If these are the best available SPs, Maholm's worth a ton

Dave Cameron goes over what he calls the best available pitchers on the trading block. The pickings are extremely thin: after Edwin Jackson (who, by my reading, profiles a lot like Maholm, but a notch better), choices like Jeremy Guthrie and Jason Marquis are markedly less attractive than Paulie (older, less effective, not noticeably better contracts). Maybe Cameron's just put together a crap list (wouldn't be surprising), but my opinion of Maholm's likely return just went up.

12 months ago JRoth95 11 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Great, let’s trade Maholm before anybody can do anything as stupid as signing him for three years.

You're entitled to your own opinions. You're not entitled to your own facts.

by WTM on Jun 3, 2011 11:32 PM EDT reply actions

Yeah, great

We’ll get 2 C prospects and give Maholm’s starts to some dude with a 4.50 ERA in Indy. That’ll be swell.

by maguro on Jun 3, 2011 11:56 PM EDT reply actions

I wish

Cameron had speculated a bit on returns. As I say, Maholm slots between Jackson and Guthrie, so that would give us nice bookends on legit expectations.

by JRoth95 on Jun 4, 2011 12:15 AM EDT reply actions

In general

starters don’t bring big time returns at the deadline. Jake Westbrook is a guy with a reume pretty close to Maholm’s (a little better, really, since he’s an AL guy) and the prospect CLE got back was a guy named Cory Kluber, a 24 year old fifth starter/long reliever type who got a C+ from Sickels this year.

I think Hanrahn is going to be worth a lot more than Maholm in the trade market. In fact, Hanrahan is probably the only veteran we have who might bring back a prospect with upside at the deadline.

by maguro on Jun 4, 2011 12:30 AM EDT up reply actions

First word should be "number 3 starters"

Dratted autoformatting.

by maguro on Jun 4, 2011 12:31 AM EDT up reply actions

Westbrook had only two months of team control left and was pitching only so-so after missing the previous year (due to TJ?). Maholm has a year plus what’s left of this year, and is healthy and pitching well. And it’s an option, so if he tanks the team isn’t stuck.

You're entitled to your own opinions. You're not entitled to your own facts.

by WTM on Jun 4, 2011 1:29 AM EDT up reply actions

Fair enough

But I think the point still stands, mid rotation starters don’t bring big hauls at the deadline. Ted Lilly is better than Maholm and didn’t bring back much either, for instance.

by maguro on Jun 4, 2011 8:37 AM EDT up reply actions

Good

Let’s trade for Gavin Floyd then

by Mr. E on Jun 4, 2011 9:10 AM EDT up reply actions

EIther way

I appreciate the input.

It’s not actually logical to value relievers over any but the most marginal of SPs, but I guess that’s the nature of the trade deadline.

Still, I was mostly surprised that Maholm at least has an argument to be the best available SP on the market (I think his contract situation is better than Jackson’s; Jackson plainly has better stuff, although his career as a whole is no better).

by JRoth95 on Jun 4, 2011 11:25 PM EDT up reply actions

ummm

Edwin Jackson is a power arm with control issues and an 8.5 million dollar contract. Oh and he’s right handed

by VoteforPedro on Jun 5, 2011 10:12 PM EDT reply actions

I just meant in terms of likely production

Obviously they’re very different pitchers. But neither is/was an elite talent, neither is particularly young or old, neither is expensive relative to market value.

When a team is trading for a rental, I don’t think they’re concerned about pitcher specifics as much as they are the combo of price and performance. A win is a win.

by JRoth95 on Jun 6, 2011 12:04 AM EDT up reply actions