2020 Trade Deadline Thread

CJ9 said:
Would be annoying to pass on beating the Clevinger offer to pay heavily for a 33-year-old.
Click to expand...

Supposedly want Garcia who's a 55/MED, but know they're not getting him. If they'd take Wilson (50/LOW) and filler and AA can't make that happen, it'll be pretty obvious there's no money to spend.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
He cashed out just as quickly as he cashed in. He got Tatis and Paddack on his sell off and that made up for everything he gave up.
Click to expand...

Exactly right. The difference in the cases was ownership and their willingness to open up the pocketbook. They wanted splashes. Landing Tatis is the type of thing that happens about as often as Trout lasts into the late 20s in the draft, so getting him really isn't something you can grade someone on - pure blind luck (kinda like getting Acuna for $100,000). They're intent since the day he was hired was to create a buzz with fans, and they didn't care so much if he failed - how'd the Machado and Hosmer contracts look a year ago? They've looked to make noise, not run a business. AA's job is nothing like Preller's.
 
GovClintonTyree said:
Southcack77 said:
Well, no, they're not, but the Dodgers haven't produced a WS title despite being perennially in that discussion. You have to try. The Pads are trying. They were #2 in run diff in the NL before the deals, now they're clearly better. Short series, they could absolutely win the pennant/WS with a couple pitchers getting hot.

Less likely for us, counting on Robbie Erlin and Tommy Milone taking us to the promised land. And while maybe everything going wrong wasn't predictable, there were enough question marks that you had think making a strong move for an established starter was in the club's best interest. So now we have to pay a deadline day premium or settle for nothing at all.
Click to expand...


the Braves lost Soroka, Hamels, and Folty to injury. Had Felix Hernandez opt out for Covid. Then had Wright, Newcomb and Touki all flail incompetently.

there is only so much you can do to protect yourself from worst case scenarios.
Click to expand...
 
clvclv said:
Exactly right. The difference in the cases was ownership and their willingness to open up the pocketbook. They wanted splashes. Landing Tatis is the type of thing that happens about as often as Trout lasts into the late 20s in the draft, so getting him really isn't something you can grade someone on - pure blind luck (kinda like getting Acuna for $100,000). They're intent since the day he was hired was to create a buzz with fans, and they didn't care so much if he failed - how'd the Machado and Hosmer contracts look a year ago? They've looked to make noise, not run a business. AA's job is nothing like Preller's.
Click to expand...


Honestly, the Padres have remarkably few home grown elements filling big roles.

Lamet was pre-Preller. Paddack and Tatis were acquired in 2016, I think, for Fernando Rodney and James Shields.

I know they got some guys kicking around the pen and maybe on the bench, but that's pretty much it.

It's not a particularly high hit rate.

But Preller tends to shakes things up a bit. He's moved a ton of their young players and prospects to varying degrees of success.
 
Southcack77 said:
GovClintonTyree said:
the Braves lost Soroka, Hamels, and Folty to injury. Had Felix Hernandez opt out for Covid. Then had Wright, Newcomb and Touki all flail incompetently.

there is only so much you can do to protect yourself from worst case scenarios.
Click to expand...

So Hamels, with a recent, significant injury history and aged 36; Foltynewicz, who'd been demoted, has bone chips in his elbow and has chosen to avoid surgery, has clearly been mentally erratic; Hernandez, who is injured, old and had clearly run out of gas in Seattle; and three guys incapable of finding home plate for more than the briefest of times.

As I said, maybe everything going wrong wasn't predictable, but there were enough question marks that making a strong move for an established starter would have been in the club's best interest.

There are two reasons for having prospects - developing them to play for you and using them as currency. I would have preferred to spend some currency on an established starter this last offseason.
Click to expand...
 
CJ9 said:
Right. And the returns aren’t either.
Click to expand...

I mean Lynn has been better this year and is less of an injury risk. The dude had a 6.8 fWAR year last year and hasn't shown any signs of letting up this year... and no I'm not saying they are equal value as Clevinger is obviously younger and has more control, but Lynn isn't exactly a second tier option.
 
GovClintonTyree said:
Southcack77 said:
So Hamels, with a recent, significant injury history and aged 36; Foltynewicz, who'd been demoted, has bone chips in his elbow and has chosen to avoid surgery, has clearly been mentally erratic; Hernandez, who is injured, old and had clearly run out of gas in Seattle; and three guys incapable of finding home plate for more than the briefest of times.

As I said, maybe everything going wrong wasn't predictable, but there were enough question marks that making a strong move for an established starter would have been in the club's best interest.

There are two reasons for having prospects - developing them to play for you and using them as currency. I would have preferred to spend some currency on an established starter this last offseason.
Click to expand...


The actual Braves front office is constrained by finances and the talent market and doesn't have the benefit of hindsight.

I think they put together a very credible roster that was pretty clearly a contender in 2020.

Due to injuries and COVID and the failure of backup plans that most people considered to be good backup plans, they aren't really a world series contender but seem relatively likely to win their division and make the playoffs.

I don't think that's a bad organizational year, myself.
Click to expand...
 
Super said:
that is generally how transactions work, yes.
Click to expand...

Not really sure what's so hard to understand here. If we're going to pay a hefty price for a 33-year-old with only one extra year of control, why not just pay what would've likely been a little more to beat the offer Cleveland got for Clevinger and get someone four years younger with two extra years of control?
 
CJ9 said:
Not really sure what's so hard to understand here. If we're going to pay a hefty price for a 33-year-old with only one extra year of control, why not just pay what would've likely been a little more to beat the offer Cleveland got for Clevinger and get someone four years younger with two extra years of control?
Click to expand...

because the costs won’t be close. that’s what you’re missing.
you seem to think the Padres didn’t trade a lot for MC. that package is far from light.
i’m curious to see a surplus value calculation.
the Braves would not be giving up anywhere near Waters, Wright plus more for Lynn. and Quantrill is undoubtedly more valuable than Wright right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top