The Atlanta Braves FO

[Horsehide Harry]

I have long thought that the accomplishments of the Braves FO have been greatly overblown. If you go back to the late 80's, early 90's the Braves were in a stretch of some of the worst baseball ever played by a professional team. But, they had a plan, created by GM Cox and Snyder which was essentially to load up on talent through the draft and International FA signings, and play for the long haul. The Braves spent tons of money on young talent acquisition.

But, they also had the financial support of the South's version of George Steinbrenner in Ted Turner, an owner willing to open the payroll for the right splash. The Braves were building to a contender with a likely target date of 1992 and had started bringing in offense by signing Nick Esasky. That failed because Esasky had lyme disease and never really played any meaningful games again.

So, then as the Braves are beginning to actually turn it around a bit, Cox goes back to managing and enter JS. JS signs Liebrant (a journeyman mid rotation starter- think Bud Norris), Pendelton (a decent 3B coming off of injury and a couple of down years, with a strong reputation for leadership- think Freese), Bream (an ok 1B who could barely walk- think Kotchman) and Belliard (a defense only shortstop- think Aybar). But the basis for the offense was already there when JS arrived in Gant, Justice, Klesko, Lopez, CJ, etc. in the minors or just arrived. The basis of the pitching was already there in Glavine, Smoltz, Avery, Merker, Smith, Wohlers, etc.

JS DOES deserve credit for making some early wise moves in signing Maddux and trading for McGriff, but outside of spending Ted's money what did he really do?

Fast forward now to JS moving to President, bringing in his retired friend in Hart to essentially look over the shoulder of their "new wave" GM in waiting in Coppy (who they obviously don't really trust), and you have an aging continuation of an ancient regime who have handed the keys to the Ferrari to a kid that they don't trust to drive. And what you get is a half-a**ed plan, sorta rebuild sorta not, that very likely leads to a huge flop and the requirement to really tear it down and rebuild only after missing on the opportunity to revitalize the franchise as they move into a new and expensive home.

Public Service Announcement: If you are going to do something radical, like rebuilding a team, make a plan, commit to the plan, don't waver from the plan, and see the plan through until the end. And, for God's sake, before starting, pull your head out of your ar*e!

[Millwood1Hitter]

And when things don't go your way, blame the economics of baseball. (Even when at the time your we're still amoungst the highest payrolls in baseball at that time).

[50PoundHead]

I have occasionally come down fairly hard on Schuerholz because he was always sitting on a fat wallet from which to make his decisions and his later "continuance" trades weren't all that good. He had his share or hits and misses, but I've always believed that if he hadn't actually arrived in Atlanta, he would have had to have been invented. I credit Cox and Snyder for doing the foundational work, but they also fell in love with a lot of the talent coming up through the system and Schuerholz came in and took a look and signed Pendleton, Bream, and Belliard and traded for Otis Nixon to mix in with the younger core guys. I had the impression at the time that Cox would not have done that and waited around and hope for success to develop organically from within. Schuerholz didn't disrupt the re-build, but he found the missing ingredients that accelerated the team's development.

I get your main point that the front office is neither fish nor fowl at this point and is having a difficult time figuring out which path to take and to stay on it. I never bought the 2017 schtick. Like I've said before, Braves' fans need 2020 vision. It took Cox that many drafts and international signing periods to put together the early 1990s core. Our best prospects, especially on offense just finished A ball or below leagues. Austin Riley could really be somebody, but I don't expect him to arrive until 2019 at the earliest.

[Horsehide Harry]

I credit Cox and Snyder for doing the foundational work, but they also fell in love with a lot of the talent coming up through the system and Schuerholz came in and took a look and signed Pendleton, Bream, and Belliard and traded for Otis Nixon to mix in with the younger core guys. I had the impression at the time that Cox would not have done that and waited around and hope for success to develop organically from within. Schuerholz didn't disrupt the re-build, but he found the missing ingredients that accelerated the team's development.


I think Cox Was trying to add to the mix. That's why I threw in the Esasky signing, who if healthy, was one of the better 1B in baseball. Bream would have never been needed or signed. But, when the Esasky thing blew up, I think Cox pulled in the reigns a bit since that failed signing had to have been a timetable set back if nothing else.

I'm not saying JS is a terrible GM because he wasn't. But, he has the baseball reputation of being a GM genius and considered HoF worthy and I don't think his body of work really warrants that IF you look past the surface. To me, he went a long time without stepping on any obvious land mines, which was his best accomplishment.

But, he's not a builder. He's not a guy you go to when you want to build an awesome hotel. He's the guy you hire to run the hotel after it's built.

[Knucksie]

But, they also had the financial support of the South's version of George Steinbrenner in Ted Turner, an owner willing to open the payroll for the right splash. The Braves were building to a contender with a likely target date of 1992 and had started bringing in offense by signing Nick Esasky. That failed because Esasky had lyme disease and never really played any meaningful games again.

How could anybody complain about this, unless there was some way to know it would happen? Esasky hit something like .350 career at AFS, the Braves needed a 3B and he resided in Marietta.


JS signs Liebrant (a journeyman mid rotation starter- think Bud Norris), Pendelton (a decent 3B coming off of injury and a couple of down years, with a strong reputation for leadership- think Freese), Bream (an ok 1B who could barely walk- think Kotchman) and Belliard (a defense only shortstop- think Aybar). But the basis for the offense was already there when JS arrived in Gant, Justice, Klesko, Lopez, CJ, etc. in the minors or just arrived. The basis of the pitching was already there in Glavine, Smoltz, Avery, Merker, Smith, Wohlers, etc.


Pretty sure that Liebrandt was a Cox acquisition before JS came along. Blame Cox for the Zane Smith trade.

Terry Pendleton won MVP in '91, and was a great leader. Nobody can complain about that signing.

[50PoundHead]

I think Cox Was trying to add to the mix. That's why I threw in the Esasky signing, who if healthy, was one of the better 1B in baseball. Bream would have never been needed or signed. But, when the Esasky thing blew up, I think Cox pulled in the reigns a bit since that failed signing had to have been a timetable set back if nothing else.

I'm not saying JS is a terrible GM because he wasn't. But, he has the baseball reputation of being a GM genius and considered HoF worthy and I don't think his body of work really warrants that IF you look past the surface. To me, he went a long time without stepping on any obvious land mines, which was his best accomplishment.

But, he's not a builder. He's not a guy you go to when you want to build an awesome hotel. He's the guy you hire to run the hotel after it's built.

Agreed.

[nsacpi]

I get your main point that the front office is neither fish nor fowl at this point and is having a difficult time figuring out which path to take and to stay on it. I never bought the 2017 schtick. Like I've said before, Braves' fans need 2020 vision. It took Cox that many drafts and international signing periods to put together the early 1990s core. Our best prospects, especially on offense just finished A ball or below leagues. Austin Riley could really be somebody, but I don't expect him to arrive until 2019 at the earliest.

Chances are good we'll have an exciting young contending team with a window starting around 2020, give or take a year. In 2020, Riley and Albies will be 23. Allard, Soroka, Yepez and Acuna will be 22. There are no guarantees in baseball. But that's a nice foundation--to be supplemented by the upcoming draft and even younger international signings like Maitan, Guttierez and Cruz. But we need to repeat over and over that there are no guarantees, and especially no guarantees with respect to propects so far away from the majors.

To me the interesting question is what we do while waiting for this wave of talent (about whom there are no guarantees--sorry to be so repetitive) to crest. Given that there are no guarantees (have any of you heard that before) I think it would be a mistake to not make some effort to field competitive teams who can play meaningful games in September if luck breaks our way while waiting for the wave to arrive.

It is true that fielding competitive teams will hurt our position in the intervening drafts. It might mean we make some mistakes in terms of the major league players or near-major league ready talent we acquire. But mistakes will also be made with respect to the draft and high profile international signings. No amount of punting will guarantee a championship at some point in the future. This is not to deny that there is some sort of trade-off between the near-term and the period when the young uns arrive. There sure is. But I don't want to put all my marbles on some sort of post 2020 nirvana. It might not work out that way.

[The Chosen One]

Hopefully by 2020 we'll have a new owner also. Maybe 2020 will be good to us like the early 2010's.

[Millwood1Hitter]

I am the greatest, bar none, Braves fans.

https://cdn3.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/LsdKWHHllF6KUangd-L4ZtSAtzo=/0x28:497x359/2400x1600/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/39539036/119274112.0.jpg

This guy is the second greatest. I did beat him in '95, though.

http://cdn.fansided.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/17/files/2014/09/mlb_a_jhart5_cr_600x400.jpg

This guy think he is the greatest, but rest assured he is not, just don't tell him he isn't.....it doesn't go over well with him.

http://img.bleacherreport.net/img/images/photos/003/528/575/hi-res-5d16597758e3f81c1850db7e361f5f74_crop_north.jpg?w= 630&h=420&q=75

And much like Bush is to Obama with Americas, this guy is to blame for all of our problems.

http://sports.cbsimg.net/u/photos/baseball/mlb/img24720216.jpg

[clvclv]

I think Cox Was trying to add to the mix. That's why I threw in the Esasky signing, who if healthy, was one of the better 1B in baseball. Bream would have never been needed or signed. But, when the Esasky thing blew up, I think Cox pulled in the reigns a bit since that failed signing had to have been a timetable set back if nothing else.

I'm not saying JS is a terrible GM because he wasn't. But, he has the baseball reputation of being a GM genius and considered HoF worthy and I don't think his body of work really warrants that IF you look past the surface. To me, he went a long time without stepping on any obvious land mines, which was his best accomplishment.

But, he's not a builder. He's not a guy you go to when you want to build an awesome hotel. He's the guy you hire to run the hotel after it's built.


Name a GM that hasn't been better at one side than the other.

One.

Before everyone screams about defending him, don't bother. That's not a blind defense of JS, simply asking anyone to find someone who has been that "complete" guy. It's not Beane. It's not Theo (yet). It's certainly not been Friedman. You can go down the list as far as you want. It's completely acceptable to criticize his tenure and the moves he made at times. The problem with doing so for most people that love to complain is that they aren't willing to also give him credit for the things he did better than others. Each of the 30 GM positions comes with different pluses and minuses - money to burn and a bad system with no pieces to trade to fill holes without continuing to spend money, being able to build systems full of players with surplus value but no money to afford players that you could trade them for, what have you.

I've been around long enough to hear many "legends" criticized - John Wooden, Dean Smith, Tom Landry, and on and on. Each had their strengths, and people have always tried to shoot holes in them because they thought someone could do better at some facet of their jobs. In some instances there could have been others that were better in an area or two.

I understand many people hate to admit it, but at the end of the day those people were simply more successful than anyone else DESPITE any perceived flaws. When the first "team-builder" wins 14 straight Division Titles, he absolutely deserves to be compared closely to JS. The problem is that no one else has achieved that level of success. Until they do, the argument is pretty pointless.

[Horsehide Harry]

How could anybody complain about this, unless there was some way to know it would happen? Esasky hit something like .350 career at AFS, the Braves needed a 3B and he resided in Marietta.



Pretty sure that Liebrandt was a Cox acquisition before JS came along. Blame Cox for the Zane Smith trade.

Terry Pendleton won MVP in '91, and was a great leader. Nobody can complain about that signing.

Was not complaining about the Esasky signing. It was just bad luck. But Esasky was a 1B.

Leibrandt was a bit odd. He was traded to the Braves for Jim Lemasters and Gerald Perry FROM KC in December 1989, was granted FA and re-signed in December 1990. Lemasters wasn't much and Perry was acquired to play DH for KC.

But, this was an early interaction between Cox the GM and JS the GM at KC.

Yes, Pendelton won an MVP BUT it was a complete surprise to everyone. His signing was a stop-gap signing that struck gold. He was 30 so already past his best years or so any GM would think. His previous 3 years OPS was .700 or below. Should JS get credit for signing him? Sure. But I would also have to credit him for being very, very lucky as well.

[Horsehide Harry]

Name a GM that hasn't been better at one side than the other.

One.

Before everyone screams about defending him, don't bother. That's not a blind defense of JS, simply asking anyone to find someone who has been that "complete" guy. It's not Beane. It's not Theo (yet). It's certainly not been Friedman. You can go down the list as far as you want. It's completely acceptable to criticize his tenure and the moves he made at times. The problem with doing so for most people that love to complain is that they aren't willing to also give him credit for the things he did better than others. Each of the 30 GM positions comes with different pluses and minuses - money to burn and a bad system with no pieces to trade to fill holes without continuing to spend money, being able to build systems full of players with surplus value but no money to afford players that you could trade them for, what have you.

I've been around long enough to hear many "legends" criticized - John Wooden, Dean Smith, Tom Landry, and on and on. Each had their strengths, and people have always tried to shoot holes in them because they thought someone could do better at some facet of their jobs. In some instances there could have been others that were better in an area or two.

I understand many people hate to admit it, but at the end of the day those people were simply more successful than anyone else DESPITE any perceived flaws. When the first "team-builder" wins 14 straight Division Titles, he absolutely deserves to be compared closely to JS. The problem is that no one else has achieved that level of success. Until they do, the argument is pretty pointless.

My point is that he is a fine administrator but not a builder. I am not criticizing him for not being both. I am saying that he, nor his extensions in Hart (and maybe Coppy), are likely to produce a great re-build because they are not good at it.

If you want to say he's a genius administrator, then OK. I don't agree with that completely because I think there were times when he fell in love with his own myth and made some moves that were unnecessary and ultimately harmful. BUT, hey, no one's perfect.

If you want to say he's a great Builder of teams (and I am not talking about, an add here, a subtract there), then I strongly disagree.

[smootness]

First, why would Schuerholz not having to build the 90s Braves equate with him not being able to build the 90s Braves? Just because he didn't have to do as much building does not mean he can't do it. In fact, he did build most of the late 90s-early 2000s teams that continued to win, some arguably even being better teams than the earlier versions? He drafted Chipper, signed Andruw, signed Furcal, etc....no?

Also, Hart did build the mid-90s Indians. And Bobby Cox did build the 90s Braves. So what, exactly, are we arguing here?

Give me 3 front offices who have been proven to be better capable of franchise-building than this one.

[Knucksie]

The far bigger FO blunders occurred before Schuerholz.

Let's start with all the organizational hype placed on Brad Komminsk. It's one thing to have a prospect bush. It's quite another to be offered the chance to get out of the mess. The Indians offered Brett Butler back to the Braves in return for Komminsk. (Believe that this was revealed in Shanks's book.) We all know the previous damage caused by the Len Barker trade, which cost Butler, Brook Jacoby (who would've been the ideal replacement when Bob Horner's wrist busted both times) and a fairly useful pitcher in Rick Behenna.

The Ozzie Virgil trade also caused substantial damage. Future Cy Young close Steve Bedrosian was shipped for one of the more disliked players in all of baseball (yes, other players were involved). This goes back further. Probably it was Ted Turner who insisted on signing Bruce Sutter. This was never necessary and we saw how that worked out.

Will contribute more later...

[smootness]

The far bigger FO blunders occurred before Schuerholz.

Let's start with all the organizational hype placed on Brad Komminsk. It's one thing to have a prospect bush. It's quite another to be offered the chance to get out of the mess. The Indians offered Brett Butler back to the Braves in return for Komminsk. (Believe that this was revealed in Shanks's book.) We all know the previous damage caused by the Len Barker trade, which cost Butler, Brook Jacoby (who would've been the ideal replacement when Bob Horner's wrist busted both times) and a fairly useful pitcher in Rick Behenna.

The Ozzie Virgil trade also caused substantial damage. Future Cy Young close Steve Bedrosian was shipped for one of the more disliked players in all of baseball (yes, other players were involved). This goes back further. Probably it was Ted Turner who insisted on signing Bruce Sutter. This was never necessary and we saw how that worked out.

Will contribute more later...

If we're going to complain about the front office leading up to the early 90s, though...

[NYCBrave]

A better question is why is John Schuerholz still in a position to make meaningful decisions? The man is 75!!! There is a reason most people retire well before they reach 75. Bobby Cox is 74. It's baffling to me that the organization is going to let these men hang on forever. Continue to celebrate them as legends, but please bring in some new blood

[smootness]

A better question is why is John Schuerholz still in a position to make meaningful decisions? The man is 75!!! There is a reason most people retire well before they reach 75. Bobby Cox is 74. It's baffling to me that the organization is going to let these men hang on forever. Continue to celebrate them as legends, but please bring in some new blood

Like our 36-year-old analytics-driven GM?

[NYCBrave]

Like our 36-year-old analytics-driven GM?

Refer to the first post and others in this thread, does he really even have all the power to make decisions?

[smootness]

Refer to the first post and others in this thread, does he really even have all the power to make decisions?

I think he's actually been making most of the personnel decisions for a while, since before he officially became GM. Schuerholz hasn't been involved in individual personnel moves in a long time, and we know Hart won't be around long. I'm pretty sure Coppy is driving this ship.

[Millwood1Hitter]

I think he's actually been making most of the personnel decisions for a while, since before he officially became GM. Schuerholz hasn't been involved in individual personnel moves in a long time, and we know Hart won't be around long. I'm pretty sure Coppy is driving this ship.

I believe this as well. Hart was hired in part to be a buffer between the young GM and the media and fans and the backlash that was going to take place with some of the tough decesions that we're going to be made regarding some fan favorites as well as to recruit and bring back and assemble the player and development portion of the staff. For that, Hart needs to be applauded for the job that has been done, but on the other front, it is too early to see if JC's plan will ultimately work as well as we hope it does. I was really confident in the first moves, but ever since the Fredi extension along with the Olivera trade, I've been pretty meh on the vision going forward and if we are indeed taking the right track to being competitive.

[smootness]

I believe this as well. Hart was hired in part to be a buffer between the young GM and the media and fans and the backlash that was going to take place with some of the tough decesions that we're going to be made regarding some fan favorites as well as to recruit and bring back and assemble the player and development portion of the staff. For that, Hart needs to be applauded for the job that has been done, but on the other front, it is too early to see if JC's plan will ultimately work as well as we hope it does. I was really confident in the first moves, but ever since the Fredi extension along with the Olivera trade, I've been pretty meh on the vision going forward and if we are indeed taking the right track to being competitive.

I agree. The Fredi extension doesn't really bother me because we're not planning to compete anyway. I hated the Olivera deal and still mostly do, but I've liked most everything else we've done. I think it's clear we're going with a long-term rebuild; I just wonder why we brought in Markakis, Olivera, and Aybar, unless it's to save some face with the fan base (not working) or to make sure we have a high enough payroll.

[Knucksie]

If we're going to complain about the front office leading up to the early 90s, though...

Then let's re-title the thread. Some suggestions:

"All-Purpose FO Bitching Session #37"

"I Haven't Scored a Date With a Woman Since Leyritz Lifted Wohlers' Hanging Slider"

"JS Killed My Dog"

"Forum Offering PayPal Credit to Mop Up Millwood1Hitter's Vented Bile"

"How About We Re-Sign Jason & Justin?"

[clvclv]

Refer to the first post and others in this thread, does he really even have all the power to make decisions?

I'd be all but willing to guarantee that if Miller is traded for Pederson that decision was made by Coppy. Call it "influenced" by him , whatever you want. Chances are much better than average that neither of the other Johns would give up that level Pitcher until at least seeing whether Pederson can actually make adjustments better than he did for the last 4+ months of last season.

[GovClintonTyree]

Who hated Ozzie Virgil? All of baseball? Really?

I would think I would have heard that.

[Knucksie]

Who hated Ozzie Virgil? All of baseball? Really?

The exact phrase was "one of the more disliked players."


I would think I would have heard that.

Tracy Jones, who probably WAS the most hated player in baseball, received some chin music from Jim Acker. Ozzie Virgil said, "go get him if you want him."

[Horsehide Harry]

My point with this thread was to point out that all of baseball simply assumes that a JS/JH led team will know what they are doing when conducting a re-build right? Because they are baseball geniuses right? But, if you look below the surface that is simply not true. JS, at least with the Braves, for 25 years, has not had to preside over a true re-build. That's to his credit. But, the foundation of players was already in place when he arrived. Hart at least did have a hand in building the Indians but in a completely different way centered around hitting.

So, this whole re-build is really on the shoulders of Coppy, but I don't think either JS nor JH are letting Coppy drive without the training wheels yet. Both have made statements in the Press that severely limit what Coppy can do -"We intend to compete in 2016," "We won't go through another year like 2015." etc. when anyone with a baseball brain can look at the team an see that it would take $50-$75M worth of expenditure to fill all the holes, which isn't in the cards. And now Coppy has painted himself into a corner by publicly declaring players "untouchable" such as Freddie, and while that may be true, you don't announce that. It's like playing 5 card stud and telling your opponents that one of your cards is the 6 of hearts. It doesn't give away your whole hand but it does provide information that can be used against you.

My biggest complaint is that there appears to be no real formalized plan, just a general rebuild while retooling philosophy. It starts for me with the bizarre signing of Markakis which isn't something you do if you are rebuilding and compounds with the delay in trading Grilli, the acquisition of Olivera (who will be 35 YO for god's sake when this team is potentially good again) and the continued insistence of trying to be better in 2016 (the only way it happens is to sign a number of veteran players who will tie up payroll and be long gone by the time the target date for the completion of the rebuild rolls around).

When you have a house with a crumbling foundation, the best thing to do is tear the house down, put down a NEW foundation and build a good house. Spending money, time and effort on trying to prop the house up and hammering on the doors and windows so they will close is just foolhardy and ultimately doomed.

[rico43]

Was not complaining about the Esasky signing. It was just bad luck. But Esasky was a 1B.

Leibrandt was a bit odd. He was traded to the Braves for Jim Lemasters and Gerald Perry FROM KC in December 1989, was granted FA and re-signed in December 1990. Lemasters wasn't much and Perry was acquired to play DH for KC.

But, this was an early interaction between Cox the GM and JS the GM at KC.

Yes, Pendelton won an MVP BUT it was a complete surprise to everyone. His signing was a stop-gap signing that struck gold. He was 30 so already past his best years or so any GM would think. His previous 3 years OPS was .700 or below. Should JS get credit for signing him? Sure. But I would also have to credit him for being very, very lucky as well.

Fair to say that most champions are built with some degree of good fortune. Let's face it, Pendleton could have been Uggla, and Uggla could have been the second coming of Pendleton. This is why all GMs are evetually fired.

[rico43]

I agree. The Fredi extension doesn't really bother me because we're not planning to compete anyway. I hated the Olivera deal and still mostly do, but I've liked most everything else we've done. I think it's clear we're going with a long-term rebuild; I just wonder why we brought in Markakis, Olivera, and Aybar, unless it's to save some face with the fan base (not working) or to make sure we have a high enough payroll.

Markakis, like it or not, was a terrific signing. We have seen him at his weakest, coming back from the neck surgery, but this is a potential 200-hit guy who plays every day. Maybe he isn't highlight film defense, but there has to be something, however small, you can count on in an everyday lineup. Aybar also fits that description. Freeman, unfortunately, does not. If you have two sound big leaguers in your lineup, it affords you the chance to try things in other positions. What these guys are being paid is irrelevant. Too many people here have become obsessed with every dollar that is spent or not spent. It's a futile exercise because there's no way we can know every dollar that is going out of coming in.

[Horsehide Harry]

Markakis, like it or not, was a terrific signing. We have seen him at his weakest, coming back from the neck surgery, but this is a potential 200-hit guy who plays every day. Maybe he isn't highlight film defense, but there has to be something, however small, you can count on in an everyday lineup. Aybar also fits that description. Freeman, unfortunately, does not. If you have two sound big leaguers in your lineup, it affords you the chance to try things in other positions. What these guys are being paid is irrelevant. Too many people here have become obsessed with every dollar that is spent or not spent. It's a futile exercise because there's no way we can know every dollar that is going out of coming in.

The Markakis deal was not a wise use of the money UNLESS you planned on competing. No other way around that. Sure, he's a great clubhouse guy, blah, blah, blah. But those guys are a dime a dozen (K Johnson being an example).

When you are rebuilding and obviously so, that $11M would be better used to bring back talent that might actually be here when the team is targeted to be good again. There are lots of different ways that might be done such as: take on multiple guys who are trying to bounce back, who, if they do, would have exceptional trade value. An example of this would be a guy like Latos (Bud Norris also fits, Happ last year, etc). Or you could take on another teams bad contract as long as additional talent comes along with it. An example of that would be the Arizona trade. Or take on a guy who might bounce back from a down year and prove valuable, Trumbo if he gets DFA would fit.

The whole "getting veteran guys to show young guys how to play the right way" is overblown IMO. What are you paying minor league coaches for?

[smootness]

Markakis, like it or not, was a terrific signing. We have seen him at his weakest, coming back from the neck surgery, but this is a potential 200-hit guy who plays every day. Maybe he isn't highlight film defense, but there has to be something, however small, you can count on in an everyday lineup. Aybar also fits that description. Freeman, unfortunately, does not. If you have two sound big leaguers in your lineup, it affords you the chance to try things in other positions. What these guys are being paid is irrelevant. Too many people here have become obsessed with every dollar that is spent or not spent. It's a futile exercise because there's no way we can know every dollar that is going out of coming in.

I don't care what we're spending on them, and Olivera's the only one I'm really upset about...I'm just saying they don't really line up with our other moves. I acknowledged that they may have been made to save face or to keep payroll up enough, but Markakis being a consistent part of the lineup is more meaningless than his salary.