Potential Johnson Landing Spots

TheBravos said:
It's just unreal...he's killing it and we will get nothing for him. That is a ridiculous rule that you can't put him back on waivers. The team that claimed him probably had NO intention on "working out a trade". They were just blocking another team. We could have gotten a NICE prospect(s) for him.
Click to expand...

That's why you trade him before the deadline - smart teams are going to block acquisitions.
 
PurpleBrave said:
MLB Trade Rumors ‏@mlbtraderumors

Braves Pull Jim Johnson Back After Waiver Claim

He's ours! All ours!!!!
Click to expand...

In knowing if they pulled him back they couldnt put him back on waivers...why pull him back?? I do t fully understand the process, but if you "don't" pull him back and a trade isn't worked out...doesn't he go back on waivers??
 
mfree80 said:
Inexcusable is a strong word to describe something basically inconsequential. There were probably deals available... something like a non-prospect and we pay all of his contract. In that case, just keep him.

Remember we were all thinking it was silly to not trade for McCann... until we saw what the Yankees want in return. Then it makes sense.

I would really love to be a fly on the wall for some of these negotiations. I suspect we would all see things a little different if we could. Of course, a fly on the wall laughing out loud would create quite a spectacle.
Click to expand...

It's not the level of the impact (or lack there of) that makes not trading Johnson at the deadline an inexcusable mistake. It's how indefensible the reasoning is.

If Kemp collapses as a player next year then trading for him was a mistake but at least there was a definable logic to it. You might disagree with the reasoning but you can understand it.

Not trading Johnson was indefensible. There was no way he was going to make it through waivers. It was a question of getting something or getting nothing and the front office chose nothing.

So that's why I call it inexcusable. It was a screw up on such a fundamental level that you can't just write it off as the front office getting one wrong.
 
Is sort of odd Marlins wouldn't have rather had Johnson but I guess Atlanta was asking for more than they got in other deal before deadline.

I guess if you don't keep your price high you can't score a coup.

Too bad.
 
The braves had next to 0 leverage in negotiating a Johnson trade. Other teams likely low balled them because they figured there was no way we would hold on to him. I bet the people who are complaining we didn't trade hm would have **** on whatever return we got if we did trade him. I know if I was another GM I wouldn't even consider sending one of my top 25 prospects for a half season of Johnson who hasn't been effective without a tomahawk on his chest I about 3-4 years.
 
Is it possible a contending team claimed him, simply to block him from a team they are competing against. Maybe someone blocked him so the mets didn't get to claim him, and offered absolutely nothing because they had no interest. Worse case scenario, the claiming team would have "had" to take on Johnson and his expiring deal. Best case, offer absolutely nothing, he has to stay on the braves, and none of the competition strengthens their bullpen.
 
cajunrevenge said:
The braves had next to 0 leverage in negotiating a Johnson trade. Other teams likely low balled them because they figured there was no way we would hold on to him. I bet the people who are complaining we didn't trade hm would have **** on whatever return we got if we did trade him. I know if I was another GM I wouldn't even consider sending one of my top 25 prospects for a half season of Johnson who hasn't been effective without a tomahawk on his chest I about 3-4 years.
Click to expand...

Ever played poker. Sometimes it is worth losing a hand to establish a reputation for unpredictability.
 
But I still hate we have all these dang vets on a team in last place...maybe winning enough to put us #4 or #5 in the draft.
 
No no no. Players are not cards. You know what you have and the other person has. What the Braves had was someone moderately valuable that is expiring so he is less valuable. You put him out and make the best deal possible. Teams know what they are willing to give up for a certain guy. Sure you can hold out for more but ultimately you know the max you are going to get and you have to make a deal to get close to that value. Otherwise you have a guy who is a waste on this team.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
No no no. Players are not cards. You know what you have and the other person has. What the Braves had was someone moderately valuable that is expiring so he is less valuable. You put him out and make the best deal possible. Teams know what they are willing to give up for a certain guy. Sure you can hold out for more but ultimately you know the max you are going to get and you have to make a deal to get close to that value. Otherwise you have a guy who is a waste on this team.
Click to expand...

Players are not cards. But GMs have to deal with each other over a sequence of bargaining games. That's why reputational considerations matter.

A favorite example from game theory. If I showed up at your front door with a brown paper bag and threatened to blow us both up if you didn't hand over your wallet you would probably laugh. But there are some people you maybe wouldn't laugh at in that situation. JC would benefit from having a reputation as a crazy stubborn tough guy.
 
Maybe they thought he could mentor some young guys and didn't want to trust anyone into high leverage roles?
That could be worth more than a crap prospect

...gasping through straws here
 
TheBravos said:
In knowing if they pulled him back they couldnt put him back on waivers...why pull him back?? I do t fully understand the process, but if you "don't" pull him back and a trade isn't worked out...doesn't he go back on waivers??
Click to expand...

You can only pull a guy back once. If he is put on waivers again, he automatically goes to the first team that claims him. No negotiations. No trade.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top