Comer, Musgrove, Perez, Wojo for Jay Happ??????  Snider for Lincoln.

Wow.  Throwing away upside for back of the rotation starters and relievers.

I'm thoroughly disgusted right now. I was pretty angry after Farrell brought in Lincoln last night instead of one of his better relievers, but now I've reached my lowest point since the Anthopoulos era began. The Astros trade now reeks of sheer panic.

From a pedigree perspective, it seems like a bad move. However, I'm seeing a guy who is now throwing in the upper 80s without another plus weapon as a strikeout pitch - that screams someone who will not be a major league starter to me.

Ryan Schimpf has had an interesting pro career, flying very low under the radar.  He has proved competent at each level of his development and that isn't changing in AA.

In SS:  153PA, .795 OPS, 15.7% Krate, 9.8% BBrate
In Low A:  395PA, .754 OPS, 24.3% Krate, 9.9% BBrate
In Hi A:  711PA, .800 OPS, 23.6% KRate, 10.4% BBrate
In AA:  55PA, 1.103 OPS, 20.0% Krate, 18.1% BBrate

Between Goins and Schimpf we might have at least a bench bat if not a passable starter for a few years of their prime.

Perhaps to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the Calgary Olympics, the Jays could have the "Battle of the Ryans" for the second base position next year. (Goins & Schimpf)

They seem about as appealing as anything else out there.

Oliver was available, hasn't worked much of late, and has had success against Dunn previously. While Janssen is ** The Closer **, he was also available and has good numbers against lefties, both this season and over his career. Both pitchers were better options than Lincoln.

Pitchers in low A have little value.  Even Aaron Sanchez, who is a year ahead of Comer and Musgrove, doesn't have a huge trade value because he is three years away from the major leagues.  There is no much failure among pitching prospects that every level down you go, their value is reduced.

Guys like Brandon Lyon and Brad Lincoln have shown they can pitch in the major leagues and that has value.  Pitchers in short season ball have very little value.  So I am less outraged than many at the trade and the value exchanging hands. 

I am more concerned about the meaning of the trade from a front office perspective.  Is the plan changing?  Is the front office more short term focused?  Are we willing to let go of the future in favour of the present?  I would like to know what the trades mean from this perspective. 

One thing that is lost in this is that the Jays 2011 crop of pitching prospects from the draft is much less successful than the 2010 draftees.  This time last year Sanchez, Syndergaard and Nicolino were the talk of the Jays minor leagues.  Nicolino and Syndergaard pitched in the playoffs for Lansing, Sanchez ended in Vancouver.  This year Musgrove was injured a lot, Comer, Gabryszwski and Norris have pitched well from time to time but I don't expect they would have pitched for Lansing in the playoffs.  I don't think they will pitch for Vancouver in the playoffs unless the Jays decide to force them up there for the experience.

Was the Jays success in the 2010 draft a result of the increased scouting focus, or luck?  What of the 2011 results?  If luck is the answer what does that mean for the future?  Luck is the scariest answer in many respects.

It seems silly to get upset about losing a pitcher who might, if things go fairly well, in 3-5 years, be as good as J.A. Happ. He could be much better, but it's also entirely possible he'll never even make it to the major leagues.

Except that we lost three or four of them.

I have no doubt that the Jays hopes for Comer, Musgrove, Wojo, Perez and Rollins has soured.  I don't see the point in throwing them away when their outlook could improve just as easily, or another team may see more value.  There's just really no point in throwing away higher upside prospects for relievers and back-of-the-rotation starters.  Pick these guys up in free agency.  Let your failing prospects turn into these types naturally.  Get them as throw-ins in larger deals.

Of course we won't truly be able to judge this trade until we see how the prospects develop, which will take many years.

Well that would be unfair.  The GM's who made the trade don't have the benefit of hindsight, so why should they be evaluated only after the availability of hindsight.

The trade should be evaluated based on all the information we know today.  Granted, we don't know what the GM's know, but that doesn't have to stop the discussion.

I can see how a catalogue of transactions from a GM could be evaluated with hindsight to try to glean some insight into the player evaluation skills, but any one transaction is subject to too much luck to fairly evaluate with hindsight.

However, they do make trades based on foresight, or their perception of future value.

Yes, but I think it's difficult to evaluate their ability to perceive future value based on one transaction.  There is too much influence of luck on a small sample.  Whether a trade "turns out good" is something that can be measured over time, but whether it is good, should be considered at the time of acquisition with the benefit of the information available. 

For example, I could go buy a Toyota Camry Hybrid tomorrow.  We might evaluate that as a good decision based on all the reports available on the quality of that vehicle compared to others in its class.  It may turn out to be a lemon.  That doesn't mean it was a bad purchase.  If I continually make purchase lemons througout my life, it could be bad luck, but there's more of a chance that I'm chosing to rely on the wrong information and not a good car buyer.

It is a small point of contention really, but I don't like it when people say we shouldn't evaluate a trade until several years have passed.  We should evaluate it now and continue to measure it into the future.

John

I agree with you on Sierra as our Left Fielder going forward.   Without injury, Sierra would be up here already.   

Snider had more pop, but Sierra was the better Outfielder, with the big RF arm.  Snider had more hype, while Sierra had the better upside.  When Sierra was hurt, missing that long, people forgot how good he was.   It possible Marc Hulet or TamRa might have better information on him.

Didn't mean to attribute that sentiment to you, CF.  I've seen it a few places around the web.

The point is that a decent chunk of people think high upside players shouldn't be traded en masse in exchange for players you use to fill out the roster.

This is all it is really. 

And plenty of talent evaluators out there seem to think that Comer, Musgrove, Snider and to a lesser extent, Wojo and Perez seem to still have a lot of upside.

Maybe time will show that AA has identified controllable relievers as the new market innefficiency - relievers are definitely problematic and have to pitch a large number of innings, who knows?  Maybe Happ is unearthed as an "on the cusp" star?  Hopefully our pro scouts are better than our high school scouts?

Value for value is what making a trade is all about.   Sometimes it's perceived value for perceived value that is involved in a trade.  No one has the same perceived value as another's perceived value about anything, which makes trading anything very difficult.  How much value does a draft pick have?  How much does a first year player have? How much value does someone not in AA have for a Major League Team?   To a Major League Team a prospect is important if he's Major League ready now or Major League ready next year or will get you someone MLB or MLB ready.   Anyone who is not yet there, only has value to the Farm system.   Perceived value is in how fast they will get here, and only 'the year after next' has value to the Big Club.  The most value is to the GM.  A strong, healthy top-ranked Farm system makes trading easier, everyone wants your guys. 

Then mopy fans, with little life of their own, bemoan and begrudge everything you do.   They absolutely know you're trading away superstars, and are incapable of evaluating MLB talent.  This is truly sad. 

I wish there was an ignore function on this site, so I don't have to read a certain someone making unprovoked insults at others in every other thread. It is really getting tiresome.

It's very simple.  I know the posters who, in my opinion, have nothing useful to offer and I ignore their comments.

Platoon mate in AAA?  Maybe.

Schimpf has only a few months in AA and I don't believe he is a great defender.  I would think Schimpf will be back in AA next year.

Goins should be in AAA next year but he is a smallish guy.  He doesn't have a lot of power and he may or may not be major league quality at shortstop.  He has surprised this year and could be more than the utility guy he was profiled to be.