The Braves Rebuild: Outgoing vs. Incoming Value, Part 6: 2017 In-Season Trades

The next to last stage, Braves Rebuild, 2017 In-Season Trades, was a slower time for the front office and fans as most of the assets that were making significant money had already been traded, and the Braves had built the highest ranked farm system in the MLB led by Ronald Acuna Jr. Here are a our first 5 pieces, if you’re new to this study:

Braves Rebuild, 2017 In-Season Trades

Braves Rebuild, 2017 In-Season Trades: Value Outgoing

  • Kevin Chapman: No MLB stats, 0 value
  • Juan Yepez: No MLB stats, no value
  • Jaime Garcia, Anthony Recker: 0.3 fWAR, 4.8 MM cost, 2.4 MM value
  • Sean Rodriguez: -0.3 fWAR, 3 MM cost, -2.4 MM value
  • Brandon Phillips: -0.1 fWAR, .3 MM cost, -0.8 MM value

Outgoing Production Value: -0.1 fWAR, -0.8 MM value

Total Cost: 3.3 MM

4.1 MM of “gained” production

Braves Rebuild, 2017 In-Season Trades: Value Incoming

  • Danny Santana: -0.1 fWAR, .75 MM cost, -0.8 MM value
  • Matt Adams: 1.4 fWAR, 2.1 MM cost, 11.2 MM value
  • Huascar Ynoa: 0.0 fWAR, 0.2 MM cost, 0 value
  • Connor Joe: No MLB stats, 0 value
  • Tony Sanchez: 0.0 fWAR, 0.2 MM cost, 0 value

Incoming Production Value: 1.3 fWAR, 10.4 MM value

Total Cost: 3.25 MM

7.15 MM of gained production

Recap

Overall, the Braves trades worked out in their favor as most of the players traded provided little to no value, and a good year from Matt Adams after the awful Freddie Freeman injury provided some nice insurance. Let’s check out the totals thus far:

Adding all 6 outcomes in our first 6 parts of the series:

  • +59.03 MM of gained production in Part 1
  • -79.5 MM of gained production in Part 2
  • +27.9 MM of gained production in Part 3
  • -2.975 of gained production in Part 4
  • -11.85 MM of gained production in Part 5
  • +11.2 MM of gained production in Part 6

Total: +3.805 MM in gained production

Huascar Ynoa and Juan Yepez get added to the list of unknown future values and here are those full lists:

And those traded away who are still playing and have not reached free agency or have not been non-tendered:

Thanks for reading “Braves Rebuild, 2017 In-season Trades”. Check out the entire series and all of our articles on the Braves Rebuild here.

Author: Ryan Cothran

Ryan is the site editor and manager of Braves Journal. Follow him on Twitter.

28 thoughts on “The Braves Rebuild: Outgoing vs. Incoming Value, Part 6: 2017 In-Season Trades”

  1. A fabulous series, Ryan. And it helps demonstrate how often those who try to rank front offices usually pick and choose with highly idiosyncratic biases…. because laying it all out is hard work.

    On the DH, has anyone looked into Julio Franco’s availability? He’s only 61.

  2. Thanks Coop and JF! I think when it’s all said and done, Alex Anthopoulos is going to look pretty good, especially taking into consideration that he’s kept the farm most intact and extended 2 of he young superstars to decade long deals.

  3. It was 15 years ago today that Franco became the oldest player to hit multiple homers in a game.

  4. And Ryan—terrific series!

    I hate the DH, but if that’s the price I’m willing to say Let’s play ball!

  5. @7, this is actually why I find it hard to get too worked up about steroids, honestly — I think we pretty much have to assume just about everyone other than Dale Murphy juiced, or took greenies, or something. As a result, I’m not too bothered by one particular player using. I’d like Julio to keep playing literally forever and then I’d like Cooperstown to figure out how to induct him for being one of the most inspiring baseball players of all time.

  6. WE WILL HAVE BASEBALL, LADIES AND GENTS!

  7. @10
    Don’t take my comment as finality. It’s just a counter-proposal, but it’s very close to what the owners sent over. It’s going to happen!

  8. New @3FlagsFlying podcast discussing draft, MiLB FA signings, and the season that’s hopefully soon upon us.

  9. @14 or the players just take the 60 games and full pro-rated salary. Do 65. How hard can it be?!

  10. There’s now apparently a kerfuffle over whether whatever came out of the Manfred/Clark face-to-face was an “agreement” or a “proposal” (with the owners arguing the former, hence their nonplussed attitude toward the players’ counteroffer).

    I’m sure it’s not this simple legally, but it seems to me that if one side comes away from a meeting thinking there wasn’t an agreement, you probably by definition did not have an agreement.

  11. I get the sense that Manfred does not have the ear of the owners. There’s a narrative that the owners did not want to go along with the March agreement — they thought it gave too much to the players — so they immediately set about trying to undo the March agreement in their negotiations with the players over the last few months. Likewise, the players are claiming that Manfred literally invited them to make a counteroffer for more games, while the owners apparently feel that Manfred had to break their arms just to get them to 60.

    So Manfred may not be a credible negotiator for his own side. Would explain a lot about how we got here.

  12. @19

    I was just thinking to myself that this could be the eight or so owners who don’t want to play at all trying to assert themselves again through the media. I’ve always assumed that most of the “DOA,” “no chance,” “livid,” “we’re nowhere” quotes that keep popping up on Twitter from media sources are pretty much all them.

  13. At the time, I agreed completely with Ryan @9 that the players’ offer signaled that a deal was imminent. The only thing separating the sides was whether they would play 60 or 70 games. It seemed obvious they would soon announce a deal at 65 and we could all celebrate.
    Alex and Nick have it just about right. Some owners do not want to play this year or reach any agreement. The key question is how many take that position. Either it’s only a handful and an agreement is reached quickly today, or the whole thing is over. In either event Manfred lacks credibility. And if they don’t reach an agreement it’s clear which side is to blame.

  14. The hang up is apparently less about the games and more about the 50/50 share of playoff revenue.

  15. There will be a new thread at some point today (likely lunch) that will stay up for today and tomorrow.

  16. Actually, it’s sort of getting at something similar from this Will Leitch piece, which I really liked: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/06/mlbs-disastrous-spring-feels-like-an-existential-crisis.html

    Ultimately, the part that’s impossible to know, which both of these pieces are really about is: what happens to baseball fans? When — if — the games resume, will the sport have the fanbase it had in 2019? Will the same number of people check ESPN.com every day and click on the “MLB” tab? Will the same number of people ask their parents to let them stay up late to watch the 9th inning? Or will even the diehard fans like us find that we have something else to do in the evening and we’ll just check the recap in the morning?

    In 15 years, how many 15-year-old baseball fans will there be?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *