Because Every Morning Needs a Jake Peavy Trade Update

by gondeee on Nov 12, 2008 8:39 AM EST in Trade News Comment 74 comments

Ho-hum:

The Padres again have asked the Braves to revise their proposal for right-hander Jake Peavy, requesting that the team substitute Single-A catcher Tyler Flowers for Single-A center fielder Gorkys Hernandez, according to major-league sources.

Flowers, 6-foot-4 and 245 pounds, is tearing up the Arizona Fall League, and the Braves probably are unwilling to part with him in the same package as shortstop Yunel Escobar and either right-hander Charlie Morton or left-hander Jo-Jo Reyes. Frankly, they're not thrilled with trading any of those players.

The Cubs and Padres, meanwhile, continue to discuss the same list of six to eight names from which the Padres would choose in a deal for Peavy. The Padres then would have the option of spinning one or more of those players to other clubs.

One rival GM poses a good question: Why are the Braves so willing to trade Escobar? When the Braves included shortstop Elvis Andrus in their package for Teixeria 16 months ago, club officials reasoned that Escobar could man the position for the next six years.

Well, Escobar is part of the price to get Peavy. The Braves believe that Brent Lillibridge would be a lesser hitter than Escobar but a superior defender, further benefiting their pitching staff.

That was from Ken Rosenthal. Interesting take on why we're willing to include Escobar, and the first major media outlet that's said Lillibridge (and he got his first name right this time) would be the guy to replace Escobar despite the drop in offense.

This is also the first I've heard about T-Flow being part of the trade instead of Gorkys. I've said from the beginning of this off-season that Flowers is a prime candidate to be included in any trade, and I wonder if the organization may feel the same way -- preferring to trade him over Gorkys. (There's a puff piece on Flowers in the AJC.) It seems like Flowers would have more value than Gorkys right now.

0 recs | Comment 74 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

huh

I gotta question your reading comprehension skills there Gondeee. Rosencrap says the Pads revised the deal to include Flowers not the Braves.

by JFP on Nov 12, 2008 8:50 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

He was probably loaded when he posted this. It happens.

I guess I should be one to talk.
There's nights that I can't even walk.
There's days I couldn't give a fuck.
And in between is where I'm stuck.

by Smoltz's Beard on Nov 12, 2008 9:44 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Hmm, posted at 8:39 a.m.

Sounds about right.

No wonder nobody likes you, Tuttle... everything's a (Pujols) damn debate.

by royhobbs on Nov 12, 2008 9:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ahaha

never gets old.

"Have you ever had your heart broken?"
"Yeah, when we lost the pennant in '87."

by jug on Nov 12, 2008 10:43 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Hum

I’ve updated. I must not have been fully awake this morning, because I read that a couple of times and got the same (wrong) impression.

It’s hard to say who has more long term value, Gorkys or Flowers. Certainly Flowers has more current value.

by gondeee on Nov 12, 2008 10:26 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

It sounds like the Padres have no idea what they want in the trade, and are just trying to take us for a ride.

I don’t substitute Flowers for Gorkys. No way, no how. If they want to substitute Flowers for Escobar then I’m all ears. I want Wren to give a “take it or leave it” ultimatum with the discussed players (Escobar, Gorkys, Morton/Reyes, and/or Locke), deadline by Friday. If the Padres are still playing their games then move on and look to trade for a bat, because I’m confident in that our trade proposal is stronger than the Cubs’ offering.

by soup du jour on Nov 12, 2008 9:07 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

OK

Fine. Pull Escobar, add Flowers and Locke to Gorkys and Morton/Reyes. You have til 9AM friday!

Wren’s offers should have peaked by now and it’s clear the Pads are being greedy. Time to start the downhill portion of the bell curve and start lowering our offers. This will probably ensure we don’t land Peavy but at this point I’m more interested in making Towers & Co. look like the asses they are for not taking our best deal when it was clearly superior to all others.

by scstrato on Nov 12, 2008 9:10 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

GOOD CALL!

If they want Flowers thenwe pull Esco and offer them T-Flow, Gorkys, Locke, and Morton/Reyes. Take it or leave it. It’s time for Frank Wren to stop being the one getting squeezed and realize that they don’t have the revenue to keep Peavy and we are giving them the best offer they are going to get. If we could pull this off without giving up any major league starters I would be ecstatic.

We’ve been pushed long enough Frank…It’s time we start doing some pushing of our own!!!

by Fischerking on Nov 12, 2008 10:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Nope.

Don’t like Yunel and Flowers in the same deal. Nope, nope, nope. As others have stated before me, if you want to substitute Flowers for Yunel, then yeah…let’s get the deal done right now.

And what’s this about Lillibridge being better defensively than Escobar? From the few starts I saw him make in ATL he didn’t seem to have better range, nor a stronger arm…although it was a brief sample size. Anyone have some minor league numbers on that?

I guess I should be one to talk.
There's nights that I can't even walk.
There's days I couldn't give a fuck.
And in between is where I'm stuck.

by Smoltz's Beard on Nov 12, 2008 9:43 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Lillibridge has more range

not a stronger arm (though at least average if not above for a SS). Don’t have numbers, but watched a lot of both of them in Richmond and Lilli was clearly the better defender, though Escobar seemed to step it up in the majors last year. Lillibridge made two plays last year in the Governors Cup championship doubleheader that were just phenomenal gets, the most memorable being a grounder up the middle that he got to on the outfield grass almost directly behind second from regular SS depth. He routinely beat Brandon Jones to fly balls in foul territory down the LF line as well.

by abravesfan on Nov 12, 2008 10:16 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Absolutely agree with this assessment. I saw them both a lot at AAA too, in fact I’ve seen them both a fair amount at the different levels of the minors, and abravesfan is right on point, Lilly has much better range, Escobar has a much better arm. I personally think Escobar is more natural at the position, but Lillibridge has the speed and quick instincts to make up for a lot. Don’t know that he’s decidedly better than Escobar, but you’re probably not losing anything on defense.
As far as offense, well, if Lilly plays up to his potential, you could eventually end up gaining.

by cbwilk on Nov 12, 2008 11:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

abravesfan & cbwilk

Thanks. I never get a chance to see anyone play in the minors, so I figured I’d ask. BP rated Lillibridge pretty poorly, but as I said it was a small sample.

I guess I should be one to talk.
There's nights that I can't even walk.
There's days I couldn't give a fuck.
And in between is where I'm stuck.

by Smoltz's Beard on Nov 12, 2008 12:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Although sadly there’s nothing last season that indicated that he’ll actually live up to his potential with the bat.

by soup du jour on Nov 12, 2008 12:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yep, sadly.

Zero plate discipline + long swing. Two Francouers and a pitcher in the lineup?!

by VictorW on Nov 12, 2008 3:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

We talked in another thread about how he dealt with a wrist/hand injury pretty much all of this season. He got off to a slow start (which I believe was due to him not making the team out of spring training, this happens to a lot of guys) and then got hurt right about the start of May. So I don’t really feel last year was a good indication of his ability. And, VictorW, that long swing was pretty much a direct result of that injury; his swing was completely different from the two years before or spring training.

by cbwilk on Nov 12, 2008 4:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

if you saw him play in Toronto last year you would see how slick he looked. I think hes AS good as Escobar if not better.

by SayHeyWerd on Nov 12, 2008 5:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

If they want Flowers, throw him in. But like everyone else is saying, take Esco out. Insert Lillibridge so that the Pads can still get rid of Greene. Then give JoJo, Gorkys, and if need be Locke. I’d say Flowers, Lilli, Gorkys, Reyes and Locke for Peavey is a fair deal.

by Bobby Cocks on Nov 12, 2008 10:37 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I’d take out either Locke or Gorkys, we don’t really need to be doing another five-for-one trade.

by gondeee on Nov 12, 2008 10:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, but the Tex 5 for 1 was for a rental. I can see your point but this is a legit Cy Young contender for 5 years. Would you not trade one prospect per each year of his service?
AND we get to keep Escobar, which is huge in my opinion.

by Bobby Cocks on Nov 12, 2008 10:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

gondee, whatever your on...

let me get some. the Tex deal was a 5 for 2 and its looking like STEPHEN MAREK was a pretty good pick up. He’s a big body that could turn into a pretty handy late innings reliever/closer sometime soon

by MIZIKE on Nov 12, 2008 2:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

of course im

referring to that Tex trade as a trade that got us Kotchmen AND Marek… (although we did get mahay in that trade with Texas as well)

by MIZIKE on Nov 12, 2008 2:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Mahay turned into Brett DeVall

if we really want to be strict about it, arbitration compensation pick

by abravesfan on Nov 12, 2008 2:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think...

the reason the Pods have switched to wanting Flowers is from reading this blog. You guys are a GM’s best source of information and logic… :-) Seriously!

As to Escobar, I have been thinking the last day or so that maybe the Braves are seeing something in him (temperament-wise) that they are not wanting to deal with. I’m sure what we see and hear is only the tip of the iceberg. Just a theory.

by sddbaker on Nov 12, 2008 11:00 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

padres don't have a clue

the AJC just had an article on Flowers yesterday. I think Towers must’ve read that as well. I hope DOB didn’t time that article to try to push the trade through.

by WhyBraves on Nov 12, 2008 11:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Flowers and Escobar

I don’t think that Wren will deal both Flowers and Escobar in the same trade. Flowers, Lillibridge, Gorkys, Reyes, Lyman and Accosta for Peavy and Greene? Since the Padres are apparently not going to sign Trevor Hoffman, maybe Wren can get the deal done by including a reliever….Lillibridge may be a good defender, but he does not have the bat and he is not young either….

by Stephen in the UAE on Nov 12, 2008 12:22 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Why trade for Greene if we’re keeping Escobar? You think we’d be able to turn around and trade him for some other prospects? Or maybe include him in a trade for a left fielder or another pitcher?

by Bobby Cocks on Nov 12, 2008 1:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Greene

That is an easy call it lets you then play Greene at 2nd if you want which he would probably be more natural at, and you can trade KJ for a Corner OF and still not lose anything. And if Greene comes back to his 07 self then you have a 25 HR and 90-100 RBI 2nd and didn’t deal esco.

by mauck98 on Nov 12, 2008 2:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That’s only true if Greene is indeed considered a negative for them. We take a big money player off their hands and in return we don’t have to give up a lot more in prospects. If they are actually wanting more prospect return if they include Greene, then I’m out.

by Bobby Cocks on Nov 12, 2008 2:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Seems like a bit of a stretch to say he’d be “more natural at” 2b. He’s not played there in the big leagues and only three games in the minors according to baseball-reference.com

by VegasAces on Nov 12, 2008 2:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

plus isnt he a pretty proficient defensive SS

"We win today, that's two in a row... if we win tomorrow, that's called a winning streak. It has happened before..."

by Swo12bv on Nov 12, 2008 7:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Also...

I just wanted to comment that T-Flow is a terrible nickname for him. What about hyacinth? chrysanthemum?…Daisy? I’m sure he’d appreciate that one!

by soup du jour on Nov 12, 2008 12:49 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I’ve always just heard everybody call him Flow.

by cbwilk on Nov 12, 2008 4:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

His bicep would beg to differ....

You can’t see it clearly in the shot, but it says (in that fancy script): T-Flow
Personally, I wouldn’t argue with him.

I’ve heard guys on the team call him both, though……

by secondbass on Nov 12, 2008 4:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Nice! I always wondered what that said. I can’t read tatoos for anything.

by cbwilk on Nov 12, 2008 5:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

technically that is his tricep..but im not a doctor, and how did u figure out that says T-FLOW it is really difficult to discern, touche on figuring that out

"We win today, that's two in a row... if we win tomorrow, that's called a winning streak. It has happened before..."

by Swo12bv on Nov 12, 2008 7:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Kind of got to know him a little bit in Rome when he was there, so I asked….I could have never cracked that code either!
And yeah – I knew as soon as I typed ‘bicep’ that I was probably talking about his leg or something…..

by secondbass on Nov 12, 2008 8:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Bah

You can’t give yourself your own nickname.

by soup du jour on Nov 12, 2008 9:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

+1

by buzzdeadwax on Nov 13, 2008 11:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

There’s nothing saying he gave himself the nickname, just that he had it imortalized on his arm.

by cbwilk on Nov 13, 2008 12:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Thank you

I was about to point that out. Soup made a little bit of a leap there…

by VegasAces on Nov 13, 2008 12:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

True, but

Tattooing your nickname on yourself is a little douchie, IMO.

by buzzdeadwax on Nov 14, 2008 1:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh, I totally agree. Fortunately I know he’s a great guy and not the least bit douchie (douchey?). I’m guessing he did it when he was 18 and dumb.

by cbwilk on Nov 14, 2008 3:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

This is being drug out way too much

Its taking so long, i feel like we should be doing things like “i won’t shave until this is over.” Or like when Catholics swear off things for Lent. “I won’t eat sweets until this is over.” I think Gondee should swear off drinking until the Peavy deal is done.

by 10-4 on Nov 12, 2008 1:15 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

+1

by sddbaker on Nov 12, 2008 1:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

“The Braves believe that Brent Lillibridge would be a lesser hitter than Escobar but a superior defender, further benefiting their pitching staff.”

So basically the Braves think Lillibridge is the best defensive shortstop in all of baseball.

by VictorW on Nov 12, 2008 3:24 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, I have a hard time believeing that. There were way to many times last season that I almost choked on my beer because Escobar made some ridiculous play.

But I havn’t seen much of Lillibridge in the field so who knows.

I guess I should be one to talk.
There's nights that I can't even walk.
There's days I couldn't give a fuck.
And in between is where I'm stuck.

by Smoltz's Beard on Nov 12, 2008 3:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Is it just me

I love Yunel Escobar as much as most folks here, but it seems like his stock has skyrocketed in the Peavy negotiations. And now all of a sudden, subsequently, Lillibridge’s stock is rising because he might be the dealt chip instead of Escobar. Crazy, this time of the year is.

No wonder nobody likes you, Tuttle... everything's a (Pujols) damn debate.

by royhobbs on Nov 12, 2008 3:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I guess I should be one to talk.
There's nights that I can't even walk.
There's days I couldn't give a fuck.
And in between is where I'm stuck.

by Smoltz's Beard on Nov 12, 2008 3:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

fail

No wonder nobody likes you, Tuttle... everything's a (Pujols) damn debate.

by royhobbs on Nov 12, 2008 4:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

blasphemy

I guess I should be one to talk.
There's nights that I can't even walk.
There's days I couldn't give a fuck.
And in between is where I'm stuck.

by Smoltz's Beard on Nov 12, 2008 4:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

well, the picture worked at first. fuck it.

I guess I should be one to talk.
There's nights that I can't even walk.
There's days I couldn't give a fuck.
And in between is where I'm stuck.

by Smoltz's Beard on Nov 12, 2008 4:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I read this too

I’ve said before that I don’t put a lot of faith in defensive metrics, although I have to preface that by saying I don’t have anywhere near the expertise to contradict any of the sources. My main problem with them is that none seem to agree, but again that’s not a great argument. This is somewhat cherry picking but when guys like Conor Jackson and Josh Willingham are considered plus defenders (whether by aberration or not), it makes it hard to believe.

Anyway, off my soapbox now. Combining what i’ve read vs. what I’ve seen, I’d rate them as such:

Range: Lilli > Esco
Arm" Esco > Lilli
Glove work (soft hands): Lilli = Esco (Lilli might have a slight advantage here, but I consider it very close)

Having said that, and having watched a lot more of Esco, I find it very hard to use the phrase “superior defender” with regards to Lilli over Esco. In fact, I find it hard to believe there is a superior defender over Esco in the majors. Better defender maybe, but superior? That’s just my 2 cents, i’m sure there are other opinions.

by scstrato on Nov 12, 2008 5:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm getting tired

of obsessively checking the internet every 5 minutes to see if a trade has gone down, but I just can’t stop. Do the trade already, please!!

by sddbaker on Nov 12, 2008 3:43 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I agree

I’m about to lose my job and my wife. Damn you Kevin Towers. Just give us Peavey for Flowers, Gorkys, Jo Jo and Lilli.

by Bobby Cocks on Nov 12, 2008 4:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ahaha

same here, I’m checking all news sources compulsively.

"Have you ever had your heart broken?"
"Yeah, when we lost the pennant in '87."

by jug on Nov 12, 2008 7:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think

The trade goes down tomarrow with Escobar, Flowers, Hernandez, Morton, and Locke going to the Padres for Peavy and Scott Hairston.

by jack dein on Nov 12, 2008 4:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Hairston?

The 2B?

Just give them Corky Miller and say it’s Flowers.

by TradeAndruw on Nov 12, 2008 5:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

different guy this one is a LF

by jack dein on Nov 12, 2008 5:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Same guy, Scott Hairston used to be a second baseman.

by cbwilk on Nov 12, 2008 5:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

if they want flowers so bad, they can not have another player, just him and escobar. wren needs to play hardball and stop fucking around, this is getting real old.

Following the Braves...one long hard drink at a time.

by bigjoe on Nov 12, 2008 4:28 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Today's Arizona game.....

Hanson: 5IP, 3H, 1BB, 1R, 9K
Flowers: 2-3, 2HR (9 total), .377 BA

At this moment, the game actually isn’t over, so Flowers could come up again…..

by secondbass on Nov 12, 2008 4:55 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

update

3-4 3hr 7rbi in todays game

No wonder Towers changed the package.

I say if Towers wants Flowers then the parameters change from Esco to Lilli or KJ.

by JFP on Nov 12, 2008 5:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Jesus Christ

He’s upping his value at the right time. Maybe we can save some pieces.

by TradeAndruw on Nov 12, 2008 6:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Holy Smokes!

by secondbass on Nov 12, 2008 8:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I can’t believe he actually hit another bomb…

I guess I should be one to talk.
There's nights that I can't even walk.
There's days I couldn't give a fuck.
And in between is where I'm stuck.

by Smoltz's Beard on Nov 12, 2008 9:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Damn

He’s either gonna be an extremely valuable trading chip or we need to put him at 1B/LF right now and get him some experience for the future.
And I agree with JFP. If we give Flowers, we shouldn’t give up Esco. Flowers, Gorkys, Lilli, and a pitching prospect not named Hanson sounds reasonable doesn’t it? Or maybe 2 pitching prospects?

by Bobby Cocks on Nov 12, 2008 6:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

sorry for the double post

But the much informed Padre fans think otherwise. They think if Escobar is taken out of the Peavy package, then Towers would lose all interest.

I, on the other hand, agree that a package consisting of Hernandez, Flowers and Locke as the centerpieces would be more than enough to get Peavy to Atlanta. The Braves could even add some throw-ins like Brent L. and Jo-Jo R.

by ChipperTeixeira89 on Nov 12, 2008 9:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Cubs Bring Third Team into Deal?

Reports are surfacing that the Cubs, lacking pitching prospects, are trying to bring a third team into the deal. An unverified report says that its the Orioles. They have several very highly rated prospects. Again, unverified, a report is saying that the Cubs are not convinced that Zambano is a pressure or big game pitcher and would like to move his contract and replace him with Peavy. I see Lou wanting that move. Zambrano would go to the Orioles for Brian Roberts and 2/3 prospects (selected by the Padres). The prospects, along with a couple of the previous Cub names to the Padres for Peavy. The Cubs end up with Peavy and Roberts, the Padres the prospects they want and the Orioles with Zambano, a #1 pitcher they want. Take it for what its worth.

by braves99 on Nov 12, 2008 7:09 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

that was the same thing i predicted yesterday, except with no clue who the thrid team would be, i figured they would trade Zambrano… thats definately a blockbuster trade if it comes to fruition. good info, if it has any merit.

"We win today, that's two in a row... if we win tomorrow, that's called a winning streak. It has happened before..."

by Swo12bv on Nov 12, 2008 7:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

So

Just so I am clear, I want to rewrite this.

The Cubs get Jake Peavy and Brian Roberts with only giving up Z
The Orioles give up 2-3 prospects and get Z.

The Padres end up with 2-3 prospects.

This sounds like it was written by a Cubs homer and definite offence meant if you are that Cubs homer. The Padres would be passing up a proven Major League SS cost controlled for six more years, pitchers who have shown at least something in the majors and a fine CF prospect for 2-3 prospects. The Orioles though have to give up Roberts and 2-3 prospects to Z and the Cubs while losing a Frontline starter are getting two frontline players at their respective positions.

I don’t know but this all doesn’t add up to me.

by JFP on Nov 12, 2008 7:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Read bit closer. Pads get the 2/3 prospects plus 2/3 of the Cub names already associated with this deal. I’m not really buying it but thought it was an interesting twist to things.

by braves99 on Nov 13, 2008 8:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Two way deals are hard enough

Three way deals are even more difficult. I think this is just media speculation. Add to this Pinellas quote today and you’ve got yourself a very unlikely rumor. Granted Hendry could be doing this outside of Pinellas knowledge, but I think that’s unlikely.

Article with Pinella quote.

by scstrato on Nov 12, 2008 7:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs