How did we get here?

Southcack77 said:
The 1997 Marlins were much more built through free agency.

They produced Jeff Conine, Luis Castillo, Charles Johnson, Edgar Renteria, Livan Hernandez.

Kevin Brown, Al Leiter, Tony Fernandez, Bobby Bonilla, Gary Sheffield, Moises Alou, Devon White all free agents. Number of them just prior to 97 season. That was much more of a bought team. But it was also an unusual circumstance as they were an expansion team that had to fill out rosters and behaved early on like a team that would have some money to play with.
Click to expand...

So is there something the Braves or any other team can learn from their experience?
 
smootness said:
Why, at this point, would you assume the Braves won't be able to establish any staying power? We have already had one wave that so far looks pretty mediocre or worse that has begun arriving, we have another wave that is starting to get here and will be coming over the next year or so, then we have another wave after that one lined up. I'm just not sure what makes you look at our system and say you just basically see one wave of talent.
Click to expand...

I think what he's doing is making is a case for trading Freeman and Inciarte for high ceiling far away from the majors talent. That would constitute the next wave. After all we have nothing to play for the next couple seasons. And Freeman and Inciarte will be getting old and expensive once we have a chance to be good. With the caveat of course that Freeman is a special face of the franchise player who is given an exemption to the above reasoning. Harry's points are not illogical. If you take it as your point of departure that 2018 and maybe 2019 are to be completely written off.
 
nsacpi said:
I think what he's doing is making is a case for trading Freeman and Inciarte for high ceiling far away from the majors talent. That would constitute the next wave. After all we have nothing to play for the next couple seasons. And Freeman and Inciarte will be getting old and expensive once we have a chance to be good. With the caveat of course that Freeman is a special face of the franchise player who is given an exemption to the above reasoning. Harry's points are not illogical. If you take it as your point of departure that 2018 and maybe 2019 are to be completely written off.
Click to expand...

Saying, 'I think there are still moves we can make that would set us up even better for the future,' is not at all the same things as, 'We aren't set up well for the future.'

Sure, arguing for trading our best current players is fair. I'm not sure how much sense it would make in terms of revenue to trade Freeman, but in terms of baseball ops, it's certainly a worthwhile discussion. I could see Inciarte as well, but at some point you do have to have players to begin to field a competitive team, and if you trade our CF for far-away talent, then Acuna comes up and plays CF and what else do you have in the OF? Then you're setting yourself up to be 3 years down the road, still not competitive, and discussing trading away a guy like Acuna.

But regardless, sure, there are moves we could make to add even more talent that is very young and far away. But we already have a lot of it. So there is a wave developing there, guys like Maitan, Severino, Waters, del Rosario, etc. Adding more helps that wave but if we don't, it doesn't mean there is no wave.
 
nsacpi said:
I think what he's doing is making is a case for trading Freeman and Inciarte for high ceiling far away from the majors talent. That would constitute the next wave. After all we have nothing to play for the next couple seasons. And Freeman and Inciarte will be getting old and expensive once we have a chance to be good. With the caveat of course that Freeman is a special face of the franchise player who is given an exemption to the above reasoning. Harry's points are not illogical. If you take it as your point of departure that 2018 and maybe 2019 are to be completely written off.
Click to expand...

Freeman and Inciarte should be traded if we get our socks blown off. like Miguel Cabrera level for Freeman and similar to Heyward for Inciarte.
 
smootness said:
Saying, 'I think there are still moves we can make that would set us up even better for the future,' is not at all the same things as, 'We aren't set up well for the future.'

Sure, arguing for trading our best current players is fair. I'm not sure how much sense it would make in terms of revenue to trade Freeman, but in terms of baseball ops, it's certainly a worthwhile discussion. I could see Inciarte as well, but at some point you do have to have players to begin to field a competitive team, and if you trade our CF for far-away talent, then Acuna comes up and plays CF and what else do you have in the OF? Then you're setting yourself up to be 3 years down the road, still not competitive, and discussing trading away a guy like Acuna.

But regardless, sure, there are moves we could make to add even more talent that is very young and far away. But we already have a lot of it. So there is a wave developing there, guys like Maitan, Severino, Waters, del Rosario, etc. Adding more helps that wave but if we don't, it doesn't mean there is no wave.
Click to expand...

I'll let him speak for himself, but maybe he is thinking about the next wave after Maitan/Severino/Waters/del Rosario. Or maybe he wants to add to that wave.
 
nsacpi said:
I'll let him speak for himself, but maybe he is thinking about the next wave after Maitan/Severino/Waters/del Rosario. Or maybe he wants to add to that wave.
Click to expand...

Does any team in baseball have a wave after that one at this point? Haha, how could you say we don't look like we're going to be able to sustain wave after wave because we don't have anyone lined up after all the 17-year-old kids we just signed?

Again, I'm sure he wants to add to that wave. That's a legitimate discussion. But it's a pretty stinking good wave as it stands today.
 
Southcack77 said:
I'd rather win 14 straight division titles and make five world series than win two WS and be a non-factor for the other seasons.

Also, as the mayor mentioned their rebuilds took a lot longer than three years so it is not particularly pertinent yet anyway.
Click to expand...

In much the same way that the Pirates were never the same after Sid's slide, the Braves have never recovered from the Wohlers hanging slider. They were in every game in '99 but never in the series. Plus, there was NO WAY they would have gotten past Montreal in '94 if not for the strike

The chest thumping about division titles rings a little hollow.
 
nsacpi said:
So is there something the Braves or any other team can learn from their experience?
Click to expand...

Probably not particularly.

As an expansion team they started with a blank slate. Their plan seems to have been to be very active in bidding for elite free agents. That culminated in the 97 team that added more salary than they could sustained. They won the series that year by a tad over a team that was probably just as good. But they had to tear it all down because I presume they lost a ton of money.

Unclear to me whether they thought the fans would come if they won or if they were just trying to buy a ring as a vanity project.

Their second title team is a lot more instructive. They build a young core in part by selling off their championship pieces and by buying low on players out of favor elsewhere. When those players neared the end of their control they went on a much more reasonable buying spree of veterans. Unfortunately, for Florida fans that was also an unsustainable payroll and they sold the pieces off again.

However, this time it did not really work out for them.
 
The Marlins "strategy" was a one in a million kind of thing. They dont even make the playoffs if not for the rule change adding the wild card.
 
Knucksie said:
In much the same way that the Pirates were never the same after Sid's slide, the Braves have never recovered from the Wohlers hanging slider. They were in every game in '99 but never in the series. Plus, there was NO WAY they would have gotten past Montreal in '94 if not for the strike
The chest thumping about division titles rings a little hollow.
Click to expand...

I don't spend much time talking about it or thumping my chest about. Honestly, I don't even think about it.

You asked a question. I'd rather win 14 division championships in 15 years and lose four world series and win one than make the playoffs twice in my franchise's history and win two WS. If you can find a Marlins fan to ask, I think they might probably would agree with me.

I think picking two world series and zero other postseason appearances would be pretty stupid unless you wanted to beat your chest about winning two rings while you watched really awful baseball in front of 800 people.
 
Knucksie said:
In much the same way that the Pirates were never the same after Sid's slide, the Braves have never recovered from the Wohlers hanging slider. They were in every game in '99 but never in the series. Plus, there was NO WAY they would have gotten past Montreal in '94 if not for the strike
The chest thumping about division titles rings a little hollow.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say there was "NO WAY" the Braves wouldn't have passed the Expos in 94. It wasn't super likely as thy were super hot and playing great ball. But they were only 6 games back at the start of August, Greg Maddux was pitching out of his skin (271 ERA+, 54 FIP-, averaged over 8 IP per start) So basically every 5th game we had a virtual win as long as we could score 3 runs. We could have overtaken the Expos who were very lucky and if any number of players who could have gone cold (Fletcher, Cordero, Hill) did that gap would be overcome even faster.
 
I agree with the Southcrack77; watching superb Braves baseball for over a decade was great, and I would prefer that to lots and lots of awful seasons punctuated by two seasons that ended with a World Series victory. I also agree that the Marlins got very lucky; they were definitely not as good as the Braves were in 1997 (the Marlins finished NINE games behind the Braves), but in a single series, a lot of stuff can (and did) happen.

Also, we'll never know what would have happened if 1994 had played out. They were trailing the Expos by 6 when their season ended on August 11, but just the season before they had trailed the Giants by 10 games on July 22, and they came back to catch them on the last weekend of the season. The Braves were definitely a better team than the Expos statistically, and had a much better/deeper pitching staff - which tends to be an advantage as the season wears on.
 
conalthomas said:
I agree with the Southcrack77; watching superb Braves baseball for over a decade was great, and I would prefer that to lots and lots of awful seasons punctuated by two seasons that ended with a World Series victory. I also agree that the Marlins got very lucky; they were definitely not as good as the Braves were in 1997 (the Marlins finished NINE games behind the Braves), but in a single series, a lot of stuff can (and did) happen.

Also, we'll never know what would have happened if 1994 had played out. They were trailing the Expos by 6 when their season ended on August 11, but just the season before they had trailed the Giants by 10 games on July 22, and they came back to catch them on the last weekend of the season. The Braves were definitely a better team than the Expos statistically, and had a much better/deeper pitching staff - which tends to be an advantage as the season wears on.
Click to expand...

Also if you for whatever reason want to give the expos the division that year despite the season not being completed the Braves won the next 11 division titles, which would also be a record.

I feel like there is some definite self hate going on to want to trade one more WS win or something like 17 playoff appearances.

That's such an odd position to take i have trouble believing it's a real thought.

Yankees, Red Sox, Cards, Giants maybe. Marlins? Really?
 
Southcack77 said:
I guess my question is why have you written off the prospects the Braves have at the lowest levels and written off all the players the Braves will draft and sign over the next few years?

Swanson is controlled through 2023.

Albies through 2024.

Acuana through 2024 or 2025.

Any pitcher promoted next season likely through 2025.

Any position player promoted controlled later.

To say the Braves don't have waves of talent coming is to write off the majority of the Braves system below Florida and to write off all the players they will draft and sign internationally over the next four or five years. They aren't going to stop accumulating players from here.

I'm not saying it is definitely going to work out. That's an open question. But to say they definitely will not be able to keep it going is based on information no one has.
Click to expand...

I haven't written those guys off. Those guys likely will be on the leading or second wave of talent the Braves have, establishing the winning, not setting up to continue it.

I am pretty much writing off the first wave (I consider Acuna as part of the second wave). The first wave was Folty, Newcomb, Wisler, Blair, Ruiz and Swanson and Albies. Out of that wave, it appears to me that the only ones likely to see 2020 as a Brave is Swanson and Albies and neither have shown a likelihood of stardom (which is ok for them since not every player can or will be a star, but the first wave should have produced at least one to replace the aging stardom of Freeman and/or Inciarte).

Freeman is a borderline superstar (likely a superstar this year without injury) but will be 30 in 2020. Inciarte a legit star will be 29. That means both will be in the beginning years of their decline phase as baseball players assuming they baseball age as normal. Will Freeman still be a borderline/true superstar? Unlikely. Even if he's "still good" he's not prime good anymore simply because that's not how it works. Same for Inciarte. So, your best players of today are likely fading players tomorrow of different shades at best with a worst being loss due to injury or other factors. They also will be approaching their FA times where if the Braves are smart, they will let them go elsewhere which means they have to be replaced. If they aren't smart then they will be extended again which means not only that they can't be replaced but limits the payroll space to address other areas even in the face of lost production.

In 2020 Teheran is gone, Folty is gone, Newcomb is probably in the pen if not gone, no one knows who Wisler and Blair even were. The pitching is very reliant on the second wave of Gohara, Allard, Soroka, Wright, Fried, Touki. Right now, the best guy of that group is a fat import in Gohara. Allard and Soroka both look like they could make it but both probably won't. Wright may come on but so far looks limited on stuff required for a ML #1 or #2 (we'll see). Fried and Touki are wildcards but 2017 didn't really help Fried and Touki remains a mystery with poor results besides improved numbers. Let's say 2 of the group become good useful ML starters by 2020...say a #2 and a #3 with one of the others being good enough to handle occasional #5 duty.

Then you have Acuna as part of the second wave. Maybe he becomes a superstar and helps carry the Braves to the wave of competition in 2020. But, in 2021 he looses and aging Freeman and in 2022 he looses an aging and less effective Inciarte (likely no longer has the same value because CF becomes harder to play for him).

So, you made it to competitive level with the second wave mostly having to replace an ineffective 1st wave. You have an expensive and declining Freeman, a relatively inexpensive but declining skills Inciarte (his value is as a CF and LO hitter; if he can't play those as well he's not very valuable) You have Albies, Swanson and Acuna either in FA or getting close so, assuming all are effective, then their cost will offset the removal of the Freeman and Inciarte obligations.

So now you are reliant on the Braves third wave of Maitan, Waters, the other International signees etc. to remain competitive. That may happen. But, you have to expect that to get to competition in the first place in 2019/2020 and stay there for a year or two some of the young talent will be traded to fill holes.

But what about the draft and International signings between now and then? Assuming the team gets incrementally better between now and then as designed, then the likelihood of impact talent decreases significantly and becomes more a function of luck.

Could everything turn up roses for the Braves even given their past and current mistakes? Of course. But, IMO, it will rely much more on luck than design.
 
smootness said:
Why, at this point, would you assume the Braves won't be able to establish any staying power? We have already had one wave that so far looks pretty mediocre or worse that has begun arriving, we have another wave that is starting to get here and will be coming over the next year or so, then we have another wave after that one lined up. I'm just not sure what makes you look at our system and say you just basically see one wave of talent.
Click to expand...

the waves arriving from the minor leagues do not arrive on a static ML team. As the current arriving waves begin to mature and get better and older they get more expensive. Combine that with the existing ML talent becoming a wave of expensive, declining and eventually departing talent, then the pressure is there to a. have the next wave be good enough and b. have the ML management and FO be disciplined enough not to trade away the future for the needs of the present.

As you get better, your draft position (and International pool) get worse which makes creating future waves harder.

My expectation is that to achieve competition to start with, the Braves FO will have to trade from future waves because of the poor quality and mis-managed service time of the present.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top