Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
3,788 comments Add your comment
Efrim
October 17th, 2011
3:24 pm
CJeffcoate
How are two of the Braves position prospects, Joey Terdoslavich and Christian Bethancourt looking. Both are ranked near the top of the AFL in hitting.
Keith Law
Bethancourt is all glove/arm, no bat. Terdoslavich has some power but no position and not much hit tool. AFL stats are not meaningful, especially not in ten game samples.
TennesseePaul
October 17th, 2011
3:29 pm
but let’s at least do best outta 3, no?
No. eh, no.
I hate this expanded playoff. It is getting close to the NBA where the regular season is meaningless. The “you’re all winners” method of playoff entry is ridiculous and it saddens me to see this great game go down such a pointless path. Although, I’m getting to the point where I see the post season as pointless and the regular season as the only fun baseball. After 162 games, the best team was the Phillies. Not the Cards. Not the Rangers. All this crap has brought the death of game 7.
I like the NLCS and ALCS. I don’t care much about the division series. And I see nothing good in adding another “second place” team to the post season. All for the sake of “wild card weekend” like the NFL. This is major league baseball. 162 game 6 month long regular season. Not the NFL, 1 game a week, hype-a-thon.
Efrim
October 17th, 2011
3:29 pm
I love the one-gamer. If luck is going to be such a big part of the process (and it is), then really roll the dice. You don’t win the division? Fine. Here’s one last shot for you. Win or go home. But we’re not going to just give you a playoff spot for being a little bit better than all the rest of the league’s losers. Not anymore. You want it? Come and get it.
Ugh, I hate it. Such a long season to have it up to 1 game.
TJ Lambert
October 17th, 2011
3:31 pm
It looks likes the Cardinals got a new nasty bull pen in the trade with the Blue Jays. That’s why they were able to catch the Braves and win in the play offs.
Efrim
October 17th, 2011
3:31 pm
I think I just hate expansion of the playoffs like TenneseePaul.
TennesseePaul
October 17th, 2011
3:34 pm
CJeffcoate
How are two of the Braves position prospects, Joey Terdoslavich and Christian Bethancourt looking. Both are ranked near the top of the AFL in hitting.
Keith Law
The Braves suck
Shaun
October 17th, 2011
3:35 pm
I think the best solution besides going back to fewer playoff teams (which isn’t going to happen) is to give the best regular season team(s) more of an advantage in the playoffs. I think having the two worst playoff teams playing in that one-game playoff could give the better regular season team an advantage. Forcing those two worst teams to use up their best pitcher or two to get in then having to play the best team in the league in the first round could be the best realistic alternative out there. Because, unfortunately we aren’t going back to only 2 teams in each league or something like that.
ncscoots
October 17th, 2011
3:36 pm
Such a long season to have it up to 1 game.
I just look at it differently, I guess. Second-place teams had all of that “long season” to prove they deserved a shot at a ring, and didn’t. I look at the play-in game as an opportunity for redemption, to actually win a playoff spot, rather than just be awarded one. Because, frankly, that’s all the wild-card is now: a way to even the brackets. “We’ll take that kid, just to even up the sides. Naw, it’s OK that he’s not as good as we are.”
Tension. Drama. Finality. Maybe even some zombies. I like it.
Efrim
October 17th, 2011
3:38 pm
Keith Law
The Braves suck
That was awesome.
TennesseePaul
October 17th, 2011
3:40 pm
I just look at it differently, I guess. Second-place teams had all of that “long season” to prove they deserved a shot at a ring, and didn’t.
Yes. End there and I’m happy. They had a long season to prove they deserved a shot at the ring and didn’t make it. Tough luck. Aim for next year, loser. Losers have no place in line for a championship ring.
You want expanded playoffs? Put four divisions in each league with 4 teams in each division, balance the schedule and have 4 winners play it out for a chance to go to the WS. There, now you have your NFL mimic and no losers in the play-offs.
Shaun
October 17th, 2011
3:40 pm
AFL stats are not meaningful, especially not in ten game samples.
What? Small sample? But, it’s 100 percent of their plate appearances so it must be a large enough sample. (sarcasm)
ncscoots
October 17th, 2011
3:40 pm
That was awesome.
I’m awarding TennPaul the very first “I Blame Keith Law” tee to roll of the assembly line.
CB
October 17th, 2011
3:40 pm
scoots, you sounded bitter. You weren’t the fat kid,were you?
Efrim
October 17th, 2011
3:41 pm
I think having the two worst playoff teams playing in that one-game playoff could give the better regular season team an advantage. Forcing those two worst teams to use up their best pitcher or two to get in then having to play the best team in the league in the first round could be the best realistic alternative out there
What happens if the Giants win the West with 84 games and get to sit home and watch the Braves and Reds duke it out in a one game playoff when they both won 94 games?
I hate divisions if they are going to do this. Let’s go to two 15 team leagues with no divisions and pick the top 4 teams in each league.
ncscoots
October 17th, 2011
3:42 pm
scoots, you sounded bitter. You weren’t the fat kid,were you?
It was my team that always had to take the fat kid, LOL.
RC
October 17th, 2011
3:43 pm
Efrim,
Where did the “real” Law chat question come from? Didn’t see that he had a chat today.
Efrim
October 17th, 2011
3:44 pm
You want expanded playoffs? Put four divisions in each league with 4 teams in each division, balance the schedule and have 4 winners play it out for a chance to go to the WS. There, now you have your NFL mimic and no losers in the play-offs.
Wasn;t there talk of this the last time and we were going to be in a division with Houston, St. Louis and Florida? Why did this not happen? Having either Boston or New York not make the playoffs?
I think I’m just against a one gamer. Make it three games and hurt that wild card team even more with their playoff rotation potentially having to throw a full series before entering the playoffs.
Efrim
October 17th, 2011
3:45 pm
Where did the “real” Law chat question come from? Didn’t see that he had a chat today.
Check his last insider column – comments section. He does a good job of answering all of the questions.
TennesseePaul
October 17th, 2011
3:47 pm
Make it three games and hurt that wild card team even more
I think this would hurt all the other teams more as they’d be sitting around during that time. 3 days off didn’t do much good for the Braves this August.
Efrim
October 17th, 2011
3:48 pm
And no longer will that wild card round = playoff appearance.
Also hate it if the friggin Braves end up having to beat a 140 million dollar Met team, and a 160 million dollar Philly team.
Spring training is here, guys. Let’s work hard for 162 games for a one game playoff……..
CB
October 17th, 2011
3:48 pm
Efrim, too cost effective to keep divisions and division rivals give you someone to hate. It’s kinda hard to hate the West Coast teams.
MFin04
October 17th, 2011
3:48 pm
If you let six teams in, and let the top 3 pick their opponents, it does create more of an incentive to finish…first…second…third…
Efrim
October 17th, 2011
3:49 pm
Adding more of a crapshoot effect to the playoffs just makes me like baseball less. Throw em all in a 30 team league and at the end, whoever has won the most games, wins it all.
No playoffs…..
RC
October 17th, 2011
3:50 pm
If you let six teams in, and let the top 3 pick their opponents, it does create more of an incentive to finish…first…second…third…
Wouldn’t the third place team just get the leftover matchup? Unless #1 picks #2 or #3?
Shaun
October 17th, 2011
3:53 pm
Any expanded playoffs compromises the regular season. I don’t think four divisions helps much because teams that are just as weak will get into the playoffs. I think what MLB needs to worry about, if they are insistent on expanding the playoffs, is giving the best playoff teams more of an advantage. Because expanding beyond 2 teams is going to compromise the regular season too much for my liking.
Jbailz
October 17th, 2011
3:54 pm
The Braves trade Chipper and I’m done being a fan. That dude has done more for Atlanta Braves baseball then everyone not named Cox or Aaron.
And anyone complaining about what we are paying him now needs to sit down and remember that he took significantly less money to keep guys like Huddy in Atlanta and reworked his contract at least once that I recall to help the organization out.
Ya, we should trade or cut someone that’s been the franchise of this organization for 10+ years, ya that’s a good idea…. Sheesh people
RC
October 17th, 2011
3:54 pm
Adding more of a crapshoot effect to the playoffs just makes me like baseball less. Throw em all in a 30 team league and at the end, whoever has won the most games, wins it all.
No playoffs…..
I’d be for this method if two problems could be resolved:
1. Every team needs to have the same schedule, with an equal # of home/away games against each of the other teams.
2. Since baseball is so dependant on the starting pitcher, the schedules would need to be structured so that each team has to have a chance to face every pitcher in an opponents rotation. Imagine if the Braves had to play the 2001 Diamondbacks in a 3 game series w/ Johnson and Schilling pitching, but they they went to Philly for a 3 game series with neither guy pitching.
While I like the idea, it works much better in a sport like soccer or football than it would in baseball.
MFin04
October 17th, 2011
3:54 pm
Numbers 1, 2, 3, can only pick from 4,5,6.
That’s what you get for finishing in the top 3.
You essentially give the the top seed the easiest matchup.
RC
October 17th, 2011
3:55 pm
Why not go with the old method of having balanced schedules in the two leagues, and the pennant winners play a 9-game World Series? Probably the fairest possible method for baseball, but it will never happen again.
RC
October 17th, 2011
3:56 pm
Numbers 1, 2, 3, can only pick from 4,5,6.
That’s what you get for finishing in the top 3.
You essentially give the the top seed the easiest matchup.
In that case, 3 isn’t really picking. They are getting what’s left over.
And what if #1 views #2 as the best matchup for them? Why shouldn’t they get the opportunity to face them right away?
Efrim
October 17th, 2011
3:57 pm
While I like the idea, it works much better in a sport like soccer or football than it would in baseball.
Yup, works perfect in soccer.
RC
October 17th, 2011
3:57 pm
The Braves trade Chipper and I’m done being a fan. That dude has done more for Atlanta Braves baseball then everyone not named Cox or Aaron.
I think your fandom is safe then. The only way Chipper plays elsewhere is if he signs there as a free agent once his contract expires, which seems very unlikely at his age, and with his legacy.
Efrim
October 17th, 2011
3:58 pm
Why not go with the old method of having balanced schedules in the two leagues, and the pennant winners play a 9-game World Series? Probably the fairest possible method for baseball, but it will never happen again.
Man o man would the Yankees, Phillies and Red Sox clean up.
MFin04
October 17th, 2011
3:58 pm
Phillies vs Braves
Brewers vs Giants
D-Backs vs Cardinals
I mean it is essentially a bye for the Phillies. The Brewers have to deal with a good rotation in SanFran, but that team can’t score any runs.
And the D-Backs get to deal with the hot Cardinals.
I guess we are missing another team though…hmm…
RC
October 17th, 2011
3:59 pm
While I like the idea, it works much better in a sport like soccer or football than it would in baseball.
Yup, works perfect in soccer.
Yeah, I really like that system. Wish they would go to it with football also, but I know that people are so obsessed with playoffs that it would never happen. Not to mention the crazy, crazy money the NFL would be losing by taking away playoffs.
Shaun
October 17th, 2011
4:00 pm
Efrim, that’s what I’m saying. Ignore wild cards and division winners. Just have the two worst playoff teams play that playoff game, and the winner plays the best team in the league in the opening round.
They could still have divisions or not. Doesn’t matter. If they have divisions, it would still be possible for a division winner to have a better record than the team that finishes third in the wild card race and is on the outside looking in at the one-game playoff. So winning a division if you are a mediocre team would still mean a little something in that case. But I would probably prefer them do away with divisions.
MFin04
October 17th, 2011
4:00 pm
“And what if #1 views #2 as the best matchup for them? Why shouldn’t they get the opportunity to face them right away?”
Because you are punishing the number 2 seed. And you really can’t do that. They’ve earned the right to choose a team.
RC
October 17th, 2011
4:01 pm
Why not go with the old method of having balanced schedules in the two leagues, and the pennant winners play a 9-game World Series? Probably the fairest possible method for baseball, but it will never happen again.
Man o man would the Yankees, Phillies and Red Sox clean up.
Yeah, they probably would. But aren’t they consistently the most talented teams, due to the incredible resources available to them (and their willingness to use those resources)?
Murph
October 17th, 2011
4:03 pm
And in the first round, the Atlanta Braves have selected to play…. The New York Yankees!
Could someone please explain the rules to Fredi? Ok folks, let’s give them a minute… Fredi appears to now understand the rules… and it looks like they are ready to make their pick. The envelope, please.
In the first round the Atlanta Braves will play… The Rockford Peaches? Look, can someone else make the Braves’ selection for them?
RC
October 17th, 2011
4:03 pm
Because you are punishing the number 2 seed. And you really can’t do that. They’ve earned the right to choose a team.
Yeah, that’s probably fair. Although if any system like that was to be put in place, I’d like to see balanced schedules return to each of the leagues. While it’s not worth losing too much sleep over, a balanced schedule might have meant the Braves were in the playoffs instead of the Cardinals, if they had the opportunity to play the Cubs, Astros, and Pirates for 18 games like the Cardinals did.
Having wildcards without balanced scheduling is a joke.
RC
October 17th, 2011
4:04 pm
And in the first round, the Atlanta Braves have selected to play…. The New York Yankees!
Could someone please explain the rules to Fredi? Ok folks, let’s give them a minute… Fredi appears to now understand the rules… and it looks like they are ready to make their pick. The envelope, please.
In the first round the Atlanta Braves will play… The Rockford Peaches? Look, can someone else make the Braves’ selection for them?
I’d have to think that Wren would get to make the decision, right?
MFin04
October 17th, 2011
4:06 pm
Expanding from a 4 team playoffs to a 5 team playoffs…
It seems like we are making the playoffs worse.
The 4th and 5th place teams already have a playoff for the Wild Card…it is called the 162-game baseball season.
The Braves vs Cardinals match up was great. Much better than a 1-game playoff…and the Braves failed to win multiple games and clinch. The Cardinals won their games and ended up clinching. It is a much more fair way to decide the Wild Card. This year’s last day of the season was more exciting than any playoff game/series so far.
jim
October 17th, 2011
4:07 pm
Add a 16th team to the AL — (Portland, Sacramento, Austin, New Orleans, Memphis, Charlotte, Montreal — pick 1) Create two leagues with two 8-team divisions and have two 7-game rounds of playoffs between division winners and then league winners — no wild cards) The 8 and then 10 team leagues produced at least 1 good pennant race each year that went down to the last day or two of the season. Braves Giants in ‘93 or Braves-Dodgers in ‘91 was a lot more exciting and better baseball than Braves-Cardinals in ‘11
Shaun
October 17th, 2011
4:07 pm
RC, I’m all for just having a longer World Series as the only playoff. But that will never happen because it wouldn’t make as much money, largely because the very casual baseball fan isn’t going to find that very interesting, I don’t think. That’s really the bottom line: money.
I think the very casual fans that maybe watch a game or two every week and watch more late in the season and during the playoffs think that baseball is like football and basketball, where the best team typically wins playoff games or series. So they are going to view a 9-game series as boring, old fashioned, too long a series and strange. Maybe there aren’t many of those people out there. But I would guess that there are.
MFin04
October 17th, 2011
4:08 pm
“Having wildcards without balanced scheduling is a joke.”
Agreed. Let’s have everyone play a different schedule and see who is the best.
Murph
October 17th, 2011
4:08 pm
I’d have to think that Wren would get to make the decision, right?
It’s pretty much a non-issue since the MLB will never let the teams choose who they play. Not… gonna… happen.
cricket
October 17th, 2011
4:09 pm
Tons of upset Boston or New York fans….
Remember, the only reason 1 more WC is added is to make sure that both BOS and NYY get in. It’s all pensioners’ fault.
Efrim
October 17th, 2011
4:09 pm
Yeah, they probably would. But aren’t they consistently the most talented teams, due to the incredible resources available to them (and their willingness to use those resources)?
Anything where we make the playoffs less of a crapshoot and the Championship listing will look like this:
World Series Champions:
2013: Philadelphia Phillies
2014: New York Yankees
2015 Boston Red Sox
2016: New York Yankees
2017: Boston Red Sox
2018: Los Angelas Dodgers
2019: Philadelphia Phillies
2020: New York Yankees
2021: Philadelphia Phillies
2022: Boston Red Sox
2023: Los Angelas Angels of Anaheim
2024: Cinncinati Reds
2025: New York Yankees
2026: New York Yankees
2027: Boston Red Sox
MFin04
October 17th, 2011
4:09 pm
“It’s pretty much a non-issue since the MLB will never let the teams choose who they play. Not… gonna… happen.”
Why? It is the most fair way to give a team an advantage!
RC
October 17th, 2011
4:10 pm
The difference between emphasis on the regular season vs. emphasis on the playoffs comes down to what your objective is. If it’s to have the most fair competition possible, then place more emphasis on the regular season. If the objective is to increase entertainment value, then place more emphasis on the postseason. It’s fairly obvious that Major League Baseball’s objective is to increase entertainment value, since that is the best way to increase revenues.
Murph
October 17th, 2011
4:10 pm
That’s really the bottom line: money.
And that, my friends, is why the MLB is headed down the same road that NBA is on. Money, money, money. More playoffs equal more money. Packed stadiums for sub .500 teams. Television money. Amigo money.
No dough… no show.
Brave New World
October 17th, 2011
4:10 pm
Regarding the playoffs, I think the team with the best record should get more than a 1 game home advantage. In the first round, let the teams with the best record have the first 2 games., let the 3rd game be away and the last 2 (if needed) be at home. Also, let’s do away with this all star game crap of deciding home field advantage.
Efrim
October 17th, 2011
4:11 pm
I threw in the Reds there once. Felt that was pretty generous.
DAP
October 17th, 2011
4:11 pm
i like the playoff system exactly how it is now. 162 games is plenty to vet the best teams.
ncscoots
October 17th, 2011
4:11 pm
I’d like to see balanced schedules return to each of the leagues.
With 15-team leagues, that’s not quite as easy as you might think. Some two teams are always playing interleague, and you can’t balance that easily. You probably couldn’t play one four-game series against each team in the other league, for example (heck, that would be over a third of your schedule), which means that the interleague sked would always be “unbalanced”. Which kinda nukes the whole premise of balanced schedule.
Me, I’m OK with unbalanced schedules weighted to divisions; otherwise, divisions serve no real purpose.
Efrim
October 17th, 2011
4:16 pm
i like the playoff system exactly how it is now. 162 games is plenty to vet the best teams.
Agreed. And I’m okay with a wild card team winning it all like the Marlins in 2003. No problems there.
Shaun
October 17th, 2011
4:17 pm
Having wildcards without balanced scheduling is a joke.
Good point. The Braves played in a division with the best team in the NL and I don’t think any team in their division was horrible. The Cardinals played in a division with perhaps the 2-3 worst teams in the league.
The Braves had their issues and I don’t think it’s clear that they were one of the four best teams in the league or that the Cardinals were a worse team, but I don’t think there is any question that the Braves had a tougher schedule. And we’ll never know who might have won out had the teams played a balanced schedule.
But at the same time, I sometimes think this issue is overblown because all teams are going to have their ups and downs and maybe the Braves would have played good teams when players were hurt or injured or didn’t play their best and the Cardinals played mediocre teams when they were at their best. Still, it’s probably worth trying to make the schedule as balanced as humanly possible when two teams are fighting for the same playoff spot.
RC
October 17th, 2011
4:18 pm
Efrim,
No Texas Rangers? Especially since they get to beat up on the AL West for the foreseeable future.
MFin04
October 17th, 2011
4:18 pm
I wouldn’t mind pointless divisions…with a balanced schedule.
I suppose you could just have a 15-team National League…and they all play the same schedule.
Problem is you have an 8-team playoff or keep the current 4 game playoff.
There is no good way to have any other amount of teams make the playoffs.
Efrim
October 17th, 2011
4:18 pm
I thought this new CBA was going to bring on a better league. It seems like it’s going to get quite a bit worse.
Murph
October 17th, 2011
4:18 pm
I saw a TV report a long time ago about the process of creating the MLB schedule… was an interesting show.
I’d think with computers nowadays it would be a lot easier to plug in the teams, plug in the criteria you want, and have it spit out schedules taking things like schedule balance, location, road trips, time changes, etc into account.
Most baseball video games give you the option of creating a league with balanced or unbalanced schedules. If a video game could do it, you’d think the actual MLB would be able to do it too.
McFann O O o
October 17th, 2011
4:20 pm
Efrim And I’m okay with a wild card team winning it all like the Marlins in 2003. No problems there.
My only problem with it is that it should be us…
RC
October 17th, 2011
4:21 pm
But at the same time, I sometimes think this issue is overblown because all teams are going to have their ups and downs and maybe the Braves would have played good teams when players were hurt or injured or didn’t play their best and the Cardinals played mediocre teams when they were at their best.
While this statement has some truth to it, I feel like the process behind the thought is faulty. The statement essentially says, “Well, there is going to be some uncontrollable randomness anyway, so why bother trying to control the variables we can?” I know that YOU weren’t saying that Shaun, but that’s the mindset behind that type of statement.
RC
October 17th, 2011
4:22 pm
Efrim And I’m okay with a wild card team winning it all like the Marlins in 2003. No problems there.
My only problem with it is that it should be us…
Does this mean we are about to start a discussion on umpires? Because THAT is an area that MLB can and should make improvements, and it would be MUCH easier to do that developing a balanced schedule.
Efrim
October 17th, 2011
4:24 pm
No Texas Rangers? Especially since they get to beat up on the AL West for the foreseeable future.
Mostly just joking. Point being that in the bigger the sample: the percentages for the stronger, wealthier, deeper team will increase.
Lemke's Knuckler
October 17th, 2011
4:25 pm
“You want expanded playoffs? Put four divisions in each league with 4 teams in each division, balance the schedule and have 4 winners play it out for a chance to go to the WS. There, now you have your NFL mimic and no losers in the play-offs.”
I agree, except you have to add 2 wild cards, because they’ll never put Boston and NY in different divisions and the whole purpose of the wild card was to ensure that the team with the 2nd best record wouldn’t be out of the postseason simply because they finished second to the best record.
You want my wholesale radical solution for everything that ails MLB with falling fan support. See below. But it would never happen, because MLB and the owners would never be patient enough to deal with reduced revenues for a few years while they wait for the long-term benefit of increased fan participation due to a better overall product.
- Expand to 32 teams, 16 per league, 4 divisions per league.
- Shorten spring training one week
- Reduce the season and play a balanced schedule without interleague (nice experiment, but it’s over and one of the few advantages MLB used to have over other sports was that teams playing in the WS were meeting for the first time, which I always enjoyed).
- Playoffs have 4 division winners and 2 wild cards. Same format at NFL, with top 2 from each league getting first round bye. Wild Card round would be 3-game series (home/away/home) with only one off day (either after game 1 or game 2 to suit the distribution of games on tv). Division round would stay 5 games and LCS and WS would be the same as always.
To me, the benefits would be many. You have 8 divisions up for grabs, which should make the final weeks of the season very exciting. And the Wild Card round would be crazy with teams scheming on when to throw their ace, knowing if they save them for game 3 they might be done in 2. Good stuff in my opinion. Best of all, the season should be over by the first or second week of October, which is exactly when it should be over.
But again, it’ll never happen in my lifetime. I still love the MLB and my Braves anyways.
RC
October 17th, 2011
4:25 pm
Also, I was thinking this weekend how the NFL was so hesitant to instant replay initially because they didn’t want to “slow the pace of the game”, yet they still stop play to have two guys run onto the field with a metal chain anytime there is a question of a first down. It’s 2011. Can’t we just use video and/or lasers to speed up this process? Not to mention removing a taunt metal chain from a sideline near which 250-lb men are running at incredible speeds trying to knock each other to the ground by any means neccesary. Just seems kind of dumb at this point.
Efrim
October 17th, 2011
4:26 pm
Baseball America: 2011 Draft Report Card: Atlanta Braves
QUICK TAKE
The Braves were one of the more conservative teams in the draft, ranking 24th in bonus spending this year. Most of their picks are safe bets to reach their ceilings but lack big upsides.
Bonus Spending: $3.7 million
BEST PURE HITTER: After hitting .398 and nearly winning the Big South Conference triple crown in the spring, 2B Tommy La Stella (8) batted .328 in low Class A in his pro debut. If he can stay at second base and avoid a move to the outfield, he could be an everyday player. BEST POWER HITTER: In terms of raw power, OF Chase Larsson (9), a 6-foot-4, 220-pounder who was the NCAA Division II player of the year and led that level in homers (29), RBIs (84), total bases (190) and slugging (1.000). 3B Kyle Kubitza (3) may have more usable power in the long run, though most of his pop currently goes to the alleys. FASTEST RUNNER: SS Logan Robbins (10) has 65 speed on the 20-80 scouting scale. BEST DEFENSIVE PLAYER: SS Nick Ahmed (2) has the range, arm and athleticism desired at his position. He wasn’t 100 percent in his debut as he continued to recover from a collapsed lung sustained in a first-base collision in April.
PITCHERS
BEST FASTBALL: RHP J.R. Graham (4) is just 6 feet and 175 pounds, but he has a fast arm that delivers fastballs that sit at 95-96 mph and top out at 98. He’s probably a reliever in the long run, though he’ll begin his pro career as a starter. BEST SECONDARY PITCH: LHP Sean Gilmartin’s (1) changeup or RHP Mark Lamm’s (6) slider. Gilmartin’s changeup helps his 88-91 mph fastball play up and helps him profile as a potential No. 3 starter.
ODDS AND ENDS
BEST PRO DEBUT: La Stella, who added nine homers and a .944 OPS in low Class A. Graham led the Rookie-level Appalachian League with a 1.72 ERA. RHPs Cody Martin (7) and Gus Schlosser (17) had sub-2.00 ERAs and combined for 14 saves in low Class A. BEST ATHLETE: OF Chris Bullard (34) played four seasons at linebacker for Western Kentucky’s football team. He’s raw but offers enticing power and speed. Robbins, his college teammate, is a quick-twitch athlete who reminds the Braves of Brent Lillibridge. MOST INTRIGUING BACKGROUND: Unsigned RHP Matt Kimbrel’s (32) brother Craig is Atlanta’s closer. C Troy Snitker’s (19) dad Brian is the Braves’ third-base coach, and unsigned 3B Jacoby Almaraz’s (40) uncle Johnny is the team’s director of international scouting and operations. 1B Jackson Laumann’s (31) father Doug is White Sox scouting director. CLOSEST TO THE MAJORS: As a lefty who can throw three average-or-better pitches for strikes, Gilmartin could move quickly. He excelled in five low Class A starts at the end of the season. BEST LATE-ROUND PICK: A Tommy John surgery survivor like his former Vanderbilt teammate Lamm, RHP Navery Moore (14) has a lively 92-96 mph fastball. Signability concerns dropped Moore in the draft, and he signed for $400,000. THE ONE WHO GOT AWAY: LHP Carlos Rodriguez (20), who has a projectable 6-foot-3 frame and an easy delivery, opted for Oregon State over pro ball.
cricket
October 17th, 2011
4:29 pm
No Texas Rangers? Especially since they get to beat up on the AL West for the foreseeable future.
Also missing from the list – Cubs, guided by the centuries-old curse lifter wizard, Master Theo…
jim
October 17th, 2011
4:30 pm
Getting back to DOB’s great hitter theory, it may be true that there have been certain great hitters who excelled in te post season — Mantle and Reggie are the first to come to mind from the more distant past, but the Bucky Dents and Billy Martins have also had huge series — there is the hot hitter theory. What we hve seen this year was more the tired pitcher theory. The Giants had a dominant staff and a couple of hot hittes — Ross and Renteria that carried them through the playoffs. The Braves and Phillies also got good pitching and not enough hitting in their series play last year.
This year only the Phillies entered the playoffs with a comparatively rested and dominant staff — Lee had a bad game, but the Philly pitching held down a good hiting Cardinal team — Pujols did not have a particularly good first round this year — The Phillie hitters did not produce when needed. Other than the Phillie staff we saw a Verlander running on fumes and doing well but no real aces to back him up. A Sabathia who had been hitting the training table a lot harder than the workout room, and only a rookie in the rotation behind him, A Wilson whose velocity was down for most of the playoffs and TB staff (except for the kid) that had left it on the diaqmond to make the playoffs.) Aside frm the Phillies, there was only 1 dominant start from Carpenter and 1 start each Nova and Moore that were noteworthy.
cricket
October 17th, 2011
4:32 pm
the whole purpose of the wild card was to ensure that the team with the 2nd best record wouldn’t be out of the postseason simply because they finished second to the best record.
Agreed. And the whole purpose of 2nd WC is to ensure both BOS and NYY get in. If TOR or BAL get their act together like the Pensioners and start getting better records than either BOS or NYY, we may be looking at 3rd WC.
David O'Brien
October 17th, 2011
4:32 pm
Link to video we did this morning:
http://blogs.ajc.com/atlanta-braves-blog/2011/10/17/dob-video-what-next-for-braves/
TennesseePaul
October 17th, 2011
4:35 pm
I threw in the Reds there once. Felt that was pretty generous.
Noticed you didn’t even toss the Cubs a bone in that hypothetical. Sounds perfect. Under no structure real or hypothetical are the Cubs capable of winning a WS.
Murph
October 17th, 2011
4:36 pm
MOST INTRIGUING BACKGROUND: Unsigned RHP Matt Kimbrel’s (32) brother Craig is Atlanta’s closer. C Troy Snitker’s (19) dad Brian is the Braves’ third-base coach, and unsigned 3B Jacoby Almaraz’s (40) uncle Johnny is the team’s director of international scouting and operations. 1B Jackson Laumann’s (31) father Doug is White Sox scouting director.
Seriously Braves?
ncscoots
October 17th, 2011
4:36 pm
Under no structure real or hypothetical are the Cubs capable of winning a WS.
Probably monsters in a parallel universe, though. Gotta give them that.
cricket
October 17th, 2011
4:37 pm
My post-season success formula – excellent starters, good bullpen, great closer and timely and patient hitting. Sorta like yanks of 90s.
Shaun
October 17th, 2011
4:39 pm
RC, oh, I think MLB should control the balancing of the scheduling. They have a responsibility to do that if teams in different divisions are going to compete for the same spot.
What I’m saying is that I think it may be overblown as a factor in why some teams may win the wild card and others don’t. But I think it’s still quite possibly a real factor in some instances and I think think baseball should do their best to control the fairness of the schedule, to the degree they can.
cricket
October 17th, 2011
4:39 pm
Probably monsters in a parallel universe, though. Gotta give them that.
Nope, same in parallel universe. Monsters in bizzaro universe.
TennesseePaul
October 17th, 2011
4:40 pm
Gilmartin’s changeup helps his 88-91 mph fastball play up
Gee. I can’t way to watch that 88mph fastball float into the catchers mitt. That sure will be swell.
TennesseePaul
October 17th, 2011
4:41 pm
Probably monsters in a parallel universe, though. Gotta give them that.
Only in bizzaro, scoots.
ncscoots
October 17th, 2011
4:42 pm
Agreed. And the whole purpose of 2nd WC is to ensure both BOS and NYY get in.
Doesn’t really matter, though. The three-round playoff format almost guarantees that the best teams won’t meet in the World Series, thus, it’s next to impossible that the best team might actually win one. And winning multiple championships in short window of years? Tougher than Middle East peace.
RC
October 17th, 2011
4:43 pm
Shaun,
I agree. And I knew you weren’t suggesting that they shouldn’t change the scheduling, just using your post to point out the fallacy of the stance taken by many that “it’s not a big deal”.
Murph
October 17th, 2011
4:44 pm
Gee. I can’t way to watch that 88mph fastball float into the catchers mitt. That sure will be swell.
Think that’s bad? Now imagine the catcher’s mitt that it’s floating into is Snitker Jr. and the Braves have 35 year old rookie Matt Kimbrel warming up in the pen.
I need a drink.
RC
October 17th, 2011
4:44 pm
Gee. I can’t way to watch that 88mph fastball float into the catchers mitt. That sure will be swell.
Seems to me that most 88mph fastballs at the major league level never make it to the catcher’s mitt.
cricket
October 17th, 2011
4:45 pm
And winning multiple championships in short window of years? Tougher than Middle East peace.
Yes, but obscene amount of money can buy bigger windows…
RC
October 17th, 2011
4:45 pm
Now imagine the catcher’s mitt that it’s floating into is Snitker Jr. and the Braves have 35 year old rookie Matt Kimbrel warming up in the pen.
Pretty sure that (32) was referring to the round Kimbrel was drafted, not his age
Murph
October 17th, 2011
4:47 pm
RC, good catch… I was wondering why the Braves drafted a 40 year old 3B prospect.
ncscoots
October 17th, 2011
4:49 pm
Yes, but obscene amount of money can buy bigger windows…
tiny ship’s porthole or ginormous bay window, doesn’t much matter if you’re outside looking in. The birds are still making you duck-and-cover.
RC
October 17th, 2011
4:50 pm
RC, good catch… I was wondering why the Braves drafted a 40 year old 3B prospect.
Well, Chipper’s going to retire someday…:)
jim
October 17th, 2011
4:51 pm
The only way that you expand the playoffs would be to also expand the rosters to allow for 2 extra pitchers.. La Russa has abused his bullpen for 11 out of 12 straight games to make up for the lack of starting pitching. It will be interesting to see how that recipe holds up in the next round of playoffs. The season + post season is too long for the starting pitchers already.
billmaier
October 17th, 2011
4:55 pm
great mangers can also shine in the post season as every move is magnified i.e. larussa to bad we do not have one and did not have one
RC
October 17th, 2011
4:56 pm
The season + post season is too long for the starting pitchers already.
This seems to be the type of thing that a team like the Braves should be able to take advantage of with it’s young pitching. Protect them a bit early in the season by limiting their innings in the minor leagues, and after you reach a certain point in the season bring up some “fresh” arms to give your starting 5 a rest here and there. If I were running a team I’d even consider a “rotating” 15-day DL stint, where each pitcher in the rotation is given a 2-week break in the middle of the season to recover a bit and build up strength for the stretch run.
TennesseePaul
October 17th, 2011
4:56 pm
Kids, I’m taking you to the park today. The Braves have this 88mph lefty on the mound. I want you to see what “signability” looks like.
MFin04
October 17th, 2011
4:58 pm
DOB needs his own Braves talk show. He’s really good on the mic. Very analytical.
McFann O O o
October 17th, 2011
5:00 pm
RC—
I was talking about this season. since we were s’posed to be the WC…
Snotboogie
October 17th, 2011
5:00 pm
I was wondering why the Braves drafted a 40 year old 3B prospect.
Shaun
October 17th, 2011
5:01 pm
I don’t think there is much of a difference between the regular season and postseason, which is why I think great hitters are typically great in the postseason, given enough chances.
I think certain types of pitchers tend to succeed in the postseason due to the nature of small samples of games that match fairly even opponents. Teams that can take the chance/randomness/luck/whatever-you-want-to-call-it factor out of the game to a higher degree than others, are going to have an advantage. High-strikeout-rate pitchers have an advantage because no batter, whether great or mediocre or bad, can get a chance hit or any other type of hit if he can’t make contact. And good fielding teams have an advantage because fewer batted balls are going to squeak by a good fielding team. I think this is why some studies find that strikeout rate of pitchers and defense are factors in postseason success.
But if a team is much more dominant than another and gets just a few breaks, they are going to win in the postseason, no matter what type of team they’ve built.
Zing
October 17th, 2011
5:06 pm
All this talk of changing the playoffs has me thinking– let’s do a BCS of baseball! Yeah! We’ll have a computer ranking, a baseball writer’s ranking, and a coach’s poll. We’ll combine them into an esoteric formula and the teams with the top 4 rankings in each league get in! Maybe we can even give bonus points to teams with the best OBP or other statistics to ensure that the absolute best teams are in the playoffs (rather than certain “lucky” teams that picked up some wins but aren’t *actually* as good as others). We can start releasing the rankings on August 1 to let everybody know where we stand.
What do you think guys???
Zing
October 17th, 2011
5:07 pm
(That was to demonstrate the sheer idiocy of the BCS by the way. I’m sure plenty of people will take it at face value, however.)
N8
October 17th, 2011
5:08 pm
“The Braves trade Chipper and I’m done being a fan. That dude has done more for Atlanta Braves baseball then everyone not named Cox or Aaron.”
More than Glavine, Maddux or Smoltz? Highly unlikely.
Hell, when you consider defense in the mix, it could be debated that Andruw did more the Braves in his prime.
Get over yourself. If the Braves could trade any one player and make the team better, that is what you should be a fan of. Classic case of somebody caring more about the name on the back of the jersey instead the one on the front.
Besides, Chipper can’t be traded without his permission. So if he were to be traded, that mean’s he’d be OK with it. If he’s OK with it, why wouldn’t you be?