According to MLBTR, Snits said that Hamels likely won't be on opening day roster with Tomlin, Wright or Davidson fighting for the last rotation spot. You have to consider MLBTR source.
"The Braves will likely open the season without left-hander Cole Hamels, manager Brian Snitker said Thursday (via Mark Bowman of MLB.com)".
Hoping there's a lesson learned here.
Not trying to back away from anything - I liked the signing too. It's hard not to jump on the opportunity to add proven guys on short-term deals or pillow contracts - you have to love being able to mitigate risk with those deals. The Hamels and Ozuna deals SHOULD serve as an example though. If you're going to bring guys like them in because you'd prefer to delay prospects like Wright/Wilson/Anderson/Pache/Waters, you shouldn't pay them market value. Hamels had a really good injury history - until last year. Ozuna's wasn't quite as good, but he arguably filled more of a need. There were obvious red flags with these guys being older players.
As a fan, we can't help but love the bigger names. The thing is (partially in retrospect), should you really spend that kind of money on a "placeholder"? That same AAV could have gotten you 4 years of Moustakas and Castellanos and freed up Riley to include in a trade for an arm (Matt Boyd maybe?). You'd still have Wright, Anderson, Pache, and Waters. Bringing in older players that are more susceptible to injuries doesn't necessarily keep you from needing to promote some prospects before you ideally would - or keep you from going out and spending more money (Puig) to delay them longer.
The new math - and numbers hounds - aren't wrong, and they've certainly taught us a lot. Unfortunately much of the information has to be thrown out the window when you're in your window. We THINK we know what Wright, Anderson, Pache, etc. are going to turn into soon. The problem with waiting for them to become those players is you allow Soroka, Fried, Acuna, and Albies to get another year older and step slower while also assuming the injury risk that comes with that.
I'm not implying that AA made the wrong call - or that the analytically-inclined are wrong at all - just pointing out that there are so many variables that can't be accounted for when you're trying to create an extended window that it's often easy to lose sight of short-term opportunities. If the prospects don't turn out like we all hope, we've missed a golden opportunity to turn this into a REALLY strong contender for a 3 year period. With a lineup that consisted of Acuna, Albies, Freeman, Castellanos, Moustakas, d'Arnaud, Waters, Dansby, Pache how much more pitching would you really need to contend if you could keep Soroka, Fried, Folty, and Boyd relatively healthy?
