6/1/15: GDT - Atlanta Braves @ Arizona Diamondbacks

[thewupk]

If we stop dealing after the Heyward trade and try and compete (which I think would have been a huge mistake - the offense would be terrible), we'd have no farm system to speak of, or at least not even close to the really good one we have now. So when this season was over, we'd be depleted when Upton signed elsewhere and there was nothing on the farm.

That's interesting. Would Justin+Gattis+EY Jr(account for BJ being out)+Gooselin and then likely Peraza(accounting for Gooselin's injury) be better or worse than LF combo+Bethancourt+Maybin+Peterson?

[nsacpi]

If we stop dealing after the Heyward trade and try and compete (which I think would have been a huge mistake - the offense would be terrible), we'd have no farm system to speak of, or at least not even close to the really good one we have now. So when this season was over, we'd be depleted when Upton signed elsewhere and there was nothing on the farm.

Let me sketch out how we could have a strong competitive team in 2017 even while stopping after the Heyward deal.

1st Freeman
2nd Peraza
SS Simmons
3B Kubitza/Castro platoon
C Acquired or Signed
RF Um Markakis
CF Acquired or signed (main trade bait is Gattis)
LF Acquired or signed (main trade bait is Gattis)

Starting rotation: Wood, Miller, Teheran, Perez, (one of Jenkins, Sims, Martin or Hale) with the others providing depth/bullpen help
Closer: Kimbrel

In this scenario we make one big signing to fill one outfield spot. I believe we all agree payroll can go up to allow for this to happen. Gattis is used to acquire the second outfielder in a trade. I bet we even have money left over in this scenario (since we are not paying Justin Upton or Heyward to stay with the team) to pick up a solid veteran starting pitcher.

It is worth noting that even with all the prospects we have picked up, there is a general consensus we are going to have to spend to get a power bat to play left or third. So in that regard, projecting we are going to spend there is the same in both scenarios. In both scenarios there is also a need for a catcher.

[thethe]

Let me sketch out how we could have a strong competitive team in 2017 even while stopping after the Heyward deal.

1st Freeman
2nd Peraza
SS Simmons
3B Kubitza/Castro platoon
C Acquired or Signed
RF Um Markakis
CF Acquired or signed (main trade bait is Gattis)
LF Acquired or signed (main trade bait is Gattis)

Starting rotation: Wood, Miller, Teheran, Perez, (one of Jenkins, Sims, Martin or Hale) with the others providing depth/bullpen help
Closer: Kimbrel

In this scenario we make one big signing to fill one outfield spot. I believe we all agree payroll can go up to allow for this to happen. Gattis is used to acquire the second outfielder in a trade. I bet we even have money left over in this scenario (since we are not paying Justin Upton or Heyward to stay with the team) to pick up a solid veteran starting pitcher.

It is worth noting that even with all the prospects we have picked up, there is a general consensus we are going to have to spend to get a power bat to play left or third. So in that regard, projecting we are going to spend there is the same in both scenarios. In both scenarios there is also a need for a catcher.

But the overall depth at the minor league levels at this point would be awful. Now we are goingto be able to use Peraza plus a starting pitcher in a deal to get a bat in RF (after markakis moves to LF) and have either Mallex Smith or Maybin in CF. I just don't see how the above approach would put us in a better position for 2017 than we are in now.

[50PoundHead]

I'm not sure what Hart's blueprint was. I remember ahead of the Heyward trade he gave an interview. He in effect said the off-season could go one of two ways. He said the team's chances of contending depended upon its ability to acquire a young cost-controlled starter. He said that was the key. If they could do that they could compete with most of the team as it existed. If not a more radical rebuild would have to ensue.

So he goes out and in fact acquires that young cost-controlled starter in the Heyward trade. But he seemed to change his mind after that about competing in 2015. I think that was a mistake given we had guys like Freeman and Simmons in their prime and under control going forward (providing a good foundation to continue to field a competitive team). The fact the team is competitive this year even with a sub-par supporting cast suggests to me that Hart misjudged our chances for success this year, and I would argue our chances for competing going forward without the radical overhaul he implemented.

The only thing that still doesn't make sense is the decision to sign Markakis. I think once deals materialized for J. Upton and Gattis, he went into full re-build mode, but I think his toe was in the water all along.

[nsacpi]

But the overall depth at the minor league levels at this point would be awful. Now we are goingto be able to use Peraza plus a starting pitcher in a deal to get a bat in RF (after markakis moves to LF) and have either Mallex Smith or Maybin in CF. I just don't see how the above approach would put us in a better position for 2017 than we are in now.

I don't disagree with that. We have improved our depth by punting. And if we punt in 2016 we can make the future even brighter. Ditto if we punt in 2017, 2018, etc, etc. You have to have some criteria to justify punting. To me that criteria is if you don't have a core to build around. If your best player is a rapidly declining Dale Murphy rather than Freeman and Simmons in their prime.

My point is not that our position would be better in 2017 without punting. I am not arguing that. I am arguing that we could have had a strong competitive team in 2017 and beyond without punting.

[nsacpi]

The only thing that still doesn't make sense is the decision to sign Markakis. I think once deals materialized for J. Upton and Gattis, he went into full re-build mode, but I think his toe was in the water all along.

I don't think a too good to refuse deal materialized for Justin Upton. He admitted he had to dial back his expectations.

[thethe]

I don't disagree with that. We have improved our depth by punting. And if we punt in 2016 we can make the future even brighter. Ditto if we punt in 2017, 2018, etc, etc. You have to have some criteria to justify punting. To me that criteria is if you don't have a core to build around. If your best player is a rapidly declining Dale Murphy rather than Freeman and Simmons in their prime.

My point is not that our position would be better in 2017 without punting. I am not arguing that. I am arguing that we could have had a strong competitive team in 2017 and beyond without punting.

I don't think that was the priority for the organization though. I think it was clear that while they wouldn't mind being good right now it was more important to be really good in 2017.

[nsacpi]

I don't think that was the priority for the organization though. I think it was clear that while they wouldn't mind being good right now it was more important to be really good in 2017.

Well I hope they realize how big a role Lady Luck can play in any given season and have some sort of deal in place with her for 2017.

Look at the Oakland A's. While the Twins have been lucky by 9 games this year, the A's have been unlucky to the tune of 10. But hey maybe we will be good and lucky in 2017. That would be awesome.