November 15, 2015

Show #321: Braves Trade Andrelton Simmons

Reaction to the move. Are the Braves better going forward? Who is still with the team come opening day?

 

 

70 Responses to “Show #321: Braves Trade Andrelton Simmons”

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 » Show All

  1. 26
    Eric Says:

    Exactly, and people keep using K.C, Chicago, Houston as examples, but what about all the failed projects, Miami, Colorado, Minnesota. For every team that has a successful rebuild, there are just as many failures if not more.

    Coppy just comes off as so arrogant in his decisions. The last 2 major trades that we have had have felt like Coppy trades and not Hart trades. Look at St. Louis as example, they have built a complete winning culture from the ground up, they are loyal to their best players, and they treat their fan base probably better than any other team. Surprise Surprise Heyward had a career year there.

  2. 27
    James Says:

    I’ve got a question for everyone. Is Coppy as bad or even possibly worse than Wren? It’s Wren’s fault we’we even in this situation to begin with. Coppy is arrogant, absolutely. Hart even insinuated as much on Buck and Cincade yesterday. I hope Coppy will learn and get better. But I still feel that, despite his arrogance, we should give him the benefit of the doubt until a couple years when we will be seeing these moves start coming to fruition. He’s playing the cards Wren delt him, but his arrogance is way too off-putting.

  3. 28
    Eric Says:

    Don’t get me wrong, Wren made some really bad moves, but at least you felt like his heart was in it, and he was really trying to put the best product he could out there. Upton and Uggla forgot how to play baseball, hard to predict that.

    With Coppy, what has he done to earn and confidence from the fans, granted we don’t have anywhere close to the information he does, but still there is no track record there to feel good about his decisions.

    I love this team, but really don’t wanna see “Top ten worst trades in baseball history lists for the next 50 years, coming in at no. 7 Simmons”….great.

  4. 29
    Chris Says:

    I think Coppy makes Frank Wren look like Branch Rickey.

  5. 30
    James Says:

    Look, I disliked the Simmons trade as much as anyone. But it’s not fair to insinuate that Coppy simply doesn’t care simply for the reason that he traded our favorite player. If he genuinely thinks that the package he got in return for Simmons makes this team better in the future, that’s caring. It may not have been the move we would have liked to see; we’re certainly free to criticize it. It’s certainly arrogant, but arronce isn’t necessarily synonymous with not caring.

  6. 31
    Jeff Says:

    We traded Maybin for two more pitchers.
    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/11/tigers-acquire-cameron-maybin.html

  7. 32
    Eric Says:

    At this point you almost hope for Freddie to get a trade, no way he signed up for this.

  8. 33
    Chris Says:

    This surely seems like a quaint idea for those who think anything the market allows is something to embrace, but I have a problem with signing players to team friendly contracts, signed by the players with the assurance that they’ll with the team long term — I mean, why else would they give a discount on their services? — and then shortly thereafter selling them off, presumably profiting off of their discounted contracts.

  9. 34
    Shaun Says:

    Eric (comment 26) says, “Exactly, and people keep using K.C, Chicago, Houston as examples, but what about all the failed projects, Miami, Colorado, Minnesota. For every team that has a successful rebuild, there are just as many failures if not more.”

    Teams that have failed never fully committed to a true rebuild. Rebuilding hasn’t worked when teams try to have it both ways.

  10. 35
    Eric Says:

    The Royals sucked for like 8 years, and were even worse before 2004. How long was Pittsburgh god awful for since like 94′? The Marlins, have basically followed the current Braves strategy since their existence, how often does it work out for them? I’m all for a rebuild, but just assuming that it is going to work, can be a dangerous mistake. Predicting how 17-22 year old are going to develop can be very hit or miss.

    Potential hall of famers are so rare, the 1% of the 1%, and to assume that they can just be replaced by so easily, I think is what is so frustrating.

  11. 36
    Shaun Says:

    @35 – When teams fully commit to a rebuild, they become contenders. It wasn’t until teams like Pittsburgh, Kansas City, and the Marlins fully committed to a rebuild (or decided to actually spend big money, in the case of some of the Marlins’ contending seasons) that their rebuilding worked. Their failures were a result of trying to have it both ways. Trying not to alienate fans was a counterproductive strategy. When they stopped worrying about that and actually committed to loading up on talent, that’s when things turned around.

    Yes, it’s impossible to project the future, what 17-22-year-old players will become. But most major league teams are very good at scouting talent. So what they can do is use their resources and assets to load up on talent. Load up on enough talent and eventually you have enough to field a good, cost-controlled Major League team, and you can fill holes with reasonably priced (for your team) free agents. That’s how rebuilding works. It’s not trading all-stars and Hall of Famers (potentially) and hope you get a Hall of Famer in return. It’s loading up on as much talent as possible and hitting on enough so that eventually you have so much that it becomes a good Major League team. So you might not have a Hall of Famer in the bunch. But you’ll have enough talent to contend. And I think this always works if a team fully commits.

  12. 37
    Walker Says:

    Great we signed a pitcher that is not only sucky at his job but also extremely ignorant.

    From Bud Norris on Foreign born players:

    We’re opening this game to everyone that can play. However, if you’re going to come into our country and make our American dollars, you need to respect a game that has been here for over a hundred years, and I think sometimes that can be misconstrued. There are some players that have antics, that have done things over the years that we don’t necessarily agree with.

  13. 38
    Eric Says:

    @36 Great points Shaun, actually helped to shed some light on situation.

  14. 39
    Chris Says:

    “Fully commit” is a subjective term. It’s in the eye of the beholder. If things don’t work out, you can still be right in your mind because you can say the commitment wasn’t full enough.

    In any case, attendance does matter. That’s real money. Not only do tickets and concessions count, but it effects advertising revenue and the ability to secure loans. This is a business, not a rotisserie team. Depending on what the balance sheet looks like, a team can take somewhat of a hit. But losing 20% off of a number that was stagnant for a decade is not a trend any business can afford.

  15. 40
    Chris #2 Says:

    I firmly believe that the team already committed to a full rebuild. However, the FO just won’t tell the fans. The Zobrist rumor and Joc Pederson for Shelby Miller are great signs of a nice turn around for 2017. If they pull this off… We will all look really stupid.

  16. 41
    Eric Says:

    True, we ready for our next show!

  17. 42
    Shaun Says:

    Chris @39, I agree there is a lot of subjectivity in the term “fully commit.” But I just mean teams willing to trade literally any piece that is going to cost them in the future for talented pieces that will cost a lot less.

    I think some mediocre-to-bad teams have hung on to some players instead of trading them when their value is high, because they are afraid of the PR hit or the attendance hit. That is what I mean by not being fully committed to a rebuild. That is often counterproductive for a team that is going to be mediocre-or-bad anyway.

    Fans will come back or new fans will come when a team starts winning. Many don’t want to admit it or don’t want to realize it but sports teams rarely do irreversible damage. Fans show up to see a winner, regardless of what happened in the past. Winning covers a multitude of (perceived) past sins.

  18. 43
    Shaun Says:

    I can understand why it makes us uncomfortable to see the Braves or any team tear it all down and try and build it back up but the uncomfortable fact is, aside from extreme cases like when the Marlins do tear down and rebuild multiple times within such a short span, it works.

  19. 44
    Eric Says:

    I am no expert, but didn’t the Astros and Cubs, build themselves up by getting really good position players, I know the plan is to trade excess pitching to grab some young talent, but what if teams are valuing top position players higher than pitching now, and we end up with lots of pitching with spare parts in the field.

  20. 45
    Chris Says:

    The point I’m trying to make is that season ticket sales count. Some new fan, likely a teenager or 20 something bro, isn’t going to be able to shell out $3,000-$5,000 for a seat. And I don’t think new season ticket purchasing fans come from the 40-50 something set. They’ve already developed an expensive hobby at that point. So you have to take care of the people with the money, those who have already developed the habit of paying the Braves that kind of cash. People who have been fans for a while.

    You know that Freeman was being actively shopped, right? There was a deal going down with the Astros. After the Simmons trade, Freeman got pulled out. You can be sure that the phones were ringing in the ticket office after that went down.

    You do a teardown where you get rid of every player worth something, your ticket revenue is going to crater. And then you struggle to even finance your rebuild.

    Ted Turner is no idiot. He never traded Niekro.

  21. 46
    Chris Says:

    So I give teams more credit. They’re not being dumb because they don’t do a complete tear down. They don’t lack commitment. They’re totally committed to their businesses, because that’s what they are.

  22. 47
    Curt Says:

    They don’t care at all about attendance next season. The lame duck season at Turner wasn’t going to be breaking any records anyway, so why not just sacrifice that season as part of this process. We discussed it on the show a couple of times, but you wonder if after they won 96 games, if they were in Sun Trust Park if they would have gone this route. It would have been a much tougher sell to a ‘full’ house up there in a new shiny publicly funded park that the answer was to destroy your major league team for three seasons. Figure they think they can get away with it in year one up there because people will be excited enough about the new park to show up. But that sentiment won’t last long.

    And as far as pitching prospects not being as valuable as hitting prospects – we’re already seeing it. Reportedly, the Braves offered Shelby Miller, Vizcaino, and a prospect for AJ Pollock and Aaron Blair (RHP, #3 prospect) and were rejected. A cheap, really good, controllable ML ready #1 or 2, a young, controllable, really good closer, and a prospect, for a guy with, albeit exciting numbers, one REALLY good year in the major leagues. And they said no. If Miller was a FA right now, he would be looking at seven figure deals, if not very close to it. So, the Braves might have tons of pitching prospects, but going 2 for 1 in deals for hitting prospects or worse will thin that herd very, very quickly. And, again, you have to keep the right ones. Trading the Wainwright and keeping the Minor is not going to get this team back to the promised land.

  23. 48
    Chris Says:

    Well, attendance dropped by 400,000 last year. That’s probably $20,000,000. You don’t think they care about that, Curt?

  24. 49
    Curt Says:

    Nothing they could do at this point is going to make next season produce a big jump in attendance. Chances were that barring a WS caliber team playing next year, attendance was going to be down because the team wasn’t very good and they are moving out of Turner Field, which doesn’t exactly ring with nostalgia. The attendance was going to be bad regardless, so fielding another lousy team next year was not going to make that big of a difference overall. So in that regard, they don’t care if attendance drops 400k or 600k. It’s the cost of undertaking this rebuild and the cost of abandoning their in-town fans.

    And despite that $20 million figure, they made money this year. And when they hit Sun Trust, they will be making money hand over fist, regardless of the product on the field or the fans in the seats. Exactly the way they want it.

  25. 50
    Shaun Says:

    Again, fans will come back and they will gain a number of new fans for every one that does not, if and when they start winning again.

    Look at the Pirates, Astros, and Royals. Those franchises made moves that many would argue alienated fans. But as soon as they started winning again, they drew fans.

    No, teams shouldn’t follow the Marlins’ example of complete tear-downs and rebuilds every few seasons. I think that does in fact alienate fans. But the flip side of that is you don’t want your franchise to be the Phillies either, where they are trying to hold on to their glory days too long. At a certain point, a franchise might need to tear down and rebuild and ignore the conventional *wisdom* about alienating fans. It’s a myth. Fans come to see a winner. Nothing that was done previously will keep fans away from wanting to see a winner (again, aside from what the Marlins have done).

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 » Show All

Leave a Reply