His wife went to Vanguard University in Costa Mesa. Austin signed a ball and bat to auction off for the baseball team. I won the auction and will forever cherish that bar and ball.
I'd bet that Barnes is snapped up by a club (hopefully the dodgers) to work on the coaching staff basically immediately (or as soon as he decides he wants to go that way).
Respectfully, Austin Barnes WAS hurting the team, simply by taking up a roster spot that needed to go to a catcher who could both hit (which Barnes hasn't done in some time) and throw (which Barnes can seemingly no longer do with any real success). In Hunter Feduccia and Dalton Rushing, the Dodgers have two players in the system who are demonstrably better players and are simply in need of opportunities to prove it. One of them needed to take Barnes' spot--and have, for some time now.
When Barnes played, the Dodgers were essentially gifting the opposition an advantage; it meant LA was playing 8-vs-9, with a gaping void in the 9-hole and with a catcher who could no longer hold runners on, at all. He was long-tenured, sure, but given the mess of the Dodgers' bench to this point in the year, changes needed desperately to be made--and this was, even in a world that includes Chris Taylor still on the 26-man and Michael Conforto still starting in LF, the obvious move to make.
Will Smith is a top-5 bat on the ballclub, and keeping him as fresh as possible needed to be a priority this year (after he's limped to the close in recent years). Moving forward, Smith shouldn't be catching more than 2/3 of the remaining games, but that would've left the Dodgers significantly exposed if Barnes had remained his backup. And even if Rushing doesn't work out, I would make the same arguments for Feduccia--though having Rushing's bat is also preferable, considering the fact that LA will need to out-slug opponents for the next month-plus, it would seem.
I see the Dodgers' retention of Barnes this year--despite the fact that he was pretty obviously washed by last season's end--as a variation of the CT "Ten-Year Service Time Gift" philosophy that the organization engages in, as taking care of its own seems paramount. That Barnes' option was picked up at all was a benevolent move by the club--a fitting going-away present, for someone whose 11-year career in LA paralleled the greatest continued run in team history, in part for his efforts and his leadership.
WIsh him nothing but the best.
But it was way past time for this move, and for me, not really that shocking at all.....
This was a huge shock! Why pick up his option if you had Rushing in the wings? Also, his bat wasn’t great but he was still contributing more than CT or Muncy according to his average. My question remains, why now. What triggered this decision?
His wife went to Vanguard University in Costa Mesa. Austin signed a ball and bat to auction off for the baseball team. I won the auction and will forever cherish that bar and ball.
I'd bet that Barnes is snapped up by a club (hopefully the dodgers) to work on the coaching staff basically immediately (or as soon as he decides he wants to go that way).
Respectfully, Austin Barnes WAS hurting the team, simply by taking up a roster spot that needed to go to a catcher who could both hit (which Barnes hasn't done in some time) and throw (which Barnes can seemingly no longer do with any real success). In Hunter Feduccia and Dalton Rushing, the Dodgers have two players in the system who are demonstrably better players and are simply in need of opportunities to prove it. One of them needed to take Barnes' spot--and have, for some time now.
When Barnes played, the Dodgers were essentially gifting the opposition an advantage; it meant LA was playing 8-vs-9, with a gaping void in the 9-hole and with a catcher who could no longer hold runners on, at all. He was long-tenured, sure, but given the mess of the Dodgers' bench to this point in the year, changes needed desperately to be made--and this was, even in a world that includes Chris Taylor still on the 26-man and Michael Conforto still starting in LF, the obvious move to make.
Will Smith is a top-5 bat on the ballclub, and keeping him as fresh as possible needed to be a priority this year (after he's limped to the close in recent years). Moving forward, Smith shouldn't be catching more than 2/3 of the remaining games, but that would've left the Dodgers significantly exposed if Barnes had remained his backup. And even if Rushing doesn't work out, I would make the same arguments for Feduccia--though having Rushing's bat is also preferable, considering the fact that LA will need to out-slug opponents for the next month-plus, it would seem.
I see the Dodgers' retention of Barnes this year--despite the fact that he was pretty obviously washed by last season's end--as a variation of the CT "Ten-Year Service Time Gift" philosophy that the organization engages in, as taking care of its own seems paramount. That Barnes' option was picked up at all was a benevolent move by the club--a fitting going-away present, for someone whose 11-year career in LA paralleled the greatest continued run in team history, in part for his efforts and his leadership.
WIsh him nothing but the best.
But it was way past time for this move, and for me, not really that shocking at all.....
My guess? If Rushing isn’t ready, Fedducia is as good or better than Barnes.
So long and good luck Austin. Taylor is next.
This was a huge shock! Why pick up his option if you had Rushing in the wings? Also, his bat wasn’t great but he was still contributing more than CT or Muncy according to his average. My question remains, why now. What triggered this decision?
My only thought: Why did it take so long?