Fangraphs Top 100 Prospects

[CJ9]

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/2017-top-100-prospects/

Braves:

Swanson 4
Albies 11
Acuna 35
Allard 41
Maitan 48
Anderson 54
Fried 62
Gohara 70
Soroka 93

He also mentions Pache was the last bat that was cut from the list.

[sturg33]

Kyle Lewis ranked 38... still irked we didn't draft him

[thewupk]

Kyle Lewis ranked 38... still irked we didn't draft him

This is all pre-draft hype though. Don't worry, when scouts get a better look at him and Anderson you can expect their prospect ranking to flip.

[thethe]

9 of top 100 with another just missing out. Sick...

[nsacpi]

No Newcomb.

[thethe]

Kyle Lewis ranked 38... still irked we didn't draft him

It looks like we may not have a long term need in the OF though. There is always need for pitching.

[striker42]

This is all pre-draft hype though. Don't worry, when scouts get a better look at him and Anderson you can expect their prospect ranking to flip.

I think if Lewis is all pre-draft hype then the most likely course of events is that both propsects' stock take dives. Anderson is riding high on his draft stock as well. He's being treated like the 3rd overall pick even though he was selected for money reasons and really is more of a mid-first rounder type of arm and I'm not even that high on him. I think there's a good chance that Anderson is out of the top 100 by this point next year.

[thethe]

No Newcomb.

I get why people are down on him. Just strongly disagree with it.

[thethe]

I think if Lewis is all pre-draft hype then the most likely course of events is that both propsects' stock take dives. Anderson is riding high on his draft stock as well. He's being treated like the 3rd overall pick even though he was selected for money reasons and really is more of a mid-first rounder type of arm and I'm not even that high on him. I think there's a good chance that Anderson is out of the top 100 by this point next year.

Why would you think he wouldn't perform well? The reports/results after he was drafted were just as strong.

[striker42]

No Newcomb.

I think that's kind of ridiculous. If Gohara eventually becomes what Newcomb is now, we should be thrilled. The fact that Gohara is on that list and Newcomb isn't is a mistake. With prospects there's such a bonus for being the shiny, new guy.

[thewupk]

I think if Lewis is all pre-draft hype then the most likely course of events is that both propsects' stock take dives. Anderson is riding high on his draft stock as well. He's being treated like the 3rd overall pick even though he was selected for money reasons and really is more of a mid-first rounder type of arm and I'm not even that high on him. I think there's a good chance that Anderson is out of the top 100 by this point next year.

Anderson is actually like the 10-12th ranked prospect from that draft class in most lists right now which is essentially where most people had him being picked going in.

[Tapate50]

He notes Wentz, Newcomb, and Pache as just misses.

[thewupk]

I think that's kind of ridiculous. If Gohara eventually becomes what Newcomb is now, we should be thrilled. The fact that Gohara is on that list and Newcomb isn't is a mistake. With prospects there's such a bonus for being the shiny, new guy.

Yeah prospect fatigue is a real thing. At some point if you aren't making obvious progress then you start to fall behind.

Also Eric tries to make it clear at the start of the article that the gap between something like 100-150+ isn't that big at all. Newcomb didn't make his top 100 list but he gave him the same FV that he did Soroka who came in #93.

[striker42]

Why would you think he wouldn't perform well? The reports/results after he was drafted were just as strong.

I'm just not tremendously high on his stuff and his potential. I see him as a good candidate to struggle to put up much more than mediocre numbers when he's at a level that challenges him at all. I think you saw that after his promotion to Danville. His K rate dove, his BB rate jumped, and his ERA leaped to a much more pedestrian range.

I see Anderson as having a ceiling of a number 3 starter but is much more likely to be a back end of the rotation arm or swing man if he ever makes it at all. There's just not a lot special there.

[thewupk]

He notes Wentz, Newcomb, and Pache as just misses.

Yeah they all got 50 FV grades which is what the last 1/4th of the top 100 got. Clearly at that point the differences are minimal at best.

[thethe]

I'm just not tremendously high on his stuff and his potential. I see him as a good candidate to struggle to put up much more than mediocre numbers when he's at a level that challenges him at all. I think you saw that after his promotion to Danville. His K rate dove, his BB rate jumped, and his ERA leaped to a much more pedestrian range.

I see Anderson as having a ceiling of a number 3 starter but is much more likely to be a back end of the rotation arm or swing man if he ever makes it at all. There's just not a lot special there.

But the reports I've seen about his stuff are excellent. 4 pitch mix with good velocity seperation, movement, and control. Just haven't seen anything about spin ratesm

[sturg33]

It looks like we may not have a long term need in the OF though. There is always need for pitching.

Why won't we have a long term need? Ender, Acuna, and ??

BPA in baseball drafts anyway. What we don't have in the system is a legit big power bat. Lewis is that.

Missed opportunity

[Southcack77]

I'm just not tremendously high on his stuff and his potential. I see him as a good candidate to struggle to put up much more than mediocre numbers when he's at a level that challenges him at all. I think you saw that after his promotion to Danville. His K rate dove, his BB rate jumped, and his ERA leaped to a much more pedestrian range.

I see Anderson as having a ceiling of a number 3 starter but is much more likely to be a back end of the rotation arm or swing man if he ever makes it at all. There's just not a lot special there.


He K'd 18 in 18 IP, then K'd 18 in 21 IP at Danville.

Yes, he was not as dominant with the step up in league, but 1) you wouldn't expect that he would be 2) he still did fine and 3) there was not enough of a sample to show any kind of improvement as he adjusted to level.

..

Lewis on the other hand was a 21 year old college player who was never bumped a level due to the injury. Not quite apples.

[thethe]

Why won't we have a long term need? Ender, Acuna, and ??

BPA in baseball drafts anyway. What we don't have in the system is a legit big power bat. Lewis is that.

Missed opportunity

Bpa isn't the only consideration in a slotting system. It's easy to fill LF with a power guy based on what we have seen this past offseason. Plus I don't think you can definitively say that Lewis is better. It's possible that he is but all of this right now is opinion.

[zbhargrove]

What?? Anderson has phenomenal stuff for his age, plus the frame to continue growing power.

[thewupk]

Bpa isn't the only consideration in a slotting system. It's easy to fill LF with a power guy based on what we have seen this past offseason. Plus I don't think you can definitively say that Lewis is better. It's possible that he is but all of this right now is opinion.

It's easy if all they have is power. I thought you were against these types of players.

[sturg33]

Bpa isn't the only consideration in a slotting system. It's easy to fill LF with a power guy based on what we have seen this past offseason. Plus I don't think you can definitively say that Lewis is better. It's possible that he is but all of this right now is opinion.

I promise you it's OK to admit the FO may have made a mistake.

Would you honestly not trade anderson for Lewis right now?

[thethe]

It's easy if all they have is power. I thought you were against these types of players.

Depends on the mix of players. I prefer contact low walk players but if you have a team littered with those players it makes sense to have a Matt Kemp type.

[Preacher]

I understand what people are saying in regards to Ian.... he doesn't have a fastball like Pint or a knee-buckling curve... .but his overall toolset is pretty good for a HS arm. I'm excited to see what we have in him.

He was a cost-savings move, would he have been the #3 pick if there was no slotting system? I doubt it, but that also doesn't mean he won't go on to be a really good pitcher for us.

[thethe]

I promise you it's OK to admit the FO may have made a mistake.

Would you honestly not trade anderson for Lewis right now?

How am I supposed to answer that question? I have no clue which player is better. All I'm dating is you can't say they made a mistake. I'm not saying definitively that they made the right decision.

[Tapate50]

I promise you it's OK to admit the FO may have made a mistake.

Would you honestly not trade anderson for Lewis right now?

Likely not seeing Lewis will miss half the year recovering from surgery.

I see your point here, as its been made a lot.

I think people discount a bit of how well regarded Anderson was late in the draft process. He was a top 10-12 pick for most scouts with late helium.

[Preacher]

I promise you it's OK to admit the FO may have made a mistake.

Would you honestly not trade anderson for Lewis right now?

They MAY have made a mistake, its also OK to say Anderson might have been the right pick.

If we could ignore the injury for a second, I would trade Anderson for Lewis, but had we drafted Lewis (despite what Enscheff says) there's no guarantee he'd sign for way below slot and we might not be able to draft Wentz/Muller/Cumberland/Wilson.... so would I trade potentially Anderson/Muller/Wilson for Lewis? It gets harder to make those decisions.

[Southcack77]

Bpa isn't the only consideration in a slotting system. It's easy to fill LF with a power guy based on what we have seen this past offseason. Plus I don't think you can definitively say that Lewis is better. It's possible that he is but all of this right now is opinion.


Time will have to tell on this one. He certainly has a nice stint in short season ball at 21 before tearing his ACL, but like Anderson he's pretty far away from breaking into the big leagues.

If he's Justin Upton then Braves may regret their pick. If he's just a .260 15 hr corner outfielder that's something of value, but maybe not a big regret.

[smootness]

I think if Lewis is all pre-draft hype then the most likely course of events is that both propsects' stock take dives. Anderson is riding high on his draft stock as well. He's being treated like the 3rd overall pick even though he was selected for money reasons and really is more of a mid-first rounder type of arm and I'm not even that high on him. I think there's a good chance that Anderson is out of the top 100 by this point next year.

This is not true. His value was on the upswing at the time of the draft, so his ranking on draft boards was still lagging behind.

He also performed very well in limited action last year.

[striker42]

I think the reason I'm not high on Anderson is that when I look at a prospect (especially a pitching prospect), I like to see something that's really exceptional that they can hang their hat on. Something they can ride to the majors on. Fried, Allard, and Touki have curveballs that are really, really special and that they can pair with good fastballs. Newcomb has effortless velocity from the left side that he can keep late into the game. Soroka has control beyond his years. Gohara can flirt with triple digits.

With Anderson, you see the word "good" a lot. He has a good fastball that has good movement but he lacks elite velocity and struggles to maintain velocity late into games. His curve and changeup both project as above average but neither one is a trademark pitch. He's also supposed to have good control. But he doesn't have anything that's really great. If he can develop his curve or changeup into a devastating pitch or if he can add enough velocity to his fastball so that it sits 94-97 throughout the game then he can really take it to the next level.

Right now, he reminds me of Matt Wisler. A collection of good pitches to pair with good control which is enough to rack up some nice numbers at lower levels but which doesn't play in the majors without something to hang your hat on. In fact, I think Wisler's a pretty good comp.

[smootness]

Why won't we have a long term need? Ender, Acuna, and ??

BPA in baseball drafts anyway. What we don't have in the system is a legit big power bat. Lewis is that.

Missed opportunity

Power bats who don't make enough contact aren't valuable. The Braves decided he had too much swing-and-miss and wouldn't be an impact bat down the road. They certainly could turn out to be wrong, but just because he's a power bat who is ranked ahead of Anderson less than a year after the draft doesn't make it a bad decision or a missed opportunity.

I said at the time I wanted Lewis, and I would still make that swap. But the FO wouldn't, and that's all we know at this point. We have no idea who is right yet.

[smootness]

I think the reason I'm not high on Anderson is that when I look at a prospect (especially a pitching prospect), I like to see something that's really exceptional that they can hang their hat on. Something they can ride to the majors on. Fried, Allard, and Touki have curveballs that are really, really special and that they can pair with good fastballs. Newcomb has effortless velocity from the left side that he can keep late into the game. Soroka has control beyond his years. Gohara can flirt with triple digits.

With Anderson, you see the word "good" a lot. He has a good fastball that has good movement but he lacks elite velocity and struggles to maintain velocity late into games. His curve and changeup both project as above average but neither one is a trademark pitch. He's also supposed to have good control. But he doesn't have anything that's really great. If he can develop his curve or changeup into a devastating pitch or if he can add enough velocity to his fastball so that it sits 94-97 throughout the game then he can really take it to the next level.

Right now, he reminds me of Matt Wisler. A collection of good pitches to pair with good control which is enough to rack up some nice numbers at lower levels but which doesn't play in the majors without something to hang your hat on. In fact, I think Wisler's a pretty good comp.

I think just about any scout would tell you Anderson has clearly better natural stuff than Wisler does.

The things that Anderson brings are good stuff (true, perhaps he doesn't have any elite pitch), already has 4 pitches, which is pretty rare for someone that age, and from what I've read, he has great command for his age. You like Soroka, and Anderson can have that kind of control but with an even better mix of pitches.

I think the fact that we signed him for under slot and then signed Wentz/Muller for over slot is clouding people's thoughts on Anderson. That does not mean that he wasn't the guy we really wanted at 3 or that he was taken higher than he should have been.

[zbhargrove]

I promise you it's OK to admit the FO may have made a mistake.

Would you honestly not trade anderson for Lewis right now?

I would have rather had Lewis than Anderson in the draft... not ashamed to say that, but I wouldn't trade him for Anderson now. The injury makes me nervous.

[striker42]

I think just about any scout would tell you Anderson has clearly better natural stuff than Wisler does.

The things that Anderson brings are good stuff (true, perhaps he doesn't have any elite pitch), already has 4 pitches, which is pretty rare for someone that age, and from what I've read, he has great command for his age. You like Soroka, and Anderson can have that kind of control but with an even better mix of pitches.

I think the fact that we signed him for under slot and then signed Wentz/Muller for over slot is clouding people's thoughts on Anderson. That does not mean that he wasn't the guy we really wanted at 3 or that he was taken higher than he should have been.

I don't see Anderson having Soroka like control. While we're talking about small sample sizes, Soroka last year put up BB rates half of what Anderson did at the same level. Anderson would have to jump to Rome and put up the same walk rate there that he did in the GCL to be on Soroka's level.

I don't think there's a huge difference in the natural stuff between Wisler and Anderson. Anderson's might be a little better but not a meaningful amoun. It is true that Anderson's stuff might develop better than Wisler's did. Anderson could still develop that out pitch that will take him to the next level. But that's all projection. Right now I'm looking at Anderson and seeing a guy who is all around good but with nothing great. That's Matt Wisler.

Maybe Anderson develops something exceptional. Maybe he doesn't. But I think that will be what defines his career.

I'm not against the plan of taking Anderson to get Wentz and Muller. It might not have been my preferred route but the end result was at least defensible. But I think we're fooling ourselves if we think we draft Anderson at 3 without a discount. If he was going to demand full slot then I don't see any way he goes at 3.

[smootness]

It was mentioned, but I think people are overlooking perhaps the most surprising and optimistic thing about this - Pache being just outside the top 100 already.

Just for the record, for those who think our system is destined to start dropping soon or won't still be in competition for the best in baseball a year from now - there are 23 players on this list younger than 20. We have 5 of them, including the youngest player on the list. We also have 2 on the list who are 20 and two who just missed who are 18.

[zbhargrove]

Pache is about to get damn exciting.... Cruz also I believe... can't wait to see him rebound in Danville after he just tore up the GCL

[smootness]

I don't see Anderson having Soroka like control. While we're talking about small sample sizes, Soroka last year put up BB rates half of what Anderson did at the same level. Anderson would have to jump to Rome and put up the same walk rate there that he did in the GCL to be on Soroka's level.

I don't think there's a huge difference in the natural stuff between Wisler and Anderson. Anderson's might be a little better but not a meaningful amoun. It is true that Anderson's stuff might develop better than Wisler's did. Anderson could still develop that out pitch that will take him to the next level. But that's all projection. Right now I'm looking at Anderson and seeing a guy who is all around good but with nothing great. That's Matt Wisler.

Maybe Anderson develops something exceptional. Maybe he doesn't. But I think that will be what defines his career.

I'm not against the plan of taking Anderson to get Wentz and Muller. It might not have been my preferred route but the end result was at least defensible. But I think we're fooling ourselves if we think we draft Anderson at 3 without a discount. If he was going to demand full slot then I don't see any way he goes at 3.

There's not a player left in the draft who would have taken full slot at 3, though, outside of perhaps Groome or Pint. If you had to pay every player the slot value of where they were taken, then yes, I think it's possible we take Anderson. We clearly just didn't like Lewis there, and neither did the 4 teams who drafted after us.

[clvclv]

Funny thing about everyone being so down on Anderson. He's been ranked higher on EVERY list than Fried, and Fried's been one of the most impressive Pitchers in camp this spring.

Also FWIW, there were 7 players 18 years old or younger ranked ahead of him on this list, and one of them was Maitan. Perspective, please.

Just sayin'.

[zbhargrove]

Funny thing about everyone being so down on Anderson. He's been ranked higher on EVERY list than Fried, and Fried's been one of the most impressive Pitchers in camp this spring.

Just sayin'.

Fried also has a big injury concern and he's pitched vs much younger competition.... prospect fatigue... makes perfect sense and how prospect rankings are usually handled

[Carp]

I promise you it's OK to admit the FO may have made a mistake.

Would you honestly not trade anderson for Lewis right now?

I wanted Lewis, but I'm happy with Anderson. Would I rather have Lewis? Probably, but it has nothing to do with organizational need. It's mostly due to the higher risk of busting.

[CJ9]

I'd have taken Lewis over Anderson and still feel that way. I also feel that way about Corey Ray, who is 20 on this list. I'd rather have Groome and Rutherford, too. Still frustrating for me to look back at last year's draft, even if I think Anderson is a decent prospect.

[smootness]

I'd have taken Lewis over Anderson and still feel that way. I also feel that way about Corey Ray, who is 20 on this list. I'd rather have Groome and Rutherford, too. Still frustrating for me to look back at last year's draft, even if I think Anderson is a decent prospect.

These rankings are almost entirely still based on pre-draft opinions, though. Groome and Rutherford were ranked high as draft prospects, so it makes sense they would still be ranked high as prospects. It will be more interesting to see where all these guys are in a year.

Also, an interesting thing to consider is that Rutherford is exactly a full year older than Anderson. Anderson is 6 months younger than Pint and about 4 months younger than Groome. I think we intentionally went after the younger talent that we liked.

Ray is one of the more intriguing rankings on the list. He was considered maybe the 4th or 5th best talent in the draft by the time draft day came around by just about everyone, yet he's the highest ranked draftee on this list. And that's after an underwhelming performance in his first taste of pro ball, though they were aggressive in terms of where they placed him.

[thewupk]

Funny thing about everyone being so down on Anderson. He's been ranked higher on EVERY list than Fried, and Fried's been one of the most impressive Pitchers in camp this spring.

Both are 55 FV prospects in Longenhagen's eyes. IMO Fried has the higher ceiling and better stuff but being 23 and the injury history bring his status down.

[Nerfherders]

Think of it this way: If we don't draft Anderson we probably don't get Muller and Wentz. Those three guys are kind of a package deal because of the $'s.

[sturg33]

Think of it this way: If we don't draft Anderson we probably don't get Muller and Wentz. Those three guys are kind of a package deal because of the $'s.

That's not actually the reality though. Lewis signed for less than Anderson, IIRC

[Enscheff]

I promise you it's OK to admit the FO may have made a mistake.

Would you honestly not trade anderson for Lewis right now?

I was one of the most pro-Lewis guys around, but no way I would trade Anderson for Lewis right now.

Before the knee injury? Absolutely.

Once Lewis plays for a month and proves he is healthy again? Definitely.

While he is still injured and hasn't taken a single competitive rep? No way.

[thethe]

That's not actually the reality though. Lewis signed for less than Anderson, IIRC

We don't live in a world where Lewis was drafted 3rd so you don't know this.

[Preacher]

That's not actually the reality though. Lewis signed for less than Anderson, IIRC

That likely has something to do with where Lewis was picked as well..... I have no idea what Lewis would have needed had he been picked #3, I'm almost positive it wouldn't have been for the full slot, but would he have taken as little as Anderson did at #3? I have no idea. Maybe we can only get one of Wentz or Muller if we had picked Lewis .... and maybe that still would have been the right way to go. Lewis/Wentz/slot college arm or Anderson/Wentz/Muller? Just throwing hypotheticals out there.

[Preacher]

doublepost.

[thewupk]

Depends on the mix of players. I prefer contact low walk players but if you have a team littered with those players it makes sense to have a Matt Kemp type.

Sure. But the reason players like Chris Carter are very cheap is that they just aren't very good even with the 30+ homers. He's a 1 WAR player due to ****ty defense and a high K%. Does that remind you of anyone?

So yeah if you want to fill an OF spot with a high power 1 WAR player then so be it. That's not going to cost you much. Just as filling a rotation spot with a 1 WAR player wouldn't cost you much either.

[Enscheff]

Sure. But the reason players like Chris Carter are very cheap is that they just aren't very good even with the 30+ homers. He's a 1 WAR player due to ****ty defense and a high K%. Does that remind you of anyone?

So yeah if you want to fill an OF spot with a high power 1 WAR player then so be it. That's not going to cost you much. Just as filling a rotation spot with a 1 WAR player wouldn't cost you much either.

It cost the Braves $23M to fill the rotation with Dickey and Colon...

[thewupk]

It cost the Braves $23M to fill the rotation with Dickey and Colon...

Yeah and they are projected to combine for close to 4 WAR between them.

[Horsehide Harry]

Yeah and they are projected to combine for close to 4 WAR between them.

A lot of risk associated with those projections

[thewupk]

A lot of risk associated with those projections

There is risk with any kind of projection.

[Managuarantano's Volunteers]

A lot of risk associated with those projections less than most, honestly. Projections are worst for prospects.

[nsacpi]

less than most, honestly. Projections are worst for prospects.

I'm guessing the range of outcomes gets pretty wide for over 40 pitchers...extra wide in the case of Colon

[rawwr]

Funny thing about everyone being so down on Anderson. He's been ranked higher on EVERY list than Fried, and Fried's been one of the most impressive Pitchers in camp this spring.

Also FWIW, there were 7 players 18 years old or younger ranked ahead of him on this list, and one of them was Maitan. Perspective, please.

Just sayin'.

Not that I'm down on Anderson, but Fried's being held back because of his injury history. If he stays healthy and sustains the stuff he's shown since the end of last season (70ish fastball and curve), he'll leapfrog Anderson no matter how well Anderson pitches this year.

[thewupk]

Not that I'm down on Anderson, but Fried's being held back because of his injury history. If he stays healthy and sustains the stuff he's shown since the end of last season (70ish fastball and curve), he'll leapfrog Anderson no matter how well Anderson pitches this year.

Loganhagen essentially said as much in his Braves writeup earlier. If he has a healthy year and does what he did at the end of 2016 then imo he's going to be a high end FV 55 player around the 30-40 range.

[Managuarantano's Volunteers]

I'm guessing the range of outcomes gets pretty wide for over 40 pitchers...extra wide in the case of Colon

Good point

[Tapate50]

Got served a full dose of Colon Blow today for spring training

http://www.cerealfix.com/wp-content/uploads/its-sugar-colon-blow-cereal-box.jpg

[clvclv]

Not that I'm down on Anderson, but Fried's being held back because of his injury history. If he stays healthy and sustains the stuff he's shown since the end of last season (70ish fastball and curve), he'll leapfrog Anderson no matter how well Anderson pitches this year.

I guess the point is that Anderson's being ranked a bit conservatively because he's from upstate NY too - certainly no games early in the spring there. Not that that's a bad thing from our point of view since he's likely taxed his arm a little less than some of the Pitchers on that list who hail from warmer climates. Probably not a major factor, but worth mentioning.

[Southcack77]

Sure. But the reason players like Chris Carter are very cheap is that they just aren't very good even with the 30+ homers. He's a 1 WAR player due to ****ty defense and a high K%. Does that remind you of anyone?

So yeah if you want to fill an OF spot with a high power 1 WAR player then so be it. That's not going to cost you much. Just as filling a rotation spot with a 1 WAR player wouldn't cost you much either.

Well, it could cost you about 18 million a year -- which some still say was a brilliant deal. I tend to think it wasn't.

[Enscheff]

Well, it could cost you about 18 million a year -- which some still say was a brilliant deal. I tend to think it wasn't.

The Kemp deal was a case where they made a bad deal in an attempt to cover up another bad deal. They should have just cut their losses, dumped Olivera, and then signed one of the many bat-only FA OFers that were on the market this offseason for much less than they owe Kemp.

Someone like Mark Trumbo would have been a good target. Bautista ended up signing for $18M total. Fowler and Ces would have been much better options in LF. Matt Joyce will likely out-produce Kemp this season, and was signed for a fraction of the price. Matt Holliday could have been another option.

But hey, Coppy's a genius, so it will all work out.

[thewupk]

Well, it could cost you about 18 million a year -- which some still say was a brilliant deal. I tend to think it wasn't.

Also true. I forget what it ended up being but the true cost of Kemp was something in the 10 million per year figure when factoring in HO's dead money. One dimensional sluggers were getting a lot less this offseason. Copy is gambling that Kemp's 2nd half offense will carry over and be a 1-2 WAR player. In that range it's not a bad deal but that's the optimistic scenario and not the realistic one.

[Russ2dollas]

I want as high on Lewis

Anderson pick I liked. I just wasn't as excited about the over slot guys.

I still think the tragedy of last year is not getting senzel bc we win a coup,e extra bs games and fell to 3.

[CJ9]

I want as high on Lewis

Anderson pick I liked. I just wasn't as excited about the over slot guys.

I still think the tragedy of last year is not getting senzel bc we win a coup,e extra bs games and fell to 3.

And we'll be saying the same thing about this year's draft when we pick fifth. One extra loss last season and we would be picking second and have $2+ million extra in our draft pool to spend.

[Eyeman]

Yep, I remember one huge comeback win towards the last month of the season that made me mad. Bugged me the rest of the season that that win might cost us, and it did. But actually I did not like Senzel last year. It appears I was very wrong on that one.

[auyushu]

That likely has something to do with where Lewis was picked as well..... I have no idea what Lewis would have needed had he been picked #3, I'm almost positive it wouldn't have been for the full slot, but would he have taken as little as Anderson did at #3? I have no idea. Maybe we can only get one of Wentz or Muller if we had picked Lewis .... and maybe that still would have been the right way to go. Lewis/Wentz/slot college arm or Anderson/Wentz/Muller? Just throwing hypotheticals out there.

We could have easily gotten both Wentz and Muller along with Lewis instead of Anderson. Max it possibly would have taken to sign Lewis would have been 5.2 mil or so, since that was slot value of the 4th pick. Anderson signed for 4 mil, so Anderson only would have saved us 1.2 mil at the top end, and it's probably likely Lewis would have been willing to sign for 4.5 mil to 5 mil if not less, since the Rockies had expressed zero interest in him and were known to likely be taking Pint. Even if he signed for 5.2 mil or so, we simply would have only needed to sign seniors instead of Harrington and Walker to make up that 1.2 mil.

So basically it would have been Walker, Harrington, and Anderson versus Lewis, which is a far different ball game than losing Wentz or Muller.

[smootness]

The Kemp deal was a case where they made a bad deal in an attempt to cover up another bad deal. They should have just cut their losses, dumped Olivera, and then signed one of the many bat-only FA OFers that were on the market this offseason for much less than they owe Kemp.

Someone like Mark Trumbo would have been a good target. Bautista ended up signing for $18M total. Fowler and Ces would have been much better options in LF. Matt Joyce will likely out-produce Kemp this season, and was signed for a fraction of the price. Matt Holliday could have been another option.

But hey, Coppy's a genius, so it will all work out.

We get it, you think Coppy's a moron and your goal in every thread is to try to prove why.

[smootness]

We could have easily gotten both Wentz and Muller along with Lewis instead of Anderson. Max it possibly would have taken to sign Lewis would have been 5.2 mil or so, since that was slot value of the 4th pick. Anderson signed for 4 mil, so Anderson only would have saved us 1.2 mil at the top end, and it's probably likely Lewis would have been willing to sign for 4.5 mil to 5 mil if not less, since the Rockies had expressed zero interest in him and were known to likely be taking Pint. Even if he signed for 5.2 mil or so, we simply would have only needed to sign seniors instead of Harrington and Walker to make up that 1.2 mil.

So basically it would have been Walker, Harrington, and Anderson versus Lewis, which is a far different ball game than losing Wentz or Muller.

They clearly didn't want Lewis. That is obvious. They preferred Anderson over Lewis, and it didn't have anything to do with the money.

As I've said before, we'll just have to see if they were right. I personally would have taken Lewis, but there are plenty of people who think he won't ever make enough contact to be an impact bat at the MLB level.

[striker42]

They clearly didn't want Lewis. That is obvious. They preferred Anderson over Lewis, and it didn't have anything to do with the money.

As I've said before, we'll just have to see if they were right. I personally would have taken Lewis, but there are plenty of people who think he won't ever make enough contact to be an impact bat at the MLB level.

I personally would have taken Lewis as well but I can understand if our scouts saw something they didn't like. It'll suck if he ends up being Jermaine Dye II which is what I think he'll be but I'm willing to accept there being red flags there. But apart from Lewis, I just don't like the Anderson pick. There are 5 or 6 ways I'd rather have seen the Braves go.

There's always a degree of projection involved with prospects. You just have to ask yourself if the projection is reasonable. Take Newcomb for instance. His stuff is excellent. The only thing standing between him and the majors is control. If he can drop his BB rate by one batter every 9 then he should be a very valuable piece. It's entirely reasonable to project Newcomb fine tuning his control that much. If Newcomb were to drop his BB rate to under 2 batters every 9 then he'd be one of the most dominant pitchers in the game. However, that's an improvement that's hard to project. That's an unreasonably large improvement.

With Anderson, in order for him to be a front line starter, as his fans say his ceiling is and what you want in a 3rd overall pick, he's going to need a hard to project jump. Right now you can probably project his fastball gaining some consistency and eventually sitting at 93 with decent life, you can project him tightening up his breaking ball and it going from a slurve to a true slider, and you can project his changeup becoming an average to above average MLB pitch. You put all that together and you've got a Trevor Bauer on your hands. A middle of the rotation starter that you really wish was more than that.

The problem is that Anderson needs a projection you just can't make to become a front line starter. With his lack of a dominant secondary offering, his fastball would need a significant jump. If he's going to be an ace that hangs his hat on his fastball then he'll probably need it to jump to sitting around 96 at least. Right now that's close to the top end of his range when he muscles up on one. It's hard to project his fastball to sit that high. Alternatively, he'll need to elevate one of his secondary pitches to being a plus, plus pitch. Neither one projects that high and it would be a stretch to do so.

Anderson's skill set is such that if something jumps to really exceptional, he doesn't have anything holding him back but there's nothing he does that projects to be exceptional. He'll require an impossible to predict improvement. That's why I'm not a fan of the pick.

[GovClintonTyree]

We get it, you think Coppy's a moron and your goal in every thread is to try to prove why.

I know, and can you imagine if we'd signed any of those guys he mentioned? He'd have hammered Coppy for signing them. Fowler and Cespedes are on the wrong side of 30 and required 4-5 year deals, you'd be paying Cespedes $28m/yr for his age 34 year, Trumbo is a power-only guy who averages .5 WAR per year for the last three years, Joyce hit .240 in the wrong side of a platoon role last year, Bautista is 36 and went into extreme decline last year with 1 WAR, Holliday is a shell of himself, late 30s and less than a 1 WAR player, and on and on.

Other thing is, free agency isn't like a fantasy league. They've got to agree to come here. Presumably we'd need to win some of those bidding wars, and the thing about bidding wars is, the winner rarely ends up with surplus value - by definition, the process strips it out and you pay full retail. But Enscheff knows all that, so the only explanation is that he's now focused on Coppy as the target of his affection.

[GovClintonTyree]

I personally would have taken Lewis as well but I can understand if our scouts saw something they didn't like. It'll suck if he ends up being Jermaine Dye II which is what I think he'll be but I'm willing to accept there being red flags there. But apart from Lewis, I just don't like the Anderson pick.

If you're still interested in Kyle Lewis, all is not lost. The Seattle GM tries on players like Lady Gaga tries on clothes. You could probably offer him one of the Rome guys and he'd bite. Hell, you could probably offer him Alex Jackson and he'd bite.

BTW, I saw Kyle in his first week out in Tri-Cities. He hit both gaps, one for a triple. The better übercomparison is a young Griffey (before he started jerking everything). He was lean and fast. I remember Dye being...well, big.

[thewupk]

I know, and can you imagine if we'd signed any of those guys he mentioned? He'd have hammered Coppy for signing them. Fowler and Cespedes are on the wrong side of 30 and required 4-5 year deals, you'd be paying Cespedes $28m/yr for his age 34 year, Trumbo is a power-only guy who averages .5 WAR per year for the last three years, Joyce hit .240 in the wrong side of a platoon role last year, Bautista is 36 and went into extreme decline last year with 1 WAR, Holliday is a shell of himself, late 30s and less than a 1 WAR player, and on and on.

Other thing is, free agency isn't like a fantasy league. They've got to agree to come here. Presumably we'd need to win some of those bidding wars, and the thing about bidding wars is, the winner rarely ends up with surplus value - by definition, the process strips it out and you pay full retail. But Enscheff knows all that, so the only explanation is that he's now focused on Coppy as the target of his affection.

Trumbo is not a .5 WAR player. He had a horrible half year in 2015 that's bringing that 3 year average way down. He's projected to be 1+ WAR guy. You know who is projected to be a .5 WAR guy? Neck and Kemp....combined. Now I don't think either of those will be that bad but there were better options than Kemp if you wanted that type of player. For the Kemp deal to be good you have to think his 2nd half offensive performance is going to carry over. 3 of his last 4 years have been meh granted 2013 was a half season.

[clvclv]

And we'll be saying the same thing about this year's draft when we pick fifth. One extra loss last season and we would be picking second and have $2+ million extra in our draft pool to spend.

The day the goal becomes having one more loss to improve draft position and pick up a couple million dollars is the day the Atlanta Braves lose TONS of fans.

[thewupk]

The day the goal becomes having one more loss to improve draft position and pick up a couple million dollars is the day the Atlanta Braves lose TONS of fans.

I doubt most fans would even care or know what that means. There are 162 games in a season. This isn't like tanking in the NFL where you just have 12 games. When you are losing 90 games 1 more isn't going to cause fans to mass exodus.

[thethe]

Trumbo is not a .5 WAR player. He had a horrible half year in 2015 that's bringing that 3 year average way down. He's projected to be 1+ WAR guy. You know who is projected to be a .5 WAR guy? Neck and Kemp....combined. Now I don't think either of those will be that bad but there were better options than Kemp if you wanted that type of player. For the Kemp deal to be good you have to think his 2nd half offensive performance is going to carry over. 3 of his last 4 years have been meh granted 2013 was a half season.

Trumbo signed for 12.3 and we have Kemp for 10. I'd rather have Kemp as his upside far exceeds trumbo.

Still dont understand the shade thrown towards kemp.

[thethe]

I doubt most fans would even care or know what that means. There are 162 games in a season. This isn't like tanking in the NFL where you just have 12 games. When you are losing 90 games 1 more isn't going to cause fans to mass exodus.

How do you puposefully lose a game?

[thewupk]

Trumbo signed for 12.3 and we have Kemp for 10. I'd rather have Kemp as his upside far exceeds trumbo.

Still dont understand the shade thrown towards kemp.

What is his upside compared to realistic expectations? Kemp is going to be 32 this year. There comes a time when upside is no longer a thing for a player.

[thewupk]

How do you puposefully lose a game?

Give key players more days off as the season ends. Not managing game 155 as it's the 7th game of the World Series.

[thethe]

Give key players more days off as the season ends. Not managing game 155 as it's the 7th game of the World Series.

So basically tell the fans to stop showing up.

[thewupk]

So basically tell the fans to stop showing up.

They already did that by the poor play the last two years.

[thethe]

What is his upside compared to realistic expectations? Kemp is going to be 32 this year. There comes a time when upside is no longer a thing for a player.

When you are talking about hitters that were once mvp caliber players then yes there is more upside. This is not me saying Kemp will be that God but there will always be more upsdie with him at the same age range than someone like trumbo.

[thethe]

They already did that by the poor play the last two years.

The poor product on the field is different than sitting your best players in the last month of a season.

[thewupk]

When you are talking about hitters that were once mvp caliber players then yes there is more upside. This is not me saying Kemp will be that God but there will always be more upsdie with him at the same age range than someone like trumbo.

Again compare that to realistic expectations. Injuries and the toll of playing center as a big bodied player has a serious negative impact on your overall game as you age.

[thewupk]

The poor product on the field is different than sitting your best players in the last month of a season.

There is. However besides getting himself another year as the manager what good did Snit to by managing the way he did down the stretch? There is no carryover effect.

[thethe]

Again compare that to realistic expectations. Injuries and the toll of playing center as a big bodied player has a serious negative impact on your overall game as you age.

Agreed but his usual still exceeds a player like trumbo

[sturg33]

I would have left Dansby down last year - and held out til the home opener in 2017.

That probably would have cost a win, and gotten us an extra year of control

[thethe]

There is. However besides getting himself another year as the manager what good did Snit to by managing the way he did down the stretch? There is no carryover effect.

I'd like to think ender enjoyed last year so much that he signed here long terms at a bargain. You have to think outside the box aside from win loss records in individual seasons.

[thewupk]

Agreed but his usual still exceeds a player like trumbo

His usual hasn't been that good lately.

[thethe]

I would have left Dansby down last year - and held out til the home opener in 2017.

That probably would have cost a win, and gotten us an extra year of control

No extra control. But less wins for sure. Less ticket sales in 2016/2017 most likely as well.

[thewupk]

I'd like to think ender enjoyed last year so much that he signed here long terms at a bargain. You have to think outside the box aside from win loss records in individual seasons.

But 1 more loss would have changed his mind? Ender cashed in on guaranteed money which is a good move by a limited offensive player.

[thethe]

His usual hasn't been that good lately.

Agreed. Kemp hasn't really cared about baseball that much for a few years and battled nagging injuries. Let's see how he does in Atlanta because the early returns have been excellent and it goes beyond his production last year.

[thethe]

But 1 more loss would have changed his mind? Ender cashed in on guaranteed money which is a good move by a limited offensive player.

The wins and losses are a byproduct of an environment and strategy. The goal is to win every game. That can't be turned on and off and it was that mentality that probably convinced ender (along with many zeroes) that Atlanta was a place to play long term.

[rawwr]

The poor product on the field is different than sitting your best players in the last month of a season.

I really think you're overestimating the effect resting the starters would have on attendance. By August in 2015 and 2016 attendance was already sitting well below 50% of capacity for most home games, even dipping down into the 30-35% area for weekday games. At that point you can see attendance went up when teams like the Mets, Nats or Yankees were in town, which had less to do with what the Braves were putting on the field and more to do with who they were playing.

[thewupk]

Agreed. Kemp hasn't really cared about baseball that much for a few years and battled nagging injuries. Let's see how he does in Atlanta because the early returns have been excellent and it goes beyond his production last year.

lol. If only every player cared just a little bit more.

[thewupk]

The wins and losses are a byproduct of an environment and strategy. The goal is to win every game. That can't be turned on and off and it was that mentality that probably convinced ender (along with many zeroes) that Atlanta was a place to play long term.

The goal should be to make your franchise better. Winning games at the end of 2016 doesn't accomplish that.

[thethe]

lol. If only every player cared just a little bit more.

I know you don't agree with this. I'm OK with that. We don't have to submit to any one style of thought. I don't mock your statistical beliefs but I'll question them. I would appreciate it if you took the same route.

[thewupk]

I know you don't agree with this. I'm OK with that. We don't have to submit to any one style of thought. I don't mock your statistical beliefs but I'll question them. I would appreciate it if you took the same route.

That's fine. I just feel there is a multitude of reasons on why Kemp hit better in the 2nd half (which he was doing in San Diego before coming over) than starting to care about baseball when he got to Atlanta.

[CJ9]

Give key players more days off as the season ends. Not managing game 155 as it's the 7th game of the World Series.

Exactly. NBA teams do this all the time when tanking, and it pays off. Now we'll have to go cheap at pick 5 instead of going cheap at pick 2.

[thethe]

That's fine. I just feel there is a multitude of reasons on why Kemp hit better in the 2nd half (which he was doing in San Diego before coming over) than starting to care about baseball when he got to Atlanta.

That's valid. I'm more curious as to how he will hit this year based on all we have heard about his off season committment. Maybe it's worse. We will find out.

[thethe]

The goal should be to make your franchise better. Winning games at the end of 2016 doesn't accomplish that.

Still believe you need to consider the possibility that other factors play into this other than wind and losses and draft position.

[clvclv]

I doubt most fans would even care or know what that means. There are 162 games in a season. This isn't like tanking in the NFL where you just have 12 games. When you are losing 90 games 1 more isn't going to cause fans to mass exodus.

That assumes an awful lot, and frankly sounds a lot more like a condescending Emscheff comment than you. Fans tend to notice a lot more during a rebuild process and when their teams are losing than they do during good times. There always seem to be more voices for them to hear discussing "what's wrong?" during those times as well. There wasn't much discussion of how the farm system was getting worse while Wren was around because the big club was doing well, but it sure didn't take long for that to become obvious when there was even a little trouble at the major league level.

Truth be told, even "average fans" are much more advanced than they were in the past than we give them credit for, and they (at the very least) have more access to people offering up that kind of information than they did in the past. That likely has a lot to do with the way this rebuild has been handled - the brass is scared to death of being accused of "tanking", whether that would move the process along faster or not. The Braves have historically had attendance problems during good times, they certainly don't want to risk driving chunks of an already fickle fanbase away by "trying" to lose.

[clvclv]

Give key players more days off as the season ends. Not managing game 155 as it's the 7th game of the World Series.

It certainly was for several people - Snitker was trying to get a job. Same for d'Arnaud, Jace, etc.. I'd be willing to bet that people like that have absolutely no interest in draft position.

[Southcack77]

Also true. I forget what it ended up being but the true cost of Kemp was something in the 10 million per year figure when factoring in HO's dead money. One dimensional sluggers were getting a lot less this offseason. Copy is gambling that Kemp's 2nd half offense will carry over and be a 1-2 WAR player. In that range it's not a bad deal but that's the optimistic scenario and not the realistic one.

I have not liked that frame, because it seemed to suggest that the Braves made something out of Oliveira. Maybe there was some financial advantage to someone in the Padres waiving Oliveira rather than the Braves waiving him, but essentially there were two components of the transaction: 1) Oliveira being waived and 2) Padres sending Braves money to offset Kemp's salary. Braves seemed to want to save face in saying that Oliveira was traded for something of value.

But, if you look at is as the Padres sent the Braves money to take Kemp and the result was Braves paying Kemp 10 million a year, I suppose that works to a degree. But the Braves are still writing an 18 million dollar check and I'm not sure how much not paying Oliveira actually offsets that? And is Kemp worth 10 million even if it is real?

[sturg33]

No extra control. But less wins for sure. Less ticket sales in 2016/2017 most likely as well.

Would have held an extra year control if we held him down for first 9 days of 2017

[thewupk]

Still believe you need to consider the possibility that other factors play into this other than wind and losses and draft position.

I'm not condoning calling up the AAA team and sitting everyone. But key days off for people and the way the games were managed at times were puzzling. Snit seemed to be managing for his job which I guess worked out for him.

[thethe]

Would have held an extra year control if we held him down for first 9 days of 2017

To be fair that is not what you said earlier. Even still playing with service time is a dangerous game. We want Swanson here not for 7 years but for 12.

[thewupk]

I have not liked that frame, because it seemed to suggest that the Braves made something out of Oliveira. Maybe there was some financial advantage to someone in the Padres waiving Oliveira rather than the Braves waiving him, but essentially there were two components of the transaction: 1) Oliveira being waived and 2) Padres sending Braves money to offset Kemp's salary. Braves seemed to want to save face in saying that Oliveira was traded for something of value.

But, if you look at is as the Padres sent the Braves money to take Kemp and the result was Braves paying Kemp 10 million a year, I suppose that works to a degree. But the Braves are still writing an 18 million dollar check and I'm not sure how much not paying Oliveira actually offsets that? And is Kemp worth 10 million even if it is real?

I'm fine with saying the Braves are paying Kemp ~10 million a year. HO was dead money that they were paying regardless and he wasn't going to be on the team. So I'm fine looking at it that way. Kemp however has not been worth that amount for the last 2 seasons. His time with Atlanta last year he did play at that level so I guess it's up to the individual to believe if that's what we are going to get going forward or he's really the sub 1 WAR player he has been the last 2 seasons.

[thewupk]

To be fair that is not what you said earlier. Even still playing with service time is a dangerous game. We want Swanson here not for 7 years but for 12.

Honestly the ideal scenario is to sign Swanson long term and buy out 3 FA years. That's through his age 31 season and all of his prime. Let someone else pay for what he did do instead of what he will do.

[thethe]

Honestly the ideal scenario is to sign Swanson long term and buy out 3 FA years. That's through his age 31 season and all of his prime. Let someone else pay for what he did do instead of what he will do.

And I think it'd more likely yhat we get him till that age range if we don't eff with his service time. It'll be interesting to see what happens with Kristen bryant. Cubs have unlimited money so they'll sign him but it hasn't exacrly been cordial between the two since the cubs played with his service time.

[thewupk]

That assumes an awful lot, and frankly sounds a lot more like a condescending Emscheff comment than you. Fans tend to notice a lot more during a rebuild process and when their teams are losing than they do during good times. There always seem to be more voices for them to hear discussing "what's wrong?" during those times as well. There wasn't much discussion of how the farm system was getting worse while Wren was around because the big club was doing well, but it sure didn't take long for that to become obvious when there was even a little trouble at the major league level.

Truth be told, even "average fans" are much more advanced than they were in the past than we give them credit for, and they (at the very least) have more access to people offering up that kind of information than they did in the past. That likely has a lot to do with the way this rebuild has been handled - the brass is scared to death of being accused of "tanking", whether that would move the process along faster or not. The Braves have historically had attendance problems during good times, they certainly don't want to risk driving chunks of an already fickle fanbase away by "trying" to lose.

Winning brings fans to the park. That is the #1 truth with attendance. A new stadium can assist in this for a short time but in the end it's all about winning. If your team is good the fans will come. If the Braves went into total tank mode the attendance would suffer. But imo that would accelerate the rebuild and get to a point where the team is good and the fans would return.

Also we are talking about a couple of games here and there. Over 162 this inconsequential to the attendance. But in the draft and getting the BPA it's huge. The Braves are worse of by picking 5th instead of 2nd. There is no way to deny that imo.

[bravesfanMatt]

To be fair that is not what you said earlier. Even still playing with service time is a dangerous game. We want Swanson here not for 7 years but for 12.

it will be interesting to see the Bryant thing play out. He was not happy with the Cubs, but then winning forgives a lot of things. He might understand the business side and just take the extension when offered. Or he might say, screw you I am maxing out somewhere else.

as for Swanson, I really don't think control is going to be an issue AT ALL. We are going to lock him up with guaranteed money prior to any arb years happening. Bringing him up when they did, was saying the torch is now yours (after E-bar trade). Show us that you can hold it please. I assume Ozzie is going to be the same thing when we trade BP.

[thewupk]

And I think it'd more likely yhat we get him till that age range if we don't eff with his service time. It'll be interesting to see what happens with Kristen bryant. Cubs have unlimited money so they'll sign him but it hasn't exacrly been cordial between the two since the cubs played with his service time.

I agree with the callup of Swanson. I think he was at a point where he needed MLB experience to further develop. Also I am a fan of staggering players like Swanson, Albies, and eventually Acuna so they aren't all hitting arbitration and FA at the same time. It's also logical to rather have 1 full season at like 27 instead of 1 extra month at age 21.

[nsacpi]

I'm not condoning calling up the AAA team and sitting everyone. But key days off for people and the way the games were managed at times were puzzling. Snit seemed to be managing for his job which I guess worked out for him.

Puzzling is the right word. There was an urgency to win at the end of last year that was puzzling. I have some thoughts on what was going on organizationally but it is only speculation.

[Southcack77]

I personally would have taken Lewis as well but I can understand if our scouts saw something they didn't like. It'll suck if he ends up being Jermaine Dye II which is what I think he'll be but I'm willing to accept there being red flags there. But apart from Lewis, I just don't like the Anderson pick. There are 5 or 6 ways I'd rather have seen the Braves go.

There's always a degree of projection involved with prospects. You just have to ask yourself if the projection is reasonable. Take Newcomb for instance. His stuff is excellent. The only thing standing between him and the majors is control. If he can drop his BB rate by one batter every 9 then he should be a very valuable piece. It's entirely reasonable to project Newcomb fine tuning his control that much. If Newcomb were to drop his BB rate to under 2 batters every 9 then he'd be one of the most dominant pitchers in the game. However, that's an improvement that's hard to project. That's an unreasonably large improvement.

With Anderson, in order for him to be a front line starter, as his fans say his ceiling is and what you want in a 3rd overall pick, he's going to need a hard to project jump. Right now you can probably project his fastball gaining some consistency and eventually sitting at 93 with decent life, you can project him tightening up his breaking ball and it going from a slurve to a true slider, and you can project his changeup becoming an average to above average MLB pitch. You put all that together and you've got a Trevor Bauer on your hands. A middle of the rotation starter that you really wish was more than that.

The problem is that Anderson needs a projection you just can't make to become a front line starter. With his lack of a dominant secondary offering, his fastball would need a significant jump. If he's going to be an ace that hangs his hat on his fastball then he'll probably need it to jump to sitting around 96 at least. Right now that's close to the top end of his range when he muscles up on one. It's hard to project his fastball to sit that high. Alternatively, he'll need to elevate one of his secondary pitches to being a plus, plus pitch. Neither one projects that high and it would be a stretch to do so.

Anderson's skill set is such that if something jumps to really exceptional, he doesn't have anything holding him back but there's nothing he does that projects to be exceptional. He'll require an impossible to predict improvement. That's why I'm not a fan of the pick.


The Braves at least profess that they see Anderson's upside as a borderline hall of famer, since their comp is Mike Mussina.

[smootness]

Puzzling is the right word. There was an urgency to win at the end of last year that was puzzling. I have some thoughts on what was going on organizationally but it is only speculation.

You can't lose games on purpose. The FO can try to assemble a team that is likely to lose a bunch of games, but once the team is assembled, you can't advocate for anything but winning games. Period. So I'm not sure what people want. Would you rather they left Dansby back until this year? Benched our best players? I'm just not sure what anyone wants.

The players are always going to go out and try to win, and making it clear you're trying to avoid that is a potentially disastrous move. Plus, it is good to have a little bit of momentum going into this year with the new park. That park will be extremely important for revenues going forward, and it is important to have as much revenues as we can right off the bat. That is more important than having the #2 pick rather than the #5 pick in an MLB draft.

[Southcack77]

So basically tell the fans to stop showing up.

I'm sure people show up to watch baseball games for many different reasons, but I'm reasonably sure a fair number of people making the conscious choice to go watch the first, second, or third worst team in baseball aren't necessarily going to the game super intent on whether the Braves win or not.

[striker42]

The Braves at least profess that they see Anderson's upside as a borderline hall of famer, since their comp is Mike Mussina.

And take the comps drafting teams throw out after drafting a player with a huge grain of salt. Pretty much everyone in the first round is compared to a borderline HOFer.

I do enjoy trying to figure out comps though. Trevor Bauer is one I read for Anderson and I could see that happening. Similar fastballs and changeups. Bauer had a curve and slider but looks to have abandoned the slider. Anderson's breaking ball could go either way. Both were also 3rd overall picks oddly enough.

I might throw Kip Wells out there as another comp for Anderson. I could see Anderson having a very similar career to Wells.

[Southcack77]

It certainly was for several people - Snitker was trying to get a job. Same for d'Arnaud, Jace, etc.. I'd be willing to bet that people like that have absolutely no interest in draft position.


That's probably true, but the fate of those guys probably isn't something that the organization needs to base decisions upon. In fact, perhaps the Braves would have been better served by having an interim manager who wasn't coaching for a job. Honestly, that may well have been what they thought they had done with Snitker though. I don't sense they intended it to be a tryout.

[Southcack77]

And take the comps drafting teams throw out after drafting a player with a huge grain of salt. Pretty much everyone in the first round is compared to a borderline HOFer.

I do enjoy trying to figure out comps though. Trevor Bauer is one I read for Anderson and I could see that happening. Similar fastballs and changeups. Bauer had a curve and slider but looks to have abandoned the slider. Anderson's breaking ball could go either way. Both were also 3rd overall picks oddly enough.

I might throw Kip Wells out there as another comp for Anderson. I could see Anderson having a very similar career to Wells.

You see Mussina on comps outside the organization as well. Not sure who was there first.

I think all comps should be taken with a grain of salt though. Even the guys with the best comps are more likely to fail than be hall of famers.

[nsacpi]

Just about any top 10 pick will have some comps that are very impressive. They all have upside. But there is also a more realistic picture when you consider the full range of possible outcomes, appropriately weighted according to past outcomes for similarly highly regarded prospects.

[50PoundHead]

It certainly was for several people - Snitker was trying to get a job. Same for d'Arnaud, Jace, etc.. I'd be willing to bet that people like that have absolutely no interest in draft position.

Pete Rose would have been the perfect manager in this situation.

[bravesfanMatt]

Pete Rose would have been the perfect manager in this situation.

I BET he would have too.

[thethe]

You can't lose games on purpose. The FO can try to assemble a team that is likely to lose a bunch of games, but once the team is assembled, you can't advocate for anything but winning games. Period. So I'm not sure what people want. Would you rather they left Dansby back until this year? Benched our best players? I'm just not sure what anyone wants.

The players are always going to go out and try to win, and making it clear you're trying to avoid that is a potentially disastrous move. Plus, it is good to have a little bit of momentum going into this year with the new park. That park will be extremely important for revenues going forward, and it is important to have as much revenues as we can right off the bat. That is more important than having the #2 pick rather than the #5 pick in an MLB draft.

The idea from fans that teams should just lose games on purpose is unrealistic and foolish IMO. Thanks for posting this.

[thethe]

And take the comps drafting teams throw out after drafting a player with a huge grain of salt. Pretty much everyone in the first round is compared to a borderline HOFer.

I do enjoy trying to figure out comps though. Trevor Bauer is one I read for Anderson and I could see that happening. Similar fastballs and changeups. Bauer had a curve and slider but looks to have abandoned the slider. Anderson's breaking ball could go either way. Both were also 3rd overall picks oddly enough.

I might throw Kip Wells out there as another comp for Anderson. I could see Anderson having a very similar career to Wells.

How could you see anything for Anderson at this point? He basically has zero body of work. He could end up even worse than Wells or he could end up being a TOR starter. Lets wait till he at least pitches in Rome.

[thethe]

So why is the idea out there that Anderson doesn't have TOR stuff?

Gondee:
The No. 3 overall pick last year, Atlanta focused on him for months as part of their “all high school pitching” 2016 draft strategy. He signed a below-slot $4 million deal, and projects at a top-of-the-rotation starter. He has a big mid-90s fastball and a plus slurve with a developing changeup. Anderson should anchor another amazing starting rotation at Rome this year, and if his development continues as planned, he could see Atlanta as early as 2019, with 2020 more likely.

Sickels:
first round pick in 2016, third-overall, from high school in New York; 2.04 ERA in 40 innings in rookie ball with 36/12 K/BB; low-to-mid-90s fastball from 6-3, 170 frame; slider and change-up can be inconsistent but are solid for his age; number three starter projection is a bit cautious at this point but I want to see how he handles a workload

Longerhans:

Anderson sat 92-95 in short bursts during showcases as a rising senior and flashed an above-average mid-70s curveball. He had a prototypical starter’s build and athleticism and had some nascent feel for a mid-80s changeup for which he had absolutely no use while playing high-school ball in upstate New York. When his senior spring arrived and, when Anderson pitched, he was mostly 91-95 with better command in the lower end of that band. That’s not a Jethro Tull joke, I swear. Anyway, Anderson missed starts last spring because of inclement weather, pneumonia and an oblique injury. The Braves stayed on him and, as the draft approached, his stuff starting improving. They drafted him No. 3 overall, cut an underslot deal that allowed them to have a dandy draft class, and Anderson was sitting 93-97 later that summer in the GCL.

When I saw him during instructional league he was 91-94 and struggling to throw strikes while flashing a 60 curveball (though there were some 40s in there, too) in the mid-70s that was better when it had two-plane movement rather than pure vertical drop. I only saw one changeup, but the arm action is good and I have it projected, quite conservatively, to average. I’ve spoken with scouts who have seen it flash above.

This is your stereotypical high-end prep pitching prospect and a potential No. 2 or 3 starter. If the body and command come along in the right way maybe, there’s more velocity in there (I’m skeptical, due to the massively increased workload), and it’s possible we exist in the universe where Anderson develops a plus change, too. He’s light years from the big leagues as a cold-weather prep arm who lost reps due to an entire Curb Your Enthusiasm season’s worth of misfortune, and the risk here is extreme.

[thethe]

Whether he develops that stuff further is one thing but the frame and arsenal is there to make it a possibility at least.

[smootness]

It certainly was for several people - Snitker was trying to get a job. Same for d'Arnaud, Jace, etc.. I'd be willing to bet that people like that have absolutely no interest in draft position.

No manager or player ever has any interest in draft position. Again, any manager or player on your team is trying to win as many games as possible, no matter the context. If they're not, they all need to be fired immediately.

[clvclv]

Winning brings fans to the park. That is the #1 truth with attendance. A new stadium can assist in this for a short time but in the end it's all about winning. If your team is good the fans will come. If the Braves went into total tank mode the attendance would suffer. But imo that would accelerate the rebuild and get to a point where the team is good and the fans would return.

Also we are talking about a couple of games here and there. Over 162 this inconsequential to the attendance. But in the draft and getting the BPA it's huge. The Braves are worse of by picking 5th instead of 2nd. There is no way to deny that imo.

And the Braves' past has proven that that's simply not the case - attendance peaked in 1993 prior to the strike, then in 1997 post-strike. It decreased every year after that DESPITE the team recording 106, 103, 95, 88, 101, 101, 96, and 90 wins through 2005. During the run, the Braves won or were on pace to win 90+ games 14 out of those 15 years, yet they only drew 3+ million fans six times.

[thethe]

And the Braves' past has proven that that's simply not the case - attendance peaked in 1993 prior to the strike, then in 1997 post-strike. It decreased every year after that DESPITE the team recording 106, 103, 95, 88, 101, 101, 96, and 90 wins through 2005. During the run, the Braves won or were on pace to win 90+ games 14 out of those 15 years, yet they only drew 3+ million fans six times.

Its almost as if people forgotten the Cubs fans outnumbering Braves fans in teh playoffs at Turner field.

No way fans are going to stay with the team if they are purposefully trying to lose.

[thewupk]

And the Braves' past has proven that that's simply not the case - attendance peaked in 1993 prior to the strike, then in 1997 post-strike. It decreased every year after that DESPITE the team recording 106, 103, 95, 88, 101, 101, 96, and 90 wins through 2005. During the run, the Braves won or were on pace to win 90+ games 14 out of those 15 years, yet they only drew 3+ million fans six times.

Atlanta is not a baseball town. The stadium moving to where more Braves fans supposedly live may change that. But the Braves being good will net them an attendance ranking in the middle of the pack. Still doesn't change the fact that it's winning will do that.

[thewupk]

Its almost as if people forgotten the Cubs fans outnumbering Braves fans in teh playoffs at Turner field.

No way fans are going to stay with the team if they are purposefully trying to lose.

If the team wins they will come back. Do you disagree with this? Especially with the stadium relocating?

[thethe]

If the team wins they will come back. Do you disagree with this? Especially with the stadium relocating?

I don't know. There isn't a generational passing down of braves fandom. I thinks it's very possible that losing has long reach affect.

[nsacpi]

There was a study from a few years ago that showed that Cubs fans are the least responsive to record and that Braves fans are among the most responsive (in terms of effect on attendance).

That's an important thing to keep in mind about the Braves.

But I really don't think this explains the puzzling push to win at all costs toward the end of last season.

[smootness]

I don't think losing a couple more games has a long-term impact on fan attendance/enthusiasm. I do think clearly attempting to lose on purpose can carry some stink for a little while, though long-term you're still probably ok once you start winning.

But we are trying to get as much revenue as we can as quickly as we can, so any carry-over in fan apathy carries with it a real hit to revenue. That will in turn bring a real hit in available resources to build the team over the next couple years.

[smootness]

There was a study from a few years ago that showed that Cubs fans are the least responsive to record and that Braves fans are among the most responsive (in terms of effect on attendance).

That's an important thing to keep in mind about the Braves.

But I really don't think this explains the puzzling push to win at all costs toward the end of last season.

What is the 'push' you're talking about? Was it in terms of roster construction, or in terms of in-game moves?

[thewupk]

I don't know. There isn't a generational passing down of braves fandom. I thinks it's very possible that losing has long reach affect.

It seemed to switch pretty quick when they were god awful to winning the division in 91.

[striker42]

So why is the idea out there that Anderson doesn't have TOR stuff?

Gondee:
The No. 3 overall pick last year, Atlanta focused on him for months as part of their “all high school pitching” 2016 draft strategy. He signed a below-slot $4 million deal, and projects at a top-of-the-rotation starter. He has a big mid-90s fastball and a plus slurve with a developing changeup. Anderson should anchor another amazing starting rotation at Rome this year, and if his development continues as planned, he could see Atlanta as early as 2019, with 2020 more likely.

Sickels:
first round pick in 2016, third-overall, from high school in New York; 2.04 ERA in 40 innings in rookie ball with 36/12 K/BB; low-to-mid-90s fastball from 6-3, 170 frame; slider and change-up can be inconsistent but are solid for his age; number three starter projection is a bit cautious at this point but I want to see how he handles a workload

Longerhans:

Anderson sat 92-95 in short bursts during showcases as a rising senior and flashed an above-average mid-70s curveball. He had a prototypical starter’s build and athleticism and had some nascent feel for a mid-80s changeup for which he had absolutely no use while playing high-school ball in upstate New York. When his senior spring arrived and, when Anderson pitched, he was mostly 91-95 with better command in the lower end of that band. That’s not a Jethro Tull joke, I swear. Anyway, Anderson missed starts last spring because of inclement weather, pneumonia and an oblique injury. The Braves stayed on him and, as the draft approached, his stuff starting improving. They drafted him No. 3 overall, cut an underslot deal that allowed them to have a dandy draft class, and Anderson was sitting 93-97 later that summer in the GCL.

When I saw him during instructional league he was 91-94 and struggling to throw strikes while flashing a 60 curveball (though there were some 40s in there, too) in the mid-70s that was better when it had two-plane movement rather than pure vertical drop. I only saw one changeup, but the arm action is good and I have it projected, quite conservatively, to average. I’ve spoken with scouts who have seen it flash above.

This is your stereotypical high-end prep pitching prospect and a potential No. 2 or 3 starter. If the body and command come along in the right way maybe, there’s more velocity in there (I’m skeptical, due to the massively increased workload), and it’s possible we exist in the universe where Anderson develops a plus change, too. He’s light years from the big leagues as a cold-weather prep arm who lost reps due to an entire Curb Your Enthusiasm season’s worth of misfortune, and the risk here is extreme.

The consistent threads you see throughout all the scouting reports of Anderson is a fastball that tends can reach the mid-90s but sits more comfortably in the low-90s and tends to lose velocity as the game goes on. There's a slurvy breaking ball there that scouting reports seem split on whether it will eventually be slowed down and kept as a mid-70's curve or whether it will be turned into a low 80's slider. Either way, the pitch will need to be tightened up. And the changeup is developing but projects as at least average.

You hear different things about whether there's much more velocity potential left. I tend to think there's a potential for a couple ticks. I could see him with a fastball that averages 94 and stays there throughout the game as his body develops. I'd actually worry that if he focuses on velocity it might straighten his fastball out a bit.

In the end, reasonable projections has a guy with a good fastball, a good curve, and a respectable changeup with above average command. He might never reach that but those projections are reasonable. That's a number 3 starter.

If he wants to be an ace, then something out of the ordinary will have to happen. He'll need to develop a fastball that averages 96+ and keeps its movement or one of his secondary pitches to become plus-plus. That just sounds like something that can't really be projected for him at this point.

[striker42]

How could you see anything for Anderson at this point? He basically has zero body of work. He could end up even worse than Wells or he could end up being a TOR starter. Lets wait till he at least pitches in Rome.

It's all coming from clips and scouting reports at this point. It's way too early to call him a bust or a failure. That's just ridiculous. However, reading and setting expectations is only natural. In fact, part of the fun is trying to predict how these guys will do.

Anderson might be our next HOF pitcher or he might never be able to successfully jump to AA. There's nothing certain with pitching prospects. But it's fun to speculate and discuss.

[rico43]

How many times are we going to keep revisiting this nonsense? It was detailed on this site last year that the Braves took a good,close look at Lewis, including interviews and face time. There was SOMETHING that had them scurrying to get away from him. We likely won't know what this was out of respect to Lewis.

This wasn't a mistake. It was a well-researched decision. It will still be that way next week, next month, in June.

[CJ9]

This wasn't a mistake.

How do you know that?

People have different opinions. Some will be right, some will be wrong. Saying it wasn't a mistake is just a guess at this point, just like the people saying it was a mistake.

[sturg33]

Yeah the mistake was winning meaningless games and keeping us from Senzel.

A future infield of Freeman, Albies, Swanson, and Senzel would be beatufil

[Southcack77]

Its almost as if people forgotten the Cubs fans outnumbering Braves fans in teh playoffs at Turner field.

No way fans are going to stay with the team if they are purposefully trying to lose.


Who exactly do you think is buying tickets to see the team with the worst record in baseball (or second worst) and what exactly do you think they are expecting to see?

You think people that go to baseball games are going to quit going to games because the Braves didn't start Teheran in the season finale or because they gave a lot of kids from the farm some playing time?

I disagree.

And people who don't buy tickets to watch the worst team in baseball very likely will buy tickets when you have a product that is young and exciting and hasn't been a contender lately.

[Southcack77]

The consistent threads you see throughout all the scouting reports of Anderson is a fastball that tends can reach the mid-90s but sits more comfortably in the low-90s and tends to lose velocity as the game goes on. There's a slurvy breaking ball there that scouting reports seem split on whether it will eventually be slowed down and kept as a mid-70's curve or whether it will be turned into a low 80's slider. Either way, the pitch will need to be tightened up. And the changeup is developing but projects as at least average.

You hear different things about whether there's much more velocity potential left. I tend to think there's a potential for a couple ticks. I could see him with a fastball that averages 94 and stays there throughout the game as his body develops. I'd actually worry that if he focuses on velocity it might straighten his fastball out a bit.

In the end, reasonable projections has a guy with a good fastball, a good curve, and a respectable changeup with above average command. He might never reach that but those projections are reasonable. That's a number 3 starter.

If he wants to be an ace, then something out of the ordinary will have to happen. He'll need to develop a fastball that averages 96+ and keeps its movement or one of his secondary pitches to become plus-plus. That just sounds like something that can't really be projected for him at this point.


I think it is fair to say that the analysis suggests #2 starter is easily within reach for him, which is actually quite a lot of upside.

If he's pitching at 94 with movement deep into games, and can locate two other above average pitches he's going to be very good.

[Southcack77]

How many times are we going to keep revisiting this nonsense? It was detailed on this site last year that the Braves took a good,close look at Lewis, including interviews and face time. There was SOMETHING that had them scurrying to get away from him. We likely won't know what this was out of respect to Lewis.

This wasn't a mistake. It was a well-researched decision. It will still be that way next week, next month, in June.

It's abundantly clear that the Braves did not love Kyle Lewis. Neither did a lot of other teams high in the draft. That's how he slipped to Seattle.

Whether that turns out to be a big mistake is anyone's guess, but it is not really a mistake specific to Atlanta if that's how it turns out.

[nsacpi]

What is the 'push' you're talking about? Was it in terms of roster construction, or in terms of in-game moves?

Bullpen usage. Stashing Ruiz on the bench for weeks after he was called up.

[rawwr]

No manager or player ever has any interest in draft position. Again, any manager or player on your team is trying to win as many games as possible, no matter the context. If they're not, they all need to be fired immediately.

Oh come on, that is true for players, but it's a massive oversimplification of a manager's role on the team. Should Joe Maddon be fired for giving his starters extra rest after the Cubs clinched home field last year? The fact is that a manager's goals are dependent on context rather than just being a near-sighted win at all costs; in the Braves' case that context is that there was no real short-term difference between finishing 68-93 and finishing 66-95, but the long-term difference is pretty significant.

You and several other posters seem to be conflating 'being aware of the team's long-term goals' with 'tanking as hard as possible,' when I think most of us on the other side just take issue with Snitker managing every game like it was the Wild Card play-in. He didn't have to rest every starter 3 times a week, but why not use the last month of the season to see what we have in some of our fringier prospects? Why did Rio Ruiz only get 7 AB after being called up? These are not radical tank-at-all-costs moves, they're savvy baseball moves to help prepare the team for the future in a season that's already lost.

[smootness]

Bullpen usage. Stashing Ruiz on the bench for weeks after he was called up.

Those are moves made by the manager, who is always going to try to win games. If your FO is either telling your manager to not try so hard to win games or telling him what moves to make, you suddenly have serious organizational issues.

[smootness]

Oh come on, that is true for players, but it's a massive oversimplification of a manager's role on the team. Should Joe Maddon be fired for giving his starters extra rest after the Cubs clinched home field last year? The fact is that a manager's goals are dependent on context rather than just being a near-sighted win at all costs; in the Braves' case that context is that there was no real short-term difference between finishing 68-93 and finishing 66-95, but the long-term difference is pretty significant.

You and several other posters seem to be conflating 'being aware of the team's long-term goals' with 'tanking as hard as possible,' when I think most of us on the other side just take issue with Snitker managing every game like it was the Wild Card play-in. He didn't have to rest every starter 3 times a week, but why not use the last month of the season to see what we have in some of our fringier prospects? Why did Rio Ruiz only get 7 AB after being called up? These are not radical tank-at-all-costs moves, they're savvy baseball moves to help prepare the team for the future in a season that's already lost.

How on earth is Maddon resting starters after clinching a playoff spot remotely similar to an interim manager on a losing team?

Sure, Joe Maddon did not fill out every lineup card with the sole purpose of winning that day's game. Why? Because he had already clinched the playoffs. Therefore, he was trying to maximize the chances of winning later. But a manager is never going to lose games, or not try to win games, so that his organization can get a better draft pick that 3-4 years from now may be ready to do something.

It is insane to suggest that Snitker should have rested starters or tried less hard to win games so that we could improve our draft spot. Period.

[nsacpi]

Those are moves made by the manager, who is always going to try to win games. If your FO is either telling your manager to not try so hard to win games or telling him what moves to make, you suddenly have serious organizational issues.

Actually a lot of teams will play a guy like Ruiz over an older player like Garcia in September.

[rawwr]

It is insane to suggest that Snitker should have rested starters or tried less hard to win games so that we could improve our draft spot. Period.

If you think it's insane for a losing team to use meaningless games in September to see what they have in some of their older prospects, I don't know what to tell you.

[smootness]

If you think it's insane for a losing team to use meaningless games in September to see what they have in some of their older prospects, I don't know what to tell you.

So all of this is about Snitker not playing Rio Ruiz more? Good gosh, people.

There's a chance we actually would have been better with Ruiz out there.

[nsacpi]

So all of this is about Snitker not playing Rio Ruiz more? Good gosh, people.

There's a chance we actually would have been better with Ruiz out there.

How about playing Mallex a bit more once he came back.

[Enscheff]

Wait, is someone really trying to argue Snitker wasn't managing every game like it was Game 7 of the WS last year?

I thought it was fairly obvious he was managing like a guy trying to earn a job for 2017 rather than managing like a guy trying to help younger assets progress.

[jpx7]

How many times are we going to keep revisiting this nonsense? It was detailed on this site last year that the Braves took a good,close look at Lewis, including interviews and face time. There was SOMETHING that had them scurrying to get away from him. We likely won't know what this was out of respect to Lewis.

This wasn't a mistake. It was a well-researched decision. It will still be that way next week, next month, in June.

Not trying to be either snide or sly, but how do you define a "mistake" then? If Anderson, Wentz, and Muller all bust, and Lewis' star burns bright for ten-plus years, then can it be called a mistake? I'm not necessarily predicting that will happen; but honestly, what's the threshold? If a decision is well-researched, but ultimately wrong, can it nonetheless never be called out as mistaken?

[smootness]

How about playing Mallex a bit more once he came back.

And again, we likely would have been even better doing that.

[nsacpi]

Wait, is someone really trying to argue Snitker wasn't managing every game like it was Game 7 of the WS last year?

I thought it was fairly obvious he was managing like a guy trying to earn a job for 2017 rather than managing like a guy trying to help younger assets progress.

Snitker has his own motives. But my recollection is that the rest of the front office was fully on board with this. This is the puzzle.

[Braves1976]

Not trying to be either snide or sly, but how do you define a "mistake" then? If Anderson, Wentz, and Muller all bust, and Lewis' star burns bright for ten-plus years, then can it be called a mistake? I'm not necessarily predicting that will happen; but honestly, what's the threshold? If a decision is well-researched, but ultimately wrong, can it nonetheless never be called out as mistaken?

The issue I take with such arguments is that it's like acting like the Braves brass are infallible like the Pope claims to be in religion. I suppose for some the Braves are their religion and they think anyone that questions a move made by the Braves brass is an attack upon their religion. I don't look at supporting the Braves that way at all. I'm not a yes man nor will I spin things like we see in politics just to defend my home team or organization. Besides, everyone makes mistakes--such is life and it won't kill us to admit that may be the case.

[auyushu]

They clearly didn't want Lewis. That is obvious. They preferred Anderson over Lewis, and it didn't have anything to do with the money.

As I've said before, we'll just have to see if they were right. I personally would have taken Lewis, but there are plenty of people who think he won't ever make enough contact to be an impact bat at the MLB level.

Oh, no doubt. I was just pointing out the consistent refrain that signing Lewis would have cost us Muller or Wentz simply wasn't true. I would much rather have seen us sign Lewis or Groome over Anderson, but none of them are close to sure things of course. Any of the three could be huge busts. My major issue with drafting Anderson at 3 is we should have been going upside with the #3 pick, and Anderson seems like more #2 starter upside, the chance of an Ace seems pretty small. At least with Lewis if he does make solid contact as he moves up to the MLB level you know he has a great chance to be a stud.

Either way, time will tell if we made the right call on Anderson as always.

[auyushu]

What is the 'push' you're talking about? Was it in terms of roster construction, or in terms of in-game moves?

Bringing up Swanson when he wasn't breaking the doors down in in AA and trading for Kemp midseason rather than waiting until the offseason were both definitely moves to make a push to "finish strong" as well as the managing the bullpen like crazy part with Snitker.

[thewupk]

From Longenhagen's chat yesterday

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/eric-longenhagen-prospects-chat-pie/

1:03
Sonny: What level of consistency do you need to see from Max Fried to feel comfortable moving him up in the rankings?
1:04
Eric A Longenhagen: Probably like half a season? That’s a long enough time of sustained stuff to feel good about him being that guy consistently.

Which is pretty much what most around here have said in regards to Frieds ranking.

[striker42]

A guy I think is getting overlooked a lot is Joey Wentz. I see him as having the potential to have stuff at least every bit as good as Anderson except coming from the left side. I think the only real reason you see Anderson get ranked so much higher on lists is because of draft position. They were similarly ranked on a lot of pre-draft lists with business considerations being the main reason for the difference in draft positions. Anderson could be signed way under slot and other teams passed on Wentz because of the money he was demanding.

Personally, I'm higher on Wentz mainly because he's a lefty.

[smootness]

A guy I think is getting overlooked a lot is Joey Wentz. I see him as having the potential to have stuff at least every bit as good as Anderson except coming from the left side. I think the only real reason you see Anderson get ranked so much higher on lists is because of draft position. They were similarly ranked on a lot of pre-draft lists with business considerations being the main reason for the difference in draft positions. Anderson could be signed way under slot and other teams passed on Wentz because of the money he was demanding.

Personally, I'm higher on Wentz mainly because he's a lefty.

I think part of the problem with Wentz is that twice now he's had his arm go sort of dead for a period of time. That's at least somewhat worrisome. This year will be big for him, to see if he can sustain his stuff through an entire year.

[CJ9]

A guy I think is getting overlooked a lot is Joey Wentz. I see him as having the potential to have stuff at least every bit as good as Anderson except coming from the left side. I think the only real reason you see Anderson get ranked so much higher on lists is because of draft position. They were similarly ranked on a lot of pre-draft lists with business considerations being the main reason for the difference in draft positions. Anderson could be signed way under slot and other teams passed on Wentz because of the money he was demanding.

Personally, I'm higher on Wentz mainly because he's a lefty.

I do like Wentz, I'm just concerned that his velocity seems to fluctuate so much. He had the dead arm thing last spring, too. I'd guess that's also a reason he isn't really talked about with many prospect lists yet.

[smootness]

Oh, no doubt. I was just pointing out the consistent refrain that signing Lewis would have cost us Muller or Wentz simply wasn't true. I would much rather have seen us sign Lewis or Groome over Anderson, but none of them are close to sure things of course. Any of the three could be huge busts. My major issue with drafting Anderson at 3 is we should have been going upside with the #3 pick, and Anderson seems like more #2 starter upside, the chance of an Ace seems pretty small. At least with Lewis if he does make solid contact as he moves up to the MLB level you know he has a great chance to be a stud.

Either way, time will tell if we made the right call on Anderson as always.

I don't think that saying Anderson has #2 upside means he doesn't have the upside that some others do. If scouts are saying a SP has #2 upside/potential, they're essentially saying he's got a really high ceiling. They don't throw that on a ton of guys, and virtually no one gets the 'ace upside' tag.

Lewis' upside is probably pretty similar to Anderson's in terms of value. I would argue that Lewis' upside is about .270 with 35 HR in the majors offensively while playing pretty good defense. That's certainly a really valuable player, but so is a legit #2 starter. And I think the Braves determined that they think Anderson has a better chance of hitting that upside than Lewis does of hitting his.

[nsacpi]

Has there ever been a pitcher taken with a pick in the top 5 who did not have the upside of a #2 starter?

[Southcack77]

Has there ever been a pitcher taken with a pick in the top 5 who did not have the upside of a #2 starter?

You would hope not for the organization's sake. I'm sure it has happened.

[striker42]

I think part of the problem with Wentz is that twice now he's had his arm go sort of dead for a period of time. That's at least somewhat worrisome. This year will be big for him, to see if he can sustain his stuff through an entire year.

True, but Anderson has had oblique troubles and his delivery isn't the easiest on his rib cage so there's concern there too. Maybe not the same level as Wentz's dead arm issues, but still a concern.

Also, the dead arm issues were part of Wentz's pre-draft rank. They're not new. If he didn't have the dead arm issues and had consistently thrown like he did after coming back, he'd probably have been rated inside the top 10.

[smootness]

True, but Anderson has had oblique troubles and his delivery isn't the easiest on his rib cage so there's concern there too. Maybe not the same level as Wentz's dead arm issues, but still a concern.

Also, the dead arm issues were part of Wentz's pre-draft rank. They're not new. If he didn't have the dead arm issues and had consistently thrown like he did after coming back, he'd probably have been rated inside the top 10.

The dead arm issues aren't new, but the fact that they happened again is a new development since the draft and elevates the risk level. He has now struggled with dead arm about as often as he hasn't over the past year or two.

[striker42]

The dead arm issues aren't new, but the fact that they happened again is a new development since the draft and elevates the risk level. He has now struggled with dead arm about as often as he hasn't over the past year or two.

When did they happen since the draft? Not being accusatory or anything, I just don't remember seeing that and am wondering what I missed.

[smootness]

When did they happen since the draft? Not being accusatory or anything, I just don't remember seeing that and am wondering what I missed.

I don't remember which it was, but there was a prospect ranking that talked about it. They may have just been alluding to the fact that his velocity ticked down again late in his HS season and not actually full dead arm, but I've seen it discussed.

[striker42]

I don't remember which it was, but there was a prospect ranking that talked about it. They may have just been alluding to the fact that his velocity ticked down again late in his HS season and not actually full dead arm, but I've seen it discussed.

Longenhagen discussed the dead arm in a chat last month. He mentioned it as a concern because it happened two years in a row but there was nothing about a post-draft dead arm.

Also, Wentz went 5 innings for Danville on Aug 29, just a few games before the end of the season. If there was any arm issue I would expect the Braves to have shut him down earlier. While having a dead arm twice in high school is concerning, I don't think it has cropped up since the draft. So there's a good argument to be made that Wentz shouldn't be rated significantly below Anderson considering their pre-draft rankings. Wentz just gets punished for getting drafted later even though the fact he fell was a money issue.

[Preacher]

Longenhagen discussed the dead arm in a chat last month. He mentioned it as a concern because it happened two years in a row but there was nothing about a post-draft dead arm.

Also, Wentz went 5 innings for Danville on Aug 29, just a few games before the end of the season. If there was any arm issue I would expect the Braves to have shut him down earlier. While having a dead arm twice in high school is concerning, I don't think it has cropped up since the draft. So there's a good argument to be made that Wentz shouldn't be rated significantly below Anderson considering their pre-draft rankings. Wentz just gets punished for getting drafted later even though the fact he fell was a money issue.

I agree with a lot of what you're saying, but I think the 'dead-arm' and questions about that are what caused Wentz to fall, not his signability. So until those concerns are put to rest, i.e. he pitches a full season I don't think ranking him lower is unjustified.

Love the potential, this is going to be a fun year to watch Anderson/Wentz/Muller/Wilson.

[striker42]

I agree with a lot of what you're saying, but I think the 'dead-arm' and questions about that are what caused Wentz to fall, not his signability. So until those concerns are put to rest, i.e. he pitches a full season I don't think ranking him lower is unjustified.

Love the potential, this is going to be a fun year to watch Anderson/Wentz/Muller/Wilson.

It's possible the dead arm made him fall but even with the dead arm he was ranked as a middle of the first round kind of pitcher. However, he was labeled as one of the toughest signs in the entire draft class as it was well known he was going to demand an overslot bonus. That took a ton of teams out of the race for him. By the middle of the first round, a lot of teams would have had to cripple their draft to sign Wentz.

I think if he hadn't dealt with the dead arm twice you're probably looking at a top 10 pick. With the dead arm he was rated as a mid first rounder. With the signability issues he fell to us.

[Managuarantano's Volunteers]

How do you know that?

People have different opinions. Some will be right, some will be wrong. Saying it wasn't a mistake is just a guess at this point, just like the people saying it was a mistake.

Mistake in rico's context meant that the Braves drafted with a purpose, not that Anderson is massively better than Lewis.

[Hawk]

Has there ever been a pitcher taken with a pick in the top 5 who did not have the upside of a #2 starter?

Matt Bush

[jpx7]

Matt Bush

Pitching upside matters a bit less when you're selected as a shortstop.

[Hawk]

Pitching upside matters a bit less when you're selected as a shortstop.

:FrediGreen:

That was the joke.

*ducks rotten egg*

[jpx7]

That was the joke.

As I figured. I actually had no idea he'd made it to the majors last season as a pitcher.

[auyushu]

Lewis' upside is probably pretty similar to Anderson's in terms of value. I would argue that Lewis' upside is about .270 with 35 HR in the majors offensively while playing pretty good defense. That's certainly a really valuable player, but so is a legit #2 starter. And I think the Braves determined that they think Anderson has a better chance of hitting that upside than Lewis does of hitting his.

I agree with your assessment of Lewis's upside (though I see him as able to hit in the .280ish range if he really clicks), but your description of his upside fits the bill of a 5+ WAR OF, which is much higher than a #2 starter. And I'm certain the Braves did determine that, or else I hope they did anyway. Time will tell if they are right. I certainly hope they are.

[striker42]

I think it is fair to say that the analysis suggests #2 starter is easily within reach for him, which is actually quite a lot of upside.

If he's pitching at 94 with movement deep into games, and can locate two other above average pitches he's going to be very good.

I think that is his absolute pie in the sky ceiling. If absolutely everything progresses like we hope then he's a number 2. However, guys almost never progress exactly as hoped. It's far more likely that some parts of his game don't develop as well as others. It might be that his slurvy breaking ball never tightens up (there are very few successful slurvy breaking balls in the majors). It might be his changeup never becomes anything more than a below average offering. His command may not progress to major league quality. It could be any number of things.

While I could see him adding some velocity to his fastball and ending up sitting at 94, I don't necessarily see that as likely. I actually see it as more likely that if he reaches the majors and settles in, his fastball will probably end up sitting in the low-90's. You see a lot of young pitchers who throw harder in the minors but learn that in the majors being able to put the ball where you want it is often better than throwing harder with worse control. So you have guys that threw 94-95 in the minors sitting at 92-93 in the majors. I would say that's the most likely course of development for him.

So yes, if everything about his development is absolutely perfect, he could be a number 2. I think a reasonable ceiling is as a number 3.

[smootness]

I agree with your assessment of Lewis's upside (though I see him as able to hit in the .280ish range if he really clicks), but your description of his upside fits the bill of a 5+ WAR OF, which is much higher than a #2 starter. And I'm certain the Braves did determine that, or else I hope they did anyway. Time will tell if they are right. I certainly hope they are.

It depends a lot on his BB rate and OBP. If it's only middling, like .325ish, and his defense is in the 0.5 dWAR range or so (that's basically what I mean by pretty good), then that's really about a 4 WAR player. Which lines up with a #2 SP.

[smootness]

I think that is his absolute pie in the sky ceiling. If absolutely everything progresses like we hope then he's a number 2. However, guys almost never progress exactly as hoped. It's far more likely that some parts of his game don't develop as well as others. It might be that his slurvy breaking ball never tightens up (there are very few successful slurvy breaking balls in the majors). It might be his changeup never becomes anything more than a below average offering. His command may not progress to major league quality. It could be any number of things.

While I could see him adding some velocity to his fastball and ending up sitting at 94, I don't necessarily see that as likely. I actually see it as more likely that if he reaches the majors and settles in, his fastball will probably end up sitting in the low-90's. You see a lot of young pitchers who throw harder in the minors but learn that in the majors being able to put the ball where you want it is often better than throwing harder with worse control. So you have guys that threw 94-95 in the minors sitting at 92-93 in the majors. I would say that's the most likely course of development for him.

So yes, if everything about his development is absolutely perfect, he could be a number 2. I think a reasonable ceiling is as a number 3.

It's very unlikely everything progresses exactly as hoped for Lewis or any other draftee as well.

[striker42]

It's very unlikely everything progresses exactly as hoped for Lewis or any other draftee as well.

Absolutely true. If everything progresses exactly as hoped with Lewis you're looking at a perennial all star who hits .310 with 35+ HRs, walks a ton, and plays solid center field defense. That's probably not a reasonable ceiling though.

[smootness]

Absolutely true. If everything progresses exactly as hoped with Lewis you're looking at a perennial all star who hits .310 with 35+ HRs, walks a ton, and plays solid center field defense. That's probably not a reasonable ceiling though.

That's not his ceiling at all, IMO. If we're capping Anderson's absolute ceiling at a #2 SP, then you have to cap Lewis' ceiling as a guy who hits a good bit under .310. There's nobody who thinks he's capable of that. Otherwise, just slap an ace ceiling on Anderson because there is about the same likelihood for both in those projections. In fact, I think there's actually a better chance Anderson becomes an ace than Lewis gets to that level because it's been proven that pitchers don't have to have otherworldly stuff to become aces. Hitters do have to have pretty innate bat/eye skill to hit .310.

[Enscheff]

That's not his ceiling at all, IMO. If we're capping Anderson's absolute ceiling at a #2 SP, then you have to cap Lewis' ceiling as a guy who hits a good bit under .310. There's nobody who thinks he's capable of that. Otherwise, just slap an ace ceiling on Anderson because there is about the same likelihood for both in those projections. In fact, I think there's actually a better chance Anderson becomes an ace than Lewis gets to that level because it's been proven that pitchers don't have to have otherworldly stuff to become aces. Hitters do have to have pretty innate bat/eye skill to hit .310.

Agreed. I don't think there is any real chance a guy with contact issues in a mediocre college conference has the hit tool to post a .310 BA. Maybe his career year, like Dye's 2006, could peak over .300, but no way could anyone project him to sustain anywhere near that level of BA.

It is far more likely he hits 30+ HRs than posts a BA over .300...just like Dye.

[striker42]

Agreed. I don't think there is any real chance a guy with contact issues in a mediocre college conference has the hit tool to post a .310 BA. Maybe his career year, like Dye's 2006, could peak over .300, but no way could anyone project him to sustain anywhere near that level of BA.

It is far more likely he hits 30+ HRs than posts a BA over .300...just like Dye.

I don't think the .310 is likely either. It's what he could do if everything progresses perfectly. Of course that almost never happens. His realistic ceiling is much more likely to be the .280 hitter we're talking about. Just like Anderson's realistic ceiling is probably a number 3 starter. It's highly doubtful everything progresses perfectly and he becomes a solid number 2 starter.

[smootness]

I don't think the .310 is likely either. It's what he could do if everything progresses perfectly. Of course that almost never happens. His realistic ceiling is much more likely to be the .280 hitter we're talking about. Just like Anderson's realistic ceiling is probably a number 3 starter. It's highly doubtful everything progresses perfectly and he becomes a solid number 2 starter.

The mistake you're making is that if everything progresses perfectly the way you're assessing Lewis, then Anderson isn't a #2; he's a bona fide stud ace.

[striker42]

The mistake you're making is that if everything progresses perfectly the way you're assessing Lewis, then Anderson isn't a #2; he's a bona fide stud ace.

I think this is where the disagreement is. With everything progressing perfectly I think Anderson still has the ceiling of a number 2. I think something abnormal would have to happen (unexpected velocity jump, a secondary pitch jumping to plus-plus, etc) for him to become a bona fide stud ace. I think if everything progresses perfectly, I see him as a Jeff Samardzija type pitcher. However, I think a more reasonable comp is Trevor Bauer.

I'm also really high on Lewis. So that goes into it as well.

[smootness]

I think this is where the disagreement is. With everything progressing perfectly I think Anderson still has the ceiling of a number 2. I think something abnormal would have to happen (unexpected velocity jump, a secondary pitch jumping to plus-plus, etc) for him to become a bona fide stud ace. I think if everything progresses perfectly, I see him as a Jeff Samardzija type pitcher. However, I think a more reasonable comp is Trevor Bauer.

I'm also really high on Lewis. So that goes into it as well.

I would argue that a jump by Anderson in velocity or secondary stuff is far more likely than a jump by Lewis in contact skills, especially given their ages.

That's my point. You seem to be including 'developing great contact skills in his 20s' as Lewis progressing perfectly but aren't including things like a tick up in velocity, refinement of secondary pitches, or developing great command in Anderson progressing perfectly.

I think the general consensus is that Anderson's realistic ceiling is pretty comparable to Lewis'.

[auyushu]

It depends a lot on his BB rate and OBP. If it's only middling, like .325ish, and his defense is in the 0.5 dWAR range or so (that's basically what I mean by pretty good), then that's really about a 4 WAR player. Which lines up with a #2 SP.

Lewis had excellent walk rates his last two years at Mercer, and had a 12% walk rate before injury with the Mariners, the chances of him posting a .325ish OBP if he's hitting .270+ with 30+ HRs is pretty damn small. Much more likely he's posting a .350+ OBP. And that's just a solid projection, his true upside would be the numbers he put up in his brief minors stint, a .285+ish avg, .380ish OBP, .900 OPS beast with decent defense.

And 4 WAR pitchers are more low to mid-level #1 starters (ERAs in the 3.30 or less range), not #2 starters.

I don't think Anderson is chopped liver or anything, but there is a reason Lewis is rated higher in pretty much every persons ranking by a decent amount.

[smootness]

Lewis had excellent walk rates his last two years at Mercer, and had a 12% walk rate before injury with the Mariners, the chances of him posting a .325ish OBP if he's hitting .270+ with 30+ HRs is pretty damn small. Much more likely he's posting a .350+ OBP. And that's just a solid projection, his true upside would be the numbers he put up in his brief minors stint, a .285+ish avg, .380ish OBP, .900 OPS beast with decent defense.

And 4 WAR pitchers are more low to mid-level #1 starters (ERAs in the 3.30 or less range), not #2 starters.

I don't think Anderson is chopped liver or anything, but there is a reason Lewis is rated higher in pretty much every persons ranking by a decent amount.

He had an excellent walk rate his last one year at Mercer, and I can't put a ton of stock into that or his walk rate in low A as a college player. That will almost certainly drop. My guess is that he's more of a 6-7% BB rate guy in MLB.

[Southcack77]

Lewis had excellent walk rates his last two years at Mercer, and had a 12% walk rate before injury with the Mariners, the chances of him posting a .325ish OBP if he's hitting .270+ with 30+ HRs is pretty damn small. Much more likely he's posting a .350+ OBP. And that's just a solid projection, his true upside would be the numbers he put up in his brief minors stint, a .285+ish avg, .380ish OBP, .900 OPS beast with decent defense.

And 4 WAR pitchers are more low to mid-level #1 starters (ERAs in the 3.30 or less range), not #2 starters.

I don't think Anderson is chopped liver or anything, but there is a reason Lewis is rated higher in pretty much every persons ranking by a decent amount.


I'm sure there was a reason why Lewis was considered likely to go in the top 3 by media and went #11 overall.

It would be odd to criticize the value the Braves got at #3 by saying they should have taken the #11 pick at that spot.

I suspect that the upside that some in this thread want to see in Lewis would have resulted in his going higher if MLB teams had seen it. He was the third OF taken and the fourth college position player, so a lot of teams had other thoughts.

But I like him just fine and would have been ok if the Braves had taken him. I'd have been upset with Corey Ray, I think.

Also some had Anderson as one of the top three high school arms and considering there were questions about Pint as a starter and Groome's makeup it starts to make a little more sense.

[auyushu]

He had an excellent walk rate his last one year at Mercer, and I can't put a ton of stock into that or his walk rate in low A as a college player. That will almost certainly drop. My guess is that he's more of a 6-7% BB rate guy in MLB.

There is no reason to say it will certainly drop, you are going on absolutely nothing there but your own gut opinion with nothing to back it up really. Guys who can jack 30+ HRs have a much easier time having good walk rates if anything, no reason to think if he's patient now that it's going to change as he moves up to that extreme. Very few of the 30+ HR hitters in baseball have sub 7% walk rates, and most of those typically have higher batting averages.

[auyushu]

I'm sure there was a reason why Lewis was considered likely to go in the top 3 by media and went #11 overall.

It would be odd to criticize the value the Braves got at #3 by saying they should have taken the #11 pick at that spot.

I suspect that the upside that some in this thread want to see in Lewis would have resulted in his going higher if MLB teams had seen it. He was the third OF taken and the fourth college position player, so a lot of teams had other thoughts.

Clearly there was a reason, and most likely that had to do with concerns about his contact skills and the conference he played in. But acting like we shouldn't criticize because teams passed on him is just flat out silly. The best player in baseball wasn't even drafted in the top 20 picks the year he came out.

And Anderson was widely considered to be drafted in the 12-18 type range at the time of the draft, so we would have been overreaching regardless.

Personally I wanted Groome first, followed by Lewis. Time will tell if we were right to pass on both.