Also, I wouldn't say AA hasn't taken any risks. Smith and Ozuna's current contract were quite clearly risky moves. But they also happened to be pretty good market value compared to recent contracts of similar players.
Also, I wouldn't say AA hasn't taken any risks. Smith and Ozuna's current contract were quite clearly risky moves. But they also happened to be pretty good market value compared to recent contracts of similar players.
"Well, you’ll learn soon enough that this was a massive red wave landslide." - thethe on the 2020 election that trump lost bigly
“I can’t fix my life, but I can fix the world.” - sturg
The weird thing to me is this deal almost seems like exactly what he'd sign for as a free agent. Maybe he'd get 50 million more. But it seems crazy to give someone a FA deal when you control them for a long time.
This deal has to be making other teams pissed. Good for the players to win one for once.
The deal doesn't make sense unless you think free agent prices are going to continue to rise and rise significantly, at least for studs. That is a reasonable bet based on history. Still a risky bet given the demographics of the fan base and uncertainty in TV marketplace. Obviously an injury would be really costly.
For next year it will be interesting. If shewmake is what KLAW thinks he is, then he's probably a high avg, high OBP player at AA or AAA by the end of the year. Do they spend on a guy like Story or even move on from Swanson. Big year for Swanson and Riley. We will need money or a trade to get a LF to move Ozuna to DH in the next budget.
jpx7 (02-19-2021)
"Well, you’ll learn soon enough that this was a massive red wave landslide." - thethe on the 2020 election that trump lost bigly
“I can’t fix my life, but I can fix the world.” - sturg
Not to get ahead of ourselves, but if Shewmake is what KLAW thinks he is, he will be what Swanson is right now. With next year being a big SS FA class, there will be a couple left out of the musical chairs. Maybe AA will finally swing a deal that has a career year Swanson at the center of it. We will need a LF (maybe Drew) and a 3B (maybe Riley) as the only holes we have in our lineup. But that is 2022.
jpx7 (02-19-2021)
jpx7 (02-19-2021)
The idea behind a Swanson trade is that the return is a guy 2-3 years away from contributing, but since you've been making deals like this for the last 10 years the line keeps churning out new players. It is the rays model, and I'm not sure it works for a team that isn't as poor as them.
Or you do a surplus for surplus swap, like the Indians try to do with their pitchers and crappy OFers from other teams, then hope it works out better than it has for the Indians and their always awful OF.
I don't see it as particularly likely the Braves trade Swanson to make room at SS for Shew though. Have you seen the historic FA SS class next year? It will likely be a bad time trying to peddle a 2-3 win SS with a year of control left during that frenzy. The rosterbation around here about the Braves getting Lindor or Story or Seager or Correa or Baez is going to be unbearable.
Last edited by Enscheff; 02-18-2021 at 02:45 PM.
jpx7 (02-19-2021)
It's "fair" to question every single MLB contract since they're guaranteed - including Trout's and Acuna's.
These folks are playing with Monopoly money, and Tatis' AAV may very well be lower during the same years of his career than the other SSs I listed. Every single contract is a gamble, and the Padres gambled on the best player in the group. In a world where the numbers defy explanation, paying the best player less than the next-best players over the same period of their careers is (strangely) as logical as anything else in a world where people are getting paid millions and millions of dollars to play a game.
The Padres were in a position to pay Michael Jordan Scottie Pippen-level money and they took it - pretty hard to blame them on any level.
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?
You could argue that including Swanson in a Suarez deal would make some sense if there would have been a DH in 2021. With no one available in Cincinnati's price range to play SS next winter either (and no one in their pipeline), they might be interested in extending Dansby. Not so much in an effort to create an opening at SS to try and get someone from next season's class, but because the Reds have absolutely no one to even stand at SS. The Reds don't "need" a replacement 3B since they have Senzel and India, so the Braves would have been able to deploy Riley in LF, Suarez at 3B, and Ozuna as a DH.
The problem is then WE wouldn't have anyone with any type of bat to stand at SS either. Would creating an offensive black hole at SS be worth having Suarez, Ozuna, and Riley in the lineup? You guys would have to do your juggling of the numbers to figure out whether that would make for a better team over 162 games.
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?
Wait, didn’t our guy tell us that Rosenthal was going to the Mets? Do we still need to panic?
jpx7 (02-19-2021)
When you consider that Mike Trout's AAV is 35m, getting extra years of Tatis at 32-33m definitely isn't a huge discount.
You can argue that Tatis will be the face of the game if you want and buying years at 2021 dollars might end up a bargain, but its huge risk for not much of a discount, IMO. I don't get it.
jpx7 (02-19-2021)