Quintana to Cubs

[nsacpi]

I like the Johnson for Bourn/Swisher deal regardless of what they were trying to do. I actually think that was a fairly unambiguously good move. They took on more money in the early days of the rebuild to have a salary flexibility in 2017. Didn't really give up anything.

I don't think there is any sort of hard pill to swallow in that one the way that some people have trouble with Kimbrell/Upton.

I have to say the Oliveira deal was a true failure in that they got the scouting so badly wrong and they also took on pretty significant long term salary. One upside of the Kemp deal is that it at least cleared the 2020 obligation to HO off the books. If Coppy can manage to move Kemp with the Braves paying less than they owed HO in 2018 or 2019 it would be a relatively decent payroll coup, I guess. I would fully support a deal sending Kemp and the Dodgers' contribution for Kemp and 6 million to whoever would take him for a bag of boiled peanuts.

i meant that was the deal that gave away that they wanted to have some money to build a more competitive team in 2017...i think they at one point really thought they could have a "young exciting competitive" team to open the new ballpark...they gradually adjusted those expectations down but still did not want a depths of rebuilding kind team out there...they've made compromises...mostly driven by the ballpark situation...

those compromises could have been fatal to the rebuild...but they got bailed out by two things...one was Dave Stewart...and the second was two unexpectedly valuable parting gifts from the ancien regime named Albies and Acuna

[NYCBrave]

It's interesting to consider just how much value the Braves gave up in their foolish attempt to be "palatable" in 2015-2016, and contenders by 2017...

1. They definitely would still have Wood and Peraza.
2. They definitely wouldn't have Matt Kemp's corpse running around LF earning $20M per year for 2.5 more seasons.
3. They would almost certainly have control over Swanson's age 29 season.
4. They would probably have 2-3 more Top 100 guys after trading Teheran.
5. They would likely have 1-2 more Top 100 guys from the Kimbrel trade.
6. They would likely have been in position to draft Senzel, who is currently a Top 15-20 guy and almost ready to step in at 3B.

That's a hell of a lot of value to give up to lose 94 games instead of 100+ for 2 seasons, and to be flirting with .500 in 2017.

I'm sure the pozzies still think it was a wise process though.

Which is the reason I wish we had a real ownership. It was pretty obvious the whole time there was massive pressure from people above Coppy that we had to be competitive by the time the new stadium opened.

[Enscheff]

i meant that was the deal that gave away that they wanted to have some money to build a more competitive team in 2017...i think they at one point really thought they could have a "young exciting competitive" team to open the new ballpark...they gradually adjusted those expectations down but still did not want a depths of rebuilding kind team out there...they've made compromises...mostly driven by the ballpark situation...

those compromises could have been fatal to the rebuild...but they got bailed out by two things...one was Dave Stewart...and the second was two unexpectedly valuable parting gifts from the ancien regime named Albies and Acuna

Ding ding ding. The Coppy-led FO has been responsible for very little of what makes the Braves rebuild a success so far.

[Southcack77]

i meant that was the deal that gave away that they wanted to have some money to build a more competitive team in 2017...i think they at one point really thought they could have a "young exciting competitive" team to open the new ballpark...they gradually adjusted those expectations down but still did not want a depths of rebuilding kind team out there...they've made compromises...mostly driven by the ballpark situation

Let's just pretend that the right term is cap space since that is what I so want to call it.

There is no real drawback to rebuilding in clearing cap space earlier so long as you aren't giving up things to do it. So I love the Johnson trade, because it made them more flexible earlier.

There is a difference, I think, between planning to be good in 2017 and giving themselves the opportunity to be good in 2017 if things worked out.

The HO trade is really the one that screwed things up. That didn't have to be a win now play, but it certainly looks dumb that they gambled 2018-2020 dollars on Oliveira being a good buy low acquisition.

The only way to see the Kemp deal as good, in my opinion, is to view it through the same lens as the Johnson/Swisher trade. Taking on more money to clear payroll a year earlier. If they managed to flip Kemp before 2019 for less than they owed Oliveira, it arguably would have been worth it.

I think someone is correct when they say that the Oliveira deal eliminated any serious plans the Braves had for trying to win in 2017.

[nsacpi]

Let's just pretend that the right term is cap space since that is what I so want to call it.

There is no real drawback to rebuilding in clearing cap space earlier so long as you aren't giving up things to do it. So I love the Johnson trade, because it made them more flexible earlier.

There is a difference, I think, between planning to be good in 2017 and giving themselves the opportunity to be good in 2017 if things worked out.

The HO trade is really the one that screwed things up. That didn't have to be a win now play, but it certainly looks dumb that they gambled 2018-2020 dollars on Oliveira being a good buy low acquisition.

The only way to see the Kemp deal as good, in my opinion, is to view it through the same lens as the Johnson/Swisher trade. Taking on more money to clear payroll a year earlier. If they managed to flip Kemp before 2019 for less than they owed Oliveira, it arguably would have been worth it.

I think someone is correct when they say that the Oliveira deal eliminated any serious plans the Braves had for trying to win in 2017.

I would say the drawback was that they persuaded themselves it was important to build a sense of momentum going into 2017...that led to the Swanson promotion and the drive for a strong finish in 2016 with attendant effect on our draft position...the drive to build momentum might have also been part of the motivation behind getting someone like Kemp, but I think the main motivation there was an erroneous sense that getting a middle of the order bat would offset the downside from getting Kemp

[Southcack77]

Anyone who simply dismisses the Miller trade because it doesn't fit their narrative isn't really a serious person. there were 29 other front offices that could have taken advantage of his supposed stupidity.

I think crediting the remainder of the rebuild to the TWO possible prospects that the front office inherited is somewhat amusing as well.

It's ok. The front office doesn't have to be perfect and the alternative isn't that they are completely stupid. It can be something in between.

[Enscheff]

Anyone who simply dismisses the Miller trade because it doesn't fit their narrative isn't really a serious person. there were 29 other front offices that could have taken advantage of his supposed stupidity.

I think crediting the remainder of the rebuild to the TWO possible prospects that the front office inherited is somewhat amusing as well.

It's ok. The front office doesn't have to be perfect and the alternative isn't that they are completely stupid. It can be something in between.

Correct...average or slightly below average.

Every time I say that you pozzies throw a tantrum though.

[Southcack77]

I would say the drawback was that they persuaded themselves it was important to build a sense of momentum going into 2017...that led to the Swanson promotion and the drive for a strong finish in 2016 with attendant effect on our draft position...the drive to build momentum might have also been part of the motivation behind getting someone like Kemp, but I think the main motivation there was an erroneous sense that getting a middle of the order bat would offset the downside from getting Kemp

to be honest, I don't really understand why they did the Kemp deal. I have a number of theories, but none of them involve the thought that they thought he was a really good player that was going to make the Braves a contender. I think he actually was more of an admission of defeat.

[Southcack77]

Correct...average or slightly below average.

Every time I say that you pozzies throw a tantrum though.

You've got them with a chance to approach .500 in year 3 and in the playoffs in year 4, with a championship window possibly opening beyond that. And you are their biggest detractor.

They've made mistakes, they've made some really interesting deals that look pretty good.

Ultimately, the proof has to be in the pudding right?

[striker42]

One thing that Hart/Coppy have done that's been overlooked is the reshaping of the front office. Bringing Roy Clark back was huge. Under the old regime we had entire drafts that were duds. But the drafting, especially after the first round, has been tremendous the last few years.

[nsacpi]

to be honest, I don't really understand why they did the Kemp deal. I have a number of theories, but none of them involve the thought that they thought he was a really good player that was going to make the Braves a contender. I think he actually was more of an admission of defeat.

that's getting kinda freudian

[nsacpi]

You've got them with a chance to approach .500 in year 3 and in the playoffs in year 4, with a championship window possibly opening beyond that. And you are their biggest detractor.

They've made mistakes, they've made some really interesting deals that look pretty good.

Ultimately, the proof has to be in the pudding right?

yup...luck eventually evens out and the won loss pretty much tells the whole story

[Enscheff]

You've got them with a chance to approach .500 in year 3 and in the playoffs in year 4, with a championship window possibly opening beyond that. And you are their biggest detractor.

They've made mistakes, they've made some really interesting deals that look pretty good.

Ultimately, the proof has to be in the pudding right?

Any competent major league sports management team could have done similar.

That is the definition of average.

Hell, you have even stated that selling off MLB assets and building a good farm as a result is nothing to brag about. And you're right, any competent management team could do it.

An above average FO doesn't shortchange a rebuild by acquiring "win now" assets in the middle of it. This FO has done that several times...I listed out exactly what that "win now" foolishness cost the Braves in future value. Here it is again:

1. They definitely would still have Wood and Peraza.
2. They definitely wouldn't have Matt Kemp's corpse running around LF earning $20M per year for 2.5 more seasons.
3. They would almost certainly have control over Swanson's age 29 season.
4. They would probably have 2-3 more Top 100 guys after trading Teheran.
5. They would likely have 1-2 more Top 100 guys from the Kimbrel trade.
6. They would likely have been in position to draft Senzel, who is currently a Top 15-20 guy and almost ready to step in at 3B.

That's a hell of a lot of value to give up to lose 94 games instead of 100+ for 2 seasons, and to be flirting with .500 in 2017.

I don't think that's the rebuild process an above average, good, or great FO follows.

I suppose you consider that a success though?

[nsacpi]

One thing that Hart/Coppy have done that's been overlooked is the reshaping of the front office. Bringing Roy Clark back was huge. Under the old regime we had entire drafts that were duds. But the drafting, especially after the first round, has been tremendous the last few years.

best post first round picks the last 3 drafts: Wentz, Waters, Wilson, Muller, Riley, Minter, Weigel

best post first round picks from the 2008-2014 "Wren drafts" (7 years): Kimbrel, Simmons, Gattis, Drury, Ahmed, Shae Simmons, Wood, La Stella, Caratini, Povse, Oberholtzer, Cunningham

The second group covers a seven year period. But I think the first group will have a hard time generating a third the value (pre-free agency years) that the second group generated. We will see. Kimbrel, Simmons and Wood alone are on track to deliver over 50 WAR during their pre-free agency years. Good luck matching that even on a pro-rated basis.

And I might add the last three drafts have benefited from having more extra picks in the second and third rounds than the Wren drafts (on average).

[Southcack77]

Any competent major league sports management team could have done similar.

That is the definition of average.

Hell, you have even stated that selling off MLB assets and building a good farm as a result is nothing to brag about. And you're right, any competent management team could do it.

An above average FO doesn't shortchange a rebuild by acquiring "win now" assets in the middle of it. This FO has done that several times...I listed out exactly what that "win now" foolishness cost the Braves in future value. Here it is again:

1. They definitely would still have Wood and Peraza.
2. They definitely wouldn't have Matt Kemp's corpse running around LF earning $20M per year for 2.5 more seasons.
3. They would almost certainly have control over Swanson's age 29 season.
4. They would probably have 2-3 more Top 100 guys after trading Teheran.
5. They would likely have 1-2 more Top 100 guys from the Kimbrel trade.
6. They would likely have been in position to draft Senzel, who is currently a Top 15-20 guy and almost ready to step in at 3B.

That's a hell of a lot of value to give up to lose 94 games instead of 100+ for 2 seasons, and to be flirting with .500 in 2017.

I don't think that's the rebuild process an above average, good, or great FO follows.

I suppose you consider that a success though?

I consider it an incomplete. They haven't really started making their big moves and decisions yet.

Ultimately, the rebuild is successful and the front office is proven to be above average if they turn a depleted organization into one that consistently wins again.

You wanted them to be a lot worse for a lot longer. I would have preferred that myself. But that isn't what they decided to do and there isn't much that can be done about it. And maybe they have chosen wisely. We'll see.

For the record, I've never been particularly impressed to hear Coppy talk. Seems like a bit of a weasel.

[Southcack77]

best post first round picks the last 3 drafts: Wentz, Waters, Wilson, Muller, Riley, Minter, Weigel

best post first round picks from the 2008-2013 "Wren drafts" (6 years): Kimbrel, Simmons, Gattis, Drury, Ahmed, Shae Simmons, Wood, La Stella, Caratini, Povse, Oberholtzer, Cunningham

The second group covers a six year period. But I think the first group will have a hard time generating half the value (pre-free agency years) that the second group generated. We will see.

And I might add the last three drafts have benefited from having more extra picks in the second and third rounds than the Wren drafts (on average).

I'm amused by the inclusion of Povse at all, but would point out he was drafted in 2014.

[IslandBrave]

Ding ding ding. The Coppy-led FO has been responsible for very little of what makes the Braves rebuild a success so far.

Hahaha. What?

[thethe]

I'm amused by the inclusion of Povse at all, but would point out he was drafted in 2014.

Or the fact that i believe kimbrel was drafted when roy Clark was here.

[thethe]

Hahaha. What?

Stop taking bait.

[nsacpi]

I'm amused by the inclusion of Povse at all, but would point out he was drafted in 2014.

see final edited version of my post