Braves donate Justin Upton to Padres for prospects

[zitothebrave]

We needed a 2B, bench, 2 SP's with little payroll to do it.

So how is it possible to do any of that.

Even if they make the playoffs, its unlikely they go far. The best move/moves were made and that is a fact.

It's not a fact. If we make the playoffs we could win it all.

I don't think we needed 2 SP, we didn't need a 2B a Peraza/TLS platoon should have been enough. For the bench we were OK as any bench out there. We had going into the season about 100 million or so in payroll. With the 15M still left to spend or so, we could have signed Masterson, Burnett, Volquez, Anderson, or Morrow and Juan Frena and JimJohnson as an extra arm. You're telling me a team of

C - Gattis
1B - Freeman
2B - Peraza/TLS
3B - Johnson/Juan Fran
SS - SImmons
LF - Justin
CF - BJ
RF - Jason

rotation
Julio
Minor
Wood
Masterson
Northcraft et al

Kimbrel
Walden
Johnson
Russell
et al.

WOuldn't have competed? You're high.

[keithlaw]

It's not a fact. If we make the playoffs we could win it all.

I don't think we needed 2 SP, we didn't need a 2B a Peraza/TLS platoon should have been enough. For the bench we were OK as any bench out there. We had going into the season about 100 million or so in payroll. With the 15M still left to spend or so, we could have signed Masterson, Burnett, Volquez, Anderson, or Morrow and Juan Frena and JimJohnson as an extra arm. You're telling me a team of

C - Gattis
1B - Freeman
2B - Peraza/TLS
3B - Johnson/Juan Fran
SS - SImmons
LF - Justin
CF - BJ
RF - Jason

rotation
Julio
Minor
Wood
Masterson
Northcraft et al

Kimbrel
Walden
Johnson
Russell
et al.

WOuldn't have competed? You're high.

Considering our 2014 team was better than that and only won 79 games, no I don't think we would have been contenders.

[Chico]

I admit this isn't the trade I was expecting, but I'm a little more optimistic than most. Chad McDonald may be the key here. We hired him two weeks ago and after spending the last 3 years as assistant GM of player personnel for the Padres. He knows that system pretty well and I'm sure he was advising Hart during these discussions. The other part to this is seeing what we do with the money.

[skillet]

After reading through this thread and checking out several expert takes on the trade, it appears we probably got anywhere from fair to slightly better than fair value for Justin, and the four prospects are probably better than one year of Justin and a sandwich pick.

The problem I have is it seems we chose quantity or quality which IMO is a bad recipe. I don't know it that was the best deal we could find, or if it was a strategy given the poor shape of our farm system. Now prospects are just that and you never know how they are going to turn out, but it appears that the only one that has a decent chance of being a really good major leaguer is Fried, and he is shelved for the next year with no guarantees he will ever be the same.

I would much rather have received one or two really good prospects than 4 decent ones. Maybe Hart tried this same tact but no team was willing to give up a premium prospect for one year of Justin, at least I hope that was his strategy. I do think it was the right move to trade Justin, but I'm disappointed in the type of return we got.

[Heyward]

It's not a fact. If we make the playoffs we could win it all.

I don't think we needed 2 SP, we didn't need a 2B a Peraza/TLS platoon should have been enough. For the bench we were OK as any bench out there. We had going into the season about 100 million or so in payroll. With the 15M still left to spend or so, we could have signed Masterson, Burnett, Volquez, Anderson, or Morrow and Juan Frena and JimJohnson as an extra arm. You're telling me a team of

C - Gattis
1B - Freeman
2B - Peraza/TLS
3B - Johnson/Juan Fran
SS - SImmons
LF - Justin
CF - BJ
RF - Jason

rotation
Julio
Minor
Wood
Masterson
Northcraft et al

Kimbrel
Walden
Johnson
Russell
et al.

WOuldn't have competed? You're high.

No, i dont, no.

Competed for a WC spot, maybe, thats about it, then Jason, Justin walk for nothing and we have nothing to show for it WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

[thethe]

It's not a fact. If we make the playoffs we could win it all.

I don't think we needed 2 SP, we didn't need a 2B a Peraza/TLS platoon should have been enough. For the bench we were OK as any bench out there. We had going into the season about 100 million or so in payroll. With the 15M still left to spend or so, we could have signed Masterson, Burnett, Volquez, Anderson, or Morrow and Juan Frena and JimJohnson as an extra arm. You're telling me a team of

C - Gattis
1B - Freeman
2B - Peraza/TLS
3B - Johnson/Juan Fran
SS - SImmons
LF - Justin
CF - BJ
RF - Jason

rotation
Julio
Minor
Wood
Masterson
Northcraft et al

Kimbrel
Walden
Johnson
Russell
et al.

WOuldn't have competed? You're high.

First off we would be competing for a wildcard because the Nats are far better than that. Even more than that you are throwing all your eggs in the 2015 basket because not only would we suck in 2016 we would be left with a horrid farm system.

[chop2chip]

First off we would be competing for a wildcard because the Nats are far better than that. Even more than that you are throwing all your eggs in the 2015 basket because not only would we suck in 2016 we would be left with a horrid farm system.

This.

I don't agree with team building strategies that consist of banking on your team improving by 15 wins without adding anyone of true significance. Even if we did, there is a very small chance we compete with Washington in the division, so we are basically betting on winning a 50/50 game. If we win that game, then it's still unlikely we win it all (but I would be fine with that outcome).

There are too many what ifs just to lose Jason and Justin for potentialy Sean Gilmartin and Matt Lipka.

[thethe]

This.

I don't agree with team building strategies that consist of banking on your team improving by 15 wins without adding anyone of true significance. Even if we did, there is a very small chance we compete with Washington in the division, so we are basically betting on winning a 50/50 game. If we win that game, then it's still unlikely we win it all (but I would be fine with that outcome).

There are too many what ifs just to lose Jason and Justin for potentialy Sean Gilmartin and Matt Lipka.

Its a failing strategy and I'm shocked that so many posters have advocated this method.

[thethe]

Tell me why I shouldn't be excited about a guy with a 80 run tool that has had around a 12.5% walk rate in the minors so far?

[kendiz]

This.

I don't agree with team building strategies that consist of banking on your team improving by 15 wins without adding anyone of true significance. Even if we did, there is a very small chance we compete with Washington in the division, so we are basically betting on winning a 50/50 game. If we win that game, then it's still unlikely we win it all (but I would be fine with that outcome).

There are too many what ifs just to lose Jason and Justin for potentialy Sean Gilmartin and Matt Lipka.

Well...we can't compete salary wise for big talent BECAUSE of past contracts and past failures. We can't continue to do things in the same way. I know we won't compete next year, but I am looking forward to watching young players, and seeing what they can do. The Marlins have done that for a few years, and they are fun to watch, and now can compete. We haven't won crap in 20 years....so shaking things up might help a bit. I would love to see the farm teams start to develop something other than pitching...that would help immensely.

[Heyward]

Well...we can't compete salary wise for big talent BECAUSE of past contracts and past failures. We can't continue to do things in the same way. I know we won't compete next year, but I am looking forward to watching young players, and seeing what they can do. The Marlins have done that for a few years, and they are fun to watch, and now can compete. We haven't won crap in 20 years....so shaking things up might help a bit. I would love to see the farm teams start to develop something other than pitching...that would help immensely.

im hoping they use both 1st on some hitters.

We have enough pitching in the system now, but i suspect it will be one pitcher/one hitter.

[chop2chip]

im hoping they use both 1st on some hitters.

We have enough pitching in the system now, but i suspect it will be one pitcher/one hitter.

Best player available. I too hope that that happens to be a position player, but you always go BPA

[emk418]

im hoping they use both 1st on some hitters.

We have enough pitching in the system now, but i suspect it will be one pitcher/one hitter.

Yea we need to focus on impact hitters now. We're in very good shape with your controllable high upside pitchers. We need to start adding bats to the organization. Dustin Peterson and Mallex are a start. If we end up moving Gattis I want bats.

[Horsehide Harry]

While I think it was a no question no brainer to move Justin, Heyward, and pretty much anyone else not named Freeman, Simmons and probably Kimbrel, nor the starters not named Minor, I question the strategy of what they are looking for in return.

It looks like they want high end pitching, therefore Fried. I don't understand this. If you look at the rotation, you have 3 or 4 young ML starters who are reasonably good (depends on if you count Minor) and are under control for significant years. And, in the minors, you have 2-4 good young starters who have a decent chance of panning out - Sims, Hursch, etc.

Now, I could understand it if the cycle of baseball was more like the '90's as opposed to the '60's where hitting was the commodity and pitching was scarce. But, that's not where we are. Whether you want to attribute it to PED testing or a natural cycle or whatever, right now hitting is a premium while pitching is a commodity.

The strategy might be to trade for pitching and sign hitting, but I think that is 100% the wrong thinking. When something is scarce, it costs more.

I would much rather see the Braves loading up on position prospects with high ceiling, even if it means taking lower level guys. After all, in effect, by the time Fried actually throws a pitch, other pitchers could have elevated from low A ball to AAA, so the fact that he is somewhat advanced in the minors already really carries no weight. The same would go for hitters.

[Heyward]

While I think it was a no question no brainer to move Justin, Heyward, and pretty much anyone else not named Freeman, Simmons and probably Kimbrel, nor the starters not named Minor, I question the strategy of what they are looking for in return.

It looks like they want high end pitching, therefore Fried. I don't understand this. If you look at the rotation, you have 3 or 4 young ML starters who are reasonably good (depends on if you count Minor) and are under control for significant years. And, in the minors, you have 2-4 good young starters who have a decent chance of panning out - Sims, Hursch, etc.

Now, I could understand it if the cycle of baseball was more like the '90's as opposed to the '60's where hitting was the commodity and pitching was scarce. But, that's not where we are. Whether you want to attribute it to PED testing or a natural cycle or whatever, right now hitting is a premium while pitching is a commodity.

The strategy might be to trade for pitching and sign hitting, but I think that is 100% the wrong thinking. When something is scarce, it costs more.

I would much rather see the Braves loading up on position prospects with high ceiling, even if it means taking lower level guys. After all, in effect, by the time Fried actually throws a pitch, other pitchers could have elevated from low A ball to AAA, so the fact that he is somewhat advanced in the minors already really carries no weight. The same would go for hitters.

I wouldnt be surprised if we dealt Minor at the deadline if he rebounds and has a good year.

You can never have enough pitching, i would like some hitting but pitching depth is something teams should always have on hand.

[thewupk]

I wouldnt be surprised if we dealt Minor at the deadline if he rebounds and has a good year.

You can never have enough pitching, i would like some hitting but pitching depth is something teams should always have on hand.

Everybody has pitching. This is a pitching league. Scoring is at a 25 year low right now. We need hitters and as it is we have like 2 everyday hitters that don't suck.

[Horsehide Harry]

I wouldnt be surprised if we dealt Minor at the deadline if he rebounds and has a good year.

You can never have enough pitching, i would like some hitting but pitching depth is something teams should always have on hand.

I think that is outmoded thinking. Pitchers don't win games. Teams win games. Yes, pitchers are the most important part of the team, most often. But, a team with great pitching and absolutely no offense isn't going to win anything, especially considering where you play. I don't know how the new park will play but I would not expect it to be a huge pitchers park.

I am all for adequate pitching, even excessive depth of pitching but only if other areas of the team are in good health. Right now, those other areas are in terrible health with almost no help expected from the minors.

[Heyward]

Everybody has pitching. This is a pitching league. Scoring is at a 25 year low right now. We need hitters and as it is we have like 2 everyday hitters that don't suck.

I agree, im hoping we trade Gattis for a couple hitters and draft two with our 2 picks.

[chop2chip]

i think someone implied or maybe even said that a run prevented is worth more indirectly than a run created because of the implications that has on saving your bullpen. I thought this was a smart comment.

Also, it's much more inexpensive to retain your homegrown position players. At least based off this year's free agent market. I don't quite know if that's a league wide trend yet, but it would make sense with the scarcity of offense. Perhaps the Braves have identified young, cheap controllable arms as an inexpensive way to build a team.

[Diesel]

I think that is outmoded thinking. Pitchers don't win games. Teams win games. Yes, pitchers are the most important part of the team, most often. But, a team with great pitching and absolutely no offense isn't going to win anything, especially considering where you play. I don't know how the new park will play but I would not expect it to be a huge pitchers park.

I am all for adequate pitching, even excessive depth of pitching but only if other areas of the team are in good health. Right now, those other areas are in terrible health with almost no help expected from the minors.

From what I've heard in the past, this organization values young pitching for a couple of reasons. First, we all know that talented pitching does put you in position most any season to compete and it's the backbone of a successful organization. Secondly, they also know that young, talented pitchers are very valuable asset and once you acquire that, they can be traded very easily to stock your team in the areas that are lacking. When in doubt, acquire pitching talent.