Atlanta Braves should trade Freddie Freeman

That's kind of a strange article. I would always listen to any offer, so it's not out of the question that a deal could come along for Freeman that I would like.

But first, the Simmons and Miller deals really didn't move our window back. In fact, you could argue the Miller deal actually accelerated our window. There is a good chance all 3 of the guys in that deal are on the major league roster in 2017, and Newcomb and Ellis will likely be up at that point as well. Our window to truly compete was already 2018, not 2016 or 2017, at the time of those deals, so they don't change anything.

Second, if we are going to compete in 2018, Freeman is a big part of that. If we could get pieces that can be contributing by then in return (say, AJ Reed), then sure. But Devers or Moncada? That would actually move our window back even further.

You can't say, 'They won't compete until at least 2018, so you should trade Freeman,' because suddenly, you wouldn't likely be competing even by 2018 at that point. I think the Miller deal was a clear sign that we're pretty much done dumping good current assets for extremely long-term ones.
 
BedellBrave said:
Makes too much sense not to at this point.
Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree. The Braves haven't planned to cancel the 2016 and 2017 seasons. There is only one other relatively long term player on the team who has seen significant playing time, and that's Julio. Heyward, Gattis, Kimbrel and Simmons were particular fan favorites, leaving only Freddie and to a lesser extent, Julio as players that fans identify with at all, unless they developed some allegiance in the past year. While it may not be realistic to expect a competitive club in 2016, it's really not as far fetched as some imply to hope for one in 2017. Who, in 1989, would have expected the 1991 pitching staff? With the young talent the Braves have in starting pitchers, it's not pipe dream that something like that could happen again. Swanson and Albies could easily be ready in 2017, and could both be effective, even at that age. More trades or even a good free agent signing could happen. Something could even occur that no one foresees, in a positive way, just as the massive rebuild was largely unforeseen in a negative way. If the assumption that the next two years are a complete waste (not only as far as making the playoffs, but as far as watching and following the team) were valid, then perhaps more "dollar value", measured in WAR per dollar spent would be valid as well, but I don't plan to completely shelf my fandom for two years. I'd like to keep Freddie. If the Angels want to trade Trout for him, straight up, I'll capitulate, but short of a stupid move of even greater magnitude than many perceive the Miller trade was for the Snakes, I hope Freddie stays and thrives in Atlanta.
 
smootness said:
That's kind of a strange article. I would always listen to any offer, so it's not out of the question that a deal could come along for Freeman that I would like.

But first, the Simmons and Miller deals really didn't move our window back. In fact, you could argue the Miller deal actually accelerated our window. There is a good chance all 3 of the guys in that deal are on the major league roster in 2017, and Newcomb and Ellis will likely be up at that point as well. Our window to truly compete was already 2018, not 2016 or 2017, at the time of those deals, so they don't change anything.

Second, if we are going to compete in 2018, Freeman is a big part of that. If we could get pieces that can be contributing by then in return (say, AJ Reed), then sure. But Devers or Moncada? That would actually move our window back even further.

You can't say, 'They won't compete until at least 2018, so you should trade Freeman,' because suddenly, you wouldn't likely be competing even by 2018 at that point. I think the Miller deal was a clear sign that we're pretty much done dumping good current assets for extremely long-term ones.
Click to expand...

I agree with the puzzlement, although my best guess as to what he meant is that it's hard to assume that we have a rotation worthy of a contender within 2 years without counting on Shelby Miller.

I'm super-stoked about the youngsters, but I think that we fans have been somewhat spoiled by watching the few guys who jump into MLB and dominate immediately. Really, those guys are the exception rather than the rule. Just because we see guys in 2017 or '18 doesn't mean they'll be ready to contribute to a playoff-caliber club at that time.

FWIW, I imagine Devers and Moncada will probably be in the bigs by 2018, Moncada probably before that. Those guys are certainly no further behind in development than Albies, and I imagine you'd put him on that timetable, right?
 
My following response HAS been posted before, and it's really the last word on this if you are being rational: There is no way the Braves can get anywhere near proper value for Freeman because he is seen as a risk, both with his chronic wrist problems and his ongoing eye problems. There are too many other fish in this pond for him to ever draw premium value.
 
Julio3000 said:
I agree with the puzzlement, although my best guess as to what he meant is that it's hard to assume that we have a rotation worthy of a contender within 2 years without counting on Shelby Miller.

I'm super-stoked about the youngsters, but I think that we fans have been somewhat spoiled by watching the few guys who jump into MLB and dominate immediately. Really, those guys are the exception rather than the rule. Just because we see guys in 2017 or '18 doesn't mean they'll be ready to contribute to a playoff-caliber club at that time.

FWIW, I imagine Devers and Moncada will probably be in the bigs by 2018, Moncada probably before that. Those guys are certainly no further behind in development than Albies, and I imagine you'd put him on that timetable, right?
Click to expand...

This is a good point. But I don't necessarily think guys like Albies or Swanson will be really good major league players by 2018; I just think they can be at least solid contributors. And when you have at least one guy like Freeman already there, adding solid contributors all around him suddenly makes you a potentially good team.

Replacing Freeman with another young guy who may be solid by then (Devers/Moncada) still, I think, moves your window back a little further.
 
Not sure i'd deal him, you need some stable players.

KC kept Gordon through their struggles. And it paid off.

Team isnt 5-6 years away.
 
I don't think we SHOULD trade Freddie but I think it's a huge mistake when Coppy comes out and says absolutely not being traded. At the state of the current team, we should be planning to keep him but keep the option open for someone blowing us away
 
Heyward said:
Not sure i'd deal him, you need some stable players.

KC kept Gordon through their struggles. And it paid off.

Team isnt 5-6 years away.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Again, though, it all just depends on what a team will give you. We're in a good spot in that everyone knows we're open to anything, so teams will continue to reach out to us if they want something.
 
smootness said:
Agreed. Again, though, it all just depends on what a team will give you. We're in a good spot in that everyone knows we're open to anything, so teams will continue to reach out to us if they want something.
Click to expand...

I mean if a team gave us a DBacks deal x2, sure but i doubt that happens.

Hes not untouchable but not sure we'll ever get proper value for him.
 
Who could pay a king's ransom for Freddie that needs a 1B (or, ostensibly, a DH)? You would think the Braves might command -- at bare minimum -- major league ready pieces and top prospects (like Top 5 caliber).
 
First, Braves would have to blow out a huge chunk of his salary in any deal, with right there makes it pointless.
 
smootness said:
This is a good point. But I don't necessarily think guys like Albies or Swanson will be really good major league players by 2018; I just think they can be at least solid contributors. And when you have at least one guy like Freeman already there, adding solid contributors all around him suddenly makes you a potentially good team.

Replacing Freeman with another young guy who may be solid by then (Devers/Moncada) still, I think, moves your window back a little further.
Click to expand...

I agree.
 
Hawk said:
Who could pay a king's ransom for Freddie that needs a 1B (or, ostensibly, a DH)? You would think the Braves might command -- at bare minimum -- major league ready pieces and top prospects (like Top 5 caliber).
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone would give us good major league-ready pieces and an elite prospect. I don't even think we could get one truly elite prospect for him from anyone other than the Diamondbacks. I do think we could get 2-3 good pieces, though. But I'm not sure anyone is a good trade partner right now. The Astros are better off just letting AJ Reed come up and play 1B.
 
To use the example of Devers/Moncada, some scenario involving prospects like them would be the only reason I'd call the FO foolish for their hardline stance on trading Freeman. By all means, we shouldn't just deal Freeman for prospects at this point just to move around our window, but Freeman only has so much value, and if a team like the Red Sox got desperate because their only hole was 1B and made a Godfather offer like Moncada and Devers, it'd be idiotic to pass it up.
 
rico43 said:
My following response HAS been posted before, and it's really the last word on this if you are being rational: There is no way the Braves can get anywhere near proper value for Freeman because he is seen as a risk, both with his chronic wrist problems and his ongoing eye problems. There are too many other fish in this pond for him to ever draw premium value.
Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree. I don't know if our idea of premium talent is the same but I think there would be quite a few teams lining up to throw prospects at us for Freeman. I don't know what these chronic wrist and eye problems your referring to. He has been relatively healthy his while Braves career. I know he had wrist injury this year and it deflated his overall stats but I think he rebounded okay from it and I don't expect it to impact him going forward.

I would need to be blown away to trade Freeman. He hits for average. He hits for power. He takes walks. He is extremely consistent and he hits with RISP. To me he is the next Chipper. A franchise quality middle of the order hitter. I think it's important to remember that he isn't even in his prime yet. I still think he has breakout potential.

Edit - I guarantee you the Cardinals would make a big offer if he was available.
 
smootness said:
I don't think anyone would give us good major league-ready pieces and an elite prospect. I don't even think we could get one truly elite prospect for him from anyone other than the Diamondbacks. I do think we could get 2-3 good pieces, though. But I'm not sure anyone is a good trade partner right now. The Astros are better off just letting AJ Reed come up and play 1B.
Click to expand...

The Astros are really the only good partner for our end if we are going to move Freddie. If they were willing to move Reed plus one of Daz/Tucker in a deal I'd be happy to see us move him, but otherwise we are really just better off keeping Freddie.
 
smootness said:
That's kind of a strange article. I would always listen to any offer, so it's not out of the question that a deal could come along for Freeman that I would like.

But first, the Simmons and Miller deals really didn't move our window back. In fact, you could argue the Miller deal actually accelerated our window. There is a good chance all 3 of the guys in that deal are on the major league roster in 2017, and Newcomb and Ellis will likely be up at that point as well. Our window to truly compete was already 2018, not 2016 or 2017, at the time of those deals, so they don't change anything.

Second, if we are going to compete in 2018, Freeman is a big part of that. If we could get pieces that can be contributing by then in return (say, AJ Reed), then sure. But Devers or Moncada? That would actually move our window back even further.

You can't say, 'They won't compete until at least 2018, so you should trade Freeman,' because suddenly, you wouldn't likely be competing even by 2018 at that point. I think the Miller deal was a clear sign that we're pretty much done dumping good current assets for extremely long-term ones.
Click to expand...

You free long term commitments. And the FA class for 18 is excellent which allows you to fill holes IF you have the money and the will.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top