50PoundHead
Hessmania Forever
It's kind of ridiculous the way they are scouting kids younger and younger, but this looks like a 6 WAR player to me.
Heyward to Cubs for less than $200M
- Thread starter Enscheff
- Start date
It's kind of ridiculous the way they are scouting kids younger and younger, but this looks like a 6 WAR player to me.
I'm not completely opposed to giving up Inciarte in a deal and getting Soler in return. The issue is just what both are worth and whether Inciarte is a real piece for us moving forward.
I think Inciarte is absolutely a real piece and should only be moved if we clearly win the deal and get more than one potential future need in return. That may not be possible, and if it's not, I keep him.
I personally don't think Mallex is a true starting-caliber CF in that I don't think he's going to be worth more than 2 WAR at his absolute peak. So we could start him, but once he hits arbitration, his value diminishes quite a bit. Inciarte is a clearly better option moving forward to me.
And I think some people are putting too much emphasis on having a big bat in the middle of the lineup. It's not that it's not important or wouldn't help a lot, it's just that I don't think it's necessary. I put far more importance on making sure you have solid bats throughout your lineup. So Swanson and Albies are absolutely potential impact bats to me; they both have a chance to be very good offensively. And Inciarte, while perhaps not an impact bat, is definitely above-average offensively as a CF. That's an answer for us long-term, so if we move him, especially if we're not getting a clear answer in return (Soler is not that yet), we better be getting 2 guys who can legitimately be answers. So if we also got a Happ or McKinney or Contreras in the deal, then I'm ok moving Inciarte. But not before then.
I think Inciarte is absolutely a real piece and should only be moved if we clearly win the deal and get more than one potential future need in return. That may not be possible, and if it's not, I keep him.
I personally don't think Mallex is a true starting-caliber CF in that I don't think he's going to be worth more than 2 WAR at his absolute peak. So we could start him, but once he hits arbitration, his value diminishes quite a bit. Inciarte is a clearly better option moving forward to me.
And I think some people are putting too much emphasis on having a big bat in the middle of the lineup. It's not that it's not important or wouldn't help a lot, it's just that I don't think it's necessary. I put far more importance on making sure you have solid bats throughout your lineup. So Swanson and Albies are absolutely potential impact bats to me; they both have a chance to be very good offensively. And Inciarte, while perhaps not an impact bat, is definitely above-average offensively as a CF. That's an answer for us long-term, so if we move him, especially if we're not getting a clear answer in return (Soler is not that yet), we better be getting 2 guys who can legitimately be answers. So if we also got a Happ or McKinney or Contreras in the deal, then I'm ok moving Inciarte. But not before then.
chop2chip
Well-known member
I'm not entirely sold on the "Upton is a bad defender" narrative. Sure, his Fangraph summary defensive value is negative, but when you look at the details you see a guy who still has good range and who has only had one year where he was negative in DRS (he was +8 this past season). Basically all of his negative value comes from his arm and that seems like the type of thing that could age well as he improves his decision making, since there doesn't seem to be problem with his arm strength.
At worse he's average, maybe slight below average in the aggregate, but with some slight upside if he can improve his outfield throws.
I agree that Mallex is not something to get excited about. I see him as an acceptable solution in CF until he starts to get expensive. I imagine he will be a non-tender candidate the minute he becomes arbitration eligible. However, assuming Mallex ends up being a 2 WAR guy that gets non-tendered before his arb-2 season, I would rather have Mallex and Soler (1-5+ WAR potential) than Mallex and Inciarte (2-3 WAR potential).
I also agree that more than Soler needs to be in the deal. No idea what that piece would/should be, but as of now Inciarte is undoubtedly the better player, and the extra piece the Cubs send over needs to reflect that fact. Probably another pitcher like Underwood would make some amount of sense.
Details of Heyward's contract have been released. Will make 15 million in 2016 and 21.5 million in 2017 and 2018. Considering he's likely to opt-out after 2018, I'd say it's an excellent deal for both sides. Cubs will get the remainder of his peak seasons at reasonable rates and then let some other team sign him after 2018 and let them pay for his decline years.
We mostly agree, but I would much rather get another bat, specifically an OF, over a pitcher, especially given Chicago's surplus there.
If you honestly are trying to compare pedro alvarez and soler then I might as well give up. There is absolutely NOTHING similar about either of those players. This is a lost cause. You don't have to want to trade Inciarte and you don't have to like Soler. He's far from a perfect player. But comparing those two players is insane
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
do explain.. Pedro was the 6th rated prospect when he debuted.. he is known for power.. sounds about right to me..
and the point of the post and you refuse to acknowledge without getting your feelings hurt, is that Soler offers one thing right now.. POWER... his minor league numbers showed promise.. I like the guy.. but you seem to discount the other parts of the game that have soooo many people worried.. But you have this crystal ball that says he will be banging 45 homers while hitting around .280...
They do profile pretty similarly, I'm not really sure what that response was about. Alvarez showed a slightly higher BB rate in the minors consistently than Soler, while Soler struck out a bit less. Otherwise, they seem similar.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
But the Cubs won't mind either because if he is healthy enough to opt out, then he'll be well worth that 26M to them.
That being said, the wording of the bonus is so weird. So it no longer being defered if he opts out means he gets it all that year?
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
they are very similar in the regard of suspect defense and great power.. Soler also showed a bit of a higher avg in the mionrs..
both debuted about the same.. again Soler showed a bit better of an average but less ISO.. both around that 30% K rate.. I don't think he looked at Pedro's numbers coming out and I was comparing 'bust' pedro to 'potential' Soler..
Yes, if he opt outs the $20 million is no longer deferred and is paid immediately.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
I decided to look at this. THere's a trick with this of course it's that Soler played in Cuba and didn't hit the minors until 20, Alvarez went to school and didn't hit the minors until 22. So you'd expect a bit more polish from Alvarez.
In the minors Soler compiled a 17.1 K% 10.8 BB% a very high (though my math could be off, I'll be applying my method to both hitters so it should be wrong equally) .330 BABIP and a .239 iso. Alvarez compiled a 24.6 K% 12.9 BB% a (also very high) .335 BABIP and a .238 iso. SO I don't think it's 100% fair to compare the 2 overall. Because you'd expect at a more physically mature age, Alvarez to have more strikezone command and power but they really didn't show it.
That being said, if Soler busts to the same tune as Alvarez, it's still a net positive player.
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
that is what I am saying.. Soler is a good prospect.. I have been on record many times saying trading JT for Soler is more acceptable for me because we are trading from a position of strength to one of weakness.. trade Inciarte for Soler is too risky for me.. My point was there are many red flags that scare me on Soler.. I feel a more diverse trade with more parts is a smarter move..
Seems that when I pointed these flaws out that scare me, I was corrected because Soler has 30 homer power.. I simply pointed out that power bats that only have hitting as their upside are risky... Sure if Soler produced like Pedro did for 5 years.. he would be a mildly productive player.. but we wouldn't look back and say.. 'Sure glad we traded that solid OF who could play defense for Pedro 2.0"
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
True there's a risk. Inciarte we've seen his ceiling almost certainly. Averagish offensively and excellent in the field. A poor man's Andrelton Simmons perhaps. Maybe the Omar Infante without the utility value would be a n accurate comp.
I don't think Inciarte is someone I'd cry over losing. Looking at his minor league numbers I don't see much offensive potential from him. I see a lot of offensive risk though. His minor league iso was about .090 and that includes time in some pretty offensive leagues. I think his advantage is similar to TLS, he doesn't K much and walks pretty well. So he should hit for a respectable average and have a solid OBP. I just asusme he's gonna have no power for us. I'd rather gamble on Mallex myself. I know the risk is way higher, because he strikes out more. But I'm willing to take that gamble because of his speed. That's where I see Incarte being hurt, he hasn't shown excellent skills in the basepaths.
I don't think Inciarte is someone I'd cry over losing. Looking at his minor league numbers I don't see much offensive potential from him. I see a lot of offensive risk though. His minor league iso was about .090 and that includes time in some pretty offensive leagues. I think his advantage is similar to TLS, he doesn't K much and walks pretty well. So he should hit for a respectable average and have a solid OBP. I just asusme he's gonna have no power for us. I'd rather gamble on Mallex myself. I know the risk is way higher, because he strikes out more. But I'm willing to take that gamble because of his speed. That's where I see Incarte being hurt, he hasn't shown excellent skills in the basepaths.
That is a very disingenuous comparison of the two. Their minor league stats:
Soler: .303/.381/.542, 17.1% strikeout rate, 10.8% walk rate
Alvarez: .278/.372/516, 24.6% strikeout rate, 12.9% walk rate
You can't just handwave a 7.5% difference in strikeout rate as "Soler struck out a bit less." He struck out significantly less - over the course of a full season that's 38-45 more strikeouts for Alvarez. The 25 points of batting average not insignificant either. Alvarez walked more, yes, but statheads and scoutheads alike will tell you strikeouts are a better predictor of hitting success in the majors than walks.
Not saying Soler's a sure thing, but aside from the superficial observation that he and Alvarez both hit for power and play bad defense, they're not at all similar.
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
absolutely.. I think we need to sell high on Inciarte while we can. .not that I think he declines much next year.. but I do think there is a higher probability we don't see any more improvement from him. That being said, I am not going to cry if we don't move him.. he is CHEAP and controllable for years.. he is solid defensively and will remain that way.. he has offensive value and could improve.. The worst that would happen is he regresses offensively and loses value.. but that is not much risk as we don't have prospects or money tied up him.. so we only lose the "what if" with him..
Not at all similar? I mean, look at those numbers...I still see that as a reasonable comparison. It may not be the absolute best comparison, and 'a bit less' may not have properly represented the difference in K rates, but the K rate is really the only divider...it explains a lot of the BA difference, which explains the SLG difference.
And Soler's K rate started to climb as he hit the higher levels and then stood at 30% last year, which is where Alvarez's was initially in the majors as well.
I just don't see how that's a laughable comparison.