Eminor3rd

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Oct 27, 2017 -> 11:32 AM) The opt out is going to kill a lot of his value too. Either he plays well enough and then leaves or he doesn't perform and you're stuck with an albatross. Not a very attractive bet to make. Exactly, and this is oft-overlooked by the mainstream press. Basically, if you're fortunate, and he ages well enough that he can still provide surplus value into the back half of the deal, then you lose him to free agency. The ONLY situation in where you pay him all that money is if he ISN'T worth it. So even if you're a gambling type, the upside is limited.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 27, 2017 -> 07:25 AM) But....we've definitely seen deals exactly like that before. For example - the Blue Jays taking on Tulowitzki while giving up top talent. The Dodgers took on extra bad contracts in order to get Gonzalez. The White Sox gave up top talent to take on half of James Shields's deal. The amount of money owed to Stanton dwarfs ALL of those.

QUOTE (Heads22 @ Oct 25, 2017 -> 07:54 PM) could just leave it the way it is Pssh

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Oct 25, 2017 -> 10:36 AM) They should just cut it short period. A whole month of goes seems too much and it seems the players think the same. Yeah, it seems ST was invented back when players didn't stay in shape all year, and so they needed time to actually get there. Nowadays they just need some reps for rhythm. Should be two weeks at most for position players.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 19, 2017 -> 11:21 AM) I was gonna post the same thing, but I had a differing thought. DH or no DH, the roster is 25 players. While removing the DH would cost certain sluggers their jobs, doesn't the existence of the DH take away a job from either an extra reliever or light-hitting defensive specialist? The same amount of jobs would be there, it would just take away a job from one type of player and hand it to a different type of player. Obviously the PA won't see it that way, but it didn't seem that cut and dry when I thought about it longer. Because those players whose jobs would be lost would push back, and the union would have nothing to say to them. The union's job is literally to represent the players' interests, and this would go against them directly, even if it doesn't affect them all equally. In addition to allowing a class of player to exist where it wouldn't normally (the DH-only guy), it allows other position players to extend their careers and earnings by playing longer. Guys like Carlos Beltran or Matt Holliday literally wouldn't have received contracts offers without the DH DH: Why are you eliminating my job? MLBPA: Well the same amount of jobs exist in total, so yeah I mean, your job sure, but there are still jobs DH: So there aren't even more jobs total as a result? MLBPA: Well no DH: Then what have you gained for us in exchange for eliminating my job? MLBPA: Well. Nothing

As long as the MLBPA exists, the DH will NEVER be removed. Doing so would take jobs away from existing members. Regardless of how you feel about the DH, there's only one way for it to go: upward. More DH teams can be added, but none will ever go away.

In our case, Jeff Mathis would provide the same benefit for a fraction of the cost.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 17, 2017 -> 01:37 PM) Another pretty radical, yet common sense idea for expansion... Add another team to the NYC market. If you divide the entire metro area by just the Mets and Yankees, it is still MUCH bigger than pretty much any other teams solo market place. Dividing that market up again might do more for rebalancing finances in baseball than anything else. It definitely makes sense on paper, but there's just no way in a billion years the Yankees and Mets would EVER agree to that. It's literally just agreeing to give up vast amounts money, present and future, to someone else.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Oct 17, 2017 -> 11:59 AM) We'd lose players. The Hawks would look a lot better with TVR, Kruger (technically not drafted but may have been a byproduct of the draft) etc. Right but everyone would lose players. Also, wasn't the Vegas expansion draft considered the most expansion-team-friendly instance in modern history or something? I think the typical MLB draft would include more players being protected. QUOTE (flavum @ Oct 17, 2017 -> 12:00 PM) The next sentence kinda answered it. 30 teams with tons of fringe major league players is watering the product down. Every team uses 50 players/25 pitchers on average. Add two more teams, that’s roughly 100 more fringe major league players. There would also be more haves and have nots. Also, just odds. Teams are now lucky if they win a World Series once every 30 years. Next, it’ll be 32. The definition of great team is getting blurred. Is it winning an October tournament, or winning 85+ games six out of 10 years. A case can be made that the latter is tougher to do. Baseball is fine at 30. It would be better at 28. It will be worse at 32. Your evidence is spot-on, but I take the opposite view on the conclusion. I actually LIKE the idea of talent dilution. It gives more players a chance, which creates a player pool with less well-rounded skillsets, thus opening the door for more interesting and unbalanced strategies. It also makes star players more scarce and thus even more valuable. If anything, that should lead to fewer teams clustered around the WC mark as teams take risks to adopt their strategies to search out what is now optimal. I don't know, that all just seems fun and interesting to me as a fan.

QUOTE (flavum @ Oct 17, 2017 -> 10:27 AM) No current fan of a team should want expansion. Why not?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 17, 2017 -> 09:37 AM) With the way Charlotte supports baseball, they could well be in the discussion for an expansion or move in team. From what I understand, whatever authority decides such a thing has done a study and officially declared that BB&T park is NOT "able" to be converted to a MLB facility. So despite the other market factors, Charlotte may actually be among the LEAST viable destinations, given how shiny, new, and ideally located their currnet ballpark is.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Oct 17, 2017 -> 09:18 AM) Not quite. You don't really hear that now a days. The schedule hasn't always been 162 games. I'm ok cutting off the 6 (1 week). Right, because we've never taken games away, we've only ever added them. So all the records only ever INCREASE. How many homeruns should a guy have to hit in a 154 game season to be considered equal to the 162 game record? Also, coverage is DRASTICALLY different than it was in 1961.

I'm 100% for expansion -- it drives new fan engagement and is a fascinating process to follow for fans of all teams. The draft would be fun, even though we'd lose players, and dilution of talent creates more opportunities for everyone while making stars even more valuable. Wins all around. However, the BA proposal is a little aggressive for me. Realignment is whatever, and I could probably get over the league-lessness although I think too many others couldn't -- but reducing the number of games (even though it's probably better for everyone involved) is too hard to swallow for me because it instantly ruins the record book. Everything will always be a pre-realignment or post-realignment record, and that is just annoying.

QUOTE (TheFutureIsNear @ Oct 15, 2017 -> 10:37 AM) Yeah I don't disagree with that. Something like Dunning and Stephens would probably be about as much as I'd give up. And I live in the Philly area so I listen to all the sports talk radio and watch some games. Franco isn't exactly the most popular in the city. Not that that means the phillies front office is listening and would trade him for cheap, but I would imagine they would at least listen. They like Galvis at SS for some reason, they were playing JP Crawford at 3B when he was brought up in September and platooning Franco between 1B and 3B. Ceasar Hernandez is a good player and they also have a 2B prospect with good pop named Kingery in AAA who is ready for a callup. They will have to make a decision on 1 of Franco/Galvis sooner or later basically. You're right that there's no room for him in PHI, but Franco's a bust. I'm okay with giving a post-hype sleeper a shot, but I wouldn't trade prospects we like and AREN'T busts. You're right that they're going to have to move someone (Kingery is the best prospect in the system, IMO, btw), but they'd have to drop it pretty low to be worth it. I wouldn't give up Dunning.

QUOTE (Jenksy Cat @ Oct 11, 2017 -> 05:46 PM) If he doesn't wait till he's 25 we're talking tens of millions in lost money. Right but we've long ago established that he already decided to do exactly that. My point is that if he was going to come over already and accept $4mm instead of hold out for $200mm, then the fact that he is having ankle surgery shouldn't make it any less likely. He isn't going to get lower offers this year because of the injury. His earning potential is already capped at 5-10% of his market value -- no team is going to be like "well we were going to give you $5mm, but now that you're hurt, we're only gonna go to $2mm."

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Oct 11, 2017 -> 12:30 PM) Otani to have ankle surgery. https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/10/shoh...le-surgery.html Guy should probably just wait a couple years and get healthy and dominate more in that time. Can't imagine it'll affect his decision much. He doesn't stand to lose any money from posting after surgery.

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Oct 10, 2017 -> 10:01 AM) Agree about Albuquerque gone and Putnam re-signed to a minor league deal. The numbers look pretty close although I think Avi's projection is a tad lite. I think Avi gets 8M and deserves it. QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Oct 10, 2017 -> 12:17 PM) Yea I know the arb process is moving away from traditional stats (where avi stands out) but there is no way the Sox low ball him like and go to arb. I'd bet they offer him 7.5 million, he counters 9 million, and they agree around 8 and avoid arb. The sox rarely if ever go to arb, right? Idk, Matt Swartz has gotten pretty damn good at predicting arb stuff. There are always a couple surprises, though. FWIW, his goal is accuracy based on past data, not on any type of projections on what a player DESERVES, or is REALLY WORTH or anything like that. As far as I know, arb is based heavily on precedent and comps, and still takes traditional numbers into account. So if Avi's seems light, I'm guessing it's because his power numbers (specifically HR/RBI) will look low when compared to other RFs his age in the recent past.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 4, 2017 -> 01:27 PM) He has to go through the Japanese posting process first. QUOTE (GenericUserName @ Oct 4, 2017 -> 01:52 PM) Yep, I forgot about that part. I'm assuming that only happens after their season is over Actually, before he goes through the Japanese posting process, the MLB and NPB have to AGREE to a posting process, as the current one expired with the end of our season. This is an underreported component of this story. One of the reporters on a Japanese baseball podcast I follow said that Yomiuri (the newspaper) published some leaked proposals from the MLB, and they all look substantially worse for the NPB than the previous system, which is right on line with the way the trend has gone. The consensus opinion over there seems to be that these proposals are simply not good enough and the NPB should push back, but the podcaster specifically opined that he wasn't sure the NPB has the backbone to do so. But, based on Manfred's public opinions about non-draft eligible new players, if the NPB DID push back much, the MLB seems unlikely to cave, even if it meant there was no system in place for the foreseeable future. If no agreement is in place, the only way Otani (this is the correct spelling, despite the fact that his jersey says 'Ohtani' -- according to a Japanese intern here at work, Japanese baseball takes the correctness of the name on the jersey much less seriously than American baseball, meaning that the players choose whatever they want to be on there, with many choosing first names or even nicknames. Several players have added an 'h' after a stressed 'O' apparently to encourage foreigners to actually pronounce their names correctly. Yos***omo Tsutsugo(h) is another example of a star who adds an 'h.' The correct way to pronounce 'Otani' is with the emphasis on the first syllable \OH-tuh-knee\ as opposed to the way we all seem to want to say it with the emphasis on the second syllable \oh-TAH-knee\) can come to America this offseason is if the Fighters decide to grant him unconditional free agency with no compensation at all. This, obviously seems extremely unlikely to occur, BUT That same podcaster personally believes that the Fighters WOULD grant him free agency, because they are specifically trying to brand themselves as a place for young superstars to choose to play specifically because they can be trusted to be lenient when said superstars want to jump to the MLB. Furthermore, those leaked proposals all call for posting fees to, essentially, equal about 15% of the contract that the player ultimately signs. So, in Otani's case, where the absolute maximum he could earn is something like $8mm, and likely far less, the Fighters don't stand to gain much anyway -- almost certainly less than a million bucks. It's all very interesting.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 3, 2017 -> 03:31 PM) Not that you're wrong to be skeptical, but Pujols didn't really hit a wall until he was 33, which would give the Sox a theoretical 5 years of plus production. Also, until this year, Pujols was still a good hitter, so that would be 8 years of production. And, not that I have any definitive proof, but despite the old player skills, I have a feeling Stanton will age better than that, but that's mere gut feeling. Prime Giancarlo Stanton isn't even remotely close to as good as prime Albert Pujols. And he's way more injury prone.

It's a bad, bad contract because ALL the risk is on the team. And he's injury prone, has "old player" skills, and his one primary strength (power) is currently more abundant in the league than ever before. I would not trade any prospects for him at all.

I've got a lot of concerns about Giolito. I understand why the broadcasters are trying to sell that 2.38 ERA, but I'm finding it very hard to buy, as it comes next to a 4.94 FIP, .189 BABIP, and a staggering 92% LOB rate. The only positives I can see are the 2.38 BB/9 rate and the fact that his homerun rate looks about where it should be, or maybe a touch high even, which at least suggests he wasn't getting lucky there. That said, I had the opportunity to watch him live and up close when was in Lehigh shortly before his call-up, and from that look and what I saw on TV, I remain mystified that his stuff isn't leading to better results. The curveball, especially, is stunning up close -- but I guess that we've always known the problem is with the fastball, despite its velocity. He's an enigma; he scares me.

QUOTE (credezcrew24 @ Oct 3, 2017 -> 01:23 AM) The Sox got Puckett + for a veteran rental scrap heap starter in Melky. The Sox got Cordell for a veteran rental in Swarzak. The Sox got Gillespie for a LOOGY. Based on those 3 returns I'd say without reservation that my view isn't spoiled from the Sale/Eaton/Q deals. It simply wasn't a good return relative to any other deal Hahn made. If Melky gets Puckett + then Frazier alone should equal Clarkin. I don't have any doubt the Sox would have benefited from holding on to Kahnle and letting him close. Also Davidson isn't "expensive" he's a market value closer. I know it's weird to think about, but we have to remember that "market value" means "no surplus value." So what a team is willing to pay for a "market value" asset is literally a matter of how much they are willing to OVERPAY for the asset given their current situation in the standings. Getting anything significant for a "market value" asset is a good deal, and largely depends more on the context around the teams involved that it does on one person's "skills" as a negotiator.

QUOTE (Tex @ Sep 26, 2017 -> 06:52 AM) No fun in asterixis. Just an FYI for anyone who wants to know: the plural of "asterix" is "astrices."

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 25, 2017 -> 01:29 PM) I read where the Cuban league is A ball or maybe AA. Plus he was adjusting his entire life in a new country without his family. He was only the 3rd player ever. Others have come from other countries, and he's the first to do that. It is a big accomplishment. If its such a technicality how come no other foreign player has done it? Call it what you want -- the number of foreign players that came to America in their primes is a FRACTION of the pool of players being referred too in this stat. I'm NOT saying Jose Abreu isn't good or hasn't accomplished anything; that his trial and burdens aren't heavy -- but THIS stat is basically made-up in an attempt to pander, and I hate when people do that. It's manipulating numbers to try to elicit a reaction. It's almost clickbait. It's just not necessary. There are plenty of reasons to appreciate Jose Abreu without having to throw out "HISTORIC" crap that's misleading. I'm not dissing Abreu, I'm complaining about bad journalism.

QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Sep 25, 2017 -> 09:57 AM) If you get caught 20 times and you steal 200, are you still hurting the team? Um, no? But what's your point?