5 year payroll plan to see how much can be added.

[Sports Guy]

11 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

What would have been the point? As you say, it would have been a facade. We would have missed the chance to get Holliday just to finish 4th instead of of 5th. That's what we got from 98-2011. For the most part it wasn't low payroll. 

Ehh, not sure this is true.

A few years ago, I wanted to sign Eovaldi. I was told it was too early, no need to spend the money, etc…

I was told similar stuff to that the year before.

But the Os ended up competing and contending in the exact time frame I said they should…the difference is, I would have tried harder and maybe we would have had a few better pieces for 2023 and 2024 had we been more aggressive in 2021 and 2022. 
 

And maybe those pieces would have put us over the top in October. We obviously will never know but I know I would have rather had Eovaldi going against Texas vs the other way around.

 

[Aristotelian]

23 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Ehh, not sure this is true.

A few years ago, I wanted to sign Eovaldi. I was told it was too early, no need to spend the money, etc…

I was told similar stuff to that the year before.

But the Os ended up competing and contending in the exact time frame I said they should…the difference is, I would have tried harder and maybe we would have had a few better pieces for 2023 and 2024 had we been more aggressive in 2021 and 2022. 
 

And maybe those pieces would have put us over the top in October. We obviously will never know but I know I would have rather had Eovaldi going against Texas vs the other way around.

 

Eovaldi was a FA after the 2022 season when we were already .500. I am talking about the worst years of the rebuild that got us Kjerstad, Cowser, and Holliday. 

I wanted Eovaldi too.

[LookitsPuck]

I reckon this team's ceiling in terms of payroll is ~$200m. 

They were at around $110m prior to the end of the season. That gives them ~$90m of payroll flexibility. Quite a bit, but Rubenstein needs to pony up for Gunnar. We can't have another Manny Machado situation which was bungled every step of the way (not extending, then trading for pennies on the dollar at the deadline). Can't let mid 20s superstars walk and/or get traded. He's going to cost similar to that of Witt (i.e. ~10 years, $25m/year give or take). That'd still leave quite a bit of room for growth over the next few years. 

[TradeAngelos]

3 hours ago, LookitsPuck said:

I reckon this team's ceiling in terms of payroll is ~$200m. 

They were at around $110m prior to the end of the season. That gives them ~$90m of payroll flexibility. Quite a bit, but Rubenstein needs to pony up for Gunnar. We can't have another Manny Machado situation which was bungled every step of the way (not extending, then trading for pennies on the dollar at the deadline). Can't let mid 20s superstars walk and/or get traded. He's going to cost similar to that of Witt (i.e. ~10 years, $25m/year give or take). That'd still leave quite a bit of room for growth over the next few years. 

Totally agree about the 200m, but Gunnar has nothing to do with anyone signed right now. He isn't making any type of real money until 2029, or another 4 full seasons away. (Even late in Arb it should be "reasonable" at least)  Anyone signed now will be gone or have a year or two left on their deal by that point. I think 175m now should be the floor increasing to 200m or so next season. That is very reasonable. And this team would have a legit shot to win it all. You have to seize on these next few years when the young talent is dirt cheap and producing. 

[Sports Guy]

2 minutes ago, TradeAngelos said:

Totally agree about the 200m, but Gunnar has nothing to do with anyone signed right now. He isn't making any type of real money until 2029, or another 4 full seasons away. (Even late in Arb it should be "reasonable" at least)  Anyone signed now will be gone or have a year or two left on their deal by that point. I think 175m now should be the floor increasing to 200m or so next season. That is very reasonable. And this team would have a legit shot to win it all. You have to seize on these next few years when the young talent is dirt cheap and producing. 

So how do you spend about 100M this offseason?

[TradeAngelos]

10 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

So how do you spend about 100M this offseason?

That's not my job, they pay people way smarter than me to figure that out. 

Signing Burnes and Santander get you to 60m alone. 

And there are 4-5 other SP's in the top 10 free agents to pick from. 

It's not hard if you actually try, and don't invent excuses to not sign every free agent because you are trying to make yourself feel better about ownership not even attempting to. 

[Sports Guy]

37 minutes ago, TradeAngelos said:

That's not my job, they pay people way smarter than me to figure that out. 

Signing Burnes and Santander get you to 60m alone. 

And there are 4-5 other SP's in the top 10 free agents to pick from. 

It's not hard if you actually try, and don't invent excuses to not sign every free agent because you are trying to make yourself feel better about ownership not even attempting to. 

Signing Santander to a completely stupid contract isn’t trying.

This is why this argument is so idiotic. If you gave Santander a 3/75 deal and he is making 25M next year, that is a raise of 12.3M vs what he made in 2024.  You will be lucky if he’s as valuable in 2025 as he was in 2024 but yet, him making more money and the payroll being higher would somehow make you feel better about the teams chances of winning.

It’s completely illogical.

If the Os all of a sudden ripped up Gunnar’s contract and paid him 35M next year, which is a $34M raise in his salary, the payroll would be about 120M without doing anything else and yet you would think their chances of winning are better because 120 million is better than 85 million.

 

[TradeAngelos]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Signing Santander to a completely stupid contract isn’t trying.

This is why this argument is so idiotic. If you gave Santander a 3/75 deal and he is making 25M next year, that is a raise of 12.3M vs what he made in 2024.  You will be lucky if he’s as valuable in 2025 as he was in 2024 but yet, him making more money and the payroll being higher would somehow make you feel better about the teams chances of winning.

It’s completely illogical.

If the Os all of a sudden ripped up Gunnar’s contract and paid him 35M next year, which is a $34M raise in his salary, the payroll would be about 120M without doing anything else and yet you would think their chances of winning are better because 120 million is better than 85 million.

 

Ahh yes we are back to the old "if we pay player X 25m, it is a terrible unworthy contract if player X does not return 25m in value and not a penny less!. That isn't how it works. How many other teams you think will be willing to pay Santander what he will end up getting? Probably a bunch. That's the market telling you what he is worth, and what you will have to pay if you actually want to have a shot at winning. You act like we are just flushing 25m down the drain for no reason if we signed him, all because maybe he only brings back 18m in value. They aren't playing in the player value championships, and they don't get a prize for keeping the payroll lower but getting "proper" value back for the players. Those teams are sitting at home watching the teams who realize you have to pay to win in MLB. Sometimes you get lucky, sometimes you don't, but if you operate from a position of constant fear, you will never win anything. 

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, TradeAngelos said:

Ahh yes we are back to the old "if we pay player X 25m, it is a terrible unworthy contract if player X does not return 25m in value and not a penny less!. That isn't how it works. How many other teams you think will be willing to pay Santander what he will end up getting? Probably a bunch. That's the market telling you what he is worth, and what you will have to pay if you actually want to have a shot at winning. You act like we are just flushing 25m down the drain for no reason if we signed him, all because maybe he only brings back 18m in value. They aren't playing in the player value championships, and they don't get a prize for keeping the payroll lower but getting "proper" value back for the players. Those teams are sitting at home watching the teams who realize you have to pay to win in MLB. Sometimes you get lucky, sometimes you don't, but if you operate from a position of constant fear, you will never win anything. 

Not one word you said here is relevant to winning or was even well thought out.

You know how many teams were willing to pay crazy money to lots of players over the years who have completely failed those contracts? 

You just think that if you spend, that means you win. That’s absurd. 
 

Again, you would feel better about this team if Gunnar and say Adley were making 60 million as opposed to like 6M in 2025.  They aren’t better because they are making more money, it just checks some illogical box in your awful narrative world.

The Os should spend this offseason. There are some very good players out there that are worth signing.  Saying they NEED to add 851100M this offseason to win is as unintelligent as anything that gets said on this site.
 

 

[forphase1]

59 minutes ago, TradeAngelos said:

That's not my job, they pay people way smarter than me to figure that out. 

Signing Burnes and Santander get you to 60m alone. 

And there are 4-5 other SP's in the top 10 free agents to pick from. 

It's not hard if you actually try, and don't invent excuses to not sign every free agent because you are trying to make yourself feel better about ownership not even attempting to. 

Signing Santander is silly,  at just about any price.  I'm all for the Os opening up the checkbook and improving the team,  but I don't want to see them foolishly spending money,  which is what I believe chasing Santander would be.   

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, forphase1 said:

Signing Santander is silly,  at just about any price.  I'm all for the Os opening up the checkbook and improving the team,  but I don't want to see them foolishly spending money,  which is what I believe chasing Santander would be.   

 But that’s the thing. TA and other fans don’t care if it’s money well spent…they care it’s money spent. That’s the thing. 
 

They equate money spent to winning.

[HowAboutThat]

Go to the car dealership and they want to know your budget…and then they try to make you pay more then that. No word about the actual price.

Thats how they get all your dough.

instead of saying how much to spend, the goal should be targets. Decide on the best guys for the holes in the roster, and then buy them.

The trick is deciding who is best for this roster, and Santander is not.

 

[HowAboutThat]

5 hours ago, LookitsPuck said:

I reckon this team's ceiling in terms of payroll is ~$200m. 

They were at around $110m prior to the end of the season. That gives them ~$90m of payroll flexibility. Quite a bit, but Rubenstein needs to pony up for Gunnar. We can't have another Manny Machado situation which was bungled every step of the way (not extending, then trading for pennies on the dollar at the deadline). Can't let mid 20s superstars walk and/or get traded. He's going to cost similar to that of Witt (i.e. ~10 years, $25m/year give or take). That'd still leave quite a bit of room for growth over the next few years. 

He shouldn’t cost as much as Witt, even though he has a slightly higher career WAR, but I’m sure Boras will use Witt as the starting point and go up. Rubenstein can afford it, of course, but he may balk at that much investment in one player.

[Sports Guy]

Just now, HowAboutThat said:

He shouldn’t cost as much as Witt, even though he has a slightly higher career WAR, but I’m sure Boras will use Witt as the starting point and go up. Rubenstein can afford it, of course, but he may balk at that much investment in one player.

He will cost more than Witt..for many reasons.

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

He will cost more than Witt..for many reasons.

Mostly because he isn't likely to sign with as much team control in play.