What if?

rico43

rico43

<B>Director of Minor League Reports</B>
This is my favorite thing to do during the off-season, because we can disagree without it getting personal. Right???

My projection is this: If the Braves were to agree to trading Albies, Acuna and Fried, what would it get and/or what else would it take for an elite player or pitcher?
 
those are 3 pretty dang good prospects to bunch together. In fact I would be hesitant to trade any of them, but seeing how you are asking I would have to get a heck of a haul for them. I would need 1 ace like pitcher and at least a top fielding prospect. and when I say ace I mean ace, not a might be ace some day. Someone like a Kluber or a Madison Bumgarner. I believe people are underselling Fried, I happen to think he has a tremendous upside and could be a Madison Bumgarner like pitcher within a couple years.
 
depley said:
those are 3 pretty dang good prospects to bunch together. In fact I would be hesitant to trade any of them, but seeing how you are asking I would have to get a heck of a haul for them. I would need 1 ace like pitcher and at least a top fielding prospect. and when I say ace I mean ace, not a might be ace some day. Someone like a Kluber or a Madison Bumgarner. I believe people are underselling Fried, I happen to think he has a tremendous upside and could be a Madison Bumgarner like pitcher within a couple years.
Click to expand...

Isn't Fried compared to Clayton by some??
 
depley said:
those are 3 pretty dang good prospects to bunch together. In fact I would be hesitant to trade any of them, but seeing how you are asking I would have to get a heck of a haul for them. I would need 1 ace like pitcher and at least a top fielding prospect. and when I say ace I mean ace, not a might be ace some day. Someone like a Kluber or a Madison Bumgarner. I believe people are underselling Fried, I happen to think he has a tremendous upside and could be a Madison Bumgarner like pitcher within a couple years.
Click to expand...

I love Fried's upside, but he's not going to be valued like a top pitching prospect because of the risk and the fact that he's never really pitched above A ball. So I think people just understand that his value is not at its peak right now. Because of that, he would absolutely not be the right guy to throw into a trade.

But Albies/Acuna/Fried doesn't get you a true ace, I don't think, at least not one with years of control left. It definitely doesn't get you Bumgarner or even in the conversation for Bumgarner.
 
Albies and Fried for Sale is a fair trade with an expected surplus value of 11 on each side.

Albies and Acuna for Archer is a fair trade with an expected surplus value of 13 wins above replacement on each side.

thats my take...ymmv
 
I really don't want to move acuna or albies.

I'd rather take on a bad contract and move some mid level guys to get some better but not elite guys. I just don't think we are close enough to make the big move yet. Instead of Archer I'd be looking at the next level down rays pitchers.

I really don't want to move our position guys
 
Given where our talent lies in the minors, we need to be trading pitching for offense. Not the other way around. Or trade a position where there is depth for a position where there is need.
 
That package by itself probably gets you one of the following:

Greinke, Carrasco, Gray, Verlander, Wainwright, Quintana, or Darvish
 
nsacpi said:
Albies and Fried for Sale is a fair trade with an expected surplus value of 11 on each side.

Albies and Acuna for Archer is a fair trade with an expected surplus value of 13 wins above replacement on each side.

thats my take...ymmv
Click to expand...

I think the Chisox will want to "win" a Sale trade. So, I think it would take all three. I wouldn't do it, mainly because I don't think the addition of Sale without improvements on the offensive side would be nearly enough.
 
Horsehide Harry said:
I think the Chisox will want to "win" a Sale trade. So, I think it would take all three. I wouldn't do it, mainly because I don't think the addition of Sale without improvements on the offensive side would be nearly enough.
Click to expand...

i dont see it happening either...some other team will agree to a price that will amount to a win for the white sox
 
nsacpi said:
Albies and Fried for Sale is a fair trade with an expected surplus value of 11 on each side.

Albies and Acuna for Archer is a fair trade with an expected surplus value of 13 wins above replacement on each side.

thats my take...ymmv
Click to expand...

If Albies and Acuna net you Archer, I'm all-in. I then turn around and trade Newcomb and Inciarte for Quintana and Folty and Peterson for Kinsler.

Rotation - Archer, Quintana, Teheran, Colon, Dickey

CF- Mallex, 2B- Kinsler, 1B- Freeman, LF- Kemp, RF- Markakis, SS- Swanson, 3B- Valbuena/Garcia, C- Castro/Flowers

You'd still have Wisler, Blair, Whalen, Gant, Jenkins, Sims, Fried, Ellis, Weigel, Povse, Allard, Toussaint, Soroka, Sanchez, Anderson, Wentz, and Muller for arms. You'd still have Dustin Peterson, Ruiz, Demeritte, Maitan, Cumberland, Riley, Davidson, plus all the other international signees from the last two years for bats AND the #5 pick in June.

That's still a Top 10 system, and I dare anybody to tell me that's not a contender in 2017. Yeah, it pushes salaries over $130 million this year, BUT it buys Wisler and Blair another year before having to be the #4 and #5 guys (since you can probably get out from under Big Sexy and Dickey's money when they prove ready). It also gives Demeritte two years to develop behind Kinsler (option for next year), and several years for Maitan to develop at his own pace. A Top 3 of Archer, Quintana, and Julio would keep that lineup competitive and relevant more than long enough for the Rome rotation to start getting here.
 
Horsehide Harry said:
I think the Chisox will want to "win" a Sale trade. So, I think it would take all three. I wouldn't do it, mainly because I don't think the addition of Sale without improvements on the offensive side would be nearly enough.
Click to expand...

I think it would take all three because it's hard to amass 5-6 WAR in one player in a given year. So I don't think lining up surplus value is a good way to do it.
 
ok I do not know who Valbueno is other than some guy not on a team that has a lifetime BA of .222 which makes me wonder why? Then Quintana, Castro, Archer and Kinsler add about 31 million in payroll, and you just gave up a gold glove center fielder for a guy that has not shown much at a ML level yet. How does the 31M fit and where would that leave us salary wise? Would it not preclude any flexability in mid season?
 
depley said:
ok I do not know who Valbueno is other than some guy not on a team that has a lifetime BA of .222 which makes me wonder why? Then Quintana, Castro, Archer and Kinsler add about 31 million in payroll, and you just gave up a gold glove center fielder for a guy that has not shown much at a ML level yet. How does the 31M fit and where would that leave us salary wise? Would it not preclude any flexability in mid season?
Click to expand...

Adding Archer, Quintana, Kinsler, and Castro would push payroll to $125,900,000 before renewals - which will be less than $7 million. That pushes it to ~$132 million.

No, Mallex isn't going to be quite as good defensively. I'd argue that Kinsler/Mallex will outproduce Albies/Ender for the next two years offensively though, and it's not like you're replacing Inciarte with Frenchy (or even B. J./Melvin for that matter) - Mallex is far better than Maybin was out there.

What "flexibility" do you need at midseason? It's not like you'd be looking to trade for a SP.

Valbuena's just an option with pop to platoon with Garcia, he wouldn't really be necessary since you'd be adding Kinsler - Ruiz would be fine there.
 
I realize it has been a long time since we all saw Mallex play, but I think we are selling him short. Is he equal to Ender? No, but the difference is much smaller than we are thinking here on the board. He hits a lot for extra bases, mostly because of speed, but we did see a few homers. He started slow with SB's, but if I remember correctly at the time of his injury he had something like 17 in a row without being caught.

And... the trajectory of his skills suggests that he is still getting better. We saw a lot of "Mallex is so good" posts before the injury.

I love Ender, but Mallex is a smaller downgrade that many of us here are thinking. He is also very good.
 
mfree80 said:
I realize it has been a long time since we all saw Mallex play, but I think we are selling him short. Is he equal to Ender? No, but the difference is much smaller than we are thinking here on the board. He hits a lot for extra bases, mostly because of speed, but we did see a few homers. He started slow with SB's, but if I remember correctly at the time of his injury he had something like 17 in a row without being caught.

And... the trajectory of his skills suggests that he is still getting better. We saw a lot of "Mallex is so good" posts before the injury.

I love Ender, but Mallex is a smaller downgrade that many of us here are thinking. He is also very good.
Click to expand...

This is why I think he would make acquiring Sonny Gray pretty simple.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top