Market for top pitching higher or lower than position players? Also- what is more market efficient paying position players or pitchers on free agency deals?
Market for top pitching higher or lower than position players? Also- what is more market efficient paying position players or pitchers on free agency deals?
Ivermectin Man
I don't get this argumentOriginally Posted by Enscheff
The braves agree. They are buying in bulk bc they are saying it's likely they will only really hit on a couple. Maybe some become innings eaters. Maybe a reliever or two.
They have to get them. Develop them. Trade the right ones and keep the right ones. Keep them healthy
Predicting the future is hard
The argument was that the Braves should trade excess pitching prospects for MLB talent when they want to contend. I stated the Braves aren't likely to produce enough legit SPs at the MLB level to allow them to trade away any prospects.
The discussion then took a turn that shows the Braves are bad at "trading the right ones", considering the best 2 pitchers the Braves have produced since 1995 (Schimdt and Wainwright) were traded away.
The bigger question is how many holes do you have to fill at the MLB level with a farm system that is pitching heavy compared to one that is position player heavy.
You can't just use cumulative war. That's like letting ppl in the Hoffa they got 500 hrs. Even if it took 25 yrs. Bruce Chen would be one that got away with that logic
Tehran minor medlen Hanson beach were all better than Schmidt. Wainwright we goofed. The hof gm goofed. He hit on more than he goofed.
With pitchers some of these guys are going to burn bright and burn out.
Huh? Bruce Chen? The guy that produced 10.2 total WAR? Chen is yet another data point saying pitching prospects rarely pan out.
Are you honestly trying to say all those guys are better than Jason Schimdt? The guy who posted 31.8 career WAR, and finished Top 5 in Cy Young voting twice? Those pitchers "burned bright" compared to Schmidt's 2004 and 2005 seasons? Do you even know who Jason Schimdt is?
I think you are the only person on the planet who thinks any of those pitchers are better than Jason Schimdt.
You mean like Craig Biggio and Eddie Murray? There are plenty of people that got in the HOF by constantly being good and occasionally great.
I don't think anyone has suggested that the Braves were a recent pitching factory.
They've made a concerted effort beginning two years ago to acquire some pitching talent. It might take awhile for that to realize itself. Glavine was drafted in 1984. Smoltz acquired by trade in 1987. Avery was drafted #3 in 1988. Merker #5 in 1988. Pete Smith was a prospect traded for in 1987. Leibrandt acquired by trade in 1989.
The Braves were a last place team in 1990 before starting the run the following season.
It's likely going to take awhile for it work.
I think the Braves, rather than saying that they are outstanding at developing pitching, have said that they believe pitching is the way to build teams and that it takes volume to do that.
But in reality, the Braves run was also fueled by the likes of Chipper Jones, Andruw Jones, Rafael Furcal, Javy Lopez, David Justice, Ron Gant, Ryan Klesko, Blauser, Lemke, and others. Honestly, the Braves arguably were better at identifying hitters.
Didn't hurt they carried a large payroll during the meat of the run.
In the end 15-20 years of contending eventually required a reset. This is it. Hopefully, it won't be too long.
People don't think the Braves are a pitcher factory?
Please explain to me what the phrase "back to the Braves Way" meant, and why the FO used the phrase when describing all the pitching talent they have amassed.
I'd also point out that the Braves really didn't produce a volume of star pitching. It was for the most part, Smoltz and Glavine and a fourth or fifth starter if one happened to be needed.
It's not likely to work out the same way, but that is also why it was so ridiculous the braves went a decade and a half in contention.
I took it to mean winning baseball with strong starting pitching and a minor league organization that constantly promoted young talent capable of helping a winning ball club.
I think they used "back to the Braves way" as distinguishing from drafting to immediate major league roster needs and gutting the system to pursue win now trades.
Whether the Braves organization can really claim to have been better than that in the end of the JS era is another story.
I just think they mean the period in the early to late 90s when the system was popping out Glavine, Smoltz, Avery, Justice, Gant, Blauser, Lemke, Chipper, Lopez, Andruw, Furcal, Giles, Dye, etc, and high enough profile prospects to trade for other things.
Honestly, while they did produce their share of decent pitching after 1992, I'm not sure it was anything particularly special. But the farm system itself was pretty strong during that period and that had something to do with high draft picks and trades and also some pretty good scouting at times of hitters and pitchers.
Yes. I don't think they belong in the hof
I respect those that prefer a small hall. Still, those two plus many others have set a precedent that being good and occasionally great for 20 years or so will get you into cooperstown. I do think cumulative WAR works in this instance even if it's spread out over many years. Being able to play stay in MLB for a decade or so even as a role player does have value.
Wood could have filled a big hole....
Not so unusual among pitchers in the HOF either.
Some would point at Glavine, but Sutton is one.
Well, we're 'building around pitching' and our young position prospects are just as good as a team like the Dodgers or Yankees. So sweet.
Back to Matt Adams.....great trade!!!
Great value. Not hof for me
5 war for ten years over 3 war for 20 is ok by me
True as well.
I agree. You can admire a player and be impressed by what they've done and still not believe it is worthy of the HOF. But at this point the baseball HOF has been watered down, so that battle has been lost.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote