How to look at the Morris Deal

by dtoddwin on Jul 31, 2007 5:59 PM EDT Comment 34 comments

Morris is scheduled to make around $2 million the rest of this year and $9.5 million next year. $9 million club option for '09 with a $1 million buyout.

Surprising deal, but since we went from thinking we had a ton of pitching to nothing behind the front 3.5 I think this is an excellent deal. Basically I think you have to look at it as going out and signing him for $10 million for one year in the free agent market at the end of this season.

Since no guy is going to sign that (look at what Meche, Lilly, Suppan all got.....generally 4 years at $10-12 per) I really think it is a good one year "signing."

We didn't give up anything and at least we have a chance to win a game from the 5th spot in the rotation vs. what Armas, VB, et al gave us. And it means we have four starters in place for next year.

0 recs | Comment 34 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Well

It means we have 4 starters in place (one of whom is a declining vet with a low K rate who gives up a ton of hits, a profile that's been very unsuccessful with the Bucs) on a team with a horrible offense and roughly half the payroll tied up in that one pitcher plus two of baseball's weakest hitters (Wilson and Izturis). I don't see how this is more than a very minor, high-risk upgrade at the cost of removing whatever financial flexibility the team had. In fact, they'll probably be desperately looking to dump payroll this fall and nobody will want Jack's salary.

by WTM on Jul 31, 2007 6:14 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Morris....

is a much better alternative than Armas, VB, et al. Look I don't think it's a great deal to have him for one year for $10 million. But, he had a good first half and if he pitches well next year the club option will be a bargain.

Also, maybe as importantly, they have NO alternatives. What are you going to do in the offseason? No free agent starter is going to sign a one year deal and they sure as hell probably don't want to come here anyway.

Secondly, you don't have ANYONE to trade except maybe one of the other starters or Bay. As far as I can tell this was a reasonable way to address an off-season need.

And don't worry about half the payroll. They have virtually everyone except Chacon signed for next year so they no exactly what the payroll is. They said they had some money to spend this year and they just spent it. What did you expect, Hughes, Chamberlain or Bucholtz?

Come on you cannot kill them for this.

by dtoddwin on Jul 31, 2007 6:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Whew

I thought I was alone on this judging by the Trade Deadline thread.

I'm with you. This isn't a great deal, but I don't see the crippling effect. If we're paying Armas and Chacon 6.8 million this year, then I'll gladly pay Morris 10 million in 2008.

Sabean did what we always complain DL does. He traded Morris when his value was lowest. His horrid July, is a red flag, but if he's healthy, the deal is fine.

by azibuck on Jul 31, 2007 10:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Kill? No. Ridicule? Yes.

They spent $3M on Morris for this year. Next year it's $9.5M, which takes the payroll well over the limits that the greedhead owners have imposed. You don't even have to take my judgment--try DL's. He's said over and over what a bad idea it is to tie up a huge % of the payroll in one player, and here he's done it with a #4 starter.

If there are no alternatives for finding a starter for next year, then there necessarily are no alternatives for finding anybody to upgrade the pitiful offense now that the money's all been spent. Snell and Maholm can't win with these deadball era hitters behind them, and they're better than Morris. So what's the use of getting Morris?

Anyway, there are plenty of other alternatives besides signing free agents. It never ceases to amaze me how so many fans assume the absolute only ways to acquire players are to sign or trade for expensive veterans or wait until your prospects develop. The Nationals went into this season without a single established starter or single top prospect, and they've had a staggering rash of pitching injuries, yet their staff ERA going into today was LOWER than the Pirates'. Pitchers are so volatile and unpredictable that teams with good scouting and judgment (of course, that eliminates the Pirates) often are able to find useful pitchers on the scrap heap. Only incompetent GMs like DL assume that established veterans are the only possible alternative.

by WTM on Jul 31, 2007 10:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't follow you

Who/what are you ranting at with your last paragraph? We --sort of-- did just what you're saying. Assuming the PTBNL isn't anyone special, we just traded Rajai Davis for... SOMETHING! A $10M roll of the dice. With this club, I'll take it. They roll the dice that he's serviceable in 2008 and they can flip him at the deadline for something better than Rajai Davis and whoever. Or, he sucks, they eat the money, buy out the option and it's all over in 15 months.

Maybe I'm missing something. Like, did we have a shot to contend next year or something?

And again, whatever the Pirate payroll is this year, subtract Armas, Chacon, and (hopefully) Wilson's salary from it. Add Morris's in 2008, and it's a wash.

by azibuck on Jul 31, 2007 11:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Contend?

Hardly, which makes the trade all the more mystifying. (Well, actually it's not. It's DL in job-saving mode.) And the Pirates didn't give up Rajai Davis, they gave up money. I guarantee you Sabean will be seeing dollar signs in his dreams tonight, not speedy slap hitters.

But what I'm talking about is the statement above that the Pirates' only chance to find another pitcher for next year was to spend big money on a FA, therefore making this a good deal because it meets one of next year's needs. The Nats, among other teams, have shown that that's nonsense, there are lots of places to find useful arms aside from the FA market. The Pirates have much more pressing uses for the $14.5M minimum this will cost than for a #4 starter. There are more efficient ways to fill that hole, especially since no #4 starter on the planet could make a meaningful difference with this AAA offense.

Your payroll assumptions are overly optimistic. They'll probably bring back Chacon, since DL's gigantic stash of minor league relievers has turned out not to have any talent in it. And you've left out Izturis. He has a $5.85M option that you can bet your Ray Oyler bobblehead they'll exercise so that Jim Tracy can reminisce about the days when he managed in the majors. In fact, they'll figure they have to, because it'll probably have to be exercised before the fall trading season, meaning they'll have to retain Izturis in case they trade Jack. And their chances of dumping more than a weenie fraction of Jack's salary are nonexistent unless they throw in somebody really good, assuming they can find anybody.

by WTM on Jul 31, 2007 11:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You're deliberately misleading people

I do not own a Ray Oyler bobblehead.

by azibuck on Aug 1, 2007 9:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Tom Matchick?

by WTM on Aug 1, 2007 9:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe Ike Brown?

LOL

by Count Vertigo on Aug 2, 2007 7:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly...

...as it stands now, the Pirates will probably be paying about $23-26 million just for Morris, Chacon, Izturis, and at least part of Jack Wilson next year. That's HORRENDOUS. I'd rather have a shitty team with a $15 million payroll and plug tons of extra money into signing foreign players and actually drafting (and paying) real draft picks.

by The Boy on Aug 1, 2007 9:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Got your back, az

After sleeping on it a night, I realized the same thing. Armas comes off the books at the end of the year. Chacon comes off too, if not sooner. Kendall is off the books. Maybe they deal Solly for something cheaper. And maybe they negotiate with Izturis to drop the option year in exchange for 2-3 years guaranteed at less per year (I would) as Wilson's replacement/Bixler's caddy/general backup infielder.

So the payroll with Morris on it really won't be that much bigger. And if Morris is finished we're through with him at the end of '08. With all due respect to WTM, he's not holding back anyone in our system, that's obvious -- and I do take your point about other ways to acquire talent. We tried filling the 4-5 hole on the cheap (Armas) and that blew up. $9M is the going rate for mediocre starting pitching on the MLB level.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

by bucdaddy on Aug 1, 2007 10:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

well put

hopefully he pitches fairly well for us

by The New Guy on Aug 1, 2007 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

agree with WTM

I agree with WTM. And, as I wrote in the trade deadline thread, we gave up value. Rajai Davis is not a heralded prospect, but he has great speed, plays center field and hit .318/.384/.469 in Triple-A this season. You can't say we didn't give up anything, especially when you look at the dearth of good center fielders in baseball.

by bolton on Jul 31, 2007 6:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Rajai Davis is not a good center fielder

At all. We have at least three players just like him -- Duffy, McLouth, Nyjer Morgan.

Groan about the money, sure, but not about sending Davis away -- especially after his recent escapades on the basepaths. He isn't major-league quality.

Pittsburgh Lumber Co.

by Cory on Jul 31, 2007 6:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Davis?

Come you are kidding about Davis right? He plays centerfield in name only. He is terrible defensively. He's gotten picked off repeatedly and he's 27 in October. He'll be lucky to spend two years as an extra outfielder. We have McCutcheon, Duffy, McLouth........he wasn't making it here. Good luck to him, but we gave up nothing.

by dtoddwin on Jul 31, 2007 6:34 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

not kidding at all

From the little I've seen, Rajai's not that bad.

He's definitely got a chance to have a major league career, and I don't think we should give away such a player when we didn't have to.

Look at how many contenders needed a starting pitcher. Not one of them -- not the Phillies, the Braves, etc -- offered the Giants a better deal than the Pirates. That tells me something. I obviously wasn't part of the negotiations, but I think the Giants were just thrilled to find someone to take the contract, regardless if they got any players back.

by bolton on Jul 31, 2007 9:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Rajai

The potential to play for the Pirates does not equal the potential for a major league career. One - he won't develop. He's just not that good. Two - on the off chance that he does develop, he won't develop before McCutcheon is here to take his spot. Three - Duffy and McClouth, while no great shakes, are better stopgap center fielders, in that they can, you know, ACTUALLY PLAY CENTER FIELD.

by SeanCollier on Aug 1, 2007 9:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

rajai

You're probably right, but two things:

You can't definitively say Rajai won't develop. How do you know? I mean he HAS developed. A raw athlete taken in the 38th round has progressed to Triple-A and hit well there. Such stories are not that common in the Pirate system.
Why eliminate that 5 percent chance that Rajai turns into something good in a Pirate uniform when you don't have to. The Giants would have given us Morris for NOTHING. They should have given us a marginal prospect to take that contract.

If you don't have to give up a so-so prospect, don't do it. Now we can't use Rajai as filler in another deal, and can't have him as insurance when other CFs fail and or go down with injuries.

by bolton on Aug 1, 2007 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Morris.

I don't know if he'll be traded now. I think more than likely Nick Sabean just made David Littlefield look like a damn fool.

by bryanzane on Jul 31, 2007 6:50 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Nick....

actually goes by Brian in real life.

by dtoddwin on Jul 31, 2007 6:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Unless.......

you mean Nick Saban, and I don't Alabama's on the schedule this year.

by dtoddwin on Jul 31, 2007 6:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

huh

Did I just combine Brian Sabean and Nick Saban? NOW WHO LOOKS LIKE A DAMN FOOL!?!

by bryanzane on Jul 31, 2007 7:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Drink a bottle of tequilla

Eat the magic worm at the bottom of the bottle. Wait an hour. Run tape of Littlefield announcing the trade. Then.....

by steve_z on Jul 31, 2007 8:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

The real way to look at the deal.

Right now, DL is just trying everything within his power to show some slight improvement this year, so that he'll have a chance at keeping his job. If Morris buys the team two wins over Armas or whomever this season, it doesn't really matter to DL that we'll be overpaying a mediocre, declining player next year, because current-season gains are all that he cares about at the moment. He's eating the seed corn so that he won't starve.

If you combine the $10M+ that Morris is going to get next year and the almost $6M that Izturis is set to make on his option (and let's be real - if Tracy's here then it's a given that they'll pick up the option), you get enough money to afford an actual star on the open market.

by Vlad on Jul 31, 2007 9:13 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I hope

you are dead wrong about the Izturis option

by The New Guy on Aug 1, 2007 8:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Money

Well your math may be generally right in that you added Morris and Izturis ($16 million). Who signs 1 year $16 million deals? A $16 million player is going to get $80 at least because he's going to get at least a five year deal. Now from your $16, subtract at least half of Wilson (because we aren't paying them both next year), Armas and possibly Chacon. That gets you roughly $12. My point is THIS IS NOT A MONEY ISSUE. If you don't like the deal, fine. But it isn't about the money.

And WTM keeps talk about how there are other ways than free agency, trading or developing prospects to find capable starters. PLEASE TELL ME HOW? I've been thinking about it for hours.

by dtoddwin on Aug 1, 2007 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Just check the Nats' roster

by WTM on Aug 1, 2007 6:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Subject

What scares me the most is how often the Pirates mis-evaluate their team. The pitching has not been good, but as Wilbur points out, this offense would make it hard for any team to win more than 70 games. So what's the solution - more pitching and defense. The Pirates haven't won with that combination yet but still try to make it work.

Morris might help the organization sell some tickets - the casual fan will notice his name and might remember he was a good pitcher once. And Morris pitching instead of Armas (another free agent waste) is probably a good thing. And maybe Morris is the difference between 67 and 72 wins - maybe.

What I fear is that the Pirates think they are better than they show. That they are just a few players away. The Pirates are four hitters and three pitchers away from .500 - not contending.

by Greg Schuler on Aug 1, 2007 8:58 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

four bats

Tim Kurkjian of ESPN said that the Pirates are one bat away from being the Minnesota Twins; the problem is that the bat he speaks of belongs to AL MVP Justin Morneau...

by bryanzane on Aug 1, 2007 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What

Who are Torri Hunter and Michael Cuddyer?

And I hope he was just talking offensively...

by The New Guy on Aug 1, 2007 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

He just forgot to add . . .

. . . "of 1998."

by WTM on Aug 1, 2007 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Things I thought

When I heard him say that I almost choked on my Cheerios (Honey Nut Scooters). I was like "ummm, what about that AL Batting Champion catcher and that Cy Young winning pitcher? What about that SIX-TIME Gold Glove center fielder?

by bryanzane on Aug 1, 2007 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

So that means

Actually, it's not that far off from reality. Except the Pirates don't have all those good players. And Johan Santana.

But if you squint real hard, Ryan Doumit kinda sorta could be Joe Maurer when Joe was in AAU or Babe Ruth (definitely not Pony League).

And LaRoche and Maureau share some similarities I am sure. They play baseball. They both might like Thai food or maybe they share a love of collecting stamps.

And the Twins do silly things like play Jason Tyner a lot and give Sidney Ponson chances. And keep their good young players on the farm for too long while the crappy veterans waste at bats and innings.

by Greg Schuler on Aug 1, 2007 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs