Well then in that case they are being silly (though I have seen nobody actually brag about Swanson struggling). This small sample size for Swanson means essentially nothing when it comes to his long term development and value.
Dansby Swanson Already Proving He Belongs
- Thread starter bobbycoxy
- Start date
Well then in that case they are being silly (though I have seen nobody actually brag about Swanson struggling). This small sample size for Swanson means essentially nothing when it comes to his long term development and value.
I think that Swanson will do what 95% of all MLB FAs do: go where the most money is offered. Are we really going to rehash the tired and worn out "home town discount" argument? How many home town discounts have the Braves gotten since the one time Andruw signed behind his agent's back? Mac left. Glavine left. Maddux left. Smoltz left. Heyward would have left when the Braves didn't offer him $185M. And on and on.
Even if the Braves somehow sign him to a contract that includes his age 29 season, they will almost certainly be paying more for that season than they will have paid if it was his last arb year.
So the best case scenario is the right to pay Swanson ~2x the amount for his age 29 season than they would have by manipulating his service clock? How exactly is that a point in favor of calling him up early? You are defending a decision where the absolute best case scenario costs the Braves an additional $10M+ for Swanson's age 29 season?
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
The key player growth is with the young pitching (and I'm not talking about the long shot back end guys like Gant, Whelan, Ellis) and it hasn't developed as fast as it needed to lead me to believe that 2017 is going to be significantly better from a SP standpoint than it has been in 2016. Do I think the Braves will bring in a veteran arm or two? Almost certainly. Do I believe that those guys will be real difference makers? NO.
The Braves trading for Sale, Fernandez, etc. is just pure fantasy. The Braves aren't going to spend several years collecting young talent just to trade away the best of the bunch to bring in pitching on a long shot chance of being competitive.
I think you CAN win trades when you find the right partner who needs immediate ML help because they think they will contend and are willing to mortgage their future for the now - see Arizona last year or the Braves when they acquired Tex or Drew. It's harder to find a team with a quality star who's willing to give that star up for players where it doesn't dictate the return (one possible exception may be Oakland trading Donaldson, but from what I've heard it was Beane acting in a fit of rage).
I don't see how anyone can look at this team and say 2017 is a contending year for the Braves without going through gyrations of getting Sale or Archer or signing Cespedes, etc., except by viewing 2017 through rose colored fan glasses.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
Because there hasn't been any.
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
That's a major crux of the debate: many of us don't feel it's wise, prudent, realistic, or a best use of resources to "want to compete next year". If one begins from that premise, then there are legitimate reasons to think calling up Swanson in 2016 didn't make sense.
So why even post here? Just to give the FO attaboys? We can only go so far on Chip Caray and Mark Bowman memes; at some point we have to discuss the decisions and construction designs of the team, even in spite of our "limited knowledge".
Yeah, the silly rosterbating involving guys like Sale and Archer and Ces are pretty annoying and shows a complete lack of understanding about where the Braves are in the rebuild process. It is beyond obvious the Braves will be making plays for guys that don't cost a draft pick and/or guys who don't cost much in the way of prospect value. The Kemp trade is very telling, as is the Braves interest in trading for Mac. Both represent overpriced modest improvements that (should) cost very little in terms of future assets to acquire.
The Braves can improve to a 75 win team next year with an outside chance at a WC slot by making modest additions that don't mortgage any future assets, and it's pretty clear to anyone who's been paying attention and is capable of making logical conclusions that it's exactly what they will do.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
Exactly.
I made one comment saying that the Braves were shielding Swanson from the best pitchers to keep him from being a .600 OPS guy and these guys grabbed that and started swinging it like a club. The conveniently omit that I said it makes no difference what he does this year in a SSS. If he hits .900 OPS this season (still YTBD) or if he hits .600 OPS (also YTBD) it means nothing to this season and little to next season.
Jeff Francouer was rushed (but at least the Braves were in a pennant race). He came up and had an .884 OPS over 274 AB. He never got close to that again outside of a 1/2 season with the Mets in 2009 and handful of AB with Texas after being traded in 2010. Jeff was anointed savior and it turned out he wasn't even a disciple.
To date, Swanson is hitting a respectable .780 OPS with fairly shaky defense. And while he HAS seen a couple of pretty good pitchers lately, he has mostly been on the bench and brought along slowly when the best pitchers have been on the rubber against the Braves. He may get better (.850 OPS, good defense) or worse between now and the end of the season. But it won't matter either way.
No, best-case scenario is: The CBA is changed, Swanson starts off next year killing it, we make tons of money starting on Opening Day next year, and we extend him before he gets to FA.
I'm not saying we have to judge bringing Swanson up now, you're the one who seems dead set on making a final judgement now. I'm saying we should probably wait before determining it was stupid.
I don't know how you've managed to do it, but you have surpassed Niners.
chop2chip
Well-known member
The crux of the Braves' side of the argument is exactly that, right? Essentially, they are making a calculated decision that having him get 150 PA's now will be beneficial to helping him come into camp confident that he can be successful; and Dansby hitting .300 has made it a lot easier to sell the notion of the "future is bright!" to the fans who have had to endure the trades of Heyward / Upton / Gattis / Kimbrel / Simmons over the past two years. I don't think it was ever a possibility that he wouldn't break camp as the Braves starting short stop next year.
The team is trying to sell expensive season tickets heading into year one of a brand new ballpark. There was no way they were going to have the Cobb County kid open up the season in Gwinnett. Especially if he were to have played well next spring training and it becomes painfully obvious that we were stashing him in AAA to manipulate his service clock. I know that we all can debate the quantified affect of increased attendance due strictly to the Dansby aspect, which we really don't have the data in order to quantify. However, the marketing / PR / perception angle is simple to understand.
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
not at all.. anyone can complain or question a move.. I just don't understand 300 pages of it.. one side thinks it was dumb to call him up to use the service time and others think that the FO will extend him and that it really doesn't matter about service time. I tend to trust the FO on this topic because I don't have near enough facts/details to make an educated decision. Everyone talks in vacuums like each situation is the same and everyone knows they aren't. I really don't care one way or the other. I have enjoyed watching him play. Glad he is up here. I can see the argument for keeping him down, but don't think it will be that big of a deal in the long run, so I don't stress about it.
I feel quite confident they've determined that having Swanson up now and to start next year will aid in bringing in more than that $10 million in revenue.
chop2chip
Well-known member
And since we don't have a major league ready short stop in the system (outside of Swanson), we end up giving Asdrubal Cabrera a $10 million contract this winter to hold down the fort in order to save $10 million dollars six years from now.
Unless you think it was realistic that we were going to open up Suntrust with Daniel Castro as our opening day shortstop.
chop2chip
Well-known member
Even if it doesn't, I would consider that hypothetical $10 million dollars well spent.
This is also a good point.
When you break it down into just talking about an extra $10 million in Year 7, it really makes you realize how little it matters. As in, nowhere near enough to warrant the kind of discussion we've had on this board about it.
VirginiaBrave
Well-known member
This debate is so dumb. The negative group says the Braves can't compete next year. You are wrong! Why? Because this is not the team that is going to take Suntrust Park next year. None of us know what the Braves are going to do in the off-season. There are pieces in place and next year could be a repeat of 1991. Bream, Belliard and Pendleton were not at the top of the free agent class that year but they were the right free agents. There is no doubt the Braves will play meaningful games late next year. Some of y'all just can't get over Frank's firing and the rebuild I guess.
Mac's a great example of what should happen with Swanson. Buy out a few FA years and let him get his big contract elsewhere. We got the best years of Mac and the Yankees essentially paid for it.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
Arizona was in much better shape to contend after 2015 than the Braves will be after 2016. They went out and signed a legitimate ace on the FA market and mortgaged their future in trade for Miller. Where are they now?
I was around for that worst to first team and this team isn't THAT team. And THAT team was extremely lucky in a lot of ways. Do you really think the Braves will sign a reclamation project who will go on to win the NL MVP this offseason?
It's two different teams, two different eras, two different situations. THAT team was at the end of a FIVE year rebuild. This team is just finishing it's 2nd.
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
Culpability for prolonging the debate hardly lies with one camp and one camp alone.
chop2chip
Well-known member
I agree with this wholeheartedly, but I find the retrospective head shaking funny. It's a message board where we debate baseball. Who cares if ensheff gloats a bit when Kemp messes up in the field or when the posibraves post "but he's not ready". Its just good-natured ribbing.