Around Baseball Offseason Edition - Derek Jeter will retire at seasons end

BRule said:
So he didn't have TJS and then have to be shut down again this year?
Click to expand...

That happens with certain pitchers in their first year back. If the season was longer he probably would have come back. He did not have an overly invasive procedure. Its not back to back serious injuries like you are making it out to be.
 
Beachy should be fine. And Hale is a pretty good candidate for the rotation if a vacancy comes up. And Cody Martin is about ready too, with a strong season last year divided between AA and AAA.
 
BRule said:
So he didn't have TJS and then have to be shut down again this year?
Click to expand...

He did but that happens with TJ.

It was a minor surgery and he should be ready to go for ST.

Again, Haren isnt that much of an upgrade over Beachy/Wood.

I'd like a veteran SP but who is out there realistically whose a big upgrade?
 
Haren's a good pitcher. My guess is he'll put up a FIP of about 3.70 next year.

The thing is that might not be an improvement over the guys currently penciled for our rotation. I expect Minor, Medlen, Wood, Teheran and Beachy to have FIP in the 3.30-3.60 range. Some might do worse than expected and some better. But I don't think there is one you can say is likely to be worse than Haren.

Our starting pitching depth could be better, but it is not bad. If Hale had to go to the rotation, I'd expect a FIP in the 3.80-4.00 range. Not great, but acceptable from your fifth starter. And he has some upside potential. And Cody Martin projects about the same as Hale imo.
 
Tapate50 said:
Interesting take. I can't agree with either. Beachy will be better than Haren, and so will Wood. Wood has been a starter in college and milb, and in MLB. Not sure why we should expect anything worse than what we have gotten so far. If anything ....better.
Click to expand...

Minor point to make here.

Minor, Medlen, Teheran, Beachy, Wood, and Hale all reached the MLB level WITHOUT being traded.

I'm interested in digging deeper for concrete evidence (and would love to have others post info if they have it on hand for quick reference), but I can't think of many examples of SPs that made it all the way through our system that went on to have successful careers as SPs that were eventually traded away. Lots of posters love to scream about Wainright, but never mention the fact that there was no spot in the rotation for him in the forseeable future when he was dealt and ignore that he was considered as another tradeable asset given that fact.

It's simply the "Braves' Way" - keep drafting (and signing) and developing Pitchers with MLB caliber ceilings. When you have the 8-10 you need to sustain reasonable success, trade the excess to fill other holes.

I'd argue that the "Moneyball" culture is more about the way the Braves have done business for at least a couple decades than the way Beane & Company has operated - if you watch what Tampa Bay has done since they stopped getting Top 5 picks in the draft, the Braves' strategy slaps you in the face...keep drafting and developing young, controllable pitching (even if some of them don't ultimately turn out to be "Aces") - you'll ALWAYS be able to trade a Medlen/Beachy/Wood for a Trumbo type whenever you want to make a run. The one thing everybody in baseball other than the Braves and Rays always seems to be starving for are those type of assets.
 
I'd still like to flip an arm to KC for Collins and maybe Crow. We have the cash to spend (and probably won't find a way to spend it elsewhere) so why not.
 
Mijares would be a good pickup. His numbers last season were hurt by a very high BABIP. Peripherals against lefties have remained strong.
 
clvclv said:
Minor point to make here.

Minor, Medlen, Teheran, Beachy, Wood, and Hale all reached the MLB level WITHOUT being traded.

I'm interested in digging deeper for concrete evidence (and would love to have others post info if they have it on hand for quick reference), but I can't think of many examples of SPs that made it all the way through our system that went on to have successful careers as SPs that were eventually traded away. Lots of posters love to scream about Wainright, but never mention the fact that there was no spot in the rotation for him in the forseeable future when he was dealt and ignore that he was considered as another tradeable asset given that fact.

It's simply the "Braves' Way" - keep drafting (and signing) and developing Pitchers with MLB caliber ceilings. When you have the 8-10 you need to sustain reasonable success, trade the excess to fill other holes.

I'd argue that the "Moneyball" culture is more about the way the Braves have done business for at least a couple decades than the way Beane & Company has operated - if you watch what Tampa Bay has done since they stopped getting Top 5 picks in the draft, the Braves' strategy slaps you in the face...keep drafting and developing young, controllable pitching (even if some of them don't ultimately turn out to be "Aces") - you'll ALWAYS be able to trade a Medlen/Beachy/Wood for a Trumbo type whenever you want to make a run. The one thing everybody in baseball other than the Braves and Rays always seems to be starving for are those type of assets.
Click to expand...

Agree and disagree, but if you go back to the 1990s, the Braves had a big payroll and were able to extend the contracts of their best players at premium prices, something the A's could never do. I think we've done a good job of drafting and developing pitching and cobbling together decent bullpens (helps to have a guy like Kimbrel at the back of pen and be able to build backwards). This has been done by thinking outside the box in some instances.

BUT (and as Pee Wee Herman said to Simone in "Pee Wee's Big Adventure," "everyone's got a big but.") we've taken anything but the Moneyball approach in putting together our big club under Wren with bad investments in guys like Lowe, Kawakami, Uggla, and Upton. I can't think of four less Beane-like examples of player acquisition.
 
I think Wren is going to be a bit gun shy with free agents and long contracts now, having been thrice burnt. That wouldn't be a bad thing. If our farm system remains productive I think a good case can be made to only dip into free agency for mid-level type guys who can fill a need for a year or two. More than anything else it is the length of contracts that have been problematic with Lowe and Upton. Uggla was not a free agent but the combination of age/length of contract has also been an issue with him.

In contrast picking up Bourn for a year and a half was good business. Picking up Maholm for a year and a half worked out ok even with his disappointing performance toward the end because the length of contract limited the risk.

So I see Wren leaning toward making those sort of deals to fill holes (Howie Kendrick btw fits that profile). And on the occasions he brings in a free agent, I don't think we'll be seeing anything longer than a two year deal.

The unknown at this point is how aggressive he will be in taking risk with the younger, homegrown talent like Heyward, Freeman and Simmons. With players who come up through your system, there is more information about those players. So a case can be made that the combination of their being very young and us having a lot of knowledge about them makes them less risky investments. It remains to be seen whether we make some longer-term contract offers to them.
 
nsacpi, I agree. It's not the annual salary outlay where Wren has been wrong (except for perhaps Upton where he appeared to bid against himself), it's been on length of contract. The problem is that the overall market has veered in the direction where the larger markets can and will take on longer contracts and that has put Wren at a competitive disadvantage.

And you're right about Uggla and perhaps I shouldn't lump him in with free agent signings, but the decision to extend his contract was a distinction without a difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top