Official 2022 Offseason Moves Thread

[GovClintonTyree]

Heyman reporting the big issue in our negotiations with Freddie is the sixth year.

I do it. FOF (Face of Franchise) Bonus Year. I completely understand those who point out the aging curve and the likelihood that we overpay late in the deal. Since he's only 38 then (not 43 like Pujols, 41 like Cabrera, 42 like Cano), and he's Freddie Freeman, FoF, I do it.

[GovClintonTyree]

was Thor ever that great?

Good years in '15 and '18; great year in '16. Stud when healthy.

[thewupk]

I guess I just can’t remember because he never seemed to be healthy. I know he had one season that was awesome. But I really can’t remember much else. I could go look but I guess I don’t care that much. 21 million seems hefty.

Career 2.93 FIP...in 718 innings since 2015

When he pitches he is great but he hasn't done a lot of pitching lately.

But it's the Angels and I doubt they care about draft picks right now. They are trying to build around Ohtani before he bolts.

[MadduxFanII]

If you give Freeman a five or six-year contract, I think you do so with the understanding that it's probably going to get pretty ugly in the last year or two of the deal. It's hard to bet on a 38-year-old Freddie Freeman playing every day and hitting .300/.400/.500 with solid first base defense. You just have to ask if Anthopolous and the organization are willing to suck it up and prep for a Freeman-sized roster burden come 2027.

[jsebe10]

I do it. FOF (Face of Franchise) Bonus Year. I completely understand those who point out the aging curve and the likelihood that we overpay late in the deal. Since he's only 38 then (not 43 like Pujols, 41 like Cabrera, 42 like Cano), and he's Freddie Freeman, FoF, I do it.

Man I dunno…the tail end of these deals are always the ass biters…Unless it’s some how front loaded to prevent it..get the bang for your buck early..

[bravesfanforlife88]

If you give Freeman a five or six-year contract, I think you do so with the understanding that it's probably going to get pretty ugly in the last year or two of the deal. It's hard to bet on a 38-year-old Freddie Freeman playing every day and hitting .300/.400/.500 with solid first base defense. You just have to ask if Anthopolous and the organization are willing to suck it up and prep for a Freeman-sized roster burden come 2027.

Honestly, it would probably be lessened by the fact he can DH....assuming the NL adopts it.

[PawPawMaxwell]

Im not AA and in all likelyhood I wont be around 6 years from now and even more so it is not my money. But I would not do it. Biggest reason is the probability that such a deal with 10/5 attached would be a potential problem in allowing me to do other deals needed down the road. It is no small matter that Braves are the only corporate owned team. First base has always been the second easiest position to fill. First base has always been the most difficult to trade.
Enscheffs 3/90 would be my limit,

[DirkPiggler]

If you give Freeman a five or six-year contract, I think you do so with the understanding that it's probably going to get pretty ugly in the last year or two of the deal. It's hard to bet on a 38-year-old Freddie Freeman playing every day and hitting .300/.400/.500 with solid first base defense. You just have to ask if Anthopolous and the organization are willing to suck it up and prep for a Freeman-sized roster burden come 2027.

This is a big part of why I've advocated front-loading any long-term deal with Freeman. The team should be better able to stomach $40MM in 2022 (especially if Ozuna is suspended without pay) if it means 38-year old Freddie is only being paid $15MM or thereabouts. Call it a signing bonus or whatever you want. It makes sense.

[bravesguy]

Man I dunno…the tail end of these deals are always the ass biters…Unless it’s some how front loaded to prevent it..get the bang for your buck early..

This is very tricky because not only does he stay expensive potentially past his value, but everyone else gets very expensive during his contract (Riley, Ronald, Fried, Anderson, Soroka, etc). You start thinking about 1-3 of them making 15M more and you wonder who we have to lose to keep Freddie.

[clvclv]

Man I dunno…the tail end of these deals are always the ass biters…Unless it’s some how front loaded to prevent it..get the bang for your buck early..

As others mentioned earlier, it's probably justifiable if Alex is chasing another flag or two. By the time you get to the 5th and 6th year, you're probably rebuilding at that point anyway - Fried becomes a free-agent in 2025 (4th year of the deal), and Riley and Anderson become free-agents in 2026 (5th year of the deal). At that point you'll be into Acuna and Albies' option years, and still having Freeman around for the fans may be helpful if you wind up trading either (or both) away trying for another quick rebuild.

FWIW, if folks are angling for a Fried extension that resembles the Berrios deal - giving him 7 years/$118 million NOW keeps him under control through the end of Acuna's deal. Certainly a lot cheaper than trying to re-sign Freddie, but that's an awful lot of risk given Max' injury history.

[Slippyjms]

I do it. FOF (Face of Franchise) Bonus Year. I completely understand those who point out the aging curve and the likelihood that we overpay late in the deal. Since he's only 38 then (not 43 like Pujols, 41 like Cabrera, 42 like Cano), and he's Freddie Freeman, FoF, I do it.

Many would argue Acuña is the new FoF. You could pretty much replace Freeman’s production by having Acuña play a full season next year.

[thewupk]

If I were the Braves I would pull a Nationals move and give him 6 years while deferring lots of money. I'd count on the Braves new tv deal that will start in 2028 to help pay for deferments.

[jpx7]

As others mentioned earlier, it's probably justifiable if Alex is chasing another flag or two. By the time you get to the 5th and 6th year, you're probably rebuilding at that point anyway - Fried becomes a free-agent in 2025 (4th year of the deal), and Riley and Anderson become free-agents in 2026 (5th year of the deal). At that point you'll be into Acuna and Albies' option years, and still having Freeman around for the fans may be helpful if you wind up trading either (or both) away trying for another quick rebuild.

FWIW, if folks are angling for a Fried extension that resembles the Berrios deal - giving him 7 years/$118 million NOW keeps him under control through the end of Acuna's deal. Certainly a lot cheaper than trying to re-sign Freddie, but that's an awful lot of risk given Max' injury history.

This fan would rather have Acuña and Albies around for their entire careers over Freeman, if it comes down to that.

[chop2chip]

If I were the Braves I would pull a Nationals move and give him 6 years while deferring lots of money. I'd count on the Braves new tv deal that will start in 2028 to help pay for deferments.

With hyper inflation, those deferral payments might not actually cost anything!

[Carp]

A 32 year old 3b at 6/180. How about this for thoughts? Corey Seager 10/300. Move Riley to 1b, Seager to 3d, Swanson stays thru 22. 2023 Move Seager to SS, Riley back to 3d, use Swanson money to find another 1b. Give Seager some opt outs in exchange for him forfeiting no-trade clause.

Seagar has been way to frail. Misses at least 20 games a season. I think some team is gonna highly regret giving him 150 million or more.

[Enscheff]

As others mentioned earlier, it's probably justifiable if Alex is chasing another flag or two. By the time you get to the 5th and 6th year, you're probably rebuilding at that point anyway - Fried becomes a free-agent in 2025 (4th year of the deal), and Riley and Anderson become free-agents in 2026 (5th year of the deal). At that point you'll be into Acuna and Albies' option years, and still having Freeman around for the fans may be helpful if you wind up trading either (or both) away trying for another quick rebuild.

FWIW, if folks are angling for a Fried extension that resembles the Berrios deal - giving him 7 years/$118 million NOW keeps him under control through the end of Acuna's deal. Certainly a lot cheaper than trying to re-sign Freddie, but that's an awful lot of risk given Max' injury history.

As much as it sucks to already think about rebuilding, this is precisely the scenario that could play out.

The problem is giving Freeman such a deal increases the chances of a rebuild 4-5 years from now. It is a "win now" move, and fans seems to think they are great ideas when made, and then whine when the other shoe drops several years into the future.

Letting Freeman walk and maintaining that flexibility 4-5 years from now may avoid the need for a rebuild. Or...the team may have to rebuild anyways, so letting Freeman walk didn't help at all anyways.

This is a very tough decision, but I would lean towards maintaining flexibility.

[Carp]

This is a big part of why I've advocated front-loading any long-term deal with Freeman. The team should be better able to stomach $40MM in 2022 (especially if Ozuna is suspended without pay) if it means 38-year old Freddie is only being paid $15MM or thereabouts. Call it a signing bonus or whatever you want. It makes sense.

Frontloading doesn't do much good, tbh. You're stuck with a bad contract regardless. Backloadingthe contract makes a bit more sense, imo. And not simply because the value of money over time. Imo, you pay him less while he is still playing at an elite level, because you want to add as many good pieces to the team as you possibly can while Freeman is still playing great. That makes it more likely we can win another title in our window.

Realistically, our window is unlikely to remain open more than 4-5 years anyways, unless payroll goes up dramatically and stays there.

[Dalyn]

This fan would rather have Acuña and Albies around for their entire careers over Freeman, if it comes down to that.

Absolutely.

[McCann'sCans]

As much as it sucks to already think about rebuilding, this is precisely the scenario that could play out.

The problem is giving Freeman such a deal increases the chances of a rebuild 4-5 years from now. It is a "win now" move, and fans seems to think they are great ideas when made, and then whine when the other shoe drops several years into the future.

Letting Freeman walk and maintaining that flexibility 4-5 years from now may avoid the need for a rebuild. Or...the team may have to rebuild anyways, so letting Freeman walk didn't help at all anyways.

This is a very tough decision, but I would lean towards maintaining flexibility.

I completely agree with you. It is a hard decision and truly could play out either way. Luck in the events following Freddie signing or not- a free agent hitting or not, guys getting hurt or not, prospects panning out or not, Freddie staying healthy or not- will determine success or failure just as much as the contract itself, and those are all unknowns until they happen. This is why I would side with you and favor flexibility to deal with those unknowns, but you can make a reasonable argument to take the bird in hand now. One thing is for sure: we'll have a lot of revisionist history experts in 4-5 years claiming that they were right all along.

If we win it will be "I told you signing Freddie was brilliant! He is the anchor of this franchise." or "I never wanted to sign Freddie- the free agents we brought in with the money saved have been better than that old guy."

If we lose it will be "I told you signing Freddie would limit our flexibility and destroy our contention window." or "As I expected, the collapse began when we decided to let the face of the franchise go win a World Series with the Dodgers."

[DirkPiggler]

Frontloading doesn't do much good, tbh. You're stuck with a bad contract regardless. Backloadingthe contract makes a bit more sense, imo. And not simply because the value of money over time. Imo, you pay him less while he is still playing at an elite level, because you want to add as many good pieces to the team as you possibly can while Freeman is still playing great. That makes it more likely we can win another title in our window.

Realistically, our window is unlikely to remain open more than 4-5 years anyways, unless payroll goes up dramatically and stays there.

It's not nearly as bad of a contract in the later years though, which makes it easier for the team to replace the production lost due to Freeman's decline. He's more likely to be worth $40MM at 32 than he is to be worth $25-30MM at 38.

The idea of front loading does rest on a couple of key assumptions. The first being Ozuna being suspended without pay for all or a significant part of 2022. The other being a larger than expected bump in payroll due to the WS win. Both of these seem likely to me. If these conditions don't materialize, then a traditional contract (or one with deferred payments) likely makes more sense.

I'm not opposed to thanking Freddie for his service and wishing him well at his next stop if the bidding gets too high, regardless of the timing of payments. If we take emotion completely out of the decision, AND if we can replace or at least approximate his production at a lower cost, that's probably still the best move to make. As someone who is scarred by watching Robert Fick, Rico Brogna, 87 year old Julio Franco, and Scott Thorman provide at or below replacement level production for many years pre-Freddie, I'm just a little leery of going on the assumption that finding a competent 1B post-Freddie is going to be easy.