The official 2008 MLB thread

[larrymcg421]

Another one run loss by the Braves. That makes it 4-20 on the year.

Our pythagorean is 44-35, 6 games better than where we're at, so hopefully we can get some luck in the second half.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Can't believe the tear that the Royals are on right now. 9 out of 10 now.

This is like the streakiest team ever.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Should be an extremely interesting game today against the Rockies. Ramirez threw a pitch behind the back of his former Rockies catcher in the 9th inning last night. Just to make sure Torrealba (sp?) didn't think it was an accident, he threw another one just behind his back. They both ended up glaring at each other pretty heavy. Expect fireworks in the series finale.

This is why I love hockey.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

This is like the streakiest team ever.

It's exhausting, but Royals fans have grown use to these kinds of frustrations. They're obviously a better team than last year, but that 12 game stinker streak in the middle just killed them.

Minnesota is also on a 9 out of 10 streak. Thank God for the National League.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

For those that are interested, there's going to be an interview with Dayton Moore (Royals GM) at 9:00 EDT. Online feed is at http://www.810whb.com in the upper right hand area.

Dayton always is a great interview. He was in the Braves organization for a long time under John Scherholtz (sp?). His way of building a franchise heavily emphasizes drafting and acquiring a lot of pitching, no doubt influenced by the Maddox/Glavine/Smoltz years.

Edit: ESPN's Buster Olney is on immediately after Dayton Moore. Good hour of interviews.

[Cringer]

The Astros' pitching has gone to levels I had only dreamed of before the season, woohoo!

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...s/5857038.html

Astros' Chacon goes all Sprewell on Wade
By. STEVE CAMPBELL
Shawn Chacon's bosses wanted to see him. In the office of Astros manager Cecil Cooper. Immediately.
Chacon didn't want to go into the office, didn't want to hear what Cooper and general manager Ed Wade had to say. Chacon wanted to sit in the clubhouse dining room and eat in peace.
The Astros agreed to pay Chacon $2 million this season, and there are no incentive clauses in his contract for accepting invitations to appear in the manager's office. Apparently, it never occurred to anybody that such a thing could possibly be above and beyond the call of workplace duty.
That led to a confrontation Wednesday in which Chacon, by his own admission, literally tried to wring Wade's neck.
Wade had the nerve to suggest — a tad indelicately, perhaps — that Chacon take a good look in the mirror.
Well, no wonder Chacon couldn't stand there calmly and take that.
If you were Shawn Anthony Chacon, and you'd pitched your way into a demotion on a pitching-starved team, and you'd somehow developed a misguided sense of entitlement that caused you to think you deserved the job security of a Supreme Court justice, would you really want to look yourself in the mirror?

Careful what you wish for

Chacon has wanted out of Houston desperately since the Astros made the decision Sunday to move him from the starting rotation. Well, Chacon got what he wanted shortly before a 3-2 defeat against the Texas Rangers. He might be a little more careful what he wishes for in the future. The Astros suspended Chacon "indefinitely" after he admitted he attacked Wade during an argument shortly after batting practice. In what may have been Chacon's last act as a big leaguer, he went Latrell Sprewell on his boss.
"Insubordination to the club," was as far as Wade was willing to go in explaining the suspension.
Sprewell got other chances after his attack on coach P.J. Carlesimo. Of course, Sprewell was an All-Star NBA guard. Chacon is a 30-year-old righthander with a 45-61 career record and 4.99 earned run average. He is 2-3 with a 5.04 ERA this season in 15 starts.
When Chacon learned Sunday of the Astros' plans to drop him from the rotation, he characterized the decision as "horse (expletive)." Through agent Dan Horwits, Chacon began lobbying for a trade. Never mind that the four pitchers that impending call-up Runelvys Hernandez joins in the rotation have lower ERAs than Chacon this season: Brandon Backe (4.82), Brian Moehler (4.03), Wandy Rodriguez (2.81) and Roy Oswalt (4.77).
"I hoped he would pitch better for us," Wade said. "The bottom line is we took him out of the rotation Sunday basically on merit."
Chacon signed with the Astros after spring training began on the promise he would get a chance to compete for a spot in the rotation. He earned a starting job, fair and square, and had a 3.53 ERA in his first eight starts.
His performance began eroding — an all-too-familiar pattern in his career. Again and again, Chacon has been good enough to get a job and not good enough to keep one. He made the All-Star team for the Colorado Rockies in 2003 — the year after he went 5-11 with a 5.73 ERA. The year after that All-Star selection, Chacon went 1-9 with a 7.11 ERA as a closer.
During the 2005 stretch run for the New York Yankees, Chacon went 7-3 with a 2.85 ERA. The Yankees dumped Chacon and his 7.00 ERA midway into the next season.
Up, down, up, down.
A major league record nine consecutive no-decisions to start this season. A tantrum on the mound during a recent rocky outing. Now this.
The Astros are Chacon's fourth team in the past four seasons. Even at that, Cooper was talking enthusiastically a few hours before the game about the impact Chacon could make out of the bullpen. He had watched in admiration as Chacon fashioned a 1.59 ERA in seven relief outings against the Astros last year as a member of the Pittsburgh Pirates.
"I thought he was really good," Cooper said.

The best way-laid plans

The plan, Cooper said, was to get Chacon into the bullpen mix "as soon as I can get him in." Next thing Cooper knew, Chacon was taking the quickest way off the team — maybe out of the majors — for good. Maybe some baseball numerologist should have seen it coming. Chacon had quality starts in each of his first five outings — and nary a victory to show for it. In 10 starts since then, Chacon allowed a .299 batting average and a .583 slugging average.
His ERA: 6.66.

[MrBug708]

Dodgers are 1 out away from winning a game where they were no hit...

[MrBug708]

And they win...

[ISiddiqui]

Wow!

[MrBug708]

ESPN is saying it's not an official no hitter because it only went 8 innings...?!?

[Jas_lov]

The Dodgers didn't have to bat in the 9th so it's not officially a no hitter.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

ESPN is saying it's not an official no hitter because it only went 8 innings...?!?

This was part of some no-hitter rules that Fay Vincent rammed through in the mid 90s. At the time, I kindof felt it was to get rid of some of the no-hitters (someone lost a no-hitter 4-0 but only pitched 8, someone else pitched a 6 inning rain shortened no-hitter) after 1990-1991 or maybe it was 91-92 where there were 15ish no-hitters in a 2 year span.

SI

[Buccaneer]

My brother, son and I saw the Padres/Rockies game at Coors last night. It was great: 23 runs and 30-something hits. I got to see my favorite pitcher (Maddux) for the last time but unfortunately, he didn't have anything on his fastballs - uncharacteristically missing the plate. The balls were really carrying last night, allowing to have an old-school Rockies game.

By the waty, got Club Level seats for the first time and what an incredible experience that was.

[BishopMVP]

A's win the Michael Inoa sweepstakes. $3.5m for a pitching prospect is insane, but so are 16y/o's that throw 95+ and have good offspeed offerings.

Red Sox have lost 4 straight, and really miss Ortiz in the lineup. It doesn't help that we've got at least 2 better players sitting in the minors (Lowrie at SS and Buchholz at SP), but if Ortiz isn't coming back, we need to sign Bonds imo.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

A's win the Michael Inoa sweepstakes. $3.5m for a pitching prospect is insane, but so are 16y/o's that throw 95+ and have good offspeed offerings.

*mutters something about needing a world draft and slotting of pick salaries*

SI

[samifan24]

This just in: Joe Borowski sucks. Oh wait, Eric Wedge didn't get the message last year or earlier this year so hey, let's just keep him in the closer's role. How high can his ERA go?

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

*mutters something about needing a world draft and slotting of pick salaries*

SI

It's the Oakland Athletics. The notoriously penny-pinching, made famous for Moneyball Athletics (FWIW it's now being reported as 4.25m. Cincy offered $5m+a ML contract, and Tex offered $5.2m). In addition to Oakland, Cincy (Duran), Seattle (Triunfel), San Fran (Villalona) and Florida (Miggy Cabrera) have signed high-money players recently. Yet in 2004, only 8-9 teams spent over $1m total. And despite how many stars come from Venezuela/DR there were only 3 players that got $1m+ (Red Sox/Yankees/Mariners signed them) last season as opposed to like 50 in the US/PR draft. Even at that point of the MLB draft, the risk/reward is so great at the MLB level given the 6-7 years of cost-controlled superstars, KC has no one to blame but itself if it's not spending the money. Luckily for you, Drayton Moore has realized this, and KC is one of the new small-market kids on the block (along with San Diego) that is going after the highest-priced prospects.

And if you and the rest of MLB want to let guys like Lars Anderson, Josh Reddick, Alex Meyer, Ryan Kalish fall to us over as little as 200-300k differences in opinion on salary, that's your loss. Just like we screwed up not signing Pedro Alvarez (over a $100k difference ). It's actually surprising how little of Boston's plethora of young farm talent recently has come from flexing financial muscles. Buchholz, Ellsbury, Lester, Bowden, Papelbon, Masterson, Lowrie and Pedroia were all essentially slot in the first couple rounds, with some even being called reaches (Pedroia and Masterson stand out there). Hanley Ramirez and Anibal Sanchez were unregarded IFA's who signed for around 25k and they brought Josh Beckett in a trade.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

It's the Oakland Athletics. The notoriously penny-pinching, made famous for Moneyball Athletics (FWIW it's now being reported as 4.25m. Cincy offered $5m+a ML contract, and Tex offered $5.2m). In addition to Oakland, Cincy (Duran), Seattle (Triunfel), San Fran (Villalona) and Florida (Miggy Cabrera) have signed high-money players recently. Yet in 2004, only 8-9 teams spent over $1m total. And despite how many stars come from Venezuela/DR there were only 3 players that got $1m+ (Red Sox/Yankees/Mariners signed them) last season as opposed to like 50 in the US/PR draft. Even at that point of the MLB draft, the risk/reward is so great at the MLB level given the 6-7 years of cost-controlled superstars, KC has no one to blame but itself if it's not spending the money. Luckily for you, Drayton Moore has realized this, and KC is one of the new small-market kids on the block (along with San Diego) that is going after the highest-priced prospects.

I realize that- I've seen our draft this year. Esposito is already going to Vandy but if Melville and Hosmer both sign (rather than just being vanity picks), then, yes, KC went the extra mile in the draft looking for talent, signability be damned. They've also been a player for some of the Latin talent out there which was unheard of a couple of years ago.

But, in the end, if the Bostons and New Yorks of the world can outbid us on MLB talent where the stakes are high. It will happen with prospects, too, just like it happens with scouts and development talent. An organization as smart and well run as Boston isn't going to sit idly by and watch a phenomenal talent go to KC for an extra $100K- they've done it once or twice but that's because they didn't expect anyone else to be a major player but they won't make that mistake again. Why would they? It'd be downright stupid. So there still needs to be a balancing mechanism in place.

SI

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

But, in the end, if the Bostons and New Yorks of the world can outbid us on MLB talent where the stakes are high. It will happen with prospects, too, just like it happens with scouts and development talent. An organization as smart and well run as Boston isn't going to sit idly by and watch a phenomenal talent go to KC for an extra $100K- they've done it once or twice but that's because they didn't expect anyone else to be a major player but they won't make that mistake again. Why would they? It'd be downright stupid. So there still needs to be a balancing mechanism in place.

SI

1. The MLB free agent argument has no impact on this. If anything it heightens the point that KC needs to be smarter and find inefficiencies - and the draft/IFA's are hugely undervalued right now compared to their return (in large part due to poor job security and an unwillingness by many GM's to up the budget on long-term investments). That's my main point - KC could have had Porcello and Inoa for a combined $10 million dollars, and odds are extremely good one of the two will be a #1 by 2012 for the 6-7 years before they would go on the market. If KC was smart like TB and MIL are right now, they'd lock them up shortly after making the majors like the deals for Hanley Ramirez, Ryan Braun, Longoria etc (have they done this with Gordon, Butler, Soria or any of their SP's yet? Grudzielanek appears to be making more than all of them combined.)

2. It's not happening with prospects. KC is improving currently and getting more highly-regarded prospects - because they are being managed better and they are proactive. A team can throw up its hands, say woe is me and stop trying (I'm looking at you Pittsburgh pre-Littlefield, and KC before Moore) or it can work its ass off to field a better product (A's, Atlanta, Royals under Moore.) The Red Sox name gets thrown out there for almost every high-profile IFA, but it appears none of the top 12 will sign with the Sox this year. Last year, Almanzar was the only big one we got, and he was under the radar on most lists.

3. The "balancing mechanism" gets to more of a philosophical argument, but its worth looking at. There already is a huge amount of revenue sharing, some of which is clearly pocketed by teams and billionaire owners like Carl Pohlad. There also needs to be a reward for good management. It seems odd today, but throughout the 80's/90's Boston was in a pack of 10-15 teams behind the Yankees for revenue streams. It's only in the last 5 years due to phenomenal branding and marketing, as well as great on-field product that the Red Sox have shot up. It could just as easily have been one of several other teams. Yet somehow, they shouldn't be rewarded for that and they should have to give back more? It's not just market share that is determining revenues.

[ISiddiqui]

Tampa!! TAMPA!!

What a great performance by Garza, building on his string of impressive starts ever since his argument with Navarro. He's getting his head where it needs to be and the Rays now have a very strong starting 3 with Kazmir, Shields, and Garza. If they deal for Sabathia, as the rumors are, that'd be a frightening rotation to go against.

[lungs]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Tampa!! TAMPA!!

What a great performance by Garza, building on his string of impressive starts ever since his argument with Navarro. He's getting his head where it needs to be and the Rays now have a very strong starting 3 with Kazmir, Shields, and Garza. If they deal for Sabathia, as the rumors are, that'd be a frightening rotation to go against.

Tampa is probably the only team that could outdo Milwaukee in terms of prospects for getting Sabathia.

Any Indians fans here? When will the Sabathia sweepstakes begin?

[ISiddiqui]

I've also heard rumors of Holliday getting dealt to Tampa, but I think Dunn could be had for much cheaper. Bay has also been brought up as a potential trade.

[BishopMVP]

Matt Holliday career at Coors 1.083 OPS Away .790
Adam Dunn .934/.866, and he'll come a lot cheaper "because he's only hitting .222"

I know which one I hope the Rays trade for.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

If KC was smart like TB and MIL are right now, they'd lock them up shortly after making the majors like the deals for Hanley Ramirez, Ryan Braun, Longoria etc (have they done this with Gordon, Butler, Soria or any of their SP's yet? Grudzielanek appears to be making more than all of them combined.)

KC locked up Soria a month or two back to a long-term extension. Contract extension talks are ongoing for Bannister and Grienke. Gordon has three years left, so talks aren't urgent with him. Butler is currently in the minors, so I don't think a long term deal is immenent there.

Don't confuse the pre-Moore tactics with what KC is doing now. They're doing quite a bit to lock up the current talent and build the minors. The signings of Meche and Guillen certainly have worked out well.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Don't confuse the pre-Moore tactics with what KC is doing now. They're doing quite a bit to lock up the current talent and build the minors. The signings of Meche and Guillen certainly have worked out well.

Oh, I'm definitely not. It's amazing what a difference a competent GM has made in 2 years. That's why I'm so surprised SI is still advocating that more needs to be done to balance the field - it's impossible to quantify, but if anything KC is getting more than 1/30th the young talent right now.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Oh, I'm definitely not. It's amazing what a difference a competent GM has made in 2 years. That's why I'm so surprised SI is still advocating that more needs to be done to balance the field - it's impossible to quantify, but if anything KC is getting more than 1/30th the young talent right now.

Just because KC is doing well in securing talent doesn't mean that the field is level. KC and other smaller budget teams have to work MUCH harder to get players than their big market competitors. Pointing to teams like Minnesota and KC and their improvement as proof that the market doesn't need adjustment is faulty logic at best.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Matt Holliday career at Coors 1.083 OPS Away .790
Adam Dunn .934/.866, and he'll come a lot cheaper "because he's only hitting .222"

I know which one I hope the Rays trade for.

Dunn is one of the most wildly underrated players in all of sports. I sure wish the Braves could get him.

[MikeVic]

I want Dunn in Toronto.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Just because KC is doing well in securing talent doesn't mean that the field is level. KC and other smaller budget teams have to work MUCH harder to get players than their big market competitors. Pointing to teams like Minnesota and KC and their improvement as proof that the market doesn't need adjustment is faulty logic at best.

Why does KC have to work MUCH harder than a bigger market team? Maybe a team like the Yankees has a slight advantage from product recognition, but it's really all about the money. Signing bonuses, academies and scouting budgets. That's why Houston and Seattle dominated VZ for awhile and the Braves have been great across LA.

Otherwise, even if the logistical nightmares could be cleared, instituting an IFA draft would just reward poorly run teams even more. While the revenue difference is troublesome for equality, I've never understood the appeal of seeing teams built because they picked high in a draft every year. This is bigger in basketball, but a lot of the Rays abundance of young talent and current success is tied up in picking Top 10 every year.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by MikeVic

I want Dunn in Toronto.

That's gonna be hard with your current GM

Originally Posted by JP Ricciardi

“Do you know the guy doesn’t really like baseball that much?” Ricciardi said to the caller. “Do you know the guy doesn’t have a passion to play the game that much? How much do you know about the player?

“There’s a reason why you’re attracted to some players and there’s a reason why you’re not attracted to some players. I don’t think you’d be very happy if we brought Adam Dunn here …

“We’ve done our homework on guys like Adam Dunn and there’s a reason why we don’t want Adam Dunn. I don’t want to get into specifics.”

Ricciardi was generally sympathetic as callers vented following the Jays 5-4 loss to Milwaukee. But Ricciardi’s demeanour changed when a caller mentioned Dunn as a hitter who might “save” the Jays’ moribund offence.

“He’s a lifetime .230, .240 hitter that strikes out a ton and hits home runs,” Ricciardi said.

I think FJM said it best at their blog

Originally Posted by http://www.firejoemorgan.com/2008/06/rough-year-for-jp-ricciardi-huh.html

Currently Adam Dunn, despite his piss-poor .227 BA, would lead your team in R, HR, RBI, OBP, SLG, and (of course) OPS.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Why does KC have to work MUCH harder than a bigger market team? Maybe a team like the Yankees has a slight advantage from product recognition, but it's really all about the money. Signing bonuses, academies and scouting budgets. That's why Houston and Seattle dominated VZ for awhile and the Braves have been great across LA.

You make my point. If a team like KC whiffs on a prospect or free agent, they could be set back for a couple of years because their budget doesn't allow them to try again. If the Yankees whiff on a prospect or free agent, they just try again because their budget allows for plenty of attempts. It's not even debatable. Bigger budget = more opportunities to get a good player.

[larrymcg421]

FJM also pointed out something that really surprised me. The top 5 all-time in AB/HR ratio:

1. Mark McGwire 10.60
2. Babe Ruth 11.80
3. Barry Bonds 12.90
4. Jim Thome 13.60
5. Adam Dunn 14.00

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

That's gonna be hard with your current GMI think FJM said it best at their blog

Yes I know. Fire idiot J.P.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

Ok, seriously.

It's true. If KC spent the money to get Dice K and he doesn't pan out, they're up a creek without a paddle. If Boston does the same and doesn't pan out, they're going to go right back out and bid on another guy the next off-season.

The Mike Sweeney and Angel Berroa contracts alone set KC back 3-4 years in regards to rebuilding. If Boston or NY makes a similar mistake, they just cut them and bid on someone else.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

You make my point. If a team like KC whiffs on a prospect or free agent, they could be set back for a couple of years because their budget doesn't allow them to try again. If the Yankees whiff on a prospect or free agent, they just try again because their budget allows for plenty of attempts. It's not even debatable. Bigger budget = more opportunities to get a good player.

I'm guessing KC's budget is around $50 million for player salaries/1st year bonuses. The majority of these guys - either well regarded IFA's or signability guys that fall, are in the .5 to 1.5m bonus category. There is no reason KC shouldn't be signing 10 of these guys every year. If 1 pans out, that's an all-star for 10m, the same you're paying Gil Meche or Jose Guillen. If 2 or 3 pan out, you have a shot at the WS. The once in a generation talent just signed for 4.5m. Teheran signed for less than 1m last year. Missing one, or even 5 of these guys won't kill you. That's erroneous. (Major League FA's have nothing to do with this argument. They are completely different markets, related only in that expenditures on the first allow you to spend significantly less in the Major League one.)

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

It's true. If KC spent the money to get Dice K and he doesn't pan out, they're up a creek without a paddle. If Boston does the same and doesn't pan out, they're going to go right back out and bid on another guy the next off-season.

The Mike Sweeney and Angel Berroa contracts alone set KC back 3-4 years in regards to rebuilding. If Boston or NY makes a similar mistake, they just cut them and bid on someone else.

They can't compete in the Major League market. They can in the minor league market. That's why they need to stop spending on the Mike Sweeney's, Angel Berroa's, and even the Gil Meche's and Jose Guillen's. For heaven's sake, Mark Grudzielanek is earning 4.5m this year, John Bale (who?) 2.2m, Ron Mahay 4m, Jimmy Gobble (who?) 1.3m. Replace all them with rookies/arb guys and that frees up 11 million to spend on player development. Develop 1-2 more Beltran's or Greinke's and they'd have a chance to compete. You can miss the playoffs with rookies just as easily as with replacement-level veterans, and much more cheaply. Look at what the Marlins have done cycling through veterans for rookies and actually occasionally winning.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

It's true. If KC spent the money to get Dice K and he doesn't pan out, they're up a creek without a paddle. If Boston does the same and doesn't pan out, they're going to go right back out and bid on another guy the next off-season.

The Mike Sweeney and Angel Berroa contracts alone set KC back 3-4 years in regards to rebuilding. If Boston or NY makes a similar mistake, they just cut them and bid on someone else.

Anybody that disagrees with this is just in denial.

The real question is whether this is actually a problem for MLB as a whole.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

None of those are prospects.

I was relating to my original point, which also discussed how detrimental a large FA signing can be if it goes wrong. Having $17M of dead salary on a $40-45M payroll that we had back then causes a major handicap. $17M on a $150-200M payroll is much less detrimental.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

Since we've recently had this discussion, I'm not really going to involve myself. But the claim that KC is hampered in getting prospects because of their poor, poor, situation is laughable.

Since we've recently had this discussion, I won't involve myself in repeating just how laughable your point really is. So now neither of us have anything further to discuss evidently.

[samifan24]

Originally Posted by lungs

Any Indians fans here? When will the Sabathia sweepstakes begin?

The CC Sabathia sweepstakes has already begun. The Tribe needed to win their series at Chicago and do well against Tampa heading into the All-Star break to set up a potential playoff run in the second half with a healthy Carmona, Hafner, Martinez and Sabathia.

The team hasn't started winning and now the trade deadline is rapidly approaching. My personal guess is that Sabathia goes to either Tampa or Milwaukee. Both teams have great systems and the Indians are likely to ask for two high level or ML ready prospects in return for Sabathia. Keep in mind that CC is a type A free agent so he is more valuable than a typical "rental player." If he is traded to Tampa, for example, and leaves after the season, the Rays will obtain Type A draft pick compensation from his new team.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by molson

Anybody that disagrees with this is just in denial.

The real question is whether this is actually a problem for MLB as a whole.

Agreed. MLB has reached a point where it has a bargaining agreement that may not be able to adequately support a competitive playing field for all markets, large and small. If they don't want to move to a NFL or NBA situation where the payroll options are much more equitable, that's fine. But ignoring the fact that there are sizable competitive disadvantages to the small market teams is complete denial.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by molson

Anybody that disagrees with this is just in denial.

The real question is whether this is actually a problem for MLB as a whole.

Who's disagreeing with that? We're talking about prospects, man. Not established players, prospects.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

You haven't once replied to how KC is hampered in getting prospects. You keep talking about free agents. I quoted you saying this:

It's ridiculous to state that missing on a prospect is going to set them back for years. You keep bringing up Dice-K and Sweeney, which is irrelevant to the point I'm making.

By having a competitive disadvantage in regards to free agency, undue pressure is put on the franchise to find that diamond in the rough in regards to drafts or signing players overseas. In addition, the scouting budgets for teams like the Yankees and Red Sox are ridiculous when compared to what the Royals work with. Those upper teams have a much better chance of finding those unknown players just because they have more people out looking for talent. The smaller teams invest as much as they can to scout players, but they have no way of competing with the other teams because the scouting budgets simply don't compare. They have to do more with less just to remain competitive in scouting.

[Logan]

We talkin bout PROSPECTS!

[samifan24]

Baseball is unbalanced. The large market teams have a financial advantage and therefore a competitive advantage. This has been a known problem for a long time. Just look at everything Billy Beane and his staff went through in Moneyball. The existence of that book and the rise of sabermetrics should be evidence enough of baseball's lack of balance. I don't see why everyone is arguing about it.

[MikeVic]

I'm half-following this convo... but don't top-flight international free agents go for crazy money too? Dice-K was $50M just to TRY and sign him... and that Fukudome guy on the Cubs went for over $10M?

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

By having a competitive disadvantage in regards to free agency, undue pressure is put on the franchise to find that diamond in the rough in regards to drafts or signing players overseas.

There's no pressure on Sox/Yankees people to do their job well? That's ridiculous. The only people who don't have pressure are those whose bosses tolerate failure. I assure you that's not the case in NY or Boston.

In addition, the scouting budgets for teams like the Yankees and Red Sox are ridiculous when compared to what the Royals work with. Those upper teams have a much better chance of finding those unknown players just because they have more people out looking for talent.

The players I'm talking about aren't unknown. They're ranked and if the info is out there to me sitting in Massachusetts, a competent GM doesn't need a $10m scouting organization. If you were arguing the Red Sox discovered more hidden gems, past history shows you're wrong. The Sox international track record prior to about 2005 was abysmal. Hanley Ramirez was the one success and he was an afterthought. They thought he was the 3rd best SS we signed that year.

The smaller teams invest as much as they can to scout players,

No, many of them do not. Notice how KC has drastically gone up and started spending more and getting more prospects the past 2 years. That indicates they weren't before.

but they have no way of competing with the other teams because the scouting budgets simply don't compare. They have to do more with less just to remain competitive in scouting.

This is just plain wrong. HOU/ATL/SF/OAK/CIN/SEA all have signed Top 100 prospects to big deals the past couple years.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by samifan24

Baseball is unbalanced. The large market teams have a financial advantage and therefore a competitive advantage. This has been a known problem for a long time. Just look at everything Billy Beane and his staff went through in Moneyball. The existence of that book and the rise of sabermetrics should be evidence enough of baseball's lack of balance. I don't see why everyone is arguing about it.

Moneyball was all about finding and exploiting market inefficiencies (it wasn't about filling your team with slow, OBP guys). Billy Beane, said architect, just signed the highest profile IFA prospect of the past decade to the biggest contract.

We're not arguing there isn't a competitive advantage when signing major league players. We're arguing there isn't one when it comes to signing prospects.

Originally Posted by MikeVic

I'm half-following this convo... but don't top-flight international free agents go for crazy money too? Dice-K was $50M just to TRY and sign him... and that Fukudome guy on the Cubs went for over $10M?

That only applies to established Japanese players coming over from Japan's major leagues, or Cuban defectors. The record (just established) for a prospect is a 4.5million signing bonus for a player that won't reach arbitration for at least 5-6 years.

[BishopMVP]

The Padres have signed the #3,5,6 players on ESPN's Top 14 list in addition to 3 more honorable mention types. This goes along with the $8.5m academy they just opened in the DR.

The Blue Jays signed #7 and rumors have the Reds signing #2. Inoa (A's) was #1. Yankees/Red Sox have signed 0 of the 14 as of now.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

They can't compete in the Major League market. They can in the minor league market. That's why they need to stop spending on the Mike Sweeney's, Angel Berroa's, and even the Gil Meche's and Jose Guillen's. For heaven's sake, Mark Grudzielanek is earning 4.5m this year, John Bale (who?) 2.2m, Ron Mahay 4m, Jimmy Gobble (who?) 1.3m. Replace all them with rookies/arb guys and that frees up 11 million to spend on player development.

Something the Red Sox, Yankees, and other big market teams don't have to do.