Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Transaction Oracle > Discussion
Transaction Oracle
— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen

Wednesday, December 07, 2005

Devil Rays - Acquired Burroughs

Tampa Bay Devil Rays - Acquired 3B Sean Burroughs from the San Diego Padres for P Dewon Brazelton

This is your classic swap of disappointing prospects to see if a new team can do something with them.  It would benefit the Devil Rays to develop a star pitcher from within to go along with Scott Kazmir, but it’s pretty clearly not Brazelton.  Burroughs’ upside is limited since he’s never developed major league power - he has the potential to hit 300/350/400 or even a little better, but it won’t be enough to make him the star the Padres were hoping for.  Good move for the Devil Rays - their part of the trade is more likely to work out down the road.

One can understand the frustration the Padres had with Burroughs’ lack of progress, but going from Lawrence/Burroughs to Brazelton/Castilla was not the answer.

2006 ZiPS Projection - Sean Burroughs
————————————————————————————-
AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB   BA   OBP   SLG
————————————————————————————-
424 61 123 16 3   5 51 34 53   5 .290 .352 .377

 

2006 ZiPS Projection - Dewon Brazelton
———————————————————————-
W   L   G GS   IP   H   ER HR BB SO   ERA
———————————————————————-
6 11 27 22 128 127   71 12 68 90 4.99

 

Dan Szymborski Posted: December 07, 2005 at 09:41 PM | 14 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. Jim Wisinski Posted: December 08, 2005 at 12:42 AM (#1766369)
If the Rays can't get the Marte deal done (and what's ridiculous is that it appears they're the ones holding things up) then Burroughs matching that projection would be fantastic for them. He would be the best third baseman the Rays have had since 1998 when Bobby Smith looked competent for a season. That says a lot more about Rays third basemen than about Burroughs but .290/.352/.377 with good defense is at least comfortably above replacement level.
   2. Kyle S Posted: December 08, 2005 at 12:46 AM (#1766374)
Jim, I take it you're a D-Rays fan. There is no conceivable way the rays would turn down Marte for Lugo, is there? I know K-Ros has reported that, but I refuse to believe it.
   3. Dingbat_Charlie Posted: December 08, 2005 at 12:47 AM (#1766375)
don't forget Loretta/Hernandez to ??/Mirabelli if they let themselves get heisted by the Sox.
   4. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: December 08, 2005 at 12:48 AM (#1766377)
One can understand the frustration the Padres had with Burroughs' lack of progress, but going from Lawrence/Burroughs to Brazelton/Castilla was not the answer.

Put that way, it seems like an appalling pair of transactions for the Padres.

I guess Brazelton might learn how to throw strikes, but barring that miracle, it seems that the Padres actually downgraded this winter.
   5. DCW3 Posted: December 08, 2005 at 12:50 AM (#1766381)
He would be the best third baseman the Rays have had since 1998

What about Huff? He was the starting 3B for most of '04.
   6. RP Posted: December 08, 2005 at 12:52 AM (#1766387)
As I mentioned in the other thread, Brazelton might have been a nice pickup for the Orioles...it would be interesting to see what Mazzone could do with him.
   7. Bromadrosis Posted: December 08, 2005 at 01:10 AM (#1766420)
Jim, I take it you're a D-Rays fan. There is no conceivable way the rays would turn down Marte for Lugo, is there? I know K-Ros has reported that, but I refuse to believe it.

Marte doesn't pitch.

Damn madde(o)ning that this deal might not get done though.
   8. robinred Posted: December 08, 2005 at 06:06 AM (#1766904)
I live in SD and root for the Padres, (and Reds--come from OH originally) and I agree with Szymborski.

Burroughs strikes me as being lazy and acting entitled, which, based on his background, is understandable if true. I will also be rooting hard for Brazelton to overcome his problems and move forward.

That said, I think the Padres quit on Burroughs too soon and trading Loretta for a 35 year-old backup catcher was silly. The Padres should have given Burroughs another 450 PAs in my opinion, particularly if the alternative is Vinny Castilla.

I think Loretta/Burroughs/Giles should have been the top of the 2006 batting order.
   9. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: December 08, 2005 at 06:28 AM (#1766989)
Well, maybe Towers is trying his best to get fired so that his former co-worker Theo Epstein can have a job in 2006.
   10. Jim Wisinski Posted: December 08, 2005 at 06:30 AM (#1766993)
What about Huff? He was the starting 3B for most of '04.

Sorta kinda. He was the primary third baseman but only played 87 games there. I would have considered him in my comment above but off the top of my head I thought he had only played around 60 there. Anyway, the point still stands that 3B has been a gaping hole for almost the entire history of the franchise and Burroughs might be an improvement and almost all of his predecessors.

Jim, I take it you're a D-Rays fan. There is no conceivable way the rays would turn down Marte for Lugo, is there? I know K-Ros has reported that, but I refuse to believe it.

I would never have believed it myself but Rosenthal, Gammons, and even the official Braves site have now said that the Rays were insisting on getting too much in the deal. It makes no sense whatsoever, I could care less that Marte doesn't pitch, his certainty and projected value are far greater than any pitcher the Rays could acquire through trade so that really doesn't matter, he'd be a major upgrade to the team's future. I'm just hoping that the new front office has a good reason for this or a great backup plan because right now it looks like they're on the verge of making a colossal blunder.
   11. Jim Wisinski Posted: December 08, 2005 at 06:42 AM (#1767037)
Actually, I shouldn't be quite so harsh at this point. Gammons and Rosenthal later reported that the Rays were back in the deal and though the official article makes it sound bad the MLB.com writers tend to be way behind with what they know, or at least what they're allowed to reveal. The break away from the Rays involvement the writer mentioned might very well be the one that happened early in the day but, according to Gammenthal, may be resolved now.

Time will tell I suppose.
   12. VegasRobb Posted: December 08, 2005 at 06:50 AM (#1767059)
Aw damn, I was hoping that the Loretta trade opened up a spot so Burroughs could stay and play.
   13. yb125 Posted: December 08, 2005 at 06:56 AM (#1767073)
Burroughs has never struck me as being lazy and never read/heard anything to that effect, never came into camp out of shape at least. To me he looked scared when he was in the batters box, and relived when ever he got a hit. Anyways I thought they should've kept him another year since they have no prospects at his postion.
   14. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: December 08, 2005 at 04:46 PM (#1767533)
Ah yb125, but they now have Vinny Castilla!

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Rough Carrigan
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.2805 seconds
66 querie(s) executed