Moderators: Shirley, Sabo, brian, rass, DaveInSeattle
Trolling. Verlander has a ways to go before I'd think his real best use is in the pen, atleast in the regular season.DSafetyGuy wrote:I don't know if you're trolling or not and I don't know how I feel if they were to do that and I think I would actually like it even though it goes against lots of things that I believe.
Yeah, many Tigers fans were suggesting he move to the pen last season (and not just for the postseason), so that was the root of my confusion.mister d wrote:Trolling. Verlander has a ways to go before I'd think his real best use is in the pen, atleast in the regular season.DSafetyGuy wrote:I don't know if you're trolling or not and I don't know how I feel if they were to do that and I think I would actually like it even though it goes against lots of things that I believe.
(Although, he's the exact type I think will reach a point where he could be a stellar late career pen arm if he can bounce back without rest.)
The "life's too short" kind of attitude had a short shelf life, eh?brian wrote:Well, you're an extremely negative person so that's not surprising.
Really? That kind of ruins what I was trying to do during the ALDS.DSafetyGuy wrote:Yeah, many Tigers fans were suggesting he move to the pen last season (and not just for the postseason), so that was the root of my confusion.
So I'm not allowed to point out the obvious?sancarlos wrote:The "life's too short" kind of attitude had a short shelf life, eh?brian wrote:Well, you're an extremely negative person so that's not surprising.
In looking at the FA OF options, it's slimmer pickings than I thought, but if you're going to try and make a splash and give up a draft pick I'd personally have rather gone with Melky Cabrera, PED concerns and all. But it makes a little bit more sense than I initially thought.mister d wrote:Sandy Alderson's tenure as Met GM will likely have zero overlap with the MLB career of the 15th pick. Not the best move for the Mets franchise but that's what happens when a team decides to try to win immediately.
CUDDYER WON A BATTING TITLE!brian wrote:In looking at the FA OF options, it's slimmer pickings than I thought, but if you're going to try and make a splash and give up a draft pick I'd personally have rather gone with Melky Cabrera, PED concerns and all. But it makes a little bit more sense than I initially thought.mister d wrote:Sandy Alderson's tenure as Met GM will likely have zero overlap with the MLB career of the 15th pick. Not the best move for the Mets franchise but that's what happens when a team decides to try to win immediately.
No idea. But they were the home team for a bunch of post-season games. That's worth a lot. Worth more is the bump in attendance, pricing, and media deals they'll get for several years to come. As a ballpark estimate, it could be enough to justify signing a pretty good free agent where in previous years they would have signed someone marginal to fill the same roster spot. Obviously money is coming off their payroll along with the free agency of Shields, Butler, and Aoki. So they have this to work with as well.brian wrote:How much was the Royals "financial windfall"?
I wonder if the Dodgers would be interested in eating any part of that contract. If they can get LA to eat $20 or $25M and get him for like $15M/year instead of $20M then there's possibly some value there, especially since he likely can't be any worse of a defender at a corner outfield position now that the Tigers have CF locked up with Gose and Davis. You gotta think if he's healthy he should be good for 3 to 4 WAR a season and you can justify paying $4-5M/WARmister d wrote:Detroit should look into assuming Matt Kemp's contract. For real.
Yeah, that was my point -- though according to MLB's goofy rules the teams actually make more in gate revenue as each series goes on which means the WS going 7 helped them a little. The only REAL value to the Royals was the fact that they can likely raise ticket prices for 2015 and get away with it and that they'll get an increase in season tickets and ticket sales in general. They've been right around 1.7M per season for the last four or five years, based on previous examples of out of nowhere runs to the World Series (Colorado, Detroit in '06, etc.) they'll likely see their attendance get up to between 2.3 and 2.5M next year unless they start out 0-20 or something. That's real money, but it's not Jon Lester or Max Scherzer money.tennbengal wrote:Teams don't make money on the tix in the playoffs (cut up among all the teams) - they make it in concession sales etc. So, a windfall for the Royals, but not as much as you might suppose.
I imagine they would, especially under the new regime and if it can net them a flyer prospect or sneaky MLB piece in return.brian wrote:I wonder if the Dodgers would be interested in eating any part of that contract. If they can get LA to eat $20 or $25M and get him for like $15M/year instead of $20M then there's possibly some value there, especially since he likely can't be any worse of a defender at a corner outfield position now that the Tigers have CF locked up with Gose and Davis. You gotta think if he's healthy he should be good for 3 to 4 WAR a season and you can justify paying $4-5M/WAR
The real interesting question (which I suppose we'll know at some point) is a) if that 6/144 deal is still on the table for the Tigers after the Cabrera extension and other assorted deals since then and b) if it is if other teams will match or exceed it.mister d wrote:I imagine they would, especially under the new regime and if it can net them a flyer prospect or sneaky MLB piece in return.brian wrote:I wonder if the Dodgers would be interested in eating any part of that contract. If they can get LA to eat $20 or $25M and get him for like $15M/year instead of $20M then there's possibly some value there, especially since he likely can't be any worse of a defender at a corner outfield position now that the Tigers have CF locked up with Gose and Davis. You gotta think if he's healthy he should be good for 3 to 4 WAR a season and you can justify paying $4-5M/WAR
Detroit going scorched earth, if that's the plan, is going to be pretty interesting. You sort of wonder if Scherzer's people know this and he'll eventually be back on a deal that makes 6Y/$144MM look like nothing.
What are you thinking for Scherzer then? 7/185?mister d wrote:Boras lives to max out, so wouldn't a massive 2 year deal plus a potential 6 year deal post-age 31 be his masterpiece? He couldn't do it across the board because too many individual players would lose even if he stayed net even or better, but a one-time deal would be a lot of fun. Really, I just want an answer to that hypothetical. I could guess most contracts now within a couple million annual but "what is Max Scherzer's one year buyout amount" is a total mystery.
I have no idea what "at the end of their salary capabilities" means. If you mean that they were running on a break-even basis if they didn't make the post-season, then I agree. When the numbers come out, I believe this will also be found to be true of the Tigers. But of course, the Royals went the max number of games. That means an extra $10-15M immediately from the profits on their share of the gate plus all the other game-related sales. But more importantly, they are assured that there is more to come in 2015 and future years as attendance and pricing go up, and their media deals get re-done. Their 2014 success also significantly raises the value of the franchise. That's not cash you can spend, but it's very close to this from an owner's point of view. It justifies pushing the cash-flow envelope.brian wrote:Yeah, that was my point -- though according to MLB's goofy rules the teams actually make more in gate revenue as each series goes on which means the WS going 7 helped them a little. The only REAL value to the Royals was the fact that they can likely raise ticket prices for 2015 and get away with it and that they'll get an increase in season tickets and ticket sales in general. They've been right around 1.7M per season for the last four or five years, based on previous examples of out of nowhere runs to the World Series (Colorado, Detroit in '06, etc.) they'll likely see their attendance get up to between 2.3 and 2.5M next year unless they start out 0-20 or something. That's real money, but it's not Jon Lester or Max Scherzer money.
I suppose their pluckiness is a matter of definition. But by mine, they were quite plucky. Spending well under $90M and getting one homerun from winning it all, when so many teams were over $130M (including the Giants and Tigers), seems pretty deep in underdog territory. Further, how many years has it been since the Royals were in a World Series?My point to DC and what a lot of people outside KC fans didn't realize was that KC was basically already at the end of their salary capabilities last year. They were middle in the pack of salary (16th in MLB/$91M), they weren't the "plucky upstarts" a lot of people wanted to make them out to be. So it's not like they can tack on $30 or 40M a year in salary because they made the World Series.
As you note, I mentioned several reasons the Royals would have at least the talent level going into 2015 that they had in 2014. The financial bonus from playing game 7 in the World Series is obviously one of the factors. But of course, not the only one.They'll be contenders for a whole host of reasons, most mentioned, but it ain't going to be because they went to the World Series one year.
That sounds right, although I wouldn't be very shocked if he gets to 8 years and over $200MM, especially if the Cubs get into a bidding war.brian wrote:What are you thinking for Scherzer then? 7/185?mister d wrote:Boras lives to max out, so wouldn't a massive 2 year deal plus a potential 6 year deal post-age 31 be his masterpiece? He couldn't do it across the board because too many individual players would lose even if he stayed net even or better, but a one-time deal would be a lot of fun. Really, I just want an answer to that hypothetical. I could guess most contracts now within a couple million annual but "what is Max Scherzer's one year buyout amount" is a total mystery.
Who's replacing Shields? He's overrated, certainly, but you can't just shrug off a #2 leaving.DC47 wrote:As you note, I mentioned several reasons the Royals would have at least the talent level going into 2015 that they had in 2014. The financial bonus from playing game 7 in the World Series is obviously one of the factors. But of course, not the only one.
