Dewon Brazelton for Sean Burroughs Otherwise Known as the Birth of a Front Office
More than three years have passed since the Rays traded Dewon Brazelton for Sean Burroughs. It feels like yesterday when the obscure Andrew Friedman traded the Rays former first round pick for another so-called bust. Upon learning of the deal, faint memories of an ESPN the Magazine story from sometime prior were summoned upon. Burroughs was the son of a major leaguer and a former little league star who was supposed to be a slugger, I mean, all third baseman should hit a lot of homeruns, right?
Obviously at this point in my baseball life I have a different appreciation of talent and various observations to point out about deals like the Burroughs and Brazelton swap. I'm glad to say that in the three-plus years that have passed I can finally appreciate how solid this trade really was, even if I didn't acknowledge it at the time.
Brazelton didn't even tease, he was just routinely poor. In 2002 and 2003 Brazelton threw a total of 61 innings, posting FIPs of 7.04 and 6.07 despite BABIPs below-.300. In 2004, Brazelton threw 120 innings and had a 4.77 strikeout-per-nine rate with a 3.95 walks-per-nine rate. His homerun rate was modest, and thus Brazelton had a 4.87 FIP. The false encouragement never had a chance to development as Brazelton would revert to below-replacement level in 2005, posting a 6.71 FIP and going insane in the process.
Brazelton would end his Rays career with a total of -0.1 wins.
So Andrew Friedman got this fellow Burroughs in return for that, and boy, is that pretty impressive in retrospect. While the Padres turned to a ragtag* team of third baseman in 2006, the Rays would plug Burroughs into Durham in hopes of him turning the corner after a poor 2005. As we all know, Burroughs would only play in a handful of games for the big league Rays before moving on elsewhere, meaning the results weren't quite what you would hope, but boy the processes...the processes were excellent.
Burroughs collected modest playing him from 2002 until being shipped to the Rays and put up win values of: 0.2, 3.2, 2.4, and 0.6 prior to the trade. Two things should catch your eye about that. 1. Any of those years taken alone is worth more than Dewon Brazelton had been worth his entire career. 2. They're all positive, and he was only one season removed from being a 2 win player. That's a three year average of ~2 wins. That's a pretty damn good player.
So why in the hell did the Padres take a chance on Brazleton? Homeruns were a problem, but he never gave up a staggering amount of flyballs. His line drive rates were average and he walked quite a few without many strikeouts. For Brazelton to put up a K/BB ratio over 1.00 would be an achievement. Did the Padres simply get lost in the aura of a former top five draft pick? Was Burroughs a jerk behind the scenes, rubbing a veteran heavy team the wrong way? Or, did they simply not know Burroughs true value?
You see, Burroughs' bat was worth (park adjusted) -4.6, 7.1, -1.6, and -8.9 runs. His glove, meanwhile, was worth -1.7, 3.9, 5.6, and 3 runs. The Padres 2006 third basemen were hardily glovesmiths, and yet the rest of their team had good defenders. Generally that doesn't happen with luck, making this move even more peculiar. I suppose the Padres felt they had too many all-glove no-hit types, or they felt Burroughs would soon flame out - they were apparently correct thanks to a myriad of injuries - but couldn't they have gotten more for him?
The Rays would make another trade soon thereafter, sending Danys Baez and Lance Carter to the Los Angeles Dodgers for Edwin Jackson and Chuck Tiffany. I didn't know it at the time either, but that was a brilliant move; trading two overvalued relievers for two young pitching prospects. Sure, Edwin would never become quite what you would hope and Tiffany would get injured, but the process was there: trading marginally useful parts with higher perceived value for potentially useful parts who were undervalued.
It's a shame I didn't know at the time, but the Rays front office wasn't just improved, it would soon be amongst the best in baseball.
*Former Ray Vinny Castilla, Mark Bellhorn, Geof Blum, Russell Branyan, Todd Walker, and Manny Alexander al took reps at third base for the Padres. Combined value: ~3 wins.
26 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
say it ain't so
You’re just now seeing the merit of trading Baez and Carter?
Anyway, as I was lying in the puddle, I think I may have found a way for us to get Bonds and Griffey, and we wouldn't have to give up that much.
~George Costanza~
I understood Edwin was supposed to be an ace at the time, but I would not have said:
The Rays would make another trade soon thereafter, sending Danys Baez and Lance Carter to the Los Angeles Dodgers for Edwin Jackson and Chuck Tiffany. I didn’t know it at the time either, but that was a brilliant move; trading two overvalued relievers for two young pitching prospects. Sure, Edwin would never become quite what you would hope and Tiffany would get injured, but the process was there: trading marginally useful parts with higher perceived value for potentially useful parts who were undervalued.
Because I was dumb and likely thought closers were important.
by R.J. Anderson on Feb 10, 2009 11:36 PM EST up reply actions
this is
the greatest post I have ever read. I know I dont post a lot on here, but I read on this site every day at least 10 times a day and when I saw the heading I knew this was gonna be good. To find a way that the trade of Brazelton/Burroughs was in anyway significant then you should be the greatest writer of all time
by Jombari on Feb 11, 2009 12:04 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
In hindsight it's not.
But if we take the facts at the time of the deal, then yeah, the Rays were making a pretty smart maneuver.
by R.J. Anderson on Feb 11, 2009 11:21 AM EST up reply actions
"That's a pretty damn good player."
but no, he really wasn’t. Not anymore of a “pretty damn good player” at the time we got him, then Morgan Ensberg is today.
Burroughs had a .675 OPS in his final 800 ABs in San Diego. And he had 3 HRs in that span. Just 3 HRs in 800 ABs. He couldnt get on base, and his power was non existent. San Diego was as sick of seeing him as we were of Brazelton. Burroughs was a flash in the pan, like Jonny Gomes in 2005. If we wouldve traded Gomes 3 months ago for a former top 5 pick like Brazelton, we wouldve all been happy in Tampa and Im sure some blogger for the other team wouldve been saying “wow our GM is a genius for getting Gomes, he’s a "pretty damn good player” if you focus on 2005 and parts of 2006 and ignore the abberation that was the rest of his pathetic time in Tampa." It just doesnt add up. Burroughs 2005 = Ensberg 2009, and we didnt even have to trade for Ensberg
Thats not to say it was a bad trade, but it was nothing more than trading our trash for theres in hopes either player would magically benefit from change of scenery. Trading trash for trash = neither GM was being particuarly savvy
It was definitely trash for trash.....
But I agree with RJ, the trash we got stunk a bit less than the trash we sent them. Unfortunately at the end of the day it still ended up being trash
Again you're missing the point.
The trade didn’t work out, but there was a greater chance Burroughs would be the better player than Brazelton at that point in ther careers. Burroughs had success in 2 of his 3 seasons before the Rays, Brazelton had none. It would be like trading 2008 Jason Hammel for 2008 Chase Headley. That’s the point. It wasn’t a great trade, but it showed the type of GM Andrew Friedman was.
by Tommy Rancel on Feb 11, 2009 8:17 AM EST up reply actions
Good points, terrible analogy.
It’s nothing like trading Jason Hammel for Chase Headley. Headley is a stud.
Tools Whore
Sign Bonds!
Of Course, I was just using those names to show the difference in WAR.
Brazelton was a -0.1 player for the Rays, Burroughs was a 0.6 player in 2005. Hammel was -0.2 in 2008, while Headley was 0.7. Burroughs was clearly a better player at the time, but injuries really took a toll on him.
by Tommy Rancel on Feb 11, 2009 8:32 AM EST up reply actions
Did you even read this part:
Burroughs collected modest playing him from 2002 until being shipped to the Rays and put up win values of: 0.2, 3.2, 2.4, and 0.6 prior to the trade. Two things should catch your eye about that. 1. Any of those years taken alone is worth more than Dewon Brazelton had been worth his entire career. 2. They’re all positive, and he was only one season removed from being a 2 win player. That’s a three year average of ~2 wins. That’s a pretty damn good player.
He had a track record of being a good player, that’s not fictional. He was hardly trash when we acquired him.
by R.J. Anderson on Feb 11, 2009 10:50 AM EST up reply actions
He was largely viewed as trash when we aquired him.
Tools Whore
Sign Bonds!
My only negative since this FO
took over is not protecting Hamilton
It’s going to get to the point where a GM won’t want to deal with Andrew, cause he knows he’ll lose
I still don't think Hamilton could have ever succeeded here.
by Erik Hahmann on Feb 11, 2009 10:14 AM EST up reply actions
i'll agree had they kept him
he’d have spent 2007 in the minors
But there is no reason to think he wouldn’t have made it
He might have fallen in the same traps being with the same people.
Stagnation might have hurt his recovery.
He would have needed to have made it before the end of the year
Or he would have become a free agent anyway. He was signed to a minor league deal that year, but he was out of options if they added him back to the major league roster.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
I remember personally thinking that this was a good trade
And I still think the Rays came out on top. They traded away a player with no talent and a serious problem with his ego and got a player in return that had been productive in the past. I personally didn’t care that he wasn’t a power-hitting 3B; the team had Jorge Cantu who at the time was a power-hitting 2nd baseman, which is equally rare (never mind the fact that defensively he was a mess). Even now, Brazelton is a relatively distant memory in the back of Rays minds and clearly associate him exclusively with the Namoli regime. They did the right thing in getting rid of him and getting anything in return, and allowed another team to watch him terminally fail.
Me too.
I also thought that Burroughs might be moved to 2B where his lack of power might not be as important. In his two full years, he seemed to be a pretty good contact hitter and was still just 25 when he came to TB. It was a smart move that did not pay off.
Brief note on a missing element in your analysis
Russ Branyan Rules
yes, I joined just to post that
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
22 xbh, 12 singles, 62 k's
yeah i miss him
Anyway, as I was lying in the puddle, I think I may have found a way for us to get Bonds and Griffey, and we wouldn't have to give up that much.
~George Costanza~
by Sandy Kazmir on Feb 11, 2009 8:51 PM EST up reply actions

by 




















