More Thoughts About Frank Wren's "Letter"
On September 29th, Frank Wren said that the Braves would not part with the organization's top prospects. Then Jake Peavy became available and there was a flurry of speculation that the Braves would give up some of their top prospects for the opportunity to land the San Diego ace. But yesterday Wren reaffirmed his stance that the Braves would not trade their top prospects in an e-mail or letter sent to the Associated Press.
Wren obviously wanted to send a message, but who was that message really to? The letter seemed to be a reassuring message for us the fans who were concerned about the reported direction the team could be taking. But were we really the intended audience, or were we just a cover for the real recipient.
Was Wren trying to wrangle with the media? Perhaps he was mad that so many rumors were being purported to have originated from an Atlanta front office that has historically been tight-lipped. Perhaps he wanted to set the record straight in saying that he and he alone controls what behind the scenes information emanates from his office.
The other thought here is that this was some sort of negotiating tactic with San Diego. They are apparently watching Hanson with a close eye in Arizona, and perhaps in early trade conversations they were insistent on his inclusion -- Wren's repeated no's to Hanson's inclusion were not being taken seriously so he wanted to make it crystal clear who was available and who was not.
Regardless of his intention, in sending this letter he has shown part of his hand. This is perhaps the first big indication of Frank Wren's departure from the John Schuerholz style of being the Braves General Manager. Schuerholz would have never revealed his intentions so plainly, he would have never taken anyone off the table, and certainly not prospects. For a guy who has so far operated like an echo of Schuerholz, this is the first original sound Frank Wren has made.
Whatever the intention, it is a curious thing to do, and certainly it is more transparency than we've seen from the Atlanta front office in well over a decade. As a fan who is hungry for information, I love the fact that Wren felt compelled to reassure his team's fan base that their fears would not be realized. As a sometimes-critic of the organization, I can't help but think this move could lessen the Braves' negotiating ability in future trade discussions.
0 recs |
20 comments
|
Comments
Wren's letter to "AP"
Gondeee,
I agree. Seems that all the speculation was getting out of hand and Wren wanted to calm things down a little. Now we see where there are supposedly 14 teams “interested” in Peavy. Sounds like San Diego is trying to up the price (Hanson?) for Peavy but Wren is refusing to bite. I’m willing to trade prospects for Peavy but gotta say that Hanson/Heyward/Schafer at least should be off-limits. Don’t wanna sell the farm to get him though.
by CHill33 on Oct 24, 2008 10:08 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yea that is bizarre, and I kind of don’t understand why he would tip his hand either, but maybe another thing is maybe with the Padres trying to jack the price on Peavy he didn’t want us to be used as some sort of token in a bidding war if we are really not going to go as high or part with as much as they want.
by BVaz on Oct 24, 2008 10:17 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think that the Padres are working against the clock
My understanding is that they want to slash their payroll to around 40 million in the near future, and Peavy is the most valuable trading chit on the team. If I were them, I would want to deal him before free agents file, lest some teams sign a pitcher and get out of the bidding. It seems now that Wren isn’t buying at the price San Diego is looking for, and I think that’s smart – even if you want him, you can try get him later, and for less.
by BraveBronco0121 on Oct 24, 2008 10:46 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't get it
I think Wren is showing too many cards to the other players at the table. No one should be offlimits, except for Smoltzie, Chipper, and McCann. The rest of the Braves, be them prospects or current Braves, should be on the table to some degree. Wren has a shot at bringing in a guy with an undervalued contract who is a proven commodity and can be an ace for the next 10 years. I’m not saying sell the farm, not at all, just don’t rule anyone out at this point.
I’m still pissed that Peavy resigned with them to begin with. He should be a free agent right now, damn it.
by TheSportsIdiot on Oct 24, 2008 10:51 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Just for kicks...
how many aces actually last 10 years?
Hint – they’re all on plaques in Cooperstown or on their way there.
Could Peavy be that for 10 years? Yeah, I guess he could be. I could also win the lottery tomorrow. Simply put, that’s more than a long shot – it’s damn near impossible for anyone to do.
In my opinion, Peavy’s mechanics are not conducive to a long career in the rotation. He’s got a very inefficient delivery that probably is putting excessive strain on his elbow and perhaps his shoulder. He did miss time this year with soreness in his elbow – this isn’t terrible because he came back and was effective, so his UCL is probably still there. It’s bad because it could well be fraying and on the way to needing a complete reconstruction. His contract certainly is team-friendly, but if he does live up to your expectations he’ll hit the market in 3 years and get one of the biggest deals a pitcher has ever seen. To me, there are way too many ifs about Peavy for me to be comfortable with the idea of a trade.
by BraveBronco0121 on Oct 24, 2008 4:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just an Odd Thought on Wren
It’s just possible that he released this statement to provide cover for Towers. Maybe Towers understands that Hanson, etc aren’t going to be part of the deal, and is willing to do something for lesser prospects/players… but the media and the blog world have created unreal expectations, which would make Towers look bad for accepting less than anticipated.
Probably reading too much into it, but it’s a thought.
by MikeinAtlanta on Oct 24, 2008 1:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Not sure about that
Towers is pretty sharp, and will get the most value he can. I’m not sure that Wren would try to cover for him like this, because it would kind of show that Towers has zero leverage. I’m not sure why he would put all of his cards out like this. It just doesn’t make sense to me, but I’m an admitted idiot.
by TheSportsIdiot on Oct 24, 2008 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like I said...
Just a thought. I haven’t really liked Wren’s candor ever since the season ended. His promise to spend every available dollar, saying so specifically what his moves would be (SP, SP, LF)… to me, at the least he’s telegraphed his hand from the start, and also boxed himself into making moves, even if really smart moves aren’t available. We’ll see!
by MikeinAtlanta on Oct 24, 2008 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Same page
We are on the same page, Mike. I don’t have a problem with him declaring that he is going after two starters and some pop in the outfield, but I do not like him declaring the prospects untouchable. I think I’ve been pretty clear about that part.
The question is who would Wren actually be willing to give up to bring in Peavy? If you are going to say who isn’t on the blocks, then why not go ahead and say who is? Disclosing either (or both for that matter) does not seem wise to me. Wren is the Bravos GM though, so he must know what he is doing. Even when Ed Wade was messing the Phils up, it turned out that he was right not to trade away his prospects like the fans wanted him to. Of course, trading Lidge for a pinch runner (Bourne) was terrible.
by TheSportsIdiot on Oct 24, 2008 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
while we're guessing --
this has probably been suggested already, but it could be an attempt to curtail the aggression of competing clubs. wren is essentially making a circuitous valutation by saying that, to the braves, peavy is worth less than any combination of elements within this particular set of prospects; so the effect is that anyone who may have been climbing the mountain to stay on wren’s heels would suddenly look down and realize that wren’s actually still in the valley.
by brndn on Oct 24, 2008 2:51 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think this is exactly it as I was mentioning above also, I think this maybe had some legs initially, the padres see the media take it and run with it and start playing up the braves’ offer to other clubs trying to get them to compete or outdo the offer, and Wren is trying to circumvent the padres using the braves as bait to get everyone in a bidding war
by BVaz on Oct 24, 2008 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow.
That must be the best name for a blog I have ever seen. Good work!! I mean it, too!
by TheSportsIdiot on Oct 24, 2008 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol
I must say I had to see for myself.
When I read what DFB stands for, this pops into mind:

No wonder nobody likes you, Tuttle... everything's a (Pujols) damn debate.
by royhobbs on Oct 24, 2008 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nice.
LOL, good one Mr. Hobbs! I think the guy in the picture is indeed DBF in the flesh…
by TheSportsIdiot on Oct 24, 2008 4:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe Wren’s saying this because the deal is over and we’ve backed out
by SayHeyWerd on Oct 24, 2008 3:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Showing your cards
I Love this move by Frank Wren. I could see how this may limit or leverage in future trades….but that’s only potentially limit. I think as far as the showing your cards analogy this must be thought of more in terms of spades than poker.
As an avid player of both, I know the advantage and disadvantage of showing cards in both games. I think Frank would as well, in realtion to the analogy here not the actual card games. Think about it. In poker you always receive a tactical advantage by hiding your hand. The only obvious reason to ever show your cards is to get into the opponents head regardless of the result. In spades. If you have all the trump cards you can just lay them down so that everyone can see the hand is over. I think Wren knows he has all the trump cards in this situation. Look at it like this. Just because Jake Peavy is available doesn’t mean we have to take him. We still have 40 million for free agents and could make trades elsewhere for other pitchers. We by NO means have to trade for him. I think most Atlanta fans will agree that we will probably love having him here, but really at the espense of 3-5 good cheap years of Schaefer, Escobar, Hanson, Heyward, Teheran, Johnson, etc. Peavy is outstanding, that is understood, but look at the talent in the above list and how many players, and very good players there are on that list knowing it will be half a decade before any of them ever make what Peavy is making right now. Wren is telling the Padres that we have the upper hand. We win no matter what. We ahve the talented players they want, and we want Peavy. But they have to take what we give them, because we can always go elsewhere and be just fine next year. They, however, have to move Peavy somewhere to cut the payroll they wish to drop and that puts us…and literally Frank Wren in the driver’s seat. Way to go Frank, I applaud your desire to posture and if anything this makes all of our prospects gain value not lose it. Knowing that we are unlikely to move them even for Peavy, I believe, makes them appear even more valuable…even if it is only to us. But, none the less, I think this is a brilliant way of completely commanding control of the trade. In all honesty I think he just called Towers’ bluff. Or to use the more appropriate Spades reference: Frank Wren just went Yard on him.
by Bravestillidie on Oct 24, 2008 3:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Spades?
I’ve never heard the term going yard in spades, so I don’t follow you there. I don’t know when you show your cards in spades either. I’m sorry, I just don’t follow that part of the analogy. Not trying to be an ass, maybe you know more about spades than me.
If you wouldn’t trade any of the top prospects for Peavy, who would you trade? I keep hearing about who the Braves should not deal, but nothing about who people think they should deal. I’m just as guilty here, but I am on record as saying that only Smoltzie, Chipper and McCann should be unavailable. Wren is on record saying that he wouldn’t trade Gonzo, or any top prospects. I’d love to know who he would be willing to move, and who he thinks he can get for them. I’m realistic, and know that I’ll never see that list, but what Wren is telling me is that Peavy will not be a Brave. And not only Peavy, but any other established #1 or #2.
by TheSportsIdiot on Oct 24, 2008 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Spades?
Sorry to everyone for my post being all bold, that was a mistake. To answer your question about the whole yard thing. It is slang for when you and your partner make ten books or more. I.E. a complete stomping. There is another slang called “making board” which means you and your partner made four books. Making four books keeps the other team from getting a double digit number of books and is the least amount of books to be made to be considered to have at least played decent. Getting less than four allows your opponents to have ten or more books, thus going “yard” on you and making you and your partner look foolish. That is something that a lot of people around here say when we play spades…I just assumed most people knew it, but it is slang, albeit nothing that any of us made up I assure you.
As far as showing your cards in Spades, if you are ever playing and counting cards as they are thrown, much as I do, you can tell who has what in there hand by about the fourth or fifth book, sometimes earlier. Thus if there are five or six books left to be had and you know that say, you and your partner have all spades left and the other team has none, then they can no longer win any books, so you lay down your hand and the game is over for that round. It signifies that I know I have all the books left either myself or between myself and my partner and it just saves having to play out the last five or six hands, or however many until the end of that deal.
by Bravestillidie on Oct 25, 2008 2:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 












