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 14, 2005

White Sox - Acquired Vazquez

Chicago White Sox - Acquired P Javier Vazquez from the Arizona Diamondbacks for OF Chris Young, P Orlando Hernandez, and P Luis Vizcaino

This is another one of those “fair” trades in which both teams get fair value for what they had.  What happened to offseasons with robberies, explosions, and Jim Bowden?  Yeah, we got a little feckless Jimmy Bowden Action going this winter (although it’s not winter yet), but unless he gets a job with a more aggressive team, enabling him to make horrible decisions on a daily basis, it’s just not enough.

The Diamondbacks could ill afford to lose a starting pitcher, but since they really didn’t have a choice, they at least managed to fill a hole.  Chris Young is the prize of this trade, though you wouldn’t know it from the press reports; I hate the headline “Such-and-such is traded for such-and-such and a prospect.”  Quite often, the prospect is the best player received in return, but sportswriters act like prospects are generic people that are all the same value as each other.  Now I’m getting off-topic.

While the Diamondbacks have a lot of excellent position player prospects, they don’t really have a centerfield-type.  And since they don’t really have a centerfield-type on the major league roster either, at least one you’d want to have on your team, Chris Young fills the hole well, even if he’s not going to be a great player, at least right away.  He’s a legitimate defensive player in center and this frees up the Diamondbacks for the long-rumored Green-to-1B, Tracy-to-3B, Glaus-to-elsewhere moves.  They still have to figure out how to get both Carlos Quentin and Conor Jackson on the team at the same time, but they had that problem before this move.  The Diamondbacks didn’t get a tremendous amount in return for Vazquez, but considering what little leverage Arizona had, Josh Byrnes did his job.

El Duque and Luis Vizcaino are really just filler here.  Hernandez is fun to watch, of course, and had that great game against the Red Sox in the playoffs, but he’s still a very old, very injury-prone pitcher who’s just not as good as he used to be.  Vizcaino still managed a nice ERA in 2005, but his K rate and his fastball speed drop every year.  I wouldn’t be surprised if Vizcaino was out of baseball in 3 or 4 years.

The White Sox, while they do lose Young, they gain some flexibility and they still have Brian Anderson.  Now is the absolute best time to trade Jon Garland - Vazquez is going to look a lot like the much-coveted pitcher of a few years ago now that he actually has a defense behind him for the first time in years.  Garland improved in 2005, but not as much as his ERA says he did and KW will be smart to cash in his value while “18-10!  Cy Young candidate!” is fresh in everyone’s heads.  A Buerhle/Vazquez/Garcia/Contreras/McCarthy rotation is still pretty sweet, especially with the addition of whatever quality they get for Garland.’

Thumbs ups all around.

2006 ZiPS Projections
——————————————————————————————-
Player       W   L   G GS   IP   H   ER HR BB SO   ERA
——————————————————————————————-
Hernandez     5 11 21 20 114 120   66 14 53 86 5.21
Vazquez     12 13 33 33 213 208 101 32 54 195 4.27
Vizcaino     3   6 69   0   66   69   38 10 29 52 5.18

 

2006 ZiPS Projections
———————————————————————————————————
Player     AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB   BA   OBP   SLG
———————————————————————————————————
Young     456 89 114 29 2 20 67 57 133 25 .250 .342 .454

 

Dan Szymborski Posted: December 14, 2005 at 06:15 PM | 62 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. shoewizard Posted: December 14, 2005 at 06:34 PM (#1777073)
Those are some ugly ZIPS for El Pukie and Vizcaino. Are those for Chase field in the NL, or the Cell in the AL? Please tell me those are AL ZIPS and they will look better when you have the time to run them again for the NL.
   2. Dan Szymborski Posted: December 14, 2005 at 06:37 PM (#1777080)
Please tell me those are AL ZIPS and they will look better when you have the time to run them again for the NL.

No. The Cell is a big HR park, but not big otherwise and the White Sox really did have a fabulous defense.
   3. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: December 14, 2005 at 06:40 PM (#1777087)
The walk rate for El Duque looks a bit high, but otherwise, that looks about right.
   4. danielj Posted: December 14, 2005 at 06:41 PM (#1777090)
Given his K/BB and K/IP ratios, I'm surprised ZIPS isn't a little more kind to Javy. I like Chris Young a lot (check out the park factor in which clubbed 26 HRs last year), especially if he can handle CF.
   5. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: December 14, 2005 at 06:45 PM (#1777099)
Does a Pavano for Glaus trade make any sense?

Both have similar contracts and are unwanted at their current teams.

Both fill holes, Glaus fills the 1B/DH spot that the Yankees have (though it would be nice to get someone who can play OF) while PAvano could help fill a rotation hole.

Granted Glaus is better than Pavano and may be able to garner more in trade, though with his contract it is doubtful.


just asking, please don't attack me levski.
   6. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: December 14, 2005 at 06:47 PM (#1777105)
Per rotoworld, Contreras reportedly got offered a three-year deal similar to the one that Garland turned down. If he turns it down as well, he might get dealt instead of or in addition to Garland.

The priority seems to be to have the rotation soldified through at least 2007.
   7. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: December 14, 2005 at 06:49 PM (#1777109)
Given his K/BB and K/IP ratios, I'm surprised ZIPS isn't a little more kind to Javy.

Comiskey is still a home-run hitters' park, and that's Vazquez' Achilles' heel.

Are we sure that Anderson is at least close to Rowand's defensive equal in center? I haven't seen enough of him to say for sure.
   8. -3E8 Posted: December 14, 2005 at 07:09 PM (#1777148)
Arizona is sending Chicago $8 million as well.

<ahref="http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2005-12-14-whitesox-dbacks-vazquez_x.htm">USA Today</a>
   9. peter21 Posted: December 14, 2005 at 07:13 PM (#1777158)
Chris Young fills the hole well, even if he's not going to be a great player.

Any 22-year-old fresh off of AA who ZIPS projects for an OPS of 800 with 2o homers and 25 steals sounds like a (potentially) great player to me.

I like this trade from both ends---but for the White Sox's sake, I hope they have another trade lined up involving another starter.

Jon Garland and Jermaine Dye for Bobby Abreu?
   10. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: December 14, 2005 at 07:15 PM (#1777161)
Jon Garland and Jermaine Dye for Bobby Abreu?

That seems like too much to ask for.
   11. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: December 14, 2005 at 07:19 PM (#1777169)
Wow. $8MM is a ton of money.
   12. Buddha Posted: December 14, 2005 at 07:33 PM (#1777192)
McCarthy, Dye and Josh Fields for Abreu?
   13. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: December 14, 2005 at 07:49 PM (#1777204)
I'll agree with the Oracle: good deal for both teams. Kudos to Byrnes for getting good value in return for Vazquez even though some of his negotiating leveraged was compromised.

Find a way to unload Glaus and/or Green while getting some solid young talent in return and I'll be really impressed.
   14. SuperGrover Posted: December 14, 2005 at 07:49 PM (#1777205)
Like many have said on this and the prior thread, this trade works for both teams asusming the Sox move a starter for a bat. If not, then it makes no sense at all.

Personally, I think Vazquez will do very well with the Sox, and the $8 million kicker is pretty sweet. Two thumbs up, contigent on the move of Garland/Contreras.
   15. Der Komminsk-sar Posted: December 14, 2005 at 08:14 PM (#1777245)
I'm a little surprised that the consensus is that this a good deal for both teams (one I concur with).
   16. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: December 14, 2005 at 08:19 PM (#1777255)
Like many have said on this and the prior thread, this trade works for both teams asusming the Sox move a starter for a bat. If not, then it makes no sense at all.

It works to take away some of Garland's and Contreras' negotiating leverage, because both pitchers have got to know that whichever one holds out longest on signing a contract is going to get dealt. It's a prisoner's dilemma.
   17. Morph Posted: December 14, 2005 at 08:57 PM (#1777314)
Which way Javy? Re-start your career, or continue down the path of suckitude? You know... I go with the latter, being a bitter Yankee fan who was at the 22-0 game and all. I had great seats.... besides Javy ruined the post season rotation as a whole with his choke job. I still think Javy can be a very good pitcher, it's really all about getting those inconsistent starts weeded out.

Not to completely hijack this thread, but I haven't seen anything on it yet... folks, the Dodgers sign Bill Mueller, giving the Yankees an undeniable lead in the Nomar situation. Move it right along...
   18. Dan Szymborski Posted: December 14, 2005 at 09:00 PM (#1777322)
Any 22-year-old fresh off of AA who ZIPS projects for an OPS of 800 with 2o homers and 25 steals sounds like a (potentially) great player to me.

You left out the modifier - "at least not right away." Chris Young isn't likely to be a great player in 2006. But he'll be good at least and a positive contributor. I think Young's upside is higher than that of Brian Anderson.
   19. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: December 14, 2005 at 09:02 PM (#1777324)
I still think Javy can be a very good pitcher, it's really all about getting those inconsistent starts weeded out.

Like Jose Contreras, perhaps?
   20. Morph Posted: December 14, 2005 at 09:05 PM (#1777327)
Yes, Jose actually is a really good comparison. There was really nothing more painful than watching Jose start against the Red Sox while wearing a Yankee uniform. Actually, I believe Jose has better stuff than Javy, if that adds anything to the discussion.
   21. Artie Ziff Posted: December 14, 2005 at 09:37 PM (#1777403)
Looks pretty even. I am not sure either team is better because of the trade.
   22. SuperGrover Posted: December 14, 2005 at 09:48 PM (#1777421)
It works to take away some of Garland's and Contreras' negotiating leverage, because both pitchers have got to know that whichever one holds out longest on signing a contract is going to get dealt. It's a prisoner's dilemma.

Yeah, but that's not worth giving up Young. At least IMHO. Plus, if neither Garland nor Contreras are moved, we'll have to stick McCarthy in the bullpen meaning we're wasting resources and possibly stunting his development.

If we can move Garland/Contreras for anything of value (Abreu, Tejeda, Beltran, whatever) then I love the deal. If not, I think it's not terrible but it's one KW will certainly regret come 2008 or so.
   23. Robert S. Posted: December 14, 2005 at 09:59 PM (#1777450)
They still have to figure out how to get both Carlos Quentin and Conor Jackson on the team at the same time, but they had that problem before this move.

Byrnes already announced that Jackson is the starting first baseman next year.
   24. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: December 14, 2005 at 10:04 PM (#1777457)
If we can move Garland/Contreras for anything of value (Abreu, Tejeda, Beltran, whatever) then I love the deal.

One would think that would be in the cards - I'm having a hard time imagining that KW would do this if not.

Now that I think about it, I wish this had come before the Thome trade, then Garland or Contreras could have been dealt instead of Rowand, and maybe they could have kept Haigwood or Gonzalez.
   25. Johnny Zen Posted: December 14, 2005 at 10:13 PM (#1777478)
Wow, even Ziffbot agrees with the prevailing sentiment. That's a first.

Per #12, I think the White Sox actually have two good minor leaguers named Josh Fields. Which one were you referring to, P or 3B? I think that sort of Abreu deal would be more likely near the deadline if (when?) the Phillies are 15 games or so out of first. The older he is relative to the team's core (Utley, Howard etc.) and the less money he has left on his deal, the more likely he is to get shipped out (although he would still have to waive his no-trade).
   26. SuperGrover Posted: December 14, 2005 at 10:24 PM (#1777494)
Now that I think about it, I wish this had come before the Thome trade, then Garland or Contreras could have been dealt instead of Rowand, and maybe they could have kept Haigwood or Gonzalez.

Do you really see Garland as being less valuable than Rowand and Gonzalez? I don't and I don't think the rest of the league does either. I could be wrong though...it's happened before (like 5 minutes ago).
   27. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: December 14, 2005 at 10:31 PM (#1777512)
"Do you really see Garland as being less valuable than Rowand and Gonzalez?"

Personally, I'd hesitate to trade Rowand for Garland even-up. Gonzalez would make it a slam dunk.
   28. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: December 14, 2005 at 10:36 PM (#1777526)
Do you really see Garland as being less valuable than Rowand and Gonzalez?

Not necessarily, but I think the White Sox will end up missing Rowand (specifically, they'll miss his glove) more than they would potentially miss Garland. Garland's certainly more expendable than Rowand was.

I guess we'll just wait and see what Williams' next move is, but in general, I'm trying to discern whether the team is actually progressing as opposed to just making moves.
   29. 1k5v3L Posted: December 14, 2005 at 10:42 PM (#1777542)
just asking, please don't attack me levski.

LOL. I'm not, and I wouldn't.

Glaus for Pavano makes sense to both teams, really. Glaus would play 1b for the Yankees, I assume, as he's not moving Arod to SS and Jeter to CF :)

I'd prefer Glaus for Clement, but the Sox fans are convinced they'll be robbing Bavasi in a Clement for Jeremy Reed trade, so who cares what I want.

The $8m (instead of $5m), or whatever the cash is, must be burning a hole in the owners' pockets, but this is poetic justice for dumping the Big Unit.

Serves them right. Suck it up, Moorad, suck it up. It'll teach you character. And it'll inure you for the day you have to pay up to dump Russ Ortiz.
   30. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: December 14, 2005 at 10:46 PM (#1777552)
I'd hesitate to trade Rowand for Garland even-up. Gonzalez would make it a slam dunk.

It depends on what your team needs, but in general, I agree.

Even if not, the White Sox could definitely afford to trade Garland before they traded Rowand.
   31. Robert S. Posted: December 14, 2005 at 10:52 PM (#1777559)
I really like this trade from Arizona's perspective, especially a couple of years down the line. They've got a ton of flexibility - the good kind - in deciding their up-the-middle alignment and a ton of money to spend on the avalanche of premium starters that hit the FA market in '07/'08.
   32. CWS Keith plans to boo your show at the Apollo Posted: December 14, 2005 at 11:16 PM (#1777606)
So, presumably Garland or Contreras is gone now?

But, for what? Where would they look to improve? Really, a package for Tejada?

My gosh, I think this team might be in some trouble for 2008 and beyond, but I'm getting extremely excited for 2006. And, KW isn't even done yet...
   33. Anthony Giacalone Posted: December 14, 2005 at 11:24 PM (#1777621)
The priority seems to be to have the rotation soldified through at least 2007.

I think that this was the key, JRE. Not only does the trade give the Sox leverage over Garland and Contreras (as you mentioned) it also guarantees them four solid starters for the next three years. Worst case scenario is that the Sox put McCarthy in long relief, where, as most us have said at one time or another, is where young pithers belong. And then next year they could allow either Contreras or Garland or both to walk and still have a 2007 rotation of Buehrle/Garcia/McCarthy/Vazquez.

This organization does "cost certainty" better than almost any other in baseball and this is another in those kind of smart moves. The $8MM means (plus the removal of the ElDuque/Vizcaino contracts) means that they keep their payroll just the same. It opens a spot in the bullpen for Bejanaru (who has been ready for two years). It gives them a very reliable long-man/spot-starter/rotation-insurance. And it guarantees them a reliable rotation for the next several years.

I think that it will be nearly impossible for Young to ever hit above .270 in the major leagues, given his strikeout rate, so, Young's potential is to be a Mike Cameron. And, while I don't like to see him go, I'm not depressed. Now, that still might make him one of the 75 greatest centerfielders ever but still I think that this is a solid move for the White Sox.

An outfield of Pods/Anderson/Dye/T.I.M.O/Borchard is not anything to get excited about though (since it neither has top-level talent nor depth), so we might still see that trade of a pitcher for a regular outfielder. If that happens, and especially if Garland is the one traded, it better be someone who still has some kind of upside. Believe it or not, I'd like to see them move something inconsequential (Borchard?) for Corey Patterson, who despite all his other problems, is only 26.
   34. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: December 14, 2005 at 11:24 PM (#1777623)
I'm getting extremely excited for 2006. And, KW isn't even done yet...

One thing that I hadn't really considered is the PR value to all this activity. The biggest thing to avoid this winter was the appearance of a Florida-style dismantling, or an appearance that the club was resting on its laurels.

Instead of that, the White Sox continue to make news this winter. Whether or not the Thome or Vazquez or future trades work out in the long run, they're going to sell a bunch of tickets for 2006.
   35. 1k5v3L Posted: December 14, 2005 at 11:42 PM (#1777649)
KW is definitely a man with man balls. Gotta give him credit.

Fwiw, Rosenthal just posted a piece on the Sox, entitled:

GM giving White Sox another shot at title

Link it up, Vince, we haven't had a White Sox thread in a while :)
   36. Shalimar Posted: December 15, 2005 at 01:31 AM (#1777785)
I hate the headline "Such-and-such is traded for such-and-such and a prospect." Quite often, the prospect is the best player received in return, but sportswriters act like prospects are generic people that are all the same value as each other.

There's a 9-question reader poll about this trade up on ESPN.com now. One of the questions is "Who will be Arizona's top starting pitcher in 2006", from which I gather that they consider the trade to be Vazquez for Hernandez and 2 throw-ins. Probably quite a few sportswriters do think of prospects as generic people.

On a side note, 26.5% said the best pitcher will be Russ Ortiz, which I think says alot about the visitors of that website. And the writers for that matter. It never would have occurred to me to even ask that question since Webb is so much better than their other starters. He only has 51.6% of the vote so far.
   37. 1k5v3L Posted: December 15, 2005 at 01:42 AM (#1777796)
For what it's worth, rotoamerica has come up with its top 100 prospects for 2006. The top 25 are free, the remaining 75 require a subscription.

http://www.rotoamerica.com/milb/top100.asp

Interestingly, Chris Young is the highest ranked White Sox player (former now, of course) at #11. Fwiw, Drew is at #8, Quentin at #18, and Jackson at #20.

Also interestingly, Young is the only CHA prospect in the top 25 there. Young, along with Drew, Quentin, Jackson and Justin Upton would give AZ 5 in the top 25.

Not bad, not bad at all...
   38. Stately, Plump Buck Mulligan Posted: December 15, 2005 at 01:54 AM (#1777814)
I wonder what Williams offered Contreras and Garland in terms of contract extensions. Anybody have thoughts about what would be fair? Would you be willing to pay either or both of them 3 or 4 years at $9 million per year? Or go to $10 million per year? Or is the market now even higher than that?
   39. Don Guillote (The Cheat) Posted: December 15, 2005 at 02:24 AM (#1777855)
I've heard Garland was offered 3/24; which given the market, his age, and past performance relative to Burnett, he would be crazy to accept. With another above average season, I can see somebody throwing 6/$66M at him next year.

Contreras has been offered "a similar deal," though I've never seen any figures. Because of his age, past performance, etc., the 3/24 figure seems like a much more realistic offer here. It will be interested in his reaction to El Duque being traded, as that too could affect his decision. -- My gut tells me he is more likely to stay with the Sox out of Loyalty, however. He was quoted in the playoffs as saying he was very grateful to the Sox for giving him a second chance.
   40. 1k5v3L Posted: December 15, 2005 at 03:42 AM (#1777943)
From John Manuel's (BA) ESPN chat today:

Rodney (Minneapolis, MN): I'm looking at the BA top 10 rankings and noticed that Brian Anderson is ranked higher than Chris Young for the ChiSox. While I realize Young has been traded, what's the logic there? Young seems to have equal speed/plate discipline, but more power from the raw stats. Is it simply because Anderson is closer to the majors at a similar age?

John Manuel: Rodney, those are last year's rankings, that's the logic. Young hadn't played above low Class A coming into 2005. He made one of the more significant jumps of any prospect I can think of in '05 (Brandon Wood made the biggest jump). Young still drew some walks, added power, stole bases and played Mike Cameron-like defense in his first stab at Double-A. He WAS the White Sox' top prospect coming out of 2005, but wow, the OF in Arizona is crowded. Luckily for Young, he can play CF and play it well, and that spot is open in AZ now. I'm not sure he's ready for the big leagues right now, but no one is in his way in CF.
   41. shoewizard Posted: December 15, 2005 at 04:41 AM (#1778002)
I mentioned it in the other thread, but the money is 4 million total, not 8. USA today has it wrong.
   42. stealfirstbase Posted: December 15, 2005 at 05:10 AM (#1778024)
I mentioned it in the other thread, but the money is 4 million total, not 8. USA today has it wrong.

Dangnabbit. Well, that's not quite as good. Again, Kenny targets the right guy, and overpays to get him.

I'm tremendously excited about next year, but I can't help but wonder why we're still playing Joe Crede at third base? We've upgraded plenty of places, sacrificed the greater part of our lefty pitching and outfield depth, and yet we couldn't find time to upgrade at third? Or left? We haven't even got a fourth outfielder.

I'm excited, because we have players who can absolutely bust out in 2006: Jim Thome, Javier Vazquez (with a defense behind him), McCarthy. I'm psyched, but I'm dreading 2008. That might be rough.
   43. SuperGrover Posted: December 15, 2005 at 06:03 AM (#1778055)
I'd hesitate to trade Rowand for Garland even-up. Gonzalez would make it a slam dunk.

Well, presonally, I agree. However, do you really think the majority of GMs feel the same? I guess we'll see.
   44. The Kentucky Gentleman, Mark Edward Posted: December 15, 2005 at 06:11 AM (#1778065)
Sox current top ten prospects:
1. Brian Anderson
2. Brandon McCarthy
3. Ray Liotta
4. Ryan Sweeney
5. Casey Rogowski
6. Josh Fields 3B
7. Lance Broadway
8. Francisco Hernandez
9. Jerry Owens
10. Robert Valido

Honorable mentions to Sean Tracey, Arnie Munoz, Jeff Bajenaru, and Charlie Haeger (just because he's a knuckleballer).
Sean Tracey
   45. My guest will be Jermaine Allensworth Posted: December 15, 2005 at 06:11 AM (#1778066)
Crede's one of those guys that could bust out, too. He wasn't just hot in the playoffs -- he put up a 1.178 OPS in the last 18 games of the regular season. I wonder if the time off from the wrist injury helped him figure out how to shorten his swing or something.

I think he's worth another look, especially considering his excellent defense. Batting a guy like him eighth is an asset, not a detriment.
   46. The Kentucky Gentleman, Mark Edward Posted: December 15, 2005 at 06:13 AM (#1778067)
Yeah, ignore that second random 'Sean Tracey.'

I'm fairly confident with 1-4 but have no idea how to rank 5-10.
   47. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: December 15, 2005 at 06:44 AM (#1778115)
3. Ray Liotta

Not only is he a good prospect, he's a goodfella.

< /rimshot>
   48. Don Guillote (The Cheat) Posted: December 15, 2005 at 03:05 PM (#1778290)
Mark, McCarthy used up his rookie status. I think that removes him from the prospect lists.
   49. smileyy Posted: December 15, 2005 at 06:25 PM (#1778594)
Those poll results don't really surprise me. Who follows the Diamondbacks? And Russ Ortiz pitched in a World Series a couple years ago. He _must_ be good.
   50. Eraser-X is emphatically dominating teh site!!! Posted: December 15, 2005 at 11:32 PM (#1779250)
As most people know, I think Young has a tremendously high ceiling--8-9 WARP as a ML CF. So I'm not going to like this trade. He was my one untouchable in the farm system. I wish they would have tried to include Sweeney or Owens and paid a little more of Vazquez's salary.

But the White Sox dumped some sunk cost, and got an extreme strong starting pitcher in a tough pitcher market for well below value.

This also adds another "Billy Beane and Kenny Williams are long-lost twins" data point. They both trade one of their top prospects for next year talent. Of course, I think Young is a better prospect than the A's guy.
   51. 1k5v3L Posted: December 15, 2005 at 11:45 PM (#1779269)
paid a little more of Vazquez's salary.

They are already paying $21m of his $21m salary, Eraser. According to a piece in the East Valley Tribune today,

White Sox get $3M in Vazquez deal

The D-Backs agreed to send about $3 million to the Chicago White Sox as part of the trade for Young, Orlando "El Duque" Hernandez and right-handed reliever Luis Vizcaino.

"We would have preferred not to" include money, "but the cash is minimal," D-Backs managing partner Ken Kendrick said. "The most critical element is Chris Young."

The D-Backs in essence will ship one of the three yearly $3 million payments due from the New York Yankees when Vazquez was acquired in the Randy Johnson deal last winter, and it is believed the money will not be paid until 2007.


This definitely makes the trade looks better from AZ POV; as el duque will not reach 205 IP for that extra $2m, the Dbacks are effectively going to pay him $4.5m, paying Viz $2m or so, and are sending $3m to the Sox in 07, for a total tab of just around $10m or so.

The Dbacks, iow, are saving themselves 14m on Javy's deal and got arguably CHA's top prospect in this trade. I'm duly impressed with Josh Byrnes right now.
   52. Eraser-X is emphatically dominating teh site!!! Posted: December 16, 2005 at 12:40 AM (#1779361)
levski: All the reports I've seen say that they are getting $5mil from the DB so that they are paying 19/24mil. If those reports are wrong, I'm sorry, I just thought that MLB.com had the numbers right.

Either way, I think this is a good trade for the D-Backs. For the Sox, I think it is great for 2005 and probably 2006, but beyond that, they morgaged a part of their future in trading their one prospect who appeared to have super-star potential.
   53. 1k5v3L Posted: December 16, 2005 at 12:45 AM (#1779366)
I know, eraser. Rosenthal wrote 5m, mlb quoted some CHA papers and also wrote 5m. USA today went as far as saying $8m. I tend to believe the EV trib article because that info came directly from Kendrick, and he should know as he's footing the bill.

I think Anderson, Owens, and Sweeney give the Sox some depth in the OF. The Dbacks badly needed a true CF prospect, and Milledge and Young were probably the only two true CF guys in the minors who conceivably could've been traded for Javy Vazquez.

This also allows the Dbacks to leave Justin Upton at SS when they sign him, instead of trying him in CF, and letting him duke out the SS position with Drew down the road. The Sox could still get something very valuable for Garland, for example.
   54. wealz Posted: December 16, 2005 at 05:06 AM (#1779677)
Either way, I think this is a good trade for the D-Backs. For the Sox, I think it is great for 2005 and probably 2006, but beyond that, they morgaged a part of their future in trading their one prospect who appeared to have super-star potential.


Think about what the Sox could get in return for Buehrle, Garcia, Contreras, and Vazquez if they have to rebuild between now and the trade deadline in 2007 and they'd still have McCarthy as a nice building block for the new staff. This is in addition to what they get for Garland who I think will be gone before spring training.
   55. Dr. Vaux Posted: December 16, 2005 at 05:12 AM (#1779687)
Not necessarily that much if Contreras and Garcia regress to places they've been at before and Vazquez keeps giving up homers at his career rate.
   56. wealz Posted: December 16, 2005 at 05:46 AM (#1779709)
Even if they have subpar years next year, Contreras (if signed to an extension) and especially Garcia will not be far enough removed from being solid pitchers to diminish their trade value all that much, imo.

Vazquez trade value will take the biggest hit with a bad year. I think Cooper & Ozzie though will get his career back on the right track.
   57. Dr. Vaux Posted: December 16, 2005 at 05:53 AM (#1779717)
You're probably right about Contreras and Garcia--after all, look at Vazquez. Then, too, Garcia at least was about average when he was "bad," though Safeco kept his ERA from getting high enough for GMs to notice. They've finally trained themselves that 4.50 is a good ERA, and now it's not 1996 anymore (knocks on wood, throws salt over shoulder).
   58. Zac Schmitt Posted: December 16, 2005 at 07:51 PM (#1780458)
nice name for the url, by the way.
   59. no neck Posted: December 16, 2005 at 11:02 PM (#1780834)
Kenny gets Vazquez for 2 years at $7 million per and then flips Garland for prospects.

Solid move.
   60. Dr. Vaux Posted: December 17, 2005 at 01:08 AM (#1780969)
It's $4 million total coming over, not $4 million per year.
   61. 1k5v3L Posted: December 17, 2005 at 01:15 AM (#1780977)
I thought it was $3m coming? 3m, 4m, same difference. Half a reliever.
   62. 1k5v3L Posted: December 21, 2005 at 01:21 AM (#1787302)
D-Backs complete deal with White Sox


El Duque passed his physical. Assuming he still breathes in August, he'll be a Met then.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
JPWF13
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.6943 seconds
47 querie(s) executed