Hector Olivera Arrested

Olivera wasn't a firing offense for a GM. However, that trade is a reason to review your FO organization and find out what went wrong. How did you have multiple baseball guys give this move a thumbs up. It's not a reason to fire Coppy but it is definitely a reason to call everyone involved on the carpet, find out why everyone missed so badly, and fix the issue so it doesn't happen again.

I would like to see Coppy be forced to sit down with the beat writers and explain what went wrong. That's not going to happen but it would be nice. The best we'll get is some GM talk after he's released about how the Braves still believe Olivera is a talented player and how the team hopes he gets his personal life straightened out so he can capitalize on that talent down the road.
 
striker42 said:
The best we'll get is some GM talk after he's released about how the Braves still believe Olivera is a talented player and how the team hopes he gets his personal life straightened out so he can capitalize on that talent down the road.
Click to expand...

Coppy has actually been pretty open and honest in interviews. Far more than most GM's.
 
sturg33 said:
Even if you bought the idea that Olivera was a good player who was worth trading major assets for... trading for a 30 year old guy in the early stages of a rebuild was just... really stupid
Click to expand...

My assumption about that has been that they thought it would be a way to lock down an area of need (3B + some OBP and pop) for a few years while the youngsters develop, without trading any of the crown jewels and without making a big salary commitment. That's ok in principle, but it appears they whiffed the execution of it. Like striker said, it's not a firing offense, but it should mandate a decision-making review and rightfully engender some skepticism among fans.
 
HO was hit .300 + with an OPS north of .800 when we made the trade. It is not like he was sucking when we got him. Sure the age and injury were concerns to me.. but he had potential. maybe someone needs to look at our developmental department and ask why a guy like this regressed so fast?
 
bravesfanMatt said:
HO was hit .300 + with an OPS north of .800 when we made the trade. It is not like he was sucking when we got him. Sure the age and injury were concerns to me.. but he had potential. maybe someone needs to look at our developmental department and ask why a guy like this regressed so fast?
Click to expand...

Are you referring to his 22 ABs in minor league AA ball?
 
bravesfanMatt said:
HO was hit .300 + with an OPS north of .800 when we made the trade. It is not like he was sucking when we got him. Sure the age and injury were concerns to me.. but he had potential. maybe someone needs to look at our developmental department and ask why a guy like this regressed so fast?
Click to expand...

Olivera had 69 minor league ABs when we traded for him. For comparison, he had 61 ABs in ST and hit .393 with an .898 OPS. However, as soon as the season started he was the same guy we saw last year.

It's obvious watching Olivera for any length of time that he has a long swing and lacks the bat speed to make up for that fact. I think he probably was a major league quality player 4 years ago but age, injuries, and inactivity robbed him of that. He's a AAA quality player at this point.
 
Julio3000 said:
My assumption about that has been that they thought it would be a way to lock down an area of need (3B + some OBP and pop) for a few years while the youngsters develop, without trading any of the crown jewels and without making a big salary commitment. That's ok in principle, but it appears they whiffed the execution of it. Like striker said, it's not a firing offense, but it should mandate a decision-making review and rightfully engender some skepticism among fans.
Click to expand...

I thought the logic was fine, but like you say, it didn't connect. And like striker says, Olivera pretty much fooled everybody.
 
striker42 said:
Olivera had 69 minor league ABs when we traded for him. For comparison, he had 61 ABs in ST and hit .393 with an .898 OPS. However, as soon as the season started he was the same guy we saw last year.

It's obvious watching Olivera for any length of time that he has a long swing and lacks the bat speed to make up for that fact. I think he probably was a major league quality player 4 years ago but age, injuries, and inactivity robbed him of that. He's a AAA quality player at this point.
Click to expand...
Olivera as a player - I don't think any of us quite know about that yet. For as much as we have seen him struggle, we have a lot of evidence of him succeeding.
 
striker42 said:
Olivera had 69 minor league ABs when we traded for him. For comparison, he had 61 ABs in ST and hit .393 with an .898 OPS. However, as soon as the season started he was the same guy we saw last year.

It's obvious watching Olivera for any length of time that he has a long swing and lacks the bat speed to make up for that fact. I think he probably was a major league quality player 4 years ago but age, injuries, and inactivity robbed him of that. He's a AAA quality player at this point.
Click to expand...
'

my point was, when we traded for him, he had shown success. in a small sample size as far as state side.. but you couple that with Cuba and he was a good hitter for what everyone could see. He comes to ATL and proves everyone was wrong.. or the hitting coach said he can't hit with that swing and changed it.. I don't know.. but the point still stands that when we traded for him.. he WAS a successful hitter.. yes, he did not fit our team and I hated the trade.. but we didn't trade for a .200 hitter
 
Fredi: "When you have a guy, a guy that is a HOF type player...say Chipper Jones, you know, they go through droughts, they look horrible, but you know in the end, you look up at the scoreboard at the end of the year, and there he is, hitting .300, with 30 homers and a bunch of doubles. We know Hector can hit, and he will hit, he just needs at bats, chances, to get through this funk. I remember in 2002 when I was coaching third for Bobby, and Julio Franco was struggling, and everyone and their mom was saying bench him, bench him, he's too old and Bobby said the guy can hit and will hit, and there we are looking at the scoreboard in Miami the last week of September and the guy is hitting .290"
 
Considering that we fiercely pursued Olivera as a free agent before LA signed him, then went out of our way to trade for him, it seems like we just really, really loved him as a player. Now, in fairness, lots of teams did- LA gave him the big contract in the first place, after all. Still, that's a rather baffling mis-evaluation, even if you take out the cost in players to acquire him.
 
I think the Olivera trade is a fireable offense. Now that doesn't mean you actually fire anyone, but the trade was so bad that I think you could use it as grounds to fire Hart or Coppy.

Now with that in mind I wouldn't fire them because they turned around and made a trade that should have immediately earned Coppy the GM of the year award.
 
weso1 said:
I think the Olivera trade is a fireable offense. Now that doesn't mean you actually fire anyone, but the trade was so bad that I think you could use it as grounds to fire Hart or Coppy.

Now with that in mind I wouldn't fire them because they turned around and made a trade that should have immediately earned Coppy the GM of the year award.
Click to expand...

Agree with this. I think there needs to be some form of accountability for the FO's complete miss on Olivera - but that need not come in the form of firings. It could be as simple as a roundtable discussion amongst the FO, analysts and scouts as to what happened in this particular case (a lessons learned, if you will) and transparency on that front.

However every GM is susceptible to making a bad trade from time to time. We know Coppy is capable of making good trades, however, so he has the benefit of the doubt in my book for now. It's what he does going forward with his current hand of cards that will make or break him. I'm not going to fault him entirely for the current state of the roster only because I'm a subscriber of the Branch Rickey adage that "problems are the price you pay for progress" -- however what is different now that he's made a bad trade or two is that his margin of error on a go forward basis is much smaller.
 
ramadon101 said:
Agree with this. I think there needs to be some form of accountability for the FO's complete miss on Olivera - but that need not come in the form of firings. It could be as simple as a roundtable discussion amongst the FO, analysts and scouts as to what happened in this particular case (a lessons learned, if you will) and transparency on that front.

However every GM is susceptible to making a bad trade from time to time. We know Coppy is capable of making good trades, however, so he has the benefit of the doubt in my book for now. It's what he does going forward with his current hand of cards that will make or break him. I'm not going to fault him entirely for the current state of the roster only because I'm a subscriber of the Branch Rickey adage that "problems are the price you pay for progress" -- however what is different now that he's made a bad trade or two is that his margin of error on a go forward basis is much smaller.
Click to expand...

I really think there's a simple answer here and the Dodgers were as susceptible at first (as were all the rest of the clubs lined up to sign Olivera) and the Braves moreso in a more costly sense. The moral of the story is "Don't sign guys based on workouts." It's difficult enough to project guys based on game action, but to judge a guy on how well he hits based on his ability to launch 85 mph lollipops 450 feet is pretty ridiculous. If you will pardon the sexist adage, Olivera is one of those guys who "looks like Tarzan, but plays like Jane."
 
ramadon101 said:
Agree with this. I think there needs to be some form of accountability for the FO's complete miss on Olivera - but that need not come in the form of firings. It could be as simple as a roundtable discussion amongst the FO, analysts and scouts as to what happened in this particular case (a lessons learned, if you will) and transparency on that front.

However every GM is susceptible to making a bad trade from time to time. We know Coppy is capable of making good trades, however, so he has the benefit of the doubt in my book for now. It's what he does going forward with his current hand of cards that will make or break him. I'm not going to fault him entirely for the current state of the roster only because I'm a subscriber of the Branch Rickey adage that "problems are the price you pay for progress" -- however what is different now that he's made a bad trade or two is that his margin of error on a go forward basis is much smaller.
Click to expand...

I don't mind making a bad trade by mis-evaluating a player. That's going to happen. If we traded for 22 year old highly regarded Hector Olivera whom our scouts love... and he comes over and flops ... well that sucks, but that's just a scouting miss.

I mind trading for the 30 year old man with a significant injury history at the very beginning of a rebuild... by the time the Braves are relevant again - Olivera will be 32/33 (maybe)
 
sturg33 said:
I don't mind making a bad trade by mis-evaluating a player. That's going to happen. If we traded for 22 year old highly regarded Hector Olivera whom our scouts love... and he comes over and flops ... well that sucks, but that's just a scouting miss.

I mind trading for the 30 year old man with a significant injury history at the very beginning of a rebuild... by the time the Braves are relevant again - Olivera will be 32/33 (maybe)
Click to expand...

Oh I'm on the same page as you about giving up young talent for an aging player when you are in a rebuild phase. It doesn't make much sense. I think the FO's logic (if you can argue that) was that they would lock up a roughly league average 3B for ~3 years at minimal cost but they missed completely on Olivera's ability to hit MLB pitching NOW, much less the natural regression which typically affects player past their peak. The allegations against Olivera are just further egg on the FO's face, especially considering this organization prides itself on player "makeup".

I think they were hoping to find a Markakis v 2.0 in that you'd have a decent player at a decent (controlled) salary which would keep us competitive while the prospects continued their development. I don't think Olivera was intended to be the future savior at 3B by any means. With that said, I have to imagine Wood+Peraza had more value in the open market than the return we received, or, at the very least, that we could have flipped them for younger players per your comment.
 
ramadon101 said:
Oh I'm on the same page as you about giving up young talent for an aging player when you are in a rebuild phase. It doesn't make much sense. I think the FO's logic (if you can argue that) was that they would lock up a roughly league average 3B for ~3 years at minimal cost but they missed completely on Olivera's ability to hit MLB pitching NOW, much less the natural regression which typically affects player past their peak. The allegations against Olivera are just further egg on the FO's face, especially considering this organization prides itself on player "makeup".

I think they were hoping to find a Markakis v 2.0 in that you'd have a decent player at a decent (controlled) salary which would keep us competitive while the prospects continued their development. I don't think Olivera was intended to be the future savior at 3B by any means. With that said, I have to imagine Wood+Peraza had more value in the open market than the return we received, or, at the very least, that we could have flipped them for younger players per your comment.
Click to expand...

Again, I didn't have much of a problem understanding the logic of the deal, even given Olivera's age. I'm not channeling the Donald here, but I have this aversion to Cuban players. I welcome as many Cubans to our shores as we can accommodate. I just don't want to sign them to yuge contracts to play baseball.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top