Braves listening on Inciarte, Teheran, and Markakis for power bat; Freeman staying

[praeceps93]

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=14557912

Nothing especially new, but the recency of the news is pretty intriguing. Interesting to hear about interest in Markakis. Plus puts Freeman trade ideas to bed for the most part.

[bravesnumberone]

There are powerful bats named Justin Upton and Yoenis Cespedes they can get without having to give up Teheran.

[The Chosen One]

Braves need to be reminded once Nick finishes his new offseason workout lifting program that he'll be the power bat we need. The power bat we deserve.

[zitothebrave]

There are powerful bats named Justin Upton and Yoenis Cespedes they can get without having to give up Teheran.

I think that was part of Markakis. Shop him off. Sign Justin or Cespedes for RF. Or LF with Olivera at 3B.

[praeceps93]

Braves need to be reminded once Nick finishes his new offseason workout lifting program that he'll be the power bat we need. The power bat we deserve.

Hm...does this mean we can trade him for Matt Harvey?

[The Chosen One]

Hm...does this mean we can trade him for Matt Harvey?

You have only been on the forum a few days.

Last year, we had a beloved poster who pushed the limits on homerism we've never seen before. From the day Heyward was traded to acquiring Olivera, to the day he stopped posting his homerism never wavered.

When the criticism of Nick Markakis began for not hitting any homers came about last year, this particular poster came jumping to the defense of Nick. Noting that he had just been through neck surgery and had not been able to have a full offseason regimen. His reasoning was, discount Nick's 2015, because when 2016 comes he'll have had an entire offseason without rehabbing, to finally lift weights again and be strong enough to hit double digit homers again.

I think you can imagine the type of hazing he received on here for standing by those comments.

[praeceps93]

You have only been on the forum a few days.

Last year, we had a beloved poster who pushed the limits on homerism we've never seen before. From the day Heyward was traded to acquiring Olivera, to the day he stopped posting his homerism never wavered.

When the criticism of Nick Markakis began for not hitting any homers came about last year, this particular poster came jumping to the defense of Nick. Noting that he had just been through neck surgery and had not been able to have a full offseason regimen. His reasoning was, discount Nick's 2015, because when 2016 comes he'll have had an entire offseason without rehabbing, to finally lift weights again and be strong enough to hit double digit homers again.

I think you can imagine the type of hazing he received on here for standing by those comments.

Uh...I was making a Dark Knight reference. Ya know, hero we deserve and all that. Harvey's nickname. All that stuff

[The Chosen One]

Uh...I was making a Dark Knight reference. Ya know, hero we deserve and all that. Harvey's nickname. All that stuff

I don't acknowledge nicknames of division rivals, unless they played for us and I liked them.

The only nickname I acknowledge is cunt, and that's specifically for Mr. Harper of the Nationals.

[zitothebrave]

I don't acknowledge nicknames of division rivals, unless they played for us and I liked them.

The only nickname I acknowledge is cunt, and that's specifically for Mr. Harper of the Nationals.

You mean Captain/Lord Douchebag

[Oklahomabrave]

I wonder who we are "listening" to. The Cubs seem like the obvious ones. Maybe the Rockies? Orioles? Rays?

[Hudson2]

The Cubs would be my guess too. It would take alot more than Soler for Inciarte and Teheran. Those 2 together should get a good haul. Markakis would get a good reliever probably. Would they actually use the money on say Cespedes?

[Hudson2]

I'd like Upton but he has the pick attached to him and I don't see them giving that up. Cespedes on the other hand...

[zitothebrave]

I'd like Upton but he has the pick attached to him and I don't see them giving that up. Cespedes on the other hand...

For us it would be a second round pick. So who cares

[Hudson2]

It would be our comp pick. I don't see the Braves giving up a pick at all.

[zitothebrave]

Maybe not. But if Justin is willing to sign a team friendly deal we should jump on it. We'd add a handful of wins with a simple move

[Hudson2]

I'd rather have Upton over Cespedes. Maybe the front office is seeing the price come down on a few power bats and will take a chance. It's better than trading valuable assets for one.

[striker42]

I get the feeling Inciarte is gonna get traded. I'm not a fan of Bowden usually but what he said makes some sense about him and Mallex kind of overlapping. Both are speedy contact hitters who profile best in center. Inciarte probably has a bit more pop and plays better defense, Mallex has better on base skills and game breaking speed.

If we move Markakis, Inciarte could easily play right but his value is very reliant on his defense and that's maximized in center. If the Braves think Mallex's speed is going to eventually translate into good enough defense for him to stick at center, Inciarte is expendable.

I don't think we'll trade Markakis. He's one of the few veteran anchors we have. Also, trading him a year after signing him doesn't make us look great to free agents in the future. Free agents might not play a big factor for us now but who knows about next year. I think we have to wait until at least midseason to deal him with next winter being more likely.

Soler still makes the most sense for a guy we'd be targeting with Inciarte being the center of what we'd be giving up. The Cubs are known to be interested in Inciarte and trading for him would allow them to shift Heyward to right where he needs to be.

Soler profiles as the young power hitting corner outfielder we're looking for. He's easily got the skills to be a 25+ HR a year guy. With guys like Mallex, Swanson, and Albies on the horizon, we have a good stock of young table setters. We need a true thumper and Soler could be that guy. Something important about Soler we can't forget, he's right handed. A right handed power bat to put behind Freddie would be huge.

Some kind of Soler for Inciarte deal (with other pieces to even things out on both sides) just makes too much sense.

[Knucksie]

Figured the usual suspects had to start jacking the thread into yet another "sign Justin" wankfest.

[bravesnumberone]

Figured the usual suspects had to start jacking the thread into yet another "sign Justin" wankfest.

Yea, sorry we want to win more and don't think it will set the franchise back multiple years giving up one pick with what we've stockpiled.

God save us all.

[bravesfanMatt]

This is that whole Cubs debate again. Do we take more ready player in Soler and/or Baez and be ready to compete in 2017.. or lesson our risk with a slew of prospects and probably set back our compete time to 2018 at the earliest. And when I say compete, I mean +.500 not WS ring.

I fall in the middle personally. I like a combination of Baez or Soler.. plus two or three more prospects.. if we trade them both Julio and Ender. I think that puts us in a shot at .500 in 2017 still and hopefully moving in the right direction from there.. But something like Baez/Eloy/Conteraras/up side pitcher... Baez could take 3rd over.. Eloy in a few years man RF.. Contreras in at C next year.

[praeceps93]

I don't think we'll trade Markakis. He's one of the few veteran anchors we have. Also, trading him a year after signing him doesn't make us look great to free agents in the future. Free agents might not play a big factor for us now but who knows about next year. I think we have to wait until at least midseason to deal him with next winter being more likely.


I don't really agree with this. Yes, free agents sign with teams they want to play for, but they also sign where the money/contention window works out for them. Us signing Markakis last year and trading him now is different to, say, the Marlins firesale back in the day. What they did, signing a bunch of bigtime FAs then selling them all a year later, is different from signing a mid-tier FA, changing our contention strategy pretty significantly in the meantime, and then trading him. I don't think future free agents are going to look at us and say, "Hmmm they kept Markakis for 2 years/1.5 years instead of 1 year, I can sign there." If anything were to negatively impact us in future contract negotiations, I would actually say it's trading homegrown guys like Andrelton right after signing a long-term extension (though I also don't think it will matter much if at all, just a consideration).

[The Chosen One]

I'm not a fan of Bowman

:Bowman:

[mqt]

*Angels call to offer Trout for Freeman, hang up disappointed*

[bamfin21]

FWIW

@jcrasnick: The #Astros have inquired on #Braves CF Ender Inciarte. Presumably would have to move Carlos Gomez to make a deal work.

[Oklahomabrave]

I'd take Springer.

[praeceps93]

FWIW

@jcrasnick: The #Astros have inquired on #Braves CF Ender Inciarte. Presumably would have to move Carlos Gomez to make a deal work.

Lots to like in the Astros system. Could definitely see a match there.

[Enscheff]

If the goal is to compete in 2017 I don't see the logic behind trading guys like Teheran and Inciarte, who can contribute significantly in 2017, for a power bat when Ces and JUp are sitting there waiting to be signed. It seems to me the most logical use of resources would be to hang on to Teheran and Inciarte, trade Markakis or Olivera, sign JUp or Ces, and then try to fix 3B next offseason if Olivera is truly no longer an IFer.

The Braves have a glaring need for a RHed power OF bat, and 2 of them happen to be sitting on the market. The market is luke warm for both hitters, so why not jump in and try to get one at 75% of the expected cost? Why part with assets that can help in 2017 like Teheran and Inciarte when all JUp or Ces will cost is money and maybe a draft pick? Why in the world would they rather trade an MLB asset for a power bat with question marks vs a comp round draft pick for a proven power bat?

[bravesfanMatt]

If the goal is to compete in 2017 I don't see the logic behind trading guys like Teheran and Inciarte, who can contribute significantly in 2017, for a power bat when Ces and JUp are sitting there waiting to be signed. It seems to me the most logical use of resources would be to hang on to Teheran and Inciarte, trade Markakis or Olivera, sign JUp or Ces, and then try to fix 3B next offseason if Olivera is truly no longer an IFer.

The Braves have a glaring need for a RHed power OF bat, and 2 of them happen to be sitting on the market. The market is luke warm for both hitters, so why not jump in and try to get one at 75% of the expected cost? Why part with assets that can help in 2017 like Teheran and Inciarte when all JUp or Ces will cost is money and maybe a draft pick? Why in the world would they rather trade an MLB asset for a power bat with question marks vs a comp round draft pick for a proven power bat?

So you think those guys would take 8 years for 15 million per? I am not sure they would.. not without a opt out after 3 or so years...

and I still don't think the Braves are wanting to drop ~35th pick in such a deep draft. So I think Cespe would be your target. If they could trade Nick for a bag of donut holes and his entire salary, then I would be on board with Cespes. for 15 /7 years with opt out after 3.. (and then hope he takes it).. Then at the deadline trade Julio and Ender to the desperate Cubs for Baez/ Eloy or McKinney/Contreras/Underwood.. We would then have all the pieces ready to compete and replacement players in place for after 2018 when Cespe opts out and HO is a bench player.

[smootness]

Both those Cubs packages (Baez/Eloy and McKinney/Contreras/Underwood) would be huge underpays for Teheran/Inciarte. Those would be really bad deals.

[bravesfanMatt]

Both those Cubs packages (Baez/Eloy and McKinney/Contreras/Underwood) would be huge underpays for Teheran/Inciarte. Those would be really bad deals.

that is one deal..
Baez +
Eloy or McKinney +
Contreras +
Underwood...

and that might even not be enough if Julio rebounds and Ender maintains his value.

[Enscheff]

So you think those guys would take 8 years for 15 million per? I am not sure they would.. not without a opt out after 3 or so years...

and I still don't think the Braves are wanting to drop ~35th pick in such a deep draft. So I think Cespe would be your target. If they could trade Nick for a bag of donut holes and his entire salary, then I would be on board with Cespes. for 15 /7 years with opt out after 3.. (and then hope he takes it).. Then at the deadline trade Julio and Ender to the desperate Cubs for Baez/ Eloy or McKinney/Contreras/Underwood.. We would then have all the pieces ready to compete and replacement players in place for after 2018 when Cespe opts out and HO is a bench player.

MLBTR predicted Gordon to sign for 5/105, and he ended up getting 4/72.

JUp was predicted to get 7/147 and Ces was projected to get 6/140, so a similar bargain rate contract would be about 5/100 to 5/110. Maybe less guaranteed years if an option year with a $5M buyout is included.

Yes, either would be a great signing for the Braves, and would set them up to compete by 2017 as long as Tehran and Inciarte are not traded.

I would NOT be interested in signing either player for the predicted $140M+ price tags.

[Chico]

FWIW

@jcrasnick: The #Astros have inquired on #Braves CF Ender Inciarte. Presumably would have to move Carlos Gomez to make a deal work.

This is the one I like. I'd love a deal for Springer. He'd be perfect for us. The Stros are looking for some contact hitters to balance out their lineup and will need a CF next year when Gomez and Rasmus are gone. Julio would be perfect for them as they don't have many SP prospects on the horizon and it's hard for them to go after the big FA pitchers.

A deal based around Julio and Ender for Springer PLUS could make sense. We would have to trade Markakis to make room for Springer, but that may already be in the works.

[praeceps93]

MLBTR predicted Gordon to sign for 5/105, and he ended up getting 4/72.

JUp was predicted to get 7/147 and Ces was projected to get 6/140, so a similar bargain rate contract would be about 5/100 to 5/110. Maybe less guaranteed years if an option year with a $5M buyout is included.

Yes, either would be a great signing for the Braves, and would set them up to compete by 2017 as long as Tehran and Inciarte are not traded.

I would NOT be interested in signing either player for the predicted $140M+ price tags.

If we could manage a 5/100-ish contract with one of them, I think we'd have to jump on that. That'd be a great price.

[Dalyn]

If the goal is to compete in 2017 I don't see the logic behind trading guys like Teheran and Inciarte, who can contribute significantly in 2017, for a power bat when Ces and JUp are sitting there waiting to be signed. It seems to me the most logical use of resources would be to hang on to Teheran and Inciarte, trade Markakis or Olivera, sign JUp or Ces, and then try to fix 3B next offseason if Olivera is truly no longer an IFer.

The Braves have a glaring need for a RHed power OF bat, and 2 of them happen to be sitting on the market. The market is luke warm for both hitters, so why not jump in and try to get one at 75% of the expected cost? Why part with assets that can help in 2017 like Teheran and Inciarte when all JUp or Ces will cost is money and maybe a draft pick? Why in the world would they rather trade an MLB asset for a power bat with question marks vs a comp round draft pick for a proven power bat?

I think that MAGICAL 2017 we kept hearing about is more about 2019 at this point.

[Knucksie]

Yea, sorry we want to win more and don't think it will set the franchise back multiple years giving up one pick with what we've stockpiled.

God save us all.

When Justin comes back, it'll be in an opposing team's uniform. Sorry to break the news to ya. :HeywardWut:

[Chico]

When Justin comes back, it'll be in an opposing team's uniform. Sorry to break the news to ya. :HeywardWut:

I agree. I don't see any way Justin is coming back here. It's as close to a sure bet as one could get.

[Enscheff]

I think that MAGICAL 2017 we kept hearing about is more about 2019 at this point.

Possibly. However, if the goal is to compete in 2017, and considering the weak FA class next year, they almost have to acquire a bat this offseason...especially if one can be had at a bargain rate.

[bravesfanMatt]

Possibly. However, if the goal is to compete in 2017, and considering the weak FA class next year, they almost have to acquire a bat this offseason...especially if one can be had at a bargain rate.

it is relative to what 'Competitive' team means. I think the team can be around .500+ in 2017 as it stands. Trade Julio and Ender and I might change that. But as it stands now, I really think this team, with a few adjustments that will be easy enough to make, will be 'competitive' in 2017..

if you think competitive = playoffs.. then I seriously doubt they will in 2017.. 50/50 in 18..just all depends on if/when prospects click... if they trade Julio and Ender, 17 goes down more and 18 would go up more... depending of course..

[Dalyn]

Possibly. However, if the goal is to compete in 2017, and considering the weak FA class next year, they almost have to acquire a bat this offseason...especially if one can be had at a bargain rate.

Yeah. I agree with that.

[Enscheff]

it is relative to what 'Competitive' team means. I think the team can be around .500+ in 2017 as it stands. Trade Julio and Ender and I might change that. But as it stands now, I really think this team, with a few adjustments that will be easy enough to make, will be 'competitive' in 2017..

if you think competitive = playoffs.. then I seriously doubt they will in 2017.. 50/50 in 18..just all depends on if/when prospects click... if they trade Julio and Ender, 17 goes down more and 18 would go up more... depending of course..

OK...so if the team can be .500+ by 2017 as it stands (81+ wins), it could be a playoff contender (85+ wins) by 2017 if JUp or Ces is signed.

[bravesfanMatt]

OK...so if the team can be .500+ by 2017 as it stands (81+ wins), it could be a playoff contender (85+ wins) by 2017 if JUp or Ces is signed.

yes.. they could..

[UNCBlue012]

I wonder if they look to sign JUP or Ces and trade Ender/Julio to speed it up even more.

[GovClintonTyree]

MLBTR predicted Gordon to sign for 5/105, and he ended up getting 4/72.

JUp was predicted to get 7/147 and Ces was projected to get 6/140, so a similar bargain rate contract would be about 5/100 to 5/110. Maybe less guaranteed years if an option year with a $5M buyout is included.

Yes, either would be a great signing for the Braves, and would set them up to compete by 2017 as long as Tehran and Inciarte are not traded.

I would NOT be interested in signing either player for the predicted $140M+ price tags.

Sold.

[The Chosen One]

2017 will be 2016.

Fredi will lead us to the playoffs and a wild card birth just missing the division in a series at the end of the regular season full of pitching duels.

[striker42]

I don't really agree with this. Yes, free agents sign with teams they want to play for, but they also sign where the money/contention window works out for them. Us signing Markakis last year and trading him now is different to, say, the Marlins firesale back in the day. What they did, signing a bunch of bigtime FAs then selling them all a year later, is different from signing a mid-tier FA, changing our contention strategy pretty significantly in the meantime, and then trading him. I don't think future free agents are going to look at us and say, "Hmmm they kept Markakis for 2 years/1.5 years instead of 1 year, I can sign there." If anything were to negatively impact us in future contract negotiations, I would actually say it's trading homegrown guys like Andrelton right after signing a long-term extension (though I also don't think it will matter much if at all, just a consideration).

If we were the Dodgers it would be a non-issue. Money covers a multitude of sins. However, with big time free agents we tend to sell ourselves as a more attractive destination than the big money markets. It actually does help us a good bit. It's not something we should just throw aside. Any discounts we can get are good things.

[Horsehide Harry]

I think the packaging of Inciarte and Teheran probably brings the best return back for the Braves since Inciarte is likely to regress a bit and Teheran is likely to improve. Teams will see that. Having said that and out of the rumored clubs that have some interest, I think the Cubs and Astros make the most sense. The deal coming back would be different in each case though.

With the Cubs, they need to have Heyward in RF and a really good/fast CF to cover for Schwarber. There is no way the Cubs can be serious about an OF of Schwarber, Heyward, Soler unless they have no other choice. This is a team on the cusp of a WS. Soler is expendable for them as is Baez. Do they want to give up either of them? No. Can they? yes. So I see a deal with them as Teheran and Inciarte for Baez, Soler and Jiminez.

As for Houston, same deal as the Cubs. They need SP depth and an OBP guy for CF who can cover any defensive holes they may have in LF. Springer would be nice to get back as part of a return but it sounds like they would have to move Gomez for the money to work which would mean Inciarte is in CF and not RF and, unlike the Cubs, they don't have a Heyward out of position to slide over. Because of that I don't see them moving Springer. After all, they are on the cusp of a WS as well. SO, I think you could get an overpay from them IF you are willing to take prospects and Gomez.

I am thinking Inciarte and Teheran for CF Gomez, RF Kyle Tucker, LF Derek Fisher, 2B Tony Kemp, 3B JD Davis. The Braves take Gomez and his salary and several future pieces. Then the Braves can either move Gomez at the deadline OR get the pick from the QO.

Of course, with the Cubs deal you play Baez at short which allows you to move Aybar and you play Soler at RF which allows you to move Markakis.

[bravesfanMatt]

I think the packaging of Inciarte and Teheran probably brings the best return back for the Braves since Inciarte is likely to regress a bit and Teheran is likely to improve. Teams will see that. Having said that and out of the rumored clubs that have some interest, I think the Cubs and Astros make the most sense. The deal coming back would be different in each case though.

With the Cubs, they need to have Heyward in RF and a really good/fast CF to cover for Schwarber. There is no way the Cubs can be serious about an OF of Schwarber, Heyward, Soler unless they have no other choice. This is a team on the cusp of a WS. Soler is expendable for them as is Baez. Do they want to give up either of them? No. Can they? yes. So I see a deal with them as Teheran and Inciarte for Baez, Soler and Jiminez.

As for Houston, same deal as the Cubs. They need SP depth and an OBP guy for CF who can cover any defensive holes they may have in LF. Springer would be nice to get back as part of a return but it sounds like they would have to move Gomez for the money to work which would mean Inciarte is in CF and not RF and, unlike the Cubs, they don't have a Heyward out of position to slide over. Because of that I don't see them moving Springer. After all, they are on the cusp of a WS as well. SO, I think you could get an overpay from them IF you are willing to take prospects and Gomez.

I am thinking Inciarte and Teheran for CF Gomez, RF Kyle Tucker, LF Derek Fisher, 2B Tony Kemp, 3B JD Davis. The Braves take Gomez and his salary and several future pieces. Then the Braves can either move Gomez at the deadline OR get the pick from the QO.

Of course, with the Cubs deal you play Baez at short which allows you to move Aybar and you play Soler at RF which allows you to move Markakis.



I would like to ask for another piece from the cubs... maybe Candelario or a young Pitcher. or take Soler or Baez plus Underwood/Contreras/Eloy.. and maybe another small piece.. Might as well ask for the sky and see if they go all Arizona on you. Stros package I like.. that would be a good return. I would like springer like you said.. but to have Gomez for half a year would be a good chip to have come deadline time.

[bamfin21]

I'm big on Baez and Soler. My only issue with them is a high strikeout rate. Those type of guys scare the crap out of me, but I think the potential that both of them bring is top of the line. That being said, I don't think the Cubs will trade both of them, especially now that Baez is slated to be in the starting lineup with the trade of Castro (unless I'm overlooking something). I don't know what other pieces I would want from Chicago to go along with Soler, but I do think that outfield depth is their strength right now and Inciarte fits them perfectly, other than the fact that he is left-handed, which would give them five lefties (Inciarte, Montero, Rizzo, Heyward and Schwarber) in the lineup.

As for Houston, I don't know what sort of package I would expect. Teheran will surely perform better than his 2015 numbers and I think any team could use a player like Inciarte on their club. Kyle Tucker is intriguing and so is JD Davis. But again, we circle back to many players having a high strikeout rate. The MLB average was 19.9% last season per plate appearance. Many players that I like in the minors have a higher strikeout rate than that, but they also possess big time power. Maybe those two just go hand-in-hand nowadays.

Also when looking at a possible return, what does the front office see as an appropriate time for a rebuild? 2017? 2018? 2019? Later? A lot of the Braves minor league depth is in the lower minors right now, which is also where names from other organizations are that are being mentioned on this board. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but if they really are expecting to compete in 2017 (which doesn't seem as likely to me) then they are going to need some depth in the upper minors. Just my two cents.

[Horsehide Harry]

I'm big on Baez and Soler. My only issue with them is a high strikeout rate. Those type of guys scare the crap out of me, but I think the potential that both of them bring is top of the line. That being said, I don't think the Cubs will trade both of them, especially now that Baez is slated to be in the starting lineup with the trade of Castro (unless I'm overlooking something). I don't know what other pieces I would want from Chicago to go along with Soler, but I do think that outfield depth is their strength right now and Inciarte fits them perfectly, other than the fact that he is left-handed, which would give them five lefties (Inciarte, Montero, Rizzo, Heyward and Schwarber) in the lineup.

As for Houston, I don't know what sort of package I would expect. Teheran will surely perform better than his 2015 numbers and I think any team could use a player like Inciarte on their club. Kyle Tucker is intriguing and so is JD Davis. But again, we circle back to many players having a high strikeout rate. The MLB average was 19.9% last season per plate appearance. Many players that I like in the minors have a higher strikeout rate than that, but they also possess big time power. Maybe those two just go hand-in-hand nowadays.

Also when looking at a possible return, what does the front office see as an appropriate time for a rebuild? 2017? 2018? 2019? Later? A lot of the Braves minor league depth is in the lower minors right now, which is also where names from other organizations are that are being mentioned on this board. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but if they really are expecting to compete in 2017 (which doesn't seem as likely to me) then they are going to need some depth in the upper minors. Just my two cents.

Cubs signed Zobrist to play 2B and have Russell at short and Bryant at 3B. Baez isn't playing for the Cubs UNLESS someone gets hurt OR he becomes a natural CF.

As for SO, I don't see them as a big deal for a power hitter as long as he hits. The Braves were loaded down with K guys in 13 who hit for power. Same guys still K'd in 14 but DIDN'T hit for power leading to two different offenses.

Unless you have a potential HoF guy, a power hitter is typically going to K quite a bit.

[bamfin21]

Yep. Totally forgot about Zobrist. Silly on my part. It still leaves a lot of lefties in the lineup, should they add Inciarte.

I'm not saying don't go after guys with high K rates. I'm just saying that I get scared seeing someone do it in the minor leagues and, to an extent, in the major leagues. Yes, those players do have real time power, but they also, in my opinion, tend to be streaky. That's what hurt the Braves in the 2013-14 playoffs. Everyone seemed to get cold at the wrong time AND they had to go up against one of the best rotations in baseball. I love the potential of the guys I listed, I just said that I am also wary of them. But shouldn't you be like that with most prospects? Again, just my opinion.

[Russ2dollas]

Do we have to give up Tehran? If Inciarte is this great asset could we not give up a Wisler, Folty, Jenkins type? If someone is looking for SP depth and a CF with good contact OBP? I get you need to move Tehran if you're looking for the mega package.

You get the most talent you can....but for prospects it seems like C is the black hole. I can at least hope Ruiz starts to play well or Riley is a savant at 3B.

Basically everyone in the cubs system is blocked unless you are a CF, C, or P now, right? If we give up Inciarte and Tehran I'd like to get quality and quantity.

[UNCBlue012]

Yep. Totally forgot about Zobrist. Silly on my part. It still leaves a lot of lefties in the lineup, should they add Inciarte.

I'm not saying don't go after guys with high K rates. I'm just saying that I get scared seeing someone do it in the minor leagues and, to an extent, in the major leagues. Yes, those players do have real time power, but they also, in my opinion, tend to be streaky. That's what hurt the Braves in the 2013-14 playoffs. Everyone seemed to get cold at the wrong time AND they had to go up against one of the best rotations in baseball. I love the potential of the guys I listed, I just said that I am also wary of them. But shouldn't you be like that with most prospects? Again, just my opinion.

It would be very interesting. I wouldn't be surprised to see us sign a big bat and go after Soler/Baez for Ender/Teheran. Our lineup would be very solid, but the rotation has a lot of questions.

[Enscheff]

Both the Cubs and the Astros have a lot of interesting players. McKinney from the Cubs is a guy I would like to see the Braves target over Baez, and maybe over Soler. He is basically a young Markakis from what I have read.

Having said that, I am all for trading Inciarte, but I don't think this is a good time to trade Teheran. Unlike trading Miller at his absolute peak value, Teheran's value is at a bit of a low point right now.

I think some people forget that Teheran has a remaining contract of 4/29 ($3M, $6M, $8M, $11M, plus $1M buyout) with another option year for an additional $11M. If he bounces back to be the 3+ WAR pitcher he was in 2013 and 2014, he is an insanely valuable asset at that salary. If he posts 4 seasons of 3 WAR he is "worth" close to $100M over those 4 years, while only being paid $29M. That is a potentially HUGE surplus value, and there is room for him to be even more than a 3 WAR pitcher since he produced 3.2 at age 22 and 3.9 at age 23.

[Chico]

I think if we trade with the Stros we come away with Springer somehow. Nehak/Springer/Feliz/Davis for Julio/Ender could make sense. We'd be taking on a couple of million, but we'd flip Neshak in July anyhow.

The follow up would be moving Markakis and signing another SP

[UNCBlue012]

I think if we trade with the Stros we come away with Springer somehow. Nehak/Springer/Feliz/Davis for Julio/Ender could make sense. We'd be taking on a couple of million, but we'd flip Neshak in July anyhow.

The follow up would be moving Markakis and signing another SP

A move for Springer would be fantastic. I've always been a big fan. I prefer him over Soler or Baez, that's for sure.

[gilesfan]

This is the one I like. I'd love a deal for Springer. He'd be perfect for us. The Stros are looking for some contact hitters to balance out their lineup and will need a CF next year when Gomez and Rasmus are gone. Julio would be perfect for them as they don't have many SP prospects on the horizon and it's hard for them to go after the big FA pitchers.

A deal based around Julio and Ender for Springer PLUS could make sense. We would have to trade Markakis to make room for Springer, but that may already be in the works.

I don't see the Astros giving up Springer; certainly not Springer PLUS for Teheran and Iciarte.

[UNCBlue012]

I don't see the Astros giving up Springer; certainly not Springer PLUS for Teheran and Iciarte.

You're right there. It'd be Teheran AND Inciarte for Springer. We wouldn't get more without giving more.

[Coach_Chris]

We wouldn't get more without giving more.

If only everyone were like the Diamondbacks . .

[bravesfanMatt]

You're right there. It'd be Teheran AND Inciarte for Springer. We wouldn't get more without giving more.

I disagree. Springer is good, but he is not worth Julio and Ender straight up. Julio with his contract should be worth a 4 WAR player alone. Ender is a 3 WAR player just by his defense. The poster is clearly trading Springer for Julio and Ender.. but adding JD Davis and Feliz in exchange for taking Salary in Neshek.. Depending on how much the Astros need better defense and OBP.. they might do that trade.

Personally I like the other Stros proposal with Gomez.. but to say Julio/Ender = Springer.. I just don't know about that.

[Chico]

I disagree. Springer is good, but he is not worth Julio and Ender straight up. Julio with his contract should be worth a 4 WAR player alone. Ender is a 3 WAR player just by his defense. The poster is clearly trading Springer for Julio and Ender.. but adding JD Davis and Feliz in exchange for taking Salary in Neshek.. Depending on how much the Astros need better defense and OBP.. they might do that trade.

Personally I like the other Stros proposal with Gomez.. but to say Julio/Ender = Springer.. I just don't know about that.

Agreed. I like Springer, but not for Julio and Ender without getting else anything in return. Yes, to get Springer without the Stros taking on salary we'd have to take back Feldman or Neshak in a deal. Obviously Neshak would be more valuable to us

[clvclv]

Really have never been one to say "never", but those interested in Springer need to understand you might as well try to pry Trout away from the Angels.

Freddie "might" get him. Noah Syndergaard "might" get him. A package of Inciarte and Julio won't.

Springer's 2015 season was scrubbed by injury - he breaks out this year, and has as much upside as anyone out there (and the Astros' brass knows it) IMO.


That said, if FF, Teheran, and Inciarte nets you Springer, A. J. Reed, and Daz Cameron, I'd pull the trigger in a heartbeat.

[zbhargrove]

Really have never been one to say "never", but those interested in Springer need to understand you might as well try to pry Trout away from the Angels.

Freddie "might" get him. Noah Syndergaard "might" get him. A package of Inciarte and Julio won't.

Springer's 2015 season was scrubbed by injury - he breaks out this year, and has as much upside as anyone out there (and the Astros' brass knows it) IMO.


That said, if FF, Teheran, and Inciarte nets you Springer, A. J. Reed, and Daz Cameron, I'd pull the trigger in a heartbeat.

There's as much upside but he hasn't put it all together yet. Comparing him to Trout is silly. Trout is a bonafide MVP year in and year out 3 years in a row.

[clvclv]

There's as much upside but he hasn't put it all together yet. Comparing him to Trout is silly. Trout is a bonafide MVP year in and year out 3 years in a row.

I didn't call him Trout - I said that if you think you're going to get Springer for Julio and Inciarte you believe you can get Trout. Simply not happening. The whispers that the Astros had kicked around the idea of dealing Springer away were only tied to getting a young, controllable, bonafide "Ace" in return - Syndergaard, Urias, deGrom, part of a package for Fernandez, etc.. Julio doesn't fit in that category.

[bravesfanMatt]

I didn't call him Trout - I said that if you think you're going to get Springer for Julio and Inciarte you believe you can get Trout. Simply not happening. The whispers that the Astros had kicked around the idea of dealing Springer away were only tied to getting a young, controllable, bonafide "Ace" in return - Syndergaard, Urias, deGrom, part of a package for Fernandez, etc.. Julio doesn't fit in that category.

Syndergaard/Urias/deGrom are not really aces.. You can make a case for deGrom.. But the other two are not Ace in any form at this point. Urias hasn't even pitched in the bigs yet...you could easily say Julio's first full year (2013) was just as good as Noah's only year... So when you are throwing around the word Bonafide.. make sure they are Bonafide..

[zbhargrove]

I didn't call him Trout - I said that if you think you're going to get Springer for Julio and Inciarte you believe you can get Trout. Simply not happening. The whispers that the Astros had kicked around the idea of dealing Springer away were only tied to getting a young, controllable, bonafide "Ace" in return - Syndergaard, Urias, deGrom, part of a package for Fernandez, etc.. Julio doesn't fit in that category.

So two of those pitchers... one has yet to throw an MLB pitch and one has just played his first partial year. Wow... those sure are some bonafide aces... Teheran most certainly has just as much potential at age 24/25. My how people forget that he was the #5 prospect in all of baseball... will he reach his ceiling of a bonafide ace?? Who knows? But it definitely is his ceiling as he has the raw stuff to make it there. He's not any further away from the pitchers you mentioned, save maybe deGrom.

[clvclv]

Syndergaard/Urias/deGrom are not really aces.. You can make a case for deGrom.. But the other two are not Ace in any form at this point. Urias hasn't even pitched in the bigs yet...you could easily say Julio's first full year (2013) was just as good as Noah's only year... So when you are throwing around the word Bonafide.. make sure they are Bonafide..

Is that you Shanks??? Take the Braves-colored glasses off.

[clvclv]

So two of those pitchers... one has yet to throw an MLB pitch and one has just played his first partial year. Wow... those sure are some bonafide aces... Teheran most certainly has just as much potential at age 24/25. My how people forget that he was the #5 prospect in all of baseball... will he reach his ceiling of a bonafide ace?? Who knows? But it definitely is his ceiling as he has the raw stuff to make it there. He's not any further away from the pitchers you mentioned, save maybe deGrom.

See above.

If you think Teheran belongs in that group, you really need to look closer.

[zbhargrove]

See above.

If you think Teheran belongs in that group, you really need to look closer.

Okay... I'll bite. He easily belongs in that group. You're delusional if you think he doesn't. Let's just look at their prospect qualities first of all. The highest ranking Syndergaard had was #11... Urias #10. That's solid, but Teheran was the #5 prospect in MLB at one point.

How can you say Teheran doesn't belong but Urias does... has Urias even pitched a single pitch at the MLB level? I'll save you the time... no, he hasn't. He's also never pitched more than 87 innings in a season. That alone, saying he's an ace over Teheran is so ridiculous I can't believe you're even trying to stick by it. Do you realize how silly that is??

Let's move onto Syndergaard... he's had one year... 150 IP, 3.24 ERA, 1.05 WHIP... VERY solid.

But Teheran has had two years that compare easily and one that was clearly better:

2013, Teheran had 185 IP, 3.20 ERA, 1.17 WHIP... so pitched more, had a slightly worse WHIP but in general it was about the same quality season.
2014, Teheran had 221 IP, 2.89 ERA, 1.08 WHIP... even with a slightly worse WHIP, it was clearly a better year than Syndergard's considering he did it over 221 innings.

Yes 2015 was a bit of a step back, but he really turned it on the second half and is still only 24. He's got more experience... has already pitched better than Syndergaard and was more highly regarded as a prospect. Just because Syndergaard has a 97 mph fastball and has more strikeouts per inning doesn't mean he's a better pitcher. The numbers clearly show that so far in their careers they are equal at best. I'd even argue that Teheran's ability to pitch is better considering he doesn't have the absurd velocity.

But you're right, by all means... please tell me how Syndergaard and Urias are more elite. I'll be waiting for specifics... not that I'm expecting you to address them.

So I looked closer, you didn't... and it's pretty clear. But please, keep the clever little quips up with little substance. "Urias is more of a bonafide ace than Teheran"... LMAO. At least Syndergaard is close. You're selling Teheran short because of your short memory and you're falling in love with the flavor of the month.

[bravesfanMatt]

I am the last person who says, I am not a homer.. I am a homer. All the players on my team Kick Ass.. But I will not discount Julio because of one really bad 1st half and that is not being a homer. Julio had Ace stuff in 2014.. So he has actually pitched like an ACE.. Noah nor Urais have..

[Chico]

I'll stay out of this debate of Julio vs these other guys, but there are two other things to consider. One is the fact that he is signed to a a very good contract and two is the fact that Ender would have a lot of value to the Stros who just traded away their CF of the future and will not be able to afford their current CF next year. So I don't think it's out of the question to think we could land Springer at all.

The only reason you trade guys like Ender or Julio this offseason is for impact bats, not for more prospects.

[Deester11]

Okay... I'll bite. He easily belongs in that group. You're delusional if you think he doesn't. Let's just look at their prospect qualities first of all. The highest ranking Syndergaard had was #11... Urias #10. That's solid, but Teheran was the #5 prospect in MLB at one point.

How can you say Teheran doesn't belong but Urias does... has Urias even pitched a single pitch at the MLB level? I'll save you the time... no, he hasn't. He's also never pitched more than 87 innings in a season. That alone, saying he's an ace over Teheran is so ridiculous I can't believe you're even trying to stick by it. Do you realize how silly that is??

Let's move onto Syndergaard... he's had one year... 150 IP, 3.24 ERA, 1.05 WHIP... VERY solid.

But Teheran has had two years that compare easily and one that was clearly better:

2013, Teheran had 185 IP, 3.20 ERA, 1.17 WHIP... so pitched more, had a slightly worse WHIP but in general it was about the same quality season.
2014, Teheran had 221 IP, 2.89 ERA, 1.08 WHIP... even with a slightly worse WHIP, it was clearly a better year than Syndergard's considering he did it over 221 innings.

Yes 2015 was a bit of a step back, but he really turned it on the second half and is still only 24. He's got more experience... has already pitched better than Syndergaard and was more highly regarded as a prospect. Just because Syndergaard has a 97 mph fastball and has more strikeouts per inning doesn't mean he's a better pitcher. The numbers clearly show that so far in their careers they are equal at best. I'd even argue that Teheran's ability to pitch is better considering he doesn't have the absurd velocity.

But you're right, by all means... please tell me how Syndergaard and Urias are more elite. I'll be waiting for specifics... not that I'm expecting you to address them.

So I looked closer, you didn't... and it's pretty clear. But please, keep the clever little quips up with little substance. "Urias is more of a bonafide ace than Teheran"... LMAO. At least Syndergaard is close. You're selling Teheran short because of your short memory and you're falling in love with the flavor of the month.
Agree so much with this research. Julio is a damn good pitcher. Anyone discounting that after a down year... No point in arguing.

[Horsehide Harry]

I'll stay out of this debate of Julio vs these other guys, but there are two other things to consider. One is the fact that he is signed to a a very good contract and two is the fact that Ender would have a lot of value to the Stros who just traded away their CF of the future and will not be able to afford their current CF next year. So I don't think it's out of the question to think we could land Springer at all.

The only reason you trade guys like Ender or Julio this offseason is for impact bats, not for more prospects.

I don't completely agree with this. The thing is that the Braves ARE NOT going to be a playoff team in 2016. And the moves made so far signal an up and coming 2017 team but still not a contender. So, trading for impact bats that are ready NOW may not make as much sense as trading for 2-3 bats that will potentially be impact bats at the time that the Braves might actually be good again. Now, Springer has 4-5 more years of control so it wouldn't be like trading for a guy going into his FA year like the Cards acquiring Heyward. However, by 2018 Springer could be making $12M a year and rolling into the finish line leading to FA.

Now, acquiring 2-3 bats that actually develop into impact bats is more risky because they might not actually develop. But, the cost and control factors certainly favor the approach.

Is it better for a team that likely isn't a real contender to take one Springer today or a package of three like Tucker, Fisher and Davis who may, or may not, be just as good or better AND fill multiple holes instead of just one?

[Chico]

I don't completely agree with this. The thing is that the Braves ARE NOT going to be a playoff team in 2016. And the moves made so far signal an up and coming 2017 team but still not a contender. So, trading for impact bats that are ready NOW may not make as much sense as trading for 2-3 bats that will potentially be impact bats at the time that the Braves might actually be good again. Now, Springer has 4-5 more years of control so it wouldn't be like trading for a guy going into his FA year like the Cards acquiring Heyward. However, by 2018 Springer could be making $12M a year and rolling into the finish line leading to FA.

Now, acquiring 2-3 bats that actually develop into impact bats is more risky because they might not actually develop. But, the cost and control factors certainly favor the approach.

Is it better for a team that likely isn't a real contender to take one Springer today or a package of three like Tucker, Fisher and Davis who may, or may not, be just as good or better AND fill multiple holes instead of just one?

I disagree. There's a time and place for everything and if we're trading young MLB talent, then we need to be getting young MLB talent back at this point.

[praeceps93]

I don't completely agree with this. The thing is that the Braves ARE NOT going to be a playoff team in 2016. And the moves made so far signal an up and coming 2017 team but still not a contender. So, trading for impact bats that are ready NOW may not make as much sense as trading for 2-3 bats that will potentially be impact bats at the time that the Braves might actually be good again. Now, Springer has 4-5 more years of control so it wouldn't be like trading for a guy going into his FA year like the Cards acquiring Heyward. However, by 2018 Springer could be making $12M a year and rolling into the finish line leading to FA.

Now, acquiring 2-3 bats that actually develop into impact bats is more risky because they might not actually develop. But, the cost and control factors certainly favor the approach.

Is it better for a team that likely isn't a real contender to take one Springer today or a package of three like Tucker, Fisher and Davis who may, or may not, be just as good or better AND fill multiple holes instead of just one?

I kind of see us being in a 2015 Mets/Cubs situation in 2017: we have the potential to be mediocre, lots of young guys with growing pains, but if some things break right for us we can become challengers.

[Chico]

I kind of see us being in a 2015 Mets/Cubs situation in 2017: we have the potential to be mediocre, lots of young guys with growing pains, but if some things break right for us we can become challengers.

Or the Royals a couple of years ago or the Astros last year. You always put yourself in a position to win because you never know. Sometimes things just fall right. Offseason predictions are never right. That's why you play the games.

[Enscheff]

I disagree. There's a time and place for everything and if we're trading young MLB talent, then we need to be getting young MLB talent back at this point.

I think you and Harry are both right. If the plan is to compete in 2017, then you hold onto Inciarte and Teheran. If they have given up on competing by 2017 then you trade those guys for prospects.

It would be silly to trade MLB-ready guys for more MLB-ready guys, thus filling holes while opening other holes.

Personally, I think this team can compete by 2017 if, and only if, they acquire an impact bat like JUp or Ces this offseason. If they do not acquire such a bat I simply don't see a way to improve the offense enough by 2017 to be competitive when the next FA class is so poor.

[mqt]

I'll stay out of this debate of Julio vs these other guys, but there are two other things to consider. One is the fact that he is signed to a a very good contract and two is the fact that Ender would have a lot of value to the Stros who just traded away their CF of the future and will not be able to afford their current CF next year. So I don't think it's out of the question to think we could land Springer at all.

The only reason you trade guys like Ender or Julio this offseason is for impact bats, not for more prospects.

I keep hearing people bring up the contract Julio is on, and while I agree it's valuable, I think people are overvaluing it to an extent. Yes, it makes him a more attractive asset, but you don't deal an elite talent like Springer for Julio after last season's performance based on his contract. Julio was not an Ace last year, nor was he really even a #2. You can point to his prospect pedigree and previous performance and paint a prettier picture, but teams are not going to pay for that when the most recent performance depresses his value.

An ace at his price is insanely valuable. A mid-rotation guy at his price is a piece you probably want, but not at the expense of a top-notch prospect. Right now, Julio has been more at that level.

[Enscheff]

I keep hearing people bring up the contract Julio is on, and while I agree it's valuable, I think people are overvaluing it to an extent. Yes, it makes him a more attractive asset, but you don't deal an elite talent like Springer for Julio after last season's performance based on his contract. Julio was not an Ace last year, nor was he really even a #2. You can point to his prospect pedigree and previous performance and paint a prettier picture, but teams are not going to pay for that when the most recent performance depresses his value.

An ace at his price is insanely valuable. A mid-rotation guy at his price is a piece you probably want, but not at the expense of a top-notch prospect. Right now, Julio has been more at that level.

Julio is guaranteed $29M over the next 4 years. Even if he pitches as badly as last year (1.5 WAR) for all 4 of those years, he would be worth around $48M. If he bounces back to his 3-4 WAR levels he posted at the ripe old ages of 22 and 23, he would be worth $100M+.

There are relievers that have signed this offseason for the kind of money Julio is owed. Julio is 25 years old. Think about that.

If anything I think most folks severely undervalue the value of Julio's contract. If a team isn't willing to pay the price of a pitcher with $50M+ of surplus value (the middle ground of his $20M worst case surplus value and his $80M best case surplus value) then the Braves would be wise to keep him.

According to prospect value analyses like this one:

http://www.thepointofpittsburgh.com/how-much-an-mlb-prospect-is-worth-updated-trade-surplus-values/

Julio is easily worth a Top 10 prospect, or 2 Top 50 guys if one of them is Top 25.

[mqt]

Julio is guaranteed $29M over the next 4 years. Even if he pitches as badly as last year (1.5 WAR) for all 4 of those years, he would be worth around $48M. If he bounces back to his 3-4 WAR levels he posted at the ripe old ages of 22 and 23, he would be worth $100M+.

There are relievers that have signed this offseason for the kind of money Julio is owed. Julio is 25 years old. Think about that.

If anything I think most folks severely undervalue the value of Julio's contract.

My thing is that for the purposes of evaluating his trade value currently, we can all but take off his 2014 performance unless he rebounds. There's still likely surplus value in his contract, but not enough to make him a believable centerpiece for a deal for a player with Springer's upside.

[Enscheff]

My thing is that for the purposes of evaluating his trade value currently, we can all but take off his 2014 performance unless he rebounds. There's still likely surplus value in his contract, but not enough to make him a believable centerpiece for a deal for a player with Springer's upside.

So you can forget about his 2014 results, but not his 2015 results? Why is one single year more representative than the 2 years prior for a young player that is most certainly not in his decline phase yet?

Other teams may feel the same way you do, which is why the Braves should not sell low on Julio. Personally, I think he is much more likely to be a 3.5 WAR pitcher than a 1.5 WAR pitcher due to age and past performances.

[mqt]

So you can forget about his 2014 results, but not his 2015 results? Why is one single year more representative than the 2 years prior for a young player that is most certainly not in his decline phase yet?

Other teams may feel the same way you do, which is why the Braves should not sell low on Julio. Personally, I think he is much more likely to be a 3.5 WAR pitcher than a 1.5 WAR pitcher due to age and past performances.

The reason I think you should throw out the previous numbers is because other teams are not going to negotiate with us giving Julio the benefit of the doubt in all likelihood. I agree that it doesn't make sense to trade Julio at his lowest value, but I think people seem to generally be taking it for granted that his value isn't currently low.

[clvclv]

The reason I think you should throw out the previous numbers is because other teams are not going to negotiate with us giving Julio the benefit of the doubt in all likelihood. I agree that it doesn't make sense to trade Julio at his lowest value, but I think people seem to generally be taking it for granted that his value isn't currently low.

This.

It's not that anyone believes Julio's incapable of rebounding - so much that his contract could be considered extremely valuable again. His late-season performance backs that up.

The point is that his first half stumble gives the rest of the teams a justifiable reason to question just how much surplus value is truly there, driving his trade value down far enough that it makes no sense to trade him IF you believe he's going to rebound. There's no reason to entertain the idea of trading him at this point unless another team believes in him as much as the Braves (and fans) do.

I understand those pointing out his 2 GOOD seasons. The problem is you have to understand the opposing perspective - he's only been good 67% of the time since you got a bad year with them. When you consider how many teams were skeptical about paying Cueto this winter, it's easy to see why they'd be skeptical about giving up premium talent for Julio as well. Both guys had an extended bad stretch to cloud what had otherwise been a pretty dominant resume. Those teams say "we know how good he CAN be, but I need to see it a little more because he wasn't that good recently".

If Teheran gives you 12-15 starts during the first half like the ones he delivered at the end of 2015, he might get you that offer of premium talent (both because of his contract and the lack of available options next winter), but you have to realize that even during his strong finish he still resembled a #3 at best - he only gave you MORE than 6 innings in 13 of his 33 starts last season.

[bravescountry]

I'm just going to say what I think after looking at a few posts here and there about comparing Teheran to Syndergaard and Urias or what not. ANd his trade value..
1) Teheran right now has little value, but if he rebounds in the first hald of 2016, he will have a whole ton of value to net a lot in return... that being said:

2) He being in the same category as Syndergaard and Urias..
I wouldn't involve Urias yet because he hasn't pitched in the majors, but I do want to say that the upside of Urias is a whole lot larger than the upside of Teheran. One commenter made an argument that Urias isn't an ace or something because he's rarely pitched in the minors, but that's not that strong of an argument if you see why he wasn't pitching much. It wasn't due to injury. He's a 19 year old in AAA. The Dodgers are going slow with him. He doesn't have injury concern, but rather due to age that he isn't pitching much.
And Syndergaard, why are you comparing Syndergaards 2015 with Teheran's 2014?If it's because of age (both were 23 in the years you compared), that's unfair because Teheran would have more experience. The true comparison should be like
Syndergaard: 9-7, 3.24 ERA, 150IP, 10 k/9, 1.9 BB/9, 166 k's, 1.047 WHIP
Teheran: 14-8, 3.20 ERA, 185 IP, 8.2 K/9, 2.2 BB/9, 170 k's,1.174 WHIP,
--> They aren't that different in their rookie seasons, but I'd take Syndergaard over Teheran..
And also abour prospect rankings, yes Syndergaard was ranked #10, but he was in a historic prospect class off Buxton, Correa, Lindor, Russell, Bryant, and more...and Urias is #4 right now...

3) Somebody said that Teheran can net a top 10 prospect or two top 50s including a top 25..
I doubt anybody would give that up for Teheran. A more reasonable expectation would be a top 30 prospect+ a top 100 prospect
Something like: Benintendi + Kopech// Brinson + Ortiz// Meadows + McGuire

Okay, so my final opinion is that I think Teheran, Inciarte, Freeman, and Markakis all end up on a different team by the start of 2017.
At the trade deadline, assuming they all show they are healthy and an produce, I think teams give up a ransom for Freeman, a solid package for Teheran, and a decent pacakge for Teheran. (I'd trade Markakis to almost anybody who takes his contract and offers a decent prospect)...

[zbhargrove]

This.

It's not that anyone believes Julio's incapable of rebounding - so much that his contract could be considered extremely valuable again. His late-season performance backs that up.

The point is that his first half stumble gives the rest of the teams a justifiable reason to question just how much surplus value is truly there, driving his trade value down far enough that it makes no sense to trade him IF you believe he's going to rebound. There's no reason to entertain the idea of trading him at this point unless another team believes in him as much as the Braves (and fans) do.

I understand those pointing out his 2 GOOD seasons. The problem is you have to understand the opposing perspective - he's only been good 67% of the time since you got a bad year with them. When you consider how many teams were skeptical about paying Cueto this winter, it's easy to see why they'd be skeptical about giving up premium talent for Julio as well. Both guys had an extended bad stretch to cloud what had otherwise been a pretty dominant resume. Those teams say "we know how good he CAN be, but I need to see it a little more because he wasn't that good recently".

If Teheran gives you 12-15 starts during the first half like the ones he delivered at the end of 2015, he might get you that offer of premium talent (both because of his contract and the lack of available options next winter), but you have to realize that even during his strong finish he still resembled a #3 at best - he only gave you MORE than 6 innings in 13 of his 33 starts last season.


Forgive me, but in no way can I take you seriously if you can keep saying Urias is more of an Ace than Teheran when he hasn't pitched more than 80 innings above A ball in his career...

[zbhargrove]

I'm just going to say what I think after looking at a few posts here and there about comparing Teheran to Syndergaard and Urias or what not. ANd his trade value..
1) Teheran right now has little value, but if he rebounds in the first hald of 2016, he will have a whole ton of value to net a lot in return... that being said:

2) He being in the same category as Syndergaard and Urias..
I wouldn't involve Urias yet because he hasn't pitched in the majors, but I do want to say that the upside of Urias is a whole lot larger than the upside of Teheran. One commenter made an argument that Urias isn't an ace or something because he's rarely pitched in the minors, but that's not that strong of an argument if you see why he wasn't pitching much. It wasn't due to injury. He's a 19 year old in AAA. The Dodgers are going slow with him. He doesn't have injury concern, but rather due to age that he isn't pitching much.
And Syndergaard, why are you comparing Syndergaards 2015 with Teheran's 2014?If it's because of age (both were 23 in the years you compared), that's unfair because Teheran would have more experience. The true comparison should be like
Syndergaard: 9-7, 3.24 ERA, 150IP, 10 k/9, 1.9 BB/9, 166 k's, 1.047 WHIP
Teheran: 14-8, 3.20 ERA, 185 IP, 8.2 K/9, 2.2 BB/9, 170 k's,1.174 WHIP,
--> They aren't that different in their rookie seasons, but I'd take Syndergaard over Teheran..
And also abour prospect rankings, yes Syndergaard was ranked #10, but he was in a historic prospect class off Buxton, Correa, Lindor, Russell, Bryant, and more...and Urias is #4 right now...

3) Somebody said that Teheran can net a top 10 prospect or two top 50s including a top 25..
I doubt anybody would give that up for Teheran. A more reasonable expectation would be a top 30 prospect+ a top 100 prospect
Something like: Benintendi + Kopech// Brinson + Ortiz// Meadows + McGuire

Okay, so my final opinion is that I think Teheran, Inciarte, Freeman, and Markakis all end up on a different team by the start of 2017.
At the trade deadline, assuming they all show they are healthy and an produce, I think teams give up a ransom for Freeman, a solid package for Teheran, and a decent pacakge for Teheran. (I'd trade Markakis to almost anybody who takes his contract and offers a decent prospect)...

Its a very strong argument... who cares about potential if its never realized? How can you call someone an ace without ever having pitched a MLB game, let alone more than 80 innings in the minors? When Teheran was a prospect he had just as high of a ceiling as Urias does. No one has any clue if Urias will be anything close to his ceiling... or even anywhere close to the pitcher Teheran is on his worst day.

[zbhargrove]

I'm just going to say what I think after looking at a few posts here and there about comparing Teheran to Syndergaard and Urias or what not. ANd his trade value..
1) Teheran right now has little value, but if he rebounds in the first hald of 2016, he will have a whole ton of value to net a lot in return... that being said:

2) He being in the same category as Syndergaard and Urias..
I wouldn't involve Urias yet because he hasn't pitched in the majors, but I do want to say that the upside of Urias is a whole lot larger than the upside of Teheran. One commenter made an argument that Urias isn't an ace or something because he's rarely pitched in the minors, but that's not that strong of an argument if you see why he wasn't pitching much. It wasn't due to injury. He's a 19 year old in AAA. The Dodgers are going slow with him. He doesn't have injury concern, but rather due to age that he isn't pitching much.
And Syndergaard, why are you comparing Syndergaards 2015 with Teheran's 2014?If it's because of age (both were 23 in the years you compared), that's unfair because Teheran would have more experience. The true comparison should be like
Syndergaard: 9-7, 3.24 ERA, 150IP, 10 k/9, 1.9 BB/9, 166 k's, 1.047 WHIP
Teheran: 14-8, 3.20 ERA, 185 IP, 8.2 K/9, 2.2 BB/9, 170 k's,1.174 WHIP,
--> They aren't that different in their rookie seasons, but I'd take Syndergaard over Teheran..
And also abour prospect rankings, yes Syndergaard was ranked #10, but he was in a historic prospect class off Buxton, Correa, Lindor, Russell, Bryant, and more...and Urias is #4 right now...

3) Somebody said that Teheran can net a top 10 prospect or two top 50s including a top 25..
I doubt anybody would give that up for Teheran. A more reasonable expectation would be a top 30 prospect+ a top 100 prospect
Something like: Benintendi + Kopech// Brinson + Ortiz// Meadows + McGuire

Okay, so my final opinion is that I think Teheran, Inciarte, Freeman, and Markakis all end up on a different team by the start of 2017.
At the trade deadline, assuming they all show they are healthy and an produce, I think teams give up a ransom for Freeman, a solid package for Teheran, and a decent pacakge for Teheran. (I'd trade Markakis to almost anybody who takes his contract and offers a decent prospect)...

So basically you just helped me make my point... that there is little difference between Syndergaard and Teheran... not this massive huge ridiculous gulf like clvclv was blathering about without thinking. That was my whole argument and you've helped me make it.

[Horsehide Harry]

This.

It's not that anyone believes Julio's incapable of rebounding - so much that his contract could be considered extremely valuable again. His late-season performance backs that up.

The point is that his first half stumble gives the rest of the teams a justifiable reason to question just how much surplus value is truly there, driving his trade value down far enough that it makes no sense to trade him IF you believe he's going to rebound. There's no reason to entertain the idea of trading him at this point unless another team believes in him as much as the Braves (and fans) do.

I understand those pointing out his 2 GOOD seasons. The problem is you have to understand the opposing perspective - he's only been good 67% of the time since you got a bad year with them. When you consider how many teams were skeptical about paying Cueto this winter, it's easy to see why they'd be skeptical about giving up premium talent for Julio as well. Both guys had an extended bad stretch to cloud what had otherwise been a pretty dominant resume. Those teams say "we know how good he CAN be, but I need to see it a little more because he wasn't that good recently".

If Teheran gives you 12-15 starts during the first half like the ones he delivered at the end of 2015, he might get you that offer of premium talent (both because of his contract and the lack of available options next winter), but you have to realize that even during his strong finish he still resembled a #3 at best - he only gave you MORE than 6 innings in 13 of his 33 starts last season.

Well, there are two sides to the equation. There may be a team that needs Teheran and Inciarte much more than the Braves do in their current situation AND be willing to pay for them. For instance take the Cubs who are built to contend for a WS right now. But, going into the season, they have their new RF, where a significant part of his value is his RF defense, slated to play CF. Now, Heyward likely can play a passable CF defensively BUT there is no question that he is out of position. Then you look at their SP where they have one stud and two very good guys who have a history of injury and/or age. They also have spare value that they could send to the Braves in return.

Is it possible that Inciarte will hit .330 with an OBP of .420 in the first half? Is it possible that Teheran will be sub 2 era in the first half? Of course. But it is at least equally possible that Inciarte will struggle with the move out of Arizona into what is likely to be a pretty awful lineup and that Teheran will start with an era of above 4.

In a perfect world both start off with career years and the Braves move them at the height of their value. But things are seldom perfect.

Right now both are 1. healthy 2. cost controlled 3. coming off either an excellent season or a good second half 4. in the offseason where an acquiring team would benefit for an entire season instead of just a playoff run 5. still young and projectable

Given all that why not keep them you say? Because the Braves need to fill holes, not necessarily for today but for 2017 and beyond and the best way to do that is trade for quality AND quantity.

But trading Teheran and Inciarte will at best move the holes you say? Not necessarily. There are internal options to replace Inciarte already in M Smith. And, his top of the lineup value is covered from a number of different directions from within with Albies, Swanson, Smith, etc. What the Braves really need is power and production bats, especially RH bats since they don't have any anywhere above rookie ball. Teheran is movable IF you believe in what you've spent the entire last year and a half doing which is acquiring young pitching. In addition, there are a number a quality veteran reclamation projects out there who could step in immediately and at least supply part of what Teheran brings.

Any move is a gamble. But a rebuilding club that gets at least good value (not necessarily great value) that potentially fills several long term holes has to be willing to make that move.

[Enscheff]

The point is that his first half stumble gives the rest of the teams a justifiable reason to question just how much surplus value is truly there, driving his trade value down far enough that it makes no sense to trade him IF you believe he's going to rebound. There's no reason to entertain the idea of trading him at this point unless another team believes in him as much as the Braves (and fans) do.


I already conceded this point. If other teams do not value him as a guy with $50M-$80M of surplus value then don't trade him. It would be selling low on this particular asset.

A top 10 prospect is worth about $40M-$50M in surplus value. A top 25-50 guy is worth around $20M-$30M. Guys outside the top 50 bust so often they aren't worth hoarding nor making the centerpiece of a deal.

So if no team is willing to send a prospect package that somehow totals Julio's surplus value....no deal.

[auyushu]

So if no team is willing to send a prospect package that somehow totals Julio's surplus value....no deal.

Pretty much sums it up. No reason to trade him unless we are getting this sort of value. We are really in a no way to lose situation with his contract for the most part.

[bravescountry]

So basically you just helped me make my point... that there is little difference between Syndergaard and Teheran... not this massive huge ridiculous gulf like clvclv was blathering about without thinking. That was my whole argument and you've helped me make it.

I wasn't taking sides- just clearing things up because you used different years of pitching which isn't really fair..

and also, to your previous response:
I can make the same argument about Teheran. If he DOESN'T rebound (in which I think he will, but we never know after Hansen ad Jurjen and Medlen and Beachy..), he will have practically no value..
and I just want to note, when you write something, make it more specific. Urias pitched more than 80 innings in the minors..
he's just never pitched more than 87 innings in a single season..
but in all honesty, I'd too take Urias over Teheran because his upside is just too great. He's only 19 years old and has dominated every single league he's been in..

[clvclv]

Pretty much sums it up. No reason to trade him unless we are getting this sort of value. We are really in a no way to lose situation with his contract for the most part.

And as of the moment, there's no one out there willing to meet that asking price.

Break it down and grasp at whatever straws someone on this message board likes (not directed at you obviously anyushu or Enscheff) - at his BEST, there's no question that Julio COULD be worth two Top 50-75 prospects. The problem is that his "best" was 2 seasons ago. If and when he gets back to that level for an extended period of time, he'll net that kind of return.

January 16, 2016 - coming off a season where he went 11-8 with a 4.04 ERA, a 93 ERA+, and 13 of 33 starts where he lasted more than 6 innings simply isn't that time.

Serious question for those who believe someone's going to give you 2 Top 50 prospects for Julio RIGHT NOW - if you believe the narrative that the Braves fleeced Arizona in the Miller deal, make sure that you use it as a reference. The D-Backs gave up ONE Top 50 prospect, ONE Top 60-100 prospect, and an "extra" OF piece to get Miller (coming off a MUCH BETTER year). Similar deals for Julio would include:

Boston - Moncada, Benintendi, and Jackie Bradley

Cubs - Gleyber Torres, Underwood, and Soler or Baez

Rangers - Gallo, Lewis Brinson, and Luis Ortiz or Michael Matuella

Rockies - Brendan Rodgers, Jeff Hoffman, and Charlie Blackmon

Astros - Cameron or Kyle Tucker, A. J. Reed, and Jake Marisnick

The question is, would you make ANY of those deals if you were running those teams after watching Teheran pitch last year??? If you would, you wouldn't have a job for very long, even if the Braves "threw-in" Inciarte.

[tomahawkchop]

There's another reason to hold onto Teheran for the time being that I haven't seen brought up...

Look at next year's crop of FA that teams will be picking from to find a SP: http://www.spotrac.com/mlb/free-agents/2017/starting-pitcher/

[mqt]

And as of the moment, there's no one out there willing to meet that asking price.

Break it down and grasp at whatever straws someone on this message board likes (not directed at you obviously anyushu or Enscheff) - at his BEST, there's no question that Julio COULD be worth two Top 50-75 prospects. The problem is that his "best" was 2 seasons ago. If and when he gets back to that level for an extended period of time, he'll net that kind of return.

January 16, 2016 - coming off a season where he went 11-8 with a 4.04 ERA, a 93 ERA+, and 13 of 33 starts where he lasted more than 6 innings simply isn't that time.

Serious question for those who believe someone's going to give you 2 Top 50 prospects for Julio RIGHT NOW - if you believe the narrative that the Braves fleeced Arizona in the Miller deal, make sure that you use it as a reference. The D-Backs gave up ONE Top 50 prospect, ONE Top 60-100 prospect, and an "extra" OF piece to get Miller (coming off a MUCH BETTER year). Similar deals for Julio would include:

Boston - Moncada, Benintendi, and Jackie Bradley

Cubs - Gleyber Torres, Underwood, and Soler or Baez

Rangers - Gallo, Lewis Brinson, and Luis Ortiz or Michael Matuella

Rockies - Brendan Rodgers, Jeff Hoffman, and Charlie Blackmon

Astros - Cameron or Kyle Tucker, A. J. Reed, and Jake Marisnick

The question is, would you make ANY of those deals if you were running those teams after watching Teheran pitch last year??? If you would, you wouldn't have a job for very long, even if the Braves "threw-in" Inciarte.

To pose this question a different way, would any of you trade Swanson, Allard and Inciarte for Garrett Richards?

[ixiXSolidXixi]

I don't know what plan the braves have with Inciarte but you think the Braves can trade him to the Astros for Carlos Gomez and Daz Cameron or Tucker and on the trade deadline trade Carlos for another 1 or 2 prospects more?

[auyushu]

And as of the moment, there's no one out there willing to meet that asking price.


So we keep him and see where things stand at the deadline or next offseason. No harm done either way really. We either have a guy with about the same value as he has now signed at a below market rate, or he rebounds and is worth a ton or is a fantastic #2 starter for us if we decide to keep him. There is just zero reason to sell him low. Before pitcher contracts went to the moon this offseason I was more in favor of moving him this offseason, but with guys who have career ERAs in the 3.90 range getting 14 mil a year it makes no sense at all to move Julio right now unless we are blown away.

I personally wouldn't expect 2 top 50 prospects for Julio even if he just had a 3.25ish ERA last season. Though I think a top 30ish and top 75ish would be reasonable.

I'd personally just hold on to him, hope he bounces back to a sub 3.50 ERA this season, and try to flip him to Boston for Benintendi (or a package including Daz/Tucker if they are looking solid) at the deadline or next offseason if they need pitching.

[zbhargrove]

I wasn't taking sides- just clearing things up because you used different years of pitching which isn't really fair..

and also, to your previous response:
I can make the same argument about Teheran. If he DOESN'T rebound (in which I think he will, but we never know after Hansen ad Jurjen and Medlen and Beachy..), he will have practically no value..
and I just want to note, when you write something, make it more specific. Urias pitched more than 80 innings in the minors..
he's just never pitched more than 87 innings in a single season..
but in all honesty, I'd too take Urias over Teheran because his upside is just too great. He's only 19 years old and has dominated every single league he's been in..

Well, if you would rather have Urias over Teheran, I can't help you... but that's just plain silly. To take a 19 year old prospect without a pitch in the majors over a 24 year that has already proven he can be a TOR pitcher is ridiculous. Again, you're still forgetting that Teheran had the same ceiling as Urias does when he was a prospect. The big difference? Teheran has actually shown he can do it in the majors... Urias has not.

[Carp]

I wasn't taking sides- just clearing things up because you used different years of pitching which isn't really fair..

and also, to your previous response:
I can make the same argument about Teheran. If he DOESN'T rebound (in which I think he will, but we never know after Hansen ad Jurjen and Medlen and Beachy..), he will have practically no value..
and I just want to note, when you write something, make it more specific. Urias pitched more than 80 innings in the minors..
he's just never pitched more than 87 innings in a single season..
but in all honesty, I'd too take Urias over Teheran because his upside is just too great. He's only 19 years old and has dominated every single league he's been in..

I'd take Urias over JT simply because we're in rebuild mode. But no team that wants to win in 2016 is taking Urias over JT, everything else being equal. But I'm not doing that trade straight up either. Quality MLB pitchers on a team friendly deal are worth more than 1 elite pitching prospect. At the same time, it's highly unlikely the Dodgers offer up Urias in a trade simply because they could likely get a pitcher like Sonny Gray with a similar package.

[NYCBrave]

There's another reason to hold onto Teheran for the time being that I haven't seen brought up...

Look at next year's crop of FA that teams will be picking from to find a SP: http://www.spotrac.com/mlb/free-agents/2017/starting-pitcher/

Great point, especially if he has a rebound season this year. Plus it gives us another year to see where we are in the rebuild and if we have any remote chance to compete in 2017 or 2018

[Chico]

The Astros had 3 objectives to start the season and it was to add a power arm in the pen, a contact hitter, and a #3 starter. They added Giles, but Rasmus accepting the QO has put them at max with their budget. So Julio and Inciarte are two players that would be very useful to their plans as well as fit in their budget. It's not easy competing in the AL with a $70 Million budget. We would have to take back Feldman or Neshak to make the money work, but I can definitely see an opportunity to get Springer back in a deal. I don't think we'd get any of their top 4 prospects, but they have some depth there depending on the deal and the money.

[emk418]

We should be looking into Desmond if the reports are true about him potentially taking a 1 year deal. He's been open to playing other positions....we should consider bringing him in at 3B

[msstate7]

We should be looking into Desmond if the reports are true about him potentially taking a 1 year deal. He's been open to playing other positions....we should consider bringing him in at 3B

I'd love to have him at 3b

[NYCBrave]

I'd love to have him at 3b

It's a bit of a gamble for us. Say we sign him to a 1 year contract and he doesn't rebound, then it's a waste. The risk would be that that he rebounds, and we offer a qualifying offer to which he rejects. Essentially we'd be buying a draft pick through this type of deal. The problem is, he's already 30.

[bamfin21]

People say that Teheran isn’t an ace, which got me to thinking, “What exactly is an ‘ace?’” I picked out Tom Glavine from the group of that “Big 3” group from the 90’s to see if everyone on here thought that he was an ace. Yes, I know I’m comparing Teheran to a 300 game winner and a Hall of Famer, but bear with me for a moment.

When you look at Glavine’s stat line entering his age 25 season (his 1991 NL CY Young Award Season), here is what you had:

ERA CG SHO IP H R ER HR BB SO BF ERA+ FIP WHIP H9 HR9 BB9 SO9
4.29 8 4 646.0 660 344 308 55 214 323 2777 89 3.95 1.353 9.2 0.8 3.0 4.5

Certainly he wasn’t ace worthy with those numbers, correct? Now let’s look at Julio’s numbers entering his age 25 season (2016):

ERA CG SHO IP H R ER HR BB SO BF ERA+ FIP WHIP H9 HR9 BB9 SO9
3.44 4 2 633.1 576 265 242 75 178 542 2612 108 3.90 1.191 8.2 1.1 2.5 7.7

Teheran looks to be better than Glavine in just about every category other than HR/9. I’ve said that Julio needs to work on his HR ratio though and, if he gets that under control I do think that he will develop as an ace. That doesn’t explain his poor 2015 season, as his HR rate was just slightly higher than it was over the past two seasons.
Again, I’m not trying to call Teheran the next Glavine, because that would be unfair and it would make me look like an idiot. I’m merely trying to point out that Julio is a 25-year-old in MLB and I don’t think it’s fair to say that Syndergaard or Urias are better than he is. He had a bad 2015 that showed a drop in velocity (was that ever explained, by the way?), which I still think was injury related. If we are going to bank on potential with other guys, I think we should do it with Julio as well. I understand that 2016 was bad for him and got him on several people’s crap list, but he was just 24. I think Julio still holds value to several teams especially with that contract. Most pitchers don’t hit their prime until their mid-20’s anyway and you need no further pitchers to look at other than “The Big 3” from the 90’s. If teams aren’t offering me a lot for Teheran, I hang up the phone and let him develop around my young group that I already have.

[NYCBrave]

People say that Teheran isn’t an ace, which got me to thinking, “What exactly is an ‘ace?’” I picked out Tom Glavine from the group of that “Big 3” group from the 90’s to see if everyone on here thought that he was an ace. Yes, I know I’m comparing Teheran to a 300 game winner and a Hall of Famer, but bear with me for a moment.

When you look at Glavine’s stat line entering his age 25 season (his 1991 NL CY Young Award Season), here is what you had:

ERA CG SHO IP H R ER HR BB SO BF ERA+ FIP WHIP H9 HR9 BB9 SO9
4.29 8 4 646.0 660 344 308 55 214 323 2777 89 3.95 1.353 9.2 0.8 3.0 4.5

Certainly he wasn’t ace worthy with those numbers, correct? Now let’s look at Julio’s numbers entering his age 25 season (2016):

ERA CG SHO IP H R ER HR BB SO BF ERA+ FIP WHIP H9 HR9 BB9 SO9
3.44 4 2 633.1 576 265 242 75 178 542 2612 108 3.90 1.191 8.2 1.1 2.5 7.7

Teheran looks to be better than Glavine in just about every category other than HR/9. I’ve said that Julio needs to work on his HR ratio though and, if he gets that under control I do think that he will develop as an ace. That doesn’t explain his poor 2015 season, as his HR rate was just slightly higher than it was over the past two seasons.
Again, I’m not trying to call Teheran the next Glavine, because that would be unfair and it would make me look like an idiot. I’m merely trying to point out that Julio is a 25-year-old in MLB and I don’t think it’s fair to say that Syndergaard or Urias are better than he is. He had a bad 2015 that showed a drop in velocity (was that ever explained, by the way?), which I still think was injury related. If we are going to bank on potential with other guys, I think we should do it with Julio as well. I understand that 2016 was bad for him and got him on several people’s crap list, but he was just 24. I think Julio still holds value to several teams especially with that contract. Most pitchers don’t hit their prime until their mid-20’s anyway and you need no further pitchers to look at other than “The Big 3” from the 90’s. If teams aren’t offering me a lot for Teheran, I hang up the phone and let him develop around my young group that I already have.

I think the main flaw in your argument is the game has changed so much in those past 25 years. Players are coming in and becoming all star caliber talents are much younger ages.

[bamfin21]

Yeah, and I thought about that as well and meant to include it in the post. Glavine was pitching in the steroid ERA, which inflates his numbers a bit, but ERA+ should be adjusted to that, if I understand the statistic correctly. It's just another angle to look at, that I didn't see anyone else post. Everyone is welcome to agree or disagree with it.

[thewupk]

Yeah, and I thought about that as well and meant to include it in the post. Glavine was pitching in the steroid ERA, which inflates his numbers a bit, but ERA+ should be adjusted to that, if I understand the statistic correctly. It's just another angle to look at, that I didn't see anyone else post. Everyone is welcome to agree or disagree with it.

That wouldn't really matter with Glavines pre 25 years though as the offensive spike started around 93 or so. With that being said yeah Glavine, Maddux, and esppecially Smoltz didn't start out guns blazing when they hit the majors. They needed some time to develop and most starters do. JT is 25 and has plenty of time to get better. Is he an ace? No and I doubt he ever gets there as true aces are hard to come by. But he is a good pitcher on an extremely team friendly deal and someone we shouldn't be trading unless blown away.

[smootness]

I think the main flaw in your argument is the game has changed so much in those past 25 years. Players are coming in and becoming all star caliber talents are much younger ages.

Yeah...you mean guys like Jake Arrieta, Corey Kluber, Max Scherzer, Jacob deGrom, Dallas Keuchel, Carlos Carrasco, and Jeff Samardzija?

Just so we're clear, none of the above guys had been an all-star or could even be argued as 'all-star caliber' after their age 25 season, which Teheran hasn't pitched yet, and some were barely even in the majors at all at that point. Teheran has done more in the majors at this point in his career than any of the above guys had done.

Just saying.

[praeceps93]

I think the main flaw in your argument is the game has changed so much in those past 25 years. Players are coming in and becoming all star caliber talents are much younger ages.

I feel like this is probably incorrect. Some guys come in and play amazingly because of the additional years of travel ball/prep leagues before they're drafted, but there are still the guys who take time to develop. Guys like Trout are the minority, even among the best in the game.

[NYCBrave]

Yeah...you mean guys like Jake Arrieta, Corey Kluber, Max Scherzer, Jacob deGrom, Dallas Keuchel, Carlos Carrasco, and Jeff Samardzija?

Just so we're clear, none of the above guys had been an all-star or could even be argued as 'all-star caliber' after their age 25 season, which Teheran hasn't pitched yet, and some were barely even in the majors at all at that point. Teheran has done more in the majors at this point in his career than any of the above guys had done.

Just saying.

Some strange names you chose to group together, and really doesn't tell the whole story. How about we take a look at the top 15 ERA leaders from last year:

Greinke: Interesting career. Outside of his age 25 CY Young Season, he really didn't start dominating until he came to the Dodgers at age 29.
Arrieta: Breakout season at age 29, was very bad until age 28
Kershaw: Dominated since age 21
Price: Dominated in his first full season at age 24
Keuchel: Came up at age 24, had two rough seasons, came out of nowhere at age 26 (7th round pick)
DeGrom: Came up as an age 26 rookie and dominated from the start. (9th round pick, underwhelming minor league stats).
Cole: Dominated from the start as a 22 year old rookie
Harvey: Dominated from the start as a 23 year old rookie
Sonny Gray: Has been very good since being a 23 year old rookie
John Lackey: N/A
Scherzer: Up and down his whole career until putting it together at age 28 (1st round pick)
Bumgarner: Has pretty much dominated from the start being an age 20 rookie
Carlos Martinez: First full season as a starter at age 23, very good season
Shelby Miller: First full season was age 22 and has been pretty good since
Lance Lynn: First full season at age 25, pretty solid since

Yea, it's hard to conclude much from these results. The people you mentioned as your examples all of the sudden put it together out of nowhere, and that's not something you can assume as a normal progression for any pitcher.

[smootness]

Yea, it's hard to conclude much from these results. The people you mentioned as your examples all of the sudden put it together out of nowhere, and that's not something you can assume as a normal progression for any pitcher.

I obviously picked the guys that helped make my point.

All your list says is that big-time pitchers take many different routes to get there. Some dominate out of the gate, some take a while to even make the majors, and others struggle for several years before figuring it out.

That still goes against your point that guys are coming in and dominating at young ages and therefore Teheran's lack of true ace numbers through his age 24 season says something about his ceiling in the majors. Teheran has been a good major league pitcher so far in his 3-year career. Every pitcher goes through some ups and downs, save for the truly elite, like Kershaw. There's nothing in Teheran's career so far that suggests he can't become a TOR starter or ace.

[cajunrevenge]

Greinke was always good. He was just drafted by an incompetent organization. Greinke was pretty much his own pitching coach figuring **** out for himself. He arbitrarily decided to throw slower so that he could gain more control. His control wasnt that bad to begin with for a guy who started pitching 6 months before being drafted. Anyways when he got to the Royals he was decent. Keep in mind he started pitching about January 2002, was drafted in the top 10 in June 2002 as a pitcher and spent most of 2004 in the starting rotation with an ERA under 4. So he quickly realizes over 2004 that the Royals are losers and no matter how well he pitches they still have no chance so he starts pitching for fun instead of effectiveness. The fans turn on him and he quits. He spends his time away deciding if he even wants to play baseball anymore. Its during this time he attends Braves spring training as a fan and some scout tells Bill Shanks that kid is a future hall of famer if the Braves ever get him. So he comes back in 2007 as a starter and he is getting rocked. They move him to the bullpen where he is lights out. Someone asks him why he is so good as a reliever and not a starter and he tells them its because he throws harder as a reliever. I dont remember who but some genius said "Hey why dont you try throwing harder as a a starter". Since then his k rate has gone up, bounced around a little, but every season since he has had a higher k rate than his first 3 seasons. His walk rate has also continuously dropped over time. If he was with a competent organization there would not have been that bump in the road that slowed down his development. Yes, I am president of his fan club.