Braves tidbits from the latest BA chat

[Preacher]

Mike (Atlanta): I'm a Braves fan, but what am I missing on the Swanson call up? His numbers in Double A are good but not great. This team won't be competitive next year, and it starts his clock. What's the point of this? Wouldn't it be better to let him finish the year in Double A, open next year in Triple A and bring him up after you gain an extra year of control?
Ben Badler: As much as I like the Braves’ effort to troll the Diamondbacks when they play them next week, it’s an obvious mistake to bring up Swanson now. Starting his service clock in a lost season—especially when he hasn’t even been dominating Double-A—is a short-sighted decision.

James (Atlanta): Were you aware of the existence of a man named Kade Scivicque before last night? What is he to Atlanta?
Ben Badler: Longshot type. Modest bat, might not stick behind the plate. Basically what you’d expect to get back for a shortstop who can’t hit with below-average defense.

John (California): Any word of an adjustment by Travis Demeritte? He started off slowly in Carolina, but he has 12BB to 7Ks in the last week.
Ben Badler: Big power, but still a lot of concerns from scouts on the chase tendencies and even missing hittable fastballs in the strike zone.

Dave (DC): What's a reasonable expectation for Dansby for the rest of the year? .250/.320/.420 with sound baserunning and defense at short?
Ben Badler: I’d take the under on the offensive line, with the caveat we’re trying to predict small sample size outcomes, although I would expect at least a few highlight defensive gems in there. He’s made some fantastic plays in the minors this year.

connor (honolulu): do you think braves will promote albies soon to play second and give the future double play combo a chance to test themselves for rest of reason?
Ben Badler: They shouldn’t. They would be wasting his service time this year, and Albies already scuffled when he got to Triple-A. But will they. . . .

Alan (MS): Ben, can you give me an under-the-radar Braves prospect that I should be excited about?
Ben Badler: Jacob Webb, their 18th-round pick in 2014, has struck out 30 of the 49 batters he’s faced this year (nice little 23 K/9) and just got promoted to Low-A Rome.



http://www.baseballamerica.com/minor...qWQAYwLcpqP.97

[nsacpi]

We have to understand that Ben Badler is just a writer and doesn't have the grasp of the whole picture that our front office does.

[Chico]

We have to understand that Ben Badler is just a writer and doesn't have the grasp of the whole picture that our front office does.

Yes, nor does he care.

As a rule of thumb he is right. I just think this isn't a decision made in a vacuum.

[Horsehide Harry]

We have to understand that Ben Badler is just a writer and doesn't have the grasp of the whole picture that our front office does.

I see what you're doing and say do it some more

[striker42]

Yes, nor does he care.

As a rule of thumb he is right. I just think this isn't a decision made in a vacuum.

Yeah, there's more in play here than just service time calculations and current competitiveness. Writers sometimes forget baseball is a business. If the Braves weren't moving into a new stadium next year then you might not see Swanson up right now.

[smootness]

All these discussions about service time will likely be moot once the new CBA is in place. There's no way the players are going to allow themselves to continue to be screwed like they are under the current one.

[bravesfanMatt]

All these discussions about service time will likely be moot once the new CBA is in place. There's no way the players are going to allow themselves to continue to be screwed like they are under the current one.

I would bet that it does change as well.

[Horsehide Harry]

I would bet that it does change as well.

It probably will but that isn't the only consideration.

Swanson is now on the 40 man for good and he doesn't have to be. The 40 man is about protecting players for the franchise, stopping other clubs from raiding your talent or the players themselves from moving on to other teams. Even IF Swanson was targeted to arrive opening day 2017, that 40 man slot could be very useful for a rebuilding team between now and then.

Having Swanson up now is also an unnecessary gamble. If he doesn't do well you have to be concerned about any negative effects that rushing him may cause. Even IF there are no long term negative effects, the fact that he flopped will limit his novelty value in opening the new stadium next year. What are they going to say "Come see your new young guns headlined by young Dansby Swanson who came up and hit .185 last year?" Even if he's just "ok", say .250, .310, .350 and plays good defense, that doesn't help you sell the casual fan that you are theoretically trying to lure to the new stadium. The only way it works is if he comes up and has a great month and a half, henceforth the gamble.

It just makes no baseball or business sense at all.

[bravesfanMatt]

It probably will but that isn't the only consideration.

Swanson is now on the 40 man for good and he doesn't have to be. The 40 man is about protecting players for the franchise, stopping other clubs from raiding your talent or the players themselves from moving on to other teams. Even IF Swanson was targeted to arrive opening day 2017, that 40 man slot could be very useful for a rebuilding team between now and then.

Having Swanson up now is also an unnecessary gamble. If he doesn't do well you have to be concerned about any negative effects that rushing him may cause. Even IF there are no long term negative effects, the fact that he flopped will limit his novelty value in opening the new stadium next year. What are they going to say "Come see your new young guns headlined by young Dansby Swanson who came up and hit .185 last year?" Even if he's just "ok", say .250, .310, .350 and plays good defense, that doesn't help you sell the casual fan that you are theoretically trying to lure to the new stadium. The only way it works is if he comes up and has a great month and a half, henceforth the gamble.

It just makes no baseball or business sense at all.

I can't argue against that.. however, I assume the FO thinks that anyone not protected is more of a sub/part time player at this point anyway.

But again, I really just come back to, the FO wants to see how their #1 prospect will handle the Bigs. In spite of all the other BS! I to hope it will not set him back, but Copi addressed that question specifically by saying everyone he talked to said Dansby can handle it. So at least that was a concern for the FO as well.. doesn't mean they are all right, but I guess I have to trust the process. I have agreed with more than I have disagreed with them.

[Preacher]

It probably will but that isn't the only consideration.

Swanson is now on the 40 man for good and he doesn't have to be. The 40 man is about protecting players for the franchise, stopping other clubs from raiding your talent or the players themselves from moving on to other teams. Even IF Swanson was targeted to arrive opening day 2017, that 40 man slot could be very useful for a rebuilding team between now and then.

Having Swanson up now is also an unnecessary gamble. If he doesn't do well you have to be concerned about any negative effects that rushing him may cause. Even IF there are no long term negative effects, the fact that he flopped will limit his novelty value in opening the new stadium next year. What are they going to say "Come see your new young guns headlined by young Dansby Swanson who came up and hit .185 last year?" Even if he's just "ok", say .250, .310, .350 and plays good defense, that doesn't help you sell the casual fan that you are theoretically trying to lure to the new stadium. The only way it works is if he comes up and has a great month and a half, henceforth the gamble.

It just makes no baseball or business sense at all.

I didn't love bringing him up right now, but I don't think you're being fair if you're going to say flatly 'it makes no baseball or business sense at all'.

You can find reasons that aren't far-fetched why it does make sense; I can certainly the idea of wanting to get his feet wet at the major league level if we plan on starting him at SS for 2017, that does make sense. Just about every scouting report on Swanson raves about his makeup, he's apparently got all the intangibles you could ask for --- I don't think you have to worry too much about his mindset if he struggles some. Sure there's no guarantees, but that doesn't seem like a big risk to me.

If he has success this season, he can use that as a springboard into 2017; and the Braves can use that as a huge marketing tool for opening up the stadium, you don't have to like the move to acknowledge that those are realistic positives from this Swanson coming up.

[Horsehide Harry]

I didn't love bringing him up right now, but I don't think you're being fair if you're going to say flatly 'it makes no baseball or business sense at all'.

You can find reasons that aren't far-fetched why it does make sense; I can certainly the idea of wanting to get his feet wet at the major league level if we plan on starting him at SS for 2017, that does make sense. Just about every scouting report on Swanson raves about his makeup, he's apparently got all the intangibles you could ask for --- I don't think you have to worry too much about his mindset if he struggles some. Sure there's no guarantees, but that doesn't seem like a big risk to me.

If he has success this season, he can use that as a springboard into 2017; and the Braves can use that as a huge marketing tool for opening up the stadium, you don't have to like the move to acknowledge that those are realistic positives from this Swanson coming up.

As I said, it's a gamble. And the only way it pays off is if he comes up and has a relatively great month and a half.

Is it possible it works out? Sure, if he hits .285, .350, .450 and has some highlight reel defensive play. And he might do that. It's possible. Just not very likely as shown by his middling success at AA.

It's more likely that he's just "ok" in which case he will be forgotten by the casual fan in six months until the Braves start trying to pump him again when said casual fan will say "wait a minute, isn't this the guy we saw last year and dismissed already."

It's even more likely, IMO, based on his track record at AA that he struggles in which case he loses casual fan AND has to be very good to win him back.

It's just a tremendously short sighted move that in itself is likely not devastating. But the fact that the FO is thinking it's a good idea to start with makes me wonder about the solidity and capability of that management.

Don't get me wrong. The FO HAS done some good things, getting Dansby at the top of the list. BUT, starting a rebuild and finishing it are two different things. I think they have gotten half way through and decided that they MUST build a dog and pony show for the benefit of the new stadium and that show doesn't move the needle forward to really being competitive and could easily cause a reverse.

[Chico]

As I said, it's a gamble. And the only way it pays off is if he comes up and has a relatively great month and a half.

Is it possible it works out? Sure, if he hits .285, .350, .450 and has some highlight reel defensive play. And he might do that. It's possible. Just not very likely as shown by his middling success at AA.

It's more likely that he's just "ok" in which case he will be forgotten by the casual fan in six months until the Braves start trying to pump him again when said casual fan will say "wait a minute, isn't this the guy we saw last year and dismissed already."

It's even more likely, IMO, based on his track record at AA that he struggles in which case he loses casual fan AND has to be very good to win him back.

It's just a tremendously short sighted move that in itself is likely not devastating. But the fact that the FO is thinking it's a good idea to start with makes me wonder about the solidity and capability of that management.

Don't get me wrong. The FO HAS done some good things, getting Dansby at the top of the list. BUT, starting a rebuild and finishing it are two different things. I think they have gotten half way through and decided that they MUST build a dog and pony show for the benefit of the new stadium and that show doesn't move the needle forward to really being competitive and could easily cause a reverse.

So you think they didn't know this day was coming? Questioning the FO is a fan's right, but that's sounds a little far fetched. I'm sure even a little nerd intern could have told them they would need to put a competitive team on the field in 2017 to get people to come see the new complex 2 years go.

I think everything they've done is to get to this day.

[Chico]

It probably will but that isn't the only consideration.

Swanson is now on the 40 man for good and he doesn't have to be. The 40 man is about protecting players for the franchise, stopping other clubs from raiding your talent or the players themselves from moving on to other teams. Even IF Swanson was targeted to arrive opening day 2017, that 40 man slot could be very useful for a rebuilding team between now and then.

Having Swanson up now is also an unnecessary gamble. If he doesn't do well you have to be concerned about any negative effects that rushing him may cause. Even IF there are no long term negative effects, the fact that he flopped will limit his novelty value in opening the new stadium next year. What are they going to say "Come see your new young guns headlined by young Dansby Swanson who came up and hit .185 last year?" Even if he's just "ok", say .250, .310, .350 and plays good defense, that doesn't help you sell the casual fan that you are theoretically trying to lure to the new stadium. The only way it works is if he comes up and has a great month and a half, henceforth the gamble.

It just makes no baseball or business sense at all.

Have you looked at our 40 man roster? There's a lot of filler that can be released and many more that will be traded as soon as the World Series is over. I don't buy that argument at all.

[Tapate50]

This is NOT as big of a deal as people are making it out to be.

[sturg33]

This is NOT as big of a deal as people are making it out to be.

Maybe not... but it seems there's a lot more reasons to support keeping him down then to bring him up.

It's just funny that the usual suspects trip all over themselves to justify anything the Johns do(not talking about you)

[Carp]

It probably will but that isn't the only consideration.

Swanson is now on the 40 man for good and he doesn't have to be. The 40 man is about protecting players for the franchise, stopping other clubs from raiding your talent or the players themselves from moving on to other teams. Even IF Swanson was targeted to arrive opening day 2017, that 40 man slot could be very useful for a rebuilding team between now and then.

Having Swanson up now is also an unnecessary gamble. If he doesn't do well you have to be concerned about any negative effects that rushing him may cause. Even IF there are no long term negative effects, the fact that he flopped will limit his novelty value in opening the new stadium next year. What are they going to say "Come see your new young guns headlined by young Dansby Swanson who came up and hit .185 last year?" Even if he's just "ok", say .250, .310, .350 and plays good defense, that doesn't help you sell the casual fan that you are theoretically trying to lure to the new stadium. The only way it works is if he comes up and has a great month and a half, henceforth the gamble.

It just makes no baseball or business sense at all.

It didn't really affect the Angels or Trout that much, though. I think most people realize that good players don't always come up and hit like Puig did to start his career.

[Carp]

Maybe not... but it seems there's a lot more reasons to support keeping him down then to bring him up.

It's just funny that the usual suspects trip all over themselves to justify anything the Johns do(not talking about you)

The usual suspects are also trashing this move, much like they have done over pretty much every move since Wren was fired.

[Enscheff]

All these discussions about service time will likely be moot once the new CBA is in place. There's no way the players are going to allow themselves to continue to be screwed like they are under the current one.

I think you are probably right. Under the new CBA, the Braves will probably have had to keep Swanson down for 3 months to get the extra year of control. Since there is almost zero chance that would have ever happened, calling him up now will probably end up making zero difference.

The interesting case will be with Albies. I can easily see them keeping him in AAA next year for 3+ months at the age of 20 while Jace holds down the fort at 2B. If his defense isn't ready for the MLB level then he needs more work down there.

[jpx7]

Have you looked at our 40 man roster? There's a lot of filler that can be released and many more that will be traded as soon as the World Series is over. I don't buy that argument at all.

You think we'll make the World Series?!

[Tapate50]

Maybe not... but it seems there's a lot more reasons to support keeping him down then to bring him up.

It's just funny that the usual suspects trip all over themselves to justify anything the Johns do(not talking about you)

No doubt. But I think in the end, it will not amount to a hill of beans.

I think Albies is in a different territory considering his age. I think he ought to stay down and fill out as much as possible by the time we get him in ATL.