Screw Winter Doldrums! The Get a Big Bat and Call It an Offseason Thread

[CubinNY]

Lots of sour grapes. Anyone think the Ricketts would behave this way if the role was reversed? 
 

A cap isn’t going to benefit competition, it’s only going to benefit the owners. 

[Cuzi]

48 minutes ago, BigbadB said:

Not sure how that's even fun, but whatever. 

Not sure how winning is fun? Why do you even watch sports if you don't enjoy winning?

[BigSlick]

Wait, that was IT? 4 years 240? What a weird deal 

Edited January 16 by BigSlick

[Bull]

1 hour ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

Would you feel dirty cheering for the Cubs if we swapped places? I wouldn’t.

I would. 

Edited January 16 by Bull

[Derwood]

And the Dodgers will still lose 60 games this year so *shrug*

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

It’s demoralizing how we’re in here praising our great offseason trading for Cabrera and signing Bregman while the back to back champs have added Tucker and Diaz to their already stacked roster. Who’s beating them without a number of major injuries? 
 

Any team that runs across them in the playoffs can beat them. Sure, the Dodgers will be favorites, but they can lose a best of 5 or best of 7. It shcks to be in their division. Over 162 games they should clearly have the best record. And they should be a clear favorite in the playoffs. But in a short series they can lose.

[Geographyhater8888]

18 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Any team that runs across them in the playoffs can beat them. Sure, the Dodgers will be favorites, but they can lose a best of 5 or best of 7. It shcks to be in their division. Over 162 games they should clearly have the best record. And they should be a clear favorite in the playoffs. But in a short series they can lose.

Sure. But injuries and age will really be the only thing that will slow them down to the point where “anything can happen” isn’t the only reason for optimism.

Edited January 16 by Geographyhater8888

[Jason Ross]

Good reminder; while I expect the Dodgers will be just fine in the regular season once again, they were just a few outs away from losing the World Series last year to a team no one really thought was going to be in the World Series pre-season. From a "uses their resources like they should" stand point, I applaud the Dodgers, but the playoffs are not a place in which the best team always wins. Funny things happen in short sample sizes. 

I'd handicap them as the favorites but they aren't the massive un-stoppable force that I think some believe they could be. That isn't to downplay them, but to speak to the randomness of how the playoffs function.

[Derwood]

3 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

Good reminder; while I expect the Dodgers will be just fine in the regular season once again, they were just a few outs away from losing the World Series last year to a team no one really thought was going to be in the World Series pre-season. From a "uses their resources like they should" stand point, I applaud the Dodgers, but the playoffs are not a place in which the best team always wins. Funny things happen in short sample sizes. 

I'd handicap them as the favorites but they aren't the massive un-stoppable force that I think some believe they could be. That isn't to downplay them, but to speak to the randomness of how the playoffs function.

Their entire offense (outside of Andy Pages) was over 30 years old last year. They are paying a ton of money for players who are on the back half of their careers. Its a ton of money tied up in Betts (32), Freeman (35), Ohtani (30), etc.

[Petrey10]

59 minutes ago, Bull said:

I would. 

Give me a break…. 
 

everyone is jealous of dodgers…. Everyone… whether you realize it or not. Their chance of not making the playoffs is so insanely low. And if something bad happens to significantly lower those odds in the first half they will make more moves at the deadline. They don’t complain about cost. They just make moves to better their team. At all costs!!

 

I love it. 

[Cuzi]

I'll take being just a few outs away from losing the WS, winning 3 out of the last 6 WS, and the first team to go back to back in 2.5 decades any day.

Are they unstoppable? No. Injuries happen, balls bounce, etc... But when you put yourself in a position to win because you are signing the best players out there again and again, you generally win.

[Petrey10]

1 minute ago, Derwood said:

Their entire offense (outside of Andy Pages) was over 30 years old last year. They are paying a ton of money for players who are on the back half of their careers. Its a ton of money tied up in Betts (32), Freeman (35), Ohtani (30), etc.

Not my problem and honestly with their tv deal they really don’t care either I presume. 
 

they want to win… every single year. No matter the cost. Bc being really good is profitable.

[Cuzi]

1 hour ago, BigSlick said:

Wait, that was IT? 4 years 240? What a weird deal 

Kyle Tucker's contract would account for 25% of the Cubs entire payroll. He sets the record for the highest AAV in history and gets another opportunity for a huge career ending contract at 30 if he opts out. Pretty sweet deal. Worked out for Bregman. See if it works out for him too.

[UMFan83]

2 hours ago, Jason Ross said:

I think there are a lot of people are going to be very surprised when there is no salary cap coming. Because I don't think one is coming; I think the owners will push for one as a guise to get other things. But a cap requires open books, revenue sharing and a floor, and there's no chance in hell they actually want all of that. 

The Dodgers are likely going to be fine in this regards. Instead what we'll see is more cost cutting measures (like we are seeing in how the MLB is limiting what data is allowed and how centralized MiLB and amateur data is), more profit streams (do ya like those helmet ads in the playoffs? They're coming to the regular season) and stronger limitations in going over the LT (to reduce spending artificially, but without it being a "cap" so that there doesn't have to be a floor or open books). But realistically. LA will be alright (they make so much money they don't care that Tucker is costing $125m - the penalties will likely be fine to their bottom line) and there isn't a cap coming.

This 100%, there's not going to be a salary cap.  But I'm also not sure what the eventual lockout is going to ultimately result in.  The current luxury tax penalties are fairly punitive and enough to stop ~25/30 teams from exceeding and 28/30 teams from greatly exceeding (including the Mets though the Dodgers lap them even still).  The Dodgers are losing like 5 of their top 7 draft picks next year and paying $2 for every $1 they spend and it isn't slowing them down, it's wild.

[Jason Ross]

9 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

I'll take being just a few outs away from losing the WS, winning 3 out of the last 6 WS, and the first team to go back to back in 2.5 decades any day.

Are they unstoppable? No. Injuries happen, balls bounce, etc... But when you put yourself in a position to win because you are signing the best players out there again and again, you generally win.

Right. As I said; they're the favorites. I also gave them the credit for spending. That wasn't a comparison of the positions of the two rosters. Only to say: I'm not going to wave goodbye to the 2026 season quite because they signed Tucker. The Dodgers are very good, but baseball  has the ability to be fairly random in small samples, too. 

[jersey cubs fan]

2 hours ago, BigbadB said:

I'd feel dirty cheering for a team that does what the Dodgers are doing. I wouldn't get satisfaction from watching the varsity baseball team at a high school competing against the junior varsity teams of half the teams and the little league teams of the others. 

Not sure how that's even fun, but whatever. 

This isn’t a varsity team playing JV. It’s a team of professional baseball players playing against other professional baseball players with an ownership committed to winning more than maximizing profit margins 

[Jason Ross]

Just now, UMFan83 said:

This 100%, there's not going to be a salary cap.  But I'm also not sure what the eventual lockout is going to ultimately result in.  The current luxury tax penalties are fairly punitive and enough to stop ~25/30 teams from exceeding and 28/30 teams from greatly exceeding (including the Mets though the Dodgers lap them even still).  The Dodgers are losing like 5 of their top 7 draft picks next year and paying $2 for every $1 they spend and it isn't slowing them down, it's wild.

My best guess will be that the players will sell out IFA as they always do. Owners will want as many revenue streams as they can; I'm guessing more playoff games, more ads on uniforms/hats. Players will fight the good fight on the cap and accept harsher punishments on the LT (whatever they might be) to offset it. And maybe they'll get a win on something like more players will be in that "bonus arb pool" or something. 

[Irrelevant Dude]

2 hours ago, CubinNY said:

A cap isn’t going to benefit competition, it’s only going to benefit the owners. 

How would a cap and floor system possibly not benefit competition?  No, it doesn't solve every problem, but it lops off the outliers at the top, and especially the bottom, to bring them closer to the pack.

[Tryptamine]

The problem with a cap is you'll start seeing super teams like the Miami Heat of the early early to mid 2000s. When teams can't significantly outbid each other due to cap restrictions, then players will funnel themselves to a select few teams in order to win. Both options are going to have major issues.

[Irrelevant Dude]

I would be ok with a combination tax/cap system.  Call it the "Dodger cap".  Keep a modified luxury tax system in place up to a certain level, then a hard cap at some very forgiving dollar amount that may only impact 2 or 3 teams.  Combine that with a salary floor.  That could end up giving more total money to the players while also stopping teams from completely abusing the system.

The only problem... It doesn't really save the owners any money and I don't think their motivation is altruistic to improve the quality of the product on the field.

[Dfan25]

Mets quickly pivot to Bichette 3 year deal 

[ILMindState]

 

 

[ILMindState]

 

[Bertz]

Gotta say if you're wanting to juice the trade value of a Horton or a Shaw this is just about best case scenario.  Especially because smart money is probably on the Mets getting Valdez too.

[17 Seconds]

rough 24 hours for toronto