No personal attics.

14 minutes ago, SilverBullet said:

No personal attics.

24 minutes ago, SilverBullet said:

No personal attics.

I prefer community attics

19 minutes ago, SonOfJack said:

I prefer community attics

Your wife lets you go there?

1 minute ago, Michael said:

Your wife lets you go there?

39 minutes ago, SonOfJack said:

I prefer community attics

Alright back on topic lol. What are the realistic possibilities/predictions that could actually improve the team?
 

3b: Evan Longoria (some health issues the past two seasons but could be a good signing with a lower base salary and incentives based on games played. Maybe a 3 year deal with an opt out after 1)

CF: Conforto (Jazz - see below)

2B: Josh Harrison and move Jazz to center to help stave off some injuries á la Tatis and the Padres. 
 

I mean honestly there isn’t much on the free agent market that can make any kind of dent in this situation. And the trade options just make me feel that they’re going to overpay up the ass from the pitching depth and won’t resolve any major issues. 

 

Just now, marlinsmaniac said:

What are the realistic possibilities/predictions that could actually improve the team?

2 or 3 additions to the lineup (3 is best, 2 if one is exceptionally great) and a strong closer or bust, no matter the cost.

That doesn't guarantee we'll contend because of the quality of the division but it improves us significantly and gives us a chance.

Anything less than that makes 2023 not worth watching. 

6 minutes ago, marlinsmaniac said:

CF: Conforto (Jazz - see below)

2B: Josh Harrison and move Jazz to center to help stave off some injuries á la Tatis and the Padres. 

Jazz to CF has been my idea for a couple years now.

 

19 minutes ago, SonOfJack said:

 

That's comically bad but that's gotta change sooner or later. Has there ever been a team to not spend a single dollar in an offseason? 

45 minutes ago, marlinsmaniac said:

Alright back on topic lol. What are the realistic possibilities/predictions that could actually improve the team?
 

3b: Evan Longoria (some health issues the past two seasons but could be a good signing with a lower base salary and incentives based on games played. Maybe a 3 year deal with an opt out after 1)

CF: Conforto (Jazz - see below)

2B: Josh Harrison and move Jazz to center to help stave off some injuries á la Tatis and the Padres. 
 

I mean honestly there isn’t much on the free agent market that can make any kind of dent in this situation. And the trade options just make me feel that they’re going to overpay up the ass from the pitching depth and won’t resolve any major issues. 

 

We could run through 800 possibilities, it's not like Kim will do any of them.

 

You want to give Longoria 3 years?

52 minutes ago, marlinsmaniac said:

3b: Evan Longoria (some health issues the past two seasons but could be a good signing with a lower base salary and incentives based on games played. Maybe a 3 year deal with an opt out after 1)

I hate contracts with player opt-outs. So basically this is a one year deal if he has a huge 2023 (not likely) and a 3 year deal if he doesn't (likely). 

Salary cap and a floor are needed by proof of the Mets and Marlins.

11 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

We could run through 800 possibilities, it's not like Kim will do any of them.

 

You want to give Longoria 3 years?

Honestly yeah, I think he would be worth it assuming the price and terms are correct. Something to shield the team from injury/underperformance and something to incentivize him to do well. If he has one great year he’ll opt out and you’re in the same position next offseason but you got all star production for this season. If he isn’t “Longo” anymore, then worst case you have a veteran type with a good glove, power, and occasional flashes of his former self. I can see him aging like a Martin Prado kind of player that still played decently well up until literally their last season.

21 minutes ago, SonOfJack said:

I hate contracts with player opt-outs. So basically this is a one year deal if he has a huge 2023 (not likely) and a 3 year deal if he doesn't (likely). 

Yeah but that’s the point, if he’s great you got one year and can always re-sign him later. Or id he’s bad he doesn’t hit his contract incentives you keep him at the reduced salary that you negotiated beforehand. The dude plays a good third base and still has really good power numbers for his age. 

1 hour ago, SilverBullet said:

2 or 3 additions to the lineup (3 is best, 2 if one is exceptionally great) and a strong closer or bust, no matter the cost.

That doesn't guarantee we'll contend because of the quality of the division but it improves us significantly and gives us a chance.

Anything less than that makes 2023 not worth watching. 

Yeah honestly I don’t even care if the team wins a championship, I just want to see a team worth freaking watching. We’ve had individual players worth coming to see (Jose and Stanton recently) but the last time we had a team that was fun to come watch was 2009 and before that 2006.

Think this is the end of my run as a baseball fan. Thanks for the memz everyone! 

1 minute ago, mk613 said:

Salary cap and a floor are needed by proof of the Mets and Marlins.

To be fair, there were 4 teams under us payroll wise last season.

We spend around $83M, and the Guardians were 27th at $66M, but they made the playoffs.

1 minute ago, rmc523 said:

To be fair, there were 4 teams under us payroll wise last season.

We spend around $83M, and the Guardians were 27th at $66M, but they made the playoffs.

Yeah cause it is possible to be somewhat successful if you have a good GM

31 minutes ago, marlinsmaniac said:

Yeah but that’s the point, if he’s great you got one year and can always re-sign him later. Or id he’s bad he doesn’t hit his contract incentives you keep him at the reduced salary that you negotiated beforehand. The dude plays a good third base and still has really good power numbers for his age. 

Yeah, it'd have to be incentive-laden for me, with him being 37 already, given his production the last few years.

 

30 minutes ago, marlinsmaniac said:

Yeah honestly I don’t even care if the team wins a championship, I just want to see a team worth freaking watching. We’ve had individual players worth coming to see (Jose and Stanton recently) but the last time we had a team that was fun to come watch was 2009 and before that 2006.

 

Agreed.  I don't need World Series or Bust.  Just a team that's fun/competitive to watch on a daily basis, and one that you don't feel like the game is over when the other team scores 1 run in the 1st.

1 minute ago, SonOfJack said:

Yeah cause it is possible to be somewhat successful if you have a good GM

What's that and where do we find one?

I'm curious about how long term protection of assets is factored into these decisions.

It is going to be really frustrating when all this pitching loses value because they are pitching against a gauntlet no matter who they face in the east...well except Washington. But even in these series the pitching has to be perfect because they are with defensively weak lineup with players out of position...

Christ....they don't have a centerfielder...this is mindboggling.

It isn't like these magical trades are coming...Teams are just waiting the Fish out.

1 hour ago, SonOfJack said:

Yeah cause it is possible to be somewhat successful if you have a good GM

I'm just about there.  I doubt I will watch any baseball next year.  This off-season has been a complete joke for MLB.  Half the teams may as well not exist.

Oops meant to quote Iowa

Edited December 21, 20223 yr by LordMagnus

1 hour ago, rmc523 said:

To be fair, there were 4 teams under us payroll wise last season.

We spend around $83M, and the Guardians were 27th at $66M, but they made the playoffs.

This is why it's hard to get a salary floor. Money doesn't guarantee winning and cheap teams have won plenty.

You would almost need to prove winning as opposed to proving spending.

Something like you're allowed to keep payroll down if you get X number of wins. 

But then the counter to that is, what if you're like the 2012 Marlins who spent more and won less? Wouldn't a team like that be allowed or justified in reducing payroll under the premise of trying to improve the team? The 2011 Marlins actually won more games than the 2012 Marlins.

If a payroll reducing team could prove they could win more games the year after payroll reduction then why penalize them? 

This is all a very tricky subject especially in baseball.