Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why the Padres are MLB's "Model" Franchise...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why the Padres are MLB's "Model" Franchise...

    And the story goes on to explain why Tatis's deal is not an albatross. Also asks a good question, if the Padres can do this, the PADRES, why can't the other clubs?

    https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/p...great-for-mlb/

  • #2
    The biggest credit they probably deserve is for building their farm, having an owner that is willing to spend to get out of mistakes, and taking advantage of other teams COVID financial situations. While they have hit on some trades, they have had their significant misses in FA that have hurt them overall. A lot of the progress they have made this offseason, in my opinion, is for the most part circumstantial. While its impossible to know for sure, I'd assume the market for the likes of Darvish and Snell would have been much more competitive in a regular year. Its also possible those guys may have been unavailable in a normal year.

    Kudos to them for having a front office and owner that is willing to take advantage of the situation though. I wish the sox were more willing to do that than they have shown.
    Last edited by DeployEloy; 02-23-2021, 01:08 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by DeployEloy View Post
      The biggest credit they probably deserve is for building their farm, having an owner that is willing to spend to get out of mistakes, and taking advantage of other teams COVID financial situations. While they have hit on some trades, they have had their significant misses in FA that have hurt them overall. A lot of the progress they have made this offseason, in my opinion, is for the most part circumstantial. While its impossible to know for sure, I'd assume the market for the likes of Darvish and Snell would have been much more competitive in a regular year. Its also possible those guys may have been unavailable in a normal year.

      Kudos to them for having a front office and owner that is willing to take advantage of the situation though. I wish the sox were more willing to do that than they have shown.
      The misses only hurt you if you let them. And they haven't been horrible. Wil Myers has a big contract. He was crazy good last year but let's assume that was just the shortened season...he's still a usable player. Same for Hosmer. Definitely not worth his deal. But he mashes righties with the best of them and is a good first baseman.

      The most important part though? The monetary commitment is just that. They're still spending despite two huge early mistakes. And I have no doubts that if these two weren't producing as well as they were, they'd be released or traded in a heartbeat. Because the Padres are running how every team serious about winning should. Regardless of how great their farm system is. If you're trying to win, then you ****ing try to win. Not try to get as many wins as you can without spending or committing funds to winning, hoping things shake out just right.

      The final details came out on Tatis's deal. He isn't even making the big money ($36 million per) until after Machado is off the books. It's very heavily back loaded.
      Last edited by vegandork; 02-23-2021, 07:59 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by vegandork View Post


        Regardless of how great their farm system is. If you're trying to win, then you ****ing try to win. Not try to get as many wins as you can without spending or committing funds to winning, hoping things shake out just right.

        The final details came out on Tatis's deal. He isn't even making the big money ($36 million per) until after Machado is off the books. It's very heavily back loaded.
        Yep. I don’t think they will be shy about making deals using their prospects given how things have played out thus far for them. I could also see them be willing to continue to take on guys/contracts if it means preserving prospect trade resources. While I see the Tatis deal as something they didn’t necessarily need to do this year, I hardly hate the deal. Lock up your best assets long term is the correct play. That’s one thing I am actually really happy about as far as Sox commitments are concerned. They have been willing to do that with their young core and I would expect they continue to try to do that. As for Tatis, it was only going to get more expensive if they waited.
        Last edited by DeployEloy; 02-23-2021, 08:25 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          The Padres and the White Sox were very similar teams until very, very recently.

          Both teams tried to spend (relatively) big in the early 2010's and only achieved mediocrity. Both teams entered a rebuild around 2016. Even in 2019 when the Padres outbid the White Sox for Manny Machado, they were both more or less doing the same thing, just $50 million more for the Padres. Both teams were praised for their rebuild, writers salivated over both teams prospects.

          But in the offseason between the 2020 and 2021 seasons, the White Sox and Padres completely diverged. The Padres spent $$$ and aggressively traded. The White Sox stood pat.

          I believe the Padres have set themselves up to dominate the next decade of baseball and the White Sox have put themselves at serious risk of disappointing. But maybe it will all go right for the Sox and the Padres will not get the performance they're seeking from their new pieces. I'd rather be the Padres right now but who knows. We'll see.
          "Hope...may be indulged in by those who have abundant resources...but those who stake their all upon the venture see it in its true colors only after they are ruined."
          -- Thucydides

          Comment


          • #6
            If simply spending money guaranteed championships the Yankees would win every year.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by FielderJones View Post
              If simply spending money guaranteed championships the Yankees would win every year.
              Certainly there are no guarantees, but spending money to acquire top talent increases your chances to win. The Yankees have won a boatload of titles in part because of the high priced, top talent guys they have signed going back to the days of "Catfish" Hunter and Reggie Jackson.

              Comment


              • #8
                Spending doesn't guarantee a championship but it greatly increases the likelihood of winning one. That's a fact.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Lipman 1 View Post

                  Certainly there are no guarantees, but spending money to acquire top talent increases your chances to win. The Yankees have won a boatload of titles in part because of the high priced, top talent guys they have signed going back to the days of "Catfish" Hunter and Reggie Jackson.
                  The Yankees won 20 World Series titles before the Reserve Clause was banished to the dustbin of history in 1975 (1923-1974). Since 1975, they have only six World Series titles. 74% of their title were without spending a single penny on free agents under the current system. I started with 1923 because that is their first WS title.

                  Another way to look at it, the Yanks won 20 titles over 52 years under the Reserve Clause and only 7 in 44 years when spending took off with free agency. That means during the 52 year stretch, in each of those years, there was a 38.4% chance of a Yankee WS title. Since 1975, that number is a 16% chance each year, a 41.67% drop off.

                  So, how had spending a lot of money helped the Yankees? They had a much higher success rate when they did not have to spend big time on free agents.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Nobody is saying that spending guarantees championships. Obviously everything in life is probabilistic and all you can do is increase your chances of winning a championship. It's hard to argue that signing Nelson Cruz for 1/13 or even 1/14 would not have increased the odds of the White Sox winning the World Series in 2021.
                    "Hope...may be indulged in by those who have abundant resources...but those who stake their all upon the venture see it in its true colors only after they are ruined."
                    -- Thucydides

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Dumpjerry View Post
                      The Yankees won 20 World Series titles before the Reserve Clause was banished to the dustbin of history in 1975 (1923-1974). Since 1975, they have only six World Series titles. 74% of their title were without spending a single penny on free agents under the current system. I started with 1923 because that is their first WS title.

                      Another way to look at it, the Yanks won 20 titles over 52 years under the Reserve Clause and only 7 in 44 years when spending took off with free agency. That means during the 52 year stretch, in each of those years, there was a 38.4% chance of a Yankee WS title. Since 1975, that number is a 16% chance each year, a 41.67% drop off.

                      So, how had spending a lot of money helped the Yankees? They had a much higher success rate when they did not have to spend big time on free agents.
                      In the Wild Card era, the Yankees have made the post-season 84.6% of the time while the White Sox have made it 15.3%. You're right that spending doesn't guarantee a World Series title, but it certainly puts you in the ballgame.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by notjimrose View Post

                        In the Wild Card era, the Yankees have made the post-season 84.6% of the time while the White Sox have made it 15.3%. You're right that spending doesn't guarantee a World Series title, but it certainly puts you in the ballgame.
                        Apples and Oranges. Throw in the Wild Card and that completely changes every team's building strategies for upcoming seasons.

                        The main reason why the Yanks were so strong in the 20's going into the 30's was that MLB needed a team in a major market to be the studs of the sport to make its appeal as broad as possible. New York was (and still is) the biggest stage in the USA for that (even more so back then), so when they landed Babe Ruth, they were golden.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Dumpjerry View Post

                          Apples and Oranges. Throw in the Wild Card and that completely changes every team's building strategies for upcoming seasons.

                          The main reason why the Yanks were so strong in the 20's going into the 30's was that MLB needed a team in a major market to be the studs of the sport to make its appeal as broad as possible. New York was (and still is) the biggest stage in the USA for that (even more so back then), so when they landed Babe Ruth, they were golden.
                          And this has what to do with the correlation between spending money and winning in the year 2021? In order to win the World Series in the here and now, you have to make the post-season. And in the era we are currently playing in, history has shown that spending money greatly increases a team's ability to make it to the post-season.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by notjimrose View Post

                            And this has what to do with the correlation between spending money and winning in the year 2021? In order to win the World Series in the here and now, you have to make the post-season. And in the era we are currently playing in, history has shown that spending money greatly increases a team's ability to make it to the post-season.
                            And not just make it, but keep open the competitive window for longer.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by notjimrose View Post

                              And this has what to do with the correlation between spending money and winning in the year 2021? In order to win the World Series in the here and now, you have to make the post-season. And in the era we are currently playing in, history has shown that spending money greatly increases a team's ability to make it to the post-season.
                              Players and team chemistry win games, not Benjamins.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X