NEWSFLASH: Gerald Laird Traded To Detroit Tigers
The Texas Rangers have reportedly acquired minor league right-hander Guillermo Moscoso (pictured) in exchange for veteran backstop Gerald Laird. - whitecapwendy/Flickr.comSo I had been vigorously preparing to roll out a lengthy Texas Rangers-centric winter meetings primer in anticipation of this week's proceedings at the luxurious Bellagio Resort & Casino in Las Vegas, but then real-life priorities and the temporary destruction of my enthusiasm for sports -- largely powered by a heartbreaking last-second defeat of the Green Bay Packers by the Houston Texans at Lambeau Field on Sunday afternoon -- inconsiderately derailed those plans.
In light of what has evidently transpired in the last 24 hours, that's probably for the best. It would have likely amounted to a great quantity of wasted words in the end, because on the eve of perhaps the most active four-day period transaction-wise of the entire calendar year, those ever-maddening Rangers appear to be on the verge of completing their most significant trade of the off-season.
FOXSports.com's Ken Rosenthal reported late Sunday evening that the Rangers had, according to an anonymous Major League source, traded catcher Gerald Laird to the Detroit Tigers for minor league right-hander Guillermo Moscoso and a second unnamed prospect, purported to be a "17-year-old [pitcher] who spent last season in the Dominican Summer League."
Since that could ultimately turn out to be anybody from Rayni Guichardo to Carlos Melo (both of whom represent raw and largely unknown commodities at this point, but both of whom also notched in excess of 10 strikeouts per nine innings for the Tigers' rookie-league DSL squad in 2008, so we can safely infer that they're live-armed individuals), there's no real point in baselessly speculating about whom that mysterious second player is -- yet.
[1:20 A.M. Update: At least one media source is reporting that the second prospect is indeed Carlos Melo, a Dominican right-hander who is primarily known for an "electric fastball that averages well over 90 miles per hour." He's exactly the sort of toolsy throw-in you'd expect to see included at the back end of a deal such as this one.]
Jon Paul Morosi of the Detroit Free Press is similarly indicating that the framework of a trade has been agreed upon by the two clubs; hours earlier, the prolific beat writer wrote that "significant progress" had been made towards a deal being completed, with Detroit fending off apparent interest in Laird from the Reds and, more recently, the Nationals. Tigers officials were reportedly "reluctant" to part ways with Moscoso, which should be perceived as a good sign -- as more than one enlightened baseball oracle has been heard to softly mutter over the years, you know that a trade is probably fair if neither club involved is particularly thrilled about the tradeoff between what was relinquished and what was acquired.
We briefly reviewed the finer qualities of Moscoso's game earlier this week when the Tigers' enhanced efforts to acquire Laird first began to make headlines, but it would surely be beneficial to take a second look at the scouting report industry publication Baseball America crafted for the 25-year-old right-hander a matter of weeks ago, when it deemed Moscoso the Tigers' 10th-best prospect:
Strengths: Moscoso has a quick arm and a fastball that reaches 91-92 mph with late riding action that makes it a swing-and-miss pitch. He can also use his fastball to handcuff hitters and force easy popouts. His delivery has some deception and hitters have trouble reading his pitches. He's aggressive in the strike zone and confident on the mound.
Weaknesses: Moscoso shows a curveball and change-up, but neither is as effective as his fastball. His shoulder problems have limited him to no more than 91 innings in a pro season, which raises the question of whether he would be better suited for the bullpen. It might be easier to keep him healthy as a reliever.
A November 2002 international signee of former Tigers baseball operations/foreign affairs assistant Ramón Peña (who was fired in May 2006), the modestly framed Venezuelan did not make his stateside debut until age 21, and was beset by minor injuries at the end of his 2005 campaign with short-season Oneonta, pushing him backwards to the rookie-league GCL Tigers to begin 2006 and helping to explain the rather notable disparity between his advanced age and his current minor league level (Double-A Erie). Lingering shoulder tendonitis that prompted a six-week shutdown at the beginning of the 2008 season surely didn't aid matters in that regard.
Perhaps the most curious aspect of the Moscoso acquisition -- and the one aspect that will require particularly close observation going forward -- is that he may well provide immediate utility to Texas if commissioned as a reliever at the big league level, and in light of his somewhat checkered medical background that also comprises 2005 shoulder surgery (details on the severity of the injury that prompted this procedure, and the specifics of said procedure, have proven rather difficult to track down thus far), the decision to groom him as a late-inning reliever may well be a prudent one.
Moscoso, however, reportedly prefers to start games (his struggles in the 2008 Venezuelan Winter League are thought to be a function of his assorted difficulties in adapting to the bullpen), and that could play into the organization's thought process when it comes to determining how the newest addition to the Rangers' 40-man roster should be developed over the coming months.
[1:30 A.M. Update: MLB.com's T.R. Sullivan writes that it's improbable that Moscoso will legitimately compete for a big league roster spot next spring, and suggests that the Reds' unwillingness to deal right-hander Homer Bailey for Laird was the sticking point in negotiations between the two clubs. Funny.]
The expulsion of Laird somewhat alleviates the organizational catching logjam from which remarks such as "Well, the Rangers have to trade a catcher this winter! They can't go into spring training with four catchers!" have frequently been born this winter. That, in my view, was never as big an issue for Texas as ensuring the acquisition of fair value in a trade involving any of the four backstops that have generated such controversy over the months: Laird, Max Ramirez, Jarrod Saltalamacchia and Taylor Teagarden. This trade has ostensibly accomplished that goal, with the added benefit of freeing up much-needed playing time for the younger talent that had rapidly accumulated behind Laird and the payroll space (somewhere around $3 million) that his 2009 contract would have consumed via salary arbitration eligibility.
Texas could also clear payroll space -- and enable additional maneuverability in a free-agent market that the club otherwise wouldn't be able to participate in -- by trading corner infielder Hank Blalock, whom the Giants are known to covet to some degree. The Rangers have reportedly dispatched a dozen front office personnel to Las Vegas to engage in the "serious discussions" that are set to take place between the two clubs and other such possibilities on the trade front, which could also include the likes of Marlon Byrd and Frank Catalanotto.
For what it's worth, Ken Rosenthal noted on Sunday afternoon that the Rangers rebuffed the Mets' proposal of a Luis Castillo-for-Vicente Padilla swap, no doubt in large part because it would have forced second baseman Ian Kinsler to a different position.
Jeff Wilson of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram reports that outfielder Milton Bradley has, as expected, declined the Rangers' offer of salary arbitration. Texas can opt to refrain from any additional pursuance of his services and net a compensatory supplemental-round draft pick in the 2009 MLB First-Year Player Draft, or stubbornly persist in their attempts to re-sign the talented slugger; either way, Bradley probably isn't going to get that $40 million contract he's actively seeking.
Stay tuned.




Joey Matschulat
Reader Comments (22)
I can't really see the value of this Moscoso character in the context of a Gerald Laird trade. It's no surprise to see Laird dealt, but I was really hoping for something more significant. Oh well.
Also, Joey is a bad person for attributing his lack of sports enthusiasm to the terrible packers, instead of the unlucky Longhorns.
I know you said not to speculate Joey, but FWIW... according to Durrett on the DMN blog, the second player is a pitcher, which narrows it down to Guichardo, Melo and Emmaneul Del Orbe.
Thanks, Jon -- I've since caught that, though I believe that was first attributed to Jon Paul Morosi from the Free Press.
For what it's worth, Jason told me he would be "very happy" if Melo or Guichardo were the second player in the deal. A quick eye-balling of each hurler's '08 statistics obviously favors the lefty-throwing Guichardo, but numbers are next to useless when you're talking about kids this young and this low in the minor league hierarchy.
We can probably rest assured that the Rangers are adequately equipped with full scouting reports on all of those DSL types and have made an informed decision with regard to which one they should select. I'm not worried about that component of this deal, and won't concern myself with it until we learn more in the coming hours.
Know you're probably already on this Joey, but Morosi has updated his story to say that the second player is Melo.
Gotta say, I'm pretty happy with this deal, I think. I wasn't too excited initially about Moscoso because of his age, but it sounds like he's got good stuff.
It's Melo. The Freep just updated their article saying so. Well done, JD! Detroit fans are livid!
You got me, Jon! Quick-draw, McGraw! Or rather quik-type!
Cheers!
Heh - that's a first I think. Normally I'm the guy late buy a minute.
I'm kinda jazzed about this.
That's about as good as can be expected for Laird. To me, the better news is that now Texas is in the driver's seat - they don't have to trade Salty or Max. They can simply say to Boston or whomever - "You give us X and you can have Salty - we won't take anything less." That's a great position to be in. Wonder if Boston will come calling with a different tune (one that includes the word "Buchholtz") when Varitek signs somewhere else (he declined arbitration yesterday).
What I'm really looking forward to with eager anticipation is what Texas will now do with Blalock, Millwood, Padilla or FCat.
Enjoy the week, dudes!
Some info on Carlos Melo:
Promising RHP arm that was signed by the Tigers out of the Dominican Republic on July 11, 2007.
According to Paul Wezner, executive editor at Tigs Town, a Tigers blog on Scout.com, Melo can hum his fastball up to the mid-90s with surprisingly good command for his age.
He also has a feel for a good curve/change.
More to follow.
I look forward to more info on Melo. Another high risk/reward type, maybe the Rangers can hit big on him.
So far I can't really get that excited about Moscoso. Jason, please tell me we didn't acquire another Kason Gabbard - a guy who has some stuff but can't stay healthy long enough to show it off ( and likely will have to stay in the bullpen).
Briant: Moscoso does have some legit injury concerns. No way around that. However, unlike Gabbard, Moscoso doesn't have fringe-average stuff. He can miss bats. His fastball is sneaky and he can command it. If his secondary stuff improves, he could be a starter, but his injury history points to a reliever.
Thanks for the reply Jason.
I'll agree with JD$ that this was likely the best the team was going to be able to get for Laird.
A little more from Mark Anderson's Scout.com report on Moscoso LAST December (that distinction is an important one to make, because it's quite possible that he's made tremendous strides stuff- and command-wise since then):
● He challenges both sides of the plate with regularity and is above-average at spotting a low-90s fastball that can reach 94 mph
● His fastball has limited movement and he doesn't work low enough in the strike zone to induce ground balls with regularity; his curveball is "slurvy" but is not dominating, often floating through the strike zone; his change-up shows promise, but he must become more consistent with his arm speed and deception on that particular offering; he has played with a splitter in the past, but doesn't seem to currently throw it
● He has pitched in some pitcher-friendly environments to date (as of the end of the 2007 season), and could struggle to keep his homer totals down against more advanced competition
● He's fearless, exhibiting tremendous confidence on the bump and mercilessly attacking hitters and the strike zone
The implication that his fastball has "limited movement" obviously does not jive with BA's recent assessment, and the concerns over his ability to pitch effectively in more hitter-friendly environments were somewhat dispelled in 2008: using three-year minor league park factors, both Lakeland and Erie rate as above-average hitters' parks both in terms of runs scored and homers hit, and Moscoso was a solid home pitcher in 2008, though clearly better on the road (3.00/1.90 FIP home/away at Lakeland, and 3.65/1.32 FIP home/away at Erie).
We obviously do not know yet whether his success has somewhat been the function of facing younger and less advanced competition at his latest stops (remember, Moscoso didn't pitch stateside until his age-21 season, so he's a bit behind the curve in that regard), but it's evident that he has a knack for missing bats, and that's not a gift that can be easily taught or instilled. The scouting reports we've read thus far suggest that his stuff may be better suited for the bullpen over the long haul, but we'll find out soon (perhaps later today, even) what the organization intends to do with him going into 2009.
Additionally, I've added a new poll to the right-hand sidebar on the Laird deal...I'll review the results of the last one later today...
And a question to those who are underwhelmed by the Laird return (of which I know there are a few): what did you really think that a player that has historically faltered -- offensively, at least -- when handed the starting backstop job was going to net? He isn't a Ramirez or a Saltalamacchia or a Teagarden, where you know there's fairly considerable upside, and his salary, while reasonable, isn't really an asset either given the shadow that is being cast on the winter meetings by the economy.
As a part-time catcher (i.e. 35-40 starts, which has the added benefit of keeping the presumed starting catcher "fresh"), he's quite valuable, and in that role I would not have minded seeing him back in Texas in '09. But that plan only works in the abstract, because realistically his mere presence alone cuts significantly into the playing time of his younger counterparts given what we know about how Ron Washington likes to deploy Laird, and removing him from the equation (and acquiring what I would consider to be "fair value," on top of that) is really the most practical solution.
There is, by the way, a WEEI.com report out today suggesting that Texas would now have to be "overwhelmed" to part ways with another catcher. I don't personally foresee the Rangers dipping into that pool of resources again this winter, but then stranger things have happened.
Hey - one more question guys. Or maybe two. Whom did we put on the 40 when we freed up spots after Loe & Littleton departed? And secondly, does this roster opening (Laird) mean that we can now add Strop to the 40 to protect him from the upcoming rule 5 draft? Or is it too late for that?
It's too late to protect Strop. The only way we can get unprotected guys onto our 40 is to have another team claim them and trade for them (and keep them on our 40 all year).
As a follow-up to JD$'s question, was Moscoso on DET's 40, or does he not have to be yet. If not, that's another advantage gained from this trade (in addition to the development it affords our young C's, and the promise of these 2 pitchers.)
And anyone not excited about the promise of Moscoso alone, check this out from Zywica on LSB:
"... [R]emember Kevin Goldstein's post a few months ago about his simple formula to judge dominance in pitching prospects - and more specifically, the ability to miss bats?
Just to review, here were his top five pitchers at missing bats last season:
1. Madison Bumgarner: +32 at Low-A (141.2-111-21-164); MBR: 0.23
2. Tommy Hanson: +23 at High-A (40-15-11-49); +3 at Double-A (98-70-41-114); MBR: 0.19,
3. Neftali Feliz: +23 at Low-A (82-55-28-106); -10 at Double-A (45.1-34-23-47); MBR: 0.10
4. Wilkins De La Rosa: +11 at Low-A (90.1-60-39-110); -2 at High-A (16.1-12-5-15); MBR: 0.08
5. Trevor Cahill: +21 at High-A (87.1-52-31-103); -10 at Double-A (37-24-19-33); MBR: 0.08
To summarize, the five best pitchers had MBR ratios ranging from from 0.23 to 0.08. Well, Moscoso only pitched 87 innings, so he was just shy of the 100 inning minimum that Goldstein set. But check him out:
Guillermo Moscoso (cumulative): +41, 0.47
He blew them away. He was basically the best pitcher in the minors last year at missing bats."
Wahooo!
http://www.lonestarball.com/2008/12/8/684661/something-on-moscoso
1) Bannister, Poveda, Eyre (?!?) and Vallejo.
2) Moscoso, a Rule 5-eligible player, was added to the Tigers' 40-man roster the same day the Rangers made their own respective roster moves. The deadline to add non-40-man players for the purpose of protecting them from the Rule 5 passed on November 20th, so Strop is essentially still out there for the taking.
Unless the Rangers cut somebody in the next couple of days (the Rule 5 is on Thursday), they won't be able to participate in those proceedings.
By the way Mike, I took the liberty of making that link into an actual hyperlink. Excellent little factoid from Brett (Perryman)-- Moscoso legitimately manhandled the competition in 2008, and we'll find out soon enough whether that will translate into results at the higher levels.
Thanks for the quick answer, guys. Strop's gonna get picked up, but I guess we'll still have Eyre.
?!? is right!
Thanks,Joey.
By the way, JD$, I agree with you about what a strong position this puts us in re ever trading 1 of our 3C's.
And remember Boston already has Littleton to consider as included in any deal we make, so they can take the deal or leave it with no risky additions to the deal on our part.
We now stand on very strong ground for negotiating with them, the Giants, the Cubs, the Rays, the Marlins...
sooo the consensus is the Rangers did very well in the trade then?
Initially - yes, I'd say they made out pretty well.
Obviously it's yet to be seen just what kind of results they're going to get out of Moscoso and way too early to know anything about Melo. But everything I've read about both of them thus far from Joey, from Jason, and from everyone else seems to make it sound like this was a pretty doggone son of a bitching good trade.
Yes I said son of a bitching.