John Manuel On XM This Morning

[Southcack77]

No idea who this Manuel guy is, but everyone proclaiming the Jackson trade a steal for the Braves should try to wrap their heads around what he said. The PosiBraves will obviously decide that Jackson will be the next Denard Span during their next circle jerk session, but the far most likely outcome is that he washes completely out of baseball before producing even 1 WAR.

Like I said the day the trade went down, it was an odd way for the Braves to spend pitching prospect value. Just because they probably weren't going to pitch for the Braves doesn't mean it was OK to spend that value on something so....odd.

I think including Povse in the Alex Jackson trade was a little eyebrow raising since it implies Atlanta was pretty interested in Jackson specifically.

I don't think there was much urgency in moving Povse to make the rosters work. I don't think Povse was that high a price though. He seemed destined to be a throw in in some trade some day regardless.

 

[smootness]

No idea who this Manuel guy is, but everyone proclaiming the Jackson trade a steal for the Braves should try to wrap their heads around what he said. The PosiBraves will obviously decide that Jackson will be the next Denard Span during their next circle jerk session, but the far most likely outcome is that he washes completely out of baseball before producing even 1 WAR.

Like I said the day the trade went down, it was an odd way for the Braves to spend pitching prospect value. Just because they probably weren't going to pitch for the Braves doesn't mean it was OK to spend that value on something so....odd.

No one ever thought any differently. It's a steal in that we got a guy with big bat potential (even if extremely risky) for spare parts. The actual value may not have been off on either side, but from our standpoint it was a good trade.

It is hard to get big bats. Even if there's a 5% chance he makes it, those odds aren't bad considering.

 

[Carp]

http://www.minorleagueball.com/2010/10/24/1772207/kansas-city-royals-top-20-prospects-for-2011

They didnt even produce one perennial all star. I dont see anyone on that list hitting anything close to what their perceived ceiling was. A lot of useful parts but nothing special. I doubt Odorizzi would be as good if he stayed with the Royals. The Rays have some of the best development systems whereas the Royals development is a dumpster fire. Their best players for their WS teams were Gordon who they already had and the players they got for trading Greinke. They were also very close to selling at the trade deadline the year they got to the first WS.

Hosmer, Moose, Myers, Duffy, Perez, Odorizzi, and Ventura have all turned into very productive major league regulars. Hosmer, Duffy, and Perez all have at least 10 career WAR. Moose is at 9.7 even with with missing the majority of 2016. Odorizzi and Ventura both have 3 WAR seasons under their belts. Myers is one of the best power hitters in the game. Montgomery and Jeffress have carved out pretty good roles as high leverage relievers.

More than half of the list you provided has made the majors. And about half the list are pretty productive major league regulars, even if there aren't any "superstars" at this time. I'd say that's pretty damn impressive.

 

[clvclv]

No idea who this Manuel guy is, but everyone proclaiming the Jackson trade a steal for the Braves should try to wrap their heads around what he said. The PosiBraves will obviously decide that Jackson will be the next Denard Span during their next circle jerk session, but the far most likely outcome is that he washes completely out of baseball before producing even 1 WAR.

Like I said the day the trade went down, it was an odd way for the Braves to spend pitching prospect value. Just because they probably weren't going to pitch for the Braves doesn't mean it was OK to spend that value on something so....odd.

Of course you don't - he doesn't have a calculator attached to his wrist. For all this vast "knowledge" you claim to possess, he'd probably be worth doing a little homework on.

 

[chipchildress]

No one ever thought any differently. It's a steal in that we got a guy with big bat potential (even if extremely risky) for spare parts. The actual value may not have been off on either side, but from our standpoint it was a good trade.

It is hard to get big bats. Even if there's a 5% chance he makes it, those odds aren't bad considering.

yeah, seattle stole a future 10+ year mlb starting pitcher. i'll reiterate...this could go down as the worst braves trade in memory.

 

[smootness]

yeah, seattle stole a future 10+ year mlb starting pitcher. i'll reiterate...this could go down as the worst braves trade in memory.

Good gosh, man.

 

[zbhargrove]

No idea who this Manuel guy is, but everyone proclaiming the Jackson trade a steal for the Braves should try to wrap their heads around what he said. The PosiBraves will obviously decide that Jackson will be the next Denard Span during their next circle jerk session, but the far most likely outcome is that he washes completely out of baseball before producing even 1 WAR.

Like I said the day the trade went down, it was an odd way for the Braves to spend pitching prospect value. Just because they probably weren't going to pitch for the Braves doesn't mean it was OK to spend that value on something so....odd.

I'm obviously a posibrave... but I have concerns about Jackson. Still, for what we gave up I think its worth the gamble just on physical talent alone. If we can kick his butt into gear, he can definitely still be a big time prospect. Maybe its not likely, but we traded two pitchers that are not likely to pitch on our team. Even though I like Whalen, it was obvious the Braves didn't see him in the future. I will miss Gant more... but I like the upside of Garcia.

 

[zbhargrove]

yeah, seattle stole a future 10+ year mlb starting pitcher. i'll reiterate...this could go down as the worst braves trade in memory.

Uhhhhh..... WUT?

 

[Enscheff]

I'm obviously a posibrave... but I have concerns about Jackson. Still, for what we gave up I think its worth the gamble just on physical talent alone. If we can kick his butt into gear, he can definitely still be a big time prospect. Maybe its not likely, but we traded two pitchers that are not likely to pitch on our team. Even though I like Whalen, it was obvious the Braves didn't see him in the future. I will miss Gant more... but I like the upside of Garcia.

You're a storm chaser. You have 2 of those super cool storm chasing rigs we all see on TV. You can only drive 1 storm chasing rig, so you drive around in the best one, and leave the lesser one sitting in your garage.

Does the fact that you don't drive the lesser rig mean you should trade it for a broken down rusted out '67 Camaro SS that needs major restoration work? Or should you hang onto that extra storm chasing rig and use it to acquire something you can actually use? Maybe swap it for an RV, or package it with other things to pay off your house? The fact you have an extra makes it expendable, but it does NOT lessen its value.

Folks keep saying things like, "they were blocked anyways", as if that lowers the value of a talent asset. It is possibly the most illogical player valuation argument I've seen. If the BoSox had 2 clones of Moncada, each would still be worth the same, no matter how many of them could play for the BoSox at the same time.

What if the Braves are hanging out at .500 near the trade deadline, and could have used Gant to acquire a BP arm or bench bat to help their cause? Wouldn't that be a better use of the asset than a guy who wasn't even assigned to full season ball 2 years after being drafted?

 

[zbhargrove]

You're a storm chaser. You have 2 of those super cool storm chasing rigs we all see on TV. You can only drive 1 storm chasing rig, so you drive around in the best one, and leave the lesser one sitting in your garage.

Does the fact that you don't drive the lesser rig mean you should trade it for a broken down rusted out '67 Camaro SS that needs major restoration work? Or should you hang onto that extra storm chasing rig and use it to acquire something you can actually use? Maybe swap it for an RV, or package it with other things to pay off your house? The fact you have an extra makes it expendable, but it does NOT lessen its value.

Folks keep saying things like, "they were blocked anyways", as if that lowers the value of a talent asset. It is possibly the most illogical player valuation argument I've seen. If the BoSox had 2 clones of Moncada, each would still be worth the same, no matter how many of them could play for the BoSox at the same time.

What if the Braves are hanging out at .500 near the trade deadline, and could have used Gant to acquire a BP arm or bench bat to help their cause? Wouldn't that be a better use of the asset than a guy who wasn't even assigned to full season ball 2 years after being drafted?

We will see... kinda hard to compare cars to baseball... if he gets moved to catcher again and turns his attitude around, its certainly a quality gamble. Also, there's no reason for a storm chasing rig (except for unnecessary TV drama)... I'd much rather chase in the camero if I can get it working

 

[zbhargrove]

If Tyler Marlette ends up being the PTBNL, then I will definitely be happy with the deal.

 

[Chico]

You're a storm chaser. You have 2 of those super cool storm chasing rigs we all see on TV. You can only drive 1 storm chasing rig, so you drive around in the best one, and leave the lesser one sitting in your garage.

Does the fact that you don't drive the lesser rig mean you should trade it for a broken down rusted out '67 Camaro SS that needs major restoration work? Or should you hang onto that extra storm chasing rig and use it to acquire something you can actually use? Maybe swap it for an RV, or package it with other things to pay off your house? The fact you have an extra makes it expendable, but it does NOT lessen its value.

Folks keep saying things like, "they were blocked anyways", as if that lowers the value of a talent asset. It is possibly the most illogical player valuation argument I've seen. If the BoSox had 2 clones of Moncada, each would still be worth the same, no matter how many of them could play for the BoSox at the same time.

What if the Braves are hanging out at .500 near the trade deadline, and could have used Gant to acquire a BP arm or bench bat to help their cause? Wouldn't that be a better use of the asset than a guy who wasn't even assigned to full season ball 2 years after being drafted?

If you're able to restore that 67 Camaro and it's worth 6 times that storm chasing truck then Yes you make that deal. Part of playing the stock market is taking gambles on a startup every now and then and not just putting your money in to sure things with small payouts. You think small you stay small IMHO

 

[Enscheff]

If you're able to restore that 67 Camaro and it's worth 6 times that storm chasing truck then Yes you make that deal. Part of playing the stock market is taking gambles on a startup every now and then and not just putting your money in to sure things with small payouts. You think small you stay small IMHO

Yup, which is what happens with a very small percentage of old junk cars. The vast majority sit around and continue to be junk.

I'll stick with following the probabilities.

 

[DirkPiggler]

Yup, which is what happens with a very small percentage of old junk cars. The vast majority sit around and continue to be junk.

I'll stick with following the probabilities.

Good analogy, but just like with your investment portfolio, you allocate a limited percentage of your assets towards more risky propositions in the hopes of larger than normal returns.

The dollar you invest as venture capital in a risky yet high end start up has the exact same value as the one you have in Berkshire Hathaway stock and the one earning 2.18% on T-bills. As long as you have a whole lot more of those dollars in the latter two investments it doesn't hurt to chase the super-high margins with the extras sometimes.

 

[Southcack77]

Good analogy, but just like with your investment portfolio, you allocate a limited percentage of your assets towards more risky propositions in the hopes of larger than normal returns.

The dollar you invest as venture capital in a risky yet high end start up has the exact same value as the one you have in Berkshire Hathaway stock and the one earning 2.18% on T-bills. As long as you have a whole lot more of those dollars in the latter two investments it doesn't hurt to chase the super-high margins with the extras sometimes.

Ideally you would want as many low risk, high reward bets as possible. If you have a high risk, you at least want to see that you get paid out if it hits.

Defining what low risk means here could be interesting. I would go with acquisition costs here rather than the likelihood of the player hitting.

 

[smootness]

Yup, which is what happens with a very small percentage of old junk cars. The vast majority sit around and continue to be junk.

I'll stick with following the probabilities.

Why do you seem to think Povse+Whalen is worth more than Jackson? They aren't. At best, the difference in value is negligible. We didn't sacrifice value because they were extra pieces we didn't need. We used extra pieces we didn't need to get a player with roughly equal value that has more potential and is a better fit for what we want.

As for Gant, how would we use him to acquire a useful BP piece? How many teams are willing to give up a useful BP piece for a less useful BP piece?

Also, how freaking valuable is a storm chasing rig? How many people on planet Earth want one of those pieces of crap?

 

[gilesfan]

Of course you don't - he doesn't have a calculator attached to his wrist. For all this vast "knowledge" you claim to possess, he'd probably be worth doing a little homework on.

Who attaches a calculator to their wrist? Doesnt make sense.

 

[mossy]

With so many experts here, why even see what he'all do on the field? What's with this constant need to be right about someone we've never seen an inning of ball from? Just a prospect gamble that we didn't give up anything substantial for.

What's with this posiBraves crap? There is plenty on this earth to bitch about, how dare someone have the nerve to be optimistic about Braves baseball on a Braves forum? Nobody is claiming Jackson will join Andy Marte in the HOF.

 

[Knucksie]

With so many experts here, why even see what he'all do on the field? What's with this constant need to be right about someone we've never seen an inning of ball from? Just a prospect gamble that we didn't give up anything substantial for.

What's with this posiBraves crap? There is plenty on this earth to bitch about, how dare someone have the nerve to be optimistic about Braves baseball on a Braves forum? Nobody is claiming Jackson will join Andy Marte in the HOF.

An anti-social malcontent with wi-fi, an empty Ritalin prescription and a few full cans of Red Bull is a dangerous mix.