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.
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 22, 2014 12:02:59 GMT -5
If by 'top' you mean anyone other than Betts, Bogaerts, Swihart, Owens or Rodriguez, that would be fine with me. Otherwise its too big of a package IMO, remember he's a year away from free agency. Unfortunately, the Braves don't care if we think its too large of a package. Even though he is a year away from FA, you can still recoup a draft pick if he doesn't re sign. Whoever trades for him gets the first chance at signing at 25 year old outfielder, those don't hit FA too often. This is kinda why these proposals are an exercise in futility. It's like the trades never happen and when they do, they make little sense.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,016
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 30, 2014 11:14:19 GMT -5
I do think that trying to predict what it will take to get him is almost impossible, because it is very largely dependent upon how many teams are seriously interested.
Imagine that the Sox were the only bidder. Well, we can wait a year and get him for a draft pick. How much is the upgrade from Cespedes to Heyward for one year, plus that draft pick, worth? It's basically a single prospect of that caliber who hasn't busted. If the Braves got Cespedes and, say, Barnes for him, that's more than fair: the downgrade from Heyward to Cespedes for one year is more than offset by getting an MLB-ready Barnes, already paid for, as opposed to signing a comparable pick, hoping he doesn't bust, and waiting for him to develop.
OTOH, if there are several teams who want him, the price could go quite a bit higher, as it seems likely to have done with Adrian Gonzalez.
So who else might be interested?
The Rangers, absolutely, since they'll be declining Alex Rios's option, but they don't have a starting OFer to deal, and they don't have a big RF.
Quite possibly the Tigers, rather than re-signing Torii Hunter (who at last report wants to play another year), but, they too, lack a good player to offer.
The Phillies could offer Marlon Byrd (1 year left at $8M), but the gap between him and Cespedes is large enough that you don't see them being able to force us to bid up our prospect package, especially considering how weak their system is.
The Orioles have Markakis leaving, but again we run into the same thing: who do they offer that the Braves could play every day? And they don't have a big RF, either.
In theory, the Yankees, but if ARod is going to DH, they have to give Beltran a shot to bounce back in RF, which is of course small.
When you look at a) high payroll, b) a comparable player to offer, c) big RF to cover, and d) deep system, there's hardly a team that can match us on the first two, let alone all four.
I wouldn't be surprised at all if the cost were shockingly low, if that makes any sense. I'd try to do it with Cespedes, Ranaudo, and someone like Rijo, Travis, Stankewicz, or Longhi (and hope that they like Ranaudo more than I do). Folks, I think, are severely overestimating the gap between Heyward and Cespedes as the Braves are likely to perceive it.
|
|
|
Post by artfuldodger on Oct 30, 2014 12:03:16 GMT -5
The other feasible option for the Braves is to use Heyward in a trade for a starter such as Cueto or Ross. If Heyward is going to the Red Sox the cost in players will probably be higher than you project.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 30, 2014 12:58:05 GMT -5
When you look at a) high payroll, b) a comparable player to offer, c) big RF to cover, and d) deep system, there's hardly a team that can match us on the first two, let alone all four. I'm not sure any of those criteria are necessary. Heyward is hardly expensive next year, and a small-market team may trade for him even without the intention of extending him (similar to what the As did with Samardijza). The Reds swapping Cueto for him comes to mind, and teams like the Indians and Blue Jays also come to mind. The Braves may not want a corner outfielder back if they plan on moving Gattis to LF and J. Upton to RF, as has been rumored. They seem likely to instead look for someone to take B.J.'s contract and/or offer a CF or proven major league starting pitching. Barnes or Ranaudo aren't the kind of prospects that would entice a win-now team like the Braves to take a downgrade for. Heyward would fit in in any sized RF, and some teams might want to try him in center. And there's no particular reason the Braves would prefer depth rather than proven MLB talent or high-end prospects, both of which should be available for a guy of Heyward's talent.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 30, 2014 14:17:42 GMT -5
Cespedes makes no sense for the Braves. He's a step back in the short term AND in the long term (because no QO). The Braves aren't at all in a situation where dealing Heyward is a necessity, after all. He's a reasonable bet to resign, the Braves have enough talent to contend in 2015, he's a slam-dunk QO offer.
Also, the idea that a team without a monstrous right field should/will avoid Heyward is a little silly. Were the Red Sox compromised by having Yaz in left in the 60's and early 70's? Should they have traded him to the Yankees because they theoretically should have valued him more because the Yankee Stadium left field was bigger? The Rangers are going to be interested if he's made available.
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Oct 30, 2014 15:03:44 GMT -5
I feel like the Cardinals could enter the mix for him. Some sort of Martinez and Piscotty could be the start of a package the Braves would like.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Oct 31, 2014 22:11:58 GMT -5
I feel like the Cardinals could enter the mix for him. Some sort of Martinez and Piscotty could be the start of a package the Braves would like. Why would heyward appeal to the cardinals?
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 31, 2014 22:33:24 GMT -5
Because he's good, and as an organizational philosophy the Cardinals tend to like players who are good.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,016
|
Post by ericmvan on Nov 5, 2014 20:17:15 GMT -5
Also, the idea that a team without a monstrous right field should/will avoid Heyward is a little silly. Were the Red Sox compromised by having Yaz in left in the 60's and early 70's? Should they have traded him to the Yankees because they theoretically should have valued him more because the Yankee Stadium left field was bigger? The Rangers are going to be interested if he's made available. You're misunderstanding me there -- the point is simply that Heyward has more defensive value to us that to say, the Orioles, so, all other things being equal, there comes a point where they don't up their sensible offer to match our sensible offer. Our big RF makes us likelier to land him, not easier. Meanwhile, if the Braves decide to rebuild towards their new ballpark in 2017, then they'll want a pure prospect package. Trading Cespedes for a rental starter and prospects for Heyward would work.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Nov 5, 2014 21:49:06 GMT -5
Also, the idea that a team without a monstrous right field should/will avoid Heyward is a little silly. Were the Red Sox compromised by having Yaz in left in the 60's and early 70's? Should they have traded him to the Yankees because they theoretically should have valued him more because the Yankee Stadium left field was bigger? The Rangers are going to be interested if he's made available. You're misunderstanding me there -- the point is simply that Heyward has more defensive value to us that to say, the Orioles, so, all other things being equal, there comes a point where they don't up their sensible offer to match our sensible offer. Our big RF makes us likelier to land him, not easier. Meanwhile, if the Braves decide to rebuild towards their new ballpark in 2017, then they'll want a pure prospect package. Trading Cespedes for a rental starter and prospects for Heyward would work. Not sure the Braves have what we need as far as a trade involving cespedes.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Nov 8, 2014 9:07:46 GMT -5
I live down here in the Braves market and most of the rumors about them getting rid of Heyward or Upton center around clearing out some payroll too. What would everyone be willing to do? Hard to know how they would value Heyward prospects wise but would you take on Chris Johnson? Work something with BJ Upton (not full contract) and stick him as the 5th OF? Make them take on a Craig or Vic in a scenario like that?
Personally I wouldn't touch BJ Upton but at least a Chris Johnson could back up the corners. They might could live with Cechini's D with Simmons at SS.
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Nov 8, 2014 9:29:10 GMT -5
Atlanta might be much more interested in Nava to replace Heyward as opposed to Cespedes. OBVIOUSLY more pieces would have to be involved, but Nava gives them flexibility in RF/LF next year (they may want to move Upton back to RF or keep him in left) and Nava is under team control for several year which is huge for the Braves. I'm not sure what kinda package gets it done as I don't claim to be a very smart man but I'm guessing a trade centered around Nava/Margot should get us close; perhaps a pitching prospect could be added. Betts/Castillo/Heyward in the outfield in 2015 and beyond......You're welcome.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 8, 2014 10:13:37 GMT -5
I can't see Heyward being traded for a package with Nava as the headliner. As a second piece, sure, but the Braves are going to want real value for one cheap year of a stud outfielder and the opportunity to extend him long-term. It'd be something closer to Heyward and Chris Johnson for Owens, Cecchini, Nava, and Rijo (a deal that I'd probably do if I were the Red Sox, by the way).
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Nov 8, 2014 10:36:09 GMT -5
I can't see Heyward being traded for a package with Nava as the headliner. As a second piece, sure, but the Braves are going to want real value for one cheap year of a stud outfielder and the opportunity to extend him long-term. It'd be something closer to Heyward and Chris Johnson for Owens, Cecchini, Nava, and Rijo (a deal that I'd probably do if I were the Red Sox, by the way). He would be the second piece, but I think Nava would carry more weight than people think. People keep throwing Cespedes name around. Cespedes has a WAR of 9.6 over the last 3 years while Nava has had a WAR of 7.6 but Cespedes has had 498 more plate appearances than Nava. By just guessing at how many pennies are in the penny jar I'd be willing to bet that if all else was equal (playing time) the difference in value between Nava and Cespedes would be marginal. Now I'm not trying to make the argument that Nava is better than Cespedes, but he is under team control for another several years and that matters and I would like to think that really matters to a team like Atlanta that can't operate like a big market team. Like you said, Nava would be a secondary piece, but I would have to believe that Nava/Margot and one of Owens/Rodriguez at the very least gets their attention.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Nov 8, 2014 11:51:59 GMT -5
Cespedes is a terrible fit in Atlanta. They don't need another free swinging high strikeout bat in their lineup. I can certainly seeing Nava as a player other teams would covet. He's never going to make big money and he's under control and a fairly flexible player. His limitations are obvious but what he can bring to a mid market team is highly valuable. He's a lineup lengthener who works a count and puts up good ABs.
This is not to suggest he could be THE main guy to get Heyward, but he could be A big part of the deal. Heyward is more name than player anyways. His value is mostly tied to his defense and he's not exactly an iron man. I think younger in trouble when you start paying for defense. Oddly enough, he's probably more valuable to the Red Six than he is any other team in baseball considering he's a left handed hitter and can play excellent defense in right field.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Nov 8, 2014 13:45:20 GMT -5
Atlanta might be much more interested in Nava to replace Heyward as opposed to Cespedes. OBVIOUSLY more pieces would have to be involved, but Nava gives them flexibility in RF/LF next year (they may want to move Upton back to RF or keep him in left) and Nava is under team control for several year which is huge for the Braves. I'm not sure what kinda package gets it done as I don't claim to be a very smart man but I'm guessing a trade centered around Nava/Margot should get us close; perhaps a pitching prospect could be added. Betts/Castillo/Heyward in the outfield in 2015 and beyond......You're welcome. Don't sell yourself short. When it comes to trade scenarios we're all speculating here. Nava makes sense for the Braves. If we have to add a top prospect pitcher such as Owens, that's fine, too. After all, isn't that while we're stockpiling all these young arms? If it's Nava, Owens plus, that's okay as long as the plus doesn't include Swihart, Mookie and Bogey.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Nov 8, 2014 14:16:12 GMT -5
I don't think the Sox would even entertain dealing Owens for one year of Heyward. I'm pretty sure the a Sox are very high on Owens.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,501
|
Post by nomar on Nov 11, 2014 14:42:28 GMT -5
I can't see Heyward being traded for a package with Nava as the headliner. As a second piece, sure, but the Braves are going to want real value for one cheap year of a stud outfielder and the opportunity to extend him long-term. It'd be something closer to Heyward and Chris Johnson for Owens, Cecchini, Nava, and Rijo (a deal that I'd probably do if I were the Red Sox, by the way). I'd pass on that unless in was Johnson instead of Owens. And Johnson would never work out here even for a year. His defense is bad and his bat matches it. He's at best a platoon 3B. I guess you could use him off the bench, but he's a burden given his contract.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,501
|
Post by nomar on Nov 14, 2014 1:20:07 GMT -5
If Stanton really does get extended we could get aggressive in pursuing a Heyward trade fairly soon.
|
|
ianrs
Veteran
Posts: 2,446
|
Post by ianrs on Nov 14, 2014 11:27:13 GMT -5
I don't think the Sox would even entertain dealing Owens for one year of Heyward. I'm pretty sure the a Sox are very high on Owens. Agreed. Especially when we already have solid OF depth, there's no reason to deal Owens in a package for Heyward.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan1994 on Nov 14, 2014 14:36:00 GMT -5
I have not read more than 5% of this discussion so I don't know where you guys stand but let me a propose a trade...
Red Sox get: Jason Heyward
Braves get: Anthony Ranaudo Brian Johnson Daniel Nava Yoenis Cespedes (sox take a chunk of his 2015 money owed?)
I've heard from sources (namely @redsoxstats on twitter) that the Braves want young, controllable arms for the back end of their rotation, Ranaudo and Johnson (in the near future) accomplish that..Yoenis takes over in Left and Justin Upton moves to right...Daniel is the 4th outfielder/backup for Freeman at 1st
If the Braves don't want to add Yoenis for the one year, they could bring in a third team like the Mariners who could use Yoenis as a DH for a year/try to work out a long-term deal. We've seen that the Mariners are willing to spend money and they are a on the cusp of being a playoff team and a big bat like Yoenis could help them a lot...Mariners would then have to send a prospect or two to the Braves to complete the deal
I'm not at all educated on most of this so please feel free to poke holes
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Nov 15, 2014 11:06:13 GMT -5
I'm not at all educated on most of this so please feel free to poke holes If you're going to propose a trade, don't think in terms of "well, the Braves supposedly want X and here's some players who theoretically satisfy that". Think in terms of what the market for Hayward would be. Because I'm pretty sure if they wanted to trade him for young arms and they shopped him around, they could come up with something better than Anthony Ranaudo and Brain Johnson.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,501
|
Post by nomar on Nov 15, 2014 20:12:37 GMT -5
I'm not at all educated on most of this so please feel free to poke holes If you're going to propose a trade, don't think in terms of "well, the Braves supposedly want X and here's some players who theoretically satisfy that". Think in terms of what the market for Hayward would be. Because I'm pretty sure if they wanted to trade him for young arms and they shopped him around, they could come up with something better than Anthony Ranaudo and Brain Johnson. Maybe not if they're getting Cespedes and Nava. There is definitely no being sure that they'd even want Cespedes though.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 15, 2014 20:29:24 GMT -5
I understand the theoretical appeal of a Cespedes plus prospects package for Heyward-- it gives them the chance to both continue to compete in the short term while also getting potential long-term value. But how often do teams trade a one-year-control guy for a package headlined by another long-term control guy, especially someone who plays the same position? If a team trades a star player, they're rarely looking for that in-between retool, because if winning now was important to them, they'd just keep the guy for one year and collect the draft pick when he leaves.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Nov 15, 2014 23:03:09 GMT -5
I understand the theoretical appeal of a Cespedes plus prospects package for Heyward-- it gives them the chance to both continue to compete in the short term while also getting potential long-term value. But how often do teams trade a one-year-control guy for a package headlined by another long-term one year control guy, especially someone who plays the same position? If a team trades a star player, they're rarely looking for that in-between retool, because if winning now was important to them, they'd just keep the guy for one year and collect the draft pick when he leaves. (assuming this is what you meant - agreed)
|
|
|