Page 16 of 33 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 320 of 653

Thread: Miller market 'hot'

  1. #301
    Sabermetric Slut
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Your Mom's Basement
    Posts
    29,669
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,721
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8,744
    Thanked in
    5,837 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    I'm not so sure I buy that. Case in point: the most recent Kimbrel trade. The Padres got a pretty sweet haul for Kimbrel, and it included a top 15ish hitting prospect in Margot.

    This front office just can't seem to play their hand correctly and score position players.
    Thay could be the case but closers, especially someone like Kimbrel, tend to be overrated compared to what they actually bring to a team. No doubt the Padres got a good deal there.

    Maybe it is the Braves FO that just keeps screwing up.

  2. #302
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by nsacpi View Post
    There are some counterexamples like the Kimbrel trade, but I think pitching is relatively abundant and hitting relatively scarce at the moment. We'll get some additional info when guys like Upton, Heyward and Cespedes sign. Last off-season the hitters were getting about 1M more per projected win than the free agent pitchers. I'm expecting more of the same this year.
    Fine, but the fact of the matter is the Braves traded Kimbrel when he was more valuable and got a lesser return. Part of the reason for that is they wanted to shed BJs money, which they are now wasting on guys like Norris, JJ and Beckham. So even that bit of "value" was rather pointless.

    Would you rather have the Padres return for Kimbrel while still paying BJ? I'm pretty sure I would. The Braves are going to be absolutely wretched for the next 2-3 years, so BJ may as well been a part of it...he still offered some sort of upside after all. At least they would have had a potential impact bat in the system instead of another MOR lottery ticket.

    It all goes back to the current series of trades/signings not following a logical plan in any way. It is very disappointing to say the least.

  3. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Enscheff For This Useful Post:

    Hawk (12-02-2015), sc1767 (12-02-2015)

  4. #303
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by thewupk View Post
    Thay could be the case but closers, especially someone like Kimbrel, tend to be overrated compared to what they actually bring to a team. No doubt the Padres got a good deal there.

    Maybe it is the Braves FO that just keeps screwing up.
    I guess we will find out once the Miller trade goes down. If the return is anything less than a legit position player (not Olivera) we pretty much have our answer.

  5. #304
    I <3 Ron Paul + gilesfan sturg33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    52,587
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,018
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8,096
    Thanked in
    5,758 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Carp View Post
    You're assuming the Braves had 23 million per year to spend on a player at that point in time. Clearly they didn't with their payroll lIke it was.
    I mean... Uggla's money + Markakis' money was $24M

  6. #305
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    11,386
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,392
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,746
    Thanked in
    1,975 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by sturg33 View Post

    I mean... Uggla's money + Markakis' money was $24M
    We were still paying Uggla's contract. And had other bad contracts while needing several upgrades to the roster. For a team with a roughly 100 million payroll, it wasn't feasible.

  7. #306
    Expects Yuge Games nsacpi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    47,433
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,704
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11,384
    Thanked in
    7,533 Posts
    It is somewhat irrelevant to consider whether the Braves could have paid Heyward 25M or whatever last year. I believe his salary was 9M in 2015. The question is whether they could have carried that salary in 2016 and beyond. No?

    We keep hearing from the front office about enhanced revenue streams and higher payrolls in 2017 and beyond from the new stadium. So the only year where it might have been an issue is 2016. I believe after the Maybin trade we would have easily been able to accommodate such a contract. To say nothing of the option for back-loading it.
    Last edited by nsacpi; 12-02-2015 at 02:15 PM.

  8. #307
    It's OVER 5,000! UNCBlue012's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    23,426
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    4,919
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,636
    Thanked in
    1,990 Posts
    Olney: As with other players not named Freddie Freeman, the Braves will listen to offers on Julio Teheran, at a time when pitching prices are high.

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to UNCBlue012 For This Useful Post:

    Knucksie (12-02-2015)

  10. #308
    It's OVER 5,000! UNCBlue012's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    23,426
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    4,919
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,636
    Thanked in
    1,990 Posts
    MLB TRADE RUMORS: Jeff Samardzija Has Purportedly Received $100MM Offer mlbtraderumors.com/2015/12/jeff-s…

  11. #309
    Sabermetric Slut
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Your Mom's Basement
    Posts
    29,669
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,721
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8,744
    Thanked in
    5,837 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by UNCBlue012 View Post
    MLB TRADE RUMORS: Jeff Samardzija Has Purportedly Received $100MM Offer mlbtraderumors.com/2015/12/jeff-s…
    5/100 would be pretty consistant with the current market

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to thewupk For This Useful Post:

    cajunrevenge (12-02-2015)

  13. #310
    Hessmania Forever
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    13,994
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    4,887
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    7,678
    Thanked in
    4,941 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by UNCBlue012 View Post
    MLB TRADE RUMORS: Jeff Samardzija Has Purportedly Received $100MM Offer mlbtraderumors.com/2015/12/jeff-s…

  14. #311
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    6,431
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    173
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,579
    Thanked in
    1,044 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    Fine, but the fact of the matter is the Braves traded Kimbrel when he was more valuable and got a lesser return. Part of the reason for that is they wanted to shed BJs money, which they are now wasting on guys like Norris, JJ and Beckham. So even that bit of "value" was rather pointless.

    Would you rather have the Padres return for Kimbrel while still paying BJ? I'm pretty sure I would. The Braves are going to be absolutely wretched for the next 2-3 years, so BJ may as well been a part of it...he still offered some sort of upside after all. At least they would have had a potential impact bat in the system instead of another MOR lottery ticket.

    It all goes back to the current series of trades/signings not following a logical plan in any way. It is very disappointing to say the least.
    I keep saying the BJ savings allowed us to trade for Touki, and everyone seems to keep ignoring that. We absolutely did not need the BJ savings to add JJ, Norris, and Beckham, so that's not what it allowed us to do. Plus, it gave us room to turn CJ's 2017 money into 2016 money, so we now have both BJ's and CJ's savings to use in 2017. Obviously we will have to wait to see how we use it, but we still have savings there.

    Second, the Padres' return basically centers around two guys. Allen and Asuaje aren't bad pieces, but they also mean little. A 24-year-old who OPS'd about .700 in AA and an 8th-round draft pick. Allen has potential, but his ceiling isn't high.

    So the trade centers around Guerra and Margot...both definitely good prospects, but Guerra would have been redundant for us with Albies (and Albies is better), and Margot and Wisler are pretty similar in value at the time of the trades, plus Wisler will play a big role for us starting this year. So while you can look at our return as Wisler/pick/money and it doesn't look great, you can also look at it as Wisler/Riley/Touki and it suddenly looks better than what the Red Sox gave up.

    And again, you simply can't take one bad deal and assume we could have gotten the same kind of deal. The Red Sox undoubtedly overpaid for Kimbrel; there is no guarantee at all that anyone was willing to offer something similar even if we had kept BJ, especially considering that the current Red Sox FO is new.
    Last edited by smootness; 12-02-2015 at 03:32 PM.

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to smootness For This Useful Post:

    chop2chip (12-02-2015), clvclv (12-02-2015)

  16. #312
    Steve Harvey'd
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    18,946
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,856
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,329
    Thanked in
    3,353 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by smootness View Post
    I keep saying the BJ savings allowed us to trade for Touki, and everyone seems to keep ignoring that. We absolutely did not need the BJ savings to add JJ, Norris, and Beckham, so that's not what it allowed us to do. Plus, it gave us room to turn CJ's 2017 money into 2016 money, so we now have both BJ's and CJ's savings to use in 2017. Obviously we will have to wait to see how we use it, but we still have savings there.

    Second, the Padres' return basically centers around two guys. Allen and Asuaje aren't bad pieces, but they also mean little. A 24-year-old who OPS'd about .700 in AA and an 8th-round draft pick. Allen has potential, but his ceiling isn't high.

    So the trade centers around Guerra and Margot...both definitely good prospects, but Guerra would have been redundant for us with Albies (and Albies is better), and Margot and Wisler are pretty similar in value at the time of the trades, plus Wisler will play a big role for us starting this year. So while you can look at our return as Wisler/pick/money and it doesn't look great, you can also look at it as Wisler/Riley/Touki and it suddenly looks better than what the Red Sox gave up.

    And again, you simply can't take one bad deal and assume we could have gotten the same kind of deal. The Red Sox undoubtedly overpaid for Kimbrel; there is no guarantee at all that anyone was willing to offer something similar even if we had kept BJ, especially considering that the current Red Sox FO is new.
    I am fine with the return for Kimbrel. I like Wisler. however, I have a problem saying Riley was a part of that trade. The FO had no idea who they were going to get when they made that trade. you can't really say for certainty that we wouldn't have Riley if it wasn't for that trade.

    I would be fine with saying the Kimbrel trade helped us get another draft pick.. just not putting a name along side it.. that just seems like you are thinking as if nothing changes if something did in fact change.

    It is all kind of silly anyway. we can't change it.. might as well enjoy what we did get.

  17. #313
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    6,431
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    173
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,579
    Thanked in
    1,044 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by bravesfanMatt View Post
    I am fine with the return for Kimbrel. I like Wisler. however, I have a problem saying Riley was a part of that trade. The FO had no idea who they were going to get when they made that trade. you can't really say for certainty that we wouldn't have Riley if it wasn't for that trade.

    I would be fine with saying the Kimbrel trade helped us get another draft pick.. just not putting a name along side it.. that just seems like you are thinking as if nothing changes if something did in fact change.

    It is all kind of silly anyway. we can't change it.. might as well enjoy what we did get.
    But this is kind of my point. I'm not going to get into hypotheticals about where Riley possibly could have been drafted if we didn't have the 41st pick to take him there, or the fact that we didn't know we were going to Riley, etc. etc.

    The bottom line is that we loved what we saw in Riley, and the 41st pick allowed us to get him there while also being able to take Soroka at 28 and not having to reach for him there. So you can say it gave us Riley, or you can say it allowed us to get Soroka, or whatever. But the bottom line is that we got the 41st pick in the deal and we got Austin Riley with it. Just like we got savings from BJ in the deal and we used it to get Touki. That is what we know, and it's impossible to know what would have happened otherwise. It was a really, really good deal.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to smootness For This Useful Post:

    chop2chip (12-02-2015)

  19. #314
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Decent article by Fangraphs explaining how Miller might be on the verge of busting out and becoming a 5+ WAR pitcher:

    http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/shelb...eudo-prospect/

    I say extend him if teams don't pony up.

  20. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Enscheff For This Useful Post:

    bravesfanforlife88 (12-02-2015), Hudson2 (12-02-2015)

  21. #315
    Connoisseur of Minors zitothebrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    DANGERZONE
    Posts
    24,622
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,428
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,432
    Thanked in
    2,463 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by chop2chip View Post
    At this point is it much of a gamble? Per 600 PA, Pollock averages 5.3 WAR. That's incredible. By comparison, Jason Heyward averages 4.9 WAR per 600 PA's.
    There's a number of reasons it's a gamble. First off his power. His minor league iso was much lower than what he's done in the majors. Not that players don't develop power in the majors. That would be a lie to say, but in general they don't improve as drastically as he has his last 2 seasons, especially if they were college aged. It would be like if TLS was posting a mid 1s iso. I wouldn't expect that to maintain.

    Though again, I like him. I think he's a valueable player. I'd trade Miller for him. But I don't think he's better or more valuable than Heyward. Only reason you make that point is his contract right now. But I'd take Heyward at Market cost and 2 years younger than 3 years below Market for Pollock. That's just me.
    Stockholm, more densely populated than NYC - sturg

  22. #316
    I <3 Ron Paul + gilesfan sturg33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    52,587
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,018
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8,096
    Thanked in
    5,758 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Carp View Post
    We were still paying Uggla's contract. And had other bad contracts while needing several upgrades to the roster. For a team with a roughly 100 million payroll, it wasn't feasible.
    We are talking about 2016 and beyond... Uggla was off the books. The Braves didn't want Heyward bc they don't seem to understand what is valuable in the current baseball environment.

    But we did get Markakis and Olivera so...

  23. #317
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Orlando,FL
    Posts
    8,329
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,013
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,349
    Thanked in
    1,487 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by sturg33 View Post
    We are talking about 2016 and beyond... Uggla was off the books. The Braves didn't want Heyward bc they don't seem to understand what is valuable in the current baseball environment.

    But we did get Markakis and Olivera so...
    My best guess is that the Braves looked at Heyward and made the decision that they did not want to spend $20+ million on him for the length of the contract. Instead they figured that they would spend the $20+ on 2 or more players to try and improve the team. I actually love the trade and I liked it at the time. It is working wonders right now.

  24. #318
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    It's interesting reading the latest chatter on the Cubs though. They may trade Soler for Miller, and then sign Heyward. That must be some sort of irony, right?

  25. The Following User Says Thank You to Enscheff For This Useful Post:

    bravesnumberone (12-02-2015)

  26. #319
    Arizona Fall Leaguer
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    100
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    191
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    43
    Thanked in
    27 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    Decent article by Fangraphs explaining how Miller might be on the verge of busting out and becoming a 5+ WAR pitcher:

    http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/shelb...eudo-prospect/

    I say extend him if teams don't pony up.
    I would rather keep him considering what we'd likely get back.

  27. #320
    Connoisseur of Minors zitothebrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    DANGERZONE
    Posts
    24,622
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,428
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,432
    Thanked in
    2,463 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by sc1767 View Post
    I would rather keep him considering what we'd likely get back.
    We trade him if we're blown away with an offer. WOrst case scenario for us is he gets hurt and loses value. Best case he keeps pitchign like he did or even better and we're holding onto a massive trade chip. I would be super passive about trading him. If we don't get a premium return (I don't consider Soler premium return)

    If the Cubs would give up Addison Russell for Shelby then I'd listen. Soler just strikes out too much .He should bring plenty of pop, but I would rather go with someone safer, like Russell. Who's shown much more power already.
    Stockholm, more densely populated than NYC - sturg

Similar Threads

  1. Market for Catchers
    By nsacpi in forum Extented Spring Training
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 11-01-2018, 06:32 PM
  2. Vizcaino trade market?
    By Preacher in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 92
    Last Post: 05-31-2016, 11:28 AM
  3. Stock Market is nuts right now
    By sturg33 in forum LOCKER ROOM TALK
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-30-2015, 08:43 AM
  4. FA Starting Pitching Market
    By nsacpi in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 08-18-2015, 09:28 AM
  5. The Market for McCann
    By nsacpi in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 100
    Last Post: 08-15-2013, 01:12 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •