Braves interested in CK and DK

[CrimsonCowboy]

I wanted Kimbrel. But not for that much.

[Buzzworm]

Good job AA.

Wasn't worth that tbh.

Cubs can take the risk of having only 7% of their payroll be a high paid closer. Whereas we can't take the risk of having close to 15-20% of our payroll be invested in an aging closer.

I agree with all you said and it was wise not to sign him to that deal but in the long run that’s the real problem with this organization.
We are a top 10 market.Yet we act like we are in the bottom half.
Until that changes and we have the ability to even think about a move like the cubs made today then I just don’t see how we will ever be a real legitimate threat to win a title again.
Hopefully we make some smart trades at the deadline to patch the bullpen up but I’m afraid we are going to have to pay a premium in prospects and regret making any move at all, when in all likelihood it won’t get us past the Dodgers anyway.

[striker42]

we will pay a contenders premium when we trade for a reliever...but I'd rather do that than take on the kind of contract the Cubs are giving to Kimbrel

Very possible. We just can't keep shopping in the bargain bin and hope to go anywhere.

[zbhargrove]

I'm so glad we didn't make the dumb mistake of giving Kimbrel a deal over 2 years. But we do certainly need to make some moves and pretty soon. If it were me, I'd really make a splash by trading for Will Smith and Ken Giles. I'd then either sign Keuchel or trade for MadBum (although I think they will be demanding more in return that I'm comfortable to give and why I'm more interested in Keuchel). I don't really want any part of Stroman. His metrics say he's pitching way over his head right now. Its starting to look like we need someone to steady this rotation even if I don't love Keuchel or MadBum.

[Carp]

Not my money, so I'd have given it to him. That's just me though.

[clvclv]

Have no problem with them passing on Kimbrel for that kind of deal (although I feel the same as Carp mentions), but whether they have anything left to spend has to honestly come into question after this comes out...

"Reports have pegged the Braves as one of the favorites to sign free-agent left-hander Dallas Keuchel, but David O’Brien of The Athletic throws cold water on that possibility. The Braves have inquired about Keuchel and do have interest in him, per O’Brien, though he writes their interest has been “overstated.” Atlanta has not engaged in deep negotiations with Keuchel, O’Brien adds. The latest from O’Brien jibes with a Tuesday report from Joel Sherman of the New York Post, who wrote that the Braves are “uncomfortable” with the idea of paying Keuchel the prorated value of the $17.9MM qualifying offer (approximately $11.5MM)."

Reports have had Keuchel pegged as being open to signing for the rest of the season and then going back out on the maeket. If they're uncomfortable about giving him HALF what they gave Donaldson, it's pretty obvious that they blew their wad when they signed Josh.

[Super]

Not my money, so I'd have given it to him. That's just me though.

this point is silly 100% of the time. the money affects what the team can do later, whether its yours or not. there's a budget.
no, it's not your money. but if it hinders the team from improving in a more significant way later, then it's bad.

[PurpleBrave]

We committed 23 mil when we didn’t need to on a guy who’s basically hitting .250 and on pace for about 70rbi. Guess not upgrading anywhere else is a ramification of that

[Super]

We committed 23 mil when we didn’t need to on a guy who’s basically hitting .250 and on pace for about 70rbi. Guess not upgrading anywhere else is a ramification of that

omg only 70 RBI! terrible sign for a player!
do you not see the difference between committing $23M for one year, and $45M for 2.5? on a reliever, no less?

[Jaw]

We've probably got something similar tied up in O'Day and Viz/T-Sweezy. I know it's not exactly the same and just this year, but...

Those deals show why the Kimbrel deal would have been irresponsible.

[Carp]

this point is silly 100% of the time. the money affects what the team can do later, whether its yours or not. there's a budget.
no, it's not your money. but if it hinders the team from improving in a more significant way later, then it's bad.

Currently we have less than 40 million per year committed over the next 3 years. Assuming increasing payrolls (as we have been told we are to expect) I don't see how it affects us the greatly.

You'd have a better argument about him declining or the injury risk. But for 3 years (2.5 really) I'm comfortable with the risk.

[Carp]

Those deals show why the Kimbrel deal would have been irresponsible.

I mean CK has been considerably better and healthier than all this guys, but point taken. I'd still take the risk.

[Jaw]

And loser cucks like you are why nothing will ever be done about how pathetic and cheap the Braves leadership is.

Using a term like "cucks" is generally seen by others as a lack of ability on your part to intelligently articulate your argument.

[Super]

Currently we have less than 40 million per year committed over the next 3 years. Assuming increasing payrolls (as we have been told we are to expect) I don't see how it affects us the greatly.

You'd have a better argument about him declining or the injury risk. But for 3 years (2.5 really) I'm comfortable with the risk.

your 2nd to last sentence and my point aren't mutually exclusive.
but saying "it isn't my money" makes no sense. it doesn't matter whose money it is. there's a finite amount, and if i want the team to be good for the long-haul (which i do), i don't advocate tying up a chunk of it in a RP who yes, outside one outlier 2017, has already declined from his peak and yes, by being being an older pitcher, is an injury risk.

[nsacpi]

For me, the sticking point in a lot of deals is the length of the contract. I loved the deal the Brewers made for Grandal. They get a productive player without the risk of a multi-year deal. Ditto for the Donaldson deal.

I think pretty much all of us would be fine with Kimbrel on a one-year deal. Or even a one-and-a-half year deal. But not another year beyond that. Its easy to say, what's another year. Well, that's how a front office gets into trouble. I'm glad AA is being careful about controlling the length of these contracts (the Acuna and Albies deals are a whole other kettle of fish) for 30something players.

[Carp]

your 2nd to last sentence and my point aren't mutually exclusive.
but saying "it isn't my money" makes no sense. it doesn't matter whose money it is. there's a finite amount, and if i want the team to be good for the long-haul (which i do), i don't advocate tying up a chunk of it in a RP who yes, outside one outlier 2017, has already declined from his peak and yes, by being being an older pitcher, is an injury risk.

And again, I'm comfortable with the amount. The "it's not money" line is because I don't have to worry about the risk. Regardless, as a fan, I'm comfortable with the risk he proposes to the team because of the need he fills, not only for this year, but in the future; and also because we have some financial flexibility thanks to all the young, cheap talent we have, that will still be cheap 2 years from now.

We need a closer. May be Luke Jackson can be that. I'd rather not hedge my bets on him though. We know that good closers cost a lot on the open market, or cost a lot in prospect capital. I'd rather keep the prospects. 3 years and 45 million guaranteed for a closer who is still one of the best closers in the game is seems extremely fair to me. Especially when Britton got 3/39. If Kimbrel isn't worth 3/45, I'm not sure what closer is. The Cubs honestly got a bargain compared to RP rates pre-2019.

[Super]

And again, I'm comfortable with the amount. The "it's not money" line is because I don't have to worry about the risk. Regardless, as a fan, I'm comfortable with the risk he proposes to the team because of the need he fills, not only for this year, but in the future; and also because we have some financial flexibility thanks to all the young, cheap talent we have, that will still be cheap 2 years from now.

We need a closer. May be Luke Jackson can be that. I'd rather not hedge my bets on him though. We know that good closers cost a lot on the open market, or cost a lot in prospect capital. I'd rather keep the prospects. 3 years and 45 million guaranteed for a closer who is still one of the best closers in the game is seems extremely fair to me. Especially when Britton got 3/39. If Kimbrel isn't worth 3/45, I'm not sure what closer is. The Cubs honestly got a bargain compared to RP rates pre-2019.

the Braves need good relievers; i know you still buy into the "closers are different" fallacy tho.
they will be available for prospects and won't tie up a good chunk of money for 2.5 years. with how fungible and flaky RPs are, a team with the Braves' budget shouldn't be spending that amount on an aging reliever.
Britton is way overpaid. the Yankees have way more funds than the Braves do. even still, Kimbrel is getting $5M per year more. no thanks. there will be more efficient ways to sure up the bullpen.
you should worry about the risk if you want the team to be good long-term. there's obvious risk there, the Braves don't spend a ton of money, and $18M being tied up in a RP the next two years could severely limit their options.

[thewupk]

We committed 23 mil when we didn’t need to on a guy who’s basically hitting .250 and on pace for about 70rbi. Guess not upgrading anywhere else is a ramification of that

We committed 23 million to a guy having a 3 WAR season instead of watching Camargo regress into oblivion

[Carp]

the Braves need good relievers; i know you still buy into the "closers are different" fallacy tho.
they will be available for prospects and won't tie up a good chunk of money for 2.5 years. with how fungible and flaky RPs are, a team with the Braves' budget shouldn't be spending that amount on an aging reliever.
Britton is way overpaid. the Yankees have way more funds than the Braves do. even still, Kimbrel is getting $5M per year more. no thanks. there will be more efficient ways to sure up the bullpen.
you should worry about the risk if you want the team to be good long-term. there's obvious risk there, the Braves don't spend a ton of money, and $18M being tied up in a RP the next two years could severely limit their options.

The Braves need a closer. Playoff teams either have a reliable closer or will be trying to trade for one. I'd rather spend money and have one of the best. And I'd rather not pay the prospect cost of acquiring other top end relievers. 2.5 years is not a substantial risk.

[thewupk]

The Braves need a closer. Playoff teams either have a reliable closer or will be trying to trade for one. I'd rather spend money and have one of the best. And I'd rather not pay the prospect cost of acquiring other top end relievers. 2.5 years is not a substantial risk.

Craig isnt one of the best anymore.