The inevitable Inciarte trade

Southcack77 said:
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).
Click to expand...

You are correct. Ender's extension (like all extensions) was all about getting control over his age 30 and 31 seasons, at the cost of guaranteeing money in his arb years. Folks seem to misunderstand how these contract extensions should be valued, considering the team already controlled the player cheaply for 6 years. There is almost zero value in paying a guy a few million less in his arb years after accounting for the increased risk in guaranteeing those seasons. Being able to dump a player at will is extremely valuable.

Was it worth taking on the risk of guaranteeing Ender's arb seasons to gain control over his age 30/31 seasons at $9M each? For a player who relies on defense to produce the bulk of his value...meh. Seems fine.

It's a perfectly good extension, and we deemed it as such at the time it was signed. Ender may be a 4th OFer with a pretty expensive option at the end of the deal, but he also serves as good insurance in case Waters/Pache aren't ready. If Pache/Waters is ready, they decline the option. If Pache/Waters isn't ready, they pick up the option and let Ender keep the seat warm for a few months before sliding to the bench as a very good 4th OFer.

Either way, I doubt Pache is ready to make Ender expendable by next off season, and I doubt Ender gets anything of any real value in trade by the time Pache does make him expendable. I'm higher on Waters than I am on Pache, and I think Waters is an Eaton-type of player...who probably also won't be ready to make Ender expendable this coming off season.
 
Last edited:
Southcack77 said:
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.
Click to expand...

i'm genuinely curious why you were fine with a penny-pinching team like the braves giving a guy who is likely to put up 1-1.5 WAR $6M, but think paying a guy who could put up, say 2 WAR and 1.5 WAR $7M and $8M is bad.
 
Super said:
this is the biggest point of contention.
it was pretty obviously a good deal/extension.
Click to expand...

LOL, quoting out of context is awesome.

You are assigning the value of this contract to the "savings" in the arbitration seasons, and you're doing it because you somehow misunderstood why the Braves got amazing value in the early years of the deal...so it's an attempt to backpedal.

The value of Ender's extension, and all such extensions, lies in the extra year(s) of control gained over FA seasons. Any argument that suggests otherwise is factually incorrect.
 
Enscheff said:
LOL, quoting out of context is awesome.

You are assigning the value of this contract to the "savings" in the arbitration seasons, and you're doing it because you somehow misunderstood why the Braves got amazing value in the early years of the deal...so it's an attempt to backpedal.

The value of Ender's extension, and all such extensions, lies in the extra year(s) of control gained over FA seasons. Any argument that suggests otherwise is factually incorrect.
Click to expand...

huh?
South's argument is that the extension was ill-advised.
i disagree for a few reasons, not just one. the early savings is one reason. am i only allowed to pick one? how on earth am i back peddling? i've always felt the extension was a good thing. never once did i say "it was only good because of the early savings."
 
Super said:
i'm genuinely curious why you were fine with a penny-pinching team like the braves giving a guy who is likely to put up 1-1.5 WAR $6M, but think paying a guy who could put up, say 2 WAR and 1.5 WAR $7M and $8M is bad.
Click to expand...


Markakis was signed to what could amount to a one year stop gap for a reasonable price, AFTER exhausting all other options. I still would be entirely open to upgrading during the season.

If it's 2022 and the Braves couldn't find a center fielder and Ender can still play a bit and was willing to do a 6m one year deal then that would be ok with me.

My issue is I don't think buying that extra two years of control is going to end up being worth a whole lot. I think its likely they could have bought those same years cheaply out of free agency. So I don't know that taking the risk of the guarantee was all that worth it.

It probably is not a huge deal either way, but in an offseason where the Braves were not engaging on much of anything after Donaldson, I am reluctant to be committed to 9m to Ender. I suspect that like Teheran it will just be a situation where you'd rather you weren't.
 
Southcack77 said:
My issue is I don't think buying that extra two years of control is going to end up being worth a whole lot. I think its likely they could have bought those same years cheaply out of free agency. So I don't know that taking the risk of the guarantee was all that worth it.

It probably is not a huge deal either way, but in an offseason where the Braves were not engaging on much of anything after Donaldson, I am reluctant to be committed to 9m to Ender. I suspect that like Teheran it will just be a situation where you'd rather you weren't.
Click to expand...

this is the main disagreement. i just think it could pretty easily be worth it, and was a good "gamble" to take (even tho i basically don't find it to be any kind of real gamble). he doesn't have to produce much to be worth that.
but i think you can apply the same logic to ender that you are applying to markakis. if paying markakis $6M this year doesn't prohibit the braves from upgrading in-season, then $8M to ender in 2021 won't stop them from upgrading in-season. i actually think they'll be more open to upgrading (if need be) from inciarte at that point than they would be markakis this season, but that's subjective.
this also goes back to your point about a 2+ WAR player, tho. if it were so easy they wouldn't have settled for markakis again.
 
Super said:
this is the main disagreement. i just think it could pretty easily be worth it, and was a good "gamble" to take (even tho i basically don't find it to be any kind of real gamble). he doesn't have to produce much to be worth that.
but i think you can apply the same logic to ender that you are applying to markakis. if paying markakis $6M this year doesn't prohibit the braves from upgrading in-season, then $8M to ender in 2021 won't stop them from upgrading in-season. i actually think they'll be more open to upgrading (if need be) from inciarte at that point than they would be markakis this season, but that's subjective.
this also goes back to your point about a 2+ WAR player, tho. if it were so easy they wouldn't have settled for markakis again.
Click to expand...

Sometimes you win with a grand slam (the Acuna contract), sometimes you win by scratching out infield singles (Inciarte contract). I think the front office has to be relentless in pursuing value in whatever form it takes.

Looked at from a risk/return perspective or from a expected wins per dollar perspective, the Inciarte contract was good business. So were other much different moves such as the Donaldson, McCann and Markakis deals this past off-season. If the going rate per expected win is $8M and you have an opportunity to pay less you don't want to pass up that opportunity.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top