The only question I have on this is if this was the sort of thing that was part of a plan, it seems a little odd to have cut bait with Greinke so recently. Couldn't you have just given the money you gave to Davis and Shields to Greinke instead?

Generally teams don't like to do what the Royals just did with Myers given the current financially realities. Sure guys like Miguel Cabrera and Matt Kemp are big talents and bring huge value to their teams, but you have to pay for them accordingly. But with a Mike Trout you get three years of him at league min, and then a few more at a good discount. And maybe that waiting time is enough to get him to sign a favorable long term deal ala Longoria.

And so when teams have a prospect who seems pretty close to a sure thing to have some decent MLB value, teams lately have treated them as close to untouchable; IE they're pretty much the last guys on the roster where it would make any financial sense to move them.

Did I forget any "big" pitchers traded recently with 1+ years?

3 years of Garza brought back Lee, Archer, Fuld, Chirinos, and Guyer.

This is the kind of trade that makes you disengage from a team. I still want the Royals to do well, but they're actively, willfully getting worse. It puts things in perspective, in a way. For decades, the Royals have said that they have to build with prospects from within. Add salary? Nope, gotta wait for the prospects. Work the trade market? Nope, gotta develop the prospects. But if Dayton feels a cold wind down *his* neck, suddenly it's time to trade their best hitting prospect, and their best pitching prospect, too. Middle-aged mediocrity, that's what we needed all along!

I guess this is the difinitive answer to the question: "Do you keep a crummy GM who builds a good farm system?" Answer: No, because when he feels his job is in jeopardy, the farm system will be out the window.

I hate, hate, hate, hate, hate this trade.

My first reaction was like most other people's: this is a classic Dayton Moore disaster trade. My second reaction was that it might not be quite so bad; two years of Shields and several years of Davis don't seem like an unreasonable trade for an excellent prospect, an okay prospect, and two near-throw-ins. If the money were equal, and if the Royals projected to 80 or so wins before the trade, I wouldn't have any problem with the deal.

But that's the thing - Shields and Davis both cost real money, and there was just an article written on how the Royals profess to be in the red if their payroll exceeds $70M. I know some people are calling BS on that claim, and are happy to see the team spend more money with the new national TV contracts about to kick in. But even if you set all of that aside, the fact remains that no projection system is going to forecast them for anything better than about 10% playoff odds this year, and in making this deal, the team has hurt its playoff chances three to six years from now, when they presumably would have been better positioned to attempt to contend. It really seems like a bad move.

One other thing I find interesting here is the language Moore used.

"It's not easy to give up prospects but it's important that we start winning games."

"Let's make something very clear. Billy Butler, Alex Gordon, Salvador Perez and Alcides Escobar signed here long-term with the full expectation that we, as a baseball operations department, would do everything that we can to put the best team on the field every single night," Moore said. "That's what we've committed to our fans, that's what we've committed to our players, so when an opportunity comes along that you can acquire a pitcher like James Shields and Wade Davis, we have to do it."

If you ask me, it doesn't sound like even Moore believes that this team is really good enough to contend for the playoffs this year!

Man, they traded Wil Myers for James Shields. I know the offseason isn't over yet, but if I had to bet on which trade this offseason has the best chance to live in infamy for a team's fans, it's this one for the Royals. Who knows, maybe Myers craps out (somehow, I guess he K's a bunch) but this looks like the kind of trade Royals fans could be upset about 35 years from now.

According to Sickels, the Royals don't view Myers as highly as "outside analysts". He strikes out a lot. If Myers ends up Jay Bruce (current version), it's not a huge loss. If Myers ends up Ryan Braun...oops.

I'd be pissed if I was a Royals fan too, but I don't see this as an obviously awful trade by any stretch.

http://www.minorleagueball.com/2012/12/9/3749448/royals-trade-farm-system-for-31-year-old-pitcher

According to Sickels, the Royals don't view Myers as highly as "outside analysts". He strikes out a lot.

So you trade him to someone who overvalues him. You don't trade him for 60% of James Shields.

Problem being, they weren't going to get anybody better than James Shields. If the idea is to try and win now...

*shrug*

This would have struck me as a bad deal for the Royals even if it was just Shields and Davis for Myers.

Man, they traded Wil Myers for James Shields. I know the offseason isn't over yet, but if I had to bet on which trade this offseason has the best chance to live in infamy for a team's fans, it's this one for the Royals.

There is the Marlins trade. Though I suppose there have to be Marlins fans in the future for it to live on in infamy among them.

Marlins trade wasn't really bad at all. I mean clearly it was bad for the Marlins as they are going to suck and probably not reinvest the money, but from a value standpoint the Marlins might have been the winners in that trade.

According to Sickels, the Royals don't view Myers as highly as "outside analysts". He strikes out a lot. If Myers ends up Jay Bruce (current version), it's not a huge loss. If Myers ends up Ryan Braun...oops.

Jay Bruce is an interesting comp for Myers - they are both high-K hitters who put up some slash lines in the high minors that would make any prospect-hound drool (Myers arguably flashed even more power than Bruce) - but you know what, Jay Bruce is pretty damn good. Since 2010: .262/.340/.493, 120 OPS+ and 30 HR a year on the nose. Maybe not an MVP, but that's a hitter that would look good in anyone's lineup. I'd put that guy behind Butler and Gordon and call it a win.

One way or another, we'll be talking about this trade for years.

As Sickels mentioned, it's clear the Royals believe they are selling high on Myers. Wil Myer's minor league numbers certainly suggest that, although he could be a great player, he also might only be an OK player. They clearly believe his upside is Mike Marshall (the outfielder) and not Jeff Bagwell. :D

And have we even mentioned the most hilarious aspect of this trade? That the Royals apparently believed Wil Myers to be blocked by mother------ Jeff Francoeur! "The Royals have advanced to the World Series on the strength of another gem by James Shields and more timely slugging from JEFF FRANCOEUR!"

But maybe the best part is how this is the culmination of a disaster that unfolded before us in slow motion. The Royals have been telegraphing their intention to trade Myers for weeks and all anyone could do was sit back and say "No, they aren't serious, are they?" We will be talking about this trade for years, and I'm certain what we'll be saying is that the Royals foolishly decided to short-circuit a long rebuilding process that was finally beginning to bear fruit for miniscule short-term gains. Because these are the Royals, I still can't decide if this is farce or tragedy.

Also Mendoza (their best starter in 2012)

Just in case anyone else was thinking of looking it up, this is apparently true. He's called Luis Mendoza - I would not have guessed that I'd have never heard of anyone who was the best starter on an MLB team in 2012, but here we are.

A triple post, but this actually reminds me more of the Adam Jones and Chris Tillman for Erik Bedard trade than anything else, in that you have one team overpaying in prospects for an "ace" because they've wildly misjudged how competitive their team is likely to be - except this is maybe even more likely to backfire.

Is this even legal?

Does James Shields help them, money aside, more than just playing Myers and telling Frenchy to go visit a hospital or something would have?

Did I forget any "big" pitchers traded recently with 1+ years?

Does Marcum for Lawrie count? Marcum didn't have the track record Shields does, but Lawrie and Myers seem pretty close as prospects.

One way or another, we'll be talking about this trade for years.

It's possible Myers flames out and this becomes Jeremy Giambi part 2, but there's no way James Shields puts the Royals over the top and into playoff contention.

1) I feel like people aren't as high on Shields as I am. There are damn few pitchers in baseball who take the ball every fifth day, do not miss a start, go into the 7th or 8th inning almost every start, and pitch above-average. He is one of those handful of pitchers. In fact, I would contend Shields is a key reason why the Rays' bullpen has been so consistently excellent over the last several years. You just don't have very many games where he blows up your bullpen with a third inning exit or something. I still wouldn't have made this trade, because giving up both top prospects is just too much, but I don't think the trade is inherently a disaster. This will help the Royals rotation, obviously, but it will also help their bullpen, by taking innings away from it.

2) I see the logic of this trade from the Royals POV, though I don't agree with it. They had a ton of young players in the lineup last year who were not great, but not complete wipeouts, either (OPS+ of between 80 and 98 for their four starters under the age of 25). Butler was excellent, and Gordon looked very good. They must believe the young hitters will improve this year, as a group. They believe Butler and Gordon will conitnue to hit well. Dyson and Frenchy don't get it done, but if they replaced them with a couple of gloves with league-average bats, you might have something. It was the starting pitching that was pretty dreadful, and Shields - and even Davis - are a pretty big upgrade over what they put out there most of last year. I dont think it is going to work, but I understand what they might be thinking...

-For reasons I'm not 100% clear on, fWAR likes Shields a lot more than bWAR, despite little overall discrepancy between his ERA and FIP. fWAR has Shields worth an average of just under 4 WAR per season since 2007.

bWAR adjusts for the quality of team defense, and presumably the very good defensive squads the Rays have had the last several seasons are causing a large adjustment on Shields's WAR numbers here.

I don't think thats why you are seeing the large discrepancy. I think it's simply all the UER Shields has given up, which gives him a highish RA9, which is what bWAR uses, not ERA. He has been well into double digits 3 of the last 4 years, allowing 12,11,5,& 14.

The year he allowed just 5 UER he had over 4 bWAR.

But I don't think there's anything wrong with the 2013 Royals trying to add a good veteran starter - what are they supposed to wait for before they're allowed to do something like that? If the price was too high, that would be true regardless of what kind of shot the Royals have at the 2013 playoffs.

The "success cycle" logic is often-misapplied to free agent signings, but I think it does apply to prospect-for-star trades. In Wil Myers, the Royals have a kid who should be a capable major league player this year, and who has a good shot to be a major league star in a couple years. Trading him away for two seasons of a good, not great pitcher is explicitly doing "success cycle" things to your team - the Royals made themselves better this year at the direct expense of being worse in 2015 and beyond. This is a trade that needs to be evaluated in terms of whether the Royals are better off storing up wins for 2015 or maximizing wins today. And it seems pretty clear the answer is the former.

(There's also the fact that the Royals have spent over $30M on pitching this offseason while giving away their best 2013 RF. They couldn't have spent that money on pitchers while not giving away their best 2013 RF?)

Even if the idea is solely to win in 2013, replacing Francouer with Myers would likely improve the 2013 team more than replacing Bruce Chen or whoever with James Shields. This trade should end Dayton Moore's career.

And Rany, if you're reading this, now is the time. The Fire Dayton and Glass Must Go armies are assembled and are only waiting for a leader. It is your destiny.

It's extremely hard to see how adding one good pitcher takes the Royals into contention. This is a trade that maybe, maybe you could defend if the Royals won 84 games last year and just needed an extra shove to get over the top against the Tigers and White Sox. But this is a Royals club that won 72 games last year. James Shields is not a difference maker for them.

The only way I see this making sense for the Royals is if no free agent wanted to sign with them because they obviously weren't looking to contend in the near future. In isolation, this trade makes about as much sense as the Celtics picking up Ray Allen a few years ago. It made them better in the short run, but Ray Allen was not the solution. However, the Ray Allen acquisition convinced Kevin Garnett to approve a trade to Boston.

So, if this kind of move makes Anibal Sanchez and/or Josh Hamilton interested in making KC their home for a few years, it will be a better move than it would seem in isolation.

That said, if that's what it must take for the transaction to make sense, it's a bad transaction.

Shields is one of those pitchers I think of as a star because he's a Ranger-killer: he's won five of his last six starts against them in the regular season, losing the other one 1-0. But the rest of the world may not share my opinion, because the Rangers, oddly enough, handled him easily in the playoffs in '10 and '11. At first I was happy because I thought the trade put him further from playing the Rangers, but of course they probably play KC about as much as they play T/SP, it just hasn't been as memorable in recent years.

Yeah I think McCarthy at 16 million is only a little worse than Shields at 20 (?) million. Edwin Jackson is still on the market and he's nearly as good as Shields (even though I abhor watching him pitch). And then of course you keep Myers and Odorizzi. Just a god awful trade.

We don't know if McCarthy would have signed the same contract with Kansas City that he did with Arizona, and he's not exactly dependable to go 180 innings or whatever Shields can do. We also don't know how much Jackson or Anibal Sanchez will cost, or whether they'd make the Royals pay more for them than a team they thought was a contender. If they had waited for Sanchez or Jackson they might have not gotten either for anything short of 6/$110M or something. If Jackson comes at a reasonable price the Royals can still sign him. It's even possible that signing him became easier now that Shields is on the team.

Does James Shields help them, money aside, more than just playing Myers and telling Frenchy to go visit a hospital or something would have?

Clearly the Royals think so, but I don't. Myers could easily be as good as Shields right now.

So, if this kind of move makes Anibal Sanchez and/or Josh Hamilton interested in making KC their home for a few years, it will be a better move than it would seem in isolation.

Hamilton to the Royals would be astounding.

Since it's not mentioned in the header, the Royals are apparently also getting a PTBNL here. If that ends up being a significant piece, this looks a little less bad for them.

Since it's not mentioned in the header, the Royals are apparently also getting a PTBNL here. If that ends up being a significant piece, this looks a little less bad for them.

No... not really. There's no possible PTBNL that could make this anything but a maelstrom of catastrophic stupidity for the Royals. If I were a Royals fan yesterday I would be an ex-Royals fan today. Hell, I'm vicariously infuriated just because of my sympathy for Rany and other Royals fans I like and respect. But my sympathy for them ends here. If they choose to keep supporting a team that's determined to kick them in the balls and laugh, it's on them now.

When I went to sleep, the reported deal was Shields and Davis for Myers. Which sounded decent for Tampa even before the rest of the package was announced. Shields will be the Royals' best pitcher for the next two seasons, and perhaps beyond if Glass somehow chooses to extend him.

Odorizzi has an excellent chance to contribute more to a MLB team than Davis does right now, and he is under control (as is Myers) for six years.

Getting Montgomery as a "what the hell, we may be able to fix him" is an added bonus.

I assume what is TBA going to Kansas City isn't significant, as it's either a player or cash.

So, the Rays rotation next year: Price, Hellickson, Moore, Cobb, and Niemann or Archer?

Huh...

I had always thought the OOTP AI trading algorithm was based off of Dayton Moore brain scans - but I just tried this deal as the Rays and the Royals (run as the AI) responded with a "That's not a fair deal, I guess we don't have anything to talk about".

Maybe I'm not patched up-to-date...

There's no possible PTBNL that could make this anything but a maelstrom of catastrophic stupidity for the Royals.

Sure, it's still a dumb trade. Just maybe slightly less dumb, depending on who the PTBNL is.

My first reaction was like most other people's: this is a classic Dayton Moore disaster trade

To be fair to Dayton - and I think he is a disaster as a GM - I can't really point to any disaster trades before this one. The Melky Cabrera trade blew up in his face, but I don't think even the internet stat nerds thought it was a bad trade at the time - Melky had one year left on his deal, seemed to be coming off a flukey season, and Sanchez had the ability to strike guys out.

He just sucks hard in roster construction, in understanding the market, in understanding replacement level talent, and in relying too heavily on "homegrown" players.

This would have struck me as a bad deal for the Royals even if it was just Shields and Davis for Myers.

This. I'm just floored Odorizzi was included.

Even if the idea is solely to win in 2013, replacing Francouer with Myers would likely improve the 2013 team more than replacing Bruce Chen or whoever with James Shields. This trade should end Dayton Moore's career.

Right. Assuming Wil is even a 1 WAR player his rookie season, that's a 3 win improvement in RF alone. Take out Hochevar and replace him with say Joe Blanton who can be a 1.5 WAR pitcher, and that's a 3 WAR improvement for roughly the same salary.

People complain that David Glass doesn't spend money, but its pretty clear that Dayton will take whatever money he gets and fritter it away like a junkie handed a $100 bill.

Never let a GM fight to save his job. Once you're considering firing him, fire him.

Otherwise, you get crap trades like this.

The Royals are a better team right now, if they put Myers in RF, and sign Edwin Jackson or somebody similar with the Shield/Davis money.

PTBNL's are used differently at different times of the season (injured player, waivers, rule 5, waiting for 1-year post-signing), but the only reason to include one in December is so that the value of the trade can be changed later. Maybe something like they get a prospect if Montgomery is healthy, but nothing (cash) if he's injured.

So what's Ben Grieve up to these days?

So what's Ben Grieve up to these days?

I don't know, but Moore should find out. He'd be an upgrade in RF for KC.

I'll be the contrarian and argue that this isn't a bad trade for the Royals. They're getting 2 years of a durable, above average starter and 5 years of an excellent reliever who could also be an average starting pitcher. They're giving up one of the best prospects in baseball, a good pitching prospect, and a few others. There's no question that Myers is talented, but I think Jay Bruce is a good comp -- an above average corner player, but not a star. Plus, it might take him a couple years to adjust to MLB. That seems like a reasonable trade for both teams.

The key to this trade might be Davis and Odorizzi. One of those guys could end up being pretty valuable and change the equation, esp. Odorizzi. This trade could look horrible in a couple years if he pans out.

As far as the success cycle thing goes, I think it's overstated. You just never know when a group of players might gel or another team in the division might fall apart, and a GM should generally try to put the best team on the field on the assumption that the playoffs are a possibility, especially when you have a young, talented team. Bad teams make sudden leaps forward all the time: Tigers in 2006, Rays in 2008, Reds in 2010, Orioles in 2012, etc. The point isn't that they won X games last year and the addition of players A and B might get them to Y wins, it's that adding a player like Shields will help a team capitalize on the opportunity if the younger players take a step forward. Of course, giving up Myers is a steep price to pay, but I can see where Moore is coming from.

I'll be the contrarian and argue that this isn't a bad trade for the Royals. They're getting 2 years of a durable, above average starter and 5 years of an excellent reliever who could also be an average starting pitcher. They're giving up one of the best prospects in baseball, a good pitching prospect, and a few others. There's no question that Myers is talented, but I think Jay Bruce is a good comp -- an above average corner player, but not a star. Plus, it might take him a couple years to adjust to MLB. That seems like a reasonable trade for both teams.

I don't think a Myers for Shields trade is that bad, but I'd guess it would be the Rays throwing in a few prospects to even it up. Giving away two more pitchers is not winning the trade.

As far as the success cycle thing goes, I think it's overstated. You just never know when a group of players might gel or another team in the division might fall apart, and a GM should generally try to put the best team on the field on the assumption that the playoffs are a possibility, especially when you have a young, talented team. Bad teams make sudden leaps forward all the time: Tigers in 2006, Rays in 2008, Reds in 2010, Orioles in 2012, etc. The point isn't that they won X games last year and the addition of players A and B might get them to Y wins, it's that adding a player like Shields will help a team capitalize on the opportunity if the younger players take a step forward. Of course, giving up Myers is a steep price to pay, but I can see where Moore is coming from.

I think starting Myers in RF in 2013 would add more immediate value to KC than what Shields brings over the guy he's replacing. Especially if you spend the $10M Shields is making on a SP.

Sticking up for this guy makes me feel dirty, but someone has to say it: why are we taking it as a given that Myers will be better, significantly better, than Francouer next year? There is a planet where Frenchy racks up another 75 XBH season and Myers, struggling to adjust to major league pitching, hits something like .235/.287/.378, minus Frenchy's defense.

OK, shower needed.

Especially if you spend the $10M Shields is making on a SP.

I think the key to this deal is that pitchers like Anibal Sanchez or Edwin Jackson won't sign with the Royals. They can't buy #2 starters, so they have to pay for them in talent.

There's no question that Myers is talented, but I think Jay Bruce is a good comp -- an above average corner player, but not a star. Plus, it might take him a couple years to adjust to MLB.

FWIW, there are rumors the Royals think there is a huge hole in his swing and he can't handle sliders. But as suggested earlier, that doesn't mean you just trade him to the first team that comes along. With how offense-starved Seattle was, you'd think they might overpay for Myers.

I think the key to this deal is that pitchers like Anibal Sanchez or Edwin Jackson won't sign with the Royals. They can't buy #2 starters, so they have to pay for them in talent.

Overpay. Jackson always struggle to get a multi-year deal; he took 1/11 from WAS last year. Offer him 4/50.

Overpay. Jackson always struggle to get a multi-year deal; he took 1/11 from WAS last year. Offer him 4/50.

The Pirates overpaid last year, and he turned them down (3/30 according to reports). Maybe he really wants to play for a contender. The Royals are not contenders.

But they should have at least tried. There were no reports the Royals were at all interested in EJax.

I mean heck, why not offer Dempster that third year he was looking for?

Sticking up for this guy makes me feel dirty, but someone has to say it: why are we taking it as a given that Myers will be better, significantly better, than Francouer next year? There is a planet where Frenchy racks up another 75 XBH season and Myers, struggling to adjust to major league pitching, hits something like .235/.287/.378, minus Frenchy's defense.

I won't defend the decision to play Francoeur, but I agree that there's a good chance that Myers won't help the team over the next couple years. He isn't Trout or Harper, and it's likely that it will take him 1000 PAs to adjust to ML pitching (and that's assuming he does eventually become a quality player).

I don't think a Myers for Shields trade is that bad, but I'd guess it would be the Rays throwing in a few prospects to even it up. Giving away two more pitchers is not winning the trade.

Right, which is why I think Odorizzi is the wild card here. If he turns into an averagish SP in the next couple years this trade will be a disaster for the Royals.

I won't defend the decision to play Francoeur,

You never know how it's going to feel until you try it.

Very early CAIRO run by SG:
LAA 95-67
DET 91-71
TEX 88-74
OAK 88-74
TBR 86-76
TOR 86-76
NYY 85-77
BOS 84-78
KCR 84-78