2019 MLB Thread

"Vertical Limit wrote:

The Yankees are really something else... It wasnt too long ago when Gerrit Cole was getting lit up as a pitcher for the Pirates.. Houston helped him become a better pitcher..

9 years 324 million for Cole is ludicrous and i get the feeling theyre going to regret that contract

The other question then is whether the Yankees are going to just say "to hell with it" and face the consequences of going so far over the luxury tax, or whether they'll now trade away other players to save money.

Speaking of Luxury Tax consequences, the guys at my favorite Cubs blog dig into it further than I've ever read before. There's a lot of angst among Cubs fans about the team essentially punting on making any improvements whatsoever for the 2020 season while they wait out some big contracts.

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2019/12/19/why-the-chicago-cubs-are-likely-working-to-get-back-under-the-luxury-tax-in-2020/

But what Brett Taylor of Bleacher Nation explains, is that its much cheaper and easier for the Cubs - or any other big market club, to spend about 207m in 2020, and then 250m in 2021, than it would be to spend 209m in 2020 and 2011m in 2021, due to the consequences of being a three-time offender going over the tax. Basically, you can go way over once and get a slap on the wrist, but do it over and over and it becomes a really big deal.

MLB is really, really screwing the Cubs over by delaying the hearing about Kris Bryant, and whether he has one or two years of team control left. Their ability to maximize a return on a potential trade has been really damaged. Teams are apparently still offering scraps and spare parts.

"Unlucky 13 wrote:

MLB is really, really screwing the Cubs over by delaying the hearing about Kris Bryant, and whether he has one or two years of team control left. Their ability to maximize a return on a potential trade has been really damaged. Teams are apparently still offering scraps and spare parts.

Yeah they need to figure that out ASAP, ridiculous it is has gone on this long. I understand that it has some serious implication, especially if they come down on Bryant's side, but you can't leave an issue like this hanging. The Astros also need to be sorted, though less sympathy since it's about cheating.

As for the Cubs, the biggest issue is just a tightwad owner acting like he's about to be sent to the poor house. The whining these owners do man ...

Trades seem in odd place right now though, and I think the Dodgers are a big reason. They have oodles of talent and are constantly linked to top tier talent, but apparently refuse to include their top prospects. Like no, my dudes, you aren't Lindor and Clevinger for a handful of 5-10 ranked prospects and an MLB backup. Make a real move or piss off.

"Unlucky 13 wrote:

MLB is really, really screwing the Cubs over by delaying the hearing about Kris Bryant, and whether he has one or two years of team control left. Their ability to maximize a return on a potential trade has been really damaged. Teams are apparently still offering scraps and spare parts.

He’s had a pretty mediocre last 3 years. I attribute that a lot to Maddon who I always felt is horrible but injuries also played a part.

don’t get me wrong I’d take him, but if I had an elite prospect type I’d rather move it for Arenado instead of Bryant. I’d like the Mets to offer Matz + a prospect or two as long as said prospect is not Francisco Alvarez or Ronny Mauricio and Bryant can be resigned.

I'd rather let Bryant walk as a free agent than take a bad offer. It sets a bad precedent and teams think they can take advantage of you.

More than anything, I hate Boras. I'd really prefer the team to avoid his clients.

"Unlucky 13 wrote:

I'd rather let Bryant walk as a free agent than take a bad offer. It sets a bad precedent and teams think they can take advantage of you.

More than anything, I hate Boras. I'd really prefer the team to avoid his clients.

Agree Boras is great for his clients for as long as teams are willing to let him have his way but he’s such a pompous douche. At this point I don’t think any fan base likes him but he sells the dream quite well.

"Unlucky 13 wrote:

I'd rather let Bryant walk as a free agent than take a bad offer. It sets a bad precedent and teams think they can take advantage of you.

More than anything, I hate Boras. I'd really prefer the team to avoid his clients.

I don't see the Cubs taking a bad offer - they still do want to compete and win now. They would need at least 1 MLB ready player (pitcher most likely), a top prospect and maybe another high ranking prospect and a lotto ticket guy imo. The Rockies are apparently definitely willing to listen on Arenado. If he gets shipped it might help frame a deal for Bryant, though ofc Arenado is signed way longer albeit at a high rate.

It's insane the league has done the ENTIRE Astros investigation and punishment and this ruling is still pending.

The dominos keep falling. Beltran is now done with the Mets.

"Vertical Limit wrote:

The dominos keep falling. Beltran is now done with the Mets.

Keep em coming! I hate cheating. It cheapens everything.

Good. Now ban them all for life.

The player I'm most surprised by the lack of HOF votes is Omar Vizquel. He was constantly referred to as a future HOFer during his playing days, but in three years on the ballot, he sits at 52.6%. Dude played 24 seasons in MLB, won nine straight gold golves, and eleven overall. I wonder if he perhaps stayed too long for some people? Had he hung it up when his time with Cleveland was over in 2002 (11 seasons) would he have had a better shot at getting in?

"Unlucky 13 wrote:

The player I'm most surprised by the lack of HOF votes is Omar Vizquel. He was constantly referred to as a future HOFer during his playing days, but in three years on the ballot, he sits at 52.6%. Dude played 24 seasons in MLB, won nine straight gold golves, and eleven overall. I wonder if he perhaps stayed too long for some people? Had he hung it up when his time with Cleveland was over in 2002 (11 seasons) would he have had a better shot at getting in?

It's because he didn't play for the Yankees. If he had, he would be almost a unanimous selection.

"Stitches wrote:

It's because he didn't play for the Yankees. If he had, he would be almost a unanimous selection.

No doubt. It's funny thinking what kind of legacy Jeter would have if he played his entire career in Oakland, Pittsburgh or even somewhere like Minnesota or Anaheim.

"Unlucky 13 wrote:

The player I'm most surprised by the lack of HOF votes is Omar Vizquel. He was constantly referred to as a future HOFer during his playing days, but in three years on the ballot, he sits at 52.6%. Dude played 24 seasons in MLB, won nine straight gold golves, and eleven overall. I wonder if he perhaps stayed too long for some people? Had he hung it up when his time with Cleveland was over in 2002 (11 seasons) would he have had a better shot at getting in?

I’m more surprised Schilling is still not in to be honest. Best all time walk/k ratio. Had a long stretch where he was one of top 3 or 4 pitchers in the game along with Pedro and Unit in addition to his 3 WS rings. I never thought of Vizquel as a truly elite all around player. But I guess if Ozzie is in then Vizquel should probably be in eventually. Next few years are light on legit nominations.

"Boik14 wrote:

I’m more surprised Schilling is still not in to be honest. Best all time walk/k ratio. Had a long stretch where he was one of top 3 or 4 pitchers in the game along with Pedro and Unit in addition to his 3 WS rings. I never thought of Vizquel as a truly elite all around player. But I guess if Ozzie is in then Vizquel should probably be in eventually. Next few years are light on legit nominations.

Schilling is because of his post-career decisions, otherwise he'd be in. He will likely get in over the next few years.

Vizquel to me is in the Hall of Really Good but he's not a HoF guy.

I'm also going to say that it's ludicrous that Bonds and Clemens aren't in.

"texanphinatic wrote:

Schilling is because of his post-career decisions, otherwise he'd be in. He will likely get in over the next few years.

Vizquel to me is in the Hall of Really Good but he's not a HoF guy.

I'm also going to say that it's ludicrous that Bonds and Clemens aren't in.

What post career decisions from Schilling? It’s also ludicrous to me that someone would ever put a cheater in the HOF. That’s every bit as stupid as letting the Astros keep their WS rings after cheating. I’ll never support it.

Shilling is actually interesting, because he's kind of like the baseball equivilant of Eli Manning. He played for a really long time (20 seasons). He was generally healthy and made a ton of starts (436). And he did have some really good years mixed in, but some fairly lousy ones as well.

I am always opposed to taking into account championships, so people who focus on that look at it differently than me. I see him as borderline based on his performance on the field. I think that had he retired and just gone away and shut up, he'd be in the HOF by now probably. However, he's been an intentionally confrontational troll over and over since his retirement, including as a broadcaster. He also treated people really poorly in the business world to boot.

So when you're borderline, and you do a lot of things to make people not like you as a human being, it doesn't exactly help your cause.

"Boik14 wrote:

What post career decisions from Schilling? It’s also ludicrous to me that someone would ever put a cheater in the HOF. That’s every bit as stupid as letting the Astros keep their WS rings after cheating. I’ll never support it.

He got major super political. IMO if I said any more Galant would come and delete it all.

I do get the backlash, but imo enough people were involved in the steroid era and it was tacitly supported by MLB too that I frankly don't really care. If both the pitchers and hitters were juicing while MLB looked the other way, I am not going to freak out.

As for the Astros, I would have been fine with player punishments, but taking away rings/championships is a hollow gesture imo that opens up more of a can of worms than it closes. You will immediately hear about needing Boston to vacate the 2018 series. You will hear about the other teams the Astros investigation reportedly might have uncovered. You could even go back and demand anyone with a steroid user be stripped of their flags. Meh.

"texanphinatic wrote:

As for the Astros, I would have been fine with player punishments, but taking away rings/championships is a hollow gesture imo that opens up more of a can of worms than it closes. You will immediately hear about needing Boston to vacate the 2018 series. You will hear about the other teams the Astros investigation reportedly might have uncovered. You could even go back and demand anyone with a steroid user be stripped of their flags. Meh.

Wipe em' all off the map! I would give up the Cubs 2016 if I felt that it was dirty.

"texanphinatic wrote:

He got major super political. IMO if I said any more Galant would come and delete it all.

I do get the backlash, but imo enough people were involved in the steroid era and it was tacitly supported by MLB too that I frankly don't really care. If both the pitchers and hitters were juicing while MLB looked the other way, I am not going to freak out.

As for the Astros, I would have been fine with player punishments, but taking away rings/championships is a hollow gesture imo that opens up more of a can of worms than it closes. You will immediately hear about needing Boston to vacate the 2018 series. You will hear about the other teams the Astros investigation reportedly might have uncovered. You could even go back and demand anyone with a steroid user be stripped of their flags. Meh.

Being super political doesn’t get you knocked out of the HOF. Sorry. Whether one agrees or disagrees it has zero impact on the game. Should Steve Largent be kicked out of the NFL HOF because he was a republican congressman post NFL career? I mean, after all he was political. Ty Cobb was as racist as racist gets and he’s still in the HOF. Schilling didn’t approach anything of the sort. Having an opinion is a right.

As for the juice heads and cheaters, I’ll agree with Lucky. Keep em out and vacate everything. Grow a set of balls Manfred and make it so it doesn’t happen again. If he wanted to make a statement he’d ban the players involved also and void their contracts. Guaranteed that will squash any of this BS from happening again.

"Boik14 wrote:

Being super political doesn’t get you knocked out of the HOF. Sorry. Whether one agrees or disagrees it has zero impact on the game. Should Steve Largent be kicked out of the NFL HOF because he was a republican congressman post NFL career? I mean, after all he was political. Ty Cobb was as racist as racist gets and he’s still in the HOF. Schilling didn’t approach anything of the sort. Having an opinion is a right.

As for the juice heads and cheaters, I’ll agree with Lucky. Keep em out and vacate everything. Grow a set of balls Manfred and make it so it doesn’t happen again. If he wanted to make a statement he’d ban the players involved also and void their contracts. Guaranteed that will squash any of this BS from happening again.

Apparently it does. He does have the right to his opinions, but does not have the right to be free of any blowback from them. And there is a difference between being an actual politician versus being an active member and participant of fringe conspiratorial stuff on either side. He's also delved into a fair bit of controversial stuff like racism and homophobia - even getting fired from ESPN for that kind of stuff. Also doesn't help that he goes in hard against media and whatnot, considering it's the media voting for the Hall.

That said, I don't agree with keeping him out based on post-career antics. Then again, I also don't agree with the Bonds/Clemens exclusions either.

I also do not think that vacating the titles will solve anything - the NCAA punishes teams by vacating titles but they still all cheat. It's a hollow gesture and it just feels stupid. Taking away a players ability to play and earn and manager/GM jobs might have an effect.

"texanphinatic wrote:

Apparently it does. He does have the right to his opinions, but does not have the right to be free of any blowback from them. And there is a difference between being an actual politician versus being an active member and participant of fringe conspiratorial stuff on either side. He's also delved into a fair bit of controversial stuff like racism and homophobia - even getting fired from ESPN for that kind of stuff. Also doesn't help that he goes in hard against media and whatnot, considering it's the media voting for the Hall.

That said, I don't agree with keeping him out based on post-career antics. Then again, I also don't agree with the Bonds/Clemens exclusions either.

I also do not think that vacating the titles will solve anything - the NCAA punishes teams by vacating titles but they still all cheat. It's a hollow gesture and it just feels stupid. Taking away a players ability to play and earn and manager/GM jobs might have an effect.

Actually he does have the right to be free of blowback regarding his comments with regards to how it relates to HOF voting. You can take issue with the comments all you want but HOF is based on what happens on the field and how you compete. He did it fair and square.

Your analogy to the NCAA is wrong. NCAA teams always cheat because they don’t get paid. If players and teams see titles and contracts will be ripped up they will solve the issue. Just like the NCAA is solving the issue by allowing players to be paid.

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/why-2028-could-be-the-year-that-reshapes-expands-and-completely-alters-major-league-baseball/

Lots of increased talk lately that MLB will undergo some huge changes in the coming years. First the switch to the universal DH. Then the reduction of the regular season to 154 games. Then the end of the AL and NL. Then an agreement to expand by two teams. Then a solution to the situations with the Athletics and Rays. And then finally, total geographic realignment.

The article that I linked is one writer laying it out pretty well, but he's not the only one saying it. The thought is that by the 2028 season, all of that could go down and we'll be in a totally new era.

So, the Kris Bryant situation is finally resolved, with the outcome that Bryant is under team control for two more seasons. This was 99% likely the whole time, so the fact that it took this long to conclude is bonkers.

That then means that the Cubs can move on to trying to trade Bryant if they so choose to. And immediately, there are reports that a deal between Chicago and Colorado involving Nolan Arenado are plausible. Apparently Arendado really, really wants out of Colorado, and that he would really like to play for the Cubs. On a basic level as a Cubs fan, I say pull the trigger. Bryant might very well go on to hit 60 homers a year playing at Coors Field, but Arenado is steadier and both are really good, but most importantly Arenado is locked up for seven more years.

But the problem comes with the Cubs getting and staying under the Luxury Tax, and even if the Rockies were willing to eat about 8m a year on the deal, which has been rumored, then the Cubs would still be over. So they need to move other contracts too, either to the Rockies in a salary dump while throwing in prospects, or move someone else too. It'll be interesting.