35 game checkup on the Lidge trade

by char6587 on May 8, 2008 1:39 AM EDT

was it worth it? I feel like there are five ways to look at this:

1) Lidge's worth as a closer

2) Myers' worth as a starter

3) Worth of Bruntlett

4) The cost of not having Bourn

5) Cost of not having Geary

So.

Is 1+2+3 > 4+5?

I know its only 35 games in. I know lidge has not had any opportunities to prove his worth in "clutch" situations. I know that bourn is 25 and brad is 31. I know that lidge is getting 6.4 mil and bourn is getting .4 mil. Still though, it's hard not to love how this is turning out.

bonus question!

who has more hits, Ryan Howard or Micah Owings?

(okay, fine... but did you hesitate?)

0 recs | Comment 10 comments | Add your comment

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

as of right now, it looks good to me… especially since bruntlett is starting to hit and cutting down on the errors

by foos05 on May 8, 2008 8:45 AM EDT reply reply 0 recs

You also have to include the worth of Costanzo. I am not sure why he isn’t valued in the equation at all. I never much liked him as a prospect, but, if the professional talent evaluators are wrong 50 percent of the time, that means I am wrong 99% percent of the time. He could turn out to be a nice cost controlled player. I still like the trade from the Phillies perspective, but you can’t just eliminate a player, can you?

by Neduol Caz on May 8, 2008 8:52 AM EDT reply reply 0 recs

Oops...

One other thing, you can’t count Lidge as a closer AND Myers as a starter. It just doesn’t work that way. If we did not acquire Lidge, Myers would still be our closer. We only gained one pitcher rom this trade, whether you want to “replace” Myers with Lidge as a closer and say we got ourselves a starter, or just add Lidge to the closers role, it is still only one guy. So, for me, the trade is “Myers starting + Bruntlett” for “Geary + Bourn + Costanzo”. We still win in my opinion.

by Neduol Caz on May 8, 2008 8:57 AM EDT reply reply 0 recs

I disagree

Myers moving back to the rotation is irrelevant, since it should have been done anyway.

Good trade. Bourn has been pretty terrible, stolen bases notwithstanding. Costanzo is doing his usual slow-start thing, and Geary has been good, but with his stuff he’s never far from getting lit up. On the other side, Lidge of cours has been awesome, and Bruntlett has been solid, but guys like him more or less grow on trees.

by phatj on May 8, 2008 9:12 AM EDT up reply reply 0 recs

If something “should” be done, it does not make it irrelevant when it happens. If we did not acquire Lidge, Myers would still be our closer. So, you can say by replacing Myers in the ‘pen with Lidge, we essentially gained Myers as a starting pitcher. Without Lidge, Myers would not be in the rotation.

by Neduol Caz on May 8, 2008 10:18 AM EDT up reply reply 0 recs

I stand by my statement

It’s irrelevant to evaluating the trade. The Phillies didn’t trade away Brett Myers the reliever and get back Brett Myers the starter.

If you want to look at the overall impact of the trade, then you can consider moving Myers to the rotation, but the way to value the trade itself is Lidge + Bruntlett vs. Bourn + Geary + Costanzo.

by phatj on May 8, 2008 10:58 AM EDT up reply reply 0 recs

caz is right

Secondary consequences of a trade are legitimate considerations in evaluating a trade.

by taco pal on May 9, 2008 12:08 PM EDT up reply reply 0 recs

I agree with you that lidge’s value should be discounted somewhat, but I think still feel like lidge is a considerable ungrade over myers as the closer. So maybe its something like:

(1/4)lidge + myers as a starter + brunts > bourn + geary (+ costanzo) —-sorry for not including him earlier. you’re right, I should have.

by char6587 on May 8, 2008 12:39 PM EDT up reply reply 0 recs

I did hesitate. Owings is a Monster!

What is wrong with Howard? He’s going to break 300 strikeouts this year. haha.

by psuimpreza on May 8, 2008 11:23 AM EDT reply reply 0 recs

Maybe the way to think about the net effect is something this—the current player in a given role versus who would be there had the trade not happened:

Lidge/closer vs. Myers/closer
Myers/starter vs. “Lohse”/starter (or whoever—Silva?)
Bruntlett vs. Nunez
Taguchi vs. Bourn
Seanez vs. Geary
(minor-league free agent) vs. Costanzo

I think the first three of these six swaps represent dramatic upgrades, another (Seanez) is a slight upgrade, and the remaining two represent slight downgrades. Bourn is pretty clearly preferable to Taguchi, but So probably hasn’t lost us any games and I can’t think of any obvious situations where Bourn would have won any in his place. Costanzo still seems like the Four Corners marginal power/patience guy we always thought he’d be; it’s not like he was going to be the third baseman this year anyway.

Things could change of course, but right now this deal looks like Pat Gillick’s (or whoever’s…) masterpiece with the Phils.

by dajafi on May 8, 2008 2:06 PM EDT reply reply 0 recs