Ok, so just dump proven major league starters to gamble on Brown... got it... Also, Garcia has 2 fewer years of control and is closer to arbitration. Brown isn't as highly thought of around the league as he is in these circles.. Burleson is probably close to an equivalent value. I didn't bring up Stanek. What is this about a setup man? It would make more sense if you weren't a homer.
Buy low, sell high... Garcia's value has dipped... If Brown is another Frances Martes we're hurting ourselves. If he's another Musgrove we may never know because there's no spot for him.
Why would they have to dump major league starters? why couldn't they trade their young, proven, controlled pitching talent for an equivalent return? I'm confused, are you mentioned Garcia as a point to trade Garcia or keep Garcia? Not sure why he's getting singled out. I will give you credit, that is a factually correct statement that Garcia has 2 less years of control than Brown... as he has played two seasons of baseball and HB has yet to play one day of ML baseball. Not sure why putting Brown in the rotation next year would be a gamble. He's a top prospect who's been one of the best pitchers in AAA this season. He'd already be starting for probably half the teams in baseball. It's much much less of a gamble than: starting Pena on opening day, handing Meyers back the starting CF job after coming off a major injury, giving Chazzy Fizz all the time he's gotten (a lot for an unheralded guy). By whom and/or using what standard? Hunter Brown is a consensus top 100 prospect. He's not an elite top 20 prospect. I think most people recognize he's got MOR potential with possibly higher upside if he gets command sorted/walk rate down. I don't see many people on the forum over-hyping that. If anything, i've seen fan bases around the league salivating at the thought of getting a top pitching prospect kicking ass in AAA. Flip side, Burleson is not a consensus top 100 guy. BA has him at 76 but Fangraphs doesn't even have in the top 100. "probably close" is subjective but I see them as two different tiers of prospects. If you're going by leverage, Montero is clearly the primary setup man/8th inning guy. Neris and Stanek have roughly similar leverage numbers and similar number of save opportunities. They're equally the secondary setup man options. Lol. I'm usually the guy saying the Astros trading their spare parts for better players is unrealistic. The one time I think the Astros would be giving up too much value in the deal, I'm a homer. Cool story.
Even when the Braves had Maddux-Glavine-Smoltz... there was still a rotating stable of arms in the 4-5 spots... and not set of 5 starters stays healthy for a full season. There was also 'no spot' for Roy Oswalt his rookie year, but the team was creative with his usage as a starter and in the bullpen. And Musgrove served his purpose in getting us our 4th ace.
Javier has a whip under 1 and an ERA under 3. He’s a top 20 starter in the AL trending upward. There is no reason he shouldn’t be in the rotation. None. I agree with you on trading Garcia.
Pitcher Values 9/3/22: Rotation 1. IL Verlander 243.3 2. Valdez 129.9 3. McCullers 122.1 4. Javier 121.3 5. Urquidy 90.0 6. Garcia 78.2 7. Brown 0.0 Relievers 1. Stanek 244.9 2. Martinez 161.3 3. Abreu 160.5 4. IL Pressly 133.5 5. Montero 130.7 6. Neris 114.8 7. Beilak 97.3 8. Smith 88.0 9. Maton 71.6
Some people define "setup man" as the 8th inning guy only (meaning, one closer, one setup man), although others, myself included, loosely use the term to define any high-leverage bullpen arm who is frequently used in late and close situations. I think of all three Neris, Montero, and Stanek all as setup men (but not the others, even though they do get such spots sometimes).
It's long and i don't have much time right now... Dealing unproven pitching prospect for unproven cf prospect PLUS more is reasonable depending on valuation. When you're contending you try to reduce the number of unknowns. We've paid a price during Pena's drought. You can't pretend AAA success translates reliably. It helps, but there's a huge gap... sometimes it takes pitchers 2 or 3 years to figure it out. If you're trying to win can you afford to do it?
Thank you for agreeing with me. If Brown serves his purpose and gets us a true everyday centerfielder for half a decade then it's worth it. Also, I noticed you used the Braves but only cited 3 starters, not 6... Verlander isn't going to like a 7 man rotation you're implying...
So you're argument is good points from irrelevant person? What sort of person relies on such a point you make to discredit someone's perspective? I have a habit of muting trolls which affects numbers if you must know. Is there some rational argument for your personal attack?
You can make a reasonable case Burleson was equivalent this year to kyle tucker in AAA. Tucker had more homers and steals. Burleson had much higher average and lower k rate. Roughly same ops. Tucker a year younger but with more professional experience. There is a subjective scouting element to it which is largely just opinion. Just pointing out similarities so you understand value. This team needs another Tucker more than Valdez or Javier... I'm fine moving Garcia if they think Brown is ready, just saying Brown has more risk and possibly more value to another team.
Pitcher Values 9/5/22: Rotation 1. IL Verlander 244.4 2. Valdez 130.8 3. McCullers 123.4 4. Javier 122.3 5. Urquidy 97.1 6. Garcia 83.3 7. Brown 0.0 Relievers 1. Stanek 253.3 2. Abreu 169.0 3. Martinez 158.0 4. IL Pressly 134.6 5. Montero 131.6 6. Neris 119.9 7. Smith 93.4 8. Beilak 88.8 9. Maton 73.4
