Braves in talks with DBacks for Trevor Cahill

ChapelHillMatt said:
I really believe that's what it boils down to. People loved Heyward so much that they are willing to question the front office's every move from this point forward. Funny thing is they hate Markakis and he put up similar numbers to Heyward last year. Obviously isn't as good defensively but there isn't a massive difference between the two offensively, at least not yet.
Click to expand...

There really isnt any doubt that is what it is.

Wont name, names but obviously very clear some, heck alot are still mad they traded him.

I agree mostly but i just dont get why some on are still mad they traded ONE player, who good, is hardly Mike Trout the way some propser Heyward to be.
 
Carp said:
We have younger, cheaper options ready to take the next step. You ride Cahill to the deadline and hope he pitches well enough to warrant a good prospect in return. Extremely likely he will not be here past this year, no matter how well he pitches.
Click to expand...

Hypothetically if Roger got him to rebound, and they didnt deal him at the deadline, i could see them use that option on Cahill.

12-13 mil for a #2-3 pitcher is a pretty solid price.
 
GovClintonTyree said:
That's a fiction. We graduated Freddie Freeman, Jason Heyward, Andrelton Simmons, Evan Gattis, Mike Minor, Alex Wood, Julio Teheran, And Craig Kimbrel.

Those rankings that people parrot don't mean a thing because they take a snapshot of the system at the time they're rating and ignore the successes that are contributing at the ML level, some at a high level and some very young.
Click to expand...

Freeman, Kimbrell, and Heyward were not drafter under Wren's tenure.

No one is saying we didn't draft/develop any players under Wren. But it's a fact that our farm was bone dry almost entirely thanks to Wren. He inherited one of the best farms in baseball and slowly turned it into one of the worst.
 
Heyward said:
Hypothetically if Roger got him to rebound, and they didnt deal him at the deadline, i could see them use that option on Cahill.

12-13 mil for a #2-3 pitcher is a pretty solid price.
Click to expand...

I don't see it all. May be if Minor continued to struggle and he was traded/non-tendered. Otherwise, I don't see us spending that sort of money on pitching when we are so deep at that position. Jenkins, Folty, Sims, ManBan, Hursch, Martin, all are knocking on the door. We'll definitely see at least one of these guys in the bigs before this season is over.
 
Heyward said:
5.5 mil is alot of money?

Interesting.

Still mad they traded Babe Ruth oops i mean Heyward.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure why I'm going waste internet bandwidth discussing something with a brick wall like you, but why not?

It was very clearly outline earlier in the thread that between Cahill, Markakis, Callaspo, KJ, Grilli, JJohnson, and others starts adding up to significant cash.

And yes - $5.5M is a lot of cash for a 5th starter who has been horrible the last few years.

Of all the boneheaded moves this offseason, this one doesn't bug me that much. But I'd much rather have spend the money on Olivera than on old garbage. But I can't wait for all the flipping to begin!
 
ChapelHillMatt said:
I really believe that's what it boils down to. People loved Heyward so much that they are willing to question the front office's every move from this point forward. Funny thing is they hate Markakis and he put up similar numbers to Heyward last year. Obviously isn't as good defensively but there isn't a massive difference between the two offensively, at least not yet.
Click to expand...

I mean, saying it over and over again doesn't make it true.

Did I like the Heyward deal? No. But I could at least understand it if we're going into full rebuild mode.

Then we go and give even MORE money to a old, injured, mediocre player like Markakis and I'm like WTF?

I just don't see where the team gets good anytime soon. They've clearly demonstrated they are unable/unwilling to spend for premium talent. So we keep trying to get "lotto tickets." Good luck with that strategy.

We have premium talent sitting in our outfield, and we don't even TALK to them about signing long term. Instead we trade for an average starting pitcher and Jace Peterson.

How exciting.
 
sturg33 said:
I mean, saying it over and over again doesn't make it true.

Did I like the Heyward deal? No. But I could at least understand it if we're going into full rebuild mode.

Then we go and give even MORE money to a old, injured, mediocre player like Markakis and I'm like WTF?

I just don't see where the team gets good anytime soon. They've clearly demonstrated they are unable/unwilling to spend for premium talent. So we keep trying to get "lotto tickets." Good luck with that strategy.

We have premium talent sitting in our outfield, and we don't even TALK to them about signing long term. Instead we trade for an average starting pitcher and Jace Peterson.

How exciting.
Click to expand...

Go root for a new team then.
 
sturg33 said:
I'm not sure why I'm going waste internet bandwidth discussing something with a brick wall like you, but why not?

It was very clearly outline earlier in the thread that between Cahill, Markakis, Callaspo, KJ, Grilli, JJohnson, and others starts adding up to significant cash.

And yes - $5.5M is a lot of cash for a 5th starter who has been horrible the last few years.

Of all the boneheaded moves this offseason, this one doesn't bug me that much. But I'd much rather have spend the money on Olivera than on old garbage. But I can't wait for all the flipping to begin!
Click to expand...

Other than Markakis, most of those deals are short-term deals, in hope to flip at the deadline.

Last 3 years, 5+ ERA, previous 2 years, he was 3.7 ERA, and 3.9 ERA, not awful. Come again? That in a HORRIBLE pitchers park.

I would have liked Olivera as well but it is what it is.

You obviously have a different view in how a team should rebuild. Minus Markakis, most of the deals are fine for what a rebuilding team should do.
 
sturg33 said:
Weren't we going to flip Wandy for a prospect at the deadline?
Click to expand...

Some will improve enough to be flipped and some will just go away as expiring contracts. Nobody ever suggested that all of these guys would be tradeable... but some will. You guys are just being obtuse now. You already know they answers to your inane questions.
 
gilesfan said:
If you believe the statistical blip of his defense.
Click to expand...

Well that gets into a whole other debate. But if we are going cite WAR as much as we do, then we can't pick and choose the years to fit our arguments. That would be thethe-ian of us.
 
thethe said:
We will be close to the league low for sure. Not sure if that is relevant to having a good offense though. Its great to have that weapon but if you can't acquire that then are you just going to throw your hands up and quit?
Click to expand...

Power is very relevant to having a good offense unless you think the team OBP is going to be near .350 or play above their heads when runners are in scoring position
 
Deester11 said:
As baffling as it is, to say he's not good or whatever is not accurate. Let's just play pin the tail on the Jackax who signed him, but for crying out loud Markakis is serviceable for a little while anyways.
Click to expand...

It depends what you determine to be a good player. He has averaged like 1.5 fwar (going off memory but it's in the 1 range). 2 WAR is considered average. So by that definition he is not a good player. So for some to think Markakis is not a good player isn't absurd.
 
gilesfan said:
And that would be great. But, this is the explanation for every single trade we make. "Maybe we can rebuild his value and trade him." Remember if teams wanted him they could have had him. Things can change, but I don't really buy the argument.
Click to expand...

That's what the Cubs have been doing the past few seasons and have had success with it. The A's use this model as well. Will it amount to much? Who knows. But it is a better option to start a players clock early in a year the team will be awful. The Braves in 2015 will be bad. So it doesn't matter who is on the team. If it's players that could potentially be flipped then what is the issue?
 
chop2chip said:
Well that gets into a whole other debate. But if we are going cite WAR as much as we do, then we can't pick and choose the years to fit our arguments. That would be thethe-ian of us.
Click to expand...

That is true. That's why most people look at multiple years and what he's predicted to do. He's averaged 1.35 fwar the last 4 years and is projected to be a 1.1 fwar player in 2015. Take that for what you will.
 
sturg33 said:
I mean, saying it over and over again doesn't make it true.

Did I like the Heyward deal? No. But I could at least understand it if we're going into full rebuild mode.

Then we go and give even MORE money to a old, injured, mediocre player like Markakis and I'm like WTF?

I just don't see where the team gets good anytime soon. They've clearly demonstrated they are unable/unwilling to spend for premium talent. So we keep trying to get "lotto tickets." Good luck with that strategy.

We have premium talent sitting in our outfield, and we don't even TALK to them about signing long term. Instead we trade for an average starting pitcher and Jace Peterson.

How exciting.
Click to expand...

Again, you shouldn't believe everything you read or hear. Furthermore, if you don't like what guys like Miller and Peterson have shown then just give up on baseball. Save yourself the misery of a season. I do not believe Heyward's side of the story. I do believe he expected to be paid like Stanton and the Braves just simply could not and would not do that and rightfully so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top