Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
SoxAce

Brewers nearing deal to acquire Narvaez

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, ChiSox59 said:

Yah, I think its primarily a reflection that Omar Narvaez isn't good.  

Of course he's not.  They traded a guy for a guy.  They needed the guy the received more than they needed the guy they got rid of.  The outrage was insane.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, ChiSox59 said:

Yah, I think its primarily a reflection that Omar Narvaez isn't good.  

That's the thing though, I'd rather have traded him for a comp pick, especially this year with the college pitching surplus. Life's all about choices... Narvaez isn't chris sale, but he's still a paperclip you'd hope to turn into a house

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bmags said:

That's the thing though, I'd rather have traded him for a comp pick, especially this year with the college pitching surplus. Life's all about choices... Narvaez isn't chris sale, but he's still a paperclip you'd hope to turn into a house

The 71st pick is worth about 3.5 million. That means the projected outcome for that slot is like .5 career WAR. 

The odds the 71st pick becomes as good as even one year of Colome is damn near zero. 

Claiming the return here is better is just being negative, again.

Edited by Look at Ray Ray Run
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

The 71st pick is worth about 3.5 million. That means the projected outcome for that slot is like .5 career WAR. 

The odds the 71st pick becomes as good as even one year of Colome is damn near zero. 

Claiming the return here is better is just being negative, again.

But the odds of spending colome's $17/mill over two years toward another reliever better than Colome is not zero. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bmags said:

But the odds of spending colome's $17/mill over two years toward another reliever better than Colome is not zero. 

Colome was pretty good last year. Who are you getting for 8.5 mil/yr that's going to be as good or better in the same time period?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, almagest said:

Colome was pretty good last year. Who are you getting for 8.5 mil/yr that's going to be as good or better in the same time period?

He's 10 million this year committed, and I'd rather have that repurposed as having signed will smith for 3 years/40. Had the sox signed smith with colome, they'd have had a bullpen costing over a third of the budget (herrerra, colome, smith = $31 mill). Without him, they could have applied those savings toward other pitchers. In other words, It doesn't matter if he is 2-3 mill less than others, he also isn't a surplus value. He's paid about what he's worth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colome is the Sox 2nd best reliever.  Sure he's paid what he's worth, but its not like we have a laundry list of guys ready to replace him.  We traded a light hitting DH that tries to catch for a closer that did very well in 2019 - despite outperforming his peripherals - and is under control again in 2020 at market price for a decent closer.  The Narvaez trade isn't going to appear in any 'best trades of the decade" lists, but it was a need for need trade.  The fact that the M's turned around and traded the guys less than 12 months later for a minimal return is fairly telling.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ChiSox59 said:

Colome is the Sox 2nd best reliever.  Sure he's paid what he's worth, but its not like we have a laundry list of guys ready to replace him.  We traded a light hitting DH that tries to catch for a closer that did very well in 2019 - despite outperforming his peripherals - and is under control again in 2020 at market price for a decent closer.  The Narvaez trade isn't going to appear in any 'best trades of the decade" lists, but it was a need for need trade.  The fact that the M's turned around and traded the guys less than 12 months later for a minimal return is fairly telling.  

fin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bmags said:

He's 10 million this year committed, and I'd rather have that repurposed as having signed will smith for 3 years/40. Had the sox signed smith with colome, they'd have had a bullpen costing over a third of the budget (herrerra, colome, smith = $31 mill). Without him, they could have applied those savings toward other pitchers. In other words, It doesn't matter if he is 2-3 mill less than others, he also isn't a surplus value. He's paid about what he's worth.

Smith just signed for 3/39 with a 4th year option at $13 mil with a contender. I don't think you were getting him for 3/40 without that option year or making that year guaranteed, and then you're looking at 50+ million. Yeah he's really good but I don't think Colome kept the White Sox from signing him, plus $31 million isn't going to be a third of their budget longer-term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, ChiSox59 said:

Colome is the Sox 2nd best reliever.  Sure he's paid what he's worth, but its not like we have a laundry list of guys ready to replace him.  We traded a light hitting DH that tries to catch for a closer that did very well in 2019 - despite outperforming his peripherals - and is under control again in 2020 at market price for a decent closer.  The Narvaez trade isn't going to appear in any 'best trades of the decade" lists, but it was a need for need trade.  The fact that the M's turned around and traded the guys less than 12 months later for a minimal return is fairly telling.  

Is the colome for narvaez trade the most pressing problem currently facing the sox? No.

Do we have to celebrate that trade as good? Also no. "The fact that the sox promoted colome as a great flip candidate and couldn't flip him is fairly telling."

I have enough evidence to go off of now, but their "in transition" moves to me were supposed to tell me if things changed. I wanted to see if they could identify undervalued talent in FA and trades. This was an example of a trade where the sox decided to go after a player and I don't think it was the best use of resources. By contrast you won't see me complain about the Joakim Soria deal, which unfortunately did not end up that well because their scouting is still pretty bad.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bmags said:

Is the colome for narvaez trade the most pressing problem currently facing the sox? No.

Do we have to celebrate that trade as good? Also no. "The fact that the sox promoted colome as a great flip candidate and couldn't flip him is fairly telling."

I have enough evidence to go off of now, but their "in transition" moves to me were supposed to tell me if things changed. I wanted to see if they could identify undervalued talent in FA and trades. This was an example of a trade where the sox decided to go after a player and I don't think it was the best use of resources. By contrast you won't see me complain about the Joakim Soria deal, which unfortunately did not end up that well because their scouting is still pretty bad.

 

While I agree that we haven't seen the improved scouting that will be necessary for sustained winning I don't think this trade and the subsequent one the Mariners made today are an example of it.  Omar only had about 350PA of good production at the dish with horrible defensive metrics (framing of course) when he was traded by the Sox.  He then put up a similar slash line (119wRC+)  this time in nearly 500PA.  So he's now had  a wRC+ of 120 over his last 850 PA. 

Framing still sucks but his bat is no longer much of a question and his value has ticked up a bit.

And still he was only able to net a C prospect and the 71st pick, which is about equal to a C+ prospect or maybe at best B-.  Like a Basabe type.  

Plenty of things to b**** about with Hahn but the Omar trade isn't one of them imo.

Edited by chitownsportsfan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×