Tweet
Why would the D-Backs entertain dealing Justin Upton? Here's four good reasons.
By Keith Law
The Diamondbacks turned the hot stove upside down this week with word that they'd consider trading Justin Upton for the right deal, and I have since spoken with several senior executives from other clubs who indicated that the price is probably high but he is indeed available.
Upton will start 2011 as a 23-year-old and is signed to a deal that owes him $49.5 million for the next five years, with a limited no-trade clause that includes four teams. He was a deserving All-Star in 2009, before tiring badly in September, but lost some power in 2010 and seemed to catch the swing-and-miss malaise that infected the entire Arizona roster (although he improved his walk rate over 2009). He's an above-average defender in right field with a strong arm, and I think it's possible he could return to center field if he's traded, since he was moved to right to accommodate Chris Young and not through any failing of his own.
So why would Arizona GM Kevin Towers want to deal a franchise player who's locked up to a reasonable deal? Let's consider some factors:
1. He doubts Upton's on-field potential. This seems unlikely, as Towers is a former scout who values tools and Upton is a hardware store who was a No. 1 overall pick. He also posted a .388 on-base average in his age-21 season (2009). In the last 50 years, the only other players who've posted a .350/.500 OBP/SLG line at 21 or younger, as Upton did that year, are Albert Pujols, Alex Rodriguez, Miguel Cabrera, Ken Griffey Jr. and Cesar Cedeno. Rodriguez even followed up that year with a more severe dropoff than Upton saw in 2010. There are no guarantees, even with players of Upton's talent, but you don't walk away from that kind of skill set and performance cavalierly.
2. He doubts Upton's makeup. Most of the bad makeup reports about the younger Upton appear to stem from his brother's reputation, although I know there were some concerns about Justin's responsiveness to coaching in the spring of 2009, when he showed up with an altered swing that he didn't correct until a week into the season. He's not Milton Bradley, though, and if he's Gary Sheffield, well, that one worked out OK.
3. He questions Upton's ability to stay healthy. Upton has had problems with his left shoulder in each of the last two years, nothing major but perhaps enough to convince Towers and his staff that there's an underlying issue. I imagine any potential trade partner would want to do extra due diligence on Upton for that reason.
4. He wants to win in 2011 and can't do it without trading Upton. In other words, Towers, who is on a two-year contract, figures he can trade the long-term potential of Upton for players with shorter-time horizons (fewer years to free agency for more guaranteed immediate performance). Given how available Upton appears to be, this seems like it must be at least part of the motivation, as there is no good long-term rationale (that we know of as outsiders) for trading Upton when he has yet to reach his peak and is signed to a reasonable deal that will be cheap if he hits his ceiling.
I imagine it's a lot of No. 4, given Towers' short window and public statements about making the team competitive in 2011, and some of Nos. 1 or 3, too. But even if he is skeptical about Upton, other GMs won't be. Players of Upton's talent rarely come on the market before free agency, at which point many clubs are priced out, and a trade now represents a rare opportunity for a team to acquire a potential star early in his ascent.
Based on those conversations with rival executives, I think Towers will ask for at least two players with major league experience, who can help the Diamondbacks in 2011, plus two others from the other team's farm system. It's a high price, but if you believe, as I do, that Upton will be one of the best players in the game by the time he's 26 or 27, it's justified.
By Keith Law
The Diamondbacks turned the hot stove upside down this week with word that they'd consider trading Justin Upton for the right deal, and I have since spoken with several senior executives from other clubs who indicated that the price is probably high but he is indeed available.
Upton will start 2011 as a 23-year-old and is signed to a deal that owes him $49.5 million for the next five years, with a limited no-trade clause that includes four teams. He was a deserving All-Star in 2009, before tiring badly in September, but lost some power in 2010 and seemed to catch the swing-and-miss malaise that infected the entire Arizona roster (although he improved his walk rate over 2009). He's an above-average defender in right field with a strong arm, and I think it's possible he could return to center field if he's traded, since he was moved to right to accommodate Chris Young and not through any failing of his own.
So why would Arizona GM Kevin Towers want to deal a franchise player who's locked up to a reasonable deal? Let's consider some factors:
1. He doubts Upton's on-field potential. This seems unlikely, as Towers is a former scout who values tools and Upton is a hardware store who was a No. 1 overall pick. He also posted a .388 on-base average in his age-21 season (2009). In the last 50 years, the only other players who've posted a .350/.500 OBP/SLG line at 21 or younger, as Upton did that year, are Albert Pujols, Alex Rodriguez, Miguel Cabrera, Ken Griffey Jr. and Cesar Cedeno. Rodriguez even followed up that year with a more severe dropoff than Upton saw in 2010. There are no guarantees, even with players of Upton's talent, but you don't walk away from that kind of skill set and performance cavalierly.
2. He doubts Upton's makeup. Most of the bad makeup reports about the younger Upton appear to stem from his brother's reputation, although I know there were some concerns about Justin's responsiveness to coaching in the spring of 2009, when he showed up with an altered swing that he didn't correct until a week into the season. He's not Milton Bradley, though, and if he's Gary Sheffield, well, that one worked out OK.
3. He questions Upton's ability to stay healthy. Upton has had problems with his left shoulder in each of the last two years, nothing major but perhaps enough to convince Towers and his staff that there's an underlying issue. I imagine any potential trade partner would want to do extra due diligence on Upton for that reason.
4. He wants to win in 2011 and can't do it without trading Upton. In other words, Towers, who is on a two-year contract, figures he can trade the long-term potential of Upton for players with shorter-time horizons (fewer years to free agency for more guaranteed immediate performance). Given how available Upton appears to be, this seems like it must be at least part of the motivation, as there is no good long-term rationale (that we know of as outsiders) for trading Upton when he has yet to reach his peak and is signed to a reasonable deal that will be cheap if he hits his ceiling.
I imagine it's a lot of No. 4, given Towers' short window and public statements about making the team competitive in 2011, and some of Nos. 1 or 3, too. But even if he is skeptical about Upton, other GMs won't be. Players of Upton's talent rarely come on the market before free agency, at which point many clubs are priced out, and a trade now represents a rare opportunity for a team to acquire a potential star early in his ascent.
Based on those conversations with rival executives, I think Towers will ask for at least two players with major league experience, who can help the Diamondbacks in 2011, plus two others from the other team's farm system. It's a high price, but if you believe, as I do, that Upton will be one of the best players in the game by the time he's 26 or 27, it's justified.
Comment