There have been some passing comments mentioned about Brandon League possibly being a starter down the line so I thought I would address that along with a more thorough review of what he is as a player. League was drafted out of college a few years ago where he was a part time starter until his final season in which he finally was made a full time starter and pitched just under 100 innings.
Since being drafted, League has spent the majority of his time in the bullpen, with occasional attempts in the rotation to see if he could stick there. Unfortunately, his over-reliance on his fastball has made him a poor fit so far, though he does has a secondary pitch that he's been working on for a while and has shown flashes at times of being useful.
Yes, League has shown some electric stuff at times. That secondary pitch he's shown off can be superb breaking ball and he has a fastball that can touch 100. His issues have always been spotty command and frankly, it's shown little to no improvement over the past three seasons.
To be a successful starter, League needs time to develop those secondary offerings for sure, but working on those means working on his fastball less and it's not like his fastball is a finished product. It gets some good movement and it certainly has velocity, but his control over it has been come and go, at best.
In addition to the one-sidedness of his pitching repertoire, League would also need to prove that he can handle a bigger work load. He's never thrown more than 120 innings combined in any one season and even then has battled arm injuries so his future as a possible starter seems washy. If you wanted to try him there, one gets the impression that he might need a complete reboot, put into the Double-A rotation and pretend like the last couple years never happened.
League has upside, for sure. Somebody with that kind of stuff always will. Unless he takes a step forward with both his durability and his control however, he likely tops out as a 0.5-1 WAR player either in the pen or rotation.
Wait, one more thing...
I got my Brandons mixed up. Everything I wrote above is about Brandon Morrow.
It's common for us, as fans, to overvalue the potential of our prospects. Brandon Morrow's upside has been bandied about a lot post trade, and in the interest of fairness, I wanted to dump some reality* on the picture. People imagine Morrow as he was during his first start against the Yankees. Sure, he has that potential. But he also has Edwin Jackson potential. The Edwin Jackson that took years to show any real improvement.
*In full disclosure, reality may contain large amounts of rationalization.
Yes, Brandon Morrow has potential to be a dynamite #2 rotation guy. But the odds that he would turn into that while under team control are just so far out there. The notion that Morrow's a starter is basically been built out of 14 starts he made in 2005-6 and that he has a good fastball. He's never shown that he can handle the innings. His fastball, the one pitch he constantly sticks with, hasn't gotten better. He walks a ton of people and he's been put through the wringer as far as confidence goes.The far more likely outcome is that Brandon Morrow becomes about as valuable as Brandon League is right now.
To be clear, I am not enamored with this trade. But giving up on Morrow is not like giving up on Adam Jones. It's like giving up on Matt Thornton or Francisco Cruceta. Sometimes it bites you in the ass, sometimes the guy never takes that step forward or he gets hurt.
Furthermore, there's a decent chance that Brandon League is more valuable to the team in 2010 than Brandon Morrow would be. First of all, League is a better reliever. He balances a few less strikeouts with notably better control and an extreme advantage in ground balls. And if he maintains the gains he took in 2009 with his new splitter, then watch out, he's better than Aardsma. League comes with his own injury and regression concerns as well of course, but the injury seems to have been of a more isolated nature and was muscular, not ligament-related. And the dramatic difference in pitch selection in 2009 lends one hope of avoiding performance regression.
Morrow's slot in the rotation is now open, for now occupied with one of our plethora of back end fringey types like Jason Vargas or Doug Fister. There's also now a stocked bullpen which means Z's attention probably turns toward picking up one of the handful of veteran or injury-risk starters still hanging around, any of whom are likely better bets than Morrow.
It's not a fabulous trade, but if you are rational about what Brandon Morrow is, then I think you'll see this isn't a fleecing. A dynamite #2 rotation guy is what Morrow's ceiling was when drafted, I'm not sure he's any closer to it now then he was then and other teams know that too.
7 recs | 173 comments
Pretty clever there, Matthew
making us all think one thing and then turning it all around on us.
nathaniel dawson - December 22, 2009
Spoiler alert!
ermac - December 22, 2009
Only if you read the comments before you read the post.
Which would be weird.
SethGrandpa - December 22, 2009
It's like eating dessert before finishing your vegetables!
Nadingo - December 22, 2009
Life is uncertain. Eat dessert first!
tibbar - December 22, 2009
if you first ate your broccoli and then were killed by a fire, boy would you be upset you didn't get that ice cream.
CapSea - December 22, 2009
I like broccolli. Making steamed broccolli right now actually.
mark sobba - December 22, 2009
Sounds like Jack Handy?
Tyler Jorgensen - December 22, 2009
We've seen repeatedly...
through interviews that Jack Z is the type of GM who consistently gains input from all of the coaches including Rick Adair. The team knows Morrow better than anyone, so I will defer to their judgment on this one.
PattyB - December 22, 2009
In Jack We Trust I guess...
EnglishMariner - December 22, 2009
After reading many of the comments today I was about to suggest something similar for your banner.
Kermit. - December 22, 2009
whatever
Poochie - December 22, 2009
I was going to say...
League’s control has gotten better.
tait644 - December 22, 2009
I was gonna say, League pitched ~140 innings as a starter in 03
Bearskin Rugburn - December 22, 2009
I was gonna say
Endy Chavez is a free agent.
kentroyals5 - December 22, 2009
Wait, whaaaaaa?
tait644 - December 22, 2009
Losing Morrow hurts more than it should because there's a feeling that he could've been much better at this point if he hadn't been rushed to the majors
Dewey N - December 22, 2009
It does feel like we've failed him as an organization
Gihyou - December 22, 2009
Maybe that's why I already like League more.
Morrow shouldn’t have been telling anyone whether he should be a closer or a starter. I, for one, am glad to see the Brandon Morrow era over.
coreyjro - December 22, 2009
I loved Brandon Morrow.
Half of it was I actually like him the other half was like having a retarded child that you wish could be normal and/or Tim Lincecum but still love him any way.
Slurvey - December 22, 2009
Yeah, I'm way more frustrated with the way he was handled than I am with this trade.
As it stands today, I’m OK with losing him, because I like League and have a hard time imagining Morrow being markedly better.
Teej - December 22, 2009
My thoughts exactly.
Eyeball Kid - December 22, 2009
I'm still shocked at the jack Z kool aid being chugged
I give him all the credit for good trades, but trying to spin off this morrow deal as a good one and trying to justify it,seems a bit homerish. I call out our GM, on both good and bad moves. IMO this was all for clearing out talent from the bavasi era, than looking at it from a talent/prospect value perspective. They couldve used morrow as a secondary piece for a larger deal which i’m sure many of us wouldve preffered. Than another right handed reliever and low A ball repeating OF. Worst case, keep morrow who still has more upside than any other sp slotting in that #3 rotation spot
MagicMike23 - December 22, 2009
The best way to ingratiate yourself with a community is to call them all homers and accuse them of groupthink!
pdb - December 22, 2009
Are you positive this is the right blog for you?
We value coherent thought here at Lookout Landing
Graham MacAree - December 22, 2009
There's a difference between "drinking the kool aid" and exploring a trade further in an attempt at making sense at it, despite not being a big fan of it.
gregrabble - December 22, 2009
You call out our GM on good moves?
ermac - December 22, 2009
Our GM cares that someone posting under a pseudonym calls him out?
oh wait
pdb - December 22, 2009
Then argue against it.
And by argue, I mean give legitimate reasons. Don’t just state platitudes and unprovable statements.
Matthew - December 22, 2009
I seem to recall a good amount of people on here
Not wanting Morrow included in last weeks deal and were actually happy he wasn’t. Now a week later saying he has not room on this roster and saying he’s not needed. Unless Jack Zis bring in naother FA Sp, then it does make sense. Didnn’t we refuse to give up morrow in an edwin jackson deal not so long ago? I’d easily take that deal looking back now
MagicMike23 - December 22, 2009
No we didn't want Saunders and we were amazed that Morrow wasn't included.
Morrow + for Cliff Lee is a decent trade.
Slurvey - December 22, 2009
That's not exactly what Matthew was advocating you do
Give solid, defensible reasons why this, in your opinion, was a bad deal. Use statistics. Don’t use anecdotes, and don’t use “people on here” – you have obviously staked out a position here, so advocate it and defend it.
pdb - December 22, 2009
This makes no sense.
-Not wanting to be part of the Lee package means nothing here.
-Nobody said he has no room on the roster
-Speculating on other trades is pretty pointless since the exact details are never known
And take time to spell check your comments.
We’re trying to be patient here, but you need to take a big step forward and meet us halfway. Regurgitating talking points without any rational thought applied will get you nowhere here.
Matthew - December 22, 2009
You have no idea what the specifics were on the Edwin Jackson deal.
It certainly wasn’t a one for one. Would you still prefer the deal if they were asking for Morrow + Lopez + Saunders? The Cliff Lee deal would still be considered a heist if Morrow was the third piece instead of Romero. The community here was excited Morrow wasn’t included because it was commonly assumed that he still had a fair amount of trade value, but in light of today’s trade that assumption may have been false.
sammy - December 22, 2009
Well put.
Teej - December 22, 2009
Completely agree, assuming you mean Ramirez and not Romero
gregrabble - December 22, 2009
Yeah, whoops.
sammy - December 22, 2009
OH NOES!
THE DEAL IS NOT GOOD AT ALL IT HAS UNDONE EVERYTHING JACK HAS DONE!
We all know Morrow has upside it’s the pit that scares us and the chances Morrow ever gets out isn’t good. I don’t like the deal but it isn’t a horrible move and it’s not enough to condemn Z forever.
Slurvey - December 22, 2009
The awesome moves are exactly why we try to justify the ones that seems confusing.
I’m willing to bet that Jack Zduriencik knows more about the players involved in this deal than I do.
Teej - December 22, 2009
No, that can't be true
you post to a fan-run Web site, so by default you know more than anybody that actually runs a team! Haven’t the interwebs taught you anything?
pdb - December 22, 2009
I think the Bavasi years made us think we could actually be GMs.
Teej - December 22, 2009
A few of the people in the LL/USSM community could have been better GMs than Bavasi.
mark sobba - December 22, 2009
*few people in the LL/USSM community could have been worse GMs than Bavasi.
PissedMick - December 22, 2009
Did you miss the part where Matthew said
“It’s not a fabulous trade, but if you are rational about what Brandon Morrow is, then I think you’ll see this isn’t a fleecing”?
I’m not thrilled either, but this isn’t a trade that makes me panic and run for the hills. Morrow has always had the potential to be a front-of-the-rotation starter, but I’d put the odds of him fulfilling that potential at this point as “slightly more likely than pigs flying”.
Jeff Nye - December 22, 2009
It is possible this is merely a precursor to other moves. We'll see.
It is also possible Morrow’s value around the league isn’t what you think it is.
Big Jared - December 22, 2009
Yes, because the USSM/LL authors and commenters have been gushing about this trade all day.
Chris Hafner - December 22, 2009
It's not about 'chugging Kool Aid'
It’s about giving a man the benefit of the doubt when he has clearly earned it.
Bottom line is, we don’t know the value of Morrow. It may have been significantly lower than we thought. And, in this case, Zduriencik deemed it fit to end the Brandon Morrow experiment in Seattle.
It really can’t be definitively labeled a ‘bad move’ if that’s the most talent Z felt he could receive for a player he no longer wanted in the organization. I’m not saying I like the speculated return – but every once in a while, you cut your losses.
cwel87 - December 22, 2009
PILE-ON
.Taylor - December 22, 2009
Good writeup
vivaelpujols - December 22, 2009
Sneaky Snake
insidetheparker - December 22, 2009
That's funny because
the whole time I was thinking “This sounds exactly like Morrow.” I’ve thought since the beginning that we pretty much got another Brandon Morrow with less upside but without the up and down past. Overall, I say meh.
Zwakamatsu - December 22, 2009
I wonder what made the Blue Jays switch League to a relief role.
Slurvey - December 22, 2009
I imagine it was because he didn't really have a second pitch.
Teej - December 22, 2009
True.
I was just looking at his pre-2003 Minor league numbers and he didn’t have control issues close to a 2.5BB/9IP his lack of a secondary offering can explain his dwindling Kper9 8.8/7.6/6.2
Slurvey - December 22, 2009
Er or the fact he started 38 in 01, 85 in 02 and 130 Innings in 2003
Slurvey - December 22, 2009
Well this is nice to know
I feel sick.
Johermyn Chavez was available in the Rule 5 draft. No one took him.
MagicMike23 - December 22, 2009
Late
gregrabble - December 22, 2009
And pretty damn irrelevant.
Matthew - December 22, 2009
But it is relevant
Chavez not getting drafted shows his value as a prospect. Chavez’s projected cumulative WAR for 2011-2015 is worth less than the headache of keeping him on the major league roster throughout 2010 to most GMs. That doesn’t make me feel sick, but it does give Chavez a comparative value to a Kanekoa Texeira.
LALOffice - December 22, 2009
No, not true.
He would learn nothing on the ML team as a bench warmer, AND take up a valuable roster spot. By wasting that year, he would become a worse prospect, and your team would be worse. I’m not convinced that a team would have picked up Carlos Triunfel on rule 5 last year for that same reason – you pick up him, great, but you spend a year with him on your ML squad and you’re essentially ensuring he becomes a worse, useless player.
CapSea - December 22, 2009
Remember, the guy is like 3 years of development away, not one year.
He would be legitimately terrible on an ML squad right now. And with all of that, you also lose an option and lose a year of service time. It would be a monumental waste of everything to pick a guy up that’s 3 years away from the majors on Rule 5.
CapSea - December 22, 2009
Great post Matthew, liked the twist.
Still dont like the trade, it basically requires League to be equal to Morrow for it to be even. Am I just overvaluing Morrow? Perhaps. I do like Morrow and want him to succeed. I feel that Morrow has more potential. (Of course, I’ve been following him for years and just heard of this League guy yesterday).
ARock - December 22, 2009
Meanwhile
Geoff Baker has his own take (more straight-forward) on overvaluing Brandon Morrow (while mentioning that we should have traded Clement/Balentien for a veteran reliever in 2007 for the umpteenth zillionth time).
I guess it is what it is. Welcome aboard, Brandon League.
ThundaPC - December 22, 2009
He still doesn't get the '07 team wasn't that good, does he?
And that the only strength of that team was an awesome bullpen. Oh Geoff.
SethGrandpa - December 22, 2009
He also apparently thinks
That the only difference between 2008 and 2009 is chemistry. Oh well.
Nadingo - December 22, 2009
It's just so funny.
Could he have possibly used stronger and less accurate wording? “Sacrifice the season”?
No Geoff, you’re right. Trading one of those guys for Al Reyes totally would’ve made up for more than the 6.5 games we finished out of a playoff spot. Revisionist history is just so much fun when you try to prove your idiocy was right.
SethGrandpa - December 22, 2009
I generally have a lot of respect for Geoff Baker,
but his continual rehashing of what has always been badly flawed analysis is pretty maddening. It would have been a dumb trade then, Geoff, and that has become even more clear in hindsight. Everybody makes mistakes, but please, please, stop reliving that one.
Chris Hafner - December 22, 2009
My favorite League-related memory
Is of a box score from a game Toronto played against Detroit on August 19th, 2005. Dave Bush and Brandon League pitched the first 4.2 innings of the game, giving up five home runs between the two of them and allowing all nine runs scored by Detroit.
The pitching line says it all (apologies for the formatting):
H/R/ER/BB/SO/HR
D. Bush…….5 / 4 / 2 / 1 / 3 / 2
B. League….5 / 5 / 5 / 1 / 0 / 3
Nadingo - December 22, 2009
Morrow - mishandleing
Feel bad for the kid. MLB is strewn with million dollar talent being lead by $.05 heads. Sorry Brandon wish you the best, sorry we screwed you so bad. Now become Matt Thorton so it will hurt a little, but not too bad.
Fat Ichiro - December 22, 2009
I think what this trade tells you more than anything is that the market for Morrow never materialized
Other teams clearly didn’t value him as much as we thought they would. Which is why the trade to Milwaukee never materialized.
OlSalty - December 22, 2009
Toronto rumors of flipping morrow to MIL for Gamel
MagicMike23 - December 22, 2009
stay off the weed
Fat Ichiro - December 22, 2009
Don't blame the weed.
Sec 108 - December 22, 2009
You disappoint me
chrisisasavage - December 22, 2009
Image size!
Matthew - December 22, 2009
Better?
chrisisasavage - December 22, 2009
yes because that trade makes sense for Toronto
Corco - December 22, 2009
I don't think any GM would make such a dick move
unless they didn’t want any further trade partners
ermac - December 22, 2009
Stop trolling
OlSalty - December 22, 2009
Repeated, with mod backing.
Stop trolling.
Matthew - December 22, 2009
Well done Matthew.
I’m happy to have League. He adds to our value as a team in 2010 which is great. Not a big amount of value added, but whenever you increase bottom line performance capabilities you have to at least be somewhat pleased.
I won’t miss Morrow or really any of the guys we have traded recently. In many ways GMZ is doing the guys a favor by letting them go start off fresh and clean somewhere else.
Sec 108 - December 22, 2009
Is this deal official yet?
fresnofan - December 22, 2009
No, not likely until tomorrow.
Matthew - December 22, 2009
What are the chances of it being someone other than Chavez?
fresnofan - December 22, 2009
7
CapSea - December 22, 2009
In pants? 'Cause that's not exactly slim
Kermit. - December 22, 2009
It's one chance for every day of the week! It's like the lottery!
CapSea - December 22, 2009
Can't win if you don't play!
Kermit. - December 22, 2009
There's been no counter to it so I'd guess very slim.
Slurvey - December 22, 2009
50/50
It either is or it isn’t.
sammy - December 22, 2009
The sun coming up tomorrow is 50/50
It either will or it won’t.
Paul AB - December 23, 2009
I'm depressed that Morrow was valued so low
But League does look to be solid reliever and contributer to the team and I like that Jack places value in our bullpen. Dave talked about how the marginal value of each win goes up as our true talent level gets high enough to be contenders. This could be a good win for 2010.
MT Olson - December 22, 2009
These are thoughts exactly.
mark sobba - December 22, 2009
That they are.
killer_ewok18 - December 22, 2009 via mobile
That only works if you think that League adds more value to the team than Morrow
I’m not sure he does, which is my problem with the trade.
mebpenguin - December 22, 2009
He may not add value.
But he secures value. Morrow is a wild card in 2010. League is a guarantee.
Wilder. - December 22, 2009
And I am late.
Not surprised, just going through the posts one-by-one.
Wilder. - December 22, 2009
I'm dissapointed but mostly because of how good our other trades were..
I think we got spoiled from what Z has done this off-season. My only thought is should we have kept Morrow if there was no market for him? Or would he have been to much of a question mark?
drm1125 - December 22, 2009
I think in retrospect, Morrow is a bigger question mark for 2010
then people here were thinking.
Matthew - December 22, 2009
Probably so
I think part of it is we’ve been talking about how Morrow was our big trading chip and this trade totally invalidates that unless you believe that Z suddenly turned into Bavasi.
drm1125 - December 22, 2009
People became too attached his upside and we thought too highly of him so it's half our fault.
Well at least some of us thought highly of him.
Slurvey - December 22, 2009
You put Morrow in the bullpen though
and you get something like 0.5 WAR probably because he can go back to just throwing his fastball. I just don’t totally see how this makes us much better. Maybe something like a fraction of a WAR next year at the loss of multiple years of a salary controlled player.
Edgar for Pres - December 22, 2009
League is under team control for one fewer year.
Matthew - December 22, 2009
Oh i thought it was 2 or 3
k. not quite so bad then
Edgar for Pres - December 22, 2009
Right, but if you assume hell be .5 WAR, just like league.
And then you throw in the prospect, then it’s basically a wash. (in that scenario).
CapSea - December 22, 2009
Yeah they just really must think he has no chance of being a SP
cause if he has any chance to be a league avg SP then it tips the balance.
Edgar for Pres - December 22, 2009
Exactly.
And if they think that, it makes perfect sense to dump him for what they did. I do think they could have gotten more, but at least I can see a glaringly obvious rationale behind it.
CapSea - December 22, 2009
Kinda seems like they could have found somebody who would have thought
Morrow would have had a chance of being a SP. Oh well. Hopefully League is cool.
Edgar for Pres - December 22, 2009
I blame you guys.
CapSea - December 22, 2009
He's a huge question mark
as is Snell. Having two people like that in the rotation was not something I was exactly comfortable with. That being said, I would have greatly preferred Morrow to Fister/French/Olson/Vargas, so I hope Jack has something up his sleeve that leaves room in our budget for a 1B.
Fuckmikereilly - December 22, 2009
The whole point of having Fister/French/Olson/Vargas
is that you can have risky pitchers on staff and have solid people to step in if/when they go down. That was the theory with Harden, why would it be any different with Morrow?
mebpenguin - December 22, 2009
This kind of suprised me
fresnofan - December 22, 2009
Oops didn't finish
Anyway, it surprised me because relievers are so easy to fill. We basically built our current bullpen for nothing at all. Hard throwing, not-the-best-command relievers is what we have a lot of. I’m not saying at all that we have too many. But trading someone like Morrow for a reliever just seems unlike anything I expected for Jack Z.
fresnofan - December 22, 2009
Our bullpen last year was also awful.
So there’s that.
Matthew - December 22, 2009
How does our bullpen look now?
Average, maybe?
fresnofan - December 22, 2009
Probalby not quite would be my guess.
Edgar for Pres - December 22, 2009
Average-ish, yeah
Matthew - December 22, 2009
Would say we're a tick below average still
Graham MacAree - December 22, 2009
Not everybody is healthy and maxes out to their ceiling
Poochie - December 22, 2009
But miles ahead of last year's!
Last year we started without a lefty in the pen, this year we have several converted starters; Morrow hurt the numbers a lot in the early going; Batista’s spot will be taken by a minor leaguer who probably sucks less; Lowe started throwing his slider for strikes over the summer… There are reasons for optimism. I don’t expect it to be a real strength but certainly not the disaster it was last year.
Bearskin Rugburn - December 22, 2009
This is true for everyone, but my retort (though not passionate) is:
1) League is good.
2) Our bullpen last year was not very good.
3) We still got the other prospect, that GMZ might value.
Also, fuck Morrow.
CapSea - December 22, 2009
And hey, this opens the door for us to get the Dolphin back!
ralphie81 - December 22, 2009
Wait, did I say the Dolphin?
I meant Mr. Snappy.
ralphie81 - December 22, 2009
I think League has a better chance of becoming
a 3 – 4 WAR starter than Morrow does.
coreyjro - December 22, 2009
No
League is not going to start, he hasn’t started in years, forget about League ever starting
edddgar - December 22, 2009
I think the point was the chances that Morrow ever becoming a 3-4 win starter is the same as League
It’s probably not gonna happen.
Slurvey - December 22, 2009
That's definitely a big part of what I was saying.
I still think there is a non-zero chance of League being a starter with the Mariners. So it’s a lot of doubting Morrow and a little bit of thinking Zduriencik might have something up his sleeve.
coreyjro - December 22, 2009
Yeah, this trade doesn't really bother me.
The only thing that bothers me was the impression that the Brewers were high on Morrow. If that’s true, I’m sure we could have gotten something better out of them. But since there is no way of knowing that’s true, a player I don’t like is now gone, so woo.
CapSea - December 22, 2009
Yeah it just seems like a low return
Its not horrible. We aren’t getting Horacio back but my expectations were a little higher.
Edgar for Pres - December 22, 2009
IMO, I think this is pretty fair
It just seems like a worse trade because we’re all used to Zduriencik-esque trades.
I don’t think there’s any obvious winner here.
fresnofan - December 22, 2009
Again, the issue is that while the end result might be fair, it's hard to believe Morrow wasn't valued highly by some organization.
And if so, why didn’t we trade with them instead. But yes, I do think that the overall package is fine, even though it is slightly boring.
CapSea - December 22, 2009
Not every GM is Bill Bavasi
I trust Jack Z explored all his options.
fresnofan - December 22, 2009
Yeah, pretty sure if Milwaukee, of all teams, was going to offer us something more
then Jack would know.
Matthew - December 22, 2009
Oh yeah, how about that.
CapSea - December 22, 2009
Yeah, this trade is a little disappointing, but now I'm excited who we go after to fill the hole in the rotation.
Goose - December 22, 2009
We already have Fister
so I’m not sure what else you think we need.
CapSea - December 22, 2009
Maybe he's thinking
That Fister isn’t the best option for filling holes?
Nadingo - December 22, 2009
Well then he'd clearly be wrong.
He’d fill those holes and then some.
CapSea - December 22, 2009
Fister? I don't even know her...
Sorry. It was just so THERE.
Tyler Jorgensen - December 22, 2009
God I hope it's Randy.
Please be Randy.
BrianL - December 22, 2009
Yesyesyesyes.
redwolf75 - December 22, 2009
Nick Hill!
JY - December 22, 2009
I like him.
SethGrandpa - December 22, 2009
Starts the season in the pen, no?
Bearskin Rugburn - December 22, 2009
Could, doesn't have to.
JY - December 24, 2009
...
SethGrandpa - December 22, 2009
Well, I missed the reaction thread to all of this
But, as it stands, I don’t like this trade. Feels like it’s missing another piece from the Jays’ side.
JLC - December 22, 2009
Long time, seldom time
Just wanted to say: Another fine post. I don’t say it enough.
John Morgan - December 22, 2009
I wonder if there was some gentleman's agreement in the Halladay/Lee trade.
That the M’s would send more talent Toronto’s way eventually. It really was a 3-way deal all along, just without alll the details hammered out until now.
rickpo - December 22, 2009
Anyone have the number for the M's front office?
Thought I would give them a call and ask who the prospect is.
Janic - December 22, 2009
This may qualify as OT,
But the quality of the articles you guys have been posting this offseason is absolutely fantastic. This post is just another example of how amazing of a blog this is. I don’t bother posting here, but I haven’t skipped a front pager in over a year, and I have a feeling there are many, many more that are the same way. Keep up the awesome work guys.
BigR - December 22, 2009
Sounds like it's time for an X-Mas donation drive...
Matthew - December 22, 2009
I have an extra fruitcake for you.
Sec 108 - December 23, 2009
This trade is not depressing, oh no.
This article, however, is:
It’s another thing all together when Morrow admits that his development process crapped out when being shoved into a relief role in 2008.
Ugh.
ThundaPC - December 22, 2009
At least he takes a bit of the blame.
Kudos to Geoff for a good interview. He’s usually the first to get on the phone with a player who’s just been traded away/for. (Well, him or Shannon.)
Teej - December 22, 2009
Yea.
Good to see him take the blame for the 2009 debacle. His account of the 2008 season, however, was just another reminder that Bill Bavasi’s decision to keep Morrow in the bullpen pretty much lead to this situation.
ThundaPC - December 22, 2009
Unbelievably frustrating.
I’ll never understand what this organization was trying to do with Morrow. Heck, I’m not sure what Zduriencik had planned for Morrow during the offseason. In the end, I hope Morrow finds great success as a starter in Toronto.
JLC - December 22, 2009
Questions about bullpen
The acquisition of League has left me wondering about our current roster construction…
Rick Adair stated his preference for 12 pitchers, and that’s the general impression I got from Jack’s quotes as well. So 5 starters, then…Aardsma, Kelley, Lowe, White, League. That leaves us two relief spots. Presumably one will be filled by a long reliever/spot starter (Vargas, French, Olson or Fister). Would anyone else really love to have a lefty in the pen this year? Having Olson and White on lefty duty wasn’t exactly comfortable last year.
Fuckmikereilly - December 22, 2009
Jays fan here...
In League you’ve got an exceptional ONE INNING guy. His stuff is exceptional – when used for ONE INNING he is mostly unhitable – however when he comes back for a second inning – look out. Clearly has CLOSER stuff – no question. Also NO QUESTION you’ll get more out of League in 2010 than you (or us) will get out of Morrow in 2010.
Chavez is a 20 year old 6’ 220 pound corner outfielder who hit 21 homers last season in Low A ball. He could be a real steal.
Unless Morrow develops into the #2 or #3 stud he was supposed to turn into – you win the trade. Personally – I like Morrow as a gamble BUT a 25 year old who hasn’t been able to throw strikes since college – does not give one a lot of hope – at this time of year however – we’ll open our hearts and hope he’s the exception – a guy that learns to get control after 25 without having to lose his stuff in order to do it.
Merry Christmas all – a a Very Happy New Year. Your team looks promising. Crush them Angels!
Mylegacy - December 22, 2009
Wait, I'm confused, how many innings is League?
I thought it was 9 unless the home team changed the rules.
Anyway, thanks. Good to know you guys are still high on Chavez. I know we got turned off of Halman pretty quick, so if you guys still like Chavez, maybe he has something Halman doesn’t. I won’t get my hopes up yet, but any time there is potential for a power hitter to develop from within your organization, it’s always fun for a while.
Also, I suppose even the slightest chance that League was going to be a starter is thrown out the window, but I didn’t expect it anyway, so no real harm.
CapSea - December 22, 2009
Morrow is a perfect guy for Toronto to take a gamble on.
They’re not contending unless they, like Tampa, ring up a couple jackpots at the same time on the talent slot machine. The Blue Jays were not going to try League out in the rotation so it makes perfect sense for them to take a risk on a guy that they will try and convert into a passable starter.
Matthew - December 22, 2009
Blue Jays have their work cut out for them for sure.
Thanks to our previous regime flummoxing his development as a starter. It can work, but Morrow’s going to need the time that we’re not able to give him right now. Luckily he’s back on track starting like he should but he probably lost 2 years of his development time to swapping back and forth.
Brandon League should fit right in our bullpen and feel right at home with Rick Adair I guess.
Not the most amazing trade but should be interesting for both parties.
ThundaPC - December 23, 2009
I take that linking my fanpost in a comment in another thread isn't legal.
Fin - December 23, 2009
If the guy in charge of the draft several years ago hadn't been retarded
we might have been looking forward to a Felix Hernandez, Tim Lincecum, Cliff Lee rotation.
I mean, wow.
Fuck
Sam Regens - December 23, 2009
I don't think that's actually how that works, homey.
CapSea - December 23, 2009
Wow, Toronto really missed out there
if we had drafted well they’d be getting Tim Lincecum for Brandon League and an outfield prospect. Eat it, Toronto!
Bearskin Rugburn - December 23, 2009
maybe you should make a list...
Make a list of every player the Mariners have ever drafted, and then look through the rest of that year’s draft and find a player who was taken later in the draft but turned out to become an all star or hall of fame candidate or at least a really good ML player.
Then you can beat yourself up everytime you see any player the Mariners ever drafted.
Paul AB - December 23, 2009
Can, and have done.
But that’s mostly because our drafts used to be godawful. 2001 was particularly bad.
Besides, first-round picks lend themselves more to second guessing.
JY - December 24, 2009
If the M's had drafted Tim Lincecum
Then it is also possible that the M’s win just enough that they don’t fire Bavasi. I am totally fine with the way it turned out. Who knows if that scenario would have been true, but I wouldn’t want to take the chance that it might.
Coug1990 - December 23, 2009
I can't believe we didn't draft Ryan Braun and Albert Pujols.
It’s so obvious years later what we should have done!
Teej - December 23, 2009
In 1983 the M's drafted Darrel Akerfelds and passed on Roger Clemens
THOSE IDIOTS
pdb - December 23, 2009
Fuckin' Justin Leone
Poochie - December 23, 2009
Well I just got an e-mail from the Mariners' official website.
Looks like the deal is official and it’s as reported. League and Halman 2.0.
BrianL - December 23, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Lookout Landing to post a comment.