The Upper Minors

[nsacpi]

Most of our best talent will be in the lower minors in 2016. But in terms of impact in 2016 and 2017 on the major league team, we still have to look mainly at the guys who will be playing in AA and AAA rather than at the lower levels. In the past, we have often used players on the verge of being major league ready as trade chips (Randall Delgado and Jose Peraza being recent examples). But I think over the next year or two, the front office is likely to leverage the emergence of those players in a different way--by trading the incumbents those prospects displace for improvements at other positions.

Mallex Smith is the best potential example for the kind of move I'm expecting. Once he is ready for center (or even a little ahead of that time) Maybin can be moved. The timing for that kind of transaction depends somewhat on Smith's development but more importantly on when a good offer arrives for Maybin. We have some needs that Maybin can help us fill. Corner outfield or third. Even if he can't help us fill those needs directly, we can acquire assets that will help us fill them indirectly.

Starting pitching is the other area where I think we'll see someone emerge from AA or AAA over the next year. Assuming a major league rotation of Miller, Teheran, Minor, Free Agent and Wisler in 2016, we'll have a AAA rotation of Williams Perez, Jenkins, Foltynevich, Weber and Gant, and in AA we'll likely have Sims, Janas, Bird, Thurman and Whalen. While none of these guys are top flight prospects, that's a lot of solid second tier prospects. Enough that the odds are good that at least one will make the case in 2016 for a place in a major league rotation. Assuming health and effectiveness (knock on wood) of the major league incumbents, that would allow us to trade away a major league starter at the deadline next year or next off-season.

Aside from Smith and starting pitching, we also have some other players likely to be at AA or AAA next year who might be able to help as bench, bullpen, or platoon type players. Among position players, these include Castro, Toscano, Ruiz, Lien, Camargo and Dustin Peterson. Among the pitchers there are quite a few (mainly the starters I've already mentioned) who could eventually end up in the major league pen. Those kinds of players can also help fill out a trade.

Given that most of the promising talent in the minors is very young, I don't see the major league team making dramatic strides anytime soon. Most of the improvement near-term will reflect the bigger payroll anticipated for 2017 and also the fact the 2015 team was so bad that there is nowhere to go but up. But I think there is enough in the upper minors to make an incremental contribution toward improving the major league team.

[Horsehide Harry]

While I agree with what you say, I hope, but doubt, that the FO is being more creative with their thinking and making things happen as opposed to just letting them come to them. By this I mean:

1. The strength of FA is Starting Pitching. And, while I certainly believe that the Braves could use a REAL ace like Greinke or Price to lead the rotation, the number and quality of very good/good starters available means that teams playing in FA should do their shopping there. If you take the signing of multiple FA SP as a given, my preference would be Price and Samardzjia but would accept other combinations as fine, then that allows you to use Miller and Teheran as trading chips to add the young position talent that you need.

Why would a team trade for SP when they could just sign it as a FA? Because there are some teams such as Colorado where no FA pitcher who has a choice will sign. You might be able to trade Miller to Colorado for OF Dahl, 3B McMahon and C Dom Nunez and replace Miller via FA, thereby best using your ML talent to replenish the team without significantly depleting the veteran ML talent.

2. The Braves have a terrible record and a protected pick. They also have some money to spend (hopefully wisely). If they are ever going to play on the high end FA, then this is the year.

3. But, What about money? Well, the Braves have created financial flexibility with the moves so far and could continue to do so if they are willing to move ML talent . For instance, moving Maybin, Freeman, Markakis, Miller, Teheran any/or all would clear payroll space so that you could bring in FA who might be too expensive to add otherwise such as Price or Greinke. I am not talking about "fire sale" time here. I am talking about moving some or all of those guys for young talent (preferably bats) and reinvesting the savings in FA pitching. essentially, you are moving the money obligation and adding talent at the same time.

4. But what about that veteran presence? Fine, go sign a veteran presence. But, you don't have to break the bank to do it. The Cubs did this when they signed David Ross for almost nothing. The Braves signed Markakis who is essentially the RF equivalent of Sid Bream.

5. But, what about building a better pen? Again, fine. But, cobbling together a few veteran arms really doesn't move the needle for 2017 and beyond. Find young, controllable power arms that you can slot into the pen and let them grow together like KC did. Going out and signing this year's version of Grilli makes no sense UNLESS you plan to move him for talent at the deadline.

[nsacpi]

The issue with guys like Price and Greinke is probable length of contract (at least 7 years imo for Price) and the aging curve. Unless the contract is front-loaded you get more bang for the buck in 2016 and 2017 from those sorts of signings and less in the back end of the deal. This works against the fact our best talent in the minors is several years away. So guys like Riley, Albies, Acuna, Allard start hitting their stride in the majors as guys like Price and Greinke start to decline and produce less WAR/$. In addition to the normal aging curve for pitchers, there is also more risk of some sort of catastrophic injury over the course of a long contract (think Cliff Lee for example).

I do think we'll make a play for a TOR type pitcher at some point (probably not this off-season), but more likely via the trade market. This will allow us to pick out a contract (or the remaining part of the contract) that is more favorable from a duration and risk-reward perspective. Chris Sale for example has a contract that is very good in that regard. Of course, you have to give up more for a player of his caliber when paired with that type of contract.

[dak]

By this time next year, I think we will have traded away some up our upper minors SP depth. Good chance we see a move this offseason. By next offseason, we'll be facing a legit-40-man roster crunch in this area. If we wait until 12 months from now to remedy this, we lose some leverage since it will be plain to see we need to open one or more spots.

This is how I'd project 40-man SPs for the upcoming season (11): Miller, Teheran, FA Veteran, Minor, Banuelos, Wisler, Perez, Weber, Folty, Jenkins, Gant

We would then go up to 14 the following season assuming we add these three: Sims, Bird, Whalen

For reference, our 40-man SP count for opening day 2015 was 9: Miller, Minor, Teheran, Wood, Cahill, Stults, Perez, Folty, Jenkins

[nsacpi]

If we wait until 12 months from now to remedy this, we lose some leverage since it will be plain to see we need to open one or more spots.

There is the downside to waiting that you point out. There is also something to be gained by waiting: a year of performance data to help you separate the wheat from the chaff. And of course with pitchers, a year from now one or more of the guys in the major league rotation may no longer be an option due to injury or performance issues.

[Horsehide Harry]

The issue with guys like Price and Greinke is probable length of contract (at least 7 years imo for Price) and the aging curve. Unless the contract is front-loaded you get more bang for the buck in 2016 and 2017 from those sorts of signings and less in the back end of the deal. This works against the fact our best talent in the minors is several years away. So guys like Riley, Albies, Acuna, Allard start hitting their stride in the majors as guys like Price and Greinke start to decline and produce less WAR/$. In addition to the normal aging curve for pitchers, there is also more risk of some sort of catastrophic injury over the course of a long contract (think Cliff Lee for example).

If you use your other ML pitchers (Miller & Teheran) to bring back near ready or ready ML talent, then after 16 but especially 18 and beyond, you are in good shape to really compete. And, while I agree that the value of the contract for the team diminishes each year because of age, you also benefit from the fact that you have veteran pitching leadership to lead your staff along the way, a staff BTW that would begin to get really expensive as the FA contract expires.

For instance, let's say the Braves signed Price for 7 years $210M just to make the numbers easy and the contract has an AAV of $30M (I am using Price, but it could be Greinke), you could argue that since 2016 is not a real competitive year that you are paying $30M to a pitcher for no reason. I would say that now is when he is available, now is when you have a protected pick, now is when you have the money and now is when you need to make a splash in the headlines to keep the attention of the more casual fans as you head into the new stadium. The Johns could say, yes we continued to trade away talent, but we got back more talent, which is young, which will help us be competitive for years and will be less expensive which will allow us to reinvest in talent just like we did with the Price signing. Also, that $30M gets cheaper relative to salary inflation every year. You also have a veteran ACE who by all reports is a good teammate, is intelligent, takes care of himself (unlikely to be a Sabathia or Colon), likes the South, likes Atlanta and will likely age well from the standpoint of transition from TOR ACE to mentor to the up and coming young studs. So, you have Price: 2016 - minimal effect, more PR than anything else; 2017 - leads the staff in trying to contend for a PO spot; 2018-2020 Staff Ace on a WS competitive team; 2021-22 - overpaid (likely) veteran who is a #3-5 starter who has been mentoring the new young guns like Allard and Soroka and Toussant or whoever they might be.

Could he get injured? Sure. It's happened before (Nick Esasky) and will happen again. But, his medical history is good (or appears to be), he hasn't been especially abused along the way, he's shown a history of durability, he doesn't appear to lead a high risk lifestyle, he appears to take care of himself, etc. Given a choice of paying him $210M over 7 or Cueto $140M over 5, I think Price is a MUCH better bet. It's not so much length of contract but likelihood of good performance to the end of the contract, no matter the length, IMO.

[dak]

There is the downside to waiting that you point out. There is also something to be gained by waiting: a year of performance data to help you separate the wheat from the chaff. And of course with pitchers, a year from now one or more of the guys in the major league rotation may no longer be an option due to injury or performance issues.

Yep, self-scouting is going to be increasingly important for us now that we'll be in the business of trading from a surplus of prospects versus trading rentals. The FO needs to align on their future valuation of all these young pitchers. As trade proposals are discussed this Winter, we need to look for opportunities where trade partners value some of these guys more than we do.

It's a dilemma, but I'm glad that we're starting to have some "rich-people" problems instead of just "poor-people" problems when it comes to asset management.

[Horsehide Harry]

Yep, self-scouting is going to be increasingly important for us now that we'll be in the business of trading from a surplus of prospects versus trading rentals. The FO needs to align on their future valuation of all these young pitchers. As trade proposals are discussed this Winter, we need to look for opportunities where trade partners value some of these guys more than we do.

It's a dilemma, but I'm glad that we're starting to have some "rich-people" problems instead of just "poor-people" problems when it comes to asset management.

The problem with trading pitching prospects is that there is a relative glut in the FA pitching market. And while you will always have markets such as Colorado where they have a hard time signing FA pitching, the glut will devalue the return, at least somewhat compared to other years where pitching is scarce.

Why trade talent away to acquire pitching prospects when you can just sign a pitcher for nothing more than money (prospects have a monetary value as well as a talent value as well)? Pitching prospects come with the risk of never panning out. Even if you sign a relative reclamation FA like a Latos, you have at least seen him do it at the ML level before.

[dak]

The problem with trading pitching prospects is that there is a relative glut in the FA pitching market. And while you will always have markets such as Colorado where they have a hard time signing FA pitching, the glut will devalue the return, at least somewhat compared to other years where pitching is scarce.

Why trade talent away to acquire pitching prospects when you can just sign a pitcher for nothing more than money (prospects have a monetary value as well as a talent value as well)? Pitching prospects come with the risk of never panning out. Even if you sign a relative reclamation FA like a Latos, you have at least seen him do it at the ML level before.

I agree that there is a surplus of mid-level SPs in the current FA market. I'd argue that this market is only minimally connected to the market for SP prospects. In other words, teams that miss out on Mat Latos are not going to look to acquire Mike Foltynewicz as a plan B. Conversely, teams looking to acquire Foltynewicz would not see Latos as a plan B.

The market that's most affected by the surplus of mid-level SPs in free agency would be the trade market for veteran SPs with 1-2 years of control.

[Enscheff]

I think we can safely assume a few things as near-facts:

1. The Braves are not going to sign anyone with a QO attached and give up their pick in the low 40s.
2. The Braves are not going to spend $25M+ per year on anyone.
3. The Braves are not going to spend $125M+ total on anyone.
4. The likely trade chips are Maybin, CB, and young pitching (maybe excluding Wisler).

Any speculations that contradict any of those near-facts is simply not grounded in reality. The Braves will utilize about $30M and the aforementioned trade chips to acquire players to fix the BP, add a catcher, add a bat for LF, and add a legit MOR pitcher. One of the acquisitions may end up being super creative and one of those holes is filled long term (such as the case with Olivera at 3B), but the moves will still adhere to those near-facts.

[Horsehide Harry]

I agree that there is a surplus of mid-level SPs in the current FA market. I'd argue that this market is only minimally connected to the market for SP prospects. In other words, teams that miss out on Mat Latos are not going to look to acquire Mike Foltynewicz as a plan B. Conversely, teams looking to acquire Foltynewicz would not see Latos as a plan B.

The market that's most affected by the surplus of mid-level SPs in free agency would be the trade market for veteran SPs with 1-2 years of control.

If that is the case, then you have to question the motivation of the acquiring team and the return (value).

What team out there is going to look at the Braves and say "they are willing to trade Folty even though they have need at the ML level so I am going to give them a significant return for him?" Or any of the Braves ready or near ready SP prospects.

Of the near ready or ready SP: Wisler - probably the best with the most value; Banuelos - injured, question mark, little value; Folty - also injured, question mark; Perez - Teams have to really believe and I doubt many do at this point; Weber - same as Perez but for different reasons.

Everyone else at this point would have to be seen as a depth acquisition.

[dak]

I think we can safely assume a few things as near-facts:

1. The Braves are not going to sign anyone with a QO attached and give up their pick in the low 40s.
2. The Braves are not going to spend $25M+ per year on anyone.
3. The Braves are not going to spend $125M+ total on anyone.
4. The likely trade chips are Maybin, CB, and young pitching (maybe excluding Wisler).

I fully agree with this assessment as it relates to the current offseason.

[Horsehide Harry]

I think we can safely assume a few things as near-facts:

1. The Braves are not going to sign anyone with a QO attached and give up their pick in the low 40s.
2. The Braves are not going to spend $25M+ per year on anyone.
3. The Braves are not going to spend $125M+ total on anyone.
4. The likely trade chips are Maybin, CB, and young pitching (maybe excluding Wisler).

Any speculations that contradict any of those near-facts is simply not grounded in reality. The Braves will utilize about $30M and the aforementioned trade chips to acquire players to fix the BP, add a catcher, add a bat for LF, and add a legit MOR pitcher. One of the acquisitions may end up being super creative and one of those holes is filled long term (such as the case with Olivera at 3B), but the moves will still adhere to those near-facts.

Unless you are one of the Johns your "near facts" are just your speculation. Now, it may be speculation based on history. But, I would say that the last 12 months or so are different historically that the last 12 years. That is already PROVEN, not near fact but FACT.

Will the Braves do what I suggest? Almost certainly not. My approach is admittedly super aggressive in a lot of ways and would be a hard sell initially to the casual fan and would be a non-traditional gamble (I would argue not going this approach is at least as big a gamble of creating, not a winner, but a perpetual "ok" team). But, I strongly believe that unless you are prepared for years, YEARS, in the wilderness like the Pirates, KC, Toronto, etc. OR you have all the money that you need to buy your way over the bumps in the road, then you have to be aggressive, creative and willing to take a few gambles if you want greatness and are not willing to settle for mediocrity.

[nsacpi]

It is true that the FO became more unpredictable this year. But some things remain unlikely. Signing Price or Greinke for example.

[Horsehide Harry]

It is true that the FO became more unpredictable this year. But some things remain unlikely. Signing Price or Greinke for example.

Unlikely in the sense that they will likely be at the top end of the most expensive FA in all of baseball. Unlikely in the sense that the Braves have not often been shopping at that height, with the last probably being Greg Maddux. Unlikely in the sense that clubs with big pockets will be players.

BUT, the Braves have cleared payroll so they can spend. They COULD clear more easily enough. The actual market for Price and Greinke will actually be fairly limited in that more than half of the clubs can be dismissed out of hand and several of the heavier spending clubs have signaled that they don't plan to play in that market (Yankees). I think the Dodgers will go hard to re-sign Greinke and would have to be seen as the front runner. Boston and the Cubs (and maybe Toronto) look to be the main competition for Price. But, with Lester signing with the Cubs last year and Arrieta's emergence, I could see them going multiple depth as opposed to just Price, maybe Zimmerman and Leake or Latos. So, I think Boston is the main comp for Price. And, given an equal or near equal financial package, I think Price comes to Atlanta - IF Atlanta plays.

[nsacpi]

I wouldn't be so sure the Yankees will not be in on Price.

[Horsehide Harry]

I wouldn't be so sure the Yankees will not be in on Price.

I saw where young Stienbrenner said he would not be paying luxury tax next year, but he could be lying I guess.

[nsacpi]

I saw where young Stienbrenner said he would not be paying luxury tax next year, but he could be lying I guess.

I think this is the third year he's said that. Maybe three's a charm.

Back in May, he had this to say: It remains my goal to get under that $189 million (luxury-tax threshold), but it’s not going to happen for at least two more years when these big contracts we have expire.

After 2016, the Teixeira, Sabathia and Beltran contracts come off the books. After 2017, ARod.

[Enscheff]

Unless you are one of the Johns your "near facts" are just your speculation. Now, it may be speculation based on history. But, I would say that the last 12 months or so are different historically that the last 12 years. That is already PROVEN, not near fact but FACT.

I guess I don't know what to say if you don't agree with the "facts" I outlined. You either haven't been paying attention to literally every single interview/quote to come from the Braves front office in the last year, or you think they are creating an elaborate smokescreen.

[dak]

If that is the case, then you have to question the motivation of the acquiring team and the return (value).

What team out there is going to look at the Braves and say "they are willing to trade Folty even though they have need at the ML level so I am going to give them a significant return for him?" Or any of the Braves ready or near ready SP prospects.

Of the near ready or ready SP: Wisler - probably the best with the most value; Banuelos - injured, question mark, little value; Folty - also injured, question mark; Perez - Teams have to really believe and I doubt many do at this point; Weber - same as Perez but for different reasons.

Everyone else at this point would have to be seen as a depth acquisition.

Not sure I'm following. My point is that each team's needs are pretty nuanced. A rebuilding team that is not seeking to contend might have an interest in a high-risk arm like Tyrell Jenkins or Folty that could develop into an asset in the long-term, but is not likely ready to contribute at a high level in 2016. That same rebuilding team has less incentive to spend $10m on a mid-rotation starter on a 1-2 year deal.

At present, we are in a decent leverage position with our young SPs. We don't have an immediate 40-man roster crunch and we have only one player in this pool out of options. Other teams know we have a surplus of young pitching. I don't anticipate we'll need to aggressively shop anyone to get the phone ringing.