Comments on: Vazquez: Good or Bad?

By: Colin Ake

Colin Ake — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 11:16:19 +0000

So if Burnett is the ace, Vazquez is #3, does Jurrjens retain the #2 role? That'd leave Campillo/Morton/Smoltz/Hanson to fight over two slots. How do you see that shaking out?

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 08:07:01 +0000

I just hope that we have something on the line at some point this season. The last couple of seasons have been a little rough.

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 08:04:48 +0000

The question is, if things don't go as planned with Burnett, who does pick up the ace role?

By: Grant

Grant — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 08:03:43 +0000

Vazquez will be good at #3. Suggesting he be the #5 and skipped down the stretch would be a more than a little extreme. He won't throw 200 innings that way, thus making him a very expensive redux of less talented pitchers we already employ. Looks like Burnett will get the nod as the ace if things go according to plan.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 07:50:50 +0000

Yeah, I don't think we should expect to rely on Vazquez as our ace, and I don't think Wren has any plan to do that. This trade has solidified the middle of our rotation. Now we need a big signing to solidify the front.

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 05:00:58 +0000

Let's just hope the pitching injury bug of 2008 is out of our systems next year. He's definitely DL-bound if the season goes anything like this past one.

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 04:59:39 +0000

I could definitely see Jurrjens holding down the 2nd spot in the rotation. I'd throw Campillo 4th and Morton/Hanson to fight for 5th. I'd much rather see Smoltz in the pen.

By: Nick

Nick — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 04:08:59 +0000

Don't know why you think he's "DL-bound" – he's pitched over 200 innings every season except one, when he was with the Yanks and Torre skipped him a couple of times. I was also very disappointed that we gave up Flowers, considering how poorly Vasquez pitched down the stretch last year and what his overall '08 numbers were, but the '07 numbers look good and a return to the NL and Turner Field being a pitchers' park makes me hopeful. Definitely not an ace but could be a solid 3 or 4, Jurrjens being 2 if we get Peavy or Burnett as an ace until Hudson gets back, and then bump everyone down a spot. Doesn't sound like too bad a rotation to me. But I'm optimistic.

By: Grant

Grant — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 12:08:52 +0000

Dempster has been gone a while. There's no guarantee he would have been that good outside of Wrigley, where 14 of his 17 wins came – and he had never shown the ability to be a consistent winner as a starter. Just look at his career numbers, hardly awe-inspiring.

Burnett I can see happening, Peavy I am starting to doubt, and the power bat in the outfield may be more important than getting two more big time starters. Vazquez will provide innings and should benefit from the NL. He is a quality addition to a rotation full of question marks and underachievers.

By: Colin Ake

Colin Ake — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 11:15:44 +0000

Thanks Andrew. Glad to hear positive things since we just gave up four prospects for them.

In all honesty, I think Vazquez will be alright late in the rotation. But he scares me once we start depending on him much more than that.

By: Andrew Reilly

Andrew Reilly — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 05:10:22 +0000

Don't be fooled by the numbers alone; Javier Vazquez is only a good pitcher when there is absolutely nothing of significance on the line. He will crush the Nationals in May, but watch him fold against the Phillies and Mets in September. It happened in Montreal, it happened in New York, and it happened in Chicago.

Remember that Johnny Damon grand slam that brought the Red Sox back to life in the 2004 ALCS? Or the epic Evan Longoria bomb in game one of the 2008 ALDS?

But, in all fairness, he will throw 200 innings and will rack up a ton of strikeouts in the process. If the Braves can stack a solid enough rotation to where Vazquez is the #5 and won't be starting in the playoffs (and is conceivably the odd man out down the stretch) you'll be glad you have him.

Logan, on the other hand…yikes. I can't tell you how many times he's been booed off the field here on the South Side. Good luck with both of them.

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 04:19:35 +0000

Well I'm not doubting that he'll get more wins than the 4 of them combined. I can't see those 4 pulling down more than 8-10.

By: Grant

Grant — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 04:12:47 +0000

He's an NL pitcher, who should thrive in Atlanta. I'll stack him up against the other four pitchers I mentioned and say he wins more games than all of them next season – probably strikeouts too for that matter. The Braves are a better team with Vazquez than they were without him.

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 04:04:19 +0000

I'm sold if you can guarantee me 15+ wins . . . oh, and that he won't fall to the ATL injury bug.

By: Grant

Grant — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 03:42:49 +0000

Vazquez is going to be valuable next year, just wait and see. As much as I am sure you would love to the vaunted rotation of Jo-Jo, Charlie Morton, Chuck James and James Parr…. I'll take Vazquez, his 200 innings, 200 K's and the 15+ games he will win in Atlanta over that collection of stiffs any day.

By: RueGrant

RueGrant — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 03:31:26 +0000

I'm not feeling it. I see nothing from Vazquez and I'm not planning on holding my breath, either. Be positive all you want, but I really don't think that "good enough" should ever make the cut.

By: Colin Ake

Colin Ake — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 12:21:46 +0000

My official first comment on this trade was "interesting" – not "wow, that's good" or "Hm, ok." Not to bash on Vazquez – whom I hope turns into a quality pitcher for us for some years – but whether or not this is "worth it" is determined by the potential upside of the prospects dealt. Flowers, Dick, is hailed as a "top prospect" in the same sentence as Tommy Hanson over on the Braves official website. So to see him go is a little bit of a surprise. The fact that we dealt four players, including our AAA shortstop for this dude

That said, is everybody ignoring Boone Logan? Left-handed reliever acquired from the ChiSox along with Vazquez. 20th round pick. ERA around 5 in '07, 6 in '08, in about 50ish innings each year. Glad to see a left-handed arm in the 'pen, and he brought his strikeouts up to one per inning last year, but he doesn't quite look like Ron Mahay.

I'm unconvinced this is a good trade. I hope Wren knows something I don't, because I don't believe I would have made this trade.

I hope something big and flashy comes out of Vegas.

By: Colin Ake

Colin Ake — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 12:08:44 +0000

OK, even if it's too early to hail Flowers as the next McCann (not that we need another catcher soon), would you also say it's too early to know he WON'T become a better prospect? The Braves have always found talent deep into the draft. The point is that there's too much potential upside to dump him for someone I can't bring myself to be excited about, especially when bundled with other prospects.

By: RueGrant

RueGrant — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 11:36:38 +0000

crap, ryan dempster is gone.

By: Dick Whitman

Dick Whitman — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 09:22:39 +0000

Apparently all you have to do to get Braves fans excited is have a good run in the Arizona Fall League and a pretty decent season at high-A ball. Leave it to you guys to bemoan the trading of a 27th round draft pick for a solid starter.