Eminor3rd

We can’t even be sure which of the latter three will make the team out of spring.

I will say that I agree, he got more than I expected, and I’m very high on him. That said, I’ve come to believe that when we talk about “years” in these types of deals, we’re just not thinking of it correctly. The important number is the total investment; the more years you can spread that investment out, the bette for the team. At the end of the day, the bidding drove the price to 1m over the previous record for a pitcher, it might as well have been a 20 year contract — you work the depreciated cost into your budgeting at the time you sign. The NPV of the contract actually goes down if you spread it out. Looking at it that way, it reframes how you think about the White Sox and their idiosyncratic spending limits. Jerry Reinsdorf insistence on avoiding the “risk” of a long term deal but paying market AAV on shorter ones is just another way he’s spending his own money inefficiently.

There’s no universe where Wyatt Langford is on the table.

The MLB won’t mandate a model that doesn’t permit teams to seek the highest revenue choice for their own market. Those numbers you listed may pass your smell test for what seems reasonable for a fan to pay given the precedents set by the old model, but they only make sense if the ad sales can make up for the loss of carriage fees in the background, and that answer will vary greatly from market to market. The Yankees are not going to forfeit the profits from their enormously successful YES network in order to take the pressure off the Padres to figure out their own s%*#, for example. The “new normal” very well may end up looking something like you suggest, ultimately, if media-viewing habits continue to evolve such that RSNs become universally non-viable, but the league won’t be in a position to mandate a shift. Each team is scrambling to come up with a way to salvage or grow an important revenue stream, and the size and terms of those streams are different enough in each market such that a one-size-fits-all solution will have clear winners and losers among the teams, and the owners in a position to lose won’t stand for it. That message is 100% PR fluff. They made the decision that lost them the least amount of money in the short term.

I mean, he's got a big name, but that doesn't mean he's actually any good at this point.

If things go as they went last year, each affected team that went to MLBAM to help with broadcasting negotiated their own separate terms with MLB. Basically, the teams need to decide how much of the responsibility they want for the production/ad sales versus how much of the profit they want to reap. MLB has seemed generally willing to take on the ad sales in exchange for the bulk of the profits, or also perfectly happy to handle the production and take a cut of the teams sales to come out a bit on top. The Padres, apparently, wanted nothing to do with trying to figure out the ad sales midseason and ceded all of that to the league. I think it's likely that most teams would opt to expand their staff and get into that game if they're given enough runway to prep for the season, but we're probably already right up on the deadline for that being realistically possible for 2024. I can tell you that a handful of the local Bally RSNs are profitable, and thus interested in carrying on into the 2024 season to continue to make money while this is all settled. I expect those units, ultimately, to be bought by another entity and to continue operating with the current contracts where possible, maybe some by the teams they cover.

It’s because they have no value, but also multiple years remaining. They’ll be expected to be moved at the deadline.

I didn’t realize anyone still thought it wasn’t a tank job.

White Sox should relieve San Diego of Jake Cronenworth, if they really do need to move his money like MLBTR suggests. If they took like half the money, he immediately slots to the top of the 2b depth chart at a commitment of just $40M over 7 years. Might even get something back if you took that much money or more. Or take him back as part of a Cease deal to strengthen the return. Seems like a perfect opportunity for a savvy front office with payroll space and a lost year ahead.

I wouldn’t even argue the numbers are all that similar. Daisuke was running ERAs in the mid-2 range the two seasons before he was posted, Yamamoto is on his third year in a row of low-1 range. Similar K/BB, but better WHIPs and two years younger to boot. Given Snell’s poor peripherals, I’d take Yamamoto all day, despite Snell’s mlb track record. It helps that Yamamoto looked great in the WBC too.

He's better than Daisuke was. You're right to point out that we don't know what he is going forward, but this is the best combo of stuff and polish that's probably ever come over from NPB.

It’s a good point. I think the length is gonna get crazy as opposed to the AAV, because of his age and the fact that owners obviously realize now that it’s better for them think of the contract as a lump investment and spread it out over a long time.

He’s legit. Six decent pitches, one of the best curveballs I’ve ever seen. Hits 98 when he wants. Elite command, can fall back on the slider/cutter/change if the curve/splitter aren’t working. Deceptive delivery. Hard worker, open-minded and a good teammate. He’s gonna be a good one. Only thing is he’s small.

They can’t make them, so they’ll acquire them. It’s very on-brand for them to get obsessed with it about ten years after there was a competitive advantage to be gained.

The dodgers now have a player paid nearly 10x the highest contract the White Sox have given lol Comparable market size

This was always the answer, IMO

Right, I think that’s exactly the point of view I’m proposing.

Bob is literally hiding behind a hedge in Ohtani’s yard with a set of binoculars

The willingness to take on big money for bounce-back candidates, but never spend for stars in their prime. The deeper you go into this team’s lore, the less anything makes sense at all.

And yet, somehow, left in a cloud of controversy, dishonored in the eyes of the team who benefited from that production, as a warning to caution against doing it again.

But remember how fun it was when they trade for injured Jake peavy?

I’m not sure if it helps us make a deal with LAD. If anything, I’d think it makes them more likely to spend money on pitching instead, allowing them to continue to clutch prospects. Agree on BAL though.

This would shock me. If true, I gotta imagine the Dodgers are about to spend some angry money on the top pitchers remaining.

Yes but… this is a rebuild, and he’s likely to get some real money. The entire offseason has operated precisely like year Two normally would, the only difference is we haven’t traded all our guys yet because they’re all at the nadir of their value, except Cease who will move soon and Robert who could be around for the next push. I expect anyone who recovers value to be jettisoned at the deadline. To be honest, if you accept my premise of a rebuild occurring slightly out of order, Getz isn’t doing a horrible job so far. The first real test, though, is typically the trades that he hasnt quite made yet.

It’s B. It’s basically extremely light hazing. The entire organization runs like that, from sales to operations. The attitude is “you’re lucky you have the opportunity to be here, so stfu and comply. If you don’t get it, you’re not meant to be a Yankee(tm).”