Almost Braves II

[50PoundHead]

You forgot and Fick was the worst of the bunch. And not just by a little, Lee and Ortiz were way better. 3 RWAr for Lee over Fick, and Ortiz +2.8

Also Fick was a ****in the playoffs.

That may be, but Lee ended up signing for $500,000 and was out of baseball before Fick.

I wasn't putting a value judgment on what happened; only relating what happened.

 

[50PoundHead]

That may be true, but a couple of things on that particular deal. First off, I never did lose any sleep over trading Schmidt who eventually developed into a dominant starter many years later, and I was a big Neagle fan and enjoyed the time and success he had in an Atlanta uniform. That's paramount and a fact, but the Neagle deal was also the beginning of the end of the Braves as we knew them. It was the prelude to having to deal Justice and Grissom in basically a salary dump in order to sign Glavine and Maddux to extensions.. Denny Neagle, was a luxury at the time, and not a need despite the spiraling career of Avery. Instead of investing money in more starting pitching, we should have used those resources including Schmidt to strengthen other areas of the club, especially the bullpen. We should have road the coat tails of the big 3 during their prime during this time, the way the playoff format was and still is a great #4 starter is not a necessity. For the most part we had a pretty dynamic offense built around power. But our biggest weakness was the pen, and if we would have had another capable arm or 2 to go along with Wohlers in 1996, things change substancially. Besides the differences in lineups, that was the biggest difference between us and the Yank's in the 90's. We had an edge in starting pitching, I'd say we had an edge at almost every every day position, but the Yanks also spent and allocated resources to the bullpen and had guys to compliment Wetteland and Rivera with the likes of Nelson, Stanton, Lloyd, Mendoza, Weathers, etc. That was the difference. I've always said, the Yanks had Mo and we didn't and that is the difference between us having a potential dynasty with multiple rings compared to just one. JS and the brass at that time didn't think the bullpen, or depth in the bullpen was important at that time and it cost us. When he finally figured it out, it was too late when Smoltz was moved to closer, as Glavine and Maddux we're no longer the workhouse stallions of previous years and resulted in little to no postseason success.

How many times did we see it? The bullpen was always a weakness and revolving door in the early 90's. We all remember Wohlers in 1996 but what about in 1999? We had leads late in the game in 2 games in the WS against the Yanks, but lost primarily due to the fact that we didn't have anyone that Bobby was confident in to go to and lost in the late innings because he kept the starters in too long. I wonder how different things would have been if say we would have acquired Wetteland during the Expos fire sale after the strike of 1994 instead of acquiring another starter middle of the season 1996?

One frustration I had during the run was that the front office was all about starting pitching pretty much at the expense of other parts of the machinery. Neagle was a luxury. Having a #4 better than the rest of the league's #4's provided some very good match-ups. Schuerholz cut his teeth in the Orioles organization and they did have the team with 4 20-game winners (Palmer, Cuellar, McNally, Pat Dobson) in 1971 and that must have stuck with him (although Schuerholz was running the Royals by then). The Orioles were all about starting pitching from the mid-1960s through the 1970s and that must have rubbed off on Schuerholz.

 

[Millwood1Hitter]

One frustration I had during the run was that the front office was all about starting pitching pretty much at the expense of other parts of the machinery. Neagle was a luxury. Having a #4 better than the rest of the league's #4's provided some very good match-ups. Schuerholz cut his teeth in the Orioles organization and they did have the team with 4 20-game winners (Palmer, Cuellar, McNally, Pat Dobson) in 1971 and that must have stuck with him (although Schuerholz was running the Royals by then). The Orioles were all about starting pitching from the mid-1960s through the 1970s and that must have rubbed off on Schuerholz.

YEP, and one only needs to go back about a week and see the same things. The Met's had the phenominal starting pitching, in fact it could be argued that 90 year old 500 lb Bartolo Colon could have beaten on any given day any one of the starters of the Royals. They held the lead for most of the series, but much like us in the 90's, things generally fell apart in the late innings. The only thing that matters is who has the lead at the end of the game, not during the game the most and in order to accomplish that you need a complete balanced roster. Those Braves starting staff's we're so much fun, I just can't but help to wonder what could have been if we would have allocated a few more resources or dollars into the pen to save leads late in the game instead of focusing so much on starting pitching.

If I were building a team, and had limited resources much like most MLB teams including our Braves, I would want 3 great starters at the top of the rotation with depth at the bottom, a balanced lineup that can score runs in a number of different ways, and a phenominal bullpen that has 3-4 viable options as shutdown type guys. Basically be able to muster enough runs across to stay in games and win most of them, while having an approach that wears down the other team's starters while having a top heavy starting staff in which you only need to win in October and a bullpen that shuts the door past the 5th inning. The Yanks at the beginning of their dynasty run before George starting spending crazy money on all-stars year after year we're built this way. The Royals and Giants recently we're similiarly constructed. I hope that's the mold that this FO takes in shaping the organization going forward, and we got the pieces and some of the foundation here in order to pull it off but there is a lot, and i emphasize A LOT, of work yet to do.

 

[Knucksie]

Denny Neagle, was a luxury at the time, and not a need despite the spiraling career of Avery.

That was was exactly the reason for the trade. If they'd won in '96, it would be viewed differently. It was coincidental to the Leyritz HR, which was the watershed incident. My eyes started to glaze over after, as they often do with your rants (despite polite request in first post) and could not finish reading after the above quoted part.

 

[Knucksie]

One frustration I had during the run was that the front office was all about starting pitching pretty much at the expense of other parts of the machinery. Neagle was a luxury. Having a #4 better than the rest of the league's #4's provided some very good match-ups. Schuerholz cut his teeth in the Orioles organization and they did have the team with 4 20-game winners (Palmer, Cuellar, McNally, Pat Dobson) in 1971 and that must have stuck with him (although Schuerholz was running the Royals by then). The Orioles were all about starting pitching from the mid-1960s through the 1970s and that must have rubbed off on Schuerholz.

Also the emphasis on pitching was during the 5 years that Bobby was GM. So it's not as if there was some radical shift in philosophy after Schuerholz took over.

 

[50PoundHead]

Also the emphasis on pitching was during the 5 years that Bobby was GM. So it's not as if there was some radical shift in philosophy after Schuerholz took over.

But a large part of that is the fact we didn't have any pitching when Cox took over as GM.

 

[Millwood1Hitter]

That was was exactly the reason for the trade. If they'd won in '96, it would be viewed differently. It was coincidental to the Leyritz HR, which was the watershed incident. My eyes started to glaze over after, as they often do with your rants (despite polite request in first post) and could not finish reading after the above quoted part.

That's fine, don't read it because then your missing the point.

I acknowledged the downfall of Avery and the need to acquire another starter, but also bring up the point that acquiring basically another #1 type starter like Neagle was redundant and wasn't needed in the postseason, and instead more resources should have been used to assemble a bullpen with depth and shut the door in the late innings.

Having another legit shut down guy in the pen along with Wohlers and things could have looked drastically different. While having Neagle was nice, it wasn't a necessity especially considering we had Schmidt, Bell, and Chen in the fold close to making an impact at the MLB level along with some lesser known prospects like Kevin Millwood which would have been great value for the productivity at the end of the rotation.

We didn't need Neagle. We could have spent less on a lesser type pitcher, and spent more on an upgrade in the pen and had the same or better results. Adding another power arm starter or a reclamation or rebuilding project for Leo in the rotation could have yielded the sme results, and allowed us to ride the coattails of 3 future HOFs in their prime more in the postseason while having a shutdown bullpen to preserve the work of those workhorses in the most of important games.

All I'm saying is we were too top heavy in starting pitching and needed more balance. The Neagle move was a no brainer in a vacuum where there aren't financial constraints, but IMO finding an adequate replacement for the injured Pedro Bourbon and another late inning shutdown reliever to compliment Wohlers was much more important and would have yielded greater success in October than trying to find an upgrade, let alone an adequate replacement, for a struggling unhealthy Avery.

 

[Carp]

Also, who can forget the venerable Austin Kearns. I can't even remember how many times we were linked to him over the years when he was with the Reds.

 

[Julio3000]

Also, who can forget the venerable Austin Kearns. I can't even remember how many times we were linked to him over the years when he was with the Reds.

He was one of those guys I was convinced was going to be a brave. I was really surprised that he never ended up in Atlanta.

 

[Knucksie]

That's fine, don't read it because then your missing the point.

The point wasn't missed at all. It's the same point you always make. You take some trade and look through the 20/20 lens of hindsight...then act as if you knew all along that it was the wrong move.

Having another legit shut down guy in the pen along with Wohlers and things could have looked drastically different. While having Neagle was nice, it wasn't a necessity especially considering we had Schmidt, Bell, and Chen in the fold close to making an impact at the MLB level along with some lesser known prospects like Kevin Millwood which would have been great value for the productivity at the end of the rotation.

They had always viewed those types as #5 starters, and at least one is off the time line. Chen wouldn't have been anywhere close to major league ready when Neagle was acquired. Neagle was (obviously) brought in during '96 and Chen was at AAA in '99. (Yeah, I saw him pitch and still have the autographed IL ball. Also have a great personal story, if anybody wants to hear.)

All I'm saying is we were too top heavy in starting pitching and needed more balance. The Neagle move was a no brainer in a vacuum where there aren't financial constraints, but IMO finding an adequate replacement for the injured Pedro Bourbon and another late inning shutdown reliever to compliment Wohlers was much more important and would have yielded greater success in October than trying to find an upgrade, let alone an adequate replacement, for a struggling unhealthy Avery.

The team had no financial constaints then. It was always among the highest payrolls, if not the highest through those years. Yeah, JS should not have made the "economics stink" comment. We can allow a little latititude, as we've all said thing in life that we later regret. Of course the fonds could have been disbursed differently. Maybe he mentioned in his book, but it'd been about 15 since reading it.

If you want a guess, Leo definitely wanted Neagle and maybe Bobby too. So it wasn't unlike some years later when they finally got Javier Vazquez, whom they'd wanted for years (I was also very fond of him, too, when he pitched for Montreal).

 

[Millwood1Hitter]

The point wasn't missed at all. It's the same point you always make. You take some trade and look through the 20/20 lens of hindsight...then act as if you knew all along that it was the wrong move.

They had always viewed those types as #5 starters, and at least one is off the time line. Chen wouldn't have been anywhere close to major league ready when Neagle was acquired. Neagle was (obviously) brought in during '96 and Chen was at AAA in '99. (Yeah, I saw him pitch and still have the autographed IL ball. Also have a great personal story, if anybody wants to hear.)

The team had no financial constaints then. It was always among the highest payrolls, if not the highest through those years. Yeah, JS should not have made the "economics stink" comment. We can allow a little latititude, as we've all said thing in life that we later regret. Of course the fonds could have been disbursed differently. Maybe he mentioned in his book, but it'd been about 15 since reading it.

If you want a guess, Leo definitely wanted Neagle and maybe Bobby too. So it wasn't unlike some years later when they finally got Javier Vazquez, whom they'd wanted for years (I was also very fond of him, too, when he pitched for Montreal).

You're still missing the point. The neagle deal was redundant, we didn't need another top of the rotation starter whom was about to become very expensive to be a number 4 starter in the postseason. We accomplished the same things in October riding Smoltz, Glavine, and Avery with a lesser veteran like Charlie Liebrandt as the 4th starter. And you know what, the 96 rotation was better yet despite the struggles of Avery. We had Maddux, the best pitcher in the game, Smoltz had his best year to date, and Glavine was in his prime.

The Neagle deal was fine, again in a vacuum without financial restraints. But don't fool yourself, even though they were a large market team and amongst the biggest spenders in the game, they had a budget framework that they had to work within. They weren't irresponsible like some of the teams going into the new millennium like the Yanks and Red Sox and modern day Dodgers that try to sign every all star imaginable. The Neagle deal and his extension along with a new payroll threshold tax in 1997 lead to the trade of Justice and Grissom to eventually free up money to keep Maddux and Glavine who were approaching FA.

And although we were players a few years later on a number of big FAs including AROD and Hampton, I shudder to think what the effect of those deals would have had later on considering just a year later we didn't have the means to spend a few million to acquire a huge need at 1st base. Andruw only stayed because he signed a below market deal, and Millwood a few years later had to be shipped because the economics of baseball did stink, only because JS made his own bed all the while knowing what our constraints were at that time. Had AROD or Hampton signed The Atlanta Braves as we knew them during that era could have been a no go and the division run could have come to a halt much earlier than it did.

Yes I realize I'm off on the timeframe of some of those pitchers, but my point being for an organization that was known for developing pitching, maybe we should have used and developed some of that pitching to fill out the rotation, with the downfall of Avery we could have acquired a lesser starter to fill our needs for a 4th starter that would have cost less in prospects and financial commitment. Hell, the way Leo was going at it, we probably could have acquired someone like Mike Remlinger (just throwing a name out there of a struggling pitcher) and accomplished the same thing All the while using a cost effective approach of putting a youngster in the 5 spot to gain experience like we did in the late 90s and early 2000s with a number of pitchers like Chen, Perez, Marquis, Moss, Ramirez etc. And with those cost savings, used it and spent it to balance the team out and put it into a deep shutdown bullpen to preserve those leads from that Phenominal Big 3. I still maintain and stand firm that trying to find a viable replacement for the injured Pedro Bourbon to setup Wohlers was a much much bigger need than acquiring another top of the rotation starter. And despite his struggles in 96, Avery could still knockout a good game here or there and that probably would have been good enough as the 4th starter in October.

 

[50PoundHead]

I'm with Millwood on this one. It never matches up completely, but if you in effect have three aces (Maddux, Glavine, Smoltz) to face off against the one, two, and three from other teams, you get to a point where it's overkill when you invest heavily in the back end of the rotation (especially your number five guy). Knucksie, you're right that the Braves had little in the way of salary constraints during the run, so why not acquire Neagle. Perfectly plausible. What I think Millwood is saying--and what I agree with--is that there were other parts of the team that could have been upgraded with the same money or same acquisition cost.

 

[Julio3000]

I'm with Millwood on this one. It never matches up completely, but if you in effect have three aces (Maddux, Glavine, Smoltz) to face off against the one, two, and three from other teams, you get to a point where it's overkill when you invest heavily in the back end of the rotation (especially your number five guy). Knucksie, you're right that the Braves had little in the way of salary constraints during the run, so why not acquire Neagle. Perfectly plausible. What I think Millwood is saying--and what I agree with--is that there were other parts of the team that could have been upgraded with the same money or same acquisition cost.

This is a completely unprovable statement, but I've always thought that the Braves would have one at least one more ring if they'd had a more reliable 'pen...during the first chapter of the run, particularly.

It was a bit of a puzzler for me, because I felt that the front office had a blind spot about it, bullpen arms being relatively available and cost-effective, in general.

 

[Carp]

You're still missing the point. The neagle deal was redundant, we didn't need another top of the rotation starter whom was about to become very expensive to be a number 4 starter in the postseason. We accomplished the same things in October riding Smoltz, Glavine, and Avery with a lesser veteran like Charlie Liebrandt as the 4th starter. And you know what, the 96 rotation was better yet despite the struggles of Avery. We had Maddux, the best pitcher in the game, Smoltz had his best year to date, and Glavine was in his prime.

The Neagle deal was fine, again in a vacuum without financial restraints. But don't fool yourself, even though they were a large market team and amongst the biggest spenders in the game, they had a budget framework that they had to work within. They weren't irresponsible like some of the teams going into the new millennium like the Yanks and Red Sox and modern day Dodgers that try to sign every all star imaginable. The Neagle deal and his extension along with a new payroll threshold tax in 1997 lead to the trade of Justice and Grissom to eventually free up money to keep Maddux and Glavine who were approaching FA.

And although we were players a few years later on a number of big FAs including AROD and Hampton, I shudder to think what the effect of those deals would have had later on considering just a year later we didn't have the means to spend a few million to acquire a huge need at 1st base. Andruw only stayed because he signed a below market deal, and Millwood a few years later had to be shipped because the economics of baseball did stink, only because JS made his own bed all the while knowing what our constraints were at that time. Had AROD or Hampton signed The Atlanta Braves as we knew them during that era could have been a no go and the division run could have come to a halt much earlier than it did.

Yes I realize I'm off on the timeframe of some of those pitchers, but my point being for an organization that was known for developing pitching, maybe we should have used and developed some of that pitching to fill out the rotation, with the downfall of Avery we could have acquired a lesser starter to fill our needs for a 4th starter that would have cost less in prospects and financial commitment. Hell, the way Leo was going at it, we probably could have acquired someone like Mike Remlinger (just throwing a name out there of a struggling pitcher) and accomplished the same thing All the while using a cost effective approach of putting a youngster in the 5 spot to gain experience like we did in the late 90s and early 2000s with a number of pitchers like Chen, Perez, Marquis, Moss, Ramirez etc. And with those cost savings, used it and spent it to balance the team out and put it into a deep shutdown bullpen to preserve those leads from that Phenominal Big 3. I still maintain and stand firm that trying to find a viable replacement for the injured Pedro Bourbon to setup Wohlers was a much much bigger need than acquiring another top of the rotation starter. And despite his struggles in 96, Avery could still knockout a good game here or there and that probably would have been good enough as the 4th starter in October.

Justice trade had more to do with him constantly being injured. They signed Brian Jordan like a year or two later and were rumored to be involved with Hampton before he signed with the Rockies. And even as recently as 2000, we were hours away from signing A-Rod, so I doubt very seriously that money was as big of an issue during 96-97 that your are making it out to be.

Also, you're forgetting that BP's were constructed much differently back then than they are today. Starters (especially Braves starters) were going much deeper into games than pitchers do today, putting less of a priority on a deep BP with several specialist. Not only that, but even with the Bourbon injury, we still had one of the better pens in the league that season with one of the best closers in the game at the time.

 

[Carp]

Also I don't suscribe to the notion that the division streak ends with the acquisition of Hampton or A-Rod (especially A-Rod). For one, this assumes that we don't make/win the WS during this time. Teams don't cut payroll after a WS berth (unless you are the Marlins). And given that A-Rod was essentially the best player in baseball during this time, I'd say we don't make trades like Jordan and Perez for Sheffield or Wainwright for JD Drew

 

[Knucksie]

This is a completely unprovable statement, but I've always thought that the Braves would have one at least one more ring if they'd had a more reliable 'pen...during the first chapter of the run, particularly.

It was a bit of a puzzler for me, because I felt that the front office had a blind spot about it, bullpen arms being relatively available and cost-effective, in general.

Partly true. ’91, they were a Lonnie Smith baserunning blunder away. The structure and terminology was different during that era. Basically, there was a closer, a setup man, middle relievers and mop-up man. You might also have somebody who could spot start but was primarily a reliever. Keep in mind that even with the most optimistic predictions, the Braves could not have been expected to finish .500, let alone contend for a World Championship. During the stretch run, Alejendro Pena was acquired to be the “closer,” while he had never served in that capacity previously. He did well enough that they could have won it all with him.

In ’92, they were not improved in the pen and eventually settled on a washed up Jeff Reardon, who was at one time among the elite. Without checking, there were at least 2 blown saves in the games that they lost against the Blue Jays.

’93: can’t remember, but it was always my belief that they were exhausted from the pennant race against the Giants in the West.

In ’95, it was confidence as much as anything else. They clearly entered the season without planning on Wohlers to fulfill expectations yet. (He was highly regarded, coming up.) Case in point, Schuerholz attempted to acquire John Wetteland in the Expos fire sale.

In ’96, there was every expectation of repeating. Cox went to Wohlers early, due to lack of confidence in the rest of the relief corps. However, we have to question if holes in the pen were the reason for the Leyritz HR. The Braves destroyed the Yankees in Games 1 & 2 and were way ahead in Game 3 before the implosion. That series should have been a Braves sweep.

 

[Knucksie]

You're still missing the point. The neagle deal was redundant, we didn't need another top of the rotation starter whom was about to become very expensive to be a number 4 starter in the postseason. We accomplished the same things in October riding Smoltz, Glavine, and Avery with a lesser veteran like Charlie Liebrandt as the 4th starter. And you know what, the 96 rotation was better yet despite the struggles of Avery. We had Maddux, the best pitcher in the game, Smoltz had his best year to date, and Glavine was in his prime.

If you want to unload about a poor trade during that era, how about Zane Smith? He would have been the ideal 2nd LH starter in the rotation, maybe not veteran enough as Charlie Liebrandt but certainly had more life left in him. The Pirates wouldn't have eventually obtained him from the Expos and the Braves wouldn't have gotten 3 busts. (Maybe Sergio Valdez was projected to be a decent pen guy, back in 1989?)