Kimbrel: Yea or Nay?

Enscheff said:
We should be past the point of discussing available payroll in terms of "so and so is leaving, so they have X dollars to spend....derp!". Try to be better than Bowman, mmkay?
Click to expand...


Ok, but I did that literally not at all.

I'm aware that BRef is an approximation.

Where does your spreadsheet suggest the Braves will be payroll wise after arbitration assuming they pickup Markakis and Flowers' options but decline Teheran. I'm happy to use that number if it will make you happy.
 
nsacpi said:
We can assume he and Teheran are not. My point is that under that assumption, we can't fold all three of Kimbrel, Donaldson and Grandal into a 120M opening day payroll. So the FO should think long and hard about bringing Kimbrel in on a deal that goes beyond this season.
Click to expand...

I think Grandal is unlikely anyways. More likely will see Mac and Flowers part deux if they hold up well this year.

More interested in seeing what we do for the OF. Do we bring trade Ender and go with Acuna, Riley, and Neck? Or do we keep Ender and find a more long term solution to RF/LF? Gotta figure Pache or Waters are in the long term plans for CF and should be ready come late 2020 or early 2021, so I think the more likely approach is to trade Ender and go with the current OF for 1 year. Also a chance Duvall could factor into these plans if he gets recalled and proves his AAA performance is legit.

I think we're more likely to make a big trade for a TOR pitcher than anything else.
 
nsacpi said:
So do we price Kimbrel based on his regular season value (WAR like any other player). Or does he get paid based on the value that top closers are supposed to generate in the post season.
Click to expand...

I would do 3/35.

7 million for remainder of this year and 14 million per for the next 2. May be give him an opt-out if helps close the deal.
 
Carp said:
More interested in seeing what we do for the OF. Do we bring trade Ender and go with Acuna, Riley, and Neck? Or do we keep Ender and find a more long term solution to RF/LF? Gotta figure Pache or Waters are in the long term plans for CF and should be ready come late 2020 or early 2021, so I think the more likely approach is to trade Ender and go with the current OF for 1 year. Also a chance Duvall could factor into these plans if he gets recalled and proves his AAA performance is legit.
Click to expand...

The most likely scenario for the outfield imo is we keep what we got (including Inciarte). He would be the fourth outfielder but play a bit more than the typical fourth outfielder with Riley spelling Donaldson some at third. This is the scenario where we continue to go cheap with McCann/Flowers behind the plate.

If we try for all three of Grandal/Kimbrel/Donaldson in 2020, then Teheran and Inciarte have to be moved.
 
Last edited:
Carp said:
I think we're more likely to make a big trade for a TOR pitcher than anything else.
Click to expand...

This I think would be a yuge mistake. Mid market teams really should not do this. Especially since we have thrown so many resources (draft picks, etc) at trying to develop a homegrown pitching staff. The whole point of doing this is to avoid the cost and risk of trying to acquire a TOR guy.

Btw there is a different kind of pitching trade which I would not be opposed to. Acquiring someone who was once a TOR guy but who is still very good and who only has a year or two of contractual obligation left. Like the Astros did with Verlander.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jaw
nsacpi said:
This I think would be a yuge mistake. Mid market teams really should not do this. Especially since we have thrown so many resources (draft picks, etc) at trying to develop a homegrown pitching staff. The whole point of doing this is to avoid the cost and risk of trying to acquire a TOR guy.

Btw there is a different kind of pitching trade which I would not be opposed to. Acquiring someone who was once a TOR guy but who is still very good and who only has a year or two of contractual obligation left. Like the Astros did with Verlander.
Click to expand...

I mean we tried trading for Paxton this past off-season and we've been linked to other TOR pitchers like Archer just last year too, so it seems inevitable that we'll trade for one, imo.
 
Carp said:
I mean we tried trading for Paxton this past off-season and we've been linked to other TOR pitchers like Archer just last year too, so it seems inevitable that we'll trade for one, imo.
Click to expand...

Random, but Archer has been pretty terrible since the trade.
 
Carp said:
I mean we tried trading for Paxton this past off-season and we've been linked to other TOR pitchers like Archer just last year too, so it seems inevitable that we'll trade for one, imo.
Click to expand...

doing due-diligence is a bit different than something being "inevitable."
 
Super said:
doing due-diligence is a bit different than something being "inevitable."
Click to expand...

Yeah. There was a lot of talk about Paxton, but I'm not sure we actually made an offer. I'm not opposed to adding starting pitching, but with the emergence of Soroka and Fried I think the need to do something like that has decreased.
 
Carp said:
I think Grandal is unlikely anyways. More likely will see Mac and Flowers part deux if they hold up well this year.

More interested in seeing what we do for the OF. Do we bring trade Ender and go with Acuna, Riley, and Neck? Or do we keep Ender and find a more long term solution to RF/LF? Gotta figure Pache or Waters are in the long term plans for CF and should be ready come late 2020 or early 2021, so I think the more likely approach is to trade Ender and go with the current OF for 1 year. Also a chance Duvall could factor into these plans if he gets recalled and proves his AAA performance is legit.

I think we're more likely to make a big trade for a TOR pitcher than anything else.
Click to expand...

You're forgetting about

51mV-CXcVmL._SY445_.jpg
 
Super said:
doing due-diligence is a bit different than something being "inevitable."
Click to expand...

Seemed more than doing "due diligence." Reportedly we finished 2nd for Archer and, I'm pretty sure we had an offer for Paxton that was regarded as better than what the Yanks offered. Don't forget the Sonny Gray situation either. Passan reported about a 3 team deal we had with Texas and NYY that fell apart.
 
Carp said:
Seemed more than doing "due diligence." Reportedly we finished 2nd for Archer and, I'm pretty sure we had an offer for Paxton that was regarded as better than what the Yanks offered. Don't forget the Sonny Gray situation either. Passan reported about a 3 team deal we had with Texas and NYY that fell apart.
Click to expand...

Gray isn’t a TOR guy. i doubt the braves made an offer even close to what archer fetched last year. idk i think it was mostly checking in and seeing if they could get a steal. i doubt they’ll be trading for a TOR arm.
 
Super said:
Gray isn’t a TOR guy. i doubt the braves made an offer even close to what archer fetched last year. idk i think it was mostly checking in and seeing if they could get a steal. i doubt they’ll be trading for a TOR arm.
Click to expand...

You're opinion on Gray is rather irrelevant. They also reportedly were interested in a trade with Cleveland for one or their top 3 staters. So they've clearly made a point to try acquire a high quality starter with control as they've attempted to acquire at least 5 different pitchers in less than a year (having sucessfully traded for Gausman last July).

That seems like way more than due diligence.
 
Carp said:
You're opinion on Gray is rather irrelevant. They also reportedly were interested in a trade with Cleveland for one or their top 3 staters. So they've clearly made a point to try acquire a high quality starter with control as they've attempted to acquire at least 5 different pitchers in less than a year (having sucessfully traded for Gausman last July).

That seems like way more than due diligence.
Click to expand...

well, you mentioned "TOR" pitchers in your post and said they'd acquire one.....which is why I said Gray is not a TOR pitcher, therefore inquiring about him doesn't back up that notion that they're after a TOR pitcher.
they were linked to Archer before acquiring Gausman.
point is, i don't think they're dead set on getting a "TOR" arm. and i don't think it will happen. seeing if you can get one in a steal is great and i hope they keep trying. could've worked out with Paxton. but again, that's more due diligence than truly chasing a TOR pitcher.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top