The release is out and the Nationals sent LHSP Glenn Gibson to the Rays in exchange for OF Elijah Dukes.
Hmmm.
Not what I was expecting. I did not envision them surrendering one of the Vermonsters for Dukes. First blush, not terrible but definitely not what I expected. Gibson was a 2006 4th round selection by the Nationals and was one of the menu of arms the Nationals put up as an example of what work being accomplished in the Nationals farm system.
Gibson is a extremely polished lefty (for someone coming out of high school) and has a major league pedigree (his father pitched in the major leagues). I like Gibson for what he is a soft-tossing lefthander in the mold of Jamie Moyer (I use that as the best case scenario). His most likely case was to develop into a serviceable lefty a la John Lannan. Someone who can serve as a #4 or 5 starting pitcher for a major league team. With the acquisitions of Josh Smoker and Jack McGeary and Ross Detwiler, Gibson became the movable lefty.
It’s a lot to surrender in a deal for a guy with the baggage Dukes has, but from a talent for talent point of view, the Nationals are the winners. Dukes has a five-tool skill set. His ceiling is a middle of the order bat with average to above average defense (once again best case scenario). His most likely career path seems likely to be a 6th hitter in the lineup with 15-20 HR and maybe a 265BA.
BUT, the big risk in this deal is the aforementioned baggage. To say Dukes has had problems on and off the field is an understatement (a colossal understatement). He has had documented discipline and attitude problems (including as recently as this past Thursday in the Dominican Winter League).
This is a tremendous gamble the Nationals are taking. They need to hope that Manny Acta and the Nationals leaders on the field (to include Dmitri Young) can help Dukes work through the issues he has.
Worst case scenario, the Nationals have traded for a bad apple who changes little with the change of address. I would imagine that it was made abundantly clear that there would be little wiggle room when it comes to the expectations of behavior. And there would not be a second chance. In that case, the Nationals gave away a potential back of the rotation starting pitcher for a headache.
In the best case, the Nationals may have identified their CF of the future. Lastings Milledge would be the starting LF. Austin Kearns in RF. Or the Nationals could be looking to package one of the four (including Wily Mo Pena) for a starting pitcher.
I understand that the initial reaction to this deal is likely going to be overwhelmingly negative. I see incredibly high risk in this move. Higher than signing Young this past off-season. Higher than the reported issues Milledge faced while with the Mets. But along with this high risk is a high reward if he can figure things out (which is truly unknown at this point).
I am going to likely be one of the only bloggers out here who says this, but I like the deal for the Nationals. Would I have preferred the Nationals deal someone else (like my suggestions of Clint Everts or Larry Broadway)? ABSOLUTELY. They were more known quantities while Gibson is still an unknown who could turn into something. But from where I see the Nationals developmentally, they have the opportunity to take on these types of risk while the farm system continues to be restock/rebuilt. They have made noted efforts on the pitching side. Keep in mind that not all of these highly-rated arms are going to develop. And with the questions remained with bats (aside from Chris Marrero), moving an arm for a higher level bat is a wise move
Elijah Dukes is a gamble. A huge gamble.
But one that could pay dividends.
Three more months | 03-Dec-07 at 8:06 pm | Permalink
If your team has been depleted, and you are trying to boost their chances more quickly within a “plan”, I have to say that it makes more sense to take this kind of chance than to sign Andruw Jones. To get Jones, who is currently a perfomance gamble, you would have to commit 3 years, at least (forget the cash). You are free to discard Dukes as quickly as you want, and the cost is a low prospect of unknown potential.
Potential for potenial, this is a win. If Dukes pans out, then he is a keeper for many years before he even becomes a free agent. Remember- the rays were considered a team of the near future because of Delmon Young and Elijah Dukes before they failed a few more times for high draft picks. This could be another piece of a huge short cut, a big payoff from high-stakes poker. Unless Glenn Gibson makes the Hall of Fame and Dukes squanders his chances immediately, you have to understand the chance the Nats are taking.
Ric | 03-Dec-07 at 8:21 pm | Permalink
Gibson is years away and, as you say, the Nats have a stable of young pitching from the last two drafts. This is a move for 2008 and 09, when Pena and Kearns could be in walk years. This means the Nationals will have (at least) Milledge, Dukes and Maxwell under control at reasonable prices in those years. Maybe Burgess too if he develops quickly. I agree with you that it is a good move. Maybe the Nats overpaid a little bit in light of Dukes’ character issues, but they now have doubled the number of players in the system who appeared on Baseball America’s “Top 100″ lists in 2006 and 2007 (Milledge 9 and Zimmerman 15 in 06; Dukes 79 and Balestar 95 in 07). Influx of talent at this stage of franchise building is worth the risk, in my view.
Dick | 03-Dec-07 at 11:06 pm | Permalink
Brian: If you read deeply enough and carefully enough, I think Chris at CP actually said it was a good deal for the Nats. Has he drunk the Kool-Aid?
I hate giving up Gibson and think he is likely to have a better big league career than Dukes; however, this years drafting of three lefties made him available (especially since the other three are untradeable by rule). It must have been a fair trade because so many people are unhappy. Isn’t that how you tell when something is fair, both sides don’t like it? Dukes, on the other hand could be an All-Star with his talent, Gibson, not likely.
If you bet the ponies, you know that you can do much better hitting a few long shots than by have to collect on every scratch bet you make! Good analysis, as always. That’s why we come to you first.
Louis J. | 03-Dec-07 at 11:36 pm | Permalink
I’ve calmed down since the initial annoucement of Dukes for Gibson. I hate to lose Gibson but I guess we couldn’t keep all of those young LHP. Anyhow, John Lannan appears to be the same type of pitcher and was tutored by Gibson’s father in the 2006 off-season. If Dukes & Gibson both reach their potential, Dukes will have a better ML career than Gibson. So I guess I have to hope that Dukes can control himself and reach that potential. Then I’ll be at peace losing Gibson.
The Nats do need position players who can hit. So far we have traded away Church, Schneider & Gibson for Milledge & Dukes. I lwould like tp keep Wily Mo and believe that he has as much “upside potential” as Milledge & Dukes. Add in Marrero, Maxwell, Burgess, Smolinski, King, Englund, etc and the Nats are starting to accumulate good young hitters. I hope these trades will work.
hartmanbirge | 03-Dec-07 at 11:49 pm | Permalink
I like the deal… I don’t love the deal. First, the Nationals now have assembled four outfielders who all have among the fastest bat speed in the game (Dukes, Pena, Milledge, Burgess). That bat speed goes a long way as a player adjusts through the course of his career. Second, the overall athleticism of the team has markedly changed - averaged out we now have a lot more power and a lot more speed through the lineup. It’s a nice problem to have. Third, Gibson was dominating in Vermont but that doesn’t necessarily translate to the ML level - polished? Yes. Dominating? Probably not. At most he projected to a 4th starter. The rise of Lannan I think (similar skills) made parting with Gibson a lot easier. But I liked Glenn Gibson. Fourth, any discussion whatsoever of benching Pena to me is out of the question - that bat needs to be in our everyday lineup. Fifth, if either Dukes or Milledge are on the bench it won’t be long before they become unglued - just in their nature. Sixth, I can’t wait to see the first on-field fight… the Nats can now kick some serious ass. Seventh, we now have some assurance - if one of our problem children implode then he could be gone in a heartbeat and we have a stud in his place to play every day.
EdDC | 04-Dec-07 at 9:22 am | Permalink
Just one thing about thinking you have enough young pitchers:
I remember a long time ago when the O’s GM gave away Curt Schilling and Pete Harnisch for a washed up old-timer, bragging that the O’s came out ahead cuz they “traded from their surplus.” That phrase has stuck with me over the years, since most of the pitchers the O’s kept didn’t do a whole lot in their careers.
Anyway, the Nats went for the bigger upside, which is what you have to do to win (rather than just get to respectability).
Will | 04-Dec-07 at 10:20 am | Permalink
Even after seeing all the other trades, I don’t like this one or think it makes sense. Dukes is to much of a risk. When giving up a player like Gibson the Nats need to get quality in return. Dukes has potential but has to many issues.
Jeff | 02-Jan-08 at 2:47 pm | Permalink
Dukes just needs to get out of Florida and away from a despicable franchise and play under the guidance of guys such as Barry Larkin (Who he’s living with until spring) and Dmitri Young, Manny Acta, etc…