Braves sign Eric Stults

Since we've been speculating about this guy or that guy being a cylon, does it trouble you at all that we just signed the guy who created the cylons?

cylon_zpsb8b2f3ec.jpg
 
Hawk said:
Are quotes broken or something?

Anyways, the Phillies just signed Billingsley to a one year, $1.5MM deal says Bob Nightengale. Wouldn't have minded giving him a shot, but I'm not too keen on that guarantee.

What is Amaro smoking?
Click to expand...

We guaranteed Wandy $2 million if he's on the roster - don't see much of a difference. I personally would rather roll the dice with Billingsley since he's got more upside.

Of course I'm all for any situation that gives Folty and Banuelos the full season to sharpen arsenals and work on control and command in Gwinnett - plug them both in in 2016 to replace Minor and Wandy/Hale/Stults/whomever.
 
clvclv said:
We guaranteed Wandy $2 million if he's on the roster - don't see much of a difference. I personally would rather roll the dice with Billingsley since he's got more upside.
Click to expand...

I meant signing him relative to the roster now, as there's just not a fit (especially, now, seeing the incentive package - which was probably a chief disqualifier for Atlanta) financially or otherwise.

I'm with you though, I would have preferred the Braves go after Billingsley as opposed to Wandy because of upside Chad brings to the table.
 
clvclv said:
We guaranteed Wandy $2 million if he's on the roster - don't see much of a difference. I personally would rather roll the dice with Billingsley since he's got more upside.
Click to expand...

The difference is that Billingsley can make up to 6.5 million in incentives along with the 1.5 million base salary. So that would be 2 million vs 8 million if Billingsley stays healthy and reaches those incentives.
 
Hawk said:
I meant signing him relative to the roster now, as there's just not a fit (especially, now, seeing the incentive package - which was probably a chief disqualifier for Atlanta) financially or otherwise.

I'm with you though, I would have preferred the Braves go after Billingsley as opposed to Wandy because of upside Chad brings to the table.
Click to expand...

Yea, I am guessing we even made Billingsley an offer or were willing to do so. We probably even would've given him more money wise than what Wandy can earn. But it was also likely no where close to 8 million total with incentives. I am guessing somewhere between 2-4 million including incentives would be more our range (give or take a million). Further, I would also guess we talked to a number of free agents like Wandy, Billingsley, Stults, Harang, etc.
 
Braves1976 said:
The difference is that Billingsley can make up to 6.5 million in incentives along with the 1.5 million base salary. So that would be 2 million vs 8 million if Billingsley stays healthy and reaches those incentives.
Click to expand...

And if Billingsley comes even remotely close to approaching those incentives he nets you a helluva lot more in a trade than Wandy or Stults will.

Moving a healthy Minor and healthy Billingsley at the deadline would bring one heckuva haul.
 
clvclv said:
And if Billingsley comes even remotely close to approaching those incentives he nets you a helluva lot more in a trade than Wandy or Stults will.

Moving a healthy Minor and healthy Billingsley at the deadline would bring one heckuva haul.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't compare what Billingsley might bring as a rental to what Minor would bring if he bounces back. Minor should bring a lot more as he wouldn't be a rental, he's not a free agent till 2018. But that isn't to say Billingsley as a rental wouldn't bring back a nice return because even Roberto Hernandez brought back a nice return from the Dodgers last year at the deadline. Which is more in line with what a rental like Billingsley should bring back. Further, it is hard to say how much more Billingsley might bring back in a trade than Wandy or Stults because you could have someone like the Dodgers overpay for one of them a la Hernandez. It happens that way at the trade deadline sometimes for various reasons.
 
Braves1976 said:
I wouldn't compare what Billingsley might bring as a rental to what Minor would bring if he bounces back. Minor should bring a lot more as he wouldn't be a rental, he's not a free agent till 2018. But that isn't to say Billingsley as a rental wouldn't bring back a nice return because even Roberto Hernandez brought back a nice return from the Dodgers last year at the deadline. Which is more in line with what a rental like Billingsley should bring back. Further, it is hard to say how much more Billingsley might bring back in a trade than Wandy or Stults because you could have someone like the Dodgers overpay for one of them a la Hernandez. It happens that way at the trade deadline sometimes for various reasons.
Click to expand...

I didn't compare anything. I said moving the two of them would bring back a nice return if they're healthy.

If you think Wandy or Stults would bring back nearly as much as a healthy Billingsley, we'll just have to disagree.
 
It's way too premature to be gauging the 2015 trade deadline, which could feature Cueto and Zimmerman, among more premium arms.
 
clvclv said:
I didn't compare anything. I said moving the two of them would bring back a nice return if they're healthy.

If you think Wandy or Stults would bring back nearly as much as a healthy Billingsley, we'll just have to disagree.
Click to expand...

The way you brought them up together made it seem like you thought they'd bring back a similar return. And I don't claim to know what Wandy or Stults might bring back at the trade deadline. If one of them surprises like Harang did last year the return could be better than expected. It depends on their performance this year and other teams needs, timing, etc. That is why I said it is "hard to say" in my previous response. Further, I didn't expect Hernandez to bring back anything of note but the Phillies got a good return for him last year.
 
Hawk said:
It's way too premature to be gauging the 2015 trade deadline, which could feature Cueto and Zimmerman, among more premium arms.
Click to expand...

It's NEVER too early to be gauging those situations - what do you think front offices get paid for?

You don't think the reason that James Shields is still unsigned three weeks before camps open is because most of his potential suitors are well-aware of the fact that better, younger arms with less innings on them will be out there? Why on earth would the Red Sox give Shields $20 million per when they know they can have Hamels or Cueto any time they want them?
 
clvclv said:
It's NEVER too early to be gauging those situations - what do you think front offices get paid for?

You don't think the reason that James Shields is still unsigned three weeks before camps open is because most of his potential suitors are well-aware of the fact that better, younger arms with less innings on them will be out there? Why on earth would the Red Sox give Shields $20 million per when they know they can have Hamels or Cueto any time they want them?
Click to expand...

The answer to that question is exceedingly simple: Because Hamels and Cueto will cost (top tier) prospects and Shields will cost dollars.

You can speculate, but it's a fool errand considering you have virtually no solid data on a plethora of factors which could drive a team to pursue an arm at the deadline (ranging from finances as a result of early season performance, to surprise contenders [or non-contenders], injuries, etc.)
 
This may explain the Flores signing covered earlier in this thread:

@DOBrienAJC · 7m 7 minutes ago
Veteran catcher Eli Whiteside signed minor league deal earlier this winter w/ #Braves, but decided to retire and become a coach w/ Giants.
 
Hawk said:
The answer to that question is exceedingly simple: Because Hamels and Cueto will cost (top tier) prospects and Shields will cost dollars.

You can speculate, but it's a fool errand considering you have virtually no solid data on a plethora of factors which could drive a team to pursue an arm at the deadline (ranging from finances as a result of early season performance, to surprise contenders [or non-contenders], injuries, etc.)
Click to expand...

It also seems he misunderstood the context of your previous point. I took it as you saying it with regard to us fans, not for GM's who don't have to speculate so much like we do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top