Is the rebuild in trouble?

Russ2dollas said:
With Swanson struggling I don't know if it can be avoided. He came up and played well. Yes sss. But it seemed like teams tried to see if he could hit MLB fastballs and he could. Clearly he can't hit MLB sliders

If he was in the minors would this issue have been raised? Would he seee enough quality sliders to work on it?

I don't know. I'm learning the new stats but I'm not fluent in it. But from watching baseball it seems most players need a year or two to work things out. Adjust to the league have them adjust to you etc etc. usually young pitchers get hit early and can't go deep in games.

IMO this yr and next yr should be about getting our 21 plus year old prospects feet wet
Click to expand...

This is precisely why I don't subscribe to the "promoting Swanson early ruined him" banter. Swanson had more PAs in AA (377) than he has had at the MLB level (344), and AA pitchers couldn't seem to exploit his slider issues. How can anyone think ~200 more PAs in AA would uncover this issue when the prior 377 didn't?

Minor league pitchers don't game plan for hitters like they do in MLB. Swanson was probably going to struggle to adjust to MLB-quality sliders no matter when they called him up. It's just a shame they gave up control of his age 29 season so he could struggle at the beginning of 2017 rather than in the middle of 2017.
 
Russ2dollas said:
We didn't have two elite closers to sell

I don't think anyone views viz or just on the same planet as chapman and Miller
Click to expand...

Was not just closers...starter also brought a high premium. Could have gotten a good bit more for Grilli also. Had we not pulled the trigger so fast on Kimbrel..can you imagine??
 
rico43 said:
Written by someone who's likely never paid his way to attend a Braves game in his life.

It's so easy to make bold, witless declarations like this when you treat it like a fantasy league. But there is real money and real long-term consequence if the Braves don't start filling this new park and generating buzz now. When Freddie was healthy, there was beginning to be that kind of buzz about this club, and that sort of thing is worth its weight in gold.

I might give your argument more consideration if you take the time to consider the return on each player you're trading above, and how they will be replaced. For example, are you willing to trade Freeman because we have Matt Adams for two more years, or because you consider 30 the crest and anything past is over the hill?

Trading Inciarte, a player with control and real value, you lose me. Kemp might well be a deadline bonanza if there are pennant races this year and certainly Markakis is a logical move as teams will be happy to take on a one-year deal and Acuna will be ready next spring.

But short-term issues at home aside, Teheran is the ace of this staff and you need a veteran under the age of 40 as an anchor.
Click to expand...

I don't quite understand why you always suggest that anyone who has a long term view on tear downs hasn't ever bought a ticket. That's a pretty wild conclusion to draw.

One thing that is pretty consistent in turning losers into winners is that it generally takes a lot of suffering to get there. That's just the way it is unless you have a lot of cash. And then, it is still usually a lot of suffering.
 
Enscheff said:
The rebuild has been delayed 1-2 years with Wisler, Blair, and Jenkins busting, and Folty spinning his wheels, but the rebuild isn't in trouble. Nobody with any clue expected the Braves to win in 2017 or 2018, and they are right on track to get back into contention by 2019.

Guys like Kemp, Markakis, Dickey, Colon, and Jaime Garcia were brought in to fill the gaps on the roster until 2019. "Name" players like those allow the posi-Braves to keep blabbering about being good, and gives the casual fan the illusion of watching a competent team.

Swanson isn't busting as much as he is showing the type of player many thought he was from the beginning. Since the moment he was drafted, Swanson was more of a high-floor type player, rather than some budding star. Most folks figured he was a 2+ WAR guy with little risk, even though most of us wished him up a bit to be a 3+ WAR cornerstone. While the Braves screwed the pooch promoting him early, I have little doubt he will settle in as an average MLB SS, which is very valuable.

Teheran should have been traded. Everyone with even half a clue stated as much from the beginning. The vast majority of good pitchers don't stay good for long (either due to injury or loss of effectiveness), and we are probably seeing Teheran's decline now. The Braves were foolish to think they could keep Teheran for 2-3 rebuilding years and have him still be an impact pitcher by the time the Braves were ready to compete. This FO has completely wasted Teheran's value to the organization by failing to trade him 1-2 years ago.

Albies' mediocre results in AAA should not be concerning. He is 20 years old and more than holding his own. Other top prospects who are 20 years old (Robles, Eloy, Rodgers, Torres, etc) are still in A+, except for Torres who just moved to AAA and is struggling a bit too. Folks need to remember that Albies is the age of a college sophomore/junior that hasn't even been drafted yet. He has relied on his plus bat-to-ball skills his entire professional career, so now he needs to refine his approach. The fact his approach hasn't been challenged until AAA is remarkable in itself.

Acuna should be ready to take over for Markakis in 2019 to join a pretty good position player core of Freeman, Inciarte, Swanson and Albies. Maitan will hopefully be right behind Acuna to take over LF or 3B. About 1-2 guys from the next elite group of pitchers (Allard, Soroka, Gohara, Anderson) should be ready to contribute by then too. Folty and Teheran will undoubtedly be around to fill out the rotation.

2019 was always the realistic year for contention, and nothing has changed.
Click to expand...

Outside of tone, I forget sometimes how much I agree with you on most of the important things.
 
Southcack77 said:
No.
Click to expand...

My recollection is they moved CJ and took on Bourn and Swisher's contracts. It seemed obvious at the time they were taking on more obligations in 2016 to shed the 2017 portion of CJ's contract. Similarly the BJ trade involved taking on some of Carlos Quentin's contract.

In both cases we cleared 2017 salary obligations. Subsequently we used it for Colon, Dickey and Garcia. I'm sure that was not the original plan. But perhaps the original plan should not have put emphasis on dumping 2017 salary obligations. In retrospect it seems to have been unwise.
 
nsacpi said:
My recollection is they moved CJ and took on Bourn and Swisher's contracts. It seemed obvious at the time they were taking on more obligations in 2016 to shed the 2017 portion of CJ's contract. Similarly the BJ trade involved taking on some of Carlos Quentin's contract.

In both cases we cleared 2017 salary obligations. Subsequently we used it for Colon, Dickey and Garcia. I'm sure that was not the original plan. But perhaps the original plan should not have put emphasis on dumping 2017 salary obligations. In retrospect it seems to have been unwise.
Click to expand...


I always thought it odd. That said, Michael Bourn is a better player than Bonifacio and I always thought dropping him and keeping Drew Stubbs at the end of spring training in 2016 was goofy (not that Bourn would have made any difference in the grand scheme of things).
 
nsacpi said:
My recollection is they moved CJ and took on Bourn and Swisher's contracts. It seemed obvious at the time they were taking on more obligations in 2016 to shed the 2017 portion of CJ's contract. Similarly the BJ trade involved taking on some of Carlos Quentin's contract.

In both cases we cleared 2017 salary obligations. Subsequently we used it for Colon, Dickey and Garcia. I'm sure that was not the original plan. But perhaps the original plan should not have put emphasis on dumping 2017 salary obligations. In retrospect it seems to have been unwise.
Click to expand...

This FO has made a consistently inconsistent series of moves as they tried to rebuild while simultaneously building to win in 2017. The end result was no winning in 2017, at the expense of assets that could have helped in 2019 and beyond. So what, exactly, was the payoff from sacrificing better future assets?

Depending on how much blame you want to assign to the pressures of opening a new ballpark, this FO as a whole must be dinged accordingly for these inefficient moves. Hence why I call Coppy an average or slightly below average GM.
 
nsacpi said:
My recollection is they moved CJ and took on Bourn and Swisher's contracts. It seemed obvious at the time they were taking on more obligations in 2016 to shed the 2017 portion of CJ's contract. Similarly the BJ trade involved taking on some of Carlos Quentin's contract.

In both cases we cleared 2017 salary obligations. Subsequently we used it for Colon, Dickey and Garcia. I'm sure that was not the original plan. But perhaps the original plan should not have put emphasis on dumping 2017 salary obligations. In retrospect it seems to have been unwise.
Click to expand...

Braves got

Wisler (#34 Prospect in baseball)
Paroubec (Traded for Int'l bonus pool money)
41st Pick (Austin Riley)
Cam Maybin --> Krol and Speier
and a lot of payroll flexibility out of the trade.

The FO directly Upton's feed salary to its acquisition of Touki. I think you can fairly link some of the bonuses extended in the past two drafts and int'l signing period to it as well.

Perhaps it also created the payroll flexibility to sign Colon and Dickey and trade for Garcia in 2017, but you could just as easily say it created the flexibility to trade for Kemp (whose acquisition is shaky, but the result of which is up in the air). How do you really decide which money was used where?

There isn't really any way of calculating what the Braves wouldn't have if they had kept Upton.

All we have to go on is that the Padres later traded Kimbrell for some prospects who might turn out to be good.
 
Southcack77 said:
Braves got

Wisler (#34 Prospect in baseball)
Paroubec (Traded for Int'l bonus pool money)
41st Pick (Austin Riley)
Cam Maybin --> Krol and Speier
and a lot of payroll flexibility out of the trade.

The FO directly Upton's feed salary to its acquisition of Touki. I think you can fairly link some of the bonuses extended in the past two drafts and int'l signing period to it as well.

Perhaps it also created the payroll flexibility to sign Colon and Dickey and trade for Garcia in 2017, but you could just as easily say it created the flexibility to trade for Kemp (whose acquisition is shaky, but the result of which is up in the air). How do you really decide which money was used where?

There isn't really any way of calculating what the Braves wouldn't have if they had kept Upton.

All we have to go on is that the Padres later traded Kimbrell for some prospects who might turn out to be good.
Click to expand...

This is comical. You call SD's return for Kimbrel "some prospects who might turn out to be good" immediately after listing the Braves return for Kimbrel...none of which has been or likely ever will be good.

Nobody other than Braves homers think their return for Kimbrel was anywhere near as good as what SD got.
 
I think its a bit of a myth that the Pads got a mint for Kimbrell:

If the Padres got max value out of Kimbrell --

Then max value was

Margot #26 in baseball
Javier Guerra .202 9 HR 141/34 K/BB rate last season in A+ (Pads #7 Prospect)
Carlos Asuaje .321 9 HRs in the PCL AAA last season - Pads #20
Logan Allen ERA in 3s at A ball - low 90s fb Pads #17

I like Margot and he's going to have a solid to good MLB career, but he's not Mike Trout. Two uncertain to contribute middle infielders and a pitcher who if he was in the Braves system would be lost in the shuffle and probably labeled a AAAA talent.

the Braves return is heavily prejudiced by the fact that Wisler has been bad and he appeared to be the headliner of the deal and I think because its not immediately clear what else they were able to do because of shedding the payroll. One thing is certain: Upton was terrible and the Braves would be in a worse place owing him 17 million dollars this year.
 
Enscheff said:
This is comical. You call SD's return for Kimbrel "some prospects who might turn out to be good" immediately after listing the Braves return for Kimbrel...none of which has been or likely ever will be good.

Nobody other than Braves homers think their return for Kimbrel was anywhere near as good as what SD got.
Click to expand...

It was Margot and some dudes.
 
Southcack77 said:
It was Margot and some dudes.
Click to expand...

SD traded Kimbrel after they used up his cheapest and most valuable season. Kimbrel was significantly less valuable at the time SD traded him than when they acquired him, yet they managed to get more for him than they gave up to get him. They essentially bought a new car for $40k, drove it 30k miles, then sold it for $45k.

I know you'll never admit it, but only posi-Braves think the Braves did well in the Kimbrel trade. Literally nobody unaffiliated with the Braves thinks it was a good move.
 
Enscheff said:
SD traded Kimbrel after they used up his cheapest and most valuable season. Kimbrel was significantly less valuable at the time SD traded him than when they acquired him, yet they managed to get more for him than they gave up to get him. They essentially bought a new car for $40k, drove it 30k miles, then sold it for $45k.

I know you'll never admit it, but only posi-Braves think the Braves did well in the Kimbrel trade. Literally nobody unaffiliated with the Braves thinks it was a good move.
Click to expand...

Can you imagine what he would have brought at the deadline last year?
 
TheBravos said:
Can you imagine what he would have brought at the deadline last year?
Click to expand...

It's nice to imagine, but it's also unrealistic to think the Braves could or should have held onto Kimbrel that long.

If we want to stay subjective, all we can do is judge the move based on the info at the time. The Braves messed up by watering down his value when they attached BJ to him.

Rebuilding teams should not be shedding payroll, they should be riding out those bad contracts and acquiring as much future assets as possible. The White Sox are showing this with their bad contracts now, just like they also showed why it is foolish to hold onto a SP waiting for better offers during non-contending seasons.
 
Enscheff said:
SD traded Kimbrel after they used up his cheapest and most valuable season. Kimbrel was significantly less valuable at the time SD traded him than when they acquired him, yet they managed to get more for him than they gave up to get him.

I know you'll never admit it, but only posi-Braves think the Braves did well in the Kimbrel trade.
Click to expand...

By the way Guerra repeating A+ this year with a 32%K and 5% walk rates.

Asuaje hitting .233 in the PCL, slugging .325.
 
Enscheff said:
Now describe how everyone on your list for the Braves return is doing.

I'll wait...
Click to expand...

Wisler is struggling pretty badly.
Austin Riley is doing better than any of the other prospects.
Tooki seems to be making strides with his control but is getting hit pretty hard
Krol is the major league pen and doing ok

Not sure what undetermined international and mlb draft signings are doing.

Matt Kemp on his way to greater than 1 bWar.

The Padres 17 million being flushed down the toilet.
 
It didn't matter what we got back. The point of the trade was dumping Upton. That we got back any value was a bonus.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top