Skip to content

Philly columnist: Braves screwed up by keeping Maddux, Glavine and Smoltz together

Feb 3, 2010, 8:30 AM EDT

Maddux Glavine Smoltz.jpgSomeone must have slipped me some bad liquor or something, because I’m sure I didn’t just read an article by Sam Donnellon of the Philadelphia Inquirer saying that the Braves would have won more titles in the 90s if they hadn’t had Maddux, Glavine and Smoltz. I mean, that would be, like, the stupidest thing ever:

Yes, the Braves cut loose some stars along that 14-season run. But they also did exactly what the Phillies resisted doing this winter. They already had John Smoltz, and Tom Glavine when they signed Greg Maddux before the 1993 season . . . Did keeping three future Hall of Famers for all those years cash-strap them out of multiple world titles? It’s a thought.

Yes, bringing together three Hall of Fame pitchers to form the best starting rotation of all time was what prevented the Braves from winning more World Series. Clearly the team would have been better off if they had avoided splurging on Greg Maddux and, rather than have him post historically awesome seasons throughout the 90s in a Braves uniform, spent the money on a lefty specialist.

And if you think I’m taking this quote out of context or something, here’s the windup:

So be careful with our hearts, fellas. We’ve made you The Show in this
hard-to-please town. Maybe we can’t be the Yankees, but we sure don’t
want to be the Braves for the next decade either.

Yeah, winning the division every year would be, like, a total downer.

  1. Michael Fihare - Feb 3, 2010 at 12:46 PM

    I think what everyone is saying is if the bRaves had Smoltz and Glavine–maybe they would have been better off signing Ken Griffy JR who plays everyday instead of another tier 1 starter—at the time of course
    I would have to agree

  2. john pileggi - Feb 3, 2010 at 2:19 PM

    It is not worth a comment. Completely stupid.

  3. salty buggar - Feb 3, 2010 at 2:42 PM

    And yet another reason to dislike Philly, stupid writers!

  4. El Lay Dave - Feb 3, 2010 at 2:51 PM

    If you gave this kind of pitching prowess to Tommy Lasorda, he would kill everyone with it, including the pitchers themselves.

  5. Ryan - Feb 3, 2010 at 3:32 PM

    Paging Old Gator!
    I’m personally always going to look back on that rotation with a huge woody, clearly this writer in Philly is letting a little success go to his head.

  6. Omega in Colorado - Feb 3, 2010 at 5:13 PM

    the reason all real baseball fans consider 1993 and 1995 consecutive years is because the 1994 season was wiped out by a strike.
    ok to comment in general on this article. That Braves rotation OWNED my beloved Rockos for the first few years of their existence. While I loved watching these men work masterful pieces of baseball art everytime they visited Denver, it broke my heart watching my boys swing and miss for 9 innings.

  7. The Rabbit - Feb 3, 2010 at 8:14 PM

    This appears to be a suckup to follow yesterday’s article.
    See: Ruben Amaro: I’m not a dummy
    Give me Maddux, Glavine, Smoltz, a healthy Chipper Jones, the Crime Dog, and the respectable outfield that the Braves had in the 90’s and I’ll take my chances against any team.

  8. Murdog - Feb 4, 2010 at 3:37 AM

    I wish I could have a starting rotation that was that bad, I guess the Braves really screwed up! What were they thinking………..

  9. eaglealan64 - Feb 4, 2010 at 5:34 AM

    I think it’s a good argument – slightly less good pitching, more batting. Perhaps you lose out on one post-season and World Series appearance but you pick up at least one more WS win. Most fans would go for that.

  10. travis smith - Mar 30, 2010 at 5:25 PM

    93 and 95 are considered consecutive because 94 is nonexistant in baseball history due to the strike

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. D. Wright (3081)
  2. J. Fernandez (2530)
  3. D. Span (2462)
  4. Y. Cespedes (2445)
  5. G. Stanton (2441)
  1. Y. Puig (2171)
  2. F. Rodney (2166)
  3. M. Teixeira (2132)
  4. G. Springer (2073)
  5. H. Olivera (1965)