Rosenthal: Dodgers Want Jack Wilson
Via WHYGAVS, the Dodgers are still interested in Jack Wilson:
The Pirates, who are discussing Wilson with several teams, wanted Dodgers shortstop Chin-Lung Hu, outfielder Delwyn Young and a third young player, sources say.
The teams spoke as recently as Monday, according to one source, but currently are at an impasse. The Dodgers first tried to obtain Wilson in early July, when Furcal was recovering from back surgery. It was then that the Pirates expressed their initial interest in Hu.
I suppose a great deal could depend on who the third player is, but I'm a bit baffled by this. I don't dislike Hu and I'm not surprised the Pirates would want him--he is, after all, a shortstop, and a good defender at that. I just don't think he's good enough to build a deal around. He had an atrocious year at the plate, posting a .485 OPS with the Dodgers and only a .708 OPS in a great hitting environment in AAA Las Vegas. Before that, he looked a bit like Wilson, but maybe with a notch less power. This year, though, he only had one homer total. He'll be 25 at the start of next season, and while I wouldn't mind having him in the Pirates' organization, I think it's fair to wonder if he's going to blossom into an everyday player.
As for Young, I don't see what the Pirates are getting at. He's a corner outfielder who will be in his age-27 season next year. He's put up superficially good-looking seasons in the minors, but they're mostly in Las Vegas, and you need to go look at his team numbers before you get too excited about them--everybody who goes to Vegas posts a .900 OPS. Young has looked more like a AAAA player than a real prospect for a couple years now.
Again, a lot could depend on who the third player is, but unless he's someone pretty impressive, I don't get why the Pirates would want this package or why the Dodgers could refuse them. Of course, it's possible the third player was Matt Kemp or something, and Rosenthal got his information from someone from the Pirates who wanted to make the Dodgers seem irrational. In which case, well played, Pirates.
0 recs |
33 comments
Comments
Dodger Talk
Hu is at best a utility man. Young can’t beat out Kemp, Ethier or anybody else. He is a good 4th outfielder. The Pirates should be able to do a helluva lot better than this if someone wants Wilson, a good defensive shortstop who can swing the bat a little and “only” makes $7-8 million!!!
by thegunner on Nov 27, 2008 1:21 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Diving off the Balcony into the Pool
Gunner, you have hit the mark. Hu doesn’t look like more than a Raphael Belliard. We cannot get rid of Jack Wilson just to move him. If our pitchers———the one’s who took us to last place and the only ones capable of bringing us back to being a creditable major league team———are to improve and eventually flourish, we have to have a shortstop with above average range and arm. We CANNOT give up 4-out innings with a pitch-to-contact young pitching staff!! We won’t improve at all with Raphael Belliard/Chin-Lung Hu at short.
Now if the Dodgers want to throw Kemp into that trade, call me back!
by Groat2Maz2Strangeglove on Nov 27, 2008 10:58 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Poor Deal for the Bucs
I hope they can do better for Jack. I agree we need a strong defensive SS for our pitchers. But what do we need more OFs for? Kemp looks like he is a decent player but we are loaded with OFs right now.
by zogger on Nov 27, 2008 11:04 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
We already have Bixler
Hu doesn’t look like he’d be any better other than probably a minor defensive upgrade. We need something useful to trade Jack. I’d flip if we got Kemp. I still think he has 30 HR power. I’d like it if we got McDonald back straight up for Jack. He could be a useful starter. We can never have enough #3 starter types. Seriously.
by Chad Bahamas on Nov 27, 2008 11:12 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't trade Jack straight up
for McDonald. There would have to be somebody else pretty good in the deal.
by patthatt on Nov 27, 2008 11:48 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Straight Up
I’d try to get more for Wilson, but, if I couldn’t get more, I would settle for McDonald “straight up”.
by thegunner on Nov 27, 2008 11:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Fantasy
No way on earth the Dodgers trade McDonald for Jack. Jack won’t bring a blue chip prospect.
by WTM on Nov 27, 2008 12:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I Think That He Could Bring a Blue Chip Prospect Or Two ...
…if the Pirates could evaluate talent, and would settle for a couple of real AA prospects. After all, that is what Wilson was when the Pirates got him. And while Wilson gave the Pirates some fairly decent years, while they were good enough for the Pirates, he would have only helped another team if they relied on Wilson strictly for his defense.
On the other hand, had Wilson played for another club where his bat was not important, like the Cardinals, he could have really solidified them; plus, not expecting much offense and with little pressure on him to produce offensively, he would probably have contributed well at the plate.
by thegunner on Nov 27, 2008 4:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Depends on what you mean by blue chip. If you’re talking about potential impact players, no way Jack brings even one, much less two. NH had trouble getting impact prospects in return for Bay and Nady. The only way he did with Bay was take one guy (LaRoche) who was once considered a high-ceiling prospect but who had a lot of doubters by the time of the trade, and another (Morris) who was coming off TJ surgery and hasn’t done much as a pro yet. The only way he got one for Nady and Marte was to take a guy (Tabata) who was gaining a rep as a head case. Jack doesn’t have nearly the value of Bay or Nady/Marte. He’ll bring less in return, not more as you’re suggesting.
by WTM on Nov 27, 2008 8:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Desperation Causes Strange Thins ...
and there are a few GMs that don’t know what they are doing.
If somebody really needs a SS, they will part with something of value.
But you’re right, Wilson’s value does not approach Bay’s, but it comes closer to approaching Nady’s.
I am happy with the result of both of those trades. Tabata may be a head case, but he IS an impact player unless the Pirates screw him up.
It is in dealing a player like Wilson that we will find out what kind of a GM Huntington is/will be.
by thegunner on Nov 28, 2008 12:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good point
Can Huntington sell Wilson’s valuable defense, contact hitting and agressive baserunning to get back top value or maybe more?
by DITO on Nov 28, 2008 1:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, all NH has to do is find a team that’s never employed a scout, has no internet connection and no subscription to any magazine that has baseball stats in it.
by WTM on Nov 28, 2008 7:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No one ever said it is easy.
You act like nothing of the sort has ever been done before.
by DITO on Nov 30, 2008 9:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
People get hosed in trades, but it’s not something you can PLAN for. If it was possible to plan to go out and fleece somebody, at least some GMs would be able to do it routinely. But nobody does. Every GM in the game has good trades and bad. If your plan for improving the team hinges on finding some moron to fleece, you’ve planned to fail.
by WTM on Nov 30, 2008 6:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Dodgers
If I were the Dodgers, I wouldn’t trade for Jack. But if I’m the Pirates, I wouldn’t deal him for Hu and Young. I think Hu has the potential to be a similar shortstop to Jack. He’s a smooth fielder and has some pop (his body seems bigger than what he’s listed at, but I haven’t seen him in person since 2007).
Delwyn Young can rake, but probably not enough for a corner — though I think he’s a better hitter than Brandon Moss — and he’s a below average fielder. He’d be a good pinch-hitter/part-time DH.
I’d probably deal Wilson for Hu and someone who throws hard.
by bolton on Nov 27, 2008 4:44 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
reality check
Wilson turns 31 in December and has a career .687 OPS. I am not sure how anyone thinks he is even worth Hu straight up.
by haven on Nov 27, 2008 10:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
He's a shortstop with a plus glove.
It’s OK to hit .687 if you’re a shortstop with a plus glove. Sure, most teams would like to do better, but the other options out there this offseason really suck, so any port in a storm.
We’d be taking a significant downgrade by moving Jack, and we don’t have a pressing need to get rid of him. Ergo, the Dodgers will have to give us something decent to make it worth our while, or they’re free to pursue other options.
by Vlad on Dec 1, 2008 1:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm a Dodger fan but...
I would be disgusted if we made this trade. Hu had vision problems this year, which explains some of the bad offense. He might not ever be a good hitter, but he can certainly be as good as Jack Wilson. And he makes the minimum. I wouldn’t trade him straight up for Wilson. There are other crappy veteran SS’s we can sign without giving up prospects. I think you guys are way overvaluing him, Wilson’s hardly worth anything except salary relief.
And even suggesting Kemp is laughable. Colletti is an idiot, but no one’s dumb enough to make that trade. Kemp’s already better and cheaper than Wilson with the potential to be a superstar. In fact, there’s not a guy on the Pirates worth Kemp straight up right now, except MAYBE Doumit. So please, stop with those kind of rumors. Doesn’t it get tiring hearing Yankee fans wanting McClouth/McCutchen for Melky Cabrera? Because thats more likely to happen than a Kemp/Wilson deal.
If you guys get Hu, Young, plus another good prospect, you can laugh all the way to the bank, because you just robbed the Dodgers, without a doubt.
by Brendan Scolari on Nov 28, 2008 5:36 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think Wilson’s quite that bad. According to multiple accounts, the Dodgers HAVE tried to get him, so they must think he’d be better than Hu. But thanks for the reality check just the same.
by WTM on Nov 28, 2008 7:05 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I guess you could be responding to some of the comments above, but if that was directed at me: I wasn’t suggesting Kemp would be involved in any kind of Wilson trade. Read the post again.
by Charlie on Nov 28, 2008 1:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Kemp is crazy talk.
But Young is waiver-bait, and Wilson is probably better than Hu, and they’re asking us to kick in a significant chunk of money. So we need something more.
by Vlad on Dec 1, 2008 1:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I've always been of the opinion that Wilson's defense
is more important than his OPS-all things considered-and I think it would be a mistake to trade him if we don’t get a decent MLB-ready shortstop in a return package.
If you have a SS who plays excellent defense and can rake, sure that’s better, but how many of those guys are there at any given time in the majors?
The Pirates can’t get one better than Jack Wilson right now.
It’s been pointed out that Wilson’s contract for 2009 and the option for 2010 are very affordable by current baseball salary standards. Accordingly, is there some legitimate reason to trade him for a couple of bums other than to dump salary?
Question for the members who are more informed about minor league prospects:
Do you rate Hu’s skills more highly than you did Brent Lillibridge’s two years ago?
How about now since Lillibridge has had a couple cups of coffee with the Braves?
Even if you have a very bad team, I think it’s important to have a solid defensive SS for the development of the pitchers, and simply to allow fans to see fundamentally-sound baseball from the position.
Trade Wilson for Hu and some AAAA player and then watch the SS position get mangled throughout the 2009 season by Hu, Cruz, Bixler etc. Then the same people who are so much in favor of getting rid of Wilson will whine and cry about how stupid Coonelly and Huntington are and demand their heads.
by patthatt on Nov 28, 2008 10:09 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Hu is supposed to be an excellent defensive shortstop. By no means would he mangle the position. It’s his offense, in my opinion, that is the issue.
by Charlie on Nov 28, 2008 1:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Charlie
I stand corrected about Hu’s defense.
I guess the point I’m trying to make is that, even if you have a 100-loss team, I believe that a quality defensive SS is important for the team and the development of young pitchers. If they can find someone who plays Rafael Belliard-type defense for a year or two, then I would take that over a guy who might do a little more at the plate but kills you in the field.
I don’t want to see Wilson traded unless we get something of reasonable value in return. Otherwise, it would simply be a salary dump.
by patthatt on Nov 29, 2008 9:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Then you want Cruz
He’s the best defensive SS, probably by more than a little. I think he will be the starting SS next year, and maybe the year after. Basically, what you said, but I think that guy is Cruz.
by azibuck on Nov 29, 2008 2:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
About Cruz --- at best he is a AAAA SS.
by thegunner on Dec 1, 2008 12:00 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think even that is too kind. That guy can’t hit at all. At some point you have to wonder if the defense is worth it. Hu isn’t a good hitter, but he at least has the potential to be slightly better than an absolute zero on defense.
by Charlie on Dec 1, 2008 12:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Please check the context of my *REPLY*
patthatt wrote,
I guess the point I’m trying to make is that, even if you have a 100-loss team, I believe that a quality defensive SS is important for the team and the development of young pitchers. If they can find someone who plays Rafael Belliard-type defense for a year or two, then I would take that over a guy who might do a little more at the plate but kills you in the field.
Rafael Belliard had a career OPS+ of 46. Forty, six. And played good enough D to last 17 years!
At no point do I say Cruz is good, or anything close. My opinion is that this org seems to like him, and I think he will be the guy they will choose to be a Rafael Belliard-type for at least 2009.
That said, I do like Cruz better than Bixler. Much better D, and Bixler’s contact issues make me think he’ll be just as bad offensively as Cruz. Cruz doesn’t whiff that much.
by azibuck on Dec 1, 2008 1:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wilson's Contract
According to Yahoo’s Tim Brown, the Dodgers want us to eat “a large chunk” of Wilson’s contract. I’m sure we wouldn’t want to do that. However, if we did, we would get a significantly greater return, wouldn’t we?
I think its important to note that the Dodgers are relatively strapped for cash, too. They just have a higher payroll in the first place.
by scully0505 on Nov 28, 2008 1:32 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Actually...
The same holds true for the Detroit deal.
Via Dejan:
“That could mean the Pirates would have to assume salary from Detroit or pay part of what Wilson is owed. The Pirates would be willing to discuss the latter, probably, but only if the prospect return is exceptional.”
by scully0505 on Nov 28, 2008 1:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

by 













