Where would we be......

AerchAngel

AerchAngel

<B>Secretary of Statistics</B>
I am mainly responsible for YNOT and getting in 57 buttocks in political threads because is a tard so I decide to surprise everyone with a take (Jim Rome)

What if....

1. We never had Colon?

2. We never had Bonasuckio?

3. We never had the piss poor D'anaurd brother

4. CollIgethammer?

How many games we would have won now and close we are to the Nats, we should be 3-0 but Johnson is as reliable as our government in doing the right thing?

I say we are 5 wins more at this time.

What say you?
 
Collmenter had a good April. Five games, nine IP, 2.00 ERA. His first appearance in May was awful and he never bounced back.

D'Arnaud was 5-for-8 at the plate at the time of his release.

Better question might be if Braves had Camargo at short from day one instead of Swanson.
 
So, am I reading this right: the board has collectively jumped ship on Swanson?
 
rico43 said:
Collmenter had a good April. Five games, nine IP, 2.00 ERA. His first appearance in May was awful and he never bounced back.

D'Arnaud was 5-for-8 at the plate at the time of his release.

Better question might be if Braves had Camargo at short from day one instead of Swanson.
Click to expand...

Ouch.

You lost a lot of friends with that quote their my friend. Hopefully those people would ignore this thread because they will jump on that statement.

4 wins is what I see so far....
 
jpx7 said:
So, am I reading this right: the board has collectively jumped ship on Swanson?
Click to expand...

Of course not. But Dansby has been bad this year, period. Camargo has already put up 0.5 fWAR (coming into today, which will surely go up)... Where Swanson has put up 0.1 for the season. Just a dreadful showing this year, unfortunately
 
If we're convinced Swanson is our SS, we could probably get him to sign a friendly extension considering his performance this year
 
Why would the Braves or Swanson want to do an extension? The braves don't need to lock up replacement level performance and if Swanson can actually hack it he'd want to show that before signing a deal.
 
Slippyjms said:
Why would the Braves or Swanson want to do an extension? The braves don't need to lock up replacement level performance and if Swanson can actually hack it he'd want to show that before signing a deal.
Click to expand...

cuz we know he's gonna be good but he doesn't know it yet...the technical term is informational asymmetry
 
nsacpi said:
cuz we know he's gonna be good but he doesn't know it yet...the technical term is informational asymmetry
Click to expand...

All we know is Swanson has been terrible both on offense and defense. It's highly possible that Swanson is a bust and if you signed him to a long term deal the franchise would just have a bad contract on its books for 6-7 years.
 
Slippyjms said:
All we know is Swanson has been terrible both on offense and defense. It's highly possible that Swanson is a bust and if you signed him to a long term deal the franchise would just have a bad contract on its books for 6-7 years.
Click to expand...

If he was terrible he would be worse than replacement level. He's better than Markakis and we're paying him 11 million.
 
Slippyjms said:
All we know is Swanson has been terrible both on offense and defense. It's highly possible that Swanson is a bust and if you signed him to a long term deal the franchise would just have a bad contract on its books for 6-7 years.
Click to expand...

Terrible is a subjective term. He has not been as good as hoped, and I am surprised at how many people have soured on his future because of that.

I think his future is still bright. We just need to be a little more patient that we hoped. Starting out a little more modestly, and getting better at a more moderate rate still projects to be a really good player, and probably at a little lower long term salary than if he had taken the league by storm this year.
 
Slippyjms said:
So because we screwed up with Markakis we should make the same mistake with Swanson? Worst logic ever.
Click to expand...

No, I was trying to define terrible for you. Terrible is Freddie's defense at third base, aka below replacement level. Mildly below average is replacement level, aka Swanson's current defense/offense.

Plus, we could pay Swanson a lot less than Markakis.
 
Ventura's Stolen Bases said:
No, I was trying to define terrible for you. Terrible is Freddie's defense at third base, aka below replacement level. Mildly below average is replacement level, aka Swanson's current defense/offense.

Plus, we could pay Swanson a lot less than Markakis.
Click to expand...

Ok but if we're saying he's replacement level then we're saying he's providing the value that any random SS we pulled up from AAA would bring us. In that case why would we pay Swanson any more that what he's being paid right now. His current level of play would make him a non-tender candidate not an extension candidate.
 
mfree80 said:
Terrible is a subjective term. He has not been as good as hoped, and I am surprised at how many people have soured on his future because of that.

I think his future is still bright. We just need to be a little more patient that we hoped. Starting out a little more modestly, and getting better at a more moderate rate still projects to be a really good player, and probably at a little lower long term salary than if he had taken the league by storm this year.
Click to expand...

I hope you are right with Swanson but I'm growing increasingly concerned that we called him up too soon and ruined him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top