Angels close to acquiring Kyle Kubitza from Braves

chop2chip said:
I don't see how that contradicts what Law said or what I said. It's pretty clear that his change is his third best pitch. However, that's not unusual since it's usually the last pitch pitchers learn to harness.
Click to expand...

That's my point- it's usually the last pitch that develops fully. I was trying to respond to your point that Law said it was a "knock"-- it can't be one if he's already throwing one with some promise- that just means he's ahead of the curve for a 17 year old. Clearly it's his 3rd best pitch but it's right behind his curve already and that's impressive.
 
Just to add to this discussion, here's what David Lee's article on him reports:

"Sanchez's fastball varied high-80s to mid-90s, which is a large range and shows how raw the teenager's arm strength is at this point. He was around 89-92 when signed, but he flashed 94-95 in Arizona this past season before going back to 88-92 as the year progressed. It's not unusual for a teenager's velo to vary like this, and it's a good sign that he's showing the arm strength for mid-90s. Whether he's capable of holding it over the course of a full season remains to be seen. If so, his status will jump considerably. If not, it won't hurt his status.

An evaluator said Sanchez's curveball is his best secondary and profiles as a potential out pitch down the road, meaning a plus-potential offering. FanGraphs' Eric Longenhagen said it flashes 55 at present with 11-5 shape at 69-74. An evaluator said the changeup isn't far behind, as Sanchez shows advanced feel for his age, and it could settle around average to above average. Longenhagen's report also says this. The pitch has solid fade and separation with good arm speed, giving him a feel for three average-or-better pitches."
 
From everything I've read about Ricky Sanchez, I'm very excited about him. MLB Pipeline has him as our 17th rated prospect while BA has him somewhere in the 6-8 range, which seems much more appropriate. Can't wait to watch his progress. The more I study this trade, the more I like it. Grade A to A+.
 
Thank you everyone for posting that information. I think it's clear Sanchez is both raw and advanced. Great mix. What a great off season so far for Hart and co. Brilliant all around.
 
sturg33 said:
Really? Brilliant?
Click to expand...

Yes, the only sensible option was to tear it down and rebuild. The farm system is now one of the strongest in baseball (maybe top 10) and thats just after the first couple of months. The organization as a whole has been vastly strengthen by the recruitment of various top scouts from other organizations. This is how you built a successful team, from the bottom up and Hart/JS/Cox understand that. They are getting the team to a point where Coppy has a tremendous amount of assets to play with.
 
thethe said:
Yes, the only sensible option was to tear it down and rebuild. The farm system is now one of the strongest in baseball (maybe top 10) and thats just after the first couple of months. The organization as a whole has been vastly strengthen by the recruitment of various top scouts from other organizations. This is how you built a successful team, from the bottom up and Hart/JS/Cox understand that. They are getting the team to a point where Coppy has a tremendous amount of assets to play with.
Click to expand...

Our team has been made worse. We all agree with that.

Ok fine. You don't accept we could have signed Heyward/Upton. But the money was there to at least sign one of them. The fact that our organization chose not to do that makes me question their judgement.

We had a talented enough core to compete in 2015. We chose not to. OK fine. But if you choose not to compete then you better get damn good returns on the assets you're trading. We didn't get enough for Heyward or Upton.

They have made some really good deals. But the two big ones they made, I believe they failed.

Lastly, our team's issue last year was offense, not pitching. What have we done? Gotten rid of 2 of our 3 best hitters for more pitching. Our minor league had a dearth of hitting talent. What did we do? Failed to use our assets to acquire any above average hitting prospects.

Brilliant? No way. To steal from John Hart, I'd say "palatable"
 
sturg33 said:
Our team has been made worse. We all agree with that.

Ok fine. You don't accept we could have signed Heyward/Upton. But the money was there to at least sign one of them. The fact that our organization chose not to do that makes me question their judgement.

We had a talented enough core to compete in 2015. We chose not to. OK fine. But if you choose not to compete then you better get damn good returns on the assets you're trading. We didn't get enough for Heyward or Upton.

They have made some really good deals. But the two big ones they made, I believe they failed.

Lastly, our team's issue last year was offense, not pitching. What have we done? Gotten rid of 2 of our 3 best hitters for more pitching. Our minor league had a dearth of hitting talent. What did we do? Failed to use our assets to acquire any above average hitting prospects.

Brilliant? No way. To steal from John Hart, I'd say "palatable"
Click to expand...

Based on what I've read I believe they tried to extend one but the two sides disagreed as to appropriate value. The Braves had no flexibility to compete in 2015. There was no wiggle room in the salary ceiling to bring in any reasonable help in the areas of need. Who says we didn't get enough for Heyward and Upton? You? Do you know what was offered? Seems you are just making a bunch of assumptions to fit what you want to believe.

It doesn't matter whether the returns are pitching or hitting. Either one are just assets to fill the major league club and thats what they will be used for.
 
thethe said:
Based on what I've read I believe they tried to extend one but the two sides disagreed as to appropriate value. The Braves had no flexibility to compete in 2015. There was no wiggle room in the salary ceiling to bring in any reasonable help in the areas of need. Who says we didn't get enough for Heyward and Upton? You? Do you know what was offered? Seems you are just making a bunch of assumptions to fit what you want to believe.

It doesn't matter whether the returns are pitching or hitting. Either one are just assets to fill the major league club and thats what they will be used for.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter what was offered. You don't trade a player for the "best offer." You trade him for his fair value. I don't think we got that. Not even close.
 
sturg33 said:
It doesn't matter what was offered. You don't trade a player for the "best offer." You trade him for his fair value. I don't think we got that. Not even close.
Click to expand...

That isn't true. You assess all options and make the determination what hte best offer was. The offers out there were better then letting the two walk for picks in what would have ultimately been a non WS year. The expectation that teams were just going to throw all these great prospects for 1 year guys is lunacy.
 
Then keep em and go for it, try to re-sign them, and if not collect a pick. We were a year away from 96 wins. We had one of the youngest teams in baseball. A simple signing like Callaspo and maybe Aoki makes us significantly better that allows us to platoon.

But nah. Let's trade them for broken pitching prospects.
 
sturg33 said:
Then keep em and go for it, try to re-sign them, and if not collect a pick. We were a year away from 96 wins. We had one of the youngest teams in baseball. A simple signing like Callaspo and maybe Aoki makes us significantly better that allows us to platoon.

But nah. Let's trade them for broken pitching prospects.
Click to expand...

There was no resigning them. Letting them walk for picks would have been a disaster. Braves got significantly more value than a compensatory pick. Pure lunacy to put your eggs in one basket that produced a miserable season the year before. Where does the pitching come from? We lost Santana/Harang who were huge for the team.
 
sturg33 said:
Then keep em and go for it, try to re-sign them, and if not collect a pick. We were a year away from 96 wins. We had one of the youngest teams in baseball. A simple signing like Callaspo and maybe Aoki makes us significantly better that allows us to platoon.

But nah. Let's trade them for broken pitching prospects.
Click to expand...

The 96 wins was a fluke.

We had no cap room, and needed 2 SP's, SP depth, some bullpen pieces, bench pieces, a starting 2B, all with little payroll IF you keep Jason/Justin.

Im not convinced we win more than 85-87 games if we keep both Justin and Jason.

Then you lose both for basically nothing. We werent winning/competing for the WS with them, its delusional to think otherwise.
 
jpx7 said:
The delusional individual is the one who boasts utter certainty in their opinions.
Click to expand...

We won 80 games, and lost Harang/Santana, and had little money to play with.

How are we replacing those 400+ innings.

In before the huge Harang stuff.
 
Tapate50 said:
Buying on a career year for Young, and while I like FG... He is no bet to play 50 games.

None of those players are near the complete package and reliability of NM. I get you don't like the signing, and that has validity but the Braves obviously wanted him around for 2017. You don't, and that's ok but it's the fundamental difference in your thought process.
Click to expand...

Colby Rasmus does, except he's been better offensively and defensively. But that's been discussed Ad Nauseum, I just listed other still avalable players who could be had for cheap. That's ignoring the trade market where we probably could have gotten Marlon Byrd, or Seth Smith, or jumped on other guys like Cuddyer or Rios.

Food for thought, for the same total dollars as Markakis, we could have gotten 3 years of Lowrie and 2 years of Cuddyer. Not that I think especially highly of those players, the Markakis deal was a terrible deal, especially when equivalent value players are still out there.

As far as Markakis contributing in 2017, I'm guessing he'll be contributing to a healthy chunk of our DL time.
 
You can only patch a crack for so long before it bursts and them the floodgates open and then you really got a problem.

That was the philosophy of Wren, yes we had a nice core but we were always patching areas of needs and in the long run it cost us. We weren't winning the WS in 2015 unless payroll went up exponentially. We could have patched with a few lower type players and made a run that would have resulted in a 1st round exit again, and then Heyward and Upton decide to leave for greener pastures and then BAM...the floodgate us open and there is no going back and it would set this organization back for 5-10 years to recover, and that's a disaster going into the new stadium.

This is why JS wanted Hart, to be at the forefront of making tough decesions to at least be able to handle the critics instead of throwing JC to the wolves. JC has a lot of clout though, and so far they have done a phenomenal job looking towards the future and rebuilding the entire organization from top to bottom so the pipeline is flowing and able to fill needs and retool year after year. That's why the run of division titles happened, we started with a good young core, added to that core and few big names at areas if need, and always had a viable replacement in the wings to fill an aging player or had the depth to acquire a need. That's the Braves Way, and that's what we're gonna get back to.

I'm kinda meh on the Upton deal as well, BUT if anything it adds depth to an organization in desperate need of it, and none of us know what Uptons value was on the market as a 1 year rental. I think Hart overplayed his hand somewhat, but it was only 2 years ago that we got Upton for relatively nothing but a really good versatile player, a dwindling pitching prospect, and a young and risky infielder. So while we were basking in the glory of raping the Dbacks for him, maybe his value amongst FOs just isn't as great as we think it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top