"It still kills me how many internet expert wannabes kept insisting he (Lillibridge) was a better player than Yunel."

It was baseball prospectus that said it; they had him taking Yunel's job by summer of 2008.

I would rather the Braves have traded Hanson, Freeman, and Heyward for Vazquez than see Jason Marquis back in a Braves uniform.

It was baseball prospectus that said it; they had him taking Yunel's job by summer of 2008.

This thread from last off-season contains some posts regarding Escobar that I found puzzling at the time.

It's being reported that Atlanta is going to offer Burnett a 5 year deal. If the Braves make it happen then I assume they're not interested in Peavey

The Braves would be more than happy to deal for Peavy and spend their FA dollars on a SS and OF. That would require the Padres to stop pretending like they have any leverage whatsoever in the deal, though. They're not getting Tommy Hanson. If Kevin Towers can come to grips with that fact before Atlanta signs Burnett or Lowe then Kevin Towers can get some reasonable return on his superstar pitcher. If he can't come to grips with that, he'll be shopping Peavy for whatever he can get without the Braves OR Cubs being in the picture.

Javy simply can't handle pressure, pretty solid when the games mean nothing though. Perfect #4 or #5, shouldn't be anywhere near a playoff rotation.

I don't see what Vazquez brings to the table that makes him worth acquiring for a guy who hits as well as Flowers does.

One thing about Vazquez is that he has a better chance than (ahem) Cliff Lee of putting up a CY-type season. He's got the goods, and you have a certain baseline for him, which is a nice thing to be able to say when you pick him up. He's worth any number of minor-league catchers.

"He's worth any number of minor-league catchers."

I might restrict it to whole, rational numbers, at least.

According to MLB Trade Rumors, someone at Baseball Prospectus is floating a Dye + Jenks for Fernando Martinez + others trade rumor.

And what makes you say that? Someone who caught all year in the minors and the AFL counts as a C in my book.

I'm guessing you overrated Daric Barton and Josh Phelps as well then...

If there are serious questions about a player's ability to stay at catcher, he needs to be debited accordingly. With rare exceptions, they're usually not quick enough to be moved anywhere other than 1B or really bad LF, and their bat usually isn't good enough to make them standout players at those positions.

Tyler Flowers the catcher is a nice prospect. Tyler Flowers the 1B is a meh prospect. Every report I've read on Flowers questions whether he'll be able to stick at catcher. Of course he's playing catcher for now - every team leaves a player where they have the most trade value until they have absolutely proven that they need to move off that position, but he still needs to make great strides behind the plate to stay there.

The Braves would be more than happy to deal for Peavy and spend their FA dollars on a SS and OF. That would require the Padres to stop pretending like they have any leverage whatsoever in the deal, though. They're not getting Tommy Hanson. If Kevin Towers can come to grips with that fact before Atlanta signs Burnett or Lowe then Kevin Towers can get some reasonable return on his superstar pitcher. If he can't come to grips with that, he'll be shopping Peavy for whatever he can get without the Braves OR Cubs being in the picture.

Or he'll just keep Jake Peavy if he can't get fair value in return for one of the better pitchers in the game who's signed long-term at way below market. It's not a matter of leverage. There's a pretty established market for his situation now, after the Haren and Bedard trades, and a trade won't get done as long as the Braves continue to offer a package that's way below market.

There's a pretty established market for his situation now, after the Haren and Bedard trades, and a trade won't get done as long as the Braves continue to offer a package that's way below market.

Did Haren and Bedard have no-trade clauses? (I honestly don't know.) If not, then they're not reasonable comps. Peavy does, and he's exercising it. That defines the "market" for Peavy, and that market is currently something like six teams - including the Braves and the Cubs.

In the Bedard trade, Bedard had only two more years left until free agency, and not nearly as consistent a track record as Peavy. Peavy should be worth a huge amount more than Bedard was worth at that time. However, the Mariners gave up way too much.

[edit: I thought Bedard was a free agent right now...but it looks like he isn't.[

Or he'll just keep Jake Peavy if he can't get fair value in return for one of the better pitchers in the game who's signed long-term at way below market. It's not a matter of leverage. There's a pretty established market for his situation now, after the Haren and Bedard trades, and a trade won't get done as long as the Braves continue to offer a package that's way below market.

I don't know, its sounds like Moores really wants to slash payroll. I'd be pretty surprised at this point if Peavy is in a Padres uniform come April.

Or he'll just keep Jake Peavy if he can't get fair value in return for one of the better pitchers in the game who's signed long-term at way below market. It's not a matter of leverage. There's a pretty established market for his situation now, after the Haren and Bedard trades, and a trade won't get done as long as the Braves continue to offer a package that's way below market.

If the Padres can keep Peavy they that's their option. If they can't, if Moores demands payroll cuts and the only way to do that is to move Peavy, that's not their option. If they have to trade, which is what has been reported so far, then they're further constrained by Peavy's no-trade clause and his list of teams that he's willing to play for. All of that significantly alters the "established market" from Haren or Bedard. Throw in the fact that it's a completely different market altogether - markets are volatile from month to month, much less year to year; the buyers and sellers in this market are completely different than the precedents - and you've got the situation as it now stands.

If the Pads aren't as constrained by payroll and destination as has been reported, that's an error of information and any resulting analysis is equally erroneous. If the information is correct then the market for Peavy is significantly more constrained than the previous markets for Haren and Bedard.

Bottom line for the Braves is simple. Jake Peavy is worth Escobar/Hernandez/Boyer/Morton TO THEM. (Or at least he was. With the Cubs out of the picture and no other obvious suitors he might be worth less than that now.) If that's not enough for the Padres they can keep their commodity or find another buyer. Eric Bedard or Dan Haren don't have squiggle to do with it, really.

In the Bedard trade, Bedard had one year left on his contract. Peavy should be worth a huge amount more than Bedard was worth at that time.

All things being equal, that's probably true. Again, it's the no-trade clause that changes things. This has a lot more in common with the Ken Griffey trade to Cincinatti than anything else. (I looked it up; since neither Bedard nor Haren had yet reached free agency, there's about a 0% chance that either had a no-trade.) Anyway, the Braves aren't competing with 28 other teams for Peavy. They're competing with less than 10, most likely. (I don't think there's any official list of teams that Peavy would be willing to be traded to. There's no advantage to the Padres to put that information out there. But I'm sure he hasn't waived that completely.) And of those >10 teams that Peavy would be willing to go to, some don't have the prospects to trade for him. Some the Padres would prefer not to trade him to. (The Dodgers come to mind...) And some might prefer not to trade for him, for whatever reason. (Maybe their scouts think he's about to have serious arm trouble.)

Anyway, Towers will not get "true value" for Peavy. And if the Braves had actually been willing to trade Escobar, Morton/Reyes, and anything else for him, Towers probably should have jumped at that. Because he's unlikely to get a better offer, and at this point, less likely to get that offer again.

And if the Braves had actually been willing to trade Escobar, Morton/Reyes, and anything else for him, Towers probably should have jumped at that. Because he's unlikely to get a better offer, and at this point, less likely to get that offer again.

Last reported offer from Atlanta - that I saw at least - was Escobar+Morton/Reyes+Gorkys Hernandez+Blaine Boyer. And the Pads walked away from that because they wanted Tommy Hanson insted of Morton/Reyes. If I'm Frank Wren and Towers comes back saying "we'll take that now" I'd reply "you can take it without Gorkys Hernandez."

I heard both Barry Axelrod and KT on the radio talking about Peavy, they both said the same thing about the no-trade clause and the supposed 6 teams Peavy aproved; they said that Peavy had no such list and that they (the Pads) had not contacted Peavy yet to waive his no-trade clause that as soon as KT finds someone who will trade what he thinks is a good package for Peavy, then he will ask Peavy to waive his no-trade clause.

Barry Axelrod said the same thing, that Peavy nor he had contacted the Pads with a list of teams he would accept to waive his no-trade clause, that that information going around was wrong information.

Don't know if it's true or not or if KT asked him to say that to have some leverage...

KT also said that if he doesn't find a nice package for Peavy, that Peavy would be the opening day starter for the Pads.

Javy simply can't handle pressure, pretty solid when the games mean nothing though. Perfect #4 or #5, shouldn't be anywhere near a playoff rotation.

Should be perfect for next year's braves then.

KT also said that if he doesn't find a nice package for Peavy, that Peavy would be the opening day starter for the Pads.

But will that mean Brian Giles and Adrian Gonzalez are gone?

Javy simply can't handle pressure, pretty solid when the games mean nothing though. Perfect #4 or #5, shouldn't be anywhere near a playoff rotation.

Just like Kenny Rogers?

Javier Vasquez is a #2 type starter. 200+ IP at 100 ERA+ or better is a REALY valuable SP.

KT also said that if he doesn't find a nice package for Peavy, that Peavy would be the opening day starter for the Pads.

As opposed to, what, the #2 or #3 starter for the Pads? That KT is quite the negotiator -- unless he finds a nice package for Peavy, he's keeping him! You go, girl.

Javier Vazquez is a #2 type starter. 200+ IP at 100 ERA+ or better is a REALY valuable SP.

Good luck with that. Come playoff time, he was the Sox #5 starter. Good riddance.

Good luck with that. Come playoff time, he was the Sox #5 starter. Good riddance.

He was actually the #4 starter - the Sox didn't have a #5 starter.

Of course, the question is, who replaces him? Clayton Richard? Lance Broadway? Jeff Marquez? None of those guys look like major-league starters at the moment.

The Sox already had a big question mark for the #5 starter going into 2009. Now they have big question marks for the #4 and #5 starters. If they're rebuilding in 2009, I can live with the rotating 5th starter of death, but it certainly puts a crimp in things if they plan on contending next year.

They got a decent return for Vazquez, but trading him does raise some questions as to what they plan to do next year.

"Just like Kenny Rogers?

Javier Vasquez is a #2 type starter. 200+ IP at 100 ERA+ or better is a REALY valuable SP."

From April to July, I agree with you. Kenny Rogers did put on a show in 2006, and I guess Javy could pull off something like that down the line, but I think it's highly unlikely. Just look at the man's facial expressions in "big" games, he gets visibly rattled at the slightest hint of trouble.

Javier Vazquez is a #2 type starter. 200+ IP at 100 ERA+ or better is a REALY valuable SP.

In the last 5 years, he has topped a 100 ERA+ only once, despite turning in 55 BB /200 K seasons like clockwork. He really is frustrating.

Good luck with that. Come playoff time, he was the Sox #5 starter. Good riddance.

The idea of labeling a MLB player a choker has always seemed absurd to me.

Kenny Rogers was viewed as this big choker in NY, then he goes and pitches lights out for Detroit in the playoffs.

I imagine there is a lot more pressure to perform when you're trying to make the majors, than when you're already a multi-millionaire who never has to work a day again in his life. No choker would ever sniff the majors.

Guesses on the Braves' opening day rotation?

As it stands now, it's Jurrjens, Vazquez, Campillo, and then a dogfight between Reyes, Morton, James, Parr, and Hanson for the final two slots. They're looking to add one more starter. (Sabathia would be nice!)

Maybe more interesting... who's in the Braves' rotation at the end of the season? Hudson might be back by then, and Hanson might be more of a factor.

I expect Hanson to be in the rotation by the end of the season. I also expect that Burnett will end up in Atlanta. I don't know why, it just seems like it's what will happen.

Guesses on the Braves' opening day rotation?

2009
----------------
Burnett
Vasquez
Jurrjens
Campillo
Reyes/Morton/James

2010
----------------
Burnett
Hudson
Jurrjens
Vasquez
Hanson

The idea of labeling a MLB player a choker has always seemed absurd to me.

I don't think he's a choker, I just think he sucks. For how many years we've been hearing how he's this #2 starter, yet every year he's never one of his team's top guys. He's worn out his welcome pretty quickly in lots of places, too.

Fact is, he's just not good enough. If he's your team's #2 starter, you have a bad team.

Fact is, he's just not good enough. If he's your team's #2 starter, you have a bad team.

I agree that he's not a #2 starter, but he doesn't suck, either. Pitchers who can eat 200 innings and be league-average or better don't exactly grow on trees. Vazquez has a lot of value.

The key is to manage expectations. Ignore the gaudy peripherals - he's not going to be your ace. But he will be pretty good. If the Braves are expecting an All-Star, they'll be disappointed, but otherwise, they should be pretty happy with what they get.

"The idea of labeling a MLB player a choker has always seemed absurd to me."

As do I, most of the time. Maybe we need a different word for "doesn't handle stress very well at this point in time".

Don't get me wrong, I like JV as a #4/#5, and there is no question his "stuff" is ace calibre at times. I hope the trade works out well for the WhiteSox and the Braves.

Wow, talk about an intentionally misleading sentence.

I wasn't trying to mislead you. I'm sorry anyway. I guess that what I meant by this was that Vazquez is not a great pitcher, and that he alone can't do much to change the Braves' fortunes in 2009. He'll be an upgrade, yes, but the rest of the rotation will consist of Jair Jurrjens and unknowns or mediocre guys. Even if the Braves acquire Burnett or Lowe, their rotation still won't be anything special, and they don't have an offense that can make up for this and get the team into the playoffs.

Who? Give me names. League average innings eaters are very desirable commodities.

I threw a "surely" in there because I don't know the values that other GMs have placed on their pitchers, nor do I know who is actually available. I wasn't expressing any certainty; I was saying something like, "There must be someone they could have gotten for cheaper." As for names, I've heard that Bronson Arroyo is available, although I could see how he would command more than Vazquez in a trade. Someone else mentioned Jason Marquis - I don't know if he's available. Livan Hernandez pitched 200 innings in 2007, and I can't imagine that he is ever not available. Mark Hendrickson could probably pitch 200 innings, but nobody keeps him in the starting rotation. I don't think that innings-eaters are terribly hard to find. With the exception of Arroyo, all of these guys are worse than Vazquez and below league average. The Braves, though, don't need a league-average innings-eater to protect their young arms; they need an innings-eater, regardless of quality, to do this.

I don't think that Vazquez has no value. I just think that this makes more sense for a team, like the Mets, that is looking for an average guy to eat up innings and is close to or in contention. The Braves fall into, from what I can tell, only one of these categories. This means that they're trading away a guy who could turn out either good or bad for a guy who is about average and probably won't be with the team when it next contends.

I'd say the Braves do/did need an inning eater, though I don't think they'll contend and would have rather they not made this deal.

If the Braves are expecting an All-Star, they'll be disappointed, but otherwise, they should be pretty happy with what they get.

Let me put this as clearly as I can. The Braves starting rotation for 2009 prior to this trade:

Jair Jurrjens
Jorge Campillo
Jo-Jo Reyes
Charlie Morton
James/Parr

Javier Vasquez is more valuable to Atlanta than is Tyler Flowers.

Of course, the question is, who replaces him? Clayton Richard? Lance Broadway? Jeff Marquez?

Or Jo-Jo Reyes, assuming he's included in the deal.

-- MWE

Or Jo-Jo Reyes, assuming he's included in the deal.

He's not.

Jo Jo isn't in the deal any more, Mike.

Mark Hendrickson and Livan Hernandez are pretty much the definition of replacement-level pitching at this point. If we wanted 200 innings of 70 ERA+ ball, we could sign them. Or we could trade for Vazquez and get 200 innings of 100 ERA+ ball (more or less). The difference is roughly 40 runs, or four wins. It's worth it to me for the Braves to lose the services of those guys and pay Vazquez 11.5mm per year to improve us by four wins.

To add to my last post: Vazquez stays in the game longer than Hendrickson and Livan do. Over his last three seasons, Vazquez has averaged 6.4 IP per start. Last year, Livan managed just 5.8. Hendrickson was even worse, at 5.3 IP per start last year. Also, Vazquez is more likely to take his turn in the rotation than an increasingly creaky Livan or an increasingly crappy Hendrickson.

I don't think the Braves are as far away from contending in the NL as you do. If they stop now, then sure, they won't go anywhere. But if they sign AJ Burnett and Adam Dunn or Bobby Abreu, suddenly that's a much better looking squad. Throw in a little luck (like a breakout performance by Jordan Schafer or Tommy Hanson) and you have a dangerous team, IMHO. Maybe I'm just a fanboy, but that's how I see it.

And, to continue my run of dominance in this thread, a quote from the thread where some folks had Lillibridge over Escobar:

I dunno - Escobar looked pretty good at short last year, and he hit a ton. Plus he does things managers love (like taking an extra base when the defense ignored him). I'm fairly certain that he'll perform better than Lillibridge will next year. It's a nice problem to have!

What genius made this prescient insight? Someone better sign him up as the Braves' new assistant GM! ;)

Javier Vasquez is more valuable to Atlanta than is Tyler Flowers.

This year. And, that assumes that the Braves are going to jump into contention. I don't see it. To give up a good hitting C prospect to stay over .500 is a bit much.

In the last 5 years, he has topped a 100 ERA+ only once,

Again, that is a silly way of putting it. You could just as easily say that Vasquez has just one year ('04) with either an ERA+ under 98 OR less than 200 IP thrown since 1999.

He is blocked at C for Atlanta, and at 1B for a while. The biggest value Flowers was going to be provide the Braves was a RH power bat. There is just not one in the system anymore.

If the Braves really want Burnett that badly, I'm sure the Pirates could be persuaded to part with him.

Maybe I'm just a fanboy, but that's how I see it.

I am, too. That Teixeira trade messed me up for life, though - and it was a completely defensible deal that I supported then (I'd support it again, too, if I didn't know the outcome). It was a trade that could have propelled the Braves to the division championship. I don't see how the acquisition of Vazquez can do this, even if the Braves can sign Burnett. Heck, even if they get a Dunn or Abreu, it still seems unlikely. I missed 1995 by a few years, and I want to watch them win a World Series in my lifetime. 2009 doesn't seem like the year that it's going to happen, and making moves possibly detrimental to future seasons worries me when it's for a lost cause.

I agree that guys like Livan Hernandez will, if given the same opportunity as Vazquez, pitch fewer innings. I'd just rather not give up a guy who may do more to help the Braves win than Vazquez.

I don't think the Braves are that far off either, but making the playoffs is one thing, and being a serious contender for the pennant another. And the Braves are not close to the latter.

FWIW, Rotoworld saying the Braves are close to signing David Ross to backup McCann . 2 year deal.
Don't mind it. He has some pop, and plays good defence.

As opposed to, what, the #2 or #3 starter for the Pads? That KT is quite the negotiator -- unless he finds a nice package for Peavy, he's keeping him! You go, girl.

Uhm, I'm pretty sure that meant that he's on the trading block to see if they can get something good for him, if not, they have no problem him staying...Meaning that he doesn't have to trade him, just looking to get better by getting 4 or 5 players of quality instead of a player that plays 32 games a year.

You "missed 1995" - what does that mean? Really long hangover? Series of acid flashbacks? Surely there aren't any Braves fans who are so young that they don't remember 1995... right?

Hell, I consider myself young, and I was at Game 6 of the 1995 World Series!

Great ####### game!

You "missed 1995" - what does that mean? Really long hangover? Series of acid flashbacks? Surely there aren't any Braves fans who are so young that they don't remember 1995... right?

It's crazy, I don't understand where all these young people come from either. It's like people are breeding, or something...

Well, my daughter "missed 1995" - she was born in 2005 - but she isn't exactly posting on BBTF yet.

AROM,

Vazquez has given up 5 unearned runs a year over the last 5 (Floyd, for instance, gave up 19 last year). He has been a significantly above average starter over that time, but his strengths and weaknesses are well-known. He strikes out batters at an excellent rate, and induces plenty of pop-ups. He has good control. As a flyball pitcher, he gives up more than his share of homers. He is much more effective with the bases empty than with runners on over his career (a characteristic he shares with Burnett). If a team expects excellence, they are likely to be disappointed, but 200 solid innings is nothing to be sneezed at.

Surely there aren't any Braves fans who are so young that they don't remember 1995... right?

Sad but true. Someone once pondered that he didn't remember Tim Wakefield having ever faced the Braves before, and I asked, "Where were you during the '92 NLCS?" Turns out that he was born in like '91 or something. Very disheartening.

Sorry to disappoint/dishearten. I was born in 1989. In 1995, I lived in Massachusetts. I didn't become a baseball fan until the 1999 offseason.

In my defense, I am aware of Wakefield's dominance over the Braves in 1992, Schilling's in 1993, Hernandez's in 1997, and Hitchcock's in 1998.

Hernandez'sEric gregg's in 1997


Fixed that for you.

I think Javy's at the end of his effectiveness, actually. Now, granted, I'm not going to be trumpeted as objective, but I'm glad the Braves got him instead of the Mets.