Sammy Sofa

I've seen some of the articles on peaks coming earlier, but I feel like they're missing something. I think the biggest reason for this is that "decent major leaguers" don't last as long as they used to. Once the "marginal" major leaguer hit arbitration, he's DFA'd. Ten years ago he still received a contract. Once the "decent" major leaguer hits free agency, he's now offerred a minor league deal, when you used to get a multi-year ML contract, because now the GM's realize they can get nearly the same production out of a rookie. And that rookie is getting a shot earlier, making his peak even earlier (simply becasue there is data for earlier). This is all based on my assumption that lack of data for a 34 year old (fewer 34 year olds getting ML free agent contracts) counts as a negative in these models. If removing these marginal players doesn't "count against" their age range, and just eliminates poorer performances, then I'm more wrong than you think I am. I would love to see reaserach on the aging curve of 10-year vets. I would imagine they are not much different that they were 10 years ago. Bumping because new page. Sofa, I’d genuinely like to hear your take on this, especially if I’m way off base. I'm just an idiot parroting what I've heard/read. I have no clue if the people claiming the changes in peak seasons are accounting for all of this.

Are the other teams not aging as well. what a weird post Yeah, I have no idea how he's getting that anyone is saying the other teams aren't likely facing decline, too. It's not like the Cubs are just going to all fall off of a cliff at once; I just think it's goofy to talk like practically everyone is going to bounce right back or deliver to expectations except for one guy, despite all of them getting older, and some of them on the back end or moving out of what are generally now considered their prime seasons. Obviously that doesn't mean that players can't or won't have surge years after their peaks, but acting, like, "nah, we're mostly cool outside of Old Man Zobrist, the guy tied for 2nd in bWAR on the team in 2018," seems a tad myopic.

The amount of spin from people inexplicably trying to defend the nonsense idea that Zobrist is the only real candidate for any kind of decline (please spare me the wobbly, nebulous, "b-b-b-but I was only talking about the special decline that old guys have, honest!") is giving my hair the kind of flowing, sexy bounce that I wish Bryce still had.

Tim did say he was talking about decline based on age. I read it that Zobrist is the only guy who is so old you have to expect decline. He also specified offense. I can't speak for Tim, but I'm sure he'd agree that Baez is also likely to regress, but thats a matter of regression to the mean, not way-past-peak age. I have to say I agree with what he wrote, and think you would too if he expounded. Nope. Especially as it's become more and more clear how early players' peaks are, especially when it comes to offensive output.

Seriously; Tim's take is the kind that people here would be losing their minds over if it came from a Cardinals or Brewers message board. That's some primo KeithStone-ing.

Holy horsefeathers. That fuckin' bites.

I knew this was trouble from the very beginning, dammit.

I still get a kick out of the idea that implying the Cubs' money is pretty tight is some kind of cagey, crafty move by the FO.

I thought I read that this budget shutting closed wasn’t anticipated and it had something to do with the Wrigley renovations The bad news: the extravagant idea to open up an HR Giger bar in Wrigley cost WAY more than expected. http://www.hrgiger.com/barmuseum.htm The good news: now we have the perfect place to drink away away our unfathomable sadness as the Cubs get bounced from the WC game next year.

I swear, Dr. Spaceman has less made up-sounding name than this imposter.

Billy Hamilton on the Cubs would be some kind of Hellraiser-esque nightmare puzzle box. None of us would be left sane or with flesh.

Damn. That's a brutal read.

The Cubs' offer:

Kaepernick coming back to play for the team with a racial slur for a nickname. Didn't see that one coming. Someone more lawyerly explain why this wouldn't work, but I would think that it would help the NFL immeasurably in his collusion case if they at least formerly made an offer to him. Like, their lizard brain thinking would be, "OK, we don't want this guy on a team, but if we have the team with an actual slur for a name make an offer, he'll likely turn it down AND we torpedo the collusion case."

i'm just saying they would have to outbid the field by a large margin to win out against what the field of suitors is likely to be. then, yeah, of course they could sign him. but so could any horsefeathers organization. offering like a few million more AAV isn't gonna do it. Right, which is why it's nonsense at this point to act like any of us know which of the few teams willing to spend on him actually are, and how much they would be willing to outspend each other. As you said yourself, this is a once in a generation-type signing opportunity, so to act like it's nigh impossible that at least one unexpected team would swoop in and clobber everyone else is, IMO, a bit of wishful thinking. This is not saying that that team is likely to be the White Sox....but the White Sox could be that type of team! It's both things! While the total pool of teams willing to actually spend what it takes is small, that tiny pool might have some unexpected fish oozing their way in because this is such an exceptional FA signing.

Nobody is saying he's not going to get a lunatic contract; this whole tangent started out of the usual, "let's horsefeathers on the hypothetical idea of Team X signing Player Y as being impossible, even if they inexplicably outbid everyone else, because we think their highly ranked farm system is actually butt."

Then we just have wildly different ideas of what "no shortage of teams" means out of 30 teams. To me, only 4-5 teams, tops (and that's also all I think is probably out there), being likely suitors is not that. in a "here's 5 teams offering you 350 (or 400 or whatever) million, pick one" situation, among the organizations likely to be able/willing to do that, i just have a hard time seeing the sox winning out. Well, yeah, if you're assuming that everyone is just offering up essentially the same contract.

Again, strongly disagree. I'd genuinely be surprised if there were even 10 teams even just considering that type of mega contract. well ten teams would be a lot to choose from. so would half that. and given the types of franchises likely to be involved in that grouping, i'd have a hard time seeing the white sox being one of the most attractive options (again, without blowing the field out of the water in terms of money). Then we just have wildly different ideas of what "no shortage of teams" means out of 30 teams. To me, only 4-5 teams, tops (and that's also all I think is probably out there), being likely suitors is not that.

Over the rest of his life.

age 26 generational (blah blah debate over this word) talents don't come through free agency but like once a decade, if that. i think all the public disinterest teams are showing is almost entirely negotiating/posturing. Again, strongly disagree. I'd genuinely be surprised if there were even 10 teams even just considering that type of mega contract.

No kidding; the point is that is not THAT bonkers that Harper would go there if they were willing to pay him what he wants. And, let's face it, that Reinsdorf is Reinsdorf is the biggest hurdle to that happening and why it likely won't happen, not, "LOL THE WHITE SOX PROSPECTS ARE ACTUALLY MADE UP OF BROKEN GI JOE FIGURES WITH POPSICLE STICKS FOR ARMS." yeah, but he's gonna have no shortage of teams that'll pay him what he wants. i think they'd have to blow teams out of the water to get him, given the overall picture. and reinsdorf's history makes it really hard to see them blowing the field out of the water, so by extension, i consider the idea pretty bonkers. also did you edit that reinsdorf stuff in after i thought of my response or am i going nuts? Disagree strongly that there's going to be a ton of teams willing to pay him what he wants. And no I did not.

Yes: [tweet] [/tweet]