Eminor3rd

I'm really curious how many teams view Yariel as a potential starter, and if that will utlimately affect his decision and/or the money he's offered. To me, he's a high-leverage reliever that can do multiple innings, but a rebuilder like the Sox would have little to lose by promising him a chance to start and just seeing how it goes, if it got him to sign.

I'll check it out -- honestly I'm not sure why I haven't yet. I've heard it referenced several times over the years.

I have no reason to doubt the veracity of the research in that book, but I'd point out a couple things: 1) As you acknowledged, it would be a gross understatement to point out that things have changed since 1995. In fact the very strike event that is subject was a watershed moment for MLB labor that has kicked off three decades of major gains in terms of revenue invested into player labor. Inflation since then is roughly 100%, but MLB salaries have grown at closer to 400% over the same time span. Also the internet happened, and major bumps in broadcast revenue. In the 90s, front offices had a couple dozen full-time employees, today there are a couple hundred. This is all good news -- but the reality is that the economic landscape from then to now isn't similar. I have no idea how much profit Jerry Reinsdorf, for example, was pulling in 1995, but there's a good reason he wanted to collude with all his other cronies back then, and his fear has become a reality. Player salaries are literally the majority of the operating cost today, and that's crazy when you consider the cost of operating a stadium nearly daily for six months out of the year. 2) I haven't read the book, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but most of the analyses of that type I've seen over the years include asset value as part of the "losing or making money" equation. That is very important when the question is whether or not owners deserve any measure of subsidy for investment (they don't) and or whether or not we should sympathize with them when they cry poor (we shouldn't), but it's very different from the issue of annual liquid revenue, and more specifically, the ability for an org to cover significant spending increases based on team need. I'll just reiterate that I'm not suggesting for a moment that all the owners are doing just fine and always will be. It's just important to make the distinction between the entity that owns the capital an the entity that actually makes up and runs the business. And is is critically important for ALL of us -- fans, players, employees, etc. -- that the business remain healthy, because as icky as it feels, without the business, none of this even exists.

You say this a lot but, you have to recognize that there is a difference between the wealth of the owner and the operating revenue of a team. The latter is liquid, the former is overwhelmingly not, and much of it is tied in the market value of the franchise itself. If your argument is that the owner should continually liquidate wealth to infuse more cash into the team at a loss until he/she runs out of money: well ok, I guess you can want that, but even if it happened, the owner would be setting off a spiral that would make the franchise insolvent, torpedo its value (which represents a great deal of the wealth in question in the first place), eventually leading to hundreds of lost jobs and a set of tremendous tax burdens on the city. I say this as someone who believed as you do for a long time, and I do really get it, but I have actually “seen the books” and I think everyone would be surprised to see how narrow the margins actually are year over year. The reason owning a team is a good investment is not because they print money — it’s because the franchise value increases reliably and significantly over time, but that value isn’t just something you can withdraw like a bank account. You can take loans against it, but again, that gets dicey really quickly if you do it very often. Believe me, I have no tears to spare for the rich. But it isn’t as simple as “be less greedy”

There’s no reason not to wait. Yamamoto’s posting window is known and limited. No team is grading Imanaga/Uwasawa in the same class as Cease, and Glasnow costs four times as much in terms of salary and with only one year of control. Half the teams will rightfully balk at Snell’s price because of his peripherals. There will come a time in January when Cease is the premier piece on the market, both free agent and trade, and there are already more suitors than available alternatives.

I'm holding on Eloy for sure. If you want to move him, now isn't the time. He has so much more value to gain from a healthy season than he has value to lose from another mediocre one. And you're not reinvesting the money in any meaningful way anyhow.

Jfc. Can you imagine if they did this AFTER acquiring three middle infielders.

Value depends on the market. We all have a sense of what we feel like a guy “like Cease” would be worth in an average scenario, but realistically the price is going to depend upon how many suitors remain when all the reasonable alternatives to Cease are off the table. I think there’s a good chance that the situation is right for a Cease deal after Yamamoto/Snell sign, because Glasnow should theoretically require a different kind of return — but it’s totally possible that it ends up making more sense to wait until the deadline, accepting the injury risk, since Cease will still have the additional year of control. I wish I had reason to believe that Getz will be able to read the market properly, but we’ll never truly know, since we won’t know what will ultimately be offered. Regardless, I think a deal is really unlikely until the top free agents sign.

It’s worth noting, though, that Shewmake wasn’t rushed whatsoever. He spent one year per level, and has topped out repeating AAA.

I mean, I guess. I see a team perennially crying poor that traded a reliever, which it needed, for a post-hype glove-only player with some upside. Then they immediately spent some of their limited resources getting a 30 year old player with the same strengths and weaknesses except no upside. If you’re rebuilding, Shewmake needs reps at the big league level. If you’re contending, neither Shewmake nor Dejong is good enough, and btw you actually still need Bummer. And if, whats most likely actually true, this is a wasted transition year and someone is just going to hold the position warm for Montgomery, there’s no reason at all for that not to be Shewmake, who could at least turn into something tradable or useful. What are the chances that can trade Dejong for something more valuable than Shewmake anyway? In what world do you need both? This just feels like random move-making

I just can’t imagine the Sox being the team that gets Manaoh back into form.

Sox obtain mlb ready prospects and then immediately block them

Gonna have to see who’s left after the free agents sign, realistically, to find out what the price is for Cease. If two motivated buyers remain with good systems, the price could be quite high. Otherwise, the deadline might be the better time to sell. I tend to think they’ll make a deal this winter, but it’s not impossible to see some small market contenders settle for mid rotation free agents given Cease’s down year.

Idk why, but I could have sworn I saw something that suggested the first syllable was pronounced “show,” and so I’ve been confused ever since.

Alright guys, I’ve been wondering this for years: How do you pronounce “Shewmake”?

Does this mean we don’t have to get Salvador Perez now?

WAT

Same. Dodgers big favorites, Giants in second, Mets a distant third from what I’ve heard.

There isn't REALLY a path to contention in 2024, but I'm guessing that the FO has decided the fanbase isn't ready to hear them utter "rebuild." Because they think we're idiots, it seems like (based on Getz' comments about no one being untouchable + the rumors of them shopping guys like Cease), that they're going to just do it anyway and pretend they aren't -- perhaps believing that it will give them the cover to half-ass it instead of trying again to do it properly. This could be either because Jerry can't handle the wait, or because they've correctly assessed that they aren't in a good position to pivot (with so many of their expensive players currently with no trade value), or both. I predict we're going to see an offseason very similar to what you'd see from the Tigers, in which a lot of money will be spent on short-term veterans that fill holes and be dealt if useful, but won't stop any of the prospects from earning PT along the way. The hope will be that the "core" bounces back to the extent that a run at the division is possible with the stopgaps in place, but they'll settle for merely having a lot of guys to move for more low-upside, close-to-the-majors prospects that can provide similar value for cheap going forward. Was trying to keep the cynicism out but it crept back there toward the end, sorry.

Absolutely — plus it’s a clear sellers’ market now, meaning the upside from the deadline represents less of a premium than in an average year.

India would be a terrible move for the white Sox. Good but not great player with his mlb control already burning away. If they got India, they’d also need a guy like Cease.

Orioles make too much sense, IMO. I like the idea of the Sox getting some of their close-to-the-majors guys, because they can’t really develop the ones far away.

If the Sox get Kiner-Falefa or Rosario at under $10m, I'll be down for it.

I agree, but given the dearth of available shortstops, I don’t see those guys coming at those prices.

Right but who are you going to get on a one-year deal that has a chance to be better? Multiple years for Amed Rosario or Kiner-Falefa coming off 0.2 fWAR seasons? One year for a bit less for Brandon Crawford coming off a 63 wRC+? Didi Gregorious coming off of 58 wRC+? They're still gonna have to spend, it's just going to be a for a worse player, or a more expensive one, or both.