Around The Majors 2019

[thewupk]

The point is they are better than their replacements, so their absence means fewer runs. Well except for Neck, but his absence still forces the bench to be shorter.

Both offenses are good with no real advantage on either side

[Southcack77]

There is a more optimistic take on the Braves. Their record at the end of May was 30-27, with a run differential of zero. Their record since is 56-27 with a +98 run differential. The most identifiable difference is Donaldson turning it on after a slow start. I'm pretty confident in asserting the real Donaldson is closer to the one we've been seeing the last few months. Also the pen has improved since the trade deadline. This team since end of May has been pretty close to elite. Not quite on par with the Astros and Dodgers, but pretty close. I think there is a case to be made we are the third best team in the majors going into the post-season.

So yes, we've had a significant amount of luck. But also this team (as currently constructed) is better than a true talent .560 team.

It's really tough to gauge, because the Braves have had a lot of unexpectedly bad performances and injuries that have been counterbalanced by a fair number of unsustainable performances by backups, reserves, and prospects.

I think the Braves have played most of the season without their platonic ideal of a best team, but they've benefitted from pretty good luck while that's been the case.

So what that means for the future, dunno. I think taking Donaldson off the team is a big blow though. That's production that will need to be replaced somehow (even if it is by Donaldson himself).

[Carp]

There is a more optimistic take on the Braves. Their record at the end of May was 30-27, with a run differential of zero. Their record since is 56-27 with a +98 run differential. The most identifiable difference is Donaldson turning it on after a slow start. I'm pretty confident in asserting the real Donaldson is closer to the one we've been seeing the last few months. Also the pen has improved since the trade deadline. This team since end of May has been pretty close to elite. Not quite on par with the Astros and Dodgers, but pretty close. I think there is a case to be made we are the third best team in the majors going into the post-season.

So yes, we've had a significant amount of luck. But also this team (as currently constructed) is better than a true talent .560 team.

This. And to add to that, we started the year with half of our rotation on the DL and since opening day, we've had like a 80 percent turnover in the BP due to either injuries or declining performance.

[NYCBrave]

This. And to add to that, we started the year with half of our rotation on the DL and since opening day, we've had like a 80 percent turnover in the BP due to either injuries or declining performance.

It's easy to forget how many poor performances we got this year from our pitching. That's not even including losing our closer Vizcaino after 4 games. We got 4 starts each from Newcomb, Wright and Wilson, the majority of which were poor. Touki was pretty bad. Winkler was very bad. Biddle was very bad. Minter was very bad. Carle was very bad. Venters was horrendous. Even Sobotka has a 5+ ERA. We somehow even survived Jackson's 7 blown saves. Kevin Gausman started 16 games for us and ended with an ERA over 6!!!

[nsacpi]

It's easy to forget how many poor performances we got this year from our pitching. That's not even including losing our closer Vizcaino after 4 games. We got 4 starts each from Newcomb, Wright and Wilson, the majority of which were poor. Touki was pretty bad. Winkler was very bad. Biddle was very bad. Minter was very bad. Carle was very bad. Venters was horrendous. Even Sobotka has a 5+ ERA. We somehow even survived Jackson's 7 blown saves. Kevin Gausman started 16 games for us and ended with an ERA over 6!!!

I think the key was that thanks to having good depth we were able to limit the damage from poor performers.

If you look at fWAR, our biggest "losers" were Venters and Carle with fWAR of -0.4. We cut our losses and moved on. Compare that to a team like the Metropolitans who had one pitcher at -0.4, one pitcher at -0.5, another at -0.6 and a third at -0.9. The Metropolitans have the aces but because they don't have as much depth they also have the bigger "losers."

It also helped that we did a good job of picking up a couple guys off the scrap heap. Even though they largely performed at replacement level, they helped limit the innings that were allocated to guys performing below replacement level.

It does raise an interesting question for the post-season. Tomlin, Blevins and Swarzak are replacement level pitchers. How much do we lean on those guys. Do they even make the post-season roster.

[NYCBrave]

According to MLB.com's Jon Morosi, there is "increasing speculation in the industry" that Stephen Strasburg will opt out of his contract with the Nationals after this season.


Strasburg would be leaving four years and $100 million on the table, but he could probably come close to doubling that monetary figure on a market that will be light on upper-tier free agents. The 31-year-old right-hander is 16-5 with a 3.47 ERA, 1.039 WHIP, and 215/43 K/BB ratio through 179 innings (28 starts) this season. Morosi also suggests that Strasburg and his agent Scott Boras could leverage the opt-out possibility into a new long-term deal with Washington

[nsacpi]

According to MLB.com's Jon Morosi, there is "increasing speculation in the industry" that Stephen Strasburg will opt out of his contract with the Nationals after this season.


Strasburg would be leaving four years and $100 million on the table, but he could probably come close to doubling that monetary figure on a market that will be light on upper-tier free agents. The 31-year-old right-hander is 16-5 with a 3.47 ERA, 1.039 WHIP, and 215/43 K/BB ratio through 179 innings (28 starts) this season. Morosi also suggests that Strasburg and his agent Scott Boras could leverage the opt-out possibility into a new long-term deal with Washington

Opt out clauses are gold for players. Heads I win. Tails you lose.

[Enscheff]

Opt out clauses are gold for players. Heads I win. Tails you lose.

Remember when fools used to argue that opt outs were actually good for teams because players would just magically opt out as soon as the team no longer wanted them?

[bravesfanMatt]

Remember when fools used to argue that opt outs were actually good for teams because players would just magically opt out as soon as the team no longer wanted them?

Not saying opt outs are always good. But him opting out might be good for the sand fleas. Not Paying a 31 year old pitcher with numerous injuries another 100 million over 4 years could be a blessing in disguise. Let another team pony up more money for Stras decline years.

[Enscheff]

Not saying opt outs are always good. But him opting out might be good for the sand fleas. Not Paying a 31 year old pitcher with numerous injuries another 100 million over 4 years could be a blessing in disguise. Let another team pony up more money for Stras decline years.

LOL...there it is.

[thethe]

Frontloading a deal with an opt out I think its an interesting move for a front office to take.

Almost guarantees the player will exercise the opt out and the team is paying for prime years.

[NYCBrave]

Remember when fools used to argue that opt outs were actually good for teams because players would just magically opt out as soon as the team no longer wanted them?

Jason Heyward lol

[bravesfanMatt]

LOL...there it is.

There what is? Not thinking stras will age well. I want no part of him for 25 million per going into age 32, 33, 34 and 35.

[Carp]

LOL...there it is.

There are certainly scenarios where opt outs can mutually benefit a team down the line, though I think it's pretty clear the opt out is completely in the player's favor when they are signed. If I'm the Nats, I thank him for his services and I happily let him walk.

[Enscheff]

There what is? Not thinking stras will age well. I want no part of him for 25 million per going into age 32, 33, 34 and 35.

Then if MLB teams agree with you his market rate won't be higher than his current deal, and he won't opt out.

It's literally the same discussion every time opt outs get mentioned haha.

[Carp]

There what is? Not thinking stras will age well. I want no part of him for 25 million per going into age 32, 33, 34 and 35.

Technically he's getting paid only 15 million per year during those years since most of that money is deferred between 2024-2030.

[Carp]

Then if MLB teams agree with you his market rate won't be higher than his current deal, and he won't opt out.

It's literally the same discussion every time opt outs get mentioned haha.

I thought teams shouldn't pay market value for pitchers in their 30's?

[bravesfanMatt]

Then if MLB teams agree with you his market rate won't be higher than his current deal, and he won't opt out.

It's literally the same discussion every time opt outs get mentioned haha.

I am not saying that. I said that him opting out might work out for the gnats. I personally don’t think he holds up. I have no doubt someone will pay stupid money for him because he stayed healthy this year.

[bravesfanMatt]

Technically he's getting paid only 15 million per year during those years since most of that money is deferred between 2024-2030.

Yeah. I knew that but it is money spent regardless.

[salmagundy]

Cubs put Kimbrel on IL according to MLBTR.