Grilli Close To Being Moved???

Status
Not open for further replies.
Enscheff said:
Grilli alone isn't going to bring back a prospect good enough to make it worth declaring yourself "sellers" if you still have even an outside chance at the postseason. Grilli is not getting Pentecost from the Jays. He is not getting Guerrero from LA. He is not getting Baez from the Cubs. He is not getting anyone that could realistically contribute to a championship caliber team, so I am against trading him away until the season is very clearly lost...and it isn't...yet.

However, Grilli might be good enough to bring back a talent like Pentecost or Guerrero or Baez if he is paired with some other pieces like AJ, JJ, Uribe and KJ. He might be good enough to make a team take on CJ's contract. I would be all for moves like those once the playoff hopes are clearly dashed, but I would never be OK with trading Grilli (who can contribute in 2016) for some C prospect that will barely make the Braves top 25 prospects list, no matter how bad the team is this year.
Click to expand...

Not sure if you're referring to Austin Barnes as that prospect, but if so you might consider that he's the #9 Catcher prospect according to Callis and Mayo (MLB Pipeline) and is hitting .300/.381/.483/.864 with 8 HRs, 11 2Bs, 1 3B, and 9 SBs (with a 26/24 BB/K Ratio) in AA. His profile with the bat is almost exactly what the organization prizes with the new Seitzer philosophy in place. Their scouting report on Barnes states...

"Barnes focuses on making contact and using the middle of the field, an approach that has helped him hit for average throughout the Minors. He walked more than he struck out in his first four pro seasons and projects as a high on-base percentage guy with gap power. He runs better than most catchers and has good instincts on the bases."
 
clvclv said:
Not sure if you're referring to Austin Barnes as that prospect, but if so you might consider that he's the #9 Catcher prospect according to Callis and Mayo (MLB Pipeline) and is hitting .300/.381/.483/.864 with 8 HRs, 11 2Bs, 1 3B, and 9 SBs (with a 26/24 BB/K Ratio) in AA. His profile with the bat is almost exactly what the organization prizes with the new Seitzer philosophy in place. Their scouting report on Barnes states...

"Barnes focuses on making contact and using the middle of the field, an approach that has helped him hit for average throughout the Minors. He walked more than he struck out in his first four pro seasons and projects as a high on-base percentage guy with gap power. He runs better than most catchers and has good instincts on the bases."
Click to expand...

Sign me up!
 
clvclv said:
And IF it does, you're looking at a ceiling of Rafael Furcal as a MI. Again, nothing close to what Freeman's ceiling was (and still is). There's absolutely nothing bad about that whatsoever - pairing him with Simmons, Peterson, or Peraza up the middle would give you a classic middle infield combination - but let's not get nuts here.

Comparing Albies to Freeman as a prospect is something Shanks would do simply because he's high on Law or someone else's list.
Click to expand...

There are so many variables in the prospect evaluation process, I don't see the point of comparing Freeman and Albies -- at all, on any level.

My comment wasn't really directed to that discussion, per se, but towards those who were trying to use Albies' apparent lack of 'pop' to denigrate his value/ranking/ceiling in the context of the debate.

Dream scenario: Albies is a perennial .300+ hitter with strong on-base skills, elite defense, speed, and cost control.

In terms of potential major league impact, it's not an incredulous proposition to imagine Albies owning more value as a Major Leaguer than Freeman (for a wide variety of circumstances, including many of the aforementioned [such as the dearth of quality MI position players] and things we already know about Freeman, like his rough defense, middling power, contract, etc.

But, again, this is basically a lame conversation to even be having about an 18 year old prospect versus an established premium MLB 1B.
 
To move him right now we need to get more then a marginal prospect. I understand if come the deadline we take what we can get but don't settle this early.
 
clvclv said:
And IF it does, you're looking at a ceiling of Rafael Furcal as a MI. Again, nothing close to what Freeman's ceiling was (and still is). There's absolutely nothing bad about that whatsoever - pairing him with Simmons, Peterson, or Peraza up the middle would give you a classic middle infield combination - but let's not get nuts here.

Comparing Albies to Freeman as a prospect is something Shanks would do simply because he's high on Law or someone else's list.
Click to expand...

First, why is his ceiling Furcal? That's asinine.

Second, have you seen Furcal's WAR numbers? There's no guarantee Freeman becomes more than that.
 
smootness said:
First, why is his ceiling Furcal? That's asinine.

Second, have you seen Furcal's WAR numbers? There's no guarantee Freeman becomes more than that.
Click to expand...

Yes I have. The difference is I don't put more stock in them than watching the player play. Awfully dangerous to become too influenced by either side - the spreadsheets or your eyes - I prefer to weight both relatively equally.

Having seen Albies several times, I'm pretty comfortable to comparing him with Furcal - same general approach at the plate, same game-breaking speed, very good at reading Pitchers' moves to the plate. Furcal had a much stronger arm and a little better range, and eventually developed 10-15 HR power.

Again, IF Albies develops that much power he's going to be one heck of a player. The same thing can be said for Peraza. My point is to be careful about making projections based on a hitter's performance in the Sally League - it's more-or-less the east coast version of the PCL.
 
clvclv said:
And IF it does, you're looking at a ceiling of Rafael Furcal as a MI. Again, nothing close to what Freeman's ceiling was (and still is). There's absolutely nothing bad about that whatsoever - pairing him with Simmons, Peterson, or Peraza up the middle would give you a classic middle infield combination - but let's not get nuts here.

Comparing Albies to Freeman as a prospect is something Shanks would do simply because he's high on Law or someone else's list.
Click to expand...

Furcal was an elite SS for awhile and if not for injuries, you're looking at guy with a career path pretty similar to Jimmy Rollins. It's hard to compare players at different positions, but suffice to say that Freeman should consider himself lucky to be held in the same regard as Rollins when all is said and done.

If Albies is anything close to Rollins or Furcal, you're looking at an elite SS. An elite SS can certainly be just as valuable as an elite 1B (and Freeman is not elite at this time).
 
clvclv said:
Yes I have. The difference is I don't put more stock in them than watching the player play. Awfully dangerous to become too influenced by either side - the spreadsheets or your eyes - I prefer to weight both relatively equally.

Having seen Albies several times, I'm pretty comfortable to comparing him with Furcal - same general approach at the plate, same game-breaking speed, very good at reading Pitchers' moves to the plate. Furcal had a much stronger arm and a little better range, and eventually developed 10-15 HR power.

Again, IF Albies develops that much power he's going to be one heck of a player. The same thing can be said for Peraza. My point is to be careful about making projections based on a hitter's performance in the Sally League - it's more-or-less the east coast version of the PCL.
Click to expand...

I can't say I quite understand what watching both of them play means in this context. When you're trying to compare the value of an impact bat at 1B vs. an all-around talent at SS, I don't see how you can use watching the games as an argument. Both are going to provide you with some amount of utility, be it through their power or through things like defense and speed. Determining which is more valuable would seem like it'd have to involve some sort of analytical argument.
 
As far as what Grilli should bring in return, a good place to start is to look at what Soria and Street brought back in return last year around the deadline.

Soria brought back two guys who ended up being rated as top 100 players in BA at the start of this year.

Street was attached to another reliever prospect, so it's not quite as easy to compare, but the Pads received 1 pre-2014 top 100 prospect, a mediocre SP prospect, a talented SS prospect, and a relief prospect.

If we can receive similar value to either of these trades, I think there is no question that you have to trade him, regardless if you think we have a shot at the playoffs this yr or not.
 
Carp said:
As far as what Grilli should bring in return, a good place to start is to look at what Soria and Street brought back in return last year around the deadline.

Soria brought back two guys who ended up being rated as top 100 players in BA at the start of this year.

Street was attached to another reliever prospect, so it's not quite as easy to compare, but the Pads received 1 pre-2014 top 100 prospect, a mediocre SP prospect, a talented SS prospect, and a relief prospect.

If we can receive similar value to either of these trades, I think there is no question that you have to trade him, regardless if you think we have a shot at the playoffs this yr or not.
Click to expand...

Good point. I don't think Grilli will return as much, partly because both could be perceived to be having even better years last year than Grilli now, but mostly because of age and likelihood to sustain it.

But if we package Grilli along with something else, we could definitely end up with something pretty nice.
 
striker42 said:
It makes no sense to trade Grilli for a marginal prospect. None. It's not like he's in the last year of his deal and we're nowhere near contention. We don't have to trade him. Maybe we compete next year and he's setting up for a new closer. He could still be of use.

So I wouldn't trade him unless I got value back. No one would give up their top guy but maybe we can nab someone's #4 or #5 prospect, especially if they're blocked.
Click to expand...

We arent near contention and Grilli is 38. We have several replacements.
 
Carp said:
Furcal was an elite SS for awhile and if not for injuries, you're looking at guy with a career path pretty similar to Jimmy Rollins. It's hard to compare players at different positions, but suffice to say that Freeman should consider himself lucky to be held in the same regard as Rollins when all is said and done.

If Albies is anything close to Rollins or Furcal, you're looking at an elite SS. An elite SS can certainly be just as valuable as an elite 1B (and Freeman is not elite at this time).
Click to expand...

No one can argue with that. The problem is Albies is an 18 year old kid in Lo-A, and has much further to go to become anything like either of the SSs mentioned.

Like I said, let's just wait until we see what he does outside of Sally League parks before anointing him as an elite player. He's definitely off to a great start and I hope he gets there as much as anybody, but more than a few "experts" and a huge number of posters here (including myself) have had to eat crow after making similar comparisons about players named Wilson Betemit, Andy Marte, and Jordan Schafer just a little too early.
 
mqt said:
I can't say I quite understand what watching both of them play means in this context. When you're trying to compare the value of an impact bat at 1B vs. an all-around talent at SS, I don't see how you can use watching the games as an argument. Both are going to provide you with some amount of utility, be it through their power or through things like defense and speed. Determining which is more valuable would seem like it'd have to involve some sort of analytical argument.
Click to expand...

Which is why I said that I only use the analytics to help back up what I feel I'm seeing or to point out why I might be missing something altogether. For example, I didn't need all the new defensive metrics to prove to me that a SS with great range and a great arm is very valuable, not do I need them to tell me that Simmons is the best defensive SS I've seen in 40 years - I can "see" that.

Spreadsheets and metrics help to put what you see in context - not the other way around. If Albies reaches the majors, hits .300/.360 with 10-15 HRs, and at least remains as good defensively I'll be the first one in line to compare him to elite SSs. Until he gets much closer to that level, all the projections and rankings are pretty much worthless. As someone mentioned earlier, Freeman had an ISO higher than .200 when he played at the same level (and was 1 year older) - if he's not an elite 1B (and I agree he's not), what guarantee does anyone have that Albies will be elite 3-4 years from now?
 
clvclv said:
Not sure if you're referring to Austin Barnes as that prospect, but if so you might consider that he's the #9 Catcher prospect according to Callis and Mayo (MLB Pipeline) and is hitting .300/.381/.483/.864 with 8 HRs, 11 2Bs, 1 3B, and 9 SBs (with a 26/24 BB/K Ratio) in AA. His profile with the bat is almost exactly what the organization prizes with the new Seitzer philosophy in place. Their scouting report on Barnes states...

"Barnes focuses on making contact and using the middle of the field, an approach that has helped him hit for average throughout the Minors. He walked more than he struck out in his first four pro seasons and projects as a high on-base percentage guy with gap power. He runs better than most catchers and has good instincts on the bases."
Click to expand...

Nope, I meant C as in lesser than a B or A prospect. If this Barnes guy is that good then there is no way he is the return for Grilli.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top