Free agency thread

[seak05]

1 hour ago, btdart20 said:

I’m not following?  They just finished building a team that won the WS.  So they must value winning to some degree.  Just because they question the wisdom of a long term contract for an aging player (in my mind) doesn’t mean they don’t value winning.  More like their view of winning is valued (measured by payroll costs) differently than yours and everyone else.

Freeman will presumably produce more wins then the person they will get to replace him. The Braves have the cash on hand to pay him. If their top value was winning, they’d pay him. Ergo, why the dodgers and other teams are willing to pay.
 

instead, they seem to value winning as long as they can continue to increase profits by not spending above a certain amount. Since they’re already making profits, as a fan their preference for increasing profit first & wins second would bother me. Guess you’re ok with it.

(nobody is saying they have to lose money, and if they had a comparable replacement it would be a diff conversation - they don’t). 

[waroriole]

8 minutes ago, seak05 said:

Freeman will presumably produce more wins then the person they will get to replace him. The Braves have the cash on hand to pay him. If their top value was winning, they’d pay him. Ergo, why the dodgers and other teams are willing to pay.
 

instead, they seem to value winning as long as they can continue to increase profits by not spending above a certain amount. Since they’re already making profits, as a fan their preference for increasing profit first & wins second would bother me. Guess you’re ok with it.

(nobody is saying they have to lose money, and if they had a comparable replacement it would be a diff conversation - they don’t). 

This is very short sighted. The goal is to maintain a winning team that can compete for the WS every year. If you tie yourself down to a guy at 30M/year, you might have a better chance this year but limit yourself down the line. It seems dumb to claim a team that won the WS last year doesn’t care about winning. Especially when they made moves at the deadline despite only being at .500. 

[seak05]

49 minutes ago, waroriole said:

This is very short sighted. The goal is to maintain a winning team that can compete for the WS every year. If you tie yourself down to a guy at 30M/year, you might have a better chance this year but limit yourself down the line. It seems dumb to claim a team that won the WS last year doesn’t care about winning. Especially when they made moves at the deadline despite only being at .500. 

He's not asking for 10yrs and 300m...plus the NL now has a dh. And this isn't a Chris Davis player, nor are the Braves a small market team for whom it would be 25% of payroll. You're probably taking a loss on year 6, but getting value in yrs 1-3 when you have a team that is good now. 

[SteveA]

Apparently we have some interest in bringing back Jose Iglesias. 

https://twitter.com/mikedeportes/status/1502668265042157572?t=tj4wIlHGWA2-BWYtYEK2KQ&s=19

[btdart20]

1 hour ago, seak05 said:

Freeman will presumably produce more wins then the person they will get to replace him. The Braves have the cash on hand to pay him. If their top value was winning, they’d pay him. Ergo, why the dodgers and other teams are willing to pay.
 

instead, they seem to value winning as long as they can continue to increase profits by not spending above a certain amount. Since they’re already making profits, as a fan their preference for increasing profit first & wins second would bother me. Guess you’re ok with it.

(nobody is saying they have to lose money, and if they had a comparable replacement it would be a diff conversation - they don’t). 

“Pick your battles wisely” fits for teams and life.  Sometimes it’s wise to walk away and other times it’s wise to go all in.  So it depends.  

Maybe they think a healthy Acuna is replacement enough? And gives them some dry powder to spend if they are in the playoff hunt at the trade deadline?  

[waroriole]

3 minutes ago, SteveA said:

Apparently we have some interest in bringing back Jose Iglesias. 

https://twitter.com/mikedeportes/status/1502668265042157572?t=tj4wIlHGWA2-BWYtYEK2KQ&s=19

I’d rather him than Odor

[DrinkinWithFermi]

25 minutes ago, SteveA said:

Apparently we have some interest in bringing back Jose Iglesias. 

https://twitter.com/mikedeportes/status/1502668265042157572?t=tj4wIlHGWA2-BWYtYEK2KQ&s=19

Oh man, a lot of people around Birdland are going flip if we sign someone like Iglesias after the Correa rumor made the rounds on Twitter, Facebook, etc. for the last 2 weeks or so. It would almost be better not to sign anyone than sign a cheap, C-tier guy lol.

[Bmorebirds24]

3 hours ago, Frobby said:

Soon only the Orioles will be in….

They’re putting the ‘wow’ offer together as we speak. 

[DrinkinWithFermi]

The Twins just acquired Isiah Kiner-Falefa from the Rangers, which is a bit odd considering that Josh Jung is out for the year with shoulder surgery, so now they seem to need another infielder despite already signing both Semien and Seager to 9 figure deals, and now I kind of want to see them sign Correa as well for the sheer spectacle of it 

[Mooreisbetter27]

Lyles deal official. 5.5m with 500k signing bonus. Club option. 

[Sports Guy]

Less than what was reported 

[Frobby]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

Less than what was reported 

Still more than he’s worth, but makes more sense.   Just hoping we can get a reasonable approximation of last year out of him.   

[oriole]

1 hour ago, DrinkinWithFermi said:

Oh man, a lot of people around Birdland are going flip if we sign someone like Iglesias after the Correa rumor made the rounds on Twitter, Facebook, etc. for the last 2 weeks or so. It would almost be better not to sign anyone than sign a cheap, C-tier guy lol.

I like to the think that the majority of fans understand that Correa isn’t actually happening.

[Sports Guy]

2 hours ago, SteveA said:

Apparently we have some interest in bringing back Jose Iglesias. 

https://twitter.com/mikedeportes/status/1502668265042157572?t=tj4wIlHGWA2-BWYtYEK2KQ&s=19

What a horrible idea 

[Ripken]