Starting Pitching in the Majors and Minors

[Southcack77]

Yeah, I worry that the Teheran trade opportunity has left with Elvis. I said back at the beginning of the rebuild that he needed to be traded then. Most everyone was against that and responded that his contract was so good that he could be traded at any time, essentially assuming a continued market. It didn't happen that way.

Now, it's harder to trade anyone because it looks like we are firmly in the window of contention. However, I think you still have to keep one eye on 3-4 years out or risk becoming the Royals. Take Folty for example. He looks like he may be developing into an ace. However, he's got 3 years control after this year and beginning to get expensive. He has essentially spent 2+ developmental years in the ML burning through control time at a time when the Braves just needed warm bodies to field a team. He probably makes $8M next year, $14M after that and $20M after that IF he stays on the current path and enters FA as a 30 YO looking for 5 years $125M minimum. Certainly no requirement to trade him now. But it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand. Same thing goes for Gausman. But Gausman unfortunately has less value in return.

And obviously Newk is someone who you have to be willing to consider moving given the right return.

I guess what I'm saying is that some of the pitchers will be traded. I think it's a mistake to assume that the ones traded should or will be the prospects.

I'm not really sure what else the Braves could do regarding starting pitching to make you think they aren't keeping an eye 3-4 years down the road. If the sheer number of legitimate prospects still working their way through the system isn't enough, how about them having spend their first rounder on yet another pitcher this year and no doubt they will spend a first rounder on it next year as well.

Their insufficient attention to this area is not a legitimate gripe.

 

[Southcack77]

There is a lot of "trade Teheran" going around on the thread (not in Enscheff's post) and if they could get value for him, I'm on that train. But why trade Teheran and sign another veteran? I doubt we could get one at the same price that would be an upgrade. If one of the younger guys is deemed ready, the addition of Gausman likely allows a trade of Teheran (and again, I'm down with that), but I don't get the veteran-for-veteran replacement plan.

A Teheran trade isn't especially realistic.

If they signed another veteran it would likely be at a much cheaper price point. The benefit would be saving 6-10 million dollars for what might figure to be similar production.

But there would be no need to sign that guy really, though they might well audition some veterans as NRIs.

 

[Carp]

Yeah, I worry that the Teheran trade opportunity has left with Elvis. I said back at the beginning of the rebuild that he needed to be traded then. Most everyone was against that and responded that his contract was so good that he could be traded at any time, essentially assuming a continued market. It didn't happen that way.

Now, it's harder to trade anyone because it looks like we are firmly in the window of contention. However, I think you still have to keep one eye on 3-4 years out or risk becoming the Royals. Take Folty for example. He looks like he may be developing into an ace. However, he's got 3 years control after this year and beginning to get expensive. He has essentially spent 2+ developmental years in the ML burning through control time at a time when the Braves just needed warm bodies to field a team. He probably makes $8M next year, $14M after that and $20M after that IF he stays on the current path and enters FA as a 30 YO looking for 5 years $125M minimum. Certainly no requirement to trade him now. But it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand. Same thing goes for Gausman. But Gausman unfortunately has less value in return.

And obviously Newk is someone who you have to be willing to consider moving given the right return.

I guess what I'm saying is that some of the pitchers will be traded. I think it's a mistake to assume that the ones traded should or will be the prospects.

Contending teams don't (or at least shouldn't) trade their best players during their competitive window. While there is certainly risk that you become the Royals, there is also risk that you become the Rays or Pirates and just get stuck in limbo trying to be competitive while selling off your best assets as they become expensive. I didn't mind the Royals not selling off their assets, and instead trying to go for it all again while they had everyone together. The problem was that they spent wastefully in FA re-signing Gordon and signing Ian Kennedy to a big deal where that money could have been better spent on 2-3 lower budget signings that made more sense. I thought the Davis for Soler deal was a good trade and that's the sort of deals they should have been looking at.
Buying low on big talent players.

I think we'd be better off riding Folty out to FA then let him walk. Sure there is risk he gets hurt or regresses to a back end starter, but our team is built to win now and finding a pitcher to replace Folty's production will be very hard.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

I'm not really sure what else the Braves could do regarding starting pitching to make you think they aren't keeping an eye 3-4 years down the road. If the sheer number of legitimate prospects still working their way through the system isn't enough, how about them having spend their first rounder on yet another pitcher this year and no doubt they will spend a first rounder on it next year as well.

Their insufficient attention to this area is not a legitimate gripe.

You missed my intent. I'm saying the easy thing to do would be to keep the "knowns" (Folty, Gausman, Newk etc. just like was done with Teheran) at the expense of trading away some of the "unknowns." If you go that route, and it works short term (no given-see Teheran), then in 3-4 years you're going to have a rotation of very expensive FA and/or near FA with a diminished pool of youngsters to draw from.

And, while it may be best to have a mix of veteran and youngster, there is no law that says the veteran has to be in-house.

 

[Super]

If they signed another veteran it would likely be at a much cheaper price point. The benefit would be saving 6-10 million dollars for what might figure to be similar production.

what vet pitcher will sign for $1M-5M? I mean, I suppose you could sign a guy similar to Buchholz or Cahill and hope they work out, but every one of them there's probably 3-4 Doug Fisters or Yovani Gallardos. we've gotten pretty lucky with sanchez, but it's not a chance that sounds great to take.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

Contending teams don't (or at least shouldn't) trade their best players during their competitive window. While there is certainly risk that you become the Royals, there is also risk that you become the Rays or Pirates and just get stuck in limbo trying to be competitive while selling off your best assets as they become expensive. I didn't mind the Royals not selling off their assets, and instead trying to go for it all again while they had everyone together. The problem was that they spent wastefully in FA re-signing Gordon and signing Ian Kennedy to a big deal where that money could have been better spent on 2-3 lower budget signings that made more sense. I thought the Davis for Soler deal was a good trade and that's the sort of deals they should have been looking at.
Buying low on big talent players.

I think we'd be better off riding Folty out to FA then let him walk. Sure there is risk he gets hurt or regresses to a back end starter, but our team is built to win now and finding a pitcher to replace Folty's production will be very hard.

It would only be hard if he continues to improve into a real ACE, which is certainly possible. But, with success comes increased monetary cost. Can this team afford a $20M Folty headed into FA? A $15M Gausman? A $15M Newk? The key for teams like the Braves IMO is value per dollar.

A 5WAR pitcher at $20M is good value. A 3WAR pitcher at $2M is better value, especially if you took the 5WAR guy and turned him into 5 or more WAR value in young players that help the team, now or in the future. MLB is fast becoming a young man's game (more so than it ever was) and it's value per dollar thinking that is driving that.

 

[Enscheff]

Yeah, I worry that the Teheran trade opportunity has left with Elvis. I said back at the beginning of the rebuild that he needed to be traded then. Most everyone was against that and responded that his contract was so good that he could be traded at any time, essentially assuming a continued market. It didn't happen that way.

Now, it's harder to trade anyone because it looks like we are firmly in the window of contention. However, I think you still have to keep one eye on 3-4 years out or risk becoming the Royals. Take Folty for example. He looks like he may be developing into an ace. However, he's got 3 years control after this year and beginning to get expensive. He has essentially spent 2+ developmental years in the ML burning through control time at a time when the Braves just needed warm bodies to field a team. He probably makes $8M next year, $14M after that and $20M after that IF he stays on the current path and enters FA as a 30 YO looking for 5 years $125M minimum. Certainly no requirement to trade him now. But it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand. Same thing goes for Gausman. But Gausman unfortunately has less value in return.

And obviously Newk is someone who you have to be willing to consider moving given the right return.

I guess what I'm saying is that some of the pitchers will be traded. I think it's a mistake to assume that the ones traded should or will be the prospects.

This is ridiculous. You are projecting insane salaries for Folty.

David Price also went through arbitration 4 times and earned, $4.4M, $10.1M, $14M, and $19.8M after winning a CYA and finishing 2nd 2 other times. He set arb records that you think Folty is going to match? And he's going to match them off the back of a first year arb salary of $2.2M?

Sorry, those salaries for Folty are not even in the realm of reasonable. Folty is not getting Price money.

The best way to maximize Folty's value to the organization is to trade him when he has 1-2 years of service time remaining, preferably at the deadline when he has 1.5 years remaining. Problem is, no team is going to trade a SP during the season when they are in contention. While trading someone like Folty in the off season after 2019 or 2020 may be the best way to maximize overall value, contending teams who aren't running a $60M payroll simply don't do that.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

This is ridiculous. You are projected insane salaries for Folty that are based on pure ignorance.

David Price also went through arbitration 4 times and earned, $4.4M, $10.1M, $14M, and $19.8M after winning a CYA and finishing 2nd 2 other times. He set arb records that you think Folty is going to match? And he's going to match them off the back of a first year arb salary of $2.2M?

Sorry, those salaries for Folty are not even in the realm of reasonable.

The best way to maximize Folty's value to the organization is to trade him when he has 1-2 years of service time remaining, preferably at the deadline when he has 1.5 years remaining. Problem is, no team is going to trade a SP during the season when they are in contention. While trading someone like Folty in the off season after 2019 or 2020 may be the best way to maximize overall value, contending teams who aren't running a $60M payroll simply don't do that.

So, what do you think Folty's numbers will be? Do you adjust for time inflation in comparison to Price or assume equivalence? I admit that I was guessing without a lot of number crunching and comparison. But, even if it's 5,10,15 the value per dollar issue is the same. Unless you value Folty as a marketable asset like what was done with Glavine, Maddux, Smoltz or LA does with Kershaw or SF does with Madbum or the Mets have done, then his contributions to the team on a value per dollar should stand on it's own merit.

I don't think the Braves will trade Folty. I do think they should be open to it (plus Gausman) depending on return based on a value per dollar viewpoint. Newk I would be open to moving given the right return because of the significant uncertainty surrounding his continuing to take positive steps.

If Folty (or any young pitcher) came up and put up early Kershaw type numbers as a 20/21 YO, then you pretty much HAVE to view him differently. Folty hasn't been that. He's essentially learned on the job until this year (happens with a lot of pitchers) where he's 26 about to be 27. He's going to get expensive no matter the numbers, assuming he continues or improves on current pace. He's going to hit FA at 30.

It would take guts to move him now and the Braves won't do it. BUT, the right time to trade him is over the next couple of years and possibly now if his value per dollar is at it's peak.

 

[Enscheff]

The fatal flaw with the "WAR/$" model of team building is that a play off contender needs to get 42 WAR from 25 roster spots, and realistically they need ~40 WAR from ~15 roster spots (8 position players, 5 SPs, 1-2 BP arms, maybe a super utility guy).

As a result, teams need several players who are able to produce many WAR from a single roster spot. This concept of "WAR consolidation" is why a single 4 WAR player is worth much more than a couple 2 WAR players, and is why strict WAR/$ valuation breaks down when building a complete roster.

Yes, it's probably most efficient to trade SPs when they have 1-2 years of control remaining, and simply back fill with young guys acquired from previously traded SPs in some sort of perpetual talent machine. It will be interesting to see if the Braves actually do that during their contention window. I'm guessing they won't, and we will see them eventually run out of ammo in 5-7 years and kick off another rebuild...probably right as they are getting ready to see Albies and Acuna leave via FA since they are going to be the main cogs for the next 5+ years.

 

[Southcack77]

what vet pitcher will sign for $1M-5M? I mean, I suppose you could sign a guy similar to Buchholz or Cahill and hope they work out, but every one of them there's probably 3-4 Doug Fisters or Yovani Gallardos. we've gotten pretty lucky with sanchez, but it's not a chance that sounds great to take.

Anibal Sanchez, Chacin, just from the Braves experience.

there are usually plenty of reclamation projects floating around. The purpose of picking up a veteran would be place holding and insurance, I would assume.

If they are looking to spend 12 million, they can find better guys than Teheran, IMO.

It's moot though. They're obligated to Teheran.

 

[nsacpi]

one way to think about it is a mid market team like the Braves can afford 5 or 6 players making 15-20M...most of them should be position players but there is room for one or two pitchers making that kind of money...the FO needs to be wise and a little lucky in their choice of who to hand that kind of contract to

 

[Horsehide Harry]

The fatal flaw with the "WAR/$" model of team building is that a play off contender needs to get 42 WAR from 25 roster spots, and realistically they need ~40 WAR from ~15 roster spots (8 position players, 5 SPs, 1-2 BP arms, maybe a super utility guy).

As a result, teams need several players who are able to produce many WAR from a single roster spot. This concept of "WAR consolidation" is why a single 4 WAR player is worth much more than a couple 2 WAR players, and is why strict WAR/$ valuation breaks down when building a complete roster.

Yes, it's probably most efficient to trade SPs when they have 1-2 years of control remaining, and simply back fill with young guys acquired from previously traded SPs in some sort of perpetual talent machine. It will be interesting to see if the Braves actually do that during their contention window. I'm guessing they won't, and we will see them eventually run out of ammo in 5-7 years and kick off another rebuild...probably right as they are getting ready to see Albies and Acuna leave via FA since they are going to be the main cogs for the next 5+ years.

I agree with what you are saying. BUT, if you can get a 4 WAR pitcher for $2M, then that is better than a 4 WAR pitcher for $15 or $20M and not trading Folty assumes that his replacement will provide less WAR. That's possible but not necessarily true. For instance, would Touki provide 4 WAR next year with Folty traded? That's unknown, maybe even unlikely. But if you trade Touki for needed WAR elsewhere, then you never find that out as a Brave. To me, it's an equation: Folty value/dollar + WAR return (potential) value/dollar of prospect trade <=> WAR return (potential) value/dollar of Folty return + WAR return (potential) value/dollar of internal/external replacement (no double counting). And that has to be evaluated over time.

It seems clear to me that the Braves have their marketing core of the future as revealed by this year - Acuna, Albies, Freeman, Swanson (FO wants this badly but he's almost played himself out of the position). Folty isn't in that group from a marketing perspective. Again, they won't do it but should be open to it.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

one way to think about it is a mid market team like the Braves can afford 5 or 6 players making 15-20M...most of them should be position players but there is room for one or two pitchers making that kind of money...the FO needs to be wise and a little lucky in their choice of who to hand that kind of contract to

I agree. And there is risk/reward with everything. Making a bold move, even if it long term works out as a benefit but short term is painful, isn't really encouraged for ML FO.

 

[nsacpi]

I agree. And there is risk/reward with everything. Making a bold move, even if it long term works out as a benefit but short term is painful, isn't really encouraged for ML FO.

I think we can be patient about the young pitching prospects...more than most around here I believe there is benefit to letting a prospect marinate in AAA...a player can develop just as well there as in the majors...so there is nothing wrong with asking guys like Touki, Wright, and Wilson to dominate in AAA over a 20 start stretch or so...we've rushed some of these guys..
sometimes out of necessity...but rushing them shouldn't be a regular practice

 

[Enscheff]

I agree with what you are saying. BUT, if you can get a 4 WAR pitcher for $2M, then that is better than a 4 WAR pitcher for $15 or $20M and not trading Folty assumes that his replacement will provide less WAR. That's possible but not necessarily true. For instance, would Touki provide 4 WAR next year with Folty traded? That's unknown, maybe even unlikely. But if you trade Touki for needed WAR elsewhere, then you never find that out as a Brave. To me, it's an equation: Folty value/dollar + WAR return (potential) value/dollar of prospect trade <=> WAR return (potential) value/dollar of Folty return + WAR return (potential) value/dollar of internal/external replacement (no double counting). And that has to be evaluated over time.

It seems clear to me that the Braves have their marketing core of the future as revealed by this year - Acuna, Albies, Freeman, Swanson (FO wants this badly but he's almost played himself out of the position). Folty isn't in that group from a marketing perspective. Again, they won't do it but should be open to it.

Yes, we all understand that it’s preferable to get 4 wins for $2M than for $15M. The Braves aren’t going to find a 4 win pitcher for $2M, so I assume you mean Touki.

The point is the Braves will want Touki and Folty producing 8 wins for $17M rather than Touki and some $10M pitcher producing 5-6 wins because they are trying to win now.

Not very many teams have the discipline to follow the Rays model, and I doubt the Braves will do it. Unless they have a down season that allows them to reload at a trade deadline, I don’t think they’ll trade proven guys to maximize value.

One exception could be if they match up with a team in a similar position as the Brewers this offseason. The Brewers had a surplus of MLB ready OFers and a need in the rotation that could have allowed 2 “win now” teams to match up in a trade.

 

[Southcack77]

Not very many teams have the discipline to follow the Rays model, and I doubt the Braves will do it. Unless they have a down season that allows them to reload at a trade deadline, I don’t think they’ll trade proven guys to maximize value.

I think this is correct. The Braves have a 50% payroll advantage over the Rays and that allows them to fill a few more holes through free agency and trade than the Rays can.

But they have a lot less flexibility than the Yankees or Red Sox or Dodgers, etc. So they should be looking to sell when it isn't their year. When it isn't their year, moving a guy like Folty near the end of his control might make perfect sense.

If the bad year doesn't happen and they simply run out of talent, then that's just the way it worked out. Hopefully, you've done enough things creatively over the years in the draft and international signings and strategic acquisitions that the down turn isn't five years.

 

[GeorgiaGirl]

Unless the Braves are going to expand payroll, they kinda are going to have to operate like the Rays. I wouldn’t do it exactly that way though. Position player wise I’d be less strict.

You must put a lot of trust into your ability to evaluate pitching though to do it. The mantra pitching wise should be develop, develop, extend the pitchers you really trust if you can, trade the ones you don’t at a certain point, and keep going developmental wise with younger pitching.

 

[Southcack77]

Unless the Braves are going to expand payroll, they kinda are going to have to operate like the Rays. I wouldn’t do it exactly that way though. Position player wise I’d be less strict.

You must put a lot of trust into your ability to evaluate pitching though to do it. The mantra pitching wise should be develop, develop, extend the pitchers you really trust if you can, trade the ones you don’t at a certain point, and keep going developmental wise with younger pitching.

Braves have a 50% payroll advantage over the Rays. They don't need to operate the same way.

 

[Carp]

It would only be hard if he continues to improve into a real ACE, which is certainly possible. But, with success comes increased monetary cost. Can this team afford a $20M Folty headed into FA? A $15M Gausman? A $15M Newk? The key for teams like the Braves IMO is value per dollar.

A 5WAR pitcher at $20M is good value. A 3WAR pitcher at $2M is better value, especially if you took the 5WAR guy and turned him into 5 or more WAR value in young players that help the team, now or in the future. MLB is fast becoming a young man's game (more so than it ever was) and it's value per dollar thinking that is driving that.

Finding a 3 WAR pitcher at 2 million isn't any easier. Since the rebuild started, we've acquired exactly 2 pitchers who have put together at least one 3 WAR season, and that is Shelby Miller and Folty's current season.

It's a decent idea in theory, but practically it doesn't make any sense for a contending team with (hopefully) an increasing payroll to sell off its best assests.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

Finding a 3 WAR pitcher at 2 million isn't any easier. Since the rebuild started, we've acquired exactly 2 pitchers who have put together at least one 3 WAR season, and that is Shelby Miller and Folty's current season.

It's a decent idea in theory, but practically it doesn't make any sense for a contending team with (hopefully) an increasing payroll to sell off its best assests.

The payroll difference between the Braves and Rays is part of the argument IMO. The Braves, within limits, have a much better possibility of buying their way out of mistakes or into needed help than the Rays. Which means making a move that has some risk easier than the Rays. You could then say that it's easier still for the RS, Yanks and Dodgers but they don't have the need to take chances on amassing young talent when they can buy what's needed, when needed.

I'm not saying there is no risk because their is. It would be a bit of a boom or bust play instead of a steady we might win with some luck play...