Lessons From Atlanta: If You Have A Shot, Take It

I think the takeaway is simple.

If you have a legit shot at the playoffs, you should go for it (at least somewhat), and not sit pat. You don't need to blow up the future. There are players to add that were once good, and might get hot/good again. You never know if you'll be in that position again (at least if you are most teams), so don't just sit still or give up. Try to get better, even if only at the margins. Atlanta got lucky, but that is largely the story of the post season, given the short nature of playoff series.

Let's be frank:

On this board if the Twins were in the position of Atlanta and we came away with a bunch of fringe trades (at the time) like Rosario, Soler, etc. there would've been a lot of complaints.  Atlanta didn't "go for it" in the sense we use that term.  They didn't make any huge, splashy additions or roster shaking moves.

They nibbled around the edge of the trade market and got their team depth.  Then they rode a few hot hands (Rosario, Ian Anderson, their bullpen) and won the small sample . I don't think this is a blueprint as much as yet another example that there isn't one way to do this, the best teams don't always win, and just try to give your team a good shot with depth and a fighting chance.

29 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Atlanta didn't "nibble at the edges." They lost 2/3rds of their outfield, including all-world Ronald Acuna.

They were below .500, on the fringe of contention, in a weak division. Instead of giving up, they remade their entire OF. That's the lesson learned. No season should EVER be given away, until there's zero hope. Spend a little prospect capital EVERY time, when it benefits the MLB club. Prospects are the most overrated thing in baseball. 

 

Their trades were all nibbles.  They traded fringe prospects and players for low end trade commodities.  Not a single sane human would call those moves splashy.  Soler was a negative WAR player with an OPS in Simmons territory.  Rosario was acquired for the corpse of Pablo Sandoval.  Adam Duvall was a perfectly league average player.  They acquired experienced players other teams were dumping.  That's it.

They worked and in hindsight were brilliant.  Not "all in" or "going for it" or any other aggressive terms.  "Not giving up" is not the same as pressing the gas pedal.  

55 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

Their trades were all nibbles.  They traded fringe prospects and players for low end trade commodities.  Not a single sane human would call those moves splashy.  Soler was a negative WAR player with an OPS in Simmons territory.  Rosario was acquired for the corpse of Pablo Sandoval.  Adam Duvall was a perfectly league average player.  They acquired experienced players other teams were dumping.  That's it.

They worked and in hindsight were brilliant.  Not "all in" or "going for it" or any other aggressive terms.  "Not giving up" is not the same as pressing the gas pedal.  

I mostly agree with this....but they didn't sit still. They tried to fill their holes, even if only with guys from the margins that were once good. As I said, they didn't quit or sit still, they did something to get better, even if only on the margins. Then they got lucky in several ways (the Mets imploding, for one).

1 hour ago, Mike Sixel said:

I mostly agree with this....but they didn't sit still. They tried to fill their holes, even if only with guys from the margins that were once good. As I said, they didn't quit or sit still, they did something to get better, even if only on the margins. Then they got lucky in several ways (the Mets imploding, for one).

Agreed, they get credit for a genuine effort.  However, these moves weren't YOLO bombs on 3rd and 20......they were crafty 5 yard screens that busted for 70 yards.  Or, in the case of Soler, a 2 yard draw play that he housed for 85.  

These were low risk, low odds of serious upside that all went absolutely bonkers.  Good for them that they took those shots, but the odds of acquiring four guys who ranged from "future contract in Japan" to "He's alright I guess" and turn that into a couple of playoff MVPs and a .900 OPS is just crazy.  I get the sense people have that they want teams not to give in.  Totally get it.  But some posters here bang on their soap box about "go for it" and "be aggressive" and I don't think they're being honest with themselves if they evaluate these moves (as they were in late July) as anything remotely like that.  These were Terry Ryan type deals.

21 minutes ago, Hosken Bombo Disco said:

The Braves executives did not view Eddie Rosario as a “low end trade commodity” any more than they viewed Freddie Freeman as an “expiring asset” that other teams might bid on. So that’s one difference. The players knew who Eddie Rosario was when he arrived, that he wants to be the guy at the plate in the biggest moments and is capable of carrying the whole team on his back when he’s in the zone.

And therein ends my bitter screed for the week.  

The Braves so valued Rosario they waited until the absolute last minute of the deadline playing a game of "are you going to DFA him" chicken and only blinked when the price was 87 year old salary dump Pablo Sandoval.

1 hour ago, Major League Ready said:

This is a fair take in isolation.  In the context of expectation / demands of posters here it's just not at a realistic portrayal of what going for it means to many here.  Can you honestly say that people would not be crucifying our FO if the Twins made the same type of moves while in a season where they had a realistic shot?  The entire premise of this thread is that Atlanta "went for it" which is a rather twisted view of reality.  The invested almost nothing.

The Dodgers and the Rays invested and failed.  The Braves invested nothing and won the WS.  To portray this as "see what happens when you go for it" is preposterous.  Do I agree the Braves did the right thing.  Of course, they did not just roll over when they got hit with injuries.  They also found a couple of unusual opportunities in Rosario and Soler.  Two guys who had been sucking but we all know have the capability of impacting a series.  What are the odds that pans out but it did.

Whether fans crucify the FO office or not has no bearing on whether the FO did the right thing. I don't judge this FO based on what people here say.....

My post was 100% clear they didn't "go for it", so I have no idea why you are quoting me. Like, none.

I also have no idea what the Dodgers and Rays have to do with anything about this post. Nor do I agree that not winning the WS is failure. Success and failure is a dial, not a switch.....