Not if they will always have the revenue to get anybody they really want, it doesn’t. And that’s the case.
Of course not, but there IS such a thing as maximizing your chances.
Problem is, as I keep having to say, sacrificing your ability to win NOW in the hopes of being able to win in the future. The trap of planning to be always very good, but never quite good enough. The trap Theo had fallen into last year, and in multiple previous years too.
You can stop right there. Tomorrow never comes.
Not getting the best possible talent almost guarantees not getting championships, right?
There’s no risk to this signing, not in a baseball sense, and not even in the future, either. The payroll number you keep bringing up? Doesn’t matter, they can afford it. Only if they start (again) to think it’s an issue does it get to be a problem, and even then the problem is with their perceptions, not their roster.
How about the chances of Grady Sizemore ever being able to play at a high level again? Is there any expectation in Cleveland of that, or is the game minus one great young talent now?
His knee is supposedly checking out, so I imagine he’ll be back to normal.
On the other hand, if he’s lost a step, maybe they’ll bat him 3rd and let him be Alfonso Soriano, which he seems to want to be, instead of making him leadoff.
Remember when Travis Haffner was a decent hitter, too? Now he’s a wasted spot in the lineup as automatic DH. The Indians might win 70 games in 2011, only because they play the Royals a lot.
It is quite possible that Crawford will be more valuable than Manny was during his time with the Sox-defense can make that big a difference. Manny’s D cratered after his first few seasons with Boston, while Crawford will be able to play shallow in front of the Monster and pick off all sorts of bloops and low liners.
Yeah, Pronk’s shoulder has really sunk his career, but I didn’t think his extension was a bad idea at the time.
His situation is really a microcosm of MLB’s main problem. A team like the Yankees or the Red Sox can make big contract offers to free agents and offer extra years to guys they know are likely to be washed up in the last year or two of the deal, but they can afford to eat those wasted years. If a team like the Indians makes a bad signing and screws up their rebuilding cycle, they have to cut payroll and start from scratch.
All that said, if everyone comes back reasonable healthy, the Tribe will have a decent lineup. Sizemore, Cabrera, Choo, Santana, Hafner, and maybe LaPorta…not too shabby.
I agree that this is one of the problems in baseball; not so much the per-year amount of the contracts, but the length of them. As you say, only a few teams can afford to eat the tail-end decline without seriously compromising their ability to win.
I haven’t really thought this through very closely, and there could be all sorts of problems with it, but i wonder whether one possible solution (assuming that we’re not likely to see a salary cap) is to place some sort of limit on the length of free agent contracts. Say, for the sake of argument, no contract longer than 3 years. Of course, that might simply mean that, instead of offering Crawford $20 million a year for 7 years, the Red Sox or Yankees might offer him $30 million a year for 3, and that the smaller clubs still couldn’t compete.
Vernon Wells can opt out of his contract after next year. That might be a good reason to put him in right field. If he doesn’t like it, the easy response is “go ahead, put up good numbers, then use the opt out to look for a team that will play you in center.”
If that happens, Rajai Davis can play center, and Jose Bautista can play first.
Well, if the Blue Jays decide to move him to right field, and he doesn’t want to play there, the Jays would be in a position to say “Tough shit. If you really want to play centre, opt out of your deal and look for a team that will play you there.” It depends on how important playing centrefield is to him.
You know the Nationals won 69 games last year, not 62, right? 69 plus 6 does in fact equal 75 wins. And that’s just taking Werth into account, not the other improvements from age, experience, better defense, and Jason Marquis not totally shitting the bed in every game he pitched.
Sure you’re right, winning brings more creditability and this contract is going to hurt in 2017. But given the situation at hand, I think this was a valid decision to make. The Nats front office shouldn’t have screwed up the Dunn situation as badly as they did, but it’s done now. The alternative was to do nothing, piss off the fanbase, and continue being the cheap Lerners who are pocketing the revenue sharing and having a payroll ranked 23 out of 30 MLB teams. Below the exceedingly wealthy teams/cities like…Baltimore, Milwaukee, and Cincinnati. Also below the notoriously big spenders like…Minnesota. And oh yes, Tampa Bay. Dunn’s and Guzman’s money are coming off the books. Even with big arbitration raises to Lannan and Willingham, and even if they sign LaRoche to something even slightly above average, the payroll will only begin to approach the middle of the pack of MLB teams. And if this year is respectable, then the front office won’t have to pay the last place / pathetic / god-you-people-suck surcharge for 2012.
It looks like the M’s are close to signing Jack Cust and Miguel Olivo. It looks like they’ve solved their offense problems. I can’t wait for next season! (It’s gonna be another looong year.)
Actually, this is great, I’ll have a lot more free time because I’ll only be watching every fifth day when Cy Felix is pitching.
Yay! Baseball offseason time! The time where hope springs eternal and all teams have an equal chance of winning! The time to improve! To get excited! …
… to find out your team just traded away their best power hitter and are rumored to be trading away their (oft-injured) best pitcher. For minor league relievers. Immediately after trading away their best pitcher during last season… for minor league pitchers (and an awful #2 starter, or, on a better team, a bad #4 or 5).
Cliff Lee has fallen over the cliff: reports are that the Yankees are going to offer 160 mil for 7 years, and the Rangers may come close to matching that. As with the Jeter signing, I think the Yankees are fools to overpay Lee like this, though I’m very happy if they make that mistake. The downsides to signing Lee at that price are
Lee’s good, but no one’s THAT good: remember, Lee won all of 12 games last season. I know, “wins” aren’t necessarily meaningful in themselves, and there are good reasons he didn’t win more games, but think about it. Is it really value received to pay that kind of money for a 12-game winner?
Lee’s young, but not THAT young: by the end of a 7-year deal, he will be, what, 39 years old? Sometimes, not often, pitchers make it to that age and are still effective. The further this deal extends in time, the greater the chances the Yankees are paying out the ass for someone who can’t pitch much better than the best rookie you’ve got.
Lee’s healthy, but not THAT healthy: related to point 2), there’s got to be some significant percentage of pitchers who simply suffer a career-ending injury at some point. Even the healthiest pitcher in the world is pretty risky–all you need is a frayed tendon, a broken toe, a skiing accident and the career is over. Pitchers in particular are subject to suddenlee falling off a Cliff.
I think the Yankees are in a bit of desperation mode with Crawford signed by the Sox. They will throw whatever they can at Lee. With CC and him against a very left-handed Sox lineup, they gotta like their chances to win the division. Plus, if the Yanks miss out on Lee, who’s left to sign that will make a big splash?
It can be, if you can take making the playoffs for granted, and focus on getting players who are proven winners *in the postseason *. Those 12 wins, or even 24 if he had them, mean nothing compared to his ability to get a single win in the Series.
Besides, if Pettite is done, what other lefthander of value could they get?
Well, Cliff Lee is only 2-2 with an ERA near 4.50 in the World Series. Anthony Reyes is 1-0 with a 2.25 ERA, is left-handed, and I’m sure could be acquired.
My point being, of course, that the small sample of post-season has much less bearing on what Cliff Lee is worth than the massive sample his career numbers provide.
Personally, I would never want my team giving 7 years to a pitcher, no matter how good. Unless, I suppose, I were a Yankees fan and had confidence that my team would spend money enough to remain competitive even if his arm falls off tomorrow.
