Braves acquire garcia

Enscheff said:
They also project Colon/Dickey/Garcia to produce 6+ WAR. Those are 2 insanely old pitchers, and one held together with duct tape. I am going to go out on a limb and predict that trio produces closer to 4 WAR when one of them blows up.

This is a 75 win team. Adding Sale would cost them WAR from other positions and leave them at about 75 wins.
Click to expand...

It's hopeless. The Braves suck and any move they make will have a net zero effect on the club. Why bother. Hopeless. I'm right.

Am I close, Wingnut?
 
Hawk said:
I don't entirely disagree with your assessment. It's just that, in my view, Garcia isn't the kind of piece this team particularly needed. His addition makes much more sense if the Braves acquire a guy like Sale/Archer at the top of the rotation and/or bring in some variety of offensive firepower - but analyzing the move in the context of where the team stands today it seems fairly lateral.
Click to expand...

I don't think he's done.
 
clvclv said:
Which is "competitive" - and about where they need to be.

An interesting note for those who are so against trading for an "Ace". Bowman was on XM earlier this morning talking about the Garcia deal, and I was a little surprised by his comment that he's hearing that payroll could be pushed into the $150 million range relatively soon. Take that for what it's worth, but that could at least support the theory that they're willing to spend soon to surround the core - Julio, Freeman, Swanson, Albies, etc. with pieces needed to contend. Committed salaries for 2018 stand at ~$79,750,000 as of today. If you replace Colon and Garcia from within at the minimum, that's still a boatload of money available - especially if you hang onto Swanson.

Obviously nobody KNOWS with any certainty if the number Bowman floated is in the ballpark or not, but it does begin to line up with the brass' statements that they expect to be in the Top 10 range (The Gnats were 10th last season at $163+ million). One of the reasons for the "optimism" from some is that free-agents that fit our long-term holes are available next winter - Lucroy and Moustakas to name a couple. If you give Lucroy the Mac contract without the option ($17 million per) and give Moustakas four years at the same number you're then still only sitting at ~$113,750,000.

CF- Inciarte, SS- Swanson, 1B- Freeman, LF- Kemp, 3B- Moustakas, C- Lucroy, RF- Markakis, 2B- TBD

Rotation - Julio, Folty, internal option, internal option, ???

The point is that the Braves are at least finally in a position to add one of those huge contracts - in the unlikely event they ever do. Assuming they did trade for a Sale or Archer type, there is plenty of money available to extend them at market value. Does that make it likely? Of course not. However, dismissing the possibility out of hand is just as short-sighted as expecting Kemp to become an MVP candidate again or expecting Markakis to hit 20 bombs.
Click to expand...

That is interesting. What it suggests to me is that rather than getting a low cost ace, they might open up their universe to include, say, Greinke and Verlander.

My preference would be for one of the young guys, but not if we tear up the team. So maybe the relative lack of surplus value gets something done.

I remember when we were a well-managed team with a top 5 payroll. It was awesome.
 
thewupk said:
A personal note on my opinion of the Braves current win total projection. Fangraphs/Steamer currently have them at 76 wins after getting Garcia. My only real issue is they have Ender/Nick/Kemp combining for 2.9 WAR. I think Ender beats that by himself. He's been at 3.3 and 3.6 the last two years. They expect his defense to take a drop and I don' really see that happening. The other thing is I have higher hopes for Nick and Kemp that 0.9 WAR combined. I think they could both be 1 WAR players each. So that would push an expected win total to 79. I would say the Braves probably project something similar internally.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think that is plenty pessimistic.
 
GovClintonTyree said:
It's hopeless. The Braves suck and any move they make will have a net zero effect on the club. Why bother. Hopeless. I'm right.

Am I close, Wingnut?
Click to expand...

Closer than you have been lately. You are absolutely right that there is no scenario where acquiring Sale doesn't rob so much from the current MLB roster that the net effect is a minimal (1-2) increase in projected wins. Further, under no scenario will the Braves be better in 2018 and later if they trade for Sale right now.

It's OK that you don't know **** about player valuation or data analysis. When we need to know the tax implications of some financial aspect of the Braves, we will come to you. Until then, it's probably best if you stop trying to speculate on matters above the contents of your brain pan.
 
Horsehide Harry said:
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.
Click to expand...

What's with your woody for Garza? Nobody on the board or in the organization has mentioned anything about the guy. He won't even get a contract when this one expires. He's a virtual piranha.
 
Enscheff said:
Closer than you have been lately. You are absolutely right that there is no scenario where acquiring Sale doesn't rob so much from the current MLB roster that the net effect is a minimal (1-2) increase in projected wins. Further, under no scenario will the Braves be better in 2018 and later if they trade for Sale right now.

It's OK that you don't know **** about player valuation or data analysis. When we need to know the tax implications of some financial aspect of the Braves, we will come to you. Until then, it's probably best if you stop trying to speculate on matters above the contents of your brain pan.
Click to expand...

Ouch. Enscheff, that's hurtful. You big bully.
 
Enscheff said:
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.
Click to expand...

I know enough to call bull**** when I see it. These projection systems hedge their bets on what they think the most likely outcome will be using things like age, strikeouts, etc. I just see the flaws in their system. They can not account for the development that goes into baseball. A guy like Foltynewicz could have the light go on and be a dominant ace this year. The projection systems will just assume a marginal improvement every year until he exits his peak because thats the most likely outcome. And I agree thats the most likely outcome, but with players like him there is upside. It might only be a 5% chance Folty figures it out this year and becomes an ace but we have a lot of players that we have the chance to hit a jackpot on. I dont know which of those players we will hit the jackpot on but we have so many that I figure we hit on a few.

And I looked it up the Orioles were projected to win about 75 games by that steaming pile of projections. Maybe it was because they were in such a bad division.

thewupk said:
Funny you mention that because Steamer's projections have his HR/9 dropping to his career avg of 0.79 and being worth 2.4 WAR. Seems like most people **** on projections when it doesn't agree with their opinion.
Click to expand...

And thats part of my problem with projections, I dont need that system to tell me a career high 20%HR/FB rate is likely to drop. Its been all over the place during his career and averaged out about 12%. I dont necessarily think it was a statistical anomaly, I think it was just Garcia hanging a few too many pitches. This is the guys free agent year. He stands to make a lot of money if he has a good year. I think the Braves help him be more consistent and he has a strong year off the back of a little bit fluky low HR per FB rate. He has been as low as 7%. I am a big fan of betting on players to have career years in their free agent year. Also why I dont trust players who have a career year in their walk year.

thewupk said:
You make projections on probabilities as well. While on the whole one or two may bust out right out of the gate that way overshoots what is projected of them you have to look at it on an individual basis. And looking at each player individual player I feel the projections are fairly accurate and reasonable. And again it's a projection not a future accounting of what will happen.
Click to expand...

I use projections and probabilities all the time. Enscheff is trying to build a house with a hammer and think you need a lot more tools to build that house. That doesnt mean I think the hammer is useless in building a house. I'm sure you could make a crudely made building with just a hammer but nothing I would want to live in. These projection systems can be right 60% of the time but that 40% its wrong comes down to factors a formula just cant predict. A computer cant comprehend a player having worse stats because he played injured. A computer cant comprehend that a pitcher at AAA is told to use his slider more often to work on the pitch which gets worse results but hopefully makes him a better pitcher. A formula cant comprehend changes in batting stances or pitching mechanics. I never see a projection system predict a player to go from like 1.2 WAR one year to 6 WAR the next. I never see a 6 WAR player projected to be 1 WAR the next. Prospects are NEVER projected to hit well unless they have a long track record of success in the high minors. Even then the best I ever see is a projected .800 OPS. If you see them projected a prospect for a .800+ OPS they are uber prospects like Seager and Moncada. I dont know that I have ever seen a rookie projected to come in with a .850 or better OPS with the possible exception of big time sluggers who are 1B/DH types like Matt Laporta.

This is why I think the Braves are undervalued. We have a lot of young players and I am hedging my bets based on the probabilities I believe in over my time analyzing baseball that when you get a lot of young talented players together some of them are going to be really good. And when I say talent I dont mean they have to be uber talented. Some might say a guy like Charles Thomas isnt talented but he was talented enough to have a randomly fluky good year for us. A lot of these prospects dont have to go to be 10 time all stars to help us now. Medlen, Beachy, and Minor were all very good for short periods of time for us. I am not advocating going all in. That Enscheff has any problems with the moves the Braves have made boggles my mind. We have made no long term commitments and traded a few marginal prospects whose most likely roles in the majors are swing men. As long as I have been posting with this community theres always the debbie downer who says we cant win. Every year. Even 10 games up in the division in June. I think the last 5 years of the streak it was always "Chipper has to stay healthy for the Braves to have any chance to win the division" and he never stayed healthy but we kept winning the division.
 
GovClintonTyree said:
What's with your woody for Garza? Nobody on the board or in the organization has mentioned anything about the guy. He won't even get a contract when this one expires. He's a virtual piranha.
Click to expand...

I don't care if it's Garza or Genghis Kahn, I'm looking for hidden value since I'm willing to start from the premise that the rebuild IS NOT done and what happens after 2017 will be much more important than what happens in 2017. I would be willing to take Garza IF taking him was a pathway to obtaining needed talent for the future eg. Phillips or Lara. I have no interest in Garza for HIS capabilities. I was pointing out that it's possible the Braves could have traded the same thing for Garza as what they traded for Garcia and received helpful talent back AND still received a potentially equal 2017 on field performance at an equal monetary cost.

Oh, and I think you meant pariah, not piranha
 
Horsehide Harry said:
I don't care if it's Garza or Genghis Kahn, I'm looking for hidden value since I'm willing to start from the premise that the rebuild IS NOT done and what happens after 2017 will be much more important than what happens in 2017. I would be willing to take Garza IF taking him was a pathway to obtaining needed talent for the future eg. Phillips or Lara. I have no interest in Garza for HIS capabilities. I was pointing out that it's possible the Braves could have traded the same thing for Garza as what they traded for Garcia and received helpful talent back AND still received a potentially equal 2017 on field performance at an equal monetary cost.

Oh, and I think you meant pariah, not piranha
Click to expand...

That was comedy.
 
Horsehide Harry said:
I don't care if it's Garza or Genghis Kahn, I'm looking for hidden value since I'm willing to start from the premise that the rebuild IS NOT done and what happens after 2017 will be much more important than what happens in 2017. I would be willing to take Garza IF taking him was a pathway to obtaining needed talent for the future eg. Phillips or Lara. I have no interest in Garza for HIS capabilities. I was pointing out that it's possible the Braves could have traded the same thing for Garza as what they traded for Garcia and received helpful talent back AND still received a potentially equal 2017 on field performance at an equal monetary cost.

Oh, and I think you meant pariah, not piranha
Click to expand...

Not sure why rebuilding brewers would be sending prospects in a deal?
 
That's not an article you can get past the first paragraph on and think it's unbiased. When people are unbiased they don't talk in absolutes and overly opinion based. It's the quickest way to not be taken seriously.
 
Chico said:
That's not an article you can get past the first paragraph on and think it's unbiased. When people are unbiased they don't talk in absolutes and overly opinion based. It's the quickest way to not be taken seriously.
Click to expand...

While I don't disagree with the overall premise of the article (that it's foolish to build around pitching), the author does seem to come across like Coppy stole his girlfriend. His tone certainly makes the reader wonder why he hates the Braves so much. Was he passed over for a job with the team maybe?

I think the Astros and Cubs have shown the optimal way to rebuild, while the Mets and Braves have shown what happens when you rely on pitching and that pitching either gets hurt or fails to develop.
 
Enscheff said:
While I don't disagree with the overall premise of the article (that it's foolish to build around pitching), the author does seem to come across like Coppy stole his girlfriend. His tone certainly makes the reader wonder why he hates the Braves so much. Was he passed over for a job with the team maybe?

I think the Astros and Cubs have shown the optimal way to rebuild, while the Mets and Braves have shown what happens when you rely on pitching and that pitching either gets hurt or fails to develop.
Click to expand...

What pitching have the braves relied on that didn't develop?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top