Ohtani to Dodgers

[FidoMcCokefiend]

Don't really buy into MLB being broken and they must have a salary cap for "competitive balance" whenever the next big player contract is announced. The perception that a salary cap makes the sport more competitive isn't really born out by facts. 6 different teams have won the World Series the last 6 years. 9 different over the last 10. And, the leagues with caps are not seeing more teams win titles. 

Since 2000
MLB has had 16/30 (53%) franchises win the World Series. 
NFL has had 13/32 (41%) franchises win the Super Bowl. 
NBA has had 11/30 (37%) franchises win the NBA Title. 

[MVP2110]

2 hours ago, FidoMcCokefiend said:

Don't really buy into MLB being broken and they must have a salary cap for "competitive balance" whenever the next big player contract is announced. The perception that a salary cap makes the sport more competitive isn't really born out by facts. 6 different teams have won the World Series the last 6 years. 9 different over the last 10. And, the leagues with caps are not seeing more teams win titles. 

Since 2000
MLB has had 16/30 (53%) franchises win the World Series. 
NFL has had 13/32 (41%) franchises win the Super Bowl. 
NBA has had 11/30 (37%) franchises win the NBA Title. 

Only 2 of those 16 franchises that won a World Series though were a small market(Kansas City, St. Louis) 

In the NBA Milwaukee, Denver, San Antonio, Cleveland have all won titles in that time period

In the NFL Green Bay, Kansas City, Tampa Bay, New Orleans, Baltimore, Denver & Pittsburgh have all won Superbowls. 

In the last 10 years only 1 small market MLB team has won(KC)

In the same time period we've seen Milwaukee, Denver, San Antonio, & Cleveland have won in the NBA meanwhile Kansas City, Tampa Bay, and Denver have won a Superbowl

 

There might be more "parity" in MLB but it's only among the large/medium markets and doesn't extend to the small market teams like other sports do. 

[TURBO]

3 hours ago, FidoMcCokefiend said:

Don't really buy into MLB being broken and they must have a salary cap for "competitive balance" whenever the next big player contract is announced. The perception that a salary cap makes the sport more competitive isn't really born out by facts. 6 different teams have won the World Series the last 6 years. 9 different over the last 10. And, the leagues with caps are not seeing more teams win titles. 

Since 2000
MLB has had 16/30 (53%) franchises win the World Series. 
NFL has had 13/32 (41%) franchises win the Super Bowl. 
NBA has had 11/30 (37%) franchises win the NBA Title. 

Ok, so you are against a salary cap then?

[RedStickBrew]

[jay87shot]

9 hours ago, Axman59 said:

But keep in mind if he gave up pitching and wasn't rehabbing his elbow, after 2024 he could easily play OF or 1B. Perhaps not CF but he could absolutely contribute to a defense.

If he gave up pitching he is worth less than being able to field. I am sure he would be a great RF or 1B but if he plays the field it would likely make it tough to pitch. Just the amount of throwing before the game and in between innings would throw off a pitching regiment.

[FidoMcCokefiend]

2 hours ago, MVP2110 said:

There might be more "parity" in MLB but it's only among the large/medium markets and doesn't extend to the small market teams like other sports do. 

There is absolutely nothing preventing MLB owners in "small markets" from spending whatever they'd like, should they choose to prioritize winning. 

[MVP2110]

18 minutes ago, FidoMcCokefiend said:

There is absolutely nothing preventing MLB owners in "small markets" from spending whatever they'd like, should they choose to prioritize winning. 

Ah yes, the idea that every owner in MLB that wants to win happens to reside in a big market. It's kind of weird how small market owners in the NBA or NFL seem to care about winning but those in MLB don't. 

[FidoMcCokefiend]

1 hour ago, TURBO said:

Ok, so you are against a salary cap then?

I want the players to make as much as possible, so ideally, yes I am against a salary cap. The Golden State Warriors franchise was worth like $500-600M when Steph Curry joined the team. It's now worth $7.6B. It's crazy that he never made more than $12M a year until 2017-18, He should be making >$100M a year, easily, for what he's done for the owners of that franchise. 

While a salary cap with an actual meaningful salary floor might force some owners to spend more, the franchises that are doing nothing to improve their on field play even with today's revenue sharing (~$60M per team in 2022) aren't going to do anything other than continue prioritizing profits.

[FidoMcCokefiend]

3 minutes ago, MVP2110 said:

Ah yes, the idea that every owner in MLB that wants to win happens to reside in a big market. It's kind of weird how small market owners in the NBA or NFL seem to care about winning but those in MLB don't. 

It's really a shame that in MLB, owners in "small markets" are not allowed to spend whatever they'd like. Maybe they should change that rule?

[TURBO]

If this is true, and I haven't done the math, it's disgusting.  lol

[MVP2110]

5 minutes ago, FidoMcCokefiend said:

It's really a shame that in MLB, owners in "small markets" are not allowed to spend whatever they'd like. Maybe they should change that rule?

You can be against a salary cap, that's fine. But the numbers are pretty clear that small markets in MLB perform at a much lower success rate compared to their counterparts in other Pro sports. Small markets in MLB make the playoffs less often, win their divisions less often, and win championships less often then their counterparts in other sports. If you're willing to create an uneven playing field in order to avoid a salary cap then that's fine but say that. Pretending that small markets in MLB are on a level playing field though is incorrect.  

[MrTPlush]

22 minutes ago, FidoMcCokefiend said:

It's really a shame that in MLB, owners in "small markets" are not allowed to spend whatever they'd like. Maybe they should change that rule?

Yes, let’s ignore the logic that a large market can spend $300mil and it still be nowhere near total profits the team brings in, but a small market can’t spend $300mil without bankrupting the team and putting money out of their own bank account into the payroll.

Which:

A) Makes literally no sense

B) Is actually almost impossible because teams (especially small markets) are rarely owned by a singular person and Attanasio rallying the entire ownership group to agree to zero profits is quite unlikely to happen.

C) Attanasio has a net worth of $700mil and would have to completely bankrupt himself to “take one for the team” and afford Ohtani.

[FidoMcCokefiend]

As pointed above, MLB teams in 2022 received ~$100M from revenue sharing and local TV deals before selling a ticket, a hot dog, or a jersey.  Seems if these "small market" owners really wanted to win and close the gap on this "severe disadvantage", they'd at least spend that $100M free money on payroll. 

Let's see how they did!

The payroll of the 2022 Pirates? $56M The A's? 48M. 

Huh. Seems that the Pirates and A's (and 6 other teams!) decided to pocket a significant portion of this money instead of looking at it as a way to close the supposed severe disadvantage and spend it on player salaries. 

A salary cap without a meaningful floor, which these exact "small market" owners will never vote for, won't change a thing with these owners.  And even with a floor, the same cheap owners will continue to do the bare minimum and skimp everything in order to maximize profits. 

[MVP2110]

2 minutes ago, FidoMcCokefiend said:

As pointed above, MLB teams in 2022 received ~$100M from revenue sharing and local TV deals before selling a ticket, a hot dog, or a jersey.  Seems if these "small market" owners really wanted to win and close the gap on this "severe disadvantage", they'd at least spend that $100M free money on payroll. 

Let's see how they did!

The payroll of the 2022 Pirates? $56M The A's? 48M. 

Huh. Seems that the Pirates and A's (and 6 other teams!) decided to pocket a significant portion of this money instead of looking at it as a way to close the supposed severe disadvantage and spend it on player salaries. 

A salary cap without a meaningful floor, which these exact "small market" owners will never vote for, won't change a thing with these owners.  And even with a floor, the same cheap owners will continue to do the bare minimum and skimp everything in order to maximize profits. 

I'm absolutely all for a salary cap & salary floor similar to other sports leagues. There are absolutely cheap ownership groups, but to say that every small market owner is cheap and large market owners want to win while ignoring all other context is wildly flawed. Just say you don't want a salary cap at all and you're ok giving up competitive balance in order to keep the status quo. 

[MrTPlush]

A single small market team could try and close the gap, because large markets won’t be challenged that much to care. However, if every small market team did it, you would just move the goalposts. Large markets have PLENTY of ammo in the bank account to raise the payroll ceiling if small markets want to challenge them.

All it will cause is payroll inflation. Small market is spending more just to be in the same spot as before. Instead of us spending $10mil on Wade Miley we will spend $20mil. Same result, just spending more.

 

[brewcrewdue80]

We'll get a good look this season what an Ohtani bat only future value looks like.  I said before, he's eclipsed 70M value according to Fangraphs each of the last 2 seasons. With combining the best of each side having a 94M potential value.  Or meaning he's not paid enough that season/s.  That is pure Ohtani value with no other version what he brings outside of just on field performance.  He accomplished 50M with the bat this season that was limited by his pitching.  

https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/savant-player/shohei-ohtani-660271?stats=statcast-r-hitting-mlb

 

He is basically #1, #2 on the batting pcts you see here and that was either steady or improved on the last 2 seasons.  So next season expect a bat worth a lot more than 50M from him.

Some team had to pay him 600+M.  Large market or small market.  700M considering he's had over 140M of value the last 2 seasons, may have been short in terms whats 70M today vs 10 seasons from now.  

Some team had to sign this deal. Arguing on large market vs small market competitiveness, is doing Ohtani injustice, because his value is equal in pay.  This season he gets to go out there and maybe just prove he's worth 70M a year batting alone.

50M seems a shoe-in to me with regard where he sits on Savant and the added batting chances he'll get in 2024 over 2023.  Playoffs are a thing to his future that is higher value added to his season's totals of 0 Playoff PA totals. Or pitching.  Will the Dodgers miss any playoffs in 10 seasons? Angels missed every one.

10/700M, thinking about that, isn't enough for what Ohtani actually provides currently.  That covers his 162 game season.  They forgot to pay him what value he can achieve in the playoffs being his 70M 162gm value self during it.

 

[MrTPlush]

3 hours ago, brewcrewdue80 said:

We'll get a good look this season what an Ohtani bat only future value looks like.  I said before, he's eclipsed 70M value according to Fangraphs each of the last 2 seasons. With combining the best of each side having a 94M potential value.  Or meaning he's not paid enough that season/s.  That is pure Ohtani value with no other version what he brings outside of just on field performance.  He accomplished 50M with the bat this season that was limited by his pitching.  

https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/savant-player/shohei-ohtani-660271?stats=statcast-r-hitting-mlb

 

He is basically #1, #2 on the batting pcts you see here and that was either steady or improved on the last 2 seasons.  So next season expect a bat worth a lot more than 50M from him.

Some team had to pay him 600+M.  Large market or small market.  700M considering he's had over 140M of value the last 2 seasons, may have been short in terms whats 70M today vs 10 seasons from now.  

Some team had to sign this deal. Arguing on large market vs small market competitiveness, is doing Ohtani injustice, because his value is equal in pay.  This season he gets to go out there and maybe just prove he's worth 70M a year batting alone.

50M seems a shoe-in to me with regard where he sits on Savant and the added batting chances he'll get in 2024 over 2023.  Playoffs are a thing to his future that is higher value added to his season's totals of 0 Playoff PA totals. Or pitching.  Will the Dodgers miss any playoffs in 10 seasons? Angels missed every one.

10/700M, thinking about that, isn't enough for what Ohtani actually provides currently.  That covers his 162 game season.  They forgot to pay him what value he can achieve in the playoffs being his 70M 162gm value self during it.

 

What elite superstar has ever been paid based on the WAR/value they hypothetically provide? Isn’t WAR equal to like $8mil? That means a 6 WAR player would be getting about $50mil…let alone some of the more elite guys. 
 

 

[Fear The Chorizo]

14 minutes ago, MrTPlush said:

What elite superstar has ever been paid based on the WAR/value they hypothetically provide? Isn’t WAR equal to like $8mil? That means a 6 WAR player would be getting about $50mil…let alone some of the more elite guys. 
 

 

Yeah, I'm convinced WAR was a stat invented by the players union and boras corp....if there was a salary cap with all teams having to build their roster under an even financial structure, WAR value might actually resemble what actual wins are worth in terms of payroll dollars

[Thurston Fluff]

14 hours ago, FidoMcCokefiend said:

There is absolutely nothing preventing MLB owners in "small markets" from spending whatever they'd like, should they choose to prioritize winning. 

You're absolutely correct. They chose financial solvency and the ability to keep their franchise over winning. I mean every small market could spend like the Dodgers for the chance to one World Series every 32 years. Granted there would be seven different owners over that period of time but you know. Priorities.

[MrTPlush]

22 minutes ago, Thurston Fluff said:

You're absolutely correct. They chose financial solvency and the ability to keep their franchise over winning. I mean every small market could spend like the Dodgers for the chance to one World Series every 32 years. Granted there would be seven different owners over that period of time but you know. Priorities.

Attanasio just needs to sell the team use the money to pay for an Ohtani or Trout. That is what a good owner would do. 

[Fear The Chorizo]

17 minutes ago, MrTPlush said:

Attanasio just needs to sell the team use the money to pay for an Ohtani or Trout. That is what a good owner would do. 

It's the only way to win a title - just look at the 2023 World Champion Mets....er, Padres...er, Dodgers....er, Yankees...oops.

Well, at least we all saw how much an impact the $40M+ arms of Scherzer and DeGrom meant to the Rangers WS title run last fall, amirite??

[MrTPlush]

2 hours ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

It's the only way to win a title - just look at the 2023 World Champion Mets....er, Padres...er, Dodgers....er, Yankees...oops.

Well, at least we all saw how much an impact the $40M+ arms of Scherzer and DeGrom meant to the Rangers WS title run last fall, amirite??

Stop it, you and I both know once you get to the postseason it is up to randomness/luck. 

[SRB]

On 12/9/2023 at 4:26 PM, MVP2110 said:

 

 

The world's gone topsy turvy when the most talented baseball player (athlete?) in history earns more money than the hedgefund managers and real-estate investors in ownership

[wiguy94]

Ohtani is deferring $68M of the $70M annually according to the Athletic. I have zero clue how this allowed. Absolute ********.

 

[markedman5]

He is getting 68 million every year  from 2034 to 2043……no interest owed by the Dodgers.