Comments on: Washburn to Detroit

By: DMZ

DMZ — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 21:35:22 +0000

Didn’t someone else report the M’s wanted Joba/Hughes? Pretty much all of these leaks appear to be attempts to make the M’s look unreasonable and justify the Yankees not getting Jarrod.

By: joser

joser — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 21:32:29 +0000

According to Ken Rosenthal (I think) on the Saturday Fox broadcast, when the Yankees inquired about Washburn Zduriencik asked for Austin Jackson, their top prospect. So he clearly was looking for a “quality long range prospect” if he could find a team desperate enough to deal one (or he just wanted to tell the Yankees to eff off).

By: joser

joser — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 20:33:37 +0000

Washburn will not be a type A free agent.
He will get something like $12-$15 in arbitration.
He won’t get offered more than $10M per year in free agency.

Thus draft picks were not part of the equation. Seattle wouldn’t have offered arbitration, and Detroit won’t offer him arbitration either. This is as pure a rental as you’ll see.

Washburn might be interested in coming back to Seattle, but he’ll probably get offered more by some other team, and Zduriencik certainly won’t get into a bidding war (if he bids at all). His first choice would be the Twins (since they play just a couple hours from his Wisconsin home) but the Twins probably won’t offer him the best deal either (though he might take a lower offer to go there, depending on where he falls between the opposing poles of Boras and family).

I think the Mâ€™s should have either traded Wash for a quality long range prospect who may be 3 or 4 years away but atleast has all-star possibilities. A guy like Hicks from Minnesota. If you donâ€™t get a top pick type player then wait the season out and collect a first round pick as comp.

I’m sure Zduriencik would’ve taken a guy like that if he was available. For Washburn, such a player clearly was not. Zduriencik is only “sacrificing the future” in some imaginary world where Bavasi-like GMs were on the other side of potential trades.

By: DMZ

DMZ — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 17:26:29 +0000

Washburn will likely be a type A free agent

He will not.

By: Seattleken

Seattleken — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 17:19:53 +0000

Dave I think with a solid year last year and a good one this year Washburn will likely be a type A free agent and no way at his age will he accept a one year arbitration deal he will want 3 year 30 million deal and he will easily get 3/30 on the open market as a left handed pitcher with a solid career and a very good 2009.

I agree Zack got fair value for Washburn but I think he went for a MLB ready lefty with 4/5th starter potential, and those guys can get you to .500 but not contend. The M’s are two years away and I think he should have went for a higher upside A ball talent.

I rather have 4 + 0 =4 then 2+2 =4, as 2s are easier find and 2s are role players. Give me a high risk 4 anytime over 2 role players.

By: Sinking Away

Sinking Away — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 04:14:41 +0000

Thank you Jarrod Washburn, we wish you happiness in Detroit. Welcome Misters Luke French and Maurico Robles we wish you success in M’s uniforms for many years ahead.

By: Dave

Dave — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 03:39:29 +0000

A guy like Hicks from Minnesota. If you donâ€™t get a top pick type player then wait the season out and collect a first round pick as comp.

You weren’t going to get anything for Washburn after the season, because you can’t offer him arbitration (he’d accept, and become a massively overpaid budget buster), and as a Type B, the pick you were hoping to get would be in the 45-50 range anyway.

If you don’t like this trade, you are using bad logic. This isn’t a case where reasonable people can disagree. This is 2+2=4. If you think 2+2=5, well, you’re wrong.

By: Seattleken

Seattleken — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 02:57:16 +0000

I normally agree with the editors and majority of the posters but this time I don’t. I don’t think the M’s got anything of value back for Wash. French is not a top 5 prospect, hes a another typical 87mph lefty with below average stuff and good control. If he reaches his peak value hes Wash, a 10 win pitcher with a 4.30 era, who wont beat good teams. Robles has at best a chance to be a set up lefty as hes too small and does not have enough control to start.

I think the M’s should have either traded Wash for a quality long range prospect who may be 3 or 4 years away but atleast has all-star possibilities. A guy like Hicks from Minnesota. If you don’t get a top pick type player then wait the season out and collect a first round pick as comp.

I am sad Jack wants to win 81 games this year at the cost of the future. He gave away trading value and did get a player back that helps a team create a winner in 2011.

By: scott19

scott19 — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 22:35:38 +0000

well, itâ€™s still Felix and the Four Dwarves, but when the dwarves can give you a lot of consistently league-average innings, you can win with that.

Agreed. Though it’s a nice luxury to have a “superstar” rotation at your disposal if you’re a GM or manager, I think of how the ’99 Mets won 97 games and got to the NLCS playing blue chip defense behind a pitching staff with Al Leiter and (a 40-year-old) Orel Hershiser as “co-aces”.

By: joser

joser — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 22:30:21 +0000

One of the guys on that Detroit site basically keeps repeating variations of

It’s experience we got. With a good ERA

Yes, that’s a quote. Hilarious.

Jarod Washburn was worth every bit of the free agaent contract we signed him to.

Well, it’s barely true and only because he’s been having this fantastic walk year:
Total contract dollars paid: ~$33.8M
Total value of Washburn’s contribution: $32.2M

But he could easily have started giving up long balls again and sucked back down into negative territory by the end of the season. Prior to this year, he was about $7M in the red.