MLB: 2013-2014 Off-season - Pre-season

jack presley

That's some rotation now in Washington.

Strasburg
Zimmerman
Gonzalez
Fister

krustydoyle

As a yankee fan i love the move for Ellsbury.
Hes a good player and brings a bit of speed to
the line up. His avg's are alright but i think he suits
the dynamics of the team.

The Cano situation is still very odd. The money isn't there for the yankees to re sign him
Does he go to the Mariners? Im a little surprised the market is so small for him.

smackbunnybaby

The Yankees still seem like they have a lot to do though.

They need 2nd and 3rd and rotation and bullpen!

krustydoyle

smackbunnybaby wrote: »

The Yankees still seem like they have a lot to do though.

They need 2nd and 3rd and rotation and bullpen!

They have about $37 million to spend so what do they get for that?

They only have 2 starters (Sabathia, Nova)
The NPB target Tanaka is still an option but that posting situation isn't gonna be resolved anytime soon.

Its just hard to see them staying under this $189 million target they have.

Coeus

jack presley wrote: »

That's some rotation now in Washington.

Strasburg
Zimmerman
Gonzalez
Fister

Fister should be better than Haren was last season. They have some guys (Deweiler/Roark/Jordan) who they can plug in as a number 5. But can they hit, no way a guy with Strasburgs numbers and talent should be finishing a season with a losing record...

jack presley

Granderson to the Mets apparently. Not official but some tweets doing the rounds in the last few minutes saying it's a done deal.

I'm happy with it if it is true. Definitely a step up from last year's outfield (if he can stay healthy!)

MilanPan!c

krustydoyle wrote: »

As a yankee fan i love the move for Ellsbury.
Hes a good player and brings a bit of speed to
the line up. His avg's are alright but i think he suits
the dynamics of the team.

The Cano situation is still very odd. The money isn't there for the yankees to re sign him
Does he go to the Mariners? Im a little surprised the market is so small for him.

As a Red sox fan I love the fact that you guys are saddled with 150M in spend for a player that has probably peaked - and is injury prone... there's no way he's worth what was spent, at all, which is why you see very little in the way of despair from the Sox camp...

A very silly move by the Yankees.

krustydoyle

MilanPan!c wrote: »

As a Red sox fan I love the fact that you guys are saddled with 150M in spend for a player that has probably peaked - and is injury prone... there's no way he's worth what was spent, at all, which is why you see very little in the way of despair from the Sox camp...

A very silly move by the Yankees.

Ah we all know that they overpaid but once he stays healthy then he'll be productive in that line up. Hes a real upgrade to the outfield.

Its the not knowing how hes going to work out in a few years but the yankees never worry about that stuff.

MilanPan!c

krustydoyle wrote: »

Ah we all know that they overpaid but once he stays healthy then he'll be productive in that line up. Hes a real upgrade to the outfield.

Its the not knowing how hes going to work out in a few years but the yankees never worry about that stuff.

They don't. That's true.

And check out how many games he played the last few years if you're interested in his health.

One word: fragile.

jack presley

Big teams in major markets don't get away with signing reliable players who will play 155-160 games year in year out but are only average at best.

So the Yankees have to take chances on players with big up sides but with a bad injury history. And it's not like they don't have the money if he does turn out to be fragile.

MilanPan!c

jack presley wrote: »

Big teams in major markets don't get away with signing reliable players who will play 155-160 games year in year out but are only average at best.

So the Yankees have to take chances on players with big up sides but with a bad injury history. And it's not like they don't have the money if he does turn out to be fragile.

Well that's obviously not true.

Many of the teams that beat up on the Yankees last year didn't take those chances. One was the Red Sox who now refuse long expensive deals and would rather take reasonible chances.

Ellsbury MAY work out, but that's not in any way a justification for a dodgy strategy.

jack presley

MilanPan!c wrote: »

Well that's obviously not true.

Many of the teams that beat up on the Yankees last year didn't take those chances. One was the Red Sox who now refuse long expensive deals and would rather take reasonible chances.

Ellsbury MAY work out, but that's not in any way a justification for a dodgy strategy.

The Yankees aren't the same as other teams though. The Yankees HAVE to have big name players. Even though the Rays for example are a better team, if the Yankees had that roster, there'd be war in the NY press and Yankee stadium would be empty.

They play by different standards. Having big name players is much more important to them than it is to the Oriols or Blue Jays.

The Yankees seem quite happy to overpay a player on the 75/25 chance that he's successful for a few years and when he's rubbish in year 5 of the deal and they're still paying him $20m, they'll worry about that then.

MilanPan!c

jack presley wrote: »

The Yankees aren't the same as other teams though. The Yankees HAVE to have big name players. Even though the Rays for example are a better team, if the Yankees had that roster, there'd be war in the NY press and Yankee stadium would be empty.

They play by different standards. Having big name players is much more important to them than it is to the Oriols or Blue Jays.

The Yankees seem quite happy to overpay a player on the 75/25 chance that he's successful for a few years and when he's rubbish in year 5 of the deal and they're still paying him $20m, they'll worry about that then.

You know what Yankees fans like even more than expensive free agents?

Winning.

The Red Sox and many other teams have shied away from the "Carl Crawford deal" - even teams that can easily afford them - because they're bad baseball.

Defending bad baseball on the basis that certain teams' fans are too stupid to appreciate a winning strategy is... Well... Dubious.

Most fans want rings a LOT more than they want an overplayed team of losers - and that includes Yankees fans.

jack presley

MilanPan!c wrote: »

You know what Yankees fans like even more than expensive free agents?

Winning.

The Red Sox and many other teams have shied away from the "Carl Crawford deal" - even teams that can easily afford them - because they're bad baseball.

Defending bad baseball on the basis that certain teams' fans are too stupid to appreciate a winning strategy is... Well... Dubious.

Most fans want rings a LOT more than they want an overplayed team of losers - and that includes Yankees fans.

With the exception of last year's Red Sox, most other teams that fit the winning formula were built from within over a number of years. If you said to a Yankees fan that they were going to build a winning team but it'll take 5-6 years with restocking the farm system etc. he'd throw you off Brooklyn bridge!

Of course Yankees fans want to win but they want to win now. Look at the last time they didn't make the playoffs. They went out and spent millions on Sabathia, Burnett and Texeria. There was no patience shown then.

MilanPan!c

jack presley wrote: »

With the exception of last year's Red Sox, most other teams that fit the winning formula were built from within over a number of years. If you said to a Yankees fan that they were going to build a winning team but it'll take 5-6 years with restocking the farm system etc. he'd throw you off Brooklyn bridge!

Of course Yankees fans want to win but they want to win now. Look at the last time they didn't make the playoffs. They went out and spent millions on Sabathia, Burnett and Texeria. There was no patience shown then.

I think you're not only wrong, but demonstrably so.

In the last decade the Yankees have spent more money than god on free agents... In the same time period, their tv ratings have dropped, precipitously.

On the other hand, teams like the Kansas City Royals, whose salary is 120M LESS than the Yankees have seen huge increases in viewership.

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2013/09/30/Media/MLB-ratings.aspx

There's NO connection between a team spending zillions on dozens of over paid free agents and a teams popularity... in fact, back before the Red Sox dumped all of their salary to the Dodgers their viewership was collapsing... Because they weren't winning.

Winning teams have fans... that's the bottom line.

And the TV viewership numbers back that up.

The 2013 Sox (and many teams before them) managed to WIN rings without padding Scot Boras' bank account. The Yankees fans know this and are a lot more patient (the real baseball fans among them) than you give them credit for. Indeed, the fly by night fans would be MORE interested if they were winning, no matter the names on the jerseys.

In summary: the idea that you can build long term interest in a losing team, by simply spending a lot of money on losing teams is demonstrably untrue. On the other hand, teams that win, no matter the salary, are almost universally popular. And. Long term contracts for players with known injury history, who have already lot their ability to drive the ball... they're stupid and they won't help the team - as a rule.

jack presley

MilanPan!c wrote: »

I think you're not only wrong, but demonstrably so.

In the last decade the Yankees have spent more money than god on free agents... In the same time period, their tv ratings have dropped, precipitously.

On the other hand, teams like the Kansas City Royals, whose salary is 120M LESS than the Yankees have seen huge increases in viewership.

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2013/09/30/Media/MLB-ratings.aspx

There's NO connection between a team spending zillions on dozens of over paid free agents and a teams popularity... in fact, back before the Red Sox dumped all of their salary to the Dodgers their viewership was collapsing... Because they weren't winning.

Winning teams have fans... that's the bottom line.

And the TV viewership numbers back that up.

The 2013 Sox (and many teams before them) managed to WIN rings without padding Scot Boras' bank account. The Yankees fans know this and are a lot more patient (the real baseball fans among them) than you give them credit for. Indeed, the fly by night fans would be MORE interested if they were winning, no matter the names on the jerseys.

In summary: the idea that you can build long term interest in a losing team, by simply spending a lot of money on losing teams is demonstrably untrue. On the other hand, teams that win, no matter the salary, are almost universally popular. And. Long term contracts for players with known injury history, who have already lot their ability to drive the ball... they're stupid and they won't help the team - as a rule.

Everyone knows that long term big money contracts are stupid but teams keep giving them. Why? Because they want short term success.

I'm not a Yankees fan but do listen to a lot of NY sports radio and if you think I'm demonstratively wrong, you should hear what the nutters on phone ins over there have to say.

What you are saying might be logical but New Yorkers are a different breed to the rest of us!

MilanPan!c

jack presley wrote: »

Everyone knows that long term big money contracts are stupid but teams keep giving them. Why? Because they want short term success.

I'm not a Yankees fan but do listen to a lot of NY sports radio and if you think I'm demonstratively wrong, you should hear what the nutters on phone ins over there have to say.

What you are saying might be logical but New Yorkers are a different breed to the rest of us!

I lived in Boston for a decade and spent every weekend - more or less - in NYC for the better part of 6 years... On top of that I have been to Yankees stadium and Fenway numerous times and have friends - good friends - that are Yankees fans... on top of all of that I grew up watching the Cardinals... I know a lot of about baseball fans, and Yankees fans... I don't think you should judge your opinion of them based on sports radio.

Saying that - it is - or has been - perceived wisdom - that you can simply buy short term gains, but the truth is that that ONLY works if you do it all at once (i.e. buy a team of superstars) and ALSO get lucky... but of course, you can get just as lucky without spending 200M on players, and without leaving your team in a massive financial pit.

I think that fewer teams are going to spend on long term contracts, unless it's on something proven, a Dustin Pedroia for example, or a Derek Jeter.

Boras and a few other people have REALLY distorted the market and the Sox Yankees arms race has certainly played into his hands... or course the Sox seems to have walked away from that game... so... who knows how much longer this bubble will last - and it is a bubble.

jack presley

MilanPan!c wrote: »

I lived in Boston for a decade and spent every weekend - more or less - in NYC for the better part of 6 years... On top of that I have been to Yankees stadium and Fenway numerous times and have friends - good friends - that are Yankees fans... on top of all of that I grew up watching the Cardinals... I know a lot of about baseball fans, and Yankees fans... I don't think you should judge your opinion of them based on sports radio.

.

So after all this, why do you think the Yankees overpaid for Ellsbury?

MilanPan!c

jack presley wrote: »

So after all this, why do you think the Yankees overpaid for Ellsbury?

For a variety of reasons:

- He's 30 - in 6 years the chances of him being worth 20M+/year are almost non-existent, as his main attribute is speed. This means that he's really being paid a LOT more than 20M a year for a few years. He's certainly not worth that.

- He's injury prone and his power is fading... fast!

The Yankees are taking a somewhat similar risk. Ellsbury, 30, is a dynamic player who finished second in the American League MVP voting in 2011, hitting .321 with 32 home runs and 105 RBIs.

But in the two years since, Ellsbury has hit 13 home runs and driven in 79 runs over 880 at-bats. Going back to 2010, Ellsbury has played in 384 of a possible 648 regular-season games, only 59 percent.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2013/12/04/jacoby-ellsbury-leaves-red-sox-for-yankees-and-seven-year-million-deal/mr4YoxqxcgtC05naoRVJNI/story.html

So you're only paying for about 60% attendance, for maybe 4 years of top performance... at that rate you're paying him so far over the mark as to be laughable... if you're a Red Sox fan... if you're a Yankees fan, all you can do is despair at the "Celtic Tiger" that seems to hold the purse strings of the Yankees.

It's this sort of magical thinking that created the 2013 team.

Consider this: The Yankees spent 200M in 2013, on players (276M on players and other salaries) - for that they finished 4th, and 12 GB from the Sox.

If that doesn't convince you, consider that the Yankees will be (probably) paying A Rod 20M for the next FOUR years.

They'll also be paying Teixeira and Sabathia 20M for three out of the next four years.

In 2015 the Yankees will be paying 80m for Teixeira, Sabathia, Ellsbury and A Rod. That's four players.

They carry about 35 players on their salary at any given point. They paid 200M total last year.

Between 2003 and 2013, they've won one World Series, and in the same time they've spent close to 2 BILLION in salary.

The Red sox have spent between 20 - 80M LESS, PER YEAR, and have won three times in the same period.

You can't buy rings.

jack presley

MilanPan!c wrote: »

For a variety of reasons:

- He's 30 - in 6 years the chances of him being worth 20M+/year are almost non-existent, as his main attribute is speed. This means that he's really being paid a LOT more than 20M a year for a few years. He's certainly not worth that.

Which is exactly the point I've been making all along. Big name player for (hopefully for them) short term success!

MilanPan!c

jack presley wrote: »

Which is exactly the point I've been making all along. Big name player for (hopefully for them) short term success!

Yes. That's their hope. But this has been their strategy for a decade. It hasn't worked. It will continue not to work. Blaming "fan impatience" for a strategy which is such a dramatic failure is also itself, not going to work.

2 billion for one World Series, falling attendance and falling viewership.

It's a huge mistake to continue on like this.

And I as a Red Sox fan am happy to watch them continually implode.

MilanPan!c

This from the NY Post:

The Yankees have committed seven years and $153 million to a core player from their chief adversaries, and those adversaries — the defending World Series champions, by the way — don’t sound distressed whatsoever, based on the conversations I had with industry folks on Wednesday.

Then why did the Red Sox’s discussions with Ellsbury rise only to the level of five years and $80 million? Partly because the Red Sox put themselves in the position of not being desperate, thanks to the development of Jackie Bradley Jr., the ability of Shane Victorino to switch from right field to center field and the financial might to play the market for a free-agent outfielder. That’s to Boston’s credit.

But also because, having lived with Ellsbury all this time, they simply didn’t value him at anything approaching the Yankees’ valuation.

Ellsbury averaged 96 games played in the prior four seasons — 18 in 2010, 158 in 2011, 74 in 2012 and 134 this past season. The missed time resulted from accidents, rather than recurring injuries, but you either are good at staying on the field or you aren’t, and Ellsbury ‘s track record in this area is shaky.

As for personality fit … again, he can handle the Northeast. He won’t wilt a la Carl Crawford in Boston. But he isn’t going to bring intangibles beyond the field. One talent evaluator from an AL team described Ellsbury as a “neutral” in terms of clubhouse contributions — not a bad guy, just quiet. Maybe you just shrug that off, yet it would be nice to get a little bonus for that sizable investment.

Let’s put it this way: When you factor in statistical reliability and personality fit, two of the Yankees’ megadeals from five years ago — seven years and $161 million for CC Sabathia and eight years and $180 million for Mark Teixeira — come off as better bets than this Ellsbury pact. And the Yankees aren’t exactly loving those agreements right now.

The club appears terrified of going past seven years with Robinson Cano, one of the game’s most durable and accomplished players who has proven his functionality in the Yankees’ world. And somehow seven years for Ellsbury, a stranger with an injury history and little power, is supposed to prompt a celebration.

Maybe Brian McCann, set to be introduced at a Yankee Stadium news conference Thursday, and Ellsbury will be immediate hits just as Sabathia and Teixeira were. If you’re a Yankees fan, though, you sure hope you’re not shaking your head at this deal five years from now the way you do at Sabathia and Teixeira. And you probably wish, too, the Red Sox felt a little worse about this development.

http://nypost.com/2013/12/04/no-tears-at-fenway-over-ellsburys-defection/

smackbunnybaby

Cano to Mariners?

"The Mariners are closing in on a deal with Robinson Cano, sources told CBSSports.com

One source with Seattle connections said the deal will be for "at least" $225 million, suggesting it will likely be more."

MilanPan!c

smackbunnybaby wrote: »

Cano to Mariners?

"The Mariners are closing in on a deal with Robinson Cano, sources told CBSSports.com

One source with Seattle connections said the deal will be for "at least" $225 million, suggesting it will likely be more."

Mixed reports all day, but then this:

Robinson Cano and the Seattle Mariners have agreed to sign a 10-year, $240 million contract, a source told ESPNdeportes.com Friday.

The player and his agents met Thursday night in Seattle with the Mariners' top executives and the team made an offer he couldn't refuse, the source added.

The source said Cano will return to Seattle on Sunday and will undergo a physical on Monday to complete what would be the third largest contract in history, tied with the one that Albert Pujols signed with Los Angeles Angels three years ago.

http://espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/story/_/id/10089241/robinson-cano-agrees-deal-seattle-mariners

MoyVilla9

Good luck to the Mariners. The Yankees have already made the 10-year mistake once.

jack presley

Ok so it's not in the same league as the Cano signing but I'm happy with the Mets picking up Granderson. A good signing considering their budget and their outfield is looking a hell of a lot better than this years. They're still not good enough to contend but hopefully they'll at least be competitive.

Coeus

jack presley wrote: »

Ok so it's not in the same league as the Cano signing but I'm happy with the Mets picking up Granderson. A good signing considering their budget and their outfield is looking a hell of a lot better than this years. They're still not good enough to contend but hopefully they'll at least be competitive.

Nice pickup for the Mets, probably had to give him an extra year top get the deal done. Hopefully he can avoid getting beaned on the hand...

As for the Cano deal, overpaying was the only way a team like the Mariners were going to get a guy like that. A bit like Washington overpaying for Werth a few years back. What I wonder about the Cano situation is why the Yankees were willing to overpay for Ellsbury and not Cano?

MilanPan!c

Coeus wrote: »

Nice pickup for the Mets, probably had to give him an extra year top get the deal done. Hopefully he can avoid getting beaned on the hand...

As for the Cano deal, overpaying was the only way a team like the Mariners were going to get a guy like that. A bit like Washington overpaying for Werth a few years back. What I wonder about the Cano situation is why the Yankees were willing to overpay for Ellsbury and not Cano?

The Yankees thought that Cano would come around. That's arrogance.

In actual fact the Yanks WAY overpaid for Ells and this will become grossly apparent within the next thee years.

krustydoyle

Yankees sign Carlos Beltran to a 3 yr £45 mill deal.

That's a very crowded outfield now

jack presley

krustydoyle wrote: »

Yankees sign Carlos Beltran to a 3 yr £45 mill deal.

That's a very crowded outfield now

Does Beltran have 3 good years left in him would you say?