Trade Review 2026 #4 - Here we go!

Analyze and breakdown all Brewster Baseball Association deals here
Ted
Ex-GM
Posts: 5630
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 2:50 pm
Has thanked: 368 times
Been thanked: 378 times

Trade Review 2026 #4 - Here we go!

Post by Ted » Sun Apr 17, 2016 3:16 am

Alright, this is what we've been waiting for. Contenders (or wanna be's depending on how you feel about things) make some big moves here to try to increase their playoff chances. We've got Sancastle, Whitten, Glendenning, Labrie and Love moving. We've got controversy. We've got Kyle bashing a trade because someone received prospects for a vet. (I kid, I kid)

Havana/Tuscon
Havana receives:
CF Leon Sandcastle
LF Francios Fremont
SP Jose Rivera

Tuscon receives:
SP Jimmy Greenwood (prospect)
RP Jeffrey Moody (prospect)
OF Neil Howell (prospect)
OF Raul De Los Santos (AAAA)
P Thomas Suarez

[list][*] Leon Sandcastle is amazing, but not as much as you think. He's 30 now, has average missing a quarter of a season each of the last three years, and has now lumped his contact two points from his career peak. He's also expensive as all getout. His contact only lasts through his age 33 season, so he'll likely still be a very good player at the end of this deal, but anything after that is questionable. Worst case scenario, he misses half a season due to another big injury and lumps to 7/7/7 and 8 in CF. With those ratings, he may still be one of the best two or three CF in the league.
[*] Francois Freemont isn't getting any younger either. One of the best EBA imports in recent years, Freemont's ability to get on base is his key feature. Prior to lumping his contact and power, he was an okay average guy who could hit a few dingers. Now? He's probably a .250 at best guy who will still get on base at a great clip, and he still has a solid corner OF glove. He's also cheap and depending on what he wants for an extension could stick around.
[*] Jose Rivera has underachieved a bit in his five big league years. He sports a career 3.96 FIP, which isn't too bad, to go with five above average pitches and very good movement. He seems to struggle a bit against lefties and that may be what's holding him back. If he completely fails as a starter, he'd make a really interesting RP conversion, possibly becoming one of the best in the league. I'll be the chance of scenery helps him get it together in Havana, bt he's already lumped his motion at 28 and that's a bit scary. [/list]


[list][*] Jimmie Greenwood. Wow. It's easy to dream, isn't it? Jimmie is 20 now and would be on a pretty good development track if his ceiling wasn't so high. This isn't to say he's behind, it's just that he has a ways to go. I bet he gets there fairly rapidly though and could see some action if you chose to use him in a 'pen role as early as next year. He's easily the best pitching prospect in the game. It would be nice to see him get another mph or two, but he doesn't have to. Even if he lumps one point across the board (which is a lot less likely at 20 than 18), 9/7/9 ratings would make him one of the best starters in the league, especially considering that a lot of the top end guys don't have 8 stamina like he does.
[*] Twenty year old righty Jeffrey Moody looks like a decent rubber armed middle relief option. If he can grab a little more velocity, maybe a tick better. His FB/SI combo will make him a bit vulnerable to good lefties, but not terribly so.
[*] Neil Howell looks a bit more like a left fielder than right, but either way he's a nice young lefty OF prospect. He's 18, so as always its a question if he gets to is 6/7/7/6/5 potentials with a plus righty split, but if he makes it he's a big leaguer at least in a platoon role. He's decently developed for his age, especially given that his power is developing rather than lagging behind his other tools.
[*] De Los Santos is a AAAA RF that could be used as a backup OF if he could play any positions other than right.
[*] Suarez is 29 with poor versus left split and is probably more suited to a bullpen role than back of the rotation starter, but when you're rebuilding and just need cheap bodies, he'll do fine.[/list]


This trade has gotten a bit of talk already, with some thought that maybe Tuscon should have gotten more for Sandcastle and Fremont. I don't know. If I had Greenwood, I don't know that I'd trade him for anyone over 28 in a one for one. I get that undeveloped players are a risk but he's special. And I HATE older players with fragile ratings. It's remarkable Sancastle hasn't lost speed with all his injuries. When that starts to go, so does his OF defense. Still, as noted above, he's still a terrific player even if he lumps, and should be good through the run of his contract. What I see is Havana moving a very big chip for a very big asset(s). Moody and Suarez for Rivera is probably close to fair, and I think if you feel Greenwood isn't enough for Sandcastle/Freemont, you probably shouldn't sleep on Howell. Howell for Freemont? Probably a bit weak, but he does project as a big league player, and you can't say that about a lot of guys. From an organizational standpoint, this makes perfect sense for both teams. Tuscon HAD to tear it down. Can't do much better than Greenwood to build around. Havana had to make a choice. Compete with Chandler and some of their other older players or rebuild/retool. Outside of Carolina, the rest of the Frick is as bangedup as ever. This is a great year to grab a wild card. Even if Atlantic City plays well, Havana could easily get the second spot, as the other divisions are pretty beat up.


Grades
Havana
Talent: A+
Organizational: A
Tuscon
Talent: A+
Organizational: A+


The Slovakian women’s hockey team qualified for the 2010 Olympics by beating Bulgaria 82-0. They later lost to team Canada in Vancouver 18-0.
[hr]


Brooklyn/California
Brooklyn receives:
SP Cisco 'Trapper' Morales (prospect)
SS Gustavo González (prospect)
3B Holden 'Sabertooth' Blackwell
P Enrico Macías

California receives:
RP Skip 'Crunchy' Glendenning
LF Brian 'Grandmaster' Whitten

[list][*] Cisco Morales is still quite young, but he did manage to make it from being signed as a prospect at 16 to playing and developing at 18 without any major lumps. 8/8/8 with 5 pitchers and good endurance, Moralees looks like a good bet as a 1A type starter. He throws pretty darned hard for an 18 year old, and if he gets velocity bumps without lumping, could turn into a legit ace. He's also a little ahead of the development curve, but his control, the least predictable asset, is only on a normal track. He also did a bizarre thing last offseason when he massively gained arm strength, then lost a bit of it. That's a bit concerning, but of unclear significance given that he didn't lump when it happened.
[*] Gustavo Gonzales is a lefty SS prospect. At 18, he doing fairly well in his first shot in rookie ball. He's also improved his defensive base ratings since he was first signed as a scouting discovery. He's a long way away, but has a great makeup and could be a solid infield option at some point.
[*] Blackwell is a 21 year old righty with very good defense, top end contact and speed. He's a bit one dimensional as a hitter, which doesn't play well in a hitter's park like California. He could easily do much better in Brooklyn, and frankly is young enough to bump at some point. He should also remain very cheap for quite some time.
[*] Enrico Macias was at one point a very good reliever. He's started to lose what little velocity he had, and looks to now struggled mightily against lefties. He's a bit expensive for a mop up reliever, but has an expiring contract.[/list]

[list][*] Brian Whitten needs little introduction. He's a left handed hitting machine. He does have a bad split against righties, but does well enough to stay in the lineup against them. His value is heavily impacted by the fact that he can only DH. He's a free agent at year's end.
[*] Skip Glendenning is simply one the best closers in the game. On the other hand, he's 31 and expensive. He hasn't really lumped yet, but we all know those 30 year old power arms can fall off any time.[/list]

On first look, this trade looks to heavily favor California. However, when you look at Brooklyn's situation, especially Whitten refusing to talk extension with them, this becomes a much better deal. Closers are one of the harder pieces to get good value for, especially expensive ones, and a rebuilding team like Brooklyn needs to move Crunchy now before he loses any value. Let's break this trade into two parts. Whitten for Morales. If Whiten could play anywhere in the field at all, this wouldn't be good. His ability compared to the average position player is much greater than compared to the average DH. Perhaps not the best deal, but not bad, especially with so few teams looking to buy. The second part would then be Glendenning for Blackwell and Gonzales. Getting two young infield prospects/players for a closer isn't too bad at all. Macias was a salary dump.

So from a point of Brooklyn getting value back in a tough situation for a player refusing to negotiate with them and an expensive, older closer, in a bad sellers market, this isn't too bad. Actually pretty decent. From California's standpoint, they have a veteran core of solid players spattered with some talented youngsters. Holding on to prospects really doesn't make sense when your pitching core is in it's late 20's. This team should be performing better, but isn't. I'm always the one that says trading blue chips to get INTO the playoffs is dumb. We'll see if I pay for breaking my own rules.


Grades
Brooklyn
Talent: A-
Organizational: A-
California
Talent: A+
Organizational: A- - I really don't like giving myself good grades, feels dirty.


During the 1987 Junior Hockey Championship, a brawl broke between Canada and the USSR. It lasted so long the officials had to turn off the lights in an attempt to quell the fight, but they were unsuccessful.
[hr]


Vancouver/Louisville
Vancouver receives:
RF Mike Love

Louisville receives:
SP Domingo Castillo

[list][*] Mike Love may not be the hitter he once was, but he's still pretty darned good. Frankly, I'm not sure how he has continued to hit .280 as a righty with 6 contact for the last few years, but he does. He's also still a diamond glove OF in either right or left, and his solid batter's eye will help him continue to age well. He is a bit pricey through 2027 at around 17 mil.[/list]



[list][*] We just talked about Domingo Castillo recently, so we'll pick up where we left off. He's turned his career around in Vancouver and has been their best starter. He is a free agent at year's end and already makes a hefty 16 mil.[/list]

Alright Brett, you're gonna have to help me out with this one. Love is old and I wouldn't trade Castillo for him normally. Vancouver is also rebuilding so if you're gonna flip Castillo, why not get younger players? I have no idea what is going on in the genious's mind either, as Lousiville isn't really in contention mode either. Color me confused. The only thing I could think of is that Castillo wanted entirely too much for an extension and Stu wanted to shore up his starting pitching to make a run at his admittedly weak division. However, if Castillo couldn't play when in Halifax, wouldn't a return to the JL East be a bit scary?


Grades
Vancouver
Talent: B-
Organizational: D+
Louisville
Talent: B-
Organizational: C



In 1974, Buffalo Sabres’ manager purposefully drafted a hockey player, who didn’t exist to mock the slow drafting process. No one realized it until training camp started
[hr]


Louisville/California
Louisville receives:
P Ramon Farias

California receives:
P Roberto Muniz (prospect)

[list][*] Farias's ERA is a bit ugly right now (it doesn't help that my pen lets every guy left on when he leaves score) but his FIP is 4 flat (career 3.8) and was a lot better before a bad run of starts recently. Signed for 4.1 mil this year and next. Great back end of the rotation guy at a decent price.[/list]



[list][*] Roberto Muniz is a 21 year old righty with very average everything. He's got two good pitches and an okay third, but will need some kind of bump to play in the Brewster, and even then looks more like a middle reliever. Still, he's organizational depth. [/list]

This move was a salary dump by California. Farias is more valuable than Muniz, but frankly not by a lot. A 7/7/7 pitcher or a fives and sixes bat type is probably more appropriate. The Crusaders could have been a bit more patient, but wanted to dump enough salary to make their moves and get the newbies on the roster. Louisville adds to that rebuilding rotation for essentially free.


Grades
Louisville
Talent: C-
Organizational: B+
California
Talent: D+
Organizational: C



Doctors in British Columbia are banned from talking about hockey during surgery.
[hr]



Brooklyn/Louisville
Brooklyn receives:
SP Juan Cruz

Louisville receives:
1B Miguel Carrasco

[list][*] For the love of jeebus, why has no one reliever converted Juan Cruz yet? 7/7/7 with four billion mediocre pitches, Cruz is the definition of journeyman starter. His 4.20ish FIP for his career isn't too bad. He's earning a cheap 2.2 mil (not bad for an acceptable 5th starter) will be a free agent after this season. {*note to self, sign Cruz in FA and spend 20 points to convert him into a dominant reliever}[/list]



[list][*] Miguel Carrasco has been sneaky solid at times with his lefty 6/6/8/5/4 ratings. He plays a good first and has 30 HR potential when he decides to pull his head out of his ass. He's a free agent after this year, and looks to be in the declining phase of his career. Still, a change of scenery might benefit him some.[/list]

This is a bit of an odd trade for an admittedly rebuilding Brooklyn. Moving Carrasco makes sense, but unless they intend to extend Cruz (which depending on what he is asking for) may or may not be a good idea, they really just sold Carraso for free, given that Cruz (or any other mediocre player) will give them zero useful innings in a lost season. On the other hand, they save a couple mil and no one else would give them anything for Carrasco I'm sure. That's not a bad reason to make a deal.


Grades
Brooklyn
Talent: C-
Organizational: B-
Louisville
Talent: C+
Organizational: B-



At the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics, NHL pro Jarome Iginla struck up a conversation with four fans sitting next to his table and found out that they were sleeping in their car. He excused himself from the conversation and booked them at his own expense at the hotel his family was staying in.
[hr]


California/Tuscon
California receives:
RF Daniel 'Danny Boy' Labrie, Jr.
3B Ray Pierce (prospect)

Tuscon receives:
C Ippolito Basaglia (prospect)
DH Fulton Reed
DH Jorge Franco

[list][*] Labrie's lost a step now that he's the baseball equivalent of an old man, but he still has a sweet lefty stroke and solid line drive power that will get him a few homers. He's a liability in the outfield at this point in his career. He's making 16 million, which is a ton for a player of his talent, and that only declines a tad over the next two seasons. However, he does offer elite on base ability, and that has value.
[*] Ray Pierce is an 18 year old lefty infielder, with okay speed, okay defensive ability, solid power to go with sketchy contact. His skill set seems to lean more towards third than anywhere else. He can also play a little outfield and could turn into an uber utility player.[/list]

[list][*] Oh little Ippo, we're so sad to see you go. Signed after some idiot computer GM in Rome dumped him a few years back, he was snatched up as an FA catcher with 5/5/5/6/6 potentials. How he's grown. Basaglia may some day be a true gem at catcher. His ceiling of 6/7/8/8/8 would make him one of the best in the league. He's a bit of a late bloomer, and at 23 may have a bit of a short prime. He's still a very nice piece at a thin position.
[*] Fulton Reed has one talent, mashing the eff out of the baseball. He's a legitimate 40 HR threat, and walks fairly well (.323 OBP this year despite a very poor batting average). He can run or play D, and that limits his value. He's making 5.8 mil for this year only.
[*] Jorge Franco at one point looked like a solid DH. He had 8/7/9/5/6 raatings versus lefties. Then he signed an extension started to lump at 26 years old. 6/6/8/5/5 still is probably playable at DH in a pinch, but most teams would want something better and he looks like more of a AAAA player now. [/list]

California gives up a lot in Basaglia, the 25th prospect in the league, for an aging once superstar in Labrie Jr. However, as noted previously, the Crusaders time is now as it's pitching core isn't getting younger. Waiting 2-3 years for Basaglia does them no good. Pierce is a nice lottery ticket. Had the Crusaders been more patient, they might have been able to get more for Reed. From Tuscon's side of things, they get a core piece to build around that should be ready about the time they are. Franco and Reed are more salary dumps, but Reed has potential value to be flipped or extended.


Grades
California
Talent: B+
Organizational: C+
Tuscon
Talent: B+
Organizational: A-



If both NHL goalies are injured, the team can literally choose any available goalie to suit up and play and this includes fans.
[hr]
Last edited by Ted on Sun Apr 17, 2016 2:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ted Schmidt
Twin Cities Typing Nightmares(2044-present)
California Crusaders (2021-2038)
Image

felipe
Ex-GM
Posts: 4560
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 11:21 am
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 81 times

Re: Trade Review 2026 #4 - Here we go!

Post by felipe » Sun Apr 17, 2016 6:26 am

Love the analysis; I got two more deals that should be consummated today that should make my other moves more logical.

Who am I kidding?

I just love to tinker...

felipe
Ex-GM
Posts: 4560
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 11:21 am
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 81 times

Re: Trade Review 2026 #4 - Here we go!

Post by felipe » Sun Apr 17, 2016 6:30 am

I do not share your love of Greenwood, btw

I don't love his lack of success (at any level), his GB%, his right handedness, there has been a few pitchers with nice ratings that never really panned out in this league...greenwood is a huge question mark for me

Ted
Ex-GM
Posts: 5630
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 2:50 pm
Has thanked: 368 times
Been thanked: 378 times

Re: Trade Review 2026 #4 - Here we go!

Post by Ted » Sun Apr 17, 2016 6:51 am

felipe wrote:I do not share your love of Greenwood, btw

I don't love his lack of success (at any level), his GB%, his right handedness, there has been a few pitchers with nice ratings that never really panned out in this league...greenwood is a huge question mark for me
I think you are a crazy, crazy man. I think you can question whether he will develop, but should he's do so, he's a gotta be a beast, right? I've never really cared about minor league success. In real baseball, maybe, but in a league where there are 25 year olds that are nearly developed in rookie ball, I just don't think it's reliable. He throws a nasty change that should help him against lefties. Ah well.
Ted Schmidt
Twin Cities Typing Nightmares(2044-present)
California Crusaders (2021-2038)
Image

bschr682
Ex-GM
Posts: 8038
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 11:24 am
Has thanked: 306 times
Been thanked: 383 times

Re: Trade Review 2026 #4 - Here we go!

Post by bschr682 » Sun Apr 17, 2016 9:46 am

Interesting read as always. My thought process on my trade. Castillo is awesome but only has 4 stamina, is fragile, is about to be 30, and is being paid 16 mil with extension demands pushing 20 mil a year. He was doing so well for me that his demands weren't dropping to realistic levels, they were going up! So it became clear he was 1 and done. So I could get a draft pick or I could trade him. Nobody wants to trade for that guy to build around. They might in win now mode but who in win now mode can afford a 16 mil a year pitcher with that baggage? So Louisville is basically in the exact same predicament I was in with Love. Love has 2 years on his deal versus Castillo's 1. That's why I made the deal. Love is older for sure but durable. He is now the best offensive talent I have. My park in theory might suppress his overall numbers to the point I can resign him if I want if I am contending 2 years from now and he is still good.

Long winded explanation but it was a long trade talk and that's what I came up with in the end. Stu saves 19ish million bucks and I get the guy with 2 years left versus 1 left.
GM Vancouver Mounties

User avatar
Lane
GB: Vice Commissioner
Posts: 6774
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2016 8:18 am
Location: Los Angeles
Has thanked: 516 times
Been thanked: 700 times

Re: Trade Review 2026 #4 - Here we go!

Post by Lane » Sun Apr 17, 2016 10:11 am

Ted wrote:
felipe wrote:I do not share your love of Greenwood, btw

I don't love his lack of success (at any level), his GB%, his right handedness, there has been a few pitchers with nice ratings that never really panned out in this league...greenwood is a huge question mark for me
I think you are a crazy, crazy man. I think you can question whether he will develop, but should he's do so, he's a gotta be a beast, right? I've never really cared about minor league success. In real baseball, maybe, but in a league where there are 25 year olds that are nearly developed in rookie ball, I just don't think it's reliable. He throws a nasty change that should help him against lefties. Ah well.
The biggest risk I see with Greenwood is the changeup. Sitting at 2/10 is pretty scary, but he's going to be down in the minors for a while anyway to get closer to his 10/8/10 ratings so I'm betting it develops.

As for the minor league stats, let's take a quick look at what Mike Swanson did in the minors, since he's been talked about a fair amount lately. He only put up a FIP under 4 twice in the minors (out of 5 seasons), then proceeded to post a FIP under 3 in 9 of his first 10 big league seasons. I see them as a pretty good comp, especially considering their GB % is pretty close.
Stephen Lane
Vice Commissioner / Historian
General Manager, Long Beach Surfers
Since 2026

Image


Ex-GM, Amsterdam Neptunes, 2025 EBA Champions

bschr682
Ex-GM
Posts: 8038
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 11:24 am
Has thanked: 306 times
Been thanked: 383 times

Re: Trade Review 2026 #4 - Here we go!

Post by bschr682 » Sun Apr 17, 2016 10:19 am

felipe wrote:I do not share your love of Greenwood, btw

I don't love his lack of success (at any level), his GB%, his right handedness, there has been a few pitchers with nice ratings that never really panned out in this league...greenwood is a huge question mark for me
:plus1:

As someone rightly pointed out above his changeup still being at 2/10 is terrifying. He is only 20 but he was also drafted over 2 years ago. If that thing never develops , yikes I don't want to think about that.
GM Vancouver Mounties

agrudez
Ex-GM
Posts: 7681
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:30 am
Has thanked: 21 times
Been thanked: 47 times

Re: Trade Review 2026 #4 - Here we go!

Post by agrudez » Sun Apr 17, 2016 10:25 am

Ted wrote:We've got Kyle bashing a trade because someone received prospects for a vet. (I kid, I kid) [/size]
Ugh, don't even joke. People collect quotes like this in a "F Kyle" folder on their desktop regardless of context.
League Director: Kyle “agrudez” Stever*
*Also serves as chief muckraker
-Ron, 2025 media guide

Image

Chey
Ex-GM
Posts: 1167
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2014 2:10 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Trade Review 2026 #4 - Here we go!

Post by Chey » Sun Apr 17, 2016 10:25 am

Yeah, the minor league stats don't scare me at all -- i don't think they have a lot to do with what a player eventually becomes. The changeup is a little frightening, but I'd still bet on Greenwood every day of the week -- of course, now I don't have to.

I don't share Ted's love for Howell though. With his speed and existing fielding ratings, I think he is at least as likely to end up as a DH than as even a passable LF, let alone RF, and even if he fully develops he's a pretty underwhelming DH (or, hell LF for that matter). Any of the prospects I included beyond Greenwood are going to need to bump to turn into a significant asset, imo.
Adam Dyck
Cairo Chariot Archers Baseball Club, General Manager 2043-Present

Edmonton Jackrabbits, General Manager 2029
Belfast North Stars, General Manager 2028
Havana Sugar Kings, General Manager 2022-2027

User avatar
Lane
GB: Vice Commissioner
Posts: 6774
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2016 8:18 am
Location: Los Angeles
Has thanked: 516 times
Been thanked: 700 times

Re: Trade Review 2026 #4 - Here we go!

Post by Lane » Sun Apr 17, 2016 11:13 am

Yeah I'm definitely looking for a bump from Howell or Moody and I think for Howell at least, his age and current development make it possible if not likely, at least in my opinion.

But really it's about Greenwood and while he's not perfect, what prospect is? If he reaches his potential I think he's the kind of guy who can lead you through the playoffs for many years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Stephen Lane
Vice Commissioner / Historian
General Manager, Long Beach Surfers
Since 2026

Image


Ex-GM, Amsterdam Neptunes, 2025 EBA Champions

bschr682
Ex-GM
Posts: 8038
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 11:24 am
Has thanked: 306 times
Been thanked: 383 times

Re: Trade Review 2026 #4 - Here we go!

Post by bschr682 » Sun Apr 17, 2016 11:43 am

Lane wrote: But really it's about Greenwood and while he's not perfect, what prospect is? If he reaches his potential I think he's the kind of guy who can lead you through the playoffs for many years.
Very true. If he does actually develop he will be awesome no doubt about that.
GM Vancouver Mounties

Ted
Ex-GM
Posts: 5630
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 2:50 pm
Has thanked: 368 times
Been thanked: 378 times

Re: Trade Review 2026 #4 - Here we go!

Post by Ted » Sun Apr 17, 2016 1:53 pm

agrudez wrote:
Ted wrote:We've got Kyle bashing a trade because someone received prospects for a vet. (I kid, I kid) [/size]
Ugh, don't even joke. People collect quotes like this in a "F Kyle" folder on their desktop regardless of context.
It's not just me? Oh wait, are you referring to me as "people" now?
Ted Schmidt
Twin Cities Typing Nightmares(2044-present)
California Crusaders (2021-2038)
Image

User avatar
ae37jr
BBA GM
Posts: 2980
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 1:37 pm
Location: Davenport, FL
Has thanked: 40 times
Been thanked: 645 times

Re: Trade Review 2026 #4 - Here we go!

Post by ae37jr » Sun Apr 17, 2016 4:39 pm

Ted wrote: size=150]Brooklyn/Louisville[/size]
Brooklyn receives:
SP Juan Cruz

Louisville receives:
1B Miguel Carrasco

[list][*] For the love of jeebus, why has no one reliever converted Juan Cruz yet? 7/7/7 with four billion mediocre pitches, Cruz is the definition of journeyman starter. His 4.20ish FIP for his career isn't too bad. He's earning a cheap 2.2 mil (not bad for an acceptable 5th starter) will be a free agent after this season. {*note to self, sign Cruz in FA and spend 20 points to convert him into a dominant reliever}[/list]



[list][*] Miguel Carrasco has been sneaky solid at times with his lefty 6/6/8/5/4 ratings. He plays a good first and has 30 HR potential when he decides to pull his head out of his ass. He's a free agent after this year, and looks to be in the declining phase of his career. Still, a change of scenery might benefit him some.[/list]

This is a bit of an odd trade for an admittedly rebuilding Brooklyn. Moving Carrasco makes sense, but unless they intend to extend Cruz (which depending on what he is asking for) may or may not be a good idea, they really just sold Carraso for free, given that Cruz (or any other mediocre player) will give them zero useful innings in a lost season. On the other hand, they save a couple mil and no one else would give them anything for Carrasco I'm sure. That's not a bad reason to make a deal.


Grades
Brooklyn
Talent: C-
Organizational: B-
Louisville
Talent: C+
Organizational: B-
1B-DH players are a dime a dozen. I had no plans on extending a "sneaky solid at times" firstbaseman on the wrong side of 30. So I put his name out there and was willing to take the first offer where I gained something. Cruz piqued my interest for the exact reason you gave. Now, Madison did use Cruz in the pen a few years ago. That was as a long man. I plan on using him strickly against right hand batters in short relief because he has drastic splits. I love projects and Cruz is a project. If he fails, oh well, his salary comes off at the end of the season.

Also, nobody count Brooklyn out for this year. We're not going to make the playoffs but we are going to make a run and maybe scare some poeple. I never play for draft position. I called up Kenny 'Crime Spree' Hill, Michael Starr, and Enrique Salazar. I also moved Joey Budding to the closer role. This is a better team right now then before the trades we made. If we can get a left fielder... watch out!!
Alan Ehlers
GM of the Twin Cities River Monster
Image

User avatar
recte44
GB: Commissioner
Posts: 43001
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 12:14 pm
Location: Oconomowoc, WI
Has thanked: 141 times
Been thanked: 1608 times
Contact:

Re: Trade Review 2026 #4 - Here we go!

Post by recte44 » Sun Apr 17, 2016 8:52 pm

Steve Nebraska was "just" a RHP, too. :)

udlb58
Ex-GM
Posts: 3553
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 8:46 pm
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 70 times

Re: Trade Review 2026 #4 - Here we go!

Post by udlb58 » Sun Apr 17, 2016 10:52 pm

He has the 4th highest control and 6th highest movement of all players under 21, and he hasn't shown a negative split vLHB. The changeup is really his only blemish. But even if that doesn't develop fully, he's still probably a good #3 or a great closer.
Image
Greenville Moonshiners/Jacksonville Hurricanes GM: 2026-Present
Jacksonville Hurricanes GM: (1251-1018); 2029, 2031, 2034-38 Div. Champions
Paris Patriots GM: 2025 (79-83)

User avatar
aaronweiner
BBA GM
Posts: 12020
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 1:56 pm
Has thanked: 50 times
Been thanked: 761 times

Re: Trade Review 2026 #4 - Here we go!

Post by aaronweiner » Mon Apr 18, 2016 7:08 am

I'm just pleased that Greenwood is out of my division. I'd be even happier if he had been traded to the JL.

User avatar
7teen
BBA GM
Posts: 9806
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 7:59 am
Has thanked: 223 times
Been thanked: 1135 times

Re: Trade Review 2026 #4 - Here we go!

Post by 7teen » Mon Apr 18, 2016 7:23 am

Nice work Ted.
Chris Wilson

LB Surfers 95-96
FL Pac Champs: 95

Madison Wolves 99-2039
JL MW: 99-2009, 17, 20, 21
JL WC: 12
JL: 01, 04, 09, 12
FL Heartland: 32
FL WC: 31, 33
BBA Champs: 04, 09

Portland Lumberjacks 2040-
FL Pacific: 50
FL WC: 49, 51
FL Champs: 49, 51

Vic Caleca TN of the Year 2046

JohnC
Ex-GM
Posts: 1664
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2011 2:51 pm
Location: Newcastle, Ontario, Canada

Re: Trade Review 2026 #4 - Here we go!

Post by JohnC » Wed Apr 20, 2016 8:35 am

I don't know...Adam and I have had a few talks about Greenwood/Gillstrom in the past. Count me on the changeup scaring me a little. Even if his changeup get's to a 5 he should be a high end SPer....BUT if it doesn't he should be a great closer. It's worth the gamble for Ted though I think.
Montreal Blazers 2002 - present
Atlantic Div Champs '02,'05,'06,'11,'12,'13,'14,'19,'21,'27,'30'33
Wild Card '04,'10,'20,'28,'29,'31,'32,'34

Image

John Callahan
GM: Montreal Blazers
Email: doghares@hotmail.com

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Trade Analysis”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests