I am sure he wanted 5 for $125 when this offseason started. I think its probably a decent deal for the Jays.Wow, 5 years 90 million? I was expecting more like 2-3 years.
I am sure he wanted 5 for $125 when this offseason started. I think its probably a decent deal for the Jays.Wow, 5 years 90 million? I was expecting more like 2-3 years.
As a Guardians fan, I don't think what the Dodgers have done has really changed the calculus for teams at the low end of the budget. Those teams have had to figure out how to win without significant free agents for the past quarter century. If the Yankees, Red Sox, Astros, etc. were ramping up into a true arms race with the Dodgers, it would be hopeless, but if the Dodgers are making those teams lose hope, it might even be better for the small market teams. It still comes down to getting to the playoffs and then repeatedly winning in small sample sizes.We appear to have reached the point where great players will take deferrals to play in L.A., and teams in less desirable markets, like Toronto, are being forced to overpay for lesser players.
As a Sox fan, what the Dodgers are doing bums me out, but I still feel like if the cards fall right, we could beat them. I think if I was the fan of any of the bottom half payroll teams, I'd be pretty depressed and feel like my team had basically no chance to win in the foreseeable future.
He's by no means a bad hitter, he just has a really extreme profile that's a uniquely poor fit for a deep right field so he was never going to be worth his market price to us.I’ve probably internalized the various criticisms of his game a little too much because I figured he’d be stuck in QO limbo until after the draft, but I guess Toronto had to eventually find someone who’d take their money.
Especially if they gut their team at some point. They are going to be distantly in 5th soon and need that minimum payroll.I’ve probably internalized the various criticisms of his game a little too much because I figured he’d be stuck in QO limbo until after the draft, but I guess Toronto had to eventually find someone who’d take their money.
The Sox are currently projected to be 14/30 in payroll. They're currently 11th in WS Champions odds, behind Baltimore (15th in payroll, +1500 WS odds), and Seattle (17th, +2600), and I'd argue not meaningfully different from Minnesota (18th, +3200), or Detroit (22nd, +3000). Given how many short series a team has to luck through in the postseason, I agree the Dodgers are still less likely to win the World Series vs. the field. But I think you're probably overestimating Boston's chances compared to the rest of the mediocrities.As a Sox fan, what the Dodgers are doing bums me out, but I still feel like if the cards fall right, we could beat them. I think if I was the fan of any of the bottom half payroll teams, I'd be pretty depressed and feel like my team had basically no chance to win in the foreseeable future.
I am not looking at just this season. I am talking more about the next say, 10 seasons. I think the Red Sox have a chance, given that they can, have, and I think will spend more.The Sox are currently projected to be 14/30 in payroll. They're currently 11th in WS Champions odds, behind Baltimore (15th in payroll, +1500 WS odds), and Seattle (17th, +2600), and I'd argue not meaningfully different from Minnesota (18th, +3200), or Detroit (22nd, +3000). Given how many short series a team has to luck through in the postseason, I agree the Dodgers are still less likely to win the World Series vs. the field. But I think you're probably overestimating Boston's chances compared to the rest of the mediocrities.
I understand your larger points, but you may be underestimating how possible it is for a few things to go right and a team to surprise. I'm old enough to remember Arizona in the WS two years ago and the Tigers taking Cleveland to 5 games in the ALDS last year.I am not looking at just this season. I am talking more about the next say, 10 seasons. I think the Red Sox have a chance, given that they can, have, and I think will spend more.
I'm not sure Pittsburgh, Tampa, Oakland, Colorado, Minnesota, Toronto, Miami, Cincinnati, the Angels, or Washington have any real chance. I'd bet none of those teams win in the next decade. That's 1/3 of the league. Teams like K.C., Baltimore, Detroit, Cleveland, Arizona, and the White Sox chances may only be slightly better.
Others may see it differently, but I think the widening gap in financial equality that is happening both within our society, and baseball is fairly unprecedented, and could threaten fan interest. I guess it still works in European soccer, where in Italy, England, and Spain, the same 3-4 teams have won over 90% of league titles in the last 30 years. I don't know how Crystal Palace, Wolverhampton, or Real Sociedad fans feel, or if there are fewer of them than their used to be.
Worry for whom? I don't know that there are any rumors of the current ownership looking to sell, and if they were, it's not as though they'd be catching a new buyer by surprise with all the future debt and expense. They'd be buying with eyes wide open, presumably. If anything, I would think that the deferred money would more likely be a deterrent for a new buyer, or at least would reduce the net windfall for the sellers.Is there any worry that Dodgers owners are simply kicking the can down the road onto new ownership?
This is how I see it too. All of these deferred contracts will likely reduce the value of the franchise. Is it by more than the increase in value that the franchise will incur from winning? I don’t know. But a new owner isn’t going to be caught off-guard by the deferred money and it will be reflected in the purchase price.Worry for whom? I don't know that there are any rumors of the current ownership looking to sell, and if they were, it's not as though they'd be catching a new buyer by surprise with all the future debt and expense. They'd be buying with eyes wide open, presumably. If anything, I would think that the deferred money would more likely be a deterrent for a new buyer, or at least would reduce the net windfall for the sellers.
By this definition, the Yankees haven't been competitive since 2009.
Anyone other than Nightengale reporting this yet?
As one of the resident also-a-Dodger's fan, I actually think the opposite in terms of the pen. No, it was really an issue, but it lacked definition, without consistent 7th-8th-9th guys. I think Dave gives the pen a bit more definition and clear roles with these new pieces.For some reason the Kirby and Scott signings just feel more egregious than the other ones. Like, Sasaki was a no brainer and frankly the MLB's system for FAs of a certain experience level internationally was much more harmful on that, Yamamoto wasn't a no brainer but made total sense for a team with their financial muscle. Everyone was chasing Ohtani of course. But the Dodgers pen wasn't really a problem last year - there is certainly room for improvement but signing two of the top-end relievers is just a total luxury flex more than anything else unless Yates is ring chasing (which given his age and lack of playoff exposure may be).
I mean, totally fair, but most teams remedying a bullpen "lacking definition" and already being 4-5 deep in good relievers aren't adding two top of market guys to that, ya know?As one of the resident also-a-Dodger's fan, I actually think the opposite in terms of the pen. No, it was really an issue, but it lacked definition, without consistent 7th-8th-9th guys. I think Dave gives the pen a bit more definition and clear roles with these new pieces.
I know this is said mostly in jest, but the Dodgers signing anyone from that 2017 Astros team would be highly entertaining.Dodgers should sign Bregman. at this point Just go full on villain
I wonder if the Dodgers will file a grievance.
It's also kinda nuts how lopsided their 40-man is: 15 position players, 25 pitchers. And I'm including Ohtani as a position player in that count despite him not playing a position in the field. They have to carry 13 position players on the active roster, which leaves their reserves kinda thin if someone were to get hurt.Their 40 man roster is entertaining to follow. They had to DFA Cartaya and trade Lux to open space for Kim and Scott. Roki is on an MiLB contract so they can delay a corresponding roster move until late spring training, and Yates I think they need to open another spot for. So they kind of are at -2 open spots right now, with varying grace periods.
They will probably be using the 60 day IL liberally, and may need to trade 1 or 2 guys randomly when they have roster crunches from players coming off the IL.
It helps to have one of the best players in the game able to play just about any position on an hour’s notice.It's also kinda nuts how lopsided their 40-man is: 15 position players, 25 pitchers. And I'm including Ohtani as a position player in that count despite him not playing a position in the field. They have to carry 13 position players on the active roster, which leaves their reserves kinda thin if someone were to get hurt.
Teams often carry extra pitchers at this point in the winter, once the 60 day IL opens up next month, they can even it out some. BOS is at 16/24 right now, not very different.It's also kinda nuts how lopsided their 40-man is: 15 position players, 25 pitchers.
This one was a bit surprising to me. Cleveland rarely dips its toe in the free agent reliever pool... maybe the swing man depth move, but the pure relievers on the major league roster are almost always cheap young guys they developed, picked up off the scrap heap or received in a trade. They've scored on enough of those that they'd been dealing their depth to address other needs (Eli Morgan, Nick Sandlin). It's a good sign that Dolan isn't just pocketing the money they saved in dumping Myles Straw on Toronto – this accounts for nearly half of it – although I'm not sure this is the investment I wanted to see. However, their staff usually proves to know what they're doing with relievers so I'm not bothered by the move either. At the very least, he throws strikes, so it won't be a repeat of last year's Scott Barlow experience.
Buster Posey was drafted fifth overall so it's not like it was a really hard decision to take him, but I wonder how much the analytics department that Goldfarb had a hand in building up was responsible for confirming Posey was the right guy?I assume this is indicative of Posey's level of interest in relying on analytics. I'll be curious to see how this goes.
View attachment 95262
Worst decision the Rays ever made, deciding to take Beckham over Posey. Oh, what could have been!Buster Posey was drafted fifth overall so it's not like it was a really hard decision to take him, but I wonder how much the analytics department that Goldfarb had a hand in building up was responsible for confirming Posey was the right guy?
Orioles and Pirates tooWorst decision the Rays ever made, deciding to take Beckham over Posey. Oh, what could have been!
Astros are a trade or two away from getting under $200m in payroll for this year. Currently at ~$212 including arbitration cases, according to Spotrac.
You're missing something here (perhaps not scrolling down far enough). I see Spotrac estimating them at ~$228M in projected tax payroll, which lines up closer to Cot's estimates (~$236M). If their goal is to reduce payroll and stay under the tax, that would seem to put lie to the rumors that their offer to Bregman is still on the table.Astros are a trade or two away from getting under $200m in payroll for this year. Currently at ~$212 including arbitration cases, according to Spotrac.
It's weird that with all the numbers on that page, the bottom line number is one of the less emphasized ones. Thanks for clarifying.You're missing something here (perhaps not scrolling down far enough). I see Spotrac estimating them at ~$228M in projected tax payroll, which lines up closer to Cot's estimates (~$236M). If their goal is to reduce payroll and stay under the tax, that would seem to put lie to the rumors that their offer to Bregman is still on the table.
View attachment 95415