BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: Chicago Tribune: Cubs call Murton back up, but only as trade bait?

Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

Chicago Tribune: Cubs call Murton back up, but only as trade bait?

The Cubs recalled Matt Murton from Triple-A Iowa on Tuesday and sent Eric Patterson back down, though they may just be showcasing Murton for a possible deal.

“We hated to send Patterson out, we really did,” manager Lou Piniella said. “He’s a good young man. We just needed a right-hand bat.”
...
General manager Jim Hendry sent special assistant Ken Kravec to scout Boston this week in Cincinnati and Philadelphia. The Cubs still are interested in Red Sox center fielder Coco Crisp,and now may be willing to include Rich Hill in a multiplayer package. Murton was acquired from Boston in the Nomar Garciaparra deal in ‘04.

After the Cubs demoted him May 1, Murton hit .298 at Iowa with one home run while playing exclusively in left field.

Wildman Rich Hill seems to have vanished; he hasn’t pitched at Iowa since the 11th, although he is on their active roster, and isn’t listed as a starting pitcher in the probables (which go through the 22nd)

NTNgod Posted: June 18, 2008 at 05:26 AM | 44 comment(s) | Login to Bookmark
Related News: General, Boston, Chi Cubs

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 1 pages

1. PASTE is not impressed by Albert Pujols (Zeth) Posted: June 18, 2008 at 05:38 AM (#2824158)

Wait a minute... Murton and Rich Hill for Coco Crisp? Seriously?

2. NTNgod Posted: June 18, 2008 at 05:42 AM (#2824160)

Rich Hill's stock has, err, sort of plummeted in 2008.

For unknown reasons, since spring training, the guy is back to throwing strikes about as often as he did during his first few minor league seasons (or college).

SOMETHING's got to be wrong with the guy. Of course, selling at rock-bottom is never smart, either, unless you think it's not resolvable.

3. AJM Posted: June 18, 2008 at 05:47 AM (#2824162)

The Mets need an OFer and have plenty of second basemen available.

Really, it's too bad the Mets have nothing to trade.

4. Dan Posted: June 18, 2008 at 06:17 AM (#2824168)

I would love, love, love the Red Sox to trade Crisp for Murton and Hill. Or Murton and any decent arm, really. Murton would be a great fit as a fourth OF in Boston with Ellsbury and Drew's LH bats. He could spell either vs. some lefties, with Drew shifting to center when Ellsbury sits.

5. NTNgod Posted: June 18, 2008 at 06:23 AM (#2824170)

Murton's pretty horrible in RF, for some reason, which does limit his flexibility.

Doesn't look comfortable out there at all, compared to LF.

6. Dan Posted: June 18, 2008 at 06:49 AM (#2824171)

That's interesting. His numbers in Dewan's plus/minus system (in LF) were very good when he was starting in Chicago, and his RZR numbers (per THT) have also been very good. I can't recall ever seeing an outfielder that could play one corner well but was lost in the other.

7. NTNgod Posted: June 18, 2008 at 07:08 AM (#2824176)

Geoff Jenkins was nowhere as good of a defender in RF for the Brewers (where he shifted when the Brewers acquired Carlos Lee) as he was in LF (where he was a god).

Not completely lost in RF, but it was a noticeable dropoff from one year to the next when he did the switch.

8. Robert Machemer Posted: June 18, 2008 at 07:32 AM (#2824179)

(I haven't looked at the numbers, but...) why would you want to trade Crisp for Murton when the Sox already have Kielty, who has typically had (if I remember correctly) good numbers against lefties?

*checks numbers*

Kielty, career vs. lefties: .296 AVG, .379 OBP, .503 SLG
Murton, career vs. lefties: .317 AVG, .391 OBP, .497 SLG

Now Murton is younger, and I'm happy to grant that he's overall a better player than Kielty (dunno if this is true or not, but let's assume it is for the sake of argument). The Sox would still be trading Crisp for a more-or-less redundant part. The Sox already have a platoon outfielder in Kielty; why trade Crisp (whom the Cubs apparently esteem) for someone who may be marginally better than the platoon guy the Sox already have?

It's not a bad deal or anything, but the improvement the trade would bring seems marginal.

9. Dan Posted: June 18, 2008 at 07:42 AM (#2824181)

Kielty, career vs. RHP: .228 .329 .348
Murton, career vs RHP: .283 .347 .426

In an age with 12 man bullpens, you can't really afford to give a spot on the roster to a guy who is a zero at the plate vs. RHP. Yeah, the role is probably going to involve facing LHP more than RHP, but the guy who can actually hit RHP as well is a much better use of a roster spot.

And presumably Murton would be coming along with a prospect of some stripe.

10. Walt Davis Posted: June 18, 2008 at 07:50 AM (#2824183)

why trade Crisp (whom the Cubs apparently esteem) for someone who may be marginally better than the platoon guy the Sox already have?

Clearly the Sox are planning on putting Manny on waivers again. :-)

I'm thoroughly confused why the Cubs would do this. Like Hendry and everyone here, I knew Jim Edmonds was gonna rebound when he came to the Cubs so it would be odd for them to pick up Crisp to play CF. And why not use Murton and Hoffpauir to fill in for Soriano -- is the "upgrade" to Crisp enough to justify this trade? Crisp's OPS+ the last 2+ seasons have varied from 77 to 84 ... here's not an offensive upgrade over Johnson or 2007 Edmonds. If all we want is his defense, just call up Pie. If the Cubs throw in Hill to this trade, they're blithering idiots.

It's also not clear what Boston is going to see in Murton's 2-3 days in the majors that they don't already know. And Boston fans shouldn't get too excited -- Murton has 1 HR and a 382 SLG this season in AAA and hasn't shown power in the majors since his rookie year.

11. Darren

Posted: June 18, 2008 at 10:37 AM (#2824199)

I know that you sort of have to take a Rich Hill quality pitcher for Coco if you can get him, but he's not a great fit for the Sox. The one thing that the Red Sox have plenty of is starting pitcher depth. What would really help them is a good, young, reliable setup man. If they're trading for a prospect, it should be a power hitter, as they are lacking that in their upper minors as well.

Walt, I'm not sure why you're saying Murton hasn't shown power in the past 2 seasons. He's had 150-ish ISOs, which is fine for a guy with his respectable batting average.

12. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: June 18, 2008 at 10:44 AM (#2824201)

Murton has 1 HR and a 382 SLG this season in AAA and hasn't shown power in the majors since his rookie year

You can't blame him for assuming he would have more success in the organization if he hit like a second baseman.

13. Harveys Wallbangers

Posted: June 18, 2008 at 10:55 AM (#2824204)

14. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: June 18, 2008 at 10:58 AM (#2824205)

You can't blame him for assuming he would have more success in the organization if he hit like a second baseman.

LOL. Primey.

15. Rusty Priske Posted: June 18, 2008 at 11:21 AM (#2824215)

16. AROM Posted: June 18, 2008 at 12:04 PM (#2824238)

If the Cubs want to trade Murton and Hill for a CF, the Angels should offer Gary Matthews Jr (and pay the salary difference). GMjr has a no-trade clause, but tell him he gets to play CF again, play on a winner, and try to finish the job his daddy could not in 1984, he might just approve.

17. Gern Blanston Posted: June 18, 2008 at 12:26 PM (#2824257)

So Hendry's shifted his fetish from middle infielders to mediocre CFs. Outstanding.

I'm all in favor of the Cubs paying premium for a good lefty reliever (Fuentes? Feliciano?) and a good starter (Sabathia, if he becomes available; much less enthusiastic about Burnett), but this Crisp talk is silly. retro-squeeze loves Coco because of his name, but I can't think of much else to recommend this.

Rich Hill's stock has, err, sort of plummeted in 2008.

Yes, which makes it all the dumber to trade him now. Hendry always does this, and it's feckin' annoying.

18. Gern Blanston Posted: June 18, 2008 at 12:27 PM (#2824258)

Do the Cubs need pitching? How about Murton and Hill for A.J. Burnett? (Hell, how about just Murton for A.J. Burnett?)

He has more value than Crisp and it would certainly make sense from teh Jays side.

I'm wary of Burnett, but this would make infinitely more sense from the Cubs' perspective. For now, though, their rotation is fine, so I wouldn't favor any trade for a starter until they determine whether Sabathia's on the market. Sabathia's the only guy out there who would significantly upgrade the Cubs' chances in a postseason series. (Plus, as Robothal pointed out, he'd give the Cubs a 1-2 punch that weighs a combined 545 pounds. That'd be awesome.)

19. T.J. Posted: June 18, 2008 at 12:29 PM (#2824260)

As a Cubs fan since the late '70s, I can only say...

Ken Kravec?!? Aaugh!

20. OCD SS Posted: June 18, 2008 at 12:43 PM (#2824270)

This rumor just doesn't make much sense. As was noted the Sox already have a pretty good idea about Murton, they shouldn't need to see him again for 4 games.

I wonder if there's something a little more complicated going on; either another suitor (real or imagined) or a 3 way deal.

Would anyone trade for Coco while he's still waiting to serve his suspension?

21. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: June 18, 2008 at 12:46 PM (#2824273)

22. SouthSideRyan Posted: June 18, 2008 at 12:47 PM (#2824274)

I would love, love, love the Red Sox to trade Crisp for Murton and Hill.

Oh really Dan??? You think you can spare Coco for that? Why the #### is this organization still looking for a CF? Ride TOFU until he plummets back to earth. I'm not sure Coco would outproduce Pie the rest of this season. This is insane.

23. SouthSideRyan Posted: June 18, 2008 at 12:49 PM (#2824276)

24. Cabbage Posted: June 18, 2008 at 01:15 PM (#2824292)

I see no need for Crisp. If you're going to flip Hill, Murton, or anything else, it should really be for another starter. Granted, Murton has no role on this club, and really should be traded, but I'm just not sure we really need another OF.

Pops, that was awesome.

25. Jimmy P Posted: June 18, 2008 at 02:26 PM (#2824360)

In what ####### universe is Rich Hill for Coco Crisp not a great fit for the Red Sox? A vastly superior player coming your way for an utterly redundant part who isn't very good. Yeah better hold out for Pie too.

I still don't get the love for Rich Hill. Maybe I'm too detached, but I just don't see it. He's nowhere near as young as one would believe, and he can't stick in the majors. Crisp is only a year older, and he's more valuable than he's given credit for.

26. Crispix Attacks Posted: June 18, 2008 at 02:39 PM (#2824371)

Sixty years from now Matt Murton will be spending his waning days awaiting mandatory euthanasia and a couple of wiseacres will walk by his bunk and crack, "Hey Matt, heard the Cubs FINALLY traded you!" followed by hoarse chuckles and general titters from onlookers.

Last decade it was Craig Wilson, this decade it's Matt Murton.

*I'M* starting to wonder why the Cubs refuse to play him if they claim he has any value at all. I wouldn't trade for Matt Murton either after all this debacle has gone down.

27. Moses Taylor demands to be housewarmed Posted: June 18, 2008 at 02:39 PM (#2824372)

This rumor just doesn't make much sense. As was noted the Sox already have a pretty good idea about Murton, they shouldn't need to see him again for 4 games.

BINGO.

This is pure speculation on the writers part. The Cubs haven't made this bad of a trade in a long time and it doesn't even pass the smell test. Murton and Hill for Crisp is not even in the picture, IMO. Keep dreaming.

There's no reason for Hendry to aim low at this point. Neither Murton or Hill have to be traded now, there is no roster squeeze and there's no risk of losing either of them on waivers. He should be looking for the best available players, and they might not all be available yet (such as CC). There's no immediate need.

28. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: June 18, 2008 at 03:03 PM (#2824395)

I would say that no team is more in need of a right-handed outfield bat than the Braves. Somehow they have ended up with a organization of lefthanded hitting outfielders and Francouer who of course can't hit.

29. SoSH U at work Posted: June 18, 2008 at 03:24 PM (#2824424)

I'm not sure Coco would outproduce Pie the rest of this season

It's OK to dislike the trade suggestion, but that's just ridiculous. There is no earthly reason to think Pie will approach Coco's production this season.

30. SouthSideRyan Posted: June 18, 2008 at 03:49 PM (#2824440)

ZiPS '08 on Pie: 269 .321 .429

Am I seriously missing something about Crisp??

Other than his defense and baserunning(which Pie isn't much worse than at worst), what is there to like about the guy? He hasn't hit since he left Cleveland.

31. JPWF13

Posted: June 18, 2008 at 03:58 PM (#2824451)

There is no earthly reason to think Pie will approach Coco's production this season.

except the fact that just about every pre-season projection had Pie outperforming Coco?
Coco has hit .264/.317/.385 followed by .268/.330/.382 followed by .262/.303/.419.

I don't want to sound like Kevin, but assuming Manny is back and plays everyday, doesn't the regular OF have to be Manny, J.D., Jacoby?

Crisp is better that, say, Juan Pierre, but that;s mostly because he's better defensively.
Pie is a kid who desperate;y needs a change of scenary

32. SoSH U at work Posted: June 18, 2008 at 04:03 PM (#2824458)

Shouldn't the fact that Coco has demonstrably proven capable of hitting major league pitching and Pie, in his opportunities, has not, count for something.

I know what ZIPS said coming into the season. I also see what Pie's done at two different levels and can't see how that wouldn't tend to override the earlier projections, or at least downgrade them substantially.

Pie may yet become a decent major league hitter. Any kind of expecation that's happening this year seems ridiculous to me.

33. JPWF13

Posted: June 18, 2008 at 04:09 PM (#2824466)

Shouldn't the fact that Coco has demonstrably proven capable of hitting major league pitching and Pie, in his opportunities, has not, count for something.

It counts for something.

The fact that Coco isn't very good at it counts for something, and the fact that Pie has a vastly greater shot of being very good at it also counts for something.

If Coco was even a 95-105 OPS+ kind of hitter I'd agree with you, but he's not, he's not that good, the risk of replacing Coco with Pie and having Pie flameout isn't all that great.

This is when teams really Eff up, there should be no effing way that any GM would view Coco as a more valuable commodity than Pie (yes I know that undoubtedly there are those that do)

34. SoSH U at work Posted: June 18, 2008 at 04:16 PM (#2824480)

The fact that Coco isn't very good at it counts for something, and the fact that Pie has a vastly greater shot of being very good at it also counts for something.

If Coco was even a 95-105 OPS+ kind of hitter I'd agree with you, but he's not, he's not that good, the risk of replacing Coco with Pie and having Pie flameout isn't all that great.

This is when teams really Eff up, there should be no effing way that any GM would view Coco as a more valuable commodity than Pie (yes I know that undoubtedly there are those that do)

I'm not arguing for the trade. I'm not arguing that Coco is a more valuable commodity. I'm specifically arguing South Side's claim that he isn't sure Coco would outproduce Pie the rest of this season. I can't see how that's a reasonable expectation at this point.

35. SouthSideRyan Posted: June 18, 2008 at 04:17 PM (#2824481)

Pie hasn't had an opportunity to hit major league pitching. He's had smatterings of ABs spread over long periods of time. If Felix Pie played every game the rest of the season vs. righties, I'd bet he'd beat out Coco in the same situation.

36. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: June 18, 2008 at 04:47 PM (#2824530)

It's OK to dislike the trade suggestion, but that's just ridiculous. There is no earthly reason to think Pie will approach Coco's production this season.

Given their expected playing time on the Cubs (mostly a 4th or 5th outfielder), the actual value contributed by either player will not be dissimilar.

37. Joe Bivens, Schmoo from Massachoosetts Posted: June 18, 2008 at 06:54 PM (#2824801)

Crisp hurt his wrist today.

38. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: June 18, 2008 at 07:10 PM (#2824832)

Crisp hurt his wrist today.

Cubs are buying low.

39. Conor Posted: June 18, 2008 at 07:37 PM (#2824874)

Murton would be a great fit for the Mets. They could use a right handed hitting LF'r.

I don't know what the Cubs would want, and I imagine the Mets are just going to bank on Alou coming back anyway.

40. Darren

Posted: June 18, 2008 at 08:59 PM (#2824947)

I think people are also ignoring the possibility that the Red Sox side would include more than Crisp.

41. SouthSideRyan Posted: June 19, 2008 at 01:11 AM (#2825331)

Crisp hurt his wrist today.

Ok fine, just Gallagher, Murton, and Hill then.

Bruce Miles on the rumor courtesy of NSBB:

This trade is not going to happen. I'm at home doing some computer training at the office, so I'm not with the team, but I checked it out. Cubs haven't seriously discussed Crisp internally since spring training. One thing about scouts is this: Almost every team has them all over the place. Kravec could have been looking at a number of players. That's what he does. But with Edmonds and Johnson doing reasonably well, and even a little better than that, and Soriano coming back eventually, something like this makes no sense.

42. NTNgod Posted: June 19, 2008 at 01:35 AM (#2825353)

Where the hell *IS* Hill?

He appears to be out of the Iowa rotation, and hasn't pitched in a week.

Kevin Hart only lasted 2+ innings for Iowa tonight, but Carrasco came in instead.

If Hill was hurt, they've got the 7-day DL in the minors, but he's still active.

43. Petooter: 11'6" 355 lbs of scrap and grit Posted: June 19, 2008 at 02:21 AM (#2825422)

Bringing a guy up to the majors to showcase him for a trade doesn't even make sense as a concept. What, a billion-dollar operation like the Red Sox can't afford to send a scout to Iowa?

Not that the trade rumor makes any more sense. No organization in their right mind would give up anything of value for Murton or Rich Hill at this point. As long as the Cubs are trying as hard as they can to completely demolish the potential trade value of both of those players, why would you dangle someone like Crisp, who despite his polarizing love-hate effect, is a more than serviceable major league player?

44. SouthSideRyan Posted: June 19, 2008 at 02:36 AM (#2825442)

Hill likely is still suffering back problems. Hart left with an injured head(??) today. The Cubs have done a magnificent job of ruining Rich Hill. I didn't think he had it in them.

Page 1 of 1 pages

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

Chicago Tribune: Cubs call Murton back up, but only as trade bait?

Reader Comments and Retorts

Support BBTF

Bookmarks

Hot Topics