GDT 3/27: OPENING DAY!!!!

The bullpen will be fine as long as our manager will use our best relievers in the highest leverage situations.

We still should’ve gotten another quality arm though.
 
50PoundHead said:
Don't forget all the extensions Anthopoulos handed out that contribute to the payroll constraints. He built a team with a defined window. The players with the extensions are all good players, but there's a trade-off in terms of payroll flexibility especially if there's a blip. What has happened is that he can't address holes without cuddling up to the next-highest luxury tax threshold.
Click to expand...

This was the point I made during the extension frenzy, and I think it's the main reason we don't see other teams hand out extensions to this degree. While it is nice to save some cash on homegrown players, locking 90% of the payroll into a core of players limits flexibility to adjust course. We are starting to see the effects of those limitations now. For example, there was no reason to lock up Olson until he's 50 when there are .800 OPS guys available to play 1B every single year for short term deals.
 
Enscheff said:
This was the point I made during the extension frenzy, and I think it's the main reason we don't see other teams hand out extensions to this degree. While it is nice to save some cash on homegrown players, locking 90% of the payroll into a core of players limits flexibility to adjust course. We are starting to see the effects of those limitations now. For example, there was no reason to lock up Olson until he's 50 when there are .800 OPS guys available to play 1B every single year for short term deals.
Click to expand...

You see plenty of teams doing it—it’s just mostly the usual suspect high-spending teams, who are willing to move on from dead money and keep spending to dig out from a player declining before their contract lapses. It’s to be determined if the Braves will be willing to do that—and at least, outside of Olson and Murphy, none of the extended players were in that “FA” age range that usually makes for poorer long-term propositions—but that will be the real test of their high-payroll aspirations.
 
jpx7 said:
You see plenty of teams doing it—it’s just mostly the usual suspect high-spending teams, who are willing to move on from dead money and keep spending to dig out from a player declining before their contract lapses. It’s to be determined if the Braves will be willing to do that—and at least, outside of Olson and Murphy, none of the extended players were in that “FA” age range that usually makes for poorer long-term propositions—but that will be the real test of their high-payroll aspirations.
Click to expand...

I think AA was smart to lock up Acuna/Ozzie/Harris/Strider and I will even go Riley since 3rd baseman can get expensive in FA... The Olson/Murphy, especially the later, was very bad moves. I mean technically, neither should be a brave..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top