Matt wisler

[Enscheff]

You are so strange.

How could I have possibly been wrong about Teheran 2-3 years ago? I didn't know this forum existed 2-3 years ago. You spend so much time saying I am going to be wrong about things without telling me what it is I'm wrong about.

I certainly have never said the Braves should never trade Teheran. At the same time there is no reason to trade a player controlled cheaply for five years for nothing much. There is no way of evaluating whether a decision is a mistake without knowing what the parameters of the decision entailed.

I can't say whether Teheran will rebound or not, but I do know that you have said that you believe he will today. I tend to think there is very little reason to think his career is done though.

The Braves didn't trade Julio because they mistakenly allowed contention in 2017 to enter into the calculus of his value. They stupidly thought they could go half in on the rebuild, and contend in 3 years rather than the usual 5 years all rebuilds take. So rather than "settling" for a fair return on Julio, they were looking for an overpay...and didn't get it.

This insanely ignorant notion that the Braves could compete by 2017 caused the Braves to completely waste a LOT of value that should have been applied to the 2018 and later teams. The Braves are in a good position to be competitive in 2019, but consider how much BETTER position they would be in had they not used so many resources on the fools errand of building for 2017:

2-3 more Top 100 guys for Teheran
Wood and Peraza still in the system
A much better return for Kimbrel by keeping BJ's contract
An additional $18M per year without Kemp
An additional $11M per year without Markakis
Vacancies in LF and RF to add players that are actually good
Control over Swanson's age 29 season
About $30M extra this year by not paying Colon, Dickey and Garcia
Probably higher picks in the draft

All of those resources went towards winning in 2017...and it was a moronic thing to attempt. Everyone said they wouldn't win in 2017, but the FO decided they could...and they were wrong.

The Braves would be much better off in 2018 and later had they followed the correct process during the rebuild. Not trading Julio was a big part of that. The FO screwed up, but obviously the pozzies will never admit it. I said it was wrong with it happened without the benefit of hindsight. It was wrong then, it was wrong now, and it will be wrong tomorrow.

 

[mfree80]

His value was the best offer someone made to acquire him. That is the definition of "value". That value has since decreased substantially, as many folks stated it would 2-3 years ago. Literally every single analysts unaffiliated with the Braves stated he should be traded. Every poster with half a clue on this board said he should have been traded.

Now the Braves owe him the same kind of money they paid for Colon and Dickey, and may not get production better than those guys gave them.

So how is that valuable in any way, shape or form?

You can hem and haw about what we did and didn't know 2-3 years ago, but you're wrong if the conclusion you come to is anything other than "the Braves should have traded Teheran for the best offer available during the rebuild".

You were wrong then. You are wrong now. And you will be wrong the next time you disagree with that statement. Hindsight is proving that statement correct at this very moment, and we didn't even need hindsight to know that statement was correct 2-3 years ago. Even if Julio bonces back to being a #3 SP, the Braves still wasted at least half of his value pitching meaningless innings for a losing team.

I suspect that if the Braves had traded him for the best available offer the board would have had a heyday criticizing the FO for undervaluing an awesome asset. Otherwise they would have done so. As I recall, the prevailing attitude on the board was that he was valuable and if nobody wanted to pony up a deal commensurate with that value, then it was better to keep him.

Obviously, hindsight is a great thing to have. His struggles in Suntrust have suggested that trading him may have been the right move, but as has been stated many times, depends on what was offered. Probably would have been disappointing at the time.

 

[Enscheff]

I suspect that if the Braves had traded him for the best available offer the board would have had a heyday criticizing the FO for undervaluing an awesome asset. Otherwise they would have done so. As I recall, the prevailing attitude on the board was that he was valuable and if nobody wanted to pony up a deal commensurate with that value, then it was better to keep him.

Obviously, hindsight is a great thing to have. His struggles in Suntrust have suggested that trading him may have been the right move, but as has been stated many times, depends on what was offered. Probably would have been disappointing at the time.

Here's a quote from Coppy: "We would have to be overwhelmed to move Teheran".

That doesn't sound like a guy who couldn't find fair offers for a pitcher. That sounds like a guy who mistakenly thinks the Braves can win in 2017 and is overvaluing this "Ace" accordingly.

And another quote from a GM: "I can get Teheran. It's just going to cost too much right now."

We don't need specific trade offers to know that they should have traded Julio. We can piece it together logically and come to the conclusion that "fair" deals were almost certainly available during the entire rebuild.

I know the pozzies wil always grasp at whatever straws they can to defend the non-trade, but they are still wrong. Pozzies are ALWAYS wrong, without fail.

 

[sturg33]

I don't know what offers the Braves had Julio (and I hate that that is the rational for "no mistake was made if you can't prove it")... but i do k ow that Coppy said, emphatically, on numerous occasions, that they will NOT trade Julio leading up to last year's deadline.

Yes - I am aware that doesn't mean they couldn't/wouldn't... but to do Q&A with Braves fans, as matter of factly state you will not trade a fan favorite, means something to me. If he were looking at offers, he would have said something like "we love Julio and aren't looking to deal him, but we will listen to all offer for all players"

But he said "We are NOT trading Julio"

 

[Southcack77]

Here's a quote from Coppy: "We would have to be overwhelmed to move Teheran".

That doesn't sound like a guy who couldn't find fair offers for a pitcher. That sounds like a guy who mistakenly thinks the Braves can win in 2017 and is overvaluing this "Ace" accordingly.

And another quote from a GM: "I can get Teheran. It's just going to cost too much right now."

We don't need specific trade offers to know that they should have traded Julio. We can piece it together logically and come to the conclusion that "fair" deals were almost certainly available during the entire rebuild.

I know the pozzies wil always grasp at whatever straws they can to defend the non-trade, but they are still wrong. Pozzies are ALWAYS wrong, without fail.

Without details we cannot evaluate.

Your bias towards your own brilliance at the expense of the front office is too great to really take what you consider to be logical very seriously, unfortunately.

 

[50PoundHead]

The Braves didn't trade Julio because they mistakenly allowed contention in 2017 to enter into the calculus of his value. They stupidly thought they could go half in on the rebuild, and contend in 3 years rather than the usual 5 years all rebuilds take. So rather than "settling" for a fair return on Julio, they were looking for an overpay...and didn't get it.

This insanely ignorant notion that the Braves could compete by 2017 caused the Braves to completely waste a LOT of value that should have been applied to the 2018 and later teams. The Braves are in a good position to be competitive in 2019, but consider how much BETTER position they would be in had they not used so many resources on the fools errand of building for 2017:

2-3 more Top 100 guys for Teheran

Wood and Peraza still in the system

A much better return for Kimbrel by keeping BJ's contract

An additional $18M per year without Kemp

An additional $11M per year without Markakis

Vacancies in LF and RF to add players that are actually good

Control over Swanson's age 29 season

About $30M extra this year by not paying Colon, Dickey and Garcia

Probably higher picks in the draft

All of those resources went towards winning in 2017...and it was a moronic thing to attempt. Everyone said they wouldn't win in 2017, but the FO decided they could...and they were wrong.

The Braves would be much better off in 2018 and later had they followed the correct process during the rebuild. Not trading Julio was a big part of that. The FO screwed up, but obviously the pozzies will never admit it. I said it was wrong with it happened without the benefit of hindsight. It was wrong then, it was wrong now, and it will be wrong tomorrow.

No argument here. I'm not as in love with Wood and Peraza, but parts are parts.

I didn't like the length of the Markakis contract, but he's the least of our problems. He has been a decent placeholder. I can get both sides of the argument on Kemp, but he's not going to be here when we're set to contend.

But don't talk to me about keeping BJ Upton around. Guy had to go. I would have just released him to retain value on Kimbrel. But Upton had become a whiner.

 

[jpx7]

But don't talk to me about keeping BJ Upton around. Guy had to go. I would have just released him.

That's his point, I believe: better to just jettison the dude and eat the cost, versus losing value in a Kimbrel trade by attaching Upton's contract.

 

[mfree80]

Here's a quote from Coppy: "We would have to be overwhelmed to move Teheran".

That doesn't sound like a guy who couldn't find fair offers for a pitcher. That sounds like a guy who mistakenly thinks the Braves can win in 2017 and is overvaluing this "Ace" accordingly.

And another quote from a GM: "I can get Teheran. It's just going to cost too much right now."

We don't need specific trade offers to know that they should have traded Julio. We can piece it together logically and come to the conclusion that "fair" deals were almost certainly available during the entire rebuild.

I know the pozzies wil always grasp at whatever straws they can to defend the non-trade, but they are still wrong. Pozzies are ALWAYS wrong, without fail.

I don't see anything in those quotes that challenges my take or yours. Do you expect every or any GM to tell you exactly what they are thinking? We tend to hang on every word they say looking for clues, but those quotes really only tell us that Coppy may have been trying to drive the price up and some other GM may have been trying to drive it down.

 

[Southcack77]

No argument here. I'm not as in love with Wood and Peraza, but parts are parts.

I didn't like the length of the Markakis contract, but he's the least of our problems. He has been a decent placeholder. I can get both sides of the argument on Kemp, but he's not going to be here when we're set to contend.

But don't talk to me about keeping BJ Upton around. Guy had to go. I would have just released him.

I suppose the Braves could have sold off every asset of value for the maximum return and eaten every horrific contract and been content losing 90-100 games for five years but that doesn't seem to have been a plan the owners and senior management were willing to contemplate.

Doesn't appear that fans would have been either but these are real world concerns.

 

[50PoundHead]

That's his point, I believe: better to just jettison the dude and eat the cost, versus losing value in a Kimbrel trade by attaching Upton's contract.

I was a little confused. He said "keeping" Upton's contract. I would have rather "eaten" it or just given him away. But even if he played better after leaving Atlanta, there was no market for the guy, witness the lack of interest when Toronto let him go.

 

[Enscheff]

Without details we cannot evaluate.

Your bias towards your own brilliance at the expense of the front office is too great to really take what you consider to be logical very seriously, unfortunately.

What did I state that is incorrect? Point out a single error.

 

[Enscheff]

No argument here. I'm not as in love with Wood and Peraza, but parts are parts.

I didn't like the length of the Markakis contract, but he's the least of our problems. He has been a decent placeholder. I can get both sides of the argument on Kemp, but he's not going to be here when we're set to contend.

But don't talk to me about keeping BJ Upton around. Guy had to go. I would have just released him to retain value on Kimbrel. But Upton had become a whiner.

Dumping BJ was fine. Attaching him to Kimbrel so the Braves had money to win in 2017 was not fine.

 

[Southcack77]

That's his point, I believe: better to just jettison the dude and eat the cost, versus losing value in a Kimbrel trade by attaching Upton's contract.

The thing is if you keep upton or buy him out you would then have to live in the reality where 1/5 of your payroll is committed to him.

And the reality of what that does to your ability to sign other players and international draft prospects.

If you are content losing 100 games and not making any effort to put a watchable produce on the field then it coukd have been done.

 

[Enscheff]

I don't see anything in those quotes that challenges my take or yours. Do you expect every or any GM to tell you exactly what they are thinking? We tend to hang on every word they say looking for clues, but those quotes really only tell us that Coppy may have been trying to drive the price up and some other GM may have been trying to drive it down.

Lol ok.

All available evidence points to the Braves keeping Julio to compete in 2017. That decision was objectively wrong.

Feel free to spin it any way that makes you feel better about the FO.

 

[Enscheff]

I was a little confused. He said "keeping" Upton's contract. I would have rather "eaten" it or just given him away. But even if he played better after leaving Atlanta, there was no market for the guy, witness the lack of interest when Toronto let him go.

Right, I should have been more precise with my words. Keeping BJ's contract meant not unloading it with Kimbrel. If they dumped BJ they still would have "kept" his contract.

 

[Enscheff]

The thing is if you keep upton or buy him out you would then have to live in the reality where 1/5 of your payroll is committed to him.

And the reality of what that does to your ability to sign other players and international draft prospects.

If you are content losing 100 games and not making any effort to put a watchable produce on the field then it coukd have been done.

See: Houston Astros.

They rebuilt correctly and now have the best team in the game.

 

[Southcack77]

I was a little confused. He said "keeping" Upton's contract. I would have rather "eaten" it or just given him away. But even if he played better after leaving Atlanta, there was no market for the guy, witness the lack of interest when Toronto let him go.

The guy can't make a roster at the minimum or at least couldn't last time I checked.

He had the worst contract in baseball arguably. A guy that can't be played being paid like one of the better players in baseball.

Not a problem if you didn't mind losing 100 games through 2017.

But if a problem if that wasn't an option.

 

[50PoundHead]

Right, I should have been more precise with my words. Keeping BJ's contract meant not unloading it with Kimbrel. If they dumped BJ they still would have "kept" his contract.

Thought that might be the case with the wording. Upton broke his hand in April and hasn't returned to the Fresno Grizzlies line-up after playing one game very early in the season.

 

[Southcack77]

See: Houston Astros.

They rebuilt correctly and now have the best team in the game.

And it took them six years of losing including three 100 loss seasons.

It's good that you are committed to the process. I would not have minded.

But it doesn't appear that the braves ownership or management hierarchy are.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

You all know where I stand on this.