Viz and Teheran listed as top trade candidates

[clvclv]

The issue that I see is that many people are using the thought process of building for 2017, 2018 instead of a longer term process that looks at improvement in 2017, being good in 2018, realistic contention in 2019 and beyond. The thing is that the FA possibilities after this season are fairly horrible and considerably limited.

Could the Braves sign Cespedes? Maybe. But, he's going to be extremely costly and is getting on the wrong side of his career. If you do sign him you have to hope he will maintain but be prepared for a gradual )hopefully) decline, say just as good in 2017, 15% off in 2018, another 15% off in 2019, another 15% off in 2020. So, you would have a guy who is 50% of the player he is now on your team in 2020 but making as much money or more than he makes in 2017. It's a huge gamble based on the desire to be competitive in 2017.

Could the Braves sign Desmond for LF? Almost surely. But should they? He's having a career year in an extreme hitters park surrounded by an excellent team. Is he the player you see today (the one you pay for) or is he the player who played in Washington? Players blossom all the time but how would everyone feel if he was doing this in Coors?

The point is that the Braves young talent isn't likely to be huge contributors to success in 2017. Atlanta doesn't have a Harper or Trout or Clemens or Martinez ready to jump from the minors straight to the All-Star team. Guys like Albies, Swanson, all the young pitchers, are likely to come up and struggle a bit before settling in and either growing into good (maybe great) ML players or wash out to be replaced by others who will likely go through the same process. Look at Wisler, Blair, Folty, etc. and you see the process working with the young pitching.

Even IF the Braves sign top FA talent in the offseason (and the hit rate on targets that are actually good and fit needs will have to be off the charts because of the lack of options), the youngsters are still going to struggle. 2017 is a pipe dream. That's why you have to think of 2018 and beyond NOW.

Even Teheran, Freeman, Viz all lose value, maybe significant value, over the next 2-3 years simply because they get older, more expensive and under less control. That doesn't even take into consideration possible injury or outside influences such as PED suspension (Viz).

The farm is improved. It may actually be one of the best overall in the game. However, the rebuild isn't close to being finished and can't (or shouldn't) be rushed.

The thing that everyone who wants to suddenly turn into the Rays somehow keeps missing is the fact that it's NOT A GAMBLE.

There are no other places you're going to need to spend money prior to the end of Julio's contract. Funny thing is, that coincides with the time you guys think the kids will be serious contributors - 2020. So what if you're paying Cespedes $25 million that season? Markakis will have fallen off the books by then, meaning you need a whole lot less production from him since there will be extra money available.

Again, no one's saying the Braves should go out and go nuts by signing Cespedes, Desmond, and Castro with the belief that they'd instantly become contenders next season. However, the fans that are complaining about "being lied to" by the brass wants to see improvement. Adding the big bat Cespedes offers would make it SO MUCH easier for guys like Albies and Swanson not to feel like they're expected to be "saviors". They can do what they're good at and be nice parts to add to the offense.

Many others have mentioned that they felt one big signing (Cespedes or Desmond) coupled with a couple of other "solid" signings (Castro, Prado, etc.) puts the Braves on the fringes of a wildcard spot. I think that'd be tough to disagree with.

You don't want a big signing? Fine. I still think you could make this team really competitive in 2017 even by adding a few of these "terrible" free-agents, and they could do so WITHOUT blocking a single prospect that you want to step in in 2020.

Sign Mark Trumbo for 3 years and $60-$75 million and stick him in LF. There's your right-handed protection for Freddie for half what Cespedes would cost. Contract would end after 2018 and he'd be 34.
Sign Justin Turner or Prado for 2 years and $25 million to play 3B. There's your veteran to guide Albies/Swanson/Ruiz. That contract would end prior to the big free-agent class that will have Machado and Donaldson - Turner would be 34, Prado would be 35.
Sign Castro for 2 years and $12 million. There's your platoon-mate for Flowers.

The point is, I completely agree with Coppy's stance that someone's paying through the nose if they want Julio. Adding a few guys like that could very easily put you in the wildcard hunt as early as next year. There is ABSOLUTELY no reason to "tank" for even half a season at this juncture. There's a fine line between continuing to acquire young talent with an eye towards being competitive in the near-future and turning into the Rays. Many people seem to have crossed that line. The brass can't say it any more convincingly than they have - payroll is going up starting January 1st. All the bad contracts will be off the books at that point, we'll (in essence) be starting from scratch financially, and the system will have been completely overhauled - rank it where you want to.

This team will be far more competitive come Opening Day 2017, regardless of who thinks that's "jumping the gun".

 

[KB21]

I don't want them to sign anyone that is going to cost them a draft pick though. Atlanta will be in a great position to add at least 2 more 1st round quality players with their picks next year, and it would be very nice to add another pick at some point.

 

[Chico]

I don't want them to sign anyone that is going to cost them a draft pick though. Atlanta will be in a great position to add at least 2 more 1st round quality players with their picks next year, and it would be very nice to add another pick at some point.

Yeah. That plays a large part in it, but there's a chance that we get a competitive balance pick. We could also trade for another one. We should know this month (before the August 1st deadline). But yes, ideally we avoid a player with a pick tied to him unless we're getting a below market deal due to it.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

The thing that everyone who wants to suddenly turn into the Rays somehow keeps missing is the fact that it's NOT A GAMBLE.

There are no other places you're going to need to spend money prior to the end of Julio's contract. Funny thing is, that coincides with the time you guys think the kids will be serious contributors - 2020. So what if you're paying Cespedes $25 million that season? Markakis will have fallen off the books by then, meaning you need a whole lot less production from him since there will be extra money available.

Again, no one's saying the Braves should go out and go nuts by signing Cespedes, Desmond, and Castro with the belief that they'd instantly become contenders next season. However, the fans that are complaining about "being lied to" by the brass wants to see improvement. Adding the big bat Cespedes offers would make it SO MUCH easier for guys like Albies and Swanson not to feel like they're expected to be "saviors". They can do what they're good at and be nice parts to add to the offense.

Many others have mentioned that they felt one big signing (Cespedes or Desmond) coupled with a couple of other "solid" signings (Castro, Prado, etc.) puts the Braves on the fringes of a wildcard spot. I think that'd be tough to disagree with.

You don't want a big signing? Fine. I still think you could make this team really competitive in 2017 even by adding a few of these "terrible" free-agents, and they could do so WITHOUT blocking a single prospect that you want to step in in 2020.

Sign Mark Trumbo for 3 years and $60-$75 million and stick him in LF. There's your right-handed protection for Freddie for half what Cespedes would cost. Contract would end after 2018 and he'd be 34.
Sign Justin Turner or Prado for 2 years and $25 million to play 3B. There's your veteran to guide Albies/Swanson/Ruiz. That contract would end prior to the big free-agent class that will have Machado and Donaldson - Turner would be 34, Prado would be 35.
Sign Castro for 2 years and $12 million. There's your platoon-mate for Flowers.

The point is, I completely agree with Coppy's stance that someone's paying through the nose if they want Julio. Adding a few guys like that could very easily put you in the wildcard hunt as early as next year. There is ABSOLUTELY no reason to "tank" for even half a season at this juncture. There's a fine line between continuing to acquire young talent with an eye towards being competitive in the near-future and turning into the Rays. Many people seem to have crossed that line. The brass can't say it any more convincingly than they have - payroll is going up starting January 1st. All the bad contracts will be off the books at that point, we'll (in essence) be starting from scratch financially, and the system will have been completely overhauled - rank it where you want to.

This team will be far more competitive come Opening Day 2017, regardless of who thinks that's "jumping the gun".

The thing is that it very well could be jumping the gun. My thoughts start with the idea that there is a fixed payroll, somewhere in the range of where it has been or maybe a little more, say $100-$120M. IF the payroll is going to jump to $150M, then OK, go for it. A bad $25M contract is a lot less hurtful for a team that is at $150M than $100M.

But, IF the budget is going to be $100M or even stretch up to $130-$140M over several years, then you have to be concerned about eating up payroll flexibility on players who may be good today but not necessarily good when you realistically have the benefits of the rebuild.

And, the thing is, you really need to see the youngsters a bit to understand where the holes really are. Outside of an almost certain lack of power, who knows what will be needed in 2018 and beyond. We all EXPECT Albies and Swanson to fill ss and 2b but what if they don't? Right now, Ruiz looks like a bust for 3B, but he's still young for AAA. What if they go sign Prado or Turner or Desmond for 3B then Ruiz blossoms? Who cares, you may say! More than one 3B wouldn't be a bad thing. But, if you sign a 3B and it turns out you don't need one, you have taken payroll that might more properly be used to fill other holes that you didn't think would be holes.

Trying to do both (compete short term but rebuild long term) almost never works, especially if you don't have an huge budget.

I think the concern about "fans" in 2017 is overblown. The new park will draw because it's a new park. Does anyone think attendance will be significantly better for a 72-90 team vs a 62-100 team? Does anyone really think adding Cespedes, a marginal 3B and a marginal C will make this team an 81 win team in 2017? I certainly don't. Fans, especially "casual" fans come to see a winning team. "Fooling" them only works for a while. Atlanta attendance has been falling for years because the product on the field has generally been below standard - at least the standard set by the 1990's Braves, which is what the casual fan sees.

IMO, it's a much better strategic plan to get your low end, low cost, tradable assets to add to the youngster mix in 2017, audition the young guys throughout 2017. Evaluate holes after 2017 and spend your money on FA before the 2017 season when you have a better idea of where those holes are going to be. If you spend $50M of the budget on FA after this season, that's $50M you don't have to spend after 2017.

As for trading Teheran, Viz, Inciarte, Johnson, Freeman, whoever, I've said before that I am all for trading any and all of them given the right return. The right return being the key phrase. Some if not all of that group will either no longer be with the Braves in 2018, 2019, 2020 or will be very expensive, and/or be on the wrong side of their prime years. None, appear to me to be likely to develop into true face of the franchise players (guys like Trout, Harper, Pujols in his prime, Glavine, Smoltz, Maddux, CJ, etc). Many are good to very good players right now, some bordering on fleeting greatness.

But their value to the franchise is what they will mean to the franchise in 18, 19 and 20. Is their value more likely to be maximized by trading them for players who will impact those years or by keeping them to enjoy their final control years before they walk away or have to be re-signed? The answer to that, I think, is dependent on what they get in trade, aka the right return.

 

[clvclv]

The thing is that it very well could be jumping the gun. My thoughts start with the idea that there is a fixed payroll, somewhere in the range of where it has been or maybe a little more, say $100-$120M. IF the payroll is going to jump to $150M, then OK, go for it. A bad $25M contract is a lot less hurtful for a team that is at $150M than $100M.

But, IF the budget is going to be $100M or even stretch up to $130-$140M over several years, then you have to be concerned about eating up payroll flexibility on players who may be good today but not necessarily good when you realistically have the benefits of the rebuild.

And, the thing is, you really need to see the youngsters a bit to understand where the holes really are. Outside of an almost certain lack of power, who knows what will be needed in 2018 and beyond. We all EXPECT Albies and Swanson to fill ss and 2b but what if they don't? Right now, Ruiz looks like a bust for 3B, but he's still young for AAA. What if they go sign Prado or Turner or Desmond for 3B then Ruiz blossoms? Who cares, you may say! More than one 3B wouldn't be a bad thing. But, if you sign a 3B and it turns out you don't need one, you have taken payroll that might more properly be used to fill other holes that you didn't think would be holes.

Trying to do both (compete short term but rebuild long term) almost never works, especially if you don't have an huge budget.

I think the concern about "fans" in 2017 is overblown. The new park will draw because it's a new park. Does anyone think attendance will be significantly better for a 72-90 team vs a 62-100 team? Does anyone really think adding Cespedes, a marginal 3B and a marginal C will make this team an 81 win team in 2017? I certainly don't. Fans, especially "casual" fans come to see a winning team. "Fooling" them only works for a while. Atlanta attendance has been falling for years because the product on the field has generally been below standard - at least the standard set by the 1990's Braves, which is what the casual fan sees.

IMO, it's a much better strategic plan to get your low end, low cost, tradable assets to add to the youngster mix in 2017, audition the young guys throughout 2017. Evaluate holes after 2017 and spend your money on FA before the 2017 season when you have a better idea of where those holes are going to be. If you spend $50M of the budget on FA after this season, that's $50M you don't have to spend after 2017.

As for trading Teheran, Viz, Inciarte, Johnson, Freeman, whoever, I've said before that I am all for trading any and all of them given the right return. The right return being the key phrase. Some if not all of that group will either no longer be with the Braves in 2018, 2019, 2020 or will be very expensive, and/or be on the wrong side of their prime years. None, appear to me to be likely to develop into true face of the franchise players (guys like Trout, Harper, Pujols in his prime, Glavine, Smoltz, Maddux, CJ, etc). Many are good to very good players right now, some bordering on fleeting greatness.

But their value to the franchise is what they will mean to the franchise in 18, 19 and 20. Is their value more likely to be maximized by trading them for players who will impact those years or by keeping them to enjoy their final control years before they walk away or have to be re-signed? The answer to that, I think, is dependent on what they get in trade, aka the right return.

Again I ask, exactly which potential signing I mentioned gets in the way of your rebuild?

 

[bravos4evr]

Brad Ziegler traded to red sox, so there goes any trade for Vizzy involving them.

 

[Southcack77]

Most players don't wildly outperform their best season at 30, particularly after two seasons of decline.

The stats scream that Desmond is due for regression. The BABIP is absurd. Even if it's real, and it's not, you will be signing him to a contract coming off a career year that well exceeds what he has done before and will extend over his decline years.

No thanks.

I also don't think your lineup is s contender as hitters and the pitching certainly would be another problem.

Building a team around financial commitment to Ian Desmond doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[Southcack77]

Because the Braves need better players, and they can afford someone like Desmond for 4/70. They can NOT afford someone like Machado in a couple years, no matter how long they wait to buy a FA. No atter how long they wait to sign a FA they are not going to afford young premium FAs for $200M+.

Folks need to get it out of their head that the Braves are going to wait until this perfect time in the baseball universe when all their prospects magically mature at the same time, at which point they sign 2 FAs for $400M total and suddenly become a playoff team.

The Braves will always target the middle tier FAs to supplement their homegrown core. Guys like Castro, Desmond and Prado are exactly that.

I think you need to consider that signing a low contact 31 year old that very well could be striking out 200 times shortly isnt going to be helpful.

I disagree with you that the braves won't be in a position to sign a player that they really like to a market deal. Their payroll should give them the flexibility to do that. And they will be much better positioned to make the argument when they are good.

It's really the opposite of what you said, I believe. The winning team will bring the attendance to support the free agents.

I dislike low OBP whiffers with power. That's never really been a recipe for success. I especially don't want one where you are paying for a fluke season. Desmond might have been a nice bargain play off the trash heap but paying him big money is just not a good idea, IMO.

cespedes or a catcher makes more sense but I'm not sure this is the splurge year as I don't think the braves are close enough.

 

[dak]

Brad Ziegler traded to red sox, so there goes any trade for Vizzy involving them.

Looks like a pretty nice trade for Boston. It seems like there will be a lot of relief pitching available on the market, so I wouldn't be interested in overpaying for Vizcaino if I was sitting on the other side of the table. Question is, how much do the Braves believe in Vizcaino as a stable late-inning RP over the next few years? Even though he's been off his stride of late, this may still be the best opportunity to sell high.

 

[Southcack77]

Because the Braves need better players, and they can afford someone like Desmond for 4/70. They can NOT afford someone like Machado in a couple years, no matter how long they wait to buy a FA. No atter how long they wait to sign a FA they are not going to afford young premium FAs for $200M+.

Folks need to get it out of their head that the Braves are going to wait until this perfect time in the baseball universe when all their prospects magically mature at the same time, at which point they sign 2 FAs for $400M total and suddenly become a playoff team.

The Braves will always target the middle tier FAs to supplement their homegrown core. Guys like Castro, Desmond and Prado are exactly that.

So you'd rather be paying whatever guy is the equivalent of a 35 year old Desmond $20M in 2022 when the same team is still competing for the playoffs?

All FA contracts end that way. The Braves will either be paying a declining Desmond in 2020, or some other declining player in 2022. Both will be a drain on the productivity of a playoff contending team.

I'd rather be overpaying a better player in 2020 than overpaying Desmomd now.

Because you would at least be overpaying for contending years rather than for the privilege of approaching .500.

 

[Southcack77]

I don't think fan sentiment is particularly relevant to the front office.

The reality is that Atlanta will be probably outbid for cespedes even if they wanted to sign him. He's the best free agent on the market and Atlanta has neither the resources nor the great story to tell him about winning.

Ian Desmond is a really bad idea and the braves will probably have to pay through the nose to get him. I don't think that is a move that helps them win even in the short term and I think signing a flop will do more to irritate fans than doing nothing.

The magical thinking isn't that some of atlanta's prospects will actually pan out, it is that choosing whatever free agents that happen to be available now will be a godsend to a team that isn't that good.

I don't mind overpaying middle tier veteran free agents to short term deals. If they want to overpay Prato for two years, that is fine.

I do mind signing middle tier players off career years to long term mega deals. That is just not smart baseball in my book.

Personally, I have no sense the front office is feeling intense pressure to sign a bunch of free agents to bring in the new ball park. I think they will inquire on guys they like but won't do anything to risk the long term future.

They showed restraint in the draft, I think they will do it again in free agency.

 

[Tapate50]

Brad Ziegler traded to red sox, so there goes any trade for Vizzy involving them.

Didn't see the Dbacks as sellers this early after their offseason

 

[WaitingFor2017]

Dbacks are in trading mode? Quick, Coppy! Try to trade them Daniel Castro and money for one of their big time prospects they will be too cheap to pay,

 

[nsacpi]

I'm for making moves this off-season that improve the on-the-field product without affecting our financial flexibility going forward. This means no big contracts going out five years or longer (especially for a 30something player). I don't even want to go four years (but would consider that if it was an exceptional deal in an area of need). I know this means we dabble in the second tier level of free agents. But that's fine. In addition to maintaining our financial flexibility going forward, we won't have to give up a draft pick. Plus we can shore up third and catcher and strengthen the bench and pen through this approach given who will be available on the trade and free agent markets this off-season.

 

[Chico]

The thing is that it very well could be jumping the gun. My thoughts start with the idea that there is a fixed payroll, somewhere in the range of where it has been or maybe a little more, say $100-$120M. IF the payroll is going to jump to $150M, then OK, go for it. A bad $25M contract is a lot less hurtful for a team that is at $150M than $100M.

But, IF the budget is going to be $100M or even stretch up to $130-$140M over several years, then you have to be concerned about eating up payroll flexibility on players who may be good today but not necessarily good when you realistically have the benefits of the rebuild. We're being ran like a corporation right now, so yes the payroll is fixed, because there is no revenue and there hasn't been for a while due to mediocrity and the pain of actually attending a game. The good news is when revenue increases, then budget increases. It's not like an owner who says Thanks, I'll just keep all of these extra profits, since I have no board to explain myself to.

And, the thing is, you really need to see the youngsters a bit to understand where the holes really are. Outside of an almost certain lack of power, who knows what will be needed in 2018 and beyond. We all EXPECT Albies and Swanson to fill ss and 2b but what if they don't? Right now, Ruiz looks like a bust for 3B, but he's still young for AAA. What if they go sign Prado or Turner or Desmond for 3B then Ruiz blossoms? Who cares, you may say! More than one 3B wouldn't be a bad thing. But, if you sign a 3B and it turns out you don't need one, you have taken payroll that might more properly be used to fill other holes that you didn't think would be holes. You could simply move them to LF if it were Prado or Desmond. If it were Turner, you could ease Ruiz in and look to flip one of them, depending on need at the deadline or next offseason. It happens all the time. It's regularly business practice.



Trying to do both (compete short term but rebuild long term) almost never works, especially if you don't have an huge budget. Yes, and where that hurts is when you're depleting your farm system to go out and get rental players just so you can miss the playoffs or lose in the wild card game. We've spent two ugly years stacking our farm system. We do not have a huge budget, but we have a lot of disposable income for the next few years, since we've shed the contracts. We don't even have to worry about arbitration raises.



I think the concern about "fans" in 2017 is overblown. The new park will draw because it's a new park. Does anyone think attendance will be significantly better for a 72-90 team vs a 62-100 team? Does anyone really think adding Cespedes, a marginal 3B and a marginal C will make this team an 81 win team in 2017? I certainly don't. Fans, especially "casual" fans come to see a winning team. "Fooling" them only works for a while. Atlanta attendance has been falling for years because the product on the field has generally been below standard - at least the standard set by the 1990's Braves, which is what the casual fan sees. The new ballpark will have its initial luster, but this it's not a Field of Dreams. We will have to put a competitive and entertaining product on the field to keep them coming. If we "fool" them for a while and work behind the scenes continuing to build up our farm system, then that time spent fooling them will have paid dividends.

IMO, it's a much better strategic plan to get your low end, low cost, tradable assets to add to the youngster mix in 2017, audition the young guys throughout 2017. Evaluate holes after 2017 and spend your money on FA before the 2017 season when you have a better idea of where those holes are going to be. If you spend $50M of the budget on FA after this season, that's $50M you don't have to spend after 2017.

As for trading Teheran, Viz, Inciarte, Johnson, Freeman, whoever, I've said before that I am all for trading any and all of them given the right return. The right return being the key phrase. Some if not all of that group will either no longer be with the Braves in 2018, 2019, 2020 or will be very expensive, and/or be on the wrong side of their prime years. None, appear to me to be likely to develop into true face of the franchise players (guys like Trout, Harper, Pujols in his prime, Glavine, Smoltz, Maddux, CJ, etc). Many are good to very good players right now, some bordering on fleeting greatness. I'm not a fan of trading Freeman, but I'd trade the other players you mentioned. We have Mallex making Inciarte expendable. We've been stacking up on you pen arms, making Viz expendable.

But their value to the franchise is what they will mean to the franchise in 18, 19 and 20. Is their value more likely to be maximized by trading them for players who will impact those years or by keeping them to enjoy their final control years before they walk away or have to be re-signed? The answer to that, I think, is dependent on what they get in trade, aka the right return.

I love a good rebuild as much as the next guy, but we cannot continue to punt. Even if it's a mirage, you have to put a product on the field at some point.

 

[Carp]

Castro isn't good. Desmond is having his best offensive season at 30 years old. Ramos is doing it at 28. All of those guys have significant question marks. Prado is the only one of the group I'd like to sign because his price would likely be reasonable, but even then, I'd be tempted to start Ruiz at third and see what we have in him.

And I like Swanson, Albies and Mallex a lot, but expecting those three to save our offense feels off to me.

Expecting better production than we've gotten so far at SS and 2B feels off???

Castro is plenty good as a platoon catcher. Having him and Flowers platoon should make a great combination. But who knows, may be we trade for Lucroy or someone else? Again, I'm not in favor of signing all these guys, but if you don't think those additions plus the young guys coming up can't make us playoff contender, then you simply are extremely pessimistic. That is a ton of talent being added to the team that is currently devoid of it. Personally, I'd add Justin Turner instead of Prado, I'd sign Josh Reddick over Desmond, but I'd still probably sign Castro. Or I might also consider signing Gio Gonzalez and trading some of our young pitching for a bat like Lucroy, Cargo, Myers, etc.

Also, we don't need Albies and Swanson to be all stars their rookie years. Just play good defense and show something resembling an MLB hitter and they'd instantly be immediate upgrades. And that's even at low expectations If they do come out of the gate hot then all the better.

 

[nsacpi]

I love a good rebuild as much as the next guy, but we cannot continue to punt. Even if it's a mirage, you have to put a product on the field at some point.

I haven't looked at this in detail but I suspect that winning matters for attendance even at the tails. I suspect 70 wins draws better than 60. 75 better than 70, etc. So there is a financial consideration that argues for improving the product (and I realize these considerations are complicated by the new ballpark), as long as you are smart about it and don't hand out contracts that impinge on your flexibility down the road.

 

[nsacpi]

Castro is plenty good as a platoon catcher. Having him and Flowers platoon should make a great combination.

Flowers has been a very good signing. I would like to see him paired up with someone better than AJ. Someone like Castro. But Flowers as our primary catcher could give us close to 2 wins. He is one of those rare high BABIP catchers (.316 career) and has some power and has value as a pitch framer. Those things make up for the high strikeout rate.

 

[Southcack77]

Flowers has been a very good signing. I would like to see him paired up with someone better than AJ. Someone like Castro. But Flowers as our primary catcher could give us close to 2 wins. He is one of those rare high BABIP catchers (.316 career) and has some power and has value as a pitch framer. Those things make up for the high strikeout rate.

He is pretty helpless with runners though.

I like him ok and I think he's under contract for next season so he will be around, but his career profiles around replacement level. I agree he's been pretty solid this year.

 

[Southcack77]

Expecting better production than we've gotten so far at SS and 2B feels off???

Castro is plenty good as a platoon catcher. Having him and Flowers platoon should make a great combination. But who knows, may be we trade for Lucroy or someone else? Again, I'm not in favor of signing all these guys, but if you don't think those additions plus the young guys coming up can't make us playoff contender, then you simply are extremely pessimistic. That is a ton of talent being added to the team that is currently devoid of it. Personally, I'd add Justin Turner instead of Prado, I'd sign Josh Reddick over Desmond, but I'd still probably sign Castro. Or I might also consider signing Gio Gonzalez and trading some of our young pitching for a bat like Lucroy, Cargo, Myers, etc.

Also, we don't need Albies and Swanson to be all stars their rookie years. Just play good defense and show something resembling an MLB hitter and they'd instantly be immediate upgrades. And that's even at low expectations If they do come out of the gate hot then all the better.

There is a pretty decent difference between being better than the Braves had the first two months at 2B and SS and being good enough to contribute to a contending ball club.

I'm not sure Swanson and Albies could be expected to put up the numbers that that Peterson and Aybar have managed in June for example, which has still not been enough to make the Braves a strong hitting team.

Good chance they scuffle for a bit. Which is fine. That's the natural progression of things. But I think it is far from certain that it is reasonable to pencil them in as major factors as to why the team is going to be much better in 2017. Possible, but I don't know that it is likely. I'd probably still have them in AAA out of camp if it were me and bring them up later to save the year of control.

But I guess that depends on whether they get advanced to AAA or Majors this fall and how they do.