SB Nation Profile of Leo Mazzone

[The Chosen One]

Could have sworn that Ashby's first two starts we're scoreless including a cg shutout seem to remember after that him being a train wreck

That was Sugar Shane.

Ashby's first start was like 5IP. He was serviceable the rest of the year.

[Knucksie]

We don't have to question anything or make up hypotheticals to serve our points. Smoltz has specifically named Mazzone as the guy who helped him after the Braves acquired him. Smoltz talks about it in the foreword to Mazzone's book, which the former wrote.

Yeah, no kidding. I read it years ago, and still have it. What would you expect somebody to say in the forward of a book? All this means is that Leo offered some tips to help get him back on track. It doesn't mean that my recollection of the roving minor league pitching instructor, from that era, is "wrong." Since we're talking some 28 years ago, chances are, you're not operating by memory. He who thought there was little difference between Jack Morris & Jack McDowell...because of, well, their first names!

Oh, and thethe is right. More than one person deserves credit. This is, after all, a team sport. A lot of these discussions here turn into debates/arguments, because there's always this presumption by certain members here that it's always 100% for or 100% with no room for gray area.

[Hawk]

What would you expect somebody to say in the forward of a book?

I have to admit that this is the first thing that entered my mind.

[gilesfan]

So Smoltz was lying because it was written in a book?

This is Heyward level logic

[Hawk]

This is Heyward level logic

I think that would actually be a compliment.

[Millwood1Hitter]

That was Sugar Shane.

Ashby's first start was like 5IP. He was serviceable the rest of the year.

Wrong, Ashby got off to a hot start with Atlanta, throwing a CG 1 run game at Baltimore and a 4 hit shutout against the rival Mets the following start on Sunday Night Baseball. Forgot that, still doesn't change my opinion that the guy was garbage though and not the type of pitcher we needed at that time.

[MadduxFanII]

I remembered Ashby's complete game against the Mets in his second start, though not the game in Baltimore, which for some reason I remembered as a "struggle through five innings with a bunch of baserunners but no runs" starts for some reason. Anyway, here's Ashby's game log for the season.

Ashby threw 140 pitches in that Mets' shutout, right after tossing 115 against the Orioles. In hindsight, having the 32-year-old pitcher with a ton of innings already on his arm throw 255 pitches in two starts wasn't Bobby's wisest move, though it's hard to worry too much about Ashby's arm in that situation.

The trade didn't work out too badly for us. Ashby posted a 111 ERA+ and went 6 1/2 innings per start, though his peripherals were pretty bad. And realistically, losing Chen didn't hurt us too much, and Osting turned into a bust.

[Millwood1Hitter]

The biggest fundamental issue with the blunder was the miscalculation on Bruce Chen's value and potential, and JS and the staff hanging on to him too long, too the point that not only was Chen losing value in sight with the Braves as well as other teams. He was once one of the biggest and highest thought of pitching prospects in the game and could have netted us a large sum in the acquisition of need during the last hurray of our run from 97-99, yes JS I'm looking at you and I'm pointing at Roberto Alomar...which was exactly what that great 1998 team needed.

But instead we overvalued Chen, thinking he was the next big thing, coming up through the pipeline and hung on to him way too long, when it was apparent from day one that Chen did not have the upside that many pundits thought. I remember reading so much hype about him coming up through the system and the first time I saw him, and the next subsequent outings, I thought Oh Oh this guy is nothing more than middle of the rotation type potential. He didn't have the stuff nor the consistent enough stuff to miss bats at the MLB level and be consistantly good, especially since he was a four seam fastball guy that pitched up in the zone. While Chen's numbers in the minors were absolutely phenominal, he just didn't have the stuff to translate to greatness at the MLB level. When it was all said and done, I become much more intrigued by the potential that I saw out of Odalis Perez, and eventually so did the Braves.

And in the end, all we netted out of Chen was 2+ months of Andy Ashby. And add to the fact that we had to throw in Jimmy Osting, who was a highly thought of arm and it makes the deal even worse, not that I was losing any sleep of losing Osting, but he still had value. I still to this day fail to see what so many thought of Chen at that point in time, but the point still remains, you either as an organization need to get production out of that type of highly thought of prospect or net something of significance in return and the fact that the Braves were pitching rich, especially at that position at that point in time, shows a lack of organizational foresight to improve the team at an area of potential need. AND THAT WAS A MASSIVE FAILURE ON THE FRONT OFFICE at that point in TIME. One year earlier, if Schilling was on the market, Chen could of and would have been the centerpiece to be able to acquire a player or pitcher of that caliber. HE WAS THAT HIGHLY THOUGHT OF at that point in time.

Thing about it this way, look at all the arms that we're highly though of coming up the system during that time frame. Not only was there Chen and Perez, but we already had Millwood establishing himself as a quality starter, but we had guys like Rob Bell, Scott Sobowiak, Jimmy Osting, & Luis Rivera and others. Beside Millwood, out of all those high quality arms which we're coveted, we got 2+ months out of Ashby and 1.5 years of medocre production out of BJ Surhoff and Bret Boone. Add Micah Bowie to the mix and you have Mulholland and Hernandez. Although later on Perez did help us net Sheffield (but that was too late as our window was essentially shut as a legit contender even though we continued to dominant the East) but our once vaunted starting staff was in slow gradual decline and still had too many gaping holes in which JS and Co. failed to address.

We had a legit shot during that time frame to get another championship if we filled some holes. Chen would have netted us a Roberto Alomar, or Johnny Damon, or Curt Schilling, or Sheffield, John Wetteland, etc. or any of those top tier players to potentially put us over the top but JS failed to pull the trigger which is what we needed but instead we got Mulholland, Hernandez, Ashby, Colbrunn, etc.

[Knucksie]

Ashby threw 140 pitches in that Mets' shutout, right after tossing 115 against the Orioles. In hindsight, having the 32-year-old pitcher with a ton of innings already on his arm throw 255 pitches in two starts wasn't Bobby's wisest move, though it's hard to worry too much about Ashby's arm in that situation.

By the standards of decades of baseball history, what's so unusual about it? Complete games, well over 200+ IP/year used to be expected of starters. Assuming that this comment is hinting at the relative merits of pitch counts and innings limits, the jury's very much out on those subjects. No evidence that conditions are "better" because of it, other than starters can go 6 innings or throw 100 pitches, while making more money than ever before.

[Julio3000]

I remembered Ashby's complete game against the Mets in his second start, though not the game in Baltimore, which for some reason I remembered as a "struggle through five innings with a bunch of baserunners but no runs" starts for some reason. Anyway, here's Ashby's game log for the season.

Ashby threw 140 pitches in that Mets' shutout, right after tossing 115 against the Orioles. In hindsight, having the 32-year-old pitcher with a ton of innings already on his arm throw 255 pitches in two starts wasn't Bobby's wisest move, though it's hard to worry too much about Ashby's arm in that situation.

The trade didn't work out too badly for us. Ashby posted a 111 ERA+ and went 6 1/2 innings per start, though his peripherals were pretty bad. And realistically, losing Chen didn't hurt us too much, and Osting turned into a bust.

I don't remember either of those CGs. I d remember him always looking worse than his line, but my recollection of his brief Braves career was definitely off.

[Millwood1Hitter]

I don't remember either of those CGs. I d remember him always looking worse than his line, but my recollection of his brief Braves career was definitely off.

I remember Don Wengert and Scott Kamienicki much more in a positive light that Andy Ashby, and they WERE HORRIBLE. Maybe I was just so dissappointed in the acquisition of Ashby when our FO lead us to believe for weeks upto that trade that we we're going to get a headliner type starter to esentially take an injured Smoltz's place in the rotation to compliment Maddux & Glavine and a struggling Millwood. And THEN we got Andy FREAKIN Ashby, or as I liked to call him Andy Assby. The guy was ass. Then 2 weeks later to follow up with the acquisition with another one of my favorites in BJ Surhoff trying to mask JS's blunder from the December before letting Klesko go for Sanders without any foresight who was going to replace Galarraga when he was going to leave so then I had to watch all time greats like Rico Brogna, Wes Helms, and Ken Caminiti man the easiest replaced production from a position until we finally settled on 93 year old Julio Franco, who was the man BTW, but still left something to be desired for a championship caliber team.

[Knucksie]

All right! Let's turn this into yet another bitching session! Let's hear about every current or former Brave, whom you knew would just suck and every Schuerholz move that didn't meet with your approval. Because that all has just soooo much to do with this thread topic.