On Sep 26, 8:06 pm, "Colin William" <colintwill... DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Tomasz Radko" <t... DeleteThis @interia.pl> wrote
>
> >> James is still young. This year he has pitched as well as has Tom
> >> Glavine, albeit in 20% fewer innings. He's facing growing pains, but he's
> >> useful for the team. He's probably more of a #4 starter than a #3, but
> >> he's not a liability.
>
> > And tell me, why exactly we are big about signing Glavine? I like him, but
> > he would demand $10-12M per year, and he'll be like 4th starter next
> > season. He had the same ERA+ as James (103), and he's declining while
> > James is going up.
>
> > Of course Dontrelle will be hot commodity and he has ERA+ 82. Madness.
>
> Free agent pitching is scarce. We likely don't have the wherewithal to trade
> for someone good and cheap, and such guys are seldom available anyway.
> Glavine looks good because he's the name people know and he reminds them of
> the good old days. And frankly, even being mediocre at 41 he'd have been
> useful for this team this year as an innings eater who didn't dig holes for
> the offense. We could have used one of those.
Agreed. Glavine is really little more than Paul Byrd at this point,
but he's Paul Byrd with the marketing cachet that comes along with
being Tom Glavine, and I suspect the Braves would put a premium on
having him end his career in the same uniform he made his name to
begin with. That's not a great move if you're simply looking at the
tactics of roster development, but if you're looking at aspects of the
business such as bringing people to the ballpark, either through
nostalgia or simply due to common fans thinking "Tom Glavine is
famous, thus signing him means they're trying to compete again", it
doesn't matter that he's not much more than Paul Byrd. He's Paul Byrd
with double the asses in the seats.
s/
>> Stay informed about: Remember the good old days when the Braves finished 3rd...