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

Sunday, January 15, 2006

Dodgers - Acquired Baez

Los Angeles Dodgers - Acquired P Danys Baez and P Lance Carter from the Tampa Bay Devil Rays for P Edwin Jackson and P Chuck Tiffany.  Signed P Aaron Sele to a minor-league contract.

I think the Devil Rays missed the boat somewhat here.  While Baez isn’t that good and Edwin Jackson is still young enough to turn things around, I think they could have gotten more for the former if they hadn’t held out for the moon.  They won’t miss Baez too much, if new ownership/management proves to be more capable and creative than the old Synergetic Dumbass Collective and the Devil Ray farm system hasn’t produced interesting pitching prospects with anywhere near the success of position player prospects.

This isn’t a bad move by the Dodgers here.  It’ll take a lot of patience to get playing value out of Jackson and Tiffany (if it even ever happens) and McCourt has shown indications this winter that he likes the sound of long-term, sober planning a lot more than actually have to undertake it.  Short-term hotshotting or not, the Dodgers did sign every bit of talent that they could lure to LA with paychecks and could very easily win 90 games, enough to win a very weak Western division.  It won’t be a pretty team and will, in fact, look quite ugly at times, but it could be enough.  One of the sore points is a very thin bullpen and this does help the team in that department in 2006.

The team also signed Aaron Sele to a minor-league deal, which is just terrible.  No, it doesn’t cost them anything, but one of the tenets of putting together a winning team is “Never put Aaron Sele in a position to play for your team.”  Like Scott Erickson last year, there’s no series of events that would lead to Sele being useful and, in fact, I think Sele would do a lot to derail the playoff hopes of a AAA franchise.

2006 ZiPS Projections
——————————————————————————————-
Player       W   L   G GS   IP   H   ER HR BB SO   ERA
——————————————————————————————-
Baez       5   4 67   0   71   63   30   8 28 59 3.80
Carter       3   3 50   0   69   71   35 11 19 36 4.57
Jackson     6 14 29 26 153 175 101 25 74 90 5.94
Sele       5 11 24 23 123 143   76 18 50 55 5.56
Tiffany     4 10 22 21 102 108   66 23 43 96 5.82

Dan Szymborski Posted: January 15, 2006 at 03:50 PM | 40 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. 1k5v3L Posted: January 15, 2006 at 04:32 PM (#1822020)
Dodgers designated RHP Joel Hanrahan for assignment.

Chuck Tiffany wasn't on the 40-man roster, so the Dodgers had to free up a spot as a result of the Danys Baez trade. Hanrahan, once regarded as one of the team's top prospects, has had his stock drop two years running. There's a good chance that he'll clear waivers. Jan. 15 - 3:46 am et
Source: Los Angeles Times

So much for the Jackson/Hanrahan aces leading the Dodgers to many world series.
   2. peter21 Posted: January 15, 2006 at 07:59 PM (#1822124)
I'm surprised Baez doesn't project a little better in Chavez Ravine.

The D-Rays have absolutely no need for Baez/Carter. NONE. Two legitimate, young, starting pitching prospects seems like an excellent haul to me.
   3. Runscreated Posted: January 16, 2006 at 01:06 AM (#1822723)
As far as Dodger pitching prospects, where does Greg Miller stand. I know he was hurt last year, but are there still high expectations for the guy?
   4. MM1f Posted: January 16, 2006 at 02:26 AM (#1822845)
I think he about in the same boat as Cole Hamels at this point minus the headcase rumors
   5. Darren Posted: January 16, 2006 at 02:38 AM (#1822861)
Am I remembering wrong, or weren't Hanrahan and Jackson two of the poster boys for the argument that the Dodgers had had great success drafting highschool pitchers? When that argument was made, I always felt it was premature, as the big argument against such a strategy was that those guys had a longer road to the majors--and thus more opporunity for injury/flameout--and were not as physically mature. The fact that these two guys seemed to have hit a wall seems to suggest that such an argument has a great deal of merit.
   6. The_Next_Big_Thing Posted: January 16, 2006 at 03:11 AM (#1822926)
Honestly, I've read everywhere until here that the trade is lopsided in the Rays favor.

Then Dave, you had to write this... c'mon now, Dave.

This site is called "The Baseball Think Factory", not "lets find a new way to blast the Rays."

Unless you were under a rock and completely oblivious to baseball, you couldn't find anyone who could tell me that 1 year of 2 mediocre-at-best relievers is worth more than the combined careers of 2 players under the age of 23.

People bring up that Baez was a closer who had 41 saves last year and an ERA under 3.00 in 2005 and basically shut down all the AL East teams as the Rays closer. However, if you actually look into Danys Baez, you'll learn that his only positive trait as a pitcher is "luck". If you look at his DIPS ERA, K/9, BB/9, H/9, K/BB ratio, WHIP and HR/9, you'll notice that he shouldn't have had 41 Saves. In fact, if he was on any other MLB team, he wouldn't have a job. If Baez wasn't 28, I could say that their was a chance that he might be a great closer some day...but that's not the case. Many Rays fans have been counting down to Baez's implosion for awhile due to his ever-worsening pitching periphreals. If the Dodgers are hoping for another all-star season from Baez, they better move back the fences.

Lance Carter was the Rays throw-in to the deal. He's had 1 good season and that's it. If the Dodgers are hoping for anything out of Carter, they can hope that he may be a good 12th pitcher in Vegas. Outside of that, he's worthless. He was worthless to the Rays, who probably would've DFAed him after the 2nd week of Spring Training.

So basically, the Dodgers got 2 extremely flammable relievers who have been only "okay" in their time with the only team that would've played them. Cleveland knew about Baez, that's why they gave him up so easily.

As for the Rays part of the deal, the Rays get 2 Starting Pitching Prospects both under the age of 23(which is around the average age of college pitchers coming into MLB) who have plenty of upside.

Edwin Jackson was once as notable of a SP prospect as Felix Hernandez is today. His MLB debut was at the age of 19 where he faced off against Randy Johnson and Edwin got the win over him. He was once rated the Top prospect in the Dodgers system and slated for a great future. However, he had a couple injuries which combined with mental lapses and park factors(w/ Las Vegas being considered an Extreme Hitters Park) to cause him to fall from the top Dodgers' prospect mountaintop. When the Dodgers demoted Jackson to AA, he seemed to have found what he had missing/fixed his mechanics and had an ERA of under 4. Jackson is still 22 and still has the 97 MPH fastball and electric secondary pitchers that got him the win against Johnson when he debuted. It's all a matter of Jackson regaining his confidence and what's not better than being traded to the pressure-free air-conditioned atmosphere of the Rays with their "positive encouragement guru"/manager, Joe Maddon.

The best part of this trade for the Rays was the inclusion of Chuck Tiffany, who ranked #10 on the Dodgers Top Prospect list last year in his first full year. If you look at Chuck, you'll notice that he has a 10+ K/9, a jaw-dropping K/BB ratio, low H/9 rate for a flyball pitcher and low WHIP. His only problem, it seems, is his HR/9 ratio. However, if you look at where he played in 2005...that considerabley high HR/9 is easily explainable. Vero Beach is known for having a high amount of HRs. If the Rays continue his level-by-level progression, he'll be placed in a very pitcher-friendly Southern League and a very pitcher-friendly park in Montgomery, where he can prove whether or not he's a gopherball pitcher like his stats post-Vero Beach are accurate or not.

Right now, the Dodgers look like they're being completely ripped off because they traded for a 1 yr rental/closer insurance policy(Baez) and a horrible reliever who miraculously got an all-star spot in his "best year"(Carter) and gave up 2 pitching prospects who were once extremely high regarded in the Dodgers Organization.

Everyone can bring up the old "TINSTAAPP" theory, but if all pitching prospects are either great or horrible...why do teams have pitching heavy drafts? Also, if they didn't want Jackson, why did they wait until his value is at its lowest to trade him?

Makes no sense on Ned Colletti's part, but right now, what does? Out of the 39 big leaguers he inherited, Colletti has traded/released/non-tendered 17 of them.

At worst for the Rays, the Rays got 1 decent reliever out of this deal...which is basically what they had given up to get Tiffany and Jackson. Baez was once a starter in his career, but failed and got moved to the pen. Jackson had more upside as a starter, so that means that he'd be a better closer than Baez.

However, if they can fix Jackson's confidence problem and cut down Tiffany's HR/9 rate while maintaining those other pitching periphreals...the Rays got more 2 MLB rotation-worthy pitchers in their system, which before this offseason the Rays didn't have much organization depth in.

So, at worst, the Rays came out even in this trade. At best, they bent Colletti over and finished off by saying "Oh, what a lovely tea-party."

Jim Rome, out!
   7. My guest will be Jermaine Allensworth Posted: January 16, 2006 at 03:15 AM (#1822937)
Then Dave, you had to write this... c'mon now, Dave.

Dave's not here, man.
   8. The_Next_Big_Thing Posted: January 16, 2006 at 03:52 AM (#1823030)
"No, I'm dave...."

Ah, the hilarity that is Cheech and Chong.
   9. The_Next_Big_Thing Posted: January 16, 2006 at 03:53 AM (#1823031)
"No, I'm dave...."

Ah, the hilarity that is Cheech and Chong.
   10. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: January 16, 2006 at 04:01 AM (#1823048)
Given where each team is in their respective success cycle, this trade makes sense for both teams. The DRays get a talented high-ceiling, but flawed pitching prospect in Jackson while the Dodgers address one of the largest remaining weaknesses (their bullpen). Should the DRays been able to get more for Baez? Possibly. But a lot of scenarios floated around seem to involve Tampa getting stuck with someone else's salary problem; with this deal, the only thing that Tampa will have to spend is innings seeing if the two young arms can develop into anything interesting.
   11. The_Next_Big_Thing Posted: January 16, 2006 at 04:42 AM (#1823147)
Exactly
   12. Sean McNally Posted: January 16, 2006 at 06:03 AM (#1823306)
I disagree with the sentiment that this is anything but a terrible idea for the Dodgers.

While Baez makes for nice Gagne/Brazoban insurance, etc... but don't the Dodgers have bigger problems?

On the other hand, the D-Rays have done well for themselves here... they have no need for a closer this season, but JAckson and Tiffany could be part of a contending team in the future.

As a baseball fan, I like what the DRays have been doing... as a Yankee fan, not so much.
   13. PreservedFish Posted: January 16, 2006 at 06:25 AM (#1823326)
Edwin Jackson was once as notable of a SP prospect as Felix Hernandez is today.


Um ... you mean the best since Mark Prior or maybe even Dwight Gooden? Don't remember Jackson quite making that level.
   14. The_Next_Big_Thing Posted: January 16, 2006 at 06:46 AM (#1823351)
On the other hand, the D-Rays have done well for themselves here... they have no need for a closer this season, but JAckson and Tiffany could be part of a contending team in the future.


They have Orvella and Mori, one of them could easily replace Baez's production.

Um ... you mean the best since Mark Prior or maybe even Dwight Gooden? Don't remember Jackson quite making that level.


One of them....a good legit young starter.
   15. Rocco's Not-so Malfunctioning Mitochondria Posted: January 16, 2006 at 06:48 AM (#1823355)
I agree, not at that level, but he WAS thought of as highly as at least Chad Billingsley and Matt Cain. Of course, I thought BA overrated Jackson back then, but I also think that people are underrating him now. Still, he probably wasn't going to get his head back on his shoulders out in LA, so it's probably just as good that he got traded, even if he does blossom.

Baez is a heart attack waiting to happen, but I feel like a lot of people are underrating him as well. He's one of those guys who seems to have minor lapses when he's in his comfort zone, and then turns the control up a notch when it matters. I know that's not the greatest characteristic in the world, but it does lead to his negative stats being a bit inflated. Over the past couple years, I can't count the number of times he's walked a guy and allowed a hit, only to strike the next guy out and induce infield flies or weak grounders after that. He's also generally good at stranding runners he's inherited for that same reason, which is a stat which tends to be very undervalued.

Inherited runners
   16. Dan The Mediocre Posted: January 16, 2006 at 08:35 PM (#1824030)
But a lot of scenarios floated around seem to involve Tampa getting stuck with someone else's salary problem

I still remember the Carlos Zambrano for Baez deal that Tampa wanted.
   17. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: January 16, 2006 at 09:01 PM (#1824041)
Jackson was never a Felix, Prior or Gooden.

Billingsley or Cain is a good reference.
   18. 1k5v3L Posted: January 16, 2006 at 09:15 PM (#1824054)
Well, DTM, Tampa was dealing with Hendry, so that's a reasonable thing to ask.
   19. Gainsay Posted: January 16, 2006 at 09:20 PM (#1824061)
the combined careers of 2 players under the age of 23


You aren't really getting their whole careers though. You are only getting the years before they turn free agents. If they use ML service time to try and work through their problems, it really cuts into their value. Ryan Vogelsong of the Pirates is kind of an example of this. He seems like he might be able to be a useful reliever, but by the time he gets things put together he's probably going to be about to head to another team.

Not saying it's a bad trade for the Rays, just that the guys they got really aren't as valuable as you were making them out to be.
   20. nycfan Posted: January 16, 2006 at 09:54 PM (#1824099)
Baez was once a starter in his career, but failed and got moved to the pen. Jackson had more upside as a starter, so that means that he'd be a better closer than Baez

I agree that the trade was good for the Rays, but this is just one example of some flimsy logic in your argument. Also, you talk about Baez's good ERA being negated by poor peripherals, yet say that Jackson had ironed out his problems in AA this year by only referencing his ERA. Jackson only had a 6.39 k/9 in AA this year, while he had one of 9.53 2 years earlier at the same level.
   21. 1k5v3L Posted: January 16, 2006 at 10:07 PM (#1824110)
Over on Baseball Analysts, Rich Lederer is hating this trade, from LA perspective.

http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2006/01/here_we_go_dodg.php

Me, I think he's too much in love with Jackson. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
   22. Mike Emeigh Posted: January 16, 2006 at 10:31 PM (#1824138)
Not saying it's a bad trade for the Rays, just that the guys they got really aren't as valuable as you were making them out to be.


Exactly. There are reasons to be concerned about both of the prospects that Tampa got. Jackson's problems are pretty well-known, plus Tiffany is home-run prone, has had injury problems (back), walks too many guys, and there are concerns about his stamina as well. They have potential, but the Dodgers have a bunch of pitchers with at least as much potential, and Jackson and Tiffany at this point are behind most of the rest of the group.

It's a good trade for Tampa, but hardly a slam-dunk.

-- MWE
   23. Kyle S Posted: January 16, 2006 at 10:46 PM (#1824151)
Too bad that Greg Miller wasn't included in this trade. Today would immediately become Exhibit A for those who think the Dodgers' farm system is overrated - as it is, they're already losing Hanrahan, Tiffany, and Jackson in one day - 3/5ths of their 2006 rotation as dreamed of after the '03 season :)
   24. 1k5v3L Posted: January 16, 2006 at 10:46 PM (#1824152)
I'm really sick and tired of Gammo and BA hyping up the Red Sox and Dodgers prospects, respectively, so the two teams can trade their castoffs for quality major league players. And Mike Crudale.
   25. 1k5v3L Posted: January 16, 2006 at 10:51 PM (#1824160)
Hey now, Kyle, three more shoulder surgeries and Greg Miller is good to go in AA in a couple of years.
   26. The_Next_Big_Thing Posted: January 16, 2006 at 11:00 PM (#1824174)
Exactly. There are reasons to be concerned about both of the prospects that Tampa got. Jackson's problems are pretty well-known, plus Tiffany is home-run prone, has had injury problems (back), walks too many guys, and there are concerns about his stamina as well. They have potential, but the Dodgers have a bunch of pitchers with at least as much potential, and Jackson and Tiffany at this point are behind most of the rest of the group


Yeah, Tiffany wasn't as HR prone until he reached the 4th strongest HR park in the minors. If you look at his WHIP(being sub 1.25) and his K/BB(being almost 3.5-4/1)...you wouldn't think that he walks too many guys either.

As for Jackson, he had some nagging forearm troubles and it didn't help him that he pitched in an extreme hitters park in Vegas and pitched in a strong HR park(1.14 HR Park Factor) in Dodgers Stadium @ Chavvy Ravine. His ERA(3.43 ERA in ~60 IP) at Double-A Jacksonville was lower than that of the Dodgers Top Pitching Prospect(Chad Billingsley- 3.51 ERA in 160 IP). There's less pressure for him now in TB compared to the pressure that was put on him by LA.
   27. buddy34 Posted: January 16, 2006 at 11:27 PM (#1824190)
are dodger prospects generally overrated? don't see many make it, and see a bunch flame out or at least not reach hype.
   28. Kyle S Posted: January 16, 2006 at 11:31 PM (#1824193)
As for Jackson, he had some nagging forearm troubles and it didn't help him that he pitched in an extreme hitters park in Vegas and pitched in a strong HR park(1.14 HR Park Factor) in Dodgers Stadium @ Chavvy Ravine. His ERA(3.43 ERA in ~60 IP) at Double-A Jacksonville was lower than that of the Dodgers Top Pitching Prospect(Chad Billingsley- 3.51 ERA in 160 IP). There's less pressure for him now in TB compared to the pressure that was put on him by LA.

Jackson also has the nagging issue of sucking donkey b****s the last two years after being a consensus top 15 (BA #4, BPro #6, Gleeman #11) prospect going into 2004. I can't believe that someone would actually make the claim he was hurt by pitching in Dodger Stadium! I'd also be concerned that he struck out 3 fewer guys per nine last year than he did in 2003 while pitching at the same level, but that's just me...
   29. Psychedelic Red Pants Posted: January 16, 2006 at 11:36 PM (#1824194)
Given where each team is in their respective success cycle, this trade makes sense for both teams.

Where, exactly, do you think the Dodgers are in their success cycle. I'm pretty sure they aren't where they think they are.
   30. PJ Martinez Posted: January 16, 2006 at 11:52 PM (#1824208)
I think the most interesting aspect of this trade is what it suggests about the new TB front office. This trade is no Zambrano for Kazmir slam dunk, but it is a solid trade for TB. The other options-- waiting till midseason or holding onto him and netting draft picks-- both involved the risk that Baez could get hurt or stop pitching well. Given that risk, and the possible upside of this deal, TB made the right call, IMO, without question.

The Dodgers side is more debatable-- I tend to think they made a mistake. But since I root for a team in the AL East, I care much less about what happens out there at Chavez Ravine.

Maybe the current TB front office will not make the same mistakes as the last one-- like holding onto Aubrey Huff until his trade value was gone. It'll be interesting to see what they do with Lugo, since he, too, has serious trade value. The other nice thing about this trade from the TB perspective is they got pitching, which is clearly what they need. More decisions like this one, and TB might actually contend a few years from now.

I wonder if TB can get out of last place next year. (Baltimore, I'm looking in your direction.) I don't expect it, but if Kazmir blossoms and some other things break right it could happen.
   31. 1k5v3L Posted: January 17, 2006 at 12:00 AM (#1824219)
The Dodgers have as good of a chance as ANY team in the NL west to make the playoffs in 06. That's says it all about where they are in the success cycle
   32. Psychedelic Red Pants Posted: January 17, 2006 at 12:06 AM (#1824224)
The Dodgers have as good of a chance as ANY team in the NL west to make the playoffs in 06. That's says it all about where they are in the success cycle

I assume by that you mean that they are far away from success. We'll be getting team projections in a few weeks, but right now I wouldn't be surprised if the dodgers were expected to finish 4th.
   33. 1k5v3L Posted: January 17, 2006 at 12:12 AM (#1824236)
Yes, I mean they can finish anywhere from 1st to 4th. That's success, right? There are 16 teams in the NL, afterall...
   34. Psychedelic Red Pants Posted: January 17, 2006 at 12:29 AM (#1824250)
Yes, I mean they can finish anywhere from 1st to 4th. That's success, right? There are 16 teams in the NL, afterall...

Normally, success means winning the world series. Even if the dodgers manage 82 wins and win the NL West in 2006, they'll get eaten alive in the playoffs. A team that (generously) has a 25% chance at a playoff spot and then a 5% chance of advancing to the second round shouldn't be trading for marginal 1-year upgrades. The Dodgers had the 3rd worst record in the NL last year. If they think they are in a position to win now, they're mistaken. Are the Dodgers an even bet to win more games than the devil rays next year?
   35. 1k5v3L Posted: January 17, 2006 at 12:35 AM (#1824257)
If I had my way, the Dodgers will finish last in the NL west next year. :)

That being said, when all is said and done, I won't be shocked if the NL west winner is again an 82 win team, and gets pummeled by the Cards again in the first round of the playoffs.
   36. Psychedelic Red Pants Posted: January 17, 2006 at 12:45 AM (#1824269)
I think Selig has the NL West rigged to give healthy Bonds one more shot at the postseason.
   37. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: January 17, 2006 at 06:43 AM (#1824696)
The Dodgers look like an 80-85 win team to me (assuming average luck in terms of health, productivity, etc). As others have said, that is good enough to put them in contention in the NL West. Trading a few flawed and (at this point) longshot prospects for some bullpen help is a reasonable move for them to make given the issues with their bullpen, pre-trade.

And if the wheels fall of the cart and the Dodgers find themselves along the Rockies at the cellar (while another NL West team has taken off), then Baez is a guy that they can look to flip midseason for something comparable, if not better, than Edwin Jackson. Chavez Ravine and the Dodgers' defense should help him put together some superficially excellent numbers (although anything can happen in 40-50 innings). A Proven Major League closer is a great commodity to have on hand near the trading deadline, particularly when idiots like Jim Hendry are heavy on prospects and short on patience.
   38. Dr. Vaux Posted: January 17, 2006 at 07:17 AM (#1824739)
ZIPS+PT may be a little screwy when it comes to exact W-L records, but the relationships of the teams are usually pretty good. It's got the Dodgers five games ahead of the Padres, D'Backs, Giants, and Rockies all jumbled together. Also, just eye-balling the rosters, the Dodgers look like the clear favorite to me.
   39. 1k5v3L Posted: January 17, 2006 at 04:06 PM (#1824931)
particularly when idiots like Jim Hendry are heavy on prospects and short on patience.

A year ago, it'd have been "idiots like Joe Jr." Sweet justice.
   40. JPWF13 Posted: January 20, 2006 at 11:57 PM (#1830899)
I wonder if TB can get out of last place next year. (Baltimore, I'm looking in your direction.) I don't expect it, but if Kazmir blossoms and some other things break right it could happen.

The Historical Abstract's recipe for a dream team-
3 young guys (1 a pitcher) step up big time- to star level perfomance- and a few dead spots improve (usually by having young guys replace unproductive vets).

As applied to TB

1: Someone between Rocco, Crawford, Cantu take the LEAP
2: Kazmir takes the LEAP
3: 2-3 guys who absolutely blew in 2005 (ie- every starter other than Kazmir) are replaced by 2-3 guys who don't totally suck.
4: A few improvements here and there, maybe Delmon taking at bats that went to Travis...

Could happen... wouldn't bet on it

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Don Malcolm
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.4986 seconds
47 querie(s) executed