The deal that sent Atlanta Braves closer Rafael Soriano to the Tampa Bay Rays for reliever Jesse Chavez is now official. The Braves were forced to deal Soriano after he accepted arbitration and would have cost the Braves too much money next year. In return they get a serviceable bullpen arm. Here is what Frank Wren had to say about Chavez:
"We are excited to add another power arm to the middle of our bullpen," Braves Executive Vice President and General Manager Frank Wren said.
I think they're just excited to get rid of Soriano after he surprised them by accepting arbitration.
The Atlanta bullpen now looks like this: Billy Wagner slots as the closer, with Takashi Saito setting him up. Peter Moylan and Kris Medlen will be the early innings guys from the right side with Eric O'Flaherty serving as the early innings LOOGY. Jesse Chavez slots as the sixth guy in the pen with one open slot to be determined in spring training. That's a pretty solid pen and one that the Braves can be proud of and hopefully have confidence in.
0 recs | 109 comments
Well
I’m kinda warming to this trade given the position that Soriano put us in by accepting arbitration.
I’m not entirely sure which position that was, though. Was it a.) fooked us running, or b.) bent us over a barrel and ran it up in use nice and slow? Thoughts?
Chopaholic - December 11, 2009
I’m gonna go with the barrel because it took so long for this decision to come.
jack dein - December 11, 2009
This bullpen is very full already, with Acosta, Proctor, Logan, and possibly others (Jo-Jo?) fighting for the last bullpen spot.
Does someone know if Chavez has options left? If he does, I wouldn’t be surprised if they have him start in Gwinett.
Yakker - December 11, 2009
That’s a sorry list of relievers for the last spot. I think I read somewhere that Chavez does have options but he’s got to be better than that drek and should make the roster barring a terrible spring training.
redwards95 - December 11, 2009
Unclear. Chavez could be dreck too, for all we know. Personally, keeping Reyes up as a possible swingman might be nice, although he would probably not be necessary until late April.
Yakker - December 11, 2009
He should have options. That could have been some of the flexibility the Braves wanted with him. My pick for the last spot is Luis Valdez. But we’ve got some good backups in the minors with Hyde, Lyman, Marek (if he bounces back), Logan (unless he’s out of options), and Abreu… and I suppose Acosta too.
gondeee - December 11, 2009
I think Logan’s gotta be trade bait. With Wagner and EOF, Logan’s not really needed. And as noted below he’s due for a raise, so he could be one of the odd men out.
Yakker - December 11, 2009
Logan may be non-tendered...
but if Chavez is on the ticket, I’d expect the last spot to be a lefty. Wags is lefty, but as a closer that doesn’t mean the same as O’Flaherty. I’d like another lefty so that we have a second choice from that side in non-9th situations.
And Chavez is a power arm? Really? His K/9 #s last year seem to disagree.
Mr. Sanchez - December 11, 2009
He was in the minors and in 2008, though it was only 15 games. I think Chavez has some decent potential. This trade has definitely grown on me since I first heard about it.
acie4mvp - December 11, 2009
Logan is indeed out of options.
MichaelProcton - December 17, 2009
Some of the idiot fans who write in to the AJC blogs are pissed about this deal, but they just don’t get it. The Braves could have not offered arbitration to Soriano and been guaranteed that he would leave – for absolutely nothing. Instead they gambled that they could get some draft picks for him and they lost that gamble. Instead of being stuck with an expensive pitcher they didn’t want, they got rid of him for maybe a useful arm. Yes for sure Chavez is not as good as Soriano, but at least Soriano is gone and the money is freed up.
If there is any lesson to learn from this, it’s that GMs are very poor prognosticators of the free agent market.
Zontar - December 11, 2009
Question
Isnt Boone Logan due for an arbitration raise?
bravesguy311 - December 11, 2009
Logan may also be due...
…for a non-tender if that is the case.
cavebird - December 11, 2009
Yep.
Yakker - December 11, 2009
Chavez does much better against lefties so you could consider him a second LOOGY.
TradeAndruw - December 11, 2009
Chavez is a power pitcher
He throws 94-98 on his fastball. He also has a plus plus change. I’m fairly convinced he will suprised alot of people this year with his effectiveness.
Anyone remember when he struck out the side against is on June 8th?. The kid has talent and we should be excited about him.
bbxxj - December 11, 2009 via mobile
Yep.
Chief Noc-A-Homa - December 11, 2009
Jon Heyman of SI.com has his winners and losers of the winter meetings post up. He names the Braves as a winner because they moved Soriano within 24 hours and that the price of pitching seems high and that Lowe’s $45M over 3 years looks reasonable. He says that if they could move $35-$40M of it they could make a run at Bay or Holliday.
jack dein - December 11, 2009
So I’m guessing that we all oughta just sit back, pop some popcorn, and wait for the market to come around to the realization that Lowe (a) ain’t such a bad option; and (b) ain’t such a bad option at $45mill for 3 years. I expect that might take us into January, but… if Lackey wants to get demanding, then somebody might get sick of the delays and call Frank.
carpengui - December 11, 2009
I’d rather have Cameron than Bay. I really hope we get either Holliday or Cameron
acie4mvp - December 11, 2009
ESTE or this
Swo12bv - December 11, 2009
+1
Very good point. Bay and Cameron are only marginally different in ability (Bay is better offensively but far worse defensively) and Bay will require far more money and years. Holliday would be great, but I still doubt it—-I get the feeling that the Red Sox will eventually offer too much for us to match.
cavebird - December 11, 2009
Clarification
/credibility
royhobbs - December 11, 2009
Heyman's credibility is torched...
…by calling the Diamonbacks winners at the winter meetings because of the trade with the Yankees and Tigers.
cavebird - December 11, 2009
He does mention that they win short term, but yeah that might’ve bumped him down a little.
acie4mvp - December 11, 2009
I don’t think that they came out that bad. Scherzer is good but has a deliver that could lead to injuries and he’s been inconsistent. Jackson is a solid 2 or 3 starter. If Sherzer and Schlareth go on to have to good careers then they lose but atleast for awhile they came out okay.
jack dein - December 11, 2009
DBack fans out here in arizona are pissed.
i thought it was a horrible trade for them.
Scott Coleman - December 11, 2009 via mobile
They should realize that you can’t get good players without giving up good players.
jack dein - December 11, 2009
I don't think they got good players.
They gave up two live arms, a (at least nominally) starter with huge upside and a reliever with big upside. They got Kennedy who has a low ceiling and it is questionable whether he is more than a AAAA player. They also got Jackson who had peripherals last year that scream fluke season. I think they got by far the worst end of that deal. If you think that Jackson is a solid 2 or 3, then you probably think the deal was not bad for them. If you think that Scherzer is significantly better than Jackson, as I do, they got the shaft.
cavebird - December 11, 2009
As with all trades they can’t be graded that well when there made, but I think for the 2010 season at least this will be okay for the Diamondbacks. Assuming that Webb is healthy Jackson will be the 3rd starter on that team. Kennedy will probably be the 4th or 5th starter and he’ll only be 25 at the start of next season, plus while his major league stats haven’t been good he’s only made 12 starts. Jackson is only 26 and has been steadily improving.
No matter what anybody says I’m still not sold on Scherzer. He’s got a jerky deliver that has injury written all over it. The guy that could be a big loss is Schlereth. He has closer written all over him. He will be a big loss for them.
I thought it when the trade was made and nothing I’ve seen or heard will change my I think the Yankees will be disappointed with Granderson. With the exception of HR’s his numbers have went down the last 3 years. He’ll probably hit 30 HR’s in that ballpark but he’ll also K 130 times.
jack dein - December 11, 2009
I just don't buy it...
…your post doesn’t mention Jackson’s peripherals or Granderson’s defense. That makes me skeptical. Those are two huge issues you don’t acknowledge.
cavebird - December 11, 2009
I guess we’ll agree to disagree. It doesn’t matter anyway because we won’t be able to grade this trade for a few years anyway.
jack dein - December 11, 2009
Fair enough.
But it will be two years—that’s all Jackson has before free agency.
cavebird - December 11, 2009
Except they didnt' really get good players.
MichaelProcton - December 17, 2009
thanks, jh
Smoltz's Beard - December 12, 2009
This deal and our pen . . .
This deal gets Soriano what he wants, the Braves what we want, and in the end we get another young arm for the tail end of the pen. Moylan, Medlin, and Chavez after Billy and Saito will be solid and the front office will find another one to fill in tht last BP spot. TB signed Soriano for more than we got Wags for. So I feel this is a good move totally and feel better about the eighth and ninth of games next year!
GeneN - December 11, 2009
Any guess as to where Gonzo ends up?
TradeAndruw - December 11, 2009
Pirates
Bmacbandwagon - December 11, 2009
booooooo
i hope the yankees.
Mr. Sanchez - December 11, 2009
Which team has the 16th pick?
acie4mvp - December 11, 2009
White Sox
i think
apoxonbothyourhouses - December 12, 2009
no, the Cubs
who COULD use Gonzo.
apoxonbothyourhouses - December 12, 2009
That would be awesome
acie4mvp - December 12, 2009
Chavez for Soriano
The fact is we could and should have gotten more for Soriano. I see no need to pull the trigger so soon. Why not let things play out a bit. There are simply not many closers of Soriano’s ability out there and 6.5 per is reasonable. Shame on you Frank Wren. The last thing we need is another arm. What about left field, first base and back up for second base?
Bravo7 - December 11, 2009
I agree to some degree. I would have liked to see a package deal including KJ explored, but at the same time, I can rest easier knowing we don’t have a 20M dollar bullpen
Bmacbandwagon - December 11, 2009
Why in the hell
Is Craig Counsell your avatar?
royhobbs - December 11, 2009
How can you tell it’s Counsell?
TradeAndruw - December 11, 2009
Nobody else has a stance like that
eaheckman10 - December 11, 2009
it’s the most gawd awful stance ever. Kinda like the Happy Gilmore swing of baseball.
Sparhawk - December 11, 2009
How can you not?
Smoltz's Beard - December 12, 2009
How do you know we could have gotten more?
Are you buddy buddy with some of the GMs around the league?
Skyagusta - December 11, 2009
Hmm I guess we could have done worse
I do agree with Bravo7 we did seem to jump the gun a little bit and basically give one of the better closers (should he have been on the free agent market) away for a middle relief guy to use in our 5th and 6th innings this season.
Chavez is decent but needs some seasoning and basically some confidence in his pitches again plus remember when the Braves signed Eric O’Flaherty off the scrap heep from the Mariners ? Everyone was scratching their heads then as well so I believe we may have scored another good reliever just not a great one and we did give Soriano away for to little but that is just my two cents.
Wren is going to make us the NL East champs in 2010 wait and see.
Holty_Panthers_Fan - December 11, 2009
It's called
Market saturation. Moving Soriano this fast provided a return There are still a lot of relief options left on the FA market, so Atlanta had to move him quickly.
JFP - December 11, 2009
when demand is still high, if they wait the teams that have a need for relievers will pick thier guy out of the lot of numerous options.
Swo12bv - December 11, 2009
And while Soriano was one of the best options...
…you can’t make other teams intelligent. If Houston had offered Soriano 3 years/$15 million he might have taken it, and if not, he would have taken 3 years/$18 million. Instead they didn’t really think about it and then paid Brandon Lyon that money, which is just stupid. You can’t make them smarter. What really sucks is that the Astros stole Lyon from the Phillies. I would have liked to see him in the Phillies pen this year.
cavebird - December 11, 2009
Then again...
Lyon certainly has some durability over Soriano. Since ‘02 when Sori debuted, Lyon’s got almost 100 games and 99 IP on Soriano. Health is a skill that must be accounted for.
MichaelProcton - December 17, 2009
I would like to point out
That Scott Proctor will also be in the bullpen mix next year.
BravesWin - December 11, 2009
But maybe not until May or June. Still, yes, he will.
cbwilk - December 12, 2009
Part of me feels like
they would have been better off waiting and giving Soriano 7Mil rather than Wagner…guess we’ll see.
Hizilla - December 11, 2009
Fire Wren!
acie4mvp - December 11, 2009
Chavez may do well in this situation
He doesn’t have too much pressure, like being the eighth inning guy would put on him. He’s got some great relievers to learn from, and a good coaching staff to develop him.
tmc5837 - December 11, 2009
agree with tmc
chavez seems to have the stuff to excel if instructed and used correctly.
really little to lose as FW did not feel he had the luxury of time to have
soriano’s salary on the books.
as to others who will either be the last guy chosen for the pen or are close to
seeing time at the show: valdez, kimbrel, lyman, further down the road
gearrin., hyde, plus several others.
why is carl crawford’s name not mentioned as a solid hitting lead off guy,
despite his batting from the port side.
sealift67 - December 11, 2009
Can someone explain to me
why FW didn’t just trade Soriano for Pujols? Doesn’t he know we need a bat?
Skyagusta - December 11, 2009
In what alternate universe is this possible?
Tonley - December 11, 2009
an infinite amount of alternate universes….if you need me to explain i happily will
Swo12bv - December 11, 2009
the Fringe-syndrome
happens
apoxonbothyourhouses - December 12, 2009
i am unaware of what you speak. at least in this universe i am unaware.
Swo12bv - December 12, 2009
LOL
Smoltz's Beard - December 12, 2009
in the rosterbation zone, all things are possible.
fandave - December 11, 2009
it was sarcasm
directed at all the haters
Skyagusta - December 11, 2009
Sarcasm???
What the heck language you speakin’
Trek - December 11, 2009
Pujols is making more...
the Cards would need to throw in some cash, or maybe Cory Rasmus.
Mr. Sanchez - December 11, 2009
colby rasmus…we already have cory rasmus we dont need him again
Swo12bv - December 11, 2009
Would be cool to see those guys together though.
cbwilk - December 12, 2009
damn it...
knew I should have just said “the other rasmus”
Mr. Sanchez - December 12, 2009
its still a head scratcher
to know we could got a cheap productive bat at the least for Soriano. Why should we settle on a middle reief arm, when we are stacked there in the majors and AAA. I call this dropping the ball. I realize we can sit back relax and some one will pick up Lowe, but at that point he still isnt gonna bring as much as Soriano could have brought. We through out our ace of spades to trump a 5 of clubs. Bad move.
bravesrbaseball - December 11, 2009
we couldn't have gotten a cheap productive bat for Soriano
The Braves had ZERO leverage in this matter. None. At all. Everyone involved knew the Braves were put in a tough spot when Soriano accepted arbitration and only one team was interested in acquiring him. The Rays, Braves, and Soriano’s camp all knew that the Braves had to get rid of his salary and getting possibly a useful bullpen piece is as good as we could have expected. No one was going to give up a useful bat because this is essentially a free agent signing for the Rays.
was385 - December 11, 2009
It's not zero leverage
When you’re fielding calls from six different teams. Two of those dropped out, but you still had four teams with which to bargain.
Bronn - December 11, 2009
it was between the astros and rays
and the astros dropped out when they got lindstrom. I don’t care how many calls you field, there were two serious contenders and one at the end. There’s a reason this is how much he got in return. Frank Wren isn’t an idiot.
was385 - December 12, 2009
Orioles and Angels were involved
I don’t know what the discussions were like with those teams, but we know they were interested, and at least potentially could have covered the money as well.
I certainly didn’t call Frank Wren an idiot, but the Rays didn’t have him nailed to the floor, either. There probably WERE other options. I don’t know what they were, but I’m not going to assume they didn’t exist just because this is the trade that was made.
Bronn - December 12, 2009
all I'm saying
Is that there were reports before the trade happened that the Rays and Astros were the only ones seriously involved and once the Stros acquired Lindstrom, they were out. It wasn’t exactly a national secret that at the end, the Rays were the only team involved. I know you’re frustrated, but 7 million was already a lot for a reliever, no team was going to give up a good piece plus 7 million.
was385 - December 12, 2009
It’s entirely possible that we were asking for more, and that’s what caused the other teams to drop out.
If everyone folds you don’t get much of a bidding war.
Lennox - December 12, 2009
All of this is speculation. In reality, none of us can know what actually happened, what teams were in on it, etc.; all we really know is what was reported about it, which isn’t gospel, it’s just rumor.
cbwilk - December 12, 2009
the number one known fact in reality was Soriano had veto power over any trade whatsoever, which could have disqualified many teams that might have otherwise been interested.
fandave - December 12, 2009
I was wondering about that. Does he have the power to veto any trade? Or once he declared that he wanted to be traded, could he be traded anywhere?
acie4mvp - December 12, 2009
my understanding is he had to approve any specific trade before it could be finalized – which effectively means he had a veto power.
fandave - December 13, 2009
it's called
Who’s going to pay ALL the money.
I’m sure we could have gotten a very good bat for Soriano. We would have had to pay most of his salary. And you don’t pay most of the salary of a salary dump.
Unless you’re the Red Sox and the player is Mike Lowell (that trade makes little sense to me). I know Beltre signing and Ramirez and blah blah blah…but to pay 9 million of his salary this year? weird.
apoxonbothyourhouses - December 12, 2009
im still trying to figure that one out, especially fter Max’s 09… but mayeb they know soemthing we don’t
Swo12bv - December 12, 2009
I don't know that they were looking for a salary dump overall..
Just a bullpen salary dump. I’m sure they would have been willing to pay a market-value salary to a hitter if he was offered. I just doubt he was.
MichaelProcton - December 17, 2009
One word.
Ew.
nick9314 - December 11, 2009
That pretty much sums it up.
Sparhawk - December 11, 2009
hmmm
I guess I’m the only one that would like to see Medlen continue to develop as a starter and have the rest of the pen filled out with a couple more arms. Calero is still an option plus I’m sure we will see some non tenders that would be enticing.
drumzalicious - December 12, 2009 via mobile
No, I’ve thought Medlen make a very good starter for years. I’d absolutely be in favor of sending him down to continue developing that way and simply signing an extra arm for the bullpen. I’d also be just as fine having him work in the bullpen in 2010 and move into the closer’s role by 2011, which seems to be the way the Braves are leaning.
Yakker - December 12, 2009
To me, he’s a bullpen guy. He’s got a live arm and great stuff but with his size I just don’t trust him lasting as a starter over a full season.
cbwilk - December 12, 2009
Pedro, Oswalt, and Tiny Tim Lincecum say hi.
I’ve never bought the small pitcher = bullpen thing.
Yakker - December 12, 2009
i think they are the exceptions that prove the rule…. and lincecum doenst prove anything.. he is a product of his exceptionally weird and effective delivery (not to take anythign away from him). Pedro is the best pitcher this world may have ever seen (at the very least he provided the best pitching season ever…ever, this fact is not up for dispute). Oswalt i guess would be a decent comp… but i trust the small guy thoery a little bit, its not a rule to live by, like the rule that states u dont trade for a TX player who put up a career year in a contract seasons, but its a solid guideline to follow
Swo12bv - December 12, 2009
This. Three elves out of the hundreds of midgets doesn’t disprove anything.
cbwilk - December 13, 2009
I think there’s an inherent bias in baseball against little SPs. It means a little guy often gets pushed to the bullpen before he even gets a chance to prove he can hold up over a whole season of starting. Sure, there aren’t tons of examples, but there are enough.
Yakker - December 13, 2009
Best pitching season ever ... not up for dispute?!
gimme a break.
if you’re going to make such a bold assertion, please back it up.
since I couldn’t believe this, I went out and did 5 minutes of research, and decided Greg Maddox’s 1995 season, Bob Gibson’s 1968 and Sandy Koufax’s 1965 all favorably compare to Pedro’s best, which seems to me as likely 2000. of course, I didn’t even look at Spann, Feller, and dozens of other HOFers’ careers.
fandave - December 13, 2009
Nothin makes me happier than someone taking the bait on this one
use ERA+ (since i dont know if you are familiar with this stat or not, ill explain it) which measures an ERA against the league avg ERA for that year and then adjusts it for park ratings.
Greg Maddux’s 1995 was amazing, GIbson’s 68 was stupendous. but neither compared to Pedro’s 2000. Going by adjusted ERA + Pedro’s 2000 was 194 % better than the avg pitcher.
Since i think the only season’s that are comparable are GIbson’s, Pedro’s and to a much lesser extent Koufax’s 65 season (also bc u brought these up) those are the ones we’ll compare.
GIbson and Koufax both have better FIPs than Pedro (Pedro barely beats Maddux). But there’s a theme i will introduce that will be recurring, Pedro did it in the most prolific offensive era in baseball era, Koufax and GIbson did it in an era dominated by pitchers. Additionally, Pedro pitched in Fenway, a hitters park, whereas Koufax played in Dodger Stadium and GIbson played in St. Louis (their stadium name escapes me), both either neutral or pitchers parks depending on the era.
Koufax was the only one of the bunch to come close to Pedro’s ability to strike batters out and Pedro strikes out a batter more per 9 than him. Maddux as can be expected was the only one to have a better walk rate.
Pedro also had the lowest BAA by about 10 pts. (again remember pitchers park, and best offensive era in all of baseball)
Maddux’s WHIP was close, but still .06 off of Pedro’s mark.
to put it simply if you combined the best aspects of the other three pitchers best season… you might have a season that is equal Pedro’s
here is the list of best adjusted ERA+ of all time.. you’ll notice TIm Keefe at the top, just a quick fact apparently it took 8 balls to walk a guy back in 1880 (forgot where i read that, it may or may not be true, but regardless its interesting)… and it was 1880 it hardly counts.
adjusted ERA+
what’s even scarier, in 2000 he posted his highest HR/9 of his dominant stretch from 1999-2003, whihc means he could have been a little better that year (theoretically). So I say again, its undisputable there has never been a season like Pedro’s 2000. he should be inducted to the HoF solely for that season.
Swo12bv - December 14, 2009
DOB has a new article today on the trade:
fandave - December 12, 2009
He really does seem to have potential. So basically, when we had absolutely no leverage, we still got a guy with a big arm and some upside while gaining $7 million. I’ll take it.
acie4mvp - December 12, 2009
From what I’ve been reading, I’m starting to like Chavez more and more.
Smoltz's Beard - December 12, 2009
I never disliked Chavez...
it was more the opportunity cost, and the fact that we have several options for relief but not nearly as many among positional players, particularly 2B, 3B, SS, and CF.
Mr. Sanchez - December 13, 2009
I agree completely about the needs elsewhere, but as I’ve seen others mention to you I’m sure if the options were available Wren would have considered them.
Now if you want to question whether or not we should of sat on Soriano for longer, that certainly is a valid question.
Smoltz's Beard - December 14, 2009
Considering Houston signing Lyon to 3 yrs/$15m...
I don’t see how they weren’t involved leaving the Rays as the only contender as some say.
And like you, the more I see about Chavez’s stuff, the more I like. But then, his #s in the minor leagues don’t exactly reflect that great stuff people keep talking about either.
Mr. Sanchez - December 14, 2009
But there were question marks about Soriano.
All we think about is how great he pitches when he’s on. But he’s also got red flags in his injury history, overuse, and cost. I just don’t think people were jumping on Soriano.
MichaelProcton - December 17, 2009
Grudgingly
This.
Yakker - December 13, 2009
Reply fail to SB
Yakker - December 13, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Talking Chop to post a comment.