Viz and Teheran listed as top trade candidates

Maybe we can start by defining terms. What's "fair value" for Teheran? Earlier in the thread I threw out a top 75 overall prospect, a minor league reliever with great numbers while being too old for the league and a C-level prospect with some toolsy upside as my sense of "fair value" for Teheran. Does that seem broadly accurate to most folks?

I don't think so. His contract alone makes him more valuable than that. The idea that money is irrelevant to the sox is inaccurate. In fact, they are probably interested in large part because of it.They are near their spending limit with needs in the rotation, bullpen, and replacement in the lineup for Ortiz. According to most sox boards they have about 30 mil to do this. Teheran is cheap enough they could fill those holes a lot easier.
 
Ken rosenthal had a sox article today that said the industry does not consider Tehran an impact player worth giving up one of their top 3 bats.

Sox won't look like zona.

That is why a six trade needs to be a blockbuster and likely a 3 team deal.

For those talking up the contract I think that matters less to a team like Boston. Still matters. But if we want total contract value we prob need to deal him to anyone other than sox yanks dodgers white sox tigers blue jays rangers

Can you please link that article? The latest he says (news and notes... From today) the industry doesn't view him as an ace... He didn't say anything about him not being an "impact player." He also said nothing about teams not willing to give up their top 3 prospects... He said in his opinion the Red Sox shouldn't give up Moncada or Benintendi for him or any other pitcher on the market. Not exactly sure how you got your conclusions without some major conjecture or twisting of his words.

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/boston-red-sox-john-farrell-upgrade-rotation-070416
 
That's fine. Some of the best trades are the ones you don't make. Teheran in the AL East is a turrible idea that only a Steinbrenner level idiot would make.
 
I don't think it's going to happen, but wouldn't it be hilarious if Wren's lasting legacy with the Braves was seeding our future playoff clubs from his perch with the Red Sox.
 
Maybe we can start by defining terms. What's "fair value" for Teheran? Earlier in the thread I threw out a top 75 overall prospect, a minor league reliever with great numbers while being too old for the league and a C-level prospect with some toolsy upside as my sense of "fair value" for Teheran. Does that seem broadly accurate to most folks?

I think given the market foe starting pitching and JT's added value for his contract, simply "fair value" is one top 50 prospect and another top 100 prospect (or someone borderline top 100), plus some other lower level prospects with decent upside (like a Dustin Peterson or Ronald Acuna type).

I expect more than fair value if we do trade him though. Something like 1 top 25 prospect, a top 75ish prospect, and 2-3 other good upside pieces in the lower minors
 
I don't think it's going to happen, but wouldn't it be hilarious if Wren's lasting legacy with the Braves was seeding our future playoff clubs from his perch with the Red Sox.

That would be something. I don't really have any bones to pick with Wren, but he's not the most creative baseball mind and my guess is he'd suggest an overpay for Teheran. I doubt Benintendi or Moncada could be pried from the Sox, but Devers would be a nice target. Sox have some other guys that are interesting as well.

What about Seattle for a destination? Teheran fits that park better and O'Neill (currently tearing up AA) would be someone who could come back our way.
 
I think given the market foe starting pitching and JT's added value for his contract, simply "fair value" is one top 50 prospect and another top 100 prospect (or someone borderline top 100), plus some other lower level prospects with decent upside (like a Dustin Peterson or Ronald Acuna type).

I expect more than fair value if we do trade him though. Something like 1 top 25 prospect, a top 75ish prospect, and 2-3 other good upside pieces in the lower minors

My take:

Teheran projects as a 3.5 WAR per season player over the rest of his contract (through 2020 with the option). Or a total of about 16 wins. During that time he will be paid $39M. At the going rate of about 7M/win that works out to about 5.5 wins. So he is a player worth 16 wins being paid a salary worth about 5.5 wins. So his expected surplus value is 10 wins.

There have been various analyses of what a top prospect is worth. Here is one study:

http://www.thepointofpittsburgh.com/mlb-prospect-surplus-values-2016-updated-edition/

It finds that a Top 10 prospect has a surplus value of about 10 wins.

So it appears to me that fair value for Teheran would be a one-for-one trade for someone like Moncada.

Of course, I want to win any trade involving a very valuable asset for Teheran, though I am realistic enough to know that a win of the order of magnitude of the Shelby Miller trade is unlikely. I would be looking for Moncada plus an asset with a surplus value of about 3 WAR. That would be my price in any talks with the Red Sox. There isn't any need to play games with them. Have a bottom line and walk away if they won't meet it.
 
Wren was pretty good when it came to trades. He rarely gave up a top prospect if memory serves. I think the highest rated prospect he gave up was Delgado and that was for J Up, who is at worst a comparable asset to Teheran. But Wren's refused to deal Heyward in a Peavy deal or Teheran in a J Up deal for example show his reluctance to deal top prospects for really good players.

So I would be shocked if he gives up Moncada.
 
Wren was pretty good when it came to trades. He rarely gave up a top prospect if memory serves. I think the highest rated prospect he gave up was Delgado and that was for J Up, who is at worst a comparable asset to Teheran. But Wren's refused to deal Heyward in a Peavy deal or Teheran in a J Up deal for example show his reluctance to deal top prospects for really good players.

So I would be shocked if he gives up Moncada.

Well, Wren wouldn't be the one making that decision.
 
The other side of this argument is the offense. If we keep Teheran and Freeman, how do we fix the offense without signing 30+ year olds from a bad free agent class? We've ignored bats in the trade market to load up on arms. How else do we get bats?

This continues to be one of the most ridiculous statements put forth around here. Not just you CJ9, but this line of thinking simply isn't true. A whole lot of people around here remain handcuffed to the idea that the brass EXPECTED to be competitive as early as next year. Regardless of where each person falls in respect to what they feel they were "told", they (Coppy, Hart, JS) only ever said that something like that was a "shoot for the moon" possibility. IF Albies and Swanson were able to be above average that quickly, Mallex turned into what he appeared he was turning into before getting hurt, and they were able to add another significant piece or two would that have ever been possible. They also said all along that they were going to rush NO ONE and there was no specific timeline. Lots of people conveniently choose to ignore this. They did expect this season to be better than last, and rightfully so. If you look at how Inciarte and Aybar have performed since returning from their injuries, there's little reason not to understand why there was some optimism. The list of players who have underperformed expectations is long and dignified - Olivera, Aybar, Inciarte, Pierzynski, Markakis, Grilli, and Jim Johnson were "proven veterans", and if they'd put up the numbers on the backs of their baseball cards you'd have expected this team to be much better than it was in April and May.

This is where most people need to take a breath and adjust their definition of "being competitive". The Braves are the 6th youngest team in MLB (http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/rosters) WITH Pierzynski, Markakis, Aybar, Francoeur, and Johnson on the roster - and NONE of those players will be here in 2017. The young players are going to struggle as they adjust to playing at the highest level, no matter how well the veterans you surround them with perform. When those veterans play badly (as ours have), it makes it that much harder for the kids because they feel like the team's struggles are their fault - and they press. We've seen this every day, and I have trouble believing people didn't expect to see that.

There are lots of folks who continually criticize the front office for creating "unrealistic expectations", but the only people who ever thought becoming a playoff contender by next season either really don't know much about development time and learning curves (which typically eliminates most posters here since I feel fairly confident that they are brighter than the average fan who's access to information stops at DOB and Bowman), or believe that the addition of players like Cespedes/Myers/Desmond/etc. could be coming. Even if you added those types of players, you're STILL only going to go as far as the young arms can take you - and we all know that will take time.

Rio Ruiz, Jace Peterson, Mallex Smith, Dustin Peterson, Austin Riley, Lucas Herbert, Jonathon Morales, Derian Cruz, Christian Pache, Ender Inciarte, Dansby Swanson, Brett Cumberland, Kevin Maitan, Yunior Severino, Abrahan Gutierrez, and Yenci Pena have all been added SINCE the rebuild began. Will any of them turn into All-Stars? Who knows? Outside of Jace and Ender, they all are projectable - even if only as "league average" performers - and all are VERY young. At least a couple of them are likely going to turn into above-average players (with "star" upside).

The thing is, if anyone's looking for a time for this team to become a legitimate contender WITHOUT going outside the organization, they should see that it's always been more realistically 2018/2019 at the EARLIEST (and that's almost entirely dependent on Maitan's development). Trading Julio or Freddie might very well add a couple of young bats, but that still wouldn't substantially affect that timeline. Gallo/Benintendi/Moncada/etc. won't be able to fill all the holes by themselves, and removing one of the two (or both) creates more holes AND requires even more development time to fill them.
 
Wren was pretty good when it came to trades. He rarely gave up a top prospect if memory serves. I think the highest rated prospect he gave up was Delgado and that was for J Up, who is at worst a comparable asset to Teheran. But Wren's refused to deal Heyward in a Peavy deal or Teheran in a J Up deal for example show his reluctance to deal top prospects for really good players.

So I would be shocked if he gives up Moncada.

Wren also had financial constraints here as opposed to in Boston. So made sense to keep some of his better guys since it's cheaper. Has the luxury in Boston to spend.
 
Wren was pretty good when it came to trades. He rarely gave up a top prospect if memory serves. I think the highest rated prospect he gave up was Delgado and that was for J Up, who is at worst a comparable asset to Teheran. But Wren's refused to deal Heyward in a Peavy deal or Teheran in a J Up deal for example show his reluctance to deal top prospects for really good players.

So I would be shocked if he gives up Moncada.

Agree. I guess what I was saying is that Wren isn't an outside-the-box guy. I don't think he'd be trying to bring extra teams into the equation but would instead look at a straight swap. It's important to remember that the J. Upton deal was a classic now-for-later deal. 4 of the 5 guys who went to Arizona are in the big leagues and Spruill made it there.
 
This continues to be one of the most ridiculous statements put forth around here. Not just you CJ9, but this line of thinking simply isn't true. A whole lot of people around here remain handcuffed to the idea that the brass EXPECTED to be competitive as early as next year. Regardless of where each person falls in respect to what they feel they were "told", they (Coppy, Hart, JS) only ever said that something like that was a "shoot for the moon" possibility. IF Albies and Swanson were able to be above average that quickly, Mallex turned into what he appeared he was turning into before getting hurt, and they were able to add another significant piece or two would that have ever been possible. They also said all along that they were going to rush NO ONE and there was no specific timeline. Lots of people conveniently choose to ignore this. They did expect this season to be better than last, and rightfully so. If you look at how Inciarte and Aybar have performed since returning from their injuries, there's little reason not to understand why there was some optimism. The list of players who have underperformed expectations is long and dignified - Olivera, Aybar, Inciarte, Pierzynski, Markakis, Grilli, and Jim Johnson were "proven veterans", and if they'd put up the numbers on the backs of their baseball cards you'd have expected this team to be much better than it was in April and May.

This is where most people need to take a breath and adjust their definition of "being competitive". The Braves are the 6th youngest team in MLB (http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/rosters) WITH Pierzynski, Markakis, Aybar, Francoeur, and Johnson on the roster - and NONE of those players will be here in 2017. The young players are going to struggle as they adjust to playing at the highest level, no matter how well the veterans you surround them with perform. When those veterans play badly (as ours have), it makes it that much harder for the kids because they feel like the team's struggles are their fault - and they press. We've seen this every day, and I have trouble believing people didn't expect to see that.

There are lots of folks who continually criticize the front office for creating "unrealistic expectations", but the only people who ever thought becoming a playoff contender by next season either really don't know much about development time and learning curves (which typically eliminates most posters here since I feel fairly confident that they are brighter than the average fan who's access to information stops at DOB and Bowman), or believe that the addition of players like Cespedes/Myers/Desmond/etc. could be coming. Even if you added those types of players, you're STILL only going to go as far as the young arms can take you - and we all know that will take time.

Rio Ruiz, Jace Peterson, Mallex Smith, Dustin Peterson, Austin Riley, Lucas Herbert, Jonathon Morales, Derian Cruz, Christian Pache, Ender Inciarte, Dansby Swanson, Brett Cumberland, Kevin Maitan, Yunior Severino, Abrahan Gutierrez, and Yenci Pena have all been added SINCE the rebuild began. Will any of them turn into All-Stars? Who knows? Outside of Jace and Ender, they all are projectable - even if only as "league average" performers - and all are VERY young. At least a couple of them are likely going to turn into above-average players (with "star" upside).

The thing is, if anyone's looking for a time for this team to become a legitimate contender WITHOUT going outside the organization, they should see that it's always been more realistically 2018/2019 at the EARLIEST (and that's almost entirely dependent on Maitan's development). Trading Julio or Freddie might very well add a couple of young bats, but that still wouldn't substantially affect that timeline. Gallo/Benintendi/Moncada/etc. won't be able to fill all the holes by themselves, and removing one of the two (or both) creates more holes AND requires even more development time to fill them.

The Braves only have themselves to blame for putting high expectations on 2017. No - they never came out and said we will win a WS in 2017... but the media pushed the narrative hard... and we know the media pushes the team's agenda

The Braves, Hart knows, could contend in 2015. The game's competitive parity blurs the line between contender and also-ran. But perhaps more importantly -- and more realistically -- a big goal here for Hart, the club's newly installed president of baseball operations, is to field a roster worthy of the World Series by 2017, when SunTrust Park opens.

"I didn't come in with the idea to take this thing down to the bare bones," said Hart, seven weeks after assuming the reins following the firing of general manager Frank Wren. "That's not one of the plans. But we're evaluating every possibility."

When asked about how long until he expects the Braves to be competitive, Schuerholz said, "some in our group would say mid-2016. Some would say early 2017. I'd be happy with either one of those."

“[Fans] have to wait until we do our winter’s work to construct the roster for this team. We will not allow another year like this to occur. We made a vow internally that that is not going to happen.

If we didn’t do this [see above] when we did it we would have slid along for a long time in this malaise as a number of teams have. … Teams like that slide and can’t stop the slide. We decided to shorten this and be aggressive. Anyway, I don’t think that will happen and 2016 is an important year and here’s why: On the heels of 2015, we need to show our fans, not that they distrust us, that we are the Braves.

That was just a quick search on google... I've read time and time again that 2017 is the magical year.

Now, what we've seen the last few months is a major slam on the brakes for those expectations. And rightfully so - bc we are nowhere near being ready to compete anytime soon without some major overhauls. But the fact remains the brass was pushing 2017 as soon as the park plans were announced
 
The thing is, if anyone's looking for a time for this team to become a legitimate contender WITHOUT going outside the organization, they should see that it's always been more realistically 2018/2019 at the EARLIEST (and that's almost entirely dependent on Maitan's development). Trading Julio or Freddie might very well add a couple of young bats, but that still wouldn't substantially affect that timeline. Gallo/Benintendi/Moncada/etc. won't be able to fill all the holes by themselves, and removing one of the two (or both) creates more holes AND requires even more development time to fill them.

If you aren't expecting to contend until 2019ish at the earliest, then it makes absolutely zero sense to keep Julio. We'd basically be hoping he's pitching at the same level 3 years from now, and only having those last two years of control that even matter. If we aren't doing what it takes to field a competitive team for 2017 then keeping Julio (along with bring up Albies and Swanson before June or so) is pointless. One of the major reasons to keep Julio is because of the excess value his contract brings, if we are using that excess value on seasons where we have no hope of competing for the playoffs then that excess value is fairly pointless.

The earliest we are going to see the international players we just signed is maybe August/September of 2019, so if you are counting on that as a reason for keeping Julio then that's a extremely false hope as well. I agree with you entirely on mid 2018 or 2019 being our realistic spot for competing, but if that's the case we should be trading Julio for an impact player that will be here until 2022 or 2023 or so.
 
If you aren't expecting to contend until 2019ish at the earliest, then it makes absolutely zero sense to keep Julio. We'd basically be hoping he's pitching at the same level 3 years from now, and only having those last two years of control that even matter. If we aren't doing what it takes to field a competitive team for 2017 then keeping Julio (along with bring up Albies and Swanson before June or so) is pointless. One of the major reasons to keep Julio is because of the excess value his contract brings, if we are using that excess value on seasons where we have no hope of competing for the playoffs then that excess value is fairly pointless.

The earliest we are going to see the international players we just signed is maybe August/September of 2019, so if you are counting on that as a reason for keeping Julio then that's a extremely false hope as well.

This is correct. Either try to win in 2017, or trade Julio now. It really is that simple if the goal is to maximize player value.

Even if they go for it next year, the Braves should be looking to trade Teheran after the 2018 season anyways. All of these pitchers should be traded when they have 1.5-2 years of control remaining.
 
Given the funds we have to spend on areas of need this off-season (catcher, third, bench and bullpen), I think we'll be a team at about 80 on the expected win curve starting the 2017 season. To me that falls within the definition of "competive". ymmv
 
Given the funds we have to spend on areas of need this off-season (catcher, third, bench and bullpen), I think we'll be a team at about 80 on the expected win curve starting the 2017 season. To me that falls within the definition of "competive". ymmv

who is worth buying nxt yr? One of the many 30+ ok catchers, Freese, and Prado? Huge risk to to put big money into Chapman?
 
Back
Top