Have Braves done enough to fix their starting rotation?

I look at it this way: No matter what happens, it's going to be a great story.

Either this rotation, which also will include Julio Teheran and Mike Foltynewicz, barring a trade, will succeed with a collection of relative spare parts, or it will blow up. (Sports writers often get accused of rooting for one team or another. The truth is, we only root for ourselves. The criteria: a good story, afternoon starts, a fast game, late deadlines, not that I ever really pay attention to deadlines.)

Here's what Hart said Monday at the winter meetings on the subject of trading prospects/assets for a quality starting pitcher like Chicago' Chris Sale or Tampa Bay's Chris Archer, via the Journal-Constitution's David O'Brien : "Because we have the new ballpark coming and because our ballclub played so well offensively at the end of the year, and because our bullpen is showing the makings of something that can be good, we (think we) can compete. That was our take on what we've done, that we have a chance now to compete. But this step is one I think that deviates from (the rebuilding plan). If you go jump that one guy, does that guy take us to where we now become the team to beat? I don't think so. Does it make us better and give us a better chance to compete? Absolutely. But at what price?"

And this, from Coppolella: “The last thing I want to do is just blow it up so we can get one guy."

Nobody has ever suggested the Braves' should "blow it up," to use Coppolella's phrasing. Nor do I think they should deal Dansby Swanson (if that's who the White Sox are holding out for in a Sale deal, as has been reported). But I do believe this pitching rotation needs a relatively sure thing next year, and beyond Teheran they don't have one. The Braves have more than enough assets to get a deal done for someone.

Hart was correct when he said getting a pitcher like Sale doesn't make the Braves "the team to beat." But if that's true, what are they without Sale? How does he define "good"? How does he define having an ability to "compete"? Do his definitions align with a fan's definitions?

I define good as a potential playoff team. I define competing as being in the playoff race in early September.

The offseason is not complete yet. But there's little comforting about the rotation right now. My default position is to keep expectations low. At worst, I'll be wrong and pleasantly surprised.

Subscribe for free to the, “We Never Played The Game” podcast with Jeff Schultz and WSB's Zach Klein on iTunes. All episodes can be downloaded and heard on iTunes or here via WSBRadio.com. New episodes every Monday and Thursday.