Olivera traded for Kemp

chop2chip said:
Well in three years he's going to be off the team, so I can't see how that's true.

The trade is fine. Kemp isn't very good and it's not a good use of money, but it's also superior to trading talent and / or signing someone to huge money this offseason when we are clearly not ready to compete. This is a solid compromise to the average fan to show that we are trying to compete, but keeping everything in play to compete after 2017 when some of the young talent is ready.
Click to expand...

I'm okay with that analysis. I, myself, think Kemp's better than that. I don't think it's just for show. If it's a stopgap, it's a really good one.
 
A team can win with a high power low on base lawn ornament in LF. They can't win with multiple players like that, but Kemp sitting in the 4 hole hitting 30+ HRs and a low .300 OBP is going to make the offense better.
 
GovClintonTyree said:
You keep telling yourself that it's better to have a KJ/Francoeur platoon in one corner and Nick Markakis in the other, dude. Either you'll show me some silly-ass metrics that prove the point you're making or you're secretly wanting the Braves to suck forever so the Nats have an easier path.
Click to expand...

Im not sure your point. The team wont compete for 2 years minimum. Kemp doesnt change that. He does hamstring the organization over the next couple years so that FA moves will be limited and lessens the possibility that you can make a trade for a guy reaching arby.

Adding kemp may add 1-2 wins per year assuming his hips and knees allow him to play everyday.

The goal is to rebuild. Im not sure how Kemp helps that and he possibly hurts it. Why not use that money for buy low type guys that could be on thr team when they are ready to compete? We didnt have to trade Ho, we could have just cut him. Instead, we take on a bad contract. That doesnt make sense to me.

I would trade for Puig or similar players that have talent and are under 30.
 
There is also the possibility of the DH coming to the National League in 2017. That would make this trade even better.
 
gilesfan said:
Im not sure your point. The team wont compete for 2 years minimum. Kemp doesnt change that. He does hamstring the organization over the next couple years so that FA moves will be limited and lessens the possibility that you can make a trade for a guy reaching arby.

Adding kemp may add 1-2 wins per year assuming his hips and knees allow him to play everyday.

The goal is to rebuild. Im not sure how Kemp helps that and he possibly hurts it. Why not use that money for buy low type guys that could be on thr team when they are ready to compete? We didnt have to trade Ho, we could have just cut him. Instead, we take on a bad contract. That doesnt make sense to me.

I would trade for Puig or similar players that have talent and are under 30.
Click to expand...

The Braves basically "signed" Kemp for the same amount of money a middle reliever signs for.

Puig has the stench of a DV episode (allegedly) from this past offseason. There's no way you add a player like that and on the other hand release HO saying domestic violence will not be tolerated.
 
chop2chip said:
The Braves basically "signed" Kemp for the same amount of money a middle reliever signs for.

Puig has the stench of a DV episode (allegedly) from this past offseason. There's no way you add a player like that and on the other hand release HO saying domestic violence will not be tolerated.
Click to expand...

Middle relievers sign for roughly 3/30? Also, do they produce more than 0.5 wins per year?
 
UNCBlue012 said:
If you think this isn't at least a decent move, you're a dingus.
Click to expand...

I would have rather cut bait than compounding a bad move by taking on a bad contract for an older player that has had knee and hip issues and is already terrible defensively. (and a .285 OBP) I'd rather wait to got he veteran route when we are ready to compete bc it doesn't make sense to do it while rebuilding unless it is a 1-2 year contract that you hope to eventually spin. To me, this seems to imply that Coppy irrationally thinks we have a chance to compete in the short term.
 
Enscheff said:
A team can win with a high power low on base lawn ornament in LF. They can't win with multiple players like that, but Kemp sitting in the 4 hole hitting 30+ HRs and a low .300 OBP is going to make the offense better.
Click to expand...

Particularly if you can back him up with a high OBP guy like Markakis so other teams don't just decide to pitch around Freddie AND Kemp and think they'll consistently be able to get away with it - would be lots of baserunners in front of Nick when they did.

Like him or not, he does still do a good job of getting runners in - better than anyone else we've had recently.

Not entirely sure putting a guy like Kemp behind Freddie for a couple years could possibly work out much worse than paying J-Up bags more money (for more years) to essentially be the same guy.
 
gilesfan said:
Im not sure your point. The team wont compete for 2 years minimum. Kemp doesnt change that. He does hamstring the organization over the next couple years so that FA moves will be limited and lessens the possibility that you can make a trade for a guy reaching arby.

Adding kemp may add 1-2 wins per year assuming his hips and knees allow him to play everyday.

The goal is to rebuild. Im not sure how Kemp helps that and he possibly hurts it. Why not use that money for buy low type guys that could be on thr team when they are ready to compete? We didnt have to trade Ho, we could have just cut him. Instead, we take on a bad contract. That doesnt make sense to me.

I would trade for Puig or similar players that have talent and are under 30.
Click to expand...

Moving payroll from $70m to $80m when the playoff league average is $140m is not a big deal. There are still plenty of dollars to spend. The problem is finding decent players to take your money.

Puig is a bad apple, will be expensive, would block prospects and is horribly overrated. Kemp is a much better fit for this club at this time.
 
chop2chip said:
http://espn.go.com/mlb/freeagents/_/type/dollars/position/rp

By my count there were three non closer relief pitchers that signed for basically what we are paying Kemp next year.
Click to expand...

And each have provided roughly the same value as Kemp in terms of war despite being middle relievers. They were each made my teams expecting to compete and wanting to shore up the pen.

Really two that are close to the contract, but contending teams act differently than rebuilding.
 
clvclv said:
Particularly if you can back him up with a high OBP guy like Markakis so other teams don't just decide to pitch around Freddie AND Kemp and think they'll consistently be able to get away with it - would be lots of baserunners in front of Nick when they did.

Like him or not, he does still do a good job of getting runners in - better than anyone else we've had recently.

Not entirely sure putting a guy like Kemp behind Freddie for a couple years could possibly work out much worse than paying J-Up bags more money (for more years) to essentially be the same guy.
Click to expand...

I didn't have the seeds to use the Upton comparison, but this is exactly what I was thinking.
 
GovClintonTyree said:
Moving payroll from $70m to $80m when the playoff league average is $140m is not a big deal. There are still plenty of dollars to spend. The problem is finding decent players to take your money.

Puig is a bad apple, will be expensive, would block prospects and is horribly overrated. Kemp is a much better fit for this club at this time.
Click to expand...

And Kemp is a declining player that is expensive and blocks prospects while being horribly overrated. Except, one there is a reasonable expectation of improvement.
 
gilesfan said:
I would have rather cut bait than compounding a bad move by taking on a bad contract for an older player that has had knee and hip issues and is already terrible defensively. (and a .285 OBP) I'd rather wait to got he veteran route when we are ready to compete bc it doesn't make sense to do it while rebuilding unless it is a 1-2 year contract that you hope to eventually spin. To me, this seems to imply that Coppy irrationally thinks we have a chance to compete in the short term.
Click to expand...

Right. He's 60 points below his career BABIP and at half his career walk rate. You think the .285 OBP is static, or will it maybe/probably/definitely go up?

I don't think we're in any danger of not being the #1-2-3 pick again this year, and hopefully by next year we start to splice in some acquisitions, guys start to develop, and we start to show signs of life. Kemp is a good guy to have hitting in the middle of a power-starved lineup in the transition time.
 
gilesfan said:
And each have provided roughly the same value as Kemp in terms of war despite being middle relievers. They were each made my teams expecting to compete and wanting to shore up the pen.

Really two that are close to the contract, but contending teams act differently than rebuilding.
Click to expand...
Okay... And Kemp still was signed for the same amount of money which was my point.
 
gilesfan said:
And Kemp is a declining player that is expensive and blocks prospects while being horribly overrated. Except, one there is a reasonable expectation of improvement.
Click to expand...

He's been ragged on for five years. How is he overrated?

If we had prospects who needed to play, why would we have started the year with KJ, Francoeur, and Markakis as corners?

Agree to disagree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top