BeanieAntics
Arbitration Eligible
Yeah in his career the dude has a 127 wRC+ away from Miami with an 87 wRC+ in Miami. I'm still not 100% on board with a trade for him, but getting him out of Miami will certainly benefit him offensively.
2018 Offseason And Targets
- Thread starter clvclv
- Start date
- Status
Yeah in his career the dude has a 127 wRC+ away from Miami with an 87 wRC+ in Miami. I'm still not 100% on board with a trade for him, but getting him out of Miami will certainly benefit him offensively.
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
Sure, he absolutely is—but he’s also going to cost more, as a result, at least on a controlable-years basis. I’m also very suspicious of his defense. Plus, the Braves have a solid catching platoon currently.
I just don’t think the Realmuto buy is a slamdunk better option than using those assets to upgrade cOF; in fact, given what’s on the market and on the current roster, I think cOF is a much bigger concern, while adding Realmuto would be a much-less-necessary luxury-buy. But maybe I have more faith in the Flowers/McCann platoon than a lot of people.
BeanieAntics
Arbitration Eligible
If it came down to it, which one of these would you prefer if you knew we had these options:
Trade: Newcomb and Wilson for 4 years of Joey Gallo
Trade: Wilson and Allard for 2 years of David Peralta
Trade: Wilson, Wentz, and Derian Cruz for 2 years of Joc Pederson
FA: Sign Nick Markakis to a 1 year 15 million dollar deal.
Of those four options, I think the Markakis option is pretty clearly the least preferable. The Gallo trade would be my number 1 preference, followed by Pederson, then Peralta. And of the trade scenarios, I'm pretty sure that at least one of those packages would be enough to get it done.
Trade: Newcomb and Wilson for 4 years of Joey Gallo
Trade: Wilson and Allard for 2 years of David Peralta
Trade: Wilson, Wentz, and Derian Cruz for 2 years of Joc Pederson
FA: Sign Nick Markakis to a 1 year 15 million dollar deal.
Of those four options, I think the Markakis option is pretty clearly the least preferable. The Gallo trade would be my number 1 preference, followed by Pederson, then Peralta. And of the trade scenarios, I'm pretty sure that at least one of those packages would be enough to get it done.
Tapate50
Well-known member
Neck ain’t getting 15 skins
BeanieAntics
Arbitration Eligible
I disagree. I think the absolute best you could reasonably (and optimistically) project Newcomb for over his 5 years of control is about 10 wins, he's projected for 1.7 next year. Sure, there is some upside there, but I wouldn't feel comfortable giving him an SV over 50 or 60 million. Gallo can very reasonably be projected to produce 12 wins over his 4 years of control, at approximately the same cost. Gallo has more value pretty clearly in my opinion, so I think we'd need to add a high 45 FV or low 50 FV kind of prospect for fair value.
Joc Pederson is projected to be worth about 6.5 wins over the next two years around a probable cost of ~20 million dollars. So we'd have to pay ~40-45 million in surplus value in a trade for him. In the most recently updated valuation charts, Wilson and Wentz collectively have a value of around ~36 million dollars. So I added Cruz as a nice upside piece to make up for the missing 4-9 million in the valuation. That should be a perfectly fair swap.
The Peralta trade was the one that I thought I actually may have overpaid on, as he's only projected for around 5 wins at a similar cost to Pederson over his 2 years. On the valuation chart, Allard and Wilson would be worth ~38 million, but since I'm a good bit lower on Allard I think that valuation is a little rich and would be willing to send those two for Peralta.
I think those valuations are perfectly reasonable.
BeanieAntics
Arbitration Eligible
I don't think he will either, but I've heard several fans suggest that number as a way to keep him on a 1 year deal. Personally, I wouldn't give him 1/10 unless it was as an absolute last resort kind of move.
BeanieAntics
Arbitration Eligible
I'm not sure about that. There are some serious concerns about Peralta's splits away from Chase along with his L on L splits. Away from Chase Field in his career, Peralta has a career wRC+ of 103 over the course of 1000+ plate appearances. Its very possible that the Braves are looking for superior options because they don't think that Peralta's game will translate well to another team.
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
Even if you’re bearish on Gallo, and project him closer to 2.5 war a year, that’s still $40 million (before any arb-raise considerations), versus about the same if you project Newcomb as a 2-win pitcher annually over the next five years. Given that each have some upside, but pitching’s inherently more volatile, I’d think the Rangers would insist on an additional player. But Newcomb would be a good starting-point for a package that I don’t think would be unpalatable—especially if you compare it to what Realmuto will likely cost.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
I wouldn't do the first trade. The next two trades are close to being fair. I wouldn't sign Muk for 15M. But if I could have him for 8M, I would do that rather than make any of the trades listed.
Hudson2
Well-known member
Reports are that we called and were turned down on Peralta. I have a feeling the price is a little steeper.
TheRunningAgent
Spring Training Invitee
You don’t lose players though. Not bad and you can deal at the deadline if things aren’t working out.
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
Where are your additional upgrades occurring, if you’re bringing The One-War Titan back into the fold to “solve” cOF?
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
I'm not as anxious as just about everyone else about that additional upgrade. I'm more focused on value. Holding on to the prospects in a sense means we give up 1-2 wins this year for something greater in the future.
But I don't rule out doing something for this year if the value is there.
How is 12 wins over 4 years very reasonably projected when he's never been a 3 WAR player, but we're not gonna project any progression for Newk?
Nevertheless, I think you'll find the trade value of 2-3 win level players is harder to gauge, especially in a market that's been flooded by 2-3 WAR corner OFers. I mean Camargo has 5 years of control left and is coming off a 3.3 WAR season. Does anyone here honestly feel like we'd be able to extract 100+ million in surplus value if we made him available?
Last edited:
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
That’s why the Gallo option intrigues me: it’s not as splashy as buying Realmuto, but because of his years of control it’s less about trading future-value for now-value, and more about shuffling where that future-value resides (pitching versus hitting). I too am less interested in concentrating 5-6+ years of value into the next 1-2 years.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
I think reasonably younger players like Gallo and Newcomb can be projected to improve slightly. I'm ok with projecting Gallo at 3 wins per year over the next four and Newk at 2 per year for the next five.
One little wrinkle when it comes to valuing Gallo is that players with his profile tend to get rewarded pretty richly by the arbitration process, compared to guys who derive their value from factors other than power. Which somewhat lowers his expected surplus value.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
The thing is, I've said over and over that, unless the Braves get enough payroll space to make a leap, then they are building for a purgatory type existence - not good enough to win anything, not bad enough to punt and rebuild again.
All this Markakis speculation is exactly the type warning sign that points to a purgatory existence. It's a easy out with no upside based on the likelihood that the franchise fire is being starved due to lack of financial commitment.
The mouthpieces that run the Braves have said several times that the Braves will have a top 10 payroll. The #10 payroll team for 2018, according to BP, was the Cards at $160M. The Braves were 10th worst at $118.3M.
Roster resource currently has them with a 2019 payroll of $115M.
So, either the ownership has lied OR the Braves have up to an estimated $45-$50M left to spend.
Sure, you can argue that they want to hold some payroll space back to make needed in-season moves. But $80M in mid season moves (keep in mind that when mid season moves are made, they often occur after 1/2 the season, and therefore half the comp, has occurred) isn't going to happen.
It doesn't make any sense.
If the Braves have no money and are unlikely to get any, therefore positioning themselves as a true small market revenue club, then they are currently positioning themselves to be the equivalent of Tampa Bay, Oakland, Pitt type franchises, never really good enough to win, get better and keep winning. If they want to escape that fate, like Houston did, then they shouldn't be pulling the trigger on trying to compete this soon and should look to maximize the value of their best veteran players by trading them and becoming worse short term for a better long term.
If the Braves do have money to spend then Markakis isn't an answer. And neither is some fictitious withholding of significant funds for some in season trading opportunity.
All this Markakis speculation is exactly the type warning sign that points to a purgatory existence. It's a easy out with no upside based on the likelihood that the franchise fire is being starved due to lack of financial commitment.
The mouthpieces that run the Braves have said several times that the Braves will have a top 10 payroll. The #10 payroll team for 2018, according to BP, was the Cards at $160M. The Braves were 10th worst at $118.3M.
Roster resource currently has them with a 2019 payroll of $115M.
So, either the ownership has lied OR the Braves have up to an estimated $45-$50M left to spend.
Sure, you can argue that they want to hold some payroll space back to make needed in-season moves. But $80M in mid season moves (keep in mind that when mid season moves are made, they often occur after 1/2 the season, and therefore half the comp, has occurred) isn't going to happen.
It doesn't make any sense.
If the Braves have no money and are unlikely to get any, therefore positioning themselves as a true small market revenue club, then they are currently positioning themselves to be the equivalent of Tampa Bay, Oakland, Pitt type franchises, never really good enough to win, get better and keep winning. If they want to escape that fate, like Houston did, then they shouldn't be pulling the trigger on trying to compete this soon and should look to maximize the value of their best veteran players by trading them and becoming worse short term for a better long term.
If the Braves do have money to spend then Markakis isn't an answer. And neither is some fictitious withholding of significant funds for some in season trading opportunity.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
I think Newk plus Wilson is a little too much. Newk and Allard would be a fair trade.
- Status