Bleacher Bums Forum

I dismissed this yesterday because I thought it was wildly unrealistic in favor of the Cubs. But I was just reading Bleacher Nation and they seem to think it's somewhat reasonable. I've seen that take on other boards too. Am I wrong?

It's five years of a mid-rotation starter who might have more upside left, a top 25 prospect (according to MLB.com's current rankings), and two more guys who could be towards the back end of top 100 lists this offseason for two years of Bryant. It just seems like such a no-brainer for the Cubs if their goal is to extend their window past next year.

Agree.  To get a decent cheap starter, a really good prospect and two other significant prospects, plus free up $20M per year to spend on free agent talents, I think that would very Cubs-favorable. 

But a common perspective on trades is that the team that gets the best individual player often wins that trade.  I'm not sure that might not actually be good for the Braves?  Adding one more really-really good regular player to their lineup right now, while their window-of-opportunity is open, might pay off.  Fried had a good year, but they may see his stuff as limited and that they can replace him, perhaps with a more-stuff-more-upside guy? 

I dismissed this yesterday because I thought it was wildly unrealistic in favor of the Cubs. But I was just reading Bleacher Nation and they seem to think it's somewhat reasonable. I've seen that take on other boards too. Am I wrong?

It's five years of a mid-rotation starter who might have more upside left, a top 25 prospect (according to MLB.com's current rankings), and two more guys who could be towards the back end of top 100 lists this offseason for two years of Bryant. It just seems like such a no-brainer for the Cubs if their goal is to extend their window past next year.

I don't think they'd get that much, but is seems more realistic than Joel Sherman's Bryant and Heyward for Segura and Jay Bruce + 3 unnamed ML.

Could see Fried as centerpiece of a Bryant trade—-but not combined with the quality of prospects in that proposal.

When Cubs drafted Almora, reports were that Fried was the other guy Cubs were considering—went right after Almora in draft. Fried has dominated Cubs in his 3 starts against them. Has really excellent curve, 4-seamer at 94, cutter at 93, and pretty good cutter.

Fried now has five years of club control. But, MLBPA is going to seek lowering the years of control in next cba and maybe they will be able to achieve something like that. That probably is at least a background factor in any trade talks involving a guy like Fried, who already is a significant big league pitcher.

I would agree that Braves not keen to move him but if Braves feel internally that Riley not a 3B (maybe, who knows) and can’t resign/sign Donaldson or Moustakis and with all the young pitching they still have, think conceivable would move Fried to get Bryant, depending on other parts of a deal.

Is that pronounced Fryed or Freed?  If he's already fryed...

Baseball Reference

Pronunciation: \FREED\

That would affect the value on any player/prospect not just Fried. This is purely hypothetical unless Bryant or Fried gets traded. If Fried projects at 15 WAR over 5 years his cost in real dollars is going to be less than what you pay Bryant over 2 for 10-12 WAR.

It affects every player but it has more significance with a player with many years of control (5) who is the centerpiece of a trade for Kris Bryant.

On other hand, MLB and MLBPA can negotiate around this by phasing in any new rules in a successor cba. But, even with that, it could bring Fried a year earlier to free agency, which is a big deal if traded this off-season.

It affects every player but it has more significance with a player with many years of control (5) who is the centerpiece of a trade for Kris Bryant.

On other hand, MLB and MLBPA can negotiate around this by phasing in any new rules in a successor cba. But, even with that, it could bring Fried a year earlier to free agency, which is a big deal if traded this off-season.

So since a prospect has 6-7 years of control it would effect their value too.  Prospects haven’t lost value in trades so the theoretical doesn’t really apply.