That's actually the point I was making. Carrying the Braves brand when you're a pitcher probably bumps up a prospect in status. That allows the Braves to trade these guys when, in most cases, they are over-rated because of the organization they come from. There's a reason why the Braves are so willing to part with these guys.
Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David
Well but you said this above, which I refuted with my post. Now you're backing up a bit. I think my post proved that the Braves have developed and benefitted tremendously from their pitching prospects.the Braves haven't developed and benefitted much at all from pitching and developing pitchers.
How could they have been labeled overrated? Because they left the Braves and didn't do very well with their new organizations? Perhaps the Braves do a better job of developing prospects than the Reds and other franchises. Adam Wainwright, Bubba Nelson, and Jung Bong all struggled with their new teams after being traded from Atlanta, and Dan Meyer and Jose Capellan have even struggled this year. Perhaps their new teams changed their mechanics and tried to put their imprint on them instead of letting them pitch the same way they did while they were in the Braves' system.
Don't blame the Braves if someone they traded doesn't turn out to be as productive as advertised. The Braves maximized their value while they still had them.
While I agree about the benefits of brand name (IMO the Dodgers are the chief beneficiaries of it, but they do precious little to capitalize on it), the Braves aren't all that bad on the pitching development front.
A rotation of Jason Schmidt, Bruce Chen, Odalis Perez and Jason Marquis with Waiwright, Capellan and Meyer working in AAA wouldn't be so bad.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
Fine. Split hairs. I meant at the major league level. I hear constantly how great the Braves are at developing starting pitchers, yet I haven't seen hardly any guys pitching for the Braves that they actually developed. Davies could be the next one, but for how much hype they get, I sure don't see the fruits to the level I hear promoted. And Perez, Schmidt, and Marquis didn't really do a whole lot until they left the Braves organization. Schmidt didn't have even an average season until two years after he left the Braves. And he didn't become the Jason Schmidt of today until 6 years after he was gone. Marquis pitched around 300 innings for the Braves and with the exception of a nice stretch in 2001, was widely considered a bust for them. Then he left and became a much better pitcher. Same for Perez. It took him leaving before he amounted to anything.Originally Posted by BelisleFan
Look, it's not like they NEVER have developed a pitcher. That wasn't the point I was making. But if Schmidt, Perez, Milwood and Marquis is all you have to show for the last 12+ years, I hardly consdier that this factory of pitching development I'm always hearing about. And that was the point I was trying to make originally, they benefit from the Braves brand attached to their pitchers. It's a good thing for the Braves. And they use it brilliantly to their advantage. I wish the Reds did the same. But as for drafting and devlopiong pitchers that become good major league starters, I don't think the Braves are the model of success that they're made out to be. It's about the hype.
Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David
If developing Schmidt, Millwood, Perez, Chen, Marquis, and others is not impressive enough, I'd like to see a franchise that has produced more. Do you have any examples?
Oakland. And why did it take Schmidt, Perez, Chen, and Marquis leaving until they actually became good pitchers?
Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David
Wait name all the Oakland pitchers that have gone on to other organizations after being developed by the A's. Mulder and Hudson and who else?
They needed the opportunity. Was Schmidt going to pitch over Maddux, Glavine, Smoltz, Millwood, and Neagle?
Perez, Chen, and Marquis were all fifth starters for the Braves. They could not move up because they had better pitchers higher in the organization.
Wainwright, Nelson, and Meyer would be hard pressed to join Atlanta's rotation today.
Sounds to me like you guys probably agree more than it seems here.
For instance, I'm guessing BelisleFan probably agrees the Braves do an excellent job of creating buzz around their pitching prospects. Everytime a Braves arm has a good minor league season he shoots up the BA charts and everyone in the game starts thinking, "I've gotta get me some kids like that."
Likewise, I'm guessing MWM probably agrees the Braves have been above average in terms of quality of arms turned out over the past decade, even though that quality pales in comparison to the amount of buzz it generates.
The Braves clearly have a brand name built up around pitching, thanks largely to the genius of Leo Mazzone. That said, it's not like that brand name masks an inept development organization. The club has produced some talent and it does an excellent job of taking a large number of arms and getting them to the hot prospect level.
Anyway, it just seemed to me like this was a case of two bright guys who mostly agree with each other and hadn't quite landed on common ground.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
Honestly, I'm not sure exactly what we're arguing about here. All I ever meant to say was that the Braves arent' as great as they're made out to be at developing starting pitchers. The ones you listed don't do a whole lot to change my mind, but then I'm also not a Braves fan either like you are. If I were, maybe I'd be making the same argument. But if the guys you listed above make the Braves the creme of the crop as far as developing starting pitchers, then that's a pretty sad commentary on the ability of major league franchises to identify, draft, and devlop high quality starting pitchers, IMO.
Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David
That's pretty much it, M2.Likewise, I'm guessing MWM probably agrees the Braves have been above average in terms of quality of arms turned out over the past decade, even though that quality pales in comparison to the amount of buzz it generates.
Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David
The Braves don't field Starting Rotations by promoting en masse from within. They've been grabbing pitchers in trades and signing them as Free Agents for a few years now.
That's part of a churn strategy that involves using the prospects they've developed as trading chips while populating the MLB rotation from outside the organization.
The Braves' pitching prospects aren't being squeezed out by having better internal options ahead of them right now. They're being squeezed out of the organization because the Braves go get external options they like better than the kids they have.
And that's fine as long as we understand that the bottleneck at the top occurs because of the Braves' MLB acquisition strategy- not their draft and develop strategy, and not because they currently are using high-level internal options as rotation pieces.
"The problem with strikeouts isn't that they hurt your team, it's that they hurt your feelings..." --Rob Neyer
"The single most important thing for a hitter is to get a good pitch to hit. A good hitter can hit a pitch that’s over the plate three times better than a great hitter with a ball in a tough spot.”
--Ted Williams
I can't think of a single aspect of the Braves organization that I wouldn't prefer over our own.
They are a shining example of John Schurholz, Bobby Cox, and Leo Mazzone's excellence.
I still can't stand the Braves, mainly because of their fans, but I sure do respect those three.
We'll go down in history as the first society that wouldn't save itself because it wasn't cost effective ~ Kurt Vonnegut
I don't think anyone can argue that. But the Reds are a pretty much worse at just about everything than just about every franchise out there. I'd give anything to have Schuerholz and Mazzone in the Reds organization (I just don't like Bobby Cox even though I admit he's a good manager). Schuerholz is probably one of the best GMs of all time. They do a lot of things right in that organization, one of which is creating the Braves brand that allows them to get more out of their prospects than if those same prospects were in other organizations. That's actually a compliment to the Braves organization.
Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David
The Reds have Gapper.
So they have that going for them.
Which is nice
MWM,
I'm not arguing with you. I'm just trying to get you to give me an example of an organization that has developed more starting pitchers that are now around baseball. Oakland was your answer, but beside the obvious two of Mulder and Hudson, you've yet to provide additional examples to explain your answer.
So if the Braves are not the creme of the crop at scouting and developing pitching talent, who is? I think the group of Schmidt, Millwood, Glavine, Perez, Chen, Marquis, Belisle, Mercker, and prospects like Wainwright, Nelson, Bong, Meyer, and Capellan is a pretty solid one and probably unmatched.
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
