GM/Winter Meetings Thread

I hope Hart does not conflate moving Melvin and his contract with upgrading our situation in center. The two are not the same. It may well be that we can't move Melvin. That should not preclude trying to find an upgrade in center. That's one of the subtle little things about the Heyward trade I didn't like. It removed our best internal option for upgrading in center.
 
nsacpi said:
I hope Hart does not conflate moving Melvin and his contract with upgrading our situation in center. The two are not the same. It may well be that we can't move Melvin. That should not preclude trying to find an upgrade in center. That's one of the subtle little things about the Heyward trade I didn't like. It removed our best internal option for upgrading in center.
Click to expand...

They are not the same, but Heyward wasn't going to be here in 2016. Getting disgruntled about that move is shortsighted unless I am missing something.
 
Tapate50 said:
They are not the same, but Heyward wasn't going to be here in 2016. Getting disgruntled about that move is shortsighted unless I am missing something.
Click to expand...

There are a few things about the Braves situation and the state of the pitching and hitting markets that I think should factor into our off-season strategy. I've discussed them elsewhere but I'll recap briefly.

1) We have what I've called a strategic conundrum with respect to our lineup in the sense we currently have four guys (Melvin, CJ, Bethancourt, Simmons) with low to very low OBP projections. You can make a case for some of those players based on various criteria. But carrying four in the lineup is likely a bridge too far. We need to populate our roster (and farm system) with alternatives. Center is really the most logical place where you want some alternatives. As I mentioned it is a subtle point, but moving Heyward hurts in that regard. I don't know what the offers were for Justin, but I would have rather moved him for this and other reasons.

2) We are seeing some confirmation with the early signings focused on hitters (and at very high prices), but it seemed likely going into this off-season that pitching would be plentiful relative to hitting. Moreover, it seemed likely that teams that waited until deep into the off-season to acquire pitching would find some bargains. We needed a couple starters going into the off-season. No doubt about that. But the way the market is set up, patience is likely to be rewarded for teams looking for pitching. And we really didn't show that. I think waiting would have netted us the pitchers we need at a lower price than we paid for Shelby Miller.
 
Mark Bowman of MLB.com reports that the Braves have discussed a two-year deal with Kris Medlen.

A non-tender candidate, Medlen is making his way back from a second Tommy John surgery. He's projected to make around $5.8 million through the arbitration process, so a two-year deal (or a one-year deal with an option) could be a nice compromise.
 
Tapate50 said:
Mark Bowman of MLB.com reports that the Braves have discussed a two-year deal with Kris Medlen.

A non-tender candidate, Medlen is making his way back from a second Tommy John surgery. He's projected to make around $5.8 million through the arbitration process, so a two-year deal (or a one-year deal with an option) could be a nice compromise.
Click to expand...

Medlen is one of my favorite Braves, but I think it makes more sense to tender Beachy. For two reasons. One is Beachy is under control for two more years, so that gives us some upside, while preserving the flexibility to let him go after 2015 if he fails to recover (as we just did with Venters). Second it would only cost about 1.5M to hold on to Beachy.
 
nsacpi said:
I hope Hart does not conflate moving Melvin and his contract with upgrading our situation in center. The two are not the same. It may well be that we can't move Melvin. That should not preclude trying to find an upgrade in center. That's one of the subtle little things about the Heyward trade I didn't like. It removed our best internal option for upgrading in center.
Click to expand...

I can see both your's and Tapate50's point on Heyward. The question on Heyward--in the event he got to pricey, which will always be debatable--is that he could have slid over the CF and given us a one-year bridge at the position while allowing the dust to settle elsewhere. It's rolling the dice to some extent, but being a GM is always rolling the dice to some extent.
 
50PoundHead said:
I can see both your's and Tapate50's point on Heyward. The question on Heyward--in the event he got to pricey, which will always be debatable--is that he could have slid over the CF and given us a one-year bridge at the position while allowing the dust to settle elsewhere. It's rolling the dice to some extent, but being a GM is always rolling the dice to some extent.
Click to expand...

I guess my thing is Miller and Jenkins is worth more than the 1st rd pick for sure. For nsacpi, he would opt with the pick instead I guess.
 
Tapate50 said:
I guess my thing is Miller and Jenkins is worth more than the 1st rd pick for sure. For nsacpi, he would opt with the pick instead I guess.
Click to expand...

Yeah. It all boils down to projected return and that likely figured foremost in the front office's decision. Whether or not it was warranted and reasonalbe, Wren's signing of Melvin Upton has turned out to be a millstone around the franchise's neck.
 
50PoundHead said:
Yeah. It all boils down to projected return and that likely figured foremost in the front office's decision. Whether or not it was warranted and reasonalbe, Wren's signing of Melvin Upton has turned out to be a millstone around the franchise's neck.
Click to expand...

It sure has.
 
Tapate50 said:
I guess my thing is Miller and Jenkins is worth more than the 1st rd pick for sure. For nsacpi, he would opt with the pick instead I guess.
Click to expand...

I think the pick is worth about 2 WAR. Miller and Jenkins are worth more than that.

But aren't we forgetting something? A season of production from Heyward at $8.3 mil. During an off-season when the going price for free agent position players is around 10M/win so far. Heyward has been a 5+ win player in two of his past three seasons. So the Cards are also getting 5 projected wins for the going salary of one (or a projected surplus of about 4 wins). The overall value for them then is 6 wins (the four from Heyward in 2015 plus the draft pick). Will Miller and Jenkins generate a surplus of 6 wins or more over their years of contractual control. It is possible. But not exactly a slam dunk.
 
nsacpi said:
I think the pick is worth about 2 WAR. Miller and Jenkins are worth more than that.

But aren't we forgetting something? A season of production from Heyward at $8.3 mil. During an off-season when the going price for free agent position players is around 10M/win so far. Heyward has been a 5+ win player in two of his past three seasons. So the Cards are also getting 5 projected wins for the going salary of one (or a projected surplus of about 4 wins). The overall value for them then is 6 wins (the four from Heyward in 2015 plus the draft pick). Will Miller and Jenkins generate a surplus of 6 wins or more over their years of contractual control. It is possible. But not exactly a slam dunk.
Click to expand...

While I agree that you have to account for Heyward's year of production, I think assuming it's a "slam dunk" for Heyward to be a 5+ WAR player while saying it's "possible" for Miller+Jenkins to generate 6 wins or more over their 10 years of control seems silly to me. I mean ZiPS projects Miller to have nearly a 3 WAR next season and he's being paid the league minimum for that level of production. Yes, it's entirely possible that Miller doesn't hit 3 WAR next season or the year(s) after but I think the Braves won the upside in this trade with Miller and Jenkins.
 
Chris Cotillo
@ChrisCotillo
While #Braves have discussed a multi-year deal with Medlen, no talks with Beachy about 2-year deal. Expected to tender both, per source.
 
ramadon101 said:
While I agree that you have to account for Heyward's year of production, I think assuming it's a "slam dunk" for Heyward to be a 5+ WAR player while saying it's "possible" for Miller+Jenkins to generate 6 wins or more over their 10 years of control seems silly to me. I mean ZiPS projects Miller to have nearly a 3 WAR next season and he's being paid the league minimum for that level of production. Yes, it's entirely possible that Miller doesn't hit 3 WAR next season or the year(s) after but I think the Braves won the upside in this trade with Miller and Jenkins.
Click to expand...

This is going to the on-going tug-of-war and I think it boils down to whether or not the brass thought the Braves were serious contenders in 2015. If not, trading Heyward makes a lot more sense than it would if the guys upstairs thought we were contenders. I frankly don't know if we are contenders or not. The question to me is: "Did we overachieve in 2013 or underachieve in 2014?" How one answers that question is probably the biggest determinant in their view on the Braves' decision to trade Heyward.
 
ramadon101 said:
While I agree that you have to account for Heyward's year of production, I think assuming it's a "slam dunk" for Heyward to be a 5+ WAR player while saying it's "possible" for Miller+Jenkins to generate 6 wins or more over their 10 years of control seems silly to me. I mean ZiPS projects Miller to have nearly a 3 WAR next season and he's being paid the league minimum for that level of production. Yes, it's entirely possible that Miller doesn't hit 3 WAR next season or the year(s) after but I think the Braves won the upside in this trade with Miller and Jenkins.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Different people will have different views as to what is likely from Heyward, Miller, and Jenkins.

Steamer projects Jason at 5.0 WAR in 2015.

They project Miller at 1.0 in 2015 (which I happen to think is low). Btw the comp in each case is what I call "surplus value" wins minus what you are paying. For 2015 it is mostly surplus value for Miller given he is pre arb. The rough rule seems to be that in year one of arb you get paid about a quarter of your expected production, in year 2 about half and in year 3 about three quarters. So collectively on average arb players get paid half their expected production. So for Miller to generate say 4 WAR of surplus value in his arb years he would have to be an 8 WAR player during this period. Hope that makes sense.
 
Hawk said:
$10.5MM

This is a good thing.
Click to expand...

Yea, it is good that the contenders lost out on Hunter. Surprising too as he was quoted as wanting to sign with a contender and leaning towards Texas, etc. That is also the type of deal the Braves should consider this year given the rebuild situation. It isn't too much money and only a year for a good stop-gap option.
 
Dodgers trade FOR an outfielder, Chris Heisey. Dealt Reds pitcher Matt Magill.
 
Braves1976 said:
Yea, it is good that the contenders lost out on Hunter. Surprising too as he was quoted as wanting to sign with a contender and leaning towards Texas, etc. That is also the type of deal the Braves should consider this year given the rebuild situation. It isn't too much money and only a year for a good stop-gap option.
Click to expand...

And the Twins can likely move him at the deadline for prospects.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top