3 minutes ago, baseball_gal_aly said:

 

This gal knows her s%*#. 

No. It's just click bait. 

 

There aren't people who will buy teams and spend the team into the red every year. 

On 12/10/2023 at 11:38 PM, Eminor3rd said:

He’s legit. Six decent pitches, one of the best curveballs I’ve ever seen. Hits 98 when he wants. Elite command, can fall back on the slider/cutter/change if the curve/splitter aren’t working. Deceptive delivery. Hard worker, open-minded and a good teammate. He’s gonna be a good one.

Only thing is he’s small. 

12 years for a pitcher is insane.

The dodgers have spent a ton of money on Ohtani and Yamamoto but Ohtani won't even pitch next year due to tommy john and has a history of arm trouble. Yamamoto is small, throws hard, and now is signed for 12 years.

These contracts are way too risky. People act like the Dodgers are winning it all because of these moves but they are all guys who are huge injury risks or never healthy.

The other guy Glassnow he's averaged like 12 starts the last four years. I liked the trade for them but the extension means yet another injury risk

Edited December 23, 20232 yr by wrathofhahn

9 minutes ago, wrathofhahn said:

12 years for a pitcher is insane.

The dodgers have spent a ton of money on Ohtani and Yamamoto but Ohtani won't even pitch next year due to tommy john and has a history of arm trouble. Yamamoto is small, throws hard, and now is signed for 12 years.

These contracts are way too risky. People act like the Dodgers are winning it all because of these moves but they are all guys who are huge injury risks or never healthy.

The other guy Glassnow he's averaged like 12 starts the last four years. I liked the trade for them but the extension means yet another injury risk

Well any single time a MLB pitcher throws a ball it is an injury risk isn't it? That's where your preparation, medical people, injury prevention staff et al come into play.

The best organizations minimize that risk so the "gamble" isn't as big.

The White Sox are not one of those organizations over and above JR's reluctance to take risks that can impact his bottom-line.

 

They use a different baseball in Japan.  It's a tackier ball so pitchers can spin it easier with less pressure on the elbow. When Japanese pitchers come over here they have to grip the ball tighter to get the same amount of spin and that puts lots more pressure on the elbow.  Add that to the fact that he's small, has a max effort delivery and throws a ton of splitters and the risk level is crazy high.  I don't think anyone is questioning his ability but they should be seriously questioning his durability.  

Just now, Harold's Leg Lift said:

They use a different baseball in Japan.  It's a tackier ball so pitchers can spin it easier with less pressure on the elbow. When Japanese pitchers come over here they have to grip the ball tighter to get the same amount of spin and that puts lots more pressure on the elbow.  Add that to the fact that he's small, has a max effort delivery and throws a ton of splitters and the risk level is crazy high.  I don't think anyone is questioning his ability but they should be seriously questioning his durability.  

fair point but again the Dodgers (and the best organizations) don't care. If he can give them three-four-five years of good performance that's what matters. The here and now. They get to the post season, possibly win in the post season, get more home games, make more money through concessions, parking, potential media deals increase in value...they get their money back in spades.

 

1 hour ago, baseball_gal_aly said:

 

This gal knows her s%*#. 

This is literally stupid as f*** and is actually the post I referencing when I said her argument was dumb.  Those teams can spend more because they make more from their TV deals than all other clubs and Cohen is a unicorn when it comes to owners due to his insane wealth.  I am actually embarrassed this person is employed as a professional writer if she is really this stupid.

17 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

This is literally stupid as f*** and is actually the post I referencing when I said her argument was dumb.  Those teams can spend more because they make more from their TV deals than all other clubs and Cohen is a unicorn when it comes to owners due to his insane wealth.  I am actually embarrassed this person is employed as a professional writer if she is really this stupid.

 

There are multiple people that work as baseball writers, that say that owners are being cheap and raking in massive profits. 

If I can find more legit writers that agree, I'll present my evidence. 

It was all over twitter when Ohtani signed. 

Edited December 23, 20232 yr by baseball_gal_aly

7 minutes ago, baseball_gal_aly said:

Do you think Craig Calcaterra is stupid? He agrees. 

There are multiple people that work as baseball writers, not just Calcaterra that say that owners are being cheap and raking in massive profits. 

If I can find more legit writers that agree, I'll present my evidence. 

I have no idea who Craig Calcaterra is.  And yes, there are some owners gaming the revenue sharing system which is why everyone is in favor of a salary floor.  But if you honestly believe most teams should be able to spend as much as the Yankees, Mets, & Dodgers, then you simply don’t get how this s%*# works.

1 hour ago, Harold's Leg Lift said:

They use a different baseball in Japan.  It's a tackier ball so pitchers can spin it easier with less pressure on the elbow. When Japanese pitchers come over here they have to grip the ball tighter to get the same amount of spin and that puts lots more pressure on the elbow.  Add that to the fact that he's small, has a max effort delivery and throws a ton of splitters and the risk level is crazy high.  I don't think anyone is questioning his ability but they should be seriously questioning his durability.  

This is 100% acurrate. That's why the deal is crazy. But they can absorb it. 

22 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

I have no idea who Craig Calcaterra is.  And yes, there are some owners gaming the revenue sharing system which is why everyone is in favor of a salary floor.  But if you honestly believe most teams should be able to spend as much as the Yankees, Mets, & Dodgers, then you simply don’t get how this s%*# works.

Correct. Maybe some could spend more but where would it get them if it's still 50% of what the top 3 can spend? 

44 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

I have no idea who Craig Calcaterra is.  And yes, there are some owners gaming the revenue sharing system which is why everyone is in favor of a salary floor.  But if you honestly believe most teams should be able to spend as much as the Yankees, Mets, & Dodgers, then you simply don’t get how this s%*# works.

No, I think you don't understand how things work. 

Edited December 23, 20232 yr by baseball_gal_aly

22 minutes ago, ptatc said:

Correct. Maybe some could spend more but where would it get them if it's still 50% of what the top 3 can spend? 

Increase the odds of getting to the post season where anything can happen.

Over a 162 game regular season talent usually wins out, more talent, the better your chances. 

7 hours ago, baseball_gal_aly said:

 

There are multiple people that work as baseball writers, that say that owners are being cheap and raking in massive profits. 

If I can find more legit writers that agree, I'll present my evidence. 

It was all over twitter when Ohtani signed. 

Realistically, there should similar rules as the NBA which forces owners to spend within a certain window, a salary floor and a salary cap. It matters less if your owner is Jerry Reinsdorf or if he’s Steve Cohen, they literally aren’t given the option aside from going into the luxury tax to retain players (rather than acquiring them via trade or free agency). Reinsdorf is “cheap” by nba owner standards by refusing to go into the luxury tax during the Derrick Rose years, arguably more recently by refusing to keep Lauri Markannen, but the disparity between the lowest payroll and the highest payroll in the NBA is $85mil compared to $280mil for the MLB last season…and that lowest payroll team, the Spurs, have been proven to spend but are rebuilding while the highest spending team, the Suns, are a relatively small market compared to Los Angeles, New York or Chicago. 
 

the financial parity in that league is so much better, I frankly don’t see why any MLB fan would want it any other way. Why should we put our hopes in some virtuous billionaire to spend money out of the kindness of his heart without having to be coerced into doing it by league regulations?

Edited December 24, 20232 yr by nrockway

5 minutes ago, nrockway said:

Realistically, there should similar rules as the NBA which forces owners to spend within a certain window, a salary floor and a salary cap. It matters less if your owner is Jerry Reinsdorf or if he’s Steve Cohen, they literally aren’t given the option aside from going into the luxury tax to retain players (rather than acquiring them via trade or free agency). Reinsdorf is “cheap” by nba owner standards by refusing to go into the luxury tax during the Derrick Rose years, arguably more recently by refusing to keep Lauri Markannen, but the disparity between the highest payroll and the largest payroll in the NBA is $85mil compared to $280mil for the MLB last season…and that lowest payroll team, the Spurs, have been proven to spend but are rebuilding while the highest spending team, the Suns, are a relatively small market compared to Los Angeles, New York or Chicago. 
 

the financial parity in that league is so much better, I frankly don’t see why any MLB fan would want it any other way. Why should we put our hopes in some virtuous billionaire to spend money out of the kindness of his heart without having to be coerced into doing it by league regulations?

I wouldn't mind a cap and floor system as long as it's like the NFL where the floor is like 88% of the cap. 

The NFL is king because all revenue is league revenue and it gets split evenly amongst the 32 teams. I have no clue why every sports league isn't run this way. 

6 minutes ago, Lip Man 1 said:

Increase the odds of getting to the post season where anything can happen.

Over a 162 game regular season talent usually wins out, more talent, the better your chances. 

True, the chances improve but by how much? It's minimal compared to the high revenue teams. Its not worth the chance to run the team into the red only to need to cut payroll and players. 

Until baseball gets a salary cap and floor, it won't change. The teams with the revenue will always have the best chance. 

37 minutes ago, baseball_gal_aly said:

No, I think you don't understand how things work. 

Lol…you think the Brewers should be able to spend as much as the Dodgers despite a TV deal that’s 10% of what LA gets?

11 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Lol…you think the Brewers should be able to spend as much as the Dodgers despite a TV deal that’s 10% of what LA gets?

Until I see the books, yes. 

If they're going to be secretive about how much they're making I'm going to assume they're hiding massive profits like those with bank accounts in the Cayman Islands and such.

Edited December 23, 20232 yr by baseball_gal_aly

30 minutes ago, baseball_gal_aly said:

I wouldn't mind a cap and floor system as long as it's like the NFL where the floor is like 88% of the cap. 

The NFL is king because all revenue is league revenue and it gets split evenly amongst the 32 teams. I have no clue why every sports league isn't run this way. 

Those leagues' players unions won these things through brutal CBA fights and work stoppages. Baseball owners don't because they don't have to under the CBA. The commissioner of baseball works for the owners and not for the overall health of the league. It would take at minimum an entire lost season to bring the owners to the brink of such concessions, and being that they are very wealthy, they can afford to lose the baseball revenue longer than the average player can live without game checks. That is the unfortunate power baseball owners have.

5 minutes ago, baseball_gal_aly said:

Until I see the books, yes. 

If they're going to be secretive about how much they're making I'm going to assume they're hiding massive profits like those with bank accounts in the Cayman Islands and such.

It fairly obvious that there is a massive discrepancy in revenues. I don't what you think they may be hiding the difference is far too large for competition. 

4 minutes ago, baseball_gal_aly said:

Until I see the books, yes. 

If they're going to be secretive about how much they're making I'm going to assume they're hiding massive profits like those with bank accounts in the Cayman Islands and such.

While there is likely some truth to the bolded, the spending power of the Brewers simply isn't that of the Dodgers or Yankees. Those teams can spend a billion with a B dollars on free agents in one offseason and still make a profit. There is simply no way a media market as small as Milwaukee can generate the same revenue.

I agree that the owners should spend every available dollar to put competitive teams on the field, but let's at least argue within the parameters of reality. I personally don't believe baseball owners should make a single dollar in profit above their purchase price paid, but it would be absurd to expect any multiple billion dollar industry to function like that. I hate it, but its simply not realistic.

3 minutes ago, Tnetennba said:

Those leagues' players unions won these things through brutal CBA fights and work stoppages. Baseball owners don't because they don't have to under the CBA. The commissioner of baseball works for the owners and not for the overall health of the league. It would take at minimum an entire lost season to bring the owners to the brink of such concessions, and being that they are very wealthy, they can afford to lose the baseball revenue longer than the average player can live without game checks. That is the unfortunate power baseball owners have.

 Its as much the union's fault as the owners. The won't agree to a salary cap. The owners have tried and they won't even discuss it. 

Just now, Tnetennba said:

While there is likely some truth to the bolded, the spending power of the Brewers simply isn't that of the Dodgers or Yankees. Those teams can spend a billion with a B dollars on free agents in one offseason and still make a profit. There is simply no way a media market as small as Milwaukee can generate the same revenue.

I agree that the owners should spend every available dollar to put competitive teams on the field, but let's at least argue within the parameters of reality. I personally don't believe baseball owners should make a single dollar in profit above their purchase price paid, but it would be absurd to expect any multiple billion dollar industry to function like that. I hate it, but its simply not realistic.

Why shouldn't the owners of a business make a profit? That just isn't realistic. 

42 minutes ago, baseball_gal_aly said:

I wouldn't mind a cap and floor system as long as it's like the NFL where the floor is like 88% of the cap. 

The NFL is king because all revenue is league revenue and it gets split evenly amongst the 32 teams. I have no clue why every sports league isn't run this way. 

Because none of the other sports were started by bookies who shared everything to take advantage of gamblers. 

1 minute ago, ptatc said:

 Its as much the union's fault as the owners. The won't agree to a salary cap. The owners have tried and they won't even discuss it. 

I'm aware. I would need to see the caveats to those proposals before holding that against the union.

1 minute ago, ptatc said:

 Its as much the union's fault as the owners. The won't agree to a salary cap. The owners have tried and they won't even discuss it. 

The issue is that the MLBPA is misguided and only cares about the contracts for the Ohtani, Trout and Harper type players and not the majority of their union. They have shown repeatedly that they're willing to sell out the young players and minor leaguers in order for the top 10 players to get 400+M contracts.