7/5 GDT: Houston Astros (57-27) vs. Atlanta Braves (40-42); Dansby's Day Off Edition

Southcack77 said:
I think Stewart was very unlucky the Diamondbacks were bad. He probably keeps his job despite the trade if they had played like this last season.
Click to expand...

there is enough randomness in baseball to sometimes get good results from a very poor process
 
I think everyone for the most part cringed when we heard this trade.

1. Trading away a young, controlled pitcher (and a lefty at that)...on a rebuilding team.

2. Trading away your #1 prospect on a rebuilding team.

3. Trading for an UNPROVEN player.

4. Trading for a player that's over 30 years old on a rebuilding team.

This might be the worst trade in Braves history. You can defend the Tex trade because we were trying to contend and Tex WAS one of the best players in the league. The Dye trade had this kind of "We gave up him for who??", but again...we were trying to contend and trading for experienced vets.

The fact that we were in a rebuild and gave up young controllable players and what we received to me....makes this hands down the worst trade and the biggest boneheaded, head scratching trade in Braves history.
 
TheBravos said:
I think everyone for the most part cringed when we heard this trade.

1. Trading away a young, controlled pitcher (and a lefty at that)...on a rebuilding team.

2. Trading away your #1 prospect on a rebuilding team.

3. Trading for an UNPROVEN player.

4. Trading for a player that's over 30 years old on a rebuilding team.

This might be the worst trade in Braves history. You can defend the Tex trade because we were trying to contend and Tex WAS one of the best players in the league. The Dye trade had this kind of "We gave up him for who??", but again...we were trying to contend and trading for experienced vets.

The fact that we were in a rebuild and gave up young controllable players and what we received to me....makes this hands down the worst trade and the biggest boneheaded, head scratching trade in Braves history.
Click to expand...

FWIW, everyone didn't. Plenty of folks said it was a foregone conclusion that Wood's arm would blow up and he would be a scrapheap reliever posthaste.

I was in favor of taking a flyer on Olivera when he left Cuba... tell the Dodgers escalated the price beyond reason. I thought it was silly to pay that much for him, and considering what we paid for him in addition...yikes. It was a sucker deal and an ill-advised loss of strategic focus. There's really no way around that.

Fortunately, that's been the exception.
 
sturg33 said:
He really has been amazing. Shut down the dbacks yesterday with 10 more ks. I don't think this is a fluke anymore... I think he's elevated himself to the upper echelon of starting pitchers.
Click to expand...

He is pitching well, but let's not get too carried away. MLB is full of guys that throw like Aces for 1-2 years then fizzle. That is likely what's going to happen with Wood.

Was still a disastrous trade though.
 
Julio3000 said:
FWIW, everyone didn't. Plenty of folks said it was a foregone conclusion that Wood's arm would blow up and he would be a scrapheap reliever posthaste.

I was in favor of taking a flyer on Olivera when he left Cuba... tell the Dodgers escalated the price beyond reason. I thought it was silly to pay that much for him, and considering what we paid for him in addition...yikes. It was a sucker deal and an ill-advised loss of strategic focus. There's really no way around that.

Fortunately, that's been the exception.
Click to expand...

Has it? Here's a quick list of moves made to "win now" during the rebuild:

HO trade.
Kemp trade.
Markakis signing.
Colon signing.
Dickey signing.
Garcia trade.
Promoting Swanson early.
Packaging BJ with Kimbrel to free up money.
Taking Aybar as part of the return for Simmons.

I'm sure there are a few more I'm forgetting at the moment.

Fact of the matter is this rebuild has been conducted sub-optimally from the start, all in a misguided effort to "win now-ish". And what did they get out of all that effort? A couple 94 loss seasons instead of 100 loss seasons.

Or in Southcrack's opinion....success.
 
I am not buying Colon, Dickey, I-me as win now type moves. More we need to bring something in that can pitch and keep our prospect. Who in there right mind could think that those 3 are catalyst to a winning team.
 
Enscheff said:
Has it? Here's a quick list of moves made to "win now" during the rebuild:

HO trade.

Kemp trade.

Markakis signing.

Colon signing.

Dickey signing.

Garcia trade.

Promoting Swanson early.

Packaging BJ with Kimbrel to free up money.

Taking Aybar as part of the return for Simmons.

I'm sure there are a few more I'm forgetting at the moment.

Fact of the matter is this rebuild has been conducted sub-optimally from the start, all in a misguided effort to "win now-ish". And what did they get out of all that effort? A couple 94 loss seasons instead of 100 loss seasons.

Or in Southcrack's opinion....success.
Click to expand...

I think some of those are overstated.

I firmly believe that aybar was included with the intention he'd play to his career Norma and we would be able to flip him for assets at the deadline, considering how dreadful the LAA farm system was I think that was preferable than trying to coax out another piece from them.

Colon/Dickey weren't win now moves, they needed a couple vets to hold down spots to give the prospects time and hopefully we could flip those guys at the deadline.

I

The Kimberly decision, the HO trade with the Kemp fallout are the two that look really bad to me.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
I am not buying Colon, Dickey, I-me as win now type moves. More we need to bring something in that can pitch and keep our prospect. Who in there right mind could think that those 3 are catalyst to a winning team.
Click to expand...

Go find the quote from a Braves FO guy when he gloated after signing those pitchers that "FG needed to go update their projections now!".

Or go find the quote where Coppy said guys need to earn their rotation slots because now they are trying to win.

It's convenient every year the Braves are bad for you guys to say, "they said they were trying to win, but they really weren't trying to win". So will you guys tell me when are they are REALLY trying to win? I'd like to know when it's time to expect the Braves to win.
 
Enscheff said:
Go find the quote from a Braves FO guy when he gloated after signing those pitchers that "FG needed to go update their projections now!".

Or go find the quote where Coppy said guys need to earn their rotation slots because now they are trying to win.

It's convenient every year the Braves are bad for you guys to say, "they said they were trying to win, but they really weren't trying to win". So will you guys tell me when are they are REALLY trying to win? I'd like to know when it's time to expect the Braves to win.
Click to expand...

I do think they were trying to win in 2017.. I just don't think those 3 are on the same plain as other moves in this regard. I think those three were stop gaps to keep prospects from being rushed and to put something on the field that resembled a team.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
I do think they were trying to win in 2017.. I just don't think those 3 are on the same plain as other moves in this regard. I think those three were stop gaps to keep prospects from being rushed and to put something on the field that resembled a team.
Click to expand...

Exactly. There is a difference between a move designed to win a few more games in order to put a more palatable product on the field in Year 1 in a new ballpark and a 'win now' move that hurts the rebuild. Arguing that Dickey, Colon, and Garcia hurt the rebuild is a serious stretch.
 
smootness said:
Exactly. There is a difference between a move designed to win a few more games in order to put a more palatable product on the field in Year 1 in a new ballpark and a 'win now' move that hurts the rebuild. Arguing that Dickey, Colon, and Garcia hurt the rebuild is a serious stretch.
Click to expand...

If you were trying to win now, you would not have limited your acquisitions to one year deals and trades where you did not give up anything. They were trying to be respectable and fill holes without sacrificing anything of value or committing long term money.
 
Southcack77 said:
If you were trying to win now, you would not have limited your acquisitions to one year deals and trades where you did not give up anything. They were trying to be respectable and fill holes without sacrificing anything of value or committing long term money.
Click to expand...

Then what's your excuse for the other moves I listed?

Oh I forgot, you think they succeeded by only losing 94 games each year.
 
Enscheff said:
Then what's your excuse for the other moves I listed?

Oh I forgot, you think they succeeded by only losing 94 games each year.
Click to expand...

Literally, never have said anything resembling that but you have difficulty remembering your own arguments let alone everyone else's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top