LambeauLeap1250 WSSP


  
Go to page Previous  1 ... 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 ... 48  Next  [ 944 posts ]  New Topic   Add Reply

Chris Archer

Author Message
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
Posted: January 01, 2018, 7:22 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 9145
I concur i keeping Corbin here.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
Posted: January 02, 2018, 1:41 AM Post
Posts: 4158
Also on Corbin, he can likely see starts in'18 in September. If Im trading to a rebuild team its Ortiz whos more than a year away from ML starts. But still, just sign Cobb or Lynn and you can save these prospects. I recall the article previously and it takes Archer's 3 years stats. Convenient to have his best year and not just his previous 2 where HRs becomes a problem for him. Said it roughly before hes a K machine which gets noticed like HRs in batters. Too much value being given to his K rate and not the other HR or hard hit ball rates.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
Posted: January 02, 2018, 9:09 AM Post
Posts: 11656
wallus said:
You could include Woodruff if you plan on signing Cobb/Lynn/Arietta. I am not sure that is the best way for a small market team to build a roster but if TB really likes Woodruff it is an option.

Maybe something like Woodruff, Harrison and Diaz.


Those three plus another arm like a Perrin or a lower level guy with serious upside. Woodruff absolutely makes sense. I got beat up pretty good for suggesting that's why they signed both Chacin and Gallardo to cover the spot left if they did include him in a deal. But it's realistic. Rays have a lot of innings to cover if they deal Archer. A rotation of Archer, Anderson, Davies, Chacin, and Gallardo/Suter/Guerra could be a very competitive one. Now if you deal for Archer and sign either Cobb or Lynn, now you're talking about a team serious about a run. In that case, they need to shore up the offense by getting Walker back in the fold if not more.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
Posted: January 02, 2018, 9:16 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 2307
JohnBriggs12 said:
A rotation of Archer, Anderson, Davies, Chacin, and Gallardo/Suter/Guerra could be a very competitive one.


Just put "Nelson" in for Archer and you have the 2017 rotation, essentially. Chacin is probably better than Garza, but I personally can't guarantee myself that Anderson will repeat. We need to shoot higher.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
Posted: January 02, 2018, 9:33 AM Post
Posts: 3280
Location: New Berlin, WI
endaround said:
This looks like its based upon Ray at the start of 2017 and not the end. Its also based upon Broxton having normal risk when that is unlikely. Broxton is weird in that his zone judgement is not bad, he just can't make contact in the zone. He beat out Chris Carter and his terrible year for the worst zone% for those with more than 200 PAs. Its hard to value him going forward. Its also questionable why Tampa would want a player in their prime if they are rebuilding.

There could be a way to get Archer without including Brinson (I don't know why Tampa would want Santana if they are rebuilding) but it would take basically everything else. Something like:

Burnes
Harrison
Diaz
Dubon
and then throw ins like Villar or Susac


I'm not so sure the Rays wouldn't be interested in Santana as part of a swap for Archer. Trading Archer doesn't necessarily mean a big rebuild. This team could very well re-tool with Santana among other pieces and contend again in the near future, maybe as soon as 2019 which Santana will be around for. Honeywell is basically MLB ready and projects top of the rotation. Archer for Santana+ is a trade of their strength for our strength. I can understand them entering a more extensive rebuild and targeting prospects versus a guy like Santana, I just don't think I'd completely dismiss that notion of Santana being in play.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
Posted: January 02, 2018, 9:35 AM Post
Posts: 3280
Location: New Berlin, WI
bill hAll Star said:
JohnBriggs12 said:
A rotation of Archer, Anderson, Davies, Chacin, and Gallardo/Suter/Guerra could be a very competitive one.


Just put "Nelson" in for Archer and you have the 2017 rotation, essentially. Chacin is probably better than Garza, but I personally can't guarantee myself that Anderson will repeat. We need to shoot higher.


Enter Josh Hader in the 5th spot.

And the 2017 rotation got way too many dreadful starts from Guerra/Peralta. So it wouldn't quite be the same. And as you noted, Chacin will probably be better than Garza.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
Posted: January 02, 2018, 10:01 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 2307
KeithStone53151 said:
bill hAll Star said:
JohnBriggs12 said:
A rotation of Archer, Anderson, Davies, Chacin, and Gallardo/Suter/Guerra could be a very competitive one.


Just put "Nelson" in for Archer and you have the 2017 rotation, essentially. Chacin is probably better than Garza, but I personally can't guarantee myself that Anderson will repeat. We need to shoot higher.


Enter Josh Hader in the 5th spot.

And the 2017 rotation got way too many dreadful starts from Guerra/Peralta. So it wouldn't quite be the same. And as you noted, Chacin will probably be better than Garza.


They went 10-11 in games started by those 2. I think there will be regression to even some things out. I'm on board with you that it would be an improvement, I'm just not sure it's enough for me to push the chips onto the table yet.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
Posted: January 02, 2018, 10:37 AM Post
Posts: 3280
Location: New Berlin, WI
bill hAll Star said:
KeithStone53151 said:
Enter Josh Hader in the 5th spot.

And the 2017 rotation got way too many dreadful starts from Guerra/Peralta. So it wouldn't quite be the same. And as you noted, Chacin will probably be better than Garza.


They went 10-11 in games started by those 2. I think there will be regression to even some things out. I'm on board with you that it would be an improvement, I'm just not sure it's enough for me to push the chips onto the table yet.


I tend to agree. I'd be inclined to be a bit more aggressive at the deadline than last year if we are in a similar position though. Also Nelson said in an interview today that his rehab was going very well and he'll start a throwing program in spring training. I would get the sense from that maybe a June return. That's my own speculation.

With potentially Nelson and Burnes primed for rotation spots in May/June, it makes way too much sense to me to roll with what we have at this point and not make any more moves for SP.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
Posted: January 03, 2018, 10:25 AM Post
Posts: 3695
KeithStone53151 said:
bill hAll Star said:
KeithStone53151 said:
Enter Josh Hader in the 5th spot.

And the 2017 rotation got way too many dreadful starts from Guerra/Peralta. So it wouldn't quite be the same. And as you noted, Chacin will probably be better than Garza.


They went 10-11 in games started by those 2. I think there will be regression to even some things out. I'm on board with you that it would be an improvement, I'm just not sure it's enough for me to push the chips onto the table yet.


I tend to agree. I'd be inclined to be a bit more aggressive at the deadline than last year if we are in a similar position though. Also Nelson said in an interview today that his rehab was going very well and he'll start a throwing program in spring training. I would get the sense from that maybe a June return. That's my own speculation.

With potentially Nelson and Burnes primed for rotation spots in May/June, it makes way too much sense to me to roll with what we have at this point and not make any more moves for SP.


We don't know Nelson's ETA, and there is always the chance of a setback.

Burnes, I think is in AAA until someone really struggles or is traded.

The latter is just as likely. I see both Davies and Woodruff as possible bargaining chips to get a TOR starter, if not this off-season, then next off-season.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
Posted: January 03, 2018, 10:31 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 3057
Location: California
https://www.draysbay.com/2018/1/2/16831078/tampa-bay-rays-reset-button-evan-longoria-chris-archer-kevin-kiermaier

While this article doesn't say Archer is unavailable, it sure does lead me to believe that the Rays will have to absolutely win a trade to deal him. Some of the "Never Archer" guys on this site may have been right all along that it would take Brinson, Burnes, Hiura, + to land him. At that point...HARD PASS


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
Posted: January 03, 2018, 10:38 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 2307
Warning Track Power said:
https://www.draysbay.com/2018/1/2/16831078/tampa-bay-rays-reset-button-evan-longoria-chris-archer-kevin-kiermaier

While this article doesn't say Archer is unavailable, it sure does lead me to believe that the Rays will have to absolutely win a trade to deal him. Some of the "Never Archer" guys on this site may have been right all along that it would take Brinson, Burnes, Hiura, + to land him. At that point...HARD PASS


Are you really surprised that a prime-age, currently performing, relatively cheap, good pitcher with dominant stuff, that has 4 years of control exposed in the offseason to the entire MLB has generated an extremely high price tag?


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
Posted: January 03, 2018, 11:06 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 3057
Location: California
bill hAll Star said:
Warning Track Power said:
https://www.draysbay.com/2018/1/2/16831078/tampa-bay-rays-reset-button-evan-longoria-chris-archer-kevin-kiermaier

While this article doesn't say Archer is unavailable, it sure does lead me to believe that the Rays will have to absolutely win a trade to deal him. Some of the "Never Archer" guys on this site may have been right all along that it would take Brinson, Burnes, Hiura, + to land him. At that point...HARD PASS


Are you really surprised that a prime-age, currently performing, relatively cheap, good pitcher with dominant stuff, that has 4 years of control exposed in the offseason to the entire MLB has generated an extremely high price tag?

Chris Archer has 2 ASG appearances and a 3.6 ERA/3.46 over the past five years. Chris Sale, was coming off 5 straight ASG and a 3.04 ERA/3.06 FIP over the past five years when he was dealt for Moncada, Kopech, Diaz and Basabe. A package of Brinson, Burnes and Hiura + appears to be better than what the Red Sox received for Sale...so yes I am surprised that the lesser pitcher could command more in a trade.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
Posted: January 03, 2018, 11:25 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 2307
Warning Track Power said:
bill hAll Star said:
Warning Track Power said:
https://www.draysbay.com/2018/1/2/16831078/tampa-bay-rays-reset-button-evan-longoria-chris-archer-kevin-kiermaier

While this article doesn't say Archer is unavailable, it sure does lead me to believe that the Rays will have to absolutely win a trade to deal him. Some of the "Never Archer" guys on this site may have been right all along that it would take Brinson, Burnes, Hiura, + to land him. At that point...HARD PASS


Are you really surprised that a prime-age, currently performing, relatively cheap, good pitcher with dominant stuff, that has 4 years of control exposed in the offseason to the entire MLB has generated an extremely high price tag?

Chris Archer has 2 ASG appearances and a 3.6 ERA/3.46 over the past five years. Chris Sale, was coming off 5 straight ASG and a 3.04 ERA/3.06 FIP over the past five years when he was dealt for Moncada, Kopech, Diaz and Basabe. A package of Brinson, Burnes and Hiura + appears to be better than what the Red Sox received for Sale...so yes I am surprised that the lesser pitcher could command more in a trade.


Really?


 Top
 
Online  Re: Chris Archer
Posted: January 03, 2018, 11:27 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 4664
Location: Three Lakes, WI
Warning Track Power said:
bill hAll Star said:
Warning Track Power said:
https://www.draysbay.com/2018/1/2/16831078/tampa-bay-rays-reset-button-evan-longoria-chris-archer-kevin-kiermaier

While this article doesn't say Archer is unavailable, it sure does lead me to believe that the Rays will have to absolutely win a trade to deal him. Some of the "Never Archer" guys on this site may have been right all along that it would take Brinson, Burnes, Hiura, + to land him. At that point...HARD PASS


Are you really surprised that a prime-age, currently performing, relatively cheap, good pitcher with dominant stuff, that has 4 years of control exposed in the offseason to the entire MLB has generated an extremely high price tag?

Chris Archer has 2 ASG appearances and a 3.6 ERA/3.46 over the past five years. Chris Sale, was coming off 5 straight ASG and a 3.04 ERA/3.06 FIP over the past five years when he was dealt for Moncada, Kopech, Diaz and Basabe. A package of Brinson, Burnes and Hiura + appears to be better than what the Red Sox received for Sale...so yes I am surprised that the lesser pitcher could command more in a trade.


Moncada was perhaps the top prospect in all of baseball when he was dealt, and Kopech was perhaps the best power pitching prospect in all of baseball. Basabe was also a top 10 prospect for the Sox. There is no way Brinson, Burnes and Hiura compare to those three, even with the best Brewer-colored glasses on.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
Posted: January 03, 2018, 11:37 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 3057
Location: California
Joey Meyer Bombs said:
Moncada was perhaps the top prospect in all of baseball when he was dealt, and Kopech was perhaps the best power pitching prospect in all of baseball. Basabe was also a top 10 prospect for the Sox. There is no way Brinson, Burnes and Hiura compare to those three, even with the best Brewer-colored glasses on.

Pre-2017, Baseball America had the following rankings:
-Moncada #2 overall propsect
-Brinson #27 overall prospect
-Kopech #32 overall prospect

With Burnes 2017 season and Hiura coming off his initial season in the minors, I will not be surprised to see Burnes top 50 and Hiura top 75 for 2018. Three top 75 prospects versus two top 30 prospects...I don't think it's that far off especially given Sale is undoubtedly the better pitcher between him and Archer.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
Posted: January 03, 2018, 11:51 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 2307
Warning Track Power said:
Joey Meyer Bombs said:
Moncada was perhaps the top prospect in all of baseball when he was dealt, and Kopech was perhaps the best power pitching prospect in all of baseball. Basabe was also a top 10 prospect for the Sox. There is no way Brinson, Burnes and Hiura compare to those three, even with the best Brewer-colored glasses on.

Pre-2017, Baseball America had the following rankings:
-Moncada #2 overall propsect
-Brinson #27 overall prospect
-Kopech #32 overall prospect

With Burnes 2017 season and Hiura coming off his initial season in the minors, I will not be surprised to see Burnes top 50 and Hiura top 75 for 2018. Three top 75 prospects versus two top 30 prospects...I don't think it's that far off especially given Sale is undoubtedly the better pitcher between him and Archer.


The #1 or #2 prospect in all of baseball holds massive value, though.

Kopech is staying the course. Brinson's been fine, but I wouldn't be surprised if he's knocked down the BA rankings a little bit prior to the season.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
Posted: January 03, 2018, 12:06 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 3057
Location: California
bill hAll Star said:
Warning Track Power said:
Joey Meyer Bombs said:
Moncada was perhaps the top prospect in all of baseball when he was dealt, and Kopech was perhaps the best power pitching prospect in all of baseball. Basabe was also a top 10 prospect for the Sox. There is no way Brinson, Burnes and Hiura compare to those three, even with the best Brewer-colored glasses on.

Pre-2017, Baseball America had the following rankings:
-Moncada #2 overall propsect
-Brinson #27 overall prospect
-Kopech #32 overall prospect

With Burnes 2017 season and Hiura coming off his initial season in the minors, I will not be surprised to see Burnes top 50 and Hiura top 75 for 2018. Three top 75 prospects versus two top 30 prospects...I don't think it's that far off especially given Sale is undoubtedly the better pitcher between him and Archer.


The #1 or #2 prospect in all of baseball holds massive value, though.

Kopech is staying the course. Brinson's been fine, but I wouldn't be surprised if he's knocked down the BA rankings a little bit prior to the season.

Agreed, but I am not sure GMs feel the same way about saying we have the "#1 prospect in baseball." Think that is more braggadocio for us fans. Honestly, think I would rather have Kopech than Moncada if given the choice between the two because of the scarcity of potential TOR arms.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
Posted: January 03, 2018, 12:19 PM Post
User avatar
Global Moderator
Posts: 4745
For all the reasons given, no, it does not surprise me to know the price on Archer is high.

I don’t see him as worth that price, and with so many teams after pitching, seeing him still with the Rays suggests I’m not the only one.

For me, Archer is a, “really like”, not a, “love.”


 Top
 
Online  Re: Chris Archer
Posted: January 03, 2018, 1:04 PM Post
User avatar
Global Moderator
Posts: 6548
I'd also like to point out that starting pitching is an area of need for Tampa, so keeping Archer fills a vital position for the Rays. And remember, this is a team that isn't necessarily 'rebuilding' and is looking to unload all their veteran talent. They won 80 games last year. Yes, they made a big deal when they traded Longoria. But he was scheduled to make a lot more money than Archer ($80M+ vs $34M). Their payroll is at about $80M this year - so they don't need to move Archer. If they want to shed some more money, they could move Denard Span - even if they have to eat some of his salary.

The team is actually pretty interesting with several of young position players (Adams, Arroyo, Adames) to go with an OF of Souza, Dickerson, Span, Malix Smith and Keirmaier. Archer would anchor the rotation with Odorizzi, Honeywell and Snell. It would be a very young team, but with some good luck, they might be able to get to the playoffs. Trading Archer really hurts the team's chances.

Also, Tampa can hang on to Archer and Odorizzi for the first half of 2018 and see how the club is doing. If they are contending, they can stay the course. If not, they can look to move the guys. Yes, there's a chance of injury and/or poor performance, but there's also a chance to be in a playoff race.

Ultimately, the Rays can really use Archer in 2018 - so they are going to need to be blown away right now if someone wants the guy.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: Chris Archer
Posted: January 03, 2018, 2:24 PM Post
Posts: 947
Location: Ohio
IIRC there is also a difference in the amount of player control. Right now there are 4 yrs of control for Archer (at cheaper rate of pay). Going INTO last season, Sale had 3 total years of control remaining.

While Sale had a better overall track record going into his trade, Archer's additional control year & reduced salary cost makes a HUGE difference. Also as Reillymcshane pointed out above: Archer also fulfills a need for Tampa at this point.

I can see Archer costing a team more than Boston paid for Sale.

Yes, Tampa is willing to move Archer at this point, but they don't HAVE to deal him now. They can wait for someone to overwhelm them or wait to see if someone gets needy enough at the 2018 trade deadline to pony up even more value (thinking Archer is the needed piece to make/ ensure a post-season trip).


 Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Go to page Previous  1 ... 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 ... 48  Next  [ 944 posts ]  New Topic   Add Reply
  


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

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