Jays acquire Jesse Chavez

[BTS]

Yes he did.

 

He threw 65 borderline elite innings. Most people wouldn't write that off as "a few good innings". He had a very good season.

[Sammy225]

He threw 65 borderline elite innings. Most people wouldn't write that off as "a few good innings". He had a very good season.

 

My issue is how often then not do these type of break out relievers crash back down to earth in the following years. He struggles against lefties as is. He is a bigger risk not to take advantage of his value

[Laika]

My issue is how often then not do these type of break out relievers crash back down to earth in the following years. He struggles against lefties as is. He is a bigger risk not to take advantage of his value

 

Yeah these guys have huge volatility. There's only so much projectable information that you can gather from one relief season. And the only sizeable way for that volatility to act is down with a guy like Hendriks.

 

Look what this guy did after a borderline elite relief season:

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=11827&position=P

[Frag]

What a dumb trade by the Jays.

 

1. Trade one of your top pen arms, a 26 yo with 4 years of control, for a mediocre starter, a 32 yo with 1 year left.

2. That mediocre starter's numbers were likely inflated by playing in a pitcher-friendly park and division.

3. This lowers the odds of Osuna or Sanchez in the rotation next year, reducing their potential value.

4. Jays waste more money on one year of a mediocre starter, money they need for the offseason.

 

I do not like this at all.

Edited November 21, 2015 by Frag

[GD]

What a dumb trade by the Jays.

 

1. Trade one of your top pen arms, a 26 yo with 4 years of control, for a mediocre starter, a 32 yo with 1 year left.

2. That mediocre starter's numbers were inflated by playing in a pitcher-friendly park and division.

3. This lowers the odds of Osuna or Sanchez in the rotation next year, reducing their potential value.

4. Jays waste more money on one year of a mediocre starter, money they need for the offseason.

 

I do not like this at all.

 

Chavez's context-neutral numbers are well above average.

[Laika]

2. That mediocre starter's numbers were inflated by playing in a pitcher-friendly park and division.

 

Jesus christ, do you really think Toronto is getting fooled by park factors in 2015?

[Frag]

Jesus christ, do you really think Toronto is getting fooled by park factors in 2015?

 

I'm more thinking they undersold on Hendriks

[Frag]

Bluebird Banter not fans of this trade, if the poll means anything, either:

 

http://www.bluebirdbanter.com/2015/11/20/9773102/blue-jays-acquire-jesse-chavez-for-liam-hendriks

[glory]

The reason I think Hendriks might have sustainable numbers is because his control is still excellent in both roles (starting and relief). Delabar was walking 4 per 9 even when he was good so an implosion for him wasn't completely shocking (and the same reason I think Sanchez as a reliever isn't guaranteed either). Hendriks didn't walk anyone, struck batters out, had great velocity, and kept the ball on the ground reasonably well (46%). Nothing other than the normal volatility of relievers is going against him having a pretty good career out of the pen if he keeps that up.

 

Also, to those saying the Jays didn't do their homework on Chavez, the org is run by Mark Shapiro now, and LaCava pretty much makes quotes that one would think would have come out of this forum. They know about advanced stats and likely know what they are getting with Chavez.

[G-Snarls]

Still holding out hope we can sign Price or another top guy. a rotation where Chavez (or Hutch) is our #5 would be nice. #1, Stro, Estrada, Dickey, Chavez

 

Agree but Zimmerman, Cueto and Shark seem like more realistic targets.

 

I don't think this team will want to tie up the $$ and years required for Price or Grienke and that's probably smart anyway

[John_Havok]

I honestly don't think this moves the needle one way or the other very much at all.

 

We need a front of rotation arm, but we also needed a depth arm. They just got the depth arm first which really is to be expected since the depth arms are easiest to get.

 

Does it kinda suck that they had to give up a controllable reliever that could very easily have been a back end type piece next year and the next 3 after that? I guess, but they are relievers growing on trees every year in FA and your own farm from other failed starters that can probably fill that hole, so it's not really something to lose sleep over.

[Krylian]

Ask yourselves this...

 

What was Hendriks one year ago today?

 

Are we really that sure we can't find a suitable replacement reasonably easily? Hendriks' value has never been higher... Could he become a closer type? Yup. But getting a starter (and this team needs them) is harder to find than a replacement for Liam Hendriks.

 

I think it's a good (not great) move.

[burlingtonbandit]

This seems like more of a trade you make in February if you don't have a SP. There are still a ton of FA SP out there that I would of preferred overpaying for and keeping Hendriks.

 

The Jays basically have Stroman + 4 back end rotation arms. You are still going to need to add an above average SP if you want to go anywhere in the playoffs as I don't think anyone is comfortable with 3 of Estrada, Chavez, Dickey Hutch making starts in the postseason. And that is why I hate giving up Hendriks because you just took away from a great bullpen. If you are going to go with a crap rotation at least have a shutdown bullpen (KC) to help closeouts games. As it stands now the Jays are going to need another great bullpen arm.

 

I do understand the risk of relievers but like someone mentioned earlier Hendriks seems like a very low risk arm. Normally the most volatile guys are the ones that struggle with command. Hendriks has always had great control and swing and miss stuff. Even if he loses 1-2 MPH he should be very effective.

[burlingtonbandit]

Ask yourselves this...

 

What was Hendriks one year ago today?

 

Are we really that sure we can't find a suitable replacement reasonably easily? Hendriks' value has never been higher... Could he become a closer type? Yup. But getting a starter (and this team needs them) is harder to find than a replacement for Liam Hendriks.

 

I think it's a good (not great) move.

 

I don't agree with this. Look at the prices to acquire elite relievers around the game, they're in very high demand. Just because you struck gold with Hendriks doesn't mean they are easier to acquire. Thats like saying since we got lucky with JB and EE we should be able to develop 30 year old nobodys into elite sluggers. I'd say finding a Chavez type starter is easier than finding a Henriks type reliever.

 

There is a ton of SP in FA too.

[Jimcanuck]

I don't agree with this. Look at the prices to acquire elite relievers around the game, they're in very high demand. Just because you struck gold with Hendriks doesn't mean they are easier to acquire. Thats like saying since we got lucky with JB and EE we should be able to develop 30 year old nobodys into elite sluggers. I'd say finding a Chavez type starter is easier than finding a Henriks type reliever.

 

There is a ton of SP in FA too.

 

One very good season as a reliever in mostly low leverage situations does not an elite reliever make.

[BigCecil]

Ask yourselves this...

 

What was Hendriks one year ago today?

 

Are we really that sure we can't find a suitable replacement reasonably easily? Hendriks' value has never been higher... Could he become a closer type? Yup. But getting a starter (and this team needs them) is harder to find than a replacement for Liam Hendriks.

 

I think it's a good (not great) move.

 

I understand the rationale for this move of SP addition by plus pen arm subtraction. I think good move (not great) is a safe assessment.

 

Doesn't help that I seemed to be eternally pissed at Gibby's use of Hendriks (Gm 2 against Tex in extra innings when he went to Hawkins over the Aussie, who got 2 outs and then gave up 3 straight line drives comes to mind, and sticks in my craw).

 

I think its hard to judge this move in isolation. We have to trust there is a larger plan that's going to unfold where you can look at this holistically and make more sense of it. There have been some good points made on both sides of this deal ITT.

[burlingtonbandit]

One very good season as a reliever in mostly low leverage situations does not an elite reliever make.

 

He was great in high leverage as well, not his fault he didn't get much opportunity.

[rydermike]

I like this trade for one reason. As great as Hendriks was as a reliever, it is irrelevant, so long as Gibbons is the manager and doesn't use him in important roles. It's like having Sidney Crosby on your team and giving him 4th line minutes. Given that I fully expected Hendricks to be used in the same role as last year (undeservedly), I'm basing my opinion on that. But Chavez provides more use to us being used properly than Hendriks does being used improperly. If Hendriks is used properly, then maybe it's a different story. So while talent-wise it may be a loss for us, performance-wise it is a win, under the assumption that Henricks would otherwise still be in middle relief

[Atothe]

Bluebird Banter not fans of this trade, if the poll means anything, either:

 

http://www.bluebirdbanter.com/2015/11/20/9773102/blue-jays-acquire-jesse-chavez-for-liam-hendriks

 

Guys bluebirdbanter doesn't like this. So let's change our opinions and agree with them. This trade is nothing to get worked up about. Only way this ends up badly is if Hendriks succeeds in a starting pitcher role.

[Laika]

Guys bluebirdbanter doesn't like this. So let's change our opinions and agree with them. This trade is nothing to get worked up about. Only way this ends up badly is if Hendriks succeeds in a starting pitcher role.

 

Doesn't sound like Oakland sees him as a SP or swing man at all.

 

Susan SlusserVerified account

‏@susanslusser

David Forst tells me #Athletics definitely see Hendriks as a reliever and as a back-end of the bullpen reliever, definite set-up material.

 

Public opinion can be pretty bad/wrong about sports trades. The Marlins trade probably would have polled an 85% approval rating with that audience.

[burlingtonbandit]

Guys bluebirdbanter doesn't like this. So let's change our opinions and agree with them. This trade is nothing to get worked up about. Only way this ends up badly is if Hendriks succeeds in a starting pitcher role.

 

I'd say if Hendriks continues his performance level for the next 3-4 years in a setup role it will be frustrating. Obviously a lot of how people will view the trade will hinge on what Chavez does this year.

[Frag]

Doesn't sound like Oakland sees him as a SP or swing man at all.

 

Susan SlusserVerified account

‏@susanslusser

David Forst tells me #Athletics definitely see Hendriks as a reliever and as a back-end of the bullpen reliever, definite set-up material.

 

Public opinion can be pretty bad/wrong about sports trades. The Marlins trade probably would have polled an 85% approval rating with that audience.

 

There's 2 ways to look at this:

 

1. Examine current and projected values of pieces in trade.

2. Compare actual values a few years from now

 

It's, of course, difficult to assess the indirect effects of the trade on future roster decisions.

[Atothe]

I'd say if Hendriks continues his performance level for the next 3-4 years in a setup role it will be frustrating. Obviously a lot of how people will view the trade will hinge on what Chavez does this year.

 

I don't doubt he'll succeed but he's a reliever. Pick up a failed minor league starting pitcher with velocity and give him a chance.

[Smokingjays1111]

Chavez isn't going to turn into an elite asset , he was a story for turning into just a serviceable one , Hendricks put up crazy numbers in Buffalo and then Toronto as a reliever no less , bad trade especially more so with Chavez projected at 4 mil

[Atothe]

Chavez isn't going to turn into an elite asset , he was a story for turning into just a serviceable one , Hendricks put up crazy numbers in Buffalo and then Toronto as a reliever no less , bad trade especially more so with Chavez projected at 4 mil

 

Eventually someone will fund out which alias you use to post as and you'll be tormented until you create another.

[Frag]

After running the numbers, with a generous win value (~$7 M per win), the surplus value for next year would be $3.5 M for the Jays using Steamer's projection for 2016. That doesn't take into consideration the fact that Hendriks has 3 more years afterward, as well as other potential roster moves that may be indirectly affected by this trade (eg. the effect the increased salary may have on the team's internal cap; relegating Osuna/Sanchez to bullpen work; etc.). If I regress Hendriks' value from years 2-4, including bumping up his salary after arbitration in 2017, that surplus value goes into the negatives for the Jays.

 

Basically, this trade may be fine in the short run, assuming going to a tougher park/division doesn't significantly affect Chavez's numbers or going to a more pitcher-friendly park/division doesn't affect Hendriks' numbers. However, after year 1, it doesn't look as good. Also, there are concerns about Chavez's durability.

[SSTP]

I think people are sleeping on Chavez quite a bit here. In the last two years he's been around the 45-55th best SP with 120 innings+ in FIP, Sierra etc..

He's in the rotation 100%.

[Laika]

After running the numbers, with a generous win value (~$7 M per win), the surplus value for next year would be $3.5 M for the Jays using Steamer's projection for 2016. That doesn't take into consideration the fact that Hendriks has 3 more years afterward, as well as other potential roster moves that may be indirectly affected by this trade (eg. the effect the increased salary may have on the team's internal cap; relegating Osuna/Sanchez to bullpen work; etc.). If I regress Hendriks' value from years 2-4, including bumping up his salary after arbitration in 2017, that surplus value goes into the negatives for the Jays.

 

Basically, this trade may be fine in the short run, assuming going to a tougher park/division doesn't significantly affect Chavez's numbers or going to a more pitcher-friendly park/division doesn't affect Hendriks' numbers. However, after year 1, it doesn't look as good. Also, there are concerns about Chavez's durability.

 

Much of this post is hogwash and you know it

[Frag]

Much of this post is hogwash and you know it

 

Nice retort.

[Frag]

Of course, if Liam Hendriks falls on his face from 2016 onwards, then the Jays look good. Happy, NJH?