Tiger337

He is good field for now. That can go fast when a shortstop reaches 30. The surprising thing about him is his lack of power. It was easy to predict that a totally undisciplined hitter was going to lose something as he aged and get on base even less often. I figured he'd at least continue to hit for power though. I hope they can get another couple of years of good range because that's all he's got now.

I had to look it up too. I have never paid much attention to silver sluggers. I always thought it was overkill to give an award for the best hitter at every position. Just give it to the best hitter.

It didn't start until 1980.

Hope he's not fragile his entire career.

They challenged both.

I hope Greene was not hurt on that catch. It looked like he might have may tweaked his shoulder and they pinch hit for him later.

Bennett Sousa DFA. Churn!

It's not that weird. Men have been admiring trash like him forever. He's the archtypical dumbass American alpha male wannabe that the rest of the world laughs about.

It's OK. I do not have may controversial opinions, but when I do have one I can be stubborn about it.

That was sarcasm on my part. They moved because they were getting poor attendance. They were a "small market" team with an exceptional farm system.

It's not a conspiracy. To me, the obvious reason for drafts (which are unque to the sports business) is to eliminate competition for player services. Again, I don't deny that they also promote competitive balance, something I probably care less about than most sports fans. I am sure I would have enjoyed baseball in the 50s and 60s just fine.

In 1964, they had already used up all the other ways. It's not subterfuge. They clearly eliminated competition for players with a draft. That is a really big deal and it's the first thing I think about when I think of sports drafts. I don't deny that this suppression of payment has the additional benefit (for some teams) of more competitive balance.

That was the situation in the 50s when the Cardinals and Brooklyn Dodgers had more teams than anyone else. It worked out so well for the Dodgers that they had to move to Los Angeles. By 1964, the last year prior to the first draft, it was less extreme: https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/affiliate.cgi?year=1964 The teams with the most clubs were: Minnesota, Los Angeles, New York Yankees and San Francisco with 9, Baltimore, Milwaukee and Pittsburgh with 8. So, it was a mix of small markets and large markets.

I agree on the importance of rest. On you first point, do they have enough situational fielding data to determine how much is lost defensively by having players moving around so much? I doubt it. Another contributing factor is every team having 13 pitchers limits the number of bench players. So, they want to do more mixing and matching and resting, but they haven't expanded the rosters enough. 28 players including 15 position players would allow for more platoons within sacrificing defense so much.

The MLB draft was introduced in the 60s when the owners completely controlled the players under the reserve clause, so they did have a nefarious plot going at the time. The players had to take whatever amount of money the owners gave them and if it was up to the owners, they would still operate that way today. The only time there was any free market for players was when they first signed with a team. The draft took that away. The players, of course, have a lot more leverage today with free agency and arbitration. None of what the players have gained since the 60s was granted because the owners (or players for that matter) wanted to make the league more competitive or better in any way. It all happened as a result of bitter battles between the owners and the players union. Those battles still exist today even with the obscene amount of money in the game for both owners and players. There was no problem with competitive balance in the game in 2011 when slot values and bonus pools were introduced into the CBA. That was done strictly to limit the amount of money young players could get which has always been the primary purpose of the draft. The difference between today and the 60s is that the player's union also benefits to an extent from limiting the amount of money young players can get. It means more money for the veterans.

I am cynical and you are idealistic. 😀

Javy Baez's statcast batting percentiles are about as depressing as you can get. Every category is below average and most categories are 20th percentile or worse. https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/savant-player/javier-baez-595879?stats=statcast-r-hitting-mlb Also, the new design for the percentile stats is really good.

That is what they tell us! The only reason they would want competitive balance is if it helps them economically which is probably the case for some owners. Containing costs helps all owners. It looks to me like the whole draft is about limiting bonuses now more than ever.

I would say containing costs is #1 (which is always the case with everything owners do) and getting a little more parity is secondary. Of course, parity is also indirectly worth money to the majority of owners, although I think that becomes less important, the more they expand playoffs.

Why does a President need to be married? Are they worried that he is gay?

The main purpose of the draft is to keep signing bonuses down which it does effectively for better or for worse. As for the lottery versus the draft, I agree it doesn't affect team behavior much if at all. It does affect how they are rewarded though. I like how the new process limits how many high picks a team can get in multiple years. I don't see how lotteries dilute anything since the poor teams still tend to get better picks than good teams. I'd rather see a close to the bottom team that's trying to get better get a pick over some garbage franchise like Oakland that doesn't even care.

The first draft lottery worked well. I like the lottery. I don't like to see teams being rewarded for being terrible.

I will say that the probably of him opting out is higher tham the .05% someone suggested. Human decisions always have higher probabilities than that! But it is still low.

I think it will take more years than that.

It might take three years after his 2023 season. If they were able to sign Rodriguez and Lorenzen or the equivalent, add a hitter on a one-year deal, get some improvement from young players and promote more young players, it will be a very entertaining team and possibly competitive in their division.