Disgusted right now

bravesatl · Post #1 » by **bravesatl** » Sun Jan 13, 2008 1:05 am

what the hell is wren thinking? trade our up and coming first round pick reliever for a below average CF with bad back problems, who hit .214 last year? i'd very much rather have anderson, blanco, or jones out there....

HORRIBLE TRADE

wren sure hasnt impressed me one bit so far....

kotsay for devine = horrible beyond words
ascaino for ohman/infante = not horrible, definitely not good, just okay
villarreal for anderson = bad, pointless
renteria for jurrjens/hernandez = good
signing glavine = good

Post #2 » by **HMFFL** » Sun Jan 13, 2008 4:06 am

So worth it 59.98% 547

Currently 547 people seem to think it's worth it who took the poll on the AJC.

Post #3 » by **dms269** » Sun Jan 13, 2008 12:31 pm

I think it is a good trade because I do not like Devine. Giving up two GS in your first two experience, then the next year having a 9.95 era, then the next year having a horrible BB:K ratio. he has struggled a lot. Even if he reduces his era, he still has to battle an extremely high walk to K ratio.

I would have preferred us to sign Patterson is a reasonable contract instead of trade for Kotsay.

HMFFL wrote:So worth it 59.98% 547

Currently 547 people seem to think it's worth it who took the poll on the AJC.

Some of the comments on ajc.com are hilarious. Saying how Devine is our future stud closer, how he was great in the minors (no mention of his struggles in the pros), how we should have gotten andrew miller from detriot in the renteria trade (he even admits that Florida gave up cabrera and willis but I guess thinks renteria=them).

Remember the last time we gave up "prospects" for a A's player? I would say we stole Hudson in that deal.

bravesatl · Post #4 » by **bravesatl** » Sun Jan 13, 2008 4:07 pm

saying you don't like devine because he had bad #s is just plain wrong, everybody knows he got rushed to the majors way too quickly, that is obvious....

i guarantee we'll be seeing devine putting up good #s for the A's and kotsay not playing more than 50 games for us....

and yes devine does have the potential to be a closer....

Post #5 » by **dms269** » Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:05 pm

bravesatl wrote:saying you don't like devine because he had bad #s is just plain wrong

So I should like Devine because he is a bad rp in the majors? I don't understand your logic there.

He was considered a mlb ready type player coming out of the draft, he got put into situations where he bombed. He was rushed a bit but that doesn't excuse for him putting up bad numbers in his second and third years. I don't see Devine all of a sudden putting up good numbers next year when his past shows he won't.

bravesatl · Post #6 » by **bravesatl** » Sun Jan 13, 2008 9:23 pm

uga_dawgs24 wrote:So I should like Devine because he is a bad rp in the majors? I don't understand your logic there.

that made no sense whatsoever, with my logic being in the same sentence....wow

Post #7 » by **FNQ** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 6:43 pm

Hopefully the low pressure atmosphere for the next season or two will convince Devine to come out his shell

A risky deal for both teams... Devine completely flops like Meyer, and the A's only saved about 1.5m to lost Kotsay's production... if Kotsay flops and Devine is even decent, ATL wasted a prospect on a scrub...

Kotsay's an excellent hitter when healthy though... he makes productive outs. Great defender too (though average/sub-average arm).

KB 34 · Post #8 » by **KB 34** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 3:12 am

In Devine and Richmond the Braves have given up arguably 2 of their best 10 prospects for an injury-prone outfielder who hasn't contributed effectively for several years. I don't like the deal, I feel it's the dumbest deal Wren has made, and I expect Kotsay to do next to nothing to help the Braves. In fact, if he bats 2nd in the lineup due to management incompetence, the Braves would be better off with KJ batting second and Anserson batting 7th. Losing Devine also weakens the bullpen depth, which is starting to concern me without Ascanio and Devine. To address an earlier point, Villarreal was going to be non-tendered because his salary for this year would have been ridiculous for his skill level. Is it better to get a utility OF in Anderson for Villarreal, or nothing at all?

Post #9 » by **lpsevier** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 6:10 pm

I can't believe we didn't target Patterson.

bravesatl · Post #10 » by **bravesatl** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:34 pm

just found out we gave jamie richmond in the deal also....wow, this deal just keeps gettin better

KB 34 · Post #11 » by **KB 34** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:19 am

lpsevier wrote:I can't believe we didn't target Patterson.

.298 career OBP says it all. Yes, I have that number memorized for easy reference.

Post #12 » by **dms269** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 1:08 am

Yeah Patterson's obp and k's have hurt him. I think returning to ATL and working with Terry could help him become the player he was once projected to be.

Post #13 » by **lpsevier** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:14 pm

KB 34 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

.298 career OBP says it all. Yes, I have that number memorized for easy reference.

I'd still rather have him and his speed than Kotsay.

Post #14 » by **HMFFL** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 6:42 am

I'm still trying to get over the fact that we are going to pay Kotsay 8 million this upcoming season.

Post #15 » by **lpsevier** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:47 pm

No we aren't, they're taking on most of his salary.

Post #16 » by **dms269** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:27 pm

Yeah the Braves are only paying him around 2 million this year.

Post #17 » by **HMFFL** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:41 pm

Thank you both for the information. I have not been able to follow up on the salary situation. I was going to read all the articles about the trade this Sunday since I have it free.

2 million is one positive, now can Mark stay healthy?!?

KB 34 · Post #18 » by **KB 34** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:02 pm

lpsevier wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

I'd still rather have him and his speed than Kotsay.

What good is speed when Patterson can't get on base to use it? My preference would have been Anderson in CF, no two top 10 prospects to the A's, and $2 million to use towards other needs when there's something worth using it on.

Post #19 » by **dms269** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:29 pm

KB 34 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

What good is speed when Patterson can't get on base to use it? My preference would have been Anderson in CF, no two top 10 prospects to the A's, and $2 million to use towards other needs when there's something worth using it on.

Top 10 prospects according to who? They aren't on the top 10 of Baseball America's list from November. They aren't even on the 2011 lineup with 5 starters and closer they have up either.

KB 34 · Post #20 » by **KB 34** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:07 pm

uga_dawgs24 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Top 10 prospects according to who? They aren't on the top 10 of Baseball America's list from November. They aren't even on the 2011 lineup with 5 starters and closer they have up either.

Devine wouldn't be on the list because he's spent parts of 3 seasons in the majors. However, based on how little he has pitched in the majors, some of us consider him to still be a prospect. I base my ratings on rankings by a columnist who I consider to understand the Braves farm system as well as anyone. link I tend to avoid lists done by national writers who can't possibly know a farm system as well as people who focus on a single team.