Kimbrel traded to Red Sox

rico43 said:
I thought that was explained well somewhere here -- it's difference between dealing Kimbrel and dealing Kimbrel with Upton's contract. Yeah, the Braves get an even better return if The Player Formerly Known as BJ wasn't attached.
Click to expand...

I'm talking more in general. The overall strategy is becoming disjointed. Acquisitions like Markakis and Olivera seem like win-soon moves, while the Simmons trade and the returns for all trades other trades seem to be based on a winning 3-4 years from now.

Why free up BJs money if they can't realistically use it to compete by 2017? Who are they going to spend it on in the weak FA class next offseason? Why not just get a top position player like the Padres did for Kimbrel and just eat BJs money since they are clearly punting the next 2-3 years anyways.

It really seems like there isn't a concise plan being followed. Either build to win now, or in the future, not half assed both ways.
 
Enscheff said:
I'm talking more in general. The overall strategy is becoming disjointed. Acquisitions like Markakis and Olivera seem like win-soon moves, while the Simmons trade and the returns for all trades other trades seem to be based on a winning 3-4 years from now.

Why free up BJs money if they can't realistically use it to compete by 2017? Who are they going to spend it on in the weak FA class next offseason? Why not just get a top position player like the Padres did for Kimbrel and just eat BJs money since they are clearly punting the next 2-3 years anyways.

It really seems like there isn't a concise plan being followed. Either build to win now, or in the future, not half assed both ways.
Click to expand...

It seems to me that the mindset at the time of the Markakis signing onward through the Kimbrel, Olivera and CJ/Bourn/Swisher deals was to clear out the dead weight in order to have the resources to have a strong contending team in 2017. The Simmons trade seems a bit at odds with that. Aybar has only one year left on his contract. Simmons is due 8M in 2017. It is very unlikely we can generate a better alternative return on that 8M. It is possible that Newcomb will be in the majors at some point in 2017, but not likely that he will be close to the finished product. So in terms of impact on 2017, we have made a whole series of trades that pointed to building a better team in 2017 up until the Simmons trade, which takes us in the opposite direction.

Personally, I don't think it makes sense to point to one season and give it much more weight than the seasons around it. So I'm not bothered by the fact that this particular trade weakens the team in 2017 as long as the net from all the years is positive. Imo the net is close to neutral. I neither love nor hate this trade.
 
Enscheff said:
I'm talking more in general. The overall strategy is becoming disjointed. Acquisitions like Markakis and Olivera seem like win-soon moves, while the Simmons trade and the returns for all trades other trades seem to be based on a winning 3-4 years from now.

Why free up BJs money if they can't realistically use it to compete by 2017? Who are they going to spend it on in the weak FA class next offseason? Why not just get a top position player like the Padres did for Kimbrel and just eat BJs money since they are clearly punting the next 2-3 years anyways.

It really seems like there isn't a concise plan being followed. Either build to win now, or in the future, not half assed both ways.
Click to expand...

Tend to agree. Knowing what we know now, I would have preferred to eat BJs contract, and move Kimbrel for by himself for the best package. At the time, it appeared genius to get the money off the books in order to spend it elsewhere to win soon. Not so much now. I think currently I would prefer BJ, Margot, Guerra, Asauje to Maybin, Wisler.
 
We're all assuming a deal of this caliber was on the table when we moved Kimbrel last year. If you would have told me the Braves would get a prospect like Margot (Whatever the 2014-2015 version of him was, since he popped up this year) plus other quality prospects, I would have laughed. The Red Sox overpaid, and have a new front office that did so. It's entirely likely that nobody else on the market last year would have come particularly close to this package for Kimbrel.
 
Our Kimbrel trade was great. At the time and now it was one of our best trades. Maybe the Padres did better. That's fine.

It remains to be seen since ours isn't "done". I believe trading Kimbrel last year financially allowed us to trade for Touki. We have yet to see how those finances are used this year. Maybin has value that we could still trade. I like Wisler. The high draft pick we used on Riley has me thrilled.

I get being angry at the front office for lack of offense in trades. I cannot objectively be mad at them for the Kimbrel trade, it was terrific.
 
Wren is with sox. He did this just to make the braves look bad. :)

I think we should take away the credit of clearing Melvin's contract if we do nothing with the money and punt for two of the three yrs.
 
wow, what an overpay for a closer. don't get me wrong, I love Craig. He is awesome.. But what is the win difference between a good closer and a great closer. 4 maybe 5 wins.. I know that can be a lot of wins when in a tight race, but to give up 4 prospects and one of them being a #25 overall prospect is a huge package to send over for 5 more wins.

and I don't even want to compare this to our return for Kimbrel. We did very very good.. different circumstances and different situations..
 
it makes me wonder what we would have gotten for Grilled Cheese last year if he didn't blow out his leg... teams will pay heavy for a closer.. and with the press on the Royals pen, and Muts staff, more teams are going to gravitate to pitching.. This is a good thing for the Braves.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
wow, what an overpay for a closer. don't get me wrong, I love Craig. He is awesome.. But what is the win difference between a good closer and a great closer. 4 maybe 5 wins.. I know that can be a lot of wins when in a tight race, but to give up 4 prospects and one of them being a #25 overall prospect is a huge package to send over for 5 more wins.

and I don't even want to compare this to our return for Kimbrel. We did very very good.. different circumstances and different situations..
Click to expand...

Preller saving his job...

I will be interested to see if Boston starts drafting low ceiling high floor college starters now that Wren is wandering the halls over there.
 
mqt said:
We're all assuming a deal of this caliber was on the table when we moved Kimbrel last year. If you would have told me the Braves would get a prospect like Margot (Whatever the 2014-2015 version of him was, since he popped up this year) plus other quality prospects, I would have laughed. The Red Sox overpaid, and have a new front office that did so. It's entirely likely that nobody else on the market last year would have come particularly close to this package for Kimbrel.
Click to expand...

I thought it was easily the best trade Hart made, but now I think the point is there was no need to use Kimbrel to get rid of Melvin last year when it's now clear we won't be competitive in 2016 and we still have not brought in any major offensive prospects. Don't say Olivera. He's going to be 31. There's less of a need to go ahead and clear Melvin's salary when you can't really use it to help go get Greinke or Price because doing so now would be pointless. And the free agent class next year will be even weaker. Had we hung on to Kimbrel, since a lot of people here consider this front office to be the kings of all kings, we could have made a very similar deal with the Red Sox and even sweetened it by dangling Teheran out there. We may could have even gotten someone to overpay in July. As mentioned earlier, I'd be willing to stomach Melvin for two more seasons (since we aren't realistically going anywhere until 2018 at the earliest) and have a package similar to what Boston just forked over instead of having a serviceable placeholder in Maybin, who might net us a decent prospect if we trade him at the right time, and Wisler, who I assume will be surpassed by others who scouts and people on here insist have higher upside.
 
bravesnumberone said:
I thought it was easily the best trade Hart made, but now I think the point is there was no need to use Kimbrel to get rid of Melvin last year when it's now clear we won't be competitive in 2016 and we still have not brought in any major offensive prospects. Don't say Olivera. He's going to be 31. There's less of a need to go ahead and clear Melvin's salary when you can't really use it to help go get Greinke or Price because doing so now would be pointless. And the free agent class next year will be even weaker. Had we hung on to Kimbrel, since a lot of people here consider this front office to be the kings of all kings, we could have made a very similar deal with the Red Sox and even sweetened it by dangling Teheran out there. We may could have even gotten someone to overpay in July. As mentioned earlier, I'd be willing to stomach Melvin for two more seasons (since we aren't realistically going anywhere until 2018 at the earliest) and have a package similar to what Boston just forked over instead of having a serviceable placeholder in Maybin, who might net us a decent prospect if we trade him at the right time, and Wisler, who I assume will be surpassed by others who scouts and people on here insist have higher upside.
Click to expand...

you are looking at this in a vacuum. you can't do that. the freed money from BJ's contract allowed us to buy Tuki.. it also allowed us to dump CJ for Bourn/Swisher and take on that money to free up money GOING into 17. There is more moves to be made and this financial freedom will allow more flexibility to wheel and deal.
 
bravesnumberone said:
I thought it was easily the best trade Hart made, but now I think the point is there was no need to use Kimbrel to get rid of Melvin last year when it's now clear we won't be competitive in 2016 and we still have not brought in any major offensive prospects. Don't say Olivera. He's going to be 31. There's less of a need to go ahead and clear Melvin's salary when you can't really use it to help go get Greinke or Price because doing so now would be pointless. And the free agent class next year will be even weaker. Had we hung on to Kimbrel, since a lot of people here consider this front office to be the kings of all kings, we could have made a very similar deal with the Red Sox and even sweetened it by dangling Teheran out there. We may could have even gotten someone to overpay in July. As mentioned earlier, I'd be willing to stomach Melvin for two more seasons (since we aren't realistically going anywhere until 2018 at the earliest) and have a package similar to what Boston just forked over instead of having a serviceable placeholder in Maybin, who might net us a decent prospect if we trade him at the right time, and Wisler, who I assume will be surpassed by others who scouts and people on here insist have higher upside.
Click to expand...

I certainly am not entirely happy with what is going on due to the lack of attention paid to hitting. However, I think it's not really fair to critique in hindsight this early.

As for signing Greinke or Price, it wouldn't be pointless. It wouldn't be that useful in 2016 but in 2017 and beyond it gives you a stabilizing presence and a mentor for your young pitching, with ACE level pitching in 18, 19 and probably 20 then passing that torch on to someone else (Newcomb?, Sims?, Allard?). It makes perfect sense.
 
Horsehide Harry said:
I certainly am not entirely happy with what is going on due to the lack of attention paid to hitting. However, I think it's not really fair to critique in hindsight this early.

As for signing Greinke or Price, it wouldn't be pointless. It wouldn't be that useful in 2016 but in 2017 and beyond it gives you a stabilizing presence and a mentor for your young pitching, with ACE level pitching in 18, 19 and probably 20 then passing that torch on to someone else (Newcomb?, Sims?, Allard?). It makes perfect sense.
Click to expand...

this message board couldn't handle it if the Braves spent 20+ million on more pitching.. it would collapse in on it self creating a black hole in the internet that could destroy everything online as we know it...
 
bravesfanMatt said:
you are looking at this in a vacuum. you can't do that. the freed money from BJ's contract allowed us to buy Tuki.. it also allowed us to dump CJ for Bourn/Swisher and take on that money to free up money GOING into 17. There is more moves to be made and this financial freedom will allow more flexibility to wheel and deal.
Click to expand...

We could have also saved money by not bothering with Markakis. Again this front office is all over the place even if you guys want to think otherwise.
 
bravesnumberone said:
We could have also saved money by not bothering with Markakis. Again this front office is all over the place even if you guys want to think otherwise.
Click to expand...

I think in their public pronouncements that's certainly the case. That wouldn't bother me because spinning is part of their job. But I am disturbed by the fact they make a bunch of trades that seem geared to one thing and then do a trade that goes in the other direction. That could be justified if the value exchange is exceptional, but I don't see it. Incoherence is the word that comes to mind.

When he was a young whippersnapper apparently Coppy used to have this data system to evaluate players that George Steinbrenner loved. He had reinvented his own cube but in a way that was appealing to George. I'm starting to think that he is more of a simplificateur terrible than a deep thinker. Bosses (and others) often love simplificateur terribles because they give them a shortcut that saves them from thinking about matters that are actually quite complicated. That has become my theory for Coppy's advancement. I could be wrong. Maybe he is a really deep thinker and I'm just not up to fully appreciating his designs.
 
Horsehide Harry said:
As for signing Greinke or Price, it wouldn't be pointless. It wouldn't be that useful in 2016 but in 2017 and beyond it gives you a stabilizing presence and a mentor for your young pitching, with ACE level pitching in 18, 19 and probably 20 then passing that torch on to someone else (Newcomb?, Sims?, Allard?). It makes perfect sense.
Click to expand...

“We believe free-agent pitching is one of the most inefficient uses of money, and we know how volatile pitching is in every sense of the word, so our goal was to load up on a quantity of quality and try to build our organization for long-lasting success."

John Coppolella a few months ago. Not saying that there is any deep coherence from day to day in the thinking at the FO but I thought his quote might inform the FO's thinking about signing guys like Price and Greinke. But maybe they are exceptions since they love the Braves so much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top