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

[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/...urplus-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.