- STARTS TODAY AT 7PM - 2016 June Amateur Draft Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
nsacpi said:
Of course not. I think though that players like Andruw Jones, Simmons, Heyward who did not spend much time in the upper minors would have benefited from some time there.

Other highly touted prospects, like Chipper and Freddie Freeman, who spent a year in AAA seem to have arrived as more mature hitters once they were in the majors.
Click to expand...

MAC?
 
Horsehide Harry said:
I'm not sure if you are serious, but you should be. The Braves likely can't put together a real, competitive team for 2017. There aren't enough bats, even IF the young pitching ripens overnight. And the FA market is horrible between 2016/2017 so no help likely there. The Braves currently have Wisler, Blair, Folty, Kelly, Jenkins, Ellis, Barker, Newcomb, Sims, Whalen, Povse, and Teheran either at the ML level or at least within two years. Not all will make it, but to be competitive, the Braves really need at least 5 to turn into competent ML pitchers with 1-2 developing as "can go against anybody and at least have a chance" kind of guys OR they need to supplement with a FA or trade guy. At this point FA SP after this season are Strasburg and Latos, then a bunch of post 30 maybes. Point is, you can't count on trading away any significant minor league pitching this offseason and still expect to be able to put together a rotation that makes you competitive (it's possible, but would be hugely lucky). Relief help isn't any better.

The Braves, long term, would be much better off using the short term payroll flexibility to add talent through international signings (Maitan/others) and taking on short term bad contracts from other teams in exchange for additional talent. Draft Lewis, Okey and Tuck with the first three picks (or something LIKE that) add Maitan and as many others as you can on an International basis, draft at the top of the board in 2017, go through another 2016 year in 2017, THEN spend money on FA in the 2017/2018 class where you have one of the biggest and best FA classes of all time, then add to that with another set of high picks in 2018, a season where you are in position to really compete.

You have essentially three lost years: 2015, 2016, 2017, but you've turned over the payroll, loaded the system with talent in both quantity AND quality, have filled holes with targeted FA signings from a class where there are a number of great/good players to choose from (not just settling for the best of what's available like spending after this season would be), and set the payroll moving forward with a level of stability and flexibility not seen in Braves country for years.
Click to expand...

I couldn't have said it better. In all honesty, I think people got too hung up on a time frame for the "competitive" team to surface per the front office, but this was always the more realistic and common sense scenario.
 
Horsehide Harry said:
You have essentially three lost years: 2015, 2016, 2017, but you've turned over the payroll, loaded the system with talent in both quantity AND quality, have filled holes with targeted FA signings from a class where there are a number of great/good players to choose from (not just settling for the best of what's available like spending after this season would be), and set the payroll moving forward with a level of stability and flexibility not seen in Braves country for years.
Click to expand...

And if we suck in 2018, the future will be even brighter...
 
Horsehide Harry said:
I'm not sure if you are serious, but you should be. The Braves likely can't put together a real, competitive team for 2017. There aren't enough bats, even IF the young pitching ripens overnight. And the FA market is horrible between 2016/2017 so no help likely there. The Braves currently have Wisler, Blair, Folty, Kelly, Jenkins, Ellis, Barker, Newcomb, Sims, Whalen, Povse, and Teheran either at the ML level or at least within two years. Not all will make it, but to be competitive, the Braves really need at least 5 to turn into competent ML pitchers with 1-2 developing as "can go against anybody and at least have a chance" kind of guys OR they need to supplement with a FA or trade guy. At this point FA SP after this season are Strasburg and Latos, then a bunch of post 30 maybes. Point is, you can't count on trading away any significant minor league pitching this offseason and still expect to be able to put together a rotation that makes you competitive (it's possible, but would be hugely lucky). Relief help isn't any better.

The Braves, long term, would be much better off using the short term payroll flexibility to add talent through international signings (Maitan/others) and taking on short term bad contracts from other teams in exchange for additional talent. Draft Lewis, Okey and Tuck with the first three picks (or something LIKE that) add Maitan and as many others as you can on an International basis, draft at the top of the board in 2017, go through another 2016 year in 2017, THEN spend money on FA in the 2017/2018 class where you have one of the biggest and best FA classes of all time, then add to that with another set of high picks in 2018, a season where you are in position to really compete.

You have essentially three lost years: 2015, 2016, 2017, but you've turned over the payroll, loaded the system with talent in both quantity AND quality, have filled holes with targeted FA signings from a class where there are a number of great/good players to choose from (not just settling for the best of what's available like spending after this season would be), and set the payroll moving forward with a level of stability and flexibility not seen in Braves country for years.
Click to expand...

Correct, but there are some FA upgrades that make sense for this upcoming offseason. For example, the gaping organizational hole at C could be filled nicely by signing Cervelli. I don't see anyone better than him becoming available in the next offseason, so a team with a young pitching staff getting set at C for the next 3-4 years would make sense.

Other upgrades can be made without impacting the ability to spend big time on the 17/18 class. Freese at 3B on a 1 year deal, for example.

I think the Braves will look to add MLB talent this offseason, I just hope they don't overspend in a poor FA class for the sake of saying they spent money.
 
Enscheff said:
I think the Braves will look to add MLB talent this offseason, I just hope they don't overspend in a poor FA class for the sake of saying they spent money.
Click to expand...

I think the issue of overspending holds regardless of whether it is a poor or great FA class. In general, I think if we are shooting for "sustainability" as the front office often says we are then we are better off laying off the high end free agent market.
 
nsacpi said:
And if we suck in 2018, the future will be even brighter...
Click to expand...

At SOME point it has to end. But, it's the FO job to set a plan then follow it. The success or failure of that plan means that they are either hero's or Zeros....or....they could strive for mediocrity so they can point to "progress" and insure another year or two of job stability. I've always been the type that says "develop a plan, follow the plan, stay the course, and if you are as smart as you think you are you'll be a hero." Mediocrity will be accepted only so long as the masses can be convinced that better times are just around the corner.
 
smootness said:
Well, sure, but that's how literally every decision in sports is made.

Just like your decision to hold back Heyward and Simmons.
Click to expand...

I was just making the point that pointing to ex post outcomes doesn't really help advance the argument.
 
nsacpi said:
I was just making the point that pointing to ex post outcomes doesn't really help advance the argument.
Click to expand...

Then shouldn't we both refrain from doing it?

You used Heyward's and Simmons' struggles after coming up to show that they shouldn't have come up so fast.
 
How is that an appeal to ex post outcomes having to do with Heyward and Simmons?

I'm arguing from a general principal based on what I've observed with a whole range of outcomes. Not anything in particular having to do with Heyward and Simmons.

Let me give you an example that might illustrate the difference between what you and I are doing.

Me: Betting a large amount of money on a coin flip is not a good way of investing.

You: The coin was heads which shows that I was right.
 
nsacpi said:
How is that an appeal to ex post outcomes having to do with Heyward and Simmons?

I'm arguing from a general principal based on what I've observed with a whole range of outcomes. Not anything in particular having to do with Heyward and Simmons.

Let me give you an example that might illustrate the difference between what you and I are doing.

Me: Betting a large amount of money on a coin flip is not a good way of investing.

You: The coin was heads which shows that I was right.
Click to expand...

You said Heyward and Simmons would have been better players if they had been held back longer. I'm saying we might not have made the playoffs without Heyward up all year.

You didn't say, 'It's a general rule that more time in the minors is good.' You said they would have been more productive players if held back longer.

In reality, we both viewed these scenarios from an ex-post perspective. We're using knowledge of the past to influence our hypothetical decisions.

If you didn't want to say anything in particular about Heyward and Simmons, you shouldn't have said anything in particular about Heyward and Simmons.
 
He's not an option for this draft, but Jake Mangum at Mississippi State is a fun player to watch.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top