More on the Teixeira-Kotchman Trade
Baseball America has their official take on last week's Teixeira-Kotchman trade on their website, but I asked Ben Badler of BA to give me a more Braves-centric take on the trade. Here is their analysis, though it may be a tough dose of reality to some:
Stephen Marek was one of the Angels' top 10 prospects, though he probably wouldn't rank that highly in most organizations' farm systems. All of the Angels top prospects—Brandon Wood, Jordan Walden, Nick Adenhart, Peter Bourjos, Sean Rodriguez and Hank Conger—have plenty of question marks, and it looks like the Braves determined it was better to acquire a player with major league experience like Kotchman as the key piece of the deal. Marek does have two plus pitches coming out of the bullpen: a low-90s fastball and a mid- to high-70s curve. He's always been old for his level, so you'll have to keep in mind that at best he'll be making his big league debut at age 25. He could be a useful bullpen piece for the Braves at some point, though it's hard to get too excited about minor league relievers.
Kotchman's strike zone discipline this year has taken a step back; he doesn't strike out much, but he's not drawing too many walks and that's held his value down significantly. He's a first baseman with only moderate power, so when he gets impatient at the plate and puts up an OBP around .330 his value isn't going to be too high. But while Kotchman is a tick below-average offensively, he's one of the best first base defenders in baseball, saving probably 10 to 15 runs a year, making him an overall above-average defender. He's still 25, so he should continue to get better, and having him for three more years at below-market value is a nice luxury for the Braves. He has a fluid swing and he makes hard contact, though he's probably never going to be a player with classic plus power at first base. But with his other skills, Kotchman can still be above-average without needing to fit into the slugger first base profile.
The trade of Teixeira (and the two implied draft picks from offering him arbitration) could be a win for the Braves, though the draft picks would have been valuable for the Braves, an organization with a strong track record of drafting hitters. But given the entire context of what transpired with Teixeira—including his production provided for the Braves, the players acquired from the Angels and the prospects dealt to the Rangers—the sum of the Teixeira trades will likely be a net loss for the Braves.
I still like Marek as a prospect, he sort of reminds me a bit of Joey Devine (don't know if that's a good thing or not). For another view of Marek, we turn to scout Deric McKamey. His take on Marek is a bit more bullish:
Marek is a strong-framed pitcher with plenty of arm strength. He was a reliever in college, where he always tried to throws gas by hitters, so his mechanics and approach were pretty raw. Since, he has done a better job of repeating his release point, which has helped his command and ability to extract the same movement from his pitches. Moving back to relief after spending the majority of his professional career as a starter has helped. He throws 88-94 MPH with his two-seam fastball and can get strikeouts with his 74-77 MPH curveball. His 79-81 MPH split-change is an average pitch at the moment, but uses it to combat LH batters. He could stand to reduce his walk rate, but misses enough bats to compensate. His ability to keep the ball down is evidenced by him giving-up just two home runs all year. His stuff is good enough to close and at worst, can be an effective setup reliever. He should be able to compete for a bullpen role in 2009.
I'm excited to get another good young arm that we could possibly add to the bullpen mix next year. Over all the Teixeira trades we will have to wait and see how all these young players and prospects pan out. All we can hope is that the three guys we ended up with will become key parts of our next post-season appearance.
0 recs |
11 comments
Comments
Teixeira trades a net loss
Badler nails it when he includes “the prospects dealt to the Rangers” in judging the Teixeira deals a probable eventual net loss.
These trades can benefit us, however, if they become a wake-up call to management and fans. Management could learn to be less impatient, and play for the longer term dynasty rather than the short-term dice roll for a wild card slot. Fans should learn to abandon their unlimited expectations for spending other people’s money, i.e. Liberty stockholders. Without the false hope of eventually re-signing Teixeira, few would have supported dealing away a bounty of top prospects for him.
Will these lessons sink in? Perhaps the hard way, if some of the pitchers we dealt to Texas take them to the late rounds of the playoffs before we get back there.
The good news? We still have some outstanding prospects and a solid major league core of affordable players. So long as we don’t deal out stars of the future for short term gain, we could become deserving contenders in 2-3 years when the young men doing so well in AA and (mostly) A ball are ready for the big leagues.
by JimK on Aug 7, 2008 11:36 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think a wake up call is necessary. Most fans should have been able to see what was going on. Smoltz was close to being finished, Chipper is getting older, rumors were that Glavine was going to join the rotation. The front office spent big with the hopes of making the playoffs twice before these Braves legends take off the uniform. If it hadn’t been for a million different injuries it might have worked. If we had made the playoffs last year and this year would it be declared a net loss? I can’t imagine so. The trade itself worked out well…but the surrounding factors did not.
It’s hardly the front office’s fault if the fans can’t grasp what they were trying to do. I for one am not upset about the trade.
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 Aug 7, 2008 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not upset either – we took a shot, it just didn’t work out. I would have been upset if we didn’t take a shot.
by VegasAces on Aug 7, 2008 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The trade for Tex was a good trade. We were trying to get to the WS and I can’t fault the organization for going for it. It didn’t work out but I applaud JS doing something bold.
by dwbrave on Aug 7, 2008 12:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I couldnt agree more. I would rather take a shot at putting together something that could be special, which they did when they acquired Tex, rather than just middling along making the playoffs and getting bounced.
I applauded the move at the time they got Tex, and I still do!
by gopherbroke on Aug 7, 2008 1:22 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Tex Trades.
I’d say that getting Tex was a good move, while the trade for him was somewhat questionable. Making that deal was a gamble, one that I supported and still feel was justified. Now, dealing him is something I’ve gone back and forth on. More specifically, what we got for him confuses me. Kotchman looks like a #2 hitter at best and, considering the rest of our roster, he’ll likely hit in the bottom third of our line-up when everyone’s healthy and right. Marek is a potential middle reliever and I just don’t think that’s worth much of anything. Better than two draft picks? Almost certainly. Enough to call the Tex trades neutral or possitive in value? Probably not.
Here we go again: http://thefulldeck.blogspot.com/
by ejruiz on Aug 7, 2008 1:59 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Neftali Feliz
I just wish he wasn’t a part of the bounty. Everyone else i can get over.
by adiven jack on Aug 7, 2008 6:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Didn’t it seem like he was a throw in? Maybe my ear wasn’t as low to the ground as some of you, but I didn’t really hear people screaming his name until after the trade was over.
He was allowing way too many baserunners when he was in our system, and although he was young and the strikeouts were there he really didn’t turn the corner until he started pitching for the Rangers.
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 Aug 8, 2008 9:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i remember beau jones being the last name added to the deal
Following the Braves...one long hard drink at a time.
by bigjoe on Aug 8, 2008 5:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry…not the last name added to the deal, but the deal centered around Salty/Andrus/Harrison at first.
The point still stands that he wasn’t pitching like a superstar as a Brave.
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 Aug 8, 2008 7:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
TEX, bad apple?
I follow the Texas Rangers as well as the Braves since they are my local team. Word here,before Tex left the Rangers, was that he was not a team player. Speculation was that he really wants to be an Oriole with the Yankees a second choice. He has been indirectly bad-mouthed this year by several of his former Texas “teammates”. Even the broadcasters suggest he was problematic and take occasional subtle “potshots” at him when he has a bad day at the plate.
Any one know of such discord with his former fellow Braves?
by bfan57 on Aug 11, 2008 7:42 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 















