The 2019 Money

[nsacpi]

I think one needs to be patient with young pitchers. It doesn't appear that either Wisler or Blair will become big contributors, but Newcomb and Foltynewicz have both shown some promise. Look at the early career numbers for some of the guys that were listed. A number of them were solid right out of the gate, but some of them really had growing pains.

Gohara and Soroka are the two I have the greatest hopes for.

 

[nsacpi]

And that's really the point, isn't it? When you look at the contenders that have a REALLY strong 1-2 punch...

Houston - added Verlander from outside.
Washington - added Scherzer from outside.
Boston - added BOTH Sale and Price from outside.
Yankees - added Tanaka (and Gray and possibly Cole) from outside.
Cleveland - Kluber came from outside.
Cubs - added Lester (and Arrieta when they had him for that matter) from outside.
Arizona - added both Greinke and Ray from outside.
Dodgers - don't really have that #2 that stops you in your tracks to pair with Kershaw (although Buehler could turn into that guy).

The only team that has two guys on that list that were developed in their own organization is the Mutts - and it's easy to point out that Syndergaard came from outside even though he finished developing in their system.

Kluber was acquired while still in the minors. Sort of like our acquiring Gohara and Syndergaard. Those guys are hybrid homegrown/external acquisition. But certainly not "stars" when acquired.

Kluber and Syndergaard btw are examples of the kind of trade we need to avoid (from the perspective of the team that traded them away). I am extremely reluctant to send multiple top prospects for Yelich. It would have to be a lopsided deal for me to do something like that.

 

[salmagundy]

With all the talk about not developing the pitchers that have been added to the system belies one problem. And that problem was not addressed this year nor has it been addressed in this topic.. The cast of pitchers in "regression" is growing as is the list of throwers not climbing towards ceiling. Yet, no one has mentioned the base of the problem.

It should be a simple answer to our pitching problems. That problem is not the pitchers we have obtained, but in their development. Who is responsible for regression or lack of climbing to "ceiling".

Easy answer, the pitching coaches. Why is Hernandez still in Atlanta. Biggest opportunity missed in not obtaining a new pitching coach at the MLB level this off season.

 

[nsacpi]

With all the talk about not developing the pitchers that have been added to the system belies one problem. And that problem was not addressed this year nor has it been addressed in this topic.. The cast of pitchers in "regression" is growing as is the list of throwers not climbing towards ceiling. Yet, no one has mentioned the base of the problem.

It should be a simple answer to our pitching problems. That problem is not the pitchers we have obtained, but in their development. Who is responsible for regression or lack of climbing to "ceiling".

Easy answer, the pitching coaches. Why is Hernandez still in Atlanta. Biggest opportunity missed in not obtaining a new pitching coach at the MLB level this off season.

Some regressed. But Gohara, Soroka and Allard were promoted very aggressively and did very well. I would not say the outlook for pitching within our system dimmed in 2017.

 

[clvclv]

Kluber was acquired while still in the minors. Sort of like our acquiring Gohara and Syndergaard. Those guys are hybrid homegrown/external acquisition. But certainly not "stars" when acquired.

He was, but he'd already pitched 167.2 innings at the AA level when they got him and he struggled for a good while after they got him before finally putting everything together. I put him more in the Syndergaard category than the Gohara category, but that's really just nitpicking. That's why I mentioned Syndergaard. But you're right - even if something amazing happens and we wind up with another TOR guy out of the Folty/Newcomb/Wright/Allard/Soroka/Anderson group, we had to go outside the organization as well.

 

[nsacpi]

He was, but he'd already pitched 167.2 innings at the AA level when they got him and he struggled for a good while after they got him before finally putting everything together. I put him more in the Syndergaard category than the Gohara category, but that's really just nitpicking. That's why I mentioned Syndergaard. But you're right - even if something amazing happens and we wind up with another TOR guy out of the Folty/Newcomb/Wright/Allard/Soroka/Anderson group, we had to go outside the organization as well.

The point I'm arguing against is going outside the organization for a guy who is already an established star.

 

[clvclv]

With all the talk about not developing the pitchers that have been added to the system belies one problem. And that problem was not addressed this year nor has it been addressed in this topic.. The cast of pitchers in "regression" is growing as is the list of throwers not climbing towards ceiling. Yet, no one has mentioned the base of the problem.

It should be a simple answer to our pitching problems. That problem is not the pitchers we have obtained, but in their development. Who is responsible for regression or lack of climbing to "ceiling".

Easy answer, the pitching coaches. Why is Hernandez still in Atlanta. Biggest opportunity missed in not obtaining a new pitching coach at the MLB level this off season.

Certainly a valid theory - although I think the jury is still out on that to some extent. Folty's a headcase, and the entire MLB landscape is littered with unbelievable arms like Newcomb who just never quite put it together. If the Gohara/Wright/Soroka/Allard/Anderson group doesn't come close to their ceilings, I definitely agree that heads should roll - but I wouldn't lose the first wink of sleep if AA replaced everyone working with the kids whenever he sees fit.

 

[clvclv]

The point I'm arguing against is going outside the organization for a guy who is already an established star.

I'm only in favor of that whenever AA deems he's "close" and that move puts them in position to start making a run. The Cubs added Lester a year early because that was their chance to get him. If he's adding one of those types of guys because he's ready to add a bat like Yelich by trading from the excess arms and spending on a Frazier or Donaldson to seriously contend in 2019, I have no problem with adding an Arrieta/Darvish (maybe even Cobb) now.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

And that's really the point, isn't it? When you look at the contenders that have a REALLY strong 1-2 punch...

Houston - added Verlander from outside.

Washington - added Scherzer from outside.

Boston - added BOTH Sale and Price from outside.

Yankees - added Tanaka (and Gray and possibly Cole) from outside.

Cleveland - Kluber came from outside.

Cubs - added Lester (and Arrieta when they had him for that matter) from outside.

Arizona - added both Greinke and Ray from outside.

Dodgers - don't really have that #2 that stops you in your tracks to pair with Kershaw (although Buehler could turn into that guy).

The only team that has two guys on that list that were developed in their own organization is the Mutts - and it's easy to point out that Syndergaard came from outside even though he finished developing in their system.

Houston - added Verlander from outside. Verlander was a salary dump from Detroit at a time when the Astros were clearly competitive for a WS. He didn't cost much in relative terms.

Washington - added Scherzer from outside. FA signing. No talent went the other way.

Boston - added BOTH Sale and Price from outside. Price was a FA. Sale was costly in terms of talent and is an example of what the Braves would have to give up. Boston can afford to do that. The Braves can't.

Yankees - added Tanaka (and Gray and possibly Cole) from outside. Tanaka signed as a FA. Gray is a reputation guy that hasn't pitched really well since 2015 and is also an injury risk. He doesn't belong on the list and what the Yankees traded for him shows it.

Cleveland - Kluber came from outside. Minor league acquisition through trade. Not equivalent to what is discussed - trading for an established TOR starter.

Cubs - added Lester (and Arrieta when they had him for that matter) from outside. Lester was a FA signing. Arrieta was a nothing until Chicago turned him around.

Arizona - added both Greinke and Ray from outside. Greinke was a FA signing. Ray was an unknown traded twice before ending with Arizona. Was part of a three team trade with Green going to the Tigers and Gregorius going to the Yanks.

Dodgers - don't really have that #2 that stops you in your tracks to pair with Kershaw (although Buehler could turn into that guy). All internal unless you count Wood who was a Brave.

So essentially what you have is one situation that is equivalent to what people are advocating the Braves do and that was the Sale acquisition by Boston where Boston sent the top prospect in baseball that cost them $63M to sign (Moncada), one of the top power RH starters in the game (Kopech), a useful and projectable prospect outfielder (Basabe) and a live arm (Diaz). So essentially equivalent to a trade where the Braves send Acuna, Wright, Waters and Sanchez.

When looked at that way it isn't so desirable anymore.

People want the Unicorn to show up where the Braves get a TOR guy for nothing that will be missed. It would take a very special set of circumstances for that to happen. One way would be if the team trading the player had other really bad contracts that they wanted to move AND the Braves had the payroll space to eat that money. Other than that, you would be trading away from the rebuild, robbing from tomorrow for the short term of today.

It would be unwise IMO, BUT, if you absolutely HAVE to have a guy, go sign a FA. That makes much more sense than trading for an Archer or equivalent.

 

[Southcack77]

this post seems so silly to me.

we should've developed an ace by now? i mean, really? there are less than 10 consensus "aces" in the league. three years into a rebuild and we should have one of them? most of the pitching we acquired is still in the minors.

newcomb also has a shot at being a #2 or #3. but it seems many, you included, underestimate how difficult it is to find a true #2, much less a true #1, or an "ace."

I agree with you.

 

[Southcack77]

The point I'm arguing against is going outside the organization for a guy who is already an established star.

My guess is you are going to have one or two guys that you go out and get during any real contention period.

I'm not super high on trading anyone right now, because the Braves haven't established a rotation or lineup that looks like a definite contending core. I think it makes sense to wait and see which of the young pitchers are going to make up say 3/5ths of the rotation and whether Acuna, Albies, Swanson, and Riley or whomever are good before you start trading away solid prospects for established starters.

But once you have determined what your core is, I don't mind as much going out and getting established players that can help you.

And if you can limit the length of your contract exposure spending big money on a guy or two seems within the budget parameters once you have sorted that out.

 

[clvclv]

Houston - added Verlander from outside. Verlander was a salary dump from Detroit at a time when the Astros were clearly competitive for a WS. He didn't cost much in relative terms.
Washington - added Scherzer from outside. FA signing. No talent went the other way.
Boston - added BOTH Sale and Price from outside. Price was a FA. Sale was costly in terms of talent and is an example of what the Braves would have to give up. Boston can afford to do that. The Braves can't.
Yankees - added Tanaka (and Gray and possibly Cole) from outside. Tanaka signed as a FA. Gray is a reputation guy that hasn't pitched really well since 2015 and is also an injury risk. He doesn't belong on the list and what the Yankees traded for him shows it.
Cleveland - Kluber came from outside. Minor league acquisition through trade. Not equivalent to what is discussed - trading for an established TOR starter.
Cubs - added Lester (and Arrieta when they had him for that matter) from outside. Lester was a FA signing. Arrieta was a nothing until Chicago turned him around.
Arizona - added both Greinke and Ray from outside. Greinke was a FA signing. Ray was an unknown traded twice before ending with Arizona. Was part of a three team trade with Green going to the Tigers and Gregorius going to the Yanks.
Dodgers - don't really have that #2 that stops you in your tracks to pair with Kershaw (although Buehler could turn into that guy). All internal unless you count Wood who was a Brave.

So essentially what you have is one situation that is equivalent to what people are advocating the Braves do and that was the Sale acquisition by Boston where Boston sent the top prospect in baseball that cost them $63M to sign (Moncada), one of the top power RH starters in the game (Kopech), a useful and projectable prospect outfielder (Basabe) and a live arm (Diaz). So essentially equivalent to a trade where the Braves send Acuna, Wright, Waters and Sanchez.

When looked at that way it isn't so desirable anymore.

People want the Unicorn to show up where the Braves get a TOR guy for nothing that will be missed. It would take a very special set of circumstances for that to happen. One way would be if the team trading the player had other really bad contracts that they wanted to move AND the Braves had the payroll space to eat that money. Other than that, you would be trading away from the rebuild, robbing from tomorrow for the short term of today.

It would be unwise IMO, BUT, if you absolutely HAVE to have a guy, go sign a FA. That makes much more sense than trading for an Archer or equivalent.

Agreed. If you can add Arrieta and use arms not named Gohara (or Wright if possible) to add Yelich's cheap contract, you have the money to play on a 3B next winter.

If the Marlins get a better offer than Soroka/Allard/Riley/Pache for Yelich, they've completely robbed someone (arguably even us).

Of course all that only works if you can convince ownership to pay Arrieta this year, backload his deal, and/or unload Markakis and/or Julio.

 

[Southcack77]

Houston - added Verlander from outside. Verlander was a salary dump from Detroit at a time when the Astros were clearly competitive for a WS. He didn't cost much in relative terms.
Washington - added Scherzer from outside. FA signing. No talent went the other way.
Boston - added BOTH Sale and Price from outside. Price was a FA. Sale was costly in terms of talent and is an example of what the Braves would have to give up. Boston can afford to do that. The Braves can't.
Yankees - added Tanaka (and Gray and possibly Cole) from outside. Tanaka signed as a FA. Gray is a reputation guy that hasn't pitched really well since 2015 and is also an injury risk. He doesn't belong on the list and what the Yankees traded for him shows it.
Cleveland - Kluber came from outside. Minor league acquisition through trade. Not equivalent to what is discussed - trading for an established TOR starter.
Cubs - added Lester (and Arrieta when they had him for that matter) from outside. Lester was a FA signing. Arrieta was a nothing until Chicago turned him around.
Arizona - added both Greinke and Ray from outside. Greinke was a FA signing. Ray was an unknown traded twice before ending with Arizona. Was part of a three team trade with Green going to the Tigers and Gregorius going to the Yanks.
Dodgers - don't really have that #2 that stops you in your tracks to pair with Kershaw (although Buehler could turn into that guy). All internal unless you count Wood who was a Brave.

So essentially what you have is one situation that is equivalent to what people are advocating the Braves do and that was the Sale acquisition by Boston where Boston sent the top prospect in baseball that cost them $63M to sign (Moncada), one of the top power RH starters in the game (Kopech), a useful and projectable prospect outfielder (Basabe) and a live arm (Diaz). So essentially equivalent to a trade where the Braves send Acuna, Wright, Waters and Sanchez.

When looked at that way it isn't so desirable anymore.

People want the Unicorn to show up where the Braves get a TOR guy for nothing that will be missed. It would take a very special set of circumstances for that to happen. One way would be if the team trading the player had other really bad contracts that they wanted to move AND the Braves had the payroll space to eat that money. Other than that, you would be trading away from the rebuild, robbing from tomorrow for the short term of today.

It would be unwise IMO, BUT, if you absolutely HAVE to have a guy, go sign a FA. That makes much more sense than trading for an Archer or equivalent.

I don't think the standard has to be giving up nothing that the Braves will end up missing. I don't have a problem with giving up real prospects if the Braves are already close and are pushing their chips into the middle.

But they are not close right now and I don't see how they could conclude the time is right to push their chips into the middle.

It makes sense that they wait and see what they really have with their young pitching and position players. Surround them with modest acquisitions and try and win as many as you can, but no reason to to acquire a #1 or #2 starter if the rest of the rotation is dismal.

 

[bravesfanMatt]

Normally aces come from legit pitching prospects. The Braves have/had these. Maybe at some point we stop blaming the pitchers and start blaming who develops them.

 

[Enscheff]

The Braves have acquired a lot of pitching talent, but very few who had true TOR potential. Folty, Newk, Gohara, Wright and maybe Touki. They were only able to acquire all but Wright because there were already questions about each guy. They were extremely fortunate to have Wright fall in their laps.

The Braves should consider themselves lucky that 1 of those “TOR prospects with major questions” looks to have panned out.

The Braves have already poured resources into pitchers. It would be silly to pour even more into pitching while the offense is below average.

The rebuild is going to live or die based on how the group of 20 arms they acquired over the last 3 years shake out. If they get 2 TOR guys and a couple more MOR guys they will be just fine. So far it looks like they hit in Gohara as a TOR guy, and Soroka is a pretty good bet to be a MOR guy.

 

[Super]

and yet, plenty of times a guy no one thought had "ace potential" becomes a really good pitcher. and a guy who definitely had "ace potential" doesn't develop.

 

[Heyward]

Looking ahead would you give Kimbrel 3 years, 60 million with a vesting option?

It would be through his age 30-33 seasons. Might decline by then though so who knows.

 

[clvclv]

Looking ahead would you give Kimbrel 3 years, 60 million with a vesting option?

It would be through his age 30-33 seasons. Might decline by then though so who knows.

Definitely looks like that's where these contracts (even for the best guys) are headed - 3 years with higher AAVs so the teams aren't stuck with that 4th (or worse 5th) year.

 

[Skeeter31]

Looking ahead would you give Kimbrel 3 years, 60 million with a vesting option?

It would be through his age 30-33 seasons. Might decline by then though so who knows.

Absolutely not. Love him. One of my favorite Braves players. But not worth that amount of money for someone who pitches 1 inning a game, maybe 3 times a week.

 

[thewupk]

Looking ahead would you give Kimbrel 3 years, 60 million with a vesting option?

It would be through his age 30-33 seasons. Might decline by then though so who knows.

Without any injuries or decline I doubt he accepts 3 years. He's going to want a longer contract at that age.