bravesnumberone
Well-known member
If Teheran is next, the time to trade him for bats would have been last offseason. Hopefully there's something coming soon.
Is "2017" a huge lie?
- Thread starter CJC
- Start date
dak
Well-known member
If we don't trade any SP talent for positional players before 2017, than I think 2017 is a big lie. I do not think 2017 is a big lie.
Here's a quick peak at pitching depth at upper levels:
ATL: Miller, Teheran, FA Veteran, Wisler, Folty, Banuelos (bullpen)
AAA: Volstad, Weber, Jenkins, Sims, Gant
AA: Newcomb, Ellis, Janas, Bird, Thurman
Here's a quick peak at pitching depth at upper levels:
ATL: Miller, Teheran, FA Veteran, Wisler, Folty, Banuelos (bullpen)
AAA: Volstad, Weber, Jenkins, Sims, Gant
AA: Newcomb, Ellis, Janas, Bird, Thurman
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
Realistically I think Newcomb will emerge as a bona fide ML starter and one of the rest from your list (which should include Williams Perez). So two to add to Miller, Teheran, FA Veteran and Wisler. Now we might get lucky and generate one more bona fide ML starter from this list. Or we might get unlucky and end up with fewer. After all there is always the risk one of the "established" guys has an injury or loses it. The most likely outcome imo from this group is six serviceable ML starters. Teheran, Miller, Wisler, FA, Newcomb and one other.
Sticking with the theme of being realistic, it will probably take more than a year for the development of these prospects. So this small surplus of ML caliber starting pitching (if you want to call it that since it is unrealistic to plan on only needing five starters in any given season) most likely won't manifest itself fully until 2018.
It seems to me that what we have at the ML and upper minor league levels will turn out to be just enough (and that includes the assumption we pick up a veteran FA). We can dream about a surplus from this group that can be used to acquire bats. But realistically it ain't gonna happen to any great extent. Imo if we want to accelerate the rebuild we will have to trade from the very young group of promising players who played in rookie leagues last year (Acuna, Yepez, Riley, Allard, Soroka) or those we pick up from the draft and international market this year.
I'm not saying that being a wizard with the glove isn't enough (or a bad thing). It's obvious that the Braves - as constructed recently - need more than that.
Freeman's not your typical power guy at 1B (again, not a bad thing). Little to no power at 3B (CJ, KJ, Uribe). Little power in RF (Heyward and Markakis). The only place "quick strikes" came from were J-Up and Gattis in LF (and when Evan was behind the plate).
For the offense to improve - especially after you removed Justin and Gattis from the equation - it was much more important that you have guys who "keep the line moving". It's no surprise the team was flirting with .500 as late as June -
May OBPs:
Simba - .342
Peterson - .351
Maybin - .371
Markakis - .339
June OBPs:
Simba - .340
Peterson - .362
Maybin - .366
Markakis - .395
If those guys could maintain that level, this team could be pretty competitive - even without adding big bats. For a stretch early on they resembled the Royals offense (that also doesn't rely on power) with runners on seemingly all the time, putting consistent pressure on opposing defenses. Of course Simba, Peterson, and Maybin weren't able to keep that up and Markakis became the only guy consistently getting on (his WORST month was July, and even then his OBP was .321). When Freddie went down during the middle of the season, there was no way for the team to score runs.
My point is that they've all but begged Andrelton to cut down on his swing and be that guy that just sprays the ball all over and it just hasn't happened - to this point. That's what the Braves needed from him. If he could do that, he'd be impossible to keep from being the NL starter at SS for years and years to come (think Jeter). His glove makes him a really good player - if he'd just make that offensive adjustment, he'd be absolutely elite.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
I think next year will be a repetition of the Markakis-Heyward discussion moved to short. Aybar is a competent pro. He will not hurt your team in the field and he is a professional hitter. But we will notice that he makes a much smaller proportion of the difficult plays that we got used to seeing made at short the past few years. I think the current FO is a bit behind the curve when it comes to valuing defense. We do very little shifting compared to a growing number of teams. And now we are going to go through a season with Pierzynski at catcher, an outfield of Markakis, Maybin or Bourn, and apparently Olivera. It will be interesting to see how much of a hit our pitching performance takes.
bravesnumberone
Well-known member
I think it's probably 50-50 Aybar even steps on the field for us, if what Coppy said the other day is true about teams lining up on him.
dak
Well-known member
Ah, knew I was forgetting someone. Added him below. I have nothing concrete to base this on, but my feeling is that the median outcome would be a little better than two of these young guys being bona fide ML starters. I'd set the over / under at Newcomb plus two of the others. Anything less would be unlucky, and anything more would be lucky. Some of the rest will become useful bullpen arms, and the remainder will fall into they abyss of real-life employment.
Self-scouting is going to be critical to maximizing these assets. In year's past, the Braves did a solid job of selling high on SP prospects that didn't end up "turning out" with their new clubs.
ATL: Miller, Teheran, FA Veteran, Wisler, Folty, Banuelos (bullpen), Perez (60-day DL for flu-like symptoms)
AAA: Volstad, Weber, Jenkins, Sims, Gant
AA: Newcomb, Ellis, Janas, Bird, Thurman
bravesnumberone
Well-known member
But Simmons showed signs throughout last season. Would have liked for him to have another offseason with Seitzer. That's why I'm saying there was no need to rush trading him. You want to talk about resembling the Royals eventually, a big component of that is being strong up the middle.
Tapate50
Well-known member
Probably where Albies comes in.
The majority of outlets had him that high at the time, according to many he was "can't-miss" - especially the widely known outlets, you're right Alex. But we both can recall questions raised, even by posters on the old board who had watched him consistently as he moved up the ladder. I'm willing to bet the BA guys would even admit they'd like to have that 2005 list back to do all over again...
4.) Ian Stewart
5.) Joel Guzman ("He's Juan Gonzalez waiting to happen.")
6.) Casey Kotchman
9.) Marte
11.) Lastings Milledge
12.) Dallas McPherson
14.) Frenchy
17.) Jason Kubel
18.) Jeremy Hermida
21.) Brian Dopriak
The only hitters they "hit" on were Mauer (#1), Delmon Young (#3), Rickie Weeks (#8), Hanley Ramirez (#10), Prince Fielder (#15), Carlos Quentin (#22), and Swisher (#24). Not their best list by any stretch of the imagination.
No doubt. But I'd argue that even Maybin showed that he'd "bought in" even more than Andrelton the vast majority of the time. I hated to see him go as well. I'm just saying that I see the rationale behind being hesitant to gamble $53 million that he was going to ever be better than he was last season.
As it was, Andrelton was exactly what Escobar is to the Royals. With better defense? Yes, but Escobar's no slouch.
Would you pay Escobar $53 million over the life of Simmons' contract? I bet DMGM won't.
NYCBrave
Well-known member
I'm not going to go as far as say Simmons was a dirty player, by all accounts he seemed like a great guy and great teammate. However, the hitting situation has been a bit troubling. You'd have thought Seitzer was the type of guy who could make an impact with Simmons. There were very slight improvements in the BB and K rate, but his power has seemingly vanished. I mean he's not even hitting doubles. I'm in the camp who says we should have held on longer and see if the bat developed, but if the Braves knew something we don't, then it made sense to trade him.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
It will be interesting to see if they push more to strike out pitchers. It appears Newcomb is that. Sims is developing into that.
I think great infield defense becomes more important the heavier you rely on ground ball pitchers.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
It also comes into play against teams with good contact hitters. As the Mets and others found out this post-season.
Russ2dollas
10 yr, $185 million Extension
Yes it's a lie.
We've seen worst to first before. But if the plan is to be legit in 17 then u have to be a real team in 16. You don't want a team of rookies in 17. A bunch of pitchers with inning limits if you are going to go to the playoffs
I wonder if the mets success scared them off.
If anything the mets show me that you don't have to be good to win. Some stud pitchers. Downside wright trade for cespedes timely hitting
We've seen worst to first before. But if the plan is to be legit in 17 then u have to be a real team in 16. You don't want a team of rookies in 17. A bunch of pitchers with inning limits if you are going to go to the playoffs
I wonder if the mets success scared them off.
If anything the mets show me that you don't have to be good to win. Some stud pitchers. Downside wright trade for cespedes timely hitting
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
True but everything is relative. Ideally you would have Simmons hit .270/.340 and either steal 30-40 bases or hit 15 hr PLUS keep his defense. But, I don't think we will ever see that. I think Simmons is a modern day Rafael Belliard which is ok if you have Gant, Justice, Pendelton, Blauser providing the offense.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
The Mets took advantage of the fact that the NL East was a horrible division this year. They got into the short series of the playoffs where their dominant SP could show out and they did.
bravesnumberone
Well-known member
Isn't it interesting that people like to cast blame of the young, talented players we trade away? "Tough to coach." "Dirty player." It's been strongly implied more than once that Heyward was a "problem in the clubhouse."
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
Not me. For me it's all about performance and how they fit into the fabric of the team and what you are trying to do with the team. I look at it like this: I hope traded players go away and develop into superstars because that makes any future player trades I might make more valuable.
There was a time not too long ago where the Braves "won" every trade where every pitching prospect traded away turned out to be fools gold. It eventually got to the point where teams didn't want Braves pitching prospects.
That's all fine but sometimes players are what they are. I'm sure it hasn't helped that we bring in hitting coaches every year or so who likely try to make hitters hit a different way. Sometimes you just got to let them be themselves. Yeah Andrelton is a drain on the offense but in the end it doesn't matter to me. He's a good player at a premium position that the Braves now have to fill long term. Which says to me that we aren't looking to compete in 2017 but a few years after that.