Oklahomabrave
Anytime Now Frankie...
I don't think we will trade for him either, but would it really shock you if you we do something similar to speed up the rebuild?
Stanton Clears Waivers
- Thread starter rico43
- Start date
I don't think we will trade for him either, but would it really shock you if you we do something similar to speed up the rebuild?
I actually predicted the day Stanton signed his extension that the Braves would trade for him about this time.
That was before the Braves decided to spend $30M per year to clog up the corner OF spots with Kemp and Markakis though. And before Acuna burst onto the scene as the Top 5 prospect in the game who should be ready by 2019 at the very latest. Ironically enough, the Braves could afford a Stanton/Acuna corner OF next year...but instead decided to spend that money on Kemp/Markakis.
The most likely next dumb move the Braves are going to make to speed up the rebuild is cashing in a lot of prospect value for an MLB SP, despite the fact they have bent over backwards trying to produce their own homegrown rotation (and failed). They have been talking about acquiring a pitcher under long term control for so long it almost seems inevitable.
I fully expect they will get someone like Archer or Fulmer this offseason, will give up tons of future wins to acquire him, and will still be terrible in 2018. As a result, they won't be very good the entire time that newly acquired pitcher is a member of the Braves.
Southcack77
Well-known member
I'd rather have Kemp/Markakis than Stanton's contract.
This has to be a joke, right?
Why?
For as much as you guys continue to scream about how bad long-term contracts for aging players are, surely you can't want Stanton's. He's never shown an ability to stay healthy for extended periods, and that deal only gets more expensive as he ages. He'll get around like Kemp does now in five years.
The funny thing about those dreaming about landing him because the Marlins supposedly HAVE to unload him is that they ignore the fact that he has a full no-trade clause. What in the world makes anyone think he'd want to come to Atlanta when you consistently say no one else does?
He can opt out after 2020, which is when you say is the earliest we'll be competitive anyway - if he actually came, surely no one expects he'd stay.
8 years and $223 million for a 31 year old after his opt-out date.
And people think I'm nuts for thinking about tacking on an additional three years to Freeman's deal.
I'll pass - thanks though.
If the pitchers hit its a world series team. Of course assuming acing is really this good.
If the Braves didn't have Kemp, and if the rotation had 3-4 of the homegrown pitchers already producing 2+ WAR seasons, Stanton would be defensible as a win now move for the Braves. Pairing Freeman with Stanton pretty much guarantees an average offense or better.
However, just like it's unwise to waste assets (prospects) adding Quintana to this team at this point in time, it is unwise to waste assets (money) adding Stanton now as well.
At some point the Braves will be good enough to consolidate future value into present value, but now is not that time.
Hudson2
Well-known member
You're spot on Encheff but at the same time Stanton wouldn't cost much to get so it's basically a money thing, and like I said they'd have to take Kemp back. So it wouldn't be that much more for the 2 years that Kemp would have been here. He would boost not only the lineup in a huge way but bring even more excitement to the new stadium and team. I agree with you that if we had a better rotation that the move would make more sense.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
I think everything really hinges on what the payroll can really be. Coppy, Hart even JS have either directly said the payroll will go up or have said it in an indirect way. I can see ways to push the Braves to the front of the line, assuming they can add enough payroll (say, if they could push the payroll into the $150-$175M range). That is absolutely no given. It would squarely push the Braves into the top 10 payrolls in baseball, maybe even top 5.
And, the Braves would have to shed some of its bad contracts along the way, even some that are not so bad as far as money goes (Dickey, Markakis). Could they do those things? I would say it all starts with the money angle and how much payroll they are willing to take on.
And a lot depend on which clubs try to trim payroll and rebuild. The working assumption is that the Marlins will do that because they are losing money and have new ownership. That's not a given.
I am not saying they should go that way. But they could.
Let's say they sign Moustakas to play 3B (maybe 5 years $100M) (+20M)
Sign Arrieta to lead the rotation (5 years $125M) (+$25M)
Trade for Stanton (average of about $28M per year) (+$28M) Let's say it takes Folty, Sims, Wisler and Blair to get it done - certainly not talent for talent but Braves are taking all the money from Stanton.
Trade Markakis to move salary (~$10M)
Pick up $25M by letting Garcia, Colon and Dickey go
Then you have a net add of about $38M. Throw in rasises for the current team and you raise payroll by about $50M for 2018 net which should put the Braves in the neighborhood of $165M
You have a line-up of:
CF Inciarte
2B Albies
1B Freeman
3B Moustakas
RF Stanton
LF Kemp/Acuna
C Flowers
SS Swanson
Rotation: Arrieta, Teheran, a veteran low cost reclamation/place holder, Newcomb, Fried
The Braves just salary dumped SRod and Garcia. They had to get permission to add Adams' $2.5M salary when Freeman got hurt. Their current payroll is under $100M. The bulk of a team's revenue comes from their TV deal, and the Braves' TV deal is one of the worst in the industry.
I see no way anyone can logically conclude the Braves are going to have $150M+ payroll next year.
Until the farm produces 3-4 members of an above average rotation, the Braves are stuck spinning their wheels. It's as simple as that really.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
I don't disagree. And that's why I was for the full rebuild from the start instead of the bastardized re-load. My thinking was that they would have to get extremely lucky to have 4 home grown legitimate starters ready out of the pack they had at that time.
But, that's not what they did. So, the only way, IMO, to make work the path they have chosen is IF they get the big raise in payroll spending and then use the money wisely. At this point, I don't think either happens.
Southcack77
Well-known member
Do you think if they had done the total rebuild instead of the partial rebuild that folks would still be complaining about the way the team was performing in 2017?
Casuals would still be complaining.
Anyone with half a clue would realize the Braves still had a couple years left in the rebuild.
It's comical that the defense of the quasi-rebuild is that the FO didn't want a terrible team in 2017...and now it's 2017 and the team is still terrible...and the homers still defend the FO's tactics haha.
Southcack77
Well-known member
I think, and this is my guess only, that Coppy accomplished what he wanted to accomplish with the 2017 team as far as competition level. They were interesting for a good while, competitive, they kept an illusion of competency. Now that may or may not be consistent with the organizational goals. But no one stepped in to make him do anything long term stupid in the roster construction this preseason and they let him trade pieces off for little return so I guess no one was too awful excited about it. Or maybe he's gonna get fired, I dunno.
I'm sure he and everyone else is disappointed in the development of Wisler/Folty/Swanson.