Well, to sort of agree with both sides … I am still trying to figure out what the strategy is here. I mean, I get that we needed to rebuild the farm system. I get that we had soon-to-be-expensive bats that we weren’t likely to re-sign, and we needed to maximize the value. I get that the Braves are historically a team built on pitching and defense, and since 70% of all top prospects don’t have meaningful careers, we needed to stockpile as many high-upside arms as possible, hoping that at least one or two turn into legitimate aces. Or at least 2/3 guys.
Check.
But those moves feel like tactics, not strategy.
So as near as I can tell, the plan is:
- To build a best-in-league pitching staff through the draft and trades.
- To load the system in a money ball sort of way with speed/contact guys, ideally at second, third, center, and possibly left.
- To see how many of those speed/contact guys can actually get on base, run the bases, and score runs at the major league level. The ones that can stick. The ones that can’t become utility guys or go away.
- To trade surplus pitching (assuming we have some), sign Cubans, pray for Ruiz, or grow in a vat Freeman-esque RBI guys to replace the speed contact guys that don’t stick, and put them (I guess) in left or at third.
Which kind of makes sense (although it still doesn’t explain, say, Markakis), but it feels a lot like saying, “my retirement plan is to buy lots and lots of lottery tickets, knowing most won’t pay off, but the ones that do, wow!”
I like loading up on pitching, especially high-upside. But given that we need arms to fill at least two rotation spots by 2017, and presumably have spares to trade, the high-risk factor makes this feel less like strategy and more like high-stakes gambling -- unless they are counting on Roger to fix more scrapheap pitchers if necessary (an idea not without merit).
Love, love the emphasis on speed and contact — it seems reasonable to expect that at least two of Perez, Smith, Peraza, and Peterson will be able to get on base and run. At least, it feels like the most likely tactic to pan out.
But in 2017, are we really counting on Freeman, Bethancourt, Markakis, Johnson (assuming he’s not replaced with a speed guy like Peterson), and Simmons alone to drive them in?
What am I missing?