2025-2026 offseason thread

UNCBlue012 said:
Given his comments at the Winter Meetings, I think Alex knows that and is going to try really hard to land someone of that caliber. The offense has been a wreck the last few years, outside of 2023, but you could argue the bigger problem is going into the playoffs with ass starters due to injuries.
Click to expand...
I think he really wants another TOR SP. I couldn't imagine adding Peralta or Framber to the rotation. That would just be insane.
 
And all kinds of pumped about watching Yaz and Dubon be starters for 145 games instead of getting legit difference makers. Just another offseason of AA doing bare minimum to appease the fans.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
To the surprise of no one but a few methhead homers. Murph will miss time(most likely significant amount) this year. What a trade that was.
Click to expand...
Hindsight is 20/20 if AA could see the future every trade Would be gold….. but if he could see the future he wouldn’t be a baseball GM.

Yes, it turns out to be a bad trade. It was an ok trade at the time, but Contreras balled out and Murphy struggled with injuries and suddenly forgot how to hit. It happens

Key thing is the AA needs to improve on what he’s done recently. If he doesn’t then he’s not the GM I, and alot of people thought he was going to be. I think he makes the right moves this year and gets back in or good graces. If not, then feel free to pile on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jaw
Mad Dog Murph said:
Hindsight is 20/20 if AA could see the future every trade Would be gold….. but if he could see the future he wouldn’t be a baseball GM.

Yes, it turns out to be a bad trade. It was an ok trade at the time, but Contreras balled out and Murphy struggled with injuries and suddenly forgot how to hit. It happens

Key thing is the AA needs to improve on what he’s done recently. If he doesn’t then he’s not the GM I, and alot of people thought he was going to be. I think he makes the right moves this year and gets back in or good graces. If not, then feel free to pile on.
Click to expand...

Plenty of people questioned that trade the moment it happened. The usual boot lickers insisted it was a great move to swap a young cheap catcher for an older more expensive one.

The worst part was watching the brewers get a young 5 win player for essentially nothing.
 
Enscheff said:
Plenty of people questioned that trade the moment it happened. The usual boot lickers insisted it was a great move to swap a young cheap catcher for an older more expensive one.

The worst part was watching the brewers get a young 5 win player for essentially nothing.
Click to expand...
I don’t think anyone said anything about a young cheap catcher and an old more expensive one.

Some people thought it was a good move to swap a young catcher who was struggling defensively for one who was proven defensively and also had success as a hitter.

Hindsight is golden, and your characterization only works after we know that Murphy has had injury problems and Contreras has been adequate defensively.

At the time of the trade, those things were not known.
 
mfree80 said:
I don’t think anyone said anything about a young cheap catcher and an old more expensive one.

Some people thought it was a good move to swap a young catcher who was struggling defensively for one who was proven defensively and also had success as a hitter.

Hindsight is golden, and your characterization only works after we know that Murphy has had injury problems and Contreras has been adequate defensively.

At the time of the trade, those things were not known.
Click to expand...
It was defintely a “win now” move, good trade on paper for sure. I liked Contreras a lot, but understood why AA did it.
 
mfree80 said:
I don’t think anyone said anything about a young cheap catcher and an old more expensive one.

Some people thought it was a good move to swap a young catcher who was struggling defensively for one who was proven defensively and also had success as a hitter.

Hindsight is golden, and your characterization only works after we know that Murphy has had injury problems and Contreras has been adequate defensively.

At the time of the trade, those things were not known.
Click to expand...

Fair. The questioning was more about being afraid of how good a hitter Contreras was likely to be, but everyone pretty much agreed Murphy was good. So it felt like it had lots of potential to be a lateral move overall when the Braves had much bigger needs than catcher.
 
Enscheff said:
Fair. The questioning was more about being afraid of how good a hitter Contreras was likely to be, but everyone pretty much agreed Murphy was good. So it felt like it had lots of potential to be a lateral move overall when the Braves had much bigger needs than catcher.
Click to expand...
I really do think it he had something to do with framing and defense and receiving but also the change in baserunning rules.
 
Enscheff said:
Fair. The questioning was more about being afraid of how good a hitter Contreras was likely to be, but everyone pretty much agreed Murphy was good. So it felt like it had lots of potential to be a lateral move overall when the Braves had much bigger needs than catcher.
Click to expand...

Yea. I was high on Contreras but at the time of the move I saw why he did it. Looking back at it now with all the info we have it clearly was a bad trade. It wasn’t a WTF trade at the time. Borderline questionable but not a ridiculous trade
 
Enscheff said:
Plenty of people questioned that trade the moment it happened. The usual boot lickers insisted it was a great move to swap a young cheap catcher for an older more expensive one.

The worst part was watching the brewers get a young 5 win player for essentially nothing.
Click to expand...
Some don't want us to revisit but a few of us hated it and still do. AA is not without misses. It is what it is. Nothing we can do now, but it is fair to recall it for as long as we have Murphy and questionable things going on with him. I like him...but not as much as Bill. Ha.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top