ImageImageImageImageImage

2021-22 Offseason Thread

Moderator: JaysRule15

Mr Swagtastic
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 21,010
And1: 3,450
Joined: Dec 29, 2005
Location: Jurassic Park
         

Re: 2021-22 Offseason Thread 

Post#581 » by Mr Swagtastic » Sun Mar 20, 2022 2:34 pm

polo007 wrote:
Read on Twitter
Very much doubt Kirk is *holding up* any Jose Ramirez deal. He's solid but the rumoured ask of Monah plus is a bit more than I would be comfortable giving up. Orelvis Martinez, Moreno and Groshans to me should be off the table especially the first two. I think Orelvis Martinez projects as a 3B or corner outfielder he's got a really strong arm and with Bichette I don't see any body playing SS for Toronto for the next decade plus.

Cleveland probably gets Pearson, Gurriel and one of Biggio or Kirk plus a guy like Kloffenstein, Beltre, Hiraldo or Lopez.
Lord Leoshes wrote:i personally would rather keep Chalmers over Lowry
polo007
General Manager
Posts: 9,344
And1: 3,039
Joined: Nov 02, 2006

Re: 2021-22 Offseason Thread 

Post#582 » by polo007 » Sun Mar 20, 2022 4:24 pm

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter
User avatar
Schad
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 58,653
And1: 18,107
Joined: Feb 08, 2006
Location: The Goat Rodeo
     

Re: 2021-22 Offseason Thread 

Post#583 » by Schad » Sun Mar 20, 2022 7:47 pm

Giving Story $140m+ to play 2B is...interesting. Much of his value comes from providing above-average defense at SS, but it's possible that once the stupid shift ban is implemented, good defensive 2Bs will become more valuable again.

It could also be a hedge against Bogaerts leaving next year (he has an opt-out that will almost definitely get exercised), Boston's in a really weird spot, with much of their team hitting free agency this year or next, so their roster could be in for a lot of turnover.
Image
**** your asterisk.
User avatar
Cyrus
Senior Mod - Raptors
Senior Mod - Raptors
Posts: 36,311
And1: 4,168
Joined: Jun 15, 2001
Location: Is taking his talents to South Beach!

Re: 2021-22 Offseason Thread 

Post#584 » by Cyrus » Sun Mar 20, 2022 9:20 pm

The Correa signing is the one that really is interesting, surprised a team like us or someone else didn't offer him a big 1 year offer, so he can get paid next year. Maybe he didn't like the idea of shifting to 2nd or we didn't want to ask Bo do it for 1 year.

I'm surprised we didn't go after dickerson harder, considreing he had a pretty good season for us, and we need a LF bat. I guess we'll be looking to move and eat contract on Randal, and try to get that LF bat.
polo007
General Manager
Posts: 9,344
And1: 3,039
Joined: Nov 02, 2006

Re: 2021-22 Offseason Thread 

Post#585 » by polo007 » Wed Mar 23, 2022 4:30 pm

Read on Twitter
User avatar
Cyrus
Senior Mod - Raptors
Senior Mod - Raptors
Posts: 36,311
And1: 4,168
Joined: Jun 15, 2001
Location: Is taking his talents to South Beach!

Re: 2021-22 Offseason Thread 

Post#586 » by Cyrus » Wed Mar 23, 2022 4:58 pm

polo007 wrote:
Read on Twitter


If anything i blame the Players for not asking for a Salary floor. In turn I'm sure the owners would have asked for stiffer upper limit, which is fine, LA Dodgers shouldn't be able to spend 10x more than worst team.

Salary floors should be like 60-70 mill or else you don't get revenue sharing or something along the lines.
User avatar
xAIRNESSx
RealGM
Posts: 18,904
And1: 14,237
Joined: Jan 06, 2005
       

Re: 2021-22 Offseason Thread 

Post#587 » by xAIRNESSx » Wed Mar 23, 2022 5:10 pm

30 year anniversary

Read on Twitter
Image
I_Like_Dirt
RealGM
Posts: 36,057
And1: 9,437
Joined: Jul 12, 2003
Location: Boardman gets paid!

Re: 2021-22 Offseason Thread 

Post#588 » by I_Like_Dirt » Wed Mar 23, 2022 6:25 pm

Cyrus wrote:
polo007 wrote:
Read on Twitter


If anything i blame the Players for not asking for a Salary floor. In turn I'm sure the owners would have asked for stiffer upper limit, which is fine, LA Dodgers shouldn't be able to spend 10x more than worst team.

Salary floors should be like 60-70 mill or else you don't get revenue sharing or something along the lines.
The players? Nah, this is all about the owners.

The league generally pools all a bunch of local revenue so teams like the Dodgers and Yankees put in way more than they take out. The CBA says teams need to use that money for baseball related stuff but it's extremely vague and doesn't seem to suggest it has to be on top of any additional spending rather than at the expense of it.

So in practice, teams like the Rays and Pirates just take that money, don't really spend it as an additional on-field investment, and turn their teams into guaranteed multi-million dollar profit machines no matter how few fans actually show up for their games. I'm all for more revenue sharing but the issue here goes beyond revenue sharing and into teams actually spending the money they get.

Yes, a salary floor would achieve that to a point, but the owners are the ones selling the product to the fans. The players are just their employees. The players shouldn't be sacrificing anything in bargaining just for increased parity. It's the owners who should suffer for putting out poor products. Getting rid of revenue sharing entirely would have the same effect, putting a lot of these owners in a situation where they'd actually risk losing money if they stayed in a poor market or put out an awful product nobody wanted to watch. The owners of the Yankees and Dodgers should be rightfully passed that they're basically paying for themselves and their competition at the same time while parasites come in for free money simply for owning a team that also appreciates in value over time because, as we've established, it's guaranteed money, in a de jure monopoly. And the Yankees and Dodgers are fine with them not spending it because it makes it easier for them to always stay on top.

People wealthy enough to own MLB teams figure among the greediest few on the planet. Until fans turn on them, nothing will ever change and they'll just keep asking for more. But for some reason fans always have the crab in a bucket mentality and are inclined to blame the players, like you're doing here.
Bucket! Bucket!
User avatar
Parataxis
General Manager
Posts: 9,534
And1: 5,813
Joined: Jan 31, 2010
Location: Penticton, BC
       

Re: 2021-22 Offseason Thread 

Post#589 » by Parataxis » Wed Mar 23, 2022 8:38 pm

Cyrus wrote:
polo007 wrote:
Read on Twitter


If anything i blame the Players for not asking for a Salary floor. In turn I'm sure the owners would have asked for stiffer upper limit, which is fine, LA Dodgers shouldn't be able to spend 10x more than worst team.

Salary floors should be like 60-70 mill or else you don't get revenue sharing or something along the lines.


Hell, the Mets have three PLAYERS making more than the entire Orioles squad. :o
User avatar
Schad
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 58,653
And1: 18,107
Joined: Feb 08, 2006
Location: The Goat Rodeo
     

Re: 2021-22 Offseason Thread 

Post#590 » by Schad » Wed Mar 23, 2022 10:45 pm

Cyrus wrote:If anything i blame the Players for not asking for a Salary floor. In turn I'm sure the owners would have asked for stiffer upper limit, which is fine, LA Dodgers shouldn't be able to spend 10x more than worst team.

Salary floors should be like 60-70 mill or else you don't get revenue sharing or something along the lines.


The players did ask for a salary floor. The owners were only willing if a really harsh ceiling with extremely slow growth was implemented. The players, correctly, calculated that doing so would be a large net loss for them. So it didn't get implemented.

It isn't incumbent upon the players to prop up low-revenue markets. The owners have the tools at their disposal to do that themselves, and if they had wanted a salary floor (and I agree with a salary floor) they should have made it revenue-neutral for the players.
Image
**** your asterisk.
User avatar
Cyrus
Senior Mod - Raptors
Senior Mod - Raptors
Posts: 36,311
And1: 4,168
Joined: Jun 15, 2001
Location: Is taking his talents to South Beach!

Re: 2021-22 Offseason Thread 

Post#591 » by Cyrus » Thu Mar 24, 2022 5:24 am

Schad wrote:
Cyrus wrote:If anything i blame the Players for not asking for a Salary floor. In turn I'm sure the owners would have asked for stiffer upper limit, which is fine, LA Dodgers shouldn't be able to spend 10x more than worst team.

Salary floors should be like 60-70 mill or else you don't get revenue sharing or something along the lines.


The players did ask for a salary floor. The owners were only willing if a really harsh ceiling with extremely slow growth was implemented. The players, correctly, calculated that doing so would be a large net loss for them. So it didn't get implemented.

It isn't incumbent upon the players to prop up low-revenue markets. The owners have the tools at their disposal to do that themselves, and if they had wanted a salary floor (and I agree with a salary floor) they should have made it revenue-neutral for the players.


I get it, definitely the players calculates they rather Dodgers spend to 300 mill, then get 5 teams to spend an extra 20-30 mill, but i don't think the bottom end teams or the upper teams like Dodgers/Mets/Yanks/Boston, want an upper limit or lower limit.

So you basically have 5 teams at the top who don't want the upper limited or stiffer penalties and you got probably another 5-8 teams at the bottom that don't want a floor, so you basically need all the mid-tier teams/owners to implement a salary floor with good revenue sharing, which I doubt will ever happen from the owner side, even if they want a "Competitive" league.

I think if Players said sure we'll take the stiffer/less growth upper limit, but all teams at the bottom have to spend up to 100 mill, failing to do so, will eliminate your club from any revenue sharing for the life of CBA. These bottom teams are just spending 30-40 mill, they probably get back like 20-30 mill in taxes/revenue share and plus their local tv deal / mlb/statcast monies, are making profits on rock bottom salaries.
User avatar
Schad
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 58,653
And1: 18,107
Joined: Feb 08, 2006
Location: The Goat Rodeo
     

Re: 2021-22 Offseason Thread 

Post#592 » by Schad » Thu Mar 24, 2022 6:06 am

Cyrus wrote:I think if Players said sure we'll take the stiffer/less growth upper limit, but all teams at the bottom have to spend up to 100 mill, failing to do so, will eliminate your club from any revenue sharing for the life of CBA.


Absolutely, if the players went to the owners and offered to give up hundreds of millions of dollars, the owners would have taken that deal. The players shouldn't do that, though. Giving up earnings in order to fix a problem for the owners isn't really their job, particularly when the owners have had the ability to fix the problem on their own.
Image
**** your asterisk.
User avatar
xAIRNESSx
RealGM
Posts: 18,904
And1: 14,237
Joined: Jan 06, 2005
       

Re: 2021-22 Offseason Thread 

Post#593 » by xAIRNESSx » Thu Mar 24, 2022 4:58 pm

Read on Twitter
Image
dagger
RealGM
Posts: 41,323
And1: 14,345
Joined: Aug 19, 2002
         

Re: 2021-22 Offseason Thread 

Post#594 » by dagger » Thu Mar 24, 2022 5:02 pm

Grichuk goes with cash, Jays also get/take Adrian Pinto.
2019 will never be forgotten because FLAGS FLY FOREVER
User avatar
xAIRNESSx
RealGM
Posts: 18,904
And1: 14,237
Joined: Jan 06, 2005
       

Re: 2021-22 Offseason Thread 

Post#595 » by xAIRNESSx » Thu Mar 24, 2022 5:06 pm

Jays 14th most valuable franchise in MLB per Forbes.

Read on Twitter
Image
User avatar
TR50
General Manager
Posts: 7,558
And1: 1,225
Joined: Dec 19, 2004
       

Re: 2021-22 Offseason Thread 

Post#596 » by TR50 » Thu Mar 24, 2022 5:06 pm

There is the (or a) lefty bat for us.
dagger
RealGM
Posts: 41,323
And1: 14,345
Joined: Aug 19, 2002
         

Re: 2021-22 Offseason Thread 

Post#597 » by dagger » Thu Mar 24, 2022 5:09 pm

A left fielder, also could make it easier to move Gurriel in a J-Ram trade.

Pinto is a Jose Altuve sized 19 year old Dominican prospect.
2019 will never be forgotten because FLAGS FLY FOREVER
User avatar
Duffman100
Forum Mod - Raptors
Forum Mod - Raptors
Posts: 47,878
And1: 72,292
Joined: Jun 27, 2002
   

Re: 2021-22 Offseason Thread 

Post#598 » by Duffman100 » Thu Mar 24, 2022 5:15 pm

dagger wrote:A left fielder, also could make it easier to move Gurriel in a J-Ram trade.

Pinto is a Jose Altuve sized 19 year old Dominican prospect.


Sign Conforto, deal Gurriel+Biggio + something for Jram.
User avatar
C Court
RealGM
Posts: 39,625
And1: 26,655
Joined: Nov 07, 2005
Location: Toronto
       

Re: 2021-22 Offseason Thread 

Post#599 » by C Court » Thu Mar 24, 2022 5:18 pm

Read on Twitter
NBA Champion Toronto Raptors
dagger
RealGM
Posts: 41,323
And1: 14,345
Joined: Aug 19, 2002
         

Re: 2021-22 Offseason Thread 

Post#600 » by dagger » Thu Mar 24, 2022 5:24 pm

Tapia is making $3.95 million on a one-year deal, and as Blake Murphy notes, it's unlikely the Jays are making up all of there $6.5 million gap, plus they are seemingly free of Grichuk's 2023 salary.
2019 will never be forgotten because FLAGS FLY FOREVER

Return to Toronto Blue Jays