Chacin About to be Traded to Angels

Braves1976 said:
You keep saying that but the return for KJ and Uribe isn't even comparable. Gant and Whalen were at least prospects at the time, this lefty Adam McCreery isn't on anyones list and couldn't even K a batter in a recent low A-ball outing. He is also old for his league and no better than the type you see picked up for free on waivers regularly (actually he's worse but point made). Which we are not even making use of well for a team that gets first shot at claims IMO.
Click to expand...

I'm hoping the Braves' FO saw something out of McCreery that makes them think he can develop into a better result than anyone else is expecting/predicting. In other words: you'd hope he was on their list, for whatever that's worth.

That being said, if not over-the-moon, I think most posters were nonetheless at least reasonably satisfied with Whalen/Gant for Uribe/Johnson, since they had solid numbers and, as you note, were prospects (albeit low-level). McCreery is, relatively, a shot-in-the-dark: a complete reclamation project (and not even one like Toussaint, who at least has a high ceiling to go with his cavernous floor).
 
jpx7 said:
I'm hoping the Braves' FO saw something out of McCreery that makes them think he can develop into a better result than anyone else is expecting/predicting. In other words: you'd hope he was on their list, for whatever that's worth.

That being said, if not over-the-moon, I think most posters were nonetheless at least reasonably satisfied with Whalen/Gant for Uribe/Johnson, since they had solid numbers and, as you note, were prospects (albeit low-level). McCreery is, relatively, a shot-in-the-dark: a complete reclamation project (and not even one like Toussaint, who at least has a high ceiling to go with his cavernous floor).
Click to expand...

Agreed. Plus I think folks were more upset to see both KJ and Uribe go as both were popular with us fans. KJ has long been popular here and Uribe won a lot over his short time here too. I know he won me over as I didn't want him at first (just because of the playoff heartbreaker mainly) and then watching him play daily I grew to appreciate what a good player he is and how great a teammate he seemed to be too. That said, shot in the dark was exactly the words I used regarding McCreery. But I really think we were just that low on Chacin as seen also with their being so much internal debate on him even making the team. IOW, smart enough to sign him given the low cost but somehow they didn't see what we had in him.
 
jpx7 said:
I'm hoping the Braves' FO saw something out of McCreery that makes them think he can develop into a better result than anyone else is expecting/predicting. In other words: you'd hope he was on their list, for whatever that's worth.

That being said, if not over-the-moon, I think most posters were nonetheless at least reasonably satisfied with Whalen/Gant for Uribe/Johnson, since they had solid numbers and, as you note, were prospects (albeit low-level). McCreery is, relatively, a shot-in-the-dark: a complete reclamation project (and not even one like Toussaint, who at least has a high ceiling to go with his cavernous floor).
Click to expand...

He's 6'8", left handed, throws hard and walks 7.6/9. Sounds like he fits the mold for the new Braves Way.
 
Braves1976 said:
You keep saying that but the return for KJ and Uribe isn't even comparable. Gant and Whalen were at least prospects at the time, this lefty Adam McCreery isn't on anyones list and couldn't even K a batter in a recent low A-ball outing. He is also old for his league and no better than the type you see picked up for free on waivers regularly (actually he's worse but point made). Which we are not even making use of well for a team that gets first shot at claims IMO.
Click to expand...

and Chacin really wasn't comparable to KJ and Uribe. When you compare what we gave up vs. what we got, they're pretty close deals value-wise.
 
At best we probably weren't getting much more than McCreery for Chacin. At worst we were getting absolutely nothing.
 
sturg33 said:
I don't see much of a difference here...

Chacin is on pace for over 2 WAR this year
Click to expand...

First, 2 players > 1 player, especially a 3B and a versatile player like Johnson.
Second, Uribe was coming off 3.6 and 5.0 WAR seasons.
The reality is guys like this who are on 1 year deals just don't have a ton of value. Chacin had bounced around and was pretty ineffective for a couple years. Again: At best, if we had waited, we might get something slightly more than what we got. At worst, we get nothing. Either way, the range of return for Chacin is not large. I know nothing about the guy the got, so I won't pretend I do.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
Curious to see what the Halos do with Chacin at the deadline. Right now I think their investment has grown since they traded for him.
Click to expand...

Agreed, that's looking like a good deal for the Halos right now.

Some of this is just bad luck or good luck, depending on what side you're on. We waited too long with Grilli, didn't wait long enough with Chacin (potentially).
 
yeezus said:
First, 2 players > 1 player, especially a 3B and a versatile player like Johnson.
Second, Uribe was coming off 3.6 and 5.0 WAR seasons.
The reality is guys like this who are on 1 year deals just don't have a ton of value. Chacin had bounced around and was pretty ineffective for a couple years. Again: At best, if we had waited, we might get something slightly more than what we got. At worst, we get nothing. Either way, the range of return for Chacin is not large. I know nothing about the guy the got, so I won't pretend I do.
Click to expand...

My post was not about the Uribe deal.

What I said was I don't see much of a difference between getting nothing and the guy we did get. He is a nobody.

If Chacin blew out his elbow or blew up on the mound... then who cares? The upside of holding onto him was much greater than the downside risk
 
Preacher said:
Agreed, that's looking like a good deal for the Halos right now.

Some of this is just bad luck or good luck, depending on what side you're on. We waited too long with Grilli, didn't wait long enough with Chacin (potentially).
Click to expand...

agreed.. I am not faulting the FO for this pre se, very tough decision.. I think they wanted to clear a spot with him in the rotation and didn't want to 'Grilli' this..

But in the same breath, I also applaud the FO for sticking with Norris. Many wanted him DFA'd and they stuck with him and I have a feeling his stock has risen pretty well this year.
 
sturg33 said:
My post was not about the Uribe deal.

What I said was I don't see much of a difference between getting nothing and the guy we did get. He is a nobody.

If Chacin blew out his elbow or blew up on the mound... then who cares? The upside of holding onto him was much greater than the downside risk
Click to expand...

This I agree with. I know the FO didn't want another Grilli... however, Chacin was never a Grilli. Grilli had value well before he blew his leg out. Chacin had no value at this point. He is a zero value player on a zero risk contract. holding him for a few more months would have equated to no risk/potential greater return... but still don't hold this trade to highly as disappointing. it just the process of out with the old/in with the new.
 
sturg33 said:
My post was not about the Uribe deal.

What I said was I don't see much of a difference between getting nothing and the guy we did get. He is a nobody.

If Chacin blew out his elbow or blew up on the mound... then who cares? The upside of holding onto him was much greater than the downside risk
Click to expand...

And there also isn't much of a difference between what we got and what we would've got if we held onto Chacin and traded him after a few more good starts. That's the point. The range is small. But please give me your scouting report on the guy we got. I'm sure you have lot of info.
 
yeezus said:
And there also isn't much of a difference between what we got and what we would've got if we held onto Chacin and traded him after a few more good starts. That's the point. The range is small. But please give me your scouting report on the guy we got. I'm sure you have lot of info.
Click to expand...

There's no point in even arguing with you FO homers... they can do no wrong.
 
sturg33 said:
There's no point in even arguing with you FO homers... they can do no wrong.
Click to expand...

or perhaps you just can't come up with a rational argument to counter what he is saying. Chacin could have thrown a perfect game and posted an ERA of 1.85 and he still wouldn't have returned much because of his history of production and injury (and one yr deal)
 
bravos4evr said:
or perhaps you just can't come up with a rational argument to counter what he is saying. Chacin could have thrown a perfect game and posted an ERA of 1.85 and he still wouldn't have returned much because of his history of production and injury (and one yr deal)
Click to expand...

The rational argument is we got a nobody prospect in exchange for a potential 2 WAR pitcher. If we had kept him and gotten nothing, we'd be in no worse shape than we are after having dealt him.
 
bravos4evr said:
or perhaps you just can't come up with a rational argument to counter what he is saying. Chacin could have thrown a perfect game and posted an ERA of 1.85 and he still wouldn't have returned much because of his history of production and injury (and one yr deal)
Click to expand...

I can't completely agree with this. Grilli was going to net us a team's top 10 prospect from a half of year value rebuild. Chacin Grilli I know, but teams will bite on improved results. Now how far would that value have increased.... I don't know... but say he throws 2 complete games (1 down) with a 3.10 ERA in about 12 starts for the Halos.... you don't think a team would give up a B prospect (20 -30 range) for that production the rest of the year and possible a pen option in October?!?
 
bravesfanMatt said:
I can't completely agree with this. Grilli was going to net us a team's top 10 prospect from a half of year value rebuild. Chacin Grilli I know, but teams will bite on improved results. Now how far would that value have increased.... I don't know... but say he throws 2 complete games (1 down) with a 3.10 ERA in about 12 starts for the Halos.... you don't think a team would give up a B prospect (20 -30 range) for that production the rest of the year and possible a pen option in October?!?
Click to expand...

Grilli had several straight years of success as a closer tho. Chacin has had trouble staying on the field and when there, has had mixed results. I was being hyperbolic of course with the perfect game stuff. But does anyone really think keeping him until July 31st would have returned that much more? Maybe instead of Mcreery you get a 24 year old AA pitcher with similar issues. it's not like he was gonna magically produce someone's #10 prospect.

and no, I don't think he returns a prospect of much worth as I bet by July his ERA will be around 4
 
sturg33 said:
The rational argument is we got a nobody prospect in exchange for a potential 2 WAR pitcher. If we had kept him and gotten nothing, we'd be in no worse shape than we are after having dealt him.
Click to expand...

I don't think its rational to assume the guy we got is nobody. We didn't just take whatever they offered. We had the leverage, and he was probably a guy that we picked. He is damn near unhittable when he isn't walking the world.
 
our terrible offense would not have allowed him to pitch two complete games. Our terrible defense would not have allowed him to post a 3.10 ERA. On the Braves, the only place for his value to go was down as it would have been doubtful he would maintain or improve his numbers on this bad hitting, bad fielding team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top