Bleacher Bums Forum

The second condition, how the season actually plays, is more relevant than the first condition, how the roster is perceived going in.  Evaluating who has the best roster going in, of course, can be evaluated by a Fangraphs computer program.  But better evaluated by the actual season. 
-Veteran guys like Taillon, Imanaga, Steele, they can fall off the table pretty quickly.  Fangraphs can have nice big-sample age-decline curves.  But the Cubs will have individuals.  Lackey, Hendricks, Lester, Q, we've got plenty of experience with proven vets who dropped off pretty sharply. 
-The same will apply for whatever Free agent pitcher(s) Hoyer signs, Fried or Peralta or Eovaldi or whomever the one (or two) guys may be.  How good Hoyer and Fangraphs thinks they might be may differ significantly from the reality.  (Duh, Craig, everybody knows that.).
-Likewise wildly unpredictable what the young guys might do. PCA, Amaya, both might hit a lot better.  But, also possible that they may be no better next year than last?  Who knows?  Shaw, Caissie, Triantos may be productive as opportunity allows, like 2016 Contreras, or 2015 Schwarber/Soler/Russell.  Or not, who knows? 
-Brown, Horton, Wicks, Assad, Little, Hodge, we might walk into the playoffs thinking we've never had a good, talented young bullpen like this before, ever...  or not.  Nobody will know in March. 

Tangent on that:  It would be fun if some unexpected relievers turned up successful.  Pearson works on something, and actually ends up being excellent.  Roberts comes back another year from surgery, and suddenly his fastball is up 3mph and his fastball command is back, and he's just a good little pitcher?  Maybe something eventually clicks with Palencia, and he actually turns into a good reliever?  Wesneski?  It could be super fun if the young pitchers turn into a dynamite bullpen. 

Thanks for thoughts on lux line, everybody.  Agree with deeg, it seems poor (mis)management to go just barely over.  But point well taken, reb, that if nibbling at the threshold, elect to add a Paredes, and have injuries, that can slip you over.  I hadn't heard Ricketts interview saying we were over, without qualifications.  So it is, I guess. 

I am a hypocrite to fault Hoyer for just going over, I confess.  In past, I've disliked the concept of staying $5-10 under to give space for mid-season acquisitions.  I've thought better off to spend near the line at the start.  Maybe you won't need to be trading for guys at deadline if you spent effectively at the start.  And if you spend smart at start, maybe by deadline the team is good and winning is focus, such that nobody cares about lux line.  So, maybe this season is a lesson why Hoyer/Theo have been justified in trying to keep some cushion.  Hoyer did what I've recommended; I'm a hypocrite to fault him for it now! 

Part of my logic in spending near the line, is that *IF* you aren't a good team, you can offload some salary at the deadline.  I'd thought if things went "sell", that Hendricks, Smyly, Gomes, Neris, Taillon, Wisdom might all be contracts you could sell at the deadline.  But Hoyer elected to keep Taillon; Neris was apparently the only salary he was able to offload. Hendricks, Wisdom, Smyly, Gomes, Bote, none of these vet salaries were guys anybody else would take. 

In retrospect, I was surprised last winter that they brought Wisdom back.  I wonder if without him we'd have been under?  That proved a mistake, I think. 

It’s not hypocritical to blame Hoyer for going over.  If the Cubs aren’t committed to being and staying over the CBT line then wasting a season on an 83 win team is a mistake.

I think there is too much emphasis on the Cubs spending this amount of this.  The problem is the Cubs aren’t devloping star players and they aren’t buying or trading for them.  The way the Cubs are set up they have little choice than to be well above the CBT to catch the Brewers.  If the Cubs aren’t going to do that they aren’t catching the Brewers.  If they don’t do it 2027, they won’t catch the Brewers.  After that the payroll resets so maybe there is a chance if the young guys really come on.

Question:  Now that Sasaki will be posted, is the intrepid Jed Hoyer dispatching Suzuki and Imanaga to Sasaki to promote Chicago and has he already studied the Dodger contracts to Yamamoto and Ohtani to see how to get some Japanese airline or auto manufacturer to fund the millions necessary to sign Sasaki?  If not, why not?

If my team (Cubs) has to become the Chiba Lotte Marines in order to win I guess I'll just accept mediocrity.

Give me Max Fried.

Get ready for a cussing in 3...2...1...

You're right P2.

How did the Dodgers get Airline and auto manufacturers to fund Yamamoto?

ticohans

    Hero Member
    *****
    Posts: 5382
        View Profile Email Personal Message (Offline)

Re: Around Baseball
« Reply #22489 on: October 28, 2024, 03:15:35 pm »

    Quote
    Modify
    Remove
    Split Topic

From Bleacher Nation:

"But the much larger benefit is the enormous profit the Dodgers are making via sponsorship and marketing opportunities. Two Asian airlines alone sponsor the Dodgers, the LA Times reported. Word is, the club’s profit is actually many times the cost to them of Ohtani’s record contract."

I don't think Ohtani was ever going to play anywhere but LA, but this was always going to be the obvious outcome of his contract: wherever he signed, his new team stood to reap enormous financial benefit from sponsorships, ticket sales, and global fan engagement.

Soto doesn't bring Japanese airline sponsorships with him, but the effect will be similar to whatever team signs him: whoever wins the Soto sweepstakes will see a significant portion of his contract covered on 2ndary effects, to say nothing of his performance on the field.

We're not going to sign him, but any Cubs front office official talking about smart spending or lux tax or anything else like that as a reason for not signing Soto is lying through their teeth and insulting your intelligence.

They're not going to sign Soto because winning is not Ricketts' primary goal.

I frankly don't accept that winning is not Rickett's primary goal.  Guys like him have too much ego for that.  But he's too risk averse to "go all in" to win.