Eminor3rd

Lol I don't understand the meta-commentary on board mood. What is the point of discussion if you're discouraged for expressing your actual opinion?

Right, at this point, it isn’t even fair to accuse the Sox of being cheap. They’ve spent the money, they’ve made the trades — the problem is that the last 6-7 transactions they’ve made range from ugly to completely indefensible, even in the moments right after they were made. It’s not that they aren’t trying, they’re just fucking it up. They’ve rushed to “beat the market” and spent money on free agents they didn’t need, when there were reams of better players available that played positions at hey DID need. Whenever a normal team has a logjam of MLB-ready prospects at a position, they trade them to fill holes elsewhere — the white Sox have instead decided that they have to keep them all and just play them out of position. It’s brutal to watch. Yes, the team is really good but it could be SO much better and it would have required nothing even remotely clever.

The Sox have committed $26.5M to their already record-high payroll without addressing any of their roster needs. They’re connected to no significant players in the media. They have the worst farm system in baseball from which to make trades. It would be irrational to be happy with their offseason at this point. If they pull off a substantial addition given their current situation, it will rightfully be shocking.

This is the issue: relievers are the most volatile performance bets on a year to year basis, by a lot. It isn’t clear if they’ll be better — it’s nearly just as likely that the poor performers you were excited about going into last year will bounce back. There’s a very good reason that zero franchises spend their offseason budget nearly exclusively on relievers. The last team to do it was the historically inept Rockies, and they were laughed at when it happened and again when it didn’t work out for them.

Already blew his load treading water, signing a couple utility infielders and a couple relievers

I think, unfortunately, you may need a bidding war. Doesn’t look like they’re going to address the RF or SP problem with cash at this point.

Good depth piece flyer. I like these types of pickups, but I fear the Sox tend to see them as reliable solutions instead of insurance policies with upside.

It's absolutely silly to only consider last year's OPS when projecting performance. Hernandez is three years younger and has been a better, healthier, and more consistent player throughout his career. I don't think there's a massive difference between the two of them for 2022, but we chose the older and riskier option.

I don't know why you didn't just pick up Hernandez's option instead. Obviously dude had a rough year but who is really more likely to be better in 2022?

You mean more veteran RPs

Yeah, I just don't get this. More RPs is always a good thing, but there's just no rational argument that this money shouldn't be spent on an impact bat or starter. Scratching my head here just like with Graveman.

His point though is that it isn’t a pure lottery ticket as you’re describing it — you can do analysis on peripheral indicators that will give you more information about whether or not you’re making a good bet. The trade can still turn out either way, for sure, but that doesn’t mean the odds were equal. Shields was a CLEARLY bad bet — coming off a year where his FIP was more than a run lower than his ERA despite those numbers tracking identically for the rest of his career, and IIRC having an even bigger disparity so far in the season leading up to the trade — and it was frustrating and embarrassing at the the time because the White Sox seemed to be the only ones that didn’t know it, making them look unsophisticated. Chris’s Bassitt is 34, but how do his peripherals look? I’m not gonna take a deep dive (and it may be that there ARE some problematic signs), but just glancing at his FIP tells a much different story than shields at the time.

It was stupid. Shields was an absolute textbook example of a pitcher whose peripherals very clearly showed he was in decline and that his recent results were not sustainable. That was clear at the time of the deal, not merely with the benefit of hindsight. I, and many others, hated that deal at the time it was made, and it had nothing to do with Tatis, but rather with the opportunity cost attached to making such an obviously bad and costly (in terms of salary added) decision on an upgrade they sorely needed.

I have/had no problem whatsoever with runners starting on base during extra innings.

Now brace yourselves for the most insane flurry of player transactions in the history of the sport.

MiLlIoNaIrEs vs. HuNdReD ThOuSaNdAiReS!

Contract staff is fine, salaried staff are fine until they decide to lay people off, seasonal staff are screwed.

Like Derek jeter but better. Was that the line?

For your lockout enjoyment: https://www.japantimes.co.jp/sports/2022/01/14/baseball/japanese-baseball/yamamoto-takatsu-hall/ https://www.mlb.com/news/shingo-takatsu-white-sox-cult-hero Second all-time in NPB saves https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=takats001shi

I would just add that there’s a difference between tanking to save money/collect draft picks and tanking to let new, younger talent develop. I think bmags’ point is a good one — the Sox we’re great example of a team that kept throwing good money into a bad team and accomplishing nothing but stopping that team from being allowed to develop a sorely needed new core. As long as there is enough pressure for teams to continue to develop and overcome new versions of a metagame, the competitive landscape will be healthy (even if there are some hiccups in some places). Its up to the labor unions and the administration to ensure that the current metagame isn’t blatantly exploitative for the lives of the players involved. It’s probably unrealistic to expect there to be any sort of perfect equilibrium on that front — but as long as there’s always action and movement and conversation, it’ll remain a mutually beneficial situation on average, like it’s been for the past several decades.

Good for him. Get the benefit of being a one-franchise guy, being in a spot where hanging around for a few more years wasn’t going to make a meaningful difference on how people perceived your numbers, and being able to be in a financial position where a few extra years of retirement was gonna be worth more than a few extra years of earning.

(1) They ARE talking. (2) This was never, ever going to be quick. It’s almost literally a staring contest. For either side to concede quickly would be for that side to let its constituents down. The broad strokes of dividing this money have been settled for decades; there’s nothing on the table that can be mutually beneficial, they both want as much of the same pile of money as they can get. If there is a pause in daily communication, it is intentional and is serving the same purpose as daily communication. Silence is a message, and that’s why silence is being reported to you. (3) If it’s boring, remember that it’s labor negotiations, not entertainment. It would be surprising if it wasn’t boring. Ask yourself why you expect anything else. (4) Remember that ALL public messaging released by either party, either directly or through their respective media cronies, ALL OF IT, is PR that is meant to sway public opinion in order to apply pressure. There is literally zero reason for any of this to leave closed doors otherwise. In fact, everything leaked carries some level of risk, and is only very carefully deployed. If you feel emotionally moved by a talking point, recognize that one entity or the other is trying to use you and it’s working. (5) If all of this starts to feel silly, and like something you shouldn’t feel like you have business following or feeling involved in, you’re getting closer to an important truth. The writers will claw their eyes out because they have to, you do not.

Minor league owners do not pay the players. The players are all employees of the MLB team. Minor league owners DO, frequently, pay for the players accommodations. In the MLBs mafia takeover of the MiLB this past year, they accepted a greater responsibility of those accommodations in return for near total control over the league and its operating decisions. The MLB has since been making cursory improvements in those accommodations and trying to use them as positive PR.

Here’s another way to look at it: I think many would agree with me that one of the largest issues facing our nation today is the vastly widening “wealth gap.” Every cent the players wrest from the owners widens the wealth gap. The “pie” that the owners/players are fighting over is the liquid operating revenue of each franchise. They are NOT fighting over the masses of illiquid wealth and equity that the owners hold. An increase in the percentage of the operating revenue that goes to the players is a decrease in the percentage of the revenue that goes to paying for everything that makes the game happen, which includes the money that pays for the salaries of every worker in the organization. I can tell you, firsthand, that the teams will not operate beyond their means for any significant period of time. I can also tell you, firsthand, that the bottom line is a direct input on the available player payroll in a given year. If the operating revenue is lower in favor of the player payroll, this means fewer seasonal workers, fewer salaried benefits, fewer infrastructure investments (which puts franchise money into the hands of local businesses), etc. Note that I am NOT defending ownership with this argument. I’m simply illustrating that a “win” for the players union is not a “win for labor” in the sense that people imagine it is. I am all for supporting better wealth distribution in this country. Wealth distribution between one-percenters is NOT that. Narratives that make the financial “struggles” of one-percenters seem like the struggles of the average person are PR campaigns.

I will say that one of the things that would surprise almost every fan (it certainly surprised me), is how much smaller the profit margins are in sports than we assume. The revenue is massive and growing, but the operating costs are also massive and growing. The owners are getting rich off of long-term, illiquid asset growth. A VERY high percentage of the liquid profit goes back into the team, because doing so drives long-term value. A lot of that reinvestment is in the form of product improvements like stadium renovations, etc., but changes in payroll are part of it, too.