Looking Back At The Shelby Miller Trade.

(Christian Petersen/Getty Images North America)

When the Braves dealt Shelby Miller to the Diamondbacks, social media exploded with the consensus being that the Braves "won" the trade. However, it might not be as much of a "win" as people claimed it to be.

I won't deny the fact that I was one of the people who claimed this trade to be a huge win for the Braves. After dealing Andrelton Simmons, the Braves still had Ozzie Albies waiting in the wings to play shortstop, but acquiring a prospect like Dansby Swanson helped to ease the loss of Simmons. Swanson came up during the 2016 season and looked to be an immediate superstar for the Braves. Hell, he was featured in commercials for the Braves before he even made his Major League debut. The Braves have marketed him as a superstar, so fans immediately placed unrealistic expectations upon him. He lived up to the hype, slashing .302/.361/.442 in his first 38 games. Many experts labeled him as the sure bet to win Rookie of the Year for the 2017 season, however, he hasn't been able to sustain his amazing start to his career. So far in 2017, he's only slashing .227/.301/.333. Unlike some others, I did expect Swanson to experience a bit of trouble in his first full season in the majors, but his extended poor play leaves him looking less like a "future hall of famer" as some fans called him (I am being for real when I say that) and more like a replacement level shortstop.

With all that said, I'm not ready to give up on the kid just yet. I think he's too talented to toss aside because of a rough first full season in the majors. I think he's talented and deserves his fair shot to prove he can make it at this level. It's just worth pointing out that you can't base a player's career off 38 games in the majors. I'd even say that judging him off of this season is harsh, but his sample size grows by the day and outside of a nice month of June (.306/.355/.418) this season hasn't lived up to the immense hype put on him by the fans of the Braves.

Getting back on track, it's time to look back at the trade that sent Shelby Miller to the Arizona Diamonbacks. On paper, the Braves did quite well in this trade. It's hard to argue against acquiring your everyday shortstop and an All-Star outfielder, Ender Inciarte. The third piece of the trade for Atlanta was pitching prospect Aaron Blair. Considered as a "throw in" in this deal, many considered him to be the steal of the trade. However, he's been a disappoint in his time with the Braves organization. In 15 starts with the Braves last season, Blair went 2-7 with an ERA well over well over 7. Win/loss record and ERA aren't the most important stats in the world, but even his strikeouts per nine (5.9) and his walks per nine (4.4) just aren't enough to be effective at the major league level. Not to mention the fact he gave up over 10 hits per nine innings as well. The Braves have kept Blair in the minors so far in 2017 and his numbers aren't improving. So far, he's 6-4 with an ERA over five. For old school fans who like wins, I'd guess they'd be happy with his win/loss record, but just glancing at his stats you can see he has still been largely ineffective.

The brightest spot of this trade for Atlanta has been Ender Inciarte. Inciarte was just named an All-Star, so congrats to him on that feat. He's been the best center fielder the Braves have had since Andruw Jones left to join the Dodgers years ago. His attitude and work ethic are what fans love to see and you could argue that he's the most important position player on the roster. He plays Gold Glove caliber defense and his offense has been essential for the Braves. As I mentioned, I think he is the most valuable player on this team. As the old saying goes, as he goes, the Braves go. Freddie Freeman is the best hitter on the team, but his lack of defense and base running greatly diminishes his overall value. We're talking about all around value here, not just what you can do with the bat. This is bringing back memories of the Trout vs Cabrera case just a few years back. Ender Inciarte is the most exciting player on the Braves and I feel comfortable saying that. Again, that's not to take anything away from Freddie Freeman, but there's only so much a first baseman can do to make things exciting. However, with Freeman playing third base occasionally now, we might get to see some fun "effort" being shown at the hot corner.

Now, was this trade bad for the Diamondbacks? Well, it's a mixed bag. You could argue that dealing Inciarte hurt their lineup, but they have A.J. Pollack and David Peralta on the roster. David Peralta is almost the exact same player as Ender Inciarte. They both put up modest, to above average production at the plate and both play above average defense. In fact, using a blind eye test:

Player A: .311/.360/.473

Player B: .306/.351/.412

Player "A" is David Peralta and player "B" is Ender Inciarte. As I was saying, there's not much difference between the two offensively. So, losing Inciarte didn't really hurt the Diamondbacks as much as you'd want to think. In fact, Peralta has been just a bit better offensively than Inciarte has been this season. Last season, Arizona had Jean Segura at shortstop and he did an amazing job for them. He was later dealt to Seattle for Taijuan Walker, but they did not initially miss Swanson at shortstop. They have used a combination of Chris Owings and Nick Ahmed at shortstop this season and both players have done a great job. Ahmed isn't much of a hitter, but plays above average defense (0.4 dWAR in 53 games) and Owings has been very effective at the plate hitting .283/.323/.490 on the season. While neither player may have the potential upside of Dansby Swanson, they're both doing a capable job playing shortstop.

The final part of this trade is Shelby Miller. It's difficult to quantify him due to his ineffectiveness last season and his short run this season due to injury, but he was pitching more in line to his career numbers this season, so there is hope for the Diamondbacks that he will at least be a decent contributor for them when he is able to pitch again. The Diamondbacks have found success using both Zack Godley (2.8 WAR) and Randall Delgado (0.9 WAR) to make up for the loss of Miller. It's worth noting that Godley was acquired from the Cubs for Miguel Montero, who they recently released. As you can imagine, they would like to have Godley right now given the performance by their rotation so far in 2017. Much like the case for Swanson, we all are just going to have to wait and see what exactly Miller can bring the Diamondbacks. He has the potential to at least be an average major league starter, but again, time will tell with him.

So, looking back at this trade, it's hard to pick a definite "winner" or "loser" at this point. You can say the Braves won the deal just for the sake of getting Swanson and Inciarte, however, Swanson has yet to live up to hype placed upon him by fans in Atlanta. I do think he'll be a fine shortstop moving forward, but he may not be the "future hall of famer" some fans were portraying him as being. As long as he's a league average shortstop, I think Atlanta fans should be happy. Also, it's hard to say that the Diamondbacks really miss Inciarte or Swanson due to them replacing them with Peralta and Owings. Granted, nobody anticipated Owings playing this well in 2017, but he has shown flashes of being a solid player the past few years.

So, who wins and loses this one? Well, that's for you to determine. I have a feeling Atlanta fans will claim they won and Diamondback fans will say it wasn't as bad as first thought. Maybe people can actually let trades play themselves out before claiming a team "won" or "lost?" Then again, staying rational doesn't get clicks... So, I'm guessing that won't be the case moving forward. Oh well.

Atlanta is not rebuilding like the Cubs.

With the Braves and Cubs about to square off this weekend in Atlanta, you're undoubtedly going to hear commentators compare the two clubs and their rebuilding processes. 

(David Banks - Getty Images)

However, there are some stark differences between the two franchises. First off, the Cubs completely remade their entire front office. While Theo Epstein garners most of the attention, the additions of Jed Hoyer and Jason McLeod shouldn't go unnoticed. All three worked together in Boston and helped them finally get over the preverbal hump (the New York Yankees.) It also doesn't hurt to have one of the best managers in Major League Baseball in Joe Maddon.

When you compare that to the Braves, they fired a successful General Manager in Frank Wren and replaced him with John Hart and later on, John Coppolella. John Hart, John Schuerholz, and Bobby Cox all still have important roles with the franchise. While these men have all had successful and accomplished careers, shouldn't the front office be rebuilt with the rest of the team? It makes you wonder just how much freedom someone like Coppolella is allowed to have when he has so many old school guys around him. 

Getting back to the rebuilding efforts of both clubs, the Cubs have taken a very different route to their successful rebuild. First and foremost, the have an ownership group that allows the front office to spend on international talent as well as allows them to spend on the amateur draft. If you look at their draft philosophy, they very much differ from the Braves. Unlike Atlanta, the Cubs believe in taking college hitters with early first-round picks, and they have done so for three straight Drafts. Those hitters being: Kris Bryant ('13), Kyle Schwarber ('14), and Ian Happ ('15). Bryant and Schwarber have already provided huge value for the Cubs and Happ is rated as the third best second base prospect (by MLB.com).  When asked about Draft philosophy, Cubs’ top scouting and player development executive Jason McLeod told Gordon Wittenmyer of the Chicago Sun Times that, “We certainly don’t walk away from pitching,” McLeod said, stressing the club’s best-player-available philosophy. “We’ve talked also about how the history of the draft will tell you if players are close on evaluations, the college hitter is the way to go. They usually pan out the best.” 

When you take a look at the Braves' drafting philosophy, they've totally abandoned taking college bats. Since firing Frank Wren at the end of the 2014 season, Atlanta has drafted seven high school pitchers within the first two rounds during the '15 and '16 drafts. The front office did well in trading Shelby Miller for Dansby Swanson, but that's more about the Diamondbacks being in "win-now" mode and making a desperation move. Atlanta did very well for themselves in getting Swanson, but it feels more like a case of Arizona making a terrible move. The Braves organization is loaded with interesting pitching prospects, but there's only one potential impact bat (Swanson) and he was one of the best college hitters available in the '15 draft. 

If you look around Major League Baseball, more and more teams are deciding to go with college bats that can make an immediate impact. Michael Conforto (Mets), Trea Turner (Nats), A.J. Reed (Astros), and Stephen Piscotty (Cards) are all college bats who have already made an immediate impact or are on the cusp of breaking into the majors. (Even Bryce Harper spent a year at a Junior College).  

The Braves philosophy seems to be more like teams from the 1990's, in that they take power pitching with "projectable bodies" that are prone to breaking down over time. Much like the book Moneyball mentioned, teams continuously take high school pitchers who "look the part" instead of going with college pitchers who do not require much time to develop. Under Frank Wren, Atlanta successfully took college pitchers like Mike Minor, Sean Gilmartin, Craig Kimbrel, and Alex Wood. Not only were these pitchers able to be major league contributors soon after draft day, but they proved to be solid value picks because they've already completed their college careers and do not have the leverage of using a college commitment to gain more bonus money. 

High school players are like the ultimate lottery ticket. Some teams have hit big and been greatly rewarded, but far too often teams take players who just look the part and it can hurt the franchise for years to come. College pitchers, in my opinion, tend to be more projectable and require less time to develop. They've already been pitching in the equivalent of Double-A ball (especially in powerhouse conferences like the ACC, SEC, and PAC-12). 

The Cubs' rebuild has been successful due to their willingness to not only take college bats, but also find gems in trades. It's clear that they have a tremendous analytics department that have found things in players that other organizations either don't care about or don't want to work on. The best two examples of this are the trades for Jake Arrieta and Anthony Rizzo. Both were top prospects, but their previous organizations gave them up after waiting on them to reach their potential. Thanks to an ownership that is engaged to the team, they've been able to spend big not only on impact free agents like Jason Heyward, Ben Zobrist, and Jon Lester, but they brought in Joe Maddon to tie all the pieces together. 

While the Braves are rebuilding, they haven't followed the same path as the Cubs. The Braves seem set on eating up bad contracts to gain draft picks and instead of taking impact college bats or pitchers, they're taking their chances on high school arms that will take much longer to develop. They've made several trades that just seem like they're spinning their wheels. Giving up cost controlled arms for players like Hector Olivera or signing aging vets like Nick Markakis who give the team no real upside. Fans see this team competing in 2017 or 2018, but unless they spend big in the free agent market, this rebuild looks like it's going to take until 2020 at the earliest. So far, there's just not enough to believe this team will suddenly compete by the window first put in place by the front office. At this point, it's unclear what the goal is for this organization. They have some nice pieces in place, but outside of Dansby Swanson, there's no immediate impact bat. Will this team actually be committed to spending on free agents? As we saw with the previous front office, spending on free agents is what ultimately cost Frank Wren his job. With the players that have been traded away, they made no attempt to sign young players like Jason Heyward or Justin Upton long term.... If those players were deemed too expensive, how can they justify spending tons of money later on for older players down the road? Especially with ownership that refused to allow the previous GM Frank Wren the ability to add salary to improve upon a 96 win team... The free agent market continues to get more and more expensive, especially for younger players with power potential. We're not too far away from seeing players like Bryce Harper potentially ask for $400M+ deal. Can the Braves really afford to play ball in that market? Time will only tell. 

There's really no comparing these two franchises. The Cubs have the front office and ownership in place to fuel success for many years down the road. They have a different philosophy and approach to building a team and so far, it's been very successful. The Braves on the other hand have been doing what teams have always done, taking high profile high school arms and praying that one of the dozen or so will actually pan out. In the end, saying these two franchises are following a similar path is just lazy journalism. When you look deeper, it's clear that vastly different ideas are in place for both franchises. Will this old school approach by Atlanta actually work? I guess we will check back in 2020 to see.