nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
2018 was real and for most fans not something to be discounted
2018 Offseason And Targets
- Thread starter clvclv
- Start date
- Status
2018 was real and for most fans not something to be discounted
msstate7
Well-known member
I bought the 2018 postseason road hat to remember it was real
also, who were you for sure getting to replace freddie's production in 19, 20, 21? what deal are you sure was out there to get those kinds of players?
in your scenario, the braves don't win the division last year and have to hope the guys acquired for freeman out-produce him in 19, 20, and 21 to give them a chance to win then. that is a long shot and a strategy i'm very glad the FO did not take.
right. i cared a whole lot about freddie's production last year. i also care a ton about it this year. and probably will in 2020.
Unlike the decision to keep Teheran, either course of action with Freeman was defensible at the time. There is merit to the idea of selling a valuable asset at the beginning of a rebuild, and there is merit in holding onto a guy who would be in his 20s and still controlled for several prime years when the window of contention opened.
What’s silly is folks using the benefit of hindsight to claim it was clearly the right idea to keep Freeman. It is silly to claim the Braves wouldn’t be just as good as they are now with 2-3 more Top 100 prospects maturing now and a FA 1B approximating Freeman’s production. There are plenty of scenarios where it’s easy to envision the Braves being better now, and in the future, had they traded Freeman.
I definitely would have traded Julio, and I probably would have traded Freeman, but it wasn’t some indefensible blunder keeping him.
What’s silly is folks using the benefit of hindsight to claim it was clearly the right idea to keep Freeman. It is silly to claim the Braves wouldn’t be just as good as they are now with 2-3 more Top 100 prospects maturing now and a FA 1B approximating Freeman’s production. There are plenty of scenarios where it’s easy to envision the Braves being better now, and in the future, had they traded Freeman.
I definitely would have traded Julio, and I probably would have traded Freeman, but it wasn’t some indefensible blunder keeping him.
it's impossible to be confident in 1). what deals were even out there for freeman 2). one of those potential deals + a FA 1B working out the same or better.
the FO was aiming for a quicker-than-usual turnaround, so I think it's fair to look at what freeman did to help win the division not long after the rebuild began as a reason to keep him.
Yes, they were looking to compete in 2017...how did that work out? 72 wins...
The Plan was to compete by 2017, and The Plan failed miserably. The New Plan was to punt 2018 by getting money off the books in preparation for the 2019 season, and let the youngsters develop. The youngsters had other ideas, and they won the division instead.
Again, folks looking back on the Freeman decision are doing so with the benefit of hindsight. The Plan was to compete in 2017, and didn't work because it was a terrible plan to begin with that was destined to fail from the beginning. The New Plan was to punt 2018 and compete in 2019. If the goal at the start of the rebuild had been to compete in 2019, keeping Freeman was not a good idea.
Things worked out well, so keeping Freeman looks like a good choice...with the benefit of hindsight. It was certainly a defensible move, but acting like it was a no-brainer at the time is nothing short of being a naive homer.
Last edited:
bravesfanforlife88
Well-known member
Jon Heyman
Verified account
@JonHeyman
10m10 minutes ago
More
Things said to “ramp up” in Sonny Gray trade talks since CC Sabathia was given clearance to pitch. At least 6 teams said to be involved. Reds are one. Padres, Brewers, A’s, Padres, Mariners, Braves among others linked to Sonny.
Verified account
@JonHeyman
10m10 minutes ago
More
Things said to “ramp up” in Sonny Gray trade talks since CC Sabathia was given clearance to pitch. At least 6 teams said to be involved. Reds are one. Padres, Brewers, A’s, Padres, Mariners, Braves among others linked to Sonny.
Braves need to settle the JTR (plus maybe a MLB arm) situation before they can settle the cOF situation before they can settle the Gray situation.
I really expected the JTR thing to happen much sooner after Grandal signed. The Marlins are buffoons of the highest order.
msstate7
Well-known member
Please do not get into a bidding war for gray
bravesfanforlife88
Well-known member
Was thinking the same thing
Getting Gray is likely contingent on using Newk in a trade for JTR or a cOF, and still having $9M to pay him.
I still think a Frazier/Gray package makes sense if the Braves sign Markakis or CarGo as well...less so if they somehow get Pollock at a bargain rate.
It's getting to be about time to either pull off the JTR trade or move on.
bravesfanforlife88
Well-known member
Gray is getting $7.5m this season. He agreed to that number with the Yankees
Southcack77
Well-known member
As it turns out there is a lot of nuance in rebuilding.
There isn't one right way or wrong way and different paths can lead to the same success or lack of success.
Probably best not to insist that you have the only and best strategy.
There isn't one right way or wrong way and different paths can lead to the same success or lack of success.
Probably best not to insist that you have the only and best strategy.
bravesfanforlife88
Well-known member
Mel Stottlemyre passed away today at 77 years old. He had bone marrow cancer...
RIP
RIP
meh, the "2017 is the year" stuff was always more of lip service by the FO to the fans to me than anything i thought they truly thought possible or likely. to me, it was hype for the new park. i have long thought this and i'm certain there are posts to back it up. and as it turns out, they were one year off, anyway.
i understand the hindsight and process > results argument. but if the FO at the time was looking ahead and didn't think the team was *that* far away (which we now know they weren't - maybe the FO felt that way beforehand?) then keeping freddie made sense.
i was against trading freddie. for an insane deal, i would've likely been on board. we don't know what players were being offered. if it was a bunch of pitchers, even highly-ranked ones, i think a lot of people wouldn't have liked it. who knows? but i don't think it's a given, at all, that 2 prospects + a FA 1B (who?) would've produced the way freeman did last year and likely will this year.
anyway, the freeman trade debate is stale. i think it had a higher chance of working out poorly than breaking even or being a clear win. that's all i'm saying. to act like it was a no-brainer to deal him and pretending to be sure that the return would make it worth it is naive.
It definitely wasn't a no-brainer either way, which is why I called keeping him defensible. Unlike Haniger in Seattle, Freeman was young and under control for many more years. Unlike Teheran, Freeman was a good bet to still be productive when the Braves were good again.
The "correct" choice was contingent on the packages being offered. My preference to trade him assumes offers were available commensurate with his value, and not centered around even more pitching. If those offers were not available, I would have been in favor of keeping him.
I can blame the FO for keeping Teheran, and I think it's dumb for Seattle to keep a 29 year old Haniger, but keeping Freeman was always an acceptable move. The fact it ended up working out doesn't change anything about the decision making process, good or bad.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
Keeping Freeman, assuming a good trade was out there to be had (and we don't know that to be the case because the Braves apparently never made him available even on a contingent basis), always made sense IF you were going to have enough payroll space at the target date to compete to be able to feed the fire of growth for the team. You need money to fill at least some of the holes so you don't spend all your prospect capital (or a big portion) and shorten your window into an all or nothing short run that will lead right back to a long rebuild (see Kansas City). Braves ownership and management have, at times, indicated that the payroll would be a top ten payroll team. That's not happening and improvements to the current team will have to come mostly through trade (the JTR, Hanniger, etc. type trades that will require a big chunk of prospect capital to get done and still leave huge holes), through gambles (signing JD on a short term gamble in hopes of getting MVP production) and hope (bringing back Muk or some other end of the bench type for major playing time hoping to catch lightning in a bottle).
Trading Freeman, also always made sense given an appropriate return AND the understanding that payroll would continue to be constrained for at least some number of years beyond the move to the new park.
The 2018 Division pennant was nice but a bit of a fluke. It was a win by a very flawed 90 win team in a division of weird happenings resulting in a Division representative that had NO CHANCE at moving into the WS with any chance to win. That 90 win team mostly surfed on the backs of excellent halfs by different players - first half miracles by guys like Muk, above norm play by Freeman in the first half, unbelievable out of the gate production out of Albies all of which fell off in the second half only to be replaced by huge surges by Acuna and Camargo.
A lot happened right for the Braves to get to 90 wins and even then they were lucky that the rest of the division stunk because normally 90 wins might get you a seat as a WC team.
Freeman now begins his decline years. It probably won't happen over night and may not be noticeable for 2-3 more years. But time marches on for everyone. And the Braves will be paying Freeman a significant chunk of their payroll as his ability declines just as the rest of the team begins to ascend and become more expensive. if payroll isn't an issue you can afford that situation. If payroll is an issue, you can't.
Trading Freeman, also always made sense given an appropriate return AND the understanding that payroll would continue to be constrained for at least some number of years beyond the move to the new park.
The 2018 Division pennant was nice but a bit of a fluke. It was a win by a very flawed 90 win team in a division of weird happenings resulting in a Division representative that had NO CHANCE at moving into the WS with any chance to win. That 90 win team mostly surfed on the backs of excellent halfs by different players - first half miracles by guys like Muk, above norm play by Freeman in the first half, unbelievable out of the gate production out of Albies all of which fell off in the second half only to be replaced by huge surges by Acuna and Camargo.
A lot happened right for the Braves to get to 90 wins and even then they were lucky that the rest of the division stunk because normally 90 wins might get you a seat as a WC team.
Freeman now begins his decline years. It probably won't happen over night and may not be noticeable for 2-3 more years. But time marches on for everyone. And the Braves will be paying Freeman a significant chunk of their payroll as his ability declines just as the rest of the team begins to ascend and become more expensive. if payroll isn't an issue you can afford that situation. If payroll is an issue, you can't.
Freeman is signed through his age 31 season at very reasonable rates. There is very little chance the Braves are paying for much decline...as long as they don't do something stupid with an extension.
Given the pretty poor returns from the prospects acquired in the tear down, it's pretty dumb to wish the same FO responsible for those mediocre prospect returns would have also been in charge of selling Freeman.
Given the pretty poor returns from the prospects acquired in the tear down, it's pretty dumb to wish the same FO responsible for those mediocre prospect returns would have also been in charge of selling Freeman.
- Status