Report: Jennings Available

by Rox Girl on Nov 14, 2006 5:41 AM MST in Rockpile Comment 21 comments

According to New York Post columist Joel Sherman, the Rockies have let teams know that Jason Jennings is available this offseason. This should make our quest for a quality centerfielder at least a little more realistic. For example, the Houston Astros are looking for mid-rotation starters to slot in behind Roy Oswalt, a Jennings for Chris Burke plus two to three quality prospects package seems reasonable to me.

Not enough for you? Consider this: with Dontrelle Willis likely staying put in Florida at least until the trade deadline, and rumors of Jake Peavy's availability seeming overblown as well, Jennings appears to be one of the best available options right now for teams seeking starting pitchers. The Mets have been offering Milledge and Heilman for those two, would they offer something comparable for Jennings? Much as I love JJ, I think this is a smart move by the front office given his trade value is unlikely to be much higher six months from now and his future with the Rockies after next season seems very much in doubt.

The Denver Post is reporting Coco Crisp is unavailable, but has brought up the Phillies' Aaron Rowand as yet another possibility in center. One more piece of juicy gossip and I'll stop updating this thread, I swear: Rosenthal says we're interested in Carl Pavano if the Yankees eat a portion of his salary. That would certainly be an interesting pick-up to see if he can return to his healthy Florida form. It finally seems as if the Rockies have wisened up about buying low and selling high.

0 recs | Comment 21 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

From Houston

This article has some of Tim Purpura's thoughts on trading Chris Burke:

"We've got a pretty good core of young players that people look at," Purpura said. "Some of our young players performed very, very well and progressed, and some of our young players didn't play so well.

"We're trying to determine who are the guys you keep and the guys you might trade off. You take an inventory now with other clubs to see who they have interest in, and you try to create some matches that way. You have the free agency part to look at and try to fill your other needs that way."

by Rox Girl on Nov 14, 2006 5:50 AM MST reply actions 0 recs

In regards to that Sherman article,

Yes to Milledge, no to Melky. I like the way the Rockies think on that issue.

by Rox Girl on Nov 14, 2006 5:57 AM MST reply actions 0 recs

What was it

someone at Baseball America said about Melky's defense last year? I think it was, "Just because he's rated the best defender in the system doesn't mean he is that great in the field."

I'd have to agree with that after watching him a number of times this past season. Not that he's bad, but he's no world-beater.

by Russ Oates on Nov 14, 2006 1:28 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

I like this move

With a bad free agent market with very little good pitchers, Jennings is going to be a target of many many teams.

I would take Milledge any day, and Melky wouldn't be to bad if he was pared with something else too.

We have enough young pitching talent to fill Jennings Slot anyways, and Jennings is likely to regress a little from last years performance. Its good to see management trying to sell high for once.

by wolf213 on Nov 14, 2006 9:25 AM MST reply actions 0 recs

Interesting notes

let's hope in fact the Rockies have made Jennings available, rather than just sitting on his contract year and punting. I'm not quite sure what the Yankees have to offer. Pavano and Cabrera for Jennings fails to excite me. Stats say Cabrera might be an average left fielder, making him a horrible centerfielder for Coors Field, and his bat is quite overrated. I like Pavano in a separate deal, but it would require the Yankees eating a ton of salary, and I'm not sure again what the trade compensation would be for Pavano. Carl's a solid groundball guy that had his best years behind a solid defense in the offense depressing Florida summer, so the humidor'ed Coors could recapture a season of 4.00 ERA.

Contrary to popular opinion, Jennings is a superior pitcher to Dontrelle Willis, as evidenced by their VORP. We all know that Willis is younger, but his arm has logged a lot of miles for his age, and his injury potential in the coming years is quite high. He's also pitched more on reputation than stuff, as his numbers, other than one season, haven't lived up to his immense hype. What I'm getting at is that Jennings "should" be able to draw the same package of Milledge and Heilman based on talent, but we all know the other forces at play here, and Jennings does only have one year remaining, making him a potential rental.

If in fact the Rockies have made Jennings available, they should try to sweeten the pot a bit to get both Heilman and Milledge, perhaps adding a young arm like Deduno to the mix, and possible balancing back with Lindstrom as well.

Milledge would be a perfect fit, a young centerfielder with 30/30 potential and years away from arbitration, with experience in the corners for when Fowler is ready to command centerfield.

Heilman should then be moved to the rotation, and past results say that he could do an admirable job filling in for Jennings.

by David "ohno" on Nov 14, 2006 9:51 AM MST reply actions 0 recs

This seems to be a good target to me

Once the Mets realize that Peavy's unavailable and Willis would cost even more than Milledge plus Heilman, we should be able to make it happen. If we're dealing with the White Sox, I'd want a JJ for Sweeney plus a lower ranked pitching prospect (like Heath Phillips) sort of deal, but would settle for Brian Anderson plus one of their top pitching prospects along the lines of Broadway, McCulloch or McCarthy. I know that seems greedy, but it's trading proven (Jennings) for unproven (any of the White Sox mentioned) and if you look at deals like the one the Tigers just made, it shouldn't be at all outside the realm of expectations for a number two pitcher. As for the Astros, I'd like Burke plus Bucholz or Hirsch and I don't think I'm being unreasonable there, either.

by Rox Girl on Nov 14, 2006 10:20 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

With the Astros

would you deal Jennings for Pence straight up? Pence has both scouts and statheads adoring him, and he has played some center. Could the team just skip him a level and let him take his lumps in center until Fowler is ready? I doubt Pence is available, but I start with that hard line.

by David "ohno" on Nov 14, 2006 10:49 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

I thought about Pence,

And adding him for two seasons in center and then sliding him over to left if we have to lose Matt Holliday or right if we're able to trade Brad Hawpe makes a lot of sense to me. If he's ready and available, you're right, this would be preferable. I would actually ask for a pitching prospect too at that point, though, since he's still unproven in the bigs we'd be taking on a lot of risk still for someone who's only been to AA, regardless of who it is. Albeit, since he is such a hot commodity, it could be a lower level or relief prospect at that point.

by Rox Girl on Nov 14, 2006 10:56 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Interesting.

I have a hard time believing that the Mets would give up 6 years of Milledge for one year of JJ.

Interesting trade scenarios:
Chris Burke + prospects for Jennings?
Jason Hirsh for Jennings?
Melky Cabrera for Jennings?
Aaron Heilman for Jennings?
Alex Rios for Jennings + prospects?

Still, I'm not sure if I believe this report (it's from New York--- the bogus rumor capital of the world) and I still remain skeptical about JJ`s availability. Renck and Ringolsby haven't printed a word about trading Jennings or him even being available thru trade.

by malakian on Nov 14, 2006 2:13 PM MST reply actions 0 recs

Good point on the validity of the report

Joel Sherman is a notorious gossip, like me, so we should take it with a grain of salt, but considering the Chicago article last week which brought him up, and considering JJ's contract posturing which makes it look like he'll test the free agent market, it does seem feasible.

As far as Milledge, Minaya would trade for Jennings and then have the time to negotiate exclusively and re-sign him to an exension in a move similar to what they are currently doing with El Duque. I don't see the one year "rental" applying in the Mets case as they'll be able to keep him as long as they want with their deep pockets. No way would I trade JJ straight up for Heilman or Cabrera or Hirsh, there would have to be more involved. JJ's value is greater than that around the league and we could get more, particularly in a pitching thin market such as this. Rios for Jennings isn't going to happen, but it's nice to think about, we'd probably have to throw in Koshansky or a similar big bat MLB ready prospect (Stewart perhaps) so that one's tough to consider.

Here's a more laughable trade suggestion in regards to Pavano by the way. I got a kick out of it at least. Silly Yankees fans.

by Rox Girl on Nov 14, 2006 2:29 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

hmmm

Maybe I'm undervaluing Jennings (It always seems like I'm the one who tends to undervalue Rockies prospects/players, so it`s a real possibility). Or maybe you're overvaluing him. Who knows?

The facts (as I see them):

Jennings is a 28 year old right-hander who:
-has a 4.75 career ERA
-is likely to regress in 2007
-has poor peripherals
-is about to become very expensive (will likely make more $ than he's worth)
-Is one of the few quality pitchers available for trade this winter, boosting his perceived value.

Jennings' current value is the highest it's been in years and I think they would be wise to trade him this winter. However, in terms of trade value, I wouldn't expect any insanely great players/prospects in return for him.

by malakian on Nov 14, 2006 3:05 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

I think if we stick with prospects

Or just emerging players, we should be able to expect more than if we looked for more established players such as Rios. It's the same deal as with the Sheffield trade, if a team needs production at the MLB level right now, then they'd be willing to give up more of speculative future production for that. JJ's value will be heightened depite his career ERA because most teams are smart enough to equate Colorado with an inflated ERA and deflated K numbers than what you would expect at other parks, even with the humidor. His career park adjusted ERA+ of 103 is a bit above average right in line with what you'd want for a mid-rotation starter, and last season's eleventh ranked VORP makes it seem as if he could be a late blooming talent. While I agree that a regression is likely (I don't know by how much, but that's why I say his value will be lower in six months) I think that it's unlikely that he regresses all the way back to his 2003-2005 level. I think if we hang onto him until right after Zito lands, teams will be even more desperate and that's when we should get what we can.

Definitely more than just Heilman or Hirsh right now, but if we wait too long, I don't know if we'll even be able to get that.

by Rox Girl on Nov 14, 2006 3:23 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Good explanation

The fact that there are so few quality pitchers available this winter will likely boost JJ's value greatly. Some competition between teams bidding for his services might even result in some overpaying.

by malakian on Nov 14, 2006 3:34 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Sell high

I don't think that any of us are under the mistaken impression that JJ is a true ace or is actually equally talented as the guys we are mentioning as possible returns on trade.

The rich trade proposals being imagined here are very much a result of the market circumstances (both the lack of quality starting pitching, the number of teams feeling that they are in contention and the influx of cash to the game).

by MADness on Nov 14, 2006 5:49 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Well if a deal gets done

I believe the other will probably ask for a 72-hour window to negotiate an extension with JJ.

by Russ Oates on Nov 14, 2006 2:37 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Not so sure

With the market the way it is and the big teams out east willing to spend so much on pitching the initial offer that either New York team could make would dwarf the maximum offer that Colorado could make.

It would likely be very difficult for JJ to turn down 10 million per year, for example.

by MADness on Nov 14, 2006 3:00 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Milledge & Heilman

If Milledge and Heilman were offered for JJ (even if someone like Deduno was required on our end) then the Rockies, IMO, would be insane not to jump all over it.

by MADness on Nov 14, 2006 3:03 PM MST reply actions 0 recs

I wonder if it is in the team's best interest

to publicize any intent to deal Jennings, and for this reason, Renck, Harding, and Ringolsby may have been reluctant to add their take on such rumors. Dealing Jennings is delicate because of his popularity and association with the new Rockies, and discussing a deal publicly might drive away fans who see such a ploy as shaving payroll and once again being a spendthrift. However, once Jennings is dealt or close to being dealt for a major package, PR friendlies will have more ammunition to rightfully justify such a move to the public. It's a lot easier to sell the Rockies trading Jennings for a number one prospect and then some, than just saying he could be dealt because he can't be resigned.

Renck's article today suggested the Rockies are starting to talk long term contract, probably just to go through the motions that will ultimately set a trade in place.

As many have said, his value can't get higher. It's a seller's market that is dying for pitching, and probably half the league could make a respectable bid. Better to deal with half the league now, than the select few looking to upgrade at the deadline. So many teams now feel like they're on the cusp that a favorable deal for Jennings should be worked without much difficulty.

by David "ohno" on Nov 14, 2006 7:39 PM MST reply actions 0 recs

The right model

This is the model that the Twins (and to some extent) the A's have used so well to build and maintain contending franchises with small-market budgets - develop and use players until they near the end of the period where the team controls them and then choosing the key players to maintain and trading off the remaining players when they are near peak value.

I have confidence in the scouting and player development guys to play thier part in this process in Colorado but I don't know really have much confidence in ownership and upper management to have the courage and vision to follow through with this type of model.

by MADness on Nov 14, 2006 9:01 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs