Blake Update

by R.J. Anderson on Jul 23, 2008 7:30 PM EDT Comment 24 comments

The Dallas Morning News has confirmed what I reported yesterday; the Rays are interested in Casey Blake:

The Rays have reportedly joined the Twins, Dodgers and Mets as clubs interested in acquiring Cleveland's Casey Blake. Like the Mets, the Rays envision Blake in the outfield and if he were to end up with either of those clubs, it can only help drive the Hank Blalock market.

Blake didn't start in today's game but entered in the 8th as a pinch hitter for third baseman Andy Marte.

0 recs | Comment 24 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

anyone else find it odd that a dallas newspaper is reporting it?

9 = 8

by websterjtc on Jul 23, 2008 7:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

ohhh, hank blalock.

9 = 8

by websterjtc on Jul 23, 2008 7:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What does Texas have to do with Cleveland :X

by Sylar on Jul 23, 2008 8:09 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Blake Sucks!

For the love of God dont go after this guy!

by bucpimpin on Jul 23, 2008 8:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Blake would be third on our team in GPA behind Hinske/Longoria and just ahead of Navarro/Upton.

by R.J. Anderson on Jul 23, 2008 8:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dumb question

But because I don’t keep up with metrics as much as I probably should – is GPA context adjusted, or is it a raw statistic?

Vogt early, Vogt often.

by Brickhaus on Jul 23, 2008 8:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Raw.

by R.J. Anderson on Jul 23, 2008 8:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Blake is the best option...

Blake is quickly emerging as the best option. He can put up an OPS hovering around .875 against lefties while coming much cheaper than other options.

Bay and Holliday would be ideal but are too costly. Blake has a better track record than Nady and there will be no league adjustment.

by tallyray on Jul 23, 2008 8:35 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I'm starting to think he is as well.

by R.J. Anderson on Jul 23, 2008 8:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Me too.

by bobr on Jul 23, 2008 8:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If Friedman picks up Blake it will be his worst move ever. Ask any Cleveland Indians fan what they think of Casey Blake. The answer will be “I hope the door dooesn’t hit’ya, where the good Lord split’ya.” If Friedman gives up anything beyond a bucket of chicken and mashed tater’s from KFC he’s giving away too damn much.

JUST SAY NO!

by John 63 on Jul 24, 2008 8:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Indians fan here.

And I must say, I would not be upset to see Casey Blake go.

However, in fairness, Blake is a lot better in right field than he is at third base (and I imagine RF is where he’d spend most of his time with the Rays). And he is hitting quite well this season.

But I’d be thrilled if we get a decent prospect or two for him.

by Peter Bendix on Jul 24, 2008 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What is the objection to Blake?

I am not terribly familiar with him, but he seems to have decent numbers, particularly against lefties. Why are Cleveland fans so disenchanted with him?

by bobr on Jul 24, 2008 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Several things.

(And keep in mind, this is just my opinion from what I’ve seen/heard)

1) He’s a “clubhouse guy.” Which is great. But it seems that he gets an undue amount of credit for his clubhouse presence.

2) Up until this season, he was AWFUL with runners in scoring position. Dating back to 2004, his BAs with RISP were: .254, .171, .261, .190. Of course, this year it’s .398, proving once again how “clutch” is random. But still, Blake was painful to watch in those situations in the past.

3) He sucks at third base. Which doesn’t matter to the Rays, as I imagine he’ll play mostly in right field, where he’s average/slightly-above-average.

Granted, many of those things matter very little to the Rays. His BA with RISP is irrelevant, the fact that he’s bad at 3B is practically irrelevant, and the fact that he’s a clubhouse guy is either irrelevant or a positive thing. But he’s also 35 years old. And his career splits, while better against lefties than righties, are hardly awe-inspiring (.267/.331/.433 against righties, .258/.348/.482 against lefties).

He would not be a bad pickup for the Rays, at all. But he’s hardly a game-changer. The Indians have no use for him and would certainly be happy to get something in return.

by Peter Bendix on Jul 24, 2008 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Rebuttal

1. We have Floyd/Percival all ready, and we’ve been through all that talk almost every time they pitch/bat. It’s annoying, yes, and the announcers/writers place far too much weight on the idea of veteran presence, but frankly that wouldn’t bother me because we’re not acquiring him for his “leadership”. We’re acquiring him for his beard, oh and his baseball skills.

2. I don’t buy too much into this either. As you mentioned clutch is random.

3. He could be a paraplegic and he’d almost outplay Hinske/Gomes in right.

I don’t think we need a game-changer. We’re top 10 in OBP/SLG as a team, we either need Jonny Gomes to regress to his career or to acquire someone like Blake on the cheap. Because let’s face it, the Indians aren’t contenders, he’s old, and he’s a FA to be—he’s almost definitely undervalued by the market, it’s just too bad a bright front office holds him.

by R.J. Anderson on Jul 24, 2008 1:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Rerebuttal.

I agree with every single thing you said.

That is all.

by Peter Bendix on Jul 24, 2008 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

This is not in opposition to acquiring someone like Blake.

It is simply a question. Suppose we do. Who leaves?

The obvious answer is Gomes. So we release him and get nothing back? That doesn’t seem consistent with the Rays’ past actions, even given the assumption that Gomes has no trade value now.

Would it be a prelude to or simply part of another deal in which we acquire another piece, perhaps a reliever, while giving up two for one roster players?

Is it possible the Rays may gamble that Gomes will improve enough the rest of the way to make any such deal unncessary? I am not convinced that his outfield play is as bad as we sometimes say. He may not be graceful out there, but I don’t think he is a butcher. In fact, given that he has even been used in CF, it suggests that he can play RF at least adequately.

The only abilities the discussed alternatives (Nady, Blake, Thames?) have that are better than Gomes’s are BA and defense. Historically Gomes has hit for more power, walked more and hit left handers better. Last year, against lefties, his line was .313/.376/.542. In 2006, when his overall numbers were awful, his line against lefties was .297/.438/.614!!! Even this year, awful as he has been with a .212 BA against, his OBP/Slugging is .320/.494 with 7 home runs.

Gomes is 27 and as far as we know is not injured. Why do we want to give up anything to get a player who may not be an improvement, in fact who may be less valuable? And since there are fewer lefties, even if teams try to load up against the Rays, whatever supposed advantage we receive will be less significant than if the issue were hitting righties.

I have watched him this year and am disgusted by what often seems his cluelessness at the plate. But it will be interested to see what the front office thinks. If they do not make a deal, it may mean they think he will rebound. If so, we have to hope they are right. But it is a defensible position.

by bobr on Jul 24, 2008 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Is it possible the Rays may gamble that Gomes will improve enough the rest of the way to make any such deal unncessary?

I don’t think it’s that much of a gamble. Even with his struggles his GPA is ahead of Crawford, Aybar, and Bartlett and he has an OPS within .01 points of being above overall league average.

by R.J. Anderson on Jul 24, 2008 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Have you watched Casey Balake play?

I’d take Gomes over Blake any day of the week. Blake is a waste of time, money & prospects.

by John 63 on Jul 24, 2008 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No, I have not

watched Blake play. What is there about his play that belie the numbers? I understand he is not a good third baseman, but that is pretty much meaningless to the Rays. While I am not enthusiastic about trading for him (see above), I don’t see anything in the numbers that indicate he is awful. On the contrary, he seems to have some value. So what is it the numbers do not show?

by bobr on Jul 24, 2008 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

whatever happened to Milton Bradley

I have heard his name come up a few times but not very often. I we just flat out not going after him.

by Dbullsfan on Jul 23, 2008 8:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

c'mon man...

...you guys know what we want. you have what we need.

and Friedman isn’t going to give us that.

by oc on Jul 24, 2008 1:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Highly doubtful Rangers make a move...

This isn’t aimed at you, but too often it is thought that just because a player’s contract is running out that the team should immediately trade them. I just can’t see that happening, especially for the rangers. A trade would signal:

- The team has given up on the season while 7.5 out of the wild card
- The team isn’t focusing on resigning Bradley.

They could also wait it out and get two draft picks without looking like they gave up.

by tallyray on Jul 23, 2008 9:34 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs