Having Smoltz as their starter rather than a dominating closer?
I understand Smoltz's logic in saying that you need strong starting pitching in the playoffs if you plan on winning a series... but did it hurt the Braves by him going back in the rotation?
They must have tried at least 10 closers in Atlants since his departure.
2006-09-02 09:09:44 · 7 answers · asked by N.J. 2 in Sports ➔ Baseball
Granted, they have had trouble finding a closer since he left, but they are not worse off because he is a starter. They are doing poorly this season because of the pitching as a whole. They still have Mike Hampton on the payroll and he hasn't played in two years, not to mention he's the highest paid player on the team. Does that make sense to anyone? Why keep a guy that using up that much payroll when you could put the money towards some better help in the bull pen? I'm a huge Braves fan, but that is mystery to me and honestly, it kind of frustrates me that he's still on the team payroll.
2006-09-02 11:05:33 · answer #1 · answered by shane 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Moving him to starter was a good move. The problem was when they let Farnsworth get away. That's when they lost their closer, long after Smoltz was made a starter.
Chow!!
2006-09-02 21:36:43 · answer #2 · answered by No one 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I;m not a Braves fan (still a little pissed about 1995), but I will say that they have a great closer now since they got Bob Wickman.
GO TRIBE !!
2006-09-02 20:30:08 · answer #3 · answered by fireman4u 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bob Wickman's a great closer!!
2006-09-02 17:14:27 · answer #4 · answered by hammerthingy66 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
a great closer is useless if you dont have the starters to get you to that point in the game.
2006-09-02 16:56:28 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
he needs to be a closer. He was alot better then.
2006-09-02 16:10:40 · answer #6 · answered by MikeAwesome 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
braves are worse off every year
2006-09-02 16:16:30 · answer #7 · answered by aj lewis 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋