to date. Thanks to a 7.67 ERA in 54 innings this year, he has pitched himself out of contention for a job in his current organization’s rotation, and after seven years with the same club, he’s running out of chances.
Ladies and gentleman, Angel Guzman. A former top prospect who has battled health problems and missed almost the entire 2005 season rehabbing from the dreaded labrum surgery, he came back this year and was quite successful in the International League, but failed to retire hitters with the same ease when given a shot with the Cubs. His velocity is still in the same 90-94 range it was before the arm problems, but his curve hasn’t had the same bite and his change is coming in a bit flatter.
Even with those problems, Guzman actually hasn’t pitched all that badly for the Cubs, or at least not as poorly as his ERA would suggest. He’s missed plenty of bats (58 K in 54 IP), which is a good indicator that his stuff is good enough, but he struggled with his command. He walked too many guys and threw a lot of hittable pitches even when he was in the zone. He just couldn’t make the ball go where he wanted.
In the minors, however, he had no such problems. His command in the PCL was just fine, indicating that his problems were more mental than physical. Overall, Guzman had a pretty successful season, throwing 100 innings for the first time as a professional and experiencing some success in Triple-A and making major leaguers swing and miss during his debut season in the majors.
So why would the Cubs be willing to trade him? Because, like every other organization in baseball, they have a finite amount of patience. After four years of high expectations, numerous trips to the disabled list, and a lot of rehab, they have a 24-year-old who gave up nearly a run per inning this season. Teams get tired of waiting for guys to turn the corner, and after a while, frustration grows. If you need a local example, Gil Meche. He’s gotten on our nerves for years with his inability to take a leap forward, and coming off his best season in years, we’re all looking forward to seeing him leave.
The Cubs are certain to spend money on a starting pitcher this offseason to go with returning starters Zambrano, Prior, Hill, and Marshall. They’re running quite low on patience waiting for Angel Guzman to put it all together, much like the Cardinals ran low on patience waiting for Dan Haren, and cashed him in for a “sure thing” in Mark Mulder.
This isn’t to say the Cubs will give him away. The title of the post is “undervalued pitcher”, not “non valued pitcher”, so the Mariners will have to give up something in return to get Guzman from the Cubs. He won’t come free, but the cost in talent will certainly be less than the cost in salary of signing a comparable free agent starter. Angel Guzman isn’t much different than Ted Lilly, Gil Meche, or Adam Eaton. Instead of giving up a mutliyear, multimillion dollar contract, the Mariners can get their high upside, high risk end of rotation starter in trade, then pay him nothing the next two years.
He might not turn into the new Dan Haren. He hasn’t taken that step forward yet. But taking risks on guys who haven’t yet made the leap is the best way to build the end of your starting rotation, and taking a shot on Angel Guzman would be a significantly better idea than throwing money at a free agent with similar question marks.
It might be heresy to the local media, but I’d be totally fine entering next year with Rodrigo Lopez and Angel Guzman as my fourth and fifth starters.
Trade Jake Woods for him.
Funny, Coach. I wonder if that would work?
Here is a big Hear, Hear. for the cheap approach to the rotation. To roughly paraphrase and transpose a previous sentiment, if it’s good enough for Beane, it’s a good idea. This is how Oakland does it, and this is how the M’s should do it – especially within context of this free agent pool.
If all went to plan this offseason (the intelligent, blog-generated plan), the M’s could land Matszu, Lopez, and Guzman to play nice with Felix and Washedup. Having the Soriano = starter option is some nice insurance for this little plan.
Hadn’t even thought about Guzman. That’s a great idea — I hope Bavasi takes it and runs with it.
But what would Chicago want in return? Jeremy Reed? Juan Pierre is a FA (and has said he’s interested in a job across town the White Sox, which would make sending Reed back to Chicago all the more poetic), but Reed wouldn’t necessarily fill that hole. I sure wouldn’t give up Jones for an oft-injured #5 starter with command issues.
Jeremy Reed looks a lot like a tradable commodity to me. He’s a Proven Veteran who’s expendable here. But trading a known like Reed for an unknown like Guzman might look too risky to the front office, even if it isn’t.
G-Man, what exactly has Jeremy Reed proven?
G-Man, what exactly has Jeremy Reed proven?
Other than that the Freddy Garcia trade didn’t pan out for us.
I’m guessing the number of managers who would give Guzman a fair shot at a rotation spot is kinda small. I’ll defer to y’all smarter than I, but is Grover that kind of guy?
It might be heresy to the local media, but I’d be totally fine entering next year with Rodrigo Lopez and Angel Guzman as my fourth and fifth starters.
Sure, why not? Especially since you could quite possibly bring in Lopez on a spring training NRI and thus keep a 40 man roster spot open, and thus actually have a competition for the backend instead of having the “oh, hey, we don’t have 6 legit starters, so here’s your rotation spot” routine. I think having Lopez, Baek, Guzman and Feierabend duke it out for the back end of the rotation would be just spiffy… and it would mean you’d have more money to do things elsewhere.
One of these years, after everyone has given up on him, Jeremy Reed is going to have a breakout year. But who knows when.
Is Guzman out of options yet?
Could he (worse case scenario) be stockpiled in Tacoma if he doesn’t show any improvement next spring if he was aquired. Or is he like Jake Woods, where he’s out of options and has to be in Seattle or out of the organization.
If he is out of options, wouldn’t that drop his value slightly? If he is still giving up a run per inning next year then what? Especially if you gave up “something” for him.
#8: I’m guessing the number of managers who would give Guzman a fair shot at a rotation spot is kinda small. I’ll defer to y’all smarter than I, but is Grover that kind of guy?
Since we’re discussing the Mariners 2007 rotation, I think that Hargrove’s inclinations are irrelevant.
Oooh, and I forgot Soriano. Even better- that’s a reasonably deep pool of talent on that end. SOMEBODY is likely to become an inexpensive pleasant surprise out of that group.
I just can’t get on the Rodrigo Lopez bandwagon. He’s too much of a Ryan Franklin type to want to go through that again. While Safeco would make him look better, I’d assume see someone who’s not so much “pitch to contact.”
I should learn how to code Sarcasm HTML, I guess. I capitalized Proven Veteran for a reason. He’s been a regular player at a relatively important defensive position, which is enough to get some other GM needing a CF to take a hard look at him.
Bavasi hasn’t won any awards for trades like the Randy Winn deal, when he last exchanged a unneeded outfielder for a formerly injured pitcher. Hence, my second sentence in #5. I fear that he might hesitate to send away someone that is known and probably perceived to have real value by some of the folks above him (from among his superiors and the ownership group) for the next Jesse Foppert (and yes, I know we got JoeJessica in that deal, too).
It isn’t simply about what intellegent minds here think, it’s about what the guys running the 30 MLB organizations operate on.
One of these years, after everyone has given up on him, Jeremy Reed is going to have a breakout year. But who knows when.
I’m still waiting for Todd Hollandsworth’s breakout year- and it seems to me Hollandsworth’s skill set is pretty comparable to Reed’s: tweener LHB 4th OF whose glove isn’t really CF-caliber, and whose bat isn’t really corner OF-caliber, doesn’t hit LHP, and his career path is starting to resemble Hollandsworth’s- disappointing the organization he debuted with and can’t stay healthy.
One could argue that Reed has somewhat more impressive minor league stats- except Hollandsworth was a younger player at every level he played at, and Hollandsworth’s AAA year at age 21 in an easier PCL park probably is a wash with Reed’s age 23 year in AAA split between the IL and PCL.
You might also consider Reed has to develop to actually REACH the .275/.330/.440 level that Todd Hollandsworth has been at for his major league career.
That doesn’t mean Jeremy Reed isn’t a useful player- a 4th OF with his skillset, in a semi-platoon with a RHB and able to fill in in CF is quite useful, and maybe he does turn into Mark Kotsay (it’s less likely now than it was, but I think it could still happen). I’m just not convinced he’s going to develop a lot past “tweener, not quite everyday OF”.
Seems like a low risk, depending on what we give up. I could see him as part of a package deal with a few players (Reed, etc) going the Cubs way and some pieces coming back.
As far as Soriano, I just don’t see him filling out the starting rotation. How many innings has he pitched in the last 3 years? I count 71’ish Major League innings. I am not sure he could last an entire season. Especially since he already experienced problems this year. I just wouldn’t count on it.
So his K rate is 9.6/G – that’s real good. But his walk rate is 5.8/G, and 6.8/G if you count the hit batsmen, which is real bad. OK, so 54IP is nothing, really, and if it’s nerves (which, based on his MiLB stats, it is) that’s ok. What’s a little more concerning is his LD% and GB%, which are nearly identical at 30. Is that something that could also be chalked up to first time call-up jitters?
As far as Soriano, I just don’t see him filling out the starting rotation. How many innings has he pitched in the last 3 years? I count 71′ish Major League innings. I am not sure he could last an entire season. Especially since he already experienced problems this year. I just wouldn’t count on it.
Which is why you don’t just give him a spot, but make him earn it in a competition. If he falters, tap the next best pitcher, which you WILL still have around. I don’t see anything wrong with that strategy.
I can’t find any extended minor league stats to see what his peripherals were like in Iowa this year. I think it’s been brought up here before, but there’s no such resource on the web, is there?
This is what I don’t understand about Soriano entering the rotation: He was super-effective as a reliever in 2006, but STILL wore down as the season progressed and had to be put on the DL with arm problems. Aren’t we taking a pretty huge risk of destroying a valuable known commodity for the possibility of getting a number 2-3 starter? Is that really worth it?
6. He also proved how selfish Ichiro is and how bad of a manager Grover is.
This is what I don’t understand about Soriano entering the rotation: He was super-effective as a reliever in 2006, but STILL wore down as the season progressed and had to be put on the DL with arm problems. Aren’t we taking a pretty huge risk of destroying a valuable known commodity for the possibility of getting a number 2-3 starter? Is that really worth it?
Dunno…but I think it’s worth it to note that a) this WAS his first year back from surgery and he’ll have better endurance next year, and b) relief pitching might be MORE stressful on his arm than starting.
after that announcement, that means 34 starts by jake woods
Well, Lincoln did say in his letter that upgrading the starting rotation was the top priority. If only he’d stopped there before saying Grover was staying…
Guzman – His command in the PCL was just fine, indicating that his problems were more mental than physical. Good Golly, that sounds like another pitcher I
Mecheknow.Guzman – His command in the PCL was just fine, indicating that his problems were more mental than physical. Good Golly, that sounds like another pitcher I
Mecheknow.And both may do some good with a change of scenery
Hargrove comments deleted. See other threads.
Um, labrum surgery? Name one pitcher who has really returned tore-surgery form.
No thanks.
#28 um, chris carpenter
Well I like Guzman more than Lopez. Picking up guys like this really is an art and I think this guy looks pretty good. The labrum surgery is not a good sign but it might just scare the crap out of everybody enough that his cost is in the right price range. His year with the cubs was pretty ugly last year and even his ERA in AAA wasn’t very good (good for us) which might make him more of a bargain.
If you look at his BB rates by month, you’ll see that his BB/9 were falling throughout the season which may support Dave’s “nerves theory”. If I remember correctly, it seems that shoulder surgeries are much more likely to affect a pitcher’s control so hopefully we aren’t misreading warning signs. A small problem I see is that his batted ball chart shows alot of balls going to right field and from his MLB experience it looks like he’ll be an extreme flyball pitcher. I don’t have a problem with this as long as he is striking out a guy per inning so its probably not a big deal. It would be great if this guy was a lefty but oh well.
So guys like this don’t come really cheap even if they have an ERA above 7. I don’t think that Reed would get him alone. Maybe Reed and Woods. I’m not sure. I guess I just don’t have a good idea of what other teams value most of our players at.
Yes! Let’s get a cheaper Meche!
Cubs fan here. Guzman is indeed a fly ball pitcher who would benefit from a move to Safeco (from Wrigley). He’s the former jewel of the system, but injuries have meant that several other prospects have passed him up. I imagine the Cubs would deal him, probably at a low cost. I can assure you that one of this organization’s canny abilities is to sell low. Plus, the Cubbies have multiple young pitchers who may or may not be ready for prime time to compete for the back end of the rotation next year. Marmol, Mateo, Ryu, Gallagher, and Veal to name a few. Everyone seems to be writing Marshall into the starting rotation for 2007, but I’m not so sure he’ll make the cut.
But anyway…Guzman. Never underestimate the power of Dusty Baker to get into a young player’s head and destroy his confidence. Just getting Guzman out of the organization may do wonders for his psyche. I thought Dusty was going to ruin Rich Hill, too, but he seems to have worked things out. I think Guzman is a good guy to take a flyer on; he still has pretty good stuff. Got some questionable 2B prospects to peddle? Jim Hendry loves stocking up on 2B talent.
I can’t find any extended minor league stats to see what his peripherals were like in Iowa this year. there’s no such resource on the web, is there?
Not sure what you’re looking for exactly, but Dave’s link on Guzman’s name as well as The Baseball Cube and Minor League Splits are pretty detailed.
As a Cubs fan, I’ve been pretty frustrated but Guzman too, so I’m encouraged to hear Dave think he may turn the corner.
I’m all in favor of dealing for Guzman. Moves like this—low- to mid-price deal for guys with physical talent but checkered career trajectories—are the actions which net major talent gains. As #30 says, getting the few good ones to be found this way is an art, and Bill B. is pretty artless, but. Labrum surgery and poor command seem to go together; certainly so for Meche. Still, if we got back a cheap Gil Meche clone for a #4 starter with whom we weren’t already totally out of patience, it would be a good-value move. Guzman is ahead of Feierabend who needs time in AAA, is surely better than Woods and Livingston, and offers a contrast in risks to Baek, with good stuff but poor command. I say do it.
Bela – IIRC (from “Saving the Pitcher”), elbow injuries affect control, shoulder injuries affect velocity.
Guess I had it backwards.
It occurs to me, Dave, that if your 4 and 5 were Lopez and Guzman, you’d only be signing Matsuzaka at the top of the rotation…and thus your need to trade Sexson to fit the roster in the salary budget (as you explained in your previous post) would be diminished. It’s hard for me to see Lopez costing more than 1-2 million, tops.
I’m spending a lot of money on someone else.
That makes sense- but were Sexson not able to be moved or only able to be moved in a “please take our overpaid crap back or write us a big check” deal that you’d probably want to decline, it wouldn’t kill your plans to upgrade the rotation.
Yeah, well, I almost hesitated to use the “name one pitcher..” line because it is so easy to get caught with an exception. Mea culpa. My larger point holds: teams should avoid pitchers with a history of labrum-repair surgeries as much as they should avoid giving out long-term contracts to veteran pitchers. The success rate is atrocious.
Dave, is the main advantage to Guzman (over, say, Meche) that he’s cheap?