Can_of_corn

Yes, but a lot of folks don't pay that much attention to you. It wouldn't hurt for you to add the f for the sake of clarity.

I think it's probably really hard to juggle the schedule so that every team can get that. Seems like a pretty mammoth undertaking. I'm just glad that it isn't 19 games each anymore.

What lawyer? Lawyers pass the bar.

While he certainly should have specified it's also obvious that he is talking about fWAR.

I don't think signing every one of these picks is a realistic goal. The money just isn't there in the middle of the round like it is at the top.

Expect? Probably not. But I'm not shocked that the #1 prospect in the game had a better first half than a 30 year old middle infielder. Now Johan Heim having a better first half than a healthy Adley is a big shock.

I think luck is less of a factor in the NBA. I also think the league itself has a more active role in who wins in the NBA...just look at the playoff officiating... With pitching being what it is I think baseball is more luck dependent than the NBA or NFL, more like the NHL where a hot goalie and get you pretty far in the playoffs.

I mean the hate is real but it goes beyond that. They also don't want the hassle of dealing with the fallout of Baltimore losing a team and OPACY being empty. They also want to get that sweet expansion money and yet another team possibly moving would slow that money train down.

So a player who has no power is making less than a player who had power. And? Why randomly mention Trea Turner? Carlos Correa 1.0 fWAR, 1.1 rWAR Correa salary: $32,000,000.

Didn't the Patriots get caught cheating on more than one occasion during the Brady years? Some sort of thing with the balls and guys watching practices?

OK SG, since this is apparently a difficult topic for you I'll try and explain it so you can understand it. Fans are happy when teams sign good young players to long term deals. Happy fans are more likely to buy season tickets and buy merch. TV ratings are higher when fans are happy. Sponsors and advertisers are willing to pay more money when a team is popular. I absolutely think that the team's revenue stream is higher today than it would be if they hadn't extended those players. You'd have to be a complete moron to think otherwise. The only question is, how much more revenue will be generated.

Yes.

I would think so, but outside of this board I've not heard his name being mentioned.

I used to think they were purposefully misunderstanding posts. I've since changed my mind and think it's legit.

I think the moves they made have positively impacted their incoming cash flow to an extent that it will compensate for any fall off from the players they extended.

It's not an utter crapshoot. But luck is certainly a factor. Look at the Phillies last year or the Nats a few years ago. The Royals last decade.

Kinda. The official story is a bunch of teams were cheating in a specific fashion, MLB told them to stop and the Astros didn't. How much of that I believe....

Nope, last year of team control.

None. It's just money right? A bad contract doesn't impact their ability to spend money. Right? I think that overall they are going to come out well ahead with the strategy they are employing.

Well they were cheating in at least one of those years....

Saw a fun picture of the Braves All-Stars this morning.

Yea, I'm sure that's all that is holding the city back.

I'm not disagreeing. I'm also not sure the Cards are in any hurry to trade him.

And once every few years one of these guys (total not per team) makes it to the majors and we all say what a great story it is.