I'm sure they would want as much as they could get...Originally Posted by Horsehide Harry
I'm sure they would want as much as they could get...
I actually think Inciarte has a higher ceiling. In fact, I think Inciarte's current value is only slightly lower than Mallex's ceiling.
I think we'll eventually trade Inciarte, but I love him and want him to stay for as long as he can.
Uh...no thanks?
Also, I don't want to be paying 36-year-old Longoria $20 million.
That was my point.
To daydream about acquiring quality players like Longoria to fix the offense is fine, even therapeutic in a way. But what the acquired player brings is only half the equation. The other half of the equation, what you have to give up for that quality acquisition, is never going to fit within the concepts of a rebuilding situation.
Well yeah, nobody does. That's with any contract though. You're always going to regret that last year and more than likely eat part of it or attach a prospect to trade said player. Most teams factor that in to the equation. I'm more open to taking on contracts or trading for players and extending them before the offseason of 2018-2019 when everyone overspends and average annual salaries jump up.
Nobody knows what it would cost to acquire him. You're just wanting to punt for two more years so you make everything that's not tanking sound impossible. That's no way to live brother!
Alright, so give me what you think it would cost.
Obviously a trade for Longoria would have to center around guys not named Ozzy Albies. All these arms were acquired precisely to bring in players like Longoria via trade. A 3-4 WAR player at 3B is exactly what this team needs if they plan to compete next year, and those types of players aren't usually available for less than $20M per year.
If the goal of competing next year is just lip service, which it probably is, then a Longoria trade makes little sense.
I don't disagree. I have just asked Chico what would need to go back from the Braves to get it done. So far, no response.
I mean everyone laughs at Lenny Land for the Trout thread where you trade 19 different versions of ML backwash for a future HoF. But trading for Longoria is a scalable version of that argument. You're not going to be able to trade 8 versions of ML backwash for Longoria any more than 19 would work for Trout.
Given his age and contract, I'd be willing to bet against you on that. Especially given the deep 3b market this winter.
How much and how long would it take to get valbuena?
I think he'll get at least 3/36 from someone. But it all depends on when he signs. If he waits too long, someone could get a good deal.
I don't know what it would cost, but to say it would cost 3 of our top 5/6 prospects and we shouldn't bother is kind of silly to me. I like Longo, but it's not going to take that much and if we wanted to do it, then it could be done without bending over. Nobody has said anything about giving them 8 roster fillers to acquire him.
You just seem so set on punting for the next 2 years, that you poo poo on everyone's suggestions that doesn't involve trading with the Rockies for Dahl/Mcmahon or saving our money for the big free gent class of 2018-2019.
I tend to agree with HH on punting. I just don't think the pitching will be ready next year. I think we can trade our biggest assets now and get players who are ready to compete by 2018/19 when our pitching will be infused with (hopefully) better depth. I like our pitching now, but to really compete we need more.. I don't think JT and Folty can do it alone.
But probably like HH, I am not giving anyone away and we would need to get massive return for any of our big assets left to trade (Viz?, JT, FF, Ender)
Horsehide Harry (08-19-2016)
Longoria will be owed between $99M-$107M depending on whether or not the option for his age 37 season is picked up. Assuming he is a 4.5 WAR player right now and the typical aging curve, he can be expected to produce 16-18 WAR over the rest of his contract. At $8M per WAR, that is a value of $128M-$144M, for a surplus value in the $30M-$45M range.
Here are the expected values of the Braves top 100 prospects:
#5 Swanson: $50M (not available)
#16 Albies: $40M (not available)
#54 Newcomb: $10M-$20M (probably close to the high end)
#69 Allard: $10M (I would value him at least 2x that though)
#88 Anderson: $10M
Everyone else: less than $10M, but I would value Soroka and Maitan very highly, and probably would not trade them.
Mallex is probably a 2 WAR player that should be expected to provide close to $50M in surplus value due to being paid the league minimum.
Ender is probably a 3 WAR player who will likely provide in the neighborhood of $35M in surplus value. I don't think the Rays would want Inciarte since he only has 3 years of control remaining. The Cubs will need a CFer and are more logical trade partners involving Inciarte.
The rest of the Braves assets are either too old or not valuable enough to headline a package for Longoria. They could be used as filler to close a gap in value of ~$5M.
So cobble together your own potential packages. Mallex for Longoria straight up makes some sense. Something centered around Newcomb makes sense, though I think it would be unwise to sell low on him.
Ultimately, I think the Braves will try to cash in either Mallex or Inciarte to acquire a position player, probably at C or 3B. Whoever they keep will be the starter in CF, and both are too good to be wasting their value as a 4th OFer on a bad team. A RHed hitting CFer should be acquired to share some time with either player because neither of those two guys should be playing regularly vs LHed pitchers.
Last edited by Enscheff; 08-19-2016 at 03:02 PM.
I can appreciate that and it's not wrong in an ideal situaiton. I'm just looking at the money aspect of it to figure out what they're more likely to do. Always follow the money! They want everyone and their mom to come to the complex to catch a game, and then keep coming back for the restaurants. That complex is going to be a cash cow for them. It almost reminds me of how you used to get free stuff for going to see a timeshare tour, only this is people are paying for a ticket to see a complex tour. There's no way we can continue to punt with that much revenue on the line.
there is probably a happy middle somewhere in there that the FO will take. This board tends to talk in extremes either for one side or the other.
Longoria's contract is still a good value. Including the buyout you would be paying him 16.5 million per year for the next 6 seasons. That's basically market value for a 2.5 WAR player. So if you feel Longoria can produce 15 WAR from 2017 on wards then he will produce to his contract. But you do have to factor in what it would cost to get him. He won't come cheap in the prospects dept.
If there's a player we should trade, it's Markakis. But if not anyone, there's nothing wrong with going four deep in the outfield, especially since two of the players are older.
Man, if Mallex is considered as a $50M in excess value by WAR then there is something wrong with that metric. From what I've seen is he's a 4th OF on a good team.
If The Rays would take Mallex for Longoria straight up, or even adding a little, then the John's pen should catch fire they sign off on the deal so fast.
The same goes for Inciarte.
Neither have shown the skills that they can lead off consistently. That means any (good) team that plays them is likely slotting them 8th and having to make up for their lack of production with the bat somewhere else.
I just don't see their value being anywhere close to being as high as you have it no matter what WAR says.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote