Peraza debuts for Dodgers

This trade can't be truly judged until next July. IMO. By then we will see how Olivera and Bird have performed, how we spent the money in the offseason, how we spend in July, and of course who we draft with the pick.

I left out how Wood and Peraza perform, because for me that doesn't matter as much.
 
sturg33 said:
I'm saying it... and many others are too.

The trade was almost universally panned by Braves fans
Click to expand...

Well there ya go. Fans react emotionally not logically. It's a defense mechanism. If you criticize it and it turns out bad then you were "right". If it works out your team is better and nobody cares about who criticized it anymore.
 
Chico said:
Well there ya go. Fans react emotionally not logically. It's a defense mechanism. If you criticize it and it turns out bad then you were "right". If it works out your team is better and nobody cares about who criticized it anymore.
Click to expand...

Braves fan universally loved a lot of our deals (Uribe, Gattis, Kimbrel, Touki, etc).

I'd say we won those
 
In judging the trade right after all the particulars were made public, I think the Dodgers won the deal. Not by a huge margin, but by a clear enough margin that I have a hard time calling this a win-win type of deal.

Some of the opinions from my "brethren" that don't like the deal seem overly extreme to me though. In particular, I think some folks are . . .

- Undervaluing how good of an offensive player Olivera can be when healthy.
- Undervaluing the importance of the $ aspect of the deal for the Braves.
- Overvaluing Peraza's value as a trade chip.
 
dak said:
In judging the trade right after all the particulars were made public, I think the Dodgers won the deal. Not by a huge margin, but by a clear enough margin that I have a hard time calling this a win-win type of deal.

Some of the opinions from my "brethren" that don't like the deal seem overly extreme to me though. In particular, I think some folks are . . .

- Undervaluing how good of an offensive player Olivera can be when healthy.
- Undervaluing the importance of the $ aspect of the deal for the Braves.
- Overvaluing Peraza's value as a trade chip.
Click to expand...

I think people are under valuing Peraza and over valuing wood.
 
dak said:
In judging the trade right after all the particulars were made public, I think the Dodgers won the deal. Not by a huge margin, but by a clear enough margin that I have a hard time calling this a win-win type of deal.

Some of the opinions from my "brethren" that don't like the deal seem overly extreme to me though. In particular, I think some folks are . . .

- Undervaluing how good of an offensive player Olivera can be when healthy.

- Undervaluing the importance of the $ aspect of the deal for the Braves.

- Overvaluing Peraza's value as a trade chip.
Click to expand...

I would add undervaluing the pick as well. The money aspect and the pick seem to be left out a lot from what I'm reading.
 
dak said:
- Undervaluing how good of an offensive player Olivera can be when healthy.
- Undervaluing the importance of the $ aspect of the deal for the Braves.
Click to expand...

For these points...

- We frankly have no idea how good of a hitter he can be. He has 13 minor league games. He is 30. And he is injured.

- I don't like the money argument because we didn't save much, if any money. We also traded very cheap and valuable assets.
 
sturg33 said:
For these points...

- We frankly have no idea how good of a hitter he can be. He has 13 minor league games. He is 30. And he is injured.

- I don't like the money argument because we didn't save much, if any money. We also traded very cheap and valuable assets.
Click to expand...

The money argument isn't about saving money. It's about adding a player who likely will be worth more than the Braves will be paying him, and probably significantly so. Although they did shed Alex Wood's arbitration years, if he makes it that far.

I think we can get an idea of what kind of hitter he may be by looking at his stats in Cuba. I think maybe present day Evan Longoria is a good comparison. That's a 3.5-4 WAR player. And he's getting paid like a 1 WAR player at most.

Of course that's assuming he can stay healthy, which is probably the biggest negative of the trade.
 
sturg33 said:
We frankly have no idea how good of a hitter he can be. He has 13 minor league games. He is 30. And he is injured.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree that there are more uncertainties with how he'll perform when healthy than with other players / prospects. With the information we DO have from his time in Cuba, the scouting reports, and his cup of coffee in MiLB . . . I personally believe the best case scenario for him offensively is > Howie Kendrick.
 
sturg33 said:
I don't know. Many are defending it hard.

If NOBODY is saying we won the deal, then we probably lost it
Click to expand...

I can see why you wouldn't like this deal (I am skeptical of it), but at what point do evaluations of trades matter based on evaluations of trades? You are essentially saying trades should take in the account the value fans get from getting warm fuzzy feelings when they read trade grades post facto.
 
i hate the money argument. B/c I'd rather have wood and Peraza than the 22 million extra would have taken to sign olivera to begin with. Or I'd rather have kept one of them and paid some of the signing bonus.

Hart's position does seem to be that his is a middle of the order hitter who we'll have for some small fraction of his true value. So the inference is that we can use that "savings" to get another bat. But if Hart is saying we can't get Cespedes/JUP/Heyward, then who is worth spending the money on?
 
chop2chip said:
I can see why you wouldn't like this deal (I am skeptical of it), but at what point do evaluations of trades matter based on evaluations of trades? You are essentially saying trades should take in the account the value fans get from getting warm fuzzy feelings when they read trade grades post facto.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that at all.

I'm saying that knowing what I know now - I'm not making that deal. If we can't do better for Alex Wood, then I would have held onto him. And frankly, if we can't do better for Alex Wood - then the FO made a horrible mistake this offseason with all the emphasis on pitching acquisition
 
weso1 said:
The money argument isn't about saving money. It's about adding a player who likely will be worth more than the Braves will be paying him, and probably significantly so. Although they did shed Alex Wood's arbitration years, if he makes it that far.

I think we can get an idea of what kind of hitter he may be by looking at his stats in Cuba. I think maybe present day Evan Longoria is a good comparison. That's a 3.5-4 WAR player. And he's getting paid like a 1 WAR player at most.

Of course that's assuming he can stay healthy, which is probably the biggest negative of the trade.
Click to expand...

Right but we have to include the value we lost in Wood and Peraza. I did napking analysis that showed we lost $70M in value over the next 6 years. You can argue the merits of that number, but I don't think it's too far off.
 
Russ2dollas said:
i hate the money argument. B/c I'd rather have wood and Peraza than the 22 million extra would have taken to sign olivera to begin with. Or I'd rather have kept one of them and paid some of the signing bonus.

Hart's position does seem to be that his is a middle of the order hitter who we'll have for some small fraction of his true value. So the inference is that we can use that "savings" to get another bat. But if Hart is saying we can't get Cespedes/JUP/Heyward, then who is worth spending the money on?
Click to expand...

Looks like price maybe.
 
Russ2dollas said:
i hate the money argument. B/c I'd rather have wood and Peraza than the 22 million extra would have taken to sign olivera to begin with. Or I'd rather have kept one of them and paid some of the signing bonus.

Hart's position does seem to be that his is a middle of the order hitter who we'll have for some small fraction of his true value. So the inference is that we can use that "savings" to get another bat. But if Hart is saying we can't get Cespedes/JUP/Heyward, then who is worth spending the money on?
Click to expand...

This is valid. We have no idea how we're going to spend that money, but Hart has shown he's going to spend every dollar he has in his budget somehow. Who knows how we'll spend the money, but odds are it will be something nobody has thought about. That's what makes it interesting. It's going to be a fun speculative offseason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top