MLBTR mock expansion draft

E

Enscheff

Well-known member
MLBTR is doing a mock expansion draft, and they are making a pool for every team to determine which players are protected.

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2020/05/braves-expansion-draft.html

The rules and common sense dictate the Braves would protect the following players:

Freddie Freeman
Ronald Acuna Jr.
Ozzie Albies
Max Fried
Mike Soroka
Mike Foltynewicz
Dansby Swanson
Kyle Wright
Cristian Pache

So there are 6 more spots to fill. They listed 19 candidates, and I bolded the ones I would consider:

Johan Camargo
Travis d’Arnaud
Grant Dayton
Adam Duvall
Ender Inciarte
Alex Jackson
Luke Jackson
Chris Martin
A.J. Minter
Sean Newcomb
Austin Riley
Will Smith
Chad Sobotka
Touki Toussaint
Jeremy Walker
Jacob Webb
Bryse Wilson
Huascar Ynoa

At the end of the day, I keep the guys with the highest ceilings in Riley, Touki and Newk. These guys seem like locks.

I keep the the legit MLB players on reasonable contracts in d'Arn and Ender.

I let some other team take on the back end of Smith's deal if they want it, and they can have bench players like Duvall and Camargo if they want them.

My 6th spot goes to Minter in hopes he returns to the back end BP arm he showed in the past.

The Braves have a lot of MLB-ready arms I expect to be raided fairly heavily in this mock draft.
 
Last edited:
Little d
Ender
Newk
Riley
Wilson
Touki.


Touki was on the bubble with Smith, but I ultimately chose Touki due to the updside and cost advantage.
 
I voted for Riley, Touki, Newk, d'Arnaud, Martin, and Smith.

I'm not so sure I'd protect Folty - I'd probably protect Smith instead. If you did that I would have had Wilson in Smith's place.

If this expansion draft follows the same rules as the last one and somebody takes Folty, you're able to more or less keep all the young pitching intact. After a team has someone picked, they're able to pull three more players back. At that point you could add Minter, Wilson, and Camargo or Ender to your protected list prior to the second round.

I understand the thought about protecting Ender, but if there was an expansion draft next week you can make the argument that he's that much more "expendable" given this will be a partial season at best. Put Acuna back in CF and platoon Markakis and Duvall or Riley in RF if need be while you still have Ozuna to hold onto all the arms with the most control. If that OF struggles too much defensively, go ahead and plug Pache in and slide Acuna back over.

ZiPS has Folty pegged at 8.35 K/9, 3.28 BB/9, and a 4.31 FIP and Wilson at 8.52 K/9, 2.71 BB/9, and a 4.36 FIP (in a roughly similar number of innings in 2020). We've seen Folty's up AND downsides already, and they're maddeningly different. If he's your #4 (which he is with Hamels healthy), I'd hope to replicate his production with some mix of Touki/Wright/Wilson/Anderson with a lot more control for substantially less money while Newk, Martin, and Smith (hopefully along with Minter at some point) are still around to close out games.
 
Last edited:
JohnAdcox said:
Why on Earth would an expansion team take on a contract like Smith's? To trade?
Click to expand...

Good question - and I don't have that answer. There were 3 All-Stars taken in the last expansion draft, why did it happen then? You don't think the Dodgers would give them a pretty *amn good prospect they'd have full control over to have Smith in their pen? I'm more worried that they'd take Smith or one of the younger arms before taking Folty - I personally would make sure to protect Touki and Wilson before I'd protect either of the other two. If either of them is left unprotected they'll be snatched up immediately, and a part of me is ready to move on from Folty before he gets any more expensive.

I don't think I'd vigorously disagree if someone felt like rolling the dice that he wouldn't be taken in order to protect Wright, Touki, and Wilson - I think there's plenty of validity to doing that (because of that contract). More about Smith over Folty for me.
 
Last edited:
JohnAdcox said:
Why on Earth would an expansion team take on a contract like Smith's? To trade?
Click to expand...

This draft would be happening after this season, at which point the Braves will possibly be willing to give the last 2 years of Smith's contract away for nothing. There would be almost zero reason to protect him, and folks suggesting the Braves should do so have no idea about the surplus value assigned to players by FOs. All they know is the players they think are "best".

Protecting BP arms like Martin on short term deals over potential long term pieces like Wright is laughable.

I also find it funny so many people want to protect Camargo, a bench piece likely to be non-tendered the moment he starts making any real money in arbitration.
 
Last edited:
Enscheff said:
This draft would be happening after this season, at which point the Braves will possibly be willing to give the last 2 years of Smith's contract away for nothing. There would be almost zero reason to protect him, and folks suggesting the Braves should do so have no idea about the surplus value assigned to players by FOs. All they know is the players they think are "best".

Protecting BP arms like Martin on short term deals over potential long term pieces like Wright is laughable.

I also find it funny so many people want to protect Camargo, a bench piece likely to be non-tendered the moment he starts making any real money in arbitration.
Click to expand...

The story stated that protecting Wright was a given - he was one of the first 9 players - you might want to go back and read the story.
 
Enscheff said:
This draft would be happening after this season, at which point the Braves will possibly be willing to give the last 2 years of Smith's contract away for nothing. There would be almost zero reason to protect him, and folks suggesting the Braves should do so have no idea about the surplus value assigned to players by FOs. All they know is the players they think are "best".

Protecting BP arms like Martin on short term deals over potential long term pieces like Wright is laughable.

I also find it funny so many people want to protect Camargo, a bench piece likely to be non-tendered the moment he starts making any real money in arbitration.
Click to expand...

I agree with you but would add that Inciarte would either be traded prior to setting the protected list OR would be left unprotected. The exercise as stated assumes certain players being around to be drafted. I think all teams, including Atlanta, would try to trade at risk pieces that have value but not necessarily long term position before having to cement a list.

If you couldn't get enough value in trade to warrant a trade then that informs your need to protect.

d'Arnaud also likely wouldn't make my list simply because he is signed only for 2021 (assuming an after 2020 season draft). You would have to weigh his one year of control against the value you need to protect PLUS the options available in FA or trade for a replacement.

From the MLBTR article, I'm not sure Folty would be protected. Likely he's like Inciarte. If you take Folty off that leaves 7 spots.

Also, it appears that the choices given to protect is pretty limited. For instance, they left out Waters, Langeliers and Anderson for some reason (plus Muller, Shewmake, Davidson, etc.). They likely did this to limit their list only to those who played in 2019 OR are top 100 and at AAA.

Having said that, I think I would go with the following 7, (in addition to the 8 mlbtr selected (less Folty): Waters, Anderson, Langeliers, Shewmake, Newcomb, Riley, Wilson.

According to the rules, the Braves would lose one player then be able to protect three more, lose one/add three, etc.

The ones I left unprotected assuming no pre-protection trades would be: Inciarte, Folty, d'Arnaud, Touki, Luke J, Alex J, Smith, Martin, Minter, etc. can't see that hurts too much.
 
Horsehide Harry said:
I agree with you but would add that Inciarte would either be traded prior to setting the protected list OR would be left unprotected. The exercise as stated assumes certain players being around to be drafted. I think all teams, including Atlanta, would try to trade at risk pieces that have value but not necessarily long term position before having to cement a list.

If you couldn't get enough value in trade to warrant a trade then that informs your need to protect.

d'Arnaud also likely wouldn't make my list simply because he is signed only for 2021 (assuming an after 2020 season draft). You would have to weigh his one year of control against the value you need to protect PLUS the options available in FA or trade for a replacement.

From the MLBTR article, I'm not sure Folty would be protected. Likely he's like Inciarte. If you take Folty off that leaves 7 spots.

Also, it appears that the choices given to protect is pretty limited. For instance, they left out Waters, Langeliers and Anderson for some reason (plus Muller, Shewmake, Davidson, etc.). They likely did this to limit their list only to those who played in 2019 OR are top 100 and at AAA.

Having said that, I think I would go with the following 7, (in addition to the 8 mlbtr selected (less Folty): Waters, Anderson, Langeliers, Shewmake, Newcomb, Riley, Wilson.

According to the rules, the Braves would lose one player then be able to protect three more, lose one/add three, etc.

The ones I left unprotected assuming no pre-protection trades would be: Inciarte, Folty, d'Arnaud, Touki, Luke J, Alex J, Smith, Martin, Minter, etc. can't see that hurts too much.
Click to expand...

Players that haven't been added to the 40-Man Roster don't have to be protected - this is for an "expansion" draft.
 
clvclv said:
Players that haven't been added to the 40-Man Roster don't have to be protected - this is for an "expansion" draft.
Click to expand...

Didn't see that explicitly given in the article and couldn't remember from the last expansion draft. Would be more interesting if it was the whole organization...would probably hurt teams like the Dodgers the most, a lot of ML talent AND minor league talent.
 
Horsehide Harry said:
Didn't see that explicitly given in the article and couldn't remember from the last expansion draft. Would be more interesting if it was the whole organization...would probably hurt teams like the Dodgers the most, a lot of ML talent AND minor league talent.
Click to expand...

Yeah it was in the fine print at the top. They had a link to the rules of the expansion draft.
 
If you haven't voted on the Nationals and summitted some combo of Starlin Castro/Yan Gomes/Difo as needing to be kept you're doing it wrong.
 
Horsehide Harry said:
I agree with you but would add that Inciarte would either be traded prior to setting the protected list OR would be left unprotected. The exercise as stated assumes certain players being around to be drafted. I think all teams, including Atlanta, would try to trade at risk pieces that have value but not necessarily long term position before having to cement a list.

If you couldn't get enough value in trade to warrant a trade then that informs your need to protect.

d'Arnaud also likely wouldn't make my list simply because he is signed only for 2021 (assuming an after 2020 season draft). You would have to weigh his one year of control against the value you need to protect PLUS the options available in FA or trade for a replacement.

From the MLBTR article, I'm not sure Folty would be protected. Likely he's like Inciarte. If you take Folty off that leaves 7 spots.

Also, it appears that the choices given to protect is pretty limited. For instance, they left out Waters, Langeliers and Anderson for some reason (plus Muller, Shewmake, Davidson, etc.). They likely did this to limit their list only to those who played in 2019 OR are top 100 and at AAA.

Having said that, I think I would go with the following 7, (in addition to the 8 mlbtr selected (less Folty): Waters, Anderson, Langeliers, Shewmake, Newcomb, Riley, Wilson.

According to the rules, the Braves would lose one player then be able to protect three more, lose one/add three, etc.

The ones I left unprotected assuming no pre-protection trades would be: Inciarte, Folty, d'Arnaud, Touki, Luke J, Alex J, Smith, Martin, Minter, etc. can't see that hurts too much.
Click to expand...

This is a good thought process that I hadn't considered. I think it's a little too in depth for this mock draft exercise though.
 
The location of the two expansion teams is more interesting to me.

Hopefully Las Vegas and one team in the South (either Charlotte or Nashville)
 
SJ24 said:
The location of the two expansion teams is more interesting to me.

Hopefully Las Vegas and one team in the South (either Charlotte or Nashville)
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, sounds great. Cut into the Braves fandom even more. Excellent idea!!
 
Skeeter31 said:
Oh yeah, sounds great. Cut into the Braves fandom even more. Excellent idea!!
Click to expand...

The south has been at the front of the line to get an expansion team for years - if and when that ever happens.

Vegas is probably a forgone conclusion now that the NFL has finally broken the glass there. It may not be right away (especially with Montreal trying to climb back into the picture), but there's bound to be an MLB team there at some point.

Why not fix it all at once? Put one team in Charlotte, move the Rays to Vegas, and move the Marlins to Montreal.
 
Last edited:
Charlotte would be a small market, struggling team without much of a fan base like its other two franchises.

Cue someone telling me how much its AAA affiliate draws, like that matters.
 
Southcack77 said:
Charlotte would be a small market, struggling team without much of a fan base like its other two franchises.

Cue someone telling me how much its AAA affiliate draws, like that matters.
Click to expand...

Have wondered the same thing about market size as well. It's been one of the first places that come up seemingly every time expansion's been discussed over the last ten years though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top