The Pitchers we can trade for....

[SouthSideRyan]

Because the price isn't that expensive, and we seem deadset on acquiring a cheap pitcher.

[Guest]

Hellickson still has a career ERA about a half run better than his FIP, the difference is that FIP is not good at all and not close to Shelby Miller's. Miller also throws much, much harder so there's not a great comparison to be made there.

 

when he was "good" it was like a run and a half. sooooooo yeah. he did a lot of catching up.

 

fwiw, they have like a 3 mph difference in average FB for their career. significant, certainly. i'm not trying to imply otherwise. i think "much, much harder" might be overstating things. it's not like it's haren vs. chapman or something.

 

the comparison was obviously more of a generalized "guy who allegedly had a knack for outperforming peripherals having chickens come home to roost" type of thing than any direct comparison of their styles, anyway.

 

The difference between 90 and 94 on the average fastball is a very big deal, and illustrates the point I was getting at, that they are very different pitchers despite any end result similarities.

 

I don't particularly love Miller either, but I think you're going a bit overboard with the Hellickson and 'just a guy' rhetoric. It would be buying high and Miller would have to be better/different than he has to date, but he also has the stuff/pedigree, repertoire, and youth to make a leap under Bosio too. I'd prefer someone like Samardzija to him(partially because I doubt Contreras + McKinney actually gets you Miller), but they're not terribly dissimilar in the type of additions they'd be.

[Guest]

Full disclosure, this was from before this season (right after the trade), which obviously makes a big difference, but they compare him to two other notorious peripheral outperformers in Cain and Hellickson

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-fascinating-jason-heywardshelby-miller-swap/

 

The long-term cost will essentially boil down to what you believe Shelby Miller is. Is he a top-flight young pitcher, the guy who has produced +6 WAR by runs allowed in 370 big league innings, and just turned 24? or is he a two-pitch tease, overrated by run prevention, heading for a short-term crash when his mediocre peripherals catch up with him? A strong case could be made for both outcomes.

 

Miller throws a lot of fastballs up in the zone, and as Eno noted through multiple conversations with pitchers this year, high fastballs can produce some terrific results, often inducing a lot of useless contact that isn’t captured in FIP-type metrics. If Miller’s approach to pitching up with a good fastball makes him a guy who can sustain a BABIP in the .270-.280 range, the underwhelming strikeout rates become a lot less problematic. If you’re a Braves fan who wants to be excited about this deal, here’s the first ~400 IP comparison you want to use.

 

Cain was always better at home run prevention than Miller, but the template is similar, and it’s certainly possible that Miller is a (somewhat worse) new version of the Cain skillset. If Miller’s FIP-beating ways prove sustainable to a significant degree, picking up four discounted years of a quality young arm is a very solid return for a single year of Heyward, especially if the Braves don’t see themselves as strong contenders in 2015.

 

But Cain is notable because most pitchers can’t do what he’s done, and not every young hurler who posts a low BABIP for 400 innings is definitely going to follow in his footsteps. Here’s another, less-rosy comparison for Miller, again with career performance through the equivalent of two full seasons.

 

A couple of years ago, the arguments for Hellickson were the same as they are for Miller today. Maybe he’s just good at inducing a lot of popups, and because he’s a flyball guy, he’s always going to run lower than average BABIPs, so he’s underrated by metrics that focus only on walks, strikeouts, and home runs or ground balls. Hellickson managed to keep things going through age-25, and then promptly fell apart, pitching poorly and getting injured. The Rays just shipped him to Arizona for two lower level prospects rather than bet on him returning to prior form.

 

More often than not, guys who post big gaps between their ERAs and their FIPs regress towards the latter, which is why FIP and xFIP work for most pitchers. It doesn’t mean Miller is definitely not an outlier, but he probably isn’t at outlier to the degree that he’s been so far, and he’s probably more of an okay pitcher than a very good one.

 

But even four years of an okay young arm is pretty valuable. After all, we’re looking at league average starters making $10-$12 million per year in free agency, and Miller will a little more than the league minimum this year, with three below-market arbitration years to follow. Even if Miller is more of a solid arm than a future ace, the Braves are getting a lot more quantity of value here, and they’re allocating it into the years where they think they might be more able to contend.

 

Maybe he really is more Cain than Hellickson, but why bother gambling on it given the price we're talking about? It's buying at the top end.

You know the last paragraph still applies, right? Just subtract a year.

[JennieGarthAlgar]

Soler+Baez+Underwood = Archer

McKinney+Contreras = Miller

Sign Heyward+Fowler

 

CF Fowler

RF Heyward

3B Bryant

1B Rizzo

LF Schwarber

2B Castro

C Montero

P Arrieta/Archer/Lester/Miller/Hendricks

SS Russell

Edited November 29, 2015 by JennieGarthAlgar

[Guest]

Because the price isn't that expensive, and we seem deadset on acquiring a cheap pitcher.

 

the price is not that expensive if you aren't high on contreras. iirc, you aren't quite sold. from what i've read, i am.

 

(and yes, i realize i had no idea who the hell he was 3 months ago)

 

a, by some accounts, good defense (by others not so much - but that's still a lot better than universally bad) C with that plate approach, contact ability, and power? yes, please.

 

that's a high price to pay IMO for a guy i just don't think is that good.

 

edit - and just to be clear, i'd definitely give him up in a package for some of the other pitchers we've talked about. just not shelby miller.

Edited November 29, 2015 by David

[Guest]

Because the price isn't that expensive, and we seem deadset on acquiring a cheap pitcher.

 

also i feel like we don't seem deadset on doing anything. there are like 100 different ways this offseason might still go and i have no idea which it will be.

 

if samardzija and/or lackey are signed, as have been some of the louder rumors, i don't see any impetus to acquire a cheap pitcher (assuming you don't mean guys like lackey and samardzija by that...i'm figuring you mean the young cost controlled types that have been discussed)

[Guest]

You know the last paragraph still applies, right? Just subtract a year.

 

Sure, that's true. I just don't see a need for that type of player. We have Hendricks and we can always fill out the rest of the back end with buy low gambles. I think I'd rather do that than try to lock in OK value on someone like Miller (like they talk about in that paragraph).

[rawaction]

Because the price isn't that expensive, and we seem deadset on acquiring a cheap pitcher.

 

the price is not that expensive if you aren't high on contreras. iirc, you aren't quite sold. from what i've read, i am.

 

(and yes, i realize i had no idea who the hell he was 3 months ago)

 

a, by some accounts, good defense (by others not so much - but that's still a lot better than universally bad) C with that plate approach, contact ability, and power? yes, please.

 

that's a high price to pay IMO for a guy i just don't think is that good.

 

edit - and just to be clear, i'd definitely give him up in a package for some of the other pitchers we've talked about. just not shelby miller.

 

I don't think Contreras and McKinney even gets it done. Supposedly 20 teams interested in Miller, I'm sure it would take 1 more piece from the Cubs to get it done and I think it'd be significant.

[Clem Fandango]

How much of his Miller's success this year, a year in which his GB rate spiked, can be attributed to having arguably the best defensive middle infield in baseball playing behind him? How much of his performance suffers when he's taken out of that environment?

[Guest]

How much of his Miller's success this year, a year in which his GB rate spiked, can be attributed to having arguably the best defensive middle infield in baseball playing behind him? How much of his performance suffers when he's taken out of that environment?

 

Miller had the highest BABIP of his career and his GB rate was middle of the pack for a qualified SP, so probably not much. Plus, aside from Simmons the Braves infield defense wasn't very remarkable. By UZR they were +2 at 2B and -4 at 3B, so while the Cubs don't have a Simmons(probably, Russell was +20 in limited time), the rest of the infield they're probably a half step better.

[davell]

Sharma mentioned a while back he thought we'd trade for TWO starters and not sign a FA. That's always stuck in my mind. I think its doubtful, but I could see 2 trades, with Javy headlining one and Soler the other. Especially if we intend on replenishing depth with Cubans. It'd leave us needing CF and RF(unless Coghlan goes in as the starter). But it'd leave us room for Heyward/Gordon and a solid guy at the other spot.

[Guest]

If you add 2 SP, you do improve the bullpen by having Hammel or one of the additions as the 6th starter in the Wood role.

 

As far as other RP additions, Mike Dunn is another that might be available. He'll make a few million bucks and is a FA after this year, which is basically the platonic ideal of someone the Marlins might want to trade.

 

For someone more outside the box(especially if you think Hammel can't be in the pen for fit/salary reasons), I wonder what it would take for Pittsburgh to trade Jeff Locke. He's a borderline non-tender candidate as is, and he bears a lot of resemblance to pre-2015 Travis Wood as someone who might be ideal for Wood's 2015 role(middling fastball that plays up in relief, LHP but no split, durable/athletic delivery) at about half the cost of Wood's arbitration projection. Plus Locke is first year arb eligible so he'd be a future option too.

[Guest]

If we trade for two pitchers, I think we add one with Javy/Soler/Castro and one with prospects.

[d_money]

I think the trade that will require young talent (Baez, McKinney, etc) for a SP happens mid season.

[Tryptamine]

I think the trade that will require young talent (Baez, McKinney, etc) for a SP happens mid season.

 

That would be a huge mistake. The NL central race is going to be much too tight a race to wait half a season before fully upgrading the rotation.

[Guest]

I think the trade that will require young talent (Baez, McKinney, etc) for a SP happens mid season.

 

That would be a huge mistake. The NL central race is going to be much too tight a race to wait half a season before fully upgrading the rotation.

He could be a believer in first half Hammel. Or he could believe it was the hamstring (right?) injury that diminished Hammel's effectiveness in the second half.

 

Personally, I'm okay with adding one MLB starter, someone with options like Sierra and then additional depth at the upper levels of the minors. I don't see a huge need to add two pieces to the rotation right away.

[StylesClash]

I think the trade that will require young talent (Baez, McKinney, etc) for a SP happens mid season.

 

If the Nats are out of it come July, and Strasburg is healthy and dominant, he'd be a prime candidate to fill that concept. I wonder what a fair price would be for two months of Strasburg (plus possible postseason starts).

 

Almora continuing his second half quality run into 2016 would make him a quality trade option for Washington. Span will be gone and Michael Taylor likely won't be a long term Center Field option.

[Tryptamine]

I think the trade that will require young talent (Baez, McKinney, etc) for a SP happens mid season.

 

That would be a huge mistake. The NL central race is going to be much too tight a race to wait half a season before fully upgrading the rotation.

He could be a believer in first half Hammel. Or he could believe it was the hamstring (right?) injury that diminished Hammel's effectiveness in the second half.

 

Personally, I'm okay with adding one MLB starter, someone with options like Sierra and then additional depth at the upper levels of the minors. I don't see a huge need to add two pieces to the rotation right away.

 

2016 and 2017 are likely the best squads this team is going to have over the duration of their playoff window. Lester is only going to get older, Arrieta will only get older and possibly be gone, etc. Everything needs to be poured into this year and next. Going into 2016 without significantly improving the squad is a huge mistake.

[Guest]

I think the trade that will require young talent (Baez, McKinney, etc) for a SP happens mid season.

 

That would be a huge mistake. The NL central race is going to be much too tight a race to wait half a season before fully upgrading the rotation.

He could be a believer in first half Hammel. Or he could believe it was the hamstring (right?) injury that diminished Hammel's effectiveness in the second half.

 

Personally, I'm okay with adding one MLB starter, someone with options like Sierra and then additional depth at the upper levels of the minors. I don't see a huge need to add two pieces to the rotation right away.

 

2016 and 2017 are likely the best squads this team is going to have over the duration of their playoff window. Lester is only going to get older, Arrieta will only get older and possibly be gone, etc. Everything needs to be poured into this year and next. Going into 2016 without significantly improving the squad is a huge mistake.

1) You're making a pretty huge assumption there that the next two years will be the best this team is going to have over "their playoff window"

2) You're assuming there is a "playoff window"

3) Adding one high quality SP and quite a bit of stashable depth is significantly improving the team from the current state. Hammel is not garbage. It will be difficult and expensive to get even a marginal upgrade on his projected performance. Given limited resources, you have to acknowledge that adding a second MLB starter is taking away resources from addressing something else on the team.

 

I mean, if money and resources are unlimited, then sure. Go for it. Just remember that if you're trading Soler to get pitching, you now have two major holes in the OF to fill. If you trade Javy, you are both depending on Castro to not suck and you're giving a whole bunch more at bats to someone like Herrera. If you can get a second starter that is both better than Hammel and costs nothing but prospects, then it is pretty much a no-brainer. But the only potential starter I've heard that can be had for just prospects is Miller -- and he's not better than Hammel in any way except likely durability.

[Guest]

I think the trade that will require young talent (Baez, McKinney, etc) for a SP happens mid season.

 

That would be a huge mistake. The NL central race is going to be much too tight a race to wait half a season before fully upgrading the rotation.

He could be a believer in first half Hammel. Or he could believe it was the hamstring (right?) injury that diminished Hammel's effectiveness in the second half.

 

Personally, I'm okay with adding one MLB starter, someone with options like Sierra and then additional depth at the upper levels of the minors. I don't see a huge need to add two pieces to the rotation right away.

 

2016 and 2017 are likely the best squads this team is going to have over the duration of their playoff window. Lester is only going to get older, Arrieta will only get older and possibly be gone, etc. Everything needs to be poured into this year and next. Going into 2016 without significantly improving the squad is a huge mistake.

Well that is a depressing piece of information. I thought they were building a juggernaut to contend for a decade. I'm mean if that's all 4 years of not trying gets them they better come up with a new business model.

[Guest]

I think the trade that will require young talent (Baez, McKinney, etc) for a SP happens mid season.

 

That would be a huge mistake. The NL central race is going to be much too tight a race to wait half a season before fully upgrading the rotation.

He could be a believer in first half Hammel. Or he could believe it was the hamstring (right?) injury that diminished Hammel's effectiveness in the second half.

 

Personally, I'm okay with adding one MLB starter, someone with options like Sierra and then additional depth at the upper levels of the minors. I don't see a huge need to add two pieces to the rotation right away.

 

2016 and 2017 are likely the best squads this team is going to have over the duration of their playoff window. Lester is only going to get older, Arrieta will only get older and possibly be gone, etc. Everything needs to be poured into this year and next. Going into 2016 without significantly improving the squad is a huge mistake.

Well that is a depressing piece of information. I thought they were building a juggernaut to contend for a decade. I'm mean if that's all 4 years of not trying gets them they better come up with a new business model.

 

He didn't say those were the only years of contention or that they wouldn't (not that they necessarily will, but you can't say that no matter how well they are set up) contend for a decade. He said that the next two seasons are probably going to be the best ones of that span. That doesn't mean the other ones won't be very good or won't contend. With what we know right now, it's not an unreasonable thing to think, for the reasons he states, but things can change quickly.

[SRQCub]

I think the trade that will require young talent (Baez, McKinney, etc) for a SP happens mid season.

 

That would be a huge mistake. The NL central race is going to be much too tight a race to wait half a season before fully upgrading the rotation.

He could be a believer in first half Hammel. Or he could believe it was the hamstring (right?) injury that diminished Hammel's effectiveness in the second half.

 

Personally, I'm okay with adding one MLB starter, someone with options like Sierra and then additional depth at the upper levels of the minors. I don't see a huge need to add two pieces to the rotation right away.

 

2016 and 2017 are likely the best squads this team is going to have over the duration of their playoff window. Lester is only going to get older, Arrieta will only get older and possibly be gone, etc. Everything needs to be poured into this year and next. Going into 2016 without significantly improving the squad is a huge mistake.

 

Because we can project the 2016 and 2017 rosters, I understand this mentality, but I think it's far from conclusive that this will be the reality.

 

That said, I do think now is the time to move. The NL West doesn't appear to have anyone outside of the aging Dodgers who look like a threat at this point. The Cardinals are the Cardinals, and I won't expect their demise until I actually see it. The East has the Nats and Mets who could be World Series competitors, but either could be very average squads in 2016. I don't know that this will really be our best squad, but I do think this could be our best chance to outclass the NL.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

2016 and 2017 are likely the best squads this team is going to have over the duration of their playoff window. Lester is only going to get older, Arrieta will only get older and possibly be gone, etc. Everything needs to be poured into this year and next. Going into 2016 without significantly improving the squad is a huge mistake.

 

Those are fantastic reasons to not pour everything into this year and next.

 

This thinking is so weird to me. We all know that the playoffs are a crapshoot and getting there as often as possible is the best way to succeed, and yet we held back resources from teams that needed them and now we're supposed to be pouring resources into rosters that don't?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Go for it. Just remember that if you're trading Soler to get pitching, you now have two major holes in the OF to fill.

 

Going from Soler to Coghlan doesn't create a major hole. Heck, going from Soler to replacement level isn't that big of a drop.

[Guest]

2016 and 2017 are likely the best squads this team is going to have over the duration of their playoff window. Lester is only going to get older, Arrieta will only get older and possibly be gone, etc. Everything needs to be poured into this year and next. Going into 2016 without significantly improving the squad is a huge mistake.

 

Those are fantastic reasons to not pour everything into this year and next.

 

This thinking is so weird to me. We all know that the playoffs are a crapshoot and getting there as often as possible is the best way to succeed, and yet we held back resources from teams that needed them and now we're supposed to be pouring resources into rosters that don't?

 

Also, this.

 

That said, I still obviously want to try to be as awesome as possible every year. But this is logically the correct thinking.

Edited November 30, 2015 by David