SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
possible Red Sox and Braves blockbuster
|
Post by jdb on Jul 9, 2016 10:10:09 GMT -5
I've got a deal in place to bang Kate Hudson tonight. Just waiting on her to say yes of course.
|
|
|
Post by adiospaydro2005 on Jul 9, 2016 17:38:18 GMT -5
Teheran gave up 5 earned runs today for his second start in a row. Interestingly it was also the first time two Columbians ((Teheran and Quintanna) started against each other in MLB game.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 9, 2016 18:06:54 GMT -5
Teheran gave up 5 earned runs today for his second start in a row. Interestingly it was also the first time two Columbians ((Teheran and Quintanna) started against each other in MLB game. There's no way he gave up five runs. He's an ace, clearly.
|
|
|
Post by ryantoworkman on Jul 10, 2016 0:08:21 GMT -5
Teheran gave up 5 earned runs today for his second start in a row. Interestingly it was also the first time two Columbians ((Teheran and Quintanna) started against each other in MLB game. There's no way he gave up five runs. He's an ace, clearly. Quintana gave up 5 in same game, and Sale gave up 5 the night before, in the same series. He's not an ace, but even aces get slapped around from time to time
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 10, 2016 0:23:50 GMT -5
There's no way he gave up five runs. He's an ace, clearly. Quintana gave up 5 in same game, and Sale gave up 5 the night before, in the same series. He's not an ace, but even aces get slapped around from time to time I just like to poke the bears. Seriously, though...as his ridiculous strand rate and BABIP regress towards the realm where rational people recognize they're likely to be, his overall line really doesn't scream "I'm worth two of the top 15 prospects in baseball!", does it? I'm pretty sure he's going to have a few more of those starts, because that's how probability works...he's just not that good. His FIP and xFIP look a lot like Porcello's...except Porcello is doing his thing against real offenses, while Teheran gets nearly 60 games against the Phillies, Mets, and Marlins. All of which is to say, if you wouldn't trade Moncada and Benintendi or Devers and another piece for Porcello, you really shouldn't be advocating it for Teheran. He an Porcello are both 2/3 starters. The Sox are plenty well-off getting Rich Hill if they can, and keeping their top-5 intact.
|
|
|
Post by ryantoworkman on Jul 10, 2016 0:28:32 GMT -5
Quintana gave up 5 in same game, and Sale gave up 5 the night before, in the same series. He's not an ace, but even aces get slapped around from time to time I just like to poke the bears. Seriously, though...as his ridiculous strand rate and BABIP regress towards the realm where rational people recognize they're likely to be, his overall line really doesn't scream "I'm worth two of the top 15 prospects in baseball!", does it? I'm pretty sure he's going to have a few more of those starts, because that's how probability works...he's just not that good. His FIP and xFIP look a lot like Porcello's...except Porcello is doing his thing against real offenses, while Teheran gets nearly 60 games against the Phillies, Mets, and Marlins. All of which is to say, if you wouldn't trade Moncada and Benintendi or Devers and another piece for Porcello, you really shouldn't be advocating it for Teheran. He an Porcello are both 2/3 starters. The Sox are plenty well-off getting Rich Hill if they can, and keeping their top-5 intact. Someone has to poke them :-) The Braves are handling this poorly. They have a guy at near max value, and they're basically telling everyone he's not available, except in the most outrageous packets in return . Maybe they think everyone in baseball has DBACKS Stupid Disease? More outrageous is how they are holding the line on Vizciano. There's no way they are offering a QO, but again, the asking price is silly. How long will that awful Shelby Miller deal screw up trades in baseball?
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 10, 2016 1:11:06 GMT -5
I just like to poke the bears. Seriously, though...as his ridiculous strand rate and BABIP regress towards the realm where rational people recognize they're likely to be, his overall line really doesn't scream "I'm worth two of the top 15 prospects in baseball!", does it? I'm pretty sure he's going to have a few more of those starts, because that's how probability works...he's just not that good. His FIP and xFIP look a lot like Porcello's...except Porcello is doing his thing against real offenses, while Teheran gets nearly 60 games against the Phillies, Mets, and Marlins. All of which is to say, if you wouldn't trade Moncada and Benintendi or Devers and another piece for Porcello, you really shouldn't be advocating it for Teheran. He an Porcello are both 2/3 starters. The Sox are plenty well-off getting Rich Hill if they can, and keeping their top-5 intact. Someone has to poke them :-) The Braves are handling this poorly. They have a guy at near max value, and they're basically telling everyone he's not available, except in the most outrageous packets in return . Maybe they think everyone in baseball has DBACKS Stupid Disease? More outrageous is how they are holding the line on Vizciano. There's no way they are offering a QO, but again, the asking price is silly. How long will that awful Shelby Miller deal screw up trades in baseball? Yeah, pretty much exactly. It's like winning 10 grand on a scratch ticket, then buying them over and over thinking you'll win 10 grand again. Maybe find a better way to invest the 7k left after taxes.
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jul 10, 2016 1:15:41 GMT -5
Quintana gave up 5 in same game, and Sale gave up 5 the night before, in the same series. He's not an ace, but even aces get slapped around from time to time I just like to poke the bears. Seriously, though...as his ridiculous strand rate and BABIP regress towards the realm where rational people recognize they're likely to be, his overall line really doesn't scream "I'm worth two of the top 15 prospects in baseball!", does it? I'm pretty sure he's going to have a few more of those starts, because that's how probability works...he's just not that good. His FIP and xFIP look a lot like Porcello's...except Porcello is doing his thing against real offenses, while Teheran gets nearly 60 games against the Phillies, Mets, and Marlins. All of which is to say, if you wouldn't trade Moncada and Benintendi or Devers and another piece for Porcello, you really shouldn't be advocating it for Teheran. He an Porcello are both 2/3 starters. The Sox are plenty well-off getting Rich Hill if they can, and keeping their top-5 intact. Careful what you wish for. It's a half season of Hill, maybe $15M in excess value, and it's an all out bidding war, with LA, TOR, DET, BALT, KC, CHIC and any other team that wants a run at the wild card. The winner could overpay by 3x!! Do you want to trade Devers (~$40M excess value)? How about Shaw (maybe $50M if he doesn't become a platoon player)? Buch has 0 excess value, so that's a non-starter. As with all things, I don't have an opinion and I'm not arguing. Just here to tell the story.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 10, 2016 1:36:51 GMT -5
I just like to poke the bears. Seriously, though...as his ridiculous strand rate and BABIP regress towards the realm where rational people recognize they're likely to be, his overall line really doesn't scream "I'm worth two of the top 15 prospects in baseball!", does it? I'm pretty sure he's going to have a few more of those starts, because that's how probability works...he's just not that good. His FIP and xFIP look a lot like Porcello's...except Porcello is doing his thing against real offenses, while Teheran gets nearly 60 games against the Phillies, Mets, and Marlins. All of which is to say, if you wouldn't trade Moncada and Benintendi or Devers and another piece for Porcello, you really shouldn't be advocating it for Teheran. He an Porcello are both 2/3 starters. The Sox are plenty well-off getting Rich Hill if they can, and keeping their top-5 intact. Careful what you wish for. It's a half season of Hill, maybe $15M in excess value, and it's an all out bidding war, with LA, TOR, DET, BALT, KC, CHIC and any other team that wants a run at the wild card. The winner could overpay by 3x!! Do you want to trade Devers (~$40M excess value)? How about Shaw (maybe $50M if he doesn't become a platoon player)? Buch has 0 excess value, so that's a non-starter. As with all things, I don't have an opinion and I'm not arguing. Just here to tell the story. Which is why I advocate that trade on a Butler salary dump. I have a hard time seeing them move Shaw, because 1) I think Beane knows he wouldn't project well to the Coliseum, and 2) that creates another hole, which Aaron Hill probably can't fill (to say nothing of the depth loss). And no, I wouldn't give up Devers for Hill. I wouldn't trade *any* of the top-5 for any rental, no matter how good. If DD and the Sox are smart (I tend to think, you know, they probably are), they recognize that their 4-5 starters have pitched *insanely* poorly, WAY below their talent level. I would hope that they'd see that it's unlikely, probabilistically, that it continues, even without any changes. So a minor move should be sufficient. There are other options out there, Pomeranz being an outstanding one. The Sox have two very solid starters and one (Price) who's been OK, but whose peripherals and track record suggest a much, much better second half. I also tend to think that Dombrowski is anticipating a return of E-Rod to at least viable quality this year. That means they "need" a #4 or 5. They have a host of options (Buchholz, Owens, Elias, O'Sullivan, maybe even Haley) who, while to date are sub-optimal, at least provide depth. Anyone putting up a 5 ERA can go .500 with this offense. Based on talent level, odds are one of them does it. There's no need to overpay. Beyond pitching, what happens if Shaw or JBJ gets hot again? Or Bogey hits for a little more power? They had a combined offensive and pitching slump in June...that sort of confluence of poor performance isn't likely to continue, not with the talent level that they have.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 10, 2016 1:52:56 GMT -5
Which is also to say, I'd rather see them overpay on $15M excess value than on a supposed $100M in Teheran (or, by my guess, what will turn out to be about $50M). What I'm "wishing" for is an intelligent use of resources. Hence, the value of taking on Butler and Hill for Buchholz, where the Sox absorb $25M in sunk cost (Butler) to get Hill's $12M excess value, and returning Buchholz's $5M remaining salary, with the option for the A's to rebuild his value in a big ballpark and the financial flexibility to exercise his option and then flip him over the winter or next summer in a deadline deal. That deal is cost-negative for the A's by about $22-23M, $10M if they exercise the option. If that's not enough of an "overpay," I'm OK with the Sox sending a player or two in the 15-30 range back. I don't like it because it's poor resource management, and I'm not convinced that they're as desperate for pitching as so many think, but it's not a system-damager like trading Devers or a system-crippler like sending two future stars and their starting 3b out for a #3 starter with serious Fenway/AL East questions.
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jul 10, 2016 1:57:58 GMT -5
Careful what you wish for. It's a half season of Hill, maybe $15M in excess value, and it's an all out bidding war, with LA, TOR, DET, BALT, KC, CHIC and any other team that wants a run at the wild card. The winner could overpay by 3x!! Do you want to trade Devers (~$40M excess value)? How about Shaw (maybe $50M if he doesn't become a platoon player)? Buch has 0 excess value, so that's a non-starter. As with all things, I don't have an opinion and I'm not arguing. Just here to tell the story. Which is why I advocate that trade on a Butler salary dump. I have a hard time seeing them move Shaw, because 1) I think Beane knows he wouldn't project well to the Coliseum, and 2) that creates another hole, which Aaron Hill probably can't fill (to say nothing of the depth loss). And no, I wouldn't give up Devers for Hill. I wouldn't trade *any* of the top-5 for any rental, no matter how good. If DD and the Sox are smart (I tend to think, you know, they probably are), they recognize that their 4-5 starters have pitched *insanely* poorly, WAY below their talent level. I would hope that they'd see that it's unlikely, probabilistically, that it continues, even without any changes. So a minor move should be sufficient. There are other options out there, Pomeranz being an outstanding one. The Sox have two very solid starters and one (Price) who's been OK, but whose peripherals and track record suggest a much, much better second half. I also tend to think that Dombrowski is anticipating a return of E-Rod to at least viable quality this year. That means they "need" a #4 or 5. They have a host of options (Buchholz, Owens, Elias, O'Sullivan, maybe even Haley) who, while to date are sub-optimal, at least provide depth. Anyone putting up a 5 ERA can go .500 with this offense. Based on talent level, odds are one of them does it. There's no need to overpay. Beyond pitching, what happens if Shaw or JBJ gets hot again? Or Bogey hits for a little more power? They had a combined offensive and pitching slump in June...that sort of confluence of poor performance isn't likely to continue, not with the talent level that they have. I think that's all good. Just to bring it around to this Braves thread, DDo is looking at $107M in excess value for 4.5 years of Teheran (which would be a 2x overpay if Teheran is only a 2 WAR pitcher, a 1.33 overpay if he's a 3 WAR pitcher, an even up if he's a 4 WAR pitcher.) vs. a 3x overpay of $40M for .5 years of a 4 WAR Rich Hill (and Hill has never pitched more than 107 innings in a season). That's not an argument, just a perspective. ADD: IMHO, leaving excess value aside, Beane should demand Kopech, the way the Sox got E-Rod for Miller. Again, IMHO, that would be a dealbreaker, DDo won't give up Kopech, the next (highly underrated) Noah Syndergaard. Apropos of this: the Braves are asking for Kopech, but they're giving the option to substitute Shaw, who looks to be far more valuable (because Kopech is underrated). Clever! DDo won't fall for it! No Kopech for you Coppy!
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 10, 2016 2:53:08 GMT -5
Which is why I advocate that trade on a Butler salary dump. I have a hard time seeing them move Shaw, because 1) I think Beane knows he wouldn't project well to the Coliseum, and 2) that creates another hole, which Aaron Hill probably can't fill (to say nothing of the depth loss). And no, I wouldn't give up Devers for Hill. I wouldn't trade *any* of the top-5 for any rental, no matter how good. If DD and the Sox are smart (I tend to think, you know, they probably are), they recognize that their 4-5 starters have pitched *insanely* poorly, WAY below their talent level. I would hope that they'd see that it's unlikely, probabilistically, that it continues, even without any changes. So a minor move should be sufficient. There are other options out there, Pomeranz being an outstanding one. The Sox have two very solid starters and one (Price) who's been OK, but whose peripherals and track record suggest a much, much better second half. I also tend to think that Dombrowski is anticipating a return of E-Rod to at least viable quality this year. That means they "need" a #4 or 5. They have a host of options (Buchholz, Owens, Elias, O'Sullivan, maybe even Haley) who, while to date are sub-optimal, at least provide depth. Anyone putting up a 5 ERA can go .500 with this offense. Based on talent level, odds are one of them does it. There's no need to overpay. Beyond pitching, what happens if Shaw or JBJ gets hot again? Or Bogey hits for a little more power? They had a combined offensive and pitching slump in June...that sort of confluence of poor performance isn't likely to continue, not with the talent level that they have. I think that's all good. Just to bring it around to this Braves thread, DDo is looking at $107M in excess value for 4.5 years of Teheran (which would be a 2x overpay if Teheran is only a 2 WAR pitcher, a 1.33 overpay if he's a 3 WAR pitcher, etc.) vs. a 3x overpay of $40M for .5 years of Rich Hill (and Hill has never pitched more than 107 innings in a season). That's not an argument, just a perspective. Who says Hill is a 3x overpay? You're stating hypotheticals as fact. How about no pay? Or pay for somebody else? There are not only two options here, unless it's trade, or don't trade. The don't trade algorithm is pretty straightforward. The "trade" option is not digital, "Hill"=1, "Teheran"=0. There are a number of different paths. I happen to believe strongly in the Sox's position player development, hence the overarching estimates that the t.p.o.p "excess value" calculations give are guiglines to me, not hard facts. They're *estimates*, which in the case of Moncada et al., I think are probably low. To whit, when they look at prospect "buckets," they're looking holistically. We all know that a 23-year old SS with good defense, a reasonable bat, and AAA experience ranks very highly on prospect lists. Or, for that matter, a player like Margot, or Swihart (17 on BA a year ago), or Henry Owens (who reached the 30s). But they don't all have the same upside, or risk. So the "excess value" calculations in the buckets sum up low-risk players who almost always produce, but not tremendously, with higher-risk players who bust more often, but also become superstars more often. The Sox are in a position to trade some risk for extreme upside, because they don't have a lot of real holes. They can afford to sign role-playing FAs (who are usually cost-effective in terms of excess value, and who have limited length of contract obligation and thus allow more payroll flexibility) and absorb smaller sunk costs. They already have the high-value, low-cost core. So prospects with superstar potential (young, age-advanced, lower minors) have more value to them than do equivalently ranked, solid MLB-ready guys. So I would dispute those estimates for the Sox's minor leaguers in the top-5. They're all high-upside, higher risk (relatively). They therefore have more value to Boston relative to their estimates than they would to a team with lesser financial resources or more holes that need reliable filling. The best way to win is to acquire as many average-or-better players as possible. If you're already close, the best way to win *a lot* is to upgrade significantly at your weakest positions. All five of the Sox's top five has the capability to be a *huge* upgrade: Benintendi in LF, Moncada wherever they put him, Devers at 3b (presuming Shaw to 1b is a wash or slight improvement over Hanley), Espinoza and Kopech at the current 4/5 SP positions. The Sox can afford to have both Espinoza and Kopech bust. It would stink, but they can find a 4/5 internally (Rodriguez is probably eventually a 1a/2 just as likely as a 5), or by FA (Hill and Pomeranz were both cheap signs). Devers can bust, they have Shaw (and Sandoval), and Hanley at 1b. Moncada can bust, they have Pedroia, and Benintendi in LF hopefully. And if Benintendi busts, they have Moncada. Their only "real" hole is LF, speaking long-term. But they can fill that one spot with a mediocre FA platoon if need be. If only one of their big five goes on to stardom (5-WAR player), they will upgrade that corresponding position by 4-5 WAR. For basically zero cost. That's a huge upgrade. But acquiring a long-term player of slightly above-average ability (Teheran, at even 3 WAR) to replace a 4/5 rotation slot where a 1-1.5 WAR player can easily be obtained, is a minor upgrade. It's not worth giving away a couple of players who could transform the team from good to transcendent. The FA WAR calculus is a blunt tool. There's more nuance here. Long-term (past this year), the Sox have limited holes to fill. The theoretical "excess value" that a player like Teheran provides has reduced value to them, because they're in a position to absorb risk. They have the financial means, and internal talent, to do so. As such, even a small-scale significant overpay for short-term gain (Hill or Pomeranz) has far less long-term damaging consequence than a less egregious "overpay" that nonetheless significantly more severely depletes the organization of young high-end talent, even if that talent provides long-term relative cost(effective) certainty. And that's because the Red Sox are in the enviable position of having a large number of positions filled by well-above-average players, with a fairly small number of positions filled by very poorly performing players.
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jul 10, 2016 3:13:19 GMT -5
I think that's all good. Just to bring it around to this Braves thread, DDo is looking at $107M in excess value for 4.5 years of Teheran (which would be a 2x overpay if Teheran is only a 2 WAR pitcher, a 1.33 overpay if he's a 3 WAR pitcher, etc.) vs. a 3x overpay of $40M for .5 years of Rich Hill (and Hill has never pitched more than 107 innings in a season). That's not an argument, just a perspective. Who says Hill is a 3x overpay? You're stating hypotheticals as fact. How about no pay? Or pay for somebody else? There are not only two options here, unless it's trade, or don't trade. The don't trade algorithm is pretty straightforward. The "trade" option is not digital, "Hill"=1, "Teheran"=0. There are a number of different paths. I happen to believe strongly in the Sox's position player development, hence the overarching estimates that the t.p.o.p "excess value" calculations give are guiglines to me, not hard facts. They're *estimates*, which in the case of Moncada et al., I think are probably low. To whit, when they look at prospect "buckets," they're looking holistically. We all know that a 23-year old SS with good defense, a reasonable bat, and AAA experience ranks very highly on prospect lists. Or, for that matter, a player like Margot, or Swihart (17 on BA a year ago), or Henry Owens (who reached the 30s). But they don't all have the same upside, or risk. So the "excess value" calculations in the buckets sum up low-risk players who almost always produce, but not tremendously, with higher-risk players who bust more often, but also become superstars more often. The Sox are in a position to trade some risk for extreme upside, because they don't have a lot of real holes. They can afford to sign role-playing FAs (who are usually cost-effective in terms of excess value, and who have limited length of contract obligation and thus allow more payroll flexibility) and absorb smaller sunk costs. They already have the high-value, low-cost core. So prospects with superstar potential (young, age-advanced, lower minors) have more value to them than do equivalently ranked, solid MLB-ready guys. So I would dispute those estimates for the Sox's minor leaguers in the top-5. They're all high-upside, higher risk (relatively). They therefore have more value to Boston relative to their estimates than they would to a team with lesser financial resources or more holes that need reliable filling. The best way to win is to acquire as many average-or-better players as possible. If you're already close, the best way to win *a lot* is to upgrade significantly at your weakest positions. All five of the Sox's top five has the capability to be a *huge* upgrade: Benintendi in LF, Moncada wherever they put him, Devers at 3b (presuming Shaw to 1b is a wash or slight improvement over Hanley), Espinoza and Kopech at the current 4/5 SP positions. The Sox can afford to have both Espinoza and Kopech bust. It would stink, but they can find a 4/5 internally (Rodriguez is probably eventually a 1a/2 just as likely as a 5), or by FA (Hill and Pomeranz were both cheap signs). Devers can bust, they have Shaw (and Sandoval), and Hanley at 1b. Moncada can bust, they have Pedroia, and Benintendi in LF hopefully. And if Benintendi busts, they have Moncada. Their only "real" hole is LF, speaking long-term. But they can fill that one spot with a mediocre FA platoon if need be. If only one of their big five goes on to stardom (5-WAR player), they will upgrade that corresponding position by 4-5 WAR. For basically zero cost. That's a huge upgrade. But acquiring a long-term player of slightly above-average ability (Teheran, at even 3 WAR) to replace a 4/5 rotation slot where a 1-1.5 WAR player can easily be obtained, is a minor upgrade. It's not worth giving away a couple of players who could transform the team from good to transcendent. The FA WAR calculus is a blunt tool. There's more nuance here. Long-term (past this year), the Sox have limited holes to fill. The theoretical "excess value" that a player like Teheran provides has reduced value to them, because they're in a position to absorb risk. They have the financial means, and internal talent, to do so. As such, even a small-scale significant overpay for short-term gain (Hill or Pomeranz) has far less long-term damaging consequence than a less egregious "overpay" that nonetheless significantly more severely depletes the organization of young high-end talent, even if that talent provides long-term relative cost(effective) certainty. And that's because the Red Sox are in the enviable position of having a large number of positions filled by well-above-average players, with a fairly small number of positions filled by very poorly performing players. The excess value analysis is a very rough approximation, at best. Its purpose is just to give a framework to put deals together quickly and analytically. I imagine some GMs would not even use it. Stewart for Arizona, for example, may go by another method. But I think Coppy does use it, and DDo will use it if he needs to. FWIW, which is approximately zero, my own opinion is the Sox will not pull the trigger unless the team believes Teheran will be a top 15 to top 30 pitcher (even accounting for Fenway, AL, 90.6 average FB, etc. etc.). They won't do it otherwise. But that and a buck will buy you a coffee. ADD: BTW, really appreciate the heavy thinking you put in. Can't find that very often, AFAIK.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 11, 2016 11:59:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jul 11, 2016 19:28:51 GMT -5
So Cameron thinks Teheran has a value of almost 16 WAR (including 2016) as a 3+ WAR pitcher, but Coppy wants 18 WAR as a 4 WAR pitcher ($107M excess plus 37M contract). So Cameron and Coppy are a little more than 2 WAR apart. Seems to be room to make a deal here, assuming DDo buys into Cameron's numbers. I went through the list of DDo's trades and he really hasn't blown any yet, and he's had quite a few turn out well. He's kind of a go big or go home guy. In fact, the one that didn't work out was when he tried a small upgrade to the #4 starter with Jarrod Washburn and Washburn was worse than replacement level, costing them the division by one game.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 12, 2016 1:52:03 GMT -5
From Longenhagen's chat today: Greg: What would a Teheran to Boston trade look like? 2:25 Eric A Longenhagen: I obviously have no idea, but I’m not a big Teheran fan. If I’m Boston I could see myself giving up Sam Travis or someone of that ilk, a 45 FV type of player. Sounds about right to me. www.fangraphs.com/blogs/eric-longenhagen-prospects-chat-711/
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jul 12, 2016 6:35:36 GMT -5
Well, Sam Travis (in my utter disregard for the pundits' ratings) is a great prospect. He's Youklis 2.0. Command of the zone, great ISO, fast learner, dutty-hard worker, just keeps getting better and better, and better. I'd hate to trade him and watch him grow into a star somewhere else.
I'd rather trade the other Travis, who looks like he has an innate problem hitting lefties, because he's one of those kids who was taught to hit lefty when he's a natural righty.
He's also a little too tall for third base, and not really the power profile for first base.
His projections have actually taken a big hit over the last month. Always better to sell before it's too late. Coppy is/was willing to give a $20M excess value for Shaw. Once Shaw starts platooning with Hill, that may seem fair.
Add Swihart in there at 40M and Devers at 40M and I have no clue, but Coppy might say deal. Of course, this assumes DDo is willing to value Teheran as a 3+ WAR pitcher, as Cameron does in his article posted by jmei above.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,825
|
Post by nomar on Jul 12, 2016 10:05:03 GMT -5
From Longenhagen's chat today: Greg: What would a Teheran to Boston trade look like? 2:25 Eric A Longenhagen: I obviously have no idea, but I’m not a big Teheran fan. If I’m Boston I could see myself giving up Sam Travis or someone of that ilk, a 45 FV type of player. Sounds about right to me. www.fangraphs.com/blogs/eric-longenhagen-prospects-chat-711/Came here to post this
|
|
|
Post by humanbeingbean on Jul 12, 2016 10:22:50 GMT -5
Well, Sam Travis (in my utter disregard for the pundits' ratings) is a great prospect. He's Youklis 2.0. Command of the zone, great ISO, fast learner, dutty-hard worker, just keeps getting better and better, and better. I'd hate to trade him and watch him grow into a star somewhere else. I'd rather trade the other Travis, who looks like he has an innate problem hitting lefties, because he's one of those kids who was taught to hit lefty when he's a natural righty. He's also a little too tall for third base, and not really the power profile for first base. His projections have actually taken a big hit over the last month. Always better to sell before it's too late. Coppy is/was willing to give a $20M excess value for Shaw. Once Shaw starts platooning with Hill, that may seem fair. Add Swihart in there at 40M and Devers at 40M and I have no clue, but Coppy might say deal. Of course, this assumes DDo is willing to value Teheran as a 3+ WAR pitcher, as Cameron does in his article posted by jmei above. So a respected and renowned prospect guy says Sam Travis for Teheran sounds reasonable, but you would think that Coppy MIGHT agree to Shaw/Swihart AND Devers? I can't deal with this trolling...
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jul 12, 2016 11:50:09 GMT -5
Bud, he was asked. "What would a Teheran to Boston trade look like?"
And he said, "I obviously have no idea, but I’m not a big Teheran fan."
So stop right there, he's definitely not the right guy if you want to understand what a Teheran to Boston trade would look like.
You can read more of what he says, if you want to. If he was Boston, he wouldn't do the trade at all, or might on terms that were ridiculously favorable to Boston. He says he would trade a a player with an FV of 45 (rated platoon/utility at 1.5 WAR, which is 9 WAR over six years, less arbitration salary).
Where Teheran has a projection of 3+ WAR, under team control for 4.5 years (more than 15 WAR), with an excess value of $90M or so on that contract.
But nevermind the details, you already have your answer: what he said. "I obviously have no idea".
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Jul 12, 2016 13:37:49 GMT -5
Dave Cameron is trying to objectively compile a trade value list, and while it clearly isn't perfect he has Benintendi ahead of Teheran. Moncada hasn't been named on the list yet, so presumably he'll be named a top 30 trade asset.
I remember a certain poster suggesting a fair value trade for Teheran would require Moncada + Benintendi + Swihart, and that if the Red Sox didn't pay that package there would be something like Bregman (also ranked ahead of Teheran on this list) + Reed + Tucker from HOU, or Mazara (also ranked ahead of Teheran on this list) + Gallo + Brinson from TEX, or Joc Pederson (also ranked ahead of Teheran on this list) + De Leon + Barnes from LAD. I'm pretty sure the other players mentioned in straight up deals like Arenado, Trout, and Machado will be comfortably ahead of Teheran on the list too. I'd suggest this poster has really underrated the value of these truly elite prospects (not to mention Trout, Machado, and Arenado).
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jul 12, 2016 13:54:36 GMT -5
Dave Cameron is trying to objectively compile a trade value list, and while it clearly isn't perfect he has Benintendi ahead of Teheran. Moncada hasn't been named on the list yet, so presumably he'll be named a top 30 trade asset. I remember a certain poster suggesting a fair value trade for Teheran would require Moncada + Benintendi + Swihart, and that if the Red Sox didn't pay that package there would be something like Bregman (also ranked ahead of Teheran on this list) + Reed + Tucker from HOU, or Mazara (also ranked ahead of Teheran on this list) + Gallo + Brinson from TEX, or Joc Pederson (also ranked ahead of Teheran on this list) + De Leon + Barnes from LAD. I'm pretty sure the other players mentioned in straight up deals like Arenado, Trout, and Machado will be comfortably ahead of Teheran on the list too. I'd suggest this poster has really underrated the value of these truly elite prospects (not to mention Trout, Machado, and Arenado). Said certain poster, if memory serves, was referring to what would happen if a bidding war broke out, and the winning bid was not fair value but an overpay, and far greater than the $107M in excess value that Coppy was proposing (in the package of Moncada ($48M) / 3rd player ($21M) / Devers ($38M)). Cameron is also, by his own braggadocio, perhaps not "objective" about Teheran. In May, he said this: Matt: So , Dave, how does it feel to be wrong on Julio Teheran? He’s been the best pitcher on the planet this May. Dave Cameron: Yes, one good month should totally outweigh the fact that he threw 200 mediocre innings last year and his stuff continues to trend the wrong way. The Braves should be trading him as soon as they can find someone to buy into this. He’s Shelby Miller 2.0. It’s a mirage, and sell high while you can. ADD: Right now, there's no bidding war, because Teheran is expected to regress to his projection. But if GMs were to become convinced that he will not regress, and that he has suddenly found his proprioception timing and become a very young 25 year old ace, then all he!! could break loose. Teheran's recent thigh infection, that caused him to miss a start, and perhaps to give up 10 runs in 12.1 innings in the two recent starts, may make it harder for GMs to "spot the ace" (if he has become an ace).
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 12, 2016 14:21:37 GMT -5
Dave Cameron is trying to objectively compile a trade value list, and while it clearly isn't perfect he has Benintendi ahead of Teheran. Moncada hasn't been named on the list yet, so presumably he'll be named a top 30 trade asset. I remember a certain poster suggesting a fair value trade for Teheran would require Moncada + Benintendi + Swihart, and that if the Red Sox didn't pay that package there would be something like Bregman (also ranked ahead of Teheran on this list) + Reed + Tucker from HOU, or Mazara (also ranked ahead of Teheran on this list) + Gallo + Brinson from TEX, or Joc Pederson (also ranked ahead of Teheran on this list) + De Leon + Barnes from LAD. I'm pretty sure the other players mentioned in straight up deals like Arenado, Trout, and Machado will be comfortably ahead of Teheran on the list too. I'd suggest this poster has really underrated the value of these truly elite prospects (not to mention Trout, Machado, and Arenado). Said certain poster, if memory serves, was referring to what would happen if a bidding war broke out, and the winning bid was not fair value but an overpay, and far greater than the $107M in excess value that Coppy was proposing (in the package of Moncada ($48M) / 3rd player ($21M) / Devers ($38M)). Cameron is also, by his own braggadocio, perhaps not "objective" about Teheran. In May, he said this: Matt: So , Dave, how does it feel to be wrong on Julio Teheran? He’s been the best pitcher on the planet this May. Dave Cameron: Yes, one good month should totally outweigh the fact that he threw 200 mediocre innings last year and his stuff continues to trend the wrong way. The Braves should be trading him as soon as they can find someone to buy into this. He’s Shelby Miller 2.0. It’s a mirage, and sell high while you can. ADD: Right now, there's no bidding war, because Teheran is expected to regress to his projection. But if GMs were to become convinced that he will not regress, and that he has suddenly found his proprioception timing and become a very young 25 year old ace, then all he!! could break loose. If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, then every day would be Christmas. The reality is that basically every GM recognizes that Teheran is smoke and mirrors (both stylistically and current performance-wise). Nobody is going to come remotely close to the Braves' asking price, and he'll either stay in Atlanta or they'll lower their ask. At some point, it's time to stop the silly hypotheticals. They're not adding anything to the discussion. Teheran isn't becoming an ace any more than Matt Cain did. Teams you're talking about--Baltimore, Boston, Toronto especially--all play in parks were Teheran *will* look like Christmas, because he'll get lit up. There is sufficient reticence around the league with anyone remotely versed in advanced stats to make Teheran a big question mark. And those two shellings he just got aren't helping his case. Regardless, even if this wholly fanciful and entirely fabricated (and I do get the impression at this point that it's trolling) idea of a bidding war does, by virtue of some bizarre three-shutout post--All Star performance, happen, I doubt DD is dumb enough to get suckered into it.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 12, 2016 14:24:12 GMT -5
The fact that Cameron and Longenhagen and others don't think Teheran can sustain his first-half ERA doesn't mean they aren't "objective" (even with the scare quotes). In fact, as national baseball analysts, they're almost certainly more objective than some random forum poster who has spent the past three weeks trying to convince the posters of SoxProspects.com that Julio Teheran is an ace.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 12, 2016 14:27:08 GMT -5
Dave Cameron is trying to objectively compile a trade value list, and while it clearly isn't perfect he has Benintendi ahead of Teheran. Moncada hasn't been named on the list yet, so presumably he'll be named a top 30 trade asset. I remember a certain poster suggesting a fair value trade for Teheran would require Moncada + Benintendi + Swihart, and that if the Red Sox didn't pay that package there would be something like Bregman (also ranked ahead of Teheran on this list) + Reed + Tucker from HOU, or Mazara (also ranked ahead of Teheran on this list) + Gallo + Brinson from TEX, or Joc Pederson (also ranked ahead of Teheran on this list) + De Leon + Barnes from LAD. I'm pretty sure the other players mentioned in straight up deals like Arenado, Trout, and Machado will be comfortably ahead of Teheran on the list too. I'd suggest this poster has really underrated the value of these truly elite prospects (not to mention Trout, Machado, and Arenado). Said certain poster, if memory serves, was referring to what would happen if a bidding war broke out, and the winning bid was not fair value but an overpay, and far greater than the $107M in excess value that Coppy was proposing (in the package of Moncada ($48M) / 3rd player ($21M) / Devers ($38M)). Cameron is also, by his own braggadocio, perhaps not "objective" about Teheran. In May, he said this: Matt: So , Dave, how does it feel to be wrong on Julio Teheran? He’s been the best pitcher on the planet this May. Dave Cameron: Yes, one good month should totally outweigh the fact that he threw 200 mediocre innings last year and his stuff continues to trend the wrong way. The Braves should be trading him as soon as they can find someone to buy into this. He’s Shelby Miller 2.0. It’s a mirage, and sell high while you can. ADD: Right now, there's no bidding war, because Teheran is expected to regress to his projection. But if GMs were to become convinced that he will not regress, and that he has suddenly found his proprioception timing and become a very young 25 year old ace, then all he!! could break loose. Teheran's recent thigh infection, that caused him to miss a start, and perhaps to give up 10 runs in 12.1 innings in the two recent starts, may make it harder for GMs to "spot the ace" (if he has become an ace). Btw, that's not Cameron NOT being objective, that's him BEING objective. That's him NOT getting swept up in the "Teheran is an ace" hype that you yourself have been caught up in and are fomenting. That's Cameron, SANS BRAGGADACIO, and with thoughtful reflection, commenting on the likely irreproducibility of that great one month. It's perspective.
|
|
|