2018 Offseason And Targets

Status
Not open for further replies.
TheBravos said:
Of course Freeman helped us, but who’s to say the three high prospects attained by trading him back in 2016-2017 might have helped us just as much or more.

The rebuild went well, but it could have been a lot more efficient.
Click to expand...

It's not just the 2-3 prospects that he would have brought in return. It's the $21M they payed him per year to go be the lipstick on the pig. And it's the additional wins he provided by being a good player on a bad team that drove the record to be better than you should want on a truly committed rebuilding team (affecting draft position, draft pool, international pool, CBA picks, rule 5 position, position for waiver claims, etc. etc.) Plus, he occupied a position on the field and in the line-up that could have been used in a developmental fashion.
 
Point of fact:

AA has yet to trade a significant prospect.

Donaldson is as small a gamble for the future of the franchise as can be imagined.

The Braves have a surplus of mlb ready starter prospects that trading from will not substantively affect the Braves ability to continue pushing talent from the minors down the road.

The Braves have 4-6 years to draft and acquire players who could help sustain the next wave of player development.

There is no bad ending written in stone at this point. It could happen or it could not. Has a lot to do with luck and skill in managing the draft and assets of the organization going forward.
 
Carp said:
Who's to say those 3 prospects would ever make a significant impact? Maybe they all bust. It's happened plenty of times before.
Click to expand...

True. But if you are rebuilding you start out taking a given that you are prepared at the scouting and talent evaluation level the very best that you can be. If you can't trust that then you've failed before you've begun.
 
Horsehide Harry said:
Yes and here's why:

Freemans good year helped drive the team forward into a premature posture of being ready to really compete. It created the situation that AA is in today. He can't do nothing, so he gambles $23M on Donaldson. That might pay off and, assuming it was one of the few holes on the team, could certainly be justified. For instance, let's say the Braves had an internal RF ready to go and be a 2-3 win player with opportunity to develop into more and let's say that they had something similar for catcher, then bringing Donaldson in as a bridge/final piece for a really good 2019 team makes sense (all given the financial outlook that appears to be the case). Then AA can use his leftover cash to fill bullpen holes and bench and maybe spend some prospect capital if he chooses.

But that's not where he is. He gambles on a production boon out of Donaldson. Then he positions himself to fill other major holes by trading away his prospect capital because he really has no other choice given his payroll constraints. Other teams know he isn't a position of trading because he wants to, but has to so every team wants an overpay. He's got a choice: pay the price in prospect capital and try to compete now as 2018 suggests, spending prospect capital at a rate and level of talent not conducive to a long term window OR not pay the price, hold the prospects, try to sell the idea of scrap heap and declining guys like Muk as the answer and pray. Either option isn't really good.

This argument is completely different than: Was Freeman good in 2018? Is he worth his contract? Is he likely to be worth the rest of his contract? etc. etc. The tactical answer is yes, yes, yes.

The strategic answer is that when the Braves decided to rebuild they should have maximized all asset returns to very best ability with an eye on competing some time years in the future (given the expected payroll levels of the future). If ownership says in 2014: OK, we rebuild BUT in 2019 you can count on the payroll being top 5 in baseball (projected $180M+), no worse than top 10 in baseball (projected $160M+) then that informs the way you rebuild and fits closer to what the Braves have done. If ownership says modest payroll growth to flat by 2019 slotting you somewhere in the range of mid-point to below in baseball, then you rebuild like the Astros did - sell your assets for talent and draft position, take payroll very low and grow over time leaving yourself room as 2019 approaches to spend as necessary to fill in the blanks, all the while you try to lock up your best assets on good contracts and work ownership around to the idea of growing payroll y/y/y to maintain the excellence once you reach excellence.
Click to expand...

follow up question...should AA have looked to trade Freeman this off-season
 
The Braves current window starts and ends with Acuna. That's always been the case since he became an uber prospect. Just as it was with Heyward when he came up. The Braves need to maximize this current 6 year window (longer if they can get an extension).
 
nsacpi said:
follow up question...should AA have looked to trade Freeman this off-season
Click to expand...

I don't think he could even if he wanted to at this point due to expectation pressures.

But, If he could get the right return, yes of course. It would have been much, MUCH better after 2016. He was a 5.2 fWAR guy in 2018, 4.4 before that (when the idiots experimented with him at 3B) and 6.2 before that. He's signed at a reasonable number through 2021.

The Diamondbacks got a respectable return for one year of Goldschmidt - Weaver, Kelly and a throw in.

What could the Braves get? IDK. Freeman's got value, even now especially to a team who's contending or on the verge of contending and need that piece to complete their line-up.

Look at a team like Houston: would they do a Freeman for Gurriel, Tucker, Alvarez and Bryan Abreu? Braves would get a body to play first in Gurriel (salary relief for he Astros) to pair with a guy like Duda, they get 2 corner outfielders who are close and a longer term pitching prospect.

The Yankees: they get Freeman the Braves get Greg Bird, Andujar, Frazier and Florial.

Or the Indians for Zimmer, Nolan Jones, Ethan Hankins and Bobby Bradley.

Then you spend the $21M that you free up to make the team better.

Obviously if you don't get good value you don't move him.
 
Heyward said:
Riley and Anderson would be an overpay imo, but gotta give to get.
Click to expand...

When the rebuild started we were told that it would focus on young pitching because that was a currency that could always be converted to young bats. It appears that the exchange rate on our currency isn't in our favor.

I can't understand why a pitching prospect like Touki can't be flipped for a not yet established bat that is MLB ready. Don't the Astros have one of those? That keeps the team young and cheap, while helping clear the logjam of pitchers that are ready for a shot.
 
Now that AA knows exactly what money he has it shouldn’t be long before we see the new COF. Pollock is still my guess.
 
Carp said:
Who's to say those 3 prospects would ever make a significant impact? Maybe they all bust. It's happened plenty of times before.
Click to expand...

True, but you usually do better in such a high profile trade.

In all, we payed him big money in losing years . He helped us win more game in those losing seasons costing us higher draft picks.

It could have been bad, but most likely we would have done well because he would have been so sought after. If the right package wasn’t there...don’t trade him. There are plenty of teams that would have sold the farm for him.

Keeping Julio, the HO trade, signing Nick (to a lesser extent)...all hurt the rebuild.

Look, I love Freddie....he should have been moved for the right deal though. I very much feel that deal would have been out there for a young All Star in his prime.
 
Last edited:
you would have had to make a perfect trade to get more production that freeman has orocded the last few seasons. a trade that likely wasn’t even available.

who cares how much money was being taken up by freeman during those years? you weren’t trying to win anyway because the team simply wasn’t there.
 
Super said:
you would have had to make a perfect trade to get more production that freeman has orocded the last few seasons. a trade that likely wasn’t even available.

who cares how much money was being taken up by freeman during those years? you weren’t trying to win anyway because the team simply wasn’t there.
Click to expand...

You could be right no doubt. The HO trade, holding onto Julio and signing Nick have very little defense though.
 
Super said:
you would have had to make a perfect trade to get more production that freeman has orocded the last few seasons. a trade that likely wasn’t even available.

who cares how much money was being taken up by freeman during those years? you weren’t trying to win anyway because the team simply wasn’t there.
Click to expand...

The point is and has always been that when you trade Freeman (say after 2016) you DON'T CARE what his production is in 2017 and 2018. It isn't about getting the production that Freeman produced. It's about getting the production that Freeman will produce in 19, 20, 21 and at a fraction of the cost. It's also about using the $21M per year he got paid in those years elsewhere like taking a bad contract back from some team as part of a deal that brings more useful talent, draft position, etc. You care about the money being spent on Freeman because it is being wasted on something that isn't really useful to the long term goal.

It's like having a Lamborghini sports car as your primary mode of transport when you've got 4 kids to haul around. You can sell the sports car and buy a van and bank the left over cash or you can park the Lambo in your garage, buy the van anyway, never drive the Lambo and pine about what fun it used to be to tool around town at 120 mph in the "old" days.
 
thewupk said:
The Braves current window starts and ends with Acuna. That's always been the case since he became an uber prospect. Just as it was with Heyward when he came up. The Braves need to maximize this current 6 year window (longer if they can get an extension).
Click to expand...

Do we think that the current free agent market (fewer teams inclined to give big money deals over long periods of time) makes it more likely the Braves are able to sign Acuna to a long term extension before he hits free agency?
 
Are we still talking about Freeman not being traded years ago? Some people have trouble letting things go. Let’s talk about trading for Heyward too..
 
Ozzie Swanson said:
Do we think that the current free agent market (fewer teams inclined to give big money deals over long periods of time) makes it more likely the Braves are able to sign Acuna to a long term extension before he hits free agency?
Click to expand...

Acuna is extremely unlikely to sign an extension with the Braves. He is slated to be the next Harper/Machado and sign a $500M contract 6 years from now.

Hopefully the Braves can get an extension that guarantees his arb years in exchange for 1-2 of his FA years. Acuna and his agents know he is likely to make record, or close to it, cash in arb already, so there is little to no incentive for him to sign an extension.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top