2018 Offseason And Targets

[Super]

Another DOB note, they think a lot of Gohara and his progress so far. Said having a normal offseason has done wonders for him. They think adding him in the rotation is going to be a difference maker.

The above doesn't jeehaw much with adding a front line starter unless you are dumping Julio IMO.

cool, we can move Gohara to the BP all year and also just for a week or two while dumping Freeman.

 

[nsacpi]

Should be noted that after 2021 Acuna will be in his 2nd year of arbitration (if no extension is done) and be at a point where he will start to make real money if he plays like we hope. Having major contract obligaions like a Greinke and Freeman coming off the books then will be a pretty big deal.

I like AA's current plan of seemingly loading up on high priced but short term deals. We need to maximize the talent on team while Albies and Acuna are cheap but not burden payroll later on that will make extending them a problem.

Yup. We want the flexibility to extent Acuna and Albies. And trading for or not trading for someone on a 3-year deal like Greinke really does not impact upon that. Either way we have the flexibility to pay Acuna and Albies as they get more expensive. The real keys to being able to do that is to have a steady influx of young cheap talent like Contreras, Riley, Waters, Pache and some of the starting pitching prospects currently in the farm system. That will allow us to afford extensions to Acuna and Albies and maybe one or two other significant contracts.

 

[Super]

in all seriousness, it's very possible gohara makes a nice (staying away from "big" or "large") impact as a SP this season. he and anderson have the most upside still for me of all our pitchers. gohara looked damn good in '17.

 

[Chico]

I keep coming back to Peralta for the OF and Bauer for the veteran SP. They're both controlled for 2 more years.

 

[nsacpi]

I keep coming back to Peralta for the OF and Bauer for the veteran SP. They're both controlled for 2 more years.

Certainly a possibility and would make us a very strong team in 2019.

My understanding though is the Indians are looking for outfield help. We can't provide that directly but maybe indirectly.

 

[Super]

i don't think the acquisition cost for peralta will be *that* high. i'd agree that he's the most likely fit when you factor in money, acquisition cost, control, and just general team fit (LHH).

 

[nsacpi]

i don't think the acquisition cost for peralta will be *that* high. i'd agree that he's the most likely fit when you factor in money, acquisition cost, control, and just general team fit (LHH).

Peralta has been our most logical OF trade target throughout this off-season. Logical in terms of fitting well into our needs (LHH as you note, cost, years of control). And also logical in terms of being on a team that seems very open to trading just about anyone currently on their roster.

 

[Carp]

One-stop shopping trade idea with Arizona.

We get:
1) Greinke (expected surplus value -3 WAR)
2) Peralta (expected surplus value +3WAR)
3) Bradley (expected surplus value +2 WAR)

They get:
1) Teheran (zero expected surplus value)
2) Newcomb (expected surplus value +5 WAR)

To equalize they send us 9M per year over the next three years reducing the cost of Greinke's salary to $23M.

Increase in 2019 payroll is about 22M: 23M (Greinke) plus 10M (combined salary of Peralta and Bradley) minus 11M (Teheran's salary).

With the Donaldson and McCann signings we will have added 47M in payroll.

Rotation is Folty, Greinke, Gausman plus two of Fried, Touki, Soroka, Gohara, Wright, Wilson.

We might have payroll room for a modestly priced veteran pitcher such as Anibal (at about 5M), which would allow us to start the year with just one young un in the rotation.

We also have the option of sending a prospect to Arizona to increase the amount of Greinke's salary they cover.

This really needs to happen.

 

[UNCBlue012]

I keep coming back to Peralta for the OF and Bauer for the veteran SP. They're both controlled for 2 more years.

This would be pretty great. It'd do some damage to our prospect resources, but I'd be happy with that team. I'd guess Ender and Newk would be traded somewhere in those deals.

Acuna CF
Donaldson 3B
Freeman 1B
Peralta LF
Albies 2B
Markakis/Cutch? RF
Mac/Flowers C
Swanson SS

Bauer
Folty
Fried
Gausman
Gohara/Touki

That's a strong team that matches up well with any team in the NL, IMO.

 

[nsacpi]

This really needs to happen.

One element of the scenario I like is we keep our prospect capital intact, which as I noted in another post is really important when you think down the road a few years and try to create the budget for holding on to Acuna and Albies.

 

[nsacpi]

It'd do some damage to our prospect resources.

Correct. Bauer will cost a pretty penny in terms of prospect capital. And Peralta alone will cost more than Peralta plus Greinke. I think in evaluating these ideas we need to keep in mind the implications for the prospect pipeline which in turn has implications for our ability to hold on to Acuna and Albies.

 

[UNCBlue012]

Correct. Bauer will cost a pretty penny in terms of prospect capital. And Peralta alone will cost more than Peralta plus Greinke. I think in evaluating these ideas we need to keep in mind the implications for the prospect pipeline which in turn has implications for our ability to hold on to Acuna and Albies.

I don't pitty AA at all; dude has his work cut out for him. That being said, at some point, we've got to spend prospect capital knowing we're close... and I think we are. Luckily for us, we have two more top 25 picks in this draft to replenish what we could potentially lose.

 

[nsacpi]

I don't pitty AA at all; dude has his work cut out for him. That being said, at some point, we've got to spend prospect capital knowing we're close... and I think we are. Luckily for us, we have two more top 25 picks in this draft to replenish what we could potentially lose.

By being creative, I think AA can build a really strong team for 2019 AND hold on to the prospect capital necessary for a long window of contention. There is a tension between the two. No doubt. But a good GM can solve this puzzle.

 

[UNCBlue012]

By being creative, I think AA can build a really strong team for 2019 AND hold on to the prospect capital necessary for a long window of contention. There is a tension between the two. No doubt. But a good GM can solve this puzzle.

Agreed, and I truly think AA is a good one. The issue will always come down to money with Atlanta.

 

[Carp]

One element of the scenario I like is we keep our prospect capital intact, which as I noted in another post is really important when you think down the road a few years and try to create the budget for holding on to Acuna and Albies.

Exactly. And honestly, if the Snakes would rather have prospects in place of Newk, I'd do that as well, as long as it want a top 10 prospect. Greinke for 3 years is ok. Yes he hamstrings us a bit next off-season, but we also have other pieces we could move to free up some space if needed. We should still have around 20-30 million available next off-season even if we take on Greinke at your suggested rate.

 

[Southcack77]

Payroll flexibility year by year under the one-stop-shopping trade idea:

After 2019: O'Day (9M), Donaldson (23M), McCann (2M), Venters (2M), Vizcaino (5M). Total (41M)

After 2020: Peralta (9M estimate), Gausman (10M estimate), Flowers (6M), Winkler (3M). Total (28M)

After 2021: Freeman (22M), Greinke (23M), Bradley (8M estimate), Folty (10M estimate), Duvall (4M estimate). Total (67M)

Plus some additional flexibility is available from non-tendering some players or not exercising some options.

It might be feasible to do a deal for just Peralta, or just Peralta and Bradley. Those scenarios could produce a good trade for us. But I think it is worth playing around with scenarios involving Greinke given the motivation of the Dbacks to move him.

You're advocating making Greinke the highest paid Brave for the next three seasons to save a few prospects. That doesn't make any sense to me.

23m is a large chunk of the payroll and you are spending it on possibly upgrading the back end of the rotation, which is the least defensible place of allocating the Braves resources right now.

I value the next three seasons much more highly than anything that comes after them, because they are the peak contention years. For the window to continue past the point where the Braves are fairly compensating their current young players, they will have to produce more young players who give them somewhat comparable surplus value. It could happen, but I'd wouldn't say it's the most likely outcome.

I can't justify blowing that much money on someone I don't see as having almost any chance of significantly upgrading the Braves contention chances in the short term.

 

[Southcack77]

Exactly. And honestly, if the Snakes would rather have prospects in place of Newk, I'd do that as well, as long as it want a top 10 prospect. Greinke for 3 years is ok. Yes he hamstrings us a bit next off-season, but we also have other pieces we could move to free up some space if needed. We should still have around 20-30 million available next off-season even if we take on Greinke at your suggested rate.

you have 20-30 million to address multiple needs, including potentially, middle of the order slugger, leverage bullpen arms, backup catcher, etc.

 

[nsacpi]

You're advocating making Greinke the highest paid Brave for the next three seasons to save a few prospects. That doesn't make any sense to me.

23m is a large chunk of the payroll and you are spending it on possibly upgrading the back end of the rotation, which is the least defensible place of allocating the Braves resources right now.

I value the next three seasons much more highly than anything that comes after them, because they are the peak contention years. For the window to continue past the point where the Braves are fairly compensating their current young players, they will have to produce more young players who give them somewhat comparable surplus value. It could happen, but I'd wouldn't say it's the most likely outcome.

I can't justify blowing that much money on someone I don't see as having almost any chance of significantly upgrading the Braves contention chances in the short term.

Note that we move Teheran as part of this deal. It is all tied together. We take on 23M/year of Greinke's salary. But Teheran is making 11M and is due another 1M as part of the buyout on is 2020 option.

 

[nsacpi]

you have 20-30 million to address multiple needs, including potentially, middle of the order slugger, leverage bullpen arms, backup catcher, etc.

You also have Riley and a bunch of pitching prospects starting the 2019 season in AAA. That holds down the cost of filling some of those needs.

 

[Southcack77]

Yup. We want the flexibility to extent Acuna and Albies. And trading for or not trading for someone on a 3-year deal like Greinke really does not impact upon that. Either way we have the flexibility to pay Acuna and Albies as they get more expensive. The real keys to being able to do that is to have a steady influx of young cheap talent like Contreras, Riley, Waters, Pache and some of the starting pitching prospects currently in the farm system. That will allow us to afford extensions to Acuna and Albies and maybe one or two other significant contracts.

Yes, a three year contract doesn't affect four seasons from now.

It affects the hell out of the next three seasons though.

If Greinke/Peralta cost 30m in 2019, 33m in 2020 and 23m (just Greinke) in 2021, why am I not better off simply signing McCutcheon or Brantley to something like 3/48?

In that scenario I keep my dirt cheap Newcomb to keep or trade, I don't give up any prospects at all, and I have 14m, 17m, 7m to go get a comparable player to Greinke.