A sensible look back at the Tex trade
by !Vive la Francoeur! on Nov 28, 2009 2:11 AM EST
Email
PrintI saw this on mlbtr in a discussion on the biggest/best/worst trades of the decade. http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/11/discussion-the-trade-of-the-decade.html
I thought this view of the trade made alot of sense. Dunno if it deserves a fan post but I am appearently a moron and cant figure out the new system of fan shots. Anyways...here it is.
Okay, I dont understand why everyone seems to think the Braves got completely jobbed in the Tex trade. Lets take a closer look at what the Braves gave up in that trade.
1. Salty- the centerpiece of the deal. In 238 career games .251/.314/.389 A .703 OPS with average defense at best. Braves have McCann. No big loss here.
2. Andrus- Despite a pedestrian year at the plate (.267/.32/.373) he was a fantastic defender at a premium position. With more ML seasoning and improved plate discipline he could become one of the better leadoff hitters in baseball and a dynamic all around player. This loss has been negated, however, by the emergence of Yunel Escobar as one of the better ss in the game.
3. Feliz- A very impressive debut but I would be careful about canonizing him after only 31 IP. Especially if the Rangers are serious about converting him to a starter.
4. Matt Harrison- 26 career games, 147 IP. 76/54 K/BB ratio. 5.76 era. 1.6 whip. Uhmmm....no thanks. I think the Braves are good on pitching anyways.
5. Beau Jones- Never pitched above AA. In 2009 he went 3-4, 4.47 era, 57/33 k/bb, 1.66 WHIP. See Above.
In each case the Braves were dealing from a position of strength. Brian Mcann's presence made salty unneeded. After dealing him away, Tyler Flowers emerged as a top catching prospect. (Later traded to CHW for Javy Vazquez)
Yunel Escobar's presence made Elvis Andrus expendable. (Escobar also allowed us to trade Edgar Renteria to the Tigers for Jair Jurrjens and Gorkys Hernandez, whom we flipped for Nate McLouth. Talk about bad trades!)
The loss of Feliz might come back to bite the Braves but the other 2 pitchers are quite redundant in the Braves organization at this point.
The Braves made a move to win the world series. They sacrificed alot of future talent for 1 full and highly productive season of Tex and .5 years of the Great Ron Mahay. I think it is a testament to the Braves' drafting and development team that not only did this trade not cripple their farm system, but the argument could be made that it is even stronger now than it was before the trade. Wow.
In any event, I think we are focusing too much on the wrong end of the Tex trade. We should be complaining about Tex's exit from Atl to Laa. Mark Texiera for Casey Kotchman and Stephan Marek? Yech!
This FanPost does not express the views or opinions of Talking Chop.
93 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
ummmmm
#1. we didn’t have tex for long. so, those players you suggest would be VERY valuable now and, honestly, we’re losing everything (sans Marek) from the tex deal.
#2. if we had andrus, we could very easily move escobar to 2B, saving him a bit and putting his bat at a position of need.
#3. if we had Feliz, the loss of gonzo and soriano would not hurt nearly as bad as we were converting him to a closer anyway. the rangers want him as a starter (which could severely negate his value as his secondary stuff, while good, is not MLB ready. that fastball is, though, MORE than enough for a closer).
so, to say the trade is not so bad, is a bit misguided as, honestly, we didn’t get fleeced so much as we got caught being short-sighted.
by apoxonbothyourhouses on Nov 28, 2009 8:03 AM EST reply actions
No, we got fleeced...
the idea that Tex might resign here was always a pipe dream considering what he turned down from Texas. And the package was good only if it returns a World Series. If not, sending two of your best position prospects, with 3 quality pitching prospects, for a pair of players that failed to produce any post season appearances is a fleecing. Keep one of Andrus or Feliz especially, but any of the main 4 in that deal, makes a difference. Oh but wait, we got others, doesn’t mean we couldn’t have packaged these guys in a deal that actually benefited the club long term. And those that dismiss Andrus because of Escobar is foolish, as they can both be on the field (even if one was forced to a corner OF spot). Harrison is a solid starter who has had some good games as well as bad ones, and you use 5 starters so our pitching depth doesn’t make him worthless. He could have in the least limited our need last off season when we paid big for Javy, Lowe and Kawakami, or helped in the disastrous 08 when starter after starter got hurt, or been shipped for a more valuable long term piece. Feliz’s use here is perfectly obvious, either as a young starter, a closer, or even set up man as KRod and Rivera were in their younger days.
To diminish the package we gave up because of some guys currently on the roster is just foolish imo.
Starting with the end result (failing to reach the World Series) and working backwards in time to the conclusion that the Braves were fleeced is classic "hindsight logic".
The more sensible analysis is to look at the trade prospectively, from the point in time at which it was made, and consider the likelihood (1) that Tex was going to be able to vault the team into such a dramatically improved competitive position as to have a realistic chance of making the playoffs and then advancing to the WS; and (2) that the Braves were actually going to have legitimate shot at signing him to a new multi-year deal.
I agree that it should have been recognized at the outset that Tex would probably walk given that other teams would almost certainly be ready, willing and able to substantially out-bid us.
The other issue (no. 1, above) is a closer question.
My take is, however, that as long as the Braves are a mid-budget team, they always have to take the long view. A short term, WS or bust approach is always going to be stupid, when we can’t each and every year compete for the top free agents or even lock up our own young guns with attractive market-rate multi-year deals.
And looking at the trade at the time...
we paid a premium price in the hopes that Mark Teixiera was the missing piece between the Braves and a potential World Series. Be it in 2007, or 2008, we had two years to hopefully make a deep run with him at the heart of our lineup. So looking at it from that angle is not “hindsight logic” to me. It is understanding the purpose of the trade and recognizing we failed to reach that purpose.
I thought we had MUCH bigger holes to fill than simply adding a power hitting 1B between us and a World Series, and the price we paid imo was a playoff price. We failed. I can respect others opinions on it, but that is mind. It’s not hindsight or whatever you want to call it. It is recognizing we paid a price with a goal in mind, and failed to come anywhere near achieving that goal. Considering the price, the failure to come anywhere near the desired goal, and the numerous other glaring holes that caused us to fail to reach that goal which were evident to my eyes at the time, it was too much to pay for too little a return. And yes, the facts of how it played out contribute to that opinion.
by Mr. Sanchez on Nov 28, 2009 12:26 PM EST up reply actions
You are entitles to your opinion, of course, but your memory is rather selective. We were 5/6 games out and scoring a lot of runs. JS tried to get pitching to help our patched together SP but was unable to do so. Chipper and Edgar were having tremendous offensive years, battling each other for a batting title. The BP had become lights out after the break and Smoltz and Hudson were terrific. The Angles were also after Tex and driving the price up. JS decided that if pitching were not available we would just get more offense and look like an AL team. The idea was good but the results were lacking. Tex held up his end but who could have predicted that Edgar and Chipper would both go down for extended time? The Braves made him an offer that would have paid him 17/18 mil average for 6 years. A good offer at the time considering all of Tex’s ties to the area. The Yanks made it 23/24 mil per and no one could match that. There are two players in that deal I regret letting go but you have to make moves at times and sometimes they don’t work out.
This is no place for logic and reasoning, young man!
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 4:50 PM EST up reply actions
he likes porn and KJ
if you can combine the two you’ll be his best (and only) friend
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
consider yourself shunned.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 5:45 PM EST up reply actions
we’ll hug it out later
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
*Unshunned
Hug it out, bitch is the appropriate expression.
*Resume shunning.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 10:44 PM EST up reply actions
i have decided to shun you for the next 3 years, its an amish technique. its like slapping someone with silence
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
*unshun
I have shunned you first, so you cannot shun the shunner
*resume shunning
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 3, 2009 9:25 AM EST up reply actions
I remember fine...
we were closer in the standings on July 1 than Aug 1, and both closer than at the end of the year. The bullpen was not “lights out” after the break, hence the need to trade for Dotel and Mahay, as Wickman had already turned to crap. And yes, Hudson and Smoltz were pitching great. But I fail to think a playoff team has Chuck James, Kyle Davies, Jojo Reyes, or Buddy Carlyle trotting to the hill 3 out of every 5 games. Runs are great, but you still need starting pitching and we had none, and just gutted our system so we’d be devoid of the prospects needed to get the help needed.
And no one was ever gonna match the Yankees, so what did it matter the offer we put on the table. He knew the Yankees were gonna offer more, as did Boras, and that was what they were waiting on.
As for the prediction of Chipper going down for extended time, that has been an easy prediction.
Y’all can feel free to disagree, as you clearly do, but I will never think we had enough pitching to make the price paid for Tex reasonable. In my humble opinion, you pay that price if and only if you think it can put you over the top for the World Series, and that starting rotation never had a chance at a World Series and ultimately was unworthy of even making the post season.
Might check the stats on the staff. I believe the BP was outstanding after the break after Soriano and Moylan took over. We had an excellent chance to make the playoffs. As for the WS, no one can predict that but you have to make the playoffs first. The Cards won a WS a few years ago with a team that was barely over .500 for the season with a late season run. Anything can happen once you are there. Carlyle was terrific, for his talent level. You expect Hudson and Smotz to do well but Buddy deserved the pitching MVP that year.
“Ultmately unworthy of even making the post season.” I have no idea what that means.
You give up lower level prospects for a potential HOF player for two runs at a title? Yep, I would for those prospects.
It means we failed to make a post season either year...
and you might want to check Carlyle’s #s that year again. Little over 100 innings and an ERA over 5 and a run of bad games down the stretch.
We pieced together a solid pen, but you need a starter to get it to them, and we had nothing there.
I know Buddy faltered at the end but to win 8 games or so and pitch well enough to win 10/11 for a playoff type team after slogging around in the Korean leagues is outstanding. Totally unexpected.
I agree...
but disagree with calling him the pitching MVP with Smoltz and Huddy pitching like they did that year.
i'm pretty sure
that’s what i said, but in a nicer way
by apoxonbothyourhouses on Nov 28, 2009 8:16 PM EST up reply actions
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 28, 2009 11:11 AM EST reply actions
I’m so tempted to delete this post just cause it’s this neverending ridiculous debate. Ugh.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
I wouldnt be offended. Like I said, I wanted this to be a fanshot but couldnt figure out how. No hard feelings bro.
7/10/09-A New Dawn.
by !Vive la Francoeur! on Nov 28, 2009 3:08 PM EST up reply actions
I don’t have any intention of deleting it, that’s just how I personally felt about it. I saw it and thought it was a good read too; it’s essentially the argument I’ve had on the trade.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
While many of the players we traded away were redundent in the Braves system, not trading them then means we could trade them at another date for players that might actually help us get somewhere. Because we later traded Tex away for comparatively little and we never even made the postseason, the players involved in the Tex trade were a futility tax.
by FineHamAbounds on Nov 28, 2009 12:52 PM EST reply actions
This is one of those things where you’re either on one side or the other and neither side is likely to have a change of opinion. Count me with the original poster on the we did not get fleeced side, for all the reasons already listed. Tex was the perfect fit into our lineup at the time. Obviously the results were disappointing, but people quickly forget that damn near every player on our team got hurt in 2008. It was sort of a lost year.
It’s like criticizing a football coach for going for it on 4th down late in the game – if you make it, you have a better chance of winning and he is a genius. If you miss it, he is an idiot.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 28, 2009 2:52 PM EST up reply actions
exactly
same for basketball. its like if a team is down 2 with 10 seconds to go and the coach draws up a play to shoot a 3 pointer with only 1 or 2 seconds left. If you make it, the coach is a genius. If you miss, the coach is a moron cause a 2 point shot or layup would’ve been a better shot.
"Are you tryin to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?"
by Scott Coleman on Nov 28, 2009 3:21 PM EST up reply actions
That is assuming we were one piece away from that win (aka World Series)...
IMO, we weren’t. We lacked the depth in starters and had a crap pen, so even fixing the one hole in the lineup left us without the pitching to make the run that trade was supposed to spark. Mahay helped on the relief aspect, but we still lacked a quality starter behind Hudson or Smoltz on that team and Wickman imploded in June taking down the bullpen before the trade. Like I say above, I think we had too many holes to think that one massive move would be the fix, therefore making it a waste to spend so much with such a small likely return.
The one saving grace that trade had was the prospect of a second year. But we attempted to capitalize on that with a team that had a glaring blackhole at the top of the order in Blanco, in addition to the questionable idea of relying on Smoltz and Hampton to be healthy (Glavine can be considered a surprise since his career was so healthy). But in both seasons, we left a glaring weakness (leadoff in 08 beside the injury prone pitching, and big questions behind the 1 and 2 starters and at closer in 07) that Tex alone couldn’t cure. It’d be like Tampa paying a ransom for Roy Halladay last July. Yeah, he’d be a great pickup, but would that really cure all that ailed them and put them over the top?
The thing about winning a WS is it is usually (for everyone but the Yankees) a lot like catching lightening in a bottle. Everything has to come together for a team, the chemistry in the locker room, the veteran leaders having great years, any number of secondary players making greater than expected contributions, good health, good karma, etc.
The role of the GM is to mix and match as strong a team as possible, maximizing the opportunity for a successful run and hoping it will all come together. The issue on the subject trade was risk v. reward v. mortaging the opportunity for future success.
The move was a close question at the time. Ripping in hindsight is easy.
I don't think it was...
a move like that propels a playoff team to a World Series. Now, will we win the WS? Maybe, maybe not, but you at least make the damn playoffs. That move wasn’t one to put a playoff contender over the top imo, because we weren’t a legit playoff contender. It was one that tried to push a team into the playoffs, not deep in it. We had big problems in the pitching staff that first year Tex couldn’t fix.
I think the comparison I made above would be apt. If Tampa gutted their minors for Roy Halladay last July. Halladay is a great player, and would have certainly improved their pitching staff. But why pay such a high price to maybe or maybe not make the playoffs? IMO, you pay the price we paid if you are a sure playoff team trying to find that last piece to win a title. We weren’t that close to a title when we made that move, and as was ultimately shown, not even worthy of the playoffs.
As I recall, despite a patched together staff, we ended up with the 6th best ERA in all of baseball and the BP (lights out after the break) was something like 3rd/4th. Not bad for a crappy staff.
Our starters...
Hudson, Smoltz (great), followed by Carlyle, Reyes, Davies, Cormier, or James. When Chuck James is your 3rd best starter, that is certainly not the makings of a good staff. We did a good job of patching a bullpen together, but it was definitely a patchwork unit with Tyler Yates logging 75 games, and trying to deal with Gonzo’s early injury, Wickman’s fatness, and Dotel’s crappiness, among other problems.
You really think this is a playoff caliber pitching staff? And if they make the playoffs, can you really hope to win a series with that?
I didn’t say we would win a WS but had a chance to get into the playoffs where anything can happen. By the way, I would take a healthy James for a #3 starter anytime. The guy had as good if not better minor league numbers than Hanson. He won 10/11 games after the break the previous year. He got hurt during the off season and the Braves medical staff could not diagnose it. He spent two years being told to rest his arm and then pitching again. Surgery found a destroyed shoulder with multiple torn tendons and ligments. A 45 minute procedure turned into serveral procedures and 4 hours. The young man lost a career and the Braves lost a #2 type starter. THe guy gets a bad rap.
Agree to disagree then...
I think you make that move to add the one missing piece so to speak, not with so many other holes on the roster. In my mind, something like the Tex deal would have made perfect sense THIS season, with the strong starting staff and other pieces on the roster, than in 2007 when we had a return to Spahn and Sain and pray for rain, or 2008 when we tried to patch together old arms and had a huge drain at the top of the order with Blanco.
Bill Belichek is an idiot for that 4th down call...
just cause they miss the call doesn’t mean you disagreed before the ball is snapped.
nor does it mean it was a bad call.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 28, 2009 5:44 PM EST up reply actions
Can we still agree Belichek is a giant, half-sleeved doucher?
"...Braves tie! ...Braves tie! ...Braves tie!"
by The Keith Lockhart Era on Nov 29, 2009 12:41 AM EST up reply actions
Yes.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 29, 2009 1:45 PM EST up reply actions
By this logic, there is no such thing as a bad call...
I clearly disagree. Going for it on 4th down isn’t a bad call on it’s own, but going for it leading late inside your own 30 is. Paying a huge price for a missing piece isn’t a bad deal, but paying that price when your team has a lot more holes that would need to be filled is. Do you not see the difference?
The logic behind the call was sound. If you make the 1st down (with Tom Brady as your QB and needing only 2 yards, your chances of getting it are VERY good), you are a genius. But, they didn’t get it, and he is a goat. It still doesn’t make it a bad call.
If it were 4th and long, that would be a bad call.
The logic was trying to prevent Peyton Manning from tying the game. Peyton can go 80 yards in 2 minutes as easily as he can go 30 yards in 3.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 29, 2009 1:47 PM EST up reply actions
All due respect to Manning...
it is absolutely foolish to think he has the same chance of going 30 yards in that time as he did going 60-80. Yes, the man is a great QB, but to think anyone can go twice as far with the same time is just foolish.
And I understand the logic behind the decision, but going for it, on 4th down, with a lead, inside your own 30, is a bad call. It just is, and countless coaches and players agreed with me. Belichek didn’t and that’s his perogative. Intelligent people can see differently on the same issue.
I feel the same about this trade, which you obviously don’t. Several seem to think we were closer to being a World Series team than I do. I felt then the same as I do now, with or without Tex we didn’t have the pitching that year to do anything, so it was a waste to send so many prospects without that giant carrot of a World Series hanging before us.
and countless statiticians disagree with you…
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
Why because of the simple success rate on 4th down?...
ever look deeper into those numbers with simple things like field position, time left in the game, score, etc.
There is no statistic that says it’s a good idea to go for it on 4th down, at your own 29, leading late in the 4th quarter because no one has ever been foolish enough to do it in that position at that time.
now settle the hell down…
the only thing it doesnt take into account is field position… but time left and score are taken into account… its a simple win probability.
It was the right decision to go for it, but Belicheck’s play call was horrendous bc they went 5 wide.
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
I love you, man.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 1, 2009 12:25 PM EST up reply actions
Actually, it did take field position into account too. Game. Set. Match. Point to Swo.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 1, 2009 12:28 PM EST up reply actions
5/4 of people in the US have trouble with fractions?
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
60% of the time, it works every time.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 10:57 AM EST up reply actions
which seems to be what you are saying...
with that Belichek 4th down call. Because it works at a high rate doesn’t make it a good call. Because that play works 60% of the time, let’s ignore the 40% chance it doesn’t work, at which point you just let the greatest QB in the game be one play from the end zone (30 yards is not much for him at all).
neither is 80 yards.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 3:13 PM EST up reply actions
because 30 = 60 or 70?
and it very well could have been 80 or more depending on the punt. You assume minimum 40 yard punt with 10 yard return (although the Colts don’t have a threat returning kicks), and you’re twice the distance. Can he go 60 yards? Sure. But not as easily as he goes 30.
Actually, it would have been something like 50/60 yards for Manning to go. For it to be 80 yards, it would have taken a 50 yard punt and no return. Neither were likely. The previous Colt possession, Manning moved down the field like he owned the defense. The Pat defense was hurting from injuries and lack of experence and were exhausted. I didn’t necessarily agree with the decision but, being a Colt fan, I liked it. The Pat defense is highly suspect as New Orleans showed.
How do you figure 50/60?...
on the day, the Patriots had 4 punts, with 0 returns, including one punt over 50 yards. So 70 to 80 is much more likely than 50-60. They panicked and got scared of Peyton, and it burned them. True, they had done well in the 4th, scoring on 3 of 4 drives with the 4th being a pick 6. But I’ll take my chances forcing him to go 70 or 80 than 30.
I don’t get this post, two of the players traded could be considered elite soon, that has to be a better-than-average return for Texas. The RedSox alone would trade us a ton for Yunel or Andrus.
Here are Pujols's stats: 1.000/1.000/4.000/5.000. That's right. He is batting a thousand, with a thousand OBP (naturally), and every hit has been a home run, and thus his OPS is a perfect 5.000.
I’m very curious to hear your definitions of “elite” and “soon”.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
Simple – Andrus gets MVP next season, and Feliz wins 20 games and a Cy Young next season.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 28, 2009 6:25 PM EST up reply actions
If that happens then I’ll fully admit I was wrong, but I’d be skeptical to see either even show up as All Stars within the next three seasons.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
I'll take that bet...
in 2010, 2011, or 2012, either Andrus or Feliz is playing in the All Star game.
It’s a gentleman’s bet then! The loser is forced to write a fanpost about how wrong he was.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
We over-paid for a rent a player who we had no chance of keeping.
True we have McCann, Escobar, and a fine nucleus of starters. Yet
even if no spots were found for any of the guys traded(assuming Andrus
was a no go at trying CF, Salty taking a shot at 1B etc.) the
trade value loss is big.
Thankfully the Braves still have some minor league depth albeit a dearth of
potential lead-off hitters and middle infield depth.
by sealift67 on Nov 28, 2009 6:57 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Things overlooked
Good reply calling Tex a “Rent” player….Who is to say that any of the 5 could of not been used in the future by our organization either as a player or as trade bait for a star player that we would own for at least 3 years? The thing that pops out at me is; "we traded five!
two are worthless, one was blocked (and replaced by Flowers), the other two were really young
this is the best trade of all time if ANdrus and Feliz don’t turn out to be stars, which when we made the trade was really unknown. (remember this trade was made 3 years ago and Andrus and Feliz are just not breaking into the majors.
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
IF they don't pan out AND Tex either resigns or leads the team to ...
a deep post season run. But he did neither, and the players have all looked good. We can debate the if this and if that, that makes the trade nicer. But we looking at the reality of what happened, it was nowhere near the “best trade of all time”, unless you are the Rangers. Salty has played although not as successfully as hoped. Feliz and Andrus certainly look capable of reaching their high ceilings, and even Harrison has had his moments (some bad outings, but he’s had some strong ones too and is still young).
Gas up that bandwagon.
"...Braves tie! ...Braves tie! ...Braves tie!"
by The Keith Lockhart Era on Nov 29, 2009 12:41 AM EST up reply actions
WE GOT HOSED
Look at what we got in return. Casey Freakin Kotchman, who flipped for LaRoache, which was nice. But we sent a SP,RP,and SS that were servicable major leaguers for 1and half years of Tex. He was great while he was here, but he never got us over the hump.
by FloridaBravesFan on Nov 29, 2009 12:15 AM EST reply actions
Dont forget Mahay!
7/10/09-A New Dawn.
by !Vive la Francoeur! on Nov 29, 2009 12:42 AM EST up reply actions
How could anyone?
"...Braves tie! ...Braves tie! ...Braves tie!"
by The Keith Lockhart Era on Nov 29, 2009 12:42 AM EST up reply actions
Would that package be enough to get Halladay this year, Cliff Lee this year, or Johan a few years ago? I think that the stupidity in that trade was giving up that much for a 1b instead of a front line starting pitcher.
Firefrankwren.com: It's gonna happen this offseason
Uhmmm….Tex represented the biggest upgrade available to our team at that time. Johan Santana could not have helped the club as much as Tex did. Although a frontline pitcher would have been an upgrade over Chuck James, Buddy Carlyle, or Kyle Davies, it would have been nowhere near the upgrade Tex represented over our soul-crushingly lugubrious platoon of Scott Thorman/Craig Wilson. To this day I feel a bit ill when I think about them manning 1B for us.
7/10/09-A New Dawn.
by !Vive la Francoeur! on Nov 29, 2009 11:52 AM EST up reply actions
I think that was the problem...
even adding Tex, look at who we trotted out to the mound 3 of 5 games. And that is a World Series team? I guess so using the same rose colored glasses that would believe he’d resign for an offer similar to what he had just declined from Texas.
i think we had a better chance of signing Teix with the same contract if you assume it wasnt all about the money.
He went to GT (although im not sure this is really important)
We are(were) perennial contenders
he would have great protection in the lineup
we have shown a willingness to spend money (more so than TX)
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
No
that was a pipe dream all along. I don’t necessarily agree with Mr. Sanchez on the trade. At the time it was more than fine with me and I don’t think that it was as aweful as others do. However, the Braves have long been relying on the hometown discount and Texeira was never a hometown discount guy. He was a hard worker, and to the Braves that may have signaled a type of character they were looking for, but to confuse that with the Tim Hudson type who would accept a hometown discount was a mistake. Tex was and is a mercenary all the way and he wanted the big money.
by Andy Braves Fan on Nov 30, 2009 2:27 PM EST up reply actions
But it was, so why assume something that isn't true...
like Borasbot was going to the highest bidder. Texas had some favorable aspects too, so the only reason to think he’d have signed a similar offer from Atlanta is to ignore the reality of the situation.
This debate might’ve been a little different in my opinion if we had the funds to really make a run at re-signing him like in the Turner days.
my gripe with the trade is
when we were dealing tex to the angels we were said to have been deciding between kotchman and morales . . . who did we get? KOTCHMAN!!!!
AHHHHHHH
That is the true 20/20 hindsight in this discussion though...
my opinion on our pitching and chances of making the postseason were there at the time of the deal and proven true after the fact. But you can’t look at the two, at the time of the trade, and not think Kotch was the better choice between the two.
Hey guys, sorry Im late........
I brought this for you
Did I miss anything?
I thought hurricane season was over........
The Rangers screwed us over and Bill Belichick is a moron. Thats about it.
7/10/09-A New Dawn.
by !Vive la Francoeur! on Dec 2, 2009 8:17 PM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
