Marlins trade for Nate Robertson

by craig on Mar 30, 2010 2:30 PM EDT in News and Rumors

The Marlins trade Jay Voss to the Tigers for Nate Robertson and cash.

Via text message:

The Marlins have acquired LHP Nate Robertson and cash from the Tigers for LHP Jay Voss. Robertson, traded by Florida to Detroit in 2003, is 51-69 in his career.

Robertson is set to make $10 million this season, hopefully, the Marlins got a lot of cash. Robertson had surgery in the offseason to repair a groin injury and judging by his spring training numbers: 3 GS, 19.2 IP, 18 H, 7 BB, 19 K and an ERA 3.66, he seems no worse for the wear.

He is a basic fast ball, slider and change pitcher. When he is right, he will induce more ground balls than fly balls. Which may or may not be a good thing depending on how our defense is playing.

No word yet on whether the Marlins are looking to use him as the fifth starter becoming the only lefty in the rotation or if they envision him coming out of the pen. My guess is they are planning to start him.

But whatever the case, Welcome back Nate.

Tweet Comment 26 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I wonder what this means for Volstad and Hensley

by cpmustangs13 on Mar 30, 2010 2:53 PM EDT reply actions

just posted that in the fan post

According to Frisaro, via twitter, Hensley to the bullpen and Nate to be #5 starter. Probably means Volstad is safe in the rotation (??????) and wood/hurk sent to minors.

by jrsyeagle on Mar 30, 2010 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions

According to Beinfest, it's

JJ – Nolasco – Sanchez – Volstad – Robertson

by dgriot on Mar 30, 2010 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions

Volstad and Hurk sent down

post the game today.

We needed a lefty starter, and he’s better than Miller…

by jrsyeagle on Mar 30, 2010 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions

Wood and Hurk.

Volstad is still up.

Bass is a kind of fish.

by 3.3seconds on Mar 30, 2010 5:19 PM EDT up reply actions

And why do we "need a lefty starter"?

Who even cares? Is it like we’re going to face teams, and they’re going to be like, “ah. we’ve seen two of your right-handed starters, now we know how to hit the third one”? That’s garbage.

Bass is a kind of fish.

by 3.3seconds on Mar 30, 2010 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions

It''s not really that

It’s more like “having the platoon advantage whenever possible is nice, and if we face a lot of lefties, then having a lefty in the rotation would give us the platoon edge.”

Don’t think it’s worth the effort, but it’s not like it’s a bad thing.

Marlin Maniac, a Florida Marlins blog
Writer, Beyond the Box Score
Writer, Baseball Propsectus Fantasy Beat
Writer, Heater Magazine

by SFiercex4 on Mar 30, 2010 8:23 PM EDT up reply actions

I'm still a little confused by the philosopohy

Does this mean against lefty heavy teams like Philly and Atlanta we’ll be sure that Robertson always gets a start? I’m not mad about this move at all, as I think Robertson is a good bet for 2 WAR, but I just think it’s weird we made this move just to have a “lefty starter”, rather than to get a solid arm at the back end of our rotation.

by tdp992 on Mar 31, 2010 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions

Oh I agree

The purpose of the move was probably off. But the purpose isn’t important. What’s important is the likely result. If Robertson is OK for 4.7 runs/9 in the NL, then I don’t think we should complain. If somehow the team can time it so he faces the Phils/Braves more often, it would be very beneficial.

My friend mentioned that the team could spot stat Hensley vs. righties more often so that Robertson could be assured a spot in series vs. lefty-heavy lineups. In the weeks that Robertson skips a start, we could use him as an additional LOOGY/long reliever. How many times do you really need your long reliever anyway?

Marlin Maniac, a Florida Marlins blog
Writer, Beyond the Box Score
Writer, Baseball Propsectus Fantasy Beat
Writer, Heater Magazine

by SFiercex4 on Mar 31, 2010 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions

It's not a bad thing...

…but I don’t see its relevance for starters. Bullpen, sure. Of course bullpen. But you’re going to run your starters out there in order anyway. I could see having a platoon for the fifth spot, as mentioned below… but even that seems a touch gimmicky to me. It’s probably better to pick one guy and guarantee him the starts.

Bass is a kind of fish.

by 3.3seconds on Mar 31, 2010 8:06 PM EDT up reply actions

Whaaaat?

Robertson is terrible. I thought it was bad that were clogging up our rotation with Hensley and not giving the young guys the time they need — this is ten times worse.

Bass is a kind of fish.

by 3.3seconds on Mar 30, 2010 3:18 PM EDT reply actions

I don't see it as a horrible move

Worst case scenario:

Robertson sucks mightily his first couple of starts and he’s placed in the bullpen or released, pushing Hensley or VandenHurk into the rotation before April ends.

Better scenario:

Like Hendrickson in ‘08, Nate gives the Marlins a serviceable couple of months before falling off a cliff, which hopefully buys enough time for one of Miller/West, and if not, on to Hensley (or RVH if he’s still being treated as a starter).

Best scenario:

Nate reproduces his fluky ’06 campaign or better, giving West/Miller all the time in the world.

by dgriot on Mar 30, 2010 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions

I don't consider those last two plausible, though.

Even when he was posting decent ERAs, Robertson was never a good pitcher… at this point, he’s 33 years old and washed up. If we’re really only paying him the minimum, it’s not disastrous — just pointless. But he’s both older and worse than Hensley. I’d be shocked if he kept his ERA under 5 even in the short run.

Honestly, I believe fervently that there’s no excuse for VandenHurk not getting the last rotation spot. Forget spring training — he was hit-or-miss in spring training, though he looked really good intermittently. He earned that spot last year… if he can’t reproduce that this year, fine, but VandenHurk in ‘09 > Hensley or Robertson in ’09. (By a huge margin.) And given that there’s no contest on potential, what advantage do the old guys have?

Bass is a kind of fish.

by 3.3seconds on Mar 30, 2010 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions

You gotta figure that if the Tigers would pay the guy $9.6M to go away, he probably isn’t that great.

Just sayin’

When the roof happens, it will rain. For now, we can enjoy games at Joe Robbie/Pro Player/Dolphins/Dolphin/Landshark/Sun Life/[your name here] Stadium.

by boteman on Mar 30, 2010 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions

Maybe he's good, but just really annoying?

Maybe they couldn’t deal with him any more? Maybe Magglio Ordonez or someone went to management and said, “listen, if I have to hear this guy’s two-hour stories about birdwatching one more time, I’m gone”?

Nah, he’s actually not good.

(Good news: doesn’t this mean the Tigers are giving Dontrelle Willis another shot?)

Bass is a kind of fish.

by 3.3seconds on Mar 30, 2010 4:45 PM EDT up reply actions

VanDenHurk optioned to NOLa

It wouldn’t be a question of service time for Vandy, would it? He’s been up long enough that his arb clock is not a concern to the front office, right?

When the roof happens, it will rain. For now, we can enjoy games at Joe Robbie/Pro Player/Dolphins/Dolphin/Landshark/Sun Life/[your name here] Stadium.

by boteman on Mar 30, 2010 4:53 PM EDT up reply actions

I think RVH is a better option, as well

but I’m holding out hope the powers that be feel that Vandy still has the potential to tighten control or do something to prevent his 20 pitch innings. In the meantime, use the same methodology for the 5th spot as they do bullpen construction.

by dgriot on Mar 30, 2010 7:17 PM EDT up reply actions

League minimum

Marlins paying Robertson league minimum, Tigers pick up the remainder.

If Volstad keeps knocking base hits maybe they should make him a position player. His batting seems at least as good as his pitching is bad.

When the roof happens, it will rain. For now, we can enjoy games at Joe Robbie/Pro Player/Dolphins/Dolphin/Landshark/Sun Life/[your name here] Stadium.

by boteman on Mar 30, 2010 3:20 PM EDT reply actions

Sorry to see Voss go

Watched him pitch early in Spring Training and thought he looked very impressive.

by LadyFish on Mar 30, 2010 3:50 PM EDT reply actions

meh

I’d like to see Vandy get the spot, just because I like him.
But in Beinfest we trust.

by brickell on Mar 30, 2010 4:35 PM EDT reply actions

How does this make sense?

So, the Marlins give away Voss for the sake of having a lefty starter. I just don’t see the upside in this move. With Pinto and Meyer already in the pen, there’s just no way I see Robertson going there. So, if he falters, the Marlins gave up a club-controlled player, who’s a decent prospect to boot, and get basically nothing back. Robertson is on the wrong side of 30 and has been able to post a sub-1.40 WHIP only twice in his career. Sorry, I just don’t see this working out.

To make matters worse, they had Hensley and Vandenhurk battling for a spot which now goes to a guy the coaching staff has seen pitch this spring how many times? None?

by psychoff on Mar 30, 2010 5:08 PM EDT reply actions

Everyone relax

This move is probably sideways at worst. Robertson is probably a bit better than Hensley (and moving to the NL, which should improve his performance), not a whole lot worse than the other guys we have. It’s quite clear the team wasn’t going to start RVH for whatever reason, so there’s no need to cry over that spilled milk. It’s an OK move. At worst, he flops as a starter, the team promotes Hensley and makes Robertson a LOOGY. Then Hensley eventually messes up and we see RVH.

Marlin Maniac, a Florida Marlins blog
Writer, Beyond the Box Score
Writer, Baseball Propsectus Fantasy Beat
Writer, Heater Magazine

by SFiercex4 on Mar 30, 2010 8:27 PM EDT reply actions

Depends on perspective

While there is a chance Robertson is a bit better than Hensley, both are below average pitchers. What makes this move puzzling is that they traded away a young, club-controlled player in Voss, who is a decent prospect, in order to acquire a lefty who they have nowhere to put if he fails as a starter. If this had been a Pinto-for-Robertson trade it would’ve made more sense. There is no way the Marlins will have 3 lefties in the bullpen, I’m pretty sure Freddy Gonzalez stated it clearly. So, if Robertson ends up released, what we have is the equivalent of having released Voss, which makes no sense at all. It just feels like a desperate move to bring a veteran pitcher to a young staff. It’d made much more sense to let Vandenhurk take his lumps as the 5th starter, at least that way they didn’t lose Voss and they’d find out what RVH has.

by psychoff on Mar 30, 2010 8:41 PM EDT up reply actions

First of all, Voss is no great shakes

BA ranked him 23rd this year in our system, and our system is currently one of the top-heaviest in baseball. There’s a good shot he would never see the light of day in the majors. How often would expect a prospect who has already been converted to a lefty reliever in High-A ball to pan out?

Second, you’re focusing on the negative without looking at the positive. The positive is that he pans out with the move to the NL, puts up a 4.5-4.6 FIP (or ERA, if you prefer), and is worth 1 WAR or so to us.

At worst, he gets released or switched into the pen as a LOOGY. At best, he ends up putting up 140-160 innings of 4th starter stuff by moving to the NL. Chances are he’s a fifth starter that can eat up some innings. For that, we’re giving up very little. There’s no reason to be concerned.

And finally, the team wasn’t going to start VandenHurk at the fifth spot to start the year. Complaining that he’d be better than either Hensley or Robertson (which he probably would be, though I’d be wary of his home run and fly ball rates of course) is moot, as the team was going to start him in Triple-A. Is it the right move? Probably not. Is it the move that was going to happen? Yes.

Marlin Maniac, a Florida Marlins blog
Writer, Beyond the Box Score
Writer, Baseball Propsectus Fantasy Beat
Writer, Heater Magazine

by SFiercex4 on Mar 31, 2010 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions