Is it too much to ask?

[Deester11]

I am much higher on touki and newcomb than most. So I want to keep them too. Homer I guess

Nope. I'm with you. Stat scouting has its place but so does upside and maturity. Seeing these kids has been as much fun for me as watching the "great 8" in Greenville. I posted yesterday or so about Newk being unhittable when he throws strikes. Tonight was great other than the walks. Touki....if you've never seen him in person, shame on you. Ha.

May take a while for them to click but it's been more fun than not so far. Struggles included.

 

[Chico]

I also wouldn't use Allard. I would only use Newcomb, Soroka, or Toussaint if they were the only big piece we gave up.

Archer is good, but he's not great.

If we decided to make a big play this offseason for somebody I think Soroka and Touki would be the two we'd have to lose. I don't want to lose either of those guys, but I could see them being traded in the right deal. Both of their values are still high and 2-3 years away like most everyone else is.

 

[Chico]

my take too...and im hopeful losing 20-30 lbs will help his defense

Theoretically it should improve baserunning as well. If you're one who looks at him as a 8.5M a year acquisition I think he could be a 1.5 War guy with some approved defense and baserunning and that's fair value on the open market. He's not going to be the Kemp of the old days, but I look at him as more of a piece of the puzzle rather than the savior.

 

[yeezus]

Nope. I'm with you. Stat scouting has its place but so does upside and maturity. Seeing these kids has been as much fun for me as watching the "great 8" in Greenville. I posted yesterday or so about Newk being unhittable when he throws strikes. Tonight was great other than the walks. Touki....if you've never seen him in person, shame on you. Ha.

May take a while for them to click but it's been more fun than not so far. Struggles included.

Any of those guys we've been discussing would be lucky to be Archer. He had a great year last year and has been very good this year. Even going back to the minors he has years of pitching a lot of good innings. With his talent, I see a more years like 2015.

 

[clvclv]

I think it is reasonable to expect good prospects to perform well at age 22 in AA. If they aren't, I see nothing wrong with throwing some caution into the wind. And I don't see anyone suggesting that Swanson isn't ready for the majors based on his numbers in AA. Sample size noise, yada yada, but he's not really tearing the cover off the ball in the majors that would suggest our organization saw something to suggest he's ready.

Yes, that means he goes 3-4 with a homer tonight. You are welcome.

Apparently one of us is confused when it comes to the English language...

mqt - "I get that I don't know as much about these players as the FO, but I cannot fathom how they see him being ready given his uneven AA performance. Did they confuse his and Albies' performance?"

Millwood1Hitter - "This is a move that the organization will pay for over the next decade. This move is astonishingly stupid. STUPID I say! These morons up in the front office are so freaking clueless. You don't have to make this move right now. He's not ready."

TheBravos - "Too soon....Albies is younger, but deserved it."

jpx7 - "Many were hoping the Braves would wait at least until May 2017 to call up Swanson, especially since his performance heretofore has not demanded promotion."

Braves1976 - "Exactly. Plus this isn't him telling us he's ready. This is just the FO deciding months ago what they wanted to do with him and still doing it despite what his play has showed them."

Horsehide Harry - "It's like handing the keys to the Porsche to a 15 YO and watching immediately drive it into a tree."

anyushu - "Apparently they don't care about players showing they are ready before promoting them to the majors either."

anyushu (2) - "The issue is less about the lost year of control and more the fact we are promoting a prospect because the FO decided to rather than the player showing he is ready. Dansby has been fairly average overall at AA and been very poor the past month and a half (hitting .250 with an OPS right at .700). Promoting a guy who is struggling at AA to the majors is just a dumb move period."

dak - "Yeah, that's the first thing I thought of when I saw this announcement. The mysterious days off in recent weeks are now making sense. We executed to the baseline plan. Readiness of the player was not the primary factor."

When was the last time you SAW him play?

anyushu - "The futures game? Not sure what it has to do with anything though, like I said, this discussion has zero to do with scouting. Even our FO guys are making quotes saying they don't necessarily think he's ready, so they clearly don't have some magical scouting insight telling them something we don't see. The move makes zero sense because A. Swanson hasn't proven he's ready"

This has been the perfect example that many of us have used when mentioning a preference for trusting the opinions of people who are actually WATCHING the players play. There were obviously signs that they were picking up that told them he'd be fine that didn't show up in the boxscores. I understand those of you who are more numerically-inclined take this personally, but you really shouldn't. The point many of us TRY to make when we say we don't only trust the numbers and the spreadsheets is that there are things that you simply can't get from them. I, for one, am not saying that they're not very useful - they obviously are helpful tools - but they alone simply can't tell us the whole story.

Swanson is obviously "ready" - you can see it when you watch him play. This doesn't mean he's not going to struggle at times - this is a game where the most successful players fail to get a hit 7 out of 10 times they step to the plate - but when you WATCH his approach, and SEE the way he handles the bat and how good his instincts are, you realize he's as equipped to be successful as any of the younger players in the game.

There are no boxscores/spreadsheets/computer models that can tell you that - and there likely won't ever be.

 

[Enscheff]

You just took hours away from your high stakes real estate career to look all that up in an attempt to somehow prove a lot of folks think Dansby is not ready for the MLB level.

Now, so we are all clear, your evidence that he is ready for the MLB level is his .641 OPS through 26 PAs? Do you think anyone you listed above is shocked by his offensive performance so far? Or do you think a .641 OPS at the MLB level is about in line with a .745 OPS in AA?

I don't know if he is ready or not, and I seriously doubt this call up is going to stunt his development in any way. My issue is strictly with service time considerations.

I just want to know what evidence you see, other than the fact he was called up, that makes you think he was ready? Because you can "see" it? You with your real estate career and extensive scouting background?

 

[clvclv]

You just took hours away from your high stakes real estate career to look all that up in an attempt to somehow prove a lot of folks think Dansby is not ready for the MLB level.

Now, so we are all clear, your evidence that he is ready for the MLB level is his .641 OPS through 26 PAs? Do you think anyone you listed above is shocked by his offensive performance so far? Or do you think a .641 OPS at the MLB level is about in line with a .745 OPS in AA?

I don't know if he is ready or not, and I seriously doubt this call up is going to stunt his development in any way. My issue is strictly with service time considerations. I just want to know what evidence you see, other than the fact he was called up, that makes you think he was ready?

Awww...did pointing out the fact that your precious time spent combing FanGraphs wasn't able to paint the entire picture of the player hurt your feelings?

I'm so sorry.

I thought you had ignored all us "morons" already - particularly me.

Buzz off troll.

 

[chop2chip]

You just took hours away from your high stakes real estate career to look all that up in an attempt to somehow prove a lot of folks think Dansby is not ready for the MLB level.

Now, so we are all clear, your evidence that he is ready for the MLB level is his .641 OPS through 26 PAs? Do you think anyone you listed above is shocked by his offensive performance so far? Or do you think a .641 OPS at the MLB level is about in line with a .745 OPS in AA?

I don't know if he is ready or not, and I seriously doubt this call up is going to stunt his development in any way. My issue is strictly with service time considerations.

I just want to know what evidence you see, other than the fact he was called up, that makes you think he was ready? Because you can "see" it? You with your real estate career and extensive scouting background?

Hart said himself that Swanson wasn't ready, but that he would hold his own. I think that's an accurate portrayal of Dansby week one. There's been a lot to like about his approach and how well he moves defensively.

 

[Enscheff]

Awww...did pointing out the fact that your precious time spent combing FanGraphs wasn't able to paint the entire picture of the player hurt your feelings?

I'm so sorry.

I thought you had ignored all us "morons" already - particularly me.

Buzz off troll.

So your answer is a very predictable, "I don't know".

 

[thewupk]

You just took hours away from your high stakes real estate career to look all that up in an attempt to somehow prove a lot of folks think Dansby is not ready for the MLB level.

Now, so we are all clear, your evidence that he is ready for the MLB level is his .641 OPS through 26 PAs? Do you think anyone you listed above is shocked by his offensive performance so far? Or do you think a .641 OPS at the MLB level is about in line with a .745 OPS in AA?

I don't know if he is ready or not, and I seriously doubt this call up is going to stunt his development in any way. My issue is strictly with service time considerations.

I just want to know what evidence you see, other than the fact he was called up, that makes you think he was ready? Because you can "see" it? You with your real estate career and extensive scouting background?

The power and walks will come as more time passes. I think the things to take away from his first week in the majors is the 25% LD rate which is good and his K rate staying in line with what he did in AA. He's not being over matched so far and that's pretty evident.

 

[Enscheff]

Hart said himself that Swanson wasn't ready, but that he would hold his own. I think that's an accurate portrayal of Dansby week one. There's been a lot to like about his approach and how well he moves defensively.

Right, but clv thinks he's ready. I want to know what he sees that tells him Swanson is ready.

 

[clvclv]

Right, but clv thinks he's ready. I want to know what he sees that tells him Swanson is ready.

Apparently I don't need to - thewupk just posted the numbers.

PLEASE put me on ignore - try as you might, you're not going to be able to drag me into your childish personal crap. If "I don't know" will get you to do that, why don't you just assume that's always going to be the answer.

 

[chop2chip]

Right, but clv thinks he's ready. I want to know what he sees that tells him Swanson is ready.

Who ****ing cares if he thinks he's ready? If he thinks he's ready than more power to clv.

I don't understand why some on this board are self anointed fan accountability officers.

 

[Southcack77]

Apparently one of us is confused when it comes to the English language...

mqt - "I get that I don't know as much about these players as the FO, but I cannot fathom how they see him being ready given his uneven AA performance. Did they confuse his and Albies' performance?"

Millwood1Hitter - "This is a move that the organization will pay for over the next decade. This move is astonishingly stupid. STUPID I say! These morons up in the front office are so freaking clueless. You don't have to make this move right now. He's not ready."

TheBravos - "Too soon....Albies is younger, but deserved it."

jpx7 - "Many were hoping the Braves would wait at least until May 2017 to call up Swanson, especially since his performance heretofore has not demanded promotion."

Braves1976 - "Exactly. Plus this isn't him telling us he's ready. This is just the FO deciding months ago what they wanted to do with him and still doing it despite what his play has showed them."

Horsehide Harry - "It's like handing the keys to the Porsche to a 15 YO and watching immediately drive it into a tree."

anyushu - "Apparently they don't care about players showing they are ready before promoting them to the majors either."

anyushu (2) - "The issue is less about the lost year of control and more the fact we are promoting a prospect because the FO decided to rather than the player showing he is ready. Dansby has been fairly average overall at AA and been very poor the past month and a half (hitting .250 with an OPS right at .700). Promoting a guy who is struggling at AA to the majors is just a dumb move period."

dak - "Yeah, that's the first thing I thought of when I saw this announcement. The mysterious days off in recent weeks are now making sense. We executed to the baseline plan. Readiness of the player was not the primary factor."

When was the last time you SAW him play?

anyushu - "The futures game? Not sure what it has to do with anything though, like I said, this discussion has zero to do with scouting. Even our FO guys are making quotes saying they don't necessarily think he's ready, so they clearly don't have some magical scouting insight telling them something we don't see. The move makes zero sense because A. Swanson hasn't proven he's ready"

This has been the perfect example that many of us have used when mentioning a preference for trusting the opinions of people who are actually WATCHING the players play. There were obviously signs that they were picking up that told them he'd be fine that didn't show up in the boxscores. I understand those of you who are more numerically-inclined take this personally, but you really shouldn't. The point many of us TRY to make when we say we don't only trust the numbers and the spreadsheets is that there are things that you simply can't get from them. I, for one, am not saying that they're not very useful - they obviously are helpful tools - but they alone simply can't tell us the whole story.

Swanson is obviously "ready" - you can see it when you watch him play. This doesn't mean he's not going to struggle at times - this is a game where the most successful players fail to get a hit 7 out of 10 times they step to the plate - but when you WATCH his approach, and SEE the way he handles the bat and how good his instincts are, you realize he's as equipped to be successful as any of the younger players in the game.

There are no boxscores/spreadsheets/computer models that can tell you that - and there likely won't ever be.

Of course John Hart said he wasn't ready, so there is that too.

 

[clvclv]

All I can tell you is that he sure doesn't LOOK like he's ready.

 

[auyushu]

Swanson is obviously "ready" - you can see it when you watch him play. This doesn't mean he's not going to struggle at times - this is a game where the most successful players fail to get a hit 7 out of 10 times they step to the plate - but when you WATCH his approach, and SEE the way he handles the bat and how good his instincts are, you realize he's as equipped to be successful as any of the younger players in the game.

The issue there is he's had that since the moment he was drafted. He had that as a player at Vandy. That's not showing you he's ready, that's simply being poised and a player with a fantastic makeup. He's done nothing so far to show he should have been rushed through the minors. He's holding his own, which I expected when he was being called up. Just like he was doing in AA. There is a huge difference between holding your own and performing well however, and we've called him up before he's even shown the ability to do the latter in the upper minors. So we are wasting control time (possibly, I'm really going to try and stay out of this discussion till the new CBA is announced, if service time changes the stuff you quoted me on no longer matters as much to me) for him to struggle and take his lumps.

My issue has always been we were:
A. Wasting a potential year of control for Dansby on two seasons where we aren't going to the playoffs
B. Moving him up to waste that year of control when he hadn't performed at a level where he needed to be forced to the majors.

Wasting control time on below average or average performance would be a dumb move if things stay as they are with the CBA, but it's too soon to say on that, as Enscheff rightly pointed out earlier in thread.

 

[clvclv]

The issue there is he's had that since the moment he was drafted. He had that as a player at Vandy. That's not showing you he's ready, that's simply being poised and a player with a fantastic makeup. He's done nothing so far to show he should have been rushed through the minors. He's holding his own, which I expected when he was being called up. Just like he was doing in AA. There is a huge difference between holding your own and performing well however, and we've called him up before he's even shown the ability to do the latter in the upper minors. So we are wasting control time (possibly, I'm really going to try and stay out of this discussion till the new CBA is announced, if service time changes the stuff you quoted me on no longer matters as much to me) for him to struggle and take his lumps.


My issue has always been we were:
A. Wasting a potential year of control for Dansby on two seasons where we aren't going to the playoffs
B. Moving him up to waste that year of control when he hadn't performed at a level where he needed to be forced to the majors.

Wasting control time on below average or average performance would be a dumb move if things stay as they are with the CBA, but it's too soon to say on that, as Enscheff rightly pointed out earlier in thread.

Well thank God for you and Enscheff.

The brass has said since the day that Swanson and Albies were invited to camp that service-time concerns were absolutely not going to play ANY role in when those two were called up. The only two players currently on the roster that will even be under contract for significant money by the time Dansby reaches arbitration (and I'll state once again that there's little to no chance of that happening) are Julio and Freeman.

I swear I don't think some people around here could breathe if they weren't *itching. How about we wait and see what the CBA looks like AFTER they finish negotiating it before jumping off the ledge?

 

[Enscheff]

^---

Low.

Information.

Fan.

 

[auyushu]

I swear I don't think some people around here could breathe if they weren't *itching. How about we wait and see what the CBA looks like AFTER they finish negotiating it before jumping off the ledge?

Do you have reading comprehension issues or something? You basically just paraphrased what I said in my post and acted like you were making a completely different argument. The only person in this thread freaking out like a ledge jumper is you.

However, assuming we are going to be able to sign Swanson to an extension is a bit iffy. I really have zero interest in seeing us sign him into his middle 30s myself (or any prospect really), and he may not be willing to sign unless he gets a 6-7 year type deal given he will be 28 or so when he would be hitting free agency. There is equally as much chance he is looking for that one big payday as there is he signs a short extension, acting like you know his mind on that is a bit silly.

 

[dak]

Back to the original topic of our young pitching, I think we'd be wise to look for a quantity for quality type trade this offseason using 2 or 3 of our young arms in AA / AAA / MLB. I'm not suggesting we target anyone elite . . . but rather a solid veteran under control for 2-3 years. A couple of young LH starters that could fit the bill would be Drew Smyly and Patrick Corbin, just for sake of example.

The tricky part is figuring out who to keep and who to deal. I don't think the Braves will part with Foltynewicz, Newcomb or Sims since they are perceived as having the most upside. The FO has tipped their hand a bit this season that they view Gant and Jenkins as relievers. If there are teams that value either of those guys as SPs, they could be among the most likely to go. Then there's the myriad of other guys who fall somewhere in the range of #3 - #5 SPs: Wisler, Blair, Whalen, Perez, Bradley, Ellis, Povse, Mader, Weigel. With the FO looking to add 1-2 veteran starters, I think now is the time to deal 2-3 of our young arms for a shorter term veteran.