Heyward ... Should we trade him now?

[Braves1976]

For the record, I like Heyward a lot and consider him the best defensive player on the team after Simmons. When you combine that with his offense (and the potential he has to do more offensively). It makes him a really important player to keep if we can do so. I wanted to sign Heyward, Freeman and Simmons long-term last off-season. But so far it seems nothing is close with Freeman or Heyward (and no word if we've even approached Simmons yet).

Hopefully we can keep all three, but if not we should do what we can to at least keep two of them. Simmons should be the easiest to lock up if we're smart and do so soon.

[Heyward]

Should we trade him now? The answer is the same as with any other player. It depends. On what the return is.

It is worth keeping in mind that a particular player's value reflects his production minus what he is paid. Once you get past the pre-free agency years, players generally get paid the expected value of their production. So no expected surplus once you get past those years. Occasionally, you see a player signed to a well below or well above market deal. The ones on below market deals (like Chris Sale) have a lot of value. The ones performing below their contract (Uggla, Wells, etc) you have to pay the other team to take.

Going beyond the basics stated above are secondary considerations. Can you trade from an area of surplus to fill an area of weakness? Specifically, with respect to Heyward you have to consider what you have in-house to replace him. Is Joey Terdoslavich for example someone that we need to make room for in the lineup?

An interesting example to consider is Heyward for Price? Does adding Price to the rotation help us more than losing Heyward from the outfield hurt us? Would the Rays also view a Heyward for Price deal in similar terms?

Whether Price is more likely to sign a below market deal than Heyward is another consideration that has to be taken into account when thinking about that hypothetical. I don't know the answer. Wren presumably has a good sense of the answer to that one.

Btw I don't view a 20M AAV for Heyward's post-arb years as an overpay. I think that would be a good deal for the team. From a budgeting perspective we can do this. After the 2015 season Justin Upton, Medlen and Uggla all hit free agency. After 2016 Kimbrel will in all likelihood be gone. So we can pay Heyward 20M/year easily. I would actually pay him a bit more for his post-free agency years if that is what it takes. To me Heyward projects as a 4-5 WAR per year player through his early 30s. The going price for that kind of output is around 25M/year. He's not like Cano and Choo whose production will be in significant decline once they hit the second half of the deals they just signed.

I think you're over-estimating what Heyward would get on the open market.

Choo didnt even get 20 mil a year, and hes much better than Heyward.

Older, i know but besides the point.

[Heyward]

And if the reports are true, then yes you trade him.

But agree with one poster it should of been done earlier in the offseason.

[Heyward]

Right now, TODAY, JUpton has more trade value in the market place than Heyward. Next year who knows.

No, he doesnt.

[Heyward]

It's always lets trade Heyward and never lets trade Freeman...Weird. I've never seen a fan base want to get rid of their best player so badly. I guess everyone just forgets how badly the Braves play when Jason is not in the lineup...

Has nothing to do with that, we are better with him but what good is it if he wont re-sign long-term?

Better to get value instead of a draft pick that will likely amount to nothing.

[nsacpi]

I think you're over-estimating what Heyward would get on the open market.

Choo didnt even get 20 mil a year, and hes much better than Heyward.

Older, i know but besides the point.

WAR the last three season:

Choo: 1.3, 2.4, 5.2

Heyward: 2.0, 6.4, 3.4

And older is not besides the point.

[nsacpi]

Has nothing to do with that, we are better with him but what good is it if he wont re-sign long-term?

Better to get value instead of a draft pick that will likely amount to nothing.

The value is the 2 seasons at sub-market prices and the draft pick. That's what you weigh against trade offers.

[benchguy]

who knows, maybe it was put out there earlier and there were no takers or something
is in the works..

And if the reports are true, then yes you trade him.

But agree with one poster it should of been done earlier in the offseason.

[nsacpi]

who knows, maybe it was put out there earlier and there were no takers or something
is in the works..

I'd be very surprised if Heyward gets moved this off-season. He'd be very difficult to replace, especially considering our current situation in center and the fact he can play there. He's also one of those players who tends to be dinged a bit by the arbitration process since defense makes up a significant part of his value. Of course, from the club's perspective that increases his surplus value.

[skillet]

I'd be very wary of signing anyone to a long term deal unless they were willing to give a real discount, and that rarely happens. The risk predominantly shifts to the team when you do that. Sure a player might be giving up some potential money down the road if he performs really well, but as a general rule long term deals rarely work out for the good of the team, unless of course you get a great deal like the Sale contract.

Look at all the long term deals we have signed over the past several years. Lowe, Kawakami, Uggla, BJ, etc. They've all bitten us square in the a__. I would go year to year with all of them and if they were really good at the end of the six years, we gain the draft pick, gain the money we had been spending on them, and go with the younger, cheaper talent. Again, unless someone is willing to give a Sale like discount, I'd continue to go year to year.

[thethe]

You only trade Heyward after making MULTIPLE attempts to resign him. 20 million a year is not a lot in the current state of major league baseball, especially for a player like Jason.

[Carp]

Are you Brian Kinney's alter ego? Try getting off the WAR and look at the world. Power is the name of the game right now. Upton has demonstrated power, Heyward has not. Uptons costs are fixed for next 2 years, Heywards are not. And there is the injury thing. Like it or not, JHey is constantly prone to nit picking injuries. Some players just are. I willing concede that Heyward is probably the most talented player on our team (well Simmons has to be considered) but he is not the end all to everything.

I forgot to add, there are reasons why Heyward will be getting a modest 2nd arb year salary.

I doubt seriously anyone other than you and family members of the Uptons think that J-Up has more trade value than Heyward. Heyward is younger and cheaper, and just as good of a player as Upton. And J-Up has proven to be just as injury prone, if not more, than Heyward as well.

[Carp]

I think you're over-estimating what Heyward would get on the open market.

Choo didnt even get 20 mil a year, and hes much better than Heyward.

Older, i know but besides the point.

Choo is a lot older and is still getting 18.9 mil. Only at Heywatrd doesn't get 20 mill is if he has a bad yr/gets hurt in his walk yr.

[thewupk]

Has nothing to do with that, we are better with him but what good is it if he wont re-sign long-term?

Better to get value instead of a draft pick that will likely amount to nothing.

Value in prospects that may amount to nothing? Braves have a small window to win. Trading one of your best players for the future isn't what we should be doing.

[jcc03004]

Yes but if we can not or should not resign him shouldn't we see what we could get ?

[yeezus]

Heyward would get more on the open market than Choo did.
Come on.
I don't want to deal him unless it's ridiculous. There's no point right now.

[thewupk]

Yes but if we can not or should not resign him shouldn't we see what we could get ?

I would rather take a couple of years of trying to win the WS and taking a first round draft pick. But that's just me.

[Perfect Cell]

Tomahawk trade has an article up saying we should be looking to get max value for j-hey hence trade him now. I agree with that sentiment because I think Jason is as unsignable as kimbrel but for different reasons. Kimbrel's unsignability is maybe overstated because of any of the big four including simba, ff , Jason and Craig, I could see kimbrel being the one most likely to take a discount to stay here. However even if we wanted to extend him budget wise and he agreed its not efficient to spend our payroll $ on a closer. Heyward is probably not going to sign for anything less then 20 aav including arb years which is insane. Jason's great but we can not spend 20% of our payroll on 1 player I say trade him. My question(s) are 1. Should we trade him and 2. What could we receive back ? Can't seem to be able to find the URL I'm using the bleacher report app on the iphone5.

don't deal jhey

[zitothebrave]

Value in prospects that may amount to nothing? Braves have a small window to win. Trading one of your best players for the future isn't what we should be doing.

Exactly. ALso we're not the the Rays or A's we can afford to have a highly paid player or 2. If we have to break the bank on Jason and Freddie so be it. Braves shoudl do everything in their power to keep Jason here long term. Short of making him the highest paid player in baseball.

[Hudson2]

Signing Heyward would be a lot easier if Uptons contract wasn't on the books or the next 4 years. But he don't wanna talk extension with us or resign for some reason. I wanna win as bad as anybody but I also don't wanna hold onto a player to long and then get squat in the long run. We have a history of that as it is. If Wren can get an awesome return for him then he needs to be fired for not taking it.