Official Offseason Thread

For the posters that teach me about analytics...how bad would castellanos be at 3b?

His numbers were bad and he’s older now. But now we have shifts and less balls hit on the ground.

I don’t really think it’s an option but o don’t like the packages I’m seeing for Bryant trades

If anybody could make NC serviceable at 3b it’d be Ron Washington.
 
For the posters that teach me about analytics...how bad would castellanos be at 3b?

His numbers were bad and he’s older now. But now we have shifts and less balls hit on the ground.

I don’t really think it’s an option but o don’t like the packages I’m seeing for Bryant trades

IMO Castellanos would be the ideal pickup IF it was a certainty that the DH is coming in 2022. Otherwise signing him now would mandate a trade before too long if the prospects mature as expected.
 
Im not missing any point. If we take on any meaningful salary at this point we are going to have to get rid of some salary. BTW I already stated that Seattle has no need of Ender so you are repetitive or ignoring my point. That in itself eliminates Seattle as a trade partner. With us taking Marte and Archer Pitt rids significant salary. Ender and prospects is not too much for AA to ask. Keeping Duvall, Markakis, Acuna, Ender, and adding another starting OFer means someone has to go like it or not and extra roster spot can be better used.

I don't want any part of Chris Archer in any scenario.
 
Castellanos is my preference if we're gonna go cheap at 3b. His numbers in Chicago were fantastic, so not worried about his ability to hit NL pitching. And his defense is trending upwards in the OF.

Ozuna is tough to figure out. His 2019 peripherals were actually in line with his 2017 season. BB Rate, HR rate, LD%, all were at 2017 levels. But he didn't see any practical improvement from the 2018 season as a whole. His BABIP in 2017 and 2019 is separated by 100 points, so his true value is somewhere in the middle, but I do worry that Ozuna is simply what his career stats say he is. That's a useful player, but I don't know that it's someone I'd commit more than 3 years to, and I do think there's a good chance it's gonna take at least 4/60 to get him. Plus he has a draft pick loss attached to him.
 
And the reality is we’ll likely settle for lesser production. Such a disappointing scenario. And it’s not entirely AA’s fault. Let’s say he doesn’t sign Will Smith. I’m still convinced we’re in the same position. He clearly didn’t want to tie future money into Donaldson out of fear of a sunk cost. We were never going to sign him, regardless of how much we had available to us in this year’s budget. It was always about 2023 and 2024 and AA did not want to go there with JD.

It really isn't AA's fault. It not a great situation. There's no clearly correct choice unless some fantastic trade falls into our lap. Everything is going to have a downside. Either we settle for less or we overpay. Neither is ideal.
 
I can understand your view but OTOH Braves had considerable interest in him in the past and even today I don't think he would be that detrimental as a backend starter.

He's literally now a replacement level pitcher with only one successful pitch. Maybe he could find success as an almost slider-exclusive short reliever, but I wouldn't want to be the ones to try it.
 
Im not missing any point. If we take on any meaningful salary at this point we are going to have to get rid of some salary. BTW I already stated that Seattle has no need of Ender so you are repetitive or ignoring my point. That in itself eliminates Seattle as a trade partner. With us taking Marte and Archer Pitt rids significant salary. Ender and prospects is not too much for AA to ask. Keeping Duvall, Markakis, Acuna, Ender, and adding another starting OFer means someone has to go like it or not and extra roster spot can be better used.

We were just trying to sign JD at 20+ million per year. Why would we have to get rid of salary to take on player(s) making less than that? That makes zero sense.
 
I think from a production standpoint, Marte is the answer. However, the logjam in the outfield that he creates is less than ideal.

He had 43 HR and 60 SB in 277 games during 2018 and 2019, hit .295 w/ .342 OBP in 2019, and is only owed $11.5M in 2020, with a $12.5M team option in 2021 that has a $1M buyout. The length and $ seems perfect, but that will surely drive up the prospect capital required to trade for him.
 
Castellanos is my preference if we're gonna go cheap at 3b. His numbers in Chicago were fantastic, so not worried about his ability to hit NL pitching. And his defense is trending upwards in the OF.

Ozuna is tough to figure out. His 2019 peripherals were actually in line with his 2017 season. BB Rate, HR rate, LD%, all were at 2017 levels. But he didn't see any practical improvement from the 2018 season as a whole. His BABIP in 2017 and 2019 is separated by 100 points, so his true value is somewhere in the middle, but I do worry that Ozuna is simply what his career stats say he is. That's a useful player, but I don't know that it's someone I'd commit more than 3 years to, and I do think there's a good chance it's gonna take at least 4/60 to get him. Plus he has a draft pick loss attached to him.

The expected stats suggest that last year should have been the best season of Ozuna's career as a hitter. Obviously did not turn out that way in the stat book. I'd be happy to sign him.
 
Castellanos is my preference if we're gonna go cheap at 3b. His numbers in Chicago were fantastic, so not worried about his ability to hit NL pitching. And his defense is trending upwards in the OF.

1) Numbers in NL are a small sample.

2) Recent outfield defense numbers are a small sample. Which for defense is even more volatile than offensive numbers.

3) Depends on price and years.
 
I think from a production standpoint, Marte is the answer. However, the logjam in the outfield that he creates is less than ideal.

He had 43 HR and 60 SB in 277 games during 2018 and 2019, hit .295 w/ .342 OBP in 2019, and is only owed $11.5M in 2020, with a $12.5M team option in 2021 that has a $1M buyout. The length and $ seems perfect, but that will surely drive up the prospect capital required to trade for him.

Took that quote on Marte directly from The Athletic article I see. Nicely done.
 
I don't want any part of Chris Archer in any scenario.


I guess I don't understand why the Braves would also be asking for Archer in a Marte deal. He's not really the kind of salary that it makes a whole lot of sense to try and dump and it's questionable whether the Braves really need someone like him right now. I think it would absolutely be reasonable for some club to take a shot at him returning to a mid 3 FIP at 8m. Particularly one that is confident in its pitching management.
 
Back
Top