Teixeira traded to Atlanta

Good! What Texas was rumored to want from Boston (Lester and Ellsbury) for Teixeira was crazy.

posted by jerseygirl at 02:10 PM - reply - flag:

Wow. This trade makes a lot of sense in the current market, for sure. As the article details, the Braves just filled a bunch of holes with just two players. But, man, if I'm a Rangers fan I am so excited today. They just grabbed the two best prospects from an organization that routinely produces major-league-ready guys, and they are top prospects at two of the most hard-to-find positions going. Saltamalachichachi is the real deal -- their next Pudge. Both organizations have a lot to be excited about right now.

posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 02:35 PM - reply - flag:

Griffey II traded for Pudge III. This trade will go down in history.

posted by Joe188 at 02:53 PM - reply - flag:

From an Atlanta perspective, it's tough watching Saltalamacchia go, but they got great value for him. Will Texeira's bat be enough to guide the Braves to the playoffs though? I'd suspect, Andruw Jones would have to heat up a little bit for them to have the chance regardless of the trade. On another note, this is a nice move to placate many Braves fans who are nervous about the new ownership regime.

posted by trox at 02:57 PM - reply - flag:

They just grabbed the two best prospects from an organization that routinely produces major-league-ready guys, and they are top prospects at two of the most hard-to-find positions going. Just hope that in 5 years, the same thing doesn't happens where Salty is traded for another group of great prospects. Rinse and repeat. It doesn't help if you always trade away your best players.

posted by jmd82 at 03:21 PM - reply - flag:

As Sousepaw suggests, I think this is a win-win trade. Saltalamacchia's main value is as a catcher -- he projects to be an average or slightly below average catcher with the glove but well above average with the bat. He does not deliver that much value (relatively speaking) as a 1B, which is the other position at which he can play. With McCann locked in to a multi-year deal, it made sense for the Braves to make Saltalamacchia the centerpiece of a trade for an All Star, Gold Glove first baseman. So the Rangers get their catcher of the future (although I think the Pudge comparisons don't extend to defense -- considering Salty threw out less than 30% of runners in the minors) and the Braves get a first baseman for their NL East/Wild Card push and next year, with a potential for years after that if Teixeira would be willing to take a hometown discount of sorts (he went to college at Georgia Tech) and sign long-term with the Braves. I personally think Teixeira will end up in his true hometown, Baltimore, long-term. But who knows.

posted by holden at 03:38 PM - reply - flag:

A great nugget from Saltalamacchia's wikipedia page: "He is married to his high school teacher, Ashley Saltalamacchia."

posted by holden at 03:53 PM - reply - flag:

I'd rather be the Texas with this one. I do like Texeira, but I just think this one scores more points for the Rangers in the future. So does this mean back to off the bench strike outs for Julio Franco or do they cut him loose again?

posted by melcarek69 at 04:21 PM - reply - flag:

holden, if he found a woman with the same last name, I say he's gotta marry her, no matter who she is. Unless it were his sister, I suppose.

posted by yerfatma at 04:26 PM - reply - flag:

holden, if he found a woman with the same last name, I say he's gotta marry her, no matter who she is. Unless it were his sister, I suppose. Shouldn't you be chiming in right about now over at the Garnett trade thread, smartass? (Actually, the blame goes to the poor drafting of the wikipedia commons, so i don't really take that personally.) In other news, apparently Salty's teacher/wife is 14 years his senior. Salty dog.

posted by holden at 04:33 PM - reply - flag:

"He is married to his high school teacher, Ashley Saltalamacchia." And I suppose she makes him do it over and over until he gets it right. To be serious, this is a very good trade for both teams. Atlanta might have to pony up some dough shortly to keep Texeira beyond the end of the '08 season. Of course, they might not want to do that, and just rent him for 2 playoff runs. Saltalamacchia might improve defensively, but his offense makes up in large part for any deficiencies. I know nothing about his ability to handle pitchers or call a game. Does this mean that Bobby Cox, or whomever he designates, will end up calling the pitches from the dugout?

posted by Howard_T at 05:32 PM - reply - flag:

As a resident of North Texas, I am thrilled with this trade. The Rangers were going nowhere anytime soon, and I think this is as much as they could ever have hoped to get for Teixeiria. FYI, I just read a site that said he married a woman that did teach at his school, but that she never had him in one of her classes. She's in her 30's, he's 22...she taught phy ed. Here's hoping she was hotter than any of the female gym teachers from my high school!

posted by dviking at 05:42 PM - reply - flag:

The Rangers' never-ending search for a catcher. Thank goodness they dumped Pudge several years ago because he was over the hill. But seriously, I think they probably try to convert Salty to a first baseman. Less stress on the legs could mean better offensive numbers.

posted by graymatters at 06:18 PM - reply - flag:

i'm a resident of the metroplex here in north Tex. been a Ranger fan for years...so you know my pain...but this needed to be done.Teixeira is an awsome player...the Braves got a great one here...now they want to unload Sosa...do you think Michael Young would have signed a longterm contract if he saw this coming?...i think not...the Rangers will once again suck for the far future...bottom line...they cant sign great pitchers...so "GO" Braves!

posted by french-connection at 06:21 PM - reply - flag:

But seriously, I think they probably try to convert Salty to a first baseman. Less stress on the legs could mean better offensive numbers. Makes sense. It is much harder to find great offensive production at the catcher position than it is at the first base position however. That may prove to be a big factor when Texas decides where they want him to play.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 08:42 PM - reply - flag:

French is right.The Rangers consistently make bad trades. When they traded Sosa he was basically an unknown quantity.But Pudge,Soriano and Tex?My real problem with this is they get squat in return.Texas has always been a big stick no pitch team,but you gotta get something in return.What the Rangers get in return is "prospects"and a sweet bottom line.Rangers management has shit for brains. Lets get A Rod. Lets get a "quality" pitcher in Chan Ho Park. Please. They are still paying dearly on these contracts. I wish the Rangers well because they are likeable losers and I live here. However, they remind me of the (shudder) Lions.

posted by sickleguy at 09:10 PM - reply - flag:

Personally, I think the Braves traded Salty away because they were tired of sewing all those letters onto his jersey. Seriously, I'm not too sure this will take the Braves over the top in the NL East. The trade should solidify their offense, but they need pitching if they're going to seriously contend.

posted by NerfballPro at 10:57 PM - reply - flag:

Saltalamacchia might improve defensively, but his offense makes up in large part for any deficiencies. I know nothing about his ability to handle pitchers or call a game. Does this mean that Bobby Cox, or whomever he designates, will end up calling the pitches from the dugout? I didn't know Bobby Cox was included in the deal to Texas also...

posted by gloglu at 07:15 AM - reply - flag:

She's in her 30's, he's 22...she taught phy ed She's 37 and teaching Phys Ed. has kept her in good shape.

posted by BornIcon at 08:13 AM - reply - flag:

I'd be VERY worried about making a deal with Atlanta, where you get prospects back in return. They have a long history of dealing "big" prospects that turn out to be busts. Other than Jason Schmidt (who took a LONG time to get good) and Jermaine Dye, it's been pretty one-sided when dealing with Atlanta (see Marte, Andy).

posted by grum@work at 08:53 AM - reply - flag:

But seriously, I think they probably try to convert Salty to a first baseman. The Brave's offensive production at 1B this season is .211, 12 HR, 41 RBIs. If Salty had any value at 1B he's still be with the organization. In other news, apparently Salty's teacher/wife is 14 years his senior. Salty dog. I thought the purpose of being a professional baseball player was to date and marry women 14 years your junior?

posted by bdaddy at 09:39 AM - reply - flag:

1) Salty's wife wasn't his teacher. She is a bit older than he is, and it's a sexy story, but it's not quite as fun as people want to make it. 2) I'd be VERY worried about making a deal with Atlanta, where you get prospects back in return. Sure enough, the Braves org. isn't going to let themselves turn upside-down on a trade, but I think, at least from a Rangers point of view, you kind of have to look at this as a straight up Tex for Salty trade. The Rangers get rid of a former hero turned sourpuss with an expiring contract that they absolutely could/would not renew for a pretty damned good young prospect that's going to be plugged in immediately and is signed for the next five or six years. Losing Mahay is no biggie as he was probably the 5th or 6th option in the bullpen. Sure, he's a serviceable lefty and those are nice to have, but nobody's crying about his departure. The other three prospects seem to be just that. Andrus seems pretty good and may have some great upside, but he's awfully raw and very young. The pitchers? Well, we'll see, but the Rangers haven't been able to develop Volquez or Diamond all that well and they gave up on Danks. Personally, I just hope they use the money that they'll be saving from Teixeira's contract on a quality free-agent pitcher in the '09 season. I'm not near as wide-eyed fairy-tale optimistic about it as some local press, but I still think it was a pretty good trade, and certainly better than the Chris Young/Adrian Gonzalez for Otsuka and Eaton deal.

posted by Ufez Jones at 10:07 AM - reply - flag:

Sure, he's a serviceable lefty and those are nice to have, but nobody's crying about his departure. Are he, Damian Miller, Kevin Millar and Brendan Donnelly the last of the 1994 replacement players? It's weird so many of them came through Boston at some point.

posted by yerfatma at 10:18 AM - reply - flag:

although I think the Pudge comparisons don't extend to defense posted by holden at 3:38 PM CDT on July 30 My comparison to Pudge was solely as their first opportunity at a long-term mainstay catcher since Pudge left. Comparing anyone talentwise to Pudge is unfair. But seriously, I think they probably try to convert Salty to a first baseman. posted by graymatters at 6:18 PM CDT on July 30 If they do, this is no longer nearly as good a trade for the Rangers. A good part of the strength of the deal is getting a solid young prospect at a position of scarcity. do you think Michael Young would have signed a longterm contract if he saw this coming? posted by french-connection at 6:21 PM CDT on July 30 Looking at the staggering dropoff in Young's power numbers since they started testing for steroids (I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'), yes, I think Young would have taken any longterm contract he could find. What the Rangers get in return is "prospects"and a sweet bottom line.Rangers management has shit for brains. Lets get A Rod. posted by sickleguy at 9:10 PM CDT on July 30 So, you don't like it when they get prospects and you don't like it when they sign established stars. You've really got them wondering how to please you now. If you're going to complain about the Rangers it's got to be about their consistent inability to assemble a decent pitching staff. I thought this year would be their best rotation in years, but apparently I overvalued Millwood, Robinson Tejada (who I annually predict will break out) and Loe. Padilla is a very solid pitcher when he stays healthy. And, if you're going to complain about this trade, you could say that Texas threw away the opportunity to get young pitching instead of more offense, and I would definitely agree with you. I like getting catchers and shortstops, though. They're pretty hard to find. Losing Mahay is no biggie as he was probably the 5th or 6th option in the bullpen. posted by Ufez Jones at 10:07 AM CDT on July 31 This was a scenario where the loss of Mahay was far, far less than the gain on the other side. With Gonzalez on the DL and McBride gone to the Tigers, the Braves didn't have a lefty in their bullpen. Mahay fills a big hole. Jo-Jo Reyes is not the guy you want in that spot in a playoff run. Not this year. I'm surprised how little consideration Elvis Andrus is getting here. He's no small part of the package. He is a major prospect.

posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 11:25 AM - reply - flag:

Other than Jason Schmidt (who took a LONG time to get good) and Jermaine Dye, it's been pretty one-sided when dealing with Atlanta (see Marte, Andy). See also Meyer, Dan -- the Tim Hudson trade being one of only a few in which there is near universal sentiment that Billy Beane got the short end. Of course, he more than made up for it in the Mulder deal. (But let's not remind this Cardinal fan of that.) I'm surprised how little consideration Elvis Andrus is getting here. He's no small part of the package. He is a major prospect. Agreed. And Matt Harrison, if he's included in the deal (there's some question as to his health and it's not clear if he is going to be one of the two minor league pitchers included), makes a haul of the Braves top three prospects (according to Baseball America) for Teixeira. Of course, Salty is less risky than those two, because he's already shown he can contribute at the major league level. But you have to be loving the potential as a Rangers fan, particularly if the worst way of looking at the deal (assuming none of the others pan out) is 5.5 years of Salty for 1.5 years of Teixeira. In other news, looks like the Yankees got Wilson Betemit from the Dodgers for Scott Proctor, which I think is a steal for New York. Betemit's .231 average is not great, but he has a .359 OBP and .474 slugging -- and all of this is in only 154 at bats. I expect he would improve on the average with more consistent at bats. Definitely an upgrade over Miguel Cairo or whoever is Mr. Utilityman for the Yankees these days. And let's face it, Proctor's arm is due to fall off from overuse any day now.

posted by holden at 11:40 AM - reply - flag:

I am so upset about the Betemit/Proctor deal I can barely speak. Proctor is a horse with a great attitude. People have been expecting his arm to fall off for two years, but he still took the ball every time called. He had a few rough outings, but overall he was a solid inning-eater who made the rest of the bullpen better by taking on the lion's share when the starters were in a rut. Cairo is one of the few guys who has been consistently good all year at situational hitting. In my book you can hit .050, but if you get that guy on third home with less than two outs every time up you earn my undying respect. He strikes out once every five at bats in a bad year. Betemit strikes out in about every three in a good one. I take Cairo over Betemit as a utility guy in a heartbeat. I predict Betemit will absolutely kill the Yankees in many key spots this year. I am a sad, sad man today. I hate this deal.

posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 11:54 AM - reply - flag:

Wow, somebody pull TCS off the ledge. I would go into the details about why I think this is a good deal and why Betemit will be better in the long run than Cairo, but (a) you're the Yankees fan and I'm not, so I've gotta make allowances there, and (b) if I couldn't convince you that the Yankees were better off with A-Rod than late-career Scott Brosius, there's no convincing you of this.

posted by holden at 12:14 PM - reply - flag:

Did you ever see Scott Brosius make the bare-handed play coming down the line on a bunt? If you really had, you'd understand.

posted by yerfatma at 12:25 PM - reply - flag:

i wonder what this guy is gonna do now.

posted by goddam at 12:31 PM - reply - flag:

i wonder what this guy is gonna do now. Rename his blog Miguel Cairo's Ears? Or Joba Chamberlain's Ass? Or Bobby Abreu's Goofy Grin? Or Johnny Damon's Leering Mien? Yankees fans -- I read somewhere that Joba Chamberlain is going to be called up as a reliever. You think he gets Proctor's innings? Seems contrary to Torre's M.O. to trust a rookie with a key bullpen role, but I would guess based on pure stuff that Chamberlain might be the best fit for that role of the available options.

posted by holden at 12:43 PM - reply - flag:

You think he gets Proctor's innings? god i hope not. i'm not sure anyone could handle Proctor's innings. looks like any Gagne deal is dead and Farnsworth isn't going anywhere. so Joba may take Proctor's place as far as order in the pen (behind Vizcaino). but i would hope he doesn't become the workhorse of the group like Proctor was. they can't afford to fuck with his arm.

posted by goddam at 01:01 PM - reply - flag:

Rename his blog Miguel Cairo's Ears? Or Joba Chamberlain's Ass? Or Bobby Abreu's Goofy Grin? Or Johnny Damon's Leering Mien? Jason Giambi's Crazy Squirrelly Eyes. I hope JasonGiambisCrazySquirrellyEye s.com is available.

posted by jerseygirl at 01:13 PM - reply - flag:

Look. Am I good fodder for mocking? Definitely. Do I have leanings toward becoming that crazy, irrational Yankees fan? Yes. Do I let my emotions get the better of me at times? Certainly. And I concede that I only know what I see with my eyes. I'm not a numbers guy and I don't read Baseball Prospectus religiously. Cairo's numbers belie the contributions that I see him make. If you saw how inconsistently the Damons, Matsuis, Abreus and even the Jeters and A-Rods were having productive at bats, moving runners over and getting them in during close games this year, maybe you would appreciate as I do what a bonus it is to have Cairo in the lineup from time to time. He seems to almost never have an unproductive at bat. And nothing is less productive than a strikeout, which is, looking just at his numbers, what Betemit seems to bring plenty of. Yes, he's only 25, but if the Yankees have an eye on the post-season, they don't need utility men with a bright future. They are better served with a seasoned veteran in that role. And, again, I can't stress enough how important Proctor was, not only at being a reasonably successful middle reliever, but at eating up a much-more-than-average quantity of innings that would otherwise drain the remainder of the bullpen. He makes your whole pitching staff better. You can say that I am overreacting to a small exchange of spare parts. I never tire of hearing how the Yankees are a collection of superstars and not a team and that's why they don't win anymore. The guys who are effected by this deal are the kinds of players that glue a team together -- the guys that people love to say the Yankees don't have. On top of that, every Yankees championship in at least the last 12 years has been won by a strong bullpen and bench depth. This deal puts wrinkles in both areas. As they look forward to the playoffs, I can't help but wonder how many Red Sox fans wouldn't do a J.D. Drew for Dave Roberts deal right about now.

posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 01:26 PM - reply - flag:

Sure enough, the Braves org. isn't going to let themselves turn upside-down on a trade well, there's a lot of speculation that Schuerholz is very close to retirement and this is his last real chance to get another ring (Smoltz/Chipper - 1 year older, Andruw is likely gone after this season). With a decent 1-3 staff and some pop in their lineup, they could potentially do some damage in the playoffs (if they make it). That might be worth it to Schuerholz to think short-term, even if long-term they are "upside down" Also, they may be considering extending long-term with Tex if Andruw is leaving, although they don't have a good history of contract negotiation with Boras.

posted by bdaddy at 01:45 PM - reply - flag:

Are we paying for any of Drew's contract in this hypothetical trade?

posted by jerseygirl at 01:46 PM - reply - flag:

And nothing is less productive than a strikeout Except, of course, a double play. Please don't think I'm mocking, because it wasn't my intent. I know you go with gut and what you see, and that's why I said I'm not in a position to judge Cairo's contributions as you are -- I don't watch 100+ Yankees games a year. There's also probably a difference of opinion, though, in what provides value. I watch a lot of Cardinals games, and while I love the hustle and the "little things" and the fact that he rarely strikes out and is a "tough out," I'm looking forward to next year when the Cardinals (hopefully) will be without David Eckstein and hopefully with a shortstop who can hit a home run now and again and slugs more than Joba Chamberlain's weight.

posted by holden at 01:51 PM - reply - flag:

I can't help but wonder how many Red Sox fans wouldn't do a J.D. Drew for Dave Roberts deal right about now. Not it. I am completely disappointed with Drew, but I can't conceive of the intangibles required to balance out the talent-gap there. Besides, no one needs a pinch runner. holden, you forgot about triple plays.

posted by yerfatma at 02:07 PM - reply - flag:

Sox to add Gagne, if he waives his no-trade. Dye talks still on-going.

posted by yerfatma at 02:10 PM - reply - flag:

Except, of course, a double play. A double play, with no outs, can still get the go-ahead run home from third. A strikeout will never do that. (That's the best argument I can make. I have to concede that there are times when I have rooted for a batter to strike out because a double play was the only other foreseeable outcome. See: Dave Winfield, circa 1983.) Talent is overrated. Where's Andy Stankiewicz when I need him? On edit: what the heck do the Red Sox need Greg Gagne for? 2nd edit: oh.

posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 02:18 PM - reply - flag:

Where is the Tiger's trade for a reliever that I've been waiting for? I may be among the minority in Detroit but I'm not sure Zumaya is going to be as good as he was last year when he returns. And from the looks at other members of a dismal bullpen (Jason Grilli anyone?), the Tigers could use some serious help in that area.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 02:25 PM - reply - flag:

On edit: what the heck do the Red Sox need Greg Gagne for? Duh, so they can turn him into a terrible NESN host, like they do with all players with even the slightest New England connection. He's gotta be better than Jim Mecir.

posted by yerfatma at 02:55 PM - reply - flag:

Jim Mecir retired? Since I hadn't heard anything about him, I just assumed he was in the Nationals bullpen.

posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 03:03 PM - reply - flag:

Jim Mecir retired? Since I hadn't heard anything about him, I just assumed he was in the Nationals bullpen. Actually, Wayne Krivsky over in Cincinnati just traded Adam Dunn to the Nationals for Mecir, Ray King and two tickets to a Senator Sam Brownback celebrity roast.

posted by holden at 03:12 PM - reply - flag:

I heard Mark Mallory MC'd that event, but he mistakenly targeted all his jokes at Ralph Nader.

posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 03:26 PM - reply - flag:

Also, they may be considering extending long-term with Tex if Andruw is leaving, although they don't have a good history of contract negotiation with Boras. Boras also represents Texeira, so if the Braves don't negotiate with Boras, they only have Texeira for one more year than Jones. My guess is that Andruw is history unless he would take a serious hometown discount, then the Braves look to try to negotiate with Texeira.

posted by trox at 03:33 PM - reply - flag:

Rangers claim they tried to resign Tex at $18 million a year before trading him. Boras rejected. There's no way the Rangers could have kept him. Now they have traded Gagne to Red Sox. So Rangers traded a disgruntled player (Tex) who they had no chance to resign, a serviceable bullpen pitcher (Mahay) and a closer (Gagne) who will be a free agent at end of season. In exchange, they get Salty, a starting pitcher, three pitching prospects, and two outfield prospects. Given the Rangers' chances this year (meaning none at all), these deals are starting to not look that bad.

posted by graymatters at 04:12 PM - reply - flag:

I can't remember the Braves ever being this active at the trade deadline, bringing in Texeira, Dotel, Mahay, and Ring (from San Diego), and apparently going after Arroyo from Cincy. I'd say their chances of winning the NL East just improved quite a bit (not that I'm say that they will win it). I don't really understand the Gagne trade. Why would the Red Sox need to make this trade? Okajima and Delcarmen have been very effective setting up Papelbon.

posted by trox at 04:46 PM - reply - flag:

People are nervous about Delcarmen's ability to keep this up, specifically in the playoffs. While the Sox' pen has been solid this year (and fantastic in spurts), it's as much by coincidence as by design. Donnelly has been out for months, Pinero has been traded away and Timlin has come back to pitch effectively in pressure situations, which I don't think was in the team's plans. Much as I hate to admit it, they probably do need the extra arm. I wish the best for Gabbard and Murphy, but they each seem to have low ceilings. Gabbard projects as a potentially decent 5 starter and Murphy seems like a platoon fielder with a good average and just a bit of doubles power.

posted by yerfatma at 04:55 PM - reply - flag:

Timlin is presently resting his arm and Donnelly is having season ending surgery, so the gagne trade makes sense to me.

posted by justgary at 05:28 PM - reply - flag:

It sounds like Gagne is willing (abetted by some extra money) to do whatever he is asked to by Boston. I agree with yerfatma's assessment on the Boston 'pen and the potential of Gabbard and Murphy. The best news in all of this from the Boston standpoint is that they did not have to give up any of their "untouchables" in the minors.

posted by Howard_T at 05:44 PM - reply - flag:

Gabbard projects as a potentially decent 5 starter Which means he's the new number 2 on Texas' staff.

posted by holden at 07:49 AM - reply - flag:

Which suggests he might disappoint, especially in a hitter's park.

posted by yerfatma at 07:58 AM - reply - flag:

Man I really thought Cleveland would make a serious run at Gagne for their much-needed closer role. They really missed the boat, made no moves, and if they falter, they have themselves to blame. As for Texas, no matter who they get, it will probably not pan out. It just seems to be the way it goes for that team. Even with supposed-talent, they continue to struggle. The Yanks must think Proctor's arm is ready to fall off. After using him non-stop, they send him away. The funniest thing I heard was someone insinuating Betemit is insurance should A-Rod leave at seasons end. That's funny.

posted by dyams at 09:16 AM - reply - flag:

The Yankees needed bullpen help before the trade, now they really do. The worst thing that could happen is they plop Hughes in the pen and Torre kills him with overuse.

posted by jerseygirl at 09:45 AM - reply - flag:

The Yankees needed bullpen help before the trade, now they really do. The worst thing that could happen is they plop Hughes in the pen and Torre kills him with overuse. I'm really surprised the Yankees couldn't pull in Gagne, particularly when looking at Boston's package. Seems like the Yankees could have dug down into their second tier of pitching prospects (Clippard, Karstens, et al) or even someone like Ian Kennedy and put something together that rivaled the Gabbard package. I think the most likely outcome for the Yankees is to bring in Joba the Hut as a bullpen arm, probably the 7th inning guy. He's already being conditioned for it in AAA and had a one inning, 13 pitch outing the other day where he struck out the side. I understand goddam's concern about blowing his arm out if he gets all of Proctor's innings, but I think the Yankees braintrust is too smart to let that happen, even if it requires Cashman laying down the law to Torre on this one. I also think the Yankees will be creative about giving him rest and not just having a standard 7th-8th-9th inning rotation for games they lead or in which they are close (although the 8th and 9th are more or less locked up).

posted by holden at 10:21 AM - reply - flag:

I'm really surprised the Yankees couldn't pull in Gagne, particularly when looking at Boston's package. I'm wondering if some teams never stopped to consider Gagne may have been open to being a full-time setup man? Boston made a good move, especially seeing how Papelbon tired at the end of last season. The Yankees were probably worried picking up Gagne would be a threat to Rivera's psyche at this point in his career, which should be ridiculous, but if Torre has any say in the matter, that's probably the way he would lean. He becomes so loyal to certain players that I think he sometimes loses sight of the bigger picture.

posted by dyams at 11:19 AM - reply - flag:

Seems like the Yankees could have dug down into their second tier of pitching prospects (Clippard, Karstens, et al) or even someone like Ian Kennedy and put something together that rivaled the Gabbard package. according Pete Abraham they asked for Kennedy or Melky. the Yankees didn't want part with either, which was fine with me.

posted by goddam at 11:33 AM - reply - flag:

The Yankees were probably worried picking up Gagne would be a threat to Rivera's psyche at this point in his career, That reasoning sounds stupid if it's even remotely true. Arguably the best, if not one of the best closers in the history of the game is going to be worried about Gagne coming on board? After he went on local sports radio and said that NYY could use some bullpen help?

posted by jerseygirl at 12:22 PM - reply - flag:

After he went on local sports radio and said that NYY could use some bullpen help? They do need bullpen help, obvioulsy (since they only plan on six innings, at the very most, from their starters), but I also seriously doubt Rivera would ever admit he (or the team) needs someone else closing games for the Yankees. It just sounds like typical Torre psychology, worrying about any time Mariano would blow a save or two that the NY media would start the "Should Gagne be the closer" crap, and how Rivera would handle it.

posted by dyams at 01:05 PM - reply - flag:

I agree with you that the NY media would only take one blown save from Mo before they started "THE GAGNE COUNTDOWN" in 46-point, blood-red type on the back page of the Post. I have a hard time believing that Torre would think that way, though. I have to wonder if you were right in your earlier comment, though. Not knowing what goes on in a GM's office, I have no idea, but what if Theo was the only GM around who had something to offer the Rangers who thought, You know, what about Gagne as a super-pen guy who can do setup or close? Hmmm... If that's the case, then Theo's smarter than I give him credit for, and I've given him plenty of credit already over the past few years. Too bad he can't run the Celtics.

posted by The_Black_Hand at 04:31 PM - reply - flag:

posted by Howard_T at 06:42 PM - reply - flag:

After a day to take it in I think boston's deal for gagne was a very good one. Donnelly is out for the season. Timlin's pitched well lately but was on the disabled list earlier and recently took a week off with a sore shoulder. Okajima is going to be pitching more innings than he ever has before. Delcarmen's inexperienced. Papelbon has had shoulder problems before. If everyone stays healthy gagne gives boston a very deep bullpen and great flexibility. If Papelbon goes down boston can fall back on an experienced closer. The question is wether they'll regret not signing dye. Their offense has been sleep inducing lately and their bench is awful. As far as new york, I think they're in a different situation. They're not giving up on the season, but they're not in the position boston is. If they can get back in the race, fine. If they can't, they'd rather give some younger pitchers a look for the future (that's the only reason I can see for getting rid of proctor). If they continue to hit 8 home runs a game, they'll be fine. The yankees look much like their last few teams that went into the playoffs with great hitting and sketchy pitching. Pitching usually beats good hitting, but we'll see. according Pete Abraham they asked for Kennedy or Melky Abraham also said the red sox paid "a hefty price" which is a bewildering statement. We're talking about a 25 year old 4/5 pitcher with a history of arm problems on a staff that has no place for him, a 4th outfielder who has no place with Ellsbury around, and a 17 year old prospect. The sox sent none of their top prospects nor anyone that would have had a chance with the team in the near future. That's exactly how a deep farm system should be used. Keep your A prospects and use your B to trade for missing pieces.

posted by justgary at 12:10 AM - reply - flag:

I don't know the particulars of what the Yankees offered for Gagne, but I did hear something to the effect that Texas told NY up front that if the Yankees couldn't top Boston's offer, then Gagne was going to Boston. that's what Cashman said today on the radio (or what Michael Kay said and Cashmans sort of agreed that it was true), that if they didn't get the deal done they were going with Boston. it basically came down to Melky and Kennedy (Cashman didn't name names, but the descriptions fit). he wasn't going to give up their everyday center fielder or a potential starter in the next year or 2 for someone who was only going to give them maybe 20-30 innings for the rest of the year and be gone.

posted by goddam at 12:13 AM - reply - flag:

Abraham also said the red sox paid "a hefty price" which is a bewildering statement. i doubt he did his research on Murphy and Gabbard. he was hung up on the 2 month rental thing. plus he does occasionally talk a bit of trash about the sox and i think it carries over into his analysis sometimes. it's one of the few things i dislike about his blog. If they can't, they'd rather give some younger pitchers a look for the future (that's the only reason I can see for getting rid of proctor). i don't think that was the only reason. while he was a workhorse, hard-throwing guys like him are a dime a dozen. i liked the guy but he was nothing special. they already have Bruney and Farnsworth. also, Cashman wanted Betemit last year, so this was an opportunity to get him. It just sounds like typical Torre psychology, worrying about any time Mariano would blow a save or two that the NY media would start the "Should Gagne be the closer" crap, and how Rivera would handle it. i don't think Torre ever worries about Mariano when it comes to baseball. nothing fazes Mo and Torre has been around long enough to realize that.

posted by goddam at 12:45 AM - reply - flag:

i don't think Torre ever worries about Mariano when it comes to baseball. nothing fazes Mo and Torre has been around long enough to realize that. Yeah, I don't see it either. Besides, this is not 2002 gagne.

posted by justgary at 01:09 AM - reply - flag:

If it comes down to parting with younger talent, I'm good with passing on Gagne. As justgary said, it's not the 2002 Gagne. A story yesterday contained a scout's report that called Gagne's present stuff fairly ordinary, and nothing like what he was when he built his reputation. He relies too much on his change, and his fastball is up too much and doesn't offset the other pitches that well. Last night in Boston, the questions were already apparently starting about why the Sox had Gagne warming up in the ninth with Papelbon in the game.

posted by dyams at 07:27 AM - reply - flag:

If it comes down to parting with younger talent, I'm good with passing on Gagne. How else would you expect to get gagne? With throw away minor leaguers? That's not going to happen. Either your system is deep enough to withstand losing B level players or it's not. it's not the 2002 Gagne. A story yesterday contained a scout's report that called Gagne's present stuff fairly ordinary, and nothing like what he was when he built his reputation. I read that also. It doesn't take an unnamed scout to see he doesn't throw as hard as he use to. At the same time you're taking his opinion as gospel. I'm sure boston scouts have watched gagne quite closely. Last night in Boston, the questions were already apparently starting about why the Sox had Gagne warming up in the ninth with Papelbon in the game. But it's not 2002 gagne remember? You seem really concerned with a relievers ability to deal with gagne being on the team. First rivera and now with papelbon. That's a problem that doesn't exist and other than this thread I haven't heard it brought up as a problem by anyone yet. They discussed the situation with papelbon. He's ok with it.

posted by justgary at 08:10 AM - reply - flag:

I find it really hard to believe the Rangers couldn't get a better offer out there for Gagne than what they took, but whatever. Maybe they were trying to make a point to the Yankees that when they say "well, then he's going to the Red Sox" they mean business. It sucks that the Yankees (and in as many cases the Red Sox) have to pay double what anybody else would have to for needed staples -- the value of the player, plus the value of keeping the player away from the other club. /griping about how hard it is to be a Yankees fan

posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 09:00 AM - reply - flag:

I don't think the Red Sox paid very much at all, honestly. No where near what they gave up for Suppan.

posted by jerseygirl at 09:28 AM - reply - flag:

Freddie Sanchez? The Sox also got Brandon Lyon who was a serviceable pitcher that became part of the Schilling deal. Relative to Hanley Ramirez, Sanchez doesn't hurt at all.

posted by yerfatma at 09:56 AM - reply - flag:

Don't forget the Sox get a first-round pick and a sandwich pick if and when Gagne leaves in the off-season.

posted by yerfatma at 10:09 AM - reply - flag:

That's a problem that doesn't exist and other than this thread I haven't heard it brought up as a problem by anyone yet. Can I be allowed to speculate about the potential of a problem? Everything in a thread doesn't have to be linked, footnoted, etc. does it? It's my belief the top closers have a different mindset than that of other players. Even though Gagne may not be what he once was, he still has the name and reputation. That counts for quite a bit with fans, media, and probably a lot of front office personnel. And if giving up decent talent for a guy with a recent history of arm problems and long DL stints is what it takes, then I am glad it didn't happen for the Yanks. If Gagne turns into a bullpen anchor for the Sox, then chalk one up for them. The Yanks still seem to be serious about not giving their young players away at the drop of a hat. That's a huge change for the organization. And for what it's worth, the Yankees' farm system is much stronger now than it was a while back. The years of them having a depleted minor league is past.

posted by dyams at 10:10 AM - reply - flag:

At least with Hanley, you have Beckett to show for it.

posted by jerseygirl at 10:18 AM - reply - flag:

Don't forget the Sox get a first-round pick and a sandwich pick if and when Gagne leaves in the off-season. Yes, if Gagne is classified as a Type A free agent and assuming the Sox offer, and Gagne declines, arbitration. My understanding is that Type classification is based on the prior two years' performance and Gagne didn't really pitch last year. So there is some question of whether he'll be Type A (two picks: first round pick -- top 15 protected -- plus a sandwich pick) or Type B (one pick: first round pick, also top 15 protected).

posted by holden at 11:05 AM - reply - flag:

Can I be allowed to speculate about the potential of a problem? Everything in a thread doesn't have to be linked, footnoted, etc. does it? No, but when there's evidence to the contrary, you're going to need to provide something more than your gut.

posted by yerfatma at 11:40 AM - reply - flag:

From yerfatma's link: Papelbon, after expressing reservations at the first meeting -- "At first, it didn't really go well," he said. "I'm going, 'Wait a minute, what's going on here?' " -- enthusiastically endorsed the deal and greeted Gagne warmly when he arrived in the clubhouse yesterday. Papelbon did, from the sound of it, have a problem with the move initially. That's what I expected. The fact he came around after the meeting that took place shows he has a good team-first attitude, and I'd really expect nothing less from a young guy like him. If he was to carry on publicly with any reservations he had/has, it would only serve to fuel a potential controversy. Anyone who falls hook-line-and-sinker for a player's "company line" about being nothing but happy and glad is as bad as me taking one scout's view on Gagne's current effectiveness as "Gospel," like justgary said I did. I really can't believe Papelbon is happy with the move, though he probably is good with the fact management came to him directly. My speculation about it impacting a current closer had more to do with the Yankees situation. Them bringing in Gagne, with Rivera's situation for next year (as far as I know) still up in the air, would cause some doubt. And as for Rivera saying the team needs bullpen help, I'd expect that from him, too. He generally always says the right thing. ESPN was where I heard them mention Gagne warming up at the end of the game last night when Papelbon was in. Regardless what is said in the papers or over the air, I think the situation still makes Papelbon think about things a bit. Regardless of what he may or may not be right now, everyone knows Gagne was the dominating closer a few short years ago.

posted by dyams at 12:47 PM - reply - flag:

I really can't believe Papelbon is happy with the move I don't think anyone would get rich betting on what goes on in that kid's head.

posted by yerfatma at 01:08 PM - reply - flag:

The more pressing question to me is whether the rotund cop who guards the bullpen door at Fenway will give Gagne a fist bump as he leaves the 'pen to come into games.

posted by holden at 01:20 PM - reply - flag:

They should have an eating contest. Gagne, he is huge, n'est pas?

posted by yerfatma at 05:50 PM - reply - flag:

Answers to some of the Gagne questions: Q Why was he warming up with Paplebon in the game? A In his words, "I hadn't thrown in a while, so I just wanted to get some work." Q Does Paplebon have to worry about his job? A Gange pitched the 9th this afternoon, entering with a 4-run lead. He gave up 2 hits and a run. Q Is there going to be a problem here? A There's a comment about a locker room full of alpha-males, and the job Francona does keeping all happy (more or less). It's on page 2 of this. The above all adds up to the Boston media tryng to write about something that just isn't there. What else is new?

posted by Howard_T at 06:21 PM - reply - flag:

They should have an eating contest. Gagne, he is huge, n'est pas? Gagne il est enorme, n'est pas? Oui, il est un grand homme.

posted by tommytrump at 06:21 PM - reply - flag:

You mean like, accroch comme un cheval?

posted by yerfatma at 07:34 PM - reply - flag:

Well, I think that might be bragging just un peu.

posted by tommytrump at 08:04 PM - reply - flag:

Can I be allowed to speculate about the potential of a problem? Everything in a thread doesn't have to be linked, footnoted, etc. does it? Sure you can. And I can disagree and point out that you're pretty much on your own with that opinion. Everyone seems fine with it (Papelbon, gagne). Not to mention in one breath you're saying the guy is average with a history of arm problems past his peak and in the next he's a threat to papelbon. He's basically a 3 month rental. So I think you're way off base. Papelbon would have to be an idiot to believe that his job is in trouble. I'm not following the company line. I'm going with what I believe to be common sense. Yes, Papelbon is a bit of a hot head and he's young. Add to that the fact that he came into the season as a starter before switching to the bullpen and I can see why he had questions. They answered them. I don't see what one has to do with the other. If a month from now there's trouble in the boston bullpen I'll gladly admit you were very insightful and correct. But I'm pretty comfortable believing that only in your mind is this a possible problem. And if giving up decent talent for a guy with a recent history of arm problems and long DL stints is what it takes, then I am glad it didn't happen for the Yanks. Giving up decent talent that you have no place for to get a guy that could help you get to the world series is a bad move? It's a brilliant move. And that's how a strong minor league system, a deep minor league system, works. It not only allows young talent to come up to the club, it allows the club to acquire key pieces. If you think that the players the yankees were asked to give up were too much, I get it. But just a generic 'I don't want to give up talent' misses the point. The yankee system has improved. I didn't say otherwise. But the sox gave up talent they didn't need that texas wanted. If the yankees could have done that, they would have. They'd be a better team with Gagne on their roster. Q Does Paplebon have to worry about his job? A Gange pitched the 9th this afternoon, entering with a 4-run lead. He gave up 2 hits and a run. That's not really fair though to pick out one game. In that case the last game papelbon had a chance for a save he gave up a two run homer to tie the game. Gagne struck out the first two hitters and gave up a fluke double to the third. The fourth hitter found a hole and knocked in the run. Gagne was impressive.

posted by justgary at 09:42 PM - reply - flag:

Papelbon would have to be an idiot to believe that his job is in trouble. I never said his job would ever be in trouble. I was only saying any professional athlete, like Papelbon in this instance, a teams closer, is going to have a few negative feelings when his team goes out and brings in a guy who is known as a (once?) dominating, intimidating closer. And if the Yankees thought the asking price was beyond what they wanted to fork over for Gagne, then I support it.

posted by dyams at 08:45 AM - reply - flag:

Why? In this case, it does sound like Texas (and the White Sox) had some unreal expectations about the value of their spare parts, but are you saying you always accept the Yankee front office at their word?

posted by yerfatma at 09:47 AM - reply - flag:

No, what I'm saying is I need to ask you and justgary exactly which situations it's appropriate to take what someone in sports says at their word. I'll make sure I do that from now on. Apparently if I take someone's words to be the truth, it's a huge mistake, and if I don't take their words as the truth, it's also a mistake.

posted by dyams at 10:09 AM - reply - flag:

In this case, it does sound like Texas (and the White Sox) had some unreal expectations about the value of their spare parts, but are you saying you always accept the Yankee front office at their word? The Yankees front office has demonstrated an unprecedented degree of baseball sense in the Cashman era, and particularly in the last year when they were able to spin malcontents and underachievers like Sheffield (more the former than the latter), Wright and Randy Johnson into a veritable boatload of talented young pitchers. On top of that they've held onto nearly every talented prospect in the organization including Hughes, Stewart and Chamberlain. The system has recently produced Cano, Melky and Wang, all integral pieces to the current club. I'd say they've more than earned the trust of Yankees fans.

posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 10:45 AM - reply - flag:

Really? Huh.

posted by jerseygirl at 10:52 AM - reply - flag:

Yep, it's all true. I didn't think it needed to be explained either, but somebody did ask the fucking question. I guess I could have been a total asshat about it, but I went the more civil approach. I'll make a note not to try that way next time.

posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 11:17 AM - reply - flag:

Dude. What the fuck was that about? You pointed out some info about Yankees that I didn't know.

posted by jerseygirl at 11:53 AM - reply - flag:

What just happened here? And how did you wind up in the traffic, jg? I need to ask you and justgary exactly which situations it's appropriate to take what someone in sports says at their word. No you don't and I'm having a hard time believing you mean that, much as I want to. The only person you directly attribute comments to are a scout and then Papelbon in a link someone else provided. My only complaint is that you were presenting your opinion as though it were more than opinion.

posted by yerfatma at 12:21 PM - reply - flag:

What the fuck was that about? i can't speak for Crafty, but my sarcasm detector went off with your "Really? Huh" comment. but i suppose it was just a false alarm.

posted by goddam at 12:34 PM - reply - flag:

When I bring up the comment about Gagne, and a particular scouts observations, I'm told I can't take what that scout says as "gospel." When Papelbon says he's happy as can be now with the situation, I guess I'm supposed to flat-out believe that 100 percent, even though he is quoted as also saying he was, initially, really upset by it. And when I say I trust the Yankees decision about who they weren't willing to part with when it came to Gagne, I'm questioned about whether or not I always accept the Yankees front office at their word. The link you provided, yerfatma, regarding Papelbon contained that quote that pretty much confirmed what I was wondering (that he wasn't happy with the idea). My belief was that any athlete has turf issues, especially when it comes to another star coming in. I chose not to believe he's really happy about the situation, regardless of what he says in the story. He's a pro athlete, not a fan. He wants the team to win, but not, potentially, at the expense of his own spot (even if Gagne's only around the remainder of this year). I didn't feel I was "presenting my opinion as though it was more than opinion." My main problem is people saying, basically, Believe this, but don't always believe this.

posted by dyams at 01:07 PM - reply - flag:

i can't speak for Crafty, but my sarcasm detector went off with your "Really? Huh" comment. Yeah. I kinda read that as "Holy Savior in Sandals, will I ever hear the end of Yankees fans patting their Wise Men on the back for coming up with the notion of trading 40-year-old relics, and for stockpiling young pitchers like they invented this idea despite evidence that 29 other teams beat them to it. Please, illuminate me with the brilliance of your cloying worship of these oh-so-novel concepts." But maybe you meant, "Really? Huh." So, uh... sorry. I also want to continue developing my reputation as somebody who will just totally go off at the slightest provocation, or none whatsoever. I'm completely insane. I'm painting my toenails right now, and afterwards I'm taking apart this computer and looking for surveillance devices. Don't mess with me.

posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 01:14 PM - reply - flag:

I like it when you've been drinking.

posted by yerfatma at 01:31 PM - reply - flag:

My main problem is people saying, basically, Believe this, but don't always believe this. That's fair. From my perspective, I don't know that I ever saw your initial comment about the scout, so it seemed like you were purposefully ignoring the incredible amount of research and footnoting gary and I did. Which is a terribly lame thing to care about in re: sports, I realize.

posted by yerfatma at 01:33 PM - reply - flag:

I also want to continue developing my reputation as somebody who will just totally go off at the slightest provocation, or none whatsoever. I'm completely insane. I'm painting my toenails right now, and afterwards I'm taking apart this computer and looking for surveillance devices. Don't mess with me. Chuck Liddell? Chuck...is that you?

posted by BornIcon at 01:39 PM - reply - flag:

I like it when you've been drinking. Oh, he's not drinking. He's sniffing nail polish. Oooh...this should be fun. Now he's taking his computer apart and he forgot to unplug it! I hope he's okay, 'cause I just love to watch him sing his "Lil' Derek Jeter," bobbleheads to sleep.

posted by tselson at 01:53 PM - reply - flag:

Just don't tell him Alex Rodriguez was a better shortstop than Jeter or he'll lose it entirely.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 02:42 PM - reply - flag:

My main problem is people saying, basically, Believe this, but don't always believe this. But again, that's not what I said. You brought up a scout saying gagne's stuff is average. I said that the sox also have scouts that obviously disagreed with that assessment. Time will tell who's correct. As for papelbon, I gave many reasons I don't think it will be a problem, I didn't just say trust his comments (although, if you've followed papelbon in the past the idea that he would follow the company line doesn't sound like the guy at all). The link you provided, yerfatma, regarding Papelbon contained that quote that pretty much confirmed what I was wondering (that he wasn't happy with the idea). So you were suggesting it would be a problem when first presented with the trade? Then yes, that confirms what you suggested. His gut reaction whas "what the hell is going on?". If you were suggesting it would be a problem in the future it confirms nothing (I had read that link before it was posted here when I made my comments). The first suggestion wouldn't stop the trade, the second would. Again, time will tell. If 2 months from now papelbon is complaining to the papers about gagne, as I said, I'll gladly eat crow. And if not... And if the Yankees thought the asking price was beyond what they wanted to fork over for Gagne, then I support it. I can understand that. Your original comment was something along the lines of not wanting to give up talent period. which isn't how the yankees or anyone else operates. perhaps I should have read more into your statement than was there.

posted by justgary at 03:21 PM - reply - flag:

Monday, July 30, 2007

Comments