It is fair to say that Ronald Acuña Jr. can be a polarizing figure in some corners of fandom of the Atlanta Braves. Most sane fans wish he could avoid issues with injuries, but agree that Acuña Jr. is a cornerstone of the Braves' roster, is one of the best players in baseball, and is a player they would love to see the Braves lock up long-term. However, a smaller subset of fans does exist that seems to take every opportunity possible to find fault with Acuña Jr. and would prefer to see him run out of town.
The reasons for the Acuña Jr. hatred are varied and sometimes truly gross, but it does exist and there have even been some proposals to trade Acuña Jr. in the past. However, a recent column by Savannah Morning News columnist and long-time radio antagonist Bill Shanks raises the possibility of an Acuña Jr. trade yet again and makes some bad faith arguments in favor of such a move along the way.
Column arguing for Braves to trade Ronald Acuña Jr. is horribly misguided
Now, this isn't the first time that Shanks has had a terrible idea to be sure and there are some grey areas where finding fault with him is purely based on one's opinion, but there are some things he got right here. It is absolutely true that Acuña Jr.'s injury issues have been costly to the Braves and if they were to trade Acuña Jr., they absolutely would get a haul for him. However, the logic beyond that point leaves a lot to be desired.
Shanks then goes on to say, "There is no confidence this ownership, that is pinching pennies for some reason, will pay for Acuña for the long term." It is true that there is not an extension with Acuña Jr. in place right now, but the idea that the reason for that is that the Braves are just being cheap is silly.
Atlanta has had a top 10 payroll the last four years and eclipsed $200 million the last three years including exceeding the luxury tax the previous two seasons. It is concerning that Acuña Jr. could hit free agency relatively soon, but most extensions with any player on any team are not done with this much control left. One can't simply just make up facts to support one's worldview (well, you can...but you shouldn't).
There are some other problems with his logic here as well. Shanks faults the Braves for Freddie Freeman, Dansby Swanson, and Max Fried leaving and makes the assertion that history shows they will let Acuña Jr. walk as well. But both Swanson and Fried's deals look like they could age very poorly and Freeman's agent is the reason why he left to essentially take less money from the Dodgers, not Alex Anthopoulos or Liberty Media.
The bigger problem here is that what Shanks seems to want to happen and what he is advocating for in this case don't match up. He seemingly wants the Braves to be good now and spend now, but his solution is to trade the Braves' best player which would send a terrible signal to the clubhouse and prospective free agents and make the team strictly worse. Shanks calls this plan "simply a reset", but call it what it is: an ill-advised trade based on a flawed understanding of the Braves' current situation. Anyone out in Braves Country want to sign up for an organizational "reset" if trading Acuña Jr. is part of the cost? We suspect few fans would agree.
Atlanta absolutely needs to make some changes and their talent development program definitely needs work especially when it comes to offensive players. However, trading Acuña Jr. to do something splashy just for the fun of it and to appeal to a segment of Braves "fans" that probably barely watch the team and think baseball peaked in the 1980's isn't the way to do it. It has been a couple of rough years for the Braves, but acting like such a drastic move is necessary shows a distinct lack of perspective and a weird sense of entitlement.
(This article is an opinion piece and doesn't reflect the views of FanSided or companies associated with FanSided.)