Spring Training Gamethread/Discussion

1. Nobody is trading for Uggla. If we pay like 90% of his salary, we may get a minor league project (not just prospect, a project). We have zero leverage to trade him. It would take two AL teams having a devastating injury at 2b and maybe, maybe they'd trade for him so they could DH him as well.

2. This clock stuff with Stella is over rated. Kid is already 25. It's not like he's 21. You start LaStella's clock early, who cares.
 
I'm also fine with giving Uggla a month or so. Hopefully the other guys will pick up the slack for him if he struggles out of the gate. But if he goes into another 2-3 month lull, I'm done. I don't care if that much money is wasted away.
 
PurpleBrave said:
1. Nobody is trading for Uggla. If we pay like 90% of his salary, we may get a minor league project (not just prospect, a project). We have zero leverage to trade him. It would take two AL teams having a devastating injury at 2b and maybe, maybe they'd trade for him so they could DH him as well.

2. This clock stuff with Stella is over rated. Kid is already 25. It's not like he's 21. You start LaStella's clock early, who cares.
Click to expand...

I would that agree our chances of unloading Uggla are next to none, unless his sight problems were larger than we knew. The surgery could possibly make at least some improvement. On the other hand, starting Tommy in AAA for a few weeks to save a year of control has to be considered. To dismiss it is a short-sighted view.
 
Millwood1Hitter said:
I might be in the minority here, but I'm all for giving Uggla a chance to prove that he still can be a productive MLB player.

Vision problems are serious and it takes time to readjust if the procedures work. Hopefully for Dan that is the case and he figured it out.

I just have a hard time believing Dan absolutely lost it, I mean, has there ever been a player that has fallen off a cliff any faster. He goes from one of the more feared righty power hitters in the game to a guy who can't get a hit once a week.

I certainly knew that the back end of that extension to expect declined production but not to this extent.

Even if he can show any glimmer of his past performance to be a power bat or utility guy off the bench would be ok IMO.
Click to expand...

I think that Uggla can be better than he was last year, for sure. I guess that makes me about as bullish on his chances as anyone. I wonder the opposite, though—has anyone who's declined that sharply over two years actually come back? I think the vision issue is the wildcard there. If it really was causing a significant proportion of his problems last year (and it's easy to imagine bad eyesight doing just that) he could definitely do enough to hold down the job. I'm not really in any camp here...I think Uggla can bounce back enough to useful, and I'm excited about TLS.
 
PurpleBrave said:
1. Nobody is trading for Uggla. If we pay like 90% of his salary, we may get a minor league project (not just prospect, a project). We have zero leverage to trade him. It would take two AL teams having a devastating injury at 2b and maybe, maybe they'd trade for him so they could DH him as well.

2. This clock stuff with Stella is over rated. Kid is already 25. It's not like he's 21. You start LaStella's clock early, who cares.
Click to expand...

It is unlikely we find a taker for Uggla. But there is a small chance. When they needed outfielders last year the Yankees took on parts of the salaries of Vernon Wells and Alfonso Soriano.

As for the clock starting on La Stella, it doesn't have to do with his age. If we had sent Heyward down to AAA for a few weeks in 2010, his free agency year would have been put off by a year. To me it is something to take into account.
 
LaStella is not going to be a star or close to it IMO. The extra year of control comes into play more with the top level player.
 
Breaking down SATURDAY box

Got to be honest with you, even for spring, all this losing and pathetic offense is getting on my nerves

Lipka 2-4, R, SB (he is impressing people and is taking many ground balls at second and third)

Gattis 1-4, RBI 2 Ks (that might be his typical line this season)

Scahfer 1-4, 2 K, outfield assist

Uggla 0-3, 2 K

Freeman 1-3, HBP (.429)

Simmons 2-4, R

Salcedo 0-2, 2 K, 2 E

Hale 2 IP, 4 H, 2 ER

Thomas 1.1 IP, 0 H, 3 K 2.08 (this guy is looking more and more like Cinderella 2014)

Buchter 1 IP, 0 H, 1 K (overdue outing)

Gearrin 1 IP, 0 H, 1 K (3.38)

Jaime (LP) 1 IP, 0 H, 0 ER, 1 R, 1 BB (2.25)

First cut any day now
 
thethe said:
LaStella is not going to be a star or close to it IMO. The extra year of control comes into play more with the top level player.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter. La Stella isn't getting diddly for playing time.
 
Has anyone seen Ian Thomas pitch yet in the spring? This guy is real interesting but just not sure what his upside is. He dominated last year in AA immediately. Maybe he can be a key piece this year.
 
thethe said:
LaStella is not going to be a star or close to it IMO. The extra year of control comes into play more with the top level player.
Click to expand...

It comes into play for all sorts of players. For example, if he had a few more weeks of service time Chris Johnson would hit free agency after 2015 rather than 2016. That extra year of contractual control has real value.
 
nsacpi said:
It comes into play for all sorts of players. For example, if he had a few more weeks of service time Chris Johnson would hit free agency after 2015 rather than 2016. That extra year of contractual control has real value.
Click to expand...

This, the idea that control years doesn't matter is silly. If we keep Tommy down for 1 month we gain 5 months of minimum pay control. Same basic situation we have with Simmons.
 
I agree that it has value but its not like you are dealing with a player you would have to pay 20+ million. I would think that an older player that reaches the majors will sign a deal in their second or third year and take less guaranteed money.

I don't think getting LaStella resigned would be an issue. The Braves are going to have more money to spend. Its just about making the best decisions to win today's game (within reason). TLS should be playing at the start of the year if he is our best option. That type of decision sets a tone and message to the organization which I think is healthy.
 
PurpleBrave said:
1. Nobody is trading for Uggla. If we pay like 90% of his salary, we may get a minor league project (not just prospect, a project). We have zero leverage to trade him. It would take two AL teams having a devastating injury at 2b and maybe, maybe they'd trade for him so they could DH him as well.

2. This clock stuff with Stella is over rated. Kid is already 25. It's not like he's 21. You start LaStella's clock early, who cares.
Click to expand...

Yankees could be the team that need him. Imagine if you would, Uggla is doing ok like say a .750 OPS. Brian ROberts is inevitably injured and they have Brendan Ryan starting at 2B, they may consider Uggla. Gumbs is at least a year away, and they did sign Kelly Johnson, but right now they also have Eduardo Nunez starting 3B. So if Uggla is playing WEll, KJ can play 3B (where he's slotted right now) and they're a better team. They're rich so they can afford Uggla and when A-Roid is back and/or Gumbs is ready Uggla can be a bench/DH player. Yankees can afford to have a 5M bench player. I don't expect a prospect in return. I'm hoping for basically what happened in the Lowe deal, save some money can use that for reliever or to keep Meds around longer, something like that.

Clock stuff does matter. If we bring him up now we have him under control 25-30 seaosn, if we wait a month we have him for 25-31. Aka we never have to worry about signing him to a deal because when he's done with his minor league deal he's basically hit the decline point. His 31 year old season if he plays well could be worth 8M or so. Maybe more who knows.
 
thethe said:
LaStella is not going to be a star or close to it IMO. The extra year of control comes into play more with the top level player.
Click to expand...

I agree. Controlling him through age 30 or 31 doesn't really matter. We would be getting him through his prime years regardless.
 
zitothebrave said:
Clock stuff does matter. If we bring him up now we have him under control 25-30 seaosn, if we wait a month we have him for 25-31. Aka we never have to worry about signing him to a deal because when he's done with his minor league deal he's basically hit the decline point. His 31 year old season if he plays well could be worth 8M or so. Maybe more who knows.
Click to expand...

If we did start his clock late and he did play well he would make a lot more then 8 million at age 31. He would of been a super 2 and had 4 years of arbitration.
 
I see it both ways with TLS.

So if we wait one month, he'd be Super Two?

But would only have him for 6 if he starts Opening Day.

Could be the difference between the Division and not winning it however.

Uggla is cooked so i dont think it would be a big deal.
 
Normally I would favor saving service time but Uggla is toast. 1 win can be the difference between facing the dodgers or the pirayes inbyhe first round likebthis last year. That 1 game probably cost us atleast an NLCS trip.
 
nsacpi said:
It comes into play for all sorts of players. For example, if he had a few more weeks of service time Chris Johnson would hit free agency after 2015 rather than 2016. That extra year of contractual control has real value.
Click to expand...

Chris Johnson is a decent point as we didn't bring him up. LaStella would likely be extended if we really wanted him, or traded down the road like Prado. We get him for his prime years regardless. Age does matter in his case because he's not like Simmons, he's 25. By the time his 6 years are up he will be 31. Freeing up salary by having a 31 year old leave isnt the end of the workd...but I believe he'll be extended or dealt before he ever reaches that point. It's seems short sighted but it's small potatoes IMO. It can be worked around fairly easily
 
Exactly!

I just don't think saving a year of service time for a 25 year old should be our concern. I fully believe that we will not be a mid market team in 2-3 years. The future is promising and we need to just think about wins and losses and not service time.
 
zitothebrave said:
Yankees could be the team that need him. Imagine if you would, Uggla is doing ok like say a .750 OPS. Brian ROberts is inevitably injured and they have Brendan Ryan starting at 2B, they may consider Uggla. Gumbs is at least a year away, and they did sign Kelly Johnson, but right now they also have Eduardo Nunez starting 3B. So if Uggla is playing WEll, KJ can play 3B (where he's slotted right now) and they're a better team. They're rich so they can afford Uggla and when A-Roid is back and/or Gumbs is ready Uggla can be a bench/DH player. Yankees can afford to have a 5M bench player. I don't expect a prospect in return. I'm hoping for basically what happened in the Lowe deal, save some money can use that for reliever or to keep Meds around longer, something like that..
Click to expand...

That's best case scenario, and that's a lot of ifs. Could probably just as easily sign Drew to play 2b and they could also live with Brendan Ryan, who sucks offensively but is one of the better defenders in the game. We'd have to pick up a significant portion of the tab on Ugglas salary this year and next. We might be the ones that have to send them a prospect to take Uggla, lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top