All Activity

The markets are different in the NFL. You can't 1:1 compare them. Look at revenue by team for both leagues and compare where each team is ranked.

I disagree with this. Over the last 20 Super Bowl champs, here are the small market winners: Green Bay, Kansas City (x3), Tampa Bay, New Orleans, Pittsburgh. That's 7 times in 20 seasons. Plus 3 arguably "middle market" SB champs: Baltimore, Seattle, Denver. That's half the SB titles in the last 20 years that weren't in a top 12 market vs. only 4 out of 20 in MLB. If Kansas City and Tampa Bay are small markets in MLB, then they're small markets in other sports too. Green Bay/Milwaukee, too.

K

Salary spend ABSOLUTELY correlates to wins in MLB. I'm not arguing against that. It does in the NBA as well. The NFL always had rough spending parity + coaching matters SO MUCH in football, so it's hard to say the cap changed much there. Some MLB teams (Brewers, Rays) buck that trend, but it's really hard. The playoffs are the equalizer there, as you pointed out, which is why I used the WS champ comparison. You're also not changing the landscape of the best regular season teams in MLB by implementing a salary cap. The cap is going to come in at the top of the current team salary spend. They're not going to make the top 5-10 teams shed a ton of salary from guaranteed contracts. So you'll still have the exact same situation you have now, and even if the cap never goes up you're still going to have the same teams at the top. Smart teams will also figure out how to skirt the rules and continue to sign the players they want even if they're at the top of the cap. If you raise the floor too then maybe you'll see some change, but you'd have to make it pretty tight to make a difference, and there aren't enough good players to go around to change much here. You're also still competing against existing market size and team revenue - you're not going to force the Pirates or A's or White Sox to spend to a point they can't afford.

I would be watching it, but I don't have that service right now. I LOVE all things Gilligan. He is incredible at what he does.

Ozark to me was like Lost in that the premise was great but the end game didn't match the build up. Pluribus is an awesome show. I love how it has gone thus far and Gilligan seems to have the story completed before it starts to avoid a bad ending in previous shows.

Anyone see the chip block on Garrett that wiped him out. Was either Kmet or Loveland. Earlier in the year Trapillo was a healthy scratch now he is the starting LT and managing well. I am sure he can be micromanaged to prove me wrong but this staff has coaches that can do their job in places needed. RB, DB, OL those guys are professionals that are getting the best out of their team. Johnson has built a staff that is getting the job done and hopefully sustainable. Johnson and Allen if they can stay on the same page can be an amazing duo. After two weeks the 2025 draft was a disaster now I am not certain Loveland and Burden are not the 2 best receivers on the team, Trapillo is the LT for the foreseeable future and KM one of the top rookie RB in the league. The health of that interior line should not be overlooked as to why we are continually getting better.

I like this move. Hey, it's what we do.

The Packers haven't been a dynasty since the 60s. Them consistently having a hall of fame quarterback and being a well coached and well run organization since the early 90s has nothing to do with the salary cap. Even with these advantages they still only have two championships in 30 years and they haven't won in 15 years. KC has a hall of fame coach and a great QB. There's no salary cap for coaches, so anyone could have hired Andy Reid at any time, and no star QB has ever been poached in the history of the NFL because of the ridiculous free agency rules until the 90s. Even since then you haven't seen it because teams know the value of a franchise QB. "People who disagree with me regularly have a disease" is certainly a take. I'll keep it respectful.

https://www.sportsmockery.com/chicago-white-sox/intriguing-opportunity-has-developed-for-the-white-sox/

If I’m Ishbia, I’m wanting a cleared deck and a clean slate as much as possible before I take over the spending. Maybe we will see modesty as the plan out of deference to the agreement

Johnson has been both transparent and backs up his talk with the work. At the bye he said “the running game is not where we want it to be and I’m gonna work to get it better” and he absolutely did that. He talks about involving players in the offense and then you see the results. He wanted to make sure Caleb stays upright and he focuses on opposing defenses and makes sure that the necessary blocks and chips are there for Caleb. He has been everything you can ask for up to this point (unless you are Joe, during a game)

I said MID market, not large. Go look at their revenue. Right in the bottom middle of NFL teams. You are just wrong if you think the Royals and Chiefs have the same reach and revenue % compared to the rest of their leagues. Saints I was wrong. They're at the bottom of revenue too. Packers are also mid market.

It was, and that makes a huge difference. But I think both things can be true. A great coach doesn't usually win with a s%*# roster. But a good roster can still suffer from coaching malpractice which can have severe negative implications on the team record. He's done a fantastic job.

Could use another lefty in rotation. Do we gamble on guys who sucked here and didn’t stints oversea for a second time this offseason? I think I’d prefer someone a little more stable but I guess if you’re paying what you paid Kay.

MLBTR’s Steve Adams reported yesterday that Foster Griffin has spoken to eight different teams with varying interest levels in his services, while MLBNetwork’s Jon Morosi added that a deal could come together soon for Griffin. Which team will land the intriguing lefty?

I read all the reports when he was with SD...if they really believed he was their CFer of the future and not a corner guy, they likely wouldn't have traded him, because they weren't yet sure Jackson Merrill would succeed in CF yet. During that time frame, CF play was being measure against guys like Grisham and Margot. "Zavala shows good defensive instincts and a solid-average arm in center field, though his speed likely fits best in a corner." baseballamerica.com And also concerns that he was going to continue to fill out/put on weight and that would work against his ending up in CF as well.

Do you mean the stats for framing or the art of framing itself? Framing will be useless if umpires are ever replaced but for now it is a skill that can change pitching counts and games.

R&D is always more expensive than the products themselves. It's an investment in staff and people as well. While the costs are minimal compared to a players salary, as I've said before, they're also costs that require an investment in innovation which is much more affordable to teams with more funds. Additionally, a huge issue with not having approved data and vendors is that a team could technically pay a provider or person to ONLY provide services/data/etc to their team which would be another big issue. I never said this area is where teams gain the biggest edge, but it's another area where teams with more resources come out on top exasperating the inequality issue in baseball.

Ya, framing stats are a bunch of hooie. Useless.

Royals are small market but Chiefs are big market. LOL, the mental hoops you will go through to continue one of your long winded arguments is good for a laugh in the morning for sure! LIP, every sport has bad owners. You're never going to get rid of all bad owners. Difference is baseball stacks the deck against those teams much more.

Of course you don't, meanwhile teams like the Bucks and OKC!! in the NBA can win titles and retain all their talent, and teams like the Packers and KC have dynasty like runs in the NFL. People like almagast and Westeddy just come into these threads to disagree with me at length, regardless of the logic put in front of them. It's an illness.

Championships in baseball are the byproduct of a playoffs which is much-more luck centric than the NBA playoffs (for example). Division wins and playoff appearances are what drive parity in a sport like baseball. The parity is no where near the same. The correlation between money spent and wins is significant in baseball. Therefore, baseball has less parity given that it has no salary cap and money drives wins/losses. This is very basic math. Using World Series wins as the indication of parity, in a sport with a 162 game regular season, is obviously not the way to asses parity.

Can I just say the WestEddy/Almagest circle jerk is just hilarious to watch in every thread.

That's if you trust those numbers . How does one determine if it's a ball outside the zone that, if framed properly, it COULD have been called a strike ? Or is it that balls in the zone are being called balls by bad umpires ? If you set up low & inside and a pitch hits the zone high & away and called a ball is that a knock against the pitcher the catcher or the ump ? I think most people quoting framing stats and using them seem to trust the people doing the video checks to determine these things. Also don't veteran catchers and pitchers get more favorable calls than younger ones ? There's so much going on between pitchers, catchers ,umps and location and the speed & shape of pitches that I'm just not going to blindly put my faith into fairly new defensive stats that seem to always be changing. Are there comprehensive videos on youtube out there that shows us how a rookie catcher gets such a bad rap for framing or any catcher for that matter ? They catch thousands of pitches . Seems like a lot of tedious work looking at how a catcher frames every single pitch and determining what is the catcher's fault as opposed the pitcher or the ump on close calls. When a catcher has to move his glove too far its practically impossible to actually frame a pitch. Youre judt.lunging to actually catch it especially on a fastball. Sinkers and split finger pitches or sliders and other breaking pitches with a lot of movement make a lot of umps and catchers look bad. Also pitching staffs on a rebuilding team or team cycling through a lot of pitchers transitioning from AAA are all getting used to each other. There's a lot dynamics going on based on familiarity between catchers pitchers and umps. Sometimes a catcher will set up low and away , the pitch is thrown perfectly hit the spot and the catcher will barely move his glove and it might be called a ball because the ump is setting ump over the catchers inside shoulder. Do catchers with a bad rep for framing get dinged because reputation becomes a self fulfilling prophesy with statisticians ? Who are the statisticians ? How do I know they are impartial ? Do they do testing where 10 or more of these guys all look at the same videos and grade each pitch and see how they differ? It all seems very subjective. Maybe their methods are flawed.