Pirates Acquire Delwyn Young
by Charlie on Apr 15, 2009 1:01 AM EDT
60 comments
To no one's surprise, the Pirates have acquired outfielder Delwyn Young from the Dodgers. Los Angeles will get two players to be named; surely neither of them will be a prospect. The Pirates have been interested in Young for some time--going back, at least, to the Dodgers-Pirates Jack Wilson trade discussions last year.
Young came through the Dodgers' system mostly as an infielder, but he's played only eight games in the infield since 2005, so the Pirates will surely treat him as an outfielder. Young is out of options and will have to be added to the big-league team. That could mean that Craig Monroe will be cut to make room for him. (UPDATE: In the comments, WTM suggests Luis Cruz could be the one to go, since the Bucs have used him so sparingly, but we'll see; if Andy LaRoche continues to be unreliable, it will be hard for the Pirates to avoid carrying an extra infielder, because utilityman Ramon Vazquez will need to be available to play third. So my guess is still that Monroe will be odd man out.)
I don't share the Pirates' strange infatuation with Young; he never hit much at Class AAA until he was old for the level, and he's entering his age-27 without having accomplished anything in the majors. As a switch-hitter with little bits of patience and power, he should be more useful than Monroe would have been, but then that's true of about a thousand Class AAA outfielders.
Still, as long as the Pirates didn't give up a prospect, they haven't lost anything here. PECOTA (subscription required) sees a shred of upside here, comparing Young to Ryan Doumit, Carl Everett and John Vander Wal amidst a mess of fringe players.
Thanks to Phil79.
UPDATE: To make room for Young, Dave Davidson has finally been kicked off the 40-man. Look for him to make it through waivers and be back with the Bucs in a week or so. In the meantime, Cruz looks to be the odd man out.
0 recs |
60 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
I like it
Like you said, he’ll probably take Monroe’s spot, which I’m fine with. As long as neither of the 2 guys we give up are worth anything, I see nothing wrong with this.
I’m guessing he’ll replace Cruz. This team has no use for a no-hit glove guy to back up the middle infield, as we’ve seen the last week.
I have the feeling you might be right.
It’s not a good feeling, though. I’m unconvinced that Young can handle 2B or 3B – he looked pretty horrible there back in the day.
2B or 3B
I don’t really care as long as he’s not starting there. It’s more important for bench guys to hit.
The problem, as I see it...
…is that if they think Young can play 2B or 3B, they might use him there. It’s kind of like the Rivas thing last year, except Young can hit a little.
This Move Means Nothing ...
and will have zero impact on the Pirates’ future.
But
Who knows, maybe he’ll turn out to be a 4th or 5th outfielder?
by northsidenotch on Apr 15, 2009 1:43 AM EDT up reply actions
Young
I agree that this seems like an odd move unless the Pirates plan to use him as a utility player. And, in that case, I see Cruz going back to AAA. Monroe seemed to prove he does have some value and at the very least could wind up as trade bait come July. I also hope we are not giving anything of real value up in return for Young. Maybe they’ll take Yoslan Herrera and Daniel Moskos off our hands. lol
Why make this trade?
This guy is never going to to be a legit contibutor in Pittsburgh. What was the point of this trade? It served no purpose! This better not mean Monroe gets cut! I love Monroe and he earned his spot on this roster with his performance this spring!! Neal and Co. better not cut Monroe. It would be very hyprocritical on their part! This guy, Delwyn Young, is terrible and will never contribute.
I worry that we might've given up actual value here.
Why 2 PsTBNL instead of 1? The Dodgers aren’t desperate for bodies. They wouldn’t ask for 2 unless they were getting 2 that they like.
I would actually guess the opposite
If they had a specific guy in mind that they truly liked, wouldn’t they have accepted that? The Dodgers really had little leverage here since they had to make a deal or release Young, so I would be stunned if either of the PTBNL were anything other than organizational guys.
The standard for a placeholder deal...
…is “a PTBNL or cash”. Since they departed from the standard, maybe their return does, too.
i agree
were giving them two bodies. thats it. i like this move. it cant hurt us.
I GOT MY STREET BUZZ BEFORE I GOT MY PEACH FUZZ
He will definitely need to be placed on the 40 man, and if he has no options left on the 25 man. That’s what most of the discussions are about; who will he replace on the 25 man.
I talked to Neil Huntington in December at the town hall meeting the evening before the decisions to tender or not were to be made (they were to be submitted by midnight that night). He told me at that time that we were not tendering Denny Bautista a contract. Working with the details of my memory here, but when I asked about getting down to 39 on the 40 man, his comment was that we have “plenty of room” on the 40 man. What I took that to mean was that there were a few others who really didn’t deserve spots, so additions would not be difficult.
There is probably no need to DFA Cruz since he still has options, so I think we will keep D. Young, send down Cruz and designate someone else, possibly Davidson. On the other hand, maybe Charlie, et. al. are right and they just release Monroe.
It's a trade to add a guy to the ML roster.
If you don’t think that’s newsworthy, I’m not sure exactly what would qualify.
Random note. Whenever I first heard about him I was shocked to find out he wasn’t related to Dimitri and Delmon. It’s like a Joesph Giambi or Jeremy Upton. Anyone else surprised?
I thought for a couple of years that he was a brother of the other two.
At least it’s not as bad as the catching Molinas.
Bench player at best
This is a cast off from another major league team. He is not part of our future and he is a touch better than what we have. We are already crowded in the outfield with Cutch knocking on the door. What purpose does this cast off serve when Monroe is just as servicable? It makes me nervous to think that he may end up blocking a prospect (ala Vazquez, Michaels, et all).
He's a part of our future if we want him to be.
Not a big part, most likely. But…
We’re still going to need backups in the future. Even if Cutch and Tabata pan out and Nate stays good/healthy, they aren’t all going to start 162 games. And since Young will be making at or near the minimum for the next three years, then we won’t need to spend $1M per on a veteran backup during those years, if he proves capable of filling that role. Half a mill here, half a mill there, and pretty soon you’re talking about real money.
I'm not sure...
this makes much sense. I, personally, don’t feel like adding mediocre depth to our infield is the right move to make at this time.
Wrong!!
I’m really replying to (agreeing with) Vlad, above. Because of age and service time, it’s possible Young serves a very real purpose in the Pirates future. Consider a (completely hypothetical) scenario where Cutch comes up and we’re looking at a 2010 or 2011 (one of those years, not both) with Nate, Cutch, Moss, Morgan, and Delwyn as our 5 OF. Suppose Moss proves to be slightly above average at the plate. Now suppose we draft an uber-prospect this year that plays OF. Delwyn can play placeholder, and one of the other 4 can be traded, with the return varying based on production. If, say, Moss were traded for a young guy that plays for us down the road, Delwyn played a role.
What the hell is my point?
Oh yeah, that the above scenario doesn’t happen with Monroe, or even Hinske. Nate, Cutch, and Moss could all be valuable commodities. So my point in disagreeing with a deck chairs/Titanic angle on this, is that it ignores the next move, or a move down the road.
Good day.
I like this move (obviously depending on what the PBC has to give up). I like Young and think he is better than some here are giving him credit for. Although I am basing that on the two Dodgers game I’ve watched him in and absolutely nothing else.
I made most of my life decisions at a Foghat concert... I stand by them.
by Chester J Lampwick on Apr 15, 2009 10:20 AM EDT reply actions
Off topic but ...
some Donald Veal discussion at THT today.
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/the-two-sides-of-the-cubs-rule-5-coin/
Nothing like killing the mojo
Good job, ’daddy.
i am fine with it
as long as the PTBNL are nothing of consequence. seriously, i would much rather have a 26 year old player with some upside that can play OF and some IF over craig monroe who has absolutely 0 future with this club other than playing terrible defense and the occasional homerun to every 10 k’s. i guess some people just miss the dave littlefield days of going with the jeremy burnitzs of the league.
"Or cash"
AP is reporting that the deal may just be for Young for “cash” (but not “Dave Cash”).
The Pittsburgh Pirates have acquired switch-hitting outfielder Delwyn Young from the Los Angeles Dodgers for two minor league players or for cash.
I’m totally ok with just paying for Young.
I’m guessing the deal is structured that the PBC can veto any guy the Dodgers might list and instead just give them an agreed-upon amount of cash instead.
Dejan is saying “bank on” Cruz being the cut from the 25-man roster when Young reports on Friday. That’s a significant upgrade, like going from a 24-man roster to 25.
If it’s possible the Dodgers could take cash instead of players, that tells you something about the players. The Dodgers had no leverage here because they were certain to lose Young to a waiver claim.
Doesn't make me forget Manny Mota
But Young had 14 PH last year.
If all Young does is be the first PH off the bench (or split that with Hinske), that’s a big improvment over Cruz.
Does anyone know who was best PH for PBC last year? Eye Chart?
B-R says...
…Jason Bay. 1 AB, 1 HR. Hardly get much better than that.
Tops among guys who actually did it once in a while were Minky (.326 in 43 AB), Gomez (.231 in 39 AB), and Michaels (.214 in 42 AB, but team-leading 2 PH HR).
And Young's stats as PH in 2008
are a .292 BA in 48 AB’s and a relatively nifty .393 OBP. So he’s pretty much an EyeChart — who also had 14 PH last year — as a PH.
If he can repeat this quality he may be worth a space on the 25 man roster just as a PH.
We made out like bandits for him and Marte
…almost makes up for the Bay trade.
by Suffering Buc on Apr 15, 2009 3:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Favorite post on linked Yankee blog
Posted by guy called “Red Sox Dynasty”
I wonder if the Yankees will call up future star, Jose Tabata, to replace him?
Two or three sarcasm-impaired Yankee fans replied that this poster was “uninformed”.
But to bring this all back to being on topic, one Yankee fan replied that Yankees should replace Nady with Delywn Young from the Dodgers.
And Nady is a free agent at the end of this year.
BWA HA HA HA!!
Priceless.
"Gimme an 'F' ! " - Country Joe MacDonald
by cocktailsfor2 on Apr 15, 2009 6:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Should've gotten Ethier
I don’t think this “almost makes up” for the Bay trade. We should have made Andre Ethier as the main part of that deal last summer, not Andy LaRoche. Ethier should be in Pittsburgh right now. I’m starting to think A LITTLE BIT differently from where I stood yesterday. I think this can be a good acquisition for the Pirates, but where are Young’s at-bats going to come from. Sanchez is our 2B, Moss is our RF, and we have Monroe and Hinske as first options off the bench. If LaRoche continues to struggle, does he play at 3B some? Is he just going to be a pinch hitter? I just don’t see him getting enough AB’s to really be a legit contributor to this team. But, I really wish we would’ve gotten Ethier in last summer’s trade with LA. Huntingdon should’ve made that him a priority.
We never would have gotten Ethier (or Kemp for that matter).
I do like the Delwyn Young pickup, though. It’s never a bad thing to make a no risk acquisition, and Young could have a decent reward if he finds form, and that form is a third-fourth MLB outfielder.
by Suffering Buc on Apr 15, 2009 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions
If you say that we should've gotten Ethier...
…what you’re really saying is that we should’ve not traded Bay to the Dodgers. Because that’s what would’ve happened if we’d insisted on Ethier. Which in turn would’ve meant either taking Tampa’s offer of Niemann and Brignac, or holding him and trying to deal again in the offseason (which was glutted with FA corner OFs).
Young is going to get AB as an OF reserve and PH. Maybe 200-some for the year as a whole. He can’t play 2B or 3B – that’s why the Dodgers moved him to the OF in the first place.
Young to be used in OF first but...
they will also try him @ 2B and 3B if needed according to DK on PBC…
The gunner
must be chewing his nails down to nothing, worrying about whether Dave Davidson, the lefty he wants in the pen in Pittsburgh, will make it through waivers to get back together with Yoslan Herrera at Indy.
I Never Was A Davidson Man
I just said that he could serve the same purpose as Will Ohman for a lot less money.
I saw Davidson in the AZ Fall League in 2006 or 2007 and was unimpressed.
Oh, my nails look great!
"I just said that he could serve the same purpose as Will Ohman for a lot less money"
Which is still wildly, laughably incorrect.
Trib reports
Young could be a replacement for Sanchez after the season. SCARY!
any1 know when they announce the players to be named
or the cash ?
When we hit you, you don't get up. When you hit us, we get up laughing.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
