Russ2dollas
10 yr, $185 million Extension
you don't have to spend the money.
you can extend guys.
you could overpay on a per year basis to get less of a long term commitment.
The 2019 Money
- Thread starter clvclv
- Start date
you don't have to spend the money.
you can extend guys.
you could overpay on a per year basis to get less of a long term commitment.
Heyward
<B>Voted Worst Poster <br>'13, '14, '15 (Co-Winner
If payroll is 120-130, Braves can easily pay a guy for 25-30 mil a year without much of an issue.
They dont have many big money guys and alot of the players are still pre-arb right now.
Doubt they'll go after Harper, and Machado seems Yankee bound but a guy like Donaldson could be a possibility if they wanted to and maybe a big name BP arm as well as catcher. Braves have the cash to make it happen.
Bowman’s latest talks about next year: https://t.co/QnF8FeGamd
He talks about us wanting to add a front line starting pitcher. The only real names he mentions as potential signings are Charlie Blackmon and AJ Pollock.
He talks about us wanting to add a front line starting pitcher. The only real names he mentions as potential signings are Charlie Blackmon and AJ Pollock.
That's not entirely unfunny, but think about it for a minute. IF you don't have the payroll constraints that somebody like Tampa or Pittsburgh have that relegate you to constantly be in rebuilding mode because you can't afford to just throw money at that "last piece" - AKA a Darvish/Arrieta/Machado/Harper/Donaldson etc. - and you feel like you're entering your window, why wouldn't you cash-in the shiny prospects you have that HAVEN'T shown any chinks in their armor if they get you someone that's proven they can succeed at the MLB level???
For instance, everybody screams bloody murder when you suggest packaging Soroka, Allard, and other pieces for someone like Archer, but does anyone realistically believe either one of them has a shot at being a better Game 1 starter in a postseason series against a Kershaw/Sale/Scherzer/Verlander/etc. than Archer would? Gohara "could" be that kind of guy if everything falls perfectly and you're incredibly lucky, but if you were betting your house on someone facing off against Scherzer/Strasburg four times in a playoff series, wouldn't you rather have Gohara as your #2 even then?
If you don't have anyone in your system that you KNOW beyond doubt that can toe the rubber against a Kershaw/Sale/Scherzer without feeling incredibly overmatched, you eventually have to pay that guy if you're serious about taking that last step. This is the entire reason the Astros finally went and did what it took to get Verlander last summer - Keuchel has typically been really good (Gohara), McCullers has unbelievable stuff (Folty), but NOBODY (and I mean nobody) ever projected that Charlie freaking Morton (Wright) could do what he did during The Series.
For as good as Severino was last year, everybody saw his meltdown when it counted - this is the entire reason Cashman is trying to add Gerritt Cole. Now that Arrieta is presumably gone, Theo and Jed are trying to throw money at Darvish. Maybe those combinations aren't better "on paper" than Scherzer and Strasburg, but I think you have to feel a lot better about your chances when you can push everybody down a slot than running a Gohara/Julio (if he were to bounce back) tandem out there against them. If healthy, name a combination you'd run out there other than Sale/Price that you knew you weren't already behind the 8-ball with. Kershaw and who? Verlander and who? The Astros are even talking to Darvish because they realize Keuchel's likely gone after 2018.
This isn't meant to get the cart before the horse - just to point out the fact that an Arrieta/Darvish/Archer/Fulmer paired with Gohara HAS to make you feel like you've got a better shot at winning a series against that type of pairing than a Gohara paired with Julio/Folty/Newcomb/Wright/Soroka/Allard does - even if any of them actually ever reach their ceilings.
Acquiring a cost-controlled pitcher like Archer versus paying a frontline starter more than 25 million is not a good idea for a team getting by on a mid-market payroll, i.e., the team that seems to be relying on something like The Battery to provide revenue for the team.
The point is, tearing it all down to take a shot when you've built this "super-system" is pretty useless if you don't realize your window simply isn't going to last longer than 3-4 years anymore unless you can spend with the big boys. The Yankees/Red Sox/Cubs/Dodgers/etc. are ALWAYS going to be able to throw money around to cover up mistakes and fill holes as long as their ownership is committed to winning - sure they'll have to pay the luxury tax penalty, but does that make THAT big a difference when your revenues for winning it all offset that?
6-10 year competitive windows (much less the 15 year run the Braves pulled off) are never going to be anything other than a fantasy going forward unless you can fix problems without simply spending money.
I’d worry about that competitive window when we’re actually competitive again.
But it was more of me making fun of the old guard that strongly emphasized drafting pitching and pitching and acquiring pitching like Wisler whom have not panned out.
But it was more of me making fun of the old guard that strongly emphasized drafting pitching and pitching and acquiring pitching like Wisler whom have not panned out.
yes, you are.
edit: the only issue with Archer is that he gives up homeruns. In this next homer happy era of baseball it's not that big of a deal but he does give up the long ball. Luckily, unlike Teheran, he doesn't walk many guys and he strikes out a ton.
Southcack77
Well-known member
If the Braves cash in Teheran's money plus some of the 70+ million they ought to have at their disposal pretty soon to upgrade their #1 spot in the rotation, I am not going to complain.
And their having acquired pitchers that didn't work out or pitchers who might isn't really going to change that much.
They basically only really have one OF spot, 3B, C and the starting rotation that are obvious places to spend the large amount of money they have to spend. Got to spend it somewhere.
And their having acquired pitchers that didn't work out or pitchers who might isn't really going to change that much.
They basically only really have one OF spot, 3B, C and the starting rotation that are obvious places to spend the large amount of money they have to spend. Got to spend it somewhere.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
If the Braves have to trade for pitching then the rebuild was a failure. Plain and simple. If they emphasized pitching like they did and can't find an internal pitcher that at least looks like a TOR guy then they failed.
Trading for a young starter and signing a FA like a Darvish or Arrieta are entirely 2 different things. The young, cost controlled starter needs to come from within. If you still need more pitching, go sign someone. Otherwise you are begging to reside in baseball purgatory.
Trading for a young starter and signing a FA like a Darvish or Arrieta are entirely 2 different things. The young, cost controlled starter needs to come from within. If you still need more pitching, go sign someone. Otherwise you are begging to reside in baseball purgatory.
Oh is that it? Just 4 of the 9 positions on the baseball field?
I hope they can find a way to spend that money on improvements! We all know how hard it is to improve a 72 win team!
I’m glad I’m not the only one who sees the hilarity in that scenario.
Definitely understandable. I just took it as more of an admission of what most circles realize as fact - that the chances of drafting and developing a true "Ace" (whether that's your focus or not) - just doesn't happen very often for anybody. When you list the widely accepted "Aces", you pretty much come up with...
Kershaw
Sale
Scherzer
Syndergaard
Verlander
Kluber
MadBum
Price (when healthy maybe)
Strasburg
then you have the next tier that probably includes...
Archer
Darvish
Arrieta
deGrom
Greinke
Carrasco
Cole
Lester
Severino
Robbie Ray
Paxton (when healthy)
Stroman
Fulmer
Keuchel
Carlos Martinez
If things go as hoped, I think we could project Gohara to fit in to that second group. I'm just one of those who still believes that you have to have as many high-upside arms as possible because so few ever develop into #1s, much less true "Aces". Given the injury and attrition rates, you've done well if you're able to develop 60% of a good rotation from within that's affordable during your window. To beat one of the true contenders in a 7 game series, you've got to have someone who - at the very least - gives you a fighting chance to beat one of the "Aces" in a Game 1 and/or Game 4 while your #2 makes you feel like you're going to win a Game 2 and/or Game 5.
Gohara is good enough to be that second guy against most Pitchers, but if you burn him against an "Ace", you're fighting an uphill battle unless everything goes right for a Folty/Newcomb/Wright/Allard-type. I just look at the admission that they may need to go outside the organization to get that guy that makes Gohara that really good #2 as a realization of that fact - that developing TWO guys from within that are that good just doesn't happen much.
We drafted and traded to acquire the pieces that should have become those “aces.” The fact that they didn’t looks bad on us. The fact that none of the Wisler, Newcomb, Folty, Blair turned into even a legitimate #2 or 3 is just sad. These were pieces that should have been what we needed and developed into that cost controlled young TOR starter. Instead they’re all back of the rotation or possible bullpen pieces.
I have a feeling the Braves will soon be in the same payroll boat as the Pirates and Rays and need to make most of their pieces come from within because Liberty is not going to give us the money needed to be competitive.
this post seems so silly to me.
we should've developed an ace by now? i mean, really? there are less than 10 consensus "aces" in the league. three years into a rebuild and we should have one of them? most of the pitching we acquired is still in the minors.
newcomb also has a shot at being a #2 or #3. but it seems many, you included, underestimate how difficult it is to find a true #2, much less a true #1, or an "ace."
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
The formula we have to stick to as a mid-market team:
1) Grow your own stars (guys who can generate over 3 WAR per season).
2) Use $$ to build depth and surround the homegrown stars with as many competent complementary players (guys who can be expected to produce up to 3 WAR per season) as possible.
Trading for stars or signing star free agents is not a good idea. There are occasional exceptions. But I'm talking as a general proposition.
1) Grow your own stars (guys who can generate over 3 WAR per season).
2) Use $$ to build depth and surround the homegrown stars with as many competent complementary players (guys who can be expected to produce up to 3 WAR per season) as possible.
Trading for stars or signing star free agents is not a good idea. There are occasional exceptions. But I'm talking as a general proposition.
50PoundHead
Hessmania Forever
I think one needs to be patient with young pitchers. It doesn't appear that either Wisler or Blair will become big contributors, but Newcomb and Foltynewicz have both shown some promise. Look at the early career numbers for some of the guys that were listed. A number of them were solid right out of the gate, but some of them really had growing pains.
And that's really the point, isn't it? When you look at the contenders that have a REALLY strong 1-2 punch...
Houston - added Verlander from outside.
Washington - added Scherzer from outside.
Boston - added BOTH Sale and Price from outside.
Yankees - added Tanaka (and Gray and possibly Cole) from outside.
Cleveland - Kluber came from outside.
Cubs - added Lester (and Arrieta when they had him for that matter) from outside.
Arizona - added both Greinke and Ray from outside.
Dodgers - don't really have that #2 that stops you in your tracks to pair with Kershaw (although Buehler could turn into that guy).
The only team that has two guys on that list that were developed in their own organization is the Mutts - and it's easy to point out that Syndergaard came from outside even though he finished developing in their system.