Powering Up

C

clvclv

<B>"What is a clvclv"</B>
Not like our Opening Day roster scares anyone much more than last season, but it is significantly more powerful overall. Several guys who are more likely to run into one when a Pitcher makes a mistake...

Swisher ---> Frenchy
Bourn ---> Stubbs
Bethancourt ---> Flowers
Castro ---> Beckham
CJ ---> KJ

You could argue that all of those guys are upgrades defensively (other than Beckham) as well.
 
Reading the tea leaves these are some things that I think may be part of Fredi's plan:

1) Garcia and Peterson get most of the PT at third and second. Adjustments will be made if those two do not grab the opportunity and run with it.

2) Go lefty righty with the first six spots of the lineup: Inciarte, Aybar (switch hitter), Freeman, Garcia, Markakis, Olivera

3) Most days, KJ will be our primary (only?) lefty bat on the bench. It is worth noting that Francoeur and Stubbs both have fairly pronounced conventional career splits. Do not be fooled by their reverse splits in 2015 (I'm talking to you Fredi). That's one of those fluky small sample size things.

4) When KJ starts, sit Jace or one of the other lefty hitters so we have a lefty pinch hitter on the bench.
 
nsacpi said:
Reading the tea leaves these are some things that I think may be part of Fredi's plan:

1) Garcia and Peterson get most of the PT at third and second. Adjustments will be made if those two do not grab the opportunity and run with it.

2) Go lefty righty with the first six spots of the lineup: Inciarte, Aybar (switch hitter), Freeman, Garcia, Markakis, Olivera

3) Most days, KJ will be our primary (only?) lefty bat on the bench. It is worth noting that Francoeur and Stubbs both have fairly pronounced conventional career splits. Do not be fooled by their reverse splits in 2015 (I'm talking to you Fredi). That's one of those fluky small sample size things.

4) When KJ starts, sit Jace or one of the other lefty hitters so we have a lefty pinch hitter on the bench.
Click to expand...

Maybe Francoeur can live at home, because if I were either him or Stubbs, I wouldn't invest in anything more than a month-to-month lease. I agree that the big thing missing on the bench is another LHH.
 
nsacpi said:
I know we are not contending this year, but it is still surprising we start the season without a second lefty in the pen and having a bench that is unbalanced in terms of having 3 RHH and 1 LHH.
Click to expand...

Agree 100%. I think both Kinman and Marksberry will spend time with the major league team this season, so that may be where they are going with that particular issue. Don't know what they are going to do about the bench balance on the offensive side of things. There may be some waiver wire/DFA stuff going on early that will help with that.
 
A couple thoughts from Fredi on the bench and decision to keep Stubbs.

Gonzalez envisions using Stubbs against some left-handers and whenever else he wants to rest Inciarte, who played a career-high 132 games last year in his second major league season.
“It’s hard to take your heart away from it, but at the end of the day it’s what’s a better fit for our team and what’s the best fit for Inciarte,” Gonzalez said. “Here’s a guy who hasn’t played 162 games, and the games he’s played he’s played (home games for Arizona) were indoors, in the air conditioning. Now we’re going to have to spell him (occasionally). Is it easier to spell him when you go up to Stubbs and say, hey, you’ve got (Giants lefty Madison) Bumgarner, in the Wednesday 12 o’clock game when you want to give him a day off, than it is to go to Bourn.”
Gonzalez believes he played second baseman Jace Peterson too much last season, large part because of reluctance to use backup Pedro Ciriaco, who hit .209 in 47 at-bats vs. lefties. He wanted to avoid a similar situation with Inciarte.
“I think having Stubbs helps Inciarte,” Gonzalez said, “and keeps me from running somebody into the ground. And it’s a perfect fit, it really is. (Stubbs) can defend, he can run, he can throw.”
Click to expand...

http://www.ajc.com/news/sports/baseball/braves-made-some-creative-moves-in-finalizing-rost/nqxyT/
 
50PoundHead said:
From the AJC;

“I think having Stubbs helps Inciarte,” Gonzalez said, “and keeps me from running somebody into the ground. And it’s a perfect fit, it really is. (Stubbs) can defend, he can run, he can throw.”

And I would add, he can't hit for sh*t.
Click to expand...

And I would add that he has no trade value and is unlikely to EVER have any.

The Bourn & Swisher cuts are just idiotic at this point. You have HAVE to pay them. A lot. A lot of money. No matter what you got back from Cleveland.

This team isn't going to contend no matter how much ruby slipper rubbing anyone does.

Both Swisher and Bourn were signed to such huge contracts because they had a history of performance. Now, will they ever play well enough to justify their salary again? Highly, highly unlikely. But they don't have to play all star baseball to be useful to the Braves. At a minimum you get the veteran "presence." Maybe even some mentoring. If either (best case both) regain some form, then they would be worth SOMETHING in trade when teams start needing veteran bats.

Let's say Swisher hits .240, .340 OBP, with 10 HR before the all-star break. At a minimum, with the Braves paying all his salary, he would be worth a low level flyer, maybe more. Same for Bourn.

I would feel differently if they were blocking youngsters from playing. But, they aren't and are unlikely to do so any time before the break. They could be released at any time during the season at no difference in releasing them now except for the possibility of not hanging on to Drew Stubbs.
 
There obviously isn't a ton of difference between the value of these three players, but I think it would have been best to keep Bourn and Stubbs and drop Francoeur. I wonder if things would have played out differently if Stubbs was released by TEX a week earlier than he was instead of just a couple of hours before the Francoeur deadline.
 
dak said:
There obviously isn't a ton of difference between the value of these three players, but I think it would have been best to keep Bourn and Stubbs and drop Francoeur. I wonder if things would have played out differently if Stubbs was released by TEX a week earlier than he was instead of just a couple of hours before the Francoeur deadline.
Click to expand...

Stubbs and Francoeur are pretty similar, except Stubbs can play center. You want diversification from your bench rather than a couple RH hitting outfielders. Especially when you consider Beckham is another right-handed hitter on the bench.
 
I think the last two or three roster spots would have been better used on some younger players with upside like Jake Cave. We could have held on to Todd Cunningham and Joey T rather than waste 40-man roster spots on some of the guys who didn't make the team. These younger players have upside (not a lot but some) and also have the advatange of being under contractual control for 5 or 6 years.

Alternatively, you fill the last two or three spots with players who are better than the waiver wire claims. Kelly Johnson is an example. The reasoning here is those players will have some value at the deadline.

Right now we have in Francoeur and Stubbs two guys who will contribute little either on the field or through trade value at the deadline. I suppose there is a tiny chance they do something and build up some value. But in general it does not strike me as a good way to round out the roster. Maybe one of them. But two??
 
Horsehide Harry said:
And I would add that he has no trade value and is unlikely to EVER have any.

The Bourn & Swisher cuts are just idiotic at this point. You have HAVE to pay them. A lot. A lot of money. No matter what you got back from Cleveland.

This team isn't going to contend no matter how much ruby slipper rubbing anyone does.

Both Swisher and Bourn were signed to such huge contracts because they had a history of performance. Now, will they ever play well enough to justify their salary again? Highly, highly unlikely. But they don't have to play all star baseball to be useful to the Braves. At a minimum you get the veteran "presence." Maybe even some mentoring. If either (best case both) regain some form, then they would be worth SOMETHING in trade when teams start needing veteran bats.

Let's say Swisher hits .240, .340 OBP, with 10 HR before the all-star break. At a minimum, with the Braves paying all his salary, he would be worth a low level flyer, maybe more. Same for Bourn.

I would feel differently if they were blocking youngsters from playing. But, they aren't and are unlikely to do so any time before the break. They could be released at any time during the season at no difference in releasing them now except for the possibility of not hanging on to Drew Stubbs.
Click to expand...

Let's not forget that Stubbs just had a year in 2014 where he posted a .821 OPS... caveat was that is was in Colorado. However, he's always had the pedigree and that was the first year he was truly just a platoon/situational player (it obviously benefits him being a situational guy). I don't know if we should count last year... he struggled but also didn't play very much. I'd much rather have him than Bourn who has struggled to be relevant since 2012. Stubbs is a nice power bat off the bench as well as a very good defender/base runner. Bourn is a one trick pony who can't even do that one trick well anymore.
 
Horsehide Harry said:
And I would add that he has no trade value and is unlikely to EVER have any.

The Bourn & Swisher cuts are just idiotic at this point. You have HAVE to pay them. A lot. A lot of money. No matter what you got back from Cleveland.

This team isn't going to contend no matter how much ruby slipper rubbing anyone does.

Both Swisher and Bourn were signed to such huge contracts because they had a history of performance. Now, will they ever play well enough to justify their salary again? Highly, highly unlikely. But they don't have to play all star baseball to be useful to the Braves. At a minimum you get the veteran "presence." Maybe even some mentoring. If either (best case both) regain some form, then they would be worth SOMETHING in trade when teams start needing veteran bats.

Let's say Swisher hits .240, .340 OBP, with 10 HR before the all-star break. At a minimum, with the Braves paying all his salary, he would be worth a low level flyer, maybe more. Same for Bourn.

I would feel differently if they were blocking youngsters from playing. But, they aren't and are unlikely to do so any time before the break. They could be released at any time during the season at no difference in releasing them now except for the possibility of not hanging on to Drew Stubbs.
Click to expand...

This is why I didn't like the Swisher/Bourn acquisitions in the first place. The books are clear on these guys after the season, but they clearly clogged things up as they pertain to current decisions.

I never hated Francoeur like some here, but his signing made no sense and continues to make no sense.

nscapi. I'm with you on Cunningham (although I'm not that big a fan), but Terdoslavich is a guy without a position.
 
Enscheff said:
You guys realize you are griping about the color of the floor mats in an old broken down vw beetle with 3 wheels, right?
Click to expand...
It's a bit like getting excited about a 28th round pick or the Rule 5 draft. It is arcane and geeky. You don't have to participate if it ain't your cup o tea.
 
A few thoughts in no particular order...

As for the OP, we'll probably see some more pop at C and 3B. The other guys you mention (hopefullly) aren't going to get enough ABs to move the needle.

I agree that none of the guys at the end of the bench/pen should get too comfortable. I imagine we'll see a lot of guys rotate through.

The Boni signing perplexed me from the get-go. Frenchy is also a bit of a headscratcher. I'm with the camp that leans towards (admittedly limited) upside and team control over one-and-done veteran fodder, unless those guys are eminently flippable . . . which none of them (Frechman, Boni, Beckham, Stubbs) look to be. It's certainly not a big deal, but I'd have preferred to see us take another direction.

As for Swisher/Bourn, that was nothing but a dead money swap to clear money a year earlier. Respectfully, Harry, Nick Swisher doesn't have those numbers in him, and wouldn't have a place to get the PAs to reach them even if he did. He moves like Bobby Cox pre-knee replacement. I'm sorry we didn't cut him earlier.
 
50PoundHead said:
This is why I didn't like the Swisher/Bourn acquisitions in the first place. The books are clear on these guys after the season, but they clearly clogged things up as they pertain to current decisions.

I never hated Francoeur like some here, but his signing made no sense and continues to make no sense.

nscapi. I'm with you on Cunningham (although I'm not that big a fan), but Terdoslavich is a guy without a position.
Click to expand...

Clogged up? Umm...they just cut $30,000,000 before the season started. Looks to me like they moved right through Fredi's colon like a castor oil and Miralax speedball.

They just kept Jeff ****ing Francoeur and signed a steaming turd hitting a buck-ninety off the waiver wire rather than worry about getting anything out of their investment in those dudes.

I'm pretty sure Todd Cunningham and Joey "The Deuce" wouldn't have been big difference makers if we'd gone that route. Shoot, I thought Swisher was literally going to hurt himself playing defense last week and Terdoslavich might be a worse defender than Swish.

This really is a discussion about whether to go with olive or coral striped vinyl seats in your 1974 AMC Pacer. Yellow exterior, of course.
 
Frenchy signing makes a bit of sense from a PR, let's write a story perspective. Maybe, maybe get a few butts in seats, in what will be a dismal season while we wait.
 
GovClintonTyree said:
Clogged up? Umm...they just cut $30,000,000 before the season started. Looks to me like they moved right through Fredi's colon like a castor oil and Miralax speedball.

They just kept Jeff ****ing Francoeur and signed a steaming turd hitting a buck-ninety off the waiver wire rather than worry about getting anything out of their investment in those dudes.

I'm pretty sure Todd Cunningham and Joey "The Deuce" wouldn't have been big difference makers if we'd gone that route. Shoot, I thought Swisher was literally going to hurt himself playing defense last week and Terdoslavich might be a worse defender than Swish.

This really is a discussion about whether to go with olive or coral striped vinyl seats in your 1974 AMC Pacer. Yellow exterior, of course.
Click to expand...

I go back to nsacpi's point. If we don't have Bourn or Swisher around and on the 40-man roster, we could have looked for some other guys during the off-season. I think the Francoeur and Stubbs signings are both fairly goofy. As Bedell says, Francoeur will be good for a quote and attendance will likely go up by the number of friends and family he can convince to come out to the game.

I'm not arguing the Cunningham or Terdoslavich or Hunter would have made any appreciable difference. I'm just saying that as younger players who may have some room on their development arc, they may develop into a usable part. Of those guys, Cunningham probably provides the most potential upside. He has a low ceiling, but he plays a good CF, has some speed, and is a switch-hitter. All that said, the Angles outrighted Cunningham to AAA in the final cutdown.

I agree that arguments like this are like debating how the deck chairs on the Titanic should be arranged, but it's at this level of decision-making that I've been disappointed with the new regime. I have tended to agree with most of their major moves. It's the stuff around the edges where some of the things they've done don't make a lot of sense and that's how I feel about the Swisher and Bourn acquisitions.
 
The FO did pick up Winkler in the Rule 5, which looks like it might turn out to be quite a coup and which also highlights the potential importance of these "small potatoes" decisions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top