Show #89: The 2010 Braves? Welcoming Melky and Glaus
Breaking down the Javier Vazquez trade and the Troy Glaus signing. And hoping more’s on the way.
378 Responses to “Show #89: The 2010 Braves? Welcoming Melky and Glaus”
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 … 16 » Show All
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 … 16 » Show All
December 28th, 2009 at 8:43 pm
UGA gittin’ their minds right by puttin’ a whuppin’ on T A&M!
December 28th, 2009 at 9:54 pm
If any of you guys are Wins Above Replacement fans, here’s a neat list:
http://www.baseballprojection.com/war/top500.htm
December 28th, 2009 at 10:14 pm
Leah and JJ, Anne is right. My buddy Scott is the voice of the intro and the outro. We’ve been friends since I moved to Atlanta in ’92. He did a bunch of shows early on (more so during the House of Braves Talk days, prior to the name change). He’s also a very, very good actor. Here’s a clip of Scott from the Swamp Thing TV show from the early ’90′s. He’s the one doing most of the talking in the opening scene (who cuts his finger off and has an electrode on his head – trust me, just watch the first couple of minutes):
http://www.hulu.com/watch/13126/swamp-thing-the-watchers#s-p1-so-i0
Bub- I love that entry from N8. He’s one of the best guys on DOB’s blog.
Tcc: it’s a great question. One we should have posed on the show, frankly. All things be equal, if we could have Vazquez or Hudson for the next three years, I go with Vazquez. Hands down. I know that Huddy’s career numbers are far superior and last year may have been an anomaly for VAzquez, but he was so damn dominant and reliable, I go with that and take Vazquez. But, of course, there’d be no 3 years of Vazquez for 27mil. I think that the Hudson extension was a very wise one.
December 28th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
Just for fun:
http://cdn.bleacherreport.com/images_root/galleries/137/137069/display_image_GYI0058208085.jpg
December 28th, 2009 at 11:13 pm
*holds out hands like Marlon Brando screaming for Stella in “Streetcar”*
LEEAAAHHHH!! LEEEAAAAHHHHHHH!
December 28th, 2009 at 11:17 pm
Quick movie stuff: Go see Up in the Air. Smart, funny, clever – really, really good.
December 28th, 2009 at 11:19 pm
Music. Now movies. If somebody brings up Barbeque we’re in big trouble.
December 28th, 2009 at 11:45 pm
Awe Bub…I do love it when you miss me. We were at a friends house for dinner and a rousing game of Guesstures. It was awesome. So I’m just now catching up on all the chatter, which took a while due to your small novel. I’m with you 100%. I have to believe that next year the team will be better. Maybe I’m naive or just not as smart as Curt but I feel better about it. I wasn’t being sarcastic in my question above. Do we trust the team docs? Shouldn’t they be able to tell at least to some degree if Glaus is good to go?
Never heard of “Up in the Air” and I like ketchup based. This NC style is for the birds…mustard or vinegar based.
December 28th, 2009 at 11:52 pm
Wow Scott…that’s some weird finger (that’s what she said). Hmmm…too many glasses of wine brings out silly Leah.
December 29th, 2009 at 12:41 am
*laughing at Silly Leah*
(The Barbeque thing was in reference to DOB’s blog, which always digresses in the direction of music, movies, or barbeque.)
That said, you like the sweet stuff over the vinegar-based? We’re through.
(… till my next beer…)
*pause*
Leeeeaaaahhhhhhhhhh!
December 29th, 2009 at 12:43 am
p.s. Your worst fears are true. Curt is smarter (more realistic) than both of us. Such is life.
December 29th, 2009 at 12:44 am
p.p.s. However, Wren is NOT mailing in the 2010 season. Is not.
December 29th, 2009 at 1:08 am
Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value! Kelly Johnson has no value!
December 29th, 2009 at 1:18 am
Steve, that scene with your buddy is so win! B-tele rules.
December 29th, 2009 at 6:36 am
I read all these posts first and so maybe my expectations were really low, but I don’t think this pod cast was overly negative – it is consistent with the mixed message the trades send. Everything Curt said needs to be said, with the appropriate passion/frustration. Steve was a good foil to bring up the other sides of the arguments and delivers with a more measured, calmer tone. And Hammy summed it up – we have to wait and see. Which adds to the frustration, but could provide a positive surprise. Nice job again, guys. Happy New Year.
December 29th, 2009 at 6:43 am
I don’t personally think they are mailing it in. But they are gambling quite a bit. And some of the gambles seem high risk, but without the chance of very high return. That bothers me.
December 29th, 2009 at 7:35 am
What gambles are high risk, low reward?
Troy Glaus = Low risk* – Very high reward.
Billy Wagner = High risk, Very high reward
Takashi Saito = Low risk, Very high reward
Scott Proctor = very low risk, Medium reward
Juan Abreu = very low risk, Medium reward. And he’s a prospect
Mitch Jones, Brent Clevlen, Joe Thurston = Very low risk – Medium reward
*Assuming the Braves don’t add another bat. If Glaus goes down at any point before the trade deadline for anything more serious than a 15 day disabled list trip, it’s naive to think that Wren wouldn’t find a suitable option for 1B ala Nate McLouth. Someone like Connor Jackson to hold down the fort, whilst keeping Prado at 2B and Omar as a versatile bench piece, would be realistic.
Here is a very good link showing 2010 NL East WAR:
http://dodgersims.blogspot.com/2009/12/2010-nl-east-war.html
That’s providing that the rosters stay the same.
If the Braves can add someone like Nady, they should add about 2 wins above a replacement player, 4 if were very lucky. That would bring the Braves to about 91 – 92 wins. Boy that felt good to say. 91 to 92 wins. Ahh.
December 29th, 2009 at 10:57 am
Will, I think you are right that Curt made some valid, logical points. You HAVE to admit he could NOT have been more negative. I like Curt’s general glass mostly empty perspective because it keeps me grounded. I’m usually way too optimistic and come crashing down when reality hits. I wanted a big bat (ahem) and am disappointed but I’m believing that everything that could go wrong won’t. Something will, it always does. But not everything (I love you baseball gods).
December 29th, 2009 at 11:29 am
No, Leah, come back to the light.
Blatant homerism is the happiest place on Earth.
I’ll just say this, there is just as strong a psychological feeding going on in cynicism as there is in homerism. The cynic’s battle cry is “I’m just being realistic, calling a spade a spade.” But you can’t believe everybody who calls something a spade is the guy with the balanced view.
Protecting your hopes from getting too high doesn’t work worth a damn anyway. If it did, a hardboiled egg like Curt wouldn’t be disgusted with the offseason moves because he’d have never believed Wren in the first place.
As for chance-taking, if you want a championship now AND a future in the farm AND you’ve got 90 million to spend, you’re gotta roll the dice.
December 29th, 2009 at 11:33 am
#69 sounded personal, Curt. I hope the tone isn’t coming off sh*ttier than I mean. Come to think of it, a lot of these comments of mine are like that. Sorry if I’ve gone over the line. Last think I want is to act like some on the DOB.
December 29th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
Interesting poll results. Of course, the Mets fan base showing is washed out by Yankees people, but Floridian Homerism isn’t worth 50%?
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/fp/flashPollResultsState?sportIndex=mlb&pollId=83746
December 29th, 2009 at 12:25 pm
Bub, I didn’t think it sounded personal. Passionate…just in the opposite direction.
December 29th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Jurrens4NLCY – I was thinking more about the Glaus and Melky trades. Glaus – seems he has quite a lot of risk – injury, never really played the position as Curt points out- so you have a decent potential for that trade to be nearly worthless – I would say as high as say 25-30%. He has a moderate chance of being a big offensive threat, sort of a 10% chance hes a huge bat, over 35 homers, maybe 10-15% chance hes a very solid bat, 26-28 homers, but odds seem even at 50% that he hits 22 homers and .260. Not bad. but not great. All that exciting averageness with a 25% injury risk where the trade totally flames out. Optimists – tend to focus only on that 10-20% huge bat/very solid bat probability, and forget about the rest of the 80%. Pessimists may look at only the negatives. Realists look at all of it as a package of risk/reward, and then ask, at what price? I will be as happy as anybody when my armchair option pricing model is wrong and we get a huge year from Glaus. But my gut says there is a lack of significant upside to compensate me for the higher probability he is just a little better than average. So bit too much risk for not enough upside. That is what I meant for Glaus. Granted, all of this can be argued to be in his low price. But why are we paying for all this low price uncertainty, and paying super high prices for guys like Lowe (and possibly KK too…). Glaus was not an emphatic move, to say the least. We wanted emphatic. For the Gipper!
As for Melky, he hasnt (yet, he says optimistically) demonstrated much power, so its more a risk that your salary dump/get rid of a great player for an slightly above average player, wait and see tactic never pays off. Which may seem conservative, but actually is a fairly high risk way of playing things in my view. Not in the driver’s seat, too conservative, too — not emphatic. If that is proper English…
December 29th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
Note: all % in the above post are pulled right out of my rear end. Which is why Wren could (fingers crossed) surprise us…
December 29th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
I just visited the depth charts of the Cubs, Brewers, Giants, and Rockies. You want to see some question marks, sheesh, try that exercise.
Do you guys know how few NL teams look as solid as the Bravos right now? I know the offseason is still going, but go and take a peek at some of these teams’ starting eight, rotations, and bullpens.
It’s troubling that the Marlins, Mets (they’ll land something big soon) and even the Nats are going to make it tough to net the wins we need for the Wild Card, but even so, our team is in solid shape when you step outside the shadow of the Phillies. Stud ballplayers just aren’t hanging out on everybody’s rosters.