Author Topic: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)  (Read 3605 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline blue911

  • Posts: 18137
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #175: December 08, 2022, 02:53:36 PM »
Might be good publicity for them though.

How so?

Offline imref

  • Posts: 38782
  • Re-contending in 202...5?
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #176: December 08, 2022, 03:11:25 PM »
How so?

In 2019 the Trump administration published new guidelines for academy grads who wished to go into professional sports. If approved, they can either delay their military service until after their playing careers are over, or reimburse the government for their education costs.

The guidelines note that military service secretaries can nominate someone for deferment or repayment if “is a strong expectation that a Military Service Academy cadet or midshipman’s future professional sports employment will provide the DoD with significant favorable media exposure likely to enhance national level recruiting or public affairs missions.”

Here are the details: Song was drafted before the memo so he's not covered by it, but this article is from 2019 when he had already petitioned for a waiver:
https://www.militarytimes.com/off-duty/military-sports/2019/11/15/military-academy-athletes-can-now-delay-service-go-pro/

The Navy used David Robinson quite a bit for recruiting. That case is a bit different though as Robinson's height forced him into the reserves as he was too tall to serve aboard a ship.


Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 23057
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #177: December 08, 2022, 03:50:45 PM »
Yea. He is just one guy. If he makes it good publicity. 

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 61030
  • THE SUMMONER OF THE REVERSE JINX
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #178: December 08, 2022, 08:59:38 PM »
Mets sign Nimmo and Robertson

Nimmo gets 8 years, 162 million

Offline imref

  • Posts: 38782
  • Re-contending in 202...5?
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #179: December 08, 2022, 08:59:43 PM »
Mets keep Nimmo. 8/$162 million.

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 23057
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #180: December 09, 2022, 06:14:53 AM »
Mets projected payroll is $333 million.  :shock:

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 35660
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #181: December 09, 2022, 08:09:26 AM »
Mets sign Nimmo and Robertson

Nimmo gets 8 years, 162 million

It looks like the pattern this year, finally, is a variation of the Lerners's deferred money strategy.  Both strategies have the benefit of stretched out payments and lowering the present value of the payment stream.  The Lerners gave short years with deferrals, which doubled the CBT impact over a shorter term. That's why the team technically exceeded the CBT when their actual payroll for players on the roster was lower. The current approach gives extra years of being on the roster for guys pretty clearly aren't going to be worth big money in exchange for lower AAV and current luxury tax impact. The current strategy allows a team to accumulate better talent up until the late years when they will be rostering the equivalent of Soriano's and Scherzer's deferred payments (money out for little value to the active squad's performance).

Seeing the two approaches, it kind of leads me to want to push back a bit on the whole "well, when we were a contender, the Lerners were willing to pay and exceed the CBT."  Technically true, but if they were really trying to max out the ability to accumulate talent to contend, deals like Scherzer's 7 year contract for $30 million a year would have been structured as a 14 year deal for $15 million a year, which is closer to the payment stream.  While it is rare, that would have been a steal of a deal for the Nats.  Scherzer would still be performing on the staff.  Of course, more deals would not work out that way, but that's sort of what the Turner / Bogaerts and possibly the Judge deal are structured. Not pitchers, so a lot less risk. 

Offline imref

  • Posts: 38782
  • Re-contending in 202...5?
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #182: December 11, 2022, 12:07:24 AM »
Kodai Senga to the Mets. 5/$75 million :(

Offline SkinsNatFan21RIP

  • Posts: 879
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #183: December 11, 2022, 01:37:54 AM »
I don’t understand being worried about the draft and tanking but  doing nothing about major market teams being able to just outspend everyone? You’ve basically set up a system where small market teams are forced to either trade their star players to the major market teams for prospects or just risk losing them to those same teams on the open market however you punish most of these same teams by having a draft lottery. What the Mets are doing is silly. It shouldn’t fly in any sport if you truly wanted a competitive balance. If you’re going to punish these small market teams that thrive off of rebuilding through the draft then you should at least implement a salary cap so these major market teams can’t just buy everyone they want. It’s ridiculous.

Offline imref

  • Posts: 38782
  • Re-contending in 202...5?
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #184: December 11, 2022, 01:54:41 AM »
:clap:

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 61030
  • THE SUMMONER OF THE REVERSE JINX
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #185: December 11, 2022, 07:23:24 AM »
I don’t understand being worried about the draft and tanking but  doing nothing about major market teams being able to just outspend everyone? You’ve basically set up a system where small market teams are forced to either trade their star players to the major market teams for prospects or just risk losing them to those same teams on the open market however you punish most of these same teams by having a draft lottery. What the Mets are doing is silly. It shouldn’t fly in any sport if you truly wanted a competitive balance. If you’re going to punish these small market teams that thrive off of rebuilding through the draft then you should at least implement a salary cap so these major market teams can’t just buy everyone they want. It’s ridiculous.

Small market teams arent forced to do anything. Their ownership is being greedy. There's more than enough shared revenue for any team in baseball to afford one of these big deals.

Offline SkinsNatFan21RIP

  • Posts: 879
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #186: December 11, 2022, 07:43:09 AM »
Small market teams arent forced to do anything. Their ownership is being greedy. There's more than enough shared revenue for any team in baseball to afford one of these big deals.

The Mets are going to pay a $73M tax on what they’ve spent so far. Small market teams with owners who aren’t Cohen can’t compete with that. I don’t see how this isn’t an issue with competitive balance? And even if it’s enough to pay one of these deals they can’t keep the rest of their players. So they sign one guy, lose the rest and then have to deal that guy anyway similar to what the Marlins did with Stanton. And I disagree that ownership is being greedy. Even with shared revenue some of these owners aren’t nearly as flush with cash as you’d think.

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 23057
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #187: December 11, 2022, 07:48:48 AM »
So what is the solution?  Hard caps? Then you penalize teams for doing a better job drafting and developing players. The NHL has not become popular because of a hard cap.  I would argue the reverse and that having teams like Tampa and Colorado unable to keep their talent hurts the sport. Most causal fans like to have a few dominant teams with the star players. Even though the NFL has a hard cap and more parity there are still some teams that seem unable to compete. New England only stayed dominant by having Brady take cheap deals for the sake of the team.

No guarantees for the Mets to win anything despite all the money spent. 

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 61030
  • THE SUMMONER OF THE REVERSE JINX
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #188: December 11, 2022, 07:51:58 AM »
The Mets are going to pay a $73M tax on what they’ve spent so far. Small market teams with owners who aren’t Cohen can’t compete with that. I don’t see how this isn’t an issue with competitive balance? And even if it’s enough to pay one of these deals they can’t keep the rest of their players. So they sign one guy, lose the rest and then have to deal that guy anyway similar to what the Marlins did with Stanton. And I disagree that ownership is being greedy. Even with shared revenue some of these owners aren’t nearly as flush with cash as you’d think.


:lmao: Marlins gave away Stanton becauae they had new ownership that wanted to be cheap (and still does). They traded Yelich despite being in year 3 of a 5 year, 50 million dollar deal.

Not all teams may be able to spend like the Mets and Dodgers, but they can field competitve payrolls. The Cardinals, Braves, and Padres have all spent big money, and they arent big market teams.

This is about willingness, not financial capability. Every team in baseball could afford 150 million in payroll. Their owners simply dont want to do it

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21230
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #189: December 11, 2022, 07:53:54 AM »
So what is the solution?  Hard caps? Then you penalize teams for doing a better job drafting and developing players. The NHL has not become popular because of a hard cap.  I would argue the reverse and that having teams like Tampa and Colorado unable to keep their talent hurts the sport. Most causal fans like to have a few dominant teams with the star players. Even though the NFL has a hard cap and more parity there are still some teams that seem unable to compete. New England only stayed dominant by having Brady take cheap deals for the sake of the team.

No guarantees for the Mets to win anything despite all the money spent. 

I think in a sport where the average fan follows their team and the league, a few dominant teams helps build interest. Looking at baseball ratings- do fans follow other teams or just their own?

Offline imref

  • Posts: 38782
  • Re-contending in 202...5?
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #190: December 11, 2022, 08:30:42 AM »
Passan says the Mets will pay $421 million, including penalties, next year as of now.

Offline SkinsNatFan21RIP

  • Posts: 879
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #191: December 11, 2022, 09:33:19 AM »
So what is the solution?  Hard caps? Then you penalize teams for doing a better job drafting and developing players. The NHL has not become popular because of a hard cap.  I would argue the reverse and that having teams like Tampa and Colorado unable to keep their talent hurts the sport. Most causal fans like to have a few dominant teams with the star players. Even though the NFL has a hard cap and more parity there are still some teams that seem unable to compete. New England only stayed dominant by having Brady take cheap deals for the sake of the team.

No guarantees for the Mets to win anything despite all the money spent. 

I do believe their should be a cap. It doesn’t have to be extremely low like hockey but a cap similar to the NFL of what will be $220M next year. Coen can still spend just not to this outrageous degree.

Offline SkinsNatFan21RIP

  • Posts: 879
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #192: December 11, 2022, 09:35:41 AM »


:lmao: Marlins gave away Stanton becauae they had new ownership that wanted to be cheap (and still does). They traded Yelich despite being in year 3 of a 5 year, 50 million dollar deal.

Not all teams may be able to spend like the Mets and Dodgers, but they can field competitve payrolls. The Cardinals, Braves, and Padres have all spent big money, and they arent big market teams.

This is about willingness, not financial capability. Every team in baseball could afford 150 million in payroll. Their owners simply dont want to do it

“Not all teams can spend like the Mets and dodgers” is admitting those teams have a competitive advantage because they simply have the capital to spend more. And it’s not a little more it’s a lot more.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21230
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #193: December 11, 2022, 09:37:21 AM »
“Not all teams can spend like the Mets and dodgers” is admitting those teams have a competitive advantage because they simply have the capital to spend more. And it’s not a little more it’s a lot more.

Those teams are in the largest markets. It’s in baseball’s interest for NYC and LA to be relevant every year

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 61030
  • THE SUMMONER OF THE REVERSE JINX
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #194: December 11, 2022, 09:48:18 AM »
“Not all teams can spend like the Mets and dodgers” is admitting those teams have a competitive advantage because they simply have the capital to spend more. And it’s not a little more it’s a lot more.
And yet, they dont. If they did, they'd have championships to prove it.

Theres more than enough money for every team to field a competitive team. Some are just choosing not to

Offline Senatorswin

  • Posts: 844
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #195: December 11, 2022, 10:55:27 AM »


:lmao: Marlins gave away Stanton becauae they had new ownership that wanted to be cheap (and still does). They traded Yelich despite being in year 3 of a 5 year, 50 million dollar deal.

Not all teams may be able to spend like the Mets and Dodgers, but they can field competitve payrolls. The Cardinals, Braves, and Padres have all spent big money, and they arent big market teams.

This is about willingness, not financial capability. Every team in baseball could afford 150 million in payroll. Their owners simply dont want to do it

For what it's worth in 2022 the Cardinals were second in attendance, the Braves fourth and the Padres fifth. In total revenue generated the Braves were 4th, the Cardinals fourteenth and the Padres fifteenth.

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 61030
  • THE SUMMONER OF THE REVERSE JINX
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #196: December 11, 2022, 11:15:20 AM »
For what it's worth in 2022 the Cardinals were second in attendance, the Braves fourth and the Padres fifth. In total revenue generated the Braves were 4th, the Cardinals fourteenth and the Padres fifteenth.
Weird how people want to go see teams that win.

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 35660
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #197: December 11, 2022, 11:36:19 AM »
Weird how people want to go see teams that win.
in fairness, they did get him to agree to some deferrals and got $51 million from the Rockies. But they also are signing Wilson Contreras

Offline imref

  • Posts: 38782
  • Re-contending in 202...5?
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #198: December 11, 2022, 12:22:40 PM »
in fairness, they did get him to agree to some deferrals and got $51 million from the Rockies. But they also are signing Wilson Contreras

weren't the Nats mid-pack in attendance this past year?

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 61030
  • THE SUMMONER OF THE REVERSE JINX
Re: 2022-23 Off-season (non-Nats)
« Reply #199: December 11, 2022, 12:26:13 PM »
in fairness, they did get him to agree to some deferrals and got $51 million from the Rockies. But they also are signing Wilson Contreras
13th in payroll. 183 million against the tax. But no, the small market teams can't compete