2018 Trade Deadline ROSTERBATION

[msstate7]

I'm not sure this is an especially good read of the market by AA.

If he is interested in protecting the farm's assets, quality relievers with remaining control will almost certainly be more costly than expiring deals.

While the non-contenders with expiring contracts will have increasing pressure to get what they can for these players, there is not necessarily an equivalent pressure on teams who have attractive players with remaining control. While a team certainly would like to get the very most value out of a player (and extorting would be contenders at the deadline is a nice method of doing that), those teams will have other opportunities to cash in those assets.

They have every incentive simply to hold on and wait for something that blows them away. The Padres did not suffer by not trading Hand last season for example.

Moreover, the longer the Braves make no move, the more pressure will be on them to make a deal. Both because they have obvious and long standing weaknesses and because the fans are clearly going to expect them to do something.

As the quality targets on the market go elsewhere, there will be fewer worthy targets of acquisition. Maybe that will be offset by the other buyers having satisfied their needs, maybe there will just be a bidding war on the last guys. Leaving the Braves the option of overpaying or settling on what teams didn't want that they can get cheaply.

Anyone that has participated in markets knows that being the last party standing and dominating the market can be good when there is a lot of valuable commodities left. it's disastrous when there isn't any quality left. How this market shapes up is anyone's guess. There is no way to calculate the supply or demand from a distance with any certainty.

But I know I would not mind having been the team that gave up 40 FV players and international money for Familia right now.

But there is always the chance that the Braves have few available resources to actually make moves. And the chance that teams are being especially unfair in trying to extort the Braves of better players than they are accepting of other teams.

With viz's heakth up in the air, we really missed by not getting familia

 

[PurpleBrave]

This is objectively incorrect. A player under control for 2 post seasons runs is without questions more valuable than a player under control for 1 post season run.

That is Trade Value 101.

Tell that to the Padres or White Sox. Teams who have the player under control have little incentive to deal him. Braves have no leverage unless they come in and blow a team away.

 

[PurpleBrave]

I'm not sure this is an especially good read of the market by AA.

If he is interested in protecting the farm's assets, quality relievers with remaining control will almost certainly be more costly than expiring deals.

While the non-contenders with expiring contracts will have increasing pressure to get what they can for these players, there is not necessarily an equivalent pressure on teams who have attractive players with remaining control. While a team certainly would like to get the very most value out of a player (and extorting would be contenders at the deadline is a nice method of doing that), those teams will have other opportunities to cash in those assets.

They have every incentive simply to hold on and wait for something that blows them away. The Padres did not suffer by not trading Hand last season for example.

Moreover, the longer the Braves make no move, the more pressure will be on them to make a deal. Both because they have obvious and long standing weaknesses and because the fans are clearly going to expect them to do something.

As the quality targets on the market go elsewhere, there will be fewer worthy targets of acquisition. Maybe that will be offset by the other buyers having satisfied their needs, maybe there will just be a bidding war on the last guys. Leaving the Braves the option of overpaying or settling on what teams didn't want that they can get cheaply.

Anyone that has participated in markets knows that being the last party standing and dominating the market can be good when there is a lot of valuable commodities left. it's disastrous when there isn't any quality left. How this market shapes up is anyone's guess. There is no way to calculate the supply or demand from a distance with any certainty.

But I know I would not mind having been the team that gave up 40 FV players and international money for Familia right now.

But there is always the chance that the Braves have few available resources to actually make moves. And the chance that teams are being especially unfair in trying to extort the Braves of better players than they are accepting of other teams.

My experience with negotiating, bids, auctions, is that it's best to be the guy in the middle. You don't want to be the one opening the bid to set the baseline nor do you want to be the guy budding at the last minute in desperation.

 

[nsacpi]

With viz's heakth up in the air, we really missed by not getting familia

It does raise the question of what kind of priority a high leverage reliever might be. There is little doubt we need a situational lefty. And someone who can strengthen the bench and left side of the infield (preferably a lefty hitter or a switch hitter who hits right-handed pitching well). How does high leverage reliever compare to those needs.

I would be ok going with Minter, Winkler and Biddle as our 7-9th inning guys, with the prospect of Viz returning in September. So I still rate high leverage guy as a lesser need compared to the other two needs. But AA should be kicking the tires on some of these guys.

 

[Southcack77]

Those two things don't really add up. He's correct about them individually, but in 1), the prices will drop for players who are pending free agents. Teams want to deal those guys and the closer the deadline comes, the more their urgency to deal them rises. I don't believe a player with control such as Castellanos is going to be any more or less expensive now vs July 31st or in the offseason.

BTW, Solarte has been awful the past 2 months. I would rather keep the players we have. Dietrich on the other hand, would be a nice addition.

There may be some pressure on a team like Toronto to deal a guy like Solarte at the deadline, with the remaining control, because they feel it might be their best opportunity to get a return on him. The idea of a contender's premium.

There might also be pressure on a team like Toronto to deal a guy like Solarte at the deadline because they no longer see him as a necessary or desirable piece of the ball club and again want to move him.

There might be pressure on a team like Toronto to deal a guy like Solarte because he's performing very poorly and the longer he does so the lower his value will be. And maybe they doubt his ability to recover.

.....

But all things being considered, for the most part teams are have less pressure to move guys with control and the cost of acquiring these players will be greater than the cost of obtaining similarly talented rentals.

But I find it bizarre that Atlanta would rule out obtaining guys on expiring contracts who could help the club that were also cheap simply because they want control. It's especially bizarre given just how much money is coming off their payroll this offseason and just how few necessary holes there are to fill.

 

[Enscheff]

Tell that to the Padres or White Sox. Teams who have the player under control have little incentive to deal him. Braves have no leverage unless they come in and blow a team away.

I love it when folks argue from positions of ignorance haha.

 

[nsacpi]

My experience with negotiating, bids, auctions, is that it's best to be the guy in the middle. You don't want to be the one opening the bid to set the baseline nor do you want to be the guy budding at the last minute in desperation.

I think we know what the asks are on Loup, Diekman, Claudio, Duke and Avilan. There are others out there too, such as Blevins.

I would not be surprised if we have made an offer on one or more of the above. I'm ok with making some low ball offers on these guys and waiting for a nibble.

 

[PurpleBrave]

I love it when folks argue from positions of ignorance haha.

Is he worth more to a buyer? Yes

That doesn’t mean a team is going to lower their price in a few days or the offseason. They can wait until there’s more demand in the offseason from other teams not interested at the moment. Maybe that’s difficult for some folks to understand. Haha

 

[nsacpi]

But I find it bizarre that Atlanta would rule out obtaining guys on expiring contracts who could help the club that were also cheap simply because they want control. It's especially bizarre given just how much money is coming off their payroll this offseason and just how few necessary holes there are to fill.

I don't think AA has ruled out anything. He has just expressed a preference for players with contractual control beyond 2018.

Looking at the supply and demand situation, my guess is he will be able to get a situational lefty with additional control (Avilan, Blevins, Alvarez or Claudio) but will settle for an infielder who is a rental (Cabrera, Escobar or Moose).

 

[Enscheff]

Interesting you mention Solarte. First, his batted ball profile suggests that his numbers this year have been depressed by bad BABIP luck. This makes him an attractive target imo. Second, apparently the Jays are shopping him. This is a change from a few weeks ago when they said they would listen to offers on him rather than actively try to move him. It could well be that his price is dropping. I agree that the drop in prices as we get closer to the deadline mainly applies to impending free agents. But in some cases it will also apply to a player like Solarte.

This is correct. His BB and K rates are normal. His exit velocities are good. His batted ball profile is normal. His ISO is normal.

All that's missing is about 30 points in BABIP due to luck. Without that bad luck he'd be slashing somewhere around his career rates.

Solarte is a good fit for this roster, but I'm skeptical that he's worth paying extra for just because he's under control for 2 more seasons. It's not exactly super valuable to have a 31 year old under control, so I wouldn't pay extra for it.

AA needs to just get a few cheap rentals after the dust settles. There is no need to try to out-smart himself here. Give up some fungible assets to improve the team now, and prepare to go big in the off season.

 

[thewupk]

Is he worth more to a buyer? Yes

That doesn’t mean a team is going to lower their price in a few days or the offseason. They can wait until there’s more demand in the offseason from other teams not interested at the moment. Maybe that’s difficult for some folks to understand. Haha

Yes it does. One of the many things that determines the cost of the player is the length of time they are under contract. Player A wit 1.5 years of time left is worth more now than he is in the off season with 1 year remaining.

 

[Enscheff]

Is he worth more to a buyer? Yes

That doesn’t mean a team is going to lower their price in a few days or the offseason. They can wait until there’s more demand in the offseason from other teams not interested at the moment. Maybe that’s difficult for some folks to understand. Haha

I think I've shown to be quite accurate in trade value analysis over the last few years.

Feel free to continue blabbering though.

 

[Enscheff]

Yes it does. One of the many things that determines the cost of the player is the length of time they are under contract. Player A wit 1.5 years of time left is worth more now than he is in the off season with 1 year remaining.

Assuming he doesn't have negative value!!

 

[PurpleBrave]

I think I've shown to be quite accurate in trade value analysis over the last few years.

Feel free to continue blabbering though.

You’re a sharp poster. All I’m saying is there are circumstances where teams are better off waiting until the offseason

 

[BeanieAntics]

Tell that to the Padres or White Sox. Teams who have the player under control have little incentive to deal him. Braves have no leverage unless they come in and blow a team away.

What? Any smart team that is rebuilding has all the incentive in the world to deal controllable players. It has been proven time and time again that the returns on controllable players is far far greater than the returns that rentals get. There are very few exceptions. The not so smart teams like the Orioles wait until those players are rentals. If Machado and Britton had been dealt with 1 or 2 more years of control, they would have gotten a kings ransom for both of them.

 

[Southcack77]

I don't think AA has ruled out anything. He has just expressed a preference for players with contractual control beyond 2018.

Looking at the supply and demand situation, my guess is he will be able to get a situational lefty with additional control (Avilan, Blevins, Alvarez or Claudio) but will settle for an infielder who is a rental (Cabrera, Escobar or Moose).

My guess would be the opposite. Situation relievers are cheap and always available. In fact, from year to year you don't even necessarily know which ones will be effective. Getting one with control seems totally unnecessary since the cost of acquiring it should be negligible. If the Braves had addressed the issue before the season they wouldn't even be in the situation, no pun intended.

The place where you would worry about giving up real assets for a rental would be in a rotation starter or a position player. So maybe you aren't interested in renting Machado but might be interested in .... well whoever the controllable 3B theoretically on the market is. Maybe you wouldn't give up Kyle Wright for JA Happ, but you might do it for Archer with the remaining control. Now that makes some good sense.

 

[Enscheff]

You’re a sharp poster. All I’m saying is there are circumstances where teams are better off waiting until the offseason

You cited the Padres and White Sox as your examples.

The Padres extended Hand this off season, so they weren't going to deal him then. They traded him at the deadline, which was the earliest opportunity to deal him.

Who exactly are the White Sox holding onto that teams want now at the deadline?

You are correct when you say there are circumstances where a trade makes more sense in the off season, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the player being equal in value after losing a control over a post season (unless that player is injured near the deadline).

Healthy players with positive value lose value as their control expires. That is Trade Value 101.

 

[nsacpi]

My guess would be the opposite. Situation relievers are cheap and always available. In fact, from year to year you don't even necessarily know which ones will be effective. Getting one with control seems totally unnecessary since the cost of acquiring it should be negligible. If the Braves had addressed the issue before the season they wouldn't even be in the situation, no pun intended.

The place where you would worry about giving up real assets for a rental would be in a rotation starter or a position player. So maybe you aren't interested in renting Machado but might be interested in .... well whoever the controllable 3B theoretically on the market is. Maybe you wouldn't give up Kyle Wright for JA Happ, but you might do it for Archer with the remaining control. Now that makes some good sense.

I dunno there has been a bit of a bubble in the market for non-elite free agent relievers the last couple off-seasons

 

[BeanieAntics]

You’re a sharp poster. All I’m saying is there are circumstances where teams are better off waiting until the offseason

Those circumstances have got to be very few and very far between. Something like an extreme buyers market where the player in question's position is saturated at the deadline. Plus a bunch of other factors would probably have to fall into place.

But, almost always, a player with 2.5 years of control is going to be worth more on the market than a player with 2 years of control. If it were someone that was like a 4 WAR player, it would be the difference between paying 90 million in surplus value plus a contender's premium vs. paying 72 million in surplus value, possibly without a contender's premium. Not taking his contract into account of course.

 

[Southcack77]

You cited the Padres and White Sox as your examples.

The Padres extended Hand this off season, so they weren't going to deal him then. They traded him at the deadline, which was the earliest opportunity to deal him.

Who exactly are the White Sox holding onto that teams want now at the deadline?

You are correct when you say there are circumstances where a trade makes more sense in the off season, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the player being equal in value after losing a control over a post season (unless that player is injured near the deadline).

The Padres tried very hard to deal Hand at the deadline last season (for a mint) and didn't get the offer they wanted.

Not getting a huge return they kept and extended him. And offered him out again at the next deadline.

You'd have to ask them whether they got as much this year as they were offered last year. My guess is there wasn't a great difference.

Either way, there was no urgency for the Padres to make the deal last year and they still got a good return with no harm done to them.