Holding him back for most of the season won't help his service time, and holding him back for the entire season plus some of next year just for service time reasons would be asinine. He proved in AA last year that he's essentially ready. Once he's healthy and proving it with success at the plate, he should be up.Originally Posted by Russ2dollas
I think they wait until he is no longer going to be a super 2 that way Swanson and Alby don't start arbitration at the same time.
I would be absolutely shocked if both Swanson and Albies aren't signed through at least their age 29 seasons very soon.
For Dansby that probably happens after this season when they sign him to something like a 6/40 contract taking him through his age 29 season. The Braves buy one FA year, and Swanson still gets to hit the FA market at age 30. Pretty standard extension scenario for above average players.
Albies will be trickier because he is so young. Assuming he makes his MLB debut by age 20 this year, he will be slated to hit the FA market at age 25 or 26 depending on when he is called up (I'm guessing they wait until after Super-2 cutoff). The Braves could sign him to an 8 year extension after his age 21 season and he would still hit the FA market before he turns 30. Something like the Altuve deal plus a couple million per year for inflation could make Albies an extremely valuable asset.
It's a no brainer for all parties involved. Braves will have money so all this talk about service time means less in comparison to years past.
Natural Immunity Croc
Signing Albies to a nine year contract and calling the resulting deal an extremely valuable asset seems ... premature.
Who said 9 year contract? Reading comprehension?
I am all for signing the young players long term ASAP. Even if some of them bust we will still save a ton overall.
"Donald Trump will serve a second term as president of the United States.
It’s over."
Little Thethe Nov 19, 2020.
If the Braves only win 72 games, they should go ahead and at least look to trade Freeman and Teheran. The logic in keeping them is that the bottom has been reached and the Braves are climbing up. If they aren't better than 72 wins, that means the likely time of being competitive is 2-3 years away, instead of being 2-3 years away from right now. If that is the case, then Freeman will be past his prime and Teheran will be a FA.
The Braves don't need to get locked into a never ending cycle of mediocrity, not bad enough to be in position to get better, not good enough to actually win anything.
Pretty much agreed on both. If we are that bad, we need to win as few as possible to grab Beer (or Luken Baker, who is also a big ol' stud) and trade Teheran and Freeman.
There is no reason at all tI trade freeman. A pure hitter can be great until his mid 30s.
If he has another year close to last year, then he'll be entering his 28-year-old season with 4 years left on his deal. While I would probably have to think about it, and I would obviously have to be blown away by an offer, I would seriously pursue it. If we win that few games, then we're not competing until 2019 or 2020 at the earliest, which would mean he's about 30 with only a couple years left on his deal. You're risking it at that point.
You could get an absolutely mega haul by dealing him, so you would have to seriously look at it.
My prediction is that freeman is a brave for the next 10 years. He is our new chipper.
He very well could be, and I'll be thrilled if he is, but you have to be practical and smart. Freeman likely won't be as good from 30 on as he will be before 30, because hardly anyone is. Thus, it would make sense to maximize his value.
Chipper was always playing on contending teams, so of course we were never going to deal him.
And it's my belief that the Braves will be contending for the next 10 years starting with 2017.
Natural Immunity Croc
I get that, but we're talking about the specific instance in which are a roughly 70-win team this year.
Understood but the braves will have their own projection systems as all as intangible factors such as having a business to run. I would like to believe they haven't considered trading freeman for we'll over a year now
I'd like to think they're always open to all possibilities.
Obviously I'm sure they haven't been entertaining trading him, and likely won't, but if they don't at least evaluate all options at all times, they're not doing their job.
Their business should be building winnings teams. If the guys they have that are close don't perform and we aren't winning that would be a set back and we would need to proceed accordingly. Keeping Freeman in that situation wouldn't be smart.
You have to watch out for the Dale Murphy syndrome: That fans come to see a player perform, not a team win.
You're going to have to pry FF out of my hands. If you pay me like he's an MVP I'll listen b/c he's a 1B and I can replace 1B. But otherwise no.
Tehran is more interesting. IF our pitchers really take a step forward AND I get a big time return then maybe I'd deal him. But in that case you'd have to feel pretty dang good that at least two of Fried, Newcombe, Weigel is playing next year and playing well and that at least one of Wisler/Blair is going to be a 5th starter.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote