The deadline is looming...Is Elias done?

[luismatos4prez]

1 hour ago, weams said:

Elias was not paying for Villar, so he would have gotten zero return there. Right or wrong, he was not tendering Villar. Bundy was too soon. I think Vavra is Austin Martin, isn't he? 

I think he should have been paying for Villar rather than trading him for a non-prospect. The Marlins were trading 1 month of him in the midst of a slump and still got a better player than we did trading 1 year of him.

I like the Vavra acquisition a lot (Smith and Nevin, too). But he's a 45 FV prospect, just ahead of Yusniel Diaz according to Fangraphs. Austin Martin is a 55 FV, 48th best prospect in baseball. And there's no reason we couldn't have gotten both.

We'll have to see though. Maybe Easton Lucas will turn out to be great and Kjerstad will have a much better career than Martin.

[DrungoHazewood]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

Of course it might end up being 70 a year.

Anything is possible.  Don't you like this path better than the one that traded Davies and Hader?  Even that one got us best record in the division for five years.

[weams]

2 minutes ago, luismatos4prez said:

I think he should have been paying for Villar rather than trading him for a non-prospect. The Marlins were trading 1 month of him in the midst of a slump and still got a better player than we did trading 1 year of him.

I like the Vavra acquisition a lot (Smith and Nevin, too). But he's a 45 FV prospect, just ahead of Yusniel Diaz according to Fangraphs. Austin Martin is a 55 FV, 48th best prospect in baseball. And there's no reason we couldn't have gotten both.

We'll have to see though. Maybe Easton Lucas will turn out to be great and Kjerstad will have a much better career than Martin.

Easton Lucas won't and just because you or I think Villar may have been with the 8 or 9 million he got, Mike obviously did not have that to spend. 

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Anything is possible.  Don't you like this path better than the one that traded Davies and Hader?  Even that one got us best record in the division for five years.

It's better sure.  Still might not be enough.

[DrungoHazewood]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

It's better sure.  Still might not be enough.

Such is life.  I don't know if I can handle a team that wins all the time anyway.  Too much staying up until 1 am watching five hour playoff games.

[drjohnnyfeva]

Do any of the players we got in return figure in on being pieces to a contenting team, or are we still pretty far out on that?  I like that we are moving players not likely to be around when we contend for players that seem pretty high on other clubs' prospect list.  I agree with Drungo, I like this kind of trading a lot better than the giving of talent for a momentary role filler for a run as we did a few years ago.

[Frobby]

14 hours ago, Roll Tide said:

He agreed to a one year deal for 8.5 instead of 10.

Actually, he signed for $8.2 mm, compared to the $10.4 mm projected by MLBTR.

That $10.4 mm figure was a fantasy based on a poor projection by MLBTR, but a lot of people here took as gospel that he’d get that or close to that.  I repeatedly said he would not get that much, for example here:
 

 

[Roll Tide]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

Actually, he signed for $8.2 mm, compared to the $10.4 mm projected by MLBTR.

That $10.4 mm figure was a fantasy based on a poor projection by MLBTR, but a lot of people here took as gospel that he’d get that or close to that.  I repeatedly said he would not get that much, for example here:
 

 

It sounded like a lot of money to me as well. 
 

Honestly, I could be wrong about my 3 year at 7 ish per statement. But we will never know since I don’t think that Elias even tried.

I think the Elias hurt his value and lost any leverage in dealing him. I would love to know what he was offered at the deadline as it’s hard to imagine he got offered less than Eason. Also, I’m not a fan of the Cashner or Bundy deals. I think he accepted too much quantity and not enough quality. I suspected Dylan would perform better with his home park not Camden Yards but, I wonder if his improvement should be credited to the Angels pitching coach.

I’m willing to look at the trades that he made this season as a whole and have a an open mind about changing my opinion of his deals. I like the Givens deal regardless of the 3rd player. But the rest of the deals obviously will require pause. I’m ok with Smith for Castro and it’s likely already an ok deal but to call it a real win imo the PTNL needs to be a pretty good prospect.

[Sports Guy]

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

Actually, he signed for $8.2 mm, compared to the $10.4 mm projected by MLBTR.

That $10.4 mm figure was a fantasy based on a poor projection by MLBTR, but a lot of people here took as gospel that he’d get that or close to that.  I repeatedly said he would not get that much, for example here:
 

 

I never understood how people bought that.  Even Elias mentioned it iirc.  He was never going to get 10M.  8ishM always made way more sense.

Dont really care that they traded him and what they said in public doesn’t mean they thought the same thing privately but the idea that him potentially making 10M was a driving force in trading him was always dumb to me.

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, Roll Tide said:

It sounded like a lot of money to me as well. 
 

Honestly, I could be wrong about my 3 year at 7 ish per statement. But we will never know since I don’t think that Elias even tried.

I think the Elias hurt his value and lost any leverage in dealing him. I would love to know what he was offered at the deadline as it’s hard to imagine he got offered less than Eason. Also, I’m not a fan of the Cashner or Bundy deals. I think he accepted too much quantity and not enough quality. I suspected Dylan would perform better with his home park not Camden Yards but, I wonder if his improvement should be credited to the Angels pitching coach.

I’m willing to look at the trades that he made this season as a whole and have a an open mind about changing my opinion of his deals. I like the Givens deal regardless of the 3rd player. But the rest of the deals obviously will require pause. I’m ok with Smith for Castro and it’s likely already an ok deal but to call it a real win imo the PTNL needs to be a pretty good prospect.

You can keep saying Elias hurt just value but that doesn’t make it true.

Villar was worth what teams were willing to pay for him..which wasn’t much at all.

Just because someone has an outlier of a season, doesn’t mean teams are all of a sudden ready to pay big to acquire that player...especially when they are set to make a good chunk of money and play a de-valued position, like second base seems to be.

[BohKnowsBmore]

11 hours ago, drjohnnyfeva said:

Do any of the players we got in return figure in on being pieces to a contenting team, or are we still pretty far out on that?  I like that we are moving players not likely to be around when we contend for players that seem pretty high on other clubs' prospect list.  I agree with Drungo, I like this kind of trading a lot better than the giving of talent for a momentary role filler for a run as we did a few years ago.

Just based on scouting reports:

- Vavra has the best chance - he could be a strong-OBP, bat-first SS/2B (more likely the latter), but might settle into more of a multi-position role player/utility man type. The comp I've seen is Joey Wendle.

- Smith is probably next - has a realistic potential to be a 4th/5th starter (possible that he cracks the back end of a contending team rotation is my understanding) or he settles in as a middle reliever who can go a couple of innings for you.

- Of the named guys, Nevin is probably the most questionable at this point based on the definition you laid out.

[CarrRun49]

47 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

You can keep saying Elias hurt just value but that doesn’t make it true.

Villar was worth what teams were willing to pay for him..which wasn’t much at all.

Just because someone has an outlier of a season, doesn’t mean teams are all of a sudden ready to pay big to acquire that player...especially when they are set to make a good chunk of money and play a de-valued position, like second base seems to be.

PREACH

Edited September 2, 2020 by CarrRun49

[Roll Tide]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

You can keep saying Elias hurt just value but that doesn’t make it true.

Villar was worth what teams were willing to pay for him..which wasn’t much at all.

Just because someone has an outlier of a season, doesn’t mean teams are all of a sudden ready to pay big to acquire that player...especially when they are set to make a good chunk of money and play a de-valued position, like second base seems to be.

I’m not the only one here who said it. I’m not naming names but if you look back another poster or two that you respect said similar things. 
 

A player that you suspect a team will not make a contract to probably has very little value to a team trading for said player. That IMO is where the leverage was lost by Elias and the Orioles. 
 

Im not suggesting you buy the 4 WAR player .... I’m suggesting you get fair value for a guy that has been a 2 WAR player over the last 5 years that also includes a .1 war season . BTW, Villar played SS last night for the Blue Jays, as I suggested he wasn’t obtained to replace Biggio. He was brought in due to the lack of offense from their SS and 3B position. He also played more games at SS than at 2B for the Marlins 14/11.

 

 

[Roll Tide]

29 minutes ago, CarrRun49 said:

PREACH

Get a room LOL  

[Roll Tide]

31 minutes ago, CarrRun49 said:

PREACH

Look ...I’m not trying to bash you but please try to offer something beyond a snarky remark. SG is hardly the voice of reason here and we certainly don’t need you stroking his ego. Which is big enough