2015 June Draft Results Thread

There are some people who wanted a draft strongly skewed toward pitching or hitting. I think a balanced approach where you really look for high upside guys early works best. Why limit yourself when so many things already make the draft so difficult. I'm happy that so far we have taken 2 HS pitchers, 2 HS hitters and 1 college pitcher. The diversified approach (informed by data about how the mix should shift over the course of the draft) makes much more sense than going in with a pre-conceived notion you are going to focus on hitters or pitchers.
 
chop2chip said:
Drury and Ahmed were the very definition of throw in pieces (at the time at least).

It's seems rather petty to criticize the team for picking the wrong players when the players they did get are almost universally performing well with the only exception being Rio Ruiz (the young offensive player we got fwiw).
Click to expand...

Im not trying to or argue the individual players the Braves have acquired. My only complaint (not really a complaint, just a difference of opinion) is that the Braves are clearly trying to acquire every pitcher they can. I don't think anyone could reasonably argue it's just coincidence and that they've always taken the highest upside players. The team is using the old strategy of acquire 10 pitchers and hope 1 works out.

In todays economics, I believe position players provide the best value to a team; especially a mid market rebuilding team like the Braves. They system is almost completely dry of position players right now with only possibly 2-3 long term position players on the major league roster. The system shows you can get veteran starters at a relatively cheap price (Miley, McCarthy, Liriano, Hammel, etc.) Heck, Shields was outstanding value. The list of available free agent position players that become available is rather ugly.
 
nsacpi said:
There are some people who wanted a draft strongly skewed toward pitching or hitting. I think a balanced approach where you really look for high upside guys early works best. Why limit yourself when so many things already make the draft so difficult. I'm happy that so far we have taken 2 HS pitchers, 2 HS hitters and 1 college pitcher. The diversified approach (informed by data about how the mix should shift over the course of the draft) makes much more sense than going in with a pre-conceived notion you are going to focus on hitters or pitchers.
Click to expand...

Agreed 100%
 
gilesfan said:
Im not trying to or argue the individual players the Braves have acquired. My only complaint (not really a complaint, just a difference of opinion) is that the Braves are clearly trying to acquire every pitcher they can. I don't think anyone could reasonably argue it's just coincidence and that they've always taken the highest upside players. The team is using the old strategy of acquire 10 pitchers and hope 1 works out.

In todays economics, I believe position players provide the best value to a team; especially a mid market rebuilding team like the Braves. They system is almost completely dry of position players right now with only possibly 2-3 long term position players on the major league roster. The system shows you can get veteran starters at a relatively cheap price (Miley, McCarthy, Liriano, Hammel, etc.) Heck, Shields was outstanding value. The list of available free agent position players that become available is rather ugly.
Click to expand...

Seriously? Nobody in the system at all aside from Freeman & Simmons?
 
dak said:
Yep, if the Braves believed strongly they were taking these two guys at market value and they were at risk of losing them, then the picks are defensible. I suppose we'll never know for sure. I guess I just prefer a more flexible, value-driven approach to drafting. In other words, don't fall in love with a 17 year old like Soroka at the risk of capitalizing on others that end up being available unexpectedly below perceived market value. It felt last night that we were willing to take on injury and development risks, but not "market" risks.
Click to expand...

True. I just think the baseball draft is a more "beauty in the eye of the beholder" enterprise than the other professional drafts (although hockey comes close). It's really hard to determine "market" because of all the factors present in the baseball draft that aren't present in other drafts, especially now with the signing pool limits. Curious to see if Cameron signs. The Astros have the pool to accommodate him.
 
chop2chip said:
I don't want us to narrow our focus on anything in specific. If the strategy is always take BPA, then I think that applies to prospect accumulation as well.

For as much love as the Cubs have gotten in this thread, they just spent 150 million on a 32 year old starting pitcher.
Click to expand...

If you could argue that what the Braves have done is take the BPA, that's fine. But, I don't think you could make the case that in every draft the BPA was a pitcher, could you?

I don't have an issue with Lester contract. Zips projects 6/151 for Lester based on a neutral park. You figure 4 to 4.5 WAR for the first couple seasons and then slow decline down.
 
gilesfan said:
Im not trying to or argue the individual players the Braves have acquired. My only complaint (not really a complaint, just a difference of opinion) is that the Braves are clearly trying to acquire every pitcher they can. I don't think anyone could reasonably argue it's just coincidence and that they've always taken the highest upside players. The team is using the old strategy of acquire 10 pitchers and hope 1 works out.

In todays economics, I believe position players provide the best value to a team; especially a mid market rebuilding team like the Braves. They system is almost completely dry of position players right now with only possibly 2-3 long term position players on the major league roster. The system shows you can get veteran starters at a relatively cheap price (Miley, McCarthy, Liriano, Hammel, etc.) Heck, Shields was outstanding value. The list of available free agent position players that become available is rather ugly.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree either. Position players are good! All things equal I take the position player. Brian Bridges said on Sunday that, all things equal, he takes the position player.

But you and Sturg are criticizing the Braves for not getting position players in their trades that they have made. What evidence do either of you have that legitimate position player prospects were available? In that case, would you advocate trading superior pitching prospects for inferior hitting prospects in the name of resource scarcity?
 
thethe said:
Seriously? Nobody in the system at all aside from Freeman & Simmons?
Click to expand...

Completely dry relative to other teams in the majors.

Peraza, Ruiz, Albies, Smith). I don't think anyone other than you could argue the Braves have a bunch of promising position players coming up through the system. And the ones they have all possibly play the same position and are the same type of hitter. (outside of Ruiz, who I really like)
 
gilesfan said:
If you could argue that what the Braves have done is take the BPA, that's fine. But, I don't think you could make the case that in every draft the BPA was a pitcher, could you?

I don't have an issue with Lester contract. Zips projects 6/151 for Lester based on a neutral park. You figure 4 to 4.5 WAR for the first couple seasons and then slow decline down.
Click to expand...

I don't see how you can argue otherwise. Allard was a slam dunk at 14. Everyone loves that pick. From that point on they went 2 hitters and 2 pitchers. That seems rather balanced.
 
chop2chip said:
I don't disagree either. Position players are good! All things equal I take the position player. Brian Bridges said on Sunday that, all things equal, he takes the position player.

But you and Sturg are criticizing the Braves for not getting position players in their trades that they have made. What evidence do either of you have that legitimate position player prospects were available? In that case, would you advocate trading superior pitching prospects for inferior hitting prospects in the name of resource scarcity?
Click to expand...

As I stated, I don't have any evidence. But, I don't think its a coincidence that it's pitchers being acquired. Especially when you hear interviews with people within the organization that state the philosophy is to acquire pitchers. Do you think it's just a coincidence? Just one possible example, but do you think the Pads would have been willing to trade Trea Turner in a deal for Justin Upton?
 
gilesfan said:
Are you 12 years old or just trying to argue like a 12 year old?
Click to expand...

But what is your argument? The Red Sox value hitting because they are signing hitters on the international market?

The Braves have done the same exact thing the last few years.
 
thethe said:
Thats because the rebuild is less than 1 year old. Come on Sturg...you are a smart guy. This is a multiple year plan and what they are doing now doesn't define what they will do for the next few years.
Click to expand...

Of course it doesn’t, and isn’t even remotely likely to be so.

But just for the sake of argument, let’s say it is. Given the wealth of pitching in the system, it’s going to be more than possible to run out a five-man rotation that’s as good as any in baseball outside of Los Angeles. You’ll probably have enough pieces left over for a more than adequate bullpen and injury insurance, even if you don’t sign free agents.

Now then. Under this admittedly absurd scenario, you’re left to cobble together an offense out of what’s in the system, say:

M Smith
Peraza
Freeman
Maybin
Markakis
Johnson/Ruiz/Peterson
Bethancourt
Simmons

I believe that team will still score more than we would have scored with Gattis, Heyward, and Upton, and I was one of the ones heartbroken by all three trades. And we’ll certainly give up fewer runs.

Now, I DO believe that at least one impact bat will come back, likely at 3rd, catcher (I guess) or even left. And I DO believe they’ll go outside for pen arms. But even if they didn’t, I’m more excited with this lineup than with what we had pre-rebuild. I really am.
 
gilesfan said:
Completely dry relative to other teams in the majors.

Peraza, Ruiz, Albies, Smith). I don't think anyone other than you could argue the Braves have a bunch of promising position players coming up through the system. And the ones they have all possibly play the same position and are the same type of hitter. (outside of Ruiz, who I really like)
Click to expand...

Braves are goingto have in all liklihood 3 top 100 prospects which are hitters. How many teams inbaseball can say the same thing?
 
gilesfan said:
Completely dry relative to other teams in the majors.

Peraza, Ruiz, Albies, Smith). I don't think anyone other than you could argue the Braves have a bunch of promising position players coming up through the system. And the ones they have all possibly play the same position and are the same type of hitter. (outside of Ruiz, who I really like)
Click to expand...
Potential top 100 prospects:

Ruiz

Davidson

Peraza

Albies

Guys that are on the periphery:

Dustin Peterson

Mallex Smith

We have at least average depth. That's far from "completely dry".
 
thethe said:
Braves haven't signed hitters in the international market?
Click to expand...

What is lost a bit in the discussion is that the Braves supposedly have the inside track on two highly-ranked position players from Latin America: SS Darian Cruz and OF Cristian Pache. The Latin American market is a little bit more like the Wild West because things aren't nailed down until the ink is dry on the contract (and there is all sorts of monkey business from scouts), but how we do there really augments the draft. I don't think one can truly separate the two.
 
gilesfan said:
As I stated, I don't have any evidence. But, I don't think its a coincidence that it's pitchers being acquired. Especially when you hear interviews with people within the organization that state the philosophy is to acquire pitchers. Do you think it's just a coincidence? Just one possible example, but do you think the Pads would have been willing to trade Trea Turner in a deal for Justin Upton?
Click to expand...

Probably not. Wil Myers under control for four years is much more valuable than 1 year of Upton (At 14 million, nevertheless).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top