Agreed. Which is why I called it anecdotal evidence. Such evidence can be found to support any opinion on this matter.
However, my issue with Swanson being called up never revolved around whether or not he was "ready". My issue always was, and always will be, losing control of his age 29 season to stick him on a non-contending roster.
Whether or not they extend him is irrelevant. That move cost them control of that season, and the absolute best case scenario is they end up paying ~$10M more for his services that year. A mid-market team with a ****ty TV deal who is struggling to draw fans to a brand new ballpark can't blatantly waste $10M like that and expect to be successful.
There are so many factors that made his call up a terrible idea, all of which were pointed out by anyone with half a brain at the time of the promotion:
1. He wasn't exactly tearing up AA.
2. The Braves were not in contention.
3. It cost them his age 29 season.
I think Coppy was somewhat forced into the move based on his quotes, so I have to assume it was forced by older FO members who won't be around (or alive) when Swanson is 29 and therefore don't care about that season.
There are literally zero positive aspects to calling him up early other than silly arguments about jersey sales and "getting his feet wet".
JohnAdcox (04-27-2017)
Not coincidentally, this is Zeets strategy as well.
Ivermectin Man
Thames will obviously cool off. But looking at his swing heat map....he hasn't been chasing pitches out of the zone. He's been super selective. That's the biggest difference. He always had power and bat speed.
Tapate50 (04-26-2017)
precisely. thus it's absurdly stupid to proclaim some giant swanson error in this department. they could just as easily had not called him up until he was ready only to find out he's never going to be ready. this is still the dumbest argument smart people make about the braves.
none of those are good explanations on your part. do you have the ability to reason or are you stuck with name calling? again, you are pretty off base with all of this. the difference in money is going to be minimal in the long run if swanson ends up being great. perhaps they hurt his development, but not really. great athletes aren't made in the D league or the minor league. if swanson is as legit as they hope, he can just as easily learn how to hit at one level as another.
the only reason ensheff must care so much is that he must be on the hook for the extra few million this might cost the braves over time, if it ends up costing them anything. otherwise, again, it's the dumbest discussion point ever. dansby will either pan out or not and it won't have a thing to do with where he is right now.
Going young. Sounds familiar. Weren't we the youngest team in baseball in 2013? Oh, well.
Those 3 points are the main 3 points teams use when determining when to call a prospect up.
Minimal difference in money? Since when is losing a player entirely after his age 28 season, or having his age 29 season cost $10M more than it otherwise should have a minimal amount for a team with a terrible TV contract and mediocre attendance numbers in a new stadium?
Again, another derptard missing the point. Nobody is claiming this will hurt Swanson's development (though some are questioning it). The issue is with mismanaging the value of a player asset. If you can't understand that, and can't write in 5th grade grammar, please refrain from discussing things with me.