SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
2023 Non-Red Sox Thread
|
Post by incandenza on Mar 2, 2023 11:10:51 GMT -5
Apropos of nothing, but it is infuriating to me to see so much national media praise of the Padres front office. Overpaying (in trades, free agency signings and extensions) for star talent that fits poorly on the field should not be that praiseworthy. It is great that Padres ownership is willing to spend to chase a title, but you cannot convince me that the front office has done a good job of allocating the resources that they have been allotted. I don't know, I kind of like it. Players work for years being underpaid and when they hit FA, they cash in. And superstars get paid, been that way forever. Bold can't be determined until the contracts / seasons are completed. Also, they are competing against Dodgers. Maybe their feeling is that just being good enough for WC won't give them as good a chance to win it all, just speculation on my part. Playoffs are a crapshoot. They should be fun to watch, though, got a lot of great players to rely on. I will be rooting for them, because of X, and because of the organizational panache. Am I the only one who resents the Padres for giving Bogaerts the single most ludicrous contract of the offseason, thus snatching away any possibility of the Red Sox keeping him?
Yes yes, I know the Red Sox boofed it by not making a serious effort to extend Bogaerts a year ago, and I am still annoyed about that. But I do think they'd have had a pretty good shot of re-signing him if the Padres hadn't gone bananas in signing a player who - as jmei alluded do - doesn't even help them that much. They already had a younger, cheaper, and very solid shortstop, so Bogaerts probably only adds like 2 WAR to their roster, and probably only for the next 2-3 years. Not a great fit for that ballpark either.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Mar 2, 2023 11:13:51 GMT -5
Apropos of nothing, but it is infuriating to me to see so much national media praise of the Padres front office. Overpaying (in trades, free agency signings and extensions) for star talent that fits poorly on the field should not be that praiseworthy. It is great that Padres ownership is willing to spend to chase a title, but you cannot convince me that the front office has done a good job of allocating the resources that they have been allotted. I don't know, I kind of like it. Players work for years being underpaid and when they hit FA, they cash in. And superstars get paid, been that way forever. Bold can't be determined until the contracts / seasons are completed. Also, they are competing against Dodgers. Maybe their feeling is that just being good enough for WC won't give them as good a chance to win it all, just speculation on my part. Playoffs are a crapshoot. They should be fun to watch, though, got a lot of great players to rely on. I will be rooting for them, because of X, and because of the organizational panache. Let's bring some realism into the discussion. Both Machado and Darvish have earned over $142M to date. Bogaerts is the pauper sitting at $85M. He was, nonetheless, guaranteed to easily double that in additional income before the $300M+ he received. By any stretch of the imagination (at least mine) these guys have already been paid. The issue is, as jmei pointed out, a significant overpayment and to what end? This isn't, to my way of thinking, about the individuals. They've been well compensated. Has the team planned for the future or is everything strictly short-term these days?
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Mar 2, 2023 11:21:02 GMT -5
The Padres owner spending like crazy makes me like them
The Padres GM being outlier bad in my estimation makes me dislike them
Manny Machado makes me hate them
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 2, 2023 11:22:11 GMT -5
I don't know, I kind of like it. Players work for years being underpaid and when they hit FA, they cash in. And superstars get paid, been that way forever. Bold can't be determined until the contracts / seasons are completed. Also, they are competing against Dodgers. Maybe their feeling is that just being good enough for WC won't give them as good a chance to win it all, just speculation on my part. Playoffs are a crapshoot. They should be fun to watch, though, got a lot of great players to rely on. I will be rooting for them, because of X, and because of the organizational panache. Let's bring some realism into the discussion. Both Machado and Darvish have earned over $142M to date. Bogaerts is the pauper sitting at $85M. He was, nonetheless, guaranteed to easily double that in additional income before the $300M+ he received. By any stretch of the imagination (at least mine) these guys have already been paid. The issue is, as jmei pointed out, a significant overpayment and to what end? This isn't, to my way of thinking, about the individuals. They've been well compensated. Has the team planned for the future or is everything strictly short-term these days? I still think the twice cancer survival of the owner is the key here. I don't think he cares about tomorrow, he's living for today.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 2, 2023 12:12:25 GMT -5
Right, to be clear, I have no issue with ownership deciding to go for it and sign off on more spending. I just have to think that there were better ways to spend the money. Rather than signing Bogaerts, why not go after Judge, who is a better roster fit? (Instead, they currently have a good defensive SS (Tatis) as their everyday RF, a good defensive SS as their everyday 2B (Kim) and a good defensive 2B (Cronenworth) as their everyday 1B.) Or why not spread that money around (or trade some of those displaced players) so you're not relying on the corpse of Nelson Cruz at DH or Wacha and Nick Martinez in your rotation?
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Mar 2, 2023 12:24:39 GMT -5
Right, to be clear, I have no issue with ownership deciding to go for it and sign off on more spending. I just have to think that there were better ways to spend the money. Rather than signing Bogaerts, why not go after Judge, who is a better roster fit? (Instead, they currently have a good defensive SS (Tatis) as their everyday RF, a good defensive SS as their everyday 2B (Kim) and a good defensive 2B (Cronenworth) as their everyday 1B.) Or why not spread that money around (or trade some of those displaced players) so you're not relying on the corpse of Nelson Cruz at DH or Wacha and Nick Martinez in your rotation? I totally agree with you on all this, but to be fair they did go after Judge - I believe they offered him $400 million. He turned down tens of millions of dollars to go back to New York. They also went after Turner, who also turned down tens of millions to go to Philadelphia instead. At that point I think Preller was basically on tilt, and he was gonna get his star offensive player goshdarnit. Bogaerts was pretty much what was left at that point. (But like you I think he should have pivoted to pitching instead.)
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Mar 2, 2023 15:04:47 GMT -5
As you astutely picked up, the fact that the Padres front office is being praised while the Red Sox front office is being trashed in most corners makes it particularly infuriating. It's really only news if something in a situation changes or if there's something that doesn't line up with expectations. The Padres never spend so the fact that they are adding payroll and fielding a competitive team is a change from the norm, exceeds expectations and should be seen as good news. The Red Sox, despite a good level of spending, are spending relatively less than usual and have the perception of being less competitive so that does not meet expectations and is bad news. Not to oversimplify, but how else could you write it up before anyone plays a real game? This is the early stage of the hype cycle and no rational discussion about fiscal responsibility is going to resonate. Also, any Sox vs Padres discussion begins and ends with Don Orsillo. Game.Set.Match.Padres.LOL. I love this. Thanks for making my day better.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Mar 2, 2023 15:14:47 GMT -5
I don't know, I kind of like it. Players work for years being underpaid and when they hit FA, they cash in. And superstars get paid, been that way forever. Bold can't be determined until the contracts / seasons are completed. Also, they are competing against Dodgers. Maybe their feeling is that just being good enough for WC won't give them as good a chance to win it all, just speculation on my part. Playoffs are a crapshoot. They should be fun to watch, though, got a lot of great players to rely on. I will be rooting for them, because of X, and because of the organizational panache. Let's bring some realism into the discussion. Both Machado and Darvish have earned over $142M to date. Bogaerts is the pauper sitting at $85M. He was, nonetheless, guaranteed to easily double that in additional income before the $300M+ he received. By any stretch of the imagination (at least mine) these guys have already been paid. The issue is, as jmei pointed out, a significant overpayment and to what end? This isn't, to my way of thinking, about the individuals. They've been well compensated. Has the team planned for the future or is everything strictly short-term these days? i have a clear bias in looking at salaries relative to the industry revenues. The players go through their bargaining and are ultimately responsible for limits on their pay, but the owners have a clear advantage before FA for almost all except the really great ones. So when they cash in, like they have this offseason, i am very happy for them. It is like that across all industries, for me. I don't worry about overypays and that stuff because I don't get paid to worry about that. Don't mean to be crass to the litany (LOL) of folks that do, it is just a non-starter for me. The Pads owner clearly doesn't care and that is good for the players and good for my pay labor doctrine.
|
|
|
Post by yuchangclan on Mar 2, 2023 17:19:31 GMT -5
I get the feeling that this kid is going to be a problem for a while….
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Mar 2, 2023 19:04:53 GMT -5
Nothing like a spring training HR with the wind blowing out to convince me he's a problem. He might be. He might not be.
If we're going on spring training performance, Sox look awesome for 2023.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Mar 2, 2023 19:08:16 GMT -5
Let's bring some realism into the discussion. Both Machado and Darvish have earned over $142M to date. Bogaerts is the pauper sitting at $85M. He was, nonetheless, guaranteed to easily double that in additional income before the $300M+ he received. By any stretch of the imagination (at least mine) these guys have already been paid. The issue is, as jmei pointed out, a significant overpayment and to what end? This isn't, to my way of thinking, about the individuals. They've been well compensated. Has the team planned for the future or is everything strictly short-term these days? i have a clear bias in looking at salaries relative to the industry revenues. The players go through their bargaining and are ultimately responsible for limits on their pay, but the owners have a clear advantage before FA for almost all except the really great ones. So when they cash in, like they have this offseason, i am very happy for them. It is like that across all industries, for me. I don't worry about overypays and that stuff because I don't get paid to worry about that. Don't mean to be crass to the litany (LOL) of folks that do, it is just a non-starter for me. The Pads owner clearly doesn't care and that is good for the players and good for my pay labor doctrine. Good for them. Very good for them. My point is this: is it good for the team? Or does that matter? If they crap out in two or three years with nothing to show, what lesson will that bring to MLB ownership and what does that do to the doctrine? Does the team matter after he's gone? All theoretical of course. And ethically difficult.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Mar 2, 2023 19:30:22 GMT -5
i have a clear bias in looking at salaries relative to the industry revenues. The players go through their bargaining and are ultimately responsible for limits on their pay, but the owners have a clear advantage before FA for almost all except the really great ones. So when they cash in, like they have this offseason, i am very happy for them. It is like that across all industries, for me. I don't worry about overypays and that stuff because I don't get paid to worry about that. Don't mean to be crass to the litany (LOL) of folks that do, it is just a non-starter for me. The Pads owner clearly doesn't care and that is good for the players and good for my pay labor doctrine. Good for them. Very good for them. My point is this: is it good for the team? Or does that matter? If they crap out in two or three years with nothing to show, what lesson will that bring to MLB ownership and what does that do to the doctrine? Does the team matter after he's gone? All theoretical of course. And ethically difficult. I would add that this is not exactly a free labor market, and the amount teams spend isn't determined by their willingness to give money to particular star players but by where the CBT thresholds are set. If I remember corrently the Padres, for instance, are willing to spend up to but not over the third threshold this season. If Machado wasn't getting a bunch of that money then it would be going to other players, maybe several mid-range players. Basically, the money available to players is zero sum, so Machado getting a big paycheck is a loss for others. And he's not the particular individual I'm especially happy to see benefit from the economics of baseball...
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Mar 4, 2023 12:20:14 GMT -5
Since we're on the topic of pay scales, here's the dope on how minor league serfs were finally able to get themselves into the MLBPA. Rich detail, and good quotes from Lux, Buehler, Kershaw and Dave Roberts. Before we start gushing about Manfred's push to speed up the game, this throws some shade on his leadership - all in service of ownership of course. One of the seminal drivers of the anger that fed the push to unionize, was the blatant effort to suppress any attempt at rationalizing the pay and living conditions in the minors. Provisions of the Save America's Pastime Act which got buried in the omnibus spending bill by the previous administration and it's Congressional waterboys (and girls) did just that. That helped pave the way for the effort to get players on board with a union. It also casts Tony Clark in a better light than he's been seen in the past. It was simple for him: get the minor leaguers into the MLBPA and start negotiating better conditions, and you have a ready-made constituency in the guys who make it to the show. That's self-serving, of course, but the self that's being served is the larger interest of the MLBPA. This, to my thinking, is a much better place to focus our interest in getting players - all of them - to share the wealth. And as the article makes clear, there's a bit of that wealth in MLB. Negotiations between the newly unionized minor league players and MLB are just kicking in. It would be good to track those to get an idea of how hard a line MLB is going to take. The MLB negotiating team isn't exactly aligned with union interests. But reading through this makes it clear that the union reps (including ex-minor leaguers) who pushed this thing along, and who will also be at the negotiating table, are not to be messed with.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 5, 2023 16:28:27 GMT -5
MLB has concluded their investigation of Clevinger. The Office of the Commissioner has closed this investigation and, barring the receipt of any new information or evidence, the Office of the Commissioner will not be imposing discipline on Mr. Clevinger in connection with these allegations.www.mlb.com/news/mlb-announces-completion-of-mike-clevinger-investigationTime to put it behind us.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Mar 9, 2023 11:35:20 GMT -5
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,797
|
Post by mobaz on Mar 9, 2023 11:47:41 GMT -5
Phew, that's all it is! Glad those never get worse!!
|
|
ematz1423
Veteran
Posts: 5,376
Member is Online
|
Post by ematz1423 on Mar 9, 2023 11:57:00 GMT -5
I have never wished injury on anyone nor will I start but everyone knew Rodon was an injury risk before he signed that deal so Yankees are getting what they paid for there. Though I said I won't wish injury on anyone, I won't shed a tear for the Yanks/Rodon either.
|
|
|
Post by backwardsk on Mar 9, 2023 13:12:03 GMT -5
That's what you get for throwing a fortune at Rodon. There's a reason why he was non tendered 3 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywaterinla on Mar 9, 2023 19:01:32 GMT -5
Phew, that's all it is! Glad those never get worse!! Those who were clamoring for the Sox to sign him this off-season are reallllllll quiet now…
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Mar 9, 2023 19:24:19 GMT -5
Jose Iglesias settled for a minor league deal with the Marlins
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,419
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Mar 9, 2023 21:26:50 GMT -5
Phew, that's all it is! Glad those never get worse!! Those who were clamoring for the Sox to sign him this off-season are reallllllll quiet now… Was anyone doing that? I literally can’t think of anyone.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Mar 9, 2023 22:20:31 GMT -5
Don't know that it qualifies as clamoring but if you search for Rodon's name across the entire forum it shows up quite a few times. Haven't looked through all of those but there were certainly people entertaining the idea.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Mar 10, 2023 10:11:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Mar 10, 2023 12:27:39 GMT -5
Harrison Bader gonna miss time with an oblique
Lou Trevino is out with a sprained UCL
Yankees having a very bad spring
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Mar 10, 2023 14:14:30 GMT -5
Pitching prospects will break your heart.
|
|
|