Possible future trade targets..

[zbhargrove]

I didn't think Wieters was even catching consecutive games this year? I have my doubts if someone still slow coming off injury is a wise investment for a ball club with a middling payroll.

It's not Weiters' decision to take it slow. It's just the club being cautious and getting him back gradually after TJS. A catcher has to be a little more careful after TJS than usual position players since throwing is a huge part of their game. Clubs ease pitchers back exactly the same. I wouldn't be concerned about that.

 

[CJ9]

I'm not interested in Lucroy and probably not even Weiters. Investing in aging catching is nothing an up-and-coming team should be doing. Swing big for Swihart, although it won't happen. Barnes and Susac are fine with me.

At third, the McMahon kid in Colorado makes so much sense. We need a 3B, Colorado always needs pitching. Make that work.

If you can get cheap, young guys like those ones at catcher at 3B, unload the money to get Justin Upton back. He is perfect in so many ways for this team.

 

[keithlaw]

I really want us to get Lucroy so he can catch Jenkins

 

[Horsehide Harry]

How do u explain Markakis

You don't

Best answer I have is that they made that decision before fully committing to 2017

 

[Julio3000]

I really want us to get Lucroy so he can catch Jenkins

LuuuuuuuuuCroy mmmmmJENKINS?

 

[Carp]

You have to trade for prospects now who won't be prospects then. And the only way the Braves will get good bats back right now is by trading the good guys that they currently have at the ML level that are somewhat expendable (Miller, Wood, maybe Teheran due to the upcoming FA market), Simmons (due to Peraza short term, Albies long term), Maybin (not on the radar in 2017, 2018 and have Smith in the wings plus FA options Fowler, Jackson), Markakis if you can get anything for him because you are focused on 2017, 2018 and what kind of player will Markakis be then?).

Prospects don't always pan out. So we'd be trading young, proven assets that are controllable and helping out now for unproven assets that might help out 2 years from now?

That doesn't make much sense. We have money to spend so we might as well spend it.

 

[gamecock4braves]

LuuuuuuuuuCroy mmmmmJENKINS?

At least he has chicken.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

Prospects don't always pan out. So we'd be trading young, proven assets that are controllable and helping out now for unproven assets that might help out 2 years from now?

That doesn't make much sense. We have money to spend so we might as well spend it.

Prospects DON'T always pan out. That's why you need volume AND quality.

True, there is money to spend but to spend it unwisely is foolish. The FA market for bats is HORRIBLE unless you think the Braves bring back Heyward or Upton. And, to be honest, I think both those guys will get way overpaid for their production. No way Heyward is worth $200M as a RF unless he transforms into a 30+, .280 guy. Right now, he is promise not fact and this is after 6 years. Upton looks like he will age badly and likely lose some competitive fire after he gets paid. But, it likely doesn't matter because I don't see either of those guys coming back to the Braves.

I am all for spending the money. But, I think you spend it on value which is the starting pitching market. But, we don't need pitching with Miller, Wood and Teheran around. We need bats. But, there are no bats and because of the relative excess of FA pitching, trade value for pitching prospects will be devalued in the short term. That's why you trade Miller, Wood and maybe Teheran for your bats, quality and quantity (although I think I would hang on to Teheran and hope he rebounds to 2014 standard then trade him at the deadline next year or after the 2016 season.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

I am thinking an Arizona like trade but with Milwaukee this time:

Braves take Garza and Gilbert Lara for a box of doughnuts. I think Garza at $12.5M to be your 3-4 over the next couple of years would be OK if it netted you back a high potential bat like Lara. Lara is a long way away, but that's Ok as long as he eventually gets there. AND, you have to consider the 40 man restrictions as well - don't need all the young talent so close to the bigs that it causes a crises with the 40 man.

 

[PurpleBrave]

I hear garza in a bunch of rumors now. Main problem with that is garza sucks

 

[Carp]

Prospects DON'T always pan out. That's why you need volume AND quality.

True, there is money to spend but to spend it unwisely is foolish. The FA market for bats is HORRIBLE unless you think the Braves bring back Heyward or Upton. And, to be honest, I think both those guys will get way overpaid for their production. No way Heyward is worth $200M as a RF unless he transforms into a 30+, .280 guy. Right now, he is promise not fact and this is after 6 years. Upton looks like he will age badly and likely lose some competitive fire after he gets paid. But, it likely doesn't matter because I don't see either of those guys coming back to the Braves.

I am all for spending the money. But, I think you spend it on value which is the starting pitching market. But, we don't need pitching with Miller, Wood and Teheran around. We need bats. But, there are no bats and because of the relative excess of FA pitching, trade value for pitching prospects will be devalued in the short term. That's why you trade Miller, Wood and maybe Teheran for your bats, quality and quantity (although I think I would hang on to Teheran and hope he rebounds to 2014 standard then trade him at the deadline next year or after the 2016 season.

Among the bunches of prospects you're advocating us to trade for, the likekihood of any of them to above average major leaguers by 2017 is not good. And your plan also leaves us with no pitching in 2017. The Braves might trade 1 pitcher among their current major league starters, but it will likely be for an established major league hitter, not prospects. And you don't have to sign a bunch of FA, but even if you did want to go that route, there are bargains to be found. But among other trade options, they are clearly interested in Lucroy.

The Braves will have about 40 million or worth of payroll to spend this offseason. You better believe are going to be spending a good chunk of that to improve the team.

 

[nsacpi]

The Braves will have about 40 million or worth of payroll to spend this offseason. You better believe are going to be spending a good chunk of that to improve the team.

The areas to upgrade are clear: catcher, left, third, bullpen. I imagine they will spend big (10-15M) in two of the areas of need and go cheaper in the other two. The pen can be shored up relatively cheaply. So that leaves one area where they will presumably explore picking up a young cost-controlled player or buy low vet coming off a sub-par season.

There is also the possibility they sign a veteran pitcher and trade away one of their starting pitchers (from the group of Teheran, Wood, Miller, Folty, Perez, Wisler and Banuelos) to fill one of the areas of need.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

Among the bunches of prospects you're advocating us to trade for, the likekihood of any of them to above average major leaguers by 2017 is not good. And your plan also leaves us with no pitching in 2017. The Braves might trade 1 pitcher among their current major league starters, but it will likely be for an established major league hitter, not prospects. And you don't have to sign a bunch of FA, but even if you did want to go that route, there are bargains to be found. But among other trade options, they are clearly interested in Lucroy.

The Braves will have about 40 million or worth of payroll to spend this offseason. You better believe are going to be spending a good chunk of that to improve the team.

No, I am advocating trading pitching now and signing pitching this winter. I have long said, I think the Braves should sign AT LEAST one top end starter this winter like Price. I would prefer two like Price and Zimmerman or Smardzjia but could live with a Price and Latos.

Lucroy is a FA after 2017 so trading for him doesn't fit the plan unless you intend to extend him, then at what price, how long and what type of player will he be in 2018 and beyond not who was he in 2014. I am not against Lucroy. I just think its dumb to spend talent acquiring him when he could be had potentially as a FA in the future.

Go back to the beginning of the Braves run in the early 90's. The Braves had home grown bats all over the field and stacked in the minors IN ADDITION to all the pitching. You had Gant and Justice at the corner OF spots. Blauser and Lemke in the middle infield. Klesko, Lopez, Chipper, Hunter, etc. all lined up set to come up and be cornerstone pieces.

Sure, the Braves brought in some veterans to help the team learn how to win like Pendelton, Bream, Belliard and Olsen. But, Pendelton was really the only one who had been a really good player elsewhere and even he was coming off a couple of injury filled down years. Then by 1993, you had McGriff replacing Bream, Blauser taking over for Belliard, Lopez displacing Olsen and CJ replacing Pendelton.

 

[nsacpi]

No, I am advocating trading pitching now and signing pitching this winter. I have long said, I think the Braves should sign AT LEAST one top end starter this winter like Price. I would prefer two like Price and Zimmerman or Smardzjia but could live with a Price and Latos.

Lucroy is a FA after 2017 so trading for him doesn't fit the plan unless you intend to extend him, then at what price, how long and what type of player will he be in 2018 and beyond not who was he in 2014. I am not against Lucroy. I just think its dumb to spend talent acquiring him when he could be had potentially as a FA in the future.

Go back to the beginning of the Braves run in the early 90's. The Braves had home grown bats all over the field and stacked in the minors IN ADDITION to all the pitching. You had Gant and Justice at the corner OF spots. Blauser and Lemke in the middle infield. Klesko, Lopez, Chipper, Hunter, etc. all lined up set to come up and be cornerstone pieces.

Sure, the Braves brought in some veterans to help the team learn how to win like Pendelton, Bream, Belliard and Olsen. But, Pendelton was really the only one who had been a really good player elsewhere and even he was coming off a couple of injury filled down years. Then by 1993, you had McGriff replacing Bream, Blauser taking over for Belliard, Lopez displacing Olsen and CJ replacing Pendelton.

Signing starting pitching to rich long-term contracts is something best left to teams with deeper pockets. The risks are too high for a team like the Braves. I think that's the whole point of building up pitching depth throughout the farm system. This gives you a steady stream of new pitchers to add to the major league team and avoids the need to take risks with guys like Price, Cueto, Greinke and Zimmerman. I do see the Braves potentially going after a "Charlie Liebrandt" type this off-season to provide some experience in the rotation. Maybe Buehrle.

I could see our off-season going something like this:

1) Sign Buehrle for 2 years plus an option at 10-15M/year

2) Sign Uribe for 2 years plus an option at 5-10M/year

3) Sign Zobrist for 2 years plus an option at 10-15M/year

4) Sign one or two guys for the pen similar to the contracts we gave out to Grilli and Johnson last off-season.

5) Trade one of our starting pitchers (Teheran, Wood, Miller, Folty, Perez, Wisler, Banuelos) for a catcher.

This is the two stars plus a solid supporting cast strategy. We have two players (Freeman and Simmons) capable or putting up 4-5 WAR. The other six position players and starting pitchers would project to about 2-3 WAR. Some might have career years, some might disappoint. But that is the baseline.

This kind of strategy avoids taking big risks on free agent contracts while preserving financial flexibility for 2017 and beyond. It doesn't block young players coming up the system with potentially underperforming veterans with big contracts. It gives you a team that projects to win about 85 games. There are no guarantees about making the playoffs or winning the WS. But I think the goal should be to build a sustainable contending team.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

Signing starting pitching to rich long-term contracts is something best left to teams with deeper pockets. The risks are too high for a team like the Braves. I think that's the whole point of building up pitching depth throughout the farm system. This gives you a steady stream of new pitchers to add to the major league team and avoids the need to take risks with guys like Price, Cueto, Greinke and Zimmerman.

Then your saying that its better to avoid the upside risk of Price, Greinke, Zimmerman, etc for the mediocrity of the FA bats available? I don't think that's how you build a consistent winner.

The Braves pulled the trigger on Greg Maddux. They resigned their own to long term deals like Glavine and Smoltz. Is their risk in signing a Price? Absolutely. Is their risk in signing Weiters to a 4 year $60M deal? Absolutely. Is their risk that Miller, Wood and/or Teheran will blow their arms out tomorrow? Absolutely.

You can't avoid risk. It's all about where you want to put your money. Do you want to put it in high end pitching where there has been a sustained track record of excellence or put it in mediocre hitting where even the bats that are considered the cream of the FA crop come with uneven production history (Upton) and paying for unrecognized potential (Heyward).

 

[nsacpi]

You can't avoid risk.

True. But you have choices. My point is that going after the top of the rotation type pitchers is not a good move for a team like the Braves. Teams like the Yankees can absorb a contract like CC Sabathia's and remain competitive. I don't think we can. The Tigers have had a much bigger payroll than us and they're going to have a hard time remaining competitive given the return/$ they are facing with Verlander's contract.

 

[Hawk]

True. But you have choices. My point is that going after the top of the rotation type pitchers is not a good move for a team like the Braves. Teams like the Yankees can absorb a contract like CC Sabathia's and remain competitive. I don't think we can. The Tigers have had a much bigger payroll than us and they're going to have a hard time remaining competitive given the return/$ they are facing with Verlander's contract.

Price is the only 'big contract' guy in this FA class that I'd pursue. I've mentioned it in several other threads in the past, but I think he has the ability (given his arsenal) to pitch with reduced stuff in the twilight years of his contract.

Which is more risky, though: giving $100MM to Zobrist/Uribe/Buerhle over two seasons, or giving $150MM to Price over 7? Especially when Zobrist/Uribe/Buerhle don't even represent clear upgrades over the team's farm options?

I think the Braves can comfortably support 2-3 $20MM+ guys and still remain competitive.

Like Harry said, it's inevitable that you are going to need to add (or retain) expensive talent at some point. That's the reality. Whether that reality is now or not is a completely different story.

 

[nsacpi]

Which is more risky, though: giving $100MM to Zobrist/Uribe/Buerhle over two seasons, or giving $150MM to Price over 7? Especially when Zobrist/Uribe/Buerhle don't even represent clear upgrades over the team's farm options?

I think the Braves can comfortably support 2-3 $20MM+ guys and still remain competitive.

Like Harry said, it's inevitable that you are going to need to add (or retain) expensive talent at some point. That's the reality. Whether that reality is now or not is a completely different story.

First, I think Buehrle/Zobrist/Uribe over two seasons will cost around $60M not $100M. And Price is going to cost more than 150M over 7 years. Verlander got 180M over 7 year and Scherzer got 210M over 7 years, though admittedly heavily backloaded. Lester got 155M over 7 years. Price is significantly better than Lester and will be paid accordingly. So once we move to more realistic numbers, I think the case is pretty clear.

Second, I don't view Buehrle as an improvement over the in-house options. I advocate signing for him as a means to create the depth that would allow us to trade a major league ready starting pitcher for a catcher. I'd rather be able to sign a catcher but I don't see one among the free agents that I really like. So I think we'll have to trade for one. I suppose we could trade someone like Peraza for a catcher, but my judgment is that Peraza will turn out to be a bit better than the consensus and would rather hold on to him.

 

[Hawk]

First, I think Buehrle/Zobrist/Uribe over two seasons will cost around $60M not $100M. And Price is going to cost more than 150M over 7 years. Verlander got 180M over 7 year and Scherzer got 210M over 7 years, though admittedly heavily backloaded. Lester got 155M over 7 years. Price is significantly better than Lester. So once we move to more realistic numbers, I think the case is pretty clear.

Second, I don't view Buehrle as an improvement over the in-house options. I advocate signing for him as a means to create the depth that would allow us to trade a major league ready starting pitcher for a catcher. I'd rather be able to sign a catcher but I don't see one among the free agents that I really like. So I think we'll have to trade one. I suppose we could trade someone like Peraza for a catcher, but my judgment is that Pereza will turn out to be a bit better than the consensus and would rather hold on to him.

I don't think it's that clear. We're talking about a market that is going to be absolutely inundated with premium pitching; Price, Cueto, Greinke, Zimmerman, Samardzija, Gallardo, Latos, Fister, Kazmir. Given those market conditions I find it improbable that we see Price achieve more than $175MM. I still think he'll ultimately settle for around $150MM, having more to do with the amount of teams able to drop that kind of coin versus what his talent would be worth in any other offseason.

You suggested Buerhle at 2 years plus option ('between 10-15MM' per annum) -- let's say he gets $12MM: ~$25MM
Uribe at 2 years plus option ('between 5-10MM' per annum) -- let's say he gets $8MM: ~$16MM
Zobrist at 2 years plus option ('between 10-15mm' per annum) -- let's say he gets $13MM: ~$26MM

That's $67MM (conservatively, given the market for 3B and MI in general) -- not including buyouts for the third year of all 3 contracts (let's just ballpark $1.5MM for each player = ~$5MM) and we're at $72MM not having spent on your suggestion of veteran relief. If we sign Jim Johnson 2.0 ($1.6MM) and Jason Grilli 2.0 (~$8MM) we're at: $81.1MM -- and this is assuming you buy out all three players and don't have buyouts for the newly signed relief corps.

Second, I don't view Buehrle as an improvement over the in-house options. I advocate signing for him as a means to create the depth that would allow us to trade a major league ready starting pitcher for a catcher. I'd rather be able to sign a catcher but I don't see one among the free agents that I really like. So I think we'll have to trade one. I suppose we could trade someone like Peraza for a catcher, but my judgment is that Pereza will turn out to be a bit better than the consensus and would rather hold on to him.

I'm a proponent of depth, but not at that kind of cost. Lohse/Young/Hudson/Norris I imagine will be available at between $5-9MM on a one year pact.

 

[The Tariff King]

Maybe Huddy will accept the lowball offer we tried to give him last time.