if i pointed out that Freeman will eventually get older and they'd have to make tough decisions on his future with the team, i'd be a genius? that's a low genius bar. because that seems like common sense to me. whatever you gotta do to pat yourself on the back, i suppose (g rated comment).
What Would A "Fair" Freeman Extension Look Like?
- Thread starter clvclv
- Start date
if i pointed out that Freeman will eventually get older and they'd have to make tough decisions on his future with the team, i'd be a genius? that's a low genius bar. because that seems like common sense to me. whatever you gotta do to pat yourself on the back, i suppose (g rated comment).
Wait...
You're taking credit for your "trade Freeman" rants because now the Braves have to decide whether or not to let him walk at the end of a contract in a couple years after he helped them win at least 2 NL East titles?
And your final point is that the Braves aren't currently "really good", and aren't currently buoyed by their 4-5 win star 1B? They just won 90 and 97 games the last 2 years...how much better are they realistically going to be with a mid-market payroll?
The only person eating sour grapes now is you...keeping Freeman worked out well, and no amount of your ranting is going to change that.
You win the award for worst brag ever...
Last edited:
Southcack77
Well-known member
Braves have won two division titles with Freddie putting up 9.3 WAR and have two more contention seasons of what look like prime years of his career, but evidently that was not worth it to Harry.
Southcack77
Well-known member
Let's hope Freddie can make it through his age 30 and 31 seasons without breaking a hip or something.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
My "rants" as you call them were all centered around the fact that the Braves would be unlikely to be a WS type team before Freeman's current deal expires and therefore he should be used to build controllable talent that will be around for a long run once the team gels. You can make the argument that the Braves got good faster than I thought they would, and you would be right. But they didn't get WS good. They haven't even become win a playoff series good. Just winning your division, or becoming a playoff team, doesn't necessarily mean you are a really good team. I don't think anyone would argue that the Braves teams over the last few years have had major flaws, flaws that showed up in a big way once they made it to the playoffs. My "rants" also pointed out that just when the Braves could expect to be a really complete team, Freeman would be beginning his decline yet would put a significant amount of pressure on ownership to re-sign him because, hey, we're this close.
Winning games is one way to show excellence but can sometimes be misleading where a team wins a lot of games but contains significant flaws that bar it from achieving true greatness like winning a WS or even short of that, winning a playoff series. And while winning a WS requires a certain amount of luck, you can't blame the string of playoff series losses that the Braves face on just bad luck.
As for sour grapes, I never said anything about that. I got kicked in the balls routinely for suggesting that Freeman should be traded because I expected most of what has transpired to transpire. I said the Braves wouldn't win anything while Freddie is under his current contract. Ok, they won a couple of division titles but nothing beyond that, at least not yet. I said that best case scenario is that he plays well, remains healthy, earns his salary and prices himself out of an extension as he enters his decline.
But all that aside, the post you quoted from me essentially says that it's too late to worry about any of that. The Braves made their decision and kept Freeman. They have no choice but to ride it out now.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
Anything is possible. He might be great until he's 40. It's just highly unlikely.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
You are confusing the idea that I think Freeman isn't any good with my real point of team value. Freeman IS very good. No question. And, he has been worth his contract and likely will continue to be, barring injury, through this current contract. He is very unlikely to be worth his next contract, whatever it is.
As for the two division titles, ok, that's better than terrible baseball. But, the Braves still haven't won a series of any kind in the playoffs for almost 20 years.
So Harry is a “flags fly forever” guy. Whereas I look at the past few seasons as a complete success and enjoyed watching and following them immensely. Yes, a WS championship would be wonderful, but as we’ve now seen from 17 and 18, apparently you had to cheat to actually win one.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
No. The way the whole "flags fly forever" tag is used around here doesn't apply to me at all. That tag essentially refers to those who are willing to go all in to try to win a WS. I'm actually the opposite. I was willing (and hopeful) that they would rebuild from the ground up and take whatever time is necessary to put the team on a footing where WS could be competed for on a regular basis with teams that have few flaws.
If by "flags fly forever" you mean that I would build a team to win and wouldn't be satisfied with anything short of that, then fine, that's me. You play to win the game as the man says. Building for a purgatory like existence of not sucking but not really being good enough to win is an economic approach, not bad enough to lose fans but not really good enough to win.
I will admit that watching reasonably competent baseball is much better than watching the professional version of the bad news bears. But, that isn't the point of the game.
Metaphysicist
Not Actually Brian Hunter
We won 97 games last year gimme a break. The idea that we could have expected better than that by trading Freeman is moronic.
Well this is just plain false.
and winning the division the last 2 years probably doesn't happen.
Yep. The likelihood we get even 1 player from such a trade that is capable of putting up 3+ WAR is pretty low. The likelihood of multiple players in such a trade even being replacement level is even lower.
MadduxFanII
Swallowed by Mark Bowman
Here's the problem, Harry, jokes and teasing notwithstanding. Because we didn't trade Freeman, you can advocate for a parallel universe where we did trade him, and because that universe doesn't actually exist, you can imagine it looking however you want and no one can prove you wrong. So when you talk about a hypothetical Freeman trade, it's a dynamite trade where the Braves acquired multiple high-quality young players and prospects and set the franchise up for years to come.
But we have no idea what a winter 2015 Freeman trade would have actually looked like. Yes, there's a scenario where the Braves trade Freeman after the 2015 season and hit the jackpot and now the 2020 Braves have a bevvy of affordable young talent that can replicate Freeman's production at a fraction of the price and everything is golden. But just as likely is a scenario where the Braves trade Freeman and whiff on all the talent they acquire in return, at which point they're a potential playoff team with a gaping hole at first base that holds them back from actually reaching the postseason.
You're a Civil War buff sitting at a map of an 1860's battlefield and re-fighting the battle with the benefit of 160 years of hindsight while assuming everything works perfectly and your plan unfolds exactly as expected.
But we have no idea what a winter 2015 Freeman trade would have actually looked like. Yes, there's a scenario where the Braves trade Freeman after the 2015 season and hit the jackpot and now the 2020 Braves have a bevvy of affordable young talent that can replicate Freeman's production at a fraction of the price and everything is golden. But just as likely is a scenario where the Braves trade Freeman and whiff on all the talent they acquire in return, at which point they're a potential playoff team with a gaping hole at first base that holds them back from actually reaching the postseason.
You're a Civil War buff sitting at a map of an 1860's battlefield and re-fighting the battle with the benefit of 160 years of hindsight while assuming everything works perfectly and your plan unfolds exactly as expected.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
That misses the point. The Braves likely would NOT have won 97 games last year or won 90 games the year before. But that is a sign of patience in building - postponing a rush to flawed success for a slower build for a less flawed future.
Also, IF the Braves would have traded Freddie, they would have had his $20+M salary to utilize as well. What would they have used that on? Who knows.
Like I said, it's too late to worry about now. The Braves committed to keeping Freddie and the point I'm making is that the Braves now face a dilema of what to do with him as his contract winds down, just like I said would happen.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
That's a different question. That's a matter of FO competence and you're saying that you don't trust the Braves FO to make a good deal. That's not a question about whether it should be done from a talent and control standpoint but a question about whether the FO can make a good trade. Fair enough. I've never said, give Freeman away. I've said trade him for as much talent as you can get back (assuming a good trade), use his $20+M per year to sign other talent, take the early rebuilding years worse records if necessary and draft earlier, accumulate more picks, maybe use the $20+M freedom to sign player that you could also trade for more young talent in the early years of the rebuild.
Now, having Coppy and the Johns in charge during that time was the first mistake, so you could be right.