Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 145 of 454 FirstFirst ... 4595135143144145146147155195245 ... LastLast
Results 2,161 to 2,175 of 6799
  1. #2161
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    3,154
    Quote Originally Posted by chibears55 View Post
    They can always go with the younger guys to see if they're ready in Rea Miller Alzolay etc. along with Mills
    I mean... they might as well now.

  2. #2162
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    14,935
    Quote Originally Posted by chibears55 View Post
    They can always go with the younger guys to see if they're ready in Rea Miller Alzolay etc. along with Mills
    I guess it doesn't matter. But if they dealt Q it would have to be for an asset. Not just payroll relief. It doesn't matter if the Cubs are $1M under the tax of $10M. So if they want to stay mildly interested in winning in 20 9which I doubt they can do), I would think they might keep Q, unless they get a decent return (prospect)

  3. #2163
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    24,790
    Quote Originally Posted by rcal10 View Post
    How many went over in 18' when the Red Sox(who went over won the WS)? How about 17' when I would guess the Dodgers were over and went to the WS? Or in 16' when the Cubs won the WS while being over? So starting in 16, there has been 4 different WS winners and of the 4, two were over. So 50% of the WS winners were over the LT. What percent of teams were over the LT those 4 years? My guess is way less than 50%. If you are going to cherry pick for your argument, so am I.
    I had posted a 15-year snapshot earlier in the thread (last week) that you may have not seen. I'll repost it here for your viewing. If you look at a larger sub-set of Luxury Tax teams over time, the percentages don't really show how it's all that advantageous.

    And who's arguing? I'm just stating an opinion that some may agree with and some may disagree with.

    Quote Originally Posted by Timmmahhh View Post
    https://imgur.com/a/GQRyFWg

    https://imgur.com/a/xjUaGGU

    Maybe take a step back and look at it in a larger sample;


    :From 2003-2017, only 8 MLB teams have surpassed the Luxury Tax.


    :Of the 30 WS participants from 2003-2017, only 7 of the 30 participants were "Luxury Tax" Teams.


    :Of the 8, 2003-2017 Luxury Tax teams, only half of those teams ever participated in a World Series during their specific "Luxury Tax" year.


    :Of those 4 teams, 3 won the Championship with Boston winning it twice.



    4 Championships over a 15 year span is hardly a great way to sell the Luxury Tax being a solid/good investment, at least IMO.

  4. #2164
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    13,097

    2019-20 Offseason Thread 2.0: Winter Meetings Edition

    So World Series winning teams since 2015 who are going into 2020 with nothing to play for and no hope of winning the division? Kansas City Royals, Chicago Cubs, Boston Red Sox. At least Royals fans know that they’re ****. What is our excuse?
    Last edited by JHBulls; 12-23-2019 at 03:44 PM.

  5. #2165
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    14,935
    Quote Originally Posted by Timmmahhh View Post
    I had posted a 15-year snapshot earlier in the thread (last week) that you may have not seen. I'll repost it here for your viewing. If you look at a larger sub-set of Luxury Tax teams over time, the percentages don't really show how it's all that advantageous.

    And who's arguing? I'm just stating an opinion that some may agree with and some may disagree with.
    So a much higher percentage of winners among the highest spenders then the percentage among the other teams. Not sure how spending and winning doesn't go hand and hand, frankly. And I think you have send info supporting spending. Point being, spending doesn't mean you will automatically win a short series. Maybe you even fall short of the post season. But it damn well does, for the most part, give you a much better chance of competing to win. Some of the teams that were over were also teams that had tried winning earlier and threw everything they could at it, and either fell short, or even won, but were then stuck with bad contracts. That is the cost of doing business when spending.
    Last edited by rcal10; 12-23-2019 at 03:52 PM.

  6. #2166
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    9,004
    So..... do the Cubs end up with a better record then the White Sox or will the White Sox pass them? At the moment the Sox are certainly the more intriguing team with the free agent signings and young guys coming up. At the moment this Cubs team is an intriguing as wet paint.

  7. #2167
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,956
    Quote Originally Posted by Salvaged Ship View Post
    So..... do the Cubs end up with a better record then the White Sox or will the White Sox pass them? At the moment the Sox are certainly the more intriguing team with the free agent signings and young guys coming up. At the moment this Cubs team is an intriguing as wet paint.
    Much more worried about having a better record than the Brewers, Cardinals, and Reds.

  8. #2168
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    14,935
    Quote Originally Posted by Salvaged Ship View Post
    So..... do the Cubs end up with a better record then the White Sox or will the White Sox pass them? At the moment the Sox are certainly the more intriguing team with the free agent signings and young guys coming up. At the moment this Cubs team is an intriguing as wet paint.
    Honestly I am much more concerned with what teams in the NL central the Cubs are better than. And what teams in the NL they are better than. I couldn't care less about the sox. This is a discussion I would expect a sox fan to have. They are way more concerned with beating the Cubs then they are winning division games. And, that I never could understand.

  9. #2169
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    27,034
    Quote Originally Posted by Timmmahhh View Post
    I had posted a 15-year snapshot earlier in the thread (last week) that you may have not seen. I'll repost it here for your viewing. If you look at a larger sub-set of Luxury Tax teams over time, the percentages don't really show how it's all that advantageous.

    And who's arguing? I'm just stating an opinion that some may agree with and some may disagree with.
    Spending beyond the luxury tax hasn't been super common to this point (as you've pointed out, only 8 teams have ever actually done it), but to say that spending doesn't correlate with winning isn't matter of opinion, it's just wrong. Teams that spend the most do win the most and there is literally a strong positive correlation.

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/wp-conte...ll-1.png?w=575

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...ccess-stories/
    Last edited by La_bibbers; 12-23-2019 at 05:29 PM.

  10. #2170
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    9,004
    Quote Originally Posted by rcal10 View Post
    Honestly I am much more concerned with what teams in the NL central the Cubs are better than. And what teams in the NL they are better than. I couldn't care less about the sox. This is a discussion I would expect a sox fan to have. They are way more concerned with beating the Cubs then they are winning division games. And, that I never could understand.
    Its just a question, nothing much else going on right now to talk about Cubs wise

  11. #2171
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    14,935
    Quote Originally Posted by Salvaged Ship View Post
    Its just a question, nothing much else going on right now to talk about Cubs wise
    On this we can agree. The off season SUCKS.

  12. #2172
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    4,720
    Quote Originally Posted by Salvaged Ship View Post
    So..... do the Cubs end up with a better record then the White Sox or will the White Sox pass them? At the moment the Sox are certainly the more intriguing team with the free agent signings and young guys coming up. At the moment this Cubs team is an intriguing as wet paint.
    Cubs dont suck as is on paper right now

    I'd say if they dont make another transaction, including not trading Bryant, their current roster probably good for close to a 500 record

  13. #2173
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Bloomington, IL
    Posts
    4,918
    I obviously don't want to trade Bryant. But if we were keeping everybody we needed to improve the team around them. If they fail to improve the team and just run back what we have right now that's also a pretty awful offseason. They've kinda backed themselves into a corner now and lost some of their leverage in a Bryant trade imo. Of course there are obviously other guys they could move. It would be a lot easier if every team in baseball didn't know the Cubs were determined to cut payroll no matter what, and that's on ownership.
    Last edited by Sofnr; 12-23-2019 at 05:48 PM.

  14. #2174
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    13,097

    2019-20 Offseason Thread 2.0: Winter Meetings Edition

    Quote Originally Posted by Salvaged Ship View Post
    So..... do the Cubs end up with a better record then the White Sox or will the White Sox pass them? At the moment the Sox are certainly the more intriguing team with the free agent signings and young guys coming up. At the moment this Cubs team is an intriguing as wet paint.
    It’s very possible. The CWS went from 62 (2018) to 72 (2019) wins and have gotten better over the offseason with more prospects to come up to the major league team in early 2020. The Cubs finished with 84 wins in 2019 and look set at any moment to trade Bryant and could also trade Willson and Quintana. Whilst the White Sox will definitely surge towards 80+ wins, the Cubs might not win 80 games and that is just the reality.
    Last edited by JHBulls; 12-23-2019 at 05:50 PM.

  15. #2175
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    A city in the United States.
    Posts
    4,739
    Quote Originally Posted by rcal10 View Post
    On this we can agree. The off season SUCKS.
    What?!?!?!? you don't like an off-season in which the Cubs are signing players to I.O.U's? Are ya insane? It's the bestestest off-season ever. (Sighs, I know that was too over-the-top sarcasm.)
    Screw sabermetics.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •