Braves acquire garcia

[striker42]

It amazes me how much people here overvalue some of our prospects. Gant and Ellis won't be missed. They're decent pieces with no future here that are easily replaceable by other arms in our system. We got a proven good SP with health concerns for just depth pieces. The worst case is he gets hurt and contributes nothing then we clear his salary after this year. If he stays healthy we have a solid proven contributor this year that can get us a better prospect mid season if we're not contending for a wild card spot. This is an easy trade to make

I don't think the issue is people thinking Gant and Ellis are super valuable. I think the issue is that Jaime Garcia isn't very valuable.

Considering that Garcia was pretty mediocre last year and has been hurt more than he's been healthy over the last 5 years (shoulder trouble at that), the fact that he's owed $12 million robs him of most of his value. That's a pretty big investment for a guy who has big question marks surrounding both his health and his effectiveness.

I just think we overpaid. Either one of Gant or Ellis should have been able to headline that deal and it would have been a generous package. Sending both was a definite overpay. It's like spending $10 to buy a $1 lottery ticket. It's not going to bankrupt you but it's annoying none the less.

 

[thethe]

I don't think the issue is people thinking Gant and Ellis are super valuable. I think the issue is that Jaime Garcia isn't very valuable.

Considering that Garcia was pretty mediocre last year and has been hurt more than he's been healthy over the last 5 years (shoulder trouble at that), the fact that he's owed $12 million robs him of most of his value. That's a pretty big investment for a guy who has big question marks surrounding both his health and his effectiveness.

I just think we overpaid. Either one of Gant or Ellis should have been able to headline that deal and it would have been a generous package. Sending both was a definite overpay. It's like spending $10 to buy a $1 lottery ticket. It's not going to bankrupt you but it's annoying none the less.

Garcia has a chance to be well worth his contract and more. Lots of variation in potential outcomes.

 

[nsacpi]

This is starting to remind me a bit of the off-season where Wren made a few redundant moves on starting pitching by signing Lowe and Kawakami and then trading for Vazquez. These moves aren't of that magnitude, but I'm still wondering on the cost/benefit of signing both Dickey and Colon. Maybe they are trying to make Teheran's fastball look faster by surrounding him with a troop of soft-tossers. If Foltynewicz follows Dickey in the rotation, his fastball will look like it's coming in at 120.

We has a long history of over-correcting for the prior season's problems. Remember the off-season we acquired both Soriano and Gonzalez as closers. Adam LaRoche for Gonzalez was an especially bad trade.

 

[nsacpi]

Agreed. With a large enough sample the models are incredibly accurate as a whole. But variation will exist within a smaller sample size and that's what infuriates so many of us. It's very possible the models are off on individual players on the braves (plus and minus) as well as the team in totality just because the sample isn't large enouhh. So when someone claims the models say the braves are a 75 win team and therefore have no shot it's not correct. You should state them at you have a certain confidence percentage in that but to act like it's a certainty shows you don't really understand how statistical analysis works.

I try not to state things as a certainty. I use phrases like expected value. Expected means an average of all the probabilities. There are always some outcomes with a 1 or 2% chance of happening. I don't feel like that has to be re-stated.

 

[GovClintonTyree]

Understand, but that's beside the point. The point isn't Garza, it's Phillips or Lara if you can get them.

Think of it this way: Assume both Garcia and Garza have an equally good first half for the Braves but are traded at the deadline. You start your return for Garza with the fact that you already got Phillips simply because Garza was a headcase. Now, argument could be made that if both pitched equally well, Garcia would be worth more in trade simply because he's LH and NOT a headcase. But, would that extra worth be enough to offset the acquisition of a Phillips?

I'm okay with the Trojan horse strategy, but not with that guy. He's poison.

 

[thethe]

I try not to state things as a certainty. I use phrases like expected value. Expected means an average of all the probabilities. There are always some outcomes with a 1 or 2% chance of happening. I don't feel like that has to be re-stated.

You think there is a 1 or 2 percent chance the braves out or under perform their projected WAR?

 

[Bj1133]

I hope the Braves, whether they are playing well or not, look to deal one of these 1 year starters early on in the season if they themselves get off to a hot start. You know that some contending team will experience an injury to a starter early on and you should be able to get more value for 4-5 months of a starter than just the 2 months after the deadline.

 

[GovClintonTyree]

This type of attitude is comical. I'm willing to bet you don't know how to mathematically regress or normalize a data set, yet you talk about it like "all they do is regress it". Never mind the fact that they had to derive WAR values in the first place. They had to prove BABIP was a predictive stat. Can you do that? Do you even know what that type of proof entails? Can you calculate an r-squared value?

Fact of the matter is the data analysis revolution in baseball is what allowed small budget teams to compete 10 years ago. Large market teams have adopted the same techniques and now they are benefiting.

The only folks in the dark ages are people like you desperate to hold onto the little bit of "knowledge" you're able to wrap your tiny brain around.

Pennants are won with pitching, defense and 3-run homers. Not with spreadsheets. Spreadsheets help figure out where the pitching, defense, and 3-run homers are likely to come from.

You need to stop saying with certainty that the "Braves are a 75-win team." They could easily be more than that - or less. I said last year that the team was a 60-win team. I was pretty close. Know why? Not enough pitching, defense, or three run homers.

Your statistical analysis is fraught with spurious accuracy. False precision, if you will.

 

[thethe]

I hope the Braves, whether they are playing well or not, look to deal one of these 1 year starters early on in the season if they themselves get off to a hot start. You know that some contending team will experience an injury to a starter early on and you should be able to get more value for 4-5 months of a starter than just the 2 months after the deadline.

Unless the braves starts out 5 games over 500 or more by mid may I think they'll do this

 

[GovClintonTyree]

There are always options.

 

[CJ9]

I hope the Braves, whether they are playing well or not, look to deal one of these 1 year starters early on in the season if they themselves get off to a hot start. You know that some contending team will experience an injury to a starter early on and you should be able to get more value for 4-5 months of a starter than just the 2 months after the deadline.

I sure hope so. I'm a little nervous we won't though. This second wildcard changes a lot and a lot of teams can convince themselves that they're competing still because of it. Add that to the fact that it would be a big surprise if we were as bad to start 2017 as we were in 2016, and I just hope Coppy doesn't convince himself that he needs to keep these veterans. Let them have the first half of the year while Wisler and Blair work in Gwinnett, then deal them and let the young guys take over in the second half.

 

[thewupk]

You think there is a 1 or 2 percent chance the braves out or under perform their projected WAR?

There are a couple of things at play. One is the actual talent on the roster outperforming their projected WAR by a significant amount. I would say that is unlikely. The other is outperforming their projected win total. That happens all the time. A few examples every year and the Braves could certainly be that team in 2017.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

I sure hope so. I'm a little nervous we won't though. This second wildcard changes a lot and a lot of teams can convince themselves that they're competing still because of it. Add that to the fact that it would be a big surprise if we were as bad to start 2017 as we were in 2016, and I just hope Coppy doesn't convince himself that he needs to keep these veterans. Let them have the first half of the year while Wisler and Blair work in Gwinnett, then deal them and let the young guys take over in the second half.

That's always been the case. The concern IMO is that the Braves FO fall's into the "we're so close" trap instead of realizing they are really "so far away."

I call it franchise purgatory. Not good enough to really contend but not bad enough where it's clear to everyone that a rebuild is in order. Wren's entire tenure was really franchise purgatory. From 2009 to 2013, they DID have some good records but never had anything close to a complete team where you could look at them and say, "that's a legitimate WS contender." Take 2013: Kershaw vs Medlen; Greinke vs Minor; Teheran vs Ryu; Garcia vs Kershaw. Could that team have suddenly got hot, got a few breaks and ultimately beat the Dodgers? Sure, but very unlikely. Then they would have had to get by St. Louis, then Boston.

And 2013 was the BEST chance the Braves had during that 5 year period.

The problem is that the wheels were obviously coming off from 2006-2008 but instead of rebuilding then, they kept trying to reload, but without the benefit of trucks full of cash. What they got was 5 years of mostly mediocrity that ultimately cratered forcing another rebuild or is it a reload.

Rebuilding hurts. But not committing to it completely is a recipe for future disaster.

 

[zbhargrove]

Dude, we aren't competitive at all. Our geriatric starting staff may not total 10 WAR.

Just enjoy the gnats choke again the next 5 years like they always do and quit trying to find anything to argue about

 

[zbhargrove]

I think this is more of the "build the illusion of a contender, but keep flexibility for when the illusion crashes" strategy.

As for what was given up I don't have much of an issue: Dykstra was a non-prospect if his name was Jones. Gant and Ellis are back end/LR guys who are behind a number of others who are better qualified for those roles. So, what was given up for Garcia doesn't really bother me. To me, the question is why trade for Garcia at all?

Could the Braves have proposed a Dykstra, Ellis, Gant trade to Milwaukee for Matt Garza and OF Brett Phillips or SS Gilbert Lara? Milwaukee HATES Garza (he's been a headcase there) and they are definitely cutting payroll and rebuilding and might send a decent prospect back to get rid of him. He makes about the same money and probably has a similar performance profile to be expected. But, he's not LH and might be bad in the clubhouse.

Well for one Garcia is about 5 times the pitcher than Garza....

 

[emk418]

I don't think the issue is people thinking Gant and Ellis are super valuable. I think the issue is that Jaime Garcia isn't very valuable.

Considering that Garcia was pretty mediocre last year and has been hurt more than he's been healthy over the last 5 years (shoulder trouble at that), the fact that he's owed $12 million robs him of most of his value. That's a pretty big investment for a guy who has big question marks surrounding both his health and his effectiveness.

I just think we overpaid. Either one of Gant or Ellis should have been able to headline that deal and it would have been a generous package. Sending both was a definite overpay. It's like spending $10 to buy a $1 lottery ticket. It's not going to bankrupt you but it's annoying none the less.

Why do you care about $12M for one year? It's not a long term investment and in the current market $12M is nothing. It's not preventing us from going after Sale. If he's healthy that's actually a favorable price for a proven #3 starter. Yes he has injury concerns, that's the only reason why you get him for fringe pieces like Gant and Ellis. Go back and look at Garcia's year last year. He was solid for a good part of the year then hit a wall hard. I don't know which version we'll get but the one thing I know is we won't miss Gant and Ellis. I'd rather take a shot on a proven middle of the rotation SP with injury concerns. If he sucks, no harm.....if he contributes and we're in contention for a WC spot, great.....or if we suck but he does well then mid season he sure as hell could bring us a better piece then Gant and Ellis.

Bottom line is this is a no risk move with the potential for a very nice payoff.

 

[thethe]

There are a couple of things at play. One is the actual talent on the roster outperforming their projected WAR by a significant amount. I would say that is unlikely. The other is outperforming their projected win total. That happens all the time. A few examples every year and the Braves could certainly be that team in 2017.

Agreed. That's all I want people to acknowledge so that when some of us think the wc is a possibility this year we are not looked like we have three heads.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

Well for one Garcia is about 5 times the pitcher than Garza....

Irrelevant in the big scheme of things and also not entirely true. Garza has a career ERA of 4.03 while Garcia's is 3.57. But Garcia has spent his career on good teams in a pretty neutral park while Garza has spent the majority of his career in hitters parks and/or the AL.

Hey, Garza is an A hole. No debate from me. But so was AJP. The benefit of Garza over Garcia to me is that to take Garza the Brewers would have to give a significant piece back such as Phillips or Lara, while with Garcia all the prospect talent is one way. Whether it's Garza or Gacia you are only looking at 1/2 a season, maybe one full season MAX, in a season that likely has no real upside anyway.

Who knows, you get Garza out of Milwaukee, tell him "if you want to pitch past this contract in MLB, you have to show 1. that you are still good and valuable and 2. that you can be a good teammate, then you might get a 10 win low 3 era first half out of him. Even IF he craters and you get nothing out of him and have to cut him in May, you would at least have Phillips (for instance). If Garcia craters, you have nothing.

 

[emk418]

Irrelevant in the big scheme of things and also not entirely true. Garza has a career ERA of 4.03 while Garcia's is 3.57. But Garcia has spent his career on good teams in a pretty neutral park while Garza has spent the majority of his career in hitters parks and/or the AL.

Hey, Garza is an A hole. No debate from me. But so was AJP. The benefit of Garza over Garcia to me is that to take Garza the Brewers would have to give a significant piece back such as Phillips or Lara, while with Garcia all the prospect talent is one way. Whether it's Garza or Gacia you are only looking at 1/2 a season, maybe one full season MAX, in a season that likely has no real upside anyway.

Who knows, you get Garza out of Milwaukee, tell him "if you want to pitch past this contract in MLB, you have to show 1. that you are still good and valuable and 2. that you can be a good teammate, then you might get a 10 win low 3 era first half out of him. Even IF he craters and you get nothing out of him and have to cut him in May, you would at least have Phillips (for instance). If Garcia craters, you have nothing.

There is no way you get Phillips or Lara just to take on Garza

 

[PurpleBrave]

FWIW, this is what Baseball Forecaster has to say about Garcia.

Did you wonder what would happen "if he could just stay healthy for a full year"? Wonder no more. Reality
didn't live up to fantasy. Too many runners did him in: Ctl regressed to match historical FpK; H% got in on the
correction game too. Hr/f brought them all around. Expect ERA back under 4.00, IP back under 150.

Projection: 9W 8L 138IP 116k 3.89era 1.30whip