Balta1701

I am surprised at Houston pushing farther into the tax, they have constantly suggested this offseason that they were using that as a major impediment. This has to have been motivated by Graveman being out, that took like 2 days.

They were building a new skyscraper foundation a couple years ago and pulled out a boat while they were digging.

It is being talked about now because the White Sox's lease at the Rate is officially up in a few years, so decisions will need to be made soon, there is actual time pressure to make a decision in the next couple years. Their options include extending the lease at the Rate, a new ballpark somewhere, or moving. These decisions don't need to be made today, but lining up hundreds of millions of dollars in funding takes time, so they need to be made soon. Any of these have some controversy to them - an extension of the lease at the Rate is complicated since the last deal was SO TEAM FRIENDLY that the politicians won't just want to renew it forever. A new ballpark is complicated since the last deal was SO TEAM FRIENDLY that the politicians won't just want to write Reinsdorf another blank check to stay in the same spot after his wealth increased by billions during the previous deal. Moving the team is obviously controversial. This particular spot has the benefits of potentially solving several of these issues. It makes sense for the city and state to put in some funds to this site since it is currently a dead zone that has had multiple development proposals fail and requires some environmental remediation. The transit options are ideal. It's much closer to downtown and could have the actual city viewable from the ballpark. It's a broad piece of land so the ballpark could serve as an anchor to a larger development - so the city and state could get tax revenue from the rest of the site once it is developed, justifying the funds they would put in to bring it back into the taxpaying base.

I do think it's a contributing factor to why there hasn't been actual revitalization of that site, and it probably involves the fact that it will take some taxpayer support to do the remediation and renovation. You probably have had successive builders think "I can get the mayor to pay for this" and then you wind up with nothing happening because owners aren't always perfect at coming through with funds and the city isn't going to pay any part of it unless they're sure the development will be completed. The city doesn't want to pay to remediate the site and then have a developer start building then go bankrupt half way through. This might well make it that a sports stadium would be ideal for that site. A high rise complex developer or business developer has some risk. If you have an ideal plan with a reputable developer, all your funding lined up, and then the 2008 collapse happens, you can do everything right and still have your plan fall apart. On the other hand, if the city is partnering with a sports team to remediate and then build on the location, the sports team isn't likely to go bankrupt in the next 3-4 years.

Paywalled.

This also tells you the market for all players is not nearly as hot as before 2023.

The hurdle would be how much it would cost and who will pay for it. It's reasonable for the city and state to pay a portion of those costs but maybe not all? And of course, it does take time to get it done.

A spot in the suburbs is quite different from a spot downtown with a contamination history.

The good news would be - if they have an actual plan to do this, they have a completely functioning ballpark they could use for a couple of extra years with no obvious issues. This isn't like "Oakland/Vegas", where I have no idea where they're actually playing while a stadium is being built. If all parties wanted this to work, it all comes down to who pays for what.

I do think there are some additional approach issues that the White Sox have screwed up with these guys in their development. With Eloy, the inability to teach him to elevate the ball, their focus on ground balls the other way, has dramatically impacted his output at the plate when he's healthy. This has been an issue for years now and it has gotten worse, I don't know who has taught them this but it's been team wide, the longer they are up the more they have focused on ground balls the other way rather than HR. With Moncada, they seem like they have ruined his eyes somehow. When he came up, he struggled the first year because he was too patient and pitchers were taking advantage of it. In 2019, his walk rate dropped, but his K rate also dropped and his contact rate went up. In 2018, he walked 10% of the time and struck out 33% of the time. In 2023, he walked 5.6% of the time and struck out 30% of the time. He's lost the walks, but the Ks have come back. A tiny loss of power when you are being that aggressive, due to injury or aging, is really damaging.

This will be a very, very long process if they want to actually do it. It makes sense, but there's going to be a huge amount of negotiation with the city and state on money and ownership rights. Construction on that site will be slow also as they will have to do a lot of environmental remediation as the first steps.

These days it isn't just that - it's also being able to take advantage of the land around your ballpark to build things that integrate with it - real estate, shops that bring in additional revenue. That's why the Cohen plan you cite is worth so much and why he's put so much money into the Mets. The White Sox could at least have some opportunity to do that at this site.

This doesn’t remind me at all of those white Sox. Adding Grandal, Keuchel, Lynn, Kimbrel, among others. They had a very different problem, they blew all of the assets they had -limited trade assets and only so mu ch money to spend - on high risk guys late in their careers who consistently imploded. The Os are at least being cautious about their assets, they aren’t being aggressive but they aren’t risking what they have on all in / doomed if it doesn’t work this year bets.

FWIW, the Yankees haven’t been done yet, but as far as I can tell ZiPS has them at 92 wins and best in the AL so far on their projections.

I doubt the Bears have decided what they're doing with the pick yet because they probably know that a truly insane offer is possible but not guaranteed. They would be smart to keep their options open, it's the obvious choice. If they're meeting with a guy like this, they're probably talking about both situations, asking for a guy's evaluation of both Fields and Williams.

Snell is also this super weird option where he has 2 Cy Young awards with 3.33 middling seasons in-between. So, the odds are 50% or better that you're signing him for $240 million and getting $75 million performance in most of the years. It's rather remarkable for a Cy Young winner - the 2023 picture is dramatically different from the previous years. Snell's agent will focus only on 2023 since he wants a maximum return, a team will look at everything.

Well neither of them are particularly good, but there are far more issues if you dig up the land to build something than if you let it sit there. Contaminants in the ground will be disturbed by construction, running pipes through the ground - pipes are never fully sealed, so you will be mobilizing them when water leaks in or out. During construction you kick up dust and if the dust is contaminated that's bad for the surroundings. It isn't insurmountable, but it does add costs during the development and construction phase. Frankly, it isn't unreasonable for the city and state to bear some of those costs, since they are a legacy of previous industries and they will be a barrier to turning this ground into taxable businesses long-term.

I figured there had to be a lot of pollution remediation issues here.

Fine. I will happily talk about the promise of the new White Sox PBP broadcaster since they are clearly someone to be excited about, with new and forward thinking. Who are they?

https://www.78chicago.com https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_78

The White Sox can't even find a play by play broadcaster, finding both?

If the offers for Cease have been as weak as I expected, the risk isn’t that great as a weak return doesnt move the needle that much. ”Oh no Cease got hurt, now we will never get Ortiz” - not exactly a franchise changing miss.

Did the Mets "flooding" the market last year lead to weak offers for TDL pitchers? I sure don't think so.

They were always "weirdly careful" with Graveman, they never seemed to want him to pitch back to back games even when they desperately needed him to for example down the stretch in '22. I wonder if this is something they've been managing for a long time.

I don't think that's overplaying it, I think that's exactly what he should have done - set a high price but recognize he has control and a pitcher that is pretty reliable on health, so he can wait unless some team gets desperate. But also recognize that most teams are unlikely to make desperation moves at this point.