Next Move?

Tapate50 said:
Zobrist is exactly the incorrect age for us to be interested in... If he falls off a cliff and we get stuck with him... We will have to package Fried + to get rid of him!
Click to expand...

Part of what makes him attractive is his ability to play several positions. Unlike BJ and Uggla, even if his offense falls below starter worthy production, he should still be valuable as a utility guy and worthy of a roster spot.
 
Enscheff said:
He is probably holding out for a 4th year, but I think he will end up signing with whichever team gives him the best 4th year option terms.
Click to expand...

Which would also give the brass the opportunity to make him a much more attractive trade piece.

Most recent salary projections for Zobrist...

FanGraphs - 3 years/$42 million ($14 million per)

Bowden - 3 years/$48 million ($16 million per)

MLBTR (Dierkes) - 3 years/$51 million ($17 million per)

Heyman - 4 years/$60 million ($15 million per)

Given the current organizational payroll status (~25 million available if they will go to that $120 million max that Hart mentioned as the ceiling last winter) why not offer 4 years and $54 million and frontload the deal during the first two years? Structuring it so that you pay $17 million per (the highest AAV projected above) the first two seasons would make him a $10 million/year player when you'd want to move him. Given his versatility, he should be relatively easy to move to a contender at that point - even in decline.
 
clvclv said:
Which would also give the brass the opportunity to make him a much more attractive trade piece.

Most recent salary projections for Zobrist...

FanGraphs - 3 years/$42 million ($14 million per)
Bowden - 3 years/$48 million ($16 million per)
MLBTR (Dierkes) - 3 years/$51 million ($17 million per)
Heyman - 4 years/$60 million ($15 million per)

Given the current organizational payroll status (~25 million available if they will go to that $120 million max that Hart mentioned as the ceiling last winter) why not offer 4 years and $54 million and frontload the deal during the first two years? Structuring it so that you pay $17 million per (the highest AAV projected above) the first two seasons would make him a $10 million/year player when you'd want to move him. Given his versatility, he should be relatively easy to move to a contender at that point - even in decline.
Click to expand...

Unless he pulls an Uggla... who was a similar type of player
 
zbhargrove said:
At the time when we traded and signed Uggla, he was a very similar type player to Zobrist is now.
Click to expand...

Uggla was 30, was a consistent 30 HR guy, struck out around 150-170 times per year, and could barely play a passable 2B.

Zobrist is 35, never hit more than 20 HRs, strikes out about 100 times per year, and can play average or better defense at multiple positions.

But yes, other than those details, very similar players.
 
bravesfanforlife88 said:
found this article about the struggles of Pederson last season. pretty interesting read

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2015/11/29/9811260/joc-pedersons-struggles-revisited
Click to expand...

I'm not a fan of trading for Pederson - certainly not trading Miller for him. He's pretty much like Baez and Soler for me. Could he fit in the lineup? Maybe. Trading for any of those three would go completely against what they've been trying to do since the new regime took over though. Trading top-shelf (even if not "Ace"-level) SPs for players with 28-30% K rates is exactly the opposite of the approach they've had so far. I'm not going to go so far as to say one side of that argument is right or wrong, but the statement all along has been that they want less strikeouts and more putting the ball in play.

None of those three even slightly fit that profile.
 
Enscheff said:
Uggla was 30, was a consistent 30 HR guy, struck out around 150-170 times per year, and could barely play a passable 2B.

Zobrist is 35, never hit more than 20 HRs, strikes out about 100 times per year, and can play average or better defense at multiple positions.

But yes, other than those details, very similar players.
Click to expand...

You're right... Zobrist starting to sound worse
 
clvclv said:
I'm not a fan of trading for Pederson - certainly not trading Miller for him. He's pretty much like Baez and Soler for me. Could he fit in the lineup? Maybe. Trading for any of those three would go completely against what they've been trying to do since the new regime took over though. Trading top-shelf (even if not "Ace"-level) SPs for players with 28-30% K rates is exactly the opposite of the approach they've had so far. I'm not going to go so far as to say one side of that argument is right or wrong, but the statement all along has been that they want less strikeouts and more putting the ball in play.

None of those three even slightly fit that profile.
Click to expand...

I don't really care what profile they fit. I thought that stipulation on targeted players was kind of dumb to begin with, so I would welcome it.
 
We need to target a power hitter and they usually do have a higher k rate. Riley is the only power bat we have in the minors.
 
The ties between O'Day and the Braves don't seem to go away. While I concede he's an elite reliever (beats his peripherals by a ton) and the price tag is lower than most elite relievers, I'd really prefer we stay away.

[TW]672755924046635008[/TW]
 
I think O'Day goes to the Nats. I see them matching whatever we offer and have the added benefit of his wife working in DC.

I like the idea of getting a shutdown closer as it would improve every spot in our pen with everyone else shifting down a spot. However, I'm reluctant to put that much into O'Day when we're not competitive now and may not be again until 18.
 
striker42 said:
I think O'Day goes to the Nats. I see them matching whatever we offer and have the added benefit of his wife working in DC.

I like the idea of getting a shutdown closer as it would improve every spot in our pen with everyone else shifting down a spot. However, I'm reluctant to put that much into O'Day when we're not competitive now and may not be again until 18.
Click to expand...

I would be ok with spending some money on O'day if it meant the Nats didn't get him.. that is there primary concern this year is the bullpen.. that and bench. If we can mess with them this offseason, then that will make me happy.. if nothing else, drive up the price a bit..
 
Carp said:
Part of what makes him attractive is his ability to play several positions. Unlike BJ and Uggla, even if his offense falls below starter worthy production, he should still be valuable as a utility guy and worthy of a roster spot.
Click to expand...

I know that. I just don't see the fit
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top