It balances the lineup, fixes the IF logjam, but does these changes improve our offense output? I’m dubious and might rather keep Walker and myers. I’m not totally out on Walker and I don’t mind finding out how much Altuve can play LF and Paredes at 2B. I don’t love losing Arrighetti as the cost bc SP depth is a major concern for me and he actually has upside.
Those are all fair points. Over the course of the season it is probably not a huge improvement in the offense, but it does balance the lineup and let them play everyone at their best defensive position, letting them field their ideal lineup more regularly. It probabiy doesn’t make much difference in the playoff lineup. My rough guess is that it probably would equate to a 1-3 win improvement in the regular season. It definitely will not be the end of the world if Houston enters the season with their current roster. They will be able to keep their best players rested. They will have a deep lineup with a lot of upside. And they will have a deep pitching staff. The have achieved a passing grade for the offseason even if they don’t make any further moves.
@Snake Diggit Not a bad idea at all, but why would the Brewers trade Frelick and what might they trade him for? What do they need that we have to give away?
Altuve's money was front loaded. It's going to be backup money in 2 years. The tax is calculated on the average, so we benefit from it now.
as a fan, I do like shakeups more than staying with status quo, all things being equal. So I’m not totally against the frelick move. I just don’t know enough about him other than he is one of those annoyingly effective Brewers.
It was a severe down year for Walker, but in line with diminishing performance from the previous 3 years. He had the lowest OBP among all MLB 1B last year... winning teams will avoid that at $20 mil/yr and a new CBA coming up. As we get closer to a lockout we'll know more about what leverage the owners have over the MLBPA on salary caps. The best argument is raising the minimum cap so teams like Oakland have to pay someone. MLB weighs salary cap as potential 2026 lockout looms Mets already had a mini firesale in anticipation of steeper penalties. I don't see any real benefit to trading Walker when you'll have to eat some of the salary and get nothing in return. I'm certainly not interested in losing more prospects after the Burrows trade. Health will be a big issue for the rotation. Don't need elite SP if you have inning eaters throughout the regular season. We'll see who rises to the occasion for the #2 and 3 spot.
Who says the Astros weren't willing to spend? They took on Correa at over $20 million a year despite having a loaded infield. They took on Sanchez at $4.5 million. It's about even distribution of spend when you're a small market revenue wise. The pitching position was full of question marks and continuous injuries (even in 2024) so you look over a position of need for a position of excess. According to your logic, short term injuries to Paredes, Pena and Alvarez (the 3 most talented hitters) mean you need to bring in Correa's contract, but the injuries to Arrighetti, Blanco and Wesneski (3 pitchers without a track record of performance) mean SP still isn't a problem? It's not like they were reliable performers before that , save Blanco's blistering start to 24. Don't overcomplicate things. Spend on performers at positions of need and avoiding paying players in their twilight years. The messier things get, the bigger of a hole you dig yourself into. It's not that I don't like the Imai signing, I don't like the idea of being a temporary feeder channel because of poor management.
The Dodgers are owned by Guggenheim Partners, who easily represent the richest ownership group in baseball. Plus, they have the largest television contract in the sport by a large margin. That’s why they are deferring nearly a billion dollars in long-term contract value and continue to spend like crazy. Jim Crane doesn’t have the Dodgers’ revenue, TV deal, nor the net worth of the Guggenheim Partners. Thus, he is unwilling to get hit with the financial penalties the Dodgers can absorb. That’s what ultimately matters right now for the Astros and Dana Brown.
Dodgers payroll for 2025, including tax but not including deferred payments, was $586M The combined payrolls of the bottom 12 teams were less than that. Try and explain to me how that is a functional financial system.
Not surprised. The Dodgers get more money annually from their TV deal than some teams entire payrolls. It’s why the comparison was ridiculous. They gave Tanner Scott 4 years, $72 million last year. After Scott bombed, they signed Ediwin Diaz for 3 years, $69 million this offseason to replace him. The Astros could never do that.
The biggest thing MLB could do to even things out (without a salary cap and floor, we can dream, right?) is to pool all (and I mean ALL) media money and distribute it equally...and they seem to be going in that direction (streaming options, ala carte, pay-as-you-go, is huge in upcoming MLB tv media talks)
I wouldn't call any team trotting g out an outfield that may hit 35 Homer's between 3 starters stacked.
My earlier numbers may have been a bit off, so here's the non-tax payroll on Opening Day 2025: Bottom 10 teams payroll: 1.08 billion dollars Mets, Dodgers, Yankees payroll: 937 million https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...eams-payroll-2025-highest-lowest/86667489007/
