The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
It’s checkers vs. chess: Braves made right move with Acuna
LAKE BUENA VISTA, FLA. — As much as I would’ve liked to see Ronald Acuna have his Jason Heyward-type of opening-day moment March 29 against the Phillies at SunTrust Park, and receive a thunderous ovation from the home crowd as his major league debut coincided with the dawn of a new season, the Braves and general manager Alex Anthopoulos did the right thing Monday when they sent their terrific prospect to the minors.
Despite Acuna clearly showing he’s
ready for the majors, despite there being no obvious flaw whatsoever in any part of his game, despite him being the best player on the team at spring training and therefore giving the Braves a better chance to win when he’s on the field, they did the right thing when
they reassigned Acuna to minor-league camp just over a week before opening day.
Because if they didn’t send Acuna to the minors, Anthopoulos would’ve effectively been playing checkers while other GMs are playing chess. And he’s not that guy. At all. He’s smart, bold and thickskinned, from what I’ve seen so far.
Simply put, whether you like the service-time rule or not — and really, could anyone other than a mathematician, accountant or lawyer possibly like it — to simply ignore it would be borderline irresponsible for a baseball general manager.
Scratch that, it wouldn’t even be borderline, it would be irresponsible.
That is, unless you’re a GM who’s extremely confident that you’re going to be able to sign the prospect in question to a multi-year deal before free agency. Or you’re just not sold on said prospect being a must-keep type of long-term asset or eventual trade chip, much less on him being a franchise-cornerstone type of talent. Neither applies in this case.
If you do believe, like so many others who’ve observed or scouted and rated Acuna as the No. 1 prospect in baseball, and like some (including myself ) who think he’s a generational-level talent, then it makes no sense to put Acuna on the opening-day roster rather than simply keep him at Triple-A until at least April 13 and assuring your team of having an entire extra season of contractual control.
Those are the service-time rules. To just ignore them because a percentage of the fan base wants badly to see him play on opening day, or because some folks have tickets during the six-game opening homestand, or because some want you to use the same “play the best players regardless” philosophy they apply to all such situations — you know, the people who insist roster decisions should be made in a vacuum, based solely on most-recent performance and regardless of 40-man roster rules, minor-league options, opt-out clauses, guaranteed money owed to a player, or players’ track records, intangibles or experience, etc. — to ignore the existence of said rules and make the feel-good decision that suits a vocal segment of the fan base would be simplistic and shortsighted.
It was one thing for the Braves to have Heyward, the Braves’ last No. 1-rated prospect whose arrival was as anticipated and hyped as Acuna’s, on the 2010 opening-day roster. Bobby Cox had already announced it would be his final season as manager, the Braves expected to contend for the division title (they would win the wild card), and they had no obvious other candidates to handle right field for a couple of weeks at the beginning of the season. The argument could be made that it made sense to have Heyward start the season in the big leagues, that two or three wins might make a difference in a playoff berth, and that his presence would be riveting to begin Cox’s final season, given all the buzz that the homegrown Heyward had created.
And sure enough, having Heyward on hand to catch a ceremonial first pitch on opening day from Hank Aaron — what many of us thought at the time was an almost literal passing of the torch to the next great Brave — and then homering in his first at-bat was chill-inducing and got the season rolling. That was a special day at the ballpark.
But this is another thing. The Braves are coming off three consecutive 90-loss seasons and have begun moving the ship forward. The future is bright, as we’ve been reminded watching so many top young players and elitelevel prospects on display for much of spring training.
But the rebuilding project isn’t over just yet, the Braves are still a year away from potentially being a strong contender — most players and team officials know this to be true, whether they say it in as many words publicly.
And while this can be a big season, a transitional year back to perennial-contender status, no one expects the Braves to unseat the Nationals to win the division. And to win a wild-card berth, it will take a lot of things going the Braves’ way and several other teams falling on their faces, in my opinion.
So even though I think this team can flirt with .500 and possibly even finish a game or two above if all goes well, the fact is this almost certainly isn’t a 90-win team, and sacrificing an entire potential year of contractual control with Acuna to see him play opening day — it’s likely to be a sellout crowd regardless — or based on the argument that Acuna might help the Braves win an extra game or two, well, that just doesn’t make much sense. Not for the long-term health of the franchise and its competitiveness.
Put another way, would you rather see Acuna at age 20 for those 12 games at the start of a non-playoff season or have an extra season of control when he’s at his peak at 27 and the Braves expect to be well into their next era of being consistent pennant contenders?