December 29, 20196 yr The Tigers refusal to trade Boyd unless they get a Sale type return is bizarre. At least with Merrifield in KC he's hilariously cheap over the length of his deal.
December 29, 20196 yr 12 minutes ago, BackDoorBreach said: The Tigers refusal to trade Boyd unless they get a Sale type return is bizarre. At least with Merrifield in KC he's hilariously cheap over the length of his deal. I never have gotten all of the buzz around Boyd. Plus didn't the Tigers already miss the bus on capitalizing on a trade for Fulmer?
December 29, 20196 yr 37 minutes ago, DaGame2584 said: I never have gotten all of the buzz around Boyd. Plus didn't the Tigers already miss the bus on capitalizing on a trade for Fulmer? Advanced metrics like him but he's just not very good and gives up a million HRs. He's one of those guys that remind me new age stats and metrics on pitchers have kinks still. You can't tell me Lance Lynn was the 11th best player in baseball last year for the same reason, despite having a really good year.
December 29, 20196 yr 16 minutes ago, BackDoorBreach said: Advanced metrics like him but he's just not very good and gives up a million HRs. He's one of those guys that remind me new age stats and metrics on pitchers have kinks still. You can't tell me Lance Lynn was the 11th best player in baseball last year for the same reason, despite having a really good year. FIP is broken. If you want to evaluate pitchers, use DRA/WARP from BP. It's a better metric and more accurate imo.
December 30, 20196 yr 20 minutes ago, EvilJester99 said: The Cubs whiff again. Although not giving a 3 year deal to a 32 year old Japanese center fielder may be a blessing in disguise for them. EDIT: Nevermind. He only got 3 years, $15 million. That’s chump change. The Cubs aren’t spending any money this offseason. https://mobile.twitter.com/Kazuto_Yamazaki/status/1211711548923596801 Edited December 30, 20196 yr by Moan4Yoan
December 30, 20196 yr Heyman reporting differently... https://mobile.twitter.com/JonHeyman/status/1211719995429982209
December 30, 20196 yr 9 minutes ago, Moan4Yoan said: Heyman reporting differently... https://mobile.twitter.com/JonHeyman/status/1211719995429982209 Maybe Heyman is quoting the price with the posting fee included?
December 30, 20196 yr 20 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said: Maybe Heyman is quoting the price with the posting fee included? Joel Sherman reporting it’s done. Three year deal but no money reported. https://mobile.twitter.com/Joelsherman1/status/1211733158732935168 Edited December 30, 20196 yr by Moan4Yoan
December 30, 20196 yr 39 minutes ago, aeichhor said: Cubs are so broke that they can’t even afford this guy. Lol
December 30, 20196 yr One of either Castellanos or Ozuna are completely fucked. Who is left out there to sign those guys to long term deals? There just aren't enough interested parties left. I think one of those two guys is going to get either a short deal or a hell of lot less money than most thought.
December 30, 20196 yr 1 minute ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said: One of either Castellanos or Ozuna are completely fucked. Who is left out there to sign those guys to long term deals? There just aren't enough interested parties left. I think one of those two guys is going to get either a short deal or a hell of lot less money than most thought. Makes me wonder what deals they were offered that are now off the table because teams have moved on or spent the $$ elsewhere. Waiting is a game that can work...but it can also burn you.
December 30, 20196 yr 2 minutes ago, wegner said: Makes me wonder what deals they were offered that are now off the table because teams have moved on or spent the $$ elsewhere. Waiting is a game that can work...but it can also burn you. Especially when you're a poor defending power hitting outfielder. That market has tanked and never quite recovered. I cited JD Martinez because it took him months to get over 100 million and no one else was offering it but the Red Sox. Castellanos is younger, and maybe slightly more capable as a defender, but he's no where near the hitter JD was. I wouldn't be shocked to see one of these two sign for like 3 years, 50 million or 1 year, 22-24 million in hopes of cashing in next year. I just don't see anyone throwing 80-90 million at either guy at this point. Besides the Rangers - who I don't understand signing an OF'er but they've been reportedly interested - who is really out there that hasn't already invested in other options? Edited December 30, 20196 yr by Look at Ray Ray Run
December 30, 20196 yr 7 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said: One of either Castellanos or Ozuna are completely fucked. Who is left out there to sign those guys to long term deals? There just aren't enough interested parties left. I think one of those two guys is going to get either a short deal or a hell of lot less money than most thought. I think they will be okay with the Rangers, Giants, and Cardinals. I think Puig will end up being the odd man out and have to settle for a short-term deal.
December 30, 20196 yr 11 minutes ago, Moan4Yoan said: I think they will be okay with the Rangers, Giants, and Cardinals. I think Puig will end up being the odd man out and have to settle for a short-term deal. Cardinals had a log jam of outfielders, and they have really wanted to get their young OF'er more at bats which was why they didn't even discuss an extension with Ozuna. I think they're a hard no for all three. All the Castellanos to Giants momentum has come to a halt and the most recent update I read was that they may be more interested in Puig and a shorter deal at this point realizing that Castellanos doesn't make much sense for their OF and window. ... that leaves the Rangers who just traded an OF'er because they already had too many. Edited December 30, 20196 yr by Look at Ray Ray Run
December 30, 20196 yr 10 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said: Cardinals had a log jam of outfielders, and they have really wanted to get their young OF'er more at bats which was why they didn't even discuss an extension with Ozuna. I think they're a hard no for all three. All the Castellanos to Giants momentum has come to a halt and the most recent update I read was that they may be more interested in Puig and a shorter deal at this point realizing that Castellanos doesn't make much sense for their OF and window. I heard a week ago on MLB network that maybe Arizona takes a swing on Ozuna or he returns back to St. Louis. Castellanos? Yeah wow. Idk. I mean you're right I keep seeing the Rangers showing interest but they have like 1000 of's. They're still waiting to make that big splash. Puig is screwed.
December 30, 20196 yr 1 hour ago, YouCanPutItOnTheBoardYES! said: Cubs are so broke that they can’t even afford this guy. Lol They're not broke. They're just channeling their inner Bill Wirtz.
December 30, 20196 yr 7 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said: They're not broke. They're just channeling their inner Bill Wirtz. Rumor has it that they couldn’t sign Eric Sogard until they subtracted money, so I think they’re pretty broke.
December 30, 20196 yr 2 minutes ago, YouCanPutItOnTheBoardYES! said: Rumor has it that they couldn’t sign Eric Sogard until they subtracted money, so I think they’re pretty broke. They aren't really broke, they are just refusing to go any more over the luxury tax threshold. It's understandable from a business perspective, but also very confusing because it is causing their window to close rapidly. Especially because of the amount of money that was pumped into the area surrounding the park.
December 30, 20196 yr 7 minutes ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said: They aren't really broke, they are just refusing to go any more over the luxury tax threshold. It's understandable from a business perspective, but also very confusing because it is causing their window to close rapidly. Especially because of the amount of money that was pumped into the area surrounding the park. They just know the Age of the White Sox is here and so they are graciously stepping aside.
December 30, 20196 yr 27 minutes ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said: They aren't really broke, they are just refusing to go any more over the luxury tax threshold. It's understandable from a business perspective, but also very confusing because it is causing their window to close rapidly. Especially because of the amount of money that was pumped into the area surrounding the park. This is the truth. The Cubs are far from broke. But the Cubs already got their World Series, Ricketts is a businessman, and now he wants the Cubs to be his cash cow and make some serious money without paying any penalties. I do think it’s hilarious that in the same offseason the Cubs may trade their star player in Bryant to stay out of the luxury tax is the same offseason they expect Cubs fans to throw them $10 to $12 bucks a month for their new network. Talk about bad timing. But Ricketts knows that Cubs fans are lemmings and will still pay up, even if the team sucks. Edited December 30, 20196 yr by Moan4Yoan
December 30, 20196 yr 32 minutes ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said: They aren't really broke, they are just refusing to go any more over the luxury tax threshold. It's understandable from a business perspective, but also very confusing because it is causing their window to close rapidly. Especially because of the amount of money that was pumped into the area surrounding the park. It's insulting to their fanbase to start a new network and slash payroll simultaneously. With the way things are right now, everyone that isn't a star player is getting screwed. Either bite the bullet and go to a cap and floor system, or eliminate the incredibly punitive parts of the luxury tax. I think the thing that is making every rich team pause a moment is the forfeiture of the 1st round draft pick for going over 3 years in a row. They're perfectly content do do it for 2 years, but they can't do it for that 3rd year.
December 30, 20196 yr 4 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said: It's insulting to their fanbase to start a new network and slash payroll simultaneously. With the way things are right now, everyone that isn't a star player is getting screwed. Either bite the bullet and go to a cap and floor system, or eliminate the incredibly punitive parts of the luxury tax. I think the thing that is making every rich team pause a moment is the forfeiture of the 1st round draft pick for going over 3 years in a row. They're perfectly content do do it for 2 years, but they can't do it for that 3rd year. A CAP/Floor system will not fix anything. Giving teams a floor when they already penny-pinch would not be a good idea IMO. You'll see more veterans screwed out of their paydays. You technically already have a CAP system in place with the Luxury Tax. There's nothing from stopping teams from going over it, and despite minimal penalties, they still choose not to do so. If you want to see teams spending again, get rid of the Luxury Tax. Then you fall right back into super team days of the Dodgers and Yankees. Not sure there is an answer that doesn't cause another problem down the road.
December 30, 20196 yr 9 minutes ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said: A CAP/Floor system will not fix anything. Giving teams a floor when they already penny-pinch would not be a good idea IMO. You'll see more veterans screwed out of their paydays. You technically already have a CAP system in place with the Luxury Tax. There's nothing from stopping teams from going over it, and despite minimal penalties, they still choose not to do so. If you want to see teams spending again, get rid of the Luxury Tax. Then you fall right back into super team days of the Dodgers and Yankees. Not sure there is an answer that doesn't cause another problem down the road. No, it fixes a lot. If every team was forced to have a $100M+ payroll it would change a ton. The middle class would get paid again. You make the floor 70% of the cap, problem solved. If the current tax is a hard cap, then nobody can spend more than $210M, on payroll, but everyone has to spend $147M. More teams will be able to keep their own players. There could even be a salary scale with performance bonuses for rookies so they get paid more. Even the freaking A's and Rays are making a ton of money. Don't let them tell you otherwise. I honestly don't think the owners want a salary cap either because they'd have to open up the books. They don't want the players to know how much money they're making. Edited December 30, 20196 yr by Jack Parkman
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.