Why a power hitter would make Atlanta's lineup scary.
by ATLandUNC on Jun 11, 2009 9:42 AM EDT
Email
PrintI know people have talked endlessly about how a trade for a power hitter is what this team needs to compete. BUT, until now I wasn't so sure about how well a power hitter really would fare in the heart of the Braves lineup. It dawned on me today that the Braves lineup is one of the most perfectly built lineups for a big #4 hitter as any in the league. Here is what I see
(1. The top three hitters all get on base at a good clip. Mclouth and Escobar both get on at a .350 and .360 clip respectively, and Chipper is getting on base at a Godly .443 clip. Chip and Esco are also two of the hottest hitters around as of late and have their averages up above .300. All these bodies on the base would provide endless RBI opportunities to the 4 spot. Of the top 5 RBI producers in the league, only Bay has a (slightly) better OBP group in front of him than what a potential 4 hitter would have here in Atlanta.
(2. Mclouth's speed. I know he isn't Carl Crawford out there, but his SB ability will give pitchers something to think about if he is on base while the cleanup spot is up. Even without the SB, Mclouth has the abilty to go first-home on any double.
(3. Great protection from the 5 spot. McCann is back to hitting like the All-Star he is, and is creeping towards the .320 average mark. He hits for good power (.533 SLG%) and has a .410 OBP. Mac would force the pitcher to throw good pitches to the cleanup hitter.
(4. Tuner Field. As Turner heats up, the power alleys become launching pads. A good slugger would have ample opportunity to float some balls through the humidity and into the bleachers.
All this adds up to the perfect recipe for a big bat to have a monster second half. I can honestly say that I think a top power hitter could easily drive in 60+ runs in Atlanta in just the second half of the season alone. The top and core of this lineup is actually VERY solid. All it is lacking is the last puzzle piece. A power hitter would have 1-2 runners on in front if him here almost 39% of the time, and Mac would always be behind him with the protection. For this reason, I think a big trade for a big bat like Bay/Holliday/Dunn/ etc.(just examples) would be worth all the trouble.
Pieces like Johnson/Vazquez/Gonzalez are all expendable at this time and could be dangled in front of a team desperate for their services. We would be giving up big pieces, but even Vazquez would be worth trading for a big time bat, especially since we have Medlen/Hudson to fill the void if need be.
Power is the biggest need, and not only would a big bat fill a big void in the lineup, I think a power hitter would absolutely thrive in Atlanta's lineup.
This FanPost does not express the views or opinions of Talking Chop.
153 comments
|
5 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
i was just thinking this this morning
rec’d
Baseball is a game where a curve is an optical illusion, a screwball can be a pitch or a person, stealing is legal and you can spit anywhere you like except in the umpire's eye or on the ball.
James Patrick Murray
I agree with the post 99%.
The 1% is this line:
Pieces like Johnson/Vazquez/Gonzalez are all expendable at this time
I don’t think ANY of those guys are expedible – ESPECIALLY with the rash of injuries that we have had lately. I would look to the farm to bring in a big bat for us. I don’t think ANY of our starting/key players should be involved in a trade (Unless their name is a French one).
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 11, 2009 10:06 AM EDT reply actions
Big pieces must be given to get big pieces back
And the best place to trade from is a position of strength. Vaz is becoming more expendable as Hanson matures, Medlen gets better, and Hudson nears return. A lot of teams would love to have a big K innings eater like Vaz and may be willing to trade a big bat for a deal headlined by him. As for French, I dont think we could get anything above an A ball player for him right now.
60% of the time, it works every time
Yeah, but when's the last time WE had one of those?
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 11, 2009 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions
I think “big pieces” aren’t restricted to MLB rosters. I think we could deal from another position of strength without weakening our MLB roster. We are deep in prospects. Players like Brandon Jones, Freddie Freeman, Cody Johnson & company could net a decent bat by themselves. Packaged with lesser prospects and minor MLB pieces (not our closer or one of our best starters) could bring in an even better haul.
I just don’t like trading away key pieces. I really really like Vasquez and would love to see him in Atlanta next year (and maybe even extended).
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 11, 2009 10:54 AM EDT up reply actions
Do you think we can bring in an impact bat without giving up Heyward? Do we really want to give up Freeman, C. Johnson, or Schafer? I just don’t see this happening.
Do you think we can bring in an impact bat without giving up Heyward?
Yes, I think we can.
Do we really want to give up Freeman, C. Johnson, or Schafer?
All of them? No. One or two of them? Sure, if it nets us a stud OF who is under control for at least a few years.
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 11, 2009 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions
I totally agree . Our pitching is o.k. , but we need a 30+ and 100+ guy in the lineup to make are #3 and #5 guys better . They’ll see much better pitches to hit which equals more runs a game which equals more wins and less losses .
by princecharming on Jun 11, 2009 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions
I really don't see Vazquez as "expendable." At all.
"...Braves tie! ...Braves tie! ...Braves tie!"
by The Keith Lockhart Era on Jun 13, 2009 2:24 AM EDT up reply actions
Ultimately rosterbation...
But your main point is correct, and you justified it very well. Recommended.
by Sid Bream's Moustache on Jun 11, 2009 10:39 AM EDT reply actions
There are a couple problems.
1) Money. We wasted our draft getting ‘signability’ players. We unceremoniously dumped Glavine and his potential 4.5 million. We didn’t sign Dunn or Abreu over a few million. There is NO way that we’re going to have the coin to trade for a masher unless the other team picks up most of their contract…and that is going to VERY slim pickings because everyone is having financial troubles. There’s a reason everyone is looking to dump payroll onto contenders.
2) Tied in with (1), specifically with Vazquez. It will be very difficult, VERY difficult, to find a trading partner who will want Vazquez (aka, a contender), is willing to pay for his contract, and just so happens to have a slugger they’re willing to part with. A three team trade might be doable, but those are notoriously difficult, and the money still has to work out.
Honestly, the only players that I can think about having a slugger who might remotely be available who could make such an impact that you’re talking about are:
Oak – Holliday
Was – Dunn
Col – Hawpe
CWS – Dye
All have their flaws (Dye and Dunn – too expensive; Hawpe – prospect cost; Holliday – not on the block, FA). You make a good point and yes, its true, but I don’t think the current landscape will lend itself for us to get one of these guys. Its been beat into the ground, but this could’ve been solved in the offseason by signing Dunn. Le sigh.
Dunn
IF we could trade Vasquez for him (I am not sure on this one, either way) wouldn’t we end up saving money? I thought Vasquez’ contract was more than Dunn’s this year.
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 11, 2009 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions
That was my thought...
At some point, there would be teams that’d consider swapping a big-money bat for a big-money pitcher if that was their need.
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 11, 2009 11:34 AM EDT up reply actions
No way the Nats would do that
They are no where near contending so Javy’s contract would not fit well in their budget
SubParr
Yeah, we would save money, but put yourself in the Nats shoes: why on earth would you want to trade for Vasquez?
by soup du jour on Jun 11, 2009 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions
bc they need pitching
and their GM isn’t known as the most savy guy out there…lol
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 11, 2009 12:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Haha, true on the GM part. But ‘need’ is a manner of question. Their biggest need is young talent, which Vaz doesn’t give them. I’m pretty sure they have the money to spend, but I don’t think it would fit with their plans for the club.
by soup du jour on Jun 11, 2009 1:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes...
I’m sure the Nats are willing to give up their 2nd best hitter for a more expensive pitcher……..get real, they’re not in contension, taking on more payroll when they’re trying to sign Strasburg is retarded, stop overvaluing our guys and look at what the other team you’re thinking about needs and if they’d even consider doing such a trade. I could sit here all day and name good hitters we could get for a good strikeout yet expensive pitcher like VaZquez, but none of those teams are gonna be willing to part with their player because they’ve either still got a shot at the playoffs and need that bat, or don’t need the extra payroll when getting him still wouldn’t put them in the playoffs, WAKE UP.
by BravesRaleigh on Jun 11, 2009 11:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes....but
That is where you dangle or package a prospect with the trade. I am soooo against depleting the farm system…I would not offer more than two….maybe a AAA and a lower A. Losing another pitching prospect would be unforgivable unless it was one of the lower A players but if we are to be playing still when October rolls around we need the 4 hole filled with a big bat…Short and Sweet of it!
haha
funny thing is that I was never serious about getting Dunn for Vasquez. If you look, all i did was ask a question about actually LOWERING our payroll by acquiring Dunn (which was in response to someone else’s post.
That part where I said
I am not sure on this one, either wayindicates that I am, indeed, AWAKE.
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 12, 2009 8:33 AM EDT up reply actions
Roster. Bation.
Why a power hitter would make ’s lineup scary.
Your poll needs a 4th option: Don’t get a bat and still win this year.
Can anyone think of any legitimate trade scenarios where the Braves acquire a power bat the Braves can acquire who won’t increase salary? You can always up the prospect package to make the original team pay for the salary as well. Keep in mind power bats aren’t cheap. One year of Matt Holliday cost Billy Beane more than 3.6 years of Nate McLouth cost the Braves.
Didn't I create a thread for this type of stuff?!
by Andy Braves Fan on Jun 11, 2009 1:00 PM EDT reply actions
Yes—but your post got kinda crusty and gross, so we threw it away. You can’t rosterbate on the same post forever, you know.
"…aren’t worthy enough to hold his (Pujols) ass cheeks apart while Playboy models wipe him with thousand dollar bills after he craps out the cure to whatever previously-incurable disease." by royhobbs 1/7/09
And there's this nasty friction problem from over use...
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 11, 2009 8:45 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't know if he was available
Though McLouth was supposedly not available either before the trade happened, but what about the Ranger’s Nelson Cruz? Could a major league ready arm and a top prospect get him?
Probably not. They’re looking primed for a pennant race, I doubt they’d trade one of the biggest reasons for their success this year. Not to mention the fact that Hamilton is on the DL again, so their OF depth isn’t quite as impressive.
by drdonkeypunch on Jun 11, 2009 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions
So how about a Frenchy and a pitching prospect seeing how they’re looking for another arm anyway?
by princecharming on Jun 11, 2009 5:08 PM EDT up reply actions
why in the world would they take jeff francoeur? they probably have 4 guys in the minor that could do a better job than him on a daily basis. the only way they’d take him is if that “pitching prospect” was tommy hanson.
i don’t know why people keep thinking we can just pawn francoeur off on some team and get anything decent back in return. that’s like the royals calling up wren and saying HYUK HYUK WE’LL GIVE YOU TONY PENA JR. AND A PITCHING PROSPECT FOR BRIAN MCCANN HYUK HURF
by drdonkeypunch on Jun 11, 2009 6:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Sounds like that kind of vocabulary comes so natural to you like you use it everyday . After all , it was just a simple question.
by princecharming on Jun 11, 2009 8:10 PM EDT up reply actions
sorry, i wasn’t trying to be derogatory, it just amazes me that people (not just you, people in the media, this board, etc.) think that any team is going to give up anything of worth for one of the worst everyday players in the entire league.
by drdonkeypunch on Jun 11, 2009 8:18 PM EDT up reply actions
No biggie , I’m sorry also . I was just thinking with Frenchy , that the talent is still there . That mabye another team might be willing to take that in consideration and that mabye a change of scenery could be all this guy needs . I like Frenchy , but i know it’s got to be hard on him struggling like he is and growing up around the Braves , having to come in contact with poeple he has known his whole life and having to hear about the rumors everyday about how everyone would like to see him traded and so on and so on . If I were in his shoes and had his talent , I’d probably struggle too from just trying too hard .
by princecharming on Jun 12, 2009 12:34 AM EDT up reply actions
Still...
“Change-of-scenery” trades don’t often net much. I’d say more often than not, you’re just going to get another player of the same caliber.
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 12, 2009 1:02 AM EDT up reply actions
Ok . So do we keep him and hope he can help us ? Or do we go another direction and call someone up and send him down or trade him ? Someone else had another good idea of instead of trading for power , trading for a lead-off hitter . This would take Frenchy out of the lineup and move Escobar down to the 2 hole , McClouth to 3 hole , Chipper to 4th , and McCann to the 5th . It would take a struggling bat out and put some speed in front of some pretty good clutch hitters . Not a bad idea ?
by princecharming on Jun 12, 2009 1:19 AM EDT up reply actions
Trade for lead-off posted by Calbers . Sorry .
by princecharming on Jun 12, 2009 1:22 AM EDT up reply actions
Huh?
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 12, 2009 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions
Read post above "Trade for lead-off posted by Calbers . Sorry . " so you can understand . Reading post above other post sometimes helps .
by princecharming on Jun 12, 2009 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Chipper has said time and time again he doesn't like hitting cleanup.
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 12, 2009 10:26 AM EDT up reply actions
Nobody is saying that he has to . You can hit McClouth 2nd and keep Chipper hitting 3rd and put McCann in at cleanup . There is more than one scenario I’m sure they can try .
by princecharming on Jun 12, 2009 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions
understatement of the year?
wouldn’t every team be better with another big hitter?
When did I ever say it would make the team simply better? I said it would make the lineup “scary”, and then pointed out how the lineup is built to be stacked for a power hitter. Read, its good for you
60% of the time, it works every time
It's FUNdamental!
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 11, 2009 8:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Better not trade for Bay or Holliday
i DONT wanna rape our farm system again for 2 months. I would be fine with Adam Dunn, Brad Hawpe, uhhh Ryan Ludwick…thats about it. If we’re gonna send one of our big time prospects, we should get atleast 1 1/2 years out of it, maybe 2 1/2.
Imagine if we would’ve signed Dunn instead of KK:
McLouth
Escobar
Chipper
Dunn
McCann
Kotch
Diaz
KJ
Lowe
Vazquez
Jurrjens
Hanson
Medlen
Yeah, we’d be in first place without a doubt. Nice post.
AB: Jeff Francoeur
Pitching: Any pitcher in MLB
Runners: Escobar at 3rd, Chipper at 2nd, McCann at 1st.
Pitch 1: In play, out(s)
would we have traded for little Mac
if we had Dunn?
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 11, 2009 5:46 PM EDT up reply actions
hmmm
we released Glavine so we saved 2 million and we sent a little less than a million to Pittsburg. What’s Nate making? 4.5 million? If so, Liberty would’ve had to pony up about 1.8 million. Hmm…im not sure with this economy. My guess would be no, but you never know.
AB: Jeff Francoeur
Pitching: Any pitcher in MLB
Runners: Escobar at 3rd, Chipper at 2nd, McCann at 1st.
Pitch 1: In play, out(s)
by Scott Coleman on Jun 11, 2009 5:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Let me rephrase that
would we have NEEDED to trade for little mac if we had signed dunn?
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 11, 2009 6:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Number corrections...
We saved $3.5 million of “spent money” (Wren’s quote) on Glavine when he was released. And McLouth only costs $2 mil this year, not $4.5. So we actually saved $1.5, rather than adding to the payroll.
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 11, 2009 8:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Did someone say Little Mac?
The New Punchout for Nintendo Wii......get it
by bravesguy311 on Jun 11, 2009 10:12 PM EDT up reply actions
A couple of issues with that...
A. Kawakami is under contract for less than $8 mil/yr. Dunn went for $10. There’s money to be made up there, and Wren still would have felt pressure to sign another pitcher, because:
B. It wouldn’t have been Hanson and Medlen out of ST. Both pitched very well there, and the team thought they needed more seasoning. Instead of Hanson and Medlen for 6+ weeks, we’d have had probably Reyes and Morton, and that’s shown not to work out very well.
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 11, 2009 8:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Let's all rec this post so it can be the rosterbation thread
"…aren’t worthy enough to hold his (Pujols) ass cheeks apart while Playboy models wipe him with thousand dollar bills after he craps out the cure to whatever previously-incurable disease." by royhobbs 1/7/09
Power Bat vs Lead off Bat
I don’t think it is likely that the Braves are going to be able to get a true impact hitter for the #4 slot. The cost will be to prohibitive. It is possible they could go get a playable RH #5 hitter like a Willingham, Ross, Jose Guillen (not my preference), maybe a Beltre to play 1B? There aren’t too many options out there that would be feasible.
My question is …would we be better off trying to find a suitable lead off hitter to play CF or RF and let McLouth move to the #3 hole?
For all the arguments above about the productivity of a #4 hitter I think you could argue the same case for a solid lead off hitter’s impact. If we had someone else who could get on base a .350+ plus clip and run..plus escobar in the #2 hole …you could slide McLouth to the #3 hole…where he would probably get on base at a .370+ clip given that nobody would want to pitch to Chipper. If you have a runner on 1st and 2nd and Chipper at the plate what happens.? Something that hasn’t happened much this year…he gets pitches to hit! Chipper gets good pitches to hit and his RBIs soar. If for some reason they choose not to pitch to Chipper you have McCann behind him who is better suited to the #5 hole and would be driving in even more runs.
I also think it is more likely to find a lead off hitter then a #4 bat. There are guys like Ryan Freel, Michael Bourn, David DeJesus, Ryan Spilbourgh, Endy Chavez, Fred Lewis, Randy Wynn, Juan Pierre, Coco Crisp etc.
I agree with the point above…I just think we could produce the similiar results, for less, but adding a lead off hitter. Keep in mind that if we were to add a lead off hitter we would also be taking Frenchy’s bat OUT of the lineup which, by itself is helping the cause. If you take his bat out of the lineup you are left with only one sure out in the whole lineup-Garret Anderson
Noone has really talked about it , but that could be a better and cheaper solution to a much needed problem?
by princecharming on Jun 12, 2009 12:40 AM EDT up reply actions
I think when Kotchman comes back McLouth will hit 3rd. Kotchman is the IDEAL #2 hole hitter. He takes pitches and he hits to the gaps and can at the least move a runner over. When Esco was at the top followed by Kotch it was amazing. the only thing that was wrong was Esco would swing at the 1st pitch.
Esco
Kotch
Lil’ Mac
Chip
Big Mac
GA/Diaz
Frenchy
K. J
Although Escobar doesnt have the most ideal speed to sit at the top of the lineup it would be more productive than the one we have now.
If we trade for a bat it should be someone we will have under control for the next 1 1/2 years at the least so we arent rushing Heyward.
And Vazquez should not be traded.
by drumzalicious on Jun 12, 2009 1:42 AM EDT up reply actions
We do we have to limit ourselves to a #4 or leadoff hitter?
We can look at this problem in so many different ways. We can say that we need a leadoff hitter, so we can move McLouth down to #3 and so on. We can say that we need a power bat to bat cleanup, leaving McLouth leading off. What we need is just someone that isn’t a black hole in the lineup. GA isn’t starting to hit the ball a bit (though is D could still use some work) KJ is going to heat up eventually, IMO. let those two bat 7 and 8. We need someone that can help turn the lineup over. Kotchman will help with this, when he gets back Sunday. I’m not for sure who can fit this bill for us, or who we have to trade to get it.
Fair point....
But keep in mind that the big issue the Braves front office having the guts to put Frenchy in AAA. The reality is that a combination of Diaz and (Anderson/Blanco) can be a workable platoon. However, Frenchy is an absolute pox upon the line up. If he is vanquished and replaced with Infante’s, Prados or even Blanco’s bat in RF…it would produce an upgrade for the lineup.
As of late tho Frenchy has been coming around and i think the FO sees that.
I personally think everyone has till the AS Break to prove they belong before we see anymore trading. If KJ, Frenchy, and GA are still not producing up to a standard that we need i wouldnt be surprised to see one of them moved
by drumzalicious on Jun 13, 2009 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions
He is?
His OPS is below .600 in the last week, two-week, and three-week spans. What exactly is this “coming around” business you speak of?
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 13, 2009 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm thinking...
Jeff Francoeur, Ron Gant, Andruw Jones, Steve Avery, Tom Glavine, and Michael Vick for Pujols.
by BravesRaleigh on Jun 11, 2009 11:40 PM EDT up reply actions
ill send em
Corky Miller too. Maybe we could do a sign-and-deal?
AB: Jeff Francoeur
Pitching: Any pitcher in MLB
Runners: Escobar at 3rd, Chipper at 2nd, McCann at 1st.
Pitch 1: In play, out(s)
by Scott Coleman on Jun 12, 2009 12:30 AM EDT up reply actions
We’re giving them quite a bit now that we would add the Corkster, I think they’d have to give us Ludwick and the rights to call Musial and Bob Gibson ours.
by BravesRaleigh on Jun 12, 2009 1:57 AM EDT up reply actions
Finally
someone who sees the light!
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 12, 2009 8:35 AM EDT up reply actions
Everyone agrees that the Braves could use a bat (pretty obvious)
I mean, couldn’t any organization? Its kind of a redundant statement.
But…
1. the Braves can’t take on more payroll
2. they traded most of their most tradeable prospects to get McLouth
3. No other team can take on payroll, so trading veterans is difficult
by Andy Braves Fan on Jun 12, 2009 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions
You don't have to be a smartass
She was just stating that she agreed with the post.
1. How do you know? Are you a member of the Board?
2. How do you know? Are you a member of the development team?
3. How do you know? Are you a member of the Board of every MLB team?
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 12, 2009 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Way to go , I feel like saying that to several poeple on this site . Kudos to you !
by princecharming on Jun 12, 2009 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions
1 is pretty much a known fact, and 2 is plausible, in terms of guys with good Braves worth:trade value ratios.
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 12, 2009 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions
it’s an assumed fact. the ownership could deepen their pockets if it meant a more competetive team.
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 12, 2009 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions
They deepened their pockets for McLouth. It’s pretty obvious the team can’t take on any significant payroll (greater than 6 figures) when they’ve been talking about payroll the entire offseason. It’s the reason FUGA was signed instead of Abreu or Dunn and partially the reason why Glavine was cut to make room for McLouth. I don’t agree with his points 2 and 3 though.
They did?
As far as I can tell, they SAVED money on that deal.
McLouth ($2.5 mil)-(Glavine ($3.5 mil)+prospects ($500K-ish total))=net savings
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 12, 2009 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought we saved on that deal also ? Didn’t think that sounded right .
by princecharming on Jun 12, 2009 5:08 PM EDT up reply actions
I know money is tight
but if someone (FW, for example) were to say “Look, members of the Board, we have a budget of $XXX,000,000. Unless we add a bat we will not compete this year. If we could add $X,000,000 more, we could get THIS guy from the XXXs. We have already worked out the details, all we need is the bank account backing. What do you say?”
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 12, 2009 5:11 PM EDT up reply actions
But they don't care.
The Braves are run as a line item for profit.
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 12, 2009 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions
New Owners
Let’s give them a chance first before we label them.
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 12, 2009 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Really?
They’ve owned the team since ’07, and payroll dropped immediately.
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 12, 2009 8:27 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought the sale
wasn’t finalized until last year and they didn’t decrease any payroll.
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 13, 2009 12:25 AM EDT up reply actions
I just realized
this is a fragment of a sentence…here is the rest of it:
…I am hopeful that the board would give the money – especially if it would increase the chances of a playoff birth, which would in turn, produce more revenue.
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 12, 2009 5:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Thank you! I was just agreeing with the post . I appreciate you standing up for me. I am so sick of these guys picking on me.
I am just a girl that loves baseball and the Braves!
At your service
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 12, 2009 6:14 PM EDT up reply actions
It’s not just you . They’ve done the same thing to me . It makes me want to just as rude to them , but then I realize that I would be lowering myself down to their standards , and I’m better than that .
by princecharming on Jun 12, 2009 7:02 PM EDT up reply actions
</holier-than-thou attitude>
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 12, 2009 8:28 PM EDT up reply actions
I never said that I was better than everyone else , I said that I was better than having to pick on everyone else . I have tried to be nice to you , I have even told you I was sorry for a post I made towards you earlier , and mabye you don’t realize what you are typing after someone else reads it could take it the wrong way . Or mabye you just really are trying to be a prick . You must really be lonely .
by princecharming on Jun 13, 2009 12:22 AM EDT up reply actions
And you're the one using vulgarity to personally attack someone. Count ME impressed.
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 13, 2009 10:23 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m done talking to you about anything other than baseball . This is the last time we will talk about anything off the subject . If you ever post any other comment towards me in a negative fashion , I WILL NOT RESPOND . Making a point is fine , but do so in a more mature manner without having to look down on someone . And I was trying to be nice by using the word ‘prick’ . Last time I checked , prick wasn’t all that vulgar . And as I’ve told you before , I’m not on here to make enemies . If you think you can talk to me respectfully , I assure you that I will do the same .
by princecharming on Jun 13, 2009 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Say it with me...
I’m good enough,
I’m smart enough,
And doggonnit—people like me!
Dude, it’s just the internets, no need weep over anonymous a-holes being mean to you.
"…aren’t worthy enough to hold his (Pujols) ass cheeks apart while Playboy models wipe him with thousand dollar bills after he craps out the cure to whatever previously-incurable disease." by royhobbs 1/7/09
by buzzdeadwax on Jun 13, 2009 10:46 PM EDT up reply actions
No , you’re right , and I’m trying not to . But this guy has done this on more than one occasion and it’s really gotten old . But I’ve said all that I’m gonna say about it . I don’t even mind still talking to the guy as long as the conversation stays mature . Bad attitudes can be very contagious . And I’ll take a smart conversation about baseball over arguing with someone anyday .
by princecharming on Jun 13, 2009 11:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Sorry
I meant no offense, nor am I “picking on you”. Glad you are a girl who loves the Braves and baseball, and I did not mean for my post to come out offensive, just trying to point out some general fact about the situation under discussion…
by Andy Braves Fan on Jun 15, 2009 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Wow, overkill
Not trying to be a smartass, just stating the facts. This post was not directed at HEY JUDE necessarily, but to the entire idea of adding a bat. Hell, If the Yankees added a bat, would they be better. Hell yes. Name a team in baseball that wouldn’t be better by adding a bat? Just pointing out that the statement seems kind of redundant, not trying to piss people off. I then went on to list the facts that limit the Braves (and other teams) from adding said bat…
Andy FYI, the facts as stated sources all over baseball:
The Braves can’t afford to increase payroll
The Braves traded most of their more tradeable players to get McClouth
Other teams are not interested in increasing payroll.
In other words, read a fucking article Justin, and get off your high horse. Or just fuck off.
by Andy Braves Fan on Jun 15, 2009 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions
wow
way to post a mature response.
I read tons of articles, and nowhere have I read that not a single MLB team can afford to add payroll.
Nowhere have I read that the Braves are absolutely dry in the tradeable prospect department.
You have changed your points to be a little less dogmatic, but the my main point is the same – you are not a member of any MLB FO so how can you know what teams can and cannot do, including the Braves?
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 15, 2009 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Sorry if my response was a little knee-jerk
but my original post was not intended to offend anyone, and your reaction was ridiculous.
My points are clearly not dogmatic. Multiple, multiple sources have said that the Braves can’t afford to add payroll. Just take Bowman’s Blog: "So with limited available funds, the Braves will continue to evaluate the trade market with the hope that it produces a solution before it’s too late. "
Multiple sources have mentioned that, while the Braves are not dry on prospects (Far from it), their moveable pieces (IE, Morton, Gorkys, and Locke), are now gone. Those are 3 of their top 10 prospects. That generally means that there aren’t many top teir prospects to trade, unless they decide to move on Jason Heyward or Freddy Freeman, and you can guess how likely that is.
And no, not every team in baseball is unable to add payroll, but in this market even the Yankees FO has come out and said that adding payroll would not interest them. The majority clubs are not looking to add payroll anytime soon. Let me just quote Buster Olney who put it very very succinctly (and this has been echo’d all over the place):
“There are just very few teams willing or able to take on salary.”
That is just how it is. You don’t have to like it that I put it too “dogmatically” for you, but I am not making crazy statements. If you have read enough articles, as I have, you should be able to read between the lines, even when writers don’t put it in black and white as clearly as Buster Olney did.
All in all, while my original post may have been interpreted as snarky, I was simply stating two things:
saying that the Braves could use another bat is a redundant statement
The Braves are not in a very good position to add another bat because of the three previously mentioned factors. By all means, feel free to debate me on any of those points. I am not a Front office person with any baseball organization, but clearly my position is supported by beatwriters all over baseball.
My apologies to HEY JUDE and anyone else who took offense, but I’m just trying to state facts…
by Andy Braves Fan on Jun 15, 2009 1:59 PM EDT up reply actions
1. the Braves can’t take on more payroll
2. they traded most of their most tradeable prospects to get McLouth
3. No other team can take on payroll, so trading veterans is difficult
Those are all dogmatic statements.
Yes, the Braves payroll is pretty much maxed out. But, the owners could decide to add a few million more if it meant a better team.
I have not read anywhere that states we have traded our tradeable pieces. Would you mind linking to one or two of those articles?
Saying that there are VERY FEW teams WILLING to take on salary is completely different than saying “NO teams CAN take on salary”
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 15, 2009 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions
subtle differences
Willing to take on salary: That is a decision by owners of MLB teams. If they are not WILLING to take on salary, than the GM in charge is not ABLE to take on salary.
As for the ownership: It is a corporate ownership. As JC Bradbury has pointed out numerous times, corporate ownership decisions in regards to payroll will be attendance driven. The Braves attendance in 2008 (average): 31,270. 2009: 24,828. That is why there is no payroll flexibility.
Can’t remember where I read that the Braves weren’t looking to deal more prospects. However, lets look at the state of the Braves prospects. They have already traded T-Flow, Gorkys, Locke, and Morton. Jo-Jo is now worthless, Medlen and Hanson are in the bigs. Heyward is untouchable. One would imagine that Schafer is both untouchable and worthless (injured and didn’t perform well in the bigs). That is a pretty solid chunk of the Braves top prospects, no?
Furthermore, If the Braves can’t add a lot more payroll (all indications are that they can’t), then trading prospects for a major league bat seems especially unlikely as trading prospects for a bat costs money. So logically, it doesn’t seem likely.
by Andy Braves Fan on Jun 15, 2009 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions
I give up. You are right. I am wrong.
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 15, 2009 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions
You're basically arguing semantics here...
His original points were valid.
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 15, 2009 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions
NO
ABF needs to cut his own balls off and mail them to gondeee, so that he may take pictures and post them on the front page. At which point, we will have a poll, asking whether the issue is settled. If we vote “Not Settled”, ABF will have to sever his own head and crap down his own throat—wait, where the hell am I going with this? No, the real point is that arguing with Justin is not something that should be done for shits and giggles. You only do it when your heart rate is dangerously low and/or you have several extra hours on your hands and you enjoy being frustrated.
"…aren’t worthy enough to hold his (Pujols) ass cheeks apart while Playboy models wipe him with thousand dollar bills after he craps out the cure to whatever previously-incurable disease." by royhobbs 1/7/09
haha
isn’t that a little extreme? I have no intention of cutting off my balls. Ever. Thanks.
by Andy Braves Fan on Jun 15, 2009 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Sorry
It’s balls or nothing. I don’t make the rules.
"…aren’t worthy enough to hold his (Pujols) ass cheeks apart while Playboy models wipe him with thousand dollar bills after he craps out the cure to whatever previously-incurable disease." by royhobbs 1/7/09
Damn...
Don’t make me bring the player’s union into this.
by Andy Braves Fan on Jun 15, 2009 8:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Do you mean my original points?
I am not sure who you were speaking to there. Sorry. If so, I agree, and thanks.
by Andy Braves Fan on Jun 15, 2009 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes...
And the “up” button will take you to the root comment, for future reference.
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 15, 2009 4:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Andy Braves Fan, I was more or less pointing a finger towards Michael Procton. I’ve only been on here for a week and he seems to always have a smart comment, to most of my and others post.
by princecharming on Jun 15, 2009 10:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Anderson was a bad sign by wren, he hasnt hit for power and he doesnt have a good OBP. Lets call up Brandon Jones maybe he will get on base
by Heyward is the next crime dog on Jun 12, 2009 12:17 PM EDT reply actions
He wouldn’t be any worse and might help to add a little spark .
by princecharming on Jun 12, 2009 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Probably
But he is injured right now.
by Andy Braves Fan on Jun 15, 2009 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions
And he wasn't exactly lighting the world on fire before that.
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 15, 2009 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions
He also missed the first month+ of the season.
He basically had to do spring training in the bigs. He’ll be at least an adequate player by the end of the season, and the 3 homers we’ve seen from him in the last two weeks is probably about the rest of the season’s worth from Jones (if he even gets that many.)
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 12, 2009 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Anderson is still pretty fucking bad right now, but he’s slowly getting better…and he’s doing much better than FYF. I’m crossing my fingers that all this talk about him turning it on after the all-star break is true. I would kill for a .809 OPS from him.
by Smoltz's Beard on Jun 12, 2009 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions
With Schafer not working out, the right fielder still sucking it up, and possible outfielders from the bench being injured/ineffective, the fact that GA is not an everyday player makes things even worse. As others have pointed out, we almost have to keep running “the right fielder” out there, despite how bad he’s playing. Now THAT is an undesirable position to be in, huh?
"When life gives you lemons, just say 'F*ck the lemons,' and bail."
by Bravely going forward on Jun 12, 2009 4:22 PM EDT up reply actions
We don’t have to keep running him out there…Brandon Jones could just as easily step in and outproduce FYF’s current numbers.
by Smoltz's Beard on Jun 12, 2009 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions
i thought he was hurt? if not, that’s definately an option.
"When life gives you lemons, just say 'F*ck the lemons,' and bail."
by Bravely going forward on Jun 12, 2009 4:36 PM EDT up reply actions
yeah, that’s sweet, then. i was gonna mention him in my original comment above, but, like i said, i really didn’t think that was an option yet.
"When life gives you lemons, just say 'F*ck the lemons,' and bail."
by Bravely going forward on Jun 12, 2009 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Hmm…must have missed that sorry. Well, if healthy Jones could outproduce the current FYF.
by Smoltz's Beard on Jun 12, 2009 4:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Best Idea I've seen yet
Call up B. Jones, and send Frenchy down for a while to stew. We could use the speed anyway.
I've said it before and I'm prob the only one who will think this but . .
IF we are so desperate for a bat and we have no financial means left to pursue that bat why don’t we do something unexpected that kinda makes sense.
Why don’t we trade Lowe?
Now I’m not saying this because Lowe did badly today against Baltimore. Just hear me out.
Lowe is a nice arm in any rotation. He ideally is a #2 but could be substituted as a #1. He has great control and will do well as long as he has a good defense behind him catching those ground balls.
Yes he is in his late 30’s but someone wrote an article about how because Lowe didnt become a starter till so late in his career he doesnt have as much mileage on his arm and is essentially coming into his prime as a starter.
Yes I know he is being paid more than a lot of teams would want to pay him as well.
Now what we would need is a team with a pretty good INF Defense. A team that has an OF that we could acquire that would bolster our lineup in a Big Way. And a team that desperately needs pitching.
So I present to you the Texas Rangers.
Here is a team that has a young core of pitchers coming through the gate with Kevin Millwood on his way out and no one to really head the rotation.
They have a very solid defensive infield.
And they have a Bat we could use.
Why dont we trade:
Derek Lowe
Francoeur
Cash (Say 4 Mil a year on Lowe’s Contract)
For
Nelson Cruz
The Rangers get a Pitcher to slot either behind or infront of Millwood. Lowe also most likely wouldnt see a drastic increase in his ERA since he is a GB pitcher (Although I’m not 100% on this). They also get him for 3 1/2 Years.
Yes they lose Cruz in RF. BUT they gain Frenchy. With the way their hitting coach has turned around Andruw Jones and how Frenchy started the season so much better after being under him not to mention the ballpark his numbers will get better for that team and he will be at least league average.
Then they get Hamilton back in July.
Braves will of course lose their “Staff Ace” but we still have a solid 1/2 behind JJ and Vazquez. Kawakami is pitching like a #3 starter with league average ERA and has shown signs of improvement. From there they can slot Medlen in the #5 hole.
If you want to take it further they could then possibly do a trade for a decent starter to hold them over till Hudson gets back since they will have cleared most of Lowes salary.
Now if you really want to stretch it you could delve into the whole issue that appears to be happening with Escobar where we might see him get traded Escobar and or Kelly Johnson would certainly be enough to net us a pitcher and im talking BETTER than Brad Penny
I would be totally against this
Lowe is not just another small piece of our pitching staff…he is the heart of it!
Any trade we make that involves on of our SPs is a bad trade – no matter who it gets us in return.
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 15, 2009 9:30 AM EDT up reply actions
If we can’t trade from our position of strength, then there is no possible way for us to improve this year. As for the proposal at hand, if we trade one of our starter, Lowe or Vazquez, it would have to be the nearly PERFECT trade. Getting a right handed bat for the outfield. Get a starter that can be slotted in the 4 or 5 spot. Maybe try to get some bullpen help.
There is a difference in trading from a position of strength and trading your strength.
Good SP is one of the rarest qualities in baseball. Our rotations the past 2 years should have proven to us that we can never have too much SP.
Everyone acts like the only tradeable commoditites that we have is SP. I beg to differ. I think we still are pretty deep in the prospect department with another slew of prospects on the way. There are some prospects that are (and should be) untouchable, but we have many many more that are not.
Trading for a bat at the cost of our SP will only serve to fill one hole while creating another. Simply putting Medlen into the rotation and moving everyone else up would be stupid. Medlen cannot replace Lowe. Let’s be honest here, our SP is the only think keeping us close right now. THAT is something that is not expendable or tradeable.
It IS our strength, but not something we have more than enough of.
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 15, 2009 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions
You misunderstand.
Im not saying to put Medlen. I’m saying that is an option, however what i would prefer is to then trade Escobar/Kelly Johnson for a #3/4 arm to a team that needs a good hitter at one of those positions.
In another thread this is what i posted.
Look at it this way, we essentially have 3 #2 starters with Lowe just being the best one.
Trade Lowe we still have Vazquez and JJ.
If we trade Escobar/Kelly we could net ourselves a solid #3/4 essentially a guy that will give up 3-4 runs a game and have occasional brilliance
There are a couple of teams that could fit that bill.
San Diego
Minnesota
Cincinnati (although doubtful)
Toronto (Would love one of their young’ns)
Arizona
Oaklandetc. there are teams out there who would love a player of Escobar’s caliber
I personally believe that we will still have a VERY strong and contention worthy rotation especially with the addition of Hudson at the end of the season. You can then put Kawakami in the bullpen for a play off push since he will most likely be a bit tired by then.
In summary you are giving up a guy that will give up 1-2 runs a game for someone that will give up 3-4 but i believe that bat of Cruz’s will make up the difference because the offense would be very capable of scoring 5-6 runs a game.
And in all honesty with Kotchman returning i think it would be even better. just think
McLouth CF
Kotchman 1B
Chipper 3B
Cruz RF
McCann C
Anderson/Diaz LF
KJ 2B
Diory SS.When Kelly gets out of this slump that is a lineup with only one auto out in Diory.
by drumzalicious on Jun 15, 2009 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions
Let me see if I get this
We trade a SP to fill a hole in the OF.
Then we trade a 2B/SS to fill a hole in the SP created by trading to fill that hole in the OF
So now, our SP hole is filled and our OF hole is filled…what happens to our 2B/SS hole that we just created to fill the other holes?
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 15, 2009 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions
the 2B/SS hole is filled with someone already on the team.
by drumzalicious on Jun 15, 2009 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Please don’t say Diory…or Prado…
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 15, 2009 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions
I would say Diory for SS simply because Infante isnt around
it’s a plausible idea with a solution to our offensive woes.
yes the starting staff is not as strong but by slotting in a pitcher of Randy Wolf’s quality would not hamper our chances that much.
It would be ideal to get Doug Davis some how
by drumzalicious on Jun 15, 2009 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions
No way...
You don’t (or at least we can’t) pay a #4 $8.5 mil, or even the $5 mil that Wolf is getting.
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 15, 2009 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Well if we part ways with Lowe we will have some flexibility payroll wise
by drumzalicious on Jun 15, 2009 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Freeing up payroll isn't a constructive exercise...
If you’re then going to use it in retarded fashion.
Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.
by MichaelProcton on Jun 15, 2009 4:43 PM EDT up reply actions
So its retarded to get a pitcher not as good as Lowe but almost half his price. Then a bat that is substantially cheaper than FYF and almost double the production?
by drumzalicious on Jun 15, 2009 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Kindof
It is creating one hole to fill another – Robbing Peter to pay Paul.
"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT
by justincredubil02 on Jun 15, 2009 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions
being able to acquire davis
or a comparable pitcher is a big if. My understanding of the league right now is that young players of any type are at a premium, and trading for them requires a premium price. Most teams don’t want to take on payroll, that makes anyone taking a Lowe sized contract really unlikely. The only teams that are clearly able to consider raising payroll (for the right player only) are the Phillies and Mets.
There are a lot of teams on the bubble who aren’t ready to throw in the towel yet, so maybe something becomes available, but I just don’t really see it.
by Andy Braves Fan on Jun 15, 2009 9:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Not that Doug davis is old
But in terms of getting a young slugger. But Doug Davis won’t be easy to get either. Though, I will say that IF the Braves were dumb enough to trade Yunel Escobar, they had better get more back than Doug Davis. KJ’s value is down right now.
by Andy Braves Fan on Jun 15, 2009 9:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Of course we get back more than Doug Davis i just dont know what it would be.
Also with Lowe its a situation where a team (Rangers) hardly have any quality starters and the ones they have coming could use a Veteran to head that rotation and teach them. Plus Lowe will still be a solid pitcher as long as he keeps throwing those sinkers.
This idea is not as crazy as some are making it out to seem the issue seems to be that people dont like it because he is our “Staff Ace” when you dont realize we have a younger version of him with a new arm arriving in two months. in the meantime a rotation of Javy, JJ, Kawakami, Mystery Man, and Hanson will tide us over enough ONLY if we get a bat that increases our offensive output substantially and i believe Nelson Cruz is a fellow like that the only other person is Upton but i doubt the Diamondbacks even think about moving him unless they are getting a haul from us. Prob something like Escobar + Medlen + Cody Johnson
by drumzalicious on Jun 16, 2009 12:21 AM EDT up reply actions
In regards to trading SP
“While dealing Javier Vazquez would provide the opportunity to gain some financial breathing room, the Braves may be reluctant to deal him before having a better feel about what they could expect from Tim Hudson during the season’s final two months and next year.
-From Bowman’s blog
by Andy Braves Fan on Jun 15, 2009 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Five tips for Showtime’s second season of ‘The Franchise’
- The 10 best things about being a Detroit Tigers fan
- Surprise! A’s finally end the Yoenis Cespedes derby with $36 million deal for Cuban star
- The time Whitney Houston sang to Jim Bowden
- Pitchers and catchers! Mariners get early start in Arizona
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
