Southcack77
Well-known member
I am not sure how they could trade either for a single season of Peralta and I'm generally extremely receptive to dealing prospects.
Unless they think and know they are selling high on a Waldrop.
2025-2026 offseason thread
- Thread starter Enscheff
- Start date
I am not sure how they could trade either for a single season of Peralta and I'm generally extremely receptive to dealing prospects.
Unless they think and know they are selling high on a Waldrop.
UNCBlue012
Well-known member
I don’t think Waldrep, Caminiti, Ritchie or even AJ Smith-Shawver would be on the table for just one year of Peralta. That said, if they were able to get Peralta to agree to an extension before the deal became official, then I think any of those guys could realistically be in play.
However, the Braves are always looking for a reliable No. 4 or 5 starter who’s young and has some upside, and Waldrep definitely fits that mold. Personally, I’d hang onto him.
Last edited:
Carp
Well-known member
The pitching market could be a little insane after what the Orioles gave up for a mediocre Shane Baz. But I still think the Corbin Burnes trade is the basis for any Peralta trade.
In that trade, the Brewers received DL Hall, who was an aging, former 1st round SP that was losing his prospect luster. I don't believe he was ranked inside any top 100 lists anymore at the time of the trade and was being used more in a reliever role by the time of the trade. There isn't a great comp for him in our current system, but strictly from a value perspective, I don't think he had any more value at that time than Nacho does now.
The other player they received was Joey Ortiz, who was a rising infield prospect that was ML ready. Ortiz was a 50 FV prospect at that point and was FG top 50 overall. It's hard to place a current prospect comparable to that since FG hasn't provided an updated ranking on our farm. But suffice to say, that probably equates to either Fuentes or Cam. I would not be comfortable trading either for 1 year of Peralta,
I think our best bet would be a quantity over quality trade. A Nacho, Ritchie, Perdomo, and Braun sort of trade.
In that trade, the Brewers received DL Hall, who was an aging, former 1st round SP that was losing his prospect luster. I don't believe he was ranked inside any top 100 lists anymore at the time of the trade and was being used more in a reliever role by the time of the trade. There isn't a great comp for him in our current system, but strictly from a value perspective, I don't think he had any more value at that time than Nacho does now.
The other player they received was Joey Ortiz, who was a rising infield prospect that was ML ready. Ortiz was a 50 FV prospect at that point and was FG top 50 overall. It's hard to place a current prospect comparable to that since FG hasn't provided an updated ranking on our farm. But suffice to say, that probably equates to either Fuentes or Cam. I would not be comfortable trading either for 1 year of Peralta,
I think our best bet would be a quantity over quality trade. A Nacho, Ritchie, Perdomo, and Braun sort of trade.
Carp
Well-known member
This is true. Peralta has traditionally been more of a MOR pitcher, while Burnes was a legitimate ace.
But Peralta is coming off the best year of his career and the pitching market via trade has already been set.
Yeah, that Baz trade being a bit baz-nanas probably makes Peralta’s cost closer to Burnes’ than it should be.
This is nothing more than a case of a fan looking at his team’s SS through rose colored glasses. All players are projected the same way, and all players have similar plusses and minuses. I’m sure fans from every other team say similar things about why the projection for their SS is too pessimistic.
Acquiring 2 impact BP arms was what this team needed to remain competitive. AA paid market rate for those arms. There’s nothing remarkable about those moves whatsoever. Anyone on this board with access to the Braves checkbook could have made those moves.
I say the offseason has been average at best because any GM should be able to pay market rates to fill obvious holes in the roster, and that’s someone controversial. Strange
And it appears we’ve learned nothing about extensions.
Carp
Well-known member
We've filled our main holes with some of the best options on the market.
But yeah, totally doing to bare minimum.....
And I find it hard to see how saying Kim is the best SS on the market "looking through rose colored glasses." Again, what other SS options are available, either in FA or by trade?
I didn’t say “doing the bare minimum”. I said “bare minimum acceptable option”. The word acceptable is literally in the quote.
I swear the reading comprehension is silly terrible on this board sometimes.
UNCBlue012
Well-known member
You are such a Cuck lmao
zbhargrove
Well-known member
Ehh... he's be a good pickup if he's priced as a really good 3/fringe 2 because his stats say that's what he is. He's a 2-4 fWAR pitcher... he's not an ace or a slam dunk impact player.
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
I don't get the idea of trading more players just because the Braves would get to extend said player at market value. Just trade what the player is worth at his current contract value... THEN try and extend him.
Someone gets it!
Agreed. Not knowing all that much about Peralta, I assumed he was some slam dunk TOR guy based on what folks have been saying in his trade rumors. Then I looked at his stats, and I thought to myself, "isn't there a pretty decent chance Waldrep is almost this good as he perfects his new arsenal?".
zbhargrove
Well-known member
Waldrep was certainly on a higher pace production wise... just hard to say if it's 100% real yet. Peralta also was never that much of a prospect... I'm skittish with a solid 3/fringe 2 about to turn 30 with very little pedigree. I'm interested but not at an overpay level
And…semantics.
More like selective reading. He literally skipped over the word "acceptable" in his rush to be upset. Missing the entire point isn't the same as arguing semantics of the word "good".