Trade Deadline Primer/Thread

[Roll Tide]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

The best part about non-tendering someone is the season of decline before you non-tender them.

 

True …Elias is shown the ability to identify quality relievers. It doesn’t bother me if he trades any of them if he gets surplus value for them.

[Aristotelian]

Pure speculation but I'll go down in favor of keeping Tate or at least demanding a "wow" offer. He has doubled his changeup usage and turned himself into a different pitcher by really mastering that pitch. I think what we're seeing is sustainable and he could contribute to our future as well as continue to build value. Of course, I'd be in favor of trading any player if we get value in return. If I were to try and "sell high" on a player it would be Lopez. 

[Aristotelian]

11 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

True …Elias is shown the ability to identify quality relievers. It doesn’t bother me if he trades any of them if he gets surplus value for them.

Do you remember how our bullpen did the last three years? I don't think it's a given that you can build a quality bullpen from the waiver wire. That said, I agree, if you can get surplus value you take it, that's basically a no brainer. The question is how much baseline value do you assign to guys like Tate and Lopez. 

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Do you remember how our bullpen did the last three years? I don't think it's a given that you can build a quality bullpen from the waiver wire. That said, I agree, if you can get surplus value you take it, that's basically a no brainer. The question is how much baseline value do you assign to guys like Tate and Lopez. 

If there was some guarantee that this bullpen would perform like a quality bullpen next season I'd be more inclined to keep them.

[Spy Fox]

Fangraphs began their annual Top 50 Trade Value series today with the Honorable Mentions and #41-50. As usual one of the inputs was interviews with some team reps around the league. 

Gunnar Henderson was listed as an Honorable Mention. Adley Rutschman seems like a slam dunk for a top 20 spot— he was ranked 24 last year. 

Grayson Rodriguez was not mentioned last year, but I predict we'll see him in the top 40 given how effusive his scouting reports have been over the past year. Even with the injury, it would be surprising if he wasn't on this list somewhere. 

Cedric Mullins was an Honorable Mention last year with the quote "there were just too many questions about how real his 2021 performance is. If he keeps this up, he’ll certainly show up next year; he isn’t eligible for arbitration until 2023." He clearly hasn't kept last year's power but he still posted 6 WAR last year and on pace for 3+ this year with three more controlled years ahead. Seems pretty valuable to me, and I suspect the #31-40 edition may include both Cedric and Grayson. 

[LookinUp]

32 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

If there was some guarantee that this bullpen would perform like a quality bullpen next season I'd be more inclined to keep them.

It would be silly to build a 1-9 lineup that looks really strong next year only to have traded away several solid or better bullpen arms for some low A flyers.

I generally agree with selling bullpen guys high, but I also think our mindset needs to shift to having a stud major league team rather than a top rated minor league organization. That means you only trade these guys who are clearly good if you get really good deals. Otherwise you're shooting the major league team in the foot.

[btdart20]

4 hours ago, wildcard said:

Too Long?  What is too long? A year?   

I can see them trading Lopez next season at the deadline when he has a year plus two months before free agency.  But there is not reason to do it now other then if someone gives an offer that can't be refused.

Our competitiveness this year is marginal and surprising.  Our BP has increased in value a ton.  Many in the BP have added trade value of team control.  Next year we’ll likely be in a more competitive position.  Why would we trade him next year if we’re more competitive heading into the 2023 deadline?

[Can_of_corn]

5 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

It would be silly to build a 1-9 lineup that looks really strong next year only to have traded away several solid or better bullpen arms for some low A flyers.

I generally agree with selling bullpen guys high, but I also think our mindset needs to shift to having a stud major league team rather than a top rated minor league organization. That means you only trade these guys who are clearly good if you get really good deals. Otherwise you're shooting the major league team in the foot.

It will be disappointing to build a 1-9 lineup that looks really strong next year only to have the bullpen regress.

 

For the record I'm not advocating giving anyone away.

[TommyPickles]

Bad timing for Mancini to be on an 0-23 stretch, or whatever it is...

[vab]

With the number of good arms already in the system and the ability these guys seem to have to rehabilitate pitchers, I wouldn't be upset with trading a Perez, Baker, Akin, Krehbiel or Tate. Now Lopez and especially Bautista, that's a little different story. Not that they would be untouchable but I'd need a good bit for those guys. 

[Just Regular]

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/examining-the-american-leagues-2022-40-man-crunch/

Longenhagen with his traditional Trade season review of systems.

For those worried about Gunnar or Westburg depriving anyone worth worrying about of a spot this winter, I noticed he did NOT list the Baltimore Orioles as an AL team with any kind of crunch.    And he even did list Oakland.

Cleveland's Joey Cantillo and Peyton Battenfield were two names who jumped out at me a little as "fringe" guys who could make some pitching contributions in the coming years.    

[tntoriole]

4 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

Yea, it’s absurd to think a pen full of journeyman are going to be successful long term.  I like Lopez and think we should keep him if the offer isn’t really good but I’m open to trading everyone outside of Bautista.  
 

Tate needs to go imo.

This… exactly.  Lopez is AllStar .. his value is peak and can only go down .  Tate is a regression waiting to happen.. peak value … Move them 

[LookinUp]

45 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

It will be disappointing to build a 1-9 lineup that looks really strong next year only to have the bullpen regress.

 

For the record I'm not advocating giving anyone away.

Some will. Some won't. That's why I want more options, not fewer. 

I don't see any of our guys as red flags to suck. I get the regression point re: Tate and Lopez, but that doesn't mean they'll be terrible. And with arm injuries being what they are, I want more people to choose from than less. 

[DrungoHazewood]

4 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

The best part about non-tendering someone is the season of decline before you non-tender them.

 

There's nothing stopping you from non-tendering high.

[interloper]

Count me in with anyone else who just doesn't trust Tate. It's great that he's been a different and much improved pitcher this year. But I just see a lot of volatility with his delivery and command. If we can get something notable for him, I make that move in a heartbeat. 

Lopez? I've stated elsewhere I'm looking for "established closer" return for him. He's not an established closer, but if someone is willing to go there, then I'm listening. I need a high-minors SP prospect though. 

Bautista is clearly off limits. 

Perez? I don't know that you're going to get much for him, so he's a guy I think stays. Teams know his past struggles and his FIP is a full 2 runs above his ERA.