Trades You'd Make At The Drop Of A Hat...

Horsehide Harry said:
Freddie's a very good but not elite hitter. I said that in the original post and I stand by it. Elite is Miguel Cabrera, Albert Pujols in his prime (and the way he's currently playing), Goldschmidt, Teixeira in his prime (and the way he's currently playing).

Freddie belongs with the group of Jose Abreu, Joey Votto, Adrian Gonzalez, Prince Fielder, Rizzo and just ahead of the likes of Adam Lind & Chris Davis.

I guess you could argue that he is anywhere as high as #3 or as low as #7 at 1B. Taking how the group is playing so far this year, I would put him currently at #6 or #7.

And, yes his defense should count. But, it counts less at 1st than anywhere else. That's why great hitters who are challenged fielders get moved to 1B. It is also a position of small instance of injury therefore the home of bat wielding old horses.

Freeman is not Chipper (who was an elite bat at 3B). He's not top three at his position year in and year out and destined for the hall of fame. That's nothing to be ashamed about.

But, the point is, I am NOT trying to argue that he isn't any good. Far from it. What I am saying is that it's quite possible that he is more valuable as a trade piece currently to the Braves.
Click to expand...

Abreu - offensive face of the franchise - $11.35 million/year - definitely a steal.
Votto - offensive face of the franchise - $22.5 million/year
Gonzalez - offensive face of the franchise - $21.25 million/year
Fielder - offensive face of the franchise - $24 million/year

Freeman - offensive face of the franchise - $18,142,857/year

Freeman's a much better deal than any of those players you listed in his group not named Abreu - why would you trade arguably the second best value at the position when you're starving for offense?
 
clvclv said:
Abreu - offensive face of the franchise - $11.35 million/year - definitely a steal.
Votto - offensive face of the franchise - $22.5 million/year
Gonzalez - offensive face of the franchise - $21.25 million/year
Fielder - offensive face of the franchise - $24 million/year

Freeman - offensive face of the franchise - $18,142,857/year

Freeman's a much better deal than any of those players you listed in his group not named Abreu - why would you trade arguably the second best value at the position when you're starving for offense?
Click to expand...

Again, the sum must be better than the part for me to think trading Freeman is a good idea.

And, given that he's a reasonably good value, who says that he SHOULD be the face of the franchise. Why can't it be someone else? I believe that you want the face of the franchise to be someone who stirs interest with the fan masses players like Cabrera in Detroit, Trout in LA, Harper in Washington, Pujols when he was with the Cards, Tulo in Colorado (although fading), Stanton in Florida.

One of the smartest baseball moves that I've seen in the last few years was the Cards allowing Pujols, the face of their franchise (and a legit one I might add), to walk because they felt the total that they could accomplish with the money he commanded was better than the part (Pujols).

I don't know that you can consider Gonzalez or Fielder the face of their respective franchises at this point. Gonzalez gets lost in the crowd and Fielder was acquired on a contract dump, it was probably Hamilton until he left then Beltre and maybe Fielder now. It will be Hamilton again if he comes back strong. The Chisox really have no face so I guess I can agree that Abreu is it. Votto in Cincy, which is a good comp for Freddie but Votto has the MVP.
 
Horsehide Harry said:
You have to look at the FA availability after the season coming up and you will see FA: Greinke, Price, Gallardo, Cueto, Zimmerman (who at best Miller equates to) then have Kazmir, Latos and many others in the second tier where you would have to place Wood.

Any team in the offseason who is in the market for pitching is going to look FA first because it only costs them money (and maybe a pick). To trade for a starter generally costs you money and talent and either forces short term uncertainty if the player is approaching FA or locks you into a contract that came from another Team.
Click to expand...

Greinke - Dodgers
Price - Braves, Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers, Cubs
Cueto - Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers, Cubs
Zimmerman - Braves, Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers, Cubs

Seriously, who else do you think has the financial flexibility to go after these guys this winter? Not Cincy, not Philadelphia, not Washington, not Detroit, not Tampa, not Texas, not Anaheim, not Pittsburgh. There are very few teams likely to be bidding on these Pitchers, and you could argue that there's one each for the likely bidders. The only team currently with the flexibility to make a play for two of them is Atlanta, and we all agree that that's unlikely.

I understand the next tier everyone likes to talk about, but there's very little reason to replace Wood and/or Miller with a bat or bats if you're replacing them in the rotation with the Gallardos, Kazmirs, and Latoses of the world - those guys are much worse investments given their age and likely salary costs AND they limit your financial flexibility when trying to add offense.

Just my opinion, but in my "perfect world", you sign Price and J-Up with the money and trade Wood or Banuelos for Lucroy. That gives you...

Price/Miller/Teheran/Wood or Banuelos/Wisler (and allows you to keep Folty)

Peterson, Maybin, Freeman, Upton, Markakis, Lucroy, 3B, Simmons

I understand why everyone says Justin's not an option, but the next time I see a free-agent turn down the highest bid for his services for "personal reasons" it'll be the first time in a long time - give me a handful of examples who have. Pujols didn't, Lester didn't, Greinke didn't, Josh Hamilton didn't, and those guys were obviously examples of players you thought might leave money on the table (and even stated openly that they were considering other factors at least as important as the $$$ in making their decisions).
 
Horsehide Harry said:
Again, the sum must be better than the part for me to think trading Freeman is a good idea.

And, given that he's a reasonably good value, who says that he SHOULD be the face of the franchise. Why can't it be someone else? I believe that you want the face of the franchise to be someone who stirs interest with the fan masses players like Cabrera in Detroit, Trout in LA, Harper in Washington, Pujols when he was with the Cards, Tulo in Colorado (although fading), Stanton in Florida.

One of the smartest baseball moves that I've seen in the last few years was the Cards allowing Pujols, the face of their franchise (and a legit one I might add), to walk because they felt the total that they could accomplish with the money he commanded was better than the part (Pujols).

I don't know that you can consider Gonzalez or Fielder the face of their respective franchises at this point. Gonzalez gets lost in the crowd and Fielder was acquired on a contract dump, it was probably Hamilton until he left then Beltre and maybe Fielder now. It will be Hamilton again if he comes back strong. The Chisox really have no face so I guess I can agree that Abreu is it. Votto in Cincy, which is a good comp for Freddie but Votto has the MVP.
Click to expand...

That particular good comp is making $90 million more for winning ONE MVP. How good does that make Freeman's deal look when you consider it in that context?
 
clvclv said:
Greinke - Dodgers
Price - Braves, Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers, Cubs
Cueto - Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers, Cubs
Zimmerman - Braves, Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers, Cubs

Seriously, who else do you think has the financial flexibility to go after these guys this winter? Not Cincy, not Philadelphia, not Washington, not Detroit, not Tampa, not Texas, not Anaheim, not Pittsburgh. There are very few teams likely to be bidding on these Pitchers, and you could argue that there's one each for the likely bidders. The only team currently with the flexibility to make a play for two of them is Atlanta, and we all agree that that's unlikely.

I understand the next tier everyone likes to talk about, but there's very little reason to replace Wood and/or Miller with a bat or bats if you're replacing them in the rotation with the Gallardos, Kazmirs, and Latoses of the world - those guys are much worse investments given their age and likely salary costs AND they limit your financial flexibility when trying to add offense.

Just my opinion, but in my "perfect world", you sign Price and J-Up with the money and trade Wood or Banuelos for Lucroy. That gives you...

Price/Miller/Teheran/Wood or Banuelos/Wisler (and allows you to keep Folty)

Peterson, Maybin, Freeman, Upton, Markakis, Lucroy, 3B, Simmons

I understand why everyone says Justin's not an option, but the next time I see a free-agent turn down the highest bid for his services for "personal reasons" it'll be the first time in a long time - give me a handful of examples who have. Pujols didn't, Lester didn't, Greinke didn't, Josh Hamilton didn't, and those guys were obviously examples of players you thought might leave money on the table (and even stated openly that they were considering other factors at least as important as the $$$ in making their decisions).
Click to expand...

Under most offseason I would agree. But this offseason has an unusual number of both top tier and mid tier options. The teams that you say won't be players for top tier FA pitching also are teams that typically don't trade talent/prospects (Angels) or teams that are rebuilding (Phillies) and will likely line up for mid tier options hoping to bargain shop. The big spenders in terms of cash and/or talent will go for the FA first which will hurt Millers value. The number of unusual comps for Wood (and/or Teheran) will hurt his value.

Now, if you hold them until after 2016 you might be right. However, their value would diminish somewhat simply because of elapsed time, always assuming they stay healthy and effective.
 
clvclv said:
That particular good comp is making $90 million more for winning ONE MVP. How good does that make Freeman's deal look when you consider it in that context?
Click to expand...

I didn't say I wanted Votto. But the $90M includes $50M for year 9 and 10 plus a $20M option ($7M buyout) for year 11. What would Freemans deal be with year 9, 10 and 11 (close to the same)? I don't remember where Votto was under control when he signed his extension but the Braves bought out Freemans last three arby years.

So, I would say Freemans deal, in context, isn't hugely better than Votto's deal outside of the fact that Votto was signed to his extension coming off 5 MVP worthy season (winning one) while the Braves signed Freeman to his as he was coming off three high quality campaigns to open his career. Score one for Frank Wren I guess.
 
Horsehide Harry said:
I didn't say I wanted Votto. But the $90M includes $50M for year 9 and 10 plus a $20M option ($7M buyout) for year 11. What would Freemans deal be with year 9, 10 and 11 (close to the same)? I don't remember where Votto was under control when he signed his extension but the Braves bought out Freemans last three arby years.

So, I would say Freemans deal, in context, isn't hugely better than Votto's deal outside of the fact that Votto was signed to his extension coming off 5 MVP worthy season (winning one) while the Braves signed Freeman to his as he was coming off three high quality campaigns to open his career. Score one for Frank Wren I guess.
Click to expand...

Votto's first extension was 3 years/$38 million, signed in his next-to-last year of team control. His 11 free-agent years cost them $242 million ($22 million per). The point is the Braves aren't paying for nearly as many of the unproductive years on the backside of Freeman's career. Votto was 28 when he would've been a free-agent for the first time - the Braves bought 5 free-agent years of Freeman for $106.5 million ($21.5 million), and he'll only be 4 years older than Votto was when he signed his extension when that commitment ends.

The 5 years the Reds will get out of an old Votto cost them $114,318,180 more than the Braves paid for Freddie - that means Atlanta could extend him for $25 million per when he's 32 to cover the same period the Reds signed Votto for OR they could walk away and save that money.

Freeman's deal is one of the best bargains in the game when you consider the "average" salary for an "average" 1B will likely be $30 million+ when he becomes a free-agent in 2022. If Freddie produces no more than he has to this point through his prime (27-32 years old - 2017-2021) when you already consider him a Top 4-10 player at his position, he's still an absolute steal.
 
clvclv said:
Why do you assume that? Neither the Rockies or Brewers are going to sniff the playoffs, and likely aren't going into firesale mode until this winter (when there are more bidders). You don't trade Miller and Wood before you're sure you're replacing them with frontline SPs. Which Pitchers that will make up that "glut" you mention can either of those teams afford (that are better than Miller and Wood) do you think they're going to bid on? Definitely not the "Aces" - neither team has the financial flexibility.
Click to expand...

clvclv said:
Greinke - Dodgers
Price - Braves, Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers, Cubs
Cueto - Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers, Cubs
Zimmerman - Braves, Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers, Cubs

Seriously, who else do you think has the financial flexibility to go after these guys this winter? Not Cincy, not Philadelphia, not Washington, not Detroit, not Tampa, not Texas, not Anaheim, not Pittsburgh. There are very few teams likely to be bidding on these Pitchers, and you could argue that there's one each for the likely bidders. The only team currently with the flexibility to make a play for two of them is Atlanta, and we all agree that that's unlikely.

I understand the next tier everyone likes to talk about, but there's very little reason to replace Wood and/or Miller with a bat or bats if you're replacing them in the rotation with the Gallardos, Kazmirs, and Latoses of the world - those guys are much worse investments given their age and likely salary costs AND they limit your financial flexibility when trying to add offense.

Just my opinion, but in my "perfect world", you sign Price and J-Up with the money and trade Wood or Banuelos for Lucroy. That gives you...

Price/Miller/Teheran/Wood or Banuelos/Wisler (and allows you to keep Folty)

Peterson, Maybin, Freeman, Upton, Markakis, Lucroy, 3B, Simmons

I understand why everyone says Justin's not an option, but the next time I see a free-agent turn down the highest bid for his services for "personal reasons" it'll be the first time in a long time - give me a handful of examples who have. Pujols didn't, Lester didn't, Greinke didn't, Josh Hamilton didn't, and those guys were obviously examples of players you thought might leave money on the table (and even stated openly that they were considering other factors at least as important as the $$$ in making their decisions).
Click to expand...

Not to mention places like Colorado, Milwaukee, Arizona, .etc that are hitter friendly and have a tough (or next to impossible in Colorado's case) time persuading top starting pitchers to sign with them.
 
I expect the Tigers to sign one. Their owner is old and wants to win a world series before he dies. They might as well rebuild if they cant re-sign Price or replace him. The Cubs I think will sign one of the top tier starters if not 2. They have **** tons of hitting prospects, add a Price and Greinke to that rotation and they can print world series tickets. The Red Sox are going to be desperate after another bad year. The White Sox are on some bizarre 3 year plan that ****s in the face of reality, so they might throw some money around thinking they have a snowballs chance in hell of winning anything in the next 2 years. The Mets are the Mets, they might sign Price to a 10 year 300 million contract because its a Met thing to do. I wouldn't put it past the Dodgers to sign all of them just to keep them away from other teams. Can never count out the Yankees. The Astros like the Cubs seem primed for big things and they could sign 2 and be right at 100 million in payroll. The Nationals might stop stucking off MLB's teet and get a lot of money if they settle their **** with the Orioles.

I remember last offseason when the Braves met with Lester they said "right pitcher, wrong time". That's when we were in an obvious rebuild but we look to be on an upswing again. Like the early 90's Braves signing Maddux when we already had a good rotation I think we go looking to add an ace. I think that pitcher is David Price. I thought he was a better pitcher than Scherzer and look what he is doing in the NL. I think we could offer something like 5 years 150 million. Its not the most money he could get but if he doesn't flame out he could cash in again after those 5 years. For the Braves 5 years is perfect as he would be coming off the books the year all this years rookies would be hitting free agency. I think Teheran is going to be traded, probably with CJ attached. Hopefully he can bring back at good RH hitting LF prospect. Someone like Aaron Judge would be perfect. I would love to throw money at a great hitter to put in the middle of the lineup but there just aren't any to sign. Heywood is Heywood. Justin Upton is the streakiest hitter alive. Wieters seems like a good option. Switch hitting catcher with good defense and 20+ HR power, but he will be expensive and is a low OBP hitter. After that the best options are Zobrist/Murphy/Kendrick/Desmond. Sure hope we get Uribe re-signed before anyone realizes he is the best FA 3B on the market.
 
clvclv said:
That was the only point I was making - that while shocking (to me as well), I'm not willing to say they won't do that. As you mention, what might they get if they decided to go that route?

For instance, say you sign Price and Zimmerman and then turn around and make Miller and Wood available for bats. Now you're looking at...

Price/Zimmerman/Teheran/Banuelos/Wisler

Would Wood and Simmons get you Tulo with the Rockies eating some of his money? Could Miller, Folty, Maybin, and Bethancourt get you Carlos Gomez and Jonathon Lucroy? I honestly don't know those answers, which is why I won't absolutely dismiss the idea that they might consider it.
Click to expand...

I don't think the plan for the future is to pay for pitching. Just too susceptible to injury. Just keep producing pitchers from the minors and trade the guys that don't want to extend at favorable prices.
 
clvclv said:
The problem here is that you can't compare Hamels' contract to whatever Price eventually signs for. If the Braves wanted Hamels at his figure, he'd cost them AT LEAST 3 Top 10 prospects or something like Miller and two Top 10 prospects - the Phillies aren't stupid enough to trade him within the division for less than that (and I might not take that if I were in their shoes). I'd be more than happy to pay Price $7 million more a year and get to keep the prospects personally.
Click to expand...

Oh I totally agree, was just comparing strictly contracts (which I suppose is useless).
 
Justin is in one of those prolonged slumps.
I'm not trying to say he isn't a good hitter, not at all. But these slumps are a total killer.
 
yeezus said:
Justin is in one of those prolonged slumps.
I'm not trying to say he isn't a good hitter, not at all. But these slumps are a total killer.
Click to expand...

Mentioned it the other day. I'm fine with our consistent 7-10 hit nights. You put Freeman back in the lineup and we are going to score a bunch of runs. The pitching is finally getting to last year's level and the offense is soooo much better.
 
msstate7 said:
What do you think it would take to get hamels?
Click to expand...

Two of Folty/Banuelos/Wisler/Fried, Peraza, and Mallex Smith at a minimum, plus you'd have to swallow all the money.

The Phillies aren't going to trade him within the division and have him beat them for the next 4 and a half years unless someone SERIOUSLY overpays IMO.
 
clvclv said:
That particular good comp is making $90 million more for winning ONE MVP. How good does that make Freeman's deal look when you consider it in that context?
Click to expand...

Slow down on the Votto thing, hoss. Votto is a good Freddie comp this year. Last year he was hurt and played 62 games. The four years prior his wRC+ were 156, 178, 157, 172.

If Freddie comes back strong and ups his game a bit, he will put up a season like the low end of that . . . which will be his first on that level.

This is neither a shot at Freddie nor an endorsement of Votto's deal, but rather a suggestion that you've mischaracterized the kind of player Votto is.
 
Julio3000 said:
Slow down on the Votto thing, hoss. Votto is a good Freddie comp this year. Last year he was hurt and played 62 games. The four years prior his wRC+ were 156, 178, 157, 172.

If Freddie comes back strong and ups his game a bit, he will put up a season like the low end of that . . . which will be his first on that level.

This is neither a shot at Freddie nor an endorsement of Votto's deal, but rather a suggestion that you've mischaracterized the kind of player Votto is.
Click to expand...

While I agree with your sentiment and I certainly don't want to argue against my own position, I think you have to keep in mind that Votto calls home to pretty much a band box stadium (not Coors Field like) but small none the less.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top