More photos » by Gene J. Puskar - AP

Browse more photos »

There's no official rumor on this, I just wanted to throw it out there and let it marinate, and I've seen it brought up here and there in some comments. J.J. Putz could be a good fit at closer for the Atlanta Braves, as he and the Mets are likely to part ways, but are we ready to take a chance on another injury-plagued reliever?

He had surgery to remove bone spurs on his throwing elbow last year, but then during his rehab he re-injured that same area that was described as "fraying and a slightly torn ulnar collateral ligament in his right elbow." He is supposed to be fully recovered from that by the time spring training rolls around, and when healthy he can be a shutdown closer.

The positive spin here is that because he is coming off of an injury he could likely be signed to an affordable one-year contract, and perhaps even an incentive-laden contract that would protect Atlanta against him re-injuring the elbow. The obvious downside here is that we really shouldn't be counting on a guy coming back from injury to be our closer. We might make the same mistake with the bullpen that we made with the starting rotation two years ago -- relying on injury-prone pitchers.

Ideally we'd want to bring in someone else who could potentially close as insurance against Putz breaking down. Perhaps re-signing Mike Gonzalez could be that insurance.

Again, I'm looking for low-cost players with potentially high upside, and Putz falls into that category. That, and we're Irish twins.

The Atlanta Braves had four of five eligible players file for free agency yesterday. First baseman Adam LaRoche, outfielder Garret Anderson, pinch hitter Greg Norton, and reliever Mike Gonzalez all filed for free agency, leaving only reliever Rafael Soriano yet to file.

The two relievers, Gonzalez and Soriano, are both type-A free agents, meaning the Braves would receive two first round draft picks (1 and 1S) is they offered either arbitration and they signed elsewhere. Because they are expected to draw interest from several teams, the Braves will likely offer arbitration to both players, though they may only seek to actually try and re-sign Gonzalez, seeing him as the less costly of the two.

LaRoche and Anderson are both type-B free agents, and Atlanta would receive only one first round (supplemental) draft pick as compensation were they to be offered arbitration and sign elsewhere. It depends on how the Braves plan to approach this off-season and the stated goal of adding right-handed power bat as to whether they will offer LaRoche arbitration.

For the record, I'd like to see the Braves offer Gonzo, Soriano, and LaRoche all arbitration. If they did sign elsewhere with teams that had one of the 15-best records in baseball last year then the Braves could find themselves with 3 first round draft picks and 3 supplemental first round picks -- possibly 6 of the first 50 selections in the draft. By having extra picks, the Braves may also be less fearful about going after other type-A free agents and losing their own first round pick.

From MLB.com's Mark Bowman, here is the latest on the Atlanta Braves efforts to re-sign Tim Hudson:

Tim Hudson has passed his physical and essentially made his three-year contract extension a done deal.  But the Braves may wait until the conclusion of the World Series to formally make this announcement.

Hudson and the Braves agreed to the terms of the three-year extension last week and then had to wait to find a doctor that the insurance company would approve.

David O'Brien reported a similar note this morning

The delay on Hudson extension resulted from the team having to find a doctor the insurance company approved of to do the physical. But they got the doc and Huddy passed the physical, from what I’m told. If so, it shouldn’t be much longer before they sign this deal and it gets announced.

Good. Signing Hudson is the right move. Now we get to endure a swirl of rumors about who the Braves will trade from the rest of the starting pitchers.

Here is the scoop from TCPalm's (regional Florida newspaper) website:

Pitcher Scott Proctor will return to the mound in 2010.

Proctor, the Martin County native, has reached an agreement with the Atlanta Braves on a one-year contract for the 2010 season, according to Proctor's Palm City-based agent Mark Rodgers.

Proctor was released by the Florida Marlins in October after missing the entire 2009 season because of Tommy John surgery on his right elbow.

"The Braves were very aggressive in their pursuit of Scott," Rodgers said Wednesday "They made it clear from the day the Marlins' released Scott that they had a strong interest in signing him to help improve their bullpen. It was obvious to me that the Braves appreciate Scott's track record with the Yankees and Dodgers. I am confident that Atlanta's needs in the bullpen best matched up with Scott's abilities."

The Braves had pursued Proctor way back in 2006 and 2007, so he is a guy they have long coveted. He'll be coming back from Tommy John Surgery, but if can do that successfully, then we have just added a strong and experienced bullpen arm for under a million dollars who doesn't yet have to occupy a space on the 40-man roster. It's a very worthwhile gamble to take on a reliever who could have a huge impact at some point next season.

Good first move of the off-season, Frank Wren. Now we're just waiting on the official word about Tim Hudson.

[UPDATE 1:30pm:]

Per MLBTR, here is an interesting tidbit:

Jeff Euston of Cot's Baseball Contracts informed me that Proctor would "have to spend all but about 21 days on the 25-man to qualify as a free agent after 2010."  He'll probably need all of April in the minors, meaning the Braves could retain Proctor for 2011 as an arbitration-eligible player if he has a successful '10 campaign.

Some confusing verbiage there, but essentially we could keep him in the minors and off the 25-man roster until mid-May and thus retain him for the 2011 season. So we just picked up a year and a half of an experienced work-horse reliever. This deal is looking even better, with potentially more upside, and no need to really rush Proctor back next spring.

He's been one of the most talked about players to defect from Cuba in several years, and now the Atlanta Braves have joined the group of teams pursuing Aroldis Chapman, according to SI.com:

The Atlanta Braves are the latest team seeking to meet with Chapman's agent, two sources told SI.com.

Though an exact date, time and location for a meeting have not been established, the two sides are expected to schedule formal conversations in the coming weeks.

He's a 21-year old southpaw flamethrower who profiles as a top of the rotation starter, why wouldn't the Braves want to make a play for him. I was wondering if Atlanta was going to throw their hat in the ring. They have good roots with the ex-pat Cuban baseball community, as both Yunel Escobar and Barbaro Canizares are both Cuban-born, as well as bench coach Chino Cadahia and several other minor league players in the organization.

More photos » by Duane Burleson - AP

Browse more photos »

There have been a lot of unconditional releases of players with some degree of past talent this spring. Should the Braves pursue any of these guys to bolster their left field ranks or their bench?

• Gary Sheffield:  He's familiar to the Braves and their fans, after spending one good and another really good year in Atlanta. At 40-years old is he still the power threat he used to be, and is he still a guy who can play without the use of the DH? He was pretty pitiful last year, as all his averages were down, and his strikeouts were up. He hit a weak .178 this spring, but with three homeruns and a lot of walks, while keeping his strikeouts under control.
• Geoff Jenkins:  Like Sheffield, Jenkins' spring has been pretty anemic, but he has shown some power and ability to hit. Jenkins has never been a prodigious power bat, and he likes the DL as much as anyone, but if we're looking for power he may at least provide more than Garret Anderson.
• Dallas McPherson:  His major league numbers are pretty awful, but it's hard to ignore two seasons in the minors where he's collected 40 or more homeruns, including last year. It's been suggested that he could backup Chipper and play some outfield, but is he anything more than a Russel Branyan, Mike Hessman, or Wes Helms -type player?
• Mike Lamb:  If we're considering backup third-baseman who have been recently released, then we have to consider Lamb, who just got dumped by the Brewers. He's a perrinnial backup, but he's shown in the past he can hit for some power and get on base at a decent rate.
• Wily Mo Pena:  If Jim Bowden were our GM, he's be on our team (but thank God he's not our GM). Pena's got power, but not much plate discipline. He's probably more of a project than we need.

It's my assertion that we don't really need any of these guys, as our bench is pretty solid and salary is already being taken up by exisiting left fielders and backups. What do you guys think?

More photos » by David J. Phillip - AP

Browse more photos »

When the Atlanta Braves signed Chipper Jones to a three-year contract extension with a vesting fourth year early on Tuesday, they were doing more than securing the services of a future Hall of Fame player who has spent his entire career with the organization, they were also putting back together the image of an organization that had been fire bombed by bad luck and bad agents this off-season. Just as they likely overpaid for their new ace pitcher Derek Lowe, they likely spent money unwisely in a baseball sense when they decided to pay Chipper Jones big bucks at ages 40 and 41. Some players perform at an elite level at age 40 and beyond, but most do not.

But this is one of those decisions you don't make with stats or all that much logic, you make it with emotion and desperation. The Braves needed a revival of the face of the franchise, and with Chipper Jones they cemented that face of the franchise for the rest of his playing career. They needed, not good, but great news, and this gives them that rose-colored headline that ends their spring training and their off-season on a positive note.

In baseball logic, you don't usually pay a player big money who is coming off five consecutive injury plagued seasons. With all we know about the decline of players as they get older, and with no external supplements to turn to, why would an organization, an NL DH-less organization, sign an untradeable veteran at age 37 (on April 24th) to a contract that eats up 15 percent of their payroll for each of the next three (possibly four) years.

This makes me think back to something Keith Law said in the Q&A I did with him in February. He said, "[the Braves] organizational weakness [is] their excessive loyalty to certain players." He singled out Jeff Francoeur and Tom Glavine, but we can apply this same idea to the Chipper Jones signing.

Is this a sign of organizational strength or organizational weakness?

While loyalty is not something talent evaluators like Law can assign a value to, it is something that players in an organization pay very close attention to. Throughout the tenure of Bobby Cox, the Braves have gone almost out of their way to maintain their loyalty to players, whether it comes to contracts or playing time. This has worked out well for the Braves when it comes to contract time, as many homegrown players feel they need to reciprocate that loyalty and sign for slightly less than market value. Though, when that discount is expected, the backlash as seen in the John Smoltz fiasco this winter, can be a devastating blow to an organization which prides itself on its loyalty to players.

We've also seen this loyalty work out well, and not work out at all, on the field. Giving Kelly Johnson, and his 2-for-34 start in 2005, time to work out his problems has payed off for the Braves, but Ryan Langerhans and his 3-for-44 start in 2007, did not. It's certainly a live-by-the-sword-die-by-the-sword philosophy in every aspect of baseball operations.

But back to Chipper and this enormous contract-slash-retirement-bonus. I'll be the first to say that on first blush I like this signing, but then again, I never professed to subscribe to baseball logic, especially when it comes to "our guys," the "Braves' guys" -- and Chipper is at the head of that class. This contract is probably not a good one in a baseball sense. Yes, Chipper won the batting title last year, but we have to come back to the fact that he missed 34 games and he's failed to drive in 100 runs in four out of the last five seasons, and for that to warrant a three or four-year deal may not be good business sense.

And here is where the conflict happens.

I like the guy, I like that he'll be a Brave for his entire career, I'm glad we're getting a final dose of good news before the season starts, but I don't like tieing up that much money in a player with his history of injuries and an aging body. This is a great day for the Braves, and it may be great for another year or two, but we may be gritting our teeth in several years when we're committing a large portion of our payroll to two guys (Lowe and Chipper) who can hardly take the field.

There wasn't a more valuable reliever on the Braves last year than Will Ohman, and somehow he's managed to still go unsigned. From K-Ros:

The Marlins would like to sign free-agent left-hander Will Ohman, but the pitcher is believed to be seeking terms similar to what the Nationals gave Joe Beimel — one year, $2 million. That's too pricey for the Fish.

Surely, surely, surely we have $2 million laying around. Could we void Garret Anderson's contract and use that $2 million on Ohman. Our LOOGY options this spring look like this:

• Boone Logan - 4.26 ERA, 4BB in 6.1IP
• Eric O'Flaherty - 14.21 ERA, 16 hits (16 hits!) in 6.1IP
• Jeff Ridgway - 40.50 ERA, and that doesn't even count the times he got blown up in exhibition games

That's bad, worse, and worser. All the other LOOGY options are in minor league camp.

Come On Frank Wren, just give him a call and give him one year and $2 million. Ohman is a guy who can pitch in 80-plus games and get lefties out (they hit just .200 off him last year). The whole reason we traded for Ohman last year was because we didn't have any lefthanders who could get anyone out in 2007. Are we going to repeat that this year?