Top 3 and Bottom 3 Hart/Coppolella moves.

weso1 said:
Bottom 3:

3: Gattis for Folty, Ruiz and whatever.

Just not a big believer in Folty. The guy has great stuff but I just get the feel that he won't put it together. Meh on Ruiz. A position of need, but the chances of him succeeding seem unlikely. The good news is that I thought Gattis was our least valuable asset. A mediocre DH. With that in mind Folty could wind up being a decent closer and if you get a decent closer for Gattis then that's pretty solid to be honest.

2: Simmons for Newcomb:

The Braves put all of their eggs in one basket in this trade. Ellis is a nice player and might be a bit underrated as a prospect, but essentially this is all about the bet that Newcomb becomes not just an ace, but an elite ace. It's just hard for me to believe that we couldn't have gotten a bit more for Simmons in the end and not taken on such a risk.

1: Wood and Peraza for Olivera, Bird, Paco and compensation pick

I think we were all just hoping that Wood and Peraza would net us a lot more than this. I get that there is some potential there, but Olivera is quickly running out of potential, Paco had to have another surgery and Bird is a mediocre prospect at best. The only two interesting things left in this deal is can Olivera hit at the major league level and what prospect can we get with that pick. I wouldn't be shocked if we wind up getting absolutely nothing from this deal. Very disappointing considering what we gave up.

Top 3:

3: Gosselin for Toussaint and Arroyo:

I believe the Braves came close to creating a new rule with this trade. They essentially paid the Diamondbacks money to obtain one of their top prospects. I feel like this is something MLB would grump about. The #3 choice was really tough for me as there were a lot of honorable mentions, but just the idea that the Braves made a lot of pundits grump about fairness makes me think they did a damn good job here. But in the end we got a high ceiling prospect for cash which should have no impact on future spending. In other words we got Toussaint for nothing as far as it concerns me as a fan. I think you could argue this was the best deal of any other deal made by Hart/JC if not for:

2: Kimbrel and BJ Upton for Wisler, Maybin, a draft pick and a bucket full of future cash:

At the time of the trade Kimbrel was a strong asset. We traded one strong asset for Wisler (an asset), Maybin (a liability), The draft pick (an asset) and a bucket full of future cash (a strong asset). So Kimbrel and the future cash offset each other value wise. Both were strong assets. And let's assume that Maybin and Upton offset each other. Both had surprising years, but are basically equal in value. So taking money out of the equation that basically leaves the Braves with Wisler and the draft pick in excess value. Let me make that clear, we got Wisler and Austin Riley for nothing. You would think that would be the best deal the Braves made except for...

1: Shelby Miller traded for Inciarte, Blair and Swanson:

Miller and Inciarte are essentially a wash. I could easily argue, without using Coppolella spin, that we will get more value out of Inciarte then we will get out of Miller. So let's cancel those two out. We gave up a rube for Blair and Swanson. In other words we got Swanson and Blair for nothing. Swanson has a chance to be the next Barry Larkin or Derek Jeter. Reasonably he's likely to be Erick Aybar as it pertains to WAR. And there is Blair who has a decent chance to be a solid 2-3 starter. Just an unbelieveable trade if you're the Braves. Oh and we have some money to work with early on.
Click to expand...

How do you figure Miller and Inciarte are a wash? Miller is twice the player.
 
Carp said:
Don't have a top/bottom 3 at this time, but I would say the worst move they've made is trading for Trevor Cahill. While we didn't give up a lot, we still sent a live body to the Diamondbacks for the privilege of paying Cahill a little over 5 million dollars to be hot garbage.
Click to expand...

What's awesome about that deal is that the Braves were even right about Cahill being a valuable piece in 2015. He just decided to become one after we gave up on him.
 
ESP47 said:
How do you figure Miller and Inciarte are a wash? Miller is twice the player.
Click to expand...

Many analysts agree that Inciarte could very well be more valuable over the course of the controlled years remaining and could end up being straight up better each year.
 
ESP47 said:
How do you figure Miller and Inciarte are a wash? Miller is twice the player.
Click to expand...

Well, as far as on a per year statement you're almost certainly right unless you're of the opinoin that a position player iwll always be worth more than a pitcher (like AA)

But Inciarte is under controlfor 2 more seasons. So let's guess that over the next 3 seasons, is a 10 WAR player. Even if we say 12 assuming he improves on last year for each of the 3 seasons. All Inciarte has to do to beat him is be worth 10 WAR which given his defense shouldn't be hard.

The downside to this analysis though is Miller will always be good enough to start, there's a chance Inciarte could be a wash with our other OF options. So for example, say Mallex and Inciarte are a wash, then he has to be a siginificant improvement over Olivera or Markakis, or down the line guys like Davidson, Acuna, Peterson, etc.

Personally I think from a value standpoint that Inciarte should easily crush Miller. I'm almost certain that miller will miss time cause of TJ.
 
zitothebrave said:
Well, as far as on a per year statement you're almost certainly right unless you're of the opinoin that a position player iwll always be worth more than a pitcher (like AA)

But Inciarte is under controlfor 2 more seasons. So let's guess that over the next 3 seasons, is a 10 WAR player. Even if we say 12 assuming he improves on last year for each of the 3 seasons. All Inciarte has to do to beat him is be worth 10 WAR which given his defense shouldn't be hard.

The downside to this analysis though is Miller will always be good enough to start, there's a chance Inciarte could be a wash with our other OF options. So for example, say Mallex and Inciarte are a wash, then he has to be a siginificant improvement over Olivera or Markakis, or down the line guys like Davidson, Acuna, Peterson, etc.

Personally I think from a value standpoint that Inciarte should easily crush Miller. I'm almost certain that miller will miss time cause of TJ.
Click to expand...

CERTAIN.. how is that?!? is there a velocity drop to point to this?
 
bravesfanMatt said:
CERTAIN.. how is that?!? is there a velocity drop to point to this?
Click to expand...

Miller has a timing issue. Timing issues and pitchers who get TJ are highly correlatory. IIRC he was also at one point shut down for his arm, though I may be blending his past with Wainwrights I've done that more than once.
 
mqt said:
What's awesome about that deal is that the Braves were even right about Cahill being a valuable piece in 2015. He just decided to become one after we gave up on him.
Click to expand...

Yup. I thought Cahill was quite a defensible move, given the context. He seemed like a guy with a chance to rebound . . . and it looks like he did, albeit after we gave up on him.
 
I agree with the top 3 and bottom 2 in the original post . . . and in that same order. 3rd worst is harder to say. It's definitely not the Gattis trade for me. Thought we did really well there, and nothing I've seen from any of the players involved has made me regret the deal. If I were an American League GM right now with a DH need, I wouldn't offer Folty OR Rio Ruiz for Gattis straight up.

For 3rd worst, I'd probably go with the Justin Upton trade. None of the 4 players acquired in that trade are likely to be everyday regulars. Seems like we overplayed our hand a bit on that one.
 
dak said:
I agree with the top 3 and bottom 2 in the original post . . . and in that same order. 3rd worst is harder to say. It's definitely not the Gattis trade for me. Thought we did really well there, and nothing I've seen from any of the players involved has made me regret the deal. If I were an American League GM right now with a DH need, I wouldn't offer Folty OR Rio Ruiz for Gattis straight up.

For 3rd worst, I'd probably go with the Justin Upton trade. None of the 4 players acquired in that trade are likely to be everyday regulars. Seems like we overplayed our hand a bit on that one.
Click to expand...

thethe said Jace was worth Justin alone.
 
zitothebrave said:
What quantifies top?

To me the best trade from a value perspective the Braves made was 100% Uribe and Withrow for Callaspo, Jaime, Thomas and Stults. Why it worked was we got a guy who was our best player for a few months and gave up 2 of our worst players. Jaime and Withrow are a wash. So we basically traded Thomas and trash for a solid 3B. And flipped Uribe and KJ for 2 solid pitching prospects. To me that's the clearest win for the Braves. Only risk is Thomas developing into a decent setup man.

To me the worst trade was giving up Wood and Peraza for Olivera. Main reason is there's a good chance Olivera won't be worth Peraza's value in the majors. And we give up one of the better young pitchers in baseball as well? Olivera was obviously someone that Hart/Scherholz had a boner for and weren't happy they lost out on. But they doubled down and overpaid by trade with the Dodgers. Who had no place for Olivera. It was just dumb all around.
Click to expand...

I really don't even see Jaime and Withrow as a wash. I think that is a big win for the Braves. The reason why is that Jaime has a big arm but has NEVER been able to consistently find the plate. Sure, Withrow is out with TJ but the recovery is so high from that now that it's a great gamble. Also, Jaime is running out of options so pretty soon he will be either on the Dodgers 25 (unlikely) or somewhere else, possibly even back with the Braves should they want him.

I also agree with the Olivera remarks. It was a terrible trade, not because of giving up Wood and/or Peraza. I was all for trading both or either. It was the fact that Olivera doesn't fit into the long term strategy. AT BEST he will be 33 when the Braves are actually likely to have any chance of being good again.
 
Horsehide Harry said:
I really don't even see Jaime and Withrow as a wash. I think that is a big win for the Braves. The reason why is that Jaime has a big arm but has NEVER been able to consistently find the plate. Sure, Withrow is out with TJ but the recovery is so high from that now that it's a great gamble. Also, Jaime is running out of options so pretty soon he will be either on the Dodgers 25 (unlikely) or somewhere else, possibly even back with the Braves should they want him.

I also agree with the Olivera remarks. It was a terrible trade, not because of giving up Wood and/or Peraza. I was all for trading both or either. It was the fact that Olivera doesn't fit into the long term strategy. AT BEST he will be 33 when the Braves are actually likely to have any chance of being good again.
Click to expand...

Agree that the logic of the deal is more puzzling than the principal parts of the deal.
 
Horsehide Harry said:
I really don't even see Jaime and Withrow as a wash. I think that is a big win for the Braves. The reason why is that Jaime has a big arm but has NEVER been able to consistently find the plate. Sure, Withrow is out with TJ but the recovery is so high from that now that it's a great gamble. Also, Jaime is running out of options so pretty soon he will be either on the Dodgers 25 (unlikely) or somewhere else, possibly even back with the Braves should they want him.

I also agree with the Olivera remarks. It was a terrible trade, not because of giving up Wood and/or Peraza. I was all for trading both or either. It was the fact that Olivera doesn't fit into the long term strategy. AT BEST he will be 33 when the Braves are actually likely to have any chance of being good again.
Click to expand...

Withrow is not exactly Greg Maddux. He's struggled with Control his whole career (walked 5 per nine in the minors) Jaime of course is even worse than that, but they're both at the same basic K/BB ratio cause Jaime struck out way more. I consider them a net even, both are in that 5-7 range of bullpen selection. That's why I consider them a wash. Neither are gonna be a big impact on either team and neither are likely to stay on the tema for more than a season or 2.

I would have been fine trading Wood and or Peraza. But I wanted to trade thme for prospects or controlled major leaguers. I didn't want a 30 yaer old prospect.
 
zitothebrave said:
Withrow is not exactly Greg Maddux. He's struggled with Control his whole career (walked 5 per nine in the minors) Jaime of course is even worse than that, but they're both at the same basic K/BB ratio cause Jaime struck out way more. I consider them a net even, both are in that 5-7 range of bullpen selection. That's why I consider them a wash. Neither are gonna be a big impact on either team and neither are likely to stay on the tema for more than a season or 2.

I would have been fine trading Wood and or Peraza. But I wanted to trade thme for prospects or controlled major leaguers. I didn't want a 30 yaer old prospect.
Click to expand...

Um what?!? Withrow was very effective in 2014.. even with his injury last year he was effect for the first half.. although his walk rate took a hit. Juan has never been able to handle the MLB hitters.

Withrow in him MLB career has 56 innings pitched.. 11.4 K/9.. 5 BB/9... 2.73 ERA... 3.65 FIP.... 1.089 WHIp
Jaime hasn't ever stayed up long enough but in 13.2 innings.. 12.5 K/9 8.6 BB/9 (wow)... 5.93 Era.. 4.38 FIp 1.976 Whip

how can you honestly say these two guys are a wash. Withrow has shown a full season of very effective relief work in the Majors.. Juan who is also 2 years older has shown he will always be an org filler guy with potential but no results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top