Olivera traded for Kemp

[nsacpi]

Trading Freeman is dumb because Swanson and Albies are ready now. If you trade Freeman, then you likely push out the competing time frame past 2019, which means Swanson and Albies will start to get expensive and have less control years remaining.

Yup. The reality is that it is very unlikely that you get all the stars and planets aligned so that all your best players peak in a certain competitive window. The real world is more messy than that and you have to try to get a competitive but not perfect team on the field whenever you can do so without mortgaging the future.

 

[NinersSBChamps]

I think the wisdom of trading Teheran and Freeman turns on your discount factor for 2017 relative to future years. That much is clear. If you are inclined to discount 2017 and maybe 2018 heavily it makes sense.

At some point the organization has to make an effort to try and compete at the big league level. It's getting so easy for them to keep pushing things to the right and have all these excuses as to why the Braves aren't there yet. Trading Julio and/or Freeman is absolutely asinine. They are the only legit players on the team.

 

[gilesfan]

Trading Freeman is dumb because Swanson and Albies are ready now. If you trade Freeman, then you likely push out the competing time frame past 2019, which means Swanson and Albies will start to get expensive and have less control years remaining.

I would say the same for JT, but we have several pitchers in line who could step up within the next 2 years and replace him. But at the same time, it must be a clear win with a JT trade, with multiple ML ready players in return.

Albies/Swanson are most certainly not "ready now." Both of those guys will likely be very good major leaguers, but I doubt either one of them are going to be above average out of the gate. Certainly not Albies at 20 years old. But, we have them for 6 years so you don't need to try to compete in year 1 or 2 with those guys. By year 3-4, it is very possible they are very good players. Keeping Freeman would mean at that point he's 29 years old. But even then, you need a heck of a lot more than that to compete.

People are endlessly posting future lineup predictions. None of the lineups that are realistic have a shot of competing within the next 2-3 years.

 

[gilesfan]

Yup. The reality is that it is very unlikely that you get all the stars and planets aligned so that all your best players peak in a certain competitive window. The real world is more messy than that and you have to try to get a competitive but not perfect team on the field whenever you can do so without mortgaging the future.

This is true and you have to have a mixture of guys at different stages. The good part is we potentially have a very valuable middle infield. Finding some fat slob to play 1B for a couple years really isn't that difficult though. Or move one of the potential 3B candidates over the 1B.

We are very thin at hitting prospects throughout the system. If we could obtain a catching prospect and an OF bat that you reasonably project could make an impact in the majors, I wouldn't even think twice about it. Add vets through FAs to fill in the gaps, even if it is at 1B.

We've discussed how common it is for big 1B to regress close to 30 years old. For a team that is not competing, why not take advantage of an asset that is very valuable at the moment. If we are lucky, we get 2-3 years of Freeman at decent play on a competing team. Trade that in for the shot at acquiring talent where we have very little prospects. We are essentially just going to waste Freemans best seasons.

 

[nsacpi]

None of the lineups that are realistic have a shot of competing within the next 2-3 years.

That's a fair observation. I think the odds are that we are going to be a sub-500 team in both 2017 and 2018.

But does that mean that we totally discount what we might get from Freeman and Teheran in those years?

 

[gilesfan]

That's a fair observation. I think the odds are that we are going to be a sub-500 team in both 2017 and 2018.

But does that mean that we totally discount what we might get from Freeman and Teheran in those years?

But, how does it benefit us in the long term plan to compete for titles? That is really all that I care about as a fan.

 

[nsacpi]

But, how does it benefit us in the long term plan to compete for titles? That is really all that I care about as a fan.

I think we differ in two ways, and it has to do with what kind of fans we are rather than how we see the situation with the Braves.

First, I'm the sort of fan who finds some satisfaction in the team improving from any point on the win curve. To me a 75 win team is more enjoyable than a 70 win team, an 80 win team more enjoyable than a 75 win team. Part of that is my realization that there is a lot of luck and randomness involved in winning a championship. So I'm at the opposite extreme from the all or nothing kind of fan.

Second, I think even a poor team can catch lightning in a bottle and make a deep run into the playoffs. But the odds improve as you go from being a 65 win team to a 70 to a 75 to an 80. I don't really think this year's Kansas City Royals team is much different than last year's. But last year's got all the magic.

 

[bravesfanMatt]

I tend to fall on the trade them side of this. I don't want to stink for the next 2 years, but I also don't want to be in the 'pretender' category for the next 5 years. I don't want to sneak in the playoffs only to get bounced early by a much more complete team. I think trading those guys at highest value (this off season) would net us very, very close to ready talents that would come up and learn with all the very, very close talent we already have. PLUS, we could back load some young prospects in those trades as well (or other trades).. I think a young exciting team that has a few vets scattered in would be a great draw for the new park.

All of what I said is predicated to what the return for those trades would be. I would also look at extenting JJ.. It might be fools gold, but I don't think he would cost us too much. maybe a 3/11 contract. If he bust out, not a huge financial loss. If he pitches like he has this year, then at the deadline, you have Viz and JJ ready to be traded for a great return and still have a great pen in the making.

 

[gilesfan]

I think we differ in two ways, and it has to do with what kind of fans we are rather than how we see the situation with the Braves.

First, I'm the sort of fan who finds some satisfaction in the team improving from any point on the win curve. To me a 75 win team is more enjoyable than a 70 win team, an 80 win team more enjoyable than a 75 win team. Part of that is my realization that there is a lot of luck and randomness involved in winning a championship. So I'm at the opposite extreme from the all or nothing kind of fan.

Second, I think even a poor team can catch lightning in a bottle and make a deep run into the playoffs. But the odds improve as you go from being a 65 win team to a 70 to a 75 to an 80. I don't really think this year's Kansas City Royals team is much different than last year's. But last year's got all the magic.

A poor team doesn't get in the playoffs. Maybe an average team can sneak in, but there aren't any poor teams making playoff runs.

Certainly, there is joy in watching a competitive team, but Freeman isn't the difference between watching a last play team and a competitive team.

 

[zitothebrave]

Again that trade kicks the ball farther down the road. Trading JT would do the same thing. The fact that both are signed for below market value and only through their prime years changes things imo. If Freeman was 30 now and signed for 5 more years I would sell asap. But that's not the case. Freeman and JT won't be at the ages where they would generally be liabilities to limit us competing when our young kids are ready. They will still be in their prime and productive barring injury. Trading both of them now is something the A's would do and would delay our rebuild by another couple of years.

But trading them now when their value is at a premium because they're below market is smart.

That being said, we need to be blwon away. If we trade Freeman, I want insane return. Like if the Nats wanted him and offered GIolito, Turner and Robles we'd have to say yes, even if it postpones the rebuild another year or so.

 

[nsacpi]

A poor team doesn't get in the playoffs.

A single example won't settle the argument, but I believe the 2014 Royals were not expected to be a 500 team and ended up in the World Series.

 

[gilesfan]

A single example won't settle the argument, but I believe the 2014 Royals were not expected to be a 500 team and ended up in the World Series.

The 13 Royals won 86 games. I think they were expected to be more average than poor.

 

[nsacpi]

The 13 Royals won 86 games. I think they were expected to be more average than poor.

They were projected to be below 500.

But not a 60-65 win team. A 75-80 win team. But that is my point. A team expected to win 75 games is a much different animal than one that is expected to win 65. And this is what we are talking about here. With Freeman and Teheran our baseline is about 75 wins. If we trade them for guys whose best years lie ahead, we are talking about a 65 win team.

Here were the Vegas Insider odds of winning the American League pennant as of January 2014.

2014 Odds to win AL Pennant
Detroit Tigers 3/1
Boston Red Sox 11/2
New York Yankees 11/2
Tampa Bay Rays 6/1
Los Angeles Angels 7/1
Oakland Athletics 8/1
Texas Rangers 8/1
Seattle Mariners 14/1
Baltimore Orioles 17/1
Kansas City Royals 17/1
Toronto Blue Jays 17/1
Chicago White Sox 17/1
Cleveland Indians 19/1
Minnesota Twins 40/1
Houston Astros 90/1

 

[clvclv]

Again that trade kicks the ball farther down the road. Trading JT would do the same thing. The fact that both are signed for below market value and only through their prime years changes things imo. If Freeman was 30 now and signed for 5 more years I would sell asap. But that's not the case. Freeman and JT won't be at the ages where they would generally be liabilities to limit us competing when our young kids are ready. They will still be in their prime and productive barring injury. Trading both of them now is something the A's would do and would delay our rebuild by another couple of years.

I just have to think they're past the point of being able to trade Freddie - even if the right offer came along. As mentioned above, he's been a Top 5 guy with almost no fanfare on a really bad team. He's been pegged as the new face of the franchise since the day he signed his extension. While I think the brass could survive the fallout from dealing Julio if someone knocks their socks off, trading Freddie probably gets them run out of town by average fans. I agree that following through completely with gutting the team likely doesn't change the timeline for being a legitimate contender is a valid point. However, given the struggles the organization has had with attendance for so long, it's awfully tough to see them opening the new park without Freeman at the very least.

With all the pitching depth they've built, the brass might be able to sell the average fans on a Julio deal that brought back important pieces - say a Devers/Kopech/Ockimey deal that might net them a potential Freeman replacement for a year or two further down the road, but it just feels like even that would be a tough sell to me. It already feels like the average fans have lost patience after two bad seasons - how long might it take to get them back if there's no chance of being even somewhat competitive before 2019?

I don't think anybody disagrees that trading both guys would load the system beyond belief - I just question how much it could hurt revenues in the long run (through 2020, anyway).

 

[gilesfan]

They were projected to be below 500.

But not a 60-65 win team. A 75-80 win team. But that is my point. A team expected to win 75 games is a much different animal than one that is expected to win 65. And this is what we are talking about here. With Freeman and Teheran our baseline is about 75 wins. If we trade them for guys whose best years lie ahead, we are talking about a 65 win team.

Here were the Vegas Insider odds of winning the American League pennant as of January 2014.

2014 Odds to win AL Pennant
Detroit Tigers 3/1
Boston Red Sox 11/2
New York Yankees 11/2
Tampa Bay Rays 6/1
Los Angeles Angels 7/1
Oakland Athletics 8/1
Texas Rangers 8/1
Seattle Mariners 14/1
Baltimore Orioles 17/1
Kansas City Royals 17/1
Toronto Blue Jays 17/1
Chicago White Sox 17/1
Cleveland Indians 19/1
Minnesota Twins 40/1
Houston Astros 90/1

Teheran and Freeman combined aren't worth 10 wins.

Still, I don't really think its a valid argument. The Royals were roughly an average team. They got lucky and cruised in the playoffs. I'm not building a team thinking I'm going to get assemble a 75 win team and find gold.

 

[Enscheff]

At some point you have to draw a line in the sand and start trying to get better. As I and others have said many times now, there isn't going to be some magical point in time where an entire starting 9 of 23 year olds are going to be sitting in AAA at the same ready to come up and compete. By keeping Teheran and Freeman, and acquiring Kemp, the Braves have said pretty blatantly that NOW is the time they draw that line and start trying to get better.

They are likely to be a 60-65 win team this year, and with some outside additions at C, 3B and a decent 3/4 starter coupled with natural progression of the young talent in the system, they can be a 75-80 win team next year. As long as they don't hamstring themselves by doing something stupid like signing Weiters this offseason, they will be in position to incrementally improve in 2018 to 80-85 wins. Then, if they play their cards right, they could put themselves in position to add that one big piece before the 2019 season that puts them over the top to being a 90+ win team with a legitimate chance at a WS title.

As long as they don't do anything stupid financially before the huge FA class in the 2018/2019 offseason I see no problem trying to get better before then by making measured additions to the roster. I don't think Kemp was a good first step, but it is what it is.

 

[chop2chip]

Albies/Swanson are most certainly not "ready now." Both of those guys will likely be very good major leaguers, but I doubt either one of them are going to be above average out of the gate. Certainly not Albies at 20 years old. But, we have them for 6 years so you don't need to try to compete in year 1 or 2 with those guys. By year 3-4, it is very possible they are very good players. Keeping Freeman would mean at that point he's 29 years old. But even then, you need a heck of a lot more than that to compete.

People are endlessly posting future lineup predictions. None of the lineups that are realistic have a shot of competing within the next 2-3 years.

But you never know. Both could be up by next May and be 4 WAR players, Folty steps up, and Newcomb takes the next step and all of a sudden we are a 85 win team. I understand that all of that isn't likely, but we are at least at a point where competing is a possibility.

If we trade Teheran and Freeman now, it won't matter if those things happen because we would still be a 70 win team.

At some point you have to go to the dance with the girl that brought ya

 

[nsacpi]

Teheran and Freeman combined aren't worth 10 wins.

eight

 

[thewupk]

But trading them now when their value is at a premium because they're below market is smart.

That being said, we need to be blwon away. If we trade Freeman, I want insane return. Like if the Nats wanted him and offered GIolito, Turner and Robles we'd have to say yes, even if it postpones the rebuild another year or so.

Yeah but I doubt that deal comes along. I'd need a trade like what the Indians got for Colon from the Expos. Those deals do happen but are so rare and need a specific set of circumstances.

 

[mfree80]

But trading them now when their value is at a premium because they're below market is smart.

That being said, we need to be blwon away. If we trade Freeman, I want insane return. Like if the Nats wanted him and offered GIolito, Turner and Robles we'd have to say yes, even if it postpones the rebuild another year or so.

I think Zito hits the nail on the head here. There is a price where you have to say yes. The big difference in what we are arguing about is that price. If you get a price too high to turn down... of course you do it. For many of us, that price would have to be outrageous, to the point where it is highly unlikely to happen. For some a fair return with a slight win for the Braves would be enough.