2018 Trade Deadline ROSTERBATION

[zitothebrave]

Gausman is easily more valuable than Heyward right now. I think Gausman will be a solid pitcher for us. Not "in love" with him, but do love that we bought low on a guy who still has some upside. Heyward only has downside from here.

Correct, because Gausman isn't on a guaranteed contract. He's a solid pitcher and he will cost less than Heyward. But Gausman's value is for 2 more years. Once he's off arby he has no real value anymore. He's now a kind of expensive asset.

How does Gausman a 27 year old who's career line is he doesn't last more than 5-6 innings of about 4 ERA ball have some upside but Heyward who's all of 17 months older than him have only Downside? If we use the you can't compare but there's no better way to do this method, Gausman as a pitcher has a career 102 ERA+, Heyward as a hitter has a career 108 wRC+. As far as offensive vs. pitching upside, I think quite easily a case could be made that they have the exact same upside. As being above average in that regard. The difference is that Heyward has the opportunity to positively effect the game in 3 areas, offense, defense, and baserunning. Gausman has an opportunity to effect the game in other areas, but typically pitchers are negligible in offense or holding runners.

 

[zitothebrave]

"if he finds his old form" in his late-20s with his defense (the previously best part of his game, easily) declining? that's the silly part.

Why is it silly? Realize that Heyward before going to Chicago had a career 118 wRC+. If he can get back to that level for us, then it doesn't matter that he's not elite defensively. He's a more than net positive player. Let's consider 2014. If you lop off a full point of WAR for him losing defense (which I dont' think is fair or likely but let's just say it happens) he's a 3.7 fWAR player. If heyward get's back to being a 110-120 wRC+ hitter with plus defense that will likely put him at similar values to (compare to this year) Schwarber or Marte. Which for what it's worth is basically the same value as career year Neck. And it's much more likely to happen than Markakis doing this ever again.

 

[msstate7]

If you go by the last 3 seasons...
Jhey 4.2 fWAR, 5.6 bWAR
KG 7.6 fWAR, 9.8 bWAR

Jhey contract = 5 more seasons 106 million
KG contract = 2 year's arbitration

I think I'd rather have gausman

 

[Super]

Correct, because Gausman isn't on a guaranteed contract. He's a solid pitcher and he will cost less than Heyward. But Gausman's value is for 2 more years. Once he's off arby he has no real value anymore. He's now a kind of expensive asset.

How does Gausman a 27 year old who's career line is he doesn't last more than 5-6 innings of about 4 ERA ball have some upside but Heyward who's all of 17 months older than him have only Downside? If we use the you can't compare but there's no better way to do this method, Gausman as a pitcher has a career 102 ERA+, Heyward as a hitter has a career 108 wRC+. As far as offensive vs. pitching upside, I think quite easily a case could be made that they have the exact same upside. As being above average in that regard. The difference is that Heyward has the opportunity to positively effect the game in 3 areas, offense, defense, and baserunning. Gausman has an opportunity to effect the game in other areas, but typically pitchers are negligible in offense or holding runners.

lordy, using heyward's career wRC+ is a joke.
gausman has good stuff but was on an awful team.
heyward does not have this problem. he's at best an average hitter with declining defense.

 

[Super]

Why is it silly? Realize that Heyward before going to Chicago had a career 118 wRC+.

awesome! what has he done since? been terrible to average.
what was alex gordon's wRC+ before 2016? should we pursue him? why not?

 

[Super]

you want to pursue heyward because you saw him come up in a braves uni. pursuing him at this point is stupid and we should be aiming higher.

 

[thewupk]

I'm one of the biggest Heyward fans around but he's not the same player he was in Atlanta. Just no.

 

[CyYoung31]

But, is Heyward not the chosen one? The one that will bring balance to the NL?

 

[Carp]

I honestly don't get why people are so in love with Gausman, he's a decent pitcher who can't go deep into games. Not a bad guy to have but he's hardly a prime asset, that's why we were able to get him for a collection of C/C+ prospects. He's kind of cheap but that's eroding quickly as he's already made 5M in arb.

Even if you aren't that high on Gausman, he's doing nothing but improving his value right now. He's been a solid mid rotation pitcher for practically his whole career and he's currently on pace for the highest WAR season of his career.

I wouldn't trade Fried and his 6+ years of control for Heyward either. The only way the Cubs are moving Heyward is if they eat at least half the contract and even then, they should expect a minimal return. If I even wanted Heyward back, I might do JT, Allard, and fodder for him with the Cubs sending over half his remaining salary.

 

[DirkPiggler]

Why is it silly? Realize that Heyward before going to Chicago had a career 118 wRC+. If he can get back to that level for us, then it doesn't matter that he's not elite defensively. He's a more than net positive player. Let's consider 2014. If you lop off a full point of WAR for him losing defense (which I dont' think is fair or likely but let's just say it happens) he's a 3.7 fWAR player. If heyward get's back to being a 110-120 wRC+ hitter with plus defense that will likely put him at similar values to (compare to this year) Schwarber or Marte. Which for what it's worth is basically the same value as career year Neck. And it's much more likely to happen than Markakis doing this ever again.

How many players fall completely off a cliff the way Heyward did for multiple years, then rebound to ultra-successful seasons of their youth?

If he wasn't tied into a $20MM/year plus contract for five more years it might be different. And in the event that he does resurrect himself into Black Jesus of 2010-2015, he does have an opt-out after this season. Should he stay with his current deal (a no-brainer at this point), he also has limited no trade protection through 2020, and a full no-trade clause for the last three years of his contract.

Bottom line is that the Braves could do much better if they're going to either sign or trade for someone in that price range. Hard pass.

 

[50PoundHead]

I'm not going to rip on Heyward. He's having a decent season and he's in a good situation for him and the Cubs. But he's turned into the world's largest singles hitter. Anyway, enough of that.

I don't know what the team's plans are for the outfield in 2019. I'm wary of another year for Markakis, especially if we are going to throw him out there every day. I was one of the few who hasn't broken out in hives every time Markakis' name has been uttered for the past four seasons, but I would look at all the other options available (along with thinking outside the box) in assembling next year's outfield.

 

[BeanieAntics]

Why is it silly? Realize that Heyward before going to Chicago had a career 118 wRC+. If he can get back to that level for us, then it doesn't matter that he's not elite defensively. He's a more than net positive player. Let's consider 2014. If you lop off a full point of WAR for him losing defense (which I dont' think is fair or likely but let's just say it happens) he's a 3.7 fWAR player. If heyward get's back to being a 110-120 wRC+ hitter with plus defense that will likely put him at similar values to (compare to this year) Schwarber or Marte. Which for what it's worth is basically the same value as career year Neck. And it's much more likely to happen than Markakis doing this ever again.

This is a lot of "ifs" to sink a solid veteran starting pitcher, a promising pitching prospect, and 60 million dollars. I think you are so in love with the idea of 2010 Jason Heyward that you are losing sight of just how much value we'd be giving away, gambling on a guy whose "resurgence" has resulted in a barely league average bat. Its just a bad trade idea dude. Not to mention that we'd be stuck with the contract, mitigated as it may be, through 2023. What if Heyward goes back to 2016, 68 OPS+, Jason Heyward whose defense won't save him in 3 years? We would have traded away valuable assets for an absolute disaster. Which does happen occasionally, I'll admit that. But usually when it does its at least a surprise. You can see the potential for that in this one from a mile away.

 

[BeanieAntics]

I'm not going to rip on Heyward. He's having a decent season and he's in a good situation for him and the Cubs. But he's turned into the world's largest singles hitter. Anyway, enough of that.

I don't know what the team's plans are for the outfield in 2019. I'm wary of another year for Markakis, especially if we are going to throw him out there every day. I was one of the few who hasn't broken out in hives every time Markakis' name has been uttered for the past four seasons, but I would look at all the other options available (along with thinking outside the box) in assembling next year's outfield.

Yeah when did this Heyward/Markakis thing become a binary choice? The only way something like this would possibly make sense is if they were the only two right fielders left on Earth. Even then I'm not sure what I'd want to do. And look I'm not trying to rip on Heyward either. Dude is having a nice little year in Chicago and I sincerely hope he turns it around. I'm just not willing to invest anything on that bet. We could probably trade value equal to Gausman+Fried and get an option far better, far more proven, and a little cheaper than Heyward this offseason.

 

[Nerfherders]

So, I guess we're not going to get a left handed bench bat eh?

 

[nsacpi]

So, I guess we're not going to get a left handed bench bat eh?

Rio Ruiz and Ryan Flaherty unless we pick up someone.

 

[Enscheff]

So, I guess we're not going to get a left handed bench bat eh?

I have to give AA the benefit of the doubt and assume he will add someone like Granderson within the next 48-72 hours.

It would be inexcusable (though not disastrous) not to add some form of bench bat to this roster.

 

[Carp]

Duda and Granderson seem like the only natural fits left on the market. Granderson is probably the more versatile of two but Duda hits RHP a little better.

 

[nsacpi]

Duda and Granderson seem like the only natural fits left on the market. Granderson is probably the more versatile of two but Duda hits RHP a little better.

Yeah. I'd go with Duda if the acquisition cost was about the same. It would be hard though to keep these guys sharp just with pinch hitting duties. I hope Snit will find a way to get his bench guys into the lineup a few times in September.

 

[Enscheff]

Duda and Granderson seem like the only natural fits left on the market. Granderson is probably the more versatile of two but Duda hits RHP a little better.

Bowman's latest blabber suggests the Braves are looking for ANY bat since Duvall has struggled.

It seems completely moronic to make such a big deal about acquiring "controllable players" like Duvall (despite it being equally as moronic to value additional control over role players), and then switch gears on Duvall based on 36 PAs in a Braves uniform.

If the Braves thought enough of Duvall as a RHH to value his future control, then it is silly to sour on him after 36 PAs, especially when only 17 of them (less than half) have came against LHP...the whole reason he was acquired. If he is the designated "LHP killer", then he needs a lot more than 17 PAs vs LHP to make any sort of determination about him.

The Braves need a LHH bench bat. He doesn't need to be able to play defense. Having that threat on the bench will completely alter how opposing managers attack the bottom of the Braves order in the postseason.

 

[zbhargrove]

Correct, because Gausman isn't on a guaranteed contract. He's a solid pitcher and he will cost less than Heyward. But Gausman's value is for 2 more years. Once he's off arby he has no real value anymore. He's now a kind of expensive asset.

How does Gausman a 27 year old who's career line is he doesn't last more than 5-6 innings of about 4 ERA ball have some upside but Heyward who's all of 17 months older than him have only Downside? If we use the you can't compare but there's no better way to do this method, Gausman as a pitcher has a career 102 ERA+, Heyward as a hitter has a career 108 wRC+. As far as offensive vs. pitching upside, I think quite easily a case could be made that they have the exact same upside. As being above average in that regard. The difference is that Heyward has the opportunity to positively effect the game in 3 areas, offense, defense, and baserunning. Gausman has an opportunity to effect the game in other areas, but typically pitchers are negligible in offense or holding runners.

You're fairly grounded and analytical usually when it comes to players you're not a fanboy of but this would be awful. Heyward instead of Gausman makes our team worse. The ship has sailed... Heyward is a mediocre offensive players who's defense is declining with a good bit of money owed... your blinders are on strong here.