J. D. Martinez

He is one year away from free agency. His 2017 salary makes him a bargain...for 2017.

Beyond that I would guess any extension would pay him something close to market value. So not much surplus value beyond 2017.

In these kinds of deals it is often the extension that kills you.
 
He is one year away from free agency. His 2017 salary makes him a bargain...for 2017.

Beyond that I would guess any extension would pay him something close to market value. So not much surplus value beyond 2017.

In these kinds of deals it is often the extension that kills you.

Another reason the level of arm I would be willing to include would have a lower ceiling than most of our "significant" ones.
 
So we are acquiring him just for 2017 right? Or are we extenting him? Extensions for guys a year from hitting free agency tend to be pretty close to market value.
 
So we are acquiring him just for 2017 right? Or are we extenting him? Extensions for guys a year from hitting free agency tend to be pretty close to market value.

I personally wouldn't want to go down that road unless we extended him - BUT (as others pointed out), that's terribly dangerous too. There's no question (and never has been) that I'm as big a "glass is half-full" guy as anyone here, and I do believe that we're close enough that the RIGHT signing/trade or two combined with a step forward from an arm or two that we already have puts us smack-dab in the mix. I don't disagree that that's a LOT of "ifs", and have never said otherwise. The point is, we've got recent concrete evidence that that COULD happen. There are no guarantees (obviously), but tell me that the Mutts were in a distinctively different position 18 months ago. The only proven high-end starter they had (at that point) was Harvey. Prior to 2015, deGrom had 140.1 IP at the MLB level (Folty logged 123.1 in 2016). Syndergaard hadn't pitched an inning at this level. Neither had Matz. They hadn't acquired Cespedes yet.

This is in no way an attempt to say that Folty, Wisler, and Newcomb are about to take those kinds of steps forward in 2017. What I am saying is that our arms are (or have been) as highly thought of as those were. There's no more reason to think that they CAN'T than there were reasons to think that their guys were going to suddenly hit like they did. The offense the Braves currently have in place is better than what they had in early 2015, and is going to get a shot in the arm with Albies at some point next season. They had d'Arnaud, Duda, Murphy, Flores, Wright, Cuddyer, Lagares, and Granderson to begin the season and improved 11 games between 2014 and the end of 2015.

I defy any of our numbers-based posters to say they saw New York being more than a wildcard contender BEFORE last season started and back it up with numbers. No one saw that coming. That certainly doesn't mean the Braves will take that kind of step either - no question. The point is, this team has more pieces in place now to make that kind of jump than they did then. The stars will have to align next season for the Braves just like they did for the Mutts then.

The situations are really similar if you think about it - there were signs that they could get on a roll if they added a bat (Cespedes) and the faith they had in their Pitchers was rewarded. Our offense made great strides over the last two months of 2016 with little help from the pitching, and closed on an absolute tear. Our "ready" arms don't even have to be nearly as unhittable as theirs' were - just better than they were THIS year. It's a lot to ask, sure - but no more than what was asked when the Mutts made their big jump.

That said, I completely understand those who are so hesitant - and agree with them to a large extent. I'm skeptical as well, and wouldn't want to give up CHUNKS of our future to roll the dice. The thing is, we're in a similar place to the one the Mutts were in - lots of really good pitching "coming", and we have the financial means to add a big piece without mortgaging the entire future. They gave up ONE of their young "Aces" (Fulmer) to get Cespedes. Would I give up Newcomb or Fried to get Martinez? In less than a heartbeat - we'd still have more high-ceiling pitching prospects than anyone else in baseball, AND we might have his bat for years to come. I thought it was really interesting to see Stan Kasten admit what so many here have been saying for a long time - that the playoffs are absolutely a crapshoot...

“It is largely correct that the playoffs are a crapshoot,” Kasten said. “So if you think you can lock something up in just one year by going all in, that is folly. I know our chances of winning a championship are better if we win eight out of 10 division titles.”

Many of the pieces needed to contend for the near future are already in place - Teheran, Freeman, Inciarte, Swanson, Albies, Kemp, a really deep pen, and LOTS of high-ceiling (cheap) arms on the way to keep costs down. Why wait until the monster free-agent class a couple winters from now to add that big piece that may or may not get you over the hump? Some of those arms are going to hit (and hit big) soon. JMO, but if the brass is willing to push some of them - at the right times, of course - I honestly don't see any reason other than catastrophic injuries that the Braves can't make the unexpected leap New York did, and we have a lot more promising prospects in place at the lower levels to help sustain success than they do.

So I guess my answer to "would I extend" Martinez if I got him would be - "maybe". If adding him made things click the way adding Cespedes made the Mutts click, absolutely. There's not likely going to be that kind of impact talent available before the 2019 season. Put him in the middle of the lineup with Freeman and Kemp in 2017, and see what happens. If he performs like most people expect him to, give him a big deal to stay. Offer him market-value like they did Cespedes and see if he's willing to go to a higher bidder with a future that isn't as bright after he spends a season here. Cespedes wasn't.
 
Folty (59th best prospect in MLB at his highest), Wisler (34th at his highest), and Newcomb (23 at his highest, but has taken a step back) have never been anywhere close to as highly thought of as Syndergaard (11th best prospect in all of baseball) or Matz (13th best prospect in all of baseball). DeGrom works... he was only ever in the top 10 in the Mets system... he came out of nowhere.
 
I personally wouldn't want to go down that road unless we extended him - BUT (as others pointed out), that's terribly dangerous too. There's no question (and never has been) that I'm as big a "glass is half-full" guy as anyone here, and I do believe that we're close enough that the RIGHT signing/trade or two combined with a step forward from an arm or two that we already have puts us smack-dab in the mix. I don't disagree that that's a LOT of "ifs", and have never said otherwise. The point is, we've got recent concrete evidence that that COULD happen. There are no guarantees (obviously), but tell me that the Mutts were in a distinctively different position 18 months ago. The only proven high-end starter they had (at that point) was Harvey. Prior to 2015, deGrom had 140.1 IP at the MLB level (Folty logged 123.1 in 2016). Syndergaard hadn't pitched an inning at this level. Neither had Matz. They hadn't acquired Cespedes yet.

This is in no way an attempt to say that Folty, Wisler, and Newcomb are about to take those kinds of steps forward in 2017. What I am saying is that our arms are (or have been) as highly thought of as those were. There's no more reason to think that they CAN'T than there were reasons to think that their guys were going to suddenly hit like they did. The offense the Braves currently have in place is better than what they had in early 2015, and is going to get a shot in the arm with Albies at some point next season. They had d'Arnaud, Duda, Murphy, Flores, Wright, Cuddyer, Lagares, and Granderson to begin the season and improved 11 games between 2014 and the end of 2015.

I defy any of our numbers-based posters to say they saw New York being more than a wildcard contender BEFORE last season started and back it up with numbers. No one saw that coming. That certainly doesn't mean the Braves will take that kind of step either - no question. The point is, this team has more pieces in place now to make that kind of jump than they did then. The stars will have to align next season for the Braves just like they did for the Mutts then.

The situations are really similar if you think about it - there were signs that they could get on a roll if they added a bat (Cespedes) and the faith they had in their Pitchers was rewarded. Our offense made great strides over the last two months of 2016 with little help from the pitching, and closed on an absolute tear. Our "ready" arms don't even have to be nearly as unhittable as theirs' were - just better than they were THIS year. It's a lot to ask, sure - but no more than what was asked when the Mutts made their big jump.

That said, I completely understand those who are so hesitant - and agree with them to a large extent. I'm skeptical as well, and wouldn't want to give up CHUNKS of our future to roll the dice. The thing is, we're in a similar place to the one the Mutts were in - lots of really good pitching "coming", and we have the financial means to add a big piece without mortgaging the entire future. They gave up ONE of their young "Aces" (Fulmer) to get Cespedes. Would I give up Newcomb or Fried to get Martinez? In less than a heartbeat - we'd still have more high-ceiling pitching prospects than anyone else in baseball, AND we might have his bat for years to come. I thought it was really interesting to see Stan Kasten admit what so many here have been saying for a long time - that the playoffs are absolutely a crapshoot...

“It is largely correct that the playoffs are a crapshoot,” Kasten said. “So if you think you can lock something up in just one year by going all in, that is folly. I know our chances of winning a championship are better if we win eight out of 10 division titles.”

Many of the pieces needed to contend for the near future are already in place - Teheran, Freeman, Inciarte, Swanson, Albies, Kemp, a really deep pen, and LOTS of high-ceiling (cheap) arms on the way to keep costs down. Why wait until the monster free-agent class a couple winters from now to add that big piece that may or may not get you over the hump? Some of those arms are going to hit (and hit big) soon. JMO, but if the brass is willing to push some of them - at the right times, of course - I honestly don't see any reason other than catastrophic injuries that the Braves can't make the unexpected leap New York did, and we have a lot more promising prospects in place at the lower levels to help sustain success than they do.

So I guess my answer to "would I extend" Martinez if I got him would be - "maybe". If adding him made things click the way adding Cespedes made the Mutts click, absolutely. There's not likely going to be that kind of impact talent available before the 2019 season. Put him in the middle of the lineup with Freeman and Kemp in 2017, and see what happens. If he performs like most people expect him to, give him a big deal to stay. Offer him market-value like they did Cespedes and see if he's willing to go to a higher bidder with a future that isn't as bright after he spends a season here. Cespedes wasn't.

When it comes to the scenarios you outline, anything is possible. But I think for the purposes of decision making, the front office has to operate in the realm of probabilities rather than possibilities. Citing the Mets of 2015 is like watching a poker player draw an inside straight and concluding hey that's possible. Let me go for that in the next round.
 
Since the thread is about Detroit.

ESPN article they might blow it up.

Have some veteran pieces but big salary.
 
Folty (59th best prospect in MLB at his highest), Wisler (34th at his highest), and Newcomb (23 at his highest, but has taken a step back) have never been anywhere close to as highly thought of as Syndergaard (11th best prospect in all of baseball) or Matz (13th best prospect in all of baseball). DeGrom works... he was only ever in the top 10 in the Mets system... he came out of nowhere.

The similarity with the Mets is there. The Braves approach is to get A LOT of guys with big potential. Not all will make it, but with the quantity and quality that the Braves have assembled, enough will that the possibility is certainly there to have a rotation made up mostly of big young arms like the Mets have developed.
 
The similarity with the Mets is there. The Braves approach is to get A LOT of guys with big potential. Not all will make it, but with the quantity and quality that the Braves have assembled, enough will that the possibility is certainly there to have a rotation made up mostly of big young arms like the Mets have developed.

I'd say the approach is similar... but our guys (at least the older prospects, the ones that were mentioned) are not near the prospects Matz and Syndergaard were... sorry
 
The similarity with the Mets is there. The Braves approach is to get A LOT of guys with big potential. Not all will make it, but with the quantity and quality that the Braves have assembled, enough will that the possibility is certainly there to have a rotation made up mostly of big young arms like the Mets have developed.

Yes and no. Yes maybe when the cohort that pitched in Rome and Rookie ball this past season is close to the majors. No when it comes to the chance that 2017 for the Braves will turn out as 2015 did for the Mets at the major league level. If I am correct with regard to this, getting JD Martinez one year before he hit free agency doesn't make sense.

In general I think the acquisitions we make this off-season should be of the multi-year variety, with emphasis on maintaining financial flexibility beyond 2017.
 
The question for me with Detroit is do they want to blow it up and start over OR are they going to try and shed some payroll but still remain within realistic possibility of competing.

They've got some pieces that could bring them a haul, Verlander, Cabrera, Kinsler, V or JD Martinez, Upton, Zimmerman, etc. Sanchez is the only one who looks like bad money. They might have to send some cash with a guy like Verlander or even Cabrera to get best trade value but they aren't toxic where they would have to unload other talent to get someone to bite.

I could see Boston having interest in either Martinez or Cabrera should Detroit decide to move either. Verlander would also be a fit for teams like Boston, Dodgers, etc. They might could send Zimmerman back to Washington or even Atlanta but his money probably limits his prospect value. Kinsler could be an LA guy. Upton is probably the guy with the least value right now.
 
My reading of the situation in Detroit is they are looking to bring down payroll but they are not looking to blow up the team. I would be surprised if they moved Verlander. But if he is on the market, we should make a bid. I would also have interest in Zimmerman if they are looking to move him. In both cases I would prefer to wait a year before making that kind of trade, but sometimes you have to strike while the iron is hot.
 
I suppose it's time to add JD Martinez to the long list of players with near zero chance of becoming a Brave yet folks insist on cooking up scenarios to get him in Atlanta.

The FO has been very clear with their words and actions that the plan is to build the core of the team from within, and supplement with low cost options until the team is in the midst of contention.
 
When it comes to the scenarios you outline, anything is possible. But I think for the purposes of decision making, the front office has to operate in the realm of probabilities rather than possibilities. Citing the Mets of 2015 is like watching a poker player draw an inside straight and concluding hey that's possible. Let me go for that in the next round.

That's really all the point was - that we're in a similar position. I certainly don't disagree that it's unlikely. Just as Kasten mentions (and the whole reason for the rebuild), the goal is to put yourself in position to make a long run as a contender - even if you're not necessarily the favorite every year. It's also the reason I'd think they'd want to extend ANY significant addition (if one were made) hoping to move the timeline up to make the window longer on the front end WITHOUT including pieces you hope will be important on the back end. The more "untouchable" prospects IMO are the ones at the lower levels - this season's Rome staff, 2016 draftees and international signings, etc.. I do think that if the "right" situation presented itself that guys like Newcomb/Sims/Ellis/Ruiz/Povse/Weigel could be included in the right deal - but definitely not a blockbuster that would have to include a couple of them PLUS any of our more "off-limits" guys.

We're all well aware of statements made about not making HUGE trades involving big chunks of our high-end talent, but ruling out deals that wouldn't involve more than one piece that could bring in players that could help now (rather than 3 years down the road) is simply short-sighted. Coppy and the brass are just doing their jobs when they say they don't expect to make significant acquisitions via trade, but if you read their statements carefully you'll notice they don't rule them out (even though they'd have to be unexpected situations). They've learned the hard way that they have to do a better job of managing fan expectations following the confusion over 2017 being some kind of target date. They're much more careful now about making definitive statements - even broad ones. Backed into a corner, saying the team COULD BE competitive in 2017 didn't make that their target date - but lots of people took it that way. No one paid attention to the "could be", they only focused on the 2017 part.

The problem with making a blanket statement that says "they aren't going to do such-and-such" is that there are too many variables that can't be accounted for. You just don't know when another team (with a piece you might be really interested in adding) might unexpectedly change course. All the talk about what the Tigers are going to do is speculation at this point, but if they really are going to reboot and Avila has been told to slash salary, targeting Martinez would make sense - only IF Markakis could be included or moved in the deal AND the prospect cost was "right". That's a situation that no one foresaw, hence the reason for never saying "never" - no matter how unlikely a deal is.
 
The question for me with Detroit is do they want to blow it up and start over OR are they going to try and shed some payroll but still remain within realistic possibility of competing.

They've got some pieces that could bring them a haul, Verlander, Cabrera, Kinsler, V or JD Martinez, Upton, Zimmerman, etc. Sanchez is the only one who looks like bad money. They might have to send some cash with a guy like Verlander or even Cabrera to get best trade value but they aren't toxic where they would have to unload other talent to get someone to bite.

I could see Boston having interest in either Martinez or Cabrera should Detroit decide to move either. Verlander would also be a fit for teams like Boston, Dodgers, etc. They might could send Zimmerman back to Washington or even Atlanta but his money probably limits his prospect value. Kinsler could be an LA guy. Upton is probably the guy with the least value right now.

Exactly - and the only reason I even mentioned some potential pieces. Without knowing what the mandate for Avila is, we can't know what pieces he HAS to move - if any. Not having more than a year of control over Martinez and Sanchez being "dead money" just leads to putting them together - a la Kimbrel/Melvin.
 
I don't see Zimmerman going anywhere. He is in year two a back-loaded contract and his value is low coming off injury. I think they keep him for 2017 and revisit trading him next offseason when his salary jumps from 17M to 24M. Also Avila is the one who signed him and they forfeited a 2nd round pick to do so.

With Zimmerman, Fullmer, Norris and whomever they cannot peddle away out of Sanchez/Pelfrey they have a foursome that would allow them to trade Verlander. If they trade JD they could get a good young pitcher to throw in to the rotation as well.
 
I suppose it's time to add JD Martinez to the long list of players with near zero chance of becoming a Brave yet folks insist on cooking up scenarios to get him in Atlanta.

The FO has been very clear with their words and actions that the plan is to build the core of the team from within, and supplement with low cost options until the team is in the midst of contention.

Thanks for reminding us that we shouldn't discuss scenarios on fan forums.
 
Back
Top