2025-2026 offseason thread

[Enscheff]

Hopefully we are seeing this play out:

Well someone doesn’t understand something, and it probably means it’s us without some bit of info about the financials of the organization.

The only way this makes sense from a luxury tax perspective is if the long term plan is to jack payroll up so high 5 years from now that they benefit from having a cap number less than the actual payroll number. If they can pay $260M on a cap number of $240 in 5 years that would be pretty sweet.

They are currently at the point where the actual payroll is significantly higher than the luxury number. Hopefully they benefit from that as I hoped they would 3 years ago.

 

[Super]

I know it’s en vogue to hate in AA lately (and I agree he’s done a bad job since the Sale trade)

But he was massively successful here (missed the playoffs once). He’s earned my support to have him guide a rebuild.

I think that’s fair. But three straight years of disappointment with this hypothetical of the season going south, and two years missing the playoffs with a decent payroll…idk, I think there should be a serious discussion. He decided to go the extension strategy route, and if it leads to three straight years of failure, it should be a consideration to let him go.

 

[Super]

I think Anthopoulos gets a couple more seasons to see if his extension strategy optimally works, but I agree that he might not be the guy to do a teardown. Coppolella deserves all the heat he gets for his hyperactivity and questionable ethics, but he moved a ton of stuff and did manage to get decent value long term on a number of deals in the fire sale.

But some GMs are good at doing a teardown and laying a foundation but are unable to put the last pieces in place. Coppolella had reached the limit of his expertise and even without the excuse of the signing bonus infractions it was time for him to go. I think Anthopoulos is different in that he can recognize which finishing touches are needed and making the necessary acquisitions. I'm always going to question the totality of the extensions even though the AAVs on most of those deals looks reasonable.

I could be wrong, but as for a rebuild, I think Anthopoulos would ride this pony into the ground before making significant moves. Wren was similar in that respect.

It would be an interesting dynamic to have the guy whose extension strategy failed leading the way of trading those extended players.

 

[chop2chip]

I think that’s fair. But three straight years of disappointment with this hypothetical of the season going south, and two years missing the playoffs with a decent payroll…idk, I think there should be a serious discussion. He decided to go the extension strategy route, and if it leads to three straight years of failure, it should be a consideration to let him go.

Two years ago we made the playoffs despite our MVP and best pitcher effectively missing the entire season. We only made the playoffs because he acquired a Cy Young season for Vaughn Grissom. Last year was a disaster and AA is primarily responsible for that. All of the issues on the roster were well know before the season and I blame AA for keeping Snitker around.

As for the extensions, I enthusiastically endorsed them at the time, along with everyone in baseball including 99% of the folks on this board (credit to @50PoundHead and @Enscheff who were to wise to call out the risk at the time). Because I still think AA made the correct decision to extend everyone, I don’t think he should lose his job because some players regressed quicker than expected (largely due to injuries as is the case with Strider, Ozzie and Riley).

As for his qualifications to be the guy during the rebuild, AA has done a good job building a development pipeline despite the international signing restrictions and the late draft picks. He’s also done a good job keeping the right prospects and moving on from the busts. Seems like the type of guy you’d want guiding a rebuild.

 

[CyYoung31]

I think that’s fair. But three straight years of disappointment with this hypothetical of the season going south, and two years missing the playoffs with a decent payroll…idk, I think there should be a serious discussion. He decided to go the extension strategy route, and if it leads to three straight years of failure, it should be a consideration to let him go.

A discussion would certainly be warranted. I think you have to at least give him the opportunity to do a rebuild though.

 

[Enscheff]

If AA shits the bed again this offseason I don't think he's the guy to lead anything anymore.

There is no excuse for painting yourself into a decade long corner with extensions by leaving yourself zero payroll flexibility. The player control given to teams via the arbitration process is literally designed to give teams cheap flexibility over their young players, and he threw all that away when he handed out the extensions. So if he maxed out his payroll for a decade, and gave away all flexibility with those extensions, it's a fireable offense for someone tasked with leading baseball operations.

I'm still giving him the benefit of the doubt though because I do think he's an elite GM who had a few disastrous player acquisition periods, but he might prove me wrong over the next few months.

 

[Southcack77]

They are gonna have to out spend some mistakes. Harris really needs to rebound. We need to stop gutting the farm every year to make a trade. We will need cheap guys like Ritchie, Caminiti, and Waldrep to balance everything out. We will know pretty quick next year if Strider is back by his velo.

We knew when all the extensions were made that the Braves had essentially committed to a core and that the injuries to and aging of the core would for all practical purposes determine whether then won or lost.

I think there was a split as to which extensions were good and which were not but at the end of the day they committed.

Realistically, they're not going to have an eight man rotation or sign an elite free agent hitter to offset their commitment.

I have no idea what their payroll limit is or how they calculate it but they're spending a lot of money any way you look at it.

I don't necessarily assume that everyone who had a bad year or an injury is washed, myself, but they could be. That's what will determine the season though.

 

[Southcack77]

Yeah, that's not a fair criticism of AA at all. Other than the obviously stupid Contreras trade (which was so bad it can't be overstated), AA hasn't made a single mistake trading away prospects.

So while the catcher trade was completely moronic, AA has done nothing even remotely close to "gutting the farm".

The opposite really. He's been extremely averse to moving higher ceiling prospects.

The Murphy injury situation has definitely made the Contreras trade look like a stinker.

 

[Southcack77]

I think that’s fair. But three straight years of disappointment with this hypothetical of the season going south, and two years missing the playoffs with a decent payroll…idk, I think there should be a serious discussion. He decided to go the extension strategy route, and if it leads to three straight years of failure, it should be a consideration to let him go.

If the question is about process and you thought the risk/reward of the extensions made sense three years ago then the dice turning up snake eyes shouldn't really affect your view of AA.

I don't think it's necessary to sacrifice someone every time an org has a transition.

The question is whether as a general idea the GM is making wise decisions, not whether the team wins or loses. Firing the GM just because a long window closes doesn't make a lot of sense to me. That's always going to happen.

If you think he makes bad decisions overall then sure. But not putting the team into further salary hell is probably better all things considered when you aren't the dodgers.

 

[NYCBrave]

Interesting conversation. I feel like it's worth pointing out a few other points.

-The window is certainly closing, and the best days are behind, and it really seems like a lot more and more each passing year will have to go right in order to be an elite contender.

-The Braves are a weird organization in that they have a top 10 payroll, but simply do not hand out large contracts to free agents. Makes me wonder if part of the logic behind the extensions was for the fans so they could grow with the players, and you can't argue with attendance, even in a down season like this one. They certainly have plenty of fan favorites.

-The player development in the organization under AA has been elite, and to me that should be another reason to keep AA during the rebuild.

 

[chop2chip]

If AA shits the bed again this offseason I don't think he's the guy to lead anything anymore.

There is no excuse for painting yourself into a decade long corner with extensions by leaving yourself zero payroll flexibility. The player control given to teams via the arbitration process is literally designed to give teams cheap flexibility over their young players, and he threw all that away when he handed out the extensions. So if he maxed out his payroll for a decade, and gave away all flexibility with those extensions, it's a fireable offense for someone tasked with leading baseball operations.

I'm still giving him the benefit of the doubt though because I do think he's an elite GM who had a few disastrous player acquisition periods, but he might prove me wrong over the next few months.

The player extensions have been mostly a dud. But the strategy also resulted in acquiring Acuna’s age 27-30 seasons for 4 years $68m (with no commitment past that age). The surplus value of that alone might cover whatever negative the other extensions may amount to.

 

[Enscheff]

The player extensions have been mostly a dud. But the strategy also resulted in acquiring Acuna’s age 27-30 seasons for 4 years $68m (with no commitment past that age). The surplus value of that alone might cover whatever negative the other extensions may amount to.

Probably, so imagine if AA only extended Albies and Acuna to those cheap deals, and didn’t extend literally anyone else. There would be no strider deal, no Riley deal, the ability to dump Harris. No Murphy deal.

The strat didn’t have to be “extend everyone” or “extend none”. There could be a lot of flexibility right now while still reaping all that value from the Albies and Acuna deals, which are the only truly high surplus value deals.

 

[50PoundHead]

Two years ago we made the playoffs despite our MVP and best pitcher effectively missing the entire season. We only made the playoffs because he acquired a Cy Young season for Vaughn Grissom. Last year was a disaster and AA is primarily responsible for that. All of the issues on the roster were well know before the season and I blame AA for keeping Snitker around.

As for the extensions, I enthusiastically endorsed them at the time, along with everyone in baseball including 99% of the folks on this board (credit to @50PoundHead and @Enscheff who were to wise to call out the risk at the time). Because I still think AA made the correct decision to extend everyone, I don’t think he should lose his job because some players regressed quicker than expected (largely due to injuries as is the case with Strider, Ozzie and Riley).

As for his qualifications to be the guy during the rebuild, AA has done a good job building a development pipeline despite the international signing restrictions and the late draft picks. He’s also done a good job keeping the right prospects and moving on from the busts. Seems like the type of guy you’d want guiding a rebuild.

One of the ironies in the scouting/player development realm under Anthopoulos is that he appears to be doing fairly well with the lower-bonus international signees and missing on most of the high-bonus guys. Way too early to tell on Perdomo and Tornes from the last two classes, but Tavarez, Benitez, Glod, and Guanipa (injuries have to be taken into account) have come up short of expectations while Fuentes, Lara, and Gil look like they might turn out to be solid prospects. The two RHP Reyes also have done alright.

Big problem for the Braves right now is that there isn't a true OF prospect above A-ball at the moment.

 

[Super]

If the question is about process and you thought the risk/reward of the extensions made sense three years ago then the dice turning up snake eyes shouldn't really affect your view of AA.

I don't think it's necessary to sacrifice someone every time an org has a transition.

The question is whether as a general idea the GM is making wise decisions, not whether the team wins or loses. Firing the GM just because a long window closes doesn't make a lot of sense to me. That's always going to happen.

If you think he makes bad decisions overall then sure. But not putting the team into further salary hell is probably better all things considered when you aren't the dodgers.

I understand your overall point and don’t necessarily disagree. That said, I think it’s a touch more nuanced than that as far as liking the extensions at the time and then judging the results.

I don’t know the future, but I would hope AA had mapped something out. If the extensions truly locked him into never really being able to build around the edges or spend real money in free agency at any point, then that would’ve changed my view at least a tad at the time all the extensions happened. Things happen in baseball. If you paint yourself into a corner and remove any roster and salary flexibility in the name of extensions, then that deserves criticism and potentially costs your job. The alternative is letting him tear it down and try something different with a decade of the team’s time this time? Idk about that.

 

[chop2chip]

Probably, so imagine if AA only extended Albies and Acuna to those cheap deals, and didn’t extend literally anyone else. There would be no strider deal, no Riley deal, the ability to dump Harris. No Murphy deal.

The strat didn’t have to be “extend everyone” or “extend none”. There could be a lot of flexibility right now while still reaping all that value from the Albies and Acuna deals, which are the only truly high surplus value deals.

Of course. But what you’re then advocating for is the strategy of only do extensions that have good results and not extensions with bad results.

I didn’t love all of the extensions, specifically the risk/reward profile for the Strider extension. But most of the others were well lauded by non-biased folks (e.g. Zips liked the Harris, Riley and Murphy extensions).

 

[chop2chip]

I understand your overall point and don’t necessarily disagree. That said, I think it’s a touch more nuanced than that as far as liking the extensions at the time and then judging the results.

I don’t know the future, but I would hope AA had mapped something out. If the extensions truly locked him into never really being able to build around the edges or spend real money in free agency at any point, then that would’ve changed my view at least a tad at the time all the extensions happened. Things happen in baseball. If you paint yourself into a corner and remove any roster and salary flexibility in the name of extensions, then that deserves criticism and potentially costs your job. The alternative is letting him tear it down and try something different with a decade of the team’s time this time? Idk about that.

The Braves have added quite a bit of salary around the edges of the core

Ozuna
Sale
Iglesias
Lopez
Morton
Profar

All these guys were all paid meaningful salaries to augment the core. By all accounts AA will have plenty of money to add to the team this offseason.

 

[Hudson2]

At least Striders is only for 3 more seasons but if he rebounds then it won't be that bad. Harris maxing out at 12 million isn't terrible either. Riley probably scares me more than any of them bc of the length of the deal and he's been injured the past couple of years. Murphy could still be traded even with the hip surgery bc he'll probably come back even better than he was. AA probably sees Murphy and Baldwin as a DH when they aren't catching and won't address the need for another bat outside of SS which is a bad idea.

 

[Southcack77]

At least Striders is only for 3 more seasons but if he rebounds then it won't be that bad. Harris maxing out at 12 million isn't terrible either. Riley probably scares me more than any of them bc of the length of the deal and he's been injured the past couple of years. Murphy could still be traded even with the hip surgery bc he'll probably come back even better than he was. AA probably sees Murphy and Baldwin as a DH when they aren't catching and won't address the need for another bat outside of SS which is a bad idea.

Riley was the one I liked the least. I'm not sure it was right to be skeptical of it, but I was.

 

[cajunrevenge]

Probably, so imagine if AA only extended Albies and Acuna to those cheap deals, and didn’t extend literally anyone else. There would be no strider deal, no Riley deal, the ability to dump Harris. No Murphy deal.

The strat didn’t have to be “extend everyone” or “extend none”. There could be a lot of flexibility right now while still reaping all that value from the Albies and Acuna deals, which are the only truly high surplus value deals.

He could trade any of those for positive value but he says he refuses to trade anyone who signed an extension. Thats the problem.

 

[UNCBlue012]

Devin Williams to the Mets on a three-year, $50M deal. Unfortunately, I love this for move for them.