Not a chance. Miller and Simmons might get you Seager. Holmes and Barnes aren't throw-ins.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Outside the box trade
- Thread starter blueagleace1
- Start date
Not a chance. Miller and Simmons might get you Seager. Holmes and Barnes aren't throw-ins.
I'm only suggesting reasons they wouldn't do it because they absolutely would not ever do it. It's pointless to even talk about. They don't really save any money on Rollins; he's only under contract for this year. The Dodgers are not the D-Backs.
And while they save some money the next 2 years replacing Ethier with CJ, they also get a player who is much worse. Ethier is still a productive player.
Give me 2 #1 overall prospects who were ever traded before hitting the majors. It just doesn't happen. It's not worth speculating on. There are plenty of potential trades out there; but the #1 prospect in baseball is not one of them, especially not for Miller or Simmons.
I'll put it this way: It took Miller plus Jenkins to get Heyward with one year left on his contract. He has far less value at that point than he had at 20 with 6 years of control left and all the promise in the world. 5 years later, after proving to not be everything he was supposed to be, it still took more than just Miller to get him. If we offered Miller and Simmons for Seager, they probably wouldn't do even that.
And while they save some money the next 2 years replacing Ethier with CJ, they also get a player who is much worse. Ethier is still a productive player.
Give me 2 #1 overall prospects who were ever traded before hitting the majors. It just doesn't happen. It's not worth speculating on. There are plenty of potential trades out there; but the #1 prospect in baseball is not one of them, especially not for Miller or Simmons.
I'll put it this way: It took Miller plus Jenkins to get Heyward with one year left on his contract. He has far less value at that point than he had at 20 with 6 years of control left and all the promise in the world. 5 years later, after proving to not be everything he was supposed to be, it still took more than just Miller to get him. If we offered Miller and Simmons for Seager, they probably wouldn't do even that.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
Not a chance. Miller and Simmons might get you Seager. Holmes and Barnes aren't throw-ins.
Alrighty then. I go elsewhere looking for my future cornerstone bat(s) with a willingness to offer some of the same players.
I want Seager because I think he would fill a long tern need (3B) and fill one of the cornerstone bat roles and I am willing to give up significant stuff to get him. But, he's not the ONLY guy out there.
But, you guys keep saying Seager is untouchable, untouchable UNTOUCHABLE. I just don't think ANY minor leaguer is untouchable for the right deal given the right team. But, as I said, maybe you guys know something that I don't and LA won't move him under ANY circumstances for ANYBODY.
ALL I say is as a GM you shouldn't assume anything and you shouldn't abandon a trade possibility because it might be hard or complicated with no real indication it might get done. It's your job as a GM. Do it. That doesn't mean you can't have 10 simultaneous conversations going on at the same time.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
Alrighty then. I go elsewhere looking for my future cornerstone bat(s) with a willingness to offer some of the same players.
I want Seager because I think he would fill a long tern need (3B) and fill one of the cornerstone bat roles and I am willing to give up significant stuff to get him. But, he's not the ONLY guy out there.
But, you guys keep saying Seager is untouchable, untouchable UNTOUCHABLE. I just don't think ANY minor leaguer is untouchable for the right deal given the right team. But, as I said, maybe you guys know something that I don't and LA won't move him under ANY circumstances for ANYBODY.
ALL I say is as a GM you shouldn't assume anything and you shouldn't abandon a trade possibility because it might be hard or complicated with no real indication it might get done. It's your job as a GM. Do it. That doesn't mean you can't have 10 simultaneous conversations going on at the same time.
You keep saying he's the #1 prospect in baseball. I have seen him in the top 5 pretty much everywhere but nowhere have I seen him as a consensus #1.
Just last year the A's traded Addison Russell to the Cubs and he was in the same range as a prospect in many places.
The two years before KC traded Will Meyers for James Shields who was a nice SP, one of the top 10-15 in baseball at the time but who was expensive and under control for only two more years.
Bottom line is it can be done. It has been done. But it takes the right circumstances and package to get it done. And, oh yeah, it takes a willingness to work to get it done.
You keep saying he's the #1 prospect in baseball. I have seen him in the top 5 pretty much everywhere but nowhere have I seen him as a consensus #1.
Just last year the A's traded Addison Russell to the Cubs and he was in the same range as a prospect in many places.
The two years before KC traded Will Meyers for James Shields who was a nice SP, one of the top 10-15 in baseball at the time but who was expensive and under control for only two more years.
Bottom line is it can be done. It has been done. But it takes the right circumstances and package to get it done. And, oh yeah, it takes a willingness to work to get it done.
quote and address yourself? LOL
I think you are downplaying Seager in relation to those guys. Seager is the only one left in the top 5 now so he's pretty much the top. Russell was 14th; Myers was top 5, but he was also a similar level hitter despite being an OF vs. a 3B.
Overall, you make solid points (against yourself). But, I just think you downplay the caliper player of Seager.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
quote and address yourself? LOL
I think you are downplaying Seager in relation to those guys. Seager is the only one left in the top 5 now so he's pretty much the top. Russell was 14th; Myers was top 5, but he was also a similar level hitter despite being an OF vs. a 3B.
Overall, you make solid points (against yourself). But, I just think you downplay the caliper player of Seager.
Quoted myself by accident. Meant to be Smootness post.
As I said, if its me I try. If it doesn't go so be it because I am trying in 10 other places for a similar or better overall return.
Everyone who has re-ranked prospects mid season has put Seager #1, including Baseball America.
Neither Russell or Myers were ever that high and Russell was outside the top 10 when he was traded. Even then, it was one of the worst trades ever, and the A's will feel it for years. The A's are notorious for being willing to ship prospects. The Dodgers have one of the top front offices in baseball, they're not going to give Seager up for Miller or Simmons, and maybe not both. I'd ask if I was a GM, because you have to, but it's not worth discussing as a fan because it won't ever happen.
There are teams out there we might be able to deal with, but the team with Kershaw and Greinke and the money to add anybody else they want probably isn't the one we're going to get a steal out of with our pitching.
Neither Russell or Myers were ever that high and Russell was outside the top 10 when he was traded. Even then, it was one of the worst trades ever, and the A's will feel it for years. The A's are notorious for being willing to ship prospects. The Dodgers have one of the top front offices in baseball, they're not going to give Seager up for Miller or Simmons, and maybe not both. I'd ask if I was a GM, because you have to, but it's not worth discussing as a fan because it won't ever happen.
There are teams out there we might be able to deal with, but the team with Kershaw and Greinke and the money to add anybody else they want probably isn't the one we're going to get a steal out of with our pitching.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
Everyone who has re-ranked prospects mid season has put Seager #1, including Baseball America.
Neither Russell or Myers were ever that high and Russell was outside the top 10 when he was traded. Even then, it was one of the worst trades ever, and the A's will feel it for years. The A's are notorious for being willing to ship prospects. The Dodgers have one of the top front offices in baseball, they're not going to give Seager up for Miller or Simmons, and maybe not both. I'd ask if I was a GM, because you have to, but it's not worth discussing as a fan because it won't ever happen.
There are teams out there we might be able to deal with, but the team with Kershaw and Greinke and the money to add anybody else they want probably isn't the one we're going to get a steal out of with our pitching.
Ok. I can agree with that.
But, what I won't agree to is that the Braves should just hang on to everybody and play the FA and trade market for patches for the offense (not saying that you in particular are calling for this).
The Braves need bats, specifically power bats. They don't have them in the minors, not in anywhere near enough quantity anyway. There are no FA power bats the next two years that fit for the Braves UNLESS you believe that Upton or Heyward will come back which I don't. Good power bats aren't moving via trade in recent times either. For a power bat to move it pretty much has to be a disgruntled player, some off field problem, a contract dump or some combination for that to happen.
So, IMO, the Braves have no choice but to trade for minor league bats (hopefully high end or else there has been a failure along the way) in quantity so that you fill your power needs from within moving forward.
The Braves do need bats, but I don't think we need tons of power. It seems clear that the Braves are focusing on pitching, defense, and speed right now. As such, Freeman is a good power bat, and if you can find one more guy with pop, that's fine.
What we need more than anything are just quality bats, guys who can get on base. Markakis gives us one, Peterson can hopefully give us another, and we will hopefully fill CF with either Maybin or Mallex. That leaves you with a corner OF spot, 3B, and C. You can sign a guy like Wieters and make a pretty big move for another, and that leaves you in good enough shape given what the pitching should be. That's not great long-term, but it gives you a solid lineup while allowing the young talent to progress.
What we need more than anything are just quality bats, guys who can get on base. Markakis gives us one, Peterson can hopefully give us another, and we will hopefully fill CF with either Maybin or Mallex. That leaves you with a corner OF spot, 3B, and C. You can sign a guy like Wieters and make a pretty big move for another, and that leaves you in good enough shape given what the pitching should be. That's not great long-term, but it gives you a solid lineup while allowing the young talent to progress.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
I completely disagree with this philosophy. Baseball is defined by history and trends. Averages are good or bad only in how they relate to others current and past. Trends matter.
For the last 25 years only a small handful of teams have made the playoffs without being at least a league average power teams and a smaller handful have won a WS
Outliers like KC from last year and the Giants from a few years ago are just that. Throw in the fact that they are in pitching parks, in pitching divisions and it becomes a very bad bet to try to turn the Braves into some speed and defense bastion standing against the tide of historical trend.
For the last 25 years only a small handful of teams have made the playoffs without being at least a league average power teams and a smaller handful have won a WS
Outliers like KC from last year and the Giants from a few years ago are just that. Throw in the fact that they are in pitching parks, in pitching divisions and it becomes a very bad bet to try to turn the Braves into some speed and defense bastion standing against the tide of historical trend.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
There are different ways to win. We need some pop in the lineup, but if the pitching and defense are good enough, putting guys on base consistently will win us a lot of games.
Maybe win a lot of games but history says not enough games.
Alrighty then. I go elsewhere looking for my future cornerstone bat(s) with a willingness to offer some of the same players.
I want Seager because I think he would fill a long tern need (3B) and fill one of the cornerstone bat roles and I am willing to give up significant stuff to get him. But, he's not the ONLY guy out there.
But, you guys keep saying Seager is untouchable, untouchable UNTOUCHABLE. I just don't think ANY minor leaguer is untouchable for the right deal given the right team. But, as I said, maybe you guys know something that I don't and LA won't move him under ANY circumstances for ANYBODY.
ALL I say is as a GM you shouldn't assume anything and you shouldn't abandon a trade possibility because it might be hard or complicated with no real indication it might get done. It's your job as a GM. Do it. That doesn't mean you can't have 10 simultaneous conversations going on at the same time.
At what point does saying Miller and Simmons might get you Seager become "he's untouchable".
I agree he's not "untouchable" - I simply pointed out that the two of them aren't going to get you Seager PLUS Holmes and Barnes.
Maybe win a lot of games but history says not enough games.
We shall see. But there's no easy way to go get a ton of power without overpaying for it. I appreciate the effort to come up with a possible deal, but I'd rather add some decent pieces for now while letting the young guys develop than to give up too much of what we've built for a player or two.
Seager may not be untouchable, but he is their future at SS and the cost to even get the Dodgers to start listening (likely Miller plus Simmons) is way more than the Braves should be willing to pay. Peraza will be a significant downgrade from Simmons defensively, and I doubt he would be much of an upgrade offensively. I would rather just see the Braves resign Uribe at that point.
He's LHed anyways, and the Braves should be focusing on impact (not necessarily power) RHed bats. Guys like Susac, Tulo, Braun, Lucroy, and Starling Marte (as examples) are the types of guys they should be targeting. If the Braves package position players like CB and Peraza with some of the arms they have stockpiled, and are willing to take on entire contracts, they should be able to acquire a RHed bat to pair with Freeman in the middle of the order through 2017.
He's LHed anyways, and the Braves should be focusing on impact (not necessarily power) RHed bats. Guys like Susac, Tulo, Braun, Lucroy, and Starling Marte (as examples) are the types of guys they should be targeting. If the Braves package position players like CB and Peraza with some of the arms they have stockpiled, and are willing to take on entire contracts, they should be able to acquire a RHed bat to pair with Freeman in the middle of the order through 2017.
Russ2dollas
10 yr, $185 million Extension
I think this type of trade happens.
Not at the deadline though. I think this offseason they'll have a strategy for upgrading the team and know if that requires big money free agent(s). They will likely try to extend at least one of Miller/Wood. If they do not extend one of both of them, then I think you see if you get some long term answers for them. Especially if you plan on landing one of the FA starters.
Guerro from LA is a problem b/c he has a trade clause in his contract that makes him a FA if traded and he's agent is Boras. I don't see us getting a long term, team friendly or neutral deal from Boras.
Not at the deadline though. I think this offseason they'll have a strategy for upgrading the team and know if that requires big money free agent(s). They will likely try to extend at least one of Miller/Wood. If they do not extend one of both of them, then I think you see if you get some long term answers for them. Especially if you plan on landing one of the FA starters.
Guerro from LA is a problem b/c he has a trade clause in his contract that makes him a FA if traded and he's agent is Boras. I don't see us getting a long term, team friendly or neutral deal from Boras.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
We shall see. But there's no easy way to go get a ton of power without overpaying for it. I appreciate the effort to come up with a possible deal, but I'd rather add some decent pieces for now while letting the young guys develop than to give up too much of what we've built for a player or two.
I don't know where I say we should give up what we've built in terms of what has been brought in vs what would be leaving. I am suggesting that we move what is excess n(middle infielders and light hitting OF) or potential excess (SP given the coming FA market) or fungible pieces that can be replaced (current crop of relief pitching).
I am not saying trade Miller, Wood or even Teheran (some or all) and not replace them. I'm saying get what you need with those guys and replace them with what is available via the coming FA.
I am not saying trade Simmons without taking into consideration that Peraza can certainly be the short term replacement (maybe long term) and your best current overall prospect can wait in the wings while the rest of the team grows in place.
I'm not saying trade JJ and/or Avilan and go exclusively in house next year. JJ was on the scrap heap as was Grilli. Veterans of that type are there to be had in the offseason. The key is picking the right one.
You seem to be saying (and I may be misunderstanding) to make some relatively minor trades now, hold the major stuff and hope to fill holes this offseason with quality replacement bats via FA and/or trade. I just don't see that as viable (or at least the best option) considering the state of FA bats the next two years and the fact that most teams who need pitching can just buy it on the FA market due to the relative plethora of options instead of trade good bats away to the Braves for second hand pitching (after all, if we aren't going to trade Miller, Wood or Teheran now why then, but who?) or arms with potential (tear down what Hart just spent the offseason building).
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
Seager may not be untouchable, but he is their future at SS and the cost to even get the Dodgers to start listening (likely Miller plus Simmons) is way more than the Braves should be willing to pay. Peraza will be a significant downgrade from Simmons defensively, and I doubt he would be much of an upgrade offensively. I would rather just see the Braves resign Uribe at that point.
He's LHed anyways, and the Braves should be focusing on impact (not necessarily power) RHed bats. Guys like Susac, Tulo, Braun, Lucroy, and Starling Marte (as examples) are the types of guys they should be targeting. If the Braves package position players like CB and Peraza with some of the arms they have stockpiled, and are willing to take on entire contracts, they should be able to acquire a RHed bat to pair with Freeman in the middle of the order through 2017.
Susac: certainly need a catcher but he doesn't move the needle with the bat
Tulo: old, injury prone, expensive and likely a product of Coors field to a certain extent. Shadow of his former self. If the Rockies are going to move him it would be now.
Braun: also old, PED history, expensive, and likely a product of Miller Park to an extent. Shadow of his former self.
Lucroy: signed through 16 with a 17 option. Fairly cheap and productive but why trade for a guy when he will be in his option year when you really want to contend. Why not wait and sign him as a FA if you want him instead of giving up talent just to have to struggle to hang on to him when he is expensive and older.
Marte: young, cheap, productive. Why would Pittsburgh trade a guy like that? As a small market team they would be crazy unless they know something you don't in case buyer beware.
This is the elephant in the room. Trade for your bats or sign them as FA. But there aren't many and none who will be cheap in terms of dollars and/or talent.