You're right, the team we had on paper should not have produced that poor of a record. I did not expect a bad season, last year. Calling it "the cliff" was wrong, but it was t5he beginning of the down slide brought on by our inability to keep or replace Kimbrel, Kelly, Nunez and Pom. What caused that "inability?" It was the trading away of too many cost-controlled young players/prospects and the over-reliance of moderate to big ticket free agent signings. This created the writing on the wall that many here denied was there.
Maybe the term "cliff" was and is hyperbole, and I often said I didn't think we'd ever get real bad as long as we kept spending just under the tax line, but the downturn is real and it is now. It wasn't a weak argument, then and it isn't now either.
The system has changed to make it harder to spend your way to greatness, in fact it hampers high spending teams. Fans can keep saying, "Henry can spend enough to get us what we need," but the fact is is won't forever. Our history was to spend big, at times, go over the line, here and there, but we always had times where we lowered spending. It wasn't a weak argument to predict we'd do that again, especially after spending more than we ever did, only to see us miss the playoffs by a pretty wide margin.
The rebuild is here. We will try to be somewhat competitive, this year, so I'm fine with saying this is not a cliff, and we were wrong using that term, but the reality is we just traded Betts and Price for pre-arb players and prospects. Call it whatever you want, but at least admit some of anti-cliff people got it horribly wrong, too.