Would you do this?

bravesfanforlife88 said:
If at the end of the season, our team is so bad, we have guaranteed ourselves a top 5 pick again, would you make moves to accelerate this rebuild, or would you try to hit the reset button?

My thinking is that we have a lot of prospects in the lower system. Maitan, Acuna, Newcomb, Allard, Gohara, Jackson, Soroka, etc. I think the quickest way to become competitive sooner rather than later would be to trade Freeman. Granted, I am NOT saying I WANT to trade him, but if we got an offer of guys ready to step up and play now, would that not make more sense for us?
Click to expand...

This team has picked its "Core" and declared the selling over. The Core is Freeman, Teheran, Folty, Swanson, Inciarte and Albies. At some point during every rebuild, a team has to draw a line in the sand to declare the tear down over and start trying to improve. The Braves drew that line this offseason.

Whether or not they chose the right time to draw the line, or if they picked the right players to constitute The Core, the biggest mistake they can make is to jump horses mid stream. This current team is the fruits of the rebuild, and they need to sink or swim with what they have.

I think this is why we are seeing them rush guys like Allard and Acuna and Soroka. The FO likely knows they will be judged on their rebuild efforts in the next ~2 years, so they need to get the young studs ready to make an impact soon to save their jobs.
 
Horsehide Harry said:
Thanks for the example. However, Swanson would need to raise his OPS by .249 points just to reach .700 in the next 11 games or .221 just to reach Trout's .672.

I think a lot of players fail to see .700 when they first come up but few end up completely lost at .451 and come back to a star career IMO.

I hope to be very wrong. But, I can't see any likelihood that the Braves rushing Swanson has done anything but seriously jeopardize his long term career. And, for no good reason.
Click to expand...

I'm not completely disagreeing with you, but I have a hard time believing Swanson wouldn't have experienced the same struggles against MLB sliders even if the Braves had waited until a few weeks into this season to call him up.

Assuming the absolute longest Swanson was going to stay in the minors was 2-3 weeks in AAA this year, do you really think an extra ~200 PAs against AA/AAA pitchers would have somehow fixed the issues he is currently having? I certainly don't.

The only fact we know for sure is that calling him up last year to a non-contending team cost the Braves control of Swanson's age 29 season. That fact alone is enough to make the move boneheaded.
 
Even suggesting trading Freeman is an embarrassment/insult to Braves fans. Otherwise, there have been some good comments in this thread. Yeah, we all know about the talent at the lower levels. Some of it won't ultimately materialize, but some of it will emerge as top notch. With Cajun on this, let the rebuild occur naturally. Come trade deadline, there are veterans who can be dangled (any/all members of the rotation not named Foltynowicz...and hopefully Johnson from the pen - a signing that inexplicably popular around here). For off season, hopefully some other team signs Lucroy to end this fascination once and for all. It's almost like a reboot of "re-sign Justin/Jason" refrain that used to echo throughout this forum.
 
I think you hang on to Freeman through this contract. His next contract will be the tricky one. I hate to pull out a Minnesota Twin comp, but Freeman is to the Braves what Mauer was to the Twins in some sense. What the Twins did frightfully wrong with Mauer is all about contract length and the fact that they signed Mauer to a long extension when he was 26 (and he'll be 35 when the contract expires). Freeman will be 31 when a new deal has to be in place and, to me, that's a dangerous zone because he'll want a lengthy contract and chances are he'll begin declining before a new deal would expire.
 
Horsehide Harry said:
Thanks for the example. However, Swanson would need to raise his OPS by .249 points just to reach .700 in the next 11 games or .221 just to reach Trout's .672.

I think a lot of players fail to see .700 when they first come up but few end up completely lost at .451 and come back to a star career IMO.

I hope to be very wrong. But, I can't see any likelihood that the Braves rushing Swanson has done anything but seriously jeopardize his long term career. And, for no good reason.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I get that. I wasn't trying to offer up some 'drop the mic' moment, I was just posting an example of a guy fans may have initially pointed at and said, 'We brought him up too fast!' But it obviously had no ill effects on his development.

Dansby is obviously struggling, but the BABIP sitting below .200 is still a huge factor in it. His K rate is not good but not atrocious, his BB rate is improving (may be due quite a bit to dropping to 8th), and he has been hitting the ball fairly well, at least relative to his results. I just still don't see him as somebody completely lost at the plate.
 
Enscheff said:
I'm not completely disagreeing with you, but I have a hard time believing Swanson wouldn't have experienced the same struggles against MLB sliders even if the Braves had waited until a few weeks into this season to call him up.

Assuming the absolute longest Swanson was going to stay in the minors was 2-3 weeks in AAA this year, do you really think an extra ~200 PAs against AA/AAA pitchers would have somehow fixed the issues he is currently having? I certainly don't.

The only fact we know for sure is that calling him up last year to a non-contending team cost the Braves control of Swanson's age 29 season. That fact alone is enough to make the move boneheaded.
Click to expand...

I think you are right if there was a predetermined plan that Swanson comes up after 2-3 weeks in the minors in 2017 no matter what. OTOH, you have scouts and minor league coaches for a reason, and the organization supposedly values those opinions, so I would hope that if 2-3 weeks into the season this year Swanson was flailing at good sliders that the coaches and scouts would be telling the Johns that he isn't ready, can't hit a ML slider and will last about a month in the majors before everyone figures that out.

And of course you are right, as I have also said all along, that the team control issue alone made it a bad move. But, last season while I (we) were kinda getting shouted down about the issue, I always added the caveat of "what if they rush him and ruin him?" I think the consensus now has gone from "never happen" to at least "a little worried."
 
Horsehide Harry said:
I think you are right if there was a predetermined plan that Swanson comes up after 2-3 weeks in the minors in 2017 no matter what. OTOH, you have scouts and minor league coaches for a reason, and the organization supposedly values those opinions, so I would hope that if 2-3 weeks into the season this year Swanson was flailing at good sliders that the coaches and scouts would be telling the Johns that he isn't ready, can't hit a ML slider and will last about a month in the majors before everyone figures that out.

And of course you are right, as I have also said all along, that the team control issue alone made it a bad move. But, last season while I (we) were kinda getting shouted down about the issue, I always added the caveat of "what if they rush him and ruin him?" I think the consensus now has gone from "never happen" to at least "a little worried."
Click to expand...

The question then becomes, "would Swanson see a MLB slider in 200 more AA/AAA PAs if he had't already seen enough in his previous 377 AA PAs to expose that weakness?".

I said from the beginning that "ruining" Swanson shouldn't be a consideration when called the move stupid because it was pure conjecture, so I won't use it as evidence that I was right now that he is struggling.

The move was wrong when Swanson succeeded last season, and it's still equally wrong now that he is struggling. His early success/failure doesn't make the move to call him up any more/less wrong.
 
People might think I'm crazy....Freddie (with his contract), might be more valuable or equal to Trout. Mike is only signed thru 2020 and Freddie is signed through 2021. The last three years Freddie maxed out at about $22 mil while trouts last three years are a whooping $33 Mil!! Trout is better, but add the extra year + the extra cash and that's about $50 mil less. I think you look at a comparable Trout deal. They key is how long Freddie is signed.

Now...as many GM's have said...the return required on Trout is so large...it's almost impossible to do. Freddie should be in that ballpark also.

So, you really can't trade him AND it would also be a PR nightmare!! IF someone like the Yankees come hard and offer a huge, team altering package (because they have the money to sign whoever they want and aren't reliant on prospects)...OF COURSE you have to listen. Clearing off that kind of cash off the payroll and getting that kind of talent would be a big deal. We have a better chance of Colon pitching a 1.30 ERA for the rest of the year though.

In saying that....EVERYONE else on the team should be available for the right deal as of now. There are too many holes to fill!!
 
50PoundHead said:
I think you hang on to Freeman through this contract. His next contract will be the tricky one. I hate to pull out a Minnesota Twin comp, but Freeman is to the Braves what Mauer was to the Twins in some sense. What the Twins did frightfully wrong with Mauer is all about contract length and the fact that they signed Mauer to a long extension when he was 26 (and he'll be 35 when the contract expires). Freeman will be 31 when a new deal has to be in place and, to me, that's a dangerous zone because he'll want a lengthy contract and chances are he'll begin declining before a new deal would expire.
Click to expand...

Trading Freeman only works if the return NET works out better than the NET you would have gotten from Freeman in the year the Braves begin to contend and onward. What Freeman does between now and when the Braves will really be able to contend doesn't have much team baseball relevance. What he individually does has personal relevance from a playing standpoint. So, let's say in a hypothetical situation that the Braves truly have the ability to contend in 2019 and not really until then. And let's say Freeman produces 6 WAR (for convenience) for that team at a cost of $21M and whoever plays 3B, LF and RF contribute another 6 WAR at a combined cost of $30M. Then you are getting 12 WAR for $51M which is likely about 30-40% of the budget. OTOH, let's say you trade Freeman now for a package like I outlined above and you get 4 WAR at 3B and 3 WAR RF, 2 WAR LF and 2 WAR at 1B at a combined cost of $20M (majority of cost coming from 2 WAR 1B signing). Then you are getting 11 WAR for $20M which is likely 12-18% of the budget, PLUS you benefit that the second scenario is made up primarily of young players growing into their primes with years of team control while Freeman in the first scenario is aging out of his prime and moving to FA. The second scenario also provides more payroll flexibility to build the rest of the team as needed.

The Mauer example is interesting to me in that the Twins made the blunder of valuing the player over the team. To a certain extent all teams do this...sign and keep the home town hero to put fans in the seats. But I think teams sometimes lose sight of the fact that what puts fans in the seats more than anything else is winning baseball. The Twins signed the home town hero who really was a little over hyped anyway and then had it blow up in their faces and it has left them wandering in the wilderness for years.
 
Enscheff said:
This team has picked its "Core" and declared the selling over. The Core is Freeman, Teheran, Folty, Swanson, Inciarte and Albies. At some point during every rebuild, a team has to draw a line in the sand to declare the tear down over and start trying to improve. The Braves drew that line this offseason.

Whether or not they chose the right time to draw the line, or if they picked the right players to constitute The Core, the biggest mistake they can make is to jump horses mid stream. This current team is the fruits of the rebuild, and they need to sink or swim with what they have.

I think this is why we are seeing them rush guys like Allard and Acuna and Soroka. The FO likely knows they will be judged on their rebuild efforts in the next ~2 years, so they need to get the young studs ready to make an impact soon to save their jobs.
Click to expand...

I disagree. The Braves have not declared the rebuild over. That would involve signing a free agent with more than a year of control or trading prospects for major league players. they haven't done that.

I don't doubt they hoped that their aging veterans would creak out another season that might have the team have a respectable first half, but imo they know what they have and the plan would be to flip assets if they could.

They would have traded Teheran, I believe, if they had gotten a solid offer. But no one wanted to pay for him like an ace in the end. Maybe they overplayed that, but it isn't the worst thing in the world to have a #3 or #4 starter signed at a reasonable contract. You might be able to flip him for about the same package later.

As to rushing prospects there may be some truth to their wanting to show progress in the minors, but there is also not a whole lot in front of those guys and so far they are handling it ok. I do think Swanson was a head scratcher, but I don't really believe that prospects that are going to end up hitting through the normal course of things are usually ruined by early frustrations. I'd have to see some evidence for that rather than anecdotes.
 
TheBravos said:
People might think I'm crazy....Freddie (with his contract), might be more valuable or equal to Trout. Mike is only signed thru 2020 and Freddie is signed through 2021. The last three years Freddie maxed out at about $22 mil while trouts last three years are a whooping $33 Mil!! Trout is better, but add the extra year + the extra cash and that's about $50 mil less. I think you look at a comparable Trout deal. They key is how long Freddie is signed.

Now...as many GM's have said...the return required on Trout is so large...it's almost impossible to do. Freddie should be in that ballpark also.

So, you really can't trade him AND it would also be a PR nightmare!! IF someone like the Yankees come hard and offer a huge, team altering package (because they have the money to sign whoever they want and aren't reliant on prospects)...OF COURSE you have to listen. Clearing off that kind of cash off the payroll and getting that kind of talent would be a big deal. We have a better chance of Colon pitching a 1.30 ERA for the rest of the year though.

In saying that....EVERYONE else on the team should be available for the right deal as of now. There are too many holes to fill!!
Click to expand...

I don't think Freddie is in the same ballpark as Trout at all. But you are right that the Braves would have to get a serious haul of MLB ready position prospects and high ceiling guys to consider it. If they can get that, then moving him makes sense. But I don't have any indication that Atlanta would consider that now.

Remember, if he does not maintain this pace, his contract looks a lot worse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top