Perfect Cell
Lynchburg Prospect
I see now issue with this deal. KJ and Uribe werent gonna bring us that much in return anyways. I do hope we continue to deal, Jim Johnson, ect ect. Nick Markakais ect. Slash and burn.
Uribe and KJ to NYM
- Thread starter Hawk
- Start date
For those still bitching about the trade, here's a scouting report for you...
"He’s made steady progress through the system, overshadowed by more famous prospects with better resumes, gaudier radar readings, and nicer height-weight measurements, but often out-pitching the guys who look better in uniform. He picks up a lot of grounders with his low-90s sinker, has a good change-up, throws strikes, and has made progress adding a slider to his repertoire. Perez doesn’t stand out under traditional analysis but he gets the job done, and could sneak into the majors as a back-end starter or long reliever sooner (and with more success) than people expect. Sounds like a sleeper to me. Grade C+."
The player? Someone over half of the people around here never heard of before this season - Williams Perez.
A little more from Sickels in June...
"Right now that's holding up pretty well. He's relying heavily on the 86-94 MPH sinker according to PITCHf/x, throwing it over 60 percent of the time. He'll mix in some curveballs in the 70s about 15 percent of the time. The pre-season reports I had made this pitch out as a slider, but right now it looks more like a curve, at least according to PITCHf/x. He also uses a straight change in the 70s and low 80s about 12 percent of the time, and some variant fastballs in the 90 MPH range about 10 percent. He's generating a lot of ground balls with all of this and his defense has backed him up.
Fluke? Yes and no. Yes, the ERA overstates matters and at some point it will (or at least should) creep closer to the FIP. Based on his overall track record, he looks a lot more like a guy who will post a 3.50 ERA in the long run than 2.20.
But no, he's not a complete fluke, and I don't see any reason why he can't be a competent inning-eater with slightly above average results as long as he stays healthy."
http://www.minorleagueball.com/2015/6/17/8768833/a-sleeper-who-woke-up-braves-rookie-williams-perez
"He’s made steady progress through the system, overshadowed by more famous prospects with better resumes, gaudier radar readings, and nicer height-weight measurements, but often out-pitching the guys who look better in uniform. He picks up a lot of grounders with his low-90s sinker, has a good change-up, throws strikes, and has made progress adding a slider to his repertoire. Perez doesn’t stand out under traditional analysis but he gets the job done, and could sneak into the majors as a back-end starter or long reliever sooner (and with more success) than people expect. Sounds like a sleeper to me. Grade C+."
The player? Someone over half of the people around here never heard of before this season - Williams Perez.
A little more from Sickels in June...
"Right now that's holding up pretty well. He's relying heavily on the 86-94 MPH sinker according to PITCHf/x, throwing it over 60 percent of the time. He'll mix in some curveballs in the 70s about 15 percent of the time. The pre-season reports I had made this pitch out as a slider, but right now it looks more like a curve, at least according to PITCHf/x. He also uses a straight change in the 70s and low 80s about 12 percent of the time, and some variant fastballs in the 90 MPH range about 10 percent. He's generating a lot of ground balls with all of this and his defense has backed him up.
Fluke? Yes and no. Yes, the ERA overstates matters and at some point it will (or at least should) creep closer to the FIP. Based on his overall track record, he looks a lot more like a guy who will post a 3.50 ERA in the long run than 2.20.
But no, he's not a complete fluke, and I don't see any reason why he can't be a competent inning-eater with slightly above average results as long as he stays healthy."
http://www.minorleagueball.com/2015/6/17/8768833/a-sleeper-who-woke-up-braves-rookie-williams-perez
sturg33
I
Dude - you need to adjust your tone and relax a bit. Get off your high horse
striker42
Well-known member
For every Williams Perez there are a hundred guys with similar stuff who never sniff the majors. If anything, the fact that people are surprised when a guy like Perez succeeds should tell you something. There's always a chance any pitcher can figure out a way to defy the odds and make it to the majors. Whether it's a good bet that they will is a different measure. I hope I'm proven wrong and both guys we got back become excellent major leaguers. I'll just be surprised if either ever becomes more than mop up guy.
A Quick Look at the Prospects in the Juan Uribe Trade
by Chris Mitchell - July 27, 2015 · Comments (1)
In an attempt to strengthen their under-achieving lineup, the Mets swung a deal for infielders Juan Uribe and Kelly Johnson from the Atlanta Braves on Friday evening. In exchange for the infielders’ services, the Mets sent right-handers Rob Whalen and John Gant to the Braves.
Neither of these arms are highly touted prospects. Kiley McDaniel gave Whalen a FV of 40 — essentially a middle reliever — on his offseason Mets writeup, while Gant didn’t even merit a mention. However, both of these pitchers have pitched fairly well in the minors this year.
Whalen, who’s 21, has spent all of 2015 as a starter for High-A Port St. Lucie. He’s put up a 3.36 ERA and 3.85 FIP in 83 innings. That’s not a bad showing for a 21-year-old, but his 17% strikeout rate leaves a little to be desired. Based on his 2015 numbers, KATOH forecasts Whalen for a meager 0.9 WAR through age-28 — down from 1.4 WAR in the preseason.
Gant has been slightly more impressive this year between High-A and Double-A. The 22-year-old opened the year at the former location, where he dominated over six starts. He struck out 30% of the batters he faced, and walked just 6%, on his way to a 1.79 ERA and 2.91 FIP.
Gant’s been much less dominant following a May promotion to Double-A. His strikeout rate’s cratered to 16%, while his walk rate has ballooned to 10%. Taking these two partial seasons together, KATOH forecasts him for 2.7 WAR through age-28, which would have put him 195th on KATOH’s preseason list. KATOH projected him for 1.7 WAR after the 2014 season.
Although Gant has the better numbers, both he and Whalen are in the same boat as prospects. Both were late-round draft picks — taken in the 12th and 21st round, respectively — and are fringy prospects at best. Their minor-league performances suggest they might be of some use to the Braves in a year or two, perhaps as middle relievers, but even that’s not guaranteed.
by Chris Mitchell - July 27, 2015 · Comments (1)
In an attempt to strengthen their under-achieving lineup, the Mets swung a deal for infielders Juan Uribe and Kelly Johnson from the Atlanta Braves on Friday evening. In exchange for the infielders’ services, the Mets sent right-handers Rob Whalen and John Gant to the Braves.
Neither of these arms are highly touted prospects. Kiley McDaniel gave Whalen a FV of 40 — essentially a middle reliever — on his offseason Mets writeup, while Gant didn’t even merit a mention. However, both of these pitchers have pitched fairly well in the minors this year.
Whalen, who’s 21, has spent all of 2015 as a starter for High-A Port St. Lucie. He’s put up a 3.36 ERA and 3.85 FIP in 83 innings. That’s not a bad showing for a 21-year-old, but his 17% strikeout rate leaves a little to be desired. Based on his 2015 numbers, KATOH forecasts Whalen for a meager 0.9 WAR through age-28 — down from 1.4 WAR in the preseason.
Gant has been slightly more impressive this year between High-A and Double-A. The 22-year-old opened the year at the former location, where he dominated over six starts. He struck out 30% of the batters he faced, and walked just 6%, on his way to a 1.79 ERA and 2.91 FIP.
Gant’s been much less dominant following a May promotion to Double-A. His strikeout rate’s cratered to 16%, while his walk rate has ballooned to 10%. Taking these two partial seasons together, KATOH forecasts him for 2.7 WAR through age-28, which would have put him 195th on KATOH’s preseason list. KATOH projected him for 1.7 WAR after the 2014 season.
Although Gant has the better numbers, both he and Whalen are in the same boat as prospects. Both were late-round draft picks — taken in the 12th and 21st round, respectively — and are fringy prospects at best. Their minor-league performances suggest they might be of some use to the Braves in a year or two, perhaps as middle relievers, but even that’s not guaranteed.
Exactly. The point is that all these "sleepers" (like Perez) came from somewhere. I don't expect them to ever be integral pieces of the big club any more than anyone else does, but surprises come in all shapes and sizes. History has shown us all that you'll never have enough arms given the number of injuries and flameouts as Pitchers climb the ladder. You keep drafting and trading for extra ones in the hopes that you stumble upon a couple of Greg McMichaels, Peter Moylans, etc. that could be useful for a season or two and you move on to the next ones.
The thing I (and I'm sure most of the rest of us) would love to see is the shift to drafting more power than pitchability guys that may never have a chance to make it into a rotation but could overpower hitters with top-shelf velocity (like DMGM has done in KC). In a perfect world, we land a Price/Greinke/Zimmerman/etc. to front the rotation this winter, trade Wood (plus, if necessary) to land someone like Lucroy, and then finally make the decision to make Folty the next Kimbrel. Folty, Vizcaino, and Simmons would give you the makings of a dominant back-end.
I'm just not sure when that will happen (if it ever does). I do agree with those who think the organization has missed several chances to develop potentially dominant back-end guys at times by spending too much time trying to develop borderline guys into starters. Until that changes, my guess is that they'll keep stockpiling arms in the hopes that some of them work out and become 6th-7th inning/swingman pieces - like these two.
Dude - go troll someone else.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
My issue isn't that they traded for two long shot pitchers. Uribe and Johnson weren't going to bring a bunch in return anyway. My issue is that I would have felt better if they were two long shot bats, even if they were rookie level nut had potential.
I think the Braves already have a number of pitchers like Gant and Whelan. At some point there will be a 40 man crises where some of these guys will have to be exposed. So, unless the Braves think that Gant and/or Whelan can be in the ML in a year or two, then it's possible they will be lost anyway.
I think the Braves have pitching on the brain. "We don't produce ML bats nearly as well as we do pitchers so the default position is to ask back for pitching." I think that school of thought ignores the current baseball cycle which is a relative excess of pitching and dearth of bats.
I think the Braves already have a number of pitchers like Gant and Whelan. At some point there will be a 40 man crises where some of these guys will have to be exposed. So, unless the Braves think that Gant and/or Whelan can be in the ML in a year or two, then it's possible they will be lost anyway.
I think the Braves have pitching on the brain. "We don't produce ML bats nearly as well as we do pitchers so the default position is to ask back for pitching." I think that school of thought ignores the current baseball cycle which is a relative excess of pitching and dearth of bats.
striker42
Well-known member
My holdup is how much value does a sleeper who might, if everything breaks his way, become a back end of the rotation starter have? Pretty much none. These guys are lottery tickets with a top prize of a couple bucks. Who's going to buy a ticket where you have a 1% chance of winning $3?
If that's all we could get for Uribe and KJ, I don't see the point in trading them. There was no gun to our head to trade them. Why deal when you get nothing back? Guys like Gant and Whalen can be found all over the place in the minors.
My problem with this trade isn't that we gave up a lot. It's that there was just no real reason to make the deal in the first place.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
Even sending 500k, the Braves saved $2.5M the rest of the way. I think that may ultimately go to making sure CJ doesn't come back next year.
In my opinion I think we might have had our bluff called by Pittsburgh and/or the Angels. After those two moved on, we made a hasty trade with the Mets and had to take on quantity over quality. It's not the end of the world. It worked out with San Diego and the Upton trade, so hopefully this one will work out as well.
Russ2dollas
10 yr, $185 million Extension
The reason is that we don't need them. If we want them back next year we can still get them. We save 2.5 million. And we get two guys who might be something useful.
The Lottery ticket analogy doesn't fit. We didn't buy anything.
The analogy would be like you bought a ballpark poncho for $25 b/c it was raining. Then the rain went away. In the 8th inning some guy offers you $10 bucks for the poncho and two scratch off tickets.
JohnAdcox
Brian Jordan's New BFF
Why? Dude, I’m not trying to antagonize you in any way, but it seems to me clvclv (I need to learn how to pronounce that) made a well-reasoned argument and backed it up. Unless I missed something, i didn’t seem even remotely dickish. Why the hostility?
(That said, I would love to be at the table when you two go out for beers. Solid entertainment.)
J
JohnAdcox
Brian Jordan's New BFF
Mets get: Simmons
Braves get: The entire Mets farm system, plus Grienke, Kershaw, Stanton, and Trout, which the Mets somehow acquire and pay 100% of their salaries from now on. Oh, and a catcher. Seems fair.
cee-ell-vee cee-ell-vee
Just my initials - obviously not particularly imaginative on my part.
cee-ell-vee cee-ell-vee
Just my initials - obviously not particularly imaginative on my part.
I prefer to read it as cliv-cliv