Adam Laroche should be signed
by Dutch Braves Fan on Nov 21, 2009 8:35 AM EST
161 comments
I have been reading all fanposts about a new outfielder/slugger that has to come to the braves by trade or free agent signing. Of course there is always a lot of excitement involved with new players coming to our beloved Braves, but what is wrong with Adam Laroche?
In 2009 he hit avg 325 obp 401 slg 557 for the Braves in 212 at bats
For Boston he only got 29 at bats hit avg 263 same OBP and slugged 526 but that is only 29 at bats.
For the Pirates he hit avg247 obp 329 slg. 441
The guy just loves to play for the Braves. Last years performance and his latest full season with the Braves 2006, (avg. 285, obp 354 slg 561) show it.
The guy can smash and combines it with Big D. He is the best available first baseman by anymeans, defense, age, slugging, health.
Of course in a couple of years we have Freddie Freeman maybe as early as 2011, but it not a sure thing. I mean he has not played that many games in the higher minors and has not yet proven he is the next thing for years to come. Understand me well he might very well be. But also a 32 year old Laroche is very tradeable.
I say sign Laroche. he is a real power source and Gold Glove defender. If Freddie Freeman proves to be the man to hold the position for years to come you trade Laroche or him, there is no harm in that.
Would like to hear your reactions. I would really like the Braves chances with a full season of Laroche maybe as a number 4 depending on the leftfielder the Braves sign.
0 recs |
161 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Hes not considered a real "big bat" i guess.
We need a guy like Gonzalez or Cabrera. Not saying thats likely, but its what we need.
hohohhohohoh its the offseason, time to rosterbate in public places
if second half laroche = first half laroche, this wouldnt even be a discussion
but that’s not the case. it’s kinda hard to give him first baseman money knowing you might only get a real first baseman for half the season.
"If I have asthma, they won't let me scuba. And if I can’t scuba, then what’s this all been about?? What am I working toward??"
theoretically i could start crapping gold tomorrow
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
Seriously, you can exclude it as wildly improbable if you like. I do not.
LaRoche has historically been one helleva second half hitter. What exactly is it that has stopped him from producing more consistently? Do you not think there is a reasonable chance he will eventually figure it out, change his off-season regime or whatever it might take to trigger him actually putting it all together, producing earlier and have a true breakout season?
Honestly, I don’t think it’s going to happen. When we traded for him, my big point was that he was going to have his same second half surge and several people told me that something like that couldn’t be predicted statistically. Well, I argued, correctly, that , at least for Adam, it is something that can be predicted and now something that’s happened every year of his career. It sucks, but until it happens, I’m just not going to believe he can do it in the first half. He’s not a bad hitter in the first half, he’s better than most of the other first baseman we had this decade, he’s just not the same guy.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
I wouldn’t have predicted Chipper hitting .364 in ’08, before he did it.
On the other hand, neither would have dismissively ruled it out.
Dude, look at LaRoche’s splits…it isn’t like he has a 2 or 3 year history of underwhelming 1st halves and magnificent 2nd halves. He has done it for his entire career. The idea that he is going to have an entire season like his typical 2nd halves is about as likely to happen as for Mike Gonzalez to win 20 games.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 21, 2009 10:47 PM EST up reply actions
I have already indicated that I’m fully aware of his past history.
I simply have more subtle point of view as to probabilities and possibilities.
I have already indicated that I’m fully aware of his past history.
I see…you are just choosing to ignore it then. Gotcha.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 21, 2009 11:59 PM EST up reply actions
cb & justin:
Are you guys seriously of the position that past athletic performance is necessarily predictive of future performance? I would suggest this is very obviously not so.
Every season in MLB, a significant percentage of players will significantly under or over perform what might be predicted based on previous years’ stats and chartable tendencies. Sometimes, this is attributable to things that are pretty obvious – for example, steroid use or injuries. Often, however, there are no such obvious explanations. Instead, the players are simply doing better or worse than they have previously.
In the case of Adam LaRoche being re-signed by the Braves, the only point that I was making is that he may at some point in his career break out of his pattern of lukewarm first halves and hot second halves, and actually put together a full year of solid production. I did not intend to boldly predict that he would do so, but merely to suggest it would seem to be a possibility.
Why? He is a reasonably accomplished hitter with a diagnosis of ADHD. My speculation (probably as good as yours) is some season, he may dial in sooner and come out of spring training with mid-season focus and intensity, and that may translate into improved first half performance.
If you think this is equivalent to gold bars flying out your asses,my only response is: Whatever you geniuses say.
You build a house with mays and mights, I’ll build one with wood and nails. We’ll see which one makes a better home.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
Gosh, I thought we were discussing baseball.
Despite Rochey’s uneven offensive production, over the last four seasons, he has been very consistsent, season to season, averaging 25.75 HR and 86 RBI, with a .276 BA and an OPS right around .850. He’s still only 30 years old.
So, are you saying that if he’s healthy and gets 550 ABs, it is a longshot for appreciably betters these averages next season? Wanna put money on it?
You are not arguing what cbwilk is. Wilk is saying that Laroche will start slow and pick it up significantly in the 2nd half. You are talking about a season average. LaRoche’s 2nd halves have been so hot that his overall season averages are impressive.
Nobody is saying that Adam won’t or hasn’t put up good numbers. We are saying that most of those numbers will come in the 2nd half.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 22, 2009 4:15 PM EST up reply actions
I know past performance cannot necessarily indicate future performance…however, given that he has quite a consistant history of mediocre first halves and just filthy second halves, I think one can safely assume that the trend will continue.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 22, 2009 12:23 PM EST up reply actions
Yep
I was one of the guys who just can’t find a principled reason why he’s had so many good second-halves and so many poor first halves. Maybe there’s something to it, or it’s dumb luck. Again. And again.
Regardless, the solution is obvious. The Braves need to find an awesome first half hitter and platoon LaRoche.
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
you would think he would start strong and then become disinterested or distracted by something else
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
ooh! Shiney object!
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 22, 2009 4:17 PM EST up reply actions
Agreed.
I don’t know why LaRoche isn’t a big priority. He would probably be the only guy on the team capable of hitting 30 HR’s. While he does struggle early, he is always an MVP calibur player in the second half. I would offer him a two-year deal.
I think it depends on how he performs at AA this year. If he is able to hold his own and show improvement as the year goes on then I think he could be ready at the start or early in 2011. That is of coarse if he’s healthy to start next season which he should be.
Still,
we shouldn’t rush top prospects(like Heyward and Freeman). Hopefully, Francoeur taught us a lesson.
So… all our prospects are now automatically on the Frenchy plan? What about the McCann plan? He leapt from AA earlier than expected and has never looked back.
I don’t think rushing Francoeur had anything do with it. He didn’t walk in the minors and I don’t know why everyone was so surprised that he didn’t walk in the majors. There was a lot of hope with him that he would make enough contact to average .280 with a .300 OBP. It just didn’t happen. McCann is a special hitter and I think that Heyward is to. I’m not as sold on Freeman but he’s still really young and has barely played at AA.
you go case by case…Francouer was rushed and that lead to his demise…he needed to stay back and learn plate discipline in the minors when it wasn’t gonna hurt our team…by moving him up the ladder you teach him he isnt doing anything wrong.
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
The thing that worried me far more than his inability to walk was the fact that his HR total’s continued to fall every year. In 05 he hit 14 HR’s in less than half a season, 06 he had 29, 07 he had 19, 08 he had 11, then in 09 he had 15 between the Braves and Mets. For a guy who isn’t going to hit for a high average and high OBP plus he doesn’t steal bases he has to have power. He’s a very average player right now.
he showed after he went to the Mets that he could still turn it around but I doubt he ever lives up to his potential.
his Avg and his OBP were nearly identical in NY…not really a sign of “turning it around”. Meanwhile, his BaBIP spiked nearly 60 points, IIRC, and all of a sudden, people thought he could hit again.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 21, 2009 10:48 PM EST up reply actions
In 75 games with the Mets, his SLG was .498. His last 237 games with the Braves, it was .356. You really should admit .498 SLG is suddenly hitting again. Or continue to deny reality.
lol…riiiiiight….Someone who thinks that LaRoche can magically be different NEXT year (for some reason, that is going to be his year…) is telling me that I am in denial….this is rich!
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 22, 2009 12:00 AM EST up reply actions
Yes, I’m telling you that you’re in denial. It is likely because of some early childhood issue and transference. Either that or you’re just extremely dogmatically bull-headed and argumentative.
And, of course, you also really get off on insulting and demeaning others, which I suspect makes you feel better about yourself.
Please, find one example where I seem to get off on insultinguothers. Go ahead, I will wait.
What? You can’t find it? dangit…you almost had me there….
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 22, 2009 4:16 PM EST up reply actions
also, you discredit your own stats when you say someone has a higher slugging percentage in 1/4 of the games, and think that that somehow proves something.
So, according to that same logic, carried out to the extreme, if someone hits 3 homeruns in 2 games, yet they only have 4 homeruns in over 500 ABs prior, then they have somehow “turned the corner” too?
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 22, 2009 12:02 AM EST up reply actions
An increased SLG in 75 games with the Mets...
….could be hitting again or it could be luck coming from an increased BABIP. However, unlike for pitchers, hitters do have more control over BABIP, so while it might have been luck, it could have been due to an increase in LD% or other factors that show improved hitting. Time, I imagine, will tell, as usual.
Is it reasonable to think that his hitting has improved, but his plate discipline hasn’t?
This is a serious question, not a smart-assed one…
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 22, 2009 6:59 PM EST up reply actions
that he's better at hitting pitches but still swings at everything...
yeah, probably. Ala Vlad Guerrero and Adam Dunn. The idea that it can last long term would be dubious.
It's entirely possible, but not certain
75 games is a small enough sample size that it could be bloopers and bleeders falling in, or it could be that he is making better contact. His line drive percentage went up from 19% with Atlanta in 2009, to 25% with the Mets. That indicates that was better hitting.
Francouer being in the majors didn't...
“lead to his demise”. His demise was led by being unable to recognize a pitch. Too scoff at an insignificant thing like OBP, and for being unable to put the bat on the ball despite trying SOOOOOOOO many times. Francouer didn’t suffer because of being in the majors, he suffered because he sucked.
he had talent and didnt meet his ceiling… so to say he sucked makes pretty much no sense…. he didnt reach his ceiling…there is a reason for that… i don tknow what it is, but its certainly not bc he is talented
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
As I allude to below Swo...
I think more goes into a player’s “ceiling” than physical tools. Things like work ethic, mental acumen, ability to make adjustments and adapt, all need to be taken into account when guessing what a player’s “ceiling” will be. IMO, Francouer’s physical tools might have led one to believe the sky was the limit, but mentally there was clearly a pretty big lid holding those physical tools back.
Excellent point. Anybody who says they saw those two play in the minors and didn’t think Francoeur was the better player is lying to you. I’m not even sold on the argument that either one was rushed, but even if we assume that, one guy panned out and the other didn’t and the reason comes down to their personal desire to adapt to the game. Mac was willing to change himself to be better, Francoeur wasn’t.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
It might not be willingness...
…it could just be ability. I haven’t noticed anything in Franceour showing stubborness. He just might not have the ability to pick up the pitches well enough to lay off.
To me, I watch those at bats where he won’t lay off an outside pitch and won’t keep his hip from flying out and see stubborness. Those are correctable things, especially for a professional hitter.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
It seemed to me that he was correcting it early last season, that he was staying on the ball and not trying to yank everything. Others mightily disagreed. And then he had a pretty impressive second half, which many – of course – dismissed and scoffed at.
Wiilingness to change is not the issue, to me. Instead, it is the capacity to translate adjustments into actual performance under game conditions. Ain’t necessarily very easy.
How long before we realize French is incomparable to ANYONE...
Andruw came up early, how’d that effect the first 10 years of his career? Furcal jumped from A ball at 19 (or 21, as he revealed upon getting a DUI), and did fine. Alongside Francouer in that class was one Brian McCann. Francouer is special.
Andruw didn’t reach his ceiling either… he was supposed to be a lot better than he was and we’ve gone over this before (this isnt to say he wasnt good he was, but his ceiling was considerably higher)
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
yeah but Andruw did reach a middle ground, and a damn good middle ground. I see what you are saying with your argument, but the guy was touted to be an A+ played and end up being a what? A-, B+? for 10 years. To me the only thing that will end up keeping Andruw out of the HoF is the fact that he aged so poorly and won’t play long into his 30s to collect stats.
FYF was supposed to be an a type player and outside of his misleading rookie year he ended up being a C- whose only real asset anymore is a strong but inaccurate arm in the OF. Frenchy is a guy who had the potential to possess several tools and ended up possessing none. Andruw should have had 5 tools and ended up possessing no less than 3 and at times he flashed all 5.
andruw should be in the hall just for his defense, it was that good. His uzr numbers are scary
by McCann's the Man on Nov 23, 2009 8:16 PM EST up reply actions
yeah, and I don’t think enough players get the kind of credit they deserve at the end of their career for playing good defense
Off the top of my head, Ozzie is the only one I can think of who got into the hall mostly due to his D…
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 28, 2009 11:44 PM EST up reply actions
He was the only guy who popped into my head. Maybe Mazeroski as well. He wasn’t a great hitter and I know his defense was spectacular.
And, coming soon, Omar Vizquel!
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
I have no problem with that…I wish more guys would make the Hall due to their D.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 29, 2009 1:51 PM EST up reply actions
His offensive numbers need some work…
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 29, 2009 6:12 PM EST up reply actions
taking into account a player's ceiling should be...
their work ethic. Players who work hard at getting better and can make adjustments to a better job of reaching their ceiling than those who don’t work hard, or are unable to make adjustments.
Andruw reached his ceiling, for someone with his work ethic.
And to add...
for the bulk of his time in Atlanta, Andruw was playing at what was considered a Hall of Fame level if he could sustain it. So I’d say that’s playing at or near his ceiling.
Read what Yondaime said… because he is spot on
and your right Andruw was a HoF while in ATL, but that wasn’t his ceiling (his ceiling was like Mays esque)
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
Mays had a work ethic, and Andruw didn't...
therefore higher ceiling.
Work ethic is a part of a player’s “ceiling” imo. And considering Andruw’s desire (or distaste) to work hard, I feel he reached his. Feel free to disagree.
I never heard that Andruw didn’t work hard. In fact I always heard that he was at the ballpark earlier than most players some days. Whether he listened to coaches or not is a different story. Some players are just incapable of making the adjustments needed to be come great. That is, in fact, what separates great players from truly good ones.
Just recall this, among other stories and his often soft looking body...
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCI/is_8_59/ai_64150818/
“Jones, the natural who made heads spin as he moved through the minors so fast, and Lombard, the project who has had to work so hard at it.”
Lines like this, about how another had to work so hard and everything came so naturally to AJ, seems to imply he never worked hard. Maybe I was reading too much into things, but I just never got the impression of Andruw as someone who works out frequently, spends hours upon hours in a batting cage, etc.
by Mr. Sanchez on Nov 24, 2009 12:15 PM EST up reply actions
I think Andruw was a very hard worker, but for guys with that much natural talent us mere mortals aren’t willing to believe that they could work hard too. And Lombard….he was ridiculously naturally gifted too, and I never got the impression that he worked that hard.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
Druw and Ozzie were buddies? Hmmmm….i wonder if that had anything with him going to the White Sox.
7/10/09-A New Dawn.
by !Vive la Francoeur! on Nov 27, 2009 12:43 PM EST up reply actions
i dunno, that just makes me think that Andruw didn’t have to work hard to be good at baseball. But that also is talking about when he was in the minors and was just naturally better than everyone else. He had documented issues with his maturity when he was that age. But I remember reading a lot of stories about how much time he put into his game later on.
He is the best we will get
We wouldn’t get anyone better for the money. I looked at his split stats and even in the 1st part of the year at home he averaged over 300 except july when he really tanked, don’t forget when he came to the Braves he had 13 HR’s and got 12 more here. He a 30 homer hitter and good defensively and I said it before in regards to Freeman “A bird in the hand is better than 2 in the bush.” The Braves need to keep him and if that means a 3 year contract then go ahead and sign him. He wants to stay in Atlanta, Frank Wren should oblige him.
Senator, we have another old saying,"Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining." Fletcher
Actually, I’ve been surprised that the free agent lists have ranked him so low – 29th (iirc) on the last one I saw. When that is combined with the facts that he wants to stay here, views the team as a title contender and most of the big budget teams are set at 1B, my guess is would he could be had for 2 years at maybe 18M + plus an option.
The reason people aren’t talking about him is because he isn’t the answer. If we sign Adam (and I hope we do) we still need another bat to hit cleanup. Bobby hit Adam 7th in the lineup last year. What makes anyone think that would be different this coming year?
Also, you gotta look at Adam’s career 1st/2nd half splits. Not really what you want in your “big bat”.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 21, 2009 12:21 PM EST reply actions
He does average 270+ and has homer potential between 25 and 30. He slugs above 500. an average is a measurement for an entire year. Laroche could even hit 4th (maybe only in the second half). I think it was wrong to hit him 7th. He is a run producer. Sign him and maybe Dye, or trade for a right handed bat and you might have a very potent line up. That is not factoring in maybe Heyward or Schafer.
by Dutch Braves Fan on Nov 21, 2009 12:40 PM EST reply actions
The problem is he hits .250 to first half and .290 the second half. More than half his HR’s are going to come after the all star break which is fine if your making a playoff run but last year proved that even his second half wasn’t enough to get into the playoffs.
Dye is no where near the player he once was. He completely disappeared after the all star break last year and he would be better suited signing with an AL team where he can DH about half his games.
Does LaRoche have his downside? Sure, anyone not named Pujols has a downside. That being said, he’s far and away the best FA 1B on the market, so unless Wren is positive he’ll be able to land someone in a trade, Roachie needs to be signed. If we can’t pull a trade, any other FA is a big downgrade. Given the choice between Roachie and Nick Johnson/Aubrey Huff, who would you rather see in ATL next year?
I didn’t folow the Braves as closely as I have in previous seasons so I apologize if I’m mistaken, but didn’t the Braves make a ridiculous September run? I thought they won something like 20 of 28 and had the second best offense in the league through that stretch. And wasn’t that with Ryan Church in RF? I’m not saying they can keep that up for an entire season, but I think the Braves proved last year that an offense of McLouth Prado Jones McCann LaRoche Escobar Diaz Church can be very effective. Resign LaRoche and replace Church with a mid range talent via trade or free agency (Mike Cameron, Juan Rivera, Chone Figgins) or even a complementary player like Scott Podsednik or Xavier Nady and you’ve got one of the better offenses in the national league. No need to spend big money. Not sure if it’s financially doable, but I’d rather see the extra money go towards the back of the pen, and/or maybe into entertaining the idea of keeping Derek Lowe, before it goes towards a big free agent OF.
Oh btw, Jermaine Dye looked dreadful in the second half of last season. For every RBI he’s still good for at the plate, you’ll lose with his horrendous defense.
Braves fans must be spoiled…here in SF, we get excited when the Giants score more than 2 runs…
If healthy I still say Troy Glaus is the best available for the money. He’ll come cheaper, will likely only require a one year commitment, and is simply a better hitter than adam. Only issue is he hasn’t played first base extensively but I’d be fairly confident in his defense transferring to first, i mean guys like miguel cabrera have made the switch quite successfully as of late and Glaus is way better at third than cabrera ever was
by McCann's the Man on Nov 21, 2009 4:06 PM EST reply actions
He is an injury risk, however...
…lots of upside, but lots of DL-based downside. And an open question whether he would be open to playing first base full time. I sort of like the idea, but I wonder whether the Braves should be taking that kind of risk. We are a player or two away from having a team that can go a long way. Perhaps we should be playing it safer.
we could mitigate that risk by keeping KJ… if Glaus gets hurt, Prado slides over to 1B and KJ plays 2B and we should theoretically still be in good shape (and i realize KJ costs 3M ish, but depending on what we sign GLaus for it might not be a bad idea) of course we could plan on using Infante in place of KJ in that situation. But i like KJ.
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
Infante…KJ…these are not guys who inspire confidence at 1B. Plus, if you sign KJ and keep Glaus, you’re already talking about $5-6M, and that leaves you with a significant risk of a gaping 1B hole.
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
He averaged 142 games per season in the previous four seasons so health before this year hadn’t been an issue since his Angels days, obviously if he has a lingering effect from last year it’d be a risk but it’s not like chipper where you can just about pen in 30-40 missed games
by McCann's the Man on Nov 23, 2009 8:19 PM EST up reply actions
Correct me if I'm wrong...
…but wasn’t his injury a shoulder or elbow problem? I’m thinking 1B would be a good way to minimize that, if we were to consider him.
by FineHamAbounds on Nov 24, 2009 3:00 AM EST up reply actions
Nope
He had major surgery on his shoulder this past season, which is why he couldn’t play third or the outfield for the Cardinals last year.
by bravesfan91 on Nov 24, 2009 11:30 AM EST up reply actions
Not that it's a significant number...
but Glaus played more at 3B than any other spot for the Cardinals this year (40 innings). He was healthy enough to play late and make the post season roster, so I don’t see how Glaus is some big injury risk.
by Mr. Sanchez on Nov 24, 2009 12:17 PM EST up reply actions
Correct. He’s also had various foot and back problems over the years. Never anything to take him out of the lineup for weeks and weeks, but the sorts of little things that could add up, especially as he ages.
Also, regarding the shoulder, he initially had the surgery in January, the Cards expected him to be ready by spring training, but he had a setback that caused him to miss almost the entire 09 season. In September, he came back for a handful of games and hit below the Mendoza line.
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
Unfortunately, there is no way to know if Glaus is healthy enough to withstand a 162-game season and produce. The guy has had injuries upon injuries upon inuries, and one of these years his body (or his bat) will give out. And the elephant in the room is his PED use—will he be able to rehab without it? Will he be able to hit? Stay healthy? What kind of long-term damage has he done to his body? Who knows?
Are you willing to essentially bet the Braves season on Glaus’s health/performance? I’m not.
I’m not against signing Glaus cheaply ($2M) and having another good 1B option (no, not KJ). But that begs the question—if you sign Glaus, you just can’t count on him. If he produces, great. If not, you still need to have a starting-quality 1B ready to plug in, and it better not be Kelly Johnson.
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
The idea behind getting Glaus for cheap as opposed to LaRoche would be that it leaves the financial flexibility to go out and add a talented OF (ie josh willingham, luke scott, mike cameron) as well as have money to spend on the bullpen. If Glaus goes down one of the OF’s would ideally be able to cover 1B (either willingham, diaz, and scott all strike me as guys that could handle the position). Maybe it’s not playing it safe but the idea of glaus playing up to his career averages and providing average to better defense at first base along with an all star level platoon of diaz/scott in LF makes me think WS contender. Higher risk but I don’t honestly see the Braves as anything more than a WC team if they commit 8M+ to LaRoche
by McCann's the Man on Nov 23, 2009 8:29 PM EST up reply actions
If healthy is the main thing I think. The guy has been injured for the most parts of past seasons. Too bad because I agree when healthy he is a fantastic ball player.
by Dutch Braves Fan on Nov 21, 2009 4:28 PM EST reply actions
It depends on how much LaRoche wants to play here
We’d be happy to sign him for to a 1 or 2 yr. deal. He could probably command more years than that on the market, and we just won’t give it to him—-it wouldn’t make sense for us. So if he wants a longer contract, he’ll be gone. On the positive side, since we are happy with a 1 yr. deal we will definitely offer him arbitration and get a sandwich pick if he leaves.
We can, and ought, to do that.
go to 3/23 to outbid if necessary. Honestly, unless Wren can get A-Gon, there is not one, not ONE, reason not to do this. It should be a no-brainer.
I would like to get Gonzalez but it would kill our farm system. Schafer, Freeman, Medlen, and Delgado would probably be enough to get him but I’m not sure I want to part with that much. He’s signed very cheaply just $4.75M in 2010 and a $5.5M team option in 2011. After that though he is a free agent. If the Braves were sure that they would have the money available to sign him to an extension and he was willing to sign before going to free agency then it would be worth it. I would offer him 6 years $102M as an extension starting in 2012 and see if he would take it. He put up great offensive numbers at PetCo with no real help around him. I think he would be great at a neutral park with better hitters around him. I think he could make a run at 50 HR’s.
That sounds about right. It’s really not a bad deal for LaRoche because he is the best 1B on the market but I can’t see the Braves giving him 3 years unless that third year is an option year. I would offer 2 years $16M with a team option for the third that automatically gets picked up if he is traded. Make the option for $10M that should help get him signed. Two years gives Freeman plenty of time in the minors and allow him to develop to his potential.
I would rather we signed someone like Delgado or Nady to a 1 year deal for $3M gueranteed plus another $3-5M in incentives. I think if Delgado is healthy he can still hit 30 HR’s.
I’m way wary of both those guys. The last thing we need is to both downgrade AND add an injury liability. The other FA options are highly underwhelming- Nick Johnson, who OBPs higher than he slugs, Aubrey Huff who fell off the table, etc. The only way to get better than LaRoche is to trade. That’s pretty unlikely, so it’s in our best interest to sign Roachie. This team as currently constructed is very close- obviously we need to replace the 2 relievers we’re about to lose, but there’s no reason we should go out and lay an egg at first base.
I know everyone remembers how good he was for us last season but the guy really isn’t very good in the first half of the season. While he’s a good second half player I doubt he puts up the same numbers in the second half this year. The fact is while he’s a above average 1B he’s just a complimentary bat. This team needs an impact bat.
I haven’t heard anything on the Lowe trade front in a couple days and I don’t expect talks for him to pick up until after Lackey signs. The Braves are going to have to give some to trade him. They have said that they can deal him without eating any of his salary. I very much doubt they can do that.
If we want to get a big bat without giving up prospects then Vazquez will have to be dealt.
Well, in a perfect world impact bats would grow on trees. But they don’t. I didn’t say he was the big impact bat we’ve been searching for- I said every other option is a downgrade from him, which is true, and we can’t afford to eat that production, and we especially can’t afford to eat it when our “impact bat” fails to materialize out of the ether. He’s not the singular answer and I never asserted he was- but we still need him badly, and signing him ought to be the easiest call Wren has to make all offseason.
The Mets are rumored to be in the running for a bet this off season. If they miss on Holliday and decide to go all in for LaRoche do we really want to get into a bidding war for him. If the Mets go to 3 years $30M for him do we want to top that. I agree that we need him but his value is going to get inflated this off season because he’s the best 1B available but when the market is this bad that doesn’t mean much. He has good but not great power, he isn’t going to hit .300 and he’s only average as a defender. If we can resign him reasonably then I’m all for it but I wouldn’t go to 3 years for him.
I am seeing a trend..(sorry my Crystal ball is really just a marble)
In a nutshell…there are a lot of average players in the free agent market this year
Cockroach may get top tier money but then again only a couple of teams would be able to pay 10mil X3yr. This year’s FA list is thick with “Side B” players….(I should copywrite this expression…Def; The “B” stands for “but”.eg..like Roachie is great in the second half “but” his first half of the season not so great.) Ithink the “A” side players in the Free Agent Market can be counted on one hand….So Roachie, should he leave us it would be after the count procedes to hillbilly counting (toes) and since we won’t be offering more than 6 mil for two years or (12 mil total…though we may go 5 for three) it will be hard to keep him.
Yeah Ike Davis but I’ve heard he has the ability to play the OF as well from Mets fans (don’t know for sure if he can) and he likely won’t be in NY next year barring anything unexpected, he’s only had 50 or so games at AA but I don’t think they’ll be big players for LaRoche if it goes 3 years and around 30 million as was suggested earlier
by McCann's the Man on Nov 22, 2009 2:27 PM EST up reply actions
Adam LaRoche should be our first choice, followed quickly by Troy Glaus. Glaus is just a higher risk-higher reward option.
I agree with this, but what if we sign Cameron? Do we still have the need for a lot of power from 1st base?
I know that a team can never have too many good hitters, but in this money-crunched time, if we could sign Cameron, I don’t think that the f/o would be willing to shell out the biggest contract in 2010 for a 1B.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 23, 2009 10:00 AM EST up reply actions
Do we "need" the power from 1st base?...
maybe not. But why not go after the best 1B we can.
by Mr. Sanchez on Nov 23, 2009 10:48 AM EST up reply actions
I mentioned that…the money constraints.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 23, 2009 11:13 AM EST up reply actions
But you still have to pay SOMEONE to do the job...
an incentive laden deal for Glaus, or any of a number of guys, sounds better than getting Kotchman back on the cheap, or going with Canizares as a spot filler til Freeman arrives. Money constraints are an issue, but it’s not like we’re talking a Tex to the Yankees size deal. Glaus, among several others, seem reasonable.
Well...
What we don’t “need” is another Casey Kotchman.
by FineHamAbounds on Nov 23, 2009 1:29 PM EST up reply actions
Did you guys read the article publishes today on mlbtraderumors.com? They are talking the batters the Braves would be targeting.
I honestly don’t understand why the Braves would sign DeRosa for a lot of money. He is not a real power source, the same goes for many names on that list. If Matt Diaz plays for 550+ at bats in a year no platoon with Garret Anderson he might very well put up number quite similar as the ones Byrd and DeRosa might, or say Nady. They may hit a bit more homers but won’t automatically produce more then Diaz (rbi’s OBP, slg)
Of course i understand the difference when we might bring in Bay, Derrek Lee, Carlos Lee, or Adrian Gonzalez (you can always dream).
But until those names surfice i totally don’t understand why you would pay a lot of money to have Matt Diaz 2.0
by Dutch Braves Fan on Nov 23, 2009 1:52 PM EST reply actions
DeRosa?
I hope not. I really don’t think he’s that good. He’ll hit 20 homers, but he doesn’t draw very many walks and his average will sit around .250-.270. Diaz is better IMO.
Does anyone remember when DeRosa made 4 errors in one game with the Braves? That was hilarious.
You say to-mah-to, I say you're retarded.
by alligatorimpersonator on Nov 23, 2009 2:16 PM EST up reply actions
DeRosa is a good complimentary player but he’s not a lineup anchor like we need. DeRosa draws most of his value from his ability to play everywhere but P, C, and CF. My issue with him is that he’s not a good defender at any of those positions. He’s okay for the short term but I wouldn’t want him starting for a long period of time.
I would stay away from Byrd.
If the Braves are going to give Diaz the job then they have got to stick with him. I say start him in LF and bat him as the leadoff man. Send Schafer, Freeman, Medlen, and Delgado to San Diego for Gonzalez and then sign him to a 6 year $108M extension starting in 2012.
That gives us a lineup of
1. Diaz LF
2. Prado 2B
3. Jones 3B
4. Gonzalez 1B
5. McCann C
6. Escobar SS
7. McLouth CF
8. Heyward if he’s up out of ST or Chruch
That line up is scary! Would love to see that, if that happens and Frank Wren can add to the bullpen a closer and a setup type guy, I would be totally in favor ot that.
by Dutch Braves Fan on Nov 23, 2009 3:00 PM EST up reply actions
Agreed...
I get the feeling we’re looking for two bats. One an impact guy hopefully that can play cleanup. And then perhaps a Derosa or Dye that can help lower in the order.
To clarify...
agreed with the idea of Dero as a complimentary bat, not the “impact” bat claimed to be needed, not with the trade scenario.
San Diego wouldn’t accept a deal for Gonzalez that didn’t include Hanson or Heyward. And I wouldn’t blame them.
by FineHamAbounds on Nov 23, 2009 5:13 PM EST up reply actions
not necessarily, i think they understand 2 years of gonzo is not worth heyward or hanson…a package around schafer, freeman, and a couple arms would probably do it..
"Im a fullonrapist, I do men, women, autistic kids, children, the elderly." -Charlie Kelly
They wouldn’t trade Peavy unless we included Hanson, who, at the time, was the best pitching prospect in baseball The main reason they wanted to move Peavy was his contract, and Gonzalez makes peanuts compared to Peavy. Asking for a major league-ready elite prospect isn’t out of the question for an all-star under control for a few seasons at near-minimum salary.
by FineHamAbounds on Nov 24, 2009 3:06 AM EST up reply actions
But asking for 2 or 3 of them might be.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Nov 24, 2009 8:29 AM EST up reply actions
I read somewhere,
can’t remember where, that the Padres are actually doing ok financially after dumping Peavy. If that’s the case, are we sure they even WANT to trade Gonzo? I mean, he is their best player and basically their only draw to the ballpark … if finances arent a problem, I’m not sure if trading him would be a priority.
"If I have asthma, they won't let me scuba. And if I can’t scuba, then what’s this all been about?? What am I working toward??"
They will only trade him for high value
They can afford him the next two years, but know they won’t compete in that time frame. After that they will lose him, so they are marketing him now because they can get more for him now. If they don’t get the offer they want, they won’t trade him.
It’s not salary that makes them want to deal him, it’s the fact that they are a rebuilding franchise, and as you so nicely put it he’s their best player- ergo they can get the biggest return by moving him. Because they’re rebuilding, though, they’ll most likely be looking for a package of prospects for him, not one or two millions-making major leaguers. If its prospects they want we have to think long and hard about whether or not to swing a deal. I still think you can toss Freeman their way, as he has high value and can help get the deal done, but only if there’s an extension agreement in place as part of the deal. Freeman must be untouchable if A-Gon would be expected to walk, because we’d still need him to play first in 2 years, which is roughly his ETA anyway.
For two years of AGonz at that price...
…I’d throw in Freeman and worry about filling our hole at first base in 2012 later. Freeman could be a bust and we would still have a hole to fill. AGonz at that price is worth some worry down the road. By 2012 we may have more salary to play with or we may not need as good a hitter at 1B. Who knows?
Freeman shouldn’t go unless you know on the front end you’ll be able to extend A-Gon. Otherwise he walks in two years and there aren’t any reinforcements coming in behind him. If you have him for two years, you book Freeman for 2012-2017.
With his numbers
you can’t guarantee re-signing him. He will get big big money, like 18-20 million if he plays like he played this season.
by Andy Braves Fan on Nov 24, 2009 9:59 AM EST up reply actions
with chippers contract coming off the books soon that shouldn’t be a problem
"Im a fullonrapist, I do men, women, autistic kids, children, the elderly." -Charlie Kelly
His contract only comes off the books soon if he voluntarily takes it off. Remember 2010 begins his 3 year extension, the only way to take that off the books is if he disappoints himself again next year and decides to walk away, and I certainly don’t wish that on him.
i thought it started this year for some reason…
but i think they’d do everything in their power to resign him if they got him…
"Im a fullonrapist, I do men, women, autistic kids, children, the elderly." -Charlie Kelly
And therein lies the rub
If they want Freeman, we need more than 2 years out of A-Gon. No extension, no Freddie. I’m not sure if we have enough premium guys to get it done without FF though- Schafer and Teheran I know are big money, but would we clean out the system of all our premium stuff for another 1B rental?
I disagree completely...
…what if Freddie turns out to be Casey Kotchman or a complete bust? We can’t write him in our 2012 line-up in stone right now anyway. We figure out 2012 when we get there. Hopefully we can restock the farm through a Lowe trade for a B-prospect and a bunch of 1st and second round draft picks from Gonzo/Soriano/LaRoche leaving. I am not 100% sold on Schafer, so losing him doesn’t bother me that much and Teheran is very young and very far away (TINSTAAPP), so yeah, if the Padres would take Freeman, Schafer, and Teheran straight up for AGonz, I’d do it in a heartbeat. I’d probably throw in Medlen, too.
So would I
but I don’t think it is happening. There are other names that will be insisted on…
by Andy Braves Fan on Nov 24, 2009 12:50 PM EST up reply actions
i highly doubt this, they might insist on teheran but the braves certainly have the pieces to get a deal done w/o either of the two you listed
by McCann's the Man on Nov 23, 2009 8:32 PM EST up reply actions
I disagree
I think those will be the first names that will come up, and they will pretty much hang up the phone without them. Even with a new GM, Jed Hoyer, I don’t see it happening without Heyward or Hanson, or maybe Jair Jurrjens.
by Andy Braves Fan on Nov 24, 2009 10:02 AM EST up reply actions
A-Gon update
Via MLBTR Olney’s saying the chances of him getting dealt are slim, considering his contract.
In that case lets see if we can get Kyle Blanks?
by Dutch Braves Fan on Nov 25, 2009 3:49 AM EST up reply actions
LOl
Awesome. Now we’re talking!
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
As long as the Braves stay away from the group: Byrd, DeRosa, Cameron etc I am fine. Those are not impact bats. They offer nothing more then Matt Diaz, why would he have to go out of the line up for a more expensive less producing player?
Go get an impact bat or stay with the things you have.
by Dutch Braves Fan on Nov 25, 2009 4:51 AM EST up reply actions
As long as the Braves stay away from the group: Byrd, DeRosa, Cameron etc I am fine. Those are not impact bats. They offer nothing more then Matt Diaz, why would he have to go out of the line up for a more expensive less producing player?
Go get an impact bat or stay with the things you have.
by Dutch Braves Fan on Nov 25, 2009 4:51 AM EST reply actions
I disagree.
I think Cameron would be a good signing. Solid plus bat with right-handed power. And he does bring something that Diaz does not—-very good defense.
Assuming Cameron has one more solid and reasonably healthy season left in his aging body, he would nice pickup – assuming the price is right. I’m leary of a 2 year deal and possibly even his one year price tag. I have no clear idea what his market is or whether he might consider a discount to play here.
I understand Cameron would be a nice complimentary bat, hitting sixth or seventh in the line up. He would not be the clean up hitter. He is not the impact bat we are looking for. His defense would make the Braves outfield way better then last years as everyone with two legs and two arms and some outfield experience would. Sorry but Garret Anderson did not even look graceful as said by Mr. Cox.
However the problem is that Cameron might ask for a contract which makes it impossible to fill the other areas of need in a sufficient way. The bullpen needs at least one solid arm. Not only do we loose two good relievers. The use of some bullpen guys was excessive last year. You can’t depend on Moylan pitching 80+ games again. With a little less calls to him he could probably be even better. I hope Valdez gets his shot, Medlen (if not used in a trade) can be a solid set up man. But you don’t have anyone with closer experience at the major league level, besides Derek Lowe, but lets just hope one of our starters gets traded. I think that is the only way the Braves will have money to find a solid arm for the bullpen, a good first baseman and the impact bat that preferably plays well in the outfield.
by Dutch Braves Fan on Nov 29, 2009 6:44 AM EST up reply actions
Agreed
Cameron is a good choice but only at the right price, although I would go as high as $8 million on a one year deal for him. The key to having the money to do anything of this is trading Lowe. Then with his salary, Gonzo’s, and Soriano’s off the books, we should have the money for a few relievers, Cameron or another outfielder, and a first baseman. Sadly, we won’t get the impact bat many seek—-there just aren’t any available at the salary level we would take on even with a trade of Lowe.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
