Insane package for Chapman

PurpleBrave said:
Right now the Rangers are locked in a deal with Andrus they'd kill to get out of.

Feliz couldn't hack it as a starter. If we keep Feliz do we get Wagner? Maybe not

Harrison was a decent starter but injuries have derailed him.

Salty took forever to develop and even then he was a platoon guy

Beau Jones who?

I don't think it's as bad as people make it out to be...and now we have clear 20/20 hindsight. The guys we dealt were replaced too ...so there is a replacement value...where they may otherwise not have been. Now if we could have spun an Andrus salty or Harrison for another good player? Maybe...
Click to expand...

Andrus 19.9 WAR; 29.92M in salary
Feliz 5.1 WAR; 11.79M in salary
Harrison 7.5 WAR; 30.79M in salary
Salty 10.2 WAR;29.07M in salary

Mahay 0 WAR; 9.25M in salary
Tex 27.1 WAR; 195.13M in salary

Total:

42.7 WAR; 101.57M in salary

vs

27.1 WAR; 204.38M in salary
 
Southcack77 said:
I believe the trade made the Braves more likely to make the WS and they easily could have done. I think it probably made the Rangers more likely to make the WS, but I don't think it is fair to say that the trade was the backbone of their success. If anything, it added some quality supporting players who were able to complement the players already in Texas.
Click to expand...

Yeah, a team that didn't even make the playoffs had a good chance of winning the WS making that move, good call. And :happy0157: at those players not being a key part of the Rangers run. Feliz was their freaking closer and Harrison was their second best pitcher in 2011.

I would agree on Wainwright being a bigger loss overall, I consider those trades equally bad, with the Drew trade having a more lasting impact.
 
gilesfan said:
The pitching staff consisted of:

Smoltz 3.11 ERA

Huddy 3.33 ERA

Carlyle 5.37 ERA

James 4.24 ERA

Davies 5.76 ERA

Reyes 6.46 ERA

Cormier 6.85 ERA

The bullpen was pretty bad (~3.5 ERA)

The team had zero shot at contending, much less winning the world series. Can you imagine a game 3 starter of Chuck James and following that up with Buddy Carlyle in game 4?
Click to expand...

I agree with you that the questionable part of the trade was whether they were ready to go for it. On the other hand, they had Smoltz and Hudson and what looked liked a reasonable bullpen and lineup. They were feeling it.

You just need four wins in a series. I guess they thought they could slug their way there with two aces.

One last thing on Andrus and the Braves SS situation. The Braves were starting Renteria at that point in time. They had a prospect who was closer to the bigs at SS and that they liked better than Andrus in Yunel Escobar. I have absolutely no problem with their having traded him in that circumstance. the idea that Escobar having issues four years later is reason why the deal shouldn't have been done? Come on. If you think that, you are just the kind of person who can never stand giving up anything.
 
auyushu said:
Yeah, a team that didn't even make the playoffs had a good chance of winning the WS making that move, good call. And :happy0157: at those players not being a key part of the Rangers run. Feliz was their freaking closer and Harrison was their second best pitcher in 2011.

I would agree on Wainwright being a bigger loss overall, I consider those trades equally bad, with the Drew trade having a more lasting impact.
Click to expand...

I think you are getting close to being rather disagreeable.

Matt Harrison was terrible in 2008, 2009, and 2010. He was decent and probably fortunate in 2011 and 2012. He struck out 126K/185IP in 2011 and 133K/213IP. Projecting alternative realities is difficult. Would he have been on the Braves in 2010 or 2011 or 2012? I'm not sure. Maybe? In any event, he was terrible every year following that.

Feliz was a perfectly decent closer several years after the trade. The Braves closed with Billy Wagner and Craig Kimbrell in 2010, 2011, 2012. Feliz would have been a nice set up man.

When Andrus was traded, the Braves had Renteria and a young Escobar on the roster. Andrus was further away and it was questionable that he would ever hit. I guess if you knew in 2007 that Andrus would become a hitter and that the Braves young SS Escobar would implode all of a sudden four years later, you might have said "hey, we better hang on to this guy" but I don't think anyone really knew that.

Salty never amounted to anything. I don't even remember who Beau Jones is honestly and I keep forgetting him each time I think of the five guys.

Finally, Feliz and Harrison were, as I said, nice complementary pieces for the Rangers run. But neither one of them was the reason the Rangers were good. They just were not. the Rangers slugged their way into the playoff with a strong lineup with fairly average pitching.

I'm not here to say that those players might not have helped the Braves four years later to some degree. I'm just here to say that the Braves traded some prospects who turned out to be pretty good for two years of Texeira and to strengthen the bullpen in an effort to win.

It seems as though you might have an issue with any trade that gives away value, no matter how significant a value, down the road for short term results. If so I disagree with you. I would trade a surplus SS prospect, a reliever prospect, and a back rotation starter prospect with middling stuff without too much hesitation if I thought that it might give the team a chance to contend.

It's baseball and sometimes you don't get the result you want. I'm sure the Braves were disappointed they crashed down the stretch, but if I recall they had some regression to the mean of some of their back rotation starters that contributed to that.

Sometimes players outperform, sometimes they underperform and you just don't always know which it will be. I do know the Braves traded for a guy who did nothing but perform at the level they should have expected him to.
 
This trade didn't sink the Braves. Somehow having an entire roster of three true outcome guys who didnt walk did in the braves.

The Uptons, Uggla, Chris Johnson, Gattis....Heyward
 
Southcack77 said:
I guess if you knew in 2007 that Andrus would become a hitter and that the Braves young SS Escobar would implode all of a sudden four years later, you might have said "hey, we better hang on to this guy" but I don't think anyone really knew that.

It seems as though you might have an issue with any trade that gives away value, no matter how significant a value, down the road for short term results. If so I disagree with you. I would trade a surplus SS prospect, a reliever prospect, and a back rotation starter prospect with middling stuff without too much hesitation if I thought that it might give the team a chance to contend.
Click to expand...

Look, if you don't want people to disagree with you then you might want to have something more to support your point of view rather than I think it was a good trade because I think so. History and statistics show that A. We had no chance to make it to the playoffs even with Tex (because that's what happened) and B. The players we traded would have been useful to have on the teams we put out during their 6 years of team control. I really don't care what they did after their 6 years of control really, because I wouldn't have wanted them to be signed long term. But they would have without a doubt been useful for a decent portion of the time we had them under team control from 2009-2014. And given we were 1 game away from making the playoffs in 2011 when all three players were very good, the odds are very good we have an extra playoff season in the books if we keep them.

And your revisionist history of Andrus's value is amusing since he was a top 50 prospect at the time of the trade and was the #19 prospect in all of baseball at the beginning of the 2008 season. He wasn't some oh, maybe he has a chance to workout prospect. He was much more well thought of than Yunel ever was as a prospect.

But I have zero problems making a trade, even an overpay if it serves a legit purpose. But the Tex trade didn't, just like the Drew trade didn't (as far as getting the WS goes, not the playoffs of course) because we didn't have the pitching to make anything happen in the postseason in either 2004 or 2007/2008. GF already showed you why we had no chance before the Tex trade happened in 2007, we had two Aces and nothing else, we never had a chance to make any noise in the playoffs with our staff. And that's actually why the majority of the people on the fanhome/scout board at the time of the trade back then were upset with the trade. Giving up that package for someone like Roy Halladay or Johan Santana at the time would have been an overpay, but it would have made sense in terms of giving us a chance to both get to and win in the playoffs. Tex didn't fix our major weakness in the slightest.

I actually would have loved it if JS had made trades to full go for it in the 98-2003 range, as we had teams that could have made WS runs if we had gone for one or two more elite pieces. One of my biggest regrets back then was JS didn't grab Schilling back in 2000, and instead settled for going after Ashby. We constantly made trades for marginal pieces like Joyner and Ashby rather than combining our prospects and getting big guns.
 
auyushu said:
Look, if you don't want people to disagree with you then you might want to have something more to support your point of view rather than I think it was a good trade because I think so. History and statistics show that A. We had no chance to make it to the playoffs even with Tex (because that's what happened) and B. The players we traded would have been useful to have on the teams we put out during their 6 years of team control. I really don't care what they did after their 6 years of control really, because I wouldn't have wanted them to be signed long term. But they would have without a doubt been useful for a decent portion of the time we had them under team control from 2009-2014. And given we were 1 game away from making the playoffs in 2011 when all three players were very good, the odds are very good we have an extra playoff season in the books if we keep them.

And your revisionist history of Andrus's value is amusing since he was a top 50 prospect at the time of the trade and was the #19 prospect in all of baseball at the beginning of the 2008 season. He wasn't some oh, maybe he has a chance to workout prospect. He was much more well thought of than Yunel ever was as a prospect.

But I have zero problems making a trade, even an overpay if it serves a legit purpose. But the Tex trade didn't, just like the Drew trade didn't (as far as getting the WS goes, not the playoffs of course) because we didn't have the pitching to make anything happen in the postseason in either 2004 or 2007/2008. GF already showed you why we had no chance before the Tex trade happened in 2007, we had two Aces and nothing else, we never had a chance to make any noise in the playoffs with our staff. And that's actually why the majority of the people on the fanhome/scout board at the time of the trade back then were upset with the trade. Giving up that package for someone like Roy Halladay or Johan Santana at the time would have been an overpay, but it would have made sense in terms of giving us a chance to both get to and win in the playoffs. Tex didn't fix our major weakness in the slightest.

I actually would have loved it if JS had made trades to full go for it in the 98-2003 range, as we had teams that could have made WS runs if we had gone for one or two more elite pieces. One of my biggest regrets back then was JS didn't grab Schilling back in 2000, and instead settled for going after Ashby. We constantly made trades for marginal pieces like Joyner and Ashby rather than combining our prospects and getting big guns.
Click to expand...

The Braves were 4.5 games out of the division lead when they made the trade. They added Texeira, Mahay, and Dotel around the deadline. They easily had one of the best lineups in baseball and a solid defense. They had two high level starters and what on paper might have been a serviceable bullpen.

I think most observers at the time believed they had a good chance to make the playoffs, but you are certainly correct that they did not. That's what we call hindsight.

Regardless, I personally don't think losing Elvis Andrus made much of a difference to the organization. I've laid out a lot of support for my argument. Despite the fact that you apparently are just not going to acknowledge that there was any support for what I said, I will acknowledge that you've provide support for your opinion.

I'm comfortable saying that I don't hate the trade and don't think that it made much of a negative impact on the Braves organization. Essentially by your line of argument, it mostly boils down to Elvis Andrus. I'm comfortable that they traded away Elvis Andrus for two years of Mark Texeira.
 
Southcack77 said:
The Braves were 4.5 games out of the division lead when they made the trade. They added Texeira, Mahay, and Dotel around the deadline. They easily had one of the best lineups in baseball and a solid defense. They had two high level starters and what on paper might have been a serviceable bullpen.

I think most observers at the time believed they had a good chance to make the playoffs, but you are certainly correct that they did not. That's what we call hindsight.

Regardless, I personally don't think losing Elvis Andrus made much of a difference to the organization. I've laid out a lot of support for my argument. Despite the fact that you apparently are just not going to acknowledge that there was any support for what I said, I will acknowledge that you've provide support for your opinion.

I'm comfortable saying that I don't hate the trade and don't think that it made much of a negative impact on the Braves organization. Essentially by your line of argument, it mostly boils down to Elvis Andrus. I'm comfortable that they traded away Elvis Andrus for two years of Mark Texeira.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but that's just silly. The impact not only only is felt by potential production we lost (which could have potentially been the difference in making the playoffs in certain years) but also by the total value our farm system loss. We traded away our top 3 prospects and 2 more of our top 15. That heavily influences you're ability to make future trades. Dan Haren, Zach Greinke, Roy Halladay, Cliff Lee, Miguel Cabrera.... all are/were elite level players that were traded within roughly two years of the Tex trade. Those could have been franchise changing trades that the same group of prospects could have been used.

When there's any sort of list for worst trades ever, the Tex trade is normally towards the top of that list.
 
Southcack77 said:
I agree with you that the questionable part of the trade was whether they were ready to go for it. On the other hand, they had Smoltz and Hudson and what looked liked a reasonable bullpen and lineup. They were feeling it.

You just need four wins in a series. I guess they thought they could slug their way there with two aces.

One last thing on Andrus and the Braves SS situation. The Braves were starting Renteria at that point in time. They had a prospect who was closer to the bigs at SS and that they liked better than Andrus in Yunel Escobar. I have absolutely no problem with their having traded him in that circumstance. the idea that Escobar having issues four years later is reason why the deal shouldn't have been done? Come on. If you think that, you are just the kind of person who can never stand giving up anything.
Click to expand...

They needed to make it to the playoffs. How do you do that when you have 60% of your rotation being hot garbage?

BTW, our offense was exactly league average even with the Tex trade. It was the 3rd best offense in the NL East behind the Phils and Mets. OUr starting pitching staff had a 4.45 ERA and 4.63 FIP. The bullpen was below average with a 3.54 ERA, 4.15 FIP.
 
Trading Andrus wasn't an issue. He was the thought of as the jewel in our system and was certainly rated higher than Escobar. The individual pieces being traded isn't the issue in itself. It was packaging that many prospects in 1 single trade that was the issue. (especially for a short term deal for an area that was less of a weakness) There are some 4 for 1 deals, but typically they are 1-2 stud prospects and then a couple fliers on other prospects. We trade 4 stud prospects for 1.5 years of a player.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top