5dimes obviously just trolling for a few suckers for a week or two following the trade

If we compare the likes of all 30 teams before and after the trade I bet we find a conspiciously large amount of additional juice after they moved Atlanta up

Agree, I have been checking MLB 5dimes odds for last few weeks. Braves were around 15:1 and after they moved up to 7.5:1 all the odds on other teams seem like they haven't moved at all. Only team w/ better odds on 5dimes than on Pinnacle is the Dodgers, and lots have significantly worse odds. Always found juice 5dimes gave on futures to be relatively fair so seems weird, maybe it gets better closer to the season.

So Prado signed for 3/$33 million. That is clearly below market and extremely reasonable, crazy that Braves made him available because they didn't want to give that to him. Pretty obvious that Prado was willing to sacrifice a significant amount of EV for security.

Still happy with the trade, but think that makes the trade much more reasonable despite any Keith Law "shouldn't factor in the extension, that is independent of the trade" reasoning. The Diamondbacks were very likely made aware of Prado's contract demands before making the trade, and unreasonable to think that didn't play a significant role in the value they placed on him.

We need to start thinking of a new thread title... something about the outfield for sure!

To be fair whatever value was gained by the exclusive negotiating rights the DBacks acquired with Prado via trade we acquired the exact same thing with Upton.

He'll be younger than Prado is now when he gets to the point of this contract having a year left, and there is a chance he gives us a bit of a discount if he enjoys playing with his brother and wants 2 more years of it.

There is also a good chance we weren't interested in extending Prado, even at that price. He is a year removed from a 1.6 fWAR season, relies on a high BABIP (that's trending downwards with age) to be a good-but-not-great offensive player, and had way out of whack defensive numbers last year that boosted his overall value a ton.

He's also going to be 30 in 9 months. While it was likely a good extension at 4/$40m I'd argue it was an exceptionally higher risk than Upton's current 3/$38.5m, and for a team with basically zero payroll flexibility we can't really afford to take those kind of chances.

This idea also fits with Wren's mindset in moves as of late. We aren't looking to sign or extend guys who are about to be or are in their 30s. It is just too risky given our payroll situation.

I think the situation would be appreciably different if we didn't have Dan Uggla (even if we had some other player taking up $13m a year) as 1) we'd need a 2B and Prado would instantly be one of the best in the league and, more importantly, 2) Prado has a much higher floor as a 2B due to the lack of offense at the position and his defensive skillset.

As a corner IF/OFer it's just a risk I don't think we can take even assuming (which may be incorrect) that we could have extended him at that same number.

We are not necessarily getting the same thing. One player indicated a willingness to sign a team friendly contract before the trade was made, the other may or may not have the same inclination. And that is assuming the circumstances are such that we want to extend him (see McCann).

If Prado were playing LF for us it would still be a fantastic trade from our perspective, but it is drastically easier to fill a hole at 3rd base than LF. Even if we have the money, we might not be able to do better than the Chris Johnson/Francisco pu pu platter at 3rd. Just saying that I think the slamming of the D'Backs side of the trade has been proven wrong now, it makes sense for them, imo.

'Upton - Upton - Heyward'

some play on 'up, up and away!' that i saw but now i can't remember

'Heartbreak is Inevitable'

'Kimbrel GOAT'

Uptown Boys

Everybody and their brother in the outfield

Thanks for the Marlins

I Don't Know's on third

------------------------------------------

Going to be weird come spring and no Chipper. I've just gotten over no Bobby.

Up, Up, and a Hey!

yeaaa i like that one

Winner :thumbup:

I approve

It has been a rather heartbreaking stretch for the local pro sports collectives lately, hasn't it

I've become desensitized to it. Falcons losing the way they did didn't even affect me much. Par for the course.

I honestly don't really get this. Yeah, losing the way the Braves, Dawgs and Falcons did hurts, but I've heard people call Atlanta "Loserville"...what?

The Falcons were T3/32, Hawks have been in the playoffs 5 straight years (not a huge accomplishment by any stretch but they are still beating half+ teams ever year), Braves T9/30 and Dawgs ended top 5 out of 120.

Like I'm kind of here to take a stand. Being an Atlanta fan is worlds better than being a Seattle, Cleveland, Nashville/Memphis, Raleigh/Charlotte or KC fan. Probably Houston. Probably Minnesota.

4 cities (or less as in this year assuming 49ers win) get to be champs a year. The rest aren't necessarily horrible sports towns.

I guess I need a blog or something.

For heartbreak to occur there first needs to be expectations and opportunities for something greater. The ATL area sports teams have been great at creating that environment but can never seem to capitalize, often failing in the most heart-wrenching way possible.

Having all these teams in the hunt every year will pay off eventually with some championships but the wait is ****ing agonizing.

lol @ loserville

Falcons have really had zero heart wrenching losses (in the last 30 years)until 2013 tho, according to your definition. Hawks none that I can certainly remember. Braves and Dawgs are totally different stories tho.

The Losersville tag dates all the way back to the 70's (SI article, 1977), and it was fairly accurate up until the Braves turned around in the early 90's. At that point, Atlanta was the only city with 3+ major sports teams to never have sent anyone to a championship game and things looked pretty grim.

This is what Atlanta sports fans had to endure (at home, obviously - attendance was terrible) for the first 25 years of having major sports teams:

Braves	W-L	GB	Place	Playoffs	_____	Falcons	W-L	Playoffs	_____	Hawks	W-L	Place	Playoffs
1990	65-97	26	6th			1990	5-11-0			1990-91	43-39	4th	Lost East Conf 1st Rd
1989	63-97	28	6th			1989	3-13-0			1989-90	41-41	6th
1988	54-106	39.5	6th			1988	5-11-0			1988-89	52-30	3rd	Lost East Conf 1st Rd
1987	69-92	20.5	5th			1987	3-12-0			1987-88	50-32	3rd	Lost East Conf Semis
1986	73-89	23	5th			1986	7-8-1			1986-87	57-25	1st	Lost East Conf Semis
1985	66-96	29	5th			1985	4-12-0			1985-86	50-32	2nd	Lost East Conf Semis
1984	80-82	12	T-2nd			1984	4-12-0			1984-85	34-48	5th
1983	88-74	3	2nd			1983	7-9-0			1983-84	40-42	3rd	Lost East Conf 1st Rd
1982	89-73		1st	0-3		1982	5-4-0	0-1		1982-83	43-39	2nd	Lost East Conf 1st Rd
1981	50-56	15	5th			1981	7-9-0			1981-82	42-40	2nd	Lost East Conf 1st Rd
1980	81-80	11	4th			1980	12-4-0	0-1		1980-81	31-51	4th
1979	66-94	23.5	6th			1979	6-10-0			1979-80	50-32	1st	Lost East Conf Semis
1978	69-93	26	6th			1978	9-7-0	1-1		1978-79	46-36	3rd	Lost East Conf Semis
1977	61-101	37	6th			1977	7-7-0			1977-78	41-41	4th	Lost East Conf 1st Rd
1976	70-92	32	6th			1976	4-10-0			1976-77	31-51	6th
1975	67-94	40.5	5th			1975	4-10-0			1975-76	29-53	5th
1974	88-74	14	3rd			1974	3-11-0			1974-75	31-51	4th
1973	76-85	22.5	5th			1973	9-5-0			1973-74	35-47	2nd
1972	70-84	25	4th			1972	7-7-0			1972-73	46-36	2nd	Lost East Conf Semis
1971	82-80	8	3rd			1971	7-6-1			1971-72	36-46	2nd	Lost East Conf Semis
1970	76-86	26	5th			1970	4-8-2			1970-71	36-46	2nd	Lost East Conf Semis
1969	93-69		1st	0-3		1969	6-8-0			1969-70	48-34	1st	Lost West Div Finals
1968	81-81	16	5th			1968	2-12-0			1968-69	48-34	2nd	Lost West Div Finals
1967	77-85	24.5	7th			1967	1-12-1
1966	85-77	10	5th			1966	3-11-0

Not to mention first failed experiment at an NHL team - the Atlanta Flames - who were in town from 1972-1980 but never finished above 3rd place and had a playoff record of 2-15.

Pitchers and Catchers have reported...

The crew over at CAC have put out a couple very good podcasts in the past week and a half that goes pretty in-depth about our current top 40 prospects.

We have a pretty weak system right now, especially with position players, but it sounds like there are a few young, high upside guys in the 30-40 range that could pan out.

This seems like the make-it-or-break-it year for both Bethancourt and Salcedo. Both were top prospects early in their professional careers but have failed to impress in MiLB.

Man, accidentally hit "First" in this thread and stumbled across this OP.

Look how far we've come in 4 years (OP is from 2/25/2009)!

We went from a projected Opening Day OF of Garret Anderson, Josh Anderson, and Jeff Francouer in 2009 (Josh Anderson was traded right before Opening Day after Schafer won the job) to an OF of Justin Upton, BJ Upton, and Jason Heyward.

Getting excited!

Bourn signed with Cleveland, 4 for 48 mill. GL to a good guy, gonna need it playing there.

Bourn's deal has a vesting option for a 5th year at $12m if he has 550 PA's in the 4th year of deal.

I'd imagine everyone ITT would have been pretty thrilled if we had locked up Bourn at that price earlier in the offseason. I'm still a bit worried about how he'll age past 30, but I too would have been pretty happy if the Braves gave him the same deal he got with Indians.

It's okay, though, BJ Upton should be solid, and we really couldn't have waited around for Boras.

Braves lost their 26th overall pick when signing BJ, but got back a pick once Bourn signed. Right now they are at 31st overall, but will fall to 32nd once Lohse signs somewhere.

Difference between 26th and 32nd overall is pretty negligible, especially given the Braves generally draft need-based when they are in the latter part of the first round, so there's a good chance we end up getting the guy we would have wanted to take at 26th.

How do they decide who gets a supplemental pick and who gets a team's pick when 2 F/As go to the same team like Bourn and Swisher?

Is it first player to sign that's former team gets the new teams pick, or based on the size of the contract?