The Nats get Yovanny Cruz, Jake Bird, Ben Grable and Jack Cebert.
Cebert is the one the Nats are probably most hopeful for - a starter that probably ends the season Top 10 in the Yankees prospect lists. One of their college arms that they turn into decent prospects. He ruled High A then struggled in AA but might be turning that around too. The main issue with Cebert is that he turns 25 next year so when a true stud should be rounding into major league form, he'll likely be proving he deserves a call-up from AAA. That is where he sits though - maybe he's a major leaguer maybe a AAAA type. But never hurts to have more of those as options.
Grable is kind of a one-trick pony in that he has a fun fastball that is tough to hit... for minor leaguers. It was DOMINANT in high A but more hittable in AA. It's gonna be one of those things that if it it holds that major leaguers find it hard to hit he'll be a great relief arm. If not he's probably nothing. But hey you want someone with a chance!
Cruz is your "dynamic stuff can he ever control it?" type. At about to be 27 it's far more likely that the answer is no BUT if it is yes he could be dominant.
Jake Bird is 30yo bullpen filler that is probably a safe bet to be out of baseball in under 5 years, maybe under 3.
The MOST likely single scenario - Jake Irvin and a couple of live bullpen arms that give you hope and maybe a good year but ultimately disappoint, but we're talking like 20% here for MOST likely. There are a lot of different possibilities. If the Nats get Grable or Cruz to become a lights out reliever then it's worth it. If they get Cebert to be a good enough rotation guy, it's worth it. And the chances are probably better that one of them has a career at least sort of like this.
23 comments:
So we traded quality for quantity… again. Seems similar to the return on the Gore trade. Toboni was serious when he said he wanted to the envy of MLB in terms of player development. And I guess you do that by stacking it with guys in the top 150-200 prospects lists.
Major bummer about Garcia being gone. He was always a good contact guy that just now found his power stroke. Just in time for him to hit some balls over that high school fence in RF at Yankee Stadium.
I don’t like this trade. In part because it means we can give up on 2026, which probably would have fizzled sooner than later. Secondly because I think the Yankees farm is inferior to our and them sending us some old granola bars for the Nats to try to make a meal with doesn’t satisfy me. And finally because Louie was a fan favorite, a good clubhouse guy and leader on a team with no veteran presence, and the longest tenured Nat they had. Welp, see ya later. Baseball is a business and it sucks sometimes.
Not that we fans know anything at all (oh hey), but the sentiment on some Yankee blogs is “why this guy? Where is he gonna play? Oh well, a bats a bat I guess…” I’m not seeing any “oh no! We gave up Ben Grable?!
Kind of confirms what someone on this blog commented last post. Something to the effect of “Garcia is worth more to the Nats than he is to anyone else.” And I tend to agree. Bad trade, Paulie.
The season ended with the Atlanta series. We will probably get one of these three actually make it to the show and be productive. I won't even speculate who that might be. I am fairly certain that next year we will be reading that the Nats are not in the playoff hunt because they can't score runs. We have a new slogan in Natsville--wait for two years.
Luis is projected to hit much better in Yankee stadium. He's more valuable there than here. And the Nats relief core is brutal. Bird and Cruz can pitch now! Cebert could come up next year (given the nats arms). Grable is a flyer. Painful trade, but wow can we use a few average relievers!
The NEW Nats management and coaches have had some notable successes this first year.....enough to give me reason to believe that these four new pitchers are not lottery tickets; they are real prospects at different stages of development. Whether they ultimately pan out, this is a shot in the arm for the now and future bullpen.
What do the Rays and Brewers do so well--they select with care and develop with great competence. Toboni wants that to be the Nats strength, as well. You don't get to that point without backing a lot of unheralded players.
Luis was cool, but I think we as fans are overvaluing a guy who had to switch positions because his fielding was bad, never draws a walk, and required a pinch-hitter when the opponent put in a lefty. The Morse trade was basically the same, a fan favorite with pop for a handful of arms. Now they will miss the playoffs in a less exciting fashion this season, but I don't think it will sink them in the long term. Move Abrams, another mediocre middle IF, to 1B in the offseason. Their pipeline is all IF now after being all OF for a while.
I don’t have an issue with trading Garcia. Yeah it’s a little frustrating that Nats fans have spent years waiting for this guy to pan out and then when he finally does they ship him off. But he is still a really limited player.
My frustration is in the return. I don’t expect to get a top 25 player for him or anything, but I would be much happier with fewer pieces and a higher probability of a useful player. If you are looking at a 20% probability of a number five starter and a 15% probability of a useful bullpen piece out of 4 players, that isn’t a particularly good return in my view. Would be much happier with 2 players and a 50% chance of getting a number five starter. You are at least increasing the likelihood of trading a useful piece for a useful piece. I loved the Mead and Ferrer trades. Early and Ford may not end up being All Stars, but they will almost certainly end up being useful major league players. Cebert and Cruz may end up being useful major league players, but at a much lower probability (and likely impact). Bird is a proven nothing and Grable is a true lottery ticket. Let the Yanks keep Bird and Grable and get the Yanks number 3 or 4 pitching prospect instead of number 6.
Matt Krook can pitch now too. So can we. Bird is org filler. I defer judgment on Cruz.
"Yankees finalizing trade for thunderous Nationals bat with imperfect defensive fit". Yanks Go Yard. Thunderous.
The primary good of this trade is it removes Garcia as a roadblock on the right side of the infield. I've been reading about "slugger" Garcia, leading me to believe that after years of being a knucklehead, 26yr old Luis is an All-Star. Ain't buying it. Seaver @ second by the end of September!
I don't love it. Like others here, I would have preferred a more concentrated return. If you trust FG's ratings, it's a 40+, 2 40's and a replacement-ish reliever, which means that the package is just objectively a little light. (Though, as with Gore, you don't need to include much lockout risk to make the math even out.)
Zips is bullish on Cebert, for what that's worth: ~1.5 fWAR/year starting next year. If that's really his median outcome, then it's hard to be too upset.
LG is a very limited player, and this package brings in two arms to address the bullpen immediately. Overall, I think the deal is more like a C+ or a B- than an F.
(it does kill me to see Arraez get Ramon Marquez, though. Yes, Arraez's bat has a more consistent track record, but taking his recent defensive improvement as 100% real is wild. Plus he's a rental. I'm not saying that Marquez was on offer for LG - in fact, I'm pretty sure that he wasn't - I'm just a little upset that the most similar player to LG on the market got a nice little overpay while our return was underwhelming.)
I think at the end of the day the Nationals will have "won" this trade. The returns on non-rental players this year seem to be a little down, so I think most front offices are operating under the assumption there will be significant games lost next season
Still I agree with the sentiment that I would've preferred quality over quantity. It's a trade that immediately makes the Yankees better with how bad Goldschmidt is against righties, and doesn't really immediately help the Nats (granted the BP is SO bad that I guess it does in a twisted way)
Thing is, the Nationals have plenty of good hitting generic infielders in the minor leagues, starting with Morales and Ortiz, who really should be tested against major league pitching: the sooner the better. Presumably, any of them can play 1B. They're not as good as Garcia, but they're cheaper and have some upside. So the Nationals didn't give up that much, with 2027 in mind. And they got what appears to be something.
Looks like Griffin to the Guardians
And now another bulk trade where the Nats take the apparent worst of it.
For Griffin, there's no equivalent of Morales and Ortiz. This straight up makes the team worse for an extremely marginal prospect haul.
Honestly, I think I'd rather have the comp pick.
Whether or not it works, the strategy appears to be: coach up a bunch of hand-picked, talented but not-yet-successful pitchers. Then use some of them to fill our own needs and trade some of the others to fill our non-pitching needs. I have no idea if they can do it or how steep the odds. But it is a strategy, and they appear to have faith in their ability to select and develop pitching talent.
FWIW - The team getting the mass of young players almost always "wins" the trade if you look at production created for the team. I think if we look back the Nats will have "won" the Max/Trea trade.
It’s possible they were too cheap to pay Garcia’s arb salary next year or to make Griffin a QO, right?
The Nats are erecting a new sign at the entrance of the Park. It features a banner that says "Get you lottery ticket here. Apparently, you can bet on which lottery pick will make it to the majors and when they might mae their major league debut. I have to give the Lerner's credit. Who knew they would turn the trade deadline into a whole new business venture.
Toboni does know that he can just go find pitchers in Indy ball right? He doesn’t need to hoard a bunch of random “lottery tickets” (that’s code for learning baseball, throws rock really hard, but cannot pitch). Especially if the exchange involves someone who can actually play such a difficult game at the highest level.
I actually somewhat see it as the opposite: they don't trust their ability to select and develop pitching, so you grab the whole haystack trying to find the needle
I see how you might be right, but hoping it is my more positive spin. Regardless not all will turn into useful players.
I actually don't think that's right, Harper, in that specific case or in the general case.
The surplus value numbers on the Max and Trea deal are terrible. The Dodgers got 11.9 fWAR for $35.4M. The Nats have, so far, gotten 2.5 fWAR for $23.7M. Even you generously/credulously project Gray for 1 WAR next season and project Ruiz for 1.5 WAR/yr through the rest of his entire guaranteed contract (2030), it only adds up to 10 WAR for $56.5M. There's just no way to slice it to make it anything but a terrible trade for the Nats.
What I do think is absolutely true is that (1) wins now are more valuable than wins later and (2) wins concentrated into fewer years and fewer roster spots are more valuable than wins diffused over more years and roster spots. Those two considerations mean that, when you do the naive calculations like what I have above, the seller should usually have the worst of it. Which is why I'm so unforgiving when the team sells for prices that are even lower than that naive fair value. That is absolutely the case for the Gore and Griffin trades, and might be the case for Garcia too (a lot is riding on Cebert, who has a surprisingly solid projection as a backend starter).
It's one of many possibilities. But it's the one that feeds into our pre-existing narratives, so it's going to get a LOT more traction than anything else.
Post a Comment