30 thoughts on “December 6, 2022: San Diego Nights”

  1. Do you want to sign Correa for the time and money it will likely take?

    Sure. I know the Pohlad's (and many MLB teams) don't think this way, but they have enough money, the franchise is valuable enough, to sign any player they want to at the going rate.

    1. The thing for me is that every team is going to have a limit to how much they'll spend in a given year. Maybe that limit is lower than we'd like to have it, but the back end of these 10-year deals can be really awful for the fans who are watching a lineup that can't really be plugged in the free agent market.

  3. I want them to sign him, but I don't expect it. Also, I have the fear that if they do sign him, all we'll hear for the next several years is that they can't make any significant moves because of all the money they're paying Correa.

    1. I'd have preferred to sign Trea Turner as his speed would have been a benefit to our lineup with the new changes being implemented, but not for stupid $$.

      1. Since signing either has to be a long-term contract, I think I'd rather have Correa's 2-year age advantage. There's also something to be said for him being familiar with the coaching staff and vice versa.

  4. Saw Amon Amarth last night (with Cattle Decapitation, Obituary and Carcass. It was a great show) and a few years ago something called a row pit got started. I'd heard of it but never seen it and it is extremely cool to witness:

          1. The Strokes and King Princess.

            I wasn't into RHCP any longer, but then I listened to 2 of the past 3 albums and really liked them. (I haven't listened to the latest one yet - they released 2 this year.)

            This is also my first US Bank Stadium concert. I'd sworn not to go there assuming the acoustics are terrible, and most reviews have said as much. However, I've talked to one or two people that sat a bit closer and felt it was pretty good, so gonna give it a try.

            1. I would go just for the Strokes I think. I think the acoustics issues have (allegedly) been fixed, but stadium shows never have optimal acoustics right?

  6. So apparently they're doing a lottery for draft picks now in MLB. I had forgotten (or never knew) about that. It only applies to the 18 non-playoff teams, with 6 lottery teams getting picked and everyone slotting into order behind those 6 winners. The Twins have 5 teams after them. So we can assume that all 5 of those teams will have their lottery numbers hit and the Twins will have the 18th draft pick next year...

      1. It's so convoluted. I wish they'd get rid of the draft altogether. Should just have a hard cap system with maximum contract lengths (say 4 years plus an option year). Then, if you want to sign an exciting young prospect, you just have to clear enough cap space, regardless of your win total. And players should reach free agency after 3 years of major league service time, too. If you are signed out of HS, teams get 3.5 years in the minor leagues (roughly corresponding to short-season A, full-season A, AA, and AAA) + 3 years major league service and players would free agents for their age-26 season. If you are signed out of juco/college, make it 1.5 years minor league time (1 short season plus one year A/AA) plus 3 years major league service time. Juniors signing at age 20 would become free agents the same age as HS'ers signing at age 18. If you think that's too harsh for the teams, I'd be okay with this earlier free agency system even if the teams got unlimited minor league options on players on their initial contract, just as long as they get paid at least the major league minimum for those years, even when they are down on the farm.

        The simplifications would be getting rid of the draft, which includes getting rid of draft pick compensation, no more arbitration (which always caused friction between players and teams anyway), and if you go for the option where teams get unlimited option years on players on their initial contract, then you can also scrap the whole Rule 5 draft system and having to expose players to waivers when sending them to the minors might be better for their development. A hard cap also means that you can get rid of the convoluted luxury tax rules. Guarantee players a year-end "dividend" bonus if the league hasn't committed enough of the league revenue to player salaries for that year, so you don't need to bother with an arbitrary payroll minimum.

        Coming from the current system, it probably seems really uncomfortable to have to relinquish team control so "early", but since it's the same for everyone and there is a hard cap in place and a maximum 4-5-year contract length, there would be a much livelier free agent market and provided you were running your team halfway competently, you should almost always have options on the FA market to fill holes in your roster. I think it'd also be a lot more fan friendly, because everyone has the same total resources to work with, and you can get rid of any bad contracts within 4-5 years. Players might not ever get the guarantee of being in a single market for a long time, but frankly, very few players these days ever have the luxury of a long-term deal with a full NTC. With contract length capped, it'd probably be easier to get a NTC so you can at least plan a handful of years at a time, and at any rate, being a free agent earlier gives you a lot more say in where you live than you get by hoping you are the 0.001% that can eventually sign a 7+-year deal with a full NTC.

        Having players up for free agency more often would also be better for matching performance to compensation. Players shouldn't have to wait for 6 years of underpaid major league performance to maybe get a long-term deal in which they wind up being overpaid for the last 4-5 years.

        I know I'm just spitting in the wind, but I've really grown to hate MLB's economic system. It's bad for teams in actual small markets, it's bad for the vast majority of players aged 24-28, it's bad for fans to have their teams weighed down with 10+-year contracts, it's bad for fans who never get a big superstar signing (which is the majority of the league), it's bad for competitive balance, and on top of all of that, it's got a bunch of byzantine rules with arbitrary deadlines and limits. Burn it down, I say.

  7. Question: who do you think will be better over the next 7 years -- Aaron Judge or Carlos Correa? I am almost tempted to say it'll be Correa. Judge had an all-time season last year, but now it's in the past and I don't think it necessarily means he's turned a corner and entered a new phase of his career. Correa's 2.5 years younger and he's big enough that you could feasibly move him to 3B or 1B in the long run, and it might even reduce wear and tear a bit.

    Anyway, I think their value will be closer than the contracts that they land. Judge will be overpaid, but likely by a big-market team that has a huge profit margin anyway.

      1. Yeah, I tend to agree. Sports medicine/training has gotten better over the years, but being that kind of an outlier in size makes me less confident in his ability to stay healthy, even without considering recent injury history.

Comments are closed.