MLB 2019

[Gabriel]

Miami got a really good return in exchange for someone who very vocally wanted out of the Sunshine State. Of course, the Phillies are all in this year and are still kicking tires on Machado and Harper both. If they land one, they won't get the other, but the other off-season additions will make them a much more dangerous team this year anyways. They came real close to the post-season last year, considering how hard it was for them to drive in runs. Realmuto is a huge immediate upgrade at Catcher. He hit .277 last year, which is outrageous for a backstop, and had a career high in home runs with 21.

That said, he could just as easily slip like JP Arencibia did in Toronto. Couple killer offensive years, and then he became a major burden at the plate. We'll have to see how Realmuto does over the next couple of seasons with Philadelphia before there can be a real judgment made on this trade. Immediately, it looks good for both sides, though skewed towards Miami for sure. In the long term, it will depend on if Realmuto can continue to be a force at the plate, and how the prospects do with Miami. Alfaro is a good pickup for the Marlins though. Downgrade at catcher for sure this season, but he had a pretty solid rookie campaign for the Phillies.

[million$$man]

If you make the DH universal, you might as well take away inter-league play. 

 

The 3 batter minimum is just plain stupid.

[Mx. Canadian Destroyer]

4 minutes ago, million$$man said:

If you make the DH universal, you might as well take away inter-league play. 

You can't really considering there are 15 teams in each league. One team from each league will need a team to play. 

[million$$man]

Just now, Ms. Canadian Destroyer said:

You can't really considering there are 15 teams in each league. One team from each league will need a team to play. 

For me, the whole intrigue of inter league play is the strategy of playing outside your rules.

 

If both leagues have DH's it takes away from seeing an AL having to use the 9 spot for their pitcher or an NL team, who uses a guy normally for 1 AB, having to play him all game. 

[Mx. Canadian Destroyer]

5 minutes ago, million$$man said:

For me, the whole intrigue of inter league play is the strategy of playing outside your rules.

 

If both leagues have DH's it takes away from seeing an AL having to use the 9 spot for their pitcher or an NL team, who uses a guy normally for 1 AB, having to play him all game. 

Yeah, I get what you're saying but with the way the teams are aligned, you would have two teams sitting around not playing for 3 days if you don't have interleague play. 

Plus, there's too much money in certain rilvaries (New York vs. New York for example). 

The only thing I don't like about interleague play is that not everybody plays everybody. I don't like that sometimes potentially get an easier over schedule because of the teams the interleague teams they play are worse.

[Meacon Keaton]

I honestly hope they do end interleague play whenever they inevitably go to 32 teams. It'll make the All-Star game, and in a way the World Series, that much more exciting. 

[Meacon Keaton]

Aaaaaaaaaaah I’m ready for baseball aaaaaaaaaaaaaah

[gunnar hendershow]

5 hours ago, Meacon said:

Aaaaaaaaaaah I’m ready for baseball aaaaaaaaaaaaaah

Bryce Harper, Manny Machado, Marwin Gonzalez, Dallas Keuchel, and dozens of other players are too.

[The Buscher]

It sounds like the NL owners are now on board for the Universal DH because it'll make the league more balanced.  But despite that, it's off the table for 2019 and probably 2020 and 2021.  Even though both sides want it, the owners know the union wants it more due to the potentially high paying job it will create.  So the owners are going to use it as a bargaining chip in the next CBA instead of giving it away for free.

[Mx. Canadian Destroyer]

It's hilarious that Brett Lawrie, who hasn't played since 2016, got signed before Manny and Bryce. 

[Gabriel]

With how aggravating the off-season has become for baseball, it's clear that something needs to change.

We already know that ownership and management of a lot of teams are at fault. There's a culture in MLB now where impact free agents seem to only want to sign for contending teams, but we also have three or four teams per division looking at the depth charts and conceding the season before it even begins... which means that they don't even really pursue those free agents in hopes of surprising, or in hopes of adding those one or two pieces that could make them a pain in the ass for that powerhouse at the top of their division.

My question now though... is are the players at all responsible? If the Toronto Blue Jays opened up their wallet and made a big offer to Harper or Machado, would either man even consider it, knowing that there are two teams who posted 100 wins or more at the top of the division? Knowing that the Jays are coming off a sub-.500 season? Forgetting about the Jays prospects and looking at the roster as it stands for opening day potentials, would either of those guys even give the Jays the time of day to consider it?

We hear a lot about fans being pissed at ownership/management... but there has to be some level of culpability for the players too. When the off season starts, you look at the list of top free agents and potential destinations, and the potential destinations are all the same. If they list three potentials per player, and a list of the top 10 players, you might have six teams show up. To me, that says that there's a problem there.

If everyone wants to play for a winning team instead of helping to make a winning team, those winning teams are eventually going to be able to set their prices and dictate the market. Why spend $300 million on one player, when you can spend the same amount and pick up three to five guys who will also improve your already dominant team?

 

[Mx. Canadian Destroyer]

But teams aren't offering players what they think their worth. I'm sure there are teams out there offering contracts but they are undervaluing those players. Why would the Blue Jays jump in and offer a contract that is millions of dollars more than what the other teams are offering. It's a problem with the system. Teams can pay their minor leaguers and prospects peanuts instead of paying millions of dollars to the superstars. 

It's absolutely not the players fault. The teams are making billions of dollars. 

[Gabriel]

Just now, Ms. Canadian Destroyer said:

But teams aren't offering players what they think their worth. I'm sure there are teams out there offering contracts but they are undervaluing those players. Why would the Blue Jays jump in and offer a contract that is millions of dollars more than what the other teams are offering. It's a problem with the system. Teams can pay their minor leaguers and prospects peanuts instead of paying millions of dollars to the superstars. 

It's absolutely not the players fault. The teams are making billions of dollars. 

And that's why I believe that a salary cap/floor system is needed in the league.

The lack of attempt at signing marquee free agents from teams that don't think they can compete at the top of their division is creating a massive divide. If teams are forced to spend X amount of dollars because it's Y percentage of their revenue, then we'd see lesser teams making those attempts more often. Conversely, if teams can only spend up to a certain amount because of a cap, it will almost force open the doors for lesser teams to able to sign those guys. Thus, creating parity.

Dynasties are important to the narrative of the sport, but not at the expense of the sport, and that's what we're seeing right now.

Like I said though, if someone like Machado wants $300 million over 10 years, let's say... but because of the lack of movement in the AL East, the Yankees don't believe that they need to add him to remain at the top of the division, and can do so by spreading that money out over other players, what's their incentive to spend that money on Machado? If lesser teams have no incentive to add, it makes it less likely that the more dominant teams will feel the need to do so, and that creates the types of stalemates we've seen over the past couple of years in the majors.

The players absolutely deserve a bigger piece of the pie than they get, as a whole. I will not argue that in any way. But the market is being dictated by the lack of movement from the lesser teams, and from a business perspective, can you really blame a GM for saving his team money, increasing the value of himself and still putting out a Division Champion?

Major changes are going to be necessary, but at the end of the day, parity is the key word. Force lesser teams to spend more money, so long as they aren't losing money, and the bigger teams will also be more likely to relent to the requests of the marquee free agents.

Free agency should be an arms race. MLB free agency is a war of attrition. It's just so wrong.

[Meacon Keaton]

Salary cap won't be passed because that takes away potential earnings for a player.

If you think Machado not getting a $300 million contract happens now, what happens when you add a salary cap? 

I'm not entirely sure what you meant by dynasties are important to the narrative, when you consider that over the last ten years the Giants and Red Sox are the only two teams with multiple World Series wins. 

If you institute a salary floor, then you're looking at a team like Baltimore who will give someone like Mike Moustakas a one-year $20 million deal just to meet the floor more than you will see them agree to pay Machado $35 million over the next decade. Teams are going to be cheap and try to make as much and pay as little as they can, regardless of what type of limits you put on it. 

The issue isn't a salary cap or floor. It's more of the whole financial system. Why aren't the Yankees going to pay Manny Machado $30 million a season? Because they're going to be paying Migeul Andujar $700,000 over the next three years, and probably $5-8 million the three years after that. That's six years at the SAME amount of what it would cost to pay Manny for one year. Salary cap and floor isn't going to solve this issue. A complete overhaul of service time, the cheap ass contracts before players are arbitration eligible, and the arbitration process and amounts themselves are what needs to be changed.

[gunnar hendershow]

2 hours ago, Meacon said:

Salary cap won't be passed because that takes away potential earnings for a player.

If you think Machado not getting a $300 million contract happens now, what happens when you add a salary cap? 

I'm not entirely sure what you meant by dynasties are important to the narrative, when you consider that over the last ten years the Giants and Red Sox are the only two teams with multiple World Series wins. 

If you institute a salary floor, then you're looking at a team like Baltimore who will give someone like Mike Moustakas a one-year $20 million deal just to meet the floor more than you will see them agree to pay Machado $35 million over the next decade. Teams are going to be cheap and try to make as much and pay as little as they can, regardless of what type of limits you put on it. 

 The issue isn't a salary cap or floor. It's more of the whole financial system. Why aren't the Yankees going to pay Manny Machado $30 million a season? Because they're going to be paying Migeul Andujar $700,000 over the next three years, and probably $5-8 million the three years after that. That's six years at the SAME amount of what it would cost to pay Manny for one year. Salary cap and floor isn't going to solve this issue. A complete overhaul of service time, the cheap ass contracts before players are arbitration eligible, and the arbitration process and amounts themselves are what needs to be changed.

Yeah the more thought I give to it the more I think they need to completely overhaul the way service time, arbitration, etc are handled. Players could either hit free agency sooner, or be eligible for more money much sooner.

Also the owners offering this as a carrot for the institution of a stricter luxury tax/salary cap might actually hold some weight. Players probably make the same over their entire careers if every team is paying around the same in total payroll. Baseball isn't like basketball where a star player's value is worth 20-30 wins in a season. The best a player can do is add about 10 wins to a team, in twice as many games as the NBA. They don't have that same level of leverage, so a compromise that might work is them getting more early in their careers to offset the fact that when it comes time for them to get a long-term contract they don't lose out due to the fact their value will depreciate over the length of the deal.

[GhostMachine]

A Salary cap ceased being an option around the same time free agency was implemented. Which sucks, because Bud Selig was full of it back when he said parity works. Larger market teams laugh at the existing luxury tax, and they can easily afford to take the smaller market teams' stars away when their contracts run out. 

Lack of a salary cap also means that a lot of players are also going to be overpaid. ie, Bryce Harper. I don't want him going to a team that I like simply because he'll be taking money that could be better spent elsewhere. His offensive output doesn't justify what he'll be getting.

If MLB ever does decide to have a salary floor, then the smaller market teams should decide what it is, with the large market teams having no say-so. Because their input would probably cripple those smaller market teams. 

 

 

[Mx. Canadian Destroyer]

Do you think a RFA system like the NHL has would work?

[GhostMachine]

It certainly couldn't hurt.

 

[The Buscher]

Jacob deGrom has given the Mets a deadline of Opening Day to hammer out a contract extension.  Like most players, he's not interested in negotiating a new contract in-season.  There's also a sense that his relationship with the team is becoming a bit strained because his camp was told two months ago that they were going to talk an extension and the team has yet to even broach the subject.

Honestly, if they don't get this resolved in the next six weeks he has another great season I'm not sure he's even going to want to talk an extension when he'll only be a year away from free agency.  Then again, he'll be 32 when his deal is up at a time where teams seem to be afraid of paying players too deep into their 30's, so it's possible a three or four-year extension right now will be a lot more appealing to him than it would to Syndergaard.

[Your Mom]

Machado to the Padres 10 years 300 million