LambeauLeap1250 WSSP


  
Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next  [ 145 posts ]  New Topic   Add Reply

Chris Archer

Author Message
Offline  Chris Archer
#1

Posted: October 07, 2017, 2:47 AM Post
Posts: 10214
Yesterday in an MLBtraderumors chat, someone proposed the idea of Domingo Santana for Chris Archer, given the options that both teams have to replace both players. The writer noted that Archer is worth more than Santana, but that Santana is definitely a legitimate asset.

So to build on that, I'd propose something like Santana, Ortiz, and Corey Ray. It's a nice haul for the Rays while also giving us a chance to acquire a cheap and controllable high end rotation asset without giving up Brinson. While there's no doubt Santana is a tough loss it would tighten up our OF defense and we could move forward with Brinson and Phillips in CF and RF with Broxton as the 4th OF. Our OF depth is taking a hit at this point but we still have some upside on the farm in the OF with guys like Clark, Lutz and Harrison.

Archer is controllable through 2021 with his current deal which includes a couple very reasonable team options.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Online  Re: Chris Archer
#2

Posted: October 07, 2017, 7:25 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 6048
Looking at his k/9, bb/9, and whip... why is his era the last two seasons in the 4’s?

“There's a fine line between being confident and cocky, or overconfident. This is an extremely humbling game. But if you don't believe in yourself, no one else is going to believe in you.”


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
#3

Posted: October 07, 2017, 7:49 AM Post
Posts: 10780
Brew4U said:
Looking at his k/9, bb/9, and whip... why is his era the last two seasons in the 4’s?


He's extremely tough to hit the first two times through the order. However, the third time through, teams hit .302/.366/.486 off him. The Rays treated him as their "ace" and so they weren't inclined to pull him when he got in trouble before the 7th inning. Used properly and with a good middle inning bullpen, he'd be closer to his FIP of 3.40. The Ray's pen wasn't very deep. No doubt the manager stuck with Archer a lot, and when he did get pulled, the pen let in his runners.

So while he's a very good pitcher, with excellent stuff, he's not a true ace as he's basically a 6 inning guy. I'd still be very interested with Santana as a part of a package if the plan is to sign another big bat like Hosmer which would allow them to move Thames to RF in platoon with Perez or use Phillips there when Brinson shows he can hit enough to play nearly every day in CF. A Thames/Perez platoon could be as productive as Santana alone. The key would be replacing the production at 1B.


Last edited by JohnBriggs12 on October 07, 2017, 8:00 AM, edited 1 time in total.

 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
#4

Posted: October 07, 2017, 7:51 AM Post
Posts: 238
I would think it's the home runs. In his first two full seasons in 2014 and 2015 he had a 0.6 and 0.8 HR/9 respectively. In 2016 and 2017 it's been 1.2 and 1.3. So take the average of that, 0.7 and 1.25, and that's a differency 0f 0.55 HR/9. A HR averages rougly 1.55 runs scored. So, 0.55 * 1.55 = 0.775 R/9. Now if some of those HRs were other types of hits that'd contribute to more than 0 runs, and there could be a difference between R/9 and ERA. But overall, it accounts fairly well for most of the difference between his 3.2-3.3 ERA in his first seasons, and the 4 ERA these last two years.

As you say, his other numbers are really good, and haven't changed much. Just that more of his fly balls go for HRs. A victim of the juiced ball? A change in his repertoire? Something else? I don't know. If we're looking at a trade for a SP, him and Nola (If either one is even available) are two of my favourites. Not that I want to make that type of trade right now mind you, but if.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
#5

Posted: October 07, 2017, 10:46 AM Post
Posts: 501
Location: Madison, WI
adambr2 said:
So to build on that, I'd propose something like Santana, Ortiz, and Corey Ray. It's a nice haul for the Rays while also giving us a chance to acquire a cheap and controllable high end rotation asset without giving up Brinson. While there's no doubt Santana is a tough loss it would tighten up our OF defense and we could move forward with Brinson and Phillips in CF and RF with Broxton as the 4th OF. Our OF depth is taking a hit at this point but we still have some upside on the farm in the OF with guys like Clark, Lutz and Harrison.



It all depends on how the Rays would view Santana moving forward. He was a legitimate 3.0+ WAR player this year but was literally a negative WAR MLB player entering this season. I would anticipate the majority of MLB teams would expect him to regress next year. Just cranking the numbers, if Santana is about a 2.4 WAR player over the next four seasons then an Archer for Santana/Ortiz/Ray looks like a pretty even trade. If the Rays don't see Santana as a steady 2.4+ WAR player over the next few years then I don't think the Brewers could swing a trade for Archer without Brinson being piece #1. Personally I would guess the Rays would rather have a second baseman to pair with Willy Adames and would prefer Brinson over Santana. I think they'd ask for a Lewis Brinson/Luis Ortiz/Isan Diaz package for Archer and in terms of surplus value this would be a pretty even trade.

As a side note, it's interesting how Baseball Reference's WAR value is so low on Archer over the last two years (1.8 and 1.2). Fangraphs has Archer as a 3.2 and 4.6 WAR player in the same two seasons. His average WAR value between the two sites over the last three years is as follows: 2015 = 4.75, 2016 = 2.5, 2017 = 2.9, 3 year average = 3.4. I projected him as a 3.6 WAR player from 2018 through 2020 and then a 3.1 WAR player in 2021. Doing so would put his total value at 140.8 million and he's scheduled to make 33.75 million which would put his surplus value at 107.05 million. That puts him right in the same area that Jose Quintana was.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Online  Re: Chris Archer
#6

Posted: October 07, 2017, 2:14 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 4636
JosephC said:
It all depends on how the Rays would view Santana moving forward. He was a legitimate 3.0+ WAR player this year but was literally a negative WAR MLB player entering this season. I would anticipate the majority of MLB teams would expect him to regress next year.

His major league career prior to this season was at the ages of 22 and 23. It's pretty darned impressive to even make the majors by age 22.

Santana's minor league career OPS is .859, but the "oldest" he was at any stop in the minors was -3.4 years to league average, up to -5.6 years to league average.

I think some are discounting how young Santana has been at every league he has played in.

For Santana + Ortiz + Ray, I'd expect another piece to come back with Archer.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
#7

Posted: October 07, 2017, 2:19 PM Post
Posts: 813
I like Santana but yes I’d do that trade.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
#8

Posted: October 07, 2017, 8:24 PM Post
Posts: 10214
It's notable too that the Rays already turned down a substantial offer from the Astros prior to the 2017 season which included 3 top 50 prospects (29, 35, and 47). https://www.draysbay.com/2017/1/5/14177 ... ton-astros

So they do value Archer very highly. How our offer compares to that I guess depends on what kind of value Santana brings, and you have to take into account it's a season later now with a year less of control for Archer. But its worth mentioning either way.

I doubt I would go much higher than the proposed offer here. Maybe Diaz instead of Ray or Ortiz...


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
#9

Posted: October 07, 2017, 9:08 PM Post
User avatar
Global Moderator
Posts: 5436
Archer's HR tendencies would probably be amplified a bit in Miller Park, but on the whole, he's a heck of a player. He's 29, and signed for four more years (2 years guaranteed and 2 option years) for $34M. Cheap and good and filling a position of need. Therefore, his value is really, really high.

The thing about Archer is that doesn't seem to have made that next step. He's no longer a 25 year old with a ton of promise. He's got a track record. How good is he really? And will he ever take that next step? I honestly don't know - I've rarely ever seen him pitch.

I will say that Santana's value has got to be pretty high right now as well. Four years of control left. If he continues to play like he did in 2017, he's going to make less than Archer during the next four years. They'd be getting his prime years.

The reason I don't see this happening, however, is Tampa DOES need Archer. They are losing Cobb. With out Cobb and Archer, their rotation is Snell, Odorizzi, Faria - maybe Honeywell - but then who? Matt Andriese and Austin Pruitt are pretty much back of the rotation type guys at best. I just don't see them giving up Archer if they want to try and compete next year.

Archer is still really cheap next year. I just don't see Tampa putting a big hole in their rotation.

But hey, it can't hurt to find out.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
#10

Posted: October 11, 2017, 1:32 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 393
Does this article on the Rays website suggest a possible match with the Brewers?

http://m.rays.mlb.com/news/article/257071378/rays-biggest-needs-are-first-base-rotation/

"Biggest needs
1. First base: Logan Morrison and Lucas Duda gave the Rays plenty of firepower at the position in 2017. Both are free agents, so unless the market is unkind, there's a good chance each will sign elsewhere. Jake Bauers, who spent the season at Triple-A Durham and packs plenty of power, is a good bet to win the job. If Bauers is not able to win the job in the spring, the Rays might try to re-sign Duda or Morrison, if one doesn't get the offer he is looking for. Mike Napoli also might serve as an interesting option. The Rangers have an $11 million option for the veteran's services in 2018 with a $2.5 million buyout. He could provide a right-handed bat to complement Bauers, who hits from the left side."

"Gray areas
1. Left field"

"X-factors
1. Money to burn? The Rays should shed a good bit of payroll with the collection of free agents they're likely to lose. And the team could trade one or more of its higher-paid pitchers, which puts Jake Odorizzi and Archer front and center."


Does a Santana & Aguilar package make sense for the start of an Archer deal?


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Online  Re: Chris Archer
#11

Posted: October 11, 2017, 2:10 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 6048
Thames and Santana for a bigger return?

“There's a fine line between being confident and cocky, or overconfident. This is an extremely humbling game. But if you don't believe in yourself, no one else is going to believe in you.”


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
#12

Posted: October 11, 2017, 2:45 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 691
Location: La Crosse
I would do that trade. It would suck to lose Santana, but you have to give something to get something. I would also prefer to swap Dubon for Ray. I think the Rays are thin on INF in their system, and I still have hope for Ray.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
#13

Posted: October 11, 2017, 3:37 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 1300
I feel like it would take a heck of a lot more than the packages listed, even with Archer's noted issues.

I've gotta think that the Rays would want prospects that are further back in the minors over Santana. If you're trading Archer, you're punting the next 2 seasons and suddenly you barely have control on Santana when you come out of that.

I also do fear Archer a bit in the sense that he's thrown a lot of sliders. That arm may not have much left in it before it needs a visit from Dr. James Andrews.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
#14

Posted: October 14, 2017, 7:25 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 724
There's absolutely no way they'd trade Chris Archer straight up for Domingo Santana. If this was offered I'd accept before the period ended the sentence.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
#15

Posted: October 15, 2017, 2:25 AM Post
Posts: 3645
sheetskout said:
There's absolutely no way they'd trade Chris Archer straight up for Domingo Santana. If this was offered I'd accept before the period ended the sentence.



I can agree on this certainly. I don't see a fit with Archer and Milwaukee. Tampa has a quality OF. Santana would be acquiring as a DH bat for them.

You can see the need for a 2b or 1b on the team. They do seem to possess some AAA depth to attempt to fill that gap. Knowing how the club is a low salary, I'd expect that route.

Archer and how Tampa works likely is a cost of 2 SP prospects, and 1 positional with a top 40 talent being the headliner and with another top 75 also involved. Firepower is something we lack, unless we wanted to part with Keston Hiura.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
#16

Posted: October 15, 2017, 11:08 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 6375
Looking at his numbers, I don't understand why everyone is so enamored with this guy...

4+ ERA the past two seasons. Yes, he strikes out a ton of guys, but I don't think this is an ACE type that we truly need.

Don't see any other numbers that scream we need to trade one of our best 2 bats for.

What am I missing?


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
#17

Posted: October 15, 2017, 1:36 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 724
Chris Archer has surpassed 194IP for the last four years including the last three being 200IP campaigns. He's K'd more than 233 each of the last three years.

He's 29 years old and is under financial control through the next four seasons at a maximum salary of 11-million.

Chris Archer is the Brewers wet-dream right now. He's exactly what we're looking for to push into the playoffs but it'll never happen.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
#18

Posted: October 15, 2017, 1:39 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 6498
turborickey said:
Looking at his numbers, I don't understand why everyone is so enamored with this guy...

4+ ERA the past two seasons. Yes, he strikes out a ton of guys, but I don't think this is an ACE type that we truly need.

Don't see any other numbers that scream we need to trade one of our best 2 bats for.

What am I missing?


I'm glad I'm not the only one who was thinking that. He's a really, really good pitcher but I just don't see him as the ace everyone else is. I'm also pretty firmly against making a big time trade at this point.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
#19

Posted: October 16, 2017, 10:48 AM Post
User avatar
Global Moderator
Posts: 5436
jerichoholicninja said:
turborickey said:
Looking at his numbers, I don't understand why everyone is so enamored with this guy...

4+ ERA the past two seasons. Yes, he strikes out a ton of guys, but I don't think this is an ACE type that we truly need.

Don't see any other numbers that scream we need to trade one of our best 2 bats for.

What am I missing?


I'm glad I'm not the only one who was thinking that. He's a really, really good pitcher but I just don't see him as the ace everyone else is. I'm also pretty firmly against making a big time trade at this point.

Archer is kind of a fascinating player to judge. As noted, he's had an ERA of over 4.00 the past two years (4.02 and 4.07). That's not bad, but it's not great either. So what is the guy?

I think a lot of the hype comes from his 2013-15 campaigns. 3.22, 3.33 and 3.32 ERAs, respectively. High strikeouts, high innings pitched. The guy was coming off his age 26 season, 5.2 fWAR/4.6 bWAR, all-star appearance. He was entering his prime years and a lot of people just thought he looked like he was going to breakout into something really special.

That, of course, didn't happen. ERA has regressed. FIP hasn't been as bad the last couple of years - 3.81 and 3.40. He still eats innings (200+ that three years), strikes out a ton of guys (233 or more for three years running), and doesn't walk too many guys (between 60-67 over the last three years).

The big change has been the HRs. He went from 19 in 2015, to 30 and 27 over the past couple of years.

Fangraphs still loves Archer - giving him a 4.6 WAR this past year. But Baseball-Reference is way lower - 1.2 WAR. That's a huge discrepancy. I know Fangraphs loves strikeouts, but I don't know enough but the two systems to know why they are so different.

I honestly haven't seen Archer that much to give any judgement other than he looks like he has premium stuff. Perhaps other people know more about him - and have more first-hand knowledge of him. I'd be curious what others have to say.

I don't doubt Tampa will put a huge value on Archer, but I'd say there's lots of positive signs about the guy that I would risk bringing him on. The price, however, has to be reasonable (I'm not saying dirt cheap - just not a big overpay). You'd want to believe he's a guy who can fill a #2 slot in a rotation. Ultimately, it's the Brewers who have to make that call.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
#20

Posted: October 16, 2017, 1:44 PM Post
Posts: 238
Fangraphs WAR is based off of FIP, while Baseball-Reference uses a system based on RA/9, while Baseball Prospectus uses DRA (Deserved Run Average). Fangraphs does calculate a RA/9 version of their WAR as well, but even that differs quite a bit for Archer; 2.7 WAR.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next  [ 145 posts ]  New Topic   Add Reply
  


Who is online


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search this forum (phpBB search):
Jump to:  
Search entire board (Google search):
Google
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Test