This thread reminds me of how unrealistic (on the part of fandom) expectations have been about what a rebuild can bring. Maybe the FO contributed to this some, but the advocates of total rebuild around here have often acted as if completely blowing up the team and maxing out on high ceiling prospects would bring about a high probability of a world series winner.
That is a pie-in-the-sky type belief. Any strategy available to any baseball FO has a low probability of success if success is defined as a world series winner within a set timeframe.
In some ways trying to find the best strategy is fools gold. Rather the path to success is best found in some nitty gritty type guidelines:
1) Avoid excessive risk through contracts running more than 4 years (except in the case of team friendly deals with pre-free agent players like Freeman and Inciarte). The Braves have actually executed on this.
2) Win the trades by focusing relentlessly on expected surplus value. The Braves have a poor to mixed record here. And I'm mostly inclined to say they were lucky rather than skillful in finding a counter-party like Dave Stewart in the one trade they did very well on.
3) Diversify smartly in prospect acquisition. Mostly pitchers in the draft and mostly hitters in international free agency. The Braves have done this.
4) As a corollary to 2 above, you win most trades by accepting returns in the form of prospects for major league talent. We have mostly done this. But my main concern is we are about to start deviating from this to try to accelerate the rebuild. Doing so would be a yuge mistake imo.
5) Be smart with clock management. Don't make exceptions. Every case is special. Do not use that as an excuse to make exceptions. I think both Swanson and Albies were brought up prematurely from the perspective of value maximization.
6) Extent every prospect who achieves a certain level of success at the major league level as early as possible to hold down long-term costs and maximize value.
The above rules should be followed pretty much wherever a team is along the expected win curve. Executing relentlessly on the above guidelines trumps various forms of rebuilding strategy in terms of its impact on putting a winning team on the field. Even then we should be realistic about the chances for a world series ring. You do your best, hope for the best, but don't be unrealistic about the chances for a ring.
I think we do get caught up in the idea that there is a linear process that leads to success in a rebuild. In order for the linear process to work, a bunch of other teams would have to cooperate. While there are win win trades and deals based on where teams are in their competitiveness cycle, for the most part teams are trying to help themselves, and only reluctantly help competitors... when it benefits them to do so.
In most cases, like the Braves now, you see some good deals, some that could have been better, and some that are just lost gambles. The proof of success is not found by a critical analysis of each deal, but in the overall direction, and to some extent, the speed at which they are moving in that direction.
I think the Braves are heading the right direction. Contrary to some on the board, I see more good than bad. The Farm is great, they have some young guys who look to be very promising, and a relatively small number of bad contracts.
My fearless prediction... In a couple more years, we will be a very competitive team with a strong Farm and a bright future. We will still complain that they didn't follow the process in a linear fashion and lament that they could have been even better. It is who we are! We will also complain about the manager, the announcers, the ownership and the fans who don't show up.
I hope we will do that from a backdrop of success and enjoy the discussion.