If it happens we can discuss what the bet will be for sure but it seems like you're hedging already after you just made a snide remark about enjoying your 78 win team.
2016-2017 Off-Season Thread
- Thread starter CrimsonCowboy
- Start date
If it happens we can discuss what the bet will be for sure but it seems like you're hedging already after you just made a snide remark about enjoying your 78 win team.
I personally think a trade featuring those players might also bring back Frazier, which would make it quite appealing to both teams.
GovClintonTyree
<B>Vencer a Los Doyers</B>
Yep. Big-league.
Bigly.
GovClintonTyree
<B>Vencer a Los Doyers</B>
No, Enscheff says Folty is 4 WAR and Sale is 4 WAR so there's no upgrade.
Steamer only projects Folty at 1.8 and Ender a 2 WAR. So if you think they could be upwards of 4 WAR a piece would you concede the Braves could have an 80 win team on the field already?
I'm not hedging my bets at all. I think the Braves are currently a ~75 win team. If they somehow miraculously add Sale their projected win total will be a simple addition of 4-5 due to Sale, minus the projected WAR from the guys they gave up. That will almost certainly result in less than 78 projected wins, but I'd have to be a complete moron to put stakes on a win total before the offseason is over.
So sure, I just talked myself into placing a bet right now on the Braves winning 78 game or less right this very moment. You're the one who wanted to hedge on whether or not they acquired Sale.
What math world are you trying to live in? I have repeatedly stated I think FG is under-projecting Inciarte by 1 win. I have also repeatedly stated that I think Folty will be the Braves best pitcher by the end of the season, and could be a 4+ WAR guy as early as 2018. FG also projects about 6 WAR total from the Garcia/Dickey/Colon trio, and I am very confident at least one of those guys will blow up and produce 0 WAR next year, lowering that total to around 4.
All of that figures into my 75 win projection for the Braves in 2017.
Reading comprehension is not your strong suit. I literally wrote, "If they give up Folty (2-4 WAR) and Inciarte (3-4 WAR) to get Sale (4-5 WAR)". That means I say Sale is anywhere from 0-3 win upgrade from Folty.
The upgrade from Folty to Sale will be offset by the downgrade from Albies or Inciarte to whatever replaces them. As a whole, the Braves would not be any better after acquiring Sale.
This is simple arithmetic. Even a tax guy can grasp that level of mathematics. Come on bro!
So basically it's your own calculations and predictions? Yet you have a problem with those that think it's at 80?
You aren't even arguing a counter point anymore.
Fine, 80. Teams projected to win 80 games still don't give up future assets for a win now Ace.
It takes so many "ifs" and "maybes" to get the Braves into playoff contention in 2017 that it's incredibly poor planning to build around the idea of contention.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
Everybody seems to want to convince themselves that this is an "85 win team and will compete for the WC." The thing is, how many times has an 85 win team been a WC? I just browsed back through 2010, and the answer is: not once. In fact, most of the time the WC team has had to have at least 89 wins. In some years, it's been as much as the mid-90's.
It can't be 75 wins, because that's too far away. That won't work, so it can't be the case! But, it could be 80 wins, because that's close to 85, which means we're in the WC chase!
Not so fast my friends. 85 wins is the absolute minimum, while 90 needs to be a more realistic goal. Wanting it badly doesn't really mean anything.
This is a process not a destination. May be a fairly even outcome right now (open to discussion of course), but the team would be set up better for continuing the process.
Its not only a math problem. It is a lot more nuanced than that.
Uh oh...Is someone taking war too serious again? I like WAR, but it's one of MANY stats used and it is flawed due to it's reliance on defensive stats.
The irony is the people who first started using WAR were progressive thinkers, but the people who obsess over it now are very short sighted.
It's like the old saying "What is now underrated will eventually be overrated"
The irony is the people who first started using WAR were progressive thinkers, but the people who obsess over it now are very short sighted.
It's like the old saying "What is now underrated will eventually be overrated"
I'm not even advocating going for it. I just don't see the big deal if someone thinks this is an 80 win team which you apparently dead set against that not being the case. Especially when you are using your personal projections for the team.
The lowest win total for an NL WC team is 87. So yes, even if we project at 80 or a little more, we would need a lot to go right to be in that conversation. The easier way to get in would actually be if the division is really bad next year and we can squeeze in with something like 83-84 wins. That's still not likely at all, especially with the Nats seemingly wanting to continue to add pieces and go for it.
When people say 85 win team they mean a true talent of 85 wins. Teams can over perform their talent level (happens every year). A true talent level of 85 wins can easily win 90 games due to the variance that comes along with the game.
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
I think a friendly game of Bro corn hole is in order to settle this.
So now the Braves are not only better than a 75 win team, they are an 85 win team with the potential to win even more? No wonder they need an Ace for the playoffs!!
You guys are a great source of comedy!
PosiBraves, assemble!!
I would destroy you.