If one thinks that Markakis is essentially an equal replacement for Heyward, then a certain logic becomes apparent: replace Heyward with his non-union Mexican equivalent for less money, receive approximately the same level of production and add Miller to the rotation, filling one of the holes left by Harang and Santana.
I don't think that way, of course, but the logic is sound if you grant the first condition.
clvclv (12-02-2014)
Thank you.
No matter how much bitching people here want to do, we've ALL known since the Freeman contract and other extensions were handed out last winter that...
WE WERE ONLY GOING TO BE ABLE TO RE-SIGN ONE OF HEYWARD OR UPTON UNLESS THE CONTRACT DO-OVER FAIRY TOOK B. J.'S CONTRACT AWAY.
Let it die already, geez. If you think Heyward was worth trying to extend INSTEAD of Justin, that's fine (and wrong) - you're welcome to have your own opinion. If you think there was a chance in hell we were ever going to be able to keep both without a new owner, new revenue structure, and a suddenly sold-out stadium for the next ten years, you're just not very bright.
Has there EVER been a statement and question a certain someone should absolutely never have made and asked publicly more than...
Kinda pathetic to see yourself as a message board knight in shining armor. How impotent does someone have to be in real life to resort to playing hero on a message board?
I think the question on Heyward is whether or not "he is who he is" at this point. The Braves must think so. It is readily apparent to me that Markakis--at 31 and with considerably less in terms of physical tools than Heyward--"is who he is."
My point here is that I don't think the Braves are 2015 contenders with or without Heyward (certainly less so without him). You are more optimistic than me on that point.
Funny thing about Markakis is that the Braves loved him coming out of Young Harris, but he flew up the draft boards and the Orioles took him before the Braves could. Braves saw him as a pitcher. Of course, in those days, the Braves' scouting brass pretty much saw everyone as a pitcher.
Last edited by 50PoundHead; 12-02-2014 at 12:40 PM.
Yeah I noticed that too. Probably has as much to do with just balancing the books long-term though...they start paying him when those two are off the books and their young Pitchers are ready to replace them in the rotation though. Can't remember if it was on MLBTR, XM, or MLB Network, but something I saw/heard since the Donaldson trade led me to believe they still had room to bring Melky back if they were inclined to meet his asking price.
One way or the other, they seriously need a left handed bat to try to balance that lineup at least a little.
Has there EVER been a statement and question a certain someone should absolutely never have made and asked publicly more than...
Kinda pathetic to see yourself as a message board knight in shining armor. How impotent does someone have to be in real life to resort to playing hero on a message board?
I think this was exactly how the Braves viewed Heyward...a young, inconsistent, light hitting corner OFer with power potential that plays premium defense at a non-premium (meaning not up the middle) position, who was also starting to develop a poor platoon split vs LHed pitching. They simply could not afford to commit $200M+ to a player like that after whiffing so badly on Uggla and BJ (who was also signed largely based on potential). If Heyward had been the .900+ OPS monster he was predicted to be, I bet the Braves would have extended him at $25M per for 10 years by now.
Markakis most definitely is what he is...a 30+ year old consistent OBP threat with average power that can play a competent RF and doesn't have much of a platoon split at all. And thus, his price tag is half that of Heyward's.
An alternative approach to Markakis is to find a team with a corner outfielder with a bad contract and take that player on and send BJ over. There are teams with surplus corner outfielders and a need for someone who can play center who might consider this. Some cash might have to go in one direction or another to make the deal work. I'm thinking of Ethier, Choo, Kemp, Craig, Victorino. It just seems to me that this kind of approach makes more sense in light of our need to free up cash to upgrade at center and elsewhere.
Braves1976 (12-02-2014)
I think it was exactly what they said it was - kicking the tires to see what we'd have to do in the event we moved Justin. "Hey Jon, we understand you'd love to pitch here and we'd love to have you. You don't have to talk dollars and specifics, but we're operating under the assumption that Boston's reported offer of 6/$110 million is relatively close. In the event we're able to move some salaries and make a deal or two before you've made your decision would you like us to get back in touch if we can get around the 5/$100 million range? We may not be a contender in 2015, but we're willing to go down that road in discussions about reshaping our roster with other teams with our eye on being a legitimate threat to win it all no later than 2017."
Since that meeting we've figured out that the Cubs blew that number out of the water and the Sox will push further if they need to. There's no reason to feel we could get close enough to that ballpark even if he were willing to give us a $10-$20 million hometown discount. I'd even be willing to bet Hart or someone has called him since the Cubs' offer was leaked and told him we couldn't.
Last edited by clvclv; 12-02-2014 at 01:00 PM.
Has there EVER been a statement and question a certain someone should absolutely never have made and asked publicly more than...
Kinda pathetic to see yourself as a message board knight in shining armor. How impotent does someone have to be in real life to resort to playing hero on a message board?