Look at Ray Ray Run

Yes, I'm sure Theo feels like he lost the deal because he's intelligent. Just because you won the lottery, it doesn't make it a smart investment.

He traded, basically, 120 million for 5 million. If you think that's a good deal, to each their own. People really shouldn't evaluate trades in baseball based on a series outcome. The point of a trade is to maximize your chances of winning by maximizing your value. Just as people want to argue they won with him, so we don't know what would happen without... I can argue the Cubs may have been even better the past three years and won a title in those years because of the value a player like Torres provided. The job of a GM is to maximize the playoff opportunities to increase the chances of winning - the playoffs are a lot of luck so getting there more often will lead to more titles. They won one, but their window closed. Had they not made the bad trades, they could still be within their window providing them with more chances of winning which could have led to more wins. In no way can you trade 120 million for 5 million and feel like you came out on top.

Theo got played because he gave up 20+ WAR for 1 WAR. Again, no matter how much weight you want to put into present value vs future value, it was a shit trade.

Yes, Andrew Miller and Aroldis Chapman are the reason their teams made the World Series. Not the position players who played every inning, or the starters who threw significantly more innings. I wonder why relievers aren't the highest paid players in baseball as they lead their teams to World Series'.

How was the return for Miller equally valuable?

It's almost like trading a lot for a reliever at the break is a bad idea.

I would guess the 100 million dollar offer is from the White Sox, but who knows?

Plenty of relievers available at the deadline could have given up 5 runs in 13 innings. To say a reliever only had 2 "bad games" in a post-season is saying he didn't have a great post-season.

No one is giving up 7 years of a top 5 prospect for 26 innings from a RP - there's a reason the Cubs are the only ones who have paid such a steep price, and there's a reason it was considered a fleecing at the time.

No matter how many times people say this, it doesn't make it true. Yes, however could the Cubs have won a World Series without that 3.86 and 3.52 ERA in the NLCS and the WS. How could they ever replace such production? The guy gave up 5 runs in 13 innings. He wasn't some lights out, games over, closer piece in the post-season that everyone wants to pretend he was. The Cubs could have replaced his production with someone else and it wouldn't have cost a top 5 prospect in baseball for 3 months of a RP - for 26 innings. There's no excuse for trading 7 years of Torres for 26 innings from Chapman. No "present day vs future value" calculation would ever say that was a good idea - not matter how heavily you want to weight present value.

Went full blown tard there for a second. Thanks.

Arbitration is a really nasty process; no idea why MLB hasnt changed the way it works.

End of the window they better be flirting with 170-180+.

Three big decisions cost Theo. 1. Trading Eloy and Cease for Quintana. 2. Not trading Schwarber when his value was peak - instead convincing himself he could be a nice NL player. 3. Trading Torres for Chapman. If he didn't trade Eloy, moving Schwarber becomes easier. He could have gotten an arm for Schwarber. Not evaluating and moving on from Russell was also a mistake but a more difficult decision to make. Amazing to think that the one prospect theo didnt love and almost made expendable turned out to be his 2nd best player - Baez. Imagine Bryant, Rizzo, Baez, Torres and Eloy. Jaysus.

I dont care what his WAR is, I'd never pay for a pitcher like Marco Gonzales.

Correct. It seems weird if they were not asking the players to take less though... why else protect them? They could still come back but they are UFA's so they wouldnt be capable of taking an assignment.

Then theres something funny about Trouts luxury tax calculation on sportrac. I'm basing my thoughts on that.

I'm not sure this is accurate, but I don't know for sure. For example, he was making 37.666 million this year with the signing bonus, but his cap hit was actually less than 36 million.

Jack, again what is this based on? The Twins haven't even made the guy a formal offer yet - or hadn't as of Thanksgiving - yet you think he would have made his decision already if it was 5/100 million. As of now, we have no idea who has bid on Wheeler and everything regarding his market is pure speculation. He is not a borderline top of the market arm, either. I agree SP's get overpaid more than any position in FA - especially those with ++ stuff - but that doesn't mean he's going to get some absurd 6/130 contract unless his agent pulls a fast one and some team gets real dumb.

Neither could throw strikes back then, and neither throw strikes now.

For luxury tax purposes, his 5 million is on this year. For their budgetary purposes internally, they put it on 2019.

I just don't think they thought anyone would claim him with the injury. He will likely end up accepting an assignment, but who knows? Edit: thought this said Burr. Ignore.

First of all, who is "everyone?" Second of all, the only reason more teams are interested is because he's "more affordable" not because he's better. You don't attempt to sign the more affordable arm for an unaffordable number just to avoid paying the big guns. The higher you go, the more reasonable it gets to just offer the money to Cole. He's got a market because he's not at the top of the market; once he enters that realm, his suitors decrease significantly.

Jack, you are speculating based on your personal bias. There's nothing out there saying the market is anywhere near 6/130. The market predictors, who have been far from perfect, believe he's going to get less than 100 million. Saying you think he would sign if that was his price is an assumption based on nothing. Maybe his offers are 4/80 and he wants 5/100. That's a pretty big difference. Almost no one signed by this time last year, so assuming he would have signed by now is a leap of faith I'm not willing to take.

No way - I actually argued pretty extensively that he would be a hell of a lot closer to Corbin than projections had him at; at FG's and other outlets, so I don't disagree with the basis of your argument. Their valuation of Wheeler was laughably low, but he's not going to get Corbin money I don't think. Corbin just had more advantages and more going for him than Wheeler. I'd be shocked if he got more than 110 and even more shocked if he got 6 years.