John Schuerholz on Braves Banter Podcast

dak

dak

Well-known member
These are the main points I took from the podcast . . .

- They see an 80 plus win team next year and feel good that they have the assets to make that possible.

- Budget is in place for 2017, and will be bigger than 2016.

- Albies with broken elbow. Doesn't sound like it will jeopardize his readiness for the start of 2017.

- Suggests this as the AA rotation to start next year: Newcomb, Sims, Weigel, Povse.

- When praising our prospects, he makes a point to mention Johan Camargo.

[TW]773879623092494336[/TW]
 
dak said:
These are the main points I took from the podcast . . .

- They see an 80 plus win team next year and feel good that they have the assets to make that possible.
- Budget is in place for 2017, and will be bigger than 2016.
- Albies with broken elbow. Doesn't sound like it will jeopardize his readiness for the start of 2017.
- Suggests this as the AA rotation to start next year: Newcomb, Sims, Weigel, Povse.
- When praising our prospects, he makes a point to mention Johan Camargo.

[TW]773879623092494336[/TW]
Click to expand...

At least someone besides Tapate50 and me are talking about Camargo.
 
Interesting that we would start all those guys back in AA. Hopefully we're prepared to promote them quickly if they prove ready right away.
 
smootness said:
Interesting that we would start all those guys back in AA. Hopefully we're prepared to promote them quickly if they prove ready right away.
Click to expand...

It maybe more about comfort with certain coaches too. The Braves are not afraid to promote to the bigs straight from AA. Newcomb and Sims has work to do to be ready. They can't allow that many BB and not get shelled. I also think AAA will be more of a reserve of pitchers that are fringy. (Perez, Gant, Whalen, Jenkins, Weber, Bradley and so on)
 
Newcomb and Sims definitely have to work on their control. So going back to AA to start is not a bad option. We are still months away from Spring Training 2017 so things can change, but as of now, that's where they should be
 
Camargo could be a good trade chip for us this winter. I like the fact he hyped him up some. Nobody is really talking about him.
 
dak said:
These are the main points I took from the podcast . . .

- They see an 80 plus win team next year and feel good that they have the assets to make that possible.
- Budget is in place for 2017, and will be bigger than 2016.
- Albies with broken elbow. Doesn't sound like it will jeopardize his readiness for the start of 2017.
- Suggests this as the AA rotation to start next year: Newcomb, Sims, Weigel, Povse.
- When praising our prospects, he makes a point to mention Johan Camargo.

[TW]773879623092494336[/TW]
Click to expand...

Considering how bad the FA market is, this statement scares me more than anything. Bowman, who doesn't write anything that isn't approved by the FO, recently wrote they aren't likely going after Ramos or Wieters, so that eases my mind a little.

Then he also says they might go with a Ruiz/Garcia platoon at 3B and add Nova to the rotation. I can't fathom a scenario where that team wins 80+ games next season, even with Mac brought back to catch.
 
Enscheff said:
Considering how bad the FA market is, this statement scares me more than anything. Bowman, who doesn't write anything that isn't approved by the FO, recently wrote they aren't likely going after Ramos or Wieters, so that eases my mind a little.

Then he also says they might go with a Ruiz/Garcia platoon at 3B and add Nova to the rotation. I can't fathom a scenario where that team wins 80+ games next season, even with Mac brought back to catch.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I saw that Bowman piece as well. In his most recent articles that touch on 2017, he suggests it's very, very unlikely the Braves will forfeit that 2nd round pick for a QO guy. I'm happy to see that. I still think there are ways to get to an 80 win projection without going down that road, but we'd probably need to make one or more small-to-medium-sized trades.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
It maybe more about comfort with certain coaches too. The Braves are not afraid to promote to the bigs straight from AA. Newcomb and Sims has work to do to be ready. They can't allow that many BB and not get shelled. I also think AAA will be more of a reserve of pitchers that are fringy. (Perez, Gant, Whalen, Jenkins, Weber, Bradley and so on)
Click to expand...

I prefer pitchers to prove their readiness at AAA before getting called up. For position prospects, I'm fine with coming straight from AA because a lot of times the pitchers there have better pure stuff. But I feel like you find a lot more quality hitters in AAA than AA. They may not have the same kind of pure tools that the guys in AA do on average, but they're usually the AAAA utility types or older guys with MLB experience, and those guys usually at least have a plan at the plate and aren't easy to get out. So I think it's good for pitchers to face AAA hitters before coming up.
 
Enscheff said:
Considering how bad the FA market is, this statement scares me more than anything. Bowman, who doesn't write anything that isn't approved by the FO, recently wrote they aren't likely going after Ramos or Wieters, so that eases my mind a little.

Then he also says they might go with a Ruiz/Garcia platoon at 3B and add Nova to the rotation. I can't fathom a scenario where that team wins 80+ games next season, even with Mac brought back to catch.
Click to expand...

He said assets, though, not 'money in the budget'. And we do, we have a lot of quality assets, even outside our top prospects, who could be packaged in deals to at least bring in some decent veterans.
 
Projecting them as a .500 club seems reasonable. With some shrewd moves over the winter and good luck without injuries, they could be better.
 
smootness said:
He said assets, though, not 'money in the budget'. And we do, we have a lot of quality assets, even outside our top prospects, who could be packaged in deals to at least bring in some decent veterans.
Click to expand...

OK, but why would a team prefer to trade away prospects rather than sign FAs that require the loss of a draft pick....that will become a prospect? If they value draft picks so highly, then it would be illogical to hoard draft picks and instead trade away talented prospects who already have had their signing bonuses paid.

My thoughts are they will look to make deals along the lines of Kemp and Mac...expensive veterans that require minimal prospect value to acquire because the Braves can afford to take on their salaries. I saw someone on FG suggest they take on Pablo Sandoval in such a deal, and I threw up in my mouth a little.

The only piece with real value I can see the Braves trading is one of Mallex or Inciarte since they are essentially redundant players. Anyone else the Braves are willing to trade won't be valuable enough to bring back anyone of significance unless the player coming back is overpriced, like Mac or Sandoval or someone else I'm sure I'm overlooking.

So I would recommend everyone get ready for the Braves to sign FAs with no QO attached (if that's still a thing this offseason), and to trade for expensive guys that require very little prospect value to acquire.
 
Enscheff said:
OK, but why would a team prefer to trade away prospects rather than sign FAs that require the loss of a draft pick....that will become a prospect? If they value draft picks so highly, then it would be illogical to hoard draft picks and instead trade away talented prospects who already have had their signing bonuses paid.

My thoughts are they will look to make deals along the lines of Kemp and Mac...expensive veterans that require minimal prospect value to acquire because the Braves can afford to take on their salaries. I saw someone on FG suggest they take on Pablo Sandoval in such a deal, and I threw up in my mouth a little.

The only piece with real value I can see the Braves trading is one of Mallex or Inciarte since they are essentially redundant players. Anyone else the Braves are willing to trade won't be valuable enough to bring back anyone of significance unless the player coming back is overpriced, like Mac or Sandoval or someone else I'm sure I'm overlooking.

So I would recommend everyone get ready for the Braves to sign FAs with no QO attached (if that's still a thing this offseason), and to trade for expensive guys that require very little prospect value to acquire.
Click to expand...

I bet the Players Association fights hard to get that removed or make it not nearly as toxic to the signing team. It's really hurting the upper middle tier FA's.
 
With what we have we are a below .500 team imo. We would need to add one more really good bat maybe two and another mid rotation starter.
 
Enscheff said:
OK, but why would a team prefer to trade away prospects rather than sign FAs that require the loss of a draft pick....that will become a prospect? If they value draft picks so highly, then it would be illogical to hoard draft picks and instead trade away talented prospects who already have had their signing bonuses paid.

My thoughts are they will look to make deals along the lines of Kemp and Mac...expensive veterans that require minimal prospect value to acquire because the Braves can afford to take on their salaries. I saw someone on FG suggest they take on Pablo Sandoval in such a deal, and I threw up in my mouth a little.

The only piece with real value I can see the Braves trading is one of Mallex or Inciarte since they are essentially redundant players. Anyone else the Braves are willing to trade won't be valuable enough to bring back anyone of significance unless the player coming back is overpriced, like Mac or Sandoval or someone else I'm sure I'm overlooking.

So I would recommend everyone get ready for the Braves to sign FAs with no QO attached (if that's still a thing this offseason), and to trade for expensive guys that require very little prospect value to acquire.
Click to expand...

So you take issue with me saying they may make trades rather than sign FAs, then suggest they make trades?

And in terms of why it could be preferable, there are several reasons:
1) You don't lose a draft pick
2) More players become available to you
3) You may not have to make the same financial commitment with as much risk
4) We have plenty of organizational filler and depth that is pretty quality. The reason you value draft picks and then maybe trade them away later is because it allows you to give away some pieces you don't need and identify the pieces you do need. You don't know who all will develop when you draft them, so this allows you to balance things out.

We have a ton of quality pitching depth, and I'm sure we've identified guys that we think could have more value in trades than they do to our future plans. If that's the case, it absolutely makes sense to start dealing those guys away.
 
Hudson2 said:
With what we have we are a below .500 team imo. We would need to add one more really good bat maybe two and another mid rotation starter.
Click to expand...

If we added two really good bats to the lineup and a decent #3 starter, that could put us in playoff contention, not just .500, assuming the young guys keep progressing.

Inciarte, Mallex, Swanson, Albies, Freeman, Kemp, really good bat, really good bat? That's suddenly a potentially good lineup, not just average.

And Teheran, Folty, #3 starter, Wisler, Prospect is not a great rotation but it could be pretty solid.
 
Unless we cannibalize the future by trading away our top prospects (Albies, Swanson, Acuna, Allard and Soroka) or unless we spend well over 120M in payroll, this team will enter 2017 at 75-80 on the win curve. With the margin of uncertainty, it is certainly possible we will win over 80 games. But not likely.

The question to me is whether in putting together the 2017 team, we do anything to compromise our prospects for further improvement going forward. You can always get some immediate gratification by borrowing from the future. My hope is that we don't do much of that this off-season.
 
nsacpi said:
Unless we cannibalize the future by trading away our top prospects (Albies, Swanson, Acuna, Allard and Soroka) or unless we spend well over 120M in payroll, this team will enter 2017 at 75-80 on the win curve. With the margin of uncertainty, it is certainly possible we will win over 80 games. But not likely.

The question to me is whether in putting together the 2017 team, we do anything to compromise our prospects for further improvement going forward. You can always get some immediate gratification by borrowing from the future. My hope is that we don't do much of that this off-season.
Click to expand...

I don't think we will. I think Swanson, Albies, Allard, Newcomb, Maitan, Soroka, Anderson, Wentz, Riley, and several others are completely off-limits this offseason. But we have a ton of depth, and I do think it's likely we'll start to move some of it.

I think we could make a couple decent but not huge trades and sign a couple decent FA to get us around a $120 million payroll and put a team together that is projected to be about .500.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top