Dalyn
Fredi Gonzalez Supporter
It's all about the Mukaki Rebuild.
Braves "Kick Tires" on Dozier
- Thread starter striker42
- Start date
It's all about the Mukaki Rebuild.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
It is clear they shifted gears quite a bit between the Muk signing and the BJ trade.
The steps as I recall:
1) Heyward trade--some emphasis on bringing back major league talent (Miller). Nov 17
2) Muk signing--clearly willing to spend on major league talent that is past its prime. Dec 3
3) Justin Upton--traded for young talent that is mostly not major league ready. Dec 19
4) Gattis trade--similar to the Justin Upton trade. Jan 14
5) Kimbrel/BJ trade--we did take on part of Carlos Quentin's contract presumably to offset the Pads taking on BJ's contract. We also got Maybin. But the return mostly centered around Wisler. April 5.
The narrative that the front office shared with the public shifted quite a bit. From looking to compete if they could acquire some young major league ready starting pitching. To being committed to playing Gattis in left. I think the front office's thinking changed quite a bit over the course of the off-season. This probably reflected a number of factors. One being the kinds of returns they were getting in the trades. Each trade I think changed the calculus a bit about what they would be willing to do in subsequent trades. I suspect to some extent they simply changed their assessment of what needed to be done and adjusted on the fly.
A famous military strategist once said "no battle plan survives contact with the enemy." The message being you have to be flexible and adjust to events. That's what the front office did. But I do think there is a legitimate criticism to be make given the distance they traveled in going from their initial strategy (including signing Muk) and the course they ultimately embarked upon. You want a plan that is somewhat in tune to the reality you are going to face.
The steps as I recall:
1) Heyward trade--some emphasis on bringing back major league talent (Miller). Nov 17
2) Muk signing--clearly willing to spend on major league talent that is past its prime. Dec 3
3) Justin Upton--traded for young talent that is mostly not major league ready. Dec 19
4) Gattis trade--similar to the Justin Upton trade. Jan 14
5) Kimbrel/BJ trade--we did take on part of Carlos Quentin's contract presumably to offset the Pads taking on BJ's contract. We also got Maybin. But the return mostly centered around Wisler. April 5.
The narrative that the front office shared with the public shifted quite a bit. From looking to compete if they could acquire some young major league ready starting pitching. To being committed to playing Gattis in left. I think the front office's thinking changed quite a bit over the course of the off-season. This probably reflected a number of factors. One being the kinds of returns they were getting in the trades. Each trade I think changed the calculus a bit about what they would be willing to do in subsequent trades. I suspect to some extent they simply changed their assessment of what needed to be done and adjusted on the fly.
A famous military strategist once said "no battle plan survives contact with the enemy." The message being you have to be flexible and adjust to events. That's what the front office did. But I do think there is a legitimate criticism to be make given the distance they traveled in going from their initial strategy (including signing Muk) and the course they ultimately embarked upon. You want a plan that is somewhat in tune to the reality you are going to face.
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
I don't think you can assume the extension is tied to where the Braves see Inciarte hitting in the lineup; it's about his overall value as a player. I also don't think contract should dictate where a player hits, if the organization has a better player for that slot.
I'm not saying Smith is or will be that player. But if he shows himself to be a ~.370 OBP player, with his speed, while Inciarte is simply able to maintain his (career-best, heretofore) ~.350 OBP, it'd be silly to insist on leading-off Inciarte simply because the Braves "didn't give Ender that extension to hit second or sixth". If Smith offensively produces to the level many on here seem to think he's capable (something about which I am personally skeptical, though hopeful, given minor-league production), then a near-future lineup with Smith and Inciarte atop the lineup, followed by Freeman, Kemp, and Swanson in some order, could be a pretty good configuration; the team could still slot Albies eighth (or ninth!), with the major questions marks again being 3B and C.
I would much prefer Drew. Valbuena would be an even bigger upgrade, but I think the plan is to give the bulk of the 3b PAs to SRod for the next 2 years.
blueagleace1
Playing the Waiting Game
Valbuena seems like he expects to be an everyday player and while he would certainly be a nice option against RHP, I just don't see him getting those AB's with Garcia, SRod, and Ruiz already getting at-bats.
Has been interesting listening to Bowden and Duquette this morning. Bowden says he's still hearing that we're very much still "in" on Dozier, and that the calls for best offer may have been an attempt to get the Dodgers to up their offer for him.
As he mentions, Dozier still makes lots of sense for us - even long-term - if you don't have to include Albies in the deal to get Dozier. For example...
1.) Jace, Wisler, and Blair for Dozier and you extend Dozier as your long-term 2B. You could even make Demeritte part of the deal if needed.
2.) Albies, Newcomb, Mallex, and Sims for Quintana
3.) Platoon Rio and S-Rod at 3B for two years - at that point Riley (or even Maitan) could possibly be ready to step in.
As he mentions, Dozier still makes lots of sense for us - even long-term - if you don't have to include Albies in the deal to get Dozier. For example...
1.) Jace, Wisler, and Blair for Dozier and you extend Dozier as your long-term 2B. You could even make Demeritte part of the deal if needed.
2.) Albies, Newcomb, Mallex, and Sims for Quintana
3.) Platoon Rio and S-Rod at 3B for two years - at that point Riley (or even Maitan) could possibly be ready to step in.
I just think I'd rather have Albies, Wisler, Blair, Newcomb, Sims, and Mallex than Dozier and Quintana. And I'm not sure that package would get you Quintana.
SJ24
New member
Those 1st 2 trades would be absolute steals for us. Sign Wieters and we'd be in the Wild Card hunt.
SJ24
New member
C- Matt Wieters
1B- Freddie Freeman
2B- Brian Dozier
SS- Dansby Swanson
3B- Adonis/Rio/S-Rod
LF- Matt Kemp
CF- Ender Inciarte
RF- Nick Markakis
SP- Julio Teheran
SP- Jose Quintana
SP- Mike Foltynewicz
SP- Jaime Garcia
SP- R.A. Dickey
SP- Bartolo Colon
Does anyone think this team couldn't compete for a Wild Card spot?
1B- Freddie Freeman
2B- Brian Dozier
SS- Dansby Swanson
3B- Adonis/Rio/S-Rod
LF- Matt Kemp
CF- Ender Inciarte
RF- Nick Markakis
SP- Julio Teheran
SP- Jose Quintana
SP- Mike Foltynewicz
SP- Jaime Garcia
SP- R.A. Dickey
SP- Bartolo Colon
Does anyone think this team couldn't compete for a Wild Card spot?
UNCBlue012
Well-known member
I absolutely think that team competes and has a really good shot at stealing a playoff spot.
If we can get Dozier for Wisler and Blair, you do it. No questions asked. That being said, I bet it takes more. I think Wisler/Blair, Demeritte and a lower-level prospect makes sense, but it still may not be enough.
UNCBlue012
Well-known member
Inciarte CF
Swanson SS
Freeman 1B
Kemp LF
Dozier 2B
Markakis RF
Wieters C
S-Rod/Adonis 3B
That's solid, man.
Not saying I'd necessarily do it either, but will give Bowden credit for explaining himself on this one - saying that the only way interest from our perspective makes any sense is if we were going to retain Dozier for the long haul. The next step of then going to get Quintana (or Archer) is my speculation - but would seem logical if you were going to add Dozier now and extend him. As mentioned, you'd then have to be considered as someone with a legitimate shot this season, and if you had Dozier and one of those SPs locked up to go along with Julio, Freeman, Swanson, and Inciarte, you'd have plenty of core pieces in place and under control, and still have Folty, Fried, and Weigel to compete for back-end spots over the next couple years plus the option to keep Dickey around to eat innings in 2018 if needed.
zbhargrove
Well-known member
Well for one, most reports say the Dodgers aren't willing to give up De Leon, so there's that...
Different player than Uggla. Much more athletic.
And the Braves want Bregman for Teheran...and Encarnacion wanted 5/$100 million...and Joey Bats thought he was going to cash-in...and the White Sox wanted Devers in the package for Sale too...and I wanted a lot more for Christmas than I got...
(Oh yeah - and Borass wants a Mac deal for Wieters.)
Most reports? Like this one?
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/12/brian-dozier-trade-rumors-final-offer-twins.html
That literally says: "Los Angeles is seeking a straight up, one-for-one swap of Dozier and top pitching prospect Jose De Leon"? Reports like that?
Every single thing I've read for the last month was they have settled on De Leon, and the Twins are playing these games trying to get the Dodgers to add another significant piece.
Should I go dig up 10 other links stating exactly the same thing? Where are all these reports suggesting otherwise? In what world would the Twins take a lesser package from the Braves than the one that has been on the table from the Dodgers for a month?
I don't know what the value of De Leon is, and it's likely the Twins do value him more, but you continue to value Wisler and Blair like they are fodder. Blair was a top 50 prospect this time a year ago and while Wisler has struggled in the majors the last two years, he also was a top pitching prospect a short time ago. Both guys still have mid rotation ceilings and plenty of time to reach those ceilings.
This is why we can't have informed baseball discussion here. I said Wisler and Blair are not as valuable as De Leon. Further, since the Twins are holding out for more than De Leon, logic dictates they would not settle for a return less valuable than De Leon. Therefore, we can conclude Wisler and Blair are not enough to get Dozier.
I did not say Wisler and Blair are fodder. If I say Trout is better than Freeman does that mean I'm calling Freeman a bum?