Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 167

Thread: Prospect digest 10 prospect listing

  1. #21
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    6,431
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    173
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,579
    Thanked in
    1,044 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBravos View Post
    My take on this....it really reminds me how bad the Simmons trade has turned out. To think what we gave up to get Gohara and then realize the ONLY player we have left that we received from the Simmons trade is Newcomb. I agree Gohara is way high, but comparing their ages...he IS probably the better prospect. If Newcomb doesn't becaome AT least a solid #2 starter....this trade was down right horrible.
    The Gohara deal was a great deal, though. It's not really fair to expect the same of every deal or to compare others that way, just like it isn't fair to compare any other deals to what we got for Miller.

    And the Simmons deal was always for Newcomb; the other pieces were pretty meaningless overall. But yeah, it definitely doesn't look as good now as it did then, when it was probably about an even deal. Aybar was hot garbage, Ellis was alright and traded, and Newcomb didn't take a big step forward. I do think most of the prospects rankings are too bearish on Newcomb, though. He's basically in the same spot he was when we got him - and while treading water usually causes you to lose prospect momentum, it doesn't necessarily mean he's much less likely to hit his ceiling.

    If we could have that one back, we might take it back. But we would still be looking to shop Simmons, and trades for prospects don't always work out.

  2. #22
    Boras' Client
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,121
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    528
    Thanked in
    406 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    I can appreciate that point of view, but a prospect guy has to be consistent. If Acuna hasn't proven enough, then neither has Maitan, Anderson or Allard.
    Yes agreed. Just like when Max was left off the lefty top 10 prospect list because the guy wanted to "see more"...after he helped win the league, but he had Groome on his list.

  3. #23
    Boras' Client
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,121
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    528
    Thanked in
    406 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by smootness View Post
    The Gohara deal was a great deal, though. It's not really fair to expect the same of every deal or to compare others that way, just like it isn't fair to compare any other deals to what we got for Miller.

    And the Simmons deal was always for Newcomb; the other pieces were pretty meaningless overall. But yeah, it definitely doesn't look as good now as it did then, when it was probably about an even deal. Aybar was hot garbage, Ellis was alright and traded, and Newcomb didn't take a big step forward. I do think most of the prospects rankings are too bearish on Newcomb, though. He's basically in the same spot he was when we got him - and while treading water usually causes you to lose prospect momentum, it doesn't necessarily mean he's much less likely to hit his ceiling.

    If we could have that one back, we might take it back. But we would still be looking to shop Simmons, and trades for prospects don't always work out.
    Aybar killed us...he could have been flipped immediately because he was still considered a good player before he played with us. I agree the trade was always about Newcomb, but Simmons wasn't your average player. You really need two impact players to let him go.

    I agree that they have been tough on Newcomb (mainly because of his age). There were also plenty of concerns about him before the trade was made. The reason we chose this trade (just like others), is that he was a big lefty. I feel we could have gotten a better return, because outside of Newcomb....the Angel's farm was horrid.

    I was ok with trading Simmons, but because of his age, talent and being he was locked up long term on the cheap...we probably could have sit on him (no hurry), and waited for the Shelby Miller type offer. He is a special player.

  4. #24
    Steve Harvey'd
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    18,946
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,856
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,329
    Thanked in
    3,353 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by smootness View Post
    The Gohara deal was a great deal, though. It's not really fair to expect the same of every deal or to compare others that way, just like it isn't fair to compare any other deals to what we got for Miller.

    And the Simmons deal was always for Newcomb; the other pieces were pretty meaningless overall. But yeah, it definitely doesn't look as good now as it did then, when it was probably about an even deal. Aybar was hot garbage, Ellis was alright and traded, and Newcomb didn't take a big step forward. I do think most of the prospects rankings are too bearish on Newcomb, though. He's basically in the same spot he was when we got him - and while treading water usually causes you to lose prospect momentum, it doesn't necessarily mean he's much less likely to hit his ceiling.

    If we could have that one back, we might take it back. But we would still be looking to shop Simmons, and trades for prospects don't always work out.
    I wouldn't say 'all about Newk'.. he was a big piece, but Ellis was in their top 5 (weak system I know) if I recall correctly and maybe #2 pitcher. He has a good profile of missing bats. Just another guy who can't control his stuff.. I think the FO is very upset about the Simmons trade and wanted more from Aybar and Ellis..

    maybe Cade or Jamie can pan out or return us something...

  5. #25
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBravos View Post
    Aybar killed us...he could have been flipped immediately because he was still considered a good player before he played with us. I agree the trade was always about Newcomb, but Simmons wasn't your average player. You really need two impact players to let him go.

    I agree that they have been tough on Newcomb (mainly because of his age). There were also plenty of concerns about him before the trade was made. The reason we chose this trade (just like others), is that he was a big lefty. I feel we could have gotten a better return, because outside of Newcomb....the Angel's farm was horrid.

    I was ok with trading Simmons, but because of his age, talent and being he was locked up long term on the cheap...we probably could have sit on him (no hurry), and waited for the Shelby Miller type offer. He is a special player.
    Aybar killed the Braves twice. He was terrible, so he couldn't be flipped for anything useful at the deadline. There was also some chatter immediately after the trade was made that if he put up his typical 2-3 WAR season he would have been extended a QO and netted the Braves another draft pick.

    Needless to say, none of that came about.

    Realistically, the only trade that has turned out well for the Braves is the Heyward -> Miller -> Swanson/Inciarte string of trades, and that success relied on the complete ineptitude of Dave Stewart. None of the other trades have produced much of anything.

  6. #26
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    6,431
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    173
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,579
    Thanked in
    1,044 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBravos View Post
    Aybar killed us...he could have been flipped immediately because he was still considered a good player before he played with us. I agree the trade was always about Newcomb, but Simmons wasn't your average player. You really need two impact players to let him go.

    I agree that they have been tough on Newcomb (mainly because of his age). There were also plenty of concerns about him before the trade was made. The reason we chose this trade (just like others), is that he was a big lefty. I feel we could have gotten a better return, because outside of Newcomb....the Angel's farm was horrid.

    I was ok with trading Simmons, but because of his age, talent and being he was locked up long term on the cheap...we probably could have sit on him (no hurry), and waited for the Shelby Miller type offer. He is a special player.
    We were likely never going to get anything close to a Miller offer. This is what I'm talking about in terms of taking legitimately great deals and comparing everything else to them.

  7. #27
    Shift Leader thethe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    69,579
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,507
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,179
    Thanked in
    3,898 Posts
    The only trade which was good for the heyward deal? Really?

  8. #28
    Boras' Client
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,121
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    528
    Thanked in
    406 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by smootness View Post
    We were likely never going to get anything close to a Miller offer. This is what I'm talking about in terms of taking legitimately great deals and comparing everything else to them.
    Agreed, but we could have definitely gotten two great prospects from a team with a better farm (instead of one high prospect, and a MLB player...I barely count Ellis). Coppy was really counting on flipping Aybar for another great prospect. In his defense....who would have thought Aybar would have played as badly as he did(and he probably did that because the Angels had no one else we wanted). Some of the trade factors like that were just bad luck. Still...when you trade a guy like Simmons, you can't put all of your eggs in one basket (we all know the prospect fail rate...especially for pitchers). I just feel there was probably a better deal out there. Of course, doesn't really matter at this point lol...I'm rooting for Newcomb. I'm hoping he has a break out year.

  9. #29
    It's OVER 5,000! striker42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    10,597
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    387
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,187
    Thanked in
    2,040 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by thethe View Post
    The only trade which was good for the heyward deal? Really?
    Apparently he forgot about the Justin Upton deal. One year of Upton for Fried, Gohara (formerly Mallex), Jace, and Dustin Peterson. That's a pretty nice haul. While it's possible none of those guys turn into anything we could easily package all of them together and get a very, very nice return just based on their current value.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to striker42 For This Useful Post:

    Knucksie (02-07-2017)

  11. #30
    Boras' Client
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,121
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    528
    Thanked in
    406 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by striker42 View Post
    Apparently he forgot about the Justin Upton deal. One year of Upton for Fried, Gohara (formerly Mallex), Jace, and Dustin Peterson. That's a pretty nice haul. While it's possible none of those guys turn into anything we could easily package all of them together and get a very, very nice return just based on their current value.
    I think he was saying that the only deal that has produced fruit. All of the guys (promising as they may be), are still prospects. There is a chance none pan out (although I doubt that's the case). By the numbers, the Shelby trade is the only trade that has proven to pay off. All the others have been labeled fails or "wait and see".

  12. #31
    Shift Leader thethe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    69,579
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,507
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,179
    Thanked in
    3,898 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by striker42 View Post
    Apparently he forgot about the Justin Upton deal. One year of Upton for Fried, Gohara (formerly Mallex), Jace, and Dustin Peterson. That's a pretty nice haul. While it's possible none of those guys turn into anything we could easily package all of them together and get a very, very nice return just based on their current value.
    And so many more. Braves went from the worst farm system to the best in 2 years and has been the best for 2 two years running with signs that a 3rd year in a row is almost a certainty.

    I just don't get that comment at all.

  13. #32
    Shift Leader thethe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    69,579
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,507
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,179
    Thanked in
    3,898 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBravos View Post
    I think he was saying that the only deal that has produced fruit. All of the guys (promising as they may be), are still prospects. There is a chance none pan out (although I doubt that's the case). By the numbers, the Shelby trade is the only trade that has proven to pay off. All the others have been labeled fails or "wait and see".
    But just because players bust doesn't mean they weren't good trades. In no world 's the touissant deal anything but a great deal even though touki may never pitch a MLB inning

  14. #33
    Boras' Client
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,121
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    528
    Thanked in
    406 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by thethe View Post
    But just because players bust doesn't mean they weren't good trades. In no world 's the touissant deal anything but a great deal even though touki may never pitch a MLB inning
    Yes , I agree with you. If a player never plays a MLB game with(or never even gets there)....it can't be considered a "good" trade though. It would be considered a good "gamble" like A Jackson and a valid reason to trade. All prospects are gambles and you take a low risk or a high risk (which validates the trade). Trades have to produce MLB players to be considered good in my opinion.

  15. #34
    It's OVER 5,000! striker42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    10,597
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    387
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,187
    Thanked in
    2,040 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBravos View Post
    Yes , I agree with you. If a player never plays a MLB game with(or never even gets there)....it can't be considered a "good" trade though. It would be considered a good "gamble" like A Jackson and a valid reason to trade. All prospects are gambles and you take a low risk or a high risk (which validates the trade). Trades have to produce MLB players to be considered good in my opinion.
    I disagree. Good prospects have a present trade value. If we trade a guy and get a package of prospects that appreciate in value, then the trade probably can be considered good at that point. What we possess is now worth more than what we traded. However, if the next year all the prospects bust then the mistake is not selling high.

  16. #35
    Steve Harvey'd
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    18,946
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,856
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,329
    Thanked in
    3,353 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by striker42 View Post
    I disagree. Good prospects have a present trade value. If we trade a guy and get a package of prospects that appreciate in value, then the trade probably can be considered good at that point. What we possess is now worth more than what we traded. However, if the next year all the prospects bust then the mistake is not selling high.
    This.. many teams improve by trading prospects.. That is why you collect so many. To replenish by using them or trading them.

  17. #36
    Boras' Client
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,121
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    528
    Thanked in
    406 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by striker42 View Post
    I disagree. Good prospects have a present trade value. If we trade a guy and get a package of prospects that appreciate in value, then the trade probably can be considered good at that point. What we possess is now worth more than what we traded. However, if the next year all the prospects bust then the mistake is not selling high.

    And when we make that trade or develop those players into MLB players...it makes it a successful trade. Look...don't get me wrong here. I love our farm. I love what they are doing. I think we should be patient and build a farm foundation that will last us for a decade or longer.

    It is all a gamble. Even a slam dunk prospect (if there is such a thing), can blow a arm or a knee out. You can have the best farm ever assembled. You can make good trades (which are really good gambles), with the info you have on hand. At some point...it has to produce MLB players either by trading prospects or developing them.

    The White Sox received a haul for Sale. I think we could all agree with that. No one would argue that they didn't maximize his value. Still, if none of those players really pan out, it ends up being a bad trade because it didn't produce.

    I am agreeing with you. We have received a TON of prospect value. We have one of the top (if not the top), farms in all of baseball. It "should" produce many MLB players either thru trade or development. The jury is still out though on many of the trades.

    It's the same as rating a draft and then going back three years later and doing it again.
    Last edited by TheBravos; 02-07-2017 at 05:26 PM.

  18. #37
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by striker42 View Post
    I disagree. Good prospects have a present trade value. If we trade a guy and get a package of prospects that appreciate in value, then the trade probably can be considered good at that point. What we possess is now worth more than what we traded. However, if the next year all the prospects bust then the mistake is not selling high.
    Right, and if they convert those assets into players that produce MLB value, they will have succeeded.

    However, as of now, nothing other than the gift from the DBacks has produced anything. The stated goal was to compete by 2017, and the trades made to achieve that goal have largely failed.

    Additionally, none of the non-DBacks prospects acquired have increased in value other than perhaps Fried. The list of prospects recently acquired via trade whose value has substantially deteriorated is extensive. I won't bother listing them all, but Newcomb, Jenkins, Blair, Touki, etc, etc, have all lost a lot of the value they held before being acquired by the Braves. Notice a trend? They are all pitchers, which is what the Braves have decided to focus on.

    So no, I would not call this rebuild a resounding success, nor would I say Coppy is doing a wonderful job. His piloting of this rebuild is mediocre, at best. I'm pretty sure any other GM could have done just as well, or better, given the same set of circumstances.
    Last edited by Enscheff; 02-07-2017 at 05:18 PM.

  19. #38
    Shift Leader thethe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    69,579
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,507
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,179
    Thanked in
    3,898 Posts
    What could coppy have done to make this rebuild better?

  20. #39
    Boras' Client
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,121
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    528
    Thanked in
    406 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by thethe View Post
    What could coppy have done to make this rebuild better?
    I don't agree that he's done an average job. I think he has done a good job, but has been bitten a few times for being agressive (it happens). They did kinda switch horses midstream though, from a partial rebuild to a full rebuild (which is where they should have started). In saying that, it could have been more of Hart's idea at the time and not Coppy's (he hadn't been given full power yet)...who knows.

  21. #40
    Shift Leader thethe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    69,579
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,507
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,179
    Thanked in
    3,898 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBravos View Post
    I don't agree that he's done an average job. I think he has done a good job, but has been bitten a few times for being agressive (it happens). They did kinda switch horses midstream though, from a partial rebuild to a full rebuild (which is where they should have started). In saying that, it could have been more of Hart's idea at the time and not Coppy's (he hadn't been given full power yet)...who knows.
    And of course no GM is 100%.

    But the Braves haven't been this well positioned in almost a decade...maybe longer.

Similar Threads

  1. MLB.com's Revised Top 100 prospect
    By rico43 in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-04-2018, 06:37 AM
  2. BA Prospect Hot Sheet 4/24
    By clvclv in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-24-2018, 11:43 AM
  3. Overlooked prospect...
    By blueagleace1 in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-10-2017, 09:30 PM
  4. What Constitues A Prospect?
    By rico43 in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 12-27-2016, 02:06 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •