Yea I agree that Valverde isn't worth their top pitching prospect, I was just saying that his value isn't as low as a low level A ball prospect or a player to be named later like Nick suggested, I still think you can get way better value than that for him
Hasn't Valverde lead the NL in saves the last two seasons? That makes him highly predictable and consistent in my book. Now, Valverde does pitch with the score in mind. If he can give up a couple of runs and still get the save, he likely to do so.
saves are by no means a measure of predictability and consistency. but i looked up his numbers and they're better than i recall. still, it seems like he's lights out one night; not as much the next - even you notice a change in his approach based on the score. i just keep going back to the fact we got him for qualls and burke - that's a pretty "meh" deal, imo - why is going to be worth appreciably more 1.5 years later?
I'd say at this point, we do indeed try to get whatever prospects we can fetch for Valverde. His value hasn't dipped that dramatically that he wouldn't command at least a respectable prospect or two.
Before the Astros got him, Valverde had alternating bad and good years, with the last being a great year. The DBacks, I suspect, were concerned that he would sign a big deal and then cough out a bad year.
