Not what AA will do, but what he should do...

[mfree80]

Ahh, clv with the “you guys aren’t as smart as the FO” argument.

Fact is some posters are smarter than others. For example, some can evaluate player value correctly. Some, like clvderpclv, think MAdams can be traded straight up for Odorizzi.

The FO is definitely smarter than clv, that’s 100% indisputable.

I truly look forward to reading all excuses when payroll is decreased in 2018. I’m sure the creativity used to explain how revenue didn’t miss projections, yet payroll went down will be extremely entertaining.

Gotta laugh at you mocking clv for doing exactly what you do all the time. Take some facts, read between the lines, add a few conclusions that may or may not come from the information at hand, then draw conclusions that support your overall narrative.

Its a fan board. We all do it. We just don't all attack those who come to different conclusions.

 

[Enscheff]

Gotta laugh at you mocking clv for doing exactly what you do all the time. Take some facts, read between the lines, add a few conclusions that may or may not come from the information at hand, then draw conclusions that support your overall narrative.

Its a fan board. We all do it. We just don't all attack those who come to different conclusions.

So you agree with his MAdams straight up for Odorizzi trade idea? Or his Sale for Jenkins proposal? Or his "they didn't protect TD and DPete to gauge trade interest" derpy doozy?

What excuse will you come up with when the payroll decreases in 2018?

 

[mfree80]

So you agree with his MAdams straight up for Odorizzi trade idea? Or his Sale for Jenkins proposal? Or his "they didn't protect TD and DPete to gauge trade interest" derpy doozy?

What excuse will you come up with when the payroll decreases in 2018?

I haven't said any of those things. No excuses necessary.

I do enjoy reading different takes... even the ones I disagree with. I don't need to respond with vitriol to every idea that I don't agree with.

 

[Enscheff]

I haven't said any of those things. No excuses necessary.

I do enjoy reading different takes... even the ones I disagree with. I don't need to respond with vitriol to every idea that I don't agree with.

There are "different takes", and there are "moronic takes". Harry specializes in different takes. Clvderpclv specializes in the moronic variety.

 

[Southcack77]

So much of those issues aren't actually problems, much less long term problems.

The Braves have two long term problems:
1. They have a below market television deal that keeps payroll in the mid-market range.
2. They may or may not see some gaps form in their farm system as a result of the international sanctions.

They cannot do much about #1. They have about five years to address #2 before it gets to the major league level.

What are the probable consequences of that? It's not terribly likely the Braves can win dynastically like they did when they won 14 straight division titles. It should not affect their ability to be periodic contenders like so many other mid and small market teams have managed to do over the recent past.

Nothing about their current situation should be a major limitation on the front office. They do not come into this with nothing but expiring contracts and a depleted system. They have young players, they will have payroll flexibility, they have assets in the minors.

They don't come into hamstrung. The one bad contract on the team is a two year deal. That's somewhat problematic, but that's not really in the contention window anyway. If they manager their resources correctly they should have plenty of financial flexibility to do the things they need to do in the 2020s.

The rest of the stuff is just morose nonsense.

It couldn't be less relevant who the coaching staff is in 2018. If the front office wants to fire every one of them and start over it can do that. I think its largely baloney the attention paid to those things, but let's say they completely agree with you. Easily addressed.

Front office restructuring is part of every major transition. No reason why any issues there have to extend beyond this year.

The penalties are tough, but already reduced to certainty and thus can be planned around.

I doubt any renaming organization members will have major influence into front office decisions beyond the current GM and whoever ends up replacing McGuirk when Liberty gets around to firing/reassigning him. It's AA's show and he can do what he wants within his budgets and parameters. He should have more payroll and assets to work with than his predecessors in the long run.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

So much of those issues aren't actually problems, much less long term problems.

The Braves have two long term problems:
1. They have a below market television deal that keeps payroll in the mid-market range.
2. They may or may not see some gaps form in their farm system as a result of the international sanctions.

They cannot do much about #1. They have about five years to address #2 before it gets to the major league level.

What are the probable consequences of that? It's not terribly likely the Braves can win dynastically like they did when they won 14 straight division titles. It should not affect their ability to be periodic contenders like so many other mid and small market teams have managed to do over the recent past.

Nothing about their current situation should be a major limitation on the front office. They do not come into this with nothing but expiring contracts and a depleted system. They have young players, they will have payroll flexibility, they have assets in the minors.

They don't come into hamstrung. The one bad contract on the team is a two year deal. That's somewhat problematic, but that's not really in the contention window anyway. If they manager their resources correctly they should have plenty of financial flexibility to do the things they need to do in the 2020s.

The rest of the stuff is just morose nonsense.

It couldn't be less relevant who the coaching staff is in 2018. If the front office wants to fire every one of them and start over it can do that. I think its largely baloney the attention paid to those things, but let's say they completely agree with you. Easily addressed.

Front office restructuring is part of every major transition. No reason why any issues there have to extend beyond this year.

The penalties are tough, but already reduced to certainty and thus can be planned around.

I doubt any renaming organization members will have major influence into front office decisions beyond the current GM and whoever ends up replacing McGuirk when Liberty gets around to firing/reassigning him. It's AA's show and he can do what he wants within his budgets and parameters. He should have more payroll and assets to work with than his predecessors in the long run.

Just not true.

Your 2 long term problems are valid and I agree that you can't do much about #1. However, #2 is a near term problem, maybe not 2018 but soon after. Since the team is unlikely to have the finances to address holes at the ML level that can't be adequately filled from within, then it will need to do that by trade in order to take advantage of its narrow window and for every young talent traded the window shortens further in a vicious cycle. That was going to happen no matter what because it doesn't appear that payroll is going anywhere up anywhere fast. But, MLB just made a 12 person trade on behalf of the Braves for a negative return (loss of talent plus loss of access to talent). You can gloss over that all you want but it doesn't go away.

As for the rest, the way the Braves climb out of small and mid market hell into a top 10 payroll in baseball that doesn't guarantee continued success but certainly is helpful is to win, and win for a period of time like being in the playoffs for 2-3 straight years. If they build to do that, then it puts fans in the seats and gives incentive to Liberty to support the product. The Royals/Rays up and down yo yo isn't going to do it and anyone paying attention to pro sports in Atlanta would see that.

Of course the front office has major limitations. Just the idea that they have to compete/rebuild at the same time is a tough deal but to try to do it with equal or less money, less prospects, bad contracts, apathetic and possibly hostile ownership, and disappointing attendance all combine into major limitation.

Look, if you are calling 2018 a year to try to compete, like most here are (or at least a mark time year), then having the current coaching staff is absolutely a hindrance. If you say the rebuild's not done, keep building and tear down more if it makes sense, welcome aboard, but this coaching staff is still a hindrance. Saying it's not is just whistling past the graveyard.

We'll just have to disagree. I think your entire stance is nonsense built on wishes and hopes without any solid plan to get from start to finish. Your plan gets to the middle somewhere and with the right luck maybe further. But depending on luck is a losing strategy.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

the sheer number of pitching prospects we have makes it likely one or two of them become a #1 or #2. i don't care much for what they currently "profile" as as few guys who becomes aces got "ace" designation as prospects. i like the talent that's all over the system.

That's an odd position to take. If you snatch up 1,000 random people there's no guarantee that one will be Albert Einstein.

An ace has at least two elite offerings. It could be elite FB, elite control, average slider, above average change. Or, it might be elite curve, elite FB. But guys who are average or a little above with no elite ability don't become 2's often and certainly not legit ones. Having 20 pitching prospects with average ability doesn't suggest that any will ever to develop into anything other than average.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

lol, it is taking the worst possible outcome of every scenario.

Not at all.

Worst scenario: Freeman get's hurt and becomes valueless but still gets paid. Pitching takes a run of injury like the Pirates of a few years ago - essentially every arm with any talent gets hurt. Swanson flames out. Albies plays good defense with below average offense. Catching regresses to 2016 WAR. 3B remains a hole and Riley proves to not only be the answer but a liability. Acuna gets hurt. etc. etc.

The scenario I laid out had none of that. It just didn't assume divine intervention (plus or minus) anywhere.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

Wow. No need to go all thethe on this, but where to start???

1.) The only quotes we have seen referring to missed revenue/attendance projections have come from those on this message board that constantly say the sky is falling. Were they as good as hoped? Maybe, maybe not - find those numbers in black and white with a link and then that's a consideration. You guys keep looking at previously opened stadiums that the surrounding infrastructure and features were fully functional when they opened - this obviously wasn't the case at SunTrust. If they were projecting revenues and attendance based on the assumption everything was going to be fully functioning on Opening Day, Liberty needs to be firing beancounters before the Braves hire new ones.There's been a few out there. Even before CoppyHart gate Hart indicated payroll was unlikely to go up.

2.) The young pitching is progressing slower than hoped? Only if you have ridiculously stupid expectations. The current rotation will be all of 26, 25, 24, 24, and 21 years old in 2018. The "next guys up" are 23 (Sims), 22 (Wright), 20 (Soroka), and 20 (Allard) - all of whom are now or will be legitimate rotation options by the end of the season. Exactly how many other organizations are in that situation. You guys act like TOR arms grow on trees. How many teams have homegrown #1s or #2s that were mostly developed in their own system AND how many of those are actually better? Gnats? Nope- Scherzer and Gio came from other teams. Mutts? Nope - Syndergaard came from elsewhere. Phillies? Obviously not. Marlins? Nope. Cubs, Brewers, Reds? Not a chance. Dodgers, Giants, Diamondbacks, Padres? Not even close. That leaves you the Pirates, Cardinals, and Rockies in the NL, and according to you guys' expectations they've got a handful of #3s and #4s as well. The AL? Not in the West - the Astros' aren't a bunch of homegrown kids, not the A's, Mariners, Rangers, or Angels. Not in the East - Boston and the Yankees have bought the majority of their rotations, Stroman and Sanchez are solid in Toronto when healthy, but they're not "Aces" in your book. The Indians you ask? Nice try - Kluber had an ERA of 10.50 in his first dozen starts after being called up - and he failed to get through 5 IP in 25% of those, so there's no chance any of the Braves' arms might step forward, right? I'll buy that the Rays, Cardinals, and maybe the Pirates have similar talent, but they don't have near the depth and since you guys have made arguments in the past that Archer's not really an "Ace" none of them are any better.Out of the guys you are talking about at the ML level, Teheran has regressed and lost stuff, Folty looks to be an ongoing headcase - million dollar arm, 10 cent head, Newk may kill somebody if he doesn't find better control, Fried is a TJ survivor who didn't look ready and Gohara looked to be the best of the bunch but has conditioning issues. Those five are not right now a winning ML rotation. Every one is no better than a #3 right now. Could they be great at some point? Sure? But that's unknown. Not all contenders have an ACE but they do have a quality rotation top to bottom at least.

3.) The farm lacks MIs? Of course - Swanson, Camargo, and Albies were just recently promoted. How many other systems are so deep that they have Top 100 prospects ready to be promoted to their big clubs immediately following promotions like those?The point isn't about the need for MI right now. It's about the need for depth when the time comes to make a critical trade. If the Rays wanted Albies in an Archer trade, and the last piece the Braves needed, in theory, was Archer, the Braves couldn't pull the trigger because they have no other options

4.) "Their philosophy continues to be centered on thinking that was en vogue 25 years ago"? You mean when AA was 15 years old and Minasian and Tinnish were 16 years old?AA may change things. I have my doubts as long as JS, Cox,

Glavine, etc are all hanging around. Has AA been given an entirely free hand? We will see.

5.) "Building to respectability isn't that hard. Most teams eventually do it." It was 8 years between playoff appearances for the Cubs, the White Sox haven't been there in 9 years, 8 years for the Rockies, the Tigers were absent for 19 years between 1987 and 2006, the Astros went 10 years without making the postseason between 2005 and 2015, the Royals were absent for 29 years prior to their recent run of success, the Marlins haven't been in 14 years and won't be getting back soon, the Brewers didn't qualify for 26 years between 1982 and 2008, the Twins were missing for 11 years between 1991 and 2002, the Pirates were missing for 21 years, the Padres haven't been in the last 11 years, the Mariners haven't been in the last 16 years, the Giants missed the playoffs for 6 straight seasons before winning 3 Championships in 5 years. It's fun to want to be "the smart guy" on an internet message board, but this *hit obviously ain't as easy as you guys think or you wouldn't be hanging out here telling us how it can be done right after we trade for Stanton.Just because it isn't that hard doesn't mean everybody is smart enough to do it. If you take the Cubs and Astros when they brought management in with a proper plan it took about 5 years.

(Oh yeah - there are 4 "s"es in "assess". I'm one of those "asses".)typing 101. mea culpa

At 2 feet it's "that's an Oak tree." I must be in a hardwood forest.

Step back1/2 a mile and you see that 90% of the trees are pines.

 

[Knucksie]

so bottom line: trade Freeman and Enciarte. That was the purpose of this topic...for the 78th time.

 

[Super]

I don't need to respond with vitriol to every idea that I don't agree with.

this is called being an adult with at least average emotional intelligence.

 

[Super]

That's an odd position to take. If you snatch up 1,000 random people there's no guarantee that one will be Albert Einstein.

An ace has at least two elite offerings. It could be elite FB, elite control, average slider, above average change. Or, it might be elite curve, elite FB. But guys who are average or a little above with no elite ability don't become 2's often and certainly not legit ones. Having 20 pitching prospects with average ability doesn't suggest that any will ever to develop into anything other than average.

that's a terrible analogy for a handful of reasons. I'm not looking for the best pitcher ever, but a couple 1s or 2s.
We don't have 20 pitching prospects with average ability. We have a bunch with high ability, some who are very young and still developing. I mean, Dallas Keuchel, Corey Kluber, Jake deGrom, probably had issues when they were 19, 20, and 21 years old. But the funny thing about guys that young is, they aren't finished developing. So assuming that where a guy is at 20 is where he'll be at 25 is massively silly.

 

[nsacpi]

That's an odd position to take. If you snatch up 1,000 random people there's no guarantee that one will be Albert Einstein.

More like if you take the graduate students in the 10 top physics and mathematics programs in the world. A top pitching prospect is not some random guy walking down the street. And we're not looking for an Einstein (second greatest Jew of all time) or Koufax (third greatest). We're looking for someone who has a chance to be a #1 or #2 in a pitching rotation.

 

[Super]

More like if you take the graduate students in the 10 top physics and mathematics programs in the world. A top pitching prospect is not some random guy walking down the street.

exactly. and you're not looking for one of the best pitchers ever, either, you're looking for a very good one. hence why i said it was a terrible analogy.

 

[Knucksie]

More like if you take the graduate students in the 10 top physics and mathematics programs in the world. A top pitching prospect is not some random guy walking down the street. And we're not looking for an Einstein (second greatest Jew of all time) or Koufax (third greatest). We're looking for someone who has a chance to be a #1 or #2 in a pitching rotation.

Who was first? Marx? Trotsky?

 

[Super]

Who was first? Marx? Trotsky?

gotta be adam sandler, no?

 

[nsacpi]

Who was first? Marx? Trotsky?

In terms of influence on the world we live in, the answer is so obvious I hesitate to give it. Take a look around yourself today.

 

[clvclv]

At 2 feet it's "that's an Oak tree." I must be in a hardwood forest.

Step back1/2 a mile and you see that 90% of the trees are pines.

Of the earlier posts...

1.) You're absolutely right that Hart said that payroll wasn't likely to go up in 2018. He said this right after the Coppy mess became widely known information and he was going to be the de facto "Guy" for awhile. At no point did he ever mention attendance or missed financial projections had anything to do with that. Did they? Who knows? Hart also knew his *ss was likely on the chopping block as well (whether for being complicit or being on the golf course rather than doing the job he was being paid to do), and he certainly wasn't going to announce that he planned to spend big when he knew corporate ownership was going to be hot about the forthcoming sanctions to begin with.

2.) Again, your expectations are simply unrealistic. What part of Corey Kluber getting shelled for his first dozen starts did you misunderstand? Are any of these guys going to eventually become what Kluber presently is? Not likely, and even if one does they'll need lots of breaks. The point is that the Braves are in a better position than any of the other 29 teams to have an entirely homegrown staff that's inexpensive for the foreseeable future. If there's someone in better shape on the pitching side of the equation, please name them.

3.) Which one of the other teams is in a different position when it comes to swinging a deal for someone like Archer like you mentioned? If Toronto tried to trade for him and Tampa said "we're not moving him without Vlad Jr, coming back", what would they do? Are the White Sox so loaded that they wouldn't take a huge hit if they had to give up Jimenez? What about the Gnats if it cost them Robles? Nobody - and I mean NOBODY - is as deep that they can pull the trigger on that type of trade (at whatever point they deem is the right time) that their depth doesn't take a huge hit. You're pointing this out as such a terrible problem AA just inherited - tell me which system he could've stepped into and made a deal for someone like Archer where it would hurt less.

5.) There is no one "proper plan". Theo admitted it when he went out and got Lester a year early. The Astros admitted it when they went out and got Verlander this year. When the opportunity to add guys that you expect to be real difference-makers arises, you jump. I'd love to find the page in Houston's playbook that addressed when they originally planned to add Yuli Gurriel. You point out those two organizations that took 5 years to complete the miraculous rebuild (with one Championship and no extended period of success yet BTW). The last time I checked, 2 of 30 is still a minority - apparently there are tons of people in baseball that aren't "smart" according to the standards you've set forth. Can the Astros and Cubs sustain their recent success? They appear to be set up to do so for a few years, but acting like either team is in a position to rip off 10+ years of dominance is ridiculous - Chicago almost missed the playoffs in 2017.

Again, it's not that the points you're making aren't valid (other than the missed projections - at least until it comes from a legitimate source) - they absolutely are. It's just that every team in baseball is facing the same problems - you're acting like the Braves are the only organization in that boat, and they just aren't.

 

[Southcack77]

Just not true.

Your 2 long term problems are valid and I agree that you can't do much about #1. However, #2 is a near term problem, maybe not 2018 but soon after. Since the team is unlikely to have the finances to address holes at the ML level that can't be adequately filled from within, then it will need to do that by trade in order to take advantage of its narrow window and for every young talent traded the window shortens further in a vicious cycle. That was going to happen no matter what because it doesn't appear that payroll is going anywhere up anywhere fast. But, MLB just made a 12 person trade on behalf of the Braves for a negative return (loss of talent plus loss of access to talent). You can gloss over that all you want but it doesn't go away.

As for the rest, the way the Braves climb out of small and mid market hell into a top 10 payroll in baseball that doesn't guarantee continued success but certainly is helpful is to win, and win for a period of time like being in the playoffs for 2-3 straight years. If they build to do that, then it puts fans in the seats and gives incentive to Liberty to support the product. The Royals/Rays up and down yo yo isn't going to do it and anyone paying attention to pro sports in Atlanta would see that.

Of course the front office has major limitations. Just the idea that they have to compete/rebuild at the same time is a tough deal but to try to do it with equal or less money, less prospects, bad contracts, apathetic and possibly hostile ownership, and disappointing attendance all combine into major limitation.

Look, if you are calling 2018 a year to try to compete, like most here are (or at least a mark time year), then having the current coaching staff is absolutely a hindrance. If you say the rebuild's not done, keep building and tear down more if it makes sense, welcome aboard, but this coaching staff is still a hindrance. Saying it's not is just whistling past the graveyard.

We'll just have to disagree. I think your entire stance is nonsense built on wishes and hopes without any solid plan to get from start to finish. Your plan gets to the middle somewhere and with the right luck maybe further. But depending on luck is a losing strategy.

I don't care about 2018. I want them to make the same kinds of marginal acquisitions they've made the last few years and I will be upset if they make major trades or acquisitions that I don't like in an effort to win in 2018. I don't think there is any real evidence that their coaching staff is going to cost them a bunch of games, but if the GM wants to believe that its not hard to fire or replace coaches. Big deal.

The result of the Braves losing all of those players is going to be a top 3-4 farm system, which is a better place than most GMs start. The payroll is relatively clean and has one two year deal that is a problem. I don't see much that would hold a competent GM back. I would expect them to be in position to make the playoffs in the early 2020s.

I reserve judgment as to the next two years until I see what moves the front office makes. I think its possible, but it really depends on when they feel it is time to make the push. That may depend heavily on how prospects develop, but 2019 is a possibility.

 

[Southcack77]

More like if you take the graduate students in the 10 top physics and mathematics programs in the world. A top pitching prospect is not some random guy walking down the street. And we're not looking for an Einstein (second greatest Jew of all time) or Koufax (third greatest). We're looking for someone who has a chance to be a #1 or #2 in a pitching rotation.

We aren't even looking for that necessarily. The club doesn't necessarily need a #1 to be successful. It would have two 2s and three 3s and that would be a good place to be.