davell

Yeah, and I don’t think that’s a bad thing. Most high school kids get chewed up by the system, and 10 years later have nothing to show for it. Granted, this gives the NCAA more power, which is never a good thing, but kids going from high school to the minor leagues usually doesn’t end well for the kids. Neither does going to college though lol. Most of the higher ranked HS kids that wind up in college, wind up getting less money than they would have, if they'd have turned early. There's no easy solution. But, in all honesty, I don't see amateur players being a big part of the next CBA. After looking at Bertz' idea..... Its just tweaking some things. An extra year of arb, a bit more minimum salary...... Personally, I think the players need more than this, but its not a horrible compromise. In the end, a lot just depends on what EXACTLY the players are wanting.

It also REALLY devalues High School players draft position. No team is taking those guys anywhere remotely early, unless they're a Griffey type talent. You're not drafting guys you think you're getting 2-3 years out of, at best. When the alternative is 4-5 years of major league time out of college players. Do my idea and make it an early entry only system then. College players enter as FA, same as an international FA would. I'd absolutely love it if it was every team for themselves, sign who you want type of thing. But, there's literally zero chance they go that direction.

It also REALLY devalues High School players draft position. No team is taking those guys anywhere remotely early, unless they're a Griffey type talent. You're not drafting guys you think you're getting 2-3 years out of, at best. When the alternative is 4-5 years of major league time out of college players.

Stay tuned. Based on his comments after the game, I'm scared as horsefeathers that he's coming back next year.

I disagree, based on how I configured the money. The players receive much more in their early years. Personally, I think they make more this way, than if the system stays the same. Plus, it technically allows the small markets extra time with their good players too, if they're willing to pay. Conceivably this could even help cut out tanking for longer stretches too. Why do you think this makes owners even more?

Here's my general idea, stealing some from each the NFL and the NBA...... Double minor league salaries. First 2 years are auto renewals, but players get paid a million per year.(prorated, if they're in the minors some..... Next 2 years are arbitration. But, moving from the current 40/60/80% model to where it's 60/80% for their 3rd and 4th years........ After that, it's a restricted FA of sorts, that's tiered. Maybe have 4 tiers, and by position too. To where relievers and outfielders aren't making the exact same tiered salaries obviously...... Maybe tiered like 4/120, 4/80, 4/50, and 4/30?(position players and starting pitchers maybe) Numbers aren't set obviously. Maybe even have certain positional tiers be higher than others? And no idea how to equate who qualifies for what tier. So, that's TBD. If a player isn't qualified, the team has the right to go year to year at 80% value for the next 4 years. If they choose not to, the player becomes a FA that receives that EXACT money, for one year, then goes year to year until becoming a true FA after 8 years, as everyone else........ Teams can obviously trade the qualified tier player if they can, instead of deciding not to tender him the contract. As a way of recouping value they're losing. After 8 years, players hit true FA. A bit later, but with much more upfront money in their pockets. Conceivably make more career money in this format, than what's current. No compensation whatsoever if a team refuses to give the player his tiered contract and the player hits the open market to either receive his 4 year deal elsewhere or to go year to year. Which if the player bets on himself, conceivably makes more money going year to year, if he breaks out. Of course, this is why teams would try trading and the allure of adding guys for cost certainty of 4 years, probably increases trade value too.

umm if you build a roster that doesnt fit your coach, you get rid of the coach 100 percent of the time. No, they've got the roster more set up for him now. They HIRED him with a roster that wasn't a fit at all.

I think the statute of limitations has expired on the jordan era bulls success counting in the plus column for the current management Considering current management had zero to do with the Jordan era Bulls, they shouldn't get credit for it at all just because they happen to run the organization now. I'm not sure the Bulls have a solid core, either. Lavine and Parker play no defense, Cam Payne is still a thing the organization refuses to admit mistakes on, Valentine is useless, the entirety of their solid core is Lauri and Wendell, having spent 10 years building a team of ball first PGs and stretch 4s with no cohesive plan and wandering aimlessly through FA every summer assuming players will want to play here because Jordan 25 years ago. Parker is useless, but LaVine is a very solid piece, even without the D. To me, it's him, Lauri, Wendell, and Dunn is 50/50, need to see more out of him to know. That's pretty solid, based on length of rebuild time.

This move is dumb. I'm not sure whether Hoiberg is a good coach or not. And I think that it's very fair to have this opinion. First, he was given a roster that was damn near the opposite of what he'd want for his offense. Then, they went young and to this point, Lauri and Dunn played ONE game this season lol. Portis and Valentine have played extremely little and none..... So, how do you judge him fairly? My gut tells me he's nothing special, but it's still dumb to get rid of him at this point. Especially since it seems like they're doing it to win more games right now, which is just horsefeathering stupid.

DiPoto will trade off Haniger, Seager, and anything else he can move by the WM. A few days later, he'll get bored, trade for Kluber, Thor, Bumgarner, Greinke, and Jon Gray before January. Realizing he's got no hitters though, he'll re-reverse course, and sell off for the second time during January.

I like this off season overall a lot. I think it's still taking Amaya, instead of Ademan probably. But, we probably could keep Monty. Contreras might bring a bit back with one of Gray or Stroman. Only move I'd stay away from us Dietrich. He can't p!ay D anywhere at this point, I'd rather have a guy who's versatile because he CAN play, not because the team is hiding him. Harper and Robertson are fine, as a "only 2 moves" off season too.

Can’t be. That horsefeathers Ross was there. They were only laughing to make sure Ross didn't take a switch to them after the game.

Fairly certain his blubber brings us a hefty sum of cash out of this. But, Angels likely weighing that option versus sending us Trout. Not sure which has more value. Hopefully Theo gets his choice and makes the right call.

Tomas is not on the 40 man roster. I believe his luxury tax number is $0 as long as he stays off the 40-man. He’s still owed his contracted salary, but I don’t think it counts towards the tax. The Red Sox have a similar situation with Rusney Castillo. He’d be a good candidate to get in a trade offload some dead money off the tax number. What's the catch with this? I think it may be true as well, because anytime I look at the Dodgers tax situation, I don't see Yasiel Sierra or that Arrabarruena guy counting against theirs.......... So, what stops us from just outrighting Chatwood and saving his money? There's gotta be something, right? I'm assuming he's got to accept it, when its possible some team could conceivably offer him a major league minimum deal? But, if that's the case, I figure someone would have done the same with Tomas as well.....

Hey, I agree completely FWIW. My honest guess is IF Ricketts has limited payroll, it's because of an uncertain TV deal that'll eventually work out just fine and shouldn't affect money available for Bryce. I am very interested to see if any team jumps past 246 before the next CBA. If not, collusion becomes an extremely legit reality. Because teams are currently making money to where the oow end of the tax SHOULD be sitting at 275. And owners staying under 246 is to help them in the next round of CBA talks. Hopefully we're just laying low.

No idea how that dude does math. Its 20% on 206-226, then you're taxed 32% on 226-240. So while its still not a ton, its 8.48 mill, if the payroll was 240. Getting Bryce into 240 requires a lot of wiggling, but it is at least feasible. Edit- That dude forgot a whole tier. The tax starts at 206, not 226.

Not to extend this too much further because I can agree to disagree but I have to add that this is basically the Yelich trade. It’s stunk for the Marlins and I say this as someone maybe too optimistic about Lewis Brinson in the long run. Schwarber’s what...2-3 years removed from being a top 20 guy? You're right, it IS basically the equivalent of the Yelich deal. Which certainly looks bad on the Marlins end right now obviously. So, if anything, I'd think the Indians could want more, not less....... Again, I don't think they NEED to trade him. Yelich was forcing himself out of Miami, maybe that even hurt their leverage? At any rate, my biggest point is I just don't see the Indians trading him at all. As for Schwarber, yeah he was a top 20 guy. His value is less now, because he's now not catching at all, he's shown to have at least a bit less of a bit tool than was expected out of him, he's not shown himself to hit lefties well, even if he needs more chances, and mainly..... He had 6 years of control, he's down to 3 now. And corner OF don't typically carry large trade value. I'm not even sure he'd pull a top 50 guy on his own. But, we're trying to.gauge value on a guy that admittedly..... Teams may very well have a wide array of opinions on too. Making it even easier for us to just agree to disagree on this one.

Honestly, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't look at Q and Schwarber as special value. Schwarber probably has the value of a top 50ish prospect, in my mind. And if I'm off, I think I'm on the high end. Q? I'd be surprised if we could get a top 100 for him. Top 100-150 lead guy, is what he'd bring back. Add that together and it's not nearly enough in my mind, as to what it'd take to actually make the Indians deal him. What other teams have is actually kind of immaterial too, because again, if Cleveland isn't blown away, why move him? In my opinion, he's just say too good to trade for less than a top 20-25 guy, a top 50 type, and some other interesting lower pieces. The lead piece is the main piece. And a guy like Schwarber, Happ, or Q....... Just not nearly enough, in my opinion.

There's not MANY teams, with that type of currency, but I could see the Yankees, Braves, Padres, Phillies, Astros, Dodgers, maybe even the Cardinals jump in. Some of those teams aren't ready for a move like that obviously. But, I'm just listing teams who conceivably could be involved. I'll disagree on how serious the Braves would be too, it'd make them that much more attractive to a Bryce or Manny too. Obviously, neither of us know how serious the Braves would be and I can see either standpoint. In my mind, they've got more than enough prospect depth to make a serious move, here and there. My main point though, is I just can't see them trading him for anything less than an eye-popping return. He's making under 8 mill in 2019. If money is an issue, you just dump some others off the roster. Just can't see them dealing him unless they're blown away. And that offer from the Cubs, isn't in that realm.

1) I don't think they'll actually deal him. We operate like when we hear WE need to shave money, it's nonsense, but when others do, it's just true. Again, just don't think they'll do it. 2) I don't think percentages show that top end prospects failure rates are THAT high at all. And I do think they'd get 2 top 50 types, maybe one of them is even top 10-15. 3) Doesn't mean much, but the MLBTR guy today laughed at this offer, so he agrees with me anyway. 4) A guy brought up Newcomb, Inciarte, and one of the Braves elite pitching prospects. I think that beats the Cubs offer by a decent amount personally. Other teams just have more ammo than we do for a move like this.

Kluber is INSANELY good. The Indians, if they traded him, would receive an absolute HAUL. His last 5 seasons? Over 200 innings each year. 31 fWAR. Seriously, THIRTY ONE. 32.6 bWAR. I mean....... horsefeathers lol. The Indians can and would do much better than anything we've got to offer, that starts with Schwarber or Happ and has Quintana in it.

Maybe it's delusion, but the more I think about this(TT's post seriously helped), I just can't see us not being seriously involved. There's obviously no guarantee we get him...... But yeah, I can absolutely see us acting like we need to pare payroll some. If we tried to dump Duensing, Kintzler, Chatwood, or whoever..... And everyone knew we were after Bryce, they'd have leverage and could conceivably ask for more...... The Dodgers story about them needing to stay completely under the tax running today just put this in perspective........ Bryce is 26. There's not another talent like him hitting FA anytime soon. The Cubs(and Dodgers) aren't going to let this guy go without giving it their best shot. Not happening. This is just poker and Boras may even play along, because he needs both those teams to have as widely opened pocket books as they can....... Because I honestly can't see Bryce wanting to play elsewhere(assuming the Yankees truly ARE out, due to their current guys).

OK, this is exactly what I'm talking about, but whatever I'm not gonna spend all offseason having this argument. We need Bryce Harper because he's awesome and figuring out what he's worth or how we get him is for the nerds to deal with. I know we or anyone else isn't structuring a deal that way. Realistically, he'd probably want one at the same time we've got everyone else as a FA. And depending on how the monetary outlay goes, he may want one in the middle, if the contract is frontloaded. They do have some value, but the key is getting him. Personally, I don't care at what cost, as long as the AAV works to where we can fit him in and also address the pen and anything else we think is necessary.

Honestly, I'd LOVE to give him a 15 year contract, with an old out EVERY year during years 6-15.

Lol.