Trades reviewd

People need to consider this when factoring Thurman's value as a "throw in" to the Gattis deal:

With the expection of three rehab starts, Thurman did not pitch between May 10 and July 18 because of that damn bus wreck. Also, he was moved up to Mississippi t help with the playoff push with limited success (1-4, 5.18).
 
Enscheff said:
That's because none of those guys were worth an elite guy. Nobody is going to give up Kris Bryant for 1 year of any OFer or for 4 years of a DH that can barely put up a .300 OBP.

I would also argue that Miller (for Heyward) is close to elite, Fried is nearly elite and Mallex is potentially an impact leadoff hitter (for JUp), and Folty is nearly elite (for Gattis). They may not be top 20 guys, but they do have a shot at being impact/elite guys. When you're trading away rentals and a DH I'm not sure you can realistically expect to get much better in return.
Click to expand...

And I'd disagree with your assessment. Miller is not elite. Very good? Maybe, but he's not an ace. Fried is an unknown. Highly ranked prior to Tommy John, but who knows how he'll recover. Mallex Smith is nowhere near elite. Many writeups I've read on him from prospect analysis question if he's even a major league starter.

As for letting our guys develop, it's kinda tough to accept when you see rookies all over the league being called up and having success from day one.

I'd argue that our front office would have got better pieces in these trades but went for quantity instead of putting all the eggs into one basket.
 
NYCBrave said:
As for letting our guys develop, it's kinda tough to accept when you see rookies all over the league being called up and having success from day one.
Click to expand...

who exactly are you referring to? what rookie came on and looked like an ace this year.

Noah S. Who struggled some this year and had a 5+ ERA last year in AAA. Very similar to Folty path right now.
 
NYCBrave said:
And I'd disagree with your assessment. Miller is not elite. Very good? Maybe, but he's not an ace. Fried is an unknown. Highly ranked prior to Tommy John, but who knows how he'll recover. Mallex Smith is nowhere near elite. Many writeups I've read on him from prospect analysis question if he's even a major league starter.

As for letting our guys develop, it's kinda tough to accept when you see rookies all over the league being called up and having success from day one.

I'd argue that our front office would have got better pieces in these trades but went for quantity instead of putting all the eggs into one basket.
Click to expand...

It's almost like you only read every other word of of my post. I said Miller is nearly elite, Fried is nearly elite (because of his injury), and Mallex is potentially an impact player. The range for Mallex is anywhere from 4th OFer to someone like Juan Pierre, and I don't think anyone would argue that Pierre was an impact leadoff hitter.

You see rookies all over the league having success? Of course you do. For one, YOU probably don't see the rookies that came up and struggled...because they aren't playing much. Secondly, this is an extremely strong rookie class this year. The Braves haven't had a prospect like Bryant or Correa or Schwarber or Buxton or Sano or Seager or Soler or Russell since Heyward and Freeman.

And guess what? No team is going to give up a prospect of that quality for what the Braves traded last offseason. So again, I'm not sure what else a rational fan could have expected to get as a better return in those trades. What other rumors have you heard after the fact about alternate possible returns? I certainly haven't seen anything surface. What are you basing your assertion that, "I'd argue that our front office would have got better pieces in these trades but went for quantity instead of putting all the eggs into one basket"?
 
Some good work involved with putting this thread together, but it really take years to properly assess a trade. Hopefully, somebody will resurrect this discussion 2-4 years from now, at about the time when here somebody's already anticipating Shelby Miller entering free agency.
 
Knucksie said:
Some good work involved with putting this thread together, but it really take years to properly assess a trade. Hopefully, somebody will resurrect this discussion 2-4 years from now, at about the time when here somebody's already anticipating Shelby Miller entering free agency.
Click to expand...

Of course you can't give final winner or loser status for a few years after a trade. However I thought it would be cool to take a look at where we are a year later.

However I think you can call the Heyward trade a win for the Braves unless he resigns then we will have to wait
 
Knucksie said:
Some good work involved with putting this thread together, but it really take years to properly assess a trade. Hopefully, somebody will resurrect this discussion 2-4 years from now, at about the time when here somebody's already anticipating Shelby Miller entering free agency.
Click to expand...

No doubt, but you can better assess the trades now than you could before the year. And you'll be better able to assess them this time next year, and on and on.

Somebody in the thread mentioned not liking the fact that Olivera is now blocking Ruiz and that Olivera and Markakis could block Davidson. I didn't like the Olivera trade at the time it was made and still don't like it, but I'm not sure how much those guys are actually blocked.

Ruiz may be to some degree because if he turns it around next year, he's potentially within another year of being ready. But there's still obviously a chance he doesn't turn it around, so I'm fine with adding a short-term 3B that you're more sure about.

And Davidson is likely at least 3 years away right now. It's hard for me to see him being ready before he's 22 or so, so he's not really blocked by those guys. By the time he's ready, they'll be pretty much out the door already. And you can't make moves because a guy in A ball may develop slightly before their contract runs out.
 
smootness said:
No doubt, but you can better assess the trades now than you could before the year. And you'll be better able to assess them this time next year, and on and on.

Somebody in the thread mentioned not liking the fact that Olivera is now blocking Ruiz and that Olivera and Markakis could block Davidson. I didn't like the Olivera trade at the time it was made and still don't like it, but I'm not sure how much those guys are actually blocked.

Ruiz may be to some degree because if he turns it around next year, he's potentially within another year of being ready. But there's still obviously a chance he doesn't turn it around, so I'm fine with adding a short-term 3B that you're more sure about.

And Davidson is likely at least 3 years away right now. It's hard for me to see him being ready before he's 22 or so, so he's not really blocked by those guys. By the time he's ready, they'll be pretty much out the door already. And you can't make moves because a guy in A ball may develop slightly before their contract runs out.
Click to expand...

With the way Ruiz has performed I don't see any way the Braves could or should worry about blocking him. The only offensive skill he's shown to date is the ability to take a walk. A valuable skill, but useless if he can't hit well enough to get to the bigs. The fact that he flopped at the level which generally weeds out overhyped prospects (albeit at a young age) is a big red flag for me.
 
Enscheff said:
It's almost like you only read every other word of of my post. I said Miller is nearly elite, Fried is nearly elite (because of his injury), and Mallex is potentially an impact player. The range for Mallex is anywhere from 4th OFer to someone like Juan Pierre, and I don't think anyone would argue that Pierre was an impact leadoff hitter.

You see rookies all over the league having success? Of course you do. For one, YOU probably don't see the rookies that came up and struggled...because they aren't playing much. Secondly, this is an extremely strong rookie class this year. The Braves haven't had a prospect like Bryant or Correa or Schwarber or Buxton or Sano or Seager or Soler or Russell since Heyward and Freeman.

And guess what? No team is going to give up a prospect of that quality for what the Braves traded last offseason. So again, I'm not sure what else a rational fan could have expected to get as a better return in those trades. What other rumors have you heard after the fact about alternate possible returns? I certainly haven't seen anything surface. What are you basing your assertion that, "I'd argue that our front office would have got better pieces in these trades but went for quantity instead of putting all the eggs into one basket"?
Click to expand...

Miller is not nearly elite.

I have no other dog in this fight, but Miller is a very good to great pitcher this past year, which was the best of his career. You'd need way more of a sample to consider him near Elite. DeGrom is near elite, Bumgarner is near elite. Miller has a long way to go to get to those 2's level.
 
zitothebrave said:
Miller is not nearly elite.

I have no other dog in this fight, but Miller is a very good to great pitcher this past year, which was the best of his career. You'd need way more of a sample to consider him near Elite. DeGrom is near elite, Bumgarner is near elite. Miller has a long way to go to get to those 2's level.
Click to expand...

You don't consider deGrom or Bumgarner elite? Holy crap, those are insane standards.
 
smootness said:
You don't consider deGrom or Bumgarner elite? Holy crap, those are insane standards.
Click to expand...

He's like the Braves version of Yankee super fan Jerome from Manhatten. He doesn't like rookies because he doesn't trust them, and then when they adjust and perform why weren't they given a chance. And if a young player is struggling on his team your garbage, but if he's on someone else team you drool over because of his raw talent. It's not good enough, unless your entire team is an All-Star including the 25th man. God forbid if your team loses to the woeful Rangers in mid August to end a 10 game winning streak, because the starting catcher was given a day off because "we're trying to clinch the division." Even if your manager wins 4 World Series in 5 years, he needs to get canned after losing game 1 of the ALCS to the Athletics because he didn't bunt with Justice in the 5th inning of a one run game. He's history, history I say!

RIP Jerome, I miss ya buddy!
 
smootness said:
You don't consider deGrom or Bumgarner elite? Holy crap, those are insane standards.
Click to expand...

Madison is elite. Degrom is on his way. I say you have to have more than one season of greatness to be elite. Zitobrave is crazy though to say degrom is almost elite but miller isn't the same. Put miller on the Mets and degrom on the Braves and their years would be very different for each.
 
smootness said:
You don't consider deGrom or Bumgarner elite? Holy crap, those are insane standards.
Click to expand...

I have a stronger definition of elite. To me Elite is someone who's proven year in and year out that they can perform at high levels. Kershaw, Price, King Felix, Scherzer, Kluber, Sale. Those guys year in and year out are top 10 pitchers. There's basically never a lull. Bumgarner doesn't really have the stats to do that. This year was his best year, and he still didn't crack the top 10. And DeGrom hasn't been doing it long enough.

Elite is a word that means best of the best. If I'm building an All-Star 5 man rotation I don't even remotely think of those guys.
 
You'll get no argument from me that Kershaw, Price, Hernandez, and Sale are elite. But I don't consider 'elite' to mean only the top 5 pitchers. It would be like saying the only elite position players are Trout, Harper, Donaldson, Goldschmidt, and Cabrera.

You include Scherzer, who's only really pitched at this level for 3 years, and Kluber, who has only had 1-2 great years, yet you won't include deGrom, who has pitched 2 years in the majors, both of which were elite? I assume you don't consider Arrieta elite yet, but his last 2 years dwarf Kluber's.

If your response is that you value guys who can consistently give you a ton of innings, how do you leave off Bumgarner? I see no separation between Kluber and Bumgarner. In fact, Bumgarner has been doing it for far longer.
 
smootness said:
You'll get no argument from me that Kershaw, Price, Hernandez, and Sale are elite. But I don't consider 'elite' to mean only the top 5 pitchers. It would be like saying the only elite position players are Trout, Harper, Donaldson, Goldschmidt, and Cabrera.

You include Scherzer, who's only really pitched at this level for 3 years, and Kluber, who has only had 1-2 great years, yet you won't include deGrom, who has pitched 2 years in the majors, both of which were elite? I assume you don't consider Arrieta elite yet, but his last 2 years dwarf Kluber's.

If your response is that you value guys who can consistently give you a ton of innings, how do you leave off Bumgarner? I see no separation between Kluber and Bumgarner. In fact, Bumgarner has been doing it for far longer.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing he doesn't know those guys stats, and was just spouting off the names he last heard on ESPN?
 
IMO part of being elite is going 200+ innings in a year. Going deep into games matter. Regarding deGrom. He has elite talent and has shown that in his 52 MLB starts. Still he only pitched 140 innings last year in the majors and only 191 this year. Someone like Kluber has pitche 457 the last 2 seasons. Over 120 more innings and that has importance. That's not to say deGrom won't get to that level but he still needs to do it.
 
hard to say someone is elite after a few seasons.. you have guys like Arrieta who weren't very good but figured it out and guys like Tim Lincecum who was 'Elite' for 3 or so years and just dropped off.. So claiming someone is elite or not elite before some time in the league to have a track record is just silly.
 
I think it's too early to judge the J Up and Gattis deals. So much of that is dependent on how well the young pups develop. If Mallex is the next Bourn then it was a great trade or if Fried or Folty develop into TOR starters then obviously the trades will be great.

We've already gotten a really good year out of Miller and his value is very high right now, so you can essentially already call that one a win. I think Miller's current value is greater than the value of the pick we would have gotten for Heyward.

We won the Kimbrel trade just because of the value in the money saved. 56 million is a lot of value for essentially only giving up a closer. You don't really need Reilly or Wisler to develop to win this trade.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
hard to say someone is elite after a few seasons.. you have guys like Arrieta who weren't very good but figured it out and guys like Tim Lincecum who was 'Elite' for 3 or so years and just dropped off.. So claiming someone is elite or not elite before some time in the league to have a track record is just silly.
Click to expand...

But what's the cut-off? Lincecum was absolutely elite; he just fell off and wasn't anymore after a while. And Arrieta is absolutely elite now. I know that because of the way he's pitched for the last 2 years. I just think calling a guy like Bumgarner 'near elite' is crazy. The guy has a career ERA and FIP of just over 3, his career K/BB is over 4, and he's pitched over 200 IP each of the last 5 years. Put up about 21 WAR in those 5 years. And he's getting better.

And if you're going to have a standard of having to have done it for a while, how in the world can you include Corey Kluber?
 
weso1 said:
I think it's too early to judge the J Up and Gattis deals. So much of that is dependent on how well the young pups develop. If Mallex is the next Bourn then it was a great trade or if Fried or Folty develop into TOR starters then obviously the trades will be great.

We've already gotten a really good year out of Miller and his value is very high right now, so you can essentially already call that one a win. I think Miller's current value is greater than the value of the pick we would have gotten for Heyward.

We won the Kimbrel trade just because of the value in the money saved. 56 million is a lot of value for essentially only giving up a closer. You don't really need Reilly or Wisler to develop to win this trade.
Click to expand...

This is fair.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top