Cleveland.Indians.MLB.com

Inbox: Fans differ on Deadline trades

• fan comments
• print this page
• e-mail this page
• post on facebook

Related Links

• Write to the Tribe Inbox
• Martinez bids Tribe a tearful goodbye
• Indians add to haul in Martinez deal
• Lee trade signals harsh reality to Tribe
• Tribe trades Lee, Francisco to Phillies

By Anthony Castrovince / MLB.com

08/03/09 11:00 AM ET

In the last Inbox, we discussed the possibility of the Indians trading Cliff Lee and Victor Martinez.

Whatever happened with all that, anyway?

Knowing full well what's on your mind this week, we'll use this edition of the Inbox to take a longer-winded, more analytical look at the Tribe's wheeling and dealing, and what it means for this franchise and its fan base.

Why are all these "fans" so vindictive of the trades made by the organization these past few weeks? Sure, Cliff Lee was nails on the mound every fifth day and Victor Martinez was the face of this franchise. But Tribe fans need to ask themselves if they would rather watch Lee win 10 or 12 games and Victor hit .300 for one of the worst teams in baseball for the next year and half, or suck it up, bite the bullet and trust that the organization is trying to build us all a winner over an extended period of time.

Tribe fans are all shouting, "We will never go to a game again!" Well, congratulations for contributing to the reason we cannot keep players, because nobody came to games while Lee and Martinez were here, anyways.

We all have to remember that we are Indians fans first. Don't spite the team for trying to create what you want. Players come and players go, but Chief Wahoo is forever.
-- Andrew, Erie, Pa.

I'm printing Andrew's e-mail here not to lambast those of you who are voicing your vehemently negative reactions to the Tribe's July purge. You're all entitled to your opinion about this club's direction, and one look at the comments section below, I'm sure, will present the reader with all reaction, both positive and negative.

No, I'm printing this e-mail because it's a calm, rational argument that opens up multiple talking points. And here's my long-winded take:

Even without significant offseason additions, you can't rule out the possibility that the Indians would have contended next season with Lee and Martinez. Baseball is unpredictable, and the American League Central is weak. In the wake of the Martinez trade, general manager Mark Shapiro said that contending next year is not out of the question, because of the acquisitions the Indians made to add on to their young core. But clearly contention would have been more possible with an ace like Lee and a three-time All-Star like Martinez.

What's more important to Shapiro, however, is building a team that is going to be competitive for years to come, not just next year. That's a tough idea to sell to the fans at this juncture, and it's even tougher when you trade two popular, proven players like Lee and Martinez.

If you think Lee was going to remain with the Indians beyond 2010, you're being delusional. The only argument against trading him now was the hope of contending with him fronting the rotation in his walk year. Shapiro assessed this 2009 team and decided such contention wasn't likely, especially with a decent chunk of the payroll tied into Lee's 2010 option.

Have a question about the Indians? E-mail your query to MLB.com Indians beat reporter Anthony Castrovince for possible inclusion in a future Inbox column. Letters may be edited for brevity, length and/or content. First Name, Last Initial: Hometown: Email Address: Question:

The same goes for Martinez and his 2010 option. Trading Martinez was more difficult, however, because, unlike Lee, he truly loved this organization and was willing to stay here long-term. If the Indians pursued it, it's my belief that they probably could have worked out a hometown discount with Martinez. But with depth in the upper levels of the farm system at catcher (read: Carlos Santana) and first base (read: Matt LaPorta), it would have been difficult to justify -- looking at things strictly from a baseball perspective -- giving Martinez a long-term deal that would begin when he's 32 years old.

Still, you hate to rob a team of its heart and soul like that. And maybe some decisions should go beyond the strict baseball perspective. That's certainly open for debate.

For now, I can neither defend nor condemn the haul of bodies brought in by the trades of Lee and Martinez. The only one I've seen play is Masterson, and his addition certainly leaves me feeling a little more optimistic about the state of the rotation in the years to come. As for the others, right now they are just names and stat lines on paper, not proven commodities.

What I can say with certainty is this: The financial situation Andrew alluded to when he mentioned attendance is real. People don't show up in droves for baseball games in this city anymore, unless the team is in contention late in the season. We saw that in 2007, when attendance was mediocre, at best, all year, until the season's final two months. Attendance directly impacts payroll, which directly impacts the quality and depth of the Major League team, which directly affects performance, which directly affects attendance. It's a vicious cycle that, combined with the difficulties of being a mid-market club in a sport without a payroll, is not easily overcome.

So what you see are situations like this, in which drastic (and sometimes emotionally difficult) decisions must be made to even entertain the hope of sustained success. The first rebuild of the Shapiro era didn't provide such success, as the Indians only flirted with the playoffs in 2005 and came up a game short of the World Series in '07. This latest "reload," as Shapiro calls it, had better provide it in a reasonably short timeframe, or you'll see some really dreary attendance figures in the years to come.

For more discussion on the payroll situation, visit the CastroTurf blog.

I have always loved the Tribe. Please tell me why I should continue to care?
-- Shannon P., Columbus, Ohio

You know, this going to come across as cheesy. And I would never tell anyone how to spend their money or their time, because I certainly don't like people telling me how to spend mine (you're talking to a guy who's been to 29 Bruce Springsteen concerts and counting).

But to me, following a ballclub and/or attending a ballgame are rites of spring, summer and fall that are a welcomed diversion from the real world. And those still paying attention this past weekend watched a trade-depleted Tribe filled with rookies and no-names take two of three from a Tigers team that's trying desperately to hang onto first place.

It's baseball. And while I don't recommend the Indians use this as their latest marketing phrase, the fact is you never know what the heck's going to happen on any given day, and that's part of the beauty of it.

With Martinez gone, is there anyone on the current roster who can step into a leadership/captain-type role? I'm not sure that I see it, but I also imagine that a lot of players are going to be challenged in the coming year.
-- Andrew S.

You simply don't replace a guy like Martinez. He was a special player, on and off the field.

Right now, I see a clubhouse devoid of vocal and emotional leadership. Grady Sizemore has become more vocal the last couple years, but he's still the type who is going to lead more by example. Kerry Wood has a great clubhouse presence, but relievers can't really fulfill a leadership role for the regulars.

Some of this stuff gets overrated, of course. This isn't football, where a captain gets in the face of his teammates every Sunday morning and challenges them to rise up. The baseball season is a long haul, and leadership by example is probably the most impactful form of leadership there is.

Still, personalities like the one owned by Martinez have a way of keeping a clubhouse together over the grind of a 162-game season. It will be interesting to see which core members of this club, if any, at least attempt to step into his shoes.

What's the word on signing Alex White? Please, please, please tell me the Indians are not making him a reliever. I think it would be a shame to waste such a talent in the 'pen.
-- Michael B., Fayetteville, N.C.

The Indians feel they've established a good relationship with White and his family, and they remain intent on, and optimistic about, signing him before the Aug. 17 deadline. White, who was taken with the 15th overall selection in June's First-Year Player Draft, is hardly the only first-rounder yet to sign. In fact, as of this writing, only four of the top 20 picks have signed.

As far as the Indians' intentions with White are concerned, assistant general manager Chris Antonetti told me the reports about White headed to the bullpen -- reports brought on by the fact that scouting director Brad Grant announced, on the day White was drafted, that the Tribe intends to move White to relief -- were overblown.

Once White is signed, Antonetti said, the Indians will sit down with him and discuss his best developmental path. They are not ruling out the possibility of him remaining a starter. But, clearly, the bullpen would provide him with a quicker path to the bigs.

That's all for this trip through the Inbox. We'll cover a broader range of topics next time around, because, if nothing else, the Indians have given us plenty to discuss.

Anthony Castrovince is a reporter for MLB.com. This story was not subject to the approval of Major League Baseball or its clubs.