almagest

If its true the Sox are trying to get both Harper and Machado I'd think it more likely they have the top offer for Machado but he's still seeing what he can get on the market, and they're still in contact with Harper to see what it will take to get him signed. They could've pitched them both on playing together as well. They may have also structured the offers for both in a way where it makes sense if they actually sign both (I doubt this is true though).

Didn't say I thought they would, just they would have to be at the luxury tax to be able to field a competitive roster with so much money tied up in two players.

If the Sox believe they can be consistently competitive by signing Bryce and Manny I think they can do it, but they'd have to be at or above the luxury tax threshold. Which is $208 million (and up) starting in 2020. You'd be looking at ~33% of your payroll being occupied by Bryce and Manny, assuming each is at 35 mil/yr. That seems doable while maintaining a competitive team, I just don't know if its smart.

I don't know why they would damage the relationship with one of their biggest clients to post a troll job. Seems really stupid and short-sighted.

As much as I'm trying not to get excited over small things, those gloves are getting me a first-class ticket on the hype train...

This picture is actually this guy: https://about.van.fedex.com/our-story/leadership/brian-philips/

Yeah I think they're a few years early on trading prospects en masse like this and I don't understand why they're doing it. A Realmuto move for them now just wouldn't make any sense.

I think they're doing the opposite of what I want the Sox to do. I think they're in that 75-80 win no-man's land the Sox were for years before they decided to trade Sale and Quintana.

If you just want a 4K blu-ray player there's no need for the X. The S does just fine.

If teams know the Dodgers need to trade Joc to sign Pollock that seems to remove some of their leverage. I don't know if they'll get full value (which is good for us).

Notable quote:

If he's bad probably.

Do you know if there is any validity to the idea that the White Sox are a source for all these contract leaks? Or is this just a ton of noise that journalists are not vetting and running with for clicks?

The only reason you have the max contract is because of the salary cap. If there was no max contract you could pay a superstar whatever you wanted and still fill out a roster with fair salaries for complementary players. So I don't know why you think the cap isn't the root problem. Also any team that pays 90%+ of their cap room for one player is begging to be non-competitive. There's no way that strategy would work in reality because there's a bunch of other teams that could spend responsibly and fill out a complete roster and beat the one star + scrubs team. Also why would an average player take a minimum salary when they could go elsewhere and make more, and probably have a better shot at being competitive?

Team control should absolutely be cut to a max age or max number of years or some combination. The lower the better in my opinion. Players should be allowed to spend their most productive years wherever they like for the amount of money they want/can get. I think the floor raised the midlevel salary specifically more than the cap. The cap just suppresses earnings on the whole.

The NFL doesn't have a max contract but they do have a salary cap.

So a salary cap doesn't put a cap on individual salaries?

He'd probably be making even more without a cap. And maybe he signs elsewhere if they can offer him more.

The cap didn't help with parity when it comes to the Heat superteam, or the Celtics, or Durant and Boogie signing with Golden State. Also there's no parity in the NBA and there never has been come on.

This has always been the case in the NBA so it obviously hasn't been fixed by a cap or a floor or complicated trade rules and exemptions. We could be in the exact same spot right now with the same teams with no cap or floor and players would still be making as much money, or even more for top players. Also if you want to be a dick in your replies go argue with someone else.

The only people I talk basketball with we talk about the state of the league and the Bulls. Most people I talk to we talk about football.

Good for *some* players.

We really disagree then. That system is a joke and it's a big reason why we have like 2 teams that can realistically win, a ton of teams with midlevel players stuck in NBA hell and a fight for lotto picks. High level players are also severely suppressed in salary potential.

Do you look at the NBA and say "yes this is good for the players, the fans, the team employees and the owners"?

Look at the NBA. You have marginal players making way too much money and lots of weird trade exemptions and salary matching and all sorts of messed up payroll situations.