BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: Pirates Revolution: Trade Nate McLouth, and Trade for Yankees’ Nick Swisher

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

Monday, January 12, 2009

Pirates Revolution: Trade Nate McLouth, and Trade for Yankees’ Nick Swisher

As Francesspool’s heart just skipped a NutraSweet…

In 2008 at age 26, Nate McLouth hit .276/.356/.497 (a 126 OPS+) with 26 HR and 94 RBI in 597 at-bats. In 2006 and 2007, McLouth had posted OPS+ lines of 74 and 110 while being used as a part-time player. He earned the league minimum in all three seasons and is now arbitration-eligible for the first time. The Pirates’ attempt to sign McLouth to a contract extension was reportedly rebuffed when McLouth and his agent felt as if the player wasn’t being valued fairly.

No matter what happens in 2009, the Pirates can’t come out ahead.

If McLouth performs as he did in 2008, then his price almost certainly will skyrocket. He will be two seasons away from free agency and should command an eight-figure average annual salary. If McLouth regresses in 2008, then the Pirates would be right to question whether or not the player was a one-year wonder and would be wise to go season-to-season with McLouth’s contract.

Trade Nate McLouth now for a haul similar to the one Billy Beane received in January of 2008.

The Braves were known to be interested in McLouth during this hot stove league, and the Reds, Mets and others should still be in the market for another outfield bat. Expect to receive two premium prospects in any deal.

Then, replace McLouth’s offensive production in the lineup by acquiring Nick Swisher from the Yankees at a discount.

Repoz Posted: January 12, 2009 at 01:44 PM | 14 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
Tags: pirates, yankees

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.

1. TVerik Posted: January 12, 2009 at 02:02 PM (#3049284)

If McLouth performs as he did in 2008, then his price almost certainly will skyrocket. He will be two seasons away from free agency and should command an eight-figure average annual salary.

If this happens, the Pirates gain those efforts on the "March to 82 wins" and his trade value improves substantially.

If he's on the way to a good season, they might be able to get something better for him in July than they would now.

Yes, if he has a poor season, they'd have held their cards too long.

I don't think the Pirates are best served by fire-saling their 27-year-old arb-eligible talent before they get a chance to bloom. Also, what projection system is saying that Swisher is likely to do anything like McLouth in 2009?

2. Shooty: Applying to be Fearless Leader

Posted: January 12, 2009 at 02:06 PM (#3049285)

Trade Nate McLouth now for a haul similar to the one Billy Beane received in January of 2008.

I don't see this happening. I think the value of young players and prospects has undergone a large shift since Billy made that trade. Also, that Abreu and Dunn, etc are still on the market would seem to preclude a deal like this. Why rape your farm system for a player when you can get a slightly inferior player for nothing but money?

3. Run Joe Run Posted: January 12, 2009 at 02:17 PM (#3049288)

Even a smart GM like Beane has his fair share of bad trades - I would keep McLouth regardless.

4. Harveys Wallbangers

Posted: January 12, 2009 at 02:30 PM (#3049291)

It will never happen, but I would trade Corey Hart and a prospect for Nate, stick the guy in right field/leadoff and watch him score 135 runs for the Crew.

He's lefty which would help balance the lineup and he takes ball four which the Brewers desperately need.

McLouth is exactly the kind of player Milwaukee needs right now. If I were Doug Melvin I would at least pick up the phone and find out if anyone's willing to chat about it..........

5. Shooty: Applying to be Fearless Leader

Posted: January 12, 2009 at 02:39 PM (#3049292)

Even a smart GM like Beane has his fair share of bad trades - I would keep McLouth regardless.

Many bad trades, actually. It's an inexact science. Just go through a couple of DMB seasons and you will be humbled by how stupid you can occasionally be. (I traded Dustin Pedroia for Mark Ellis and Jon Lester, which sounds good, except I didn't sign Jon Lester. D'oh!) But my point was not that the Pirates may make a bad trade in dumping McClouth, but that the kind of haul Billy got for Dan Haren just isn't available anymore so it's moot to even bring that trade up as something the Pirates should do.

6. jyjjy Posted: January 12, 2009 at 03:16 PM (#3049311)

Swisher for Grabow and Duke?
Grabow was great last year but that's his only good year(at age 29) and he is a FA next season. Swisher is under control at a reasonable price for the next 3-4 years. Furthermore the Yankees really don't need bullpen help. The bullpen was great last year and they've added Marte for a full season this time around. Almost all of their top prospects are reliever types and a good number of them are very close and could join the club next season.
Duke is garbage. In the 3 years since his nice rookie (half)season he has an ERA close to 5 and struck out just 245 in 507 IP while walking 140. He would be slaughtered in the AL East.
I'd be shocked if Cashman even considered this trade. I'd wouldn't even really be that interested in a direct trade of Swisher plus for McLouth. If they had similar offensive value next season it wouldn't surprise me at all. Also, gold glove aside, I'm a bit sketched out by Nate's -14 UZR. Even Swisher himself could top that.

7. AROM Posted: January 12, 2009 at 03:16 PM (#3049312)

If McLouth performs as he did in 2008...

I don't view McLouth as a guy who had a breakout year and who we should wonder if he can keep it up, but as an established talent. He didn't really do anything in 2008 that he hadn't done before, except play every day. Prorate his 2007 stats to his 685 PA of 2008 and you get:

38 2b 5 3b 23hr 70bb

The only real change was a drop in his strikeout rate which allowed his BA to rise 18 points.

That said, I wouldn't deal Swisher for him if I were the Yankees, because he's not that good defensively. Kind of like Nady and Swisher - decent in a corner, but overmatched in center. Pirates have room to move him to left though, and a legit CF to replace him in Andrew McCutcheon.

8. littleJoe Posted: January 12, 2009 at 03:40 PM (#3049335)

That article read as if a 10th grader wrote it and maybe that's why they propose trading Duke and Grabow for Swisher? But the author makes a valid point, until the Pirates start trading off their core players for some younger talent it's 95 and out baby.

9. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: January 12, 2009 at 03:55 PM (#3049351)

Just go through a couple of DMB seasons and you will be humbled by how stupid you can occasionally be

I dealt Leo Nunez for Wily Mo Pena, and signed Brad Wilkerson and Jeff Suppan. D'oh!

10. Run Joe Run Posted: January 12, 2009 at 03:58 PM (#3049355)

In some ways it is a conservative strategy of a GM to trade away good young players for prospects. You can sell it to your ownership because you are keeping costs low and you can sell the concept that you are "building for the future." Eventually you are doing nothing more than keeping payroll low. But the idea is to collect really good players to win a championship - not deal them away for the future

11. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: January 12, 2009 at 04:02 PM (#3049361)

Nate as starter, 2008: .276/.355/.497, 683 PA
Nate as starter, 2007: .273/.368/.492, 304 PA

He already IS an established talent. Most people just haven't realized it yet, because they weren't paying attention to the Pirates in 2007.

Personally, I'd be surprised to see them trade Nate right now, but I think they'd probably give it serious thought in a year or so. Two years is a good time frame for an acquiring team - long enough to plan around him, but not long enough to be shackled to him if it's not a good fit. And while the Pirates finally have a little bit of OF depth in the upper minors (McCutchen and Tabata), none of it is ready to step in right now in the event of a Nate trade - and we're already relying on some extraordinarily shaky combination of Brandon Moss, Steve Pearce, and Nyjer Morgan in the corners. It'd be a real pain in the ass for the team to trade him right now, as it'd blow a huge hole in the lineup and stab their season marketing plan right in the kidney, so they'd need to get something extremely tasty back in order for it to make sense for them... and I don't see an offer of that magnitude on the table right now. In a year, though, McCutchen should be ready (and Tabata might be as well), and they'll have the opportunity to shop for a mid-tier FA to fill a spot if needed.

12. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: January 12, 2009 at 04:03 PM (#3049364)

Cubs should trade Fukudome, and trade for Carlos Beltran to replace him.

13. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: January 12, 2009 at 04:12 PM (#3049369)

"Why would you keep Grabow (who is unlikely to be a Pirate in 2010) over Sean Burnett or Donnie Veal, two former top prospects who could contribute to the team long-term? Trading Grabow accomplishes two goals: Add more years of player control to the system, and audition the questionable talent you possess."

Counting on Burnett is a fool's errand. The last time he had a good season, at any level, was 2003. His stuff is poor enough that he has no real margin for error (career 117/110 K/BB in parts of four seasons at AAA, career 72/62 in the majors), and he's so totally helpless against RHB (.328/.442/.537 against them last year) that he imposes serious constraints on bullpen management and construction.

I'm fine with trading Grabow for value if we can get it, because decent relievers are always the one thing a bad team can buy on the FA market, but if we do we'll need to sign one of the other lefties who's still FA (like Ohman or Shouse, for example). Going into the year with Burnett and Veal as the only two pen lefties is a disaster waiting to happen.

14. Best Regards, Larry M. Posted: January 12, 2009 at 07:13 PM (#3049633)

Then, replace McLouth’s offensive production in the lineup by acquiring Nick Swisher from the Yankees at a discount.

I'm sure Cashman would jump at that. They're clearly eager to dump Swisher, what with his bargain contract and big upside. Their clear desire to keep him rather than Nady makes it all the more clear that they'd gladly give Swisher away for a song!

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Monday, January 12, 2009

Pirates Revolution: Trade Nate McLouth, and Trade for Yankees’ Nick Swisher

Reader Comments and Retorts

Support BBTF

Bookmarks

Hot Topics