what would you deem the best way to compare one division with another? Does record outside division have anything to do with it?
what you think they should have held onto Clevinger instead of getting Quintrell (who has pitched better), Naylor and Hedges?
Actually, no I didn’t. From the jump I said that the reason why these little things are brought up is because there are no big successes to point to. I neither praised nor criticized individual deals. What I have said is that the model is a road to nowhere. You have to hope that you catch lightning in a bottle that one time like the KC Royals did in 2015.
Winning percentage of the participants.
that is the goal of the deals- to win a championship. There are different ways to build a team- and trading guys at the height of their value before they are signed to deals that all to often turn out to be bad for the signing team is usually a pretty good strategy.
I said “this is what you tell yourself when you don’t win anything”. I didn’t criticize any single move nor praise it. Have a great time this fall rooting for future Dodgers, Giants, Yankees, Red Sox, and Mets.
A parade that I attended with my friends and family on Halloween day 2008.
How did the Rays do in the eyes of the networks when they’ve made their runs? The Royals? You’re talking some of the lowest metrics MLB ratings have seen.
some are, some aren't. The East has 4 payrolls 20 or lower. West has 3. Not sure how this is some sort of "win" for you, though, as in this discussion about the Tribe we all know their owner is cheap......but the FO is exceptional.
Two of those payrolls are teams in Florida where no one cares about pro sports in the Marlins and the Rays. The other is the Nats who have shown a willingness to spend money. They won a WS and are now rebuilding. When they build another core they will spend money again.
In a sense you are correct as it was Wiggy and not me who said this (post 24,655). He tried to remind you the Tribe FO has been exceptional making deals and instead of saying something mundane like "that's true and they seem to be set up well", you went with “Better end of the deal” - what you tell yourself when you haven’t won a World Series since 1948. I’m sorry. Isn’t winning a championship the goal of sports competition?"
Cool, which division participants has a better overall record.....
hey- that is fine- the Mets can pay Lindor a ton of money to be no better or worse than Andres Gimenez.
The “set up well” shit is what I’m pushing back on. How can you say that when experience tells you that you’re watching players who will soon be paid by other teams? It’s “set up well” if the plan is eventually pay those guys and keep them together when it’s time for them to win.
Where in my post did I say that you should do analysis by breaking the data up into subsets?
lightning in a bottle? Thats what happens when you barely ever make the playoffs like the Phillies.
The Marlins have won multiple World Series since Cleveland last won. The Washington Expos have actually closed the deal more recently than the Indians as well. This is exactly what I’m talking about. When there are no results to point to you become innately focused on over playing small process victories that have led nowhere and will continue to lead nowhere.
The Marlins and Rays are in the East. Been a long time since either was willing to spend. Not sure the Rays ever have.
