2016-2017 Off-Season Thread

thethe said:
You could argue that we got touki because of the deal as well. To me that should be considered as part of the package.
Click to expand...

With the signing of Markakis it seems likely that the Braves still could have added Arroyo's salary while keeping BJ on the team.
 
thewupk said:
With the signing of Markakis it seems likely that the Braves still could have added Arroyo's salary while keeping BJ on the team.
Click to expand...

They still would have needed someone to play right field. They weren't going to put out the worst major league product in the history of baseball.
 
thewupk said:
With the signing of Markakis it seems likely that the Braves still could have added Arroyo's salary while keeping BJ on the team.
Click to expand...

They signed Neck before they traded BJ so that signing had nothing to do with the trade. But I am hesitant to put Touki in that trade because, I don't think any MLB team (outside of Zona) could come up with 10 million to get a talent like Touki...
 
UNCBlue012 said:
I've said it a million times it feels like, but Justin Turner is a PERFECT fit for us.

Inciarte CF

Swanson SS

Freeman 1B

Kemp LF

Turner 3B

Markakis RF

Flowers C

Teheran RHP

Albies 2B
Click to expand...

I like Turner a lot. But I also like Longoria, and Frazier, and Solarte....anybody who can handle the glove and give us a little power from the corner. 2-3 years from now, we'll have a home grown 3B.

Frazier seems particularly attainable because he doesn't fit there and he's a moderately priced short term guy who shouldn't cost an arm and a leg in prospects. Of course I'm assuming he hits .260 not .210, but he's a fine defender and of course has Big Power.
 
thewupk said:
Elite closers will generally out pace their surplus value in a trade just like they do in most FA signings. They just usually cost more than what their WAR suggests. With that being said a year ago Margot and Guerrera were 52 and 56 on the BA Top 100. That combined surplus value came in around 50 million. Craigs surplus value was only like 10 million at the time of the trade. Padres got more back imo.
Click to expand...

It was a different marketplace. The Braves were among the first teams to capitalize on the inflated value of relief pitchers, unfortunately we weren't exactly at the peak of the bubble. If we had Kimbrel this past summer it would have been us trading for Clint Frazier or Gleybarr Torres.

I agree with your general point that Upton attaching the Braves costs the Braves the ability to extract better prospects from SD, but the Braves essentially got back the "surplus value" of Margot and Guerrera in the form of ridding themselves of BJ's contract. Losing Kimbrel's surplus value of $10 million and taking on Quentin's $8 million eats into that value. But if you add back in Wisler's $25 million in surplus value with the value of the draft pick and Maybin you get something in the neighborhood of 60-80 million in net surplus value, which is comparable to what the Padres received from Boston.

The real counter argument would be should the Braves have foreseen the inflated closer market? My counter would be even if they had, it still made more sense to trade Kimbrel when we did because the risk was too enormous that Kimbrel would get hurt or lose his effectiveness and then you're stuck with ~90 million in bad contracts with no assets to show for it.

EDIT: I don't think surplus value is necessarily the best way to evaluate a trade like this, but it seems to be the only way some are willing to evaluate trades these days.
 
thewupk said:
Is it trying to paint the team in a bad light if it's suggested the Braves sold themselves short by attacking Melvin to Kimbrel? Also Quientin and Maybin have to be factored into the trade as well to get a complete analysis.

I don't think it was a bad trade but the Braves likely could have gotten more if it was just Kimbrel.
Click to expand...

It's certainly possible, but people clamoring it was a bad trade are just flat out wrong. Again, we still got good value even if we could have gotten a better deal somewhere else.
 
thewupk said:
Elite closers will generally out pace their surplus value in a trade just like they do in most FA signings. They just usually cost more than what their WAR suggests. With that being said a year ago Margot and Guerrera were 52 and 56 on the BA Top 100. That combined surplus value came in around 50 million. Craigs surplus value was only like 10 million at the time of the trade. Padres got more back imo.
Click to expand...

Congrats to the Padres. I don't know what that has to do with our trade.
 
chop2chip said:
It was a different marketplace. The Braves were among the first teams to capitalize on the inflated value of relief pitchers, unfortunately we weren't exactly at the peak of the bubble. If we had Kimbrel this past summer it would have been us trading for Clint Frazier or Gleybarr Torres.

I agree with your general point that Upton attaching the Braves costs the Braves the ability to extract better prospects from SD, but the Braves essentially got back the "surplus value" of Margot and Guerrera in the form of ridding themselves of BJ's contract. Losing Kimbrel's surplus value of $10 million and taking on Quentin's $8 million eats into that value. But if you add back in Wisler's $25 million in surplus value with the value of the draft pick and Maybin you get something in the neighborhood of 60-80 million in net surplus value, which is comparable to what the Padres received from Boston.

The real counter argument would be should the Braves have foreseen the inflated closer market? My counter would be even if they had, it still made more sense to trade Kimbrel when we did because the risk was too enormous that Kimbrel would get hurt or lose his effectiveness and then you're stuck with ~90 million in bad contracts with no assets to show for it.
Click to expand...

Great post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top