(03-20-2019 02:27 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  Of course. The last two years worth of FAs got deals smaller than they were hoping, or didn't get deals at all. Agents and players see the writing on the wall and under the current CBA the current set of conditions incentivize this.

And that's probably not going to change going forward. If we believe the media reports about the commissioner's office and the MLBPA working on compromising to avoid a lockout or strike, that probably means management will make a few minor concessions (such as universal DH and/or a salary floor for every team) but there will be no major changes in the next CBA.

(03-20-2019 08:16 AM)stever20 Wrote:  so 1st game of the 2019 season and 5 homers were hit... 18 strike outs. 9 walks.

And most shocking......

a 1-2-3 inning for Hunter Strickland to get the save for the Mariners.

If Fiers can't last five innings in his starts and the A's have to keep putting marginal pitchers like Dull in before the 5th inning, then either Fiers will be out of the rotation soon, or this season will not be as much fun as last season. Or both, I suppose.

so Ichiro is retiring after today's game....

and this is utterly amazing...

Also amazing...

Dude is 45 years old.

And kinda funny: On the outfield wall as Ichiro is lining up to make the catch and show off his cannon, you can see an ad for Canon.

and the next extension is Blake Snell with the Rays. 50 million for 5 years.

(03-21-2019 01:56 PM)stever20 Wrote:  and the next extension is Blake Snell with the Rays. 50 million for 5 years.

Another indicator that what's going on in MLB right now doesn't have to be collusion. The CBA incentivizes this behavior.

But take a close look at the contract: $20MM in the first three years; $30MM in the last two. There isn't a no-trade clause and this is Tampa Bay, so what are the odds he's traded after year 3? I'm thinking pretty good.

(03-21-2019 05:34 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(03-21-2019 01:56 PM)stever20 Wrote:  and the next extension is Blake Snell with the Rays. 50 million for 5 years.

Another indicator that what's going on in MLB right now doesn't have to be collusion. The CBA incentivizes this behavior.

But take a close look at the contract: $20MM in the first three years; $30MM in the last two. There isn't a no-trade clause and this is Tampa Bay, so what are the odds he's traded after year 3? I'm thinking pretty good.

A club-friendly contract like that is a significant trade asset. The Rays could trade him even before year 3. For that matter, if their first half goes poorly this year and some team makes an attractive offer to the Rays, they could do to Snell what the Clippers did to Blake Griffin.

https://youtu.be/7SB16il97yw

Have to share my favorite baseball clip. No one does it like Mr.Jones.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(03-21-2019 06:42 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-21-2019 05:34 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(03-21-2019 01:56 PM)stever20 Wrote:  and the next extension is Blake Snell with the Rays. 50 million for 5 years.

Another indicator that what's going on in MLB right now doesn't have to be collusion. The CBA incentivizes this behavior.

But take a close look at the contract: $20MM in the first three years; $30MM in the last two. There isn't a no-trade clause and this is Tampa Bay, so what are the odds he's traded after year 3? I'm thinking pretty good.

A club-friendly contract like that is a significant trade asset. The Rays could trade him even before year 3. For that matter, if their first half goes poorly this year and some team makes an attractive offer to the Rays, they could do to Snell what the Clippers did to Blake Griffin.

It's a shame because the Rays have a good ML roster, a top 5 farm system, and a very low payroll. With some real ownership they could be a contender for the next decade and beyond, but they're essentially building a roster with one hand tied behind their backs. Such a shame that that has to be the case. Imagine if the front office was authorized to spend just $130 million a year?

so Red Sox looking like they're closing in on an extension with Sale.... will start next year

IMO a huge gamble for Boston. Covering his 31-35 years.... Notorious for wearing down late in seasons. And all the questions from last season at the end.

Huge risk, potentially huge reward.

(03-22-2019 02:07 PM)stever20 Wrote:  so Red Sox looking like they're closing in on an extension with Sale.... will start next year

IMO a huge gamble for Boston. Covering his 31-35 years.... Notorious for wearing down late in seasons. And all the questions from last season at the end.

Huge risk, potentially huge reward.

Pitchers over 32 are a risk, position players over 34, though the MLBPA will disagree.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(03-22-2019 01:26 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  Imagine if the front office was authorized to spend just $130 million a year?

I'm an A's fan, so that is obviously a question I have considered.

(03-22-2019 02:12 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(03-22-2019 02:07 PM)stever20 Wrote:  so Red Sox looking like they're closing in on an extension with Sale.... will start next year

IMO a huge gamble for Boston. Covering his 31-35 years.... Notorious for wearing down late in seasons. And all the questions from last season at the end.

Huge risk, potentially huge reward.

Pitchers over 32 are a risk, position players over 34, though the MLBPA will disagree.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

with his profile, Sale is even more of a risk....

(03-22-2019 02:19 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-22-2019 02:12 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(03-22-2019 02:07 PM)stever20 Wrote:  so Red Sox looking like they're closing in on an extension with Sale.... will start next year

IMO a huge gamble for Boston. Covering his 31-35 years.... Notorious for wearing down late in seasons. And all the questions from last season at the end.

Huge risk, potentially huge reward.

Pitchers over 32 are a risk, position players over 34, though the MLBPA will disagree.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

with his profile, Sale is even more of a risk....

Is there really the possibility of a huge reward? He's not likely to get more durable as the years go on.

(03-22-2019 02:27 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(03-22-2019 02:19 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-22-2019 02:12 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(03-22-2019 02:07 PM)stever20 Wrote:  so Red Sox looking like they're closing in on an extension with Sale.... will start next year

IMO a huge gamble for Boston. Covering his 31-35 years.... Notorious for wearing down late in seasons. And all the questions from last season at the end.

Huge risk, potentially huge reward.

Pitchers over 32 are a risk, position players over 34, though the MLBPA will disagree.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

with his profile, Sale is even more of a risk....

Is there really the possibility of a huge reward? He's not likely to get more durable as the years go on.

You could make the case if he could have his innings managed and he performs like he did 2 years ago.... that could be a huge reward...

(03-22-2019 02:34 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-22-2019 02:27 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(03-22-2019 02:19 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-22-2019 02:12 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(03-22-2019 02:07 PM)stever20 Wrote:  so Red Sox looking like they're closing in on an extension with Sale.... will start next year

IMO a huge gamble for Boston. Covering his 31-35 years.... Notorious for wearing down late in seasons. And all the questions from last season at the end.

Huge risk, potentially huge reward.

Pitchers over 32 are a risk, position players over 34, though the MLBPA will disagree.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

with his profile, Sale is even more of a risk....

Is there really the possibility of a huge reward? He's not likely to get more durable as the years go on.

You could make the case if he could have his innings managed and he performs like he did 2 years ago.... that could be a huge reward...

Sure, but the farther we get from "2 years ago" the less likely he is to perform like that. I tend to agree that risk outweighs the reward but it's the Sox we're talking about and they can easily handle the payroll (if they so choose).

(03-22-2019 03:20 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(03-22-2019 02:34 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-22-2019 02:27 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(03-22-2019 02:19 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-22-2019 02:12 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  Pitchers over 32 are a risk, position players over 34, though the MLBPA will disagree.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

with his profile, Sale is even more of a risk....

Is there really the possibility of a huge reward? He's not likely to get more durable as the years go on.

You could make the case if he could have his innings managed and he performs like he did 2 years ago.... that could be a huge reward...

Sure, but the farther we get from "2 years ago" the less likely he is to perform like that. I tend to agree that risk outweighs the reward but it's the Sox we're talking about and they can easily handle the payroll (if they so choose).

yeah I agree with you.... I probably wouldn't have done it, but then again, I probably wouldn't have done the Kershaw deal either.... It's really an interesting move quite frankly....

deGrom and Mets join the extension trend. 5 yr/$137.5MM.Replaces his current deal. Opt out after 2022 and a club option for 2024. Not sure he or the Mets were gonna allow this to get close to free agency but it’s still kind of amazing how the MLB landscape is shifting. If this continues the guys who hit free agency are more likely to have “issues” that make them higher risk signings. Teams without tradable assets are going to struggle a bit more to move up.

(03-20-2019 03:25 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-20-2019 02:27 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  Of course. The last two years worth of FAs got deals smaller than they were hoping, or didn't get deals at all. Agents and players see the writing on the wall and under the current CBA the current set of conditions incentivize this.

And that's probably not going to change going forward. If we believe the media reports about the commissioner's office and the MLBPA working on compromising to avoid a lockout or strike, that probably means management will make a few minor concessions (such as universal DH and/or a salary floor for every team) but there will be no major changes in the next CBA.

I wouldn't characterize eliminating the DH in the NL as anything close to minor. It would be a fundamental alteration of the game. One which IMHO would make it worse. While I'm not fond of the DH in the AL and elsewhere, I'm willing to live with the current situation where we can have a choice of which style we prefer. I should hope that the powers that be would recognize how much of their fanbase would not approve of the DH exiting anytime soon.

(03-26-2019 08:23 AM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  deGrom and Mets join the extension trend. 5 yr/$137.5MM.Replaces his current deal. Opt out after 2022 and a club option for 2024. Not sure he or the Mets were gonna allow this to get close to free agency but it’s still kind of amazing how the MLB landscape is shifting. If this continues the guys who hit free agency are more likely to have “issues” that make them higher risk signings. Teams without tradable assets are going to struggle a bit more to move up.

Aren't these kind of extensions to good, worth-the-risk players indications that the free market/free-agency system is working? IF the only free agnets become more-or-less as you describe, then how could the Players complain? Their guys who are worth it are not only getting paid, but the threat of FA is getting them extended: AGREEMENTS by the players themselves to extend, not reserve-clause era stuff. To me, the players have almost nothing to complain about in this area--the system works. Why penalize clubs for being smart or rather, prudent?