Your Ideal Offseason

Hudson2 said:
Mark Texiera..rings a bell. None of the guys that left in that trade killed us. And how do you know the ones I mentioned will? We have to trade some of these guys if we are gonna fill holes with quality players that are cost controlled for awhile. If we wanna get we have to give. I love prospects and get attached like anybody else does but I’d be ok trading that package if it meant getting back star quality talent like we would be.
Click to expand...

The Tex trade will forever be the rallying cry for all the folks who can’t bear to give up prospects. 30 years from now.

It worked out about as badly as it could have for Atlanta on the prospect side but it still wasn’t that big a deal.

The overpay for a bat was puzzling. Wouldn’t have bothered me if they’d used same prospects and gotten some pitching to go along.
 
I wouldnt trade for Haniger and Diaz, that would be a gutting system trade.

Maybe Haniger alone, but we're gonna have to make a trade or two eventually if we wanna get to where we wanna get to.
 
Hudson2 said:
Mark Texiera..rings a bell. None of the guys that left in that trade killed us. And how do you know the ones I mentioned will? We have to trade some of these guys if we are gonna fill holes with quality players that are cost controlled for awhile. If we wanna get we have to give. I love prospects and get attached like anybody else does but I’d be ok trading that package if it meant getting back star quality talent like we would be.
Click to expand...

Sure, but you don't have to gut the farm to get those types of players. There are plenty of players "available" for the right price that no one's talking about. Seattle's everyone's focus right now since they're in the news. Starling Marte and Gregory Polanco fit and could probably be had for the right price. Kyle Schwarber. Peralta. Nick Castellanos. Wil Myers. Joey Gallo. Domingo Santana or Eric Thames. The deal doesn't need to be a blockbuster where you pick up 2 or 3 pieces from the same team. Even if you went that route, Peralta and Archie Bradley wouldn't gut the system. Maybe you get Drew Steckenrider added to a Realmuto deal. Or Kirby Yates added to a Myers (or other OF) deal.

There are plenty of ways to approach filling the holes without putting that many eggs into one basket - including filling the current holes with stopgaps in 2019 and pushing your chips in next winter when you have a better feel for who Riley, Pache, Contreras, and the rest of the arms are actually turn out to be.
 
Southcack77 said:
The Tex trade will forever be the rallying cry for all the folks who can’t bear to give up prospects. 30 years from now.

It worked out about as badly as it could have for Atlanta on the prospect side but it still wasn’t that big a deal.

The overpay for a bat was puzzling. Wouldn’t have bothered me if they’d used same prospects and gotten some pitching to go along.
Click to expand...

As one of the few who has long defended the reasoning behind the Tex trade, it wasn't just about "trading prospects". It was about WHICH prospects you trade. There's no rule that says they couldn't have moved Andrus to 2B to make the MLB club better just as there's not one that says putting Riley in LF won't do the same. You've already got a 25-30 HR bat in Riley, it's just a question of when you promote him and where you play him. A system gutting trade for two pieces like Haniger and Diaz would destroy any flexibility and depth the Braves currently have. The reason the Tex trade didn't work out is that JS didn't go all the way. If you're going to make that kind of deal, you also HAVE to sign Grandal - regardless of cost - and hope Folty or one of the pieces you kept turns into the kind of SP you feel like at least gives you a chance in a Game 1 (or Game 7) against a Sale/deGrom/etc..

Sure, it could work out if everybody stays healthy and performs, but what are the chances that actually happens? Haniger could just as easily blow out a knee or Diaz his elbow - then where would you be?
 
Last edited:
Heyward said:
I wouldnt trade for Haniger and Diaz, that would be a gutting system trade.

Maybe Haniger alone, but we're gonna have to make a trade or two eventually if we wanna get to where we wanna get to.
Click to expand...
I’d be all over it. We have 10 top 100 prospects with the no. 9 and no. 21 picks coming our way to replenish a bit... no way in hell I wouldn’t make that trade. It fills big holes so quickly
 
Heyward said:
I wouldnt trade for Haniger and Diaz, that would be a gutting system trade.

Maybe Haniger alone, but we're gonna have to make a trade or two eventually if we wanna get to where we wanna get to.
Click to expand...

When we have major league talent we can conceivably trade, that's not really accurate about gutting the system. Newcomb, Fried, Inciarte all bring quite a bit of MLB ready talent to the table... Riley is quite an impressive headliner at this point too and he's really close. We have a ton of top 100 prospects... I don't think it would hurt as much as you think... *IF* the Mariners were interested in a fair trade. If the asking price is absurd and a blatant overpay then obviously no.
 
clvclv said:
As one of the few who has long defended the reasoning behind the Tex trade, it wasn't just about "trading prospects". It was about WHICH prospects you trade. There's no rule that says they couldn't have moved Andrus to 2B to make the MLB club better just as there's not one that says putting Riley in LF won't do the same. You've already got a 25-30 HR bat in Riley, it's just a question of when you promote him and where you play him. A system gutting trade for two pieces like Haniger and Diaz would destroy any flexibility and depth the Braves currently have. The reason the Tex trade didn't work out is that JS didn't go all the way. If you're going to make that kind of deal, you also HAVE to sign Grandal - regardless of cost - and hope Folty or one of the pieces you kept turns into the kind of SP you feel like at least gives you a chance in a Game 1 (or Game 7) against a Sale/deGrom/etc..

Sure, it could work out if everybody stays healthy and performs, but what are the chances that actually happens? Haniger could just as easily blow out a knee or Diaz his elbow - then where would you be?
Click to expand...


I think the Braves botched to some degree both of the Tex trades, especially the second one, but I don't think what they gave up was really that big a deal. The media attention surrounding the Rangers making the WS with those guys happening to play well has sort of blown it out of proportion.

They were complementary pieces and most of it was lightning in a model. Andrus is the easily the best career of them by a mile and he's checking in at 27 career WAR. Nice player, but almost all of it is defensive value.

But yeah, they gave up to much to acquire something that wasn't enough. It likely was the move of a GM trying to give an aging core one last run at is as he retired. I'd have been more sympathetic, in retrospect, if they had done something to help the rotation.

But I don't really care that Andrus, Harrison, Salty, Feliz were not Braves. No regrets there.
 
zbhargrove said:
When we have major league talent we can conceivably trade, that's not really accurate about gutting the system. Newcomb, Fried, Inciarte all bring quite a bit of MLB ready talent to the table... Riley is quite an impressive headliner at this point too and he's really close. We have a ton of top 100 prospects... I don't think it would hurt as much as you think... *IF* the Mariners were interested in a fair trade. If the asking price is absurd and a blatant overpay then obviously no.
Click to expand...

Just think about the value that the Phillies got for Giles at the time (two top 60ish pitching prospects plus a 45 FV guy and a two 40 FV guys) and then add about 80-90 million in surplus value on top of that. I think that is pretty fair. Diaz is in a pretty comparable situation to what Giles was in at the time of his trade. It'd be a freaking haul and a half.

I don't think the Mariners will move either of those guys unless they are just blown away with a deal. To include both of them, I think we'd have to include at least: 1 of Riley/Pache, 1 of Soroka/Wright/Anderson, 1 of Touki/Gohara, and 1 of Wilson/Wentz/Muller plus probably some quality 45 FV guy in the 12-25 range on the back end. I'm just not willing to give up that much value in any one trade, even if it is for two really talented players who are controlled for 4 years.

I should also note that I don't think we can afford to include any of our MLB position players in trades. We just don't have the depth or resources to easily replace those guys. Fried and Newk are conceivable, but if the Mariners are trading Haniger and Diaz, that signals full blown rebuild and I'd be more focused on getting back better value on long term pieces than getting back MLB ready pieces. But if we could significantly cut in to the SV the Mariners would require by including a Fried or Newk, then maybe it starts to make more sense.
 
BeanieAntics said:
Just think about the value that the Phillies got for Giles at the time (two top 60ish pitching prospects plus a 45 FV guy and a two 40 FV guys) and then add about 80-90 million in surplus value on top of that. I think that is pretty fair. Diaz is in a pretty comparable situation to what Giles was in at the time of his trade. It'd be a freaking haul and a half.

I don't think the Mariners will move either of those guys unless they are just blown away with a deal. To include both of them, I think we'd have to include at least: 1 of Riley/Pache, 1 of Soroka/Wright/Anderson, 1 of Touki/Gohara, and 1 of Wilson/Wentz/Muller plus probably some quality 45 FV guy in the 12-25 range on the back end. I'm just not willing to give up that much value in any one trade, even if it is for two really talented players who are controlled for 4 years.

I should also note that I don't think we can afford to include any of our MLB position players in trades. We just don't have the depth or resources to easily replace those guys. Fried and Newk are conceivable, but if the Mariners are trading Haniger and Diaz, that signals full blown rebuild and I'd be more focused on getting back better value on long term pieces than getting back MLB ready pieces. But if we could significantly cut in to the SV the Mariners would require by including a Fried or Newk, then maybe it starts to make more sense.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying it won't be a haul... but it wouldn't gut the system. And DiPoto does a lot of dumb stuff. If we traded Inciarte or Swanson, I'm sure AA would have a plan to replace them with equal or better value
 
Haniger is one dude and he isn’t anything like the best player in baseball.

He ain’t going to gut the system but I’m sure it would be pricy.
 
Southcack77 said:
Haniger is one dude and he isn’t anything like the best player in baseball.

He ain’t going to gut the system but I’m sure it would be pricy.
Click to expand...

4 years of control makes A LOT of difference. If you're a 3 to 4 win player with 4 years of control, you're going to cost a butt load. I think he'd be more expensive than Realmuto. If you add a guy like Diaz you are absolutely approaching "farm gutting" territory.
 
zbhargrove said:
Actually yes he's been very good when healthy but I don't expect the stats will get in the way of your opinion
Click to expand...

Hate to steal from clv, but:

Freeman 2018 - 3.83 xFIP, 10.37 K/9, 5.72 BB/9, 52.1 GB%
Freeman Career - 3.91 xFIP, 8.97 K/9, 5.04 BB/9, 52.0 GB%

And combined over the last 2 years, he's been eerily close to his career averages as well. He's striking out a few more, but other than that, he's been the same pitcher he's always been. Which again, he isn't a terrible reliever, but also isn't a "really good" one either. He's an average/above average middle reliever who is starting to get expensive. He's not someone we will lament losing if we non-tender him. We have several quality options who should be just as good or better for half the price. He is simply not worth 1.5 million to this team.
 
Hudson2 said:
Mark Texiera..rings a bell. None of the guys that left in that trade killed us. And how do you know the ones I mentioned will? We have to trade some of these guys if we are gonna fill holes with quality players that are cost controlled for awhile. If we wanna get we have to give. I love prospects and get attached like anybody else does but I’d be ok trading that package if it meant getting back star quality talent like we would be.
Click to expand...

What those players became is irrelvant.
The prospect capital we gave up set us back for years. That same off-season, we could have traded for Dan Haren (an actual need) for the same package, and been in a much better situation. CC Sabathia was in his prime and got traded the following deadline. I mean there were clearly better uses of our prospect capital that could have stretched our competitive window much further.
 
UNCBlue012 said:
I’d be all over it. We have 10 top 100 prospects with the no. 9 and no. 21 picks coming our way to replenish a bit... no way in hell I wouldn’t make that trade. It fills big holes so quickly
Click to expand...

We have money to burn and in such a scenario, trading for Haniger fills an OF hole cheaply. Why would you trade prospect capital for a closer when several really good closers are on the market? Makes zero sense.
 
Carp said:
We have money to burn and in such a scenario, trading for Haniger fills an OF hole cheaply. Why would you trade prospect capital for a closer when several really good closers are on the market? Makes zero sense.
Click to expand...

Just like trying to deal for Haniger. Again, it's not about being afraid to trade prospects - by a long shot. Pretty sure my stance on that has been obvious on that for a long time.

MLBTR mentioned again today that Haniger and Diaz are the two guys Seattle intends to hang on to, and that they'd have to be "blown away" to move either, much less BOTH...

"However, it continues to look as though the Mariners will keep their two top players, outfielder Mitch Haniger and closer Edwin Diaz. It would take overwhelming offers for the Mariners to seriously consider moving either Haniger or Diaz, Olney tweets. Both stars are controllable for the next four years, including another pre-arbitration season apiece."

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018...s-astros-pollock-brantley-cutch-mariners.html

Now we're talking about TWO Realmuto-type offers. It's not that the Braves can't do that, but what does anyone honestly think they'd be left with after that kind of trade - even as one of maybe 2-3 teams that could meet that kind of asking price?

As one of the select few who are a part of the "all-in" crowd, I'm even really hesitant to make that kind of deal because it leaves you with no prospect capital in the event of injury (or that you need one more piece - even if that piece is a rental). Unlike BeanieAntics, I think a deal for both guys costs you BOTH Pache and Riley plus several arms. Dipoto is still an old-school guy, so you can't count on the value charts. He has obviously convinced Seattle's ownership that he can turn this around in a couple years - no matter what others (here and anywhere else) believe. He wants players who are ready NOW, which would completely eat away the Braves' depth. If you assume that he's just like everyone else in baseball (including most numbers guys) and doesn't like admitting he made a mistake in Gohara, you're now looking at something that would likely have to involve Pache, Riley, Wright, Soroka/Touki/Anderson (likely two of them), and other pieces to get it done.

Whether that fits anybody's charts or not, that's the least I'd ask for as well - and I think he'd be nuts if he didn't tell AA to "*uck off" if he wasn't willing to go there. If he's trying to turn things around in 1-2 years, he'd be an idiot for taking pieces that were further away than those guys.
 
Last edited:
I’ve stated several times that based on the other moves the Ms have made, it is unlikely they deal Haniger. We have also seen several reports suggesting he isn’t going to be traded.

I suggest focusing mental energies thinking about alternate cOF acquisitions.
 
If anyone could make them trade Haniger, it's the Braves, but it seems they dont wanna part with him. And Miami doesnt wanna trade JTR within the division. Unless AA send them absurd offers, those are two players we cant add.

Still think Brantley makes most sense for cOF though.
 
clvclv said:
Just like trying to deal for Haniger. Again, it's not about being afraid to trade prospects - by a long shot. Pretty sure my stance on that has been obvious on that for a long time.

MLBTR mentioned again today that Haniger and Diaz are the two guys Seattle intends to hang on to, and that they'd have to be "blown away" to move either, much less BOTH...

"However, it continues to look as though the Mariners will keep their two top players, outfielder Mitch Haniger and closer Edwin Diaz. It would take overwhelming offers for the Mariners to seriously consider moving either Haniger or Diaz, Olney tweets. Both stars are controllable for the next four years, including another pre-arbitration season apiece."

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018...s-astros-pollock-brantley-cutch-mariners.html

Now we're talking about TWO Realmuto-type offers. It's not that the Braves can't do that, but what does anyone honestly think they'd be left with after that kind of trade - even as one of maybe 2-3 teams that could meet that kind of asking price?

As one of the select few who are a part of the "all-in" crowd, I'm even really hesitant to make that kind of deal because it leaves you with no prospect capital in the event of injury (or that you need one more piece - even if that piece is a rental). Unlike BeanieAntics, I think a deal for both guys costs you BOTH Pache and Riley plus several arms. Dipoto is still an old-school guy, so you can't count on the value charts. He has obviously convinced Seattle's ownership that he can turn this around in a couple years - no matter what others (here and anywhere else) believe. He wants players who are ready NOW, which would completely eat away the Braves' depth. If you assume that he's just like everyone else in baseball (including most numbers guys) and doesn't like admitting he made a mistake in Gohara, you're now looking at something that would likely have to involve Pache, Riley, Wright, Soroka/Touki/Anderson (likely two of them), and other pieces to get it done.

Whether that fits anybody's charts or not, that's the least I'd ask for as well - and I think he'd be nuts if he didn't tell AA to "*uck off" if he wasn't willing to go there. If he's trying to turn things around in 1-2 years, he'd be an idiot for taking pieces that were further away than those guys.
Click to expand...

Haniger is different. He's substantially better than anyone we realistically have a shot at on the FA market. Diaz is certainly better than all FA options other than Kimbrell, but he's still a reliever, so his value is limited. A closer among the group of Robertson, Familia, Britton, or Ottavino can give us a good closer.
 
Carp said:
We have money to burn and in such a scenario, trading for Haniger fills an OF hole cheaply. Why would you trade prospect capital for a closer when several really good closers are on the market? Makes zero sense.
Click to expand...

I get that and Tex only had a year and a half of service time left. If we give up big time prospects it needs to be for controllable assets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top