sk7326
-
Posts
7,631 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Boston Red Sox Videos
2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking
Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker
News
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by sk7326
-
I wouldn't even go that far - you can get much more bang for reliever pitcher buck elsewhere.
-
They certainly do if you buy the logic of the billionaires - or just want free stuff.
-
Votto He will be a drag - but I suspect he will retain his ability to get on base for another 2-3 years. It will be suboptimal for his salary - but nothing which anyone will regret too much.
-
I would not be surprised if the eventual deal ended up something like that.
-
it is reasonable to expect 4 or 5 peak-ish years from that deal. That alone makes the deal a win in total. Obviously PED assessments are pointless to make - baseball careers typically do not flame out at 27 either way. I mean most old timey careers were solidly peaking in the 28-32 range.
-
We'll see what happens. The gap between Keuchel and Kimbrel as far as offseason prizes to go is vast.
-
There is a very high likelihood that the first 5 years of the deal will more than make up for any dropoff in the final 2 or 3. Ellsbury was 31 when he signed his Yankees deal. Pujols was 32. Alex Rodriguez was 25 when he signed his deal with the Rangers which was an absolute win on any level. The Rangers dealt him because their team stunk - but that's a different issue. These cases are just not comparable. A guy like Machado fits virtually every team's lifecycle.
-
If a 26 year old is hurting your future - that is not much of a future. The latter reasons are unsourced nonsense. He fits in with any team's timeline. And the Yankees can afford any player they want, contrary to what Steinbrenner tells people. Player salaries are decreasing while the industry is drowning in money - the facts here refute any claims of poverty. Fans identify with the owners - I expect that, but it is still remarkable to me.
-
Why would you think that? They make tons of money and spend relatively little on players. The proof is in the priorities. They could afford Machado - all 30 teams could.
-
So, I can have a 26 year old superstar, or a 29 year old reliever who can't throw strikes anymore. Hmmmmm.
-
It means they will probably choose not to - but that is a Hal problem. The Yankees can afford anything they want. Flags fly forever - games aren't played today for three years from now. The chances to win titles are special and it is derelict to not to push your chips in when that chance is there. (and the chips are there)
-
The value per win is different by team - and sometimes during the season. I mean, JD Martinez was a 3 or 4 win improvement over the incumbent DHs ... but those wins were immensely valuable to the Red Sox because he literally solved their only weakness. For a team like Philadelphia, 3 or 4 extra wins could get them to MAKE THE PLAYOFFS which is another new revenue stream - one which the owners get a much larger slice of. The marginal value of those extra wins is enormous. Now for a non contender, your math is right. Also - baseball is fun and great baseball players are worth watching. Now the playoffs are largely a crapshoot - but MAKING THE PLAYOFFS is not.
-
When the top 3 free agents are unsigned entering the season - that is the definition of teams not trying to improve. You might want the owners to keep all the money entering the system and just sit on profits - I do not. Baseball pays its players a smaller slice of the pie than any other sport. And any offseason this dull is bad for everyone - the players and the fans, and industry popularity. And - TV pays for mostly everything. The fans pay for quite a bit - but it's small relative to TV (though fans watching obviously is critical there). Most of these players came from nothing. Hal Steinbrenner's biggest accomplishment was not being an uberdouche to his dad.
-
Are they? They dumped salary in the offseason already - yet they are on the cusp of making a leap. They are the sort of team who benefits a ton from the marginal wins a stud would provide.
-
This makes sense in theory - but flags fly forever, and signing a 26 year old already-really good player aligns perfectly with the other guys. If they punt on this, it's good for us - so I weep for nobody.
-
The Yankees built an impregnable bullpen which then barfed out a near 5.00 ERA in the ALDS ... so the expertise there is meh.
-
I just want the sense the owner is doing everything the can to win. Hal is doing - less than that. Yay!
-
of course they are. They are not the only problem - the Phillies are in some ways worse - but sure they are a problem.
-
The Dodgers with their new ownership got an enormous TV deal - their revenue jumped. The Red Sox have always been pretty generous. Now is more aggressive than they have been - but it's always been pretty good. The Yankees thing is really funny to me. They are loaded - and there is a chance to make a significant improvement in the infield in a position where the marginal wins are incredibly valuable, and all it costs is money. And yet, they sit out and their fans seem way too okay with that. Now I still think there is a 30% chance they sign Machado because who knows - but it's striking.
-
They are a crapshoot - it's why teams have so much turnover there. Now there are relievers who are reliable - but it's a relatively small number. I mean Kimbrel had a good season in spots last year - but late last year he was flat out not good. Since relievers pitch in short stretches often in higher leverage spots, small changes can lead to very volatile results.
-
The Yankees spend 29% ... the Red Sox and Dodgers spend closer to 50% (at least based on last Forbes report). It's cute that the Yankees treat the luxury tax tiers as a salary cap - but it's their choice, they can afford any of these big players.
-
Yankees spend 29% of their revenue on players - 29th in the league (or thereabouts). A way to tell that it has gone down is that their payroll has not increased at the rate of the revenue influxes. Also - like the Sox - they own their own media property, which involves money which might not even be tracked properly. I mean they are getting a cut of the take on Brooklyn Nets games too. The Yankees will ALWAYS be able to afford more players than other teams - their revenue is just much much higher. But they are choosing to pocket a lot of that - and pay for the stadium which is obviously forcing Hal to turn to payday loans.
-
Longoria is not a very good example - injuries kicked in for him. That is a fair question for Harper - Machado has been very durable. Any contract can go bad - but as far as playing the percentages go, 26 year olds are a pretty good breed. I bet the Rays would do that again given the information they had then 10 times out of 10 - not all good ideas work.
-
It made me realize Hal Steinbrenner is a Scrooge
-
Here is the thing with Machado or Harper. At this point they are being undervalued relative to production. Normally a team like the Padres or White Sox doesn't make sense. However, they are so young - and the team expects to have a bunch of solid players on cheapo entry deals, that it actually matches their schedule quite nicely. Now, if the Phillies don't end up with one of them, that is a massive organizational failing. I still half expect the Yankees to nab Machado - frankly it is derelict they have not already.