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.
|
|
Post by myleskennefick on Feb 26, 2015 11:55:35 GMT -5
In other words, he's not biased by knowledge? No he has plenty of knowledge on how few times guys pan out versus their projections. What he doesn't have is information on each guys scouting reports and he doesn't pretend to, nor does he make claims and assertions that would require him to know. People can't know everything and it's asinine to say he doesn't do his homework, like he's lazy at his job just because he's not knowledgable about the farm system. He doesn't need to be. He does plenty of "homework" in other areas and is very well prepared for his show. To state otherwise, just because he's not up on the same stuff you or I are is ignorant at best. It's not a Sox prospect show. Well, when someone argues over and over that the Red Sox should trade Mookie Betts for Hamels (an assertion, to use your words) it would help if they had more knowledge beyond "well things didn't work out with Middlebrooks." It's also somewhat irresponsible to keep suggesting that Moncada is on steroids. Felger is a bright guy, works hard, and is generally entertaining, but he's got a predictable slant to 90% of his "takes" and it can get pretty old. |
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Feb 26, 2015 13:43:10 GMT -5
In other words, he's not biased by knowledge? No he has plenty of knowledge on how few times guys pan out versus their projections. What he doesn't have is information on each guys scouting reports and he doesn't pretend to, nor does he make claims and assertions that would require him to know. People can't know everything and it's asinine to say he doesn't do his homework, like he's lazy at his job just because he's not knowledgable about the farm system. He doesn't need to be. He does plenty of "homework" in other areas and is very well prepared for his show. To state otherwise, just because he's not up on the same stuff you or I are is ignorant at best. It's not a Sox prospect show. Yes, he does need to know the top Red Sox prospects and to lump them all together is quite moronic. It's not about prospect love. It's about having enough knowledge to know why signing Moncada is a big deal, why Mookie Betts and Will Middlebrooks aren't one in the same when saying the Sox should trade Prospect X for Cole Hamels or whatever and playing the "They're just prospects and X% of them flame out anyways" card. I'd say the flameout rate isn't the same for all prospects. They are NOT created equally. And because he doesn't care to know it, it makes him sound pretty moronic and unprepared to talk about what the Sox should be willing to give up for Hamels or any other thing that requires at least rudimentary knowledge of the Red Sox farm system. |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 26, 2015 14:16:07 GMT -5
Prospects probably flame out at the same rate that 31+ year old pitchers do.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 26, 2015 14:28:33 GMT -5
I don't remember if this was mentioned in this thread so apologize if it was.
What is even more crazy about the Yankees passing on him is that to break even on him using $/WAR calculations, since they are pretty much at a 50% luxury tax rate for the foreseeable future, you would use a $/WAR * 1.5 rate to determine break even. So instead of $6M/WAR, you'd calculate $9M/WAR.
He'd basically have to put up about 6 total WAR over 6 years for the Yankees to break even on the $70M + salary if you include inflation and assume they're always paying the 50% tax.
Not much of a risk at all, especially since they wouldn't be wasting a roster spot on him if he busted like they do on guys like ARod when they bust.
|
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Feb 26, 2015 21:06:13 GMT -5
What is even more crazy about the Yankees passing on him is that to break even on him using $/WAR calculations, since they are pretty much at a 50% luxury tax rate for the foreseeable future, you would use a $/WAR * 1.5 rate to determine break even. So instead of $6M/WAR, you'd calculate $9M/WAR. Eh... I don't think that's an entirely legitimate calculation. Yes, their marginal cost for adding more WAR via free agency is 1.5x normal, but their average cost per WAR is lower because they only pay tax on the overage, e.g. if they're at 120% of the cap they pay 130% so their multiplier is 13/12x. |
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Feb 26, 2015 21:57:24 GMT -5
What is even more crazy about the Yankees passing on him is that to break even on him using $/WAR calculations, since they are pretty much at a 50% luxury tax rate for the foreseeable future, you would use a $/WAR * 1.5 rate to determine break even. So instead of $6M/WAR, you'd calculate $9M/WAR. Eh... I don't think that's an entirely legitimate calculation. Yes, their marginal cost for adding more WAR via free agency is 1.5x normal, but their average cost per WAR is lower because they only pay tax on the overage, e.g. if they're at 120% of the cap they pay 130% so their multiplier is 13/12x. WAR values are based on the marginal value not the average value. It seems more reasonable to use the full lux tax penalty because of that. As was mentioned several times in the nyyfans page, in their case, signing Moncada would allow the Yankees future relief on their lux tax penalties. |
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Feb 26, 2015 23:58:36 GMT -5
Speier has an article up about why the Sox chose to invest money in Moncada while not outbidding the Cubs for Lester. He gets John Henry's thoughts about that decision - probably a bit easier to do these days since the Globe is one of Henry's properties: Spoken like a hedge fund manager. Read though an analysis a few days back, I'll link to it if I can remember where it was. The writer mentioned how unafraid the Sox were of failure, that it's part of the risk-taking they've embraced in building the farm system and the team. I've also been reading through the Moncada thread at NYYFans.com and it's alternately hilarious and painful. Many are just lashing out at Yankee ownership and management. Others have a very clear-eyed picture of where the Yankees are at this point. There are varying levels of understanding as to how bad the financial bind is, and some very interesting stuff on how the Sox have taken those "bold" steps and NY hasn't. This all came together for the Sox: that they'd blown past the international salary allotment effectively immunizing ownership from caring much about spending more money; that Moncada became available before the July 2nd cutoff date; that they had Cuban friends such as Tiant; all of it. Let's see if the kid's up to the hype...
|
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Feb 27, 2015 0:08:13 GMT -5
I've also been keeping up with the nnyfans thread and I'm wondering if the fan fallout from this reality shake isn't going to cost the Yankee brand more than Moncada would have cost. They don't have Jeter to sell anymore and it seems like the Mets should take full advantage here and do something bold like use some of their excess young pitching to trade for Tulo.
Their Moncada thread is growing at a faster percentage than our Moncada thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Feb 27, 2015 9:02:13 GMT -5
I'm wondering if the fan fallout from this reality shake isn't going to cost the Yankee brand more than Moncada would have cost. You've been watching too much Darren Rovell. You know how many people are going to be all "they didn't sign Moncada?? I'm cancelling YES!" Zero. That's how many. Yankee fans will be blustery and exaggerate and stuff but they're still going to watch every game and tell you how many rings they've won. |
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Feb 27, 2015 9:05:36 GMT -5
I'm wondering if the fan fallout from this reality shake isn't going to cost the Yankee brand more than Moncada would have cost. You've been watching too much Darren Rovell. You know how many people are going to be all "they didn't sign Moncada?? I'm cancelling YES!" Zero. That's how many. Yankee fans will be blustery and exaggerate and stuff but they're still going to watch every game and tell you how many rings they've won. I also wonder how many NYY fans even know who Moncada is. I doubt it exceeds 30%. |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 27, 2015 9:07:21 GMT -5
I'm wondering if the fan fallout from this reality shake isn't going to cost the Yankee brand more than Moncada would have cost. You've been watching too much Darren Rovell. You know how many people are going to be all "they didn't sign Moncada?? I'm cancelling YES!" Zero. That's how many. Yankee fans will be blustery and exaggerate and stuff but they're still going to watch every game and tell you how many rings they've won. It's more about buying tickets to 2 games instead of 10. |
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Feb 27, 2015 9:25:54 GMT -5
I'm wondering if the fan fallout from this reality shake isn't going to cost the Yankee brand more than Moncada would have cost. You've been watching too much Darren Rovell. You know how many people are going to be all "they didn't sign Moncada?? I'm cancelling YES!" Zero. That's how many. Yankee fans will be blustery and exaggerate and stuff but they're still going to watch every game and tell you how many rings they've won. I have no idea who Rovell is but you're apparently somebody that doesn't equate putting out a good product to ratings & revenues. Peter Gammons ?@pgammo 4h4 hours ago A-Rod tension all that keeps Yankees from a drab irrelevance nyp.st/1GydGGv via @nypost ADD: It should also be noted that the Yankees are no longer the majority owner of YES. They were a few yeaqrs ago but right now they only own 20%. |
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 27, 2015 9:27:02 GMT -5
You've been watching too much Darren Rovell. You know how many people are going to be all "they didn't sign Moncada?? I'm cancelling YES!" Zero. That's how many. Yankee fans will be blustery and exaggerate and stuff but they're still going to watch every game and tell you how many rings they've won. It's more about buying tickets to 2 games instead of 10. The same analysis applies either way. Moncada is too obscure a name for most fans to care that much about, and those who do know about him are going to watch/go to games either way. In general, the bottom line is that if the team is good, fans will show up/watch, and no one individual player is going to affect that too much. That's especially true for a 19-year-old Cuban who is two years away from the majors. |
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Feb 27, 2015 9:32:34 GMT -5
It seems to be snowballing in the NY media. More a case of the straw that broke the camels back, it's not Moncada in isolation.
.
.
.
Sorry for no link but I looked and couldn't find it. I originally saw a story linked in the nyfans moncada thread that was pretty interesting and about this topic.
Anyhow, the story covered a lot including the possible sale of the Yankees (they say no way) but it also contained quotes from unnamed baseball GMs. The gist was that given the Red Sox core of young players, and the lack of same with the Yankees, the Yankees can't afford to let the Red Sox make them irrelevant.
.
.
.
Let me ask this, do you guys seriously believe that Jeter batted second all year because Girardi thought that was the most productive lineup ?
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 27, 2015 10:01:16 GMT -5
It's more about buying tickets to 2 games instead of 10. The same analysis applies either way. Moncada is too obscure a name for most fans to care that much about, and those who do know about him are going to watch/go to games either way. In general, the bottom line is that if the team is good, fans will show up/watch, and no one individual player is going to affect that too much. That's especially true for a 19-year-old Cuban who is two years away from the majors. Well those fans will be mad they didn't sign Scherzer. If they saw them spending $65-70 million on some Cuban kid, they'd probably get excited about it at minimum or at least feel like they're committed to improving the team. There would be tons of articles and stories on the news and the team would hype him up, regardless of when he's ready to contribute. I hate getting into what it means to be a good fan argument, but a lot of fans I think need to sense a commitment to getting better in order to want to commit more of their money to the team. And this offseason probably doesn't feel that way at all to a lot of Yankees fans. |
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Feb 27, 2015 10:08:31 GMT -5
It's more about buying tickets to 2 games instead of 10. The same analysis applies either way. Moncada is too obscure a name for most fans to care that much about, and those who do know about him are going to watch/go to games either way. In general, the bottom line is that if the team is good, fans will show up/watch, and no one individual player is going to affect that too much. That's especially true for a 19-year-old Cuban who is two years away from the majors. I think this is a little bit outdated thinking ... with the fragmenting of the media landscape, there's a lot more focus on building up the "base" (in political terms) instead of the soft supporters. You want your real fans to watch/buy obsessively instead of casually. The whole thing is really more of a spectrum, with a lot of money coming from the core of strong supporters. So excitement in that group matters. I mean, did you watch as many Sox games in August/September 2014 as you did August/September 2013? I sure didn't. |
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 27, 2015 10:17:27 GMT -5
We aren't talking about the Marlins or the Rays here-- I think a $210m payroll shows a pretty good sense of commitment. I mean, they spent half a billion dollars on marquee free agents as recently as last offseason, and I think their less-splashy moves made the team better this year (Gregorius, Eovaldi, etc). Yes, if the Yankees continue on this playoff drought, revenues will certainly drop, and I would buy the argument that not signing Moncada makes that scenario more likely. But in the long run, I think it's a relatively minor non-move that you all are exaggerating out of schadenfreude.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 27, 2015 10:22:14 GMT -5
We aren't talking about the Marlins or the Rays here-- I think a $210m payroll shows a pretty good sense of commitment. I mean, they spent half a billion dollars on marquee free agents as recently as last offseason, and I think their less-splashy moves made the team better this year (Gregorius, Eovaldi, etc). Yes, if the Yankees continue on this playoff drought, revenues will certainly drop, and I would buy the argument that not signing Moncada makes that scenario more likely. But in the long run, I think it's a relatively minor non-move that you all are exaggerating out of schadenfreude. If we're talking about the fickle uniformed fan, there is a lot of 'what have you done lately?' They don't care about sensible moves. Other than winning, they care about big money being thrown around. |
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Feb 27, 2015 10:24:12 GMT -5
We aren't talking about the Marlins or the Rays here-- I think a $210m payroll shows a pretty good sense of commitment. I mean, they spent half a billion dollars on marquee free agents as recently as last offseason, and I think their less-splashy moves made the team better this year (Gregorius, Eovaldi, etc). Yes, if the Yankees continue on this playoff drought, revenues will certainly drop, and I would buy the argument that not signing Moncada makes that scenario more likely. But in the long run, I think it's a relatively minor non-move that you all are exaggerating out of schadenfreude. The half a billion in long term commitments netted them a grand total of 6.3 fWAR in the first year. It takes the team performing and like I said, this seems to be the straw not the entire hay bale. |
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 27, 2015 10:25:08 GMT -5
The same analysis applies either way. Moncada is too obscure a name for most fans to care that much about, and those who do know about him are going to watch/go to games either way. In general, the bottom line is that if the team is good, fans will show up/watch, and no one individual player is going to affect that too much. That's especially true for a 19-year-old Cuban who is two years away from the majors. I think this is a little bit outdated thinking ... with the fragmenting of the media landscape, there's a lot more focus on building up the "base" (in political terms) instead of the soft supporters. You want your real fans to watch/buy obsessively instead of casually. The whole thing is really more of a spectrum, with a lot of money coming from the core of strong supporters. So excitement in that group matters. I mean, did you watch as many Sox games in August/September 2014 as you did August/September 2013? I sure didn't.Right, but that's because the team was non-competitive in 2014, not because they didn't have Ellsbury or any other particular player. Like I said, if the team is good, folks will tune in, and while Moncada would likely make the Yankees better, they can be competitive without him as well. |
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 27, 2015 10:27:57 GMT -5
We aren't talking about the Marlins or the Rays here-- I think a $210m payroll shows a pretty good sense of commitment. I mean, they spent half a billion dollars on marquee free agents as recently as last offseason, and I think their less-splashy moves made the team better this year (Gregorius, Eovaldi, etc). Yes, if the Yankees continue on this playoff drought, revenues will certainly drop, and I would buy the argument that not signing Moncada makes that scenario more likely. But in the long run, I think it's a relatively minor non-move that you all are exaggerating out of schadenfreude. If we're talking about the fickle uniformed fan, there is a lot of 'what have you done lately?' They don't care about sensible moves. Other than winning, they care about big money being thrown around. If those moves help them win (which I believe they will), those fans will happily root for those guys. See, e.g., the 2012-2013 Red Sox offseason-- many folks on this board hated all the moves they made right up until they all started working out. |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 27, 2015 10:31:30 GMT -5
If we're talking about the fickle uniformed fan, there is a lot of 'what have you done lately?' They don't care about sensible moves. Other than winning, they care about big money being thrown around. If those moves help them win (which I believe they will), those fans will happily root for those guys. See, e.g., the 2012-2013 Red Sox offseason-- many folks on this board hated all the moves they made right up until they all started working out. That's fine, but I doubt the things they ignored are going to work out well. |
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 27, 2015 10:32:02 GMT -5
We aren't talking about the Marlins or the Rays here-- I think a $210m payroll shows a pretty good sense of commitment. I mean, they spent half a billion dollars on marquee free agents as recently as last offseason, and I think their less-splashy moves made the team better this year (Gregorius, Eovaldi, etc). Yes, if the Yankees continue on this playoff drought, revenues will certainly drop, and I would buy the argument that not signing Moncada makes that scenario more likely. But in the long run, I think it's a relatively minor non-move that you all are exaggerating out of schadenfreude. The half a billion in long term commitments netted them a grand total of 6.3 fWAR in the first year. It takes the team performing and like I said, this seems to be the straw not the entire hay bale. Even if they signed him, he wouldn't really help the 2015 or 2016 teams, and if those teams aren't in playoff contention, the fanbase will be pretty upset regardless of the 21-year-old Cuban stud they have in the minors. I just don't see this non-signing as much of a marginal difference in terms of fan interest. If they were going to be bad without him, they're not going to be much better with him, and if they were going to be good without him, it doesn't matter either way. |
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Feb 27, 2015 11:00:19 GMT -5
I think this is a little bit outdated thinking ... with the fragmenting of the media landscape, there's a lot more focus on building up the "base" (in political terms) instead of the soft supporters. You want your real fans to watch/buy obsessively instead of casually. The whole thing is really more of a spectrum, with a lot of money coming from the core of strong supporters. So excitement in that group matters. I mean, did you watch as many Sox games in August/September 2014 as you did August/September 2013? I sure didn't.Right, but that's because the team was non-competitive in 2014, not because they didn't have Ellsbury or any other particular player. Like I said, if the team is good, folks will tune in, and while Moncada would likely make the Yankees better, they can be competitive without him as well. Yeah, right ... I agree with that. I think focus on "marketability" of specific players is mostly wrong-headed and guess that the Red Sox think that, too. Winning is almost 100% of the game, and the rest is mostly just "don't sign a bunch of outright criminals." I was mostly just reacting to the implication that you can take hard-core fans for granted and think of casual fans when it comes to these kinds of decisions. On this particular case, signing Moncada to appease the fans would be short-sighted. But I think over-reaching for this particular asset would've made a lot of sense for them as a baseball matter, and, incidentally, it would've given the hard-core fans a reason to think that there was an overarching plan. Their system is in dire shape, and they need infusions of young talent very badly. They are telling their fans that they are committed to that, but then they lose out on this key asset. Makes the fans feel like there really isn't a plan, after all, and the Yankees are just adrift. That's not a good thing for them. But it's not as important as the real problems they have with their talent level. |
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Feb 27, 2015 11:50:50 GMT -5
Let's not forget that the Yankees acquired 10 of the top 30 international free agents in this signing period at a cost of about $30M, penalties included while we got 2 prior to Moncada. Our costs are more than double theirs. The odds are pretty good that they will reap a numbers success (make the majors as contributors)for theirs at least as good as our signings. Yankee fans should see that side of things.
|
|
|
