How do you rate the return on the Britton trade?

[osfan83]

14 hours ago, utvolzac said:

I voted disappointed, not based off the prospects, but the situation itself. What could have been had they traded him at peak value when teams were overvaluing closers. Just sucks all the wasted value of Manny & Britton trades.

As for the trade itself, seems like decent value considering the circumstances 

They Yankees should deal Judge right now....can you image the haul they would get!

[Hank Scorpio]

3 minutes ago, hoosiers said:

Who cares?  Do you want to sell off an asset at or near peak value or don't you?  I advocated dealing guys like Davis and Wieters and Hardy around 2012 and 2013 and was mostly mocked - you can't do that, this team can win now, blah, blah, blah.  The Red Sox traded away fan favorite and starting shortstop Nomar Garciaparra in the middle of a pennant race.  It's only a matter of conviction of moving older or less young (and more injury prone) players moving to the wrong side of the salary/production cycle for quality prospects.

The A's constantly cycle and sell off assets for newer, younger ones as do the Rays.   

You know, when you sell off an asset at peak value that you get good, quality value back, right?  Maybe create one hole, but fix another in a better way.  I mean, don't make the trade if the talent received back isn't good enough.  We survived at the closer position just fine after dealing away Jim Johnson.  We will be just fine again in the closer position after dealing ZB.

I post here about once a year regarding the Bedard trade.  Folks love that trade for the excess talent received, but wouldn't do it again if the team was near competing.  I would.  Keep adding to the organizational talent base and good things happen.  

More eloquently stated than I have the capacity for.

Thanks.

[Hank Scorpio]

3 minutes ago, osfan83 said:

They Yankees should deal Judge right now....can you image the haul they would get!

The Yankees have a really good farm system.

[Bradysburns]

1 hour ago, Luke-OH said:

I haven’t got to 2018 game video yet, but watching some 2017 AFL footage, Carroll looks like a heck of a second piece. Premium stuff, double plus FB, plus breaking ball, some deception. He’s a better athlete than I’d have guessed too and there may be more command in the future even though he’s not particularly young.

 

He hides that delivery well! Promising...

[Bradysburns]

2 hours ago, FlipTheBird said:

They're not going to compete with an all-rookie team. There will have to be some experience when the next window comes around. Plus, you've got these guys through, what 2024 at the least?

I was wondering about that. Has anyone broken down controllability on these three players? Do they have full options, etc.? If so, even better. 

[Santandah]

The thing about older prospects also -- if they make it, you control them through their peak years on the cheap. Let's say Cody Carroll becomes a serviceable part of the bullpen next year. He'll be 26. The O's have complete control of him until he is 32.  If he's a stud, he doesn't really get expensive until he's 30/31. 

[Luke-OH]

12 minutes ago, Bradysburns said:

I was wondering about that. Has anyone broken down controllability on these three players? Do they have full options, etc.? If so, even better. 

None of them have any MLB service time, so they all have the full contingent of options and team control. The control clock only starts when they are promoted to the majors.

[SouthRider]

15 hours ago, atomic said:

Older prospects who still need to work on things.  Probably a couple of middling relievers.  I guess people weren't expecting much.   The outlook for this team is depressing.  

On the plus side,,  I heard on the radio two of the three guys obtained  were in the Yankees'  top 15 prospect list.  Perhaps that means the Yankees' farm system isn't that great. 

[Thato'sfan]

Just now, SouthRider said:

On the plus side,,  I heard on the radio two of the three guys obtained  were in the Yankees'  top 15 prospect list.  Perhaps that means the Yankees' farm system isn't that great. 

It's pretty great. Extremely deep in quality pitching. Organizational rankings aren't a solid way to compare farm systems, but it is safe to say that two of the Yankee top 15 prospects are really solid prospects.

[Luke-OH]

41 minutes ago, jasmith85 said:

Is that Yusniel Diaz the one striking out in the second video? Did you pick that one on purpose? haha

Yeah, on three straight nasty sliders. Diaz was hunting for a 100mph FB and didn’t get it. Tanner Scott did the same thing with Acuna in the AFL all star game.

[Redskins Rick]

2 minutes ago, Luke-OH said:

None of them have any MLB service time, so they all have the full contingent of options and team control. The control clock only starts when they are promoted to the majors.

And one has already had TJ, so thats out of the way.

[Redskins Rick]

2 minutes ago, SouthRider said:

On the plus side,,  I heard on the radio two of the three guys obtained  were in the Yankees'  top 15 prospect list.  Perhaps that means the Yankees' farm system isn't that great. 

Even with the influx of minors to the majors, they were still ranked #6 in MLB by baseball prospectus.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Redskins Rick said:

And one has already had TJ, so thats out of the way.

Six years.

[Grt 2BA FL Gator]

37 minutes ago, hoosiers said:

Who cares?  Do you want to sell off an asset at or near peak value or don't you?  I advocated dealing guys like Davis and Wieters and Hardy around 2012 and 2013 and was mostly mocked - you can't do that, this team can win now, blah, blah, blah.  The Red Sox traded away fan favorite and starting shortstop Nomar Garciaparra in the middle of a pennant race.  It's only a matter of conviction of moving older or less young (and more injury prone) players moving to the wrong side of the salary/production cycle for quality prospects.

The A's constantly cycle and sell off assets for newer, younger ones as do the Rays.  

You know, when you sell off an asset at peak value that you get good, quality value back, right?  Maybe create one hole, but fix another in a better way.  I mean, don't make the trade if the talent received back isn't good enough.  We survived at the closer position just fine after dealing away Jim Johnson.  We will be just fine again in the closer position after dealing ZB.

I post here about once a year regarding the Bedard trade.  Folks love that trade for the excess talent received, but wouldn't do it again if the team was near competing.  I would.  Keep adding to the organizational talent base and good things happen.  

I guess it just depends on where you are at as an organization. I think we thought we were in a good place in 2014 especially. But as time went on, in order to have a truly sustainable and long term winner, we should have been thinking of what you are saying above. Especially when it was clear that we wouldn't be able to resign, guys getting expensive in arbitration, etc. 

The Red Sox are actually in an interesting place right now IMO. Their rotation is on the older side and their farm isn't very good. Their Major League team is obviously set up pretty well with the bullpen, defense and offense (and starters, although on older side). Should they consider trading some of their pieces, or because they have financial resources they don't need to be as proactive? 

[Redskins Rick]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

Six years.

still has a few years left in that elbow.