2018 Offseason And Targets

Status
Not open for further replies.
nsacpi said:
I see Braves 2018 as a bit like Astros 2015. These things don't necessarily go in a straight line. Astros 2016 didn't make the playoffs, finishing 11 games back in their division.
Click to expand...

tough judgment call for AA if they are sitting four or five out of the wild card at the deadline. Selling would not be popular but might be the best thing.
 
You guys (and gals) can whistle past the graveyard all you want. But, whether you want to acknowledge it or not, the Braves appear to be on a very tight budget, one tight enough where there is a real good chance that they starve the fire for want of fuel.

I see your Astros comparison. The difference is that they took their payroll down to $29M in 2013, they shamelessly tanked, they played the International market hard, and they grew most of their team in house until they started needing the final pieces to make it happen and keep it going. The Astro's year end 2018 payroll was $187M and will likely be as much or more this year. Thats 6 plus X payroll growth in 5 years. They used their free cash to add as needed, when needed and keep and pay developing stars. When the Astros got ready to really compete, they had few holes and a young team with a core that could grow together (cheaply) as they got better. When they failed the one year after the one good year, they still were a young team with money to spend and developing stars.

The Braves aren't really doing it that way. The Braves 40 man has varied over the last 5 years from a low of $107.5M to a high of $136M. Everything about this offseason signals moderate payroll growth at best, meaning band aids and bailing wire, not true fixes.

There's two ways to build a sustainably good franchise: 1. Commit to a rebuild, take it down to the metal and smartly rebuild from the ground up spending your cash wisely along the way (the Astros model) and 2. Rebuild on the fly, spend massive cash where needed to get over the hump and stay there (the Yankees and Red Sox model).

The Braves are trying this half assed toe in the water pray for rain strategy which won't work for any kind of sustained success.

I was hopeful that with the new park, the Braves would start spending like they should which is a top 10 type franchise. But, that's not happening.

That's why I say that if the Braves fail in 2019, short of pretty visible and fixable circumstances, they need to be open on moving Freeman, Inciarte and others because of the windage of the situation - when the young guys get good enough to be helpful enough you can't have the monied veterans eating up payroll in a career decline phase.
 
Last edited:
Horsehide Harry said:
You guys (and gals) can whistle past the graveyard all you want. But, whether you want to acknowledge it or not, the Braves appear to be on a very tight budget, one tight enough where there is a real good chance that they starve the fire for want of fuel.

I see your Astros comparison. The difference is that they took their payroll down to $29M in 2013, they shamelessly tanked, they played the International market hard, and they grew most of their team in house until they started needing the final pieces to make it happen and keep it going. The Astro's year end 2018 payroll was $187M and will likely be as much or more this year. Thats 6 plus X payroll growth in 5 years. They used their free cash to add as needed, when needed and keep and pay developing stars. When the Astros got ready to really compete, they had few holes and a young team with a core that could grow together (cheaply) as they got better. When they failed the one year after the one good year, they still were a young team with money to spend and developing stars.

The Braves aren't really doing it that way. The Braves 40 man has varied over the last 5 years from a low of $107.5M to a high of $136M. Everything about this offseason signals moderate payroll growth at best, meaning band aids and bailing wire, not true fixes.

There's two ways to build a sustainably good franchise: 1. Commit to a rebuild, take it down to the metal and smartly rebuild from the ground up spending your cash wisely along the way (the Astros model) and 2. Rebuild on the fly, spend massive cash where needed to get over the hump and stay there (the Yankees and Red Sox model).

The Braves are trying this half assed toe in the water pray for rain strategy which won't work for any kind of sustained success.

I was hopeful that with the new park, the Braves would start spending like they should which is a top 10 type franchise. But, that's not happening.

That's why I say that if the Braves fail in 2019, short of pretty visible and fixable circumstances, they need to be open on moving Freeman, Inciarte and others because of the windage of the situation - when the young guys get good enough to be helpful enough you can't have the monied veterans eating up payroll in a career decline phase.
Click to expand...

Did you have to watch?
 
nsacpi said:
Harry likes to watch...that's how this whole thing started
Click to expand...

You guys really don't want to get vulgar with me. I'll explode this board completely out of the interwebs. I'm a master in profanity and profane situations like some are masters of oil or clay. A true artist.
 
Horsehide Harry said:
You guys (and gals) can whistle past the graveyard all you want. But, whether you want to acknowledge it or not, the Braves appear to be on a very tight budget, one tight enough where there is a real good chance that they starve the fire for want of fuel.

I see your Astros comparison. The difference is that they took their payroll down to $29M in 2013, they shamelessly tanked, they played the International market hard, and they grew most of their team in house until they started needing the final pieces to make it happen and keep it going. The Astro's year end 2018 payroll was $187M and will likely be as much or more this year. Thats 6 plus X payroll growth in 5 years. They used their free cash to add as needed, when needed and keep and pay developing stars. When the Astros got ready to really compete, they had few holes and a young team with a core that could grow together (cheaply) as they got better. When they failed the one year after the one good year, they still were a young team with money to spend and developing stars.

The Braves aren't really doing it that way. The Braves 40 man has varied over the last 5 years from a low of $107.5M to a high of $136M. Everything about this offseason signals moderate payroll growth at best, meaning band aids and bailing wire, not true fixes.

There's two ways to build a sustainably good franchise: 1. Commit to a rebuild, take it down to the metal and smartly rebuild from the ground up spending your cash wisely along the way (the Astros model) and 2. Rebuild on the fly, spend massive cash where needed to get over the hump and stay there (the Yankees and Red Sox model).

The Braves are trying this half assed toe in the water pray for rain strategy which won't work for any kind of sustained success.

I was hopeful that with the new park, the Braves would start spending like they should which is a top 10 type franchise. But, that's not happening.

That's why I say that if the Braves fail in 2019, short of pretty visible and fixable circumstances, they need to be open on moving Freeman, Inciarte and others because of the windage of the situation - when the young guys get good enough to be helpful enough you can't have the monied veterans eating up payroll in a career decline phase.
Click to expand...

I really don't understand how anyone can draw this conclusion. Of all the teams in MLB, the Braves are widely considered one of the teams most set up for long term (5+ years) success.

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/heres-who-will-win-the-next-five-world-series/

This "half-assed approach" already got the Braves an NL East title. This "half-assed approach" has the Braves projected to win 82 games in 2019, and they haven't addressed CoF at all. This "half-assed approach" has the Braves set up with almost zero long term payroll commitments and a young core everyone fully expects to get better and better.

There are very few plausible scenarios where a team at the very beginning of a window of contention can trade away a 4-5 win player and still be competitive in the near future.

Freeman will play out his contract as a Brave, and unless he signs a series of short extensions, will be allowed to walk following the 2021 season. They may consider trading him as a rental in 2021 if they are out of the race, but I find that scenario fairly unlikely.
 
CrazyTrain said:
Coppy fleeced the d-backs for Ender and Swanson and he might be the worst executive in the history of the sport. Even a blind mouse finds the cheese once in a while.
Click to expand...

The two trades I listed for AA are still more impressive, no offense to Ender. However, it's true that we won that D'Backs trade by a lot. But it was also right after that moron traded Simmons to the Angels.
 
Enscheff said:
I really don't understand how anyone can draw this conclusion. Of all the teams in MLB, the Braves are widely considered one of the teams most set up for long term (5+ years) success.

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/heres-who-will-win-the-next-five-world-series/

This "half-assed approach" already got the Braves an NL East title. This "half-assed approach" has the Braves projected to win 82 games in 2019, and they haven't addressed CoF at all. This "half-assed approach" has the Braves set up with almost zero long term payroll commitments and a young core everyone fully expects to get better and better.

There are very few plausible scenarios where a team at the very beginning of a window of contention can trade away a 4-5 win player and still be competitive in the near future.

Freeman will play out his contract as a Brave, and unless he signs a series of short extensions, will be allowed to walk following the 2021 season. They may consider trading him as a rental in 2021 if they are out of the race, but I find that scenario fairly unlikely.
Click to expand...

First: Kiley.

Second: there's a difference in short term, limited opportunity and a sustained (5-7 year window of success). If everything goes right could the Braves win a WS in 2019? Sure. Is it likely? No. If most things go right could they win the Division in 2019? Sure. Is it likely? Not at this point - even if they fill a cOF spot with a 5 win guy, where does that leave them -87 wins? Is that good enough? probably not.

But let's assume 2019 is successful in some form. Does Acuna go to a 8 Win guy for 2020? Probably not. But even if he does, that gets negated somewhat by Freeman regressing from 5 to 3, while eating payroll space.

I'm all for keeping Freeman IF the Braves will spend the cash to bring in what needs to be brought in to fill the gaps that arise year to year along with the ebb and flow of young talent coming, going, growing and declining. They aren't doing that with payroll which narrows the margin so much that any kind of sustained era of excellence seems unlikely to me.
 
I have lamented the fact that there isn't an option in the OF between the ~$50M market of flawed OFers like Cutch/Brantley/Pollock and the $350M Harper option. This makes it very hard (impossible) for the Braves to address cOF with a solid FA in the $100M-$150M price range right now.

Looking at the 2019-2020 FA class may shed some light on why the Braves are favoring these 1 year deals:

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018/08/2019-20-mlb-free-agents.html

Several appropriately aged FAs at cOF and 3B will be available next offseason:

Arenado (29)
Rendon (30)
Puig (29)
Ozuna (29)

These are all excellent mid-tier options for a team like the Braves to chase with 5+ year deals, and the future availability of these guys is likely why they aren't committing to a flawed player right now. I could see the Braves being in on all these players, and possibly even more than one of them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top