2018 Offseason And Targets

Status
Not open for further replies.
bravesfanforlife88 said:
That’s right Enscheff. Please tell him how he should think. I’m fact, every opinion on this board is null and void until you tell us the correct opinion
Click to expand...

Yep!!! And then we get to sit back and wait for post after post of him trying to break his arm patting himself on the back because he was right in a post 10 pages or more back.

Love the analytical input brought to the site....but this "I am better and smarter than everyone" crap is old. Sadly there really isn't a better site available. I will go back to lurking before I get a PM telling me to grow up and leave Enscheff alone. Because whats going on around here is so adult.
 
bravesfanforlife88 said:
That’s right Enscheff. Please tell him how he should think. I’m fact, every opinion on this board is null and void until you tell us the correct opinion
Click to expand...

The internet allows every ignoramus to to spread their uninformed opinion on every subject.

I’m just glad the Braves have a GM who’s smarter than the folks with those ignorant opinions.
 
IowaBrave14 said:
Yep!!! And then we get to sit back and wait for post after post of him trying to break his arm patting himself on the back because he was right in a post 10 pages or more back.

Love the analytical input brought to the site....but this "I am better and smarter than everyone" crap is old. Sadly there really isn't a better site available. I will go back to lurking before I get a PM telling me to grow up and leave Enscheff alone. Because whats going on around here is so adult.
Click to expand...

I put him on mute months ago. I bet his real life is so, so pathetic.
 
Super said:
i mean, to be fair, thinking about it in the way clv said is a bad mindset and not one the good GMs have. way overpaying for a guy because "this is your window" is a really bad idea. and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, right? overpaying in prospects for a guy because you're in a "contention window" will, in turn, greatly shorten your window. the astros are really young and will be a team in contention for a while; overpaying for more a of a "win-now" guy and cutting down on future success isn't smart.
Click to expand...

To be fair - you folks understand you're not the GM of anything other than your own spreadsheet, right???

Once again, a select few folks miss the entire point of the post.

Nobody here gets paid, not even a gold star, for being the smartest GM on the internet message board. This stuff isn't rocket science - no matter how much some people try to make it out to be - and the vast majority of posters here are quite aware of what an overpay is and what the consequences for overpaying are. The difference with those who don't mind an overpay here and there is that they grasp the fact that they don't care about it - they want to win now, and couldn't give less of a *hit what that causes to happen 5 years from now because they're not asked to deal with that.

The rant I referred to came from a host - not any of the former GMs who a blackjack dealer thinks he's infinitely more intelligent than - who makes some sense. His point was that he's grown so tired of hearing fans calling in and saying "I don't want Harper/Machado/insert whatever player you like because of the situation he'll put the organization in 8-10 years down the road". What the *ell do you care? Are you the owner? A Liberty Media shareholder? Do you even go to SunTrust Park more than a couple times a year??? It's not your money, so what difference does it make? MLB baseball is entertainment, and it's much more entertaining when your team has lots of very good players and a chance to win.

It's great to understand the inner-workings of the baseball business, but there's no award for doing so - and just because people enjoy being impatient fans doesn't preclude one from knowing whether decisions are "smart" business decisions or not. They simply don't care since it's not their money or job on the line. Those who lose sleep over those things seriously need to take a step back and consider what's actually important in their lives. There's honestly no harm going to come from wishing the Braves would have signed Harper, Machado, Kimbrel, and Corbin to go with Freeman, Donaldson, and Acuna and taking a shot while you have them - I promise. If you think those wishing those things don't understand that it wasn't possible or would be a bad business decision, you're obviously not half as smart as you think you are - this isn't Reddit, MLBTR, or an ESPN message board.
 
Super said:
i mean, to be fair, thinking about it in the way clv said is a bad mindset and not one the good GMs have. way overpaying for a guy because "this is your window" is a really bad idea. and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, right? overpaying in prospects for a guy because you're in a "contention window" will, in turn, greatly shorten your window. the astros are really young and will be a team in contention for a while; overpaying for more a of a "win-now" guy and cutting down on future success isn't smart.
Click to expand...

A few things:

It was more of the tone in which he was saying "mindless rambling"....stop taking personal jabs....

Yes trading prospects can shorten a window. But, we have not had a championship team since 95....Sometimes you have to go for it. We have a strong farm system and a team that has the chance to make a deep playoff run, if the FO would commit to going for it. I'm not saying trade every prospect for the sake of trading them. But dammit, make a go at it!
 
Enscheff said:
The internet allows every ignoramus to to spread their uninformed opinion on every subject.

I’m just glad the Braves have a GM who’s smarter than the folks with those ignorant opinions.
Click to expand...

Just as many are glad they don't consult you.
 
bravesfanforlife88 said:
A few things:

It was more of the tone in which he was saying "mindless rambling"....stop taking personal jabs....

Yes trading prospects can shorten a window. But, we have not had a championship team since 95....Sometimes you have to go for it. We have a strong farm system and a team that has the chance to make a deep playoff run, if the FO would commit to going for it. I'm not saying trade every prospect for the sake of trading them. But dammit, make a go at it!
Click to expand...

they have "a go at it." and will have "a go at it" for many more years provided they don't do anything stupid and try and go all-in for a year or two.
 
clvclv said:
His point was that he's grown so tired of hearing fans calling in and saying "I don't want Harper/Machado/insert whatever player you like because of the situation he'll put the organization in 8-10 years down the road". What the *ell do you care? Are you the owner? A Liberty Media shareholder?.
Click to expand...

I care because I remember what the BJ Upton contract did to the braves. What the Derek Lowe contract did. Dan Uggla. And Harper or Machado would be 2-3x that amount. We don’t want to see that happen again. Because those large record breaking contracts hardly ever work out in the team’s favor. Are there exceptions? Of course. But blowing our wad to go all in for one year will often times end up in more periods where the braves have to rebuild and having Josh Anderson roam CF isn’t very entertaining.

Not to mention, signing Harper may mean that we have to let Freddie/Acuna/Albies/etc go before we really should bc of the money tied up to Harper. It just doesn’t make sense for a mid market team to spend that kind of money on one player.
 
clvclv said:
To be fair - you folks understand you're not the GM of anything other than your own spreadsheet, right???

Once again, a select few folks miss the entire point of the post.

Nobody here gets paid, not even a gold star, for being the smartest GM on the internet message board. This stuff isn't rocket science - no matter how much some people try to make it out to be - and the vast majority of posters here are quite aware of what an overpay is and what the consequences for overpaying are. The difference with those who don't mind an overpay here and there is that they grasp the fact that they don't care about it - they want to win now, and couldn't give less of a *hit what that causes to happen 5 years from now because they're not asked to deal with that.

The rant I referred to came from a host - not any of the former GMs who a blackjack dealer thinks he's infinitely more intelligent than - who makes some sense. His point was that he's grown so tired of hearing fans calling in and saying "I don't want Harper/Machado/insert whatever player you like because of the situation he'll put the organization in 8-10 years down the road". What the *ell do you care? Are you the owner? A Liberty Media shareholder? Do you even go to SunTrust Park more than a couple times a year??? It's not your money, so what difference does it make? MLB baseball is entertainment, and it's much more entertaining when your team has lots of very good players and a chance to win.

It's great to understand the inner-workings of the baseball business, but there's no award for doing so - and just because people enjoy being impatient fans doesn't preclude one from knowing whether decisions are "smart" business decisions or not. They simply don't care since it's not their money or job on the line. Those who lose sleep over those things seriously need to take a step back and consider what's actually important in their lives. There's honestly no harm going to come from wishing the Braves would have signed Harper, Machado, Kimbrel, and Corbin to go with Freeman, Donaldson, and Acuna and taking a shot while you have them - I promise. If you think those wishing those things don't understand that it wasn't possible or would be a bad business decision, you're obviously not half as smart as you think you are - this isn't Reddit, MLBTR, or an ESPN message board.
Click to expand...

I don't really care about your first statement. GMs aren't going to mortgage the future for one year. The good ones, anyway. That's just a fact - ignore it all you want in favor of ignorance.

Informed, realistic discussion is good and better than the alternative. as usual, i don't understand what point your rambling is trying to make. i care what happens 5 years from now because, presumably, i'll still be alive and a fan 5 years from now. going all-in for a year or two while screwing the team 5 years from now isn't entertainment (for me), or smart at all from a team and GM perspective. again: that's just a fact. you're free to be impatient and want the team to make bad moves to go all-in. others are free to point out why it's a bad idea.

it's not my money, no. and if the braves were the phillies or yankees, i would care a whole lot less what they gave a player. since the braves operate on a far tighter budget than those two teams, this follows the "don't mortgage the future to go all-in for a year or two because i want to see the team succeed 1,3,5,7,9 years from now." again: good GMs will not vastly overpay to go all-in; baseball is far too unpredictable for that.

who wants an award...? i'd rather continue to learn and be more informed and see sustained success than hope my team cashes in all their chips, hope they win, and if/when they don't deal with 60-win seasons again. i don't lose a second of sleep thinking about what people here say. once again, your last paragraphs makes so, so little sense it hurts. pointing out that signing all those guys you listed is not only completely unrealistic but impossible is, once again, a fact. i think some people truly don't understand when their suggestions are really bad ideas.
 
DontStopTheChop said:
I care because I remember what the BJ Upton contract did to the braves. What the Derek Lowe contract did. Dan Uggla. And Harper or Machado would be 2-3x that amount. We don’t want to see that happen again. Because those large record breaking contracts hardly ever work out in the team’s favor. Are there exceptions? Of course. But blowing our wad to go all in for one year will often times end up in more periods where the braves have to rebuild and having Josh Anderson roam CF isn’t very entertaining.

Not to mention, signing Harper may mean that we have to let Freddie/Acuna/Albies/etc go before we really should bc of the money tied up to Harper. It just doesn’t make sense for a mid market team to spend that kind of money on one player.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

clv's argument is so bad right now. Of course we care about what a bad contract does to the future of the organization. Being the owner or shareholder means nothing. I want the Braves to be successful for as long as possible, so I don't want things that will keep that from happening 8-10 years down the road. Not sure why that is so hard to understand.
 
Super said:
i mean, to be fair, thinking about it in the way clv said is a bad mindset and not one the good GMs have. way overpaying for a guy because "this is your window" is a really bad idea. and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, right? overpaying in prospects for a guy because you're in a "contention window" will, in turn, greatly shorten your window. the astros are really young and will be a team in contention for a while; overpaying for more a of a "win-now" guy and cutting down on future success isn't smart.
Click to expand...


I think the point that you should be willing to sacrifice the future to maximize your chance at winning a championship is, if not correct, then certainly a valid school of thought.

But no one should ever grossly overpay for anything. Unless perhaps you are breaking a 100 year dry spell of championships.

Some of the proposed moves to contend are what I would consider gross overpays and I think those are foolish. If for nothing else, than those all in moves might have netted you more value elsewhere.
 
Southcack77 said:
I think the point that you should be willing to sacrifice the future to maximize your chance at winning a championship is, if not correct, then certainly a valid school of thought.
Click to expand...

i would say it heavily depends on the exact situation. but in general, it's not a smart thing to do. especially for a team like the braves, and especially for right now.
 
CJ9 said:
Exactly.

clv's argument is so bad right now. Of course we care about what a bad contract does to the future of the organization. Being the owner or shareholder means nothing. I want the Braves to be successful for as long as possible, so I don't want things that will keep that from happening 8-10 years down the road. Not sure why that is so hard to understand.
Click to expand...


I'm not sure I really find the idea of forever sustained success particularly realistic. I think a rebuild is inevitable in most places. You can manage to some extent how bad that rebuild will be, but in large part it isn't in your control how your players age and how your prospects develop.

I certainly agree that avoiding long term deals that are paying people in their late 30s huge blocks of your payroll are always to be avoided. I don't necessarily think paying a 26 year old a ton of money for a long time is a killer. Machado and Harper are going to come in way under what was sort of thrown around here this offseason, I think. Not that I think the Braves should be in there, but I wouldn't put that in the same class as those deals that clearly are going to be wayyyy underwater for a significant portion of the contract.
 
Super said:
i would say it heavily depends on the exact situation. but in general, it's not a smart thing to do. especially for a team like the braves, and especially for right now.
Click to expand...


Tell me what the move is and I'll tell you whether I think it makes sense.

I'm married to neither approach.

the future is pretty far out there and there are all sorts of things that make it brighter or dimmer that simply aren't knowable or particularly within the org's control. So I'm not going to manage for the future with any specific in stone parameters.

But generally speaking, I'm going to try and avoid committing long term money to players in their 30s that will clearly be underwater before they are done; I'm going to try and avoid trading quality prospects for short term fixes that are not clear cut first division solutions.

But would I give up a fair amount to get a Realmuto (though not my real passion), Kluber/DeGrom/Syndegard, Haniger? I would. If the whole puzzle fit together and not narrowed the window to like two years.

If you do your job in the draft and free agency and in trades, then you can possibly manage around holes. If you find you can't do that, you can take steps to make your rebuild less of a death walk.
 
Southcack77 said:
Tell me what the move is and I'll tell you whether I think it makes sense.

I'm married to neither approach.

the future is pretty far out there and there are all sorts of things that make it brighter or dimmer that simply aren't knowable or particularly within the org's control. So I'm not going to manage for the future with any specific in stone parameters.

But generally speaking, I'm going to try and avoid committing long term money to players in their 30s that will clearly be underwater before they are done; I'm going to try and avoid trading quality prospects for short term fixes that are not clear cut first division solutions.

But would I give up a fair amount to get a Realmuto (though not my real passion), Kluber/DeGrom/Syndegard, Haniger? I would. If the whole puzzle fit together and not narrowed the window to like two years.

If you do your job in the draft and free agency and in trades, then you can possibly manage around holes. If you find you can't do that, you can take steps to make your rebuild less of a death walk.
Click to expand...

i mean, i'm not suggesting (nor have i ever) never trading a potential future piece. i would certainly pay a good price for a good player. but that's not really what was being talked about.
 
Southcack77 said:
I'm not sure I really find the idea of forever sustained success particularly realistic. I think a rebuild is inevitable in most places. You can manage to some extent how bad that rebuild will be, but in large part it isn't in your control how your players age and how your prospects develop.

I certainly agree that avoiding long term deals that are paying people in their late 30s huge blocks of your payroll are always to be avoided. I don't necessarily think paying a 26 year old a ton of money for a long time is a killer. Machado and Harper are going to come in way under what was sort of thrown around here this offseason, I think. Not that I think the Braves should be in there, but I wouldn't put that in the same class as those deals that clearly are going to be wayyyy underwater for a significant portion of the contract.
Click to expand...

I'm fine with putting Harper/Machado in another category because obviously the talent level of Harper/Machado supercedes that of Upton/Lowe/Uggla. But, it doesn't matter if Harper puts up Mike Trout level seasons each and every year of his new contract if the braves can't afford to add big pieces around him. What has Trout won in LA? One player can't do it alone. Even Trout. And let's be honest, Harper isn't Trout. Point being - paying Harper that kind of money would absolutely be a killer for the Braves long-term unless they all of a sudden become the Yanks/Dodgers and have a sustained top 5 payroll. I'm operating under the assumption that isn't going to happen and the Braves are going to have a mid-market payroll. And for mid market teams, it isn't a good move because it will limit the amount of players that we can put around him, which will limit our success, which will ultimately lead to subpar entertainment.

Logic aside - would I be absolutely giddy if the Braves signed Harper? Of freaking course I would. The fan in me would go nuts. It would be awesome to pair Harper with Freddie and Acuna. Doesn't mean that there aren't reasonable opinions out there to say it doesn't make sense for the Braves to do it. The "it isn't your money, why do you care?" excuse is so lame. As fans, we should want what is best for the braves, both long-term and short-term.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top