Peraza In Play

Deester11 said:
I can admit a bias...I've seen him in several parks last year. I enjoy seeing a guy be able to beat out a routine grounder and YES, he has flaws like many other prospects. That's what he is. But he'd put a lot more pressure on an infield than freaking Schafer. I don't buy that at all.
Click to expand...

They are pretty damn close offensively, especially when it comes to putting pressure on an infield.
 
To make it clear...I like Peraza WAY more than Schafer. That's not what I'm saying. Just offensively they have very similar strengths and weaknesses.
 
emk418 said:
I just don't see how trading Gattis AND Peraza for someone like Bundy makes us any better short or long term. Look...if we held on to La Stella or say got a guy like Panik along with a lot more in an Upton deal I'm not against shopping Peraza. But we need impact bats and Peraza could be that. We better be getting a big prospect at another position if we trade him.
Click to expand...

Again, I'm just trying to follow the logic. I do think that Hart & Company are doing absolutely everything they can to land a controllable "Ace" and then figure the rest out from there. If you had a Gausman/Bundy/Walker type that you have 5-6 years of control over to slot in front of Teheran, Wood, and Miller, you then move whatever pieces you have (including Minor) left to upgrade offensively long-term.
 
clvclv said:
Again, I'm just trying to follow the logic. I do think that Hart & Company are doing absolutely everything they can to land a controllable "Ace" and then figure the rest out from there. If you had a Gausman/Bundy/Walker type that you have 5-6 years of control over to slot in front of Teheran, Wood, and Miller, you then move whatever pieces you have (including Minor) left to upgrade offensively long-term.
Click to expand...

My logic is we have a lot of needs and we desperately need impact bats. I just see offense as a much bigger need then finding a potential ace especially a prospect who already has had tommy john. I think we're in good shape long term with high end young pithing with Teheran/Wood/Miller//Minor/Sims/Jenkins. Doesn't mean I don't want to continue adding SP's but we should focus on bats. I'm definitely not against Bundy, my only point was Gattis AND Peraza is way too rich for me.
 
emk418 said:
My logic is we have a lot of needs and we desperately need impact bats. I just see offense as a much bigger need then finding a potential ace especially a prospect who already has had tommy john. I think we're in good shape long term with high end young pithing with Teheran/Wood/Miller//Minor/Sims/Jenkins. Doesn't mean I don't want to continue adding SP's but we should focus on bats. I'm definitely not against Bundy, my only point was Gattis AND Peraza is way too rich for me.
Click to expand...

The problem with trying to apply "our" logic is that we KNOW JS, Hart, and Cox' logic is focused on hoarding pitching and it has been for years.

The market for impact bats is only going to get more expensive as time passes. Theo and Jed and the other front offices that have cheap impact bats currently have said they're NOT moving them under any circumstances. If that's the case, Hart & Company's logic makes sense to the extent that IF we (as a mid-market franchise) are going to have to pay big dollars for bats we better have A LOT of high-end, cheap pitching.

If you go offer Wood, Miller, and a controllable "Ace" Teheran-like extensions to cover their next 5-6 seasons you'll at least have the dead money available to spend on bats before moving into the new park.
 
clvclv said:
The market for impact bats is only going to get more expensive as time passes. Theo and Jed and the other front offices that have cheap impact bats currently have said they're NOT moving them under any circumstances.
Click to expand...

Which is why it's a bit odd that the Braves are looking to trade, rather than extenting, their own—but I nonetheless agree: hoarding pitching and paying no mind to offense does seem to be the road down which they're marching.
 
Russ2dollas said:
Well if a team thinks he can play SS he may have even more value....

If he goes it better be for a stud. I wonder how Hart thinks we are going to score runs. I guess he's planning on winning games 1-0 and 3-2.
Click to expand...

No different than any other year lately.
 
Too bad that guy still isn't a GM, I bet we could get a damn good haul from his club for BJ, despite the fact that he already has 20 major league outfielders already on his roster.
 
SF isnt trading Panik especially for maybe a 1-yr rental.

And trading Peraza is stupid.
 
This doesn't make sense to me either. It would have to be a situation where we would trade Peraza to get a lefty pitcher who would replace Minor who would be traded for a bat....Then Crick and Panik would make sense. That's a whole lot of moves and would probably be lateral moves.
 
The phrase "led to believe" is pretty weak, especially since what comes after it tells us nothing. We all know anyone can become trade bait. Still, I hope we keep him. I'd love to see if he could become the leadoff hitter we've been craving for.
 
Dalyn said:
To make it clear...I like Peraza WAY more than Schafer. That's not what I'm saying. Just offensively they have very similar strengths and weaknesses.
Click to expand...

Really? I don't agree. Peraza is more of a batting average guy with a walk rate that leaves something to be desired and minimal pop but doesn't strike out. Schafer was a lower average, but much higher walk-rate with pop and strikeouts. I don't really see many similarities other than speed.
 
yeezus said:
Really? I don't agree. Peraza is more of a batting average guy with a walk rate that leaves something to be desired and minimal pop but doesn't strike out. Schafer was a lower average, but much higher walk-rate with pop and strikeouts. I don't really see many similarities other than speed.
Click to expand...

The other thing is that Schafer was a really good prospect at age 20 and that his development since represents a disappointment in the sense that the typical prospect ranked as highly as him (#42 on BA's Top 100) turns out to be more successful than Jordan has been.

My thought is Peraza is going to be ranked somewhere close to (but probably a little lower) than Schafer was after his age 20 season. If Peraza just simply ends up being average for a prospect with that rank then he is going to end up being quite a bit better than Schafer.
 
nsacpi said:
The other thing is that Schafer was a really good prospect at age 20 and that his development since represents a disappointment in the sense that the typical prospect ranked as highly as him (#42 on BA's Top 100) turns out to be more successful than Jordan has been.

My thought is Peraza is going to be ranked somewhere close to (but probably a little lower) than Schafer was after his age 20 season. If Peraza just simply ends up being average for a prospect with that rank then he is going to end up being quite a bit better than Schafer.
Click to expand...

I feel prospects ranked even just that low still have a high chance of not working out. I agree overall though.
 
nsacpi said:
The other thing is that Schafer was a really good prospect at age 20 and that his development since represents a disappointment in the sense that the typical prospect ranked as highly as him (#42 on BA's Top 100) turns out to be more successful than Jordan has been.

My thought is Peraza is going to be ranked somewhere close to (but probably a little lower) than Schafer was after his age 20 season. If Peraza just simply ends up being average for a prospect with that rank then he is going to end up being quite a bit better than Schafer.
Click to expand...

yeezus said:
I feel prospects ranked even just that low still have a high chance of not working out. I agree overall though.
Click to expand...

I think they now realize that they rushed Jordan up and refuse to do the same with Peraza, hence the Callaspo signing.
 
Just so I am clear. Some people are gonna lose their **** if Peraza is traded. Guess these great prospects we have aren't really that great then if everyone's hero La Stella was decent for like a month and has since been traded.
 
NinersSBChamps said:
Just so I am clear. Some people are gonna lose their **** if Peraza is traded. Guess these great prospects we have aren't really that great then if everyone's hero La Stella was decent for like a month and has since been traded.
Click to expand...
I have yet to see anyone say they'll lose their mind. However, he's not a trash prospect by any stretch and his potential is good. People want a good return. For the love of all that's good and evil, that's not so tough to understand. He's a prospect and a good one. Underselling him is just as bad as overrating him.
 
Deester11 said:
I have yet to see anyone say they'll lose their mind. However, he's not a trash prospect by any stretch and his potential is good. People want a good return. For the love of all that's good and evil, that's not so tough to understand. He's a prospect and a good one. Underselling him is just as bad as overrating him.
Click to expand...

And if he brings us a major league player, I consider it a win. I will take a proven player in the bigs over a prospect every time. Especially a prospect who people on this board think is gonna good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top