The inevitable Inciarte trade

[Southcack77]

All of these deals involve some risk to the club. But most of the time they work out in the club's favor. So the team should do them and not let the occasional one that doesn't work out deter them.

I don't think Inciarte is the type of payer for whom extensions are advisable. He was maxed out as a player when he signed the deal and it was all downside from there.

You can say that he only has to be a 1 WAR player to get market value for his salary, but a contending team with payroll limitations shouldn't be paying market value for a 1 win player. That isn't value, it's opportunity cost.

Sure, he could hold his value better than I think he will, but I don't think the expected value really gives you any premium on the risk. There are better bets to be made.

 

[Southcack77]

with a .347 BABIP, a 25.7% k-rate, and a 4.6% BB rate. he would get torn to shreds in the major leagues.
i'm not sure what 21 year old pache has to do with this. the post i'm citing mentioned replacing ender *today* with pache, since "Pache could arguably replace his defense TODAY, so even if his bat doesn't develop further are you really losing much if you already believe you're only paying for Ender to play defense and hit 7th or 8th?"

yes. you are losing a lot. that's the answer.

and that ender is "easily replaceable from within." neither of these things are remotely true. so your point of going out there and trying to trade assets for a 2.8-win guy is moot since this specifically stated "easily from WITHIN."

if pache were inserted into the lineup *today* he would be an awful hitter. however little ender has given you on offense the last couple of years, pache would be *much worse* than that right now. of course pache can develop further and improve as a hitter. that has literally nothing to do with what i said, tho, so i'm not sure where that point is going.

it's still very unlikely pache will be able to put up 90 wRC+ by next year tho. like there's almost no shot based on what we've seen.

Yeah, I wouldn't be putting him in the lineup right now and I wouldn't be expecting 3 wins out of him this moment (or hypothetically next year). That part of it is a little unrealistic as was the statement that he would fetch 2 Top 100 players.

Should have been clear that I was making the case for trading Inciarte after the season, which I guess I knew was not exactly what poster was proposing.

I personally would try to move him this offseason. If you can't manage it, then fine. It's might not be an "albatross" of a contract, but it's still less than ideal for a stingy club like the Braves to be paying 9 million to a light hitting reserve.

 

[Super]

I don't think Inciarte is the type of payer for whom extensions are advisable. He was maxed out as a player when he signed the deal and it was all downside from there.

You can say that he only has to be a 1 WAR player to get market value for his salary, but a contending team with payroll limitations shouldn't be paying market value for a 1 win player. That isn't value, it's opportunity cost.

Sure, he could hold his value better than I think he will, but I don't think the expected value really gives you any premium on the risk. There are better bets to be made.

dude, what?
since he signed his deal in '17, he's put up 2.9 WAR in both years at a cost of $2M and 4M respectively. that is phenomenal value. he's making $5M this year. if he puts up only 2 WAR, it's phenomenal value.
it's been a very good deal and could easily continue to be.

 

[Super]

Yeah, I wouldn't be putting him in the lineup right now and I wouldn't be expecting 3 wins out of him this moment (or hypothetically next year). That part of it is a little unrealistic as was the statement that he would fetch 2 Top 100 players.

Should have been clear that I was making the case for trading Inciarte after the season, which I guess I knew was not exactly what poster was proposing.

I personally would try to move him this offseason. If you can't manage it, then fine. It's might not be an "albatross" of a contract, but it's still less than ideal for a stingy club like the Braves to be paying 9 million to a light hitting reserve.

other teams will also see that he's likely to decline and not give up much for him.
he plays next season at $7M. it's far from unreasonable that he puts up 2 WAR. in which case he's fine.
i'll also take any bet at all that pache puts up a 90 wRC+ next year.

 

[Southcack77]

dude, what?
since he signed his deal in '17, he's put up 2.9 WAR in both years at a cost of $2M and 4M respectively. that is phenomenal value. he's making $5M this year. if he puts up only 2 WAR, it's phenomenal value.
it's been a very good deal and could easily continue to be.

The Braves would have gotten the same "phenomenal value" for Inciarte without extending him. He was already under team control for those seasons and it's unlikely he would have gotten very expensive in arbitration.

The thing the Braves got out of an extension was a little bit of cost certainty/control and the right to pay him 8.7m in 2021 and have a 9m option for 2022.

We won't know whether that's a phenomenal value until 2023.

I highly suspect that it won't be a phenomenal value.

 

[Southcack77]

other teams will also see that he's likely to decline and not give up much for him.
he plays next season at $7M. it's far from unreasonable that he puts up 2 WAR. in which case he's fine.
i'll also take any bet at all that pache puts up a 90 wRC+ next year.

Is it a "phenomenal value" or is it obvious to everyone that they shouldn't give up that much for him?

I don't think it's necessary that the Braves CF produce 3 wins in 2020 to make trading Inciarte a good thing.

First, I don't think Inciarte will produce 3 wins in 2020.

Second, if the 9m the Braves owe him is spent on other things, then a step down in a particular OF spot doesn't mean the team hasn't gotten better.

Lot of different variables in play. I don't much care if Pache or Player X puts up 3 wins or not. But it's entirely possible that the Braves could find such a player.

 

[Super]

The Braves would have gotten the same "phenomenal value" for Inciarte without extending him. He was already under team control for those seasons and it's unlikely he would have gotten very expensive in arbitration.

The thing the Braves got out of an extension was a little bit of cost certainty/control and the right to pay him 8.7m in 2021 and have a 9m option for 2022.

We won't know whether that's a phenomenal value until 2023.

I highly suspect that it won't be a phenomenal value.

they probably won't be picking up the $9M option.
if you have 3+ years of good value from a contract...i'm inclined to say the contract was worth it.
ender would have made more the last 2 years than he actually did.
the only potential downside i really see is 2021. 4 years good, 1 year maybe bad. i'll take that, and count it as a good extension.

 

[Super]

Is it a "phenomenal value" or is it obvious to everyone that they shouldn't give up that much for him?

they aren't mutually exclusive.

 

[Super]

Is it a "phenomenal value" or is it obvious to everyone that they shouldn't give up that much for him?

I don't think it's necessary that the Braves CF produce 3 wins in 2020 to make trading Inciarte a good thing.

First, I don't think Inciarte will produce 3 wins in 2020.

Second, if the 9m the Braves owe him is spent on other things, then a step down in a particular OF spot doesn't mean the team hasn't gotten better.

Lot of different variables in play. I don't much care if Pache or Player X puts up 3 wins or not. But it's entirely possible that the Braves could find such a player.

i didn't say inciarte will, or is likely to, produce 3 wins in 2020. i literally said 2 wins in the post you quoted. again, no idea where you're drumming this stuff up. i guess it's to help your point?
2 wins is perfectly reasonable and possible. and at $7M, it will be a good deal. objectively.

 

[Southcack77]

they probably won't be picking up the $9M option.
if you have 3+ years of good value from a contract...i'm inclined to say the contract was worth it.
ender would have made more the last 2 years than he actually did.
the only potential downside i really see is 2021. 4 years good, 1 year maybe bad. i'll take that, and count it as a good extension.

Kevin Pillar

arb 1 3.25m
arb 2 5.8m

Jackie Bradley, Jr.

arb 1 3.6
arb 2 6.1
arb 3 8.5


Ender

Arb 1 2.7
Arb 2 4.7
Arb 3 5.7
Arb 4 7.7


Don't think Pillar was a Super 2, so it's not quite apples.

I think Ender is making more or less what he would have in arbitration. It's not a huge difference either way.

So if the option is declined, the value of the deal is essentially whatever small savings you want to attribute to avoiding arb and whatever surplus there might be over the 9.7m the Braves would owe him for 2021 (with buyout).

 

[Super]

Is it a "phenomenal value" or is it obvious to everyone that they shouldn't give up that much for him?

I don't think it's necessary that the Braves CF produce 3 wins in 2020 to make trading Inciarte a good thing.

First, I don't think Inciarte will produce 3 wins in 2020.

Second, if the 9m the Braves owe him is spent on other things, then a step down in a particular OF spot doesn't mean the team hasn't gotten better.

Lot of different variables in play. I don't much care if Pache or Player X puts up 3 wins or not. But it's entirely possible that the Braves could find such a player.

i also find it interesting you were happy about giving markakis $6M for 1-1.5 WAR but are claiming that inciarte for $7M and ~2 WAR is a bad deal.

 

[Super]

Kevin Pillar

arb 1 3.25m
arb 2 5.8m

Jackie Bradley, Jr.

arb 1 3.6
arb 2 6.1
arb 3 8.5


Ender

Arb 1 2.7
Arb 2 4.7
Arb 3 5.7
Arb 4 7.7


Don't think Pillar was a Super 2, so it's not quite apples.

I think Ender is making more or less what he would have in arbitration. It's not a huge difference either way.

So if the option is declined, the value of the deal is essentially whatever small savings you want to attribute to avoiding arb and whatever surplus there might be over the 9.7m the Braves would owe him for 2021 (with buyout).

where are you getting the $700k on the arb years for ender?
what i'm seeing is that that's good savings.

$1.25 and $1.6 saved over pillar and bradley year 1.
$1.8 and $2.1 saved over pillar and bradley year 2.
$3.5 over bradley year 3.

sign me up. savings confirmed. thanks.

 

[Southcack77]

i didn't say inciarte will, or is likely to, produce 3 wins in 2020. i literally said 2 wins in the post you quoted. again, no idea where you're drumming this stuff up. i guess it's to help your point?
2 wins is perfectly reasonable and possible. and at $7M, it will be a good deal. objectively.

You seem a little frisky.

I quoted your post. Calm down.

I agree that you didn't say Ender would produce 3 wins this year or next or in 2021.

However, my entry into this conversation was a discussion of whether Pache could produce 3 wins. That's where 3 wins comes from. That's where the 90 wRC+ number comes from.

Because 90 wRC+ is the number that theoretically would correlates to 3 wins if the talk of his defense is correct. You used that number in your post saying that you would take any bet that Pache would not have a 90 wRC+.

That's fine, but to replace 2 wins he wouldn't need to have a 90 wRC+.

If we are only replacing 2 wins now, there are even more other options who could reasonably be expected to produce that in the OF.

......

Inciarte may or many not produce 2 wins this year. Regardless, my concern is with 2021 and whether he's worth 9.7m then. I don't think it's as simple as saying it's an objective bargain simply if he he outperforms the market rate for buying a win in free agency.

 

[Super]

You seem a little frisky.

I quoted your post. Calm down.

I agree that you didn't say Ender would produce 3 wins this year or next or in 2021.

However, my entry into this conversation was a discussion of whether Pache could produce 3 wins. That's where the 90 wRC+ number comes from. Because that is the wRC+ that theoretically would correlates to 3 wins if the talk of his defense is correct. You used that number in your post saying that you would take any bet that Pache would not have a 90 wRC+.

That's fine, but to replace 2 wins he wouldn't need to have a 90 wRC+.

If we are only replacing 2 wins now, there are even more other options who could reasonably be expected to produce that in the OF.

......

Inciarte may or many not produce 2 wins this year. Regardless, my concern is with 2021 and whether he's worth 9.7m then. I don't think it's as simple as saying it's an objective bargain simply if he he outperforms the market rate for buying a win in free agency.

you just say a lot of stuff that makes no sense and has nothing to do with the discussion - sorry!
you replied to me about something totally different, when i replied to clv saying nonsense about pache this year.
i'll also take any bet that pache can't and won't put up 2 WAR next year.

so your suggestion is trading ender away for something, and then trading a team something for a similar player?
ender is making $8M in 2021. that's the only part of the deal that probably doesn't project as an easy "win." 4/5 = good deal.

 

[Super]

i also find it interesting you were happy about giving markakis $6M for 1-1.5 WAR but are claiming that inciarte for $7M and ~2 WAR is a bad deal.

seriously, we've already saved $6M vs bradley and pillar on this deal. so ender in 2021 at $8M is bad for the braves if he produces only 1 WAR. but nick, if he produces 1 WAR at $6M, is a good deal? despite the years leading up to 2021 in ender's deal? that logic makes zero sense.

 

[Southcack77]

where are you getting the $700k on the arb years for ender?
what i'm seeing is that that's good savings.

$1.25 and $1.6 saved over pillar and bradley year 1.
$1.8 and $2.1 saved over pillar and bradley year 2.
$3.5 over bradley year 3.

sign me up. savings confirmed. thanks.

Baseball reference. Could be wrong, I guess.


Super 2 Bradley 3.6 Inciarte 2.7
Arb 1 Bradley 6.1 Inciarte 4.7 Pillar 3.25
Arb 2 Bradley 8.5 Inciarte 5.7 Pillar 5.8
Arb 3 Bradley ? inciarte 7.7 Pillar ?

Bradley, Jr. is a significantly better player than Inciarte, so it's to be expected he gets paid more.

Pillar's number probably suggest Inciarte is getting paid a little bit less than he would have in arbitration, but it's not a large amount. He would not approach the 8.5m that Bradley got to avoid arb, so savings are probably less than 1.5m. Maybe you can find a better comp. I grabbed the two that seemed closest and set some parameters.

 

[Super]

Baseball reference. Could be wrong, I guess.


Super 2 Bradley 3.6 Inciarte 2.7
Arb 1 Bradley 6.1 Inciarte 4.7 Pillar 3.25
Arb 2 Bradley 8.5 Inciarte 5.7 Pillar 5.8
Arb 3 Bradley ? inciarte 7.7 Pillar ?

Bradley, Jr. is a significantly better player than Inciarte, so it's to be expected he gets paid more.

fangraphs and cot's both have $2M, 4M, 5M, 7M. maybe it's incentives? idk.
but uhhh is bradley "significantly better"? how so? he had one year where he was, 2016. ender has been the better player the last 2 years.

 

[Southcack77]

you just say a lot of stuff that makes no sense and has nothing to do with the discussion - sorry!
you replied to me about something totally different, when i replied to clv saying nonsense about pache this year.
i'll also take any bet that pache can't and won't put up 2 WAR next year.

so your suggestion is trading ender away for something, and then trading a team something for a similar player?
ender is making $8M in 2021. that's the only part of the deal that probably doesn't project as an easy "win." 4/5 = good deal.

1. I don't know why you keep proposing bets on what Pache will produce next year. Do you think I'm a great Pache advocate? I think it's very possible he could be a 2 win player next season, but I'd rather not find out.

2. I've just suggested that it would be possible to trade Inciarte and then acquire a player who can replace or upgrade Inciarte's production in free agency or trade. I also think it's entirely possible that some combination of Camargo, Riley, Pache or Waters could possibly do that internally. I think it's something the front office should and will look into.


While the original poster may have messed up some of the details and may have been talking about something different, I think trading Inciarte this offseason to avoid being on the hook for the next two season is something that may have merit. That's all.

 

[Southcack77]

fangraphs and cot's both have $2M, 4M, 5M, 7M. maybe it's incentives? idk.
but uhhh is bradley "significantly better"? how so? he had one year where he was, 2016. ender has been the better player the last 2 years.

JBJ is the better career offensive player and has a 5 win season under his bet. Stands to reason he would make more in arbitration.

 

[Southcack77]

seriously, we've already saved $6M vs bradley and pillar on this deal. so ender in 2021 at $8M is bad for the braves if he produces only 1 WAR. but nick, if he produces 1 WAR at $6M, is a good deal? despite the years leading up to 2021 in ender's deal? that logic makes zero sense.

I think you are high on the savings. I think he'd have made less than Bradley has in Arbitration. Pillar's isn't quite as good a player offensively, so I think his numbers do reflect the Braves got some savings out of it, but I think it's more like a 1m-1.5/year than 3m/yr.