Is it 100% the white so trade Q?Originally Posted by thewupk
Is it 100% the white so trade Q?
I would say it's pretty close. They will be able to get more at the deadline for some team thinking they have a shot. He will almost certainly be the #1 name available.
Until someone else better is availble. Once you throw the possibility of Q being traded you open up for many options.
He is being his usual contrarian self. He can't provide any actual points of his own, so he just defaults to his posi-Brave position and concocts any kind of point he can in an attempt to make himself "right"...even if it isn't relevant.
Who reads everything I just posted and only focuses on the one sentence he decides is a dig against the Braves?
Honestly that doesn't make much sense. The White Sox are in clear rebuild mode. They have an excellent pitcher with a great contract. They will be sellers at the deadline and will have one of the most attractive options at a time where teams overpay. It would be dumb to not trade. It's not hard to see this.
These are equivalent scenarios in your head?
Judge is worth about 7% of the Yank's entire farm. Swanson is worth almost 22% of the Braves'.
Giolito and Lopez will start the season in AAA to delay their clocks. Swanson will be the starting SS on opening day and lose eligibility after game 3.
Do you even read what you write and make sure it makes sense before you click Post?
And what if he isn't as effective this year or if he gets hurt a bit. There is no definite.
Why is it hard to see someone like Judge/Giolito/Lopez lose eligibility? Seems to e it's just as likely as a Q trade.
If you are desperately grasping at straws to back your posi-Braves point of view, it makes perfect sense.
I was really, truly, trying to start an intelligent conversation. Unfortunately, the usual suspects turned it into a silly argument over a point that isn't even germane to the topic.
It's not. And even if they are, who cares? Braves will still lose the biggest chunk of their farm value after 3 games. Which will be the single biggest impact of anything from now until the mid season rankings.
This is "Mr. Weak Contact is the Latest Market Inefficiency That Our Brilliant Front Office has Uncovered" we are talking about.
A smart discussion on a imprecise measure such as surplus value on prospects? Please.
I think we all get that. We often argue based on expect values, but understand there is a range of possibilities. Thanks for the reminder.
It was a smart discussion before you started posting in the thread.
Sorry to ruin your hypothetical party.
Hawk (02-13-2017)
It's ok. But what we do know is when a team graduates the #3 prospect in baseball that their overall ranking will drop hard. That is not a hypothetical and something you apparently have a hard time understanding.
Oh I understand. What I don't understand is why you all seem to think you are intellectually superior to most because of your ability to regurgitate others work. Where's the original thought in any of this?
Have you seen anyone rank farm systems based on surplus value? Please show us.
Also I don't think I am intellectually superior to anyone. I do however pay attention to what's happening in the world of baseball. I understand how moves are made and how teams look at their assets. If you can't or refuse to see this then I am sorry.
Ventura's Stolen Bases
Braves have an insignificantly higher chance by the virtue of having more guys in the top 200. Or that's my posi-Brave spin away from our current discussion to try to begin a new argument, anyway.
Also have to back up Enscheff in that I've never seen an analysis like this before, and it is legitimately impressive.
One of the interesting things in the OP is the mix of positional and pitching value in the top 4 systems. White Sox are heavily skewed toward pitching. Brewers and Yankees toward hitting.
And we have pretty good balance. Which confirms a belief I've held for some time. I'm fine with going pitching heavy in the draft as long as we balance it out the other way in the international market. And that's what we've been doing with Albies, Acuna, Maitan and others. I believe with pitching it is harder to pick the ones who will make it the younger you go. Obviously it is harder too with hitting, but my point has to do with relative difficulty. Therefore, it makes sense in the international market to have a strong bias toward hitting. You have exceptions like Teheran and Felix Hernandez. But in general you are on safer ground going after hitters in the international market.
Last edited by nsacpi; 02-13-2017 at 07:36 PM.
All this did was bring someone else's study (surplus value on prospect ranks) and projected to a farm system. This is not propietary. The study on surplus value of prospects is the original thought.
I've never refused to read into studies. Sorry that I have a questioning nature to me.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote