Given the contract, Eaton will almost undoubtedly be the better value.

 

To be fair to Taylor's bad argument, the question wasn't who is more valuable in a trade, because that is WITHOUT A DOUBT Adam Eaton and that's not up for debate. The question was simply who is the better player, to which I think it's Eaton based on numbers, and he thinks it's Heyward based on his height.

I'm almost positive that was never the plan.

 

 

But as of now, the Cubs are expecting Heyward to be their primary option at a position he's only appeared in 32 times (30 starts) in 816 career games as a defender.

 

The Cubs believe Heyward can handle it. As president of baseball operations Theo Epstein was rattling off the attributes that made Heyward attractive to his club, he said Heyward is "probably the best right fielder in the game, and someone we feel can play a solid-to-excellent center field, as well."

 

http://m.mlb.com/news/article/159745898/ja...enter-for-cubs/

Jesus christ, what's with the strawmen? Did I ever say they didn't value defense? I said a team isn't going to give up the farm for a guy whose WAR has been drastically inflated due to RF defense. Maybe if he was a plus defender at CF, C, or SS.

No but you said defense wasn't one of the main factors for why Heyward got paid so much. You keep saying he was an established player, but his established offensive production up to that point wasn't enough to nearly justify the cost. So you're basically arguing the Cubs paid extra due to potential. Raw power doesn't mean anything if you can't hit the ball in the air consistently.

Edited December 7, 20169 yr by OmarComing25

A strong half by Abreu could make him one of the most valuable bats at the deadline

 

He can play crappy defense at 1B or DH for an American league team

 

Am I nuts, or do the Rangers appear to be in serious need of a 1B/DH?

 

Why wouldn't they be interested in Abreu? (Side note...wow that Shin Soo Choo signing has backfired on the Rangers)

 

Yeah, it is going to take a while to play out though. EE and Napoli are still out there as is Bautista, so the market won't really take shape until those guys find a home. Once that happens, the market for Abreu will take shape and the contracts those guys receive will further clarify Abreus value.

http://m.mlb.com/news/article/159745898/ja...enter-for-cubs/

I remember. I just don't think that was ever the plan. They were going to get a cf somewhere so Heyward could play right. Him playing center would have been a last resort for them.

From what I've seen, the only people still demanding Turner is in the context of a Quintana + Eaton trade, in which case that's entirely valid for a pair of 4-5 WAR players.

I honestly don't believe that to be true. You can't trade Turner if you're the Nats. You just cannot trade him.

To be fair to Taylor's bad argument, the question wasn't who is more valuable in a trade, because that is WITHOUT A DOUBT Adam Eaton and that's not up for debate. The question was simply who is the better player, to which I think it's Eaton based on numbers, and he thinks it's Heyward based on his height.

Big guy, lots of tools, raw power. 25 years old. Taylor must love Avi Garcia.

They are 8 months apart in age. Apparently Heyward's tools took a huge hit and now that he is almost 28, using your criteria, there really isn't any hope these tools develop.

 

I actually think Eaton is improving, and think he will hit with more power. I also though Heyward would hit with more power when he became a Cub, but he is messed up, and hasn't hit for much power in several years.

You should read the thread again. The debate started because we were talking about Eaton's value now vs Heyward's value then. They were compared because much of their WAR value is in their defense. My position is that Heyward was far more valuable at the time because Heyward has better tools and athleticism. It's certainly not unheard of for a an athletically gifted baseball player to continue to develop at the age of 26. The Cubs were willing to take a risk because of his upside. Eaton does not possess that upside.

 

You should read the thread again. The debate started because we were talking about Eaton's value now vs Heyward's value then. They were compared because much of their WAR value is in their defense. My position is that Heyward was far more valuable at the time because Heyward has better tools and athleticism. It's certainly not unheard of for a an athletically gifted baseball player to continue to develop at the age of 26. The Cubs were willing to take a risk because of his upside. Eaton does not possess that upside.

If Heyward was worth $184 million, what is Eaton worth?

 

As far as upside, Eaton has gone from a 3.1 WAR, to a 3.7 WAR to a 6.0 WAR his 3 years with the White Sox. He might not put up a 6 WAR again, but why wouldn't he be a consistent 4-5 WAR guy?

Edited December 7, 20169 yr by Dick Allen

Big guy, lots of tools, raw power. 25 years old. Taylor must love Avi Garcia.

Why are you being an asshole? I haven't insulted anyone.

I honestly don't believe that to be true. You can't trade Turner if you're the Nats. You just cannot trade him.

 

I mean, that's fine, but you can't expect to receive a top 10 P and a top 3 OF in 2016 without moving him. They would be acquiring 2 all-star caliber, major award-caliber players. Keep Turner, but no shot at those 2 paired together.

I honestly don't believe that to be true. You can't trade Turner if you're the Nats. You just cannot trade him.

 

Which means that it would have to be a three team deal. Its going to be nearly impossible to sell a Turner trade to that fanbase, and their rotation is pretty full as it is, so it would make sense that the Nats would move a starter to get some more prospects to add to the deal. As it stands, the Nats don't have enough high end talent to pull in both Eaton in Q in a single deal without including Turner.

 

I think this is all smoke screen anyway to gauge interest from other teams, I don't really see Q as a fit for the Nats and Eaton would be wasted in LF there.

We now have multiple threads so I'll post this here, too. If I see one more post demanding Turner ++ for Quintana +.

 

Washington is not going to trade Turner for guys their fans have never even heard of - there would be a mutiny.

 

Trea Turner, in 73 games last year across 307 at bats, had a .937 OPS with 13 homers, 14 doubles, 8 triples, and 33 stolen bases. WHAT THE F*CK THEY ARE NOT GOING TO F*CKING TRADE THIS GUY.

 

Their fans would riot.

 

I would ask for Turner and demand that Harper kid as well.

You should read the thread again. The debate started because we were talking about Eaton's value now vs Heyward's value then. They were compared because much of their WAR value is in their defense. My position is that Heyward was far more valuable at the time because Heyward has better tools and athleticism. It's certainly not unheard of for a an athletically gifted baseball player to continue to develop at the age of 26. The Cubs were willing to take a risk because of his upside. Eaton does not possess that upside.

I agree with you.

 

Heyward's hurt himself last year, but if you were to put them both on the market again before the season, the delta in the contracts would not be commensurate with their WAR.

No but you said defense wasn't one of the main factors for why Heyward got paid so much. You keep saying he was an established player, but his established offensive production up to that point wasn't enough to nearly justify the cost. So you're basically arguing the Cubs paid extra due to potential. Raw power doesn't mean anything if you can't hit the ball in the air consistently.

 

Off the bat, Heyward and Avi are very similar offensive players. Both with good power, but mash the ball in to the ground instead.

I mean, that's fine, but you can't expect to receive a top 10 P and a top 3 OF in 2016 without moving him. They would be acquiring 2 all-star caliber, major award-caliber players. Keep Turner, but no shot at those 2 paired together.

Adam Eaton has never been an All Star and never finished higher than 19 in MVP voting.

Big guy, lots of tools, raw power. 25 years old. Taylor must love Avi Garcia.

 

f***, I JUST made that comparison, although only in way that they hit a baseball.

A reasonable proposal or a proposal that is purposefully light because it's coming from just one org?

 

Quintana - #2 Robles/#4 Fedde/#8 Stevenson/#14 Severino

Eaton - #3 Lopez/#7 Neuse/#11 Banks/#30 Reetz

 

This leaves then with their #1, 5, 6, 9 & 10 guys still intact.

 

Does it hurt them? Yes. Are they much better now? Yes.

 

And guess what? If they lose Harper in two years, they can move Q and Eaton then to restock much of that system.

 

I'm just not sure I want to try and squeeze that much value out of one organization's prospects

 

I'd rather individually deal Q and Eaton

Maybe this is Rizzo try to waste RH/KW's time after they used him to perfection yesterday.

 

if that's the case, then you leverage the players you want from WSH and you use that as your benchmark for dealing with any other teams.

 

the White Sox are dealing from a position of power. they have the pieces other teams want. there's no need to rush or settle for anything less than what Hahn wants.

Edited December 7, 20169 yr by peppers312

Adam Eaton has never been an All Star and never finished higher than 19 in MVP voting.

 

Highly irrelevant when evaluating players. Derek Jeter won like 12 gold gloves, but that doesn't mean s***. 4-5 WAR players are all-star caliber. 6+ WAR is MVP-level. Those are benchmarks regardless of voting results.

I mean, that's fine, but you can't expect to receive a top 10 P and a top 3 OF in 2016 without moving him. They would be acquiring 2 all-star caliber, major award-caliber players. Keep Turner, but no shot at those 2 paired together.

 

^^^THIS

Highly irrelevant when evaluating players. Derek Jeter won like 12 gold gloves, but that doesn't mean s***. 4-5 WAR players are all-star caliber. 6+ WAR is MVP-level. Those are benchmarks regardless of voting results.

There's not a GM in baseball that would come close to considering Adam Eaton a "major award-caliber player."

if that's the case, then you leverage the players you want from WSH and you use that as your benchmark for dealing with any other teams.

 

the White Sox are dealing from a position of power. they have the pieces other teams wants. there's no need to rush or settle for anything less than what Hahn wants.

 

True

 

Right now the White Sox are one of the few organizations that are actively willing to trade quality mlb talent.

 

I would not settle, but at the same time if a deal exists out there I would not shy away from making it and moving forward

There's not a GM in baseball that would come close to considering Adam Eaton a "major award-caliber player."

 

Based on his results of finishing with the 8th highest WAR in the AL, I'd say it's possible, but sure, I'll concede that top 5 is probably closer to being MVP-caliber. Was still the 3rd best OF in baseball last season.

There's not a GM in baseball that would come close to considering Adam Eaton a "major award-caliber player."

How many of those guys are around? He's averaged 4.2 fWAR the past 3 years, and it's been rising. He's signed for $38 million over the next 5 seasons.

 

If other teams don't want to value that for what it's worth, the Sox can keep him and be fine with the best RF in town for $145 million less than Theo paid for his physical specimen who forgot how to hit homers 4 years ago, and forgot how to hit at all in 2016.

Edited December 7, 20169 yr by Dick Allen