Dan Uggla's Forearm
- Joined: Jun 3, 2013
- Last Login: Oct 19, 2021, 12:48pm EDT
- Posts: 1
- Comments: 10,932
Share this profile
Comment 1 reply
I mean as soon as Bellinger swung about 6 seconds late at the 1-1 fastball, I was thinking they’d go back to it. Especially with Jackson being a two pitch guy, I think that was a pretty easy pitch to sit on given the previous swing and Bellinger’s own scouting report, which I’m sure he is aware of.
Comment 1 reply
I think the problem with that pitch is that it seemed fairly predictable. If I can sit at home and know that a high fastball is coming, Cody Bellinger probably knows too. He just looked so bad on the previous swing that you just knew they were going to try it again. And even with it being that far up, it’s probably not too hard for a guy like Bellinger to tomahawk that ball if he knows it’s coming.
Comment 1 rec
And to reinforce that point, I don’t think many people would be calling for AA’s head if he didn’t make those moves (we probably would have never known the deals were out there), and if the team missed the playoffs, I think a lot of us would have conceded that the job was impossible given what all went down. That we’re even here is kind of amazing. It is kind of hard to argue with the methodology of someone who has assembled a division winner year after year, even if there are difficult situations that test the methodology in seemingly new ways every season.
Comment 1 reply, 1 rec
I don’t really see the "competing against" angle as a terribly important one. For one, it hasn’t really proven to be all that difficult to navigate yet. And two, if you’re competing against a team, it’s because they’re a good team (since bad teams don’t really buy deadline rentals), and good teams usually don’t have many holes that need filling. I guess I’d need to see the Braves get burned this way before I can believe that it’s a big deal. There are far more good players than there are good teams. Yes, whittling it down by quality, cost, value, and remaining contract length makes the list shorter, it still almost always leaves several options available.
Comment 1 reply, 6 recs
But at what point has that approach doomed them? Maybe it feels like tempting fate to leave holes on the bench, but in theory, we’re not a team made up of platoon guys. If healthy, the same guys play nearly every single day. Pache was kind of the only question mark. I’m just saying that I don’t think it’s reasonable to assemble the ideal bench the way we’d all like. Not only are we thin on money thanks to a great cast of starters, but other players see those starters and understand that we can’t really offer much opportunity. The Dodgers mostly have good bench players because they’ve graduated them from the minors or already had a guy under contract when an even better player was acquired (like, say, acquiring Mookie Betts and pushing Pollock into a bench-ish role). Since we’re not really in the running for a guy like Betts, it would be nearly impossible for the Braves to follow a similar method.
Comment 1 reply, 8 recs
At what point in modern MLB history has there just been no one available? The Braves make moves virtually every trade deadline to get better players in areas of need. Even if they only got two of the four guys they ended up with, that would solve a lot of problems. In order for there to be good teams looking to buy, there have to be bad teams looking to sell. It’s not like it’s unheard of for platoon outfielders to be moved at the deadline. You don’t have to know what names are going to be available. But it’s reasonable to expect that someone better than what we had would be on the move.
Comment 2 replies, 7 recs
But like, who? Who would sign here to be a COF bench guy behind (presumed at the time) Ozuna and Acuna? I suppose we could have traded for that depth at some point in the offseason, but then you’re still trading anyways.
I also think there’s a prospect angle to this where AA doesn’t want to tie up too much in a bench player in case, say, Drew Waters pushes his way to the MLB roster. I think the short answer is that AA’s plan throughout his tenure here seems to be flexibility in seemingly all directions, and without that, he may not have even had a chance to reinforce the roster in the wake of all that happened. To any degree that flexibility can be an overarching plan, it seems to me that this was the plan. "If things go south, we’ll find guys that we can get at the deadline."
Comment 5 recs
And it can be a fluid thing too. Like if it turned out that someone better was available for a better prospect, maybe that makes sense. But the fact that the Braves got FOUR guys, all of whom COULD start for some teams but are at worst platoon players, shows that these guys are available. You don’t have to know how the season will go to know that there will be good players towards the end of their team control on bad teams.
Comment 1 reply, 6 recs
But isn’t being prepared for trades a similar kind of preparation? Who could we have signed that would have been better than what we got? I don’t think it’s likely we could have signed someone good enough to be a starter on some teams if they knew they’d only play once or twice a week, or if their playing time fate was tied to Pache.
Comment 1 reply, 7 recs
It’s not insane to predict that guys are going to be available at the deadline. Guys are available every year. As I said, you don’t have to know who those guys are in the offseason, just that someone is going to be available, and you just figure out what you’re willing to give up for whoever those guys are. The Braves didn’t exactly move off of any premium prospects in order to get the four guys they ended up with. And trades are just about the only way you’re going to get those guys anyways; they are probably not going to sign FA contracts with teams that tell them they’re going to be platoon players.
Did the Braves get somewhat lucky that these guys were on the market? Probably. But if it wasn’t them, it would have been someone else, and they may have been able to help out just as much. By getting four guys, their odds were pretty good. But you also can’t really keep those four guys on the bench all season long anyways, especially if Acuna and Ozuna are expected to be in the lineup everyday. Could the depth have been better? Sure! But it wasn’t, so when disaster struck, AA made the most out of it. I think that’s commendable. Now, if he hadn’t made those deals, we’d have a problem. But the deals were there, and he made them.
Comment 2 replies, 10 recs
I suppose it’s possible that the backup plan for all of that was exactly what ended up happening with the trades. Even if you don’t know who the exact players will be, I think it’s safe for a contending GM to assume that they can find a rental OF or two for small returns. What they probably can’t account for is how those guys picked up their game after the trades. Soler and Rosario in particular put up like 50 point increases to their wRC+ post-trade, while Pederson has been slightly better and Duvall has been more or less the same guy. I highly doubt AA knew that quartet was "due" for something more, but by getting four different guys (all with pretty good pedigree), you have to feel pretty good about one or two of them going off.
I’m not sure how it would have been possible for the Braves to prepare for what happened to their outfield. Aside from Pache, it’s not like Ozuna and Acuna would have been platoon guys that required pairing with a solid bench player. But AA eventually picked up four MLB regulars for cheap, and maybe that’s just the plan for how to deal with these situations.
Comment 6 recs
Comment 1 reply
Is it ever productive to essentially concede games to someone like Burnes while maybe improving your odds in all non-Burnes game by throwing your worst starter against Burnes and then stacking the rest of the guys against the other team’s 2/3/4? I highly doubt anyone would ever do it anyways, but weird things happen sometimes and if you’re expecting to be shut down twice in a 5 game series anyways, might it be better to optimize the other 3 games?
How are the Pirates supposed to rebuild forever if they don’t trade him? He could make as much as like, $850k next year. Do they really want that on the books?