Megathread: Braves lose Maitan, Bae and 10+ plus International Sanctions.

[striker42]

To play devil's advocate here, it doesn't say it was someone the Braves actually signed. Coppy could have set up a meeting with a free agent and both sides had interest on completing a deal. In this situation it's possible an opt clause was verbally agreed upon in negotiations but was then never included in the contract offer. So essentially, the agent was lied to and it led to a big waste of time and possibly allowed to other potential suitors to make signings and leave the market thinner for the pitcher in question.

That being said, I am not saying I believe the reports. But certainly it wouldn't be hard to imagine a scenario where this would make sense.

It was Sean Burnett. DOB wrote about it in an article. Apparently Coppy agreed to an opt out after 2 weeks and an opt out at 30 days. When the contract came it just had the 30 day opt out. The agent mentioned this and Coppy swore that Burnett would be in the majors before two weeks was up. Then after two weeks, Burnett wasn't called up and wanted to opt out and the Braves balked.

You can say it's the agent's fault for not insisting the two week opt out be included but that doesn't change the fact that Coppy was violating trust with someone he was likely going to have to work with again in the future. Not smart.

[Tapate50]

It was Sean Burnett. DOB wrote about it in an article. Apparently Coppy agreed to an opt out after 2 weeks and an opt out at 30 days. When the contract came it just had the 30 day opt out. The agent mentioned this and Coppy swore that Burnett would be in the majors before two weeks was up. Then after two weeks, Burnett wasn't called up and wanted to opt out and the Braves balked.

You can say it's the agent's fault for not insisting the two week opt out be included but that doesn't change the fact that Coppy was violating trust with someone he was likely going to have to work with again in the future. Not smart.

Not a good look.

[CyYoung31]

To play devil's advocate here, it doesn't say it was someone the Braves actually signed. Coppy could have set up a meeting with a free agent and both sides had interest on completing a deal. In this situation it's possible an opt clause was verbally agreed upon in negotiations but was then never included in the contract offer. So essentially, the agent was lied to and it led to a big waste of time and possibly allowed to other potential suitors to make signings and leave the market thinner for the pitcher in question.

That being said, I am not saying I believe the reports. But certainly it wouldn't be hard to imagine a scenario where this would make sense.

This was basically what I started writing up last night but got distracted.

[Chico]

Here's the article http://www.ajc.com/sports/baseball/a...s0qW2KThAl5FJ/

The Braves are going to contine to pile on Coppy here to protect the franchise's name, so I expect to see a lot more of these come out. It's scapegoating for sure, but Coppy may have brought some of this on himself being green and not realizing how important relationships are in business.

I'm in advertising and it's nothing but vendor/client relations since you are selling a service and not a product. The young guys always want to beat up their vendors on pricing to pad their profit. I did the same thing at one time. The problem is when your top client has an issue you need the help of that vendor to keep your client happy. If you beat them up on pricing, you don't get the service needed to keep your client and you risk losing them. It's a lesson they all learn eventually. I know I did. Coppy may be learning his now.

[striker42]

Here's the article http://www.ajc.com/sports/baseball/a...s0qW2KThAl5FJ/

The Braves are going to contine to pile on Coppy here to protect the franchise's name, so I expect to see a lot more of these come out. It's scapegoating for sure, but Coppy may have brought some of this on himself being green and not realizing how important relationships are in business.

I'm in advertising and it's nothing but vendor/client relations since you are selling a service and not a product. The young guys always want to beat up their vendors on pricing to pad their profit. I did the same thing at one time. The problem is when your top client has an issue you need the help of that vendor to keep your client happy. If you beat them up on pricing, you don't get the service needed to keep your client and you risk losing them. It's a lesson they all learn eventually. I know I did. Coppy may be learning his now.

How is an agent telling a writer about his experience with Coppy the franchise piling on?

We've actually not heard much from the franchise. We've heard pretty much every writer say that rank and file employees they trust told them that the situation in the front office was bad and that Coppy was not well liked. That's about it.

I actually get the feeling that the top brass are trying to keep things quiet. The fewer details that get out the fewer people will be calling for their heads.

[Chico]

How is an agent telling a writer about his experience with Coppy the franchise piling on?

We've actually not heard much from the franchise. We've heard pretty much every writer say that rank and file employees they trust told them that the situation in the front office was bad and that Coppy was not well liked. That's about it.

I actually get the feeling that the top brass are trying to keep things quiet. The fewer details that get out the fewer people will be calling for their heads.

No, we haven't heard much from the brass, but they're going to use the media to scapegoat him for sure. You're not going to read any "coppy was misunderstood" articles come out.

[MadduxFanII]

No, we haven't heard much from the brass, but they're going to use the media to scapegoat him for sure. You're not going to read any "coppy was misunderstood" articles come out.

I think Law owns that beat.

[Enscheff]

Missing revenue projections is one possible explanation of a static to slightly trimmed payroll. It is not the only explanation.

Another very possible explanation is that the Braves jumped the payroll for last year with the acquisitions of guys like Colon and Dickey in order to create buzz for the first year at the new park. You want the hype as big as you can get it the first year at a new park to try to drive season ticket sales. If you can get someone to buy season tickets once, you're much more likely to get them to renew. So a one time investment for last year makes sense.

Another explanation is that the Braves have been spending almost all of their max allotted payroll in recent years which can lead to smaller bonuses for the brass. Those decision makers may very well have decided to roll the amount actually spent back a bit so they can bump their own bonuses.

Yet another possible explanation is that the Braves are just sandbagging here. It's the beginning of the offseason. You don't want agents or other teams to know if you have extra cash to play with. You want to them to think you're poverty stricken. If an agent knows you have money to spend they'll squeeze you for more and if we try to trade someone like Kemp, we want the other team picking up as much of the tab as possible.

Personally I believe the payroll talk is largely sandbagging. I don't think there's any way Hart comes out and announces to the world our max payroll figure.

If a team is going to have a Top 10 payroll in the near future ($160M+), and increased payroll from ~$100M in 2016 to ~$120M in 2017, what would you expect the payroll to be in 2018? Probably something like $140M? Then around the $160M goal in 2019 in the 3rd year of the new stadium?

If that was the case, they wouldn't be "managing expectations" or "sandbagging". They have been pimping how good they would be for 3 years now, and they wouldn't clamp that down now after yet another disappointing season where a couple rookies (Albies and Gohara) finally showed promise.

If the Braves were drawing expected revenues I would expect chatter about an Ozuna/Inciarte/Acuna OF. I would expect to see rumors about the Braves targeting a solution at 3B like Frazier. I would expect them to mention adding a solidifying presence in the rotation, just like we heard last year. They told us exactly what they would do last offseason, and then they did it.

We have heard none of that. All we have heard is 1-2 arms for the BP. We will be lucky if the Braves payroll remains flat at $120M for 2018. All this talk around here is just folks trying to keep the rainbows and butterflies pumping as long as possible.

[striker42]

No, we haven't heard much from the brass, but they're going to use the media to scapegoat him for sure. You're not going to read any "coppy was misunderstood" articles come out.

It wouldn't surprise me to see him scapegoated for everything from the next top prospect failure to team running out of ketchup packets in the employee commissary. You don't let a chance like this go to waste.

That being said, I'm against the idea that Coppy's firing was him being scapegoated for other issues. He got fired on his own merit. Piling all the issues we can on him as he goes out the door is just good business.

[Super]

How is an agent telling a writer about his experience with Coppy the franchise piling on?

We've actually not heard much from the franchise. We've heard pretty much every writer say that rank and file employees they trust told them that the situation in the front office was bad and that Coppy was not well liked. That's about it.

I actually get the feeling that the top brass are trying to keep things quiet. The fewer details that get out the fewer people will be calling for their heads.

All the speculation about the FO and Coppy makes no sense. Unless JS is calling reporters, posing as execs from around the league, then this idea has no juice behind it. People are believing what they want to believe in this case.

[Super]

No, we haven't heard much from the brass, but they're going to use the media to scapegoat him for sure. You're not going to read any "coppy was misunderstood" articles come out.

are they also going to use other execs and other people around the league to do their dirty work?

[Chico]

It wouldn't surprise me to see him scapegoated for everything from the next top prospect failure to team running out of ketchup packets in the employee commissary. You don't let a chance like this go to waste.

That being said, I'm against the idea that Coppy's firing was him being scapegoated for other issues. He got fired on his own merit. Piling all the issues we can on him as he goes out the door is just good business.

Yes I agree there. I think his firing was on his own merit not something like missed revenue projections.

[striker42]

If a team is going to have a Top 10 payroll in the near future ($160M+), and increased payroll from ~$100M in 2016 to ~$120M in 2017, what would you expect the payroll to be in 2018? Probably something like $140M? Then around the $160M goal in 2019 in the 3rd year of the new stadium?

If that was the case, they wouldn't be "managing expectations" or "sandbagging". They have been pimping how good they would be for 3 years now, and they wouldn't clamp that down now after yet another disappointing season where a couple rookies (Albies and Gohara) finally showed promise.

If the Braves were drawing expected revenues I would expect chatter about an Ozuna/Inciarte/Acuna OF. I would expect to see rumors about the Braves targeting a solution at 3B like Frazier. I would expect them to mention adding a solidifying presence in the rotation, just like we heard last year. They told us exactly what they would do last offseason, and then they did it.

We have heard none of that. All we have heard is 1-2 arms for the BP. We will be lucky if the Braves payroll remains flat at $120M for 2018. All this talk around here is just folks trying to keep the rainbows and butterflies pumping as long as possible.

I think the promises of large future payrolls were empty and intended to try to drum up interest. "Sure we'll be increasing payroll in the future! As soon as we get all this new revenue we'll pump it into the payroll. Better get your season tickets now. If you wait until we actually increase the payroll to the top 10 it'll be too late!"

The idea that the Braves would take all this new stadium money and turn around and dump it into payroll was always naive. This team isn't owned by a rich guy who sees it as a toy. It's owned by a faceless company that cares about numbers. What motive does Liberty Media have to dump an extra $40 million into payroll when they're accomplishing their goals now?

Also, don't forget that the Braves are now as much a real estate company as they are a baseball team. It's not just about ticket sales. It's about filling out the Battery and squeezing that whole complex for as much money as they can.

[dak]

Hmm, this doesn't seem like the best idea. Hopefully, it's just a Bowman thought bubble and nothing more.

[Southcack77]

If a team is going to have a Top 10 payroll in the near future ($160M+), and increased payroll from ~$100M in 2016 to ~$120M in 2017, what would you expect the payroll to be in 2018? Probably something like $140M? Then around the $160M goal in 2019 in the 3rd year of the new stadium?

If that was the case, they wouldn't be "managing expectations" or "sandbagging". They have been pimping how good they would be for 3 years now, and they wouldn't clamp that down now after yet another disappointing season where a couple rookies (Albies and Gohara) finally showed promise.

If the Braves were drawing expected revenues I would expect chatter about an Ozuna/Inciarte/Acuna OF. I would expect to see rumors about the Braves targeting a solution at 3B like Frazier. I would expect them to mention adding a solidifying presence in the rotation, just like we heard last year. They told us exactly what they would do last offseason, and then they did it.

We have heard none of that. All we have heard is 1-2 arms for the BP. We will be lucky if the Braves payroll remains flat at $120M for 2018. All this talk around here is just folks trying to keep the rainbows and butterflies pumping as long as possible.

As far as I know you are one of the few people pushing the idea that the braves were going to have a 160 million dollar payroll.

Those of us who are more realistic didn't think that would be happening any time soon.

I expect there to be little movement in payroll and little long term commitment being made in free agency, but admittedly that's in part because I don't want long term commitments being made and don't see it as making sense in this free agent class.

until recently neither do you, but this wouldn't be the first time you've changed your views to hammer whoever happens to be in the braces front office.

If hart and JS leave you'll probably claim the secretary was and is still running things and she's super worried about losing her job.

[Jaw]

Glavine? What madness is this?

[MadduxFanII]

WHAT POSSIBLE QUALIFICATIONS DOES TOM GLAVINE HAVE TO RUN AN MLB ORGANIZATION, BOWMAN? YOU REMEMBER A PARTICULARLY SWEET CHANGE-UP HE THREW WHILE YOU WERE ENJOYING A PARTICULARLY SWEET COOKIE?!

[Enscheff]

Hmm, this doesn't seem like the best idea. Hopefully, it's just a Bowman thought bubble and nothing more.

LOL of course the Braves would hire Glavine to lead them.

He will be as good as Dave Stewart was.

[Enscheff]

As far as I know you are one of the few people pushing the idea that the braves were going to have a 160 million dollar payroll.

Those of us who are more realistic didn't think that would be happening any time soon.

I expect there to be little movement in payroll and little long term commitment being made in free agency, but admittedly that's in part because I don't want long term commitments being made and don't see it as making sense in this free agent class.

until recently neither do you, but this wouldn't be the first time you've changed your views to hammer whoever happens to be in the braces front office.

If hart and JS leave you'll probably claim the secretary was and is still running things and she's super worried about losing her job.

What long term commitments did I suggest? Trading for 2 years of Ozuna? Signing Frazier for 3 years?

Is the sand in your eyes interfering with your ability to read?

And of course you don't remember folks happily rosterbating based on a Top 10 payroll. Of course you call it unrealistic now that it isn't happening.

Almost like you forgot the board has a search function.

[weso1]

I'm not surprised that Glavine has an interest in front office stuff. If memory serves he played a key roll in union negotiations as a player rep.