 |
|
|
| |
« Trade Market: First Basemen | Main | Rockies To Lock Up Tracy, O'Dowd »
Trades Of The Decade: Kazmir For Zambrano
The Mets weren't particularly close to a playoff spot on the morning of July 30th, 2004. They were in fourth place in the NL East, six games out of first and ninth in the Wild Card race. That didn't stop Mets GM Jim Duquette from trading for Victor Zambrano and Kris Benson in a pair of trades that evening. For Zambrano and Bartolome Fortunato, the Mets gave up Jose Diaz and Scott Kazmir.
Kazmir hadn't pitched in the majors yet, but the 20-year-old Texan already had a profile. The Mets selected him in the first round of the 2002 draft and Kazmir dominated minor league hitters, striking out 259 in 203.1 innings.
Devil Rays GM Chuck LaMar called Kazmir one of baseball's best left-handed pitching prospects and told ESPN he couldn't pass up the chance to acquire him.
"We needed to start getting our hands on some pitching that can truly beat the Red Sox and Yankees in this division," LaMar said."We think Scott Kazmir has that kind of ability."
LaMar turned out to be right. Kazmir contributed to the Rays' 2008 division title and run to the World Series past the Yankees and Red Sox. Overall, he had a 3.92 ERA in parts of six seasons with the Rays. He struck out more than a batter per inning (9.4K/9) and allowed less than a hit per inning (8.4H/9) in 834 frames, though he was susceptible to walks (4.1BB/9).
No matter how you measure it, Kazmir has been worth the $10MM or so the Rays paid him. (In case you're wondering, FanGraphs says his performance in Tampa would have cost about $70MM to replace on the free agent market.) The Rays flipped Kazmir to the Angels this summer, but they obtained Alexander Torres, Matthew Sweeney and Sean Rodriguez, so the 2004 trade still shapes today's Rays.
They made the deal with the future in mind, but Duquette thought the Mets could win in 2004. He acknowledged to the New York Times that the deal was "more of a current trade rather than a long-term trade." Five years later, that's quite the understatement.
Zambrano, who was pitching through elbow soreness at the time of the deal, appeared just three times for the Mets in 2004 due to the injury. Two years later Zambrano was recovering from Tommy John and flexor tendon surgery, and the Mets non-tendered the righty. He posted a 4.42 ERA in just over 200 innings with the club; he continued to be plagued by control problems when healthy.
The Mets finished 20 games below .500 with a walk-prone injured 29-year-old who was about to become expensive. The Rays finished 21 games below .500 with one of baseball's top pitching prospects under team control for six years. As any Mets fan will tell you, It's hard to find a more lopsided trade.
Comments
Verify your Comment
Previewing your Comment
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Top Stories
Search MLBTR
MLBTR Features
Recent Posts
Rumors By Team
Monthly Archives
Live Chats
Tuesdays at 2 p.m. CST
Kazmir for Zambrano is one of the ten biggest trades of the decade?
I would argue that multiple trades that aren't on your list (Ramirez/Lofton to Cubs, Beltran/Dotel trade, Gonzalez/Young to Padres, Cabrera to the Tigers) are more significant than this.
One of the players dealt was essentially worthless for the rest of his career, and the other player emerged as one of the best young starters in the game before showing signs of decline, his xFIP, FIP and ERA have all gone up in each season since 2006.
I just don't see how this is one of the ten biggest deals of the decade, although I do like the series and the idea of reflecting on past deals.
Posted by: scribbletone | October 28, 2009 at 03:58 PM
"Oh. Cuttin deep honkey!"
Dave Chapelle eases the pain a little.
Posted by: metsknicksrutgers | October 28, 2009 at 04:02 PM
This trade is the Mets in a nutshell.
If they had anything worth trading in the minors they would be working deals right now.
Posted by: Zero | October 28, 2009 at 04:06 PM
They do have prospects with value in the minors, but why sell the farm?
Posted by: jaydh2 | October 28, 2009 at 04:08 PM
Scribbletone:
This was a huge trade. First of all, people who consider Kazmir is done are stupid. You dont go from being one of the bets pitchers in baseball for 3 or 4 years in a row to being a bust just because of 1 subpar year. (even though last year was below his usual all star year he still pitched very well). Thats like saying that if Tim Lincecum had a terrible year next year people should ride him off. Im not discounting what your saying about his declining rate stats, Im just saying Id give him some more time to right the ship before calling him a bust.
Posted by: Mickey Mac | October 28, 2009 at 04:10 PM
I'm pretty sure Steve Philips was the GM of the Mets at the time of the trade. He has a history of bone-headed decisions.
Posted by: Curtis Gallant | October 28, 2009 at 04:13 PM
I can see the rationale for making this one of the ten biggest trades. Given the angst that it caused Met fans and the lesson taught to ownership (they pushed Duquette on the trade didn't they?)and the fact that Duquette never got another GM job I'd say there were quite a few ramifications. Not to mention that it may have been some kind of turning point for the Rays, they clearly leaned how to target and groom young pitchers at some point. I will say this, it was one of the few things LaMar was ever right about. I'll give him that. The trade may not have had any immediate impact for either team but it clearly had long term effects for both, perhaps shaping the way each view prospects and how they deal with them.
I guess the main lesson was "Don't trade for Victor Zambrano!".
Posted by: pageian | October 28, 2009 at 04:15 PM
"As any Mets fan will tell you, It's hard to find a more lopsided trade."
As a Met's fan, I could name a dozen or more trades that were more lopsided off the top of my head. Plus a few wavier claims and 5 five draft mistakes. Now I'm not saying that this was a good trade by any means - most people saw that at the time - and it may ranks with the worst in recent memory, but when trading away prospects there is always the chance that deals will look awful in hindsight.
Posted by: Mule | October 28, 2009 at 04:15 PM
Kazmir was an integral part of the Rays transformation. His importance to that club during their building years was huge.
That said, this trade boils down to this: The Mets traded away a top prospect for an injured and mediocre starting pitcher. Regardless of how Zambrano might have pitched if healthy or how Kazmir developed into a stud lefty, this was just a bad deal.
Posted by: bjsguess | October 28, 2009 at 04:20 PM
"This was a huge trade. First of all, people who consider Kazmir is done are stupid. You dont go from being one of the bets pitchers in baseball for 3 or 4 years in a row to being a bust just because of 1 subpar year. (even though last year was below his usual all star year he still pitched very well). Thats like saying that if Tim Lincecum had a terrible year next year people should ride him off. Im not discounting what your saying about his declining rate stats, Im just saying Id give him some more time to right the ship before calling him a bust."
I'm not questioning that it was a huge trade at the time, it certainly was, and I'm not claiming that Kazmir is done either.
I'm just saying that given how worthless Zambrano has been and Kazmir's recent struggles, I don't see how you consider this to be a bigger deal than ones like Cabrera/Willis to DET, Lofton/Ramirez to CHC, and Gonzalez/Young to SD.
Posted by: scribbletone | October 28, 2009 at 04:22 PM
Kazmir was never even on Lincecum's level. He wasn't ever one of the best pitchers in the league. He was a bright young arm with a big future, and it hasn't come to fruition. He is a valuable pitcher, but he isn't the pitcher everybody thought he would be. He has skills but some serious issues. He walks way too many batters, struggled to pitch 6 innings, and is injured pretty much every year. It was an awful trade, but losing Kazmir doesn't kill me. Trading Reyes or Wright (the other big time prospects at the time), which almost happened, would have been 10 times worse.
Posted by: nrmax88 | October 28, 2009 at 04:25 PM
Mickey. The term is "write off", not ride off. Stop calling people stupid when you can't even get the simplest of things right. As if comparing Lincecum and Kazmir isn't bad enough.
Posted by: nrmax88 | October 28, 2009 at 04:27 PM
''but when trading away prospects there is always the chance that deals will look awful in hindsight.''
No, this trade looked awful through hindsight, foresight, then-sight, any kind of sight. The only justification for this trade, at least given at the time, was that Kazmir was not healthy and he was a walking time bomb. But hell, even if he was damaged goods, it was still worth the chance at the time. I still don't ever think it was about Victor Zambrano and Rick Peterson's quote about ''fixing him in ten minutes.'' I'm sure the Mets could've found a way to get Zambrano if they really wanted to without getting rid of their top pitching prospect. Instead, the big deal here was about the Mets' fear that Kazmir was never going to be healthy as a Major League pitcher.
The Mets were coming off painful seasons under Art Howe, Steve Phillips and Bobby Valentine's successes were long forgotten at that time, and the franchise needed some fresh blood to come in and ignite the team. Those 2005-2008 teams, which, were for the most part successful, would've been even more equipped with Kazmir around, that's for sure.
Posted by: MattyMets | October 28, 2009 at 04:27 PM
"I'm pretty sure Steve Philips was the GM of the Mets at the time of the trade. He has a history of bone-headed decisions."
Nope. Jim Duquette. Even says it in the article.
Posted by: nrmax88 | October 28, 2009 at 04:28 PM
Nolan Ryan For Jim Fregosi anyone?
The Kazmir/Zambrano move was by far the definition of a "desperation move" and immediately squashed any chance that Jim Duquette would be back as GM....
Posted by: metsfan79 | October 28, 2009 at 04:28 PM
''Nope. Jim Duquette. Even says it in the article.''
Yup Max, people still continue to make that mistake about this trade. Jim Duquette actually spoke about it on the MLB Network about 2 months ago and he just called it a ''bad read'' and went along with that sort of explanation. Yeah, I'd say that's about right..
Posted by: MattyMets | October 28, 2009 at 04:31 PM
"Nolan Ryan For Jim Fregosi anyone?"
Wrong decade.
While I do agree that I can think of many other trades that were bigger than this one, I'd say the Kazmir/Zambrano trade definitely ranks up there.
Posted by: start_wearing_purple | October 28, 2009 at 04:36 PM
Did Kazmir pitch that year for the Rays?
Posted by: 661dodgerblue | October 28, 2009 at 04:38 PM
"Did Kazmir pitch that year for the Rays?"
Yeah, he pitched about 30 innings in the bigs. He got slapped around some but put up a great K rate.
Posted by: start_wearing_purple | October 28, 2009 at 04:41 PM
If we got anything of value from the Rays this actually wouldn't have been that bad of a trade. Kazmir already has had a litany of injuries and his velocity is on the steady downward spiral. He's certainly still a good pitcher, but no way is he comparable to Tim Lincecum, LOL!!!!
The worst part about this trade is that we could have gotten so much more for Kaz than sh**ty Victor Zambrano. We undersold on him big time. Who knows what we could have gotten for him back in 2004, when he was such a highly touted prospect.
Lastly, is it really necessary to write on the night when the Yankees and Phillies play Game 1 of the WS??? Like that isn't painful enough for Mets fans, now we take a stroll down memory lane, sheesh.
Posted by: JoseJoseJoseeee | October 28, 2009 at 04:50 PM
Nolan Ryan For Jim Fregosi anyone?
Posted by: metsfan79 | October 28, 2009 at 04:28 PM
Tom Seaver for Doug Flynn, Pat Zachry, Steve Henderson, and Dan Norman.
Posted by: icedrake523 | October 28, 2009 at 04:51 PM
JJ for Rentawreck is a lop sided trade. I am a Tiger fan so it really stings lol
Posted by: allstarlineup | October 28, 2009 at 04:52 PM
"Tom Seaver for Doug Flynn, Pat Zachry, Steve Henderson, and Dan Norman.
Posted by: icedrake523 | October 28, 2009 at 04:51 PM"
Ding, Ding, Ding!
Posted by: 661dodgerblue | October 28, 2009 at 04:53 PM
The Kazmir/Zambrano deal doesnt get any hype if the Mets were involved.
Kazmir pitched 150 IP for the Rays in 08 and was LIT up in the playoffs....he "contributed" but not in a positive manner. The Rays make the playoffs in 08 without him and a league average SP in his place I bet.
This trade has been talked about far too much for what it is/was. Big deal the Mets made a bad move, now the rest of baseball has to hear about it for all eternity.
Posted by: PL | October 28, 2009 at 04:57 PM
One important facet you guys are missing is what happened to the Mets after this trade. There was a blatant shift in attitude and culture directly because of this fiasco of a trade.
The trade happened at the end of the 2004 season. Next season, Duquette was relieved and Omar was brought on. Then, the Mets signed Pedro from free agency and traded for Beltran.
It was a horrible trade, but the way the Mets responded to it helped them in the long run. One of the most indirectly impactful trades, I would say.
Posted by: East Coast Bias | October 28, 2009 at 05:14 PM
"
One important facet you guys are missing is what happened to the Mets after this trade. There was a blatant shift in attitude and culture directly because of this fiasco of a trade.
The trade happened at the end of the 2004 season. Next season, Duquette was relieved and Omar was brought on. Then, the Mets signed Pedro from free agency and traded for Beltran.
It was a horrible trade, but the way the Mets responded to it helped them in the long run. One of the most indirectly impactful trades, I would say."
Good observation, Met fans certainly can't complain with the Pedro and Beltran signings, those were two of Omar's better moves, even if Pedro didn't do much in his final two seasons.
The Mets really changed course after that season, too, in terms of player development, as Minaya paved the way for them to be one of the powerhouses in signing top amateur Latin talent.
Posted by: scribbletone | October 28, 2009 at 05:19 PM
"No, this trade looked awful through hindsight, foresight, then-sight, any kind of sight."
That made me laugh so hard, that i may have pulled a muscle.
Posted by: Moses Magnum | October 28, 2009 at 05:33 PM
The trade happened at the end of the 2004 season. Next season, Duquette was relieved and Omar was brought on. Then, the Mets signed Pedro from free agency and traded for Beltran.
Posted by: scribbletone | October 28, 2009 at 05:19 PM
Not to correct you but the mets did not trade for beltran...they signed him to a free agent deal as well...and they need to extend his contract because I cannot see anyone else patrolling center field for this team
Posted by: metsfan79 | October 28, 2009 at 06:23 PM
"Not to correct you but the mets did not trade for beltran...they signed him to a free agent deal as well...and they need to extend his contract because I cannot see anyone else patrolling center field for this team"
Whoa whoa whoa, crap, you're right, why did I write that, I knew that Beltran was a FA signing.
My mistake, thanks for pointing it out.
Posted by: scribbletone | October 28, 2009 at 06:26 PM
Oh wait, I didn't write that. That was a part of the quote that I was responding to.
I thought that it was odd that I would have written that..
Posted by: scribbletone | October 28, 2009 at 06:27 PM
Oh wait, I didn't write that. That was a part of the quote that I was responding to.
I thought that it was odd that I would have written that..
Posted by: scribbletone | October 28, 2009 at 06:27 PM
Just caught that too...sorry
Posted by: metsfan79 | October 28, 2009 at 06:31 PM
jose...... speaking of the world series, did you the way that Jimmy Rollins bunted into an out on the first pitch of the game? Really set the tone. That was a gritty bunt attempt right there. That is what the Mets need. More gritty guys who give up outs with bunts. :)
Posted by: nrmax88 | October 28, 2009 at 07:09 PM
ECB... totally right. It was a horrible trade, but it might have actually been the best thing for them in the long run. Not that Minaya is brilliant, but he has gotten them competetive again, and Wright and Reyes may both very well be playing for other teams if Duquette doesn't trade Kazmir and get fired. That is a point I always bring up, it certainly was a wake up call for the owners.
Posted by: nrmax88 | October 28, 2009 at 07:11 PM
jose...... speaking of the world series, did you the way that Jimmy Rollins bunted into an out on the first pitch of the game? Really set the tone. That was a gritty bunt attempt right there. That is what the Mets need. More gritty guys who give up outs with bunts. :)
Posted by: nrmax88 | October 28, 2009 at 07:09 PM
That play was full of grission. That's the kind of passion and baseball intelligence this Mets team needs. I know I would want my leadoff batter to bunt on the first pitch, that play oozes with baseball intelligence. Very grissiony!!!!
Posted by: JoseJoseJoseeee | October 28, 2009 at 07:13 PM
"Jimmy Rollins bunted into an out on the first pitch of the game? Really set the tone. That was a gritty bunt attempt right there"
haha, that was pure grit
As for the Kazmir trade, yes it was a big trade that altered both franchises. Was it a top 10 of the decade? I am not sure about that. Kazmir was good but as mentioned above, had all the talent but was injured or was coming out after 5 innings and 9k's, leaving the bullpen to be taxed. Don't get me wrong, that would have been welcome on the mets over the last 6 seasons.
If they did not trade Kazmir back then, would they have Johan Santana? Probably not.
Posted by: MrMet | October 28, 2009 at 08:26 PM
I wrote it. My bad about that, got it confused with some other trade.
And I'm cracking up at the J. Roll gritty bunt comment(s)!
Posted by: East Coast Bias | October 28, 2009 at 08:47 PM
"If they did not trade Kazmir back then, would they have Johan Santana? Probably not."
I think the two don't correlate. Even so, looking at the way things panned out, I would say Mets would still go for Johan, with or without Kaz on the roster. Kazmir is not an ace, he's a second starter at best. Plus...it's freaking Johan! You try to get him regardless of who you have on your staff.
Posted by: East Coast Bias | October 28, 2009 at 08:53 PM
"Not that Minaya is brilliant, but he has gotten them competetive again, and Wright and Reyes may both very well be playing for other teams if Duquette doesn't trade Kazmir and get fired."
Minaya inherited two of the best young players in BB, and by far the largest budget in the NL, and managed to parley that into a .527 winning percentage over five years. And in a league where 25% of the teams make the playoffs, he managed to make the playoffs only 20% of the time, despite the largest payroll in the league.
Very impressive.
Posted by: Joey B | October 28, 2009 at 09:26 PM
"No, this trade looked awful through hindsight, foresight, then-sight, any kind of sight."
Yup, there are a lot of trades that look bad in hindsight, but extremely, extremely few that looked bad from the moment they mad the trade. That was one of those rare moments. I understand trading a prospect, even a great prospect, for a star, but Zambrano is a guy that was carrying a Whip of ~1.50, and a K/W ratio of 386/294 in 495 IPs. It would generous to call him an average pitcher at the time, and on top of that, he was hurt. This was a trade with almost -0- justification from any perspective.
Posted by: Joey B | October 28, 2009 at 09:39 PM
This was probably the worst trade of the decade. Everyone knew Zambrano had a sore elbow, and everyone knew Kazmir was one of the best pitching prospects in the game. I recall when this trade was rumored, thinking, "what in the heck are the Mets thinking."
There are bad trades that turn out to be a wash (Griffey), and big trades that help both teams (Haren to the DBacks), and trades that historically look bad (Bagwell and whoever else that was involved in the trade with the Red Sox), but this was bad before it happened. Kazmir falling off a bridge wouldn't have made this trade fair.
Posted by: Know ID yuh | October 29, 2009 at 12:53 AM
I think the Mets thought they were getting CARLOS zambrano
Posted by: Bill | October 29, 2009 at 09:00 AM
Is it the most one sided trade ever? No.
No no Nenette-Babe Ruth
Nolan Ryan-Jim Fregosi
Seaver- a pale of crap
Just to name a few. I will tell you though, thinking on this it seems as though my Mets have had a long tradition of getting hosed on trades centered around pitching.
The thing is that the Mets did predict that Kazmir was going to have arm trouble. It is not that they made the wrong move by trading him. They made the wrong move in trading him for Victor Zambrano. Who was hurt and continued to be hurt while with the Mets. Could they at least have gotten Carl Crawford in the deal! Sheesh!.
Posted by: coolpapabell | October 29, 2009 at 09:38 AM
"The thing is that the Mets did predict that Kazmir was going to have arm trouble. It is not that they made the wrong move by trading him. They made the wrong move in trading him for Victor Zambrano. Who was hurt and continued to be hurt while with the Mets. Could they at least have gotten Carl Crawford in the deal! Sheesh!."
I agree. Even if you had a reason for dumping a prospect, there is no reason dump him for a guy with little or no upside. Even after Buchholz got shelled last year, there was no way the RS were going to trade him for a possibly injured, #3/4 SP.
Posted by: Joey B | October 29, 2009 at 11:19 AM
If you Met fans remember the appeal for Zambrano was Rick Peterson needed 10 minutes with him and he'll have him an all-star.
Posted by: rob | November 20, 2009 at 10:34 PM