My knee-jerk reaction to the Todd Helton deal occured on Saturday, and with all the new information and opinion having been dissected, I have changed my thinking somewhat even though the crux of my thinking remains: I don’t see a reason to add an aging, overpaid and declining first baseman to the roster.
You can vote at the poll over to the right your opinion of the Todd Helton trade. Feel free to explain your vote in the comments. The previous poll gave us these results:
Will Coco Crisp have a strong season?
* He will outperform his PECOTA numbers and make himself a mainstay on the Sox for years to come. 19% of all votes
* Yes, he will match his ’07 PECOTA, which matches his ’04 + ’05 seasons. 54% of all votes
* He’ll improve but will still be below average. 14% of all votes
* Coco Crisp in 2006 is the real Crisp. 13% of all votes
Hopefully the majority of the Red Sox fans are correct and we see a .309/.361/.452 from Crisp. Back to the Helton trade. Let’s run this trade through more in-depth, and meet Mr. Helton.
Todd Helton, born August 20, 1973 was drafted eighth overall in the 1995 draft by the Rockies. Batting left and throwing left, he made his major league debut in 1997 amassing 93 at-bats for a line of .280/.337/.484 and then started full-time the following year for a line of .315/.380/.530. In the ten years since, Helton has a staggering career line of .333/.430/.593 and has also nabbed three Gold Gloves during his major league tenure. While there is no doubting Helton’s abilities, there are some major knocks on Helton currently.
Helton will be entering his age-33 season having posted his lowest OPS since 1997 at .880 with a line of .302/.404/.476 and has suffered back troubles the past two years. (I really hate to bring this up, but I feel like I’m obligated to: from 2000 to 2004, Helton had consecutive 1.000+ OPS seasons, and the past two years have seen back troubles flare up and statistics trend downwards. While the Coors Field humidor certainly had an effect, this is another person who may have used steroids. This is complete conjecture however, and should not be taken as fact.)
Helton says those back troubles are past him, but what’s not past him is his affinity for Coors Field. He has a career .371/.465/.676 line at home, which is incredible. It’s an 1.141 OPS as compared to his road OPS of .900 and line of .294/.393/.507. He hit .338/.445/.531 at home in 2006 (.976 OPS), and .266/.360/.421 on the road for a paltry .781 OPS.
There is one major caveat I would like to issue here.
There is absolutely no doubt Coors Field has aided Helton in his career.
But there is ALSO absolutely no doubt that the extreme pitchers park of San Diego, San Francisco and Los Angeles have depressed Helton’s road numbers.
Okay, maybe San Francisco and Los Angeles, but not San Diego. His career line at Petco is .363/.476/.657, so maybe he’s not inflated as much by Coors as we all think. He has a career .807 OPS in Dodger Stadium and in Whatever Phone Company They’re Calling It These Days Park, his career OPS is .800.
Just think about that for a minute. I know it certainly changed my line of thinking when I realized that. In addition, Helton would fit the Red Sox’s lineup perfectly. He fights for the balls he wants, has tremendous plate discipline, and is a good character guy. As Up in the Rockies says, he is “the face of Colorado Rockies baseball” (definitely read this article to get the Rockies’ perspective).
Helton nabbed 40 doubles this past year, and his hit chart shows that Helton may benefit from the Green Monster. But then again, who doesn’t? Interestingly enough, all of Helton’s home-runs at Coors Field this past year, all eight of them in 546 AB, went to right centerfield, which is 375 ft. away, which should give us pause … 15 total HR. Only 8 at Coors Field, all pull home-runs. Yes, he was injured. It’s still concerning. (Fenway’s right centerfield is 380 ft. away.)
Getting away from the extreme pitchers parks that he has to play in on the road should help, but getting away from Coors won’t help. That essentially negates the two, so while I wouldn’t put too much emphasis on his home/road splits, I absolutely would put emphasis on his final line: 546 AB, 40 2B, 15 HR, 91 BB, 64 K, 81 RBI, 94 R, .302/.404/.476.
Helton has already gone on record saying that he would accept a trade to the Red Sox, and both teams have already agreed on the dollar amount the Rockies would send the Red Sox to cover Helton’s contract: slightly less than half of the $90.1 million remaining, which puts us at an estimated value of $50.1 million over five years. Considering J.D. Drew just signed for $70 million over five years with the Red Sox, $50.1 million over five years for Helton is really not that bad. Drew is entering his age-31 season in baseball, Helton will enter at age-33. Considering the Red Sox will drop Curt Schilling’s $17 million contract after 2007 and replace it with minor league minimum Jon Lester and/or Clay Buchholz and lose Manny Ramirez’s $20 million after 2008, the financials make sense in the long-term. (Side note: I wonder if getting away from the high altitude of Denver would benefit Helton.)
Here are the following names that are associated with the Red Sox trading to the Rockies for Helton:
SP Matt Clement
SP/RP Julian Tavarez
SP Daniel Bard
SP Jon Lester
RP Craig Hansen
SP Clay Buchholz
RP Manny Delcarmen
3B Mike Lowell
CF Jacoby Ellsbury
The Red Sox and Rockies have reportedly agreed on Lowell and Tavarez being part of the trade, but the dickering continues over the minor leaguers involved, as the Rockies want either Jacoby Ellsbury, Daniel Bard, Manny Delcarmen, Craig Hansen, Clay Buchholz, or Jon Lester, and the Red Sox are unwilling to meet those demands.
I am not a fan of including Matt Clement in the deal, because he is a pitcher in a contract year with a lot to prove and a fresh arm coming to us in July. Clement could provide a much needed boost at the time. While I wouldn’t hesitate to move Clement for minor leaguers, I think it is a good thing the Rockies are not interested in acquiring Clement. As for Lowell, if Helton comes to Boston, it is a necessary evil for Mike Lowell to be shipped out. Lowell could either be included in this deal or flipped elsewhere for a reliever. However, I think it would be far easier to be rid of Lowell and the full balance of his $9 million contract (one year remaining) in the Helton deal than attempt to open talks with other teams this close to Spring Training on Lowell for a reliever. Julian Tavarez is also under contract for one more year and while he did impress as a starter near the end of this past year, he still ended up with a 4.47 ERA and 1.56 WHIP despite a mid 3.00’s ERA starting.
Jacoby Ellsbury, Clay Buchholz and Jon Lester cannot be part of this deal. Period. Walk away if any of them has to be.
Many people are having problems with the inclusion of Hansen or Delcarmen in the deal. I am unsure of whether or not this is a problem or not. I am not going to deny the fact that we should not deal two young relievers, but I will also mention that middle relievers grow on trees and middle relievers/closers are always so fluid in effectiveness from year to year that I would not let this be a major sticking point. Dealing both these players is still certainly problematic, but only one? Dealing either Hansen or Delcarmen would be fine to me. Delcarmen impressed this past year, and I think he is a major sleeper for the closer’s role if he can harness his secondary pitches, for he has the demeanor for it. I do not believe Hansen can ever be a closer. I definitely think he has the promise of a productive career ahead of him, and his stuff is absolutely electric. After watching Hansen the past two years however, I question his demeanor fitting into a closer’s role. (Do you remember the ‘Derek Lowe Face’? That’s what Hansen utilizes.)
Daniel Bard kind of works here (Fire Brand interview of Bard) because he’s rather young and the jury is still out on whether or not Bard can develop into a major-league arm. The other prospects the Rockies are demanding are either much closer to the majors or have more talent. If I had to pick between Lowell, Tavarez and Bard for Helton and $40-$45 million, I have to say take the deal. However, it sounds like Daniel Bard cannot even be used as a player to be named later because no player can be traded for one year after they sign with a team, and Bard did not sign until September.
I have to wonder if the Rockies would be interested in David Murphy, because word is they will have a very quick leash on Willy Taveras if he is ineffective (and since he’s a poor man’s Juan Pierre, he will be). David Murphy and a young minor league arm such as Edgar Martinez might work.
If the deal really is Lowell, Tavarez, and someone young and high-level like Bard for Helton and all that money, I have to reconsider if this is really a bad deal or not.
Assuming we get Helton, the lineup would theoretically look like:
SS Julio Lugo
1B Todd Helton (.824 OPS v. LHP in 2006, .898 v. RHP)
DH David Ortiz
LF Manny Ramirez
RF J.D. Drew
3B Kevin Youkilis
C Jason Varitek
CF Coco Crisp
2B Dustin Pedroia
That gives us a two through six lineup of devastating patience and power (doubles and home-run) for opposing pitchers to contend with. Helton’s 2007 PECOTA projects to 493 AB, 92 R, 34 2B, 3 3B, 20 HR, 83 RBI, 75 BB, 70 K, and a .303/.396/.501 line, all assuming that he is playing in a lackluster Colorado offense. He has a 15 percent chance of improving on these numbers, a 43 percent chance of a collapse (indicative of a risk), a three percent chance to improve (oppose of collapse), and nine percent chance of attrition (percent his playing time will decrease due to injury or ineffectiveness).
Todd Helton at $10 million a year with a projected .303/.396/.501 line would do wonders for the Red Sox’s offense, and would also be a welcome Gold Glover at first base. Helton tied for second in the majors with a .997 fielding percentage, fourth in range factor at 10.28 and 14th in zone rating at .838. Mientkiewicz did not qualify for these ratings, but Mienkiewicz clocked in at .997/9.53/.840 when he was with the Red Sox.
There are also rumors that reliever Brian Fuentes could be included in the deal. If he is, DO IT. Fuentes is entering his age-31 season and has saved 31 and 30 games for the Rockies the past two years with ERAs of 2.91 and 3.44. He has a career ERA of 3.62 in 298 IP, all but 11.2 with the Rockies. He was drafted by the Mariners and traded to the Rockies along with Jose Panaigua and Denny Star for Jeff Cirillo in 2001. Fuentes is a power left-hander who struck out 73 in 65.1 IP last year while walking 26. It seems too good to be true that Fuentes would be in this discussion, so that is all I will say on the Fuentes matter.
We’ve had quite a nice little talk about Helton here, but as I said in my first paragraph, “I don’t see a reason to add an aging, overpaid and declining first baseman to the roster.”
I still don’t see a reason. $10 million for five years is pretty reasonable, but why add Helton when we have Kevin Youkilis at first base and an expiring contract in Mike Lowell (who did have an effective 2006 season) at third? Next year, you have the following free agents: Bobby Abreu, Mark Buehrle, Eric Gagne, Marcus Giles, Torii Hunter, Geoff Jenkins, Jason Jennings, Mariano Rivera (I know, but just throwing it out there), Ichiro, Mike Sweeney, Koji Uehara (Japan), Jake Westbrook, Brad Wilkerson, Michael Young, Carlos Zambrano. (In 2008? Some names include Johan Santana, Travis Hafner, Joe Nathan, C.C. Sabathia.) I would hate for an aging, overpaid and declining first baseman to handicap the Red Sox in chasing these names (but in fairness, Helton could wind out to be a godsend. Let’s not forget that. Helton HAS the ability to be a godsend).
If the Red Sox acquire Helton for some form of Lowell, Tavarez and a minor leaguer, I won’t whine. I will be pleased and happy to have a hitter and fielder of Helton’s caliber on the team even as I wince at the acquisition due to the potential ramifications it could bring. Helton is a risk with a capital R … and also a capital I, S and K. Tread carefully, Theo. Tread carefully.