Shelby to AZ for E. Inciarte, A. Blair, and Dansby Swanson

Julio3000 said:
Just for the sake of fair mindedness, I think this is a point worth mentioning.

Swanson is a high-floor guy but not necessarily a high-ceiling one. He has a lot going for him, but he's not a prodigy.
Click to expand...

I don't think this is true at all. He may not have the ceiling of a Bryce Harper, but he is absolutely a high-ceiling prospect.

A guy who can be an .850-.900 OPS guy as a good defensive SS who does everything well is a really high ceiling.

Carlos Correa was also supposed to be a 'high-floor, low-ceiling' #1 pick. But if you go #1, you have a high ceiling. Period.
 
smootness said:
I don't think this is true at all. He may not have the ceiling of a Bryce Harper, but he is absolutely a high-ceiling prospect.

A guy who can be an .850-.900 OPS guy as a good defensive SS who does everything well is a really high ceiling.

Carlos Correa was also supposed to be a 'high-floor, low-ceiling' #1 pick. But if you go #1, you have a high ceiling. Period.
Click to expand...

Yeah, as a middle infielder he has a very high ceiling. His ceiling is essentially Barry Larkin outside of the one year when Larkin hit 30 HR's. Now do I think Swanson is going to reach that ceiling? Of course the chances are very small, but as Julio points out the floor is very high as well. He's got a Gordon Beckham floor which is an above average player at that position in the terms of one WAR per year. Chances are he'll be somewhere in the middle between ceiling and floor. Ironically enough I think Erick Aybar is a good comp in regards to the type of WAR we might get from Swansby.
 
weso1 said:
Yeah, as a middle infielder he has a very high ceiling. His ceiling is essentially Barry Larkin outside of the one year when Larkin hit 30 HR's. Now do I think Swanson is going to reach that ceiling? Of course the chances are very small, but as Julio points out the floor is very high as well. He's got a Gordon Beckham floor which is an above average player at that position in the terms of one WAR per year. Chances are he'll be somewhere in the middle between ceiling and floor. Ironically enough I think Erick Aybar is a good comp in regards to the type of WAR we might get from Swansby.
Click to expand...

I think that is selling him short as well. The guy was the #1 pick in the draft. He's likely to be a very good major league player. I realize Aybar had a few good years, but Swansby is likely to be better than that.
 
Enscheff said:
I think I'd rather trade Mallex than Inciarte. However, the bulk of Inciarte's value comes from defense, and we know the Braves probably don't value that as highly as other organizations as evidenced by not resigning Heyward and trading away Simmons.

I have to imagine a Teheran/Inciarte package would bring back another pretty huge haul...maybe from the Cubs? They need a SP and a CF.
Click to expand...

Folty or Wisler and Mallex for Soler or Baez.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
this is my stance with players.. I really value tangible numbers that show something more so than potential. I love Beaz and Soler.. but both have big ? surrounding them. Julio and Ender are just good solid players who are going to produce X numbers for you year after year... I don't think you devalue that over potential every time..
Click to expand...

So agree. I would keep both. We are now in a good place but have too many question marks.
 
Twilo73 said:
Folty or Wisler and Mallex for Soler or Baez.
Click to expand...

I value Wisler much more than Folty at this point and do not want to trade him. That would be counterproductive, IMO. And I don't think Folty would be enough for the Cubs; they see the same issues we see.

I personally think we need to forget about Soler and Baez. I like Soler's potential, but I'm not fully sold, and I don't think Baez will ever truly be a difference-maker in the majors. I just think our fan base needs to let them go. We are now in a pretty good spot. We do need one more big bat to throw into the middle of the order, but we'll see what happens in the draft next year.
 
weso1 said:
Yeah, as a middle infielder he has a very high ceiling. His ceiling is essentially Barry Larkin outside of the one year when Larkin hit 30 HR's. Now do I think Swanson is going to reach that ceiling? Of course the chances are very small, but as Julio points out the floor is very high as well. He's got a Gordon Beckham floor which is an above average player at that position in the terms of one WAR per year. Chances are he'll be somewhere in the middle between ceiling and floor. Ironically enough I think Erick Aybar is a good comp in regards to the type of WAR we might get from Swansby.
Click to expand...

Barry Larkin is a good comp for his ceiling. Jeter is another name you hear thrown around a lot. I could see that kind of ceiling from him. Craig Biggio is another with a similar skill set.

With Swanson, the best case scenario is a guy who will hit around .300, .400 OBP, and a SLG% between .450 and .500. Maybe 15-18 HRs with a ton of doubles and 20 SBs and good defense at SS. That's superstar level production.

As for his floor, I don't think Beckham is a good comparison as Swanson has excellent plate discipline and Beckham's has never been more than average. WAR-wise I can see Aybar type production as a floor though they're very different players.

Assuming nothing bizarre happens like he completely busts for inexplicable reasons, I could see a floor of an Edgar Renteria on a down year. Like Renteria circa-2005. Or maybe a Walt Weiss with more power. Someone who is very solid if not a star.

There are two reasons I'm bullish on Swanson. First is his makeup. Everyone says he's just off the charts there. I think that will help him really make the most of his talent and be a steady producer. The second reason is his plate discipline. His plate approach is something that will seriously help him.

With his makeup and plate approach I just can't see him busting completely. I see worst case scenario he's league average. Best case scenario he's a star.
 
Yeah, I don't see any reason to deal Inciarte unless we're blown away again. I'm a huge fan of Mallex and his potential but that's no reason to deal Inciarte at this point. Inciarte has an 80 arm and can play any outfield position. Mallex could easily handle left if needed. The options you have are a wonderful luxury.
 
smootness said:
I don't think this is true at all. He may not have the ceiling of a Bryce Harper, but he is absolutely a high-ceiling prospect.

A guy who can be an .850-.900 OPS guy as a good defensive SS who does everything well is a really high ceiling.

Carlos Correa was also supposed to be a 'high-floor, low-ceiling' #1 pick. But if you go #1, you have a high ceiling. Period.
Click to expand...

I don't want my statement to be construed as being down on Swanson at all. I am on board with the love—I like the plate discipline, the raves about his work ethic and makeup, the fact that he seems to do everything pretty darned well. I may not be expressing the term "ceiling" exactly right. If all of those pretty good skills translate to the bigs, as you say, he's going to be a hell of a player. Still, he doesn't seem to have any tool that scouts see as exceptional. Yes, any #1 overall has the potential to be special, but not every draft class is created equal.

Correa was a late riser, something of a surprising #1. Still, he was (barely) 18 vs. Swanson's 21, and his power, avg., and arm were more highly graded than DS's. His future power was rated as a 70 at that tender age. I don't know how much you can compare him, or if you could consider him a "high-floor/low-ceiling" guy.

I'm not seeing what's objectionable about saying he has a lower—though not a low—ceiling relative to some of his peers in the last few years. Hopefully he blows up this year and the discussion becomes moot.
 
Julio3000 said:
I don't want my statement to be construed as being down on Swanson at all. I am on board with the love—I like the plate discipline, the raves about his work ethic and makeup, the fact that he seems to do everything pretty darned well. I may not be expressing the term "ceiling" exactly right. If all of those pretty good skills translate to the bigs, as you say, he's going to be a hell of a player. Still, he doesn't seem to have any tool that scouts see as exceptional. Yes, any #1 overall has the potential to be special, but not every draft class is created equal.

Correa was a late riser, something of a surprising #1. Still, he was (barely) 18 vs. Swanson's 21, and his power, avg., and arm were more highly graded than DS's. His future power was rated as a 70 at that tender age. I don't know how much you can compare him, or if you could consider him a "high-floor/low-ceiling" guy.

I'm not seeing what's objectionable about saying he has a lower—though not a low—ceiling relative to some of his peers in the last few years. Hopefully he blows up this year and the discussion becomes moot.
Click to expand...

I think Lindor is a better comparison.
 
Julio3000 said:
I don't want my statement to be construed as being down on Swanson at all. I am on board with the love—I like the plate discipline, the raves about his work ethic and makeup, the fact that he seems to do everything pretty darned well. I may not be expressing the term "ceiling" exactly right. If all of those pretty good skills translate to the bigs, as you say, he's going to be a hell of a player. Still, he doesn't seem to have any tool that scouts see as exceptional. Yes, any #1 overall has the potential to be special, but not every draft class is created equal.

Correa was a late riser, something of a surprising #1. Still, he was (barely) 18 vs. Swanson's 21, and his power, avg., and arm were more highly graded than DS's. His future power was rated as a 70 at that tender age. I don't know how much you can compare him, or if you could consider him a "high-floor/low-ceiling" guy.

I'm not seeing what's objectionable about saying he has a lower—though not a low—ceiling relative to some of his peers in the last few years. Hopefully he blows up this year and the discussion becomes moot.
Click to expand...

Pretty reasonable discussion on Swanson for the most part, but the most interesting thing for me is that the discussion is flowing almost as if Swanson alone is the sole indicator for the value of the trade. (I know that's not literally true, but it's where the vast majority of the discussion lies, because folks are so happy to have gotten him.) Inciarte might wind up being a better than average player overall at centerfield and Blair could well wind up a solid "2". If Swanson just exceeds what most would consider his floor and the others do pan out, it's an awesome trade, even if Shelby becomes an ace.
 
How's this for a radical idea? Since Inciarte has proven himself in the majors in a number of ways, why don't we consider including Mallex in a deal somewhere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top