5/7/15 minor league THREAD: Sugar Ray! Who knew?

Deester11 said:
If he grew, it was about 10 milliliters. My gf thought he was honestly the bat boy. Even the short guys could pat him on the head. That being said, if you guys haven't seen his defense....trust me, it's Andrelton-lite range wise. He got to a ball from deep short on the second base side and almost threw a guy out. Quick hands to the ball.....he's going to be a good ballplayer for a while. His skill set is not prolonged for slumps.
Click to expand...

Ozhaino is a HUGE part of the reason I'm so much in favor of promoting Peraza before long. Albies is going to come faster than Jose has IMO, and he's maybe the one guy in the organization that I personally don't want blocked in any way. Having him waste away in Gwinnett for several months while you're trying to get maximum value for Peraza in a year or two could cause him to stagnate.

I think Hart & Company may well have actually identified HIM as the SS or 2B of the future already and could be willing to move Andrelton or Peraza when someone knocks their socks off for either of them. All relevant disclaimers apply (small sample size, success at lower levels doesn't always translate, etc.), but I think that he'll get every bit of the hype that any hitter prospect in our system has in years by the middle of next season and could very well be ready by the time the new park opens.
 
clvclv said:
Ozhaino is a HUGE part of the reason I'm so much in favor of promoting Peraza before long. Albies is going to come faster than Jose has IMO, and he's maybe the one guy in the organization that I personally don't want blocked in any way. Having him waste away in Gwinnett for several months while you're trying to get maximum value for Peraza in a year or two could cause him to stagnate.

I think Hart & Company may well have actually identified HIM as the SS or 2B of the future already and could be willing to move Andrelton or Peraza when someone knocks their socks off for either of them. All relevant disclaimers apply (small sample size, success at lower levels doesn't always translate, etc.), but I think that he'll get every bit of the hype that any hitter prospect in our system has in years by the middle of next season and could very well be ready by the time the new park opens.
Click to expand...

I'm already on record, but let me just state again: No, no, no, no, no. That would be the biggest mistake we've made in a long time. Luckily, I doubt the front office would ever consider it.

Albies' best value for a team may be at SS, but you can't get rid of Simmons to facilitate that. Simmons is invaluable to this team going forward.
 
smootness said:
I'm already on record, but let me just state again: No, no, no, no, no. That would be the biggest mistake we've made in a long time. Luckily, I doubt the front office would ever consider it.

Albies' best value for a team may be at SS, but you can't get rid of Simmons to facilitate that. Simmons is invaluable to this team going forward.
Click to expand...
Make no mistake about it. Let's hope Simmons is a Brave for a long time. As long as we are smart contract wise, he should retire a Brave. That being said, we have two strengths in the minors right now: Pitching and Middle Infielders. What Hart did to the system in the span of a year was all the more important when you consider the draft. We can go after high potential arms and bats and when we need to replenish the MLB team, we can do that. Simmons may not be dealt, but Ozzie is no slouch even now. Let's just hope we continue to have a good problem debate in the future
 
I predict one of Simmons/Peraza/Albies is packaged with pitching to bring Tulo to Atlanta to play 3B.

Sign JUp.

Dominate.
 
Why would we trade for Tulo? Guy is not the same player (still good) away.

He is hurt a lot and is on the wrong side of 30.

No thanks.

Sign J-Upt? YES PLEASE!
 
Enscheff said:
I predict one of Simmons/Peraza/Albies is packaged with pitching to bring Tulo to Atlanta to play 3B.

Sign JUp.

Dominate.
Click to expand...

Would be an interesting thought, but I don't think we'd be willing to part with the level of Pitcher they'd be looking for to make it happen. If Simmons/Peraza/Albies plus something like Banuelos and Sims would get it done I could see pulling the trigger, but I don't think they'd be willing to add any of Wisler, Folty, or Fried in any package that also included one of those infielders unless they were getting somebody like Kris Bryant back. Tulo's injury concerns and contract are just too big a detriment to feel comfortable including more than 1 premium prospect/young guy for for my taste.

That said, if they were willing to add David Dahl or Raimel Tapia to Tulo AND take Chris Johnson's deal back...
 
Deester11 said:
Make no mistake about it. Let's hope Simmons is a Brave for a long time. As long as we are smart contract wise, he should retire a Brave. That being said, we have two strengths in the minors right now: Pitching and Middle Infielders. What Hart did to the system in the span of a year was all the more important when you consider the draft. We can go after high potential arms and bats and when we need to replenish the MLB team, we can do that. Simmons may not be dealt, but Ozzie is no slouch even now. Let's just hope we continue to have a good problem debate in the future
Click to expand...

Yes, we do have a surplus of middle infielders. We also have Simmons, which makes our minor leaguers expendable, not the other way around. Personally, if everyone reaches their potential, I want Simmons at SS and Albies at 2B.

I honestly can't believe people would actually consider trading Simmons.
 
smootness said:
Yes, we do have a surplus of middle infielders. We also have Simmons, which makes our minor leaguers expendable, not the other way around. Personally, if everyone reaches their potential, I want Simmons at SS and Albies at 2B.

I honestly can't believe people would actually consider trading Simmons.
Click to expand...

I agree, I'm as high on Simmons as anyone. I have been arguing that he's special since his early minor league days. But I am not surprised that people would consider trading him and I doubt you truly are yourself. There are fans that would trade basically anyone and some for a lot less than you'd believe. Nothing surprises me in that regard to be honest. Further, I think it was Bill Shanks that claimed that when the Yankees made a run at Simmons this off-season that the Braves would consider trading him, and that pretty much no one is totally off-limits.
 
Braves1976 said:
I agree, I'm as high on Simmons as anyone. I have been arguing that he's special since his early minor league days. But I am not surprised that people would consider trading him and I doubt you truly are yourself. There are fans that would trade basically anyone and some for a lot less than you'd believe. Nothing surprises me in that regard to be honest. Further, I think it was Bill Shanks that claimed that when the Yankees made a run at Simmons this off-season that the Braves would consider trading him, and that pretty much no one is totally off-limits.
Click to expand...

I think Hart's (or any other GM for that matter) not doing his job if he's not willing to "listen" to offers for everybody. That doesn't mean he has to accept any of those offers.

The asking price for Andrelton would obviously be substantially higher than for Jose or Ozhaino, but Hart would be a fool for not at least considering moving him if (for some reason) Boston wanted to keep him away from the Yankees and offered something like Jackie Bradley, Rafael Devers, and Brian Johnson for him. I'm not saying they would, but they're certainly in a position to. The reasoning behind something like that is they'd be able to keep Simmons away from the Yankees and then decide which one of Andrelton or Bogaerts they wanted to keep - spinning the other off to someone else to replace the prospects they gave up to begin with. If Simmons really has turned the corner with his offense, a move like that could make a ton of sense for the Red Sox.
 
clvclv said:
I think Hart's (or any other GM for that matter) not doing his job if he's not willing to "listen" to offers for everybody. That doesn't mean he has to accept any of those offers.

The asking price for Andrelton would obviously be substantially higher than for Jose or Ozhaino, but Hart would be a fool for not at least considering moving him if (for some reason) Boston wanted to keep him away from the Yankees and offered something like Jackie Bradley, Rafael Devers, and Brian Johnson for him. I'm not saying they would, but they're certainly in a position to. The reasoning behind something like that is they'd be able to keep Simmons away from the Yankees and then decide which one of Andrelton or Bogaerts they wanted to keep - spinning the other off to someone else to replace the prospects they gave up to begin with. If Simmons really has turned the corner with his offense, a move like that could make a ton of sense for the Red Sox.
Click to expand...

You'd do that?
 
Julio3000 said:
You'd do that?
Click to expand...

I don't know that I would. The point is I'd certainly "listen".

If - as Braves1976 suggests - a GM would be fired for considering something like that, Hart would've already been out since that's arguably a better return than he got in either the Heyward, Upton, or Gattis deals. Bradley's ready to solve our CF situation now, Devers is already ahead of Ruiz according to every major ranking I've seen (with a substantially higher ceiling and big-time power), and Johnson's ceiling is a #3 (and he's all but ready to step into a rotation now). I don't think I'd take it at first glance, but would be tempted if they substituted Eduardo Rodriguez for Johnson. Rodriguez would push past all the arms we've already acquired and would become our best pitching prospect, Devers would rank no lower than our #4 prospect, plus you land your CF for the foreseeable future.

I'm not sure that's even enough for me, but I'd definitely have our scouts take a long, hard look at them before I'd say no out of hand. The problem I have with folks that say those kind of offers are ridiculous is that they're the same ones that roasted Hart for the earlier deals that are currently awfully quiet when discussions turn to how those prospects we got are performing now. Everyone's big on Simmons right now while he's hot, but if he suddenly regresses and he returns to his old approach that turns into a really good return for a defense-only SS that's going to be making $12 million per when the new park opens.

That's always the problem when you start trying to label players as "untouchable" IMO - people that want to do that always scream that you're giving someone away for unproven prospects. It wasn't very long ago when Simmons was an "unproven prospect" with HUGE questions about his bat. We all hope he's turning that corner and that this is what we're going to get from him offensively from here on out, but there's no guarantee we will.

Again, the point isn't about Andrelton specifically - it's that both Wren and Hart have said (correctly IMO) that they wouldn't ever consider anyone "off-limits", and that IF they got the right kind of offer after consulting the people they'd put in place to help them make those decisions they'd be willing to trade anyone.
 
clvclv said:
If - as Braves1976 suggests - a GM would be fired for considering something like that, Hart would've already been out since that's arguably a better return than he got in either the Heyward, Upton, or Gattis deals.
Click to expand...

Actually, that doesn't hold up because Simmons is not just very special he's also signed through 2020 unlike Heyward, Upton or Gattis. Quite frankly, I'd argue that it makes no sense to compare trading Simmons to trading Heyward and Upton heading into their last year before free agency. Further, I said: "Any GM (or President in our case) that would should be fired IMO" not that they "would be fired for considering something like that".
 
Braves1976 said:
Actually, that doesn't hold up because Simmons is not just very special he's also signed through 2020 unlike Heyward, Upton or Gattis. Quite frankly, I'd argue that it makes no sense to compare trading Simmons to trading Heyward and Upton heading into their last year before free agency.
Click to expand...

Again, you're cherry-picking. They DID control Gattis for a similar period (at a substantially smaller financial commitment than Simmons is owed), and that would be a better return than they got for him as well as a better return than they got for the others.

Labeling someone as "untouchable" can be just as bad as making bad free-agent signings. You need to look at every opportunity to improve the organization as a whole rather than being stubborn - those kinds of decisions lead you down the road the Phillies currently live on pretty quickly. Trying to set everything up for a short window where you're going to make a run ALWAYS comes with the cost of having extended down cycles when that window does close.

The goal is to get the system back to a point where we're consistently able to replace injured or expensive players from within - THAT's what leads to extended periods of success when you don't have the financial flexibility that some organizations have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top