- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: ATL Thread | offseason hot takes + discussion
Posted on 12/21/22 at 11:46 am to Broski
Posted on 12/21/22 at 11:46 am to Broski
Yea this is really beginning to seem like the Saints in recent years with just poor roster management. Too many holes and just letting the cornerstone pieces leave for nothing without replacing them with someone as good or better. Meanwhile the Phillies and Mets are pushing their chips in at a time when the 3 teams were all fairly close, so they’re getting better and the Braves are not. That strategy didn’t work for the Saints, and I don’t see it working out for ATL sadly.
Super glad now we got the WS when it happened. Not looking to me like we’ll be back there soon.
Super glad now we got the WS when it happened. Not looking to me like we’ll be back there soon.
Posted on 12/21/22 at 1:18 pm to Starchild
Alex Anthopoulos after discussing Correa to the Mets, "I was really glad he ended up with the Giants". Guess what, Alex?
So it's going to be interesting to see if this philosophy works. Locking up young talent has a lot of upside. But it also comes with a lot of risks. You have to get them agree to the long term deal at a lower rate. This has worked pretty well sans Dansby, Freddie, and Max (no idea if they were offered extensions, and if so, when they were offered). But not every young player will pan out. Imagine in year 5 of a long term Francoeur or Heyward contract. I'd imagine the Padres are possibly regretting their contract with Tatis, though that has more to do with off the field acts.
Long term veteran contracts are also risky but moreso due to injuries and the contract not being worth it the last few years. But I still maintain that in 10 years, 25 million won't move the needle nearly as much as it does now. Unless Cohen forces a salary cap. Then all bets are off.
So it's going to be interesting to see if this philosophy works. Locking up young talent has a lot of upside. But it also comes with a lot of risks. You have to get them agree to the long term deal at a lower rate. This has worked pretty well sans Dansby, Freddie, and Max (no idea if they were offered extensions, and if so, when they were offered). But not every young player will pan out. Imagine in year 5 of a long term Francoeur or Heyward contract. I'd imagine the Padres are possibly regretting their contract with Tatis, though that has more to do with off the field acts.
Long term veteran contracts are also risky but moreso due to injuries and the contract not being worth it the last few years. But I still maintain that in 10 years, 25 million won't move the needle nearly as much as it does now. Unless Cohen forces a salary cap. Then all bets are off.
Posted on 12/21/22 at 1:30 pm to Dale Murphy
It just seems like we got too excited about youth contract control over immediate production.
For example, we're basically paying Olson roughly the same money that we would've paid Freddie, but in the process we also gave up a great trade chip in Shea and another decent asset in Pache, although his value was diminishing. Ironically, because we gave the A's Shea, they tabbed him as their C of the future, which in turn triggered our trade for Murphy.
There's an alternate universe out there where we re-signed Freddie (who right now is a better 1B than Olson), kept Shea as our TDA incumbent, still traded Contreras, Muller and whoever else was left on the farm for a SS (because we still let Dansby walk) or LF instead of C. The payroll would be roughly the same, we'd be a little older at 1B but probably getting better production at the plate and we'd have less holes.
I understand to a degree the thought process of wanting Olson over Freddie, but it just feels like we gave up a lot of prospects to still spend the same amount of money.
For example, we're basically paying Olson roughly the same money that we would've paid Freddie, but in the process we also gave up a great trade chip in Shea and another decent asset in Pache, although his value was diminishing. Ironically, because we gave the A's Shea, they tabbed him as their C of the future, which in turn triggered our trade for Murphy.
There's an alternate universe out there where we re-signed Freddie (who right now is a better 1B than Olson), kept Shea as our TDA incumbent, still traded Contreras, Muller and whoever else was left on the farm for a SS (because we still let Dansby walk) or LF instead of C. The payroll would be roughly the same, we'd be a little older at 1B but probably getting better production at the plate and we'd have less holes.
I understand to a degree the thought process of wanting Olson over Freddie, but it just feels like we gave up a lot of prospects to still spend the same amount of money.
Posted on 12/21/22 at 4:59 pm to Broski
Dansby's Deal with the Cubs -
$7 million signing bonus.
2023: $13 mill salary
2024: $25 mill
2025: $27 mill
2026: $27 mill
2027: $27 mill
2028: $26 mill
2029: $25 mill
Good for him. Still dissappointed we couldn't re-sign him. He was the Captain and team leader. It'll hurt.
Hope we lock Fried up.
$7 million signing bonus.
2023: $13 mill salary
2024: $25 mill
2025: $27 mill
2026: $27 mill
2027: $27 mill
2028: $26 mill
2029: $25 mill
Good for him. Still dissappointed we couldn't re-sign him. He was the Captain and team leader. It'll hurt.
Hope we lock Fried up.
This post was edited on 12/21/22 at 5:04 pm
Posted on 12/21/22 at 6:30 pm to wheelz007
quote:
Hope we lock Fried up.
Don’t worry. We won’t.
Posted on 12/21/22 at 10:53 pm to Broski
quote:
understand to a degree the thought process of wanting Olson over Freddie, but it just feels like we gave up a lot of prospects to still spend the same amount
Pretty much. I understood not budging on money with Freddie when I thought we were a 150ish mil payroll team. Buy letting Freddie walk made zero sense when our payroll went up to 200 mil that same season. Just a dumb waste of resources.
Posted on 12/21/22 at 11:22 pm to wheelz007
I'm sure this has already been discussed, so my apologies if so. Just passing along an article on Swanson.
LINK
LINK
quote:
While Swanson is getting used to his new surroundings, his old boss and Braves general manager Alex Anthopoulos acknowledged on Wednesday that Swanson was willing to take "a lot less" money in order to return to Atlanta -- Anthopoulos just didn't think that the deal made sense from the Braves' perspective.
Posted on 12/21/22 at 11:36 pm to beauchristopher
So are we just never going to be a lux tax team if Dansby taking a lot less didn’t make sense?
If so, that’s insanely dumb and we really need Liberty Media to get the frick out.
If so, that’s insanely dumb and we really need Liberty Media to get the frick out.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 1:21 am to beauchristopher
Reading the full quote just makes it even worse
If a gold glove player at a premium defensive position still in his 20's is willing to take less money, it should ALWAYS make sense for a championship caliber team both in the short term and long term.
It's just a terrible look for this franchise that we're at two straight offseasons now where star players and key pieces to our championship (one playing at an MVP level) wanted to stay in Atlanta and we let them walk. To replace them, we're asking Olson to have the best season of his life just to match what Freddie's last two seasons in Atlanta were and Grissom to take a huge step up defensively just to be close to what Dansby was.
None of this makes sense if we're serious about winning.
quote:
But I will say this: Dansby made every effort to find a way to stay in Atlanta. We had conversations in the summer. He was willing to take a lot less than what he got. That's important. But we have to manage in our minds short term and long term, and we have to make sure we have enough payroll to allocate a full 26. He deserves everything he got, but at a certain point, it doesn't make sense for us. It's hard because you're losing a phenomenal human being and a phenomenal player.
If a gold glove player at a premium defensive position still in his 20's is willing to take less money, it should ALWAYS make sense for a championship caliber team both in the short term and long term.
It's just a terrible look for this franchise that we're at two straight offseasons now where star players and key pieces to our championship (one playing at an MVP level) wanted to stay in Atlanta and we let them walk. To replace them, we're asking Olson to have the best season of his life just to match what Freddie's last two seasons in Atlanta were and Grissom to take a huge step up defensively just to be close to what Dansby was.
None of this makes sense if we're serious about winning.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 7:40 am to Broski
quote:
If so, that’s insanely dumb and we really need Liberty Media to get the frick out.
Your ire needs to be directed at Terry McGuirk.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 8:03 am to Broski
It doesn't make sense at all.
I understand not wanting to be stuck with a big bad contract in the final couple of years. We've had a few of them -
BJ Upton
Ozuna's current deal
Dan Uggla in the last 2-3 years of his deal
Cole Hamels 1 year deal didn't work out for us
So I get understand some of it.
But - we're in position to win now.
And with Dansby's work ethic, desire to win and his leadership.... $140 over 6 is pretty close to what we're paying Riley and Olson per year.
It's dissappointing ...
Having said that, we will need those dollars to keep our pitching staff strong over the next 3-5 years. So maybe that was a major part of AA's decision not to put those dollars towards our Short Stop.
Our young pitching is going to get expensive too.
I understand not wanting to be stuck with a big bad contract in the final couple of years. We've had a few of them -
BJ Upton
Ozuna's current deal
Dan Uggla in the last 2-3 years of his deal
Cole Hamels 1 year deal didn't work out for us
So I get understand some of it.
But - we're in position to win now.
And with Dansby's work ethic, desire to win and his leadership.... $140 over 6 is pretty close to what we're paying Riley and Olson per year.
It's dissappointing ...
Having said that, we will need those dollars to keep our pitching staff strong over the next 3-5 years. So maybe that was a major part of AA's decision not to put those dollars towards our Short Stop.
Our young pitching is going to get expensive too.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 8:13 am to Broski
quote:
But I will say this: Dansby made every effort to find a way to stay in Atlanta. We had conversations in the summer. He was willing to take a lot less than what he got. That's important. But we have to manage in our minds short term and long term, and we have to make sure we have enough payroll to allocate a full 26. He deserves everything he got, but at a certain point, it doesn't make sense for us. It's hard because you're losing a phenomenal human being and a phenomenal player.
It seems like AA went into the offseason thinking he'd be able to get up to the luxury tax and then at some point in the offseason was told to keep payroll below $200M.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 8:17 am to wheelz007
quote:
Our young pitching is going to get expensive too.
Let's home he can extend them because we know he won't sign them if they reach FA.
Wonder if Jazz Chisholm can play short.
This post was edited on 12/22/22 at 9:00 am
Posted on 12/22/22 at 9:33 am to Dale Murphy
quote:
Wonder if Jazz Chisholm can play short.
I'd loooooove to get him but I'd hate to see what the Marlins are asking for him. I remember some of the packages they asked for in the Realmuto talks, specifically one that asked for Riley, Albies, and Ian Anderson.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 10:56 am to Broski
quote:
I just hope we change our hitting philosophy this year, especially now that the shift is gone and base hits gain some value again. It was infuriating at times how we lacked situational awareness at the plate by not being able to put a ball in play because 1-9 would be asked to go up there and hit a home run, leading to a strikeout.
I agree. Yet, you go on to whine the next 4 pages about losing the worst offender of this very philosophy you’re complaining about. Dansby got a taste for hitting a few homers in ‘19 and has been pull happy ever since. And while 25 home runs is nice from the SS position, it’s not enough to justify his long slumps when he simply refuses to go the other way. This was by far the best offensive season of his career, but he still struck out 182 times to just 48 walks. Isn’t that a stat (SO:BB ratio) that you’ve referenced the importance of on here?
Let me preface this by saying I really like Dansby and wanted him back. I think he’s great defensively (but don’t some of the metrics not value his defense as much I do with my eyeballs? I seem to remember some past arguments when I was arguing he was a great defensive SS while being shouted down by someone trying to shove some analytics down my throat). But you’re right that this lineup has way too much swing and miss. I was listening to a podcast a month or so ago and they were talking about LF, and the guy was wanting a guy like Nimmo (he turned out to be way too expensive, but someone like him) because he thought the lineup needed someone who could actually put the ball in play consistently.
He recited some stats about our all or nothing approach. I think we were 2nd in MLB in hard hit rate and exit velo, but near the bottom in swinging at pitches out of the strike zone. And also near the bottom in making contact with those pitches. We were the only team in baseball to make the playoffs at the bottom in those 2. There were a couple who made the playoffs swinging at pitches out of the strike zone, but they were both in the top 10 in making contact on those. So they were at least staying in the at-bats, being competitive by shortening their swings and at least fouling balls off. We were still trying to hit the ball 420 feet and whiffing.
Again, not saying I didn’t want Dansby back—I did. But a change in approach, even with a lesser player, could make the lineup as a whole better than the sum of its parts. Can we not do better than Kevin Seitzer? I’m not sure how well he’s thought of as a hitting coach, but I’m not a huge fan. And didn’t I read something about him being kind of a POS or an a-hole or something? Was there maybe an incident in his past? Or am I making that up?
This post was edited on 12/22/22 at 11:03 am
Posted on 12/22/22 at 11:41 am to Hot Carl
quote:You're probably thinking of the recently released story from his playing days when he tried fricking around with Bo Jackson and found out.
And didn’t I read something about him being kind of a POS or an a-hole or something? Was there maybe an incident in his past? Or am I making that
As for Dansby, he is incredibly inconsistent in every facet of his game. Some people here act like he's a Simba level defender, when in reality he has been mediocre every other season, which is still a better track record than what he does with the bat. I wouldn't be the slightest bit surprised if Grissom and Arcia put better numbers this season. I haven't liked most of the moves we've made since the start of last off season, but there are some people here who act as entitled as Yankees fans and just want to bitch about something. I'm sure if I put in the effort I could find plenty of evidence of those posters calling for Dansby's head two months into this most recent season
Posted on 12/22/22 at 11:58 am to Hot Carl
quote:
Kevin Seitzer? I’m not sure how well he’s thought of as a hitting coach
From everything I've read he's very respected and the guys love him.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 12:03 pm to Dale Murphy
Like I said in the main MLB thread last night, one of these days people will learn that the off-season winners rarely win jack shite. There are numerous examples in both the NFL and MLB to back me up. It's window dressing and a large contingent of fans fall all over themselves when big signings happen.
And w/that payroll, anything short of a WS title for the Mets will be a failure.
And w/that payroll, anything short of a WS title for the Mets will be a failure.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 12:51 pm to diremustang
So for all of my fellow nega Braves, if AA lands Bryan Reynolds, how much better will you feel? Of course, this would depend on what was given up. And while I’m sure it will make me feel better temporarily, I’ll still have concerns about long term given refusal of signing FAs in their prime.
Already seeing Twitter talk about Devers to the Dodgers or Phillies. And you know Ohtani will end up with the Mets, Padres, or Dodgers.
Make no mistake about it, though. Come March 30th, I’ll be taking the day off to watch. Possibly even making the trip over. Can’t get here fast enough.
Already seeing Twitter talk about Devers to the Dodgers or Phillies. And you know Ohtani will end up with the Mets, Padres, or Dodgers.
Make no mistake about it, though. Come March 30th, I’ll be taking the day off to watch. Possibly even making the trip over. Can’t get here fast enough.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 12:53 pm to Dale Murphy
Reynolds would be an awesome acquisition. Just not sure the Braves have the ammo to get him. Pittsburgh apparently is asking for the moon and they'll have no shortage of offers if they're serious about moving him.
ETA: Apparently they want young starting pitching. I would assume Soroka almost has to be involved. I would not do the deal if Soroka has to be part of it.
ETA: Apparently they want young starting pitching. I would assume Soroka almost has to be involved. I would not do the deal if Soroka has to be part of it.
This post was edited on 12/22/22 at 1:05 pm
Popular
Back to top


1


.png)


