I would consider Tucker, Devenski, plus other prospects as overpaying for Valencia. If they can get him for Tucker and some lower prospects then its worth the risk, IMO.
Valbuena currently ranks 22nd (out of 26) in OPS among 3B with at least 155 PAs. Valvencia is 1st. If he (severely) regresses and the deal doesn't work out... no one can argue with the intent. On paper, he would be a massive upgrade at a position of significant need.
I think a lot of it depends on what Luhnow and the FO think of Bregman and Reed. IF they think those guys are ready to help, and are waiting out to make absolutely sure on Super 2, then there would be no need to move assets for a guy like Valencia. If they are not planning on either of those guys being here anytime soon, then it could make some sense.
I would be absolutely shocked if they put all their eggs in the baskets of two young, unproven rookies. BTW, as much as *fans* are beating the drum for Bregman, he has significantly fewer minor league PAs then, well most of their prospects when called up. I just don't think he's in their plans for this year. Reed? Sure, possibly. But you can't turn both of those areas of need over to inexperienced prospects. And remember, while now is not the time to discuss it - Gattis remains an incredibly streaky hitter. So even if they call-up both rookies, they could find everyday ABs for Valencia.
Valencia has been the worst 3B at defense in the league this season and can't play "SS" in a shift against LHBs like Valbuena. If he was on the Astros, he would provide more value at 1B/DH over White than he would at 3B over Valbuena. I would expect Bregman to provide more defensive value at 3B than Valencia hitting and fielding combined. The only question would be whether Bregman can be an average hitter (which I think he'll do).
Neither Tucker nor Devenski has a for-sure future with the Astros. If you're able to get an established player for two relative unknowns, you do that trade every time.... I also doubt Beane goes for that sort of trade. He would look more for the lower level/high-upside players.
Valbuena has a .267/.353/.511 line the last 103 PAs, so he has really turned it around. Valencia's big advantage is that he would help us greatly against LHP. I'd trade for him, but not much. Guys that break out at 30 are always a concern.
That sounds like the motto of an owner who expects he could die at any minute. Bregman is a more unknown than Devenski....but Astros would laugh if A's asked for him + another player for Valencia.
(Luis Valbuena's 30....) As this season has demonstrated, the Astros are full of way too many streaky hitters - and if those slumps are all perfectly aligned... I don't know Danny Valencia form Danny Zucko - I was just responding to the idea that he wasn't "enough of an impact move." He has an near-.400 OB% and plays a position that features one of our more extreme boom-or-bust players. I don't know about his credentials, long-term impact, etc - but a 3B with an OPS over .900 (with no, "in his last so-so PAs" caveats) would definitely make an impact.
Luis Valbuena isn't breaking out at 30. Valencia isn't going to continue that production is the issue. I wouldn't mind having him, especially if it was a straight up deal for Preston Tucker, but I don't want to give up quality prospects.
If you're unconvinced of Valencia's long-term validity (which is fair), don't counter it with the last 103 PAs of 30-year old Luis Valbuena. That was my point. Of the two, I'd put far more money on Valencia sustaining his run than I would Valbuena.
I'm not countering anything other than to say Valbuena has turned his season around and 3B isn't a need position. I expect Valbuena to be the player he has been for the past 3.5 seasons (.231/.328/417). We can upgrade sure, but it isn't a major need. You think Danny Valencia is more likely to post a .343/.387/.580 line than Valbuena is to continue to his pace? Why?
you shouldn't be so stingy with dealing prospects. numbers suggest 80% of them won't make it to an all star game. Singleton+ Gregerson+ duffy or moran for .280 hitter with high walks in his late late 20s.
Wait... so Luis Valbuena has turned his season around based on 103 PAs - but you're dubious of Danny Valencia's .305/.357/.537/.894 line since the start of the 2015 season (588 PAs)? Past 3.5 seasons: Valencia: .291/.336/.492/.827 Valbuena: .231/.328/.417/.745 Again, I know nothing about Valencia. But he would be an upgrade over an inconsistent, overall sub-par (offensive) 3B. (Or, if you prefer, 1B.) Valbuena's .267/.353/.511 pace over his last 103 PAs that you posted? Yes. That .511 slugging % would represent a career high by some 70 points for Valbuena. And as you said, most players don't blossom at 30. He will, as he does, go through an arctic stretch so that it normalizes to his ~.400 career level. Again, I'm merely countering the notion (made by someone else, not you) that Valencia wouldn't be an impact upgrade; I think he would be - significantly if his numbers this year are no fluke.
Valencia will turn 32 this September; he's not young. And he's arbitration eligible next year - he's (probably) going to get paid. But he's been a very good hitter since the start of last season and addresses a significant need (upgrading 3B, or 1B, or DH).
It should be noted that Valencia was completely awful vs. righties in 2014, and not very good against them in 2013. At the same time, he didn't play a ton in 2013 and 2014. In 2015, he was fairly even against both sides, and this year he's right in line with the above vs. righties and crushing lefties (as he always does)
Valbuena is actually an above average hitting 3B over that time period even though it isn't close to Valencia's. Granted, Bryant (assuming he goes back to 3B full time) and Arenado are doing there best to change what is average for a 3B offensively.
Actually, you make it sound like somebody who over-values their own homegrown players who aren't all that high on the prospect/future radar. Bregman is a highly touted prospect... never included him in this discussion. Devenski, while he's been solid in the majors thus far, isn't expected to be either a TOR starter or a back-end bullpen guy. Doesn't mean he can't carve out a solid career... but it also doesn't make him untradeable. As it is, his current role is as the 12th man on the 12 man pitching staff for a team expected to contend long-term... he's a mop-up/long-relief/depth guy. He wouldn't be the next man up as a starter (Feldman would), nor would he be considered to supplant any of the 4 solid back-end bullpen guys.
The difference is BABIP. Valbuena has a sub .300 one, while Valencia's is over .350. I believe Valencia is a .275/.320/.450 type offensive player. He reminds me of Chris Johnson. I see Valencia as the better offensive player, and I expect his numbers to be better than Valbuena, but think Valbuena's surge is more sustainable than Valencia's monster numbers.
