Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 41

Thread: Stanton Clears Waivers

  1. #21
    Anytime Now Frankie...
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    1,420
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    434
    Thanked in
    265 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    Nice! Now Stanton can be the next guy with 0% chance of being a Braves that the board can discuss outlandish scenarios for 20 pages haha.
    I don't think we will trade for him either, but would it really shock you if you we do something similar to speed up the rebuild?

  2. #22
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Oklahomabrave View Post
    I don't think we will trade for him either, but would it really shock you if you we do something similar to speed up the rebuild?
    I actually predicted the day Stanton signed his extension that the Braves would trade for him about this time.

    That was before the Braves decided to spend $30M per year to clog up the corner OF spots with Kemp and Markakis though. And before Acuna burst onto the scene as the Top 5 prospect in the game who should be ready by 2019 at the very latest. Ironically enough, the Braves could afford a Stanton/Acuna corner OF next year...but instead decided to spend that money on Kemp/Markakis.

    The most likely next dumb move the Braves are going to make to speed up the rebuild is cashing in a lot of prospect value for an MLB SP, despite the fact they have bent over backwards trying to produce their own homegrown rotation (and failed). They have been talking about acquiring a pitcher under long term control for so long it almost seems inevitable.

    I fully expect they will get someone like Archer or Fulmer this offseason, will give up tons of future wins to acquire him, and will still be terrible in 2018. As a result, they won't be very good the entire time that newly acquired pitcher is a member of the Braves.
    Last edited by Enscheff; 08-16-2017 at 03:50 PM.

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Enscheff For This Useful Post:

    JohnAdcox (08-17-2017)

  4. #23
    Atlanta Braves Fan
    Wash Nationals Fan
    Bryce Harper Fanatic

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    11,459
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    87
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,317
    Thanked in
    874 Posts
    The Braves cannot afford him and realistically expect to field a team. But, I would have claimed him if I was a big market team.
    "Yes, I did think Aldrich was good UNTIL I SAW HIM PLAY. "- thethe

  5. #24
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    7,772
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    270
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,491
    Thanked in
    1,150 Posts
    I'd rather have Kemp/Markakis than Stanton's contract.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Southcack77 For This Useful Post:

    Chico (08-17-2017)

  7. #25
    Voted Worst Poster
    '13, '14, '15 (Co-Winner)
    Heyward's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    22,572
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,251
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,257
    Thanked in
    1,831 Posts
    Kemp's contract is ****ty, Markakis' is moveable.

    But i dont know what an offer for Stanton would be like.

  8. #26
    Atlanta Braves Fan
    Wash Nationals Fan
    Bryce Harper Fanatic

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    11,459
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    87
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,317
    Thanked in
    874 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Southcack77 View Post
    I'd rather have Kemp/Markakis than Stanton's contract.
    This has to be a joke, right?
    "Yes, I did think Aldrich was good UNTIL I SAW HIM PLAY. "- thethe

  9. #27
    Expects Yuge Games nsacpi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    47,430
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,704
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11,384
    Thanked in
    7,533 Posts
    Stanton's contract is not the albatross everyone seems to thing it is. Whether or not you assume he goes for the opt out after the 2020 season, which I think think he is likely to.
    "I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."

    "I am your retribution."

  10. #28
    "What is a clvclv"
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Nebo, NC
    Posts
    9,634
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,354
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,340
    Thanked in
    1,628 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by gilesfan View Post
    This has to be a joke, right?
    Why?

    For as much as you guys continue to scream about how bad long-term contracts for aging players are, surely you can't want Stanton's. He's never shown an ability to stay healthy for extended periods, and that deal only gets more expensive as he ages. He'll get around like Kemp does now in five years.

    The funny thing about those dreaming about landing him because the Marlins supposedly HAVE to unload him is that they ignore the fact that he has a full no-trade clause. What in the world makes anyone think he'd want to come to Atlanta when you consistently say no one else does?

    He can opt out after 2020, which is when you say is the earliest we'll be competitive anyway - if he actually came, surely no one expects he'd stay.
    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?

  11. #29
    "What is a clvclv"
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Nebo, NC
    Posts
    9,634
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,354
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,340
    Thanked in
    1,628 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by nsacpi View Post
    Stanton's contract is not the albatross everyone seems to thing it is. Whether or not you assume he goes for the opt out after the 2020 season, which I think think he is likely to.
    8 years and $223 million for a 31 year old after his opt-out date.

    And people think I'm nuts for thinking about tacking on an additional three years to Freeman's deal.

    I'll pass - thanks though.
    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?

  12. #30
    I <3 Ron Paul + gilesfan sturg33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    52,573
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,018
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8,093
    Thanked in
    5,756 Posts
    Adding Stanton without giving up prospects would substantially move up our timeline. That's a 5-7 WAR bat immediately added to the lineup.

    i don't want that contract... but if they are desperate to compete, that's a way to do it.

  13. #31
    Shift Leader thethe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    69,567
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,507
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,179
    Thanked in
    3,898 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by sturg33 View Post
    Adding Stanton without giving up prospects would substantially move up our timeline. That's a 5-7 WAR bat immediately added to the lineup.

    i don't want that contract... but if they are desperate to compete, that's a way to do it.
    If the pitchers hit its a world series team. Of course assuming acing is really this good.
    Natural Immunity Croc

  14. #32
    It's OVER 5,000! Hudson2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    8,679
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    956
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,455
    Thanked in
    1,123 Posts
    Stantons contract is big but they would have to take Kemp as part of the deal. Would they take 2 years of Kemps contract vs 8 more of Stantons? I think so if another good prospect was going their way also.

  15. #33
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by sturg33 View Post
    Adding Stanton without giving up prospects would substantially move up our timeline. That's a 5-7 WAR bat immediately added to the lineup.

    i don't want that contract... but if they are desperate to compete, that's a way to do it.
    If the Braves didn't have Kemp, and if the rotation had 3-4 of the homegrown pitchers already producing 2+ WAR seasons, Stanton would be defensible as a win now move for the Braves. Pairing Freeman with Stanton pretty much guarantees an average offense or better.

    However, just like it's unwise to waste assets (prospects) adding Quintana to this team at this point in time, it is unwise to waste assets (money) adding Stanton now as well.

    At some point the Braves will be good enough to consolidate future value into present value, but now is not that time.

  16. #34
    It's OVER 5,000! Hudson2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    8,679
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    956
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,455
    Thanked in
    1,123 Posts
    You're spot on Encheff but at the same time Stanton wouldn't cost much to get so it's basically a money thing, and like I said they'd have to take Kemp back. So it wouldn't be that much more for the 2 years that Kemp would have been here. He would boost not only the lineup in a huge way but bring even more excitement to the new stadium and team. I agree with you that if we had a better rotation that the move would make more sense.

  17. #35
    Mr. Free Trade
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3,139
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    470
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    834
    Thanked in
    514 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    If the Braves didn't have Kemp, and if the rotation had 3-4 of the homegrown pitchers already producing 2+ WAR seasons, Stanton would be defensible as a win now move for the Braves. Pairing Freeman with Stanton pretty much guarantees an average offense or better.

    However, just like it's unwise to waste assets (prospects) adding Quintana to this team at this point in time, it is unwise to waste assets (money) adding Stanton now as well.

    At some point the Braves will be good enough to consolidate future value into present value, but now is not that time.
    I think everything really hinges on what the payroll can really be. Coppy, Hart even JS have either directly said the payroll will go up or have said it in an indirect way. I can see ways to push the Braves to the front of the line, assuming they can add enough payroll (say, if they could push the payroll into the $150-$175M range). That is absolutely no given. It would squarely push the Braves into the top 10 payrolls in baseball, maybe even top 5.

    And, the Braves would have to shed some of its bad contracts along the way, even some that are not so bad as far as money goes (Dickey, Markakis). Could they do those things? I would say it all starts with the money angle and how much payroll they are willing to take on.

    And a lot depend on which clubs try to trim payroll and rebuild. The working assumption is that the Marlins will do that because they are losing money and have new ownership. That's not a given.

    I am not saying they should go that way. But they could.

    Let's say they sign Moustakas to play 3B (maybe 5 years $100M) (+20M)
    Sign Arrieta to lead the rotation (5 years $125M) (+$25M)
    Trade for Stanton (average of about $28M per year) (+$28M) Let's say it takes Folty, Sims, Wisler and Blair to get it done - certainly not talent for talent but Braves are taking all the money from Stanton.

    Trade Markakis to move salary (~$10M)
    Pick up $25M by letting Garcia, Colon and Dickey go

    Then you have a net add of about $38M. Throw in rasises for the current team and you raise payroll by about $50M for 2018 net which should put the Braves in the neighborhood of $165M

    You have a line-up of:

    CF Inciarte
    2B Albies
    1B Freeman
    3B Moustakas
    RF Stanton
    LF Kemp/Acuna
    C Flowers
    SS Swanson

    Rotation: Arrieta, Teheran, a veteran low cost reclamation/place holder, Newcomb, Fried

  18. #36
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Horsehide Harry View Post
    I think everything really hinges on what the payroll can really be. Coppy, Hart even JS have either directly said the payroll will go up or have said it in an indirect way. I can see ways to push the Braves to the front of the line, assuming they can add enough payroll (say, if they could push the payroll into the $150-$175M range). That is absolutely no given. It would squarely push the Braves into the top 10 payrolls in baseball, maybe even top 5.

    And, the Braves would have to shed some of its bad contracts along the way, even some that are not so bad as far as money goes (Dickey, Markakis). Could they do those things? I would say it all starts with the money angle and how much payroll they are willing to take on.

    And a lot depend on which clubs try to trim payroll and rebuild. The working assumption is that the Marlins will do that because they are losing money and have new ownership. That's not a given.

    I am not saying they should go that way. But they could.

    Let's say they sign Moustakas to play 3B (maybe 5 years $100M) (+20M)
    Sign Arrieta to lead the rotation (5 years $125M) (+$25M)
    Trade for Stanton (average of about $28M per year) (+$28M) Let's say it takes Folty, Sims, Wisler and Blair to get it done - certainly not talent for talent but Braves are taking all the money from Stanton.

    Trade Markakis to move salary (~$10M)
    Pick up $25M by letting Garcia, Colon and Dickey go

    Then you have a net add of about $38M. Throw in rasises for the current team and you raise payroll by about $50M for 2018 net which should put the Braves in the neighborhood of $165M

    You have a line-up of:

    CF Inciarte
    2B Albies
    1B Freeman
    3B Moustakas
    RF Stanton
    LF Kemp/Acuna
    C Flowers
    SS Swanson

    Rotation: Arrieta, Teheran, a veteran low cost reclamation/place holder, Newcomb, Fried
    The Braves just salary dumped SRod and Garcia. They had to get permission to add Adams' $2.5M salary when Freeman got hurt. Their current payroll is under $100M. The bulk of a team's revenue comes from their TV deal, and the Braves' TV deal is one of the worst in the industry.

    I see no way anyone can logically conclude the Braves are going to have $150M+ payroll next year.

    Until the farm produces 3-4 members of an above average rotation, the Braves are stuck spinning their wheels. It's as simple as that really.

  19. #37
    Mr. Free Trade
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3,139
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    470
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    834
    Thanked in
    514 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    The Braves just salary dumped SRod and Garcia. They had to get permission to add Adams' $2.5M salary when Freeman got hurt. Their current payroll is under $100M. The bulk of a team's revenue comes from their TV deal, and the Braves' TV deal is one of the worst in the industry.

    I see no way anyone can logically conclude the Braves are going to have $150M+ payroll next year.

    Until the farm produces 3-4 members of an above average rotation, the Braves are stuck spinning their wheels. It's as simple as that really.
    I don't disagree. And that's why I was for the full rebuild from the start instead of the bastardized re-load. My thinking was that they would have to get extremely lucky to have 4 home grown legitimate starters ready out of the pack they had at that time.

    But, that's not what they did. So, the only way, IMO, to make work the path they have chosen is IF they get the big raise in payroll spending and then use the money wisely. At this point, I don't think either happens.

  20. #38
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    7,772
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    270
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,491
    Thanked in
    1,150 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Horsehide Harry View Post
    I don't disagree. And that's why I was for the full rebuild from the start instead of the bastardized re-load. My thinking was that they would have to get extremely lucky to have 4 home grown legitimate starters ready out of the pack they had at that time.

    But, that's not what they did. So, the only way, IMO, to make work the path they have chosen is IF they get the big raise in payroll spending and then use the money wisely. At this point, I don't think either happens.
    Do you think if they had done the total rebuild instead of the partial rebuild that folks would still be complaining about the way the team was performing in 2017?

  21. #39
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Southcack77 View Post
    Do you think if they had done the total rebuild instead of the partial rebuild that folks would still be complaining about the way the team was performing in 2017?
    Casuals would still be complaining.

    Anyone with half a clue would realize the Braves still had a couple years left in the rebuild.

    It's comical that the defense of the quasi-rebuild is that the FO didn't want a terrible team in 2017...and now it's 2017 and the team is still terrible...and the homers still defend the FO's tactics haha.

  22. #40
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    7,772
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    270
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,491
    Thanked in
    1,150 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    Casuals would still be complaining.

    Anyone with half a clue would realize the Braves still had a couple years left in the rebuild.

    It's comical that the defense of the quasi-rebuild is that the FO didn't want a terrible team in 2017...and now it's 2017 and the team is still terrible...and the homers still defend the FO's tactics haha.

    I think, and this is my guess only, that Coppy accomplished what he wanted to accomplish with the 2017 team as far as competition level. They were interesting for a good while, competitive, they kept an illusion of competency. Now that may or may not be consistent with the organizational goals. But no one stepped in to make him do anything long term stupid in the roster construction this preseason and they let him trade pieces off for little return so I guess no one was too awful excited about it. Or maybe he's gonna get fired, I dunno.

    I'm sure he and everyone else is disappointed in the development of Wisler/Folty/Swanson.

Similar Threads

  1. Stanton
    By nsacpi in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 379
    Last Post: 12-12-2017, 05:10 PM
  2. McCann clears waivers
    By PurpleBrave in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 08-17-2016, 12:56 PM
  3. Braves claim Jessie Biddle off of waivers
    By Freshmaker in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 03-22-2016, 09:12 AM
  4. The Stanton Contract-Implications
    By nsacpi in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-18-2014, 04:21 PM
  5. Erick Aybar placed on Trade Waivers, Any Takers?
    By tvsportscaster in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-19-2013, 08:23 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •