Comments on: Why Not Garret Anderson?

By: chris

chris — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 10:42:18 +0000

ummmmm….while KJ is above average offensively for his position now, by moving him, you make him SUBSTANTIALLY below average for his position in LF. and while you believe Prado is better defensively, there is no documentation to prove that. as a matter of fact, most documentation and statistical analysis would tend to say that Prado is a deficient defender.

i like Prado, but the biggest issue is that Griffey is who we need. The guy hit 20 HR last year on a destroyed knee. the guy lives in Florida and respects Bobby. he wants to be a Brave. that is something that we haven't had in a while.

I also like Anderson ALOT, but he's slowed down some and his fielding is not what it used to be. I would like to see the Braves sign Griffey for 1 year / 3.5 million + incentives (pushing the value to 6 million if he meets plate appearances and average/slugging). if not, sign Anderson to the same thing. if not, stick with what we got.

no use giving up talent for a maybe (Swisher) or a 1 year phenom (Nady).

By: Tim

Tim — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 04:08:28 +0000

I agree with that. I'm a huge fan of Prado and he deserves to be playing everyday for somebody. Dude just hits. He's also a much better fielder than Johnson.

By: derek b

derek b — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 18:38:57 +0000

Griffey is nothing more than a great name these days. He definitely doesnt have his skills of the past. Braves dont need side show to draw a crowd, they need production in the OF.

By: derek b

derek b — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 18:36:41 +0000

Jim Edmonds' offensive #s continue to decline year by year. Although he hit 20 Hrs last season, his Avg. dropped to .235. Braves dont need any mid to low .200 hitters. If they are concerned about Anderson's #s, then Edmonds is surely out of the picture. I think a healthy Diaz is a better option alone than Edmonds at this time.

By: Keith

Keith — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 01:07:28 +0000

Furthermore, Prado is a very important back up. Championships are built on pitching, defense and depth. At one point last season the Braves were so banged up that Prado was playing third. Chipper, Yunnel were hurt and even the back up Omar Infante was down. You can't win without quality back ups.

By: Keith

Keith — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 00:41:40 +0000

I agree that Prado can play well enough on an everyday basis @ second. Here's the problem with your proposal: The Braves have known from day one that moving Kelly to left was an option. But they have been reluctant to do so for two reasons. When Kelly arrived in the bigs he was an infielder. The Braves moved him to left, two seasons ago because they were in the same position then as they are now. It didn't work and that's why he is playing second. This guy is a better infielder and the bat is better because he is not having to concentrate on catching the fly balls. He has done for only one year in his life.

Secondly, Prado couldn't three homers if you spotted him two. This move would do nothing for the powerless Braves. If fact, this team would be poised to hit with less power with this line up than last year. Not to mention this would surely FORCE Chipper to bat fourth.

By: dave

dave — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 03:41:38 +0000

Why not move Kelly back to left field and Prado to second. I agree Prado is a good hitter good enough I believe to be an everyday player. I believe Kelly is now coming into his own, he very well could hit 20+ home runs this year. I know to get quality you have to give up something of value. I'm just knot sure giving up Kelly at this point in his career is wise, I think he is ready to have a breakout year like Ludwick did, and Kelly is coming up on 27 years old , Ludwick will be 31.

By: Larry

Larry — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 01:55:51 +0000

Ludwick would be the best option. He's under control for a few years. I don't know that he will put up the high numbers again but could be a 25 hr guy. I really hate to lose KJ but Prado is one heck of a hitter an the swap of KJ for Luddy keeps the same amount of lefties in the lineup. This is all very possible, Wren has been talking about a deal for an outfielder for quite some time now. This may be the beginning of it. Who knows?

By: Grant

Grant — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 01:20:48 +0000

You're absolutely right about the league switch factor. Seems to me Anderson would be an ideal replacement in Seattle for Raul Ibanez.

While Anderson has a decent arm and is an adequate fielder, the Braves really need to acquire either a full-time left fielder or center fielder. Another reduced time, or platoon player does absolutely nothing to solve the problem.

By: B-RITT

B-RITT — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 01:20:29 +0000

I saw this in the comments section on Braves.com, and it is an idea that really intrigues me. With the Cards releasing Adam Kennedy, could they be gearing up to get KJ or Orlando Hudson? These appear to be two very possible situations, and one that could benefit the Braves; KJ, Logan, and low-level OF prospect for Ludwick or Ankiel, I think I would be satisfied with that (and no, I don't think Luddy was a 1 year fluke)?

By: Dan Fisher

Dan Fisher — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 22:29:54 +0000

I have to agree with the idea that bringing in Anderson is not the best idea. Anderson is certainly a quality guy and would be highly marketable, I do not believe him to be an NL player at this point in his career. He has the look of a part-time outfielder and a DH. While Anderson certainly can hit for great contact, as he has for his entire career, he will be an immediate defensive liability and the power is probably not going to eclipse 20 homers. If the price is right and he would be willing to accept a reduced role with the Braves, this makes sense. At the current time, I would think that there are too many AL clubs that could offer him more playing time than the Braves can. I am sure that he would be looking for more money than the going rate for a platoon outfielder.

By: dave

dave — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 22:14:30 +0000

It comes down to what are you willing to give up. If the money numbers are right, and with Kelly and Jeff unsigned I see no other solution but to trade someone to get Swisher or Abreu. Even tho Abreu is a free agent I have read he has been offered 8 million a year. Depending on who we believe Atlanta has somewhere from 6 to 9 million to spend. If this is true with an small offer to Glavine, and I have read Ohman is no longer in the picture, it seems to me we are near the end of the row. I would like to have Swisher, Nady, or Abreu either one would be a great edition. Realistically tho I think an older player at a cheaper price could be the only solution. Tell me what you think.

By: Larry

Larry — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 21:42:08 +0000

I'm for Swisher. He hits 20+ hr every year and very versatile. He can play all outfield positions and first. He doesnt have a high average but we got average guys on the team. I think batting him 5th behind McCann he could be productive. If not him then I vote abreu.

By: Grant

Grant — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 21:31:28 +0000

Part of the problem with the veteran outfield market, is that fact that it is flooded with left-handed bats. Griffey and Edmonds are fast approaching 40 years old and neither had much success against left-handers. In fact, Edmonds (.148-1-1) was abysmal and has not batted over .200 against lefties since 2005.

Alou doesn't fit because he simply cannot be counted on to stay healthy, or even play everyday at 43 years old by season's end. The guy hasn't played more than 123 games since 2004 , managing just 15 last year. The Braves don't need another part-time or platoon player.

If I had a choice, I'd say Abreu should be targeted first, followed by Griffey and then Garret Anderson. Abreu is the least injury prone of the bunch and would be the most ideal if the price is right. Griffey may have one more good full season left if he bounces back from the knee problems of 2008. No one should even think about Adam Dunn because he is going to land elsewhere and far above the financial limits the Braves are working with.

By: dave

dave — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 19:36:30 +0000

Good thought Jeff, I am for any body that will bridge the gap for a year or two. I just think with the limited amount of money we have to spend it is going have to be someone a little older that is maybe more affordable than some others mentioned. I do not think a trade is doable without having to give up to much. Maybe spring training will answer many of our questions. Let's hear what you think.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 19:10:07 +0000

If we were going to mention an aging outfielder like Anderson or Alou or Edmonds, what about Griffey?

By: dave

dave — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 17:27:51 +0000

It is becoming more and more apparent that signing someone at a reasonable salary is all we can do. Maybe that is all we need to do, just bridge the gap for a year or two until the farm starts to yield its talent. Garret Anderson could be the answer. I suggested Moises Alou the other day without mush response. Now let me throw one other name out there for debate.How about Jim Edmonds? He will be 39 in June, Anderson will be 37in June. I am not as familiar with Anderson, but I saw Jim play in 2008 he can still play some defensive, and has always been a great hitter. Tell me what you think. Best Wishes