Greeson: Braves need to forget '90s and rebuild

Floundering around the .500 mark, these Atlanta Braves are the game's ultimate paradox.

They are better than expected, and they are worse than anticipated.

So it goes for a team that is bullpen blessed but offensively inept. The Braves are rich in seconds -- they have three No. 2 starting pitchers and a lineup peppered with No. 2 hitters -- but have little likelihood of a hard push for first place.

Even the most ardent Braves fan would have a difficult time making the argument this group is better than the Philadelphia Phillies, who can't win at home, or the New York Mets, who can't stay healthy.

It could be argued that this is the most mediocre team in the National League. The sum is equal to its parts; its parts just are not all that good.

It was to be predicted in some ways, I suppose. Retreads at first base and in left field leave the offense always scrambling for power. Plus, with a steady diet of bad timing -- Atlanta managed to score seven runs Thursday with its alleged ace on the mound and still lost -- and boneheadedness (yes, I made that word up, but how would you describe Yunel Escobar lately), momentum is a distant illusion for this bunch.

Yes, the Braves are within squinted sight of the East Division lead, but the recent struggles -- they have won one of their last 10 series heading into the weekend set with Boston -- leaves the organization with some serious questions.

These dilemmas vary by person and perspective, but at the core is the basic debate of winning now or planning for the future.

Sure, in a perfect world these ideas do not have to be mutually exclusive. But the 1990s are a distant memory and the Braves' new world is far from perfect.

The front office has displayed the teeth to gnaw on and digest the tough decisions. Some can be second-guessed (think John Smoltz); some can be understandable (think Tom Glavine).

In the next month or so, the path will become clearer, depending on where they sit in the standings.

This is not to say this group needs to be completely blown up or the deck should be cleared for a new deal. Brian McCann, Tommy Hanson, Jair Jurrjens, Jordan Schafer and Rafael Soriano combine for a solid nucleus in several of the game's most crucial positions.

From there, though, everyone should be in play. If that means Chipper Jones or Derek Lowe, so be it.

Truthfully, there is not a lot of desirable names on the roster, and if you are looking down the road, the prospects must be protected. Not that there's an overabundance of household names in the minors, either, after the trade for the since-departed Mark Teixeira last summer.

That failed, albeit noble, attempt a year ago makes this summer's decisions all the more important.

Yes, it's hard to imagine a playoff contender backing up the prospect truck for the likes of Kelly Johnson or Matt Diaz. Jeff Francoeur's name was floated about earlier this season, and the various offers were met with crickets and steady breezes -- although the latter may just have been Frenchy swinging wildly at another 58-foot breaking ball.

That brings us back to Lowe and Jones -- the two pieces who would interest any club looking to get over that late-summer hump. Both fit the bill that contending teams covet: They have postseason experience, they have been involved in a pennant race or 12 and they play attractive positions. Seriously, when was the last time a contender made a move that did not involve a starting pitcher or a big bat?

Lowe's contract will be a tough sell in a market that features teams trying to improve frugally. He is in the first season of a four-year deal that will pay him $60 milion, and unless the Braves are willing to pick up part of his salary, he will be very difficult to deal.

Jones, however, will have the most value in the next six weeks, and the Braves must listen to any and all offers.

If dealing the final player connected to the team's glory days means a brighter 2010 and beyond, it must be done.

The '90s are done -- just ask Smoltz and Glavine.