Register now to remove this ad

Page 7 of 22 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 325

Thread: Mookie and Andrew Mcutchen .....

  1. #91
    Deity Slasher9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    10,109
    also, it seems teams can have their own merchandise for sale that isn't MLB officially licesnsed which would circumvent the sharing. Probably most of the stuff sold in the yawkey way shops falls under this category. wally stuff, green monstah shirts, fenway stuff, etc.
    other names i have posted under: none

  2. #92
    Deity
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    12,756
    Quote Originally Posted by Slasher9 View Post
    also, it seems teams can have their own merchandise for sale that isn't MLB officially licesnsed which would circumvent the sharing. Probably most of the stuff sold in the yawkey way shops falls under this category. wally stuff, green monstah shirts, fenway stuff, etc.
    Do teams do that or independant retailers? Or both?

    Even then, some of the unlicensed stuff has agreements, especially if it has a players name or number on it...

  3. #93
    Deity Slasher9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    10,109
    Quote Originally Posted by notin View Post
    Do teams do that or independant retailers? Or both?

    Even then, some of the unlicensed stuff has agreements, especially if it has a players name or number on it...
    i cant speak for certain but i would bet the farm that JH owns every red sox merch shop within 10 blocks of fenway park.
    as for the player...i came across something that said only if it has both the # and the name on the jersey is there royalty compensation. it is interesting trying to research this. not much hard data / facts out there. the owners/clubs keep tight lid on this stuff.
    other names i have posted under: none

  4. #94
    Deity
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    12,756
    Quote Originally Posted by Slasher9 View Post
    i cant speak for certain but i would bet the farm that JH owns every red sox merch shop within 10 blocks of fenway park.
    as for the player...i came across something that said only if it has both the # and the name on the jersey is there royalty compensation. it is interesting trying to research this. not much hard data / facts out there. the owners/clubs keep tight lid on this stuff.
    I think this is how Woodward and Bernstein got started...

  5. #95
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    20,286
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    I already posted a list of all the top contracts of all time. (Go to the Realistic thread. I just reposted it.)

    It's not even close to 10:1, but the judging criteria is subjective.

    I'd say it's more like 3:2 or 5:3, but if you narrow it down to 8+ year deals with players 27 or 28, my guess is the numbers are close to 1:1.
    Even if the ratio is 1:1, which I don't think it is, that's still only a 50-50 shot of the contract being good. That's an awfully big risk to take when you're handing out that kind of money for that length of time.

    Also, even if a player is worth the contract because of great play in the early years, you still will likely have those albatross years at the end of the contract that are difficult to work around.

  6. #96
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    20,286
    Quote Originally Posted by Slasher9 View Post
    i would guess a player like betts that sells a ton of #50 merch would be profitable for an owner into the $3-$400MM range. the flipside is that if you invest that amount of $$ into 1 player that prevents signing other players that could potentially bring us parades (see: pitchers).
    many on here for years have been stating the JH doesnt care about budgets and that player payroll doesnt matter. clearly it does. 2020 will be the 2nd time during his ownership that this has been shown. we are finally getting out from the panda/hram contracts but are still saddled with price/sale. do we want to have $345/10 on the books for the next decade for 1 player?
    Well said.

    Posters often ask why we care about how much Henry spends since it's not our money. This is exactly why we should care, because it affects what the team can do in future years. Henry has been more than generous with his payroll, but no owner is going to spend without limit.

    Do not make the mistake of tying that much money up in one player.

  7. #97
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    29,798
    Quote Originally Posted by Kimmi View Post
    Even if the ratio is 1:1, which I don't think it is, that's still only a 50-50 shot of the contract being good. That's an awfully big risk to take when you're handing out that kind of money for that length of time.

    Also, even if a player is worth the contract because of great play in the early years, you still will likely have those albatross years at the end of the contract that are difficult to work around.
    Yes, 50-50 is a huge risk, and I didn't dive deep into the rating, but I think the ones that were signed younger did better.

    BTW, which ratings do you disagree on? (Also, the 50-50 was on all contracts over $20M/yr. The mega deals- $25+M worked out better than 50-50.)
    Sox 4 Ever

  8. #98
    Quote Originally Posted by Kimmi View Post
    Well said.

    Posters often ask why we care about how much Henry spends since it's not our money. This is exactly why we should care, because it affects what the team can do in future years. Henry has been more than generous with his payroll, but no owner is going to spend without limit.

    Do not make the mistake of tying that much money up in one player.
    There's no shortage of good players....what do you with Devers after signing Betts to 10 year, $350M contract? Chris Sale will still be on the books. I rather Sox be nimble. For me, JD's contract is great. If he's not injured, he'll opt out after 2020. He would have been well worth it for 3 years and he earned his pay.

  9. #99
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    20,286
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    Yes, 50-50 is a huge risk, and I didn't dive deep into the rating, but I think the ones that were signed younger did better.

    BTW, which ratings do you disagree on? (Also, the 50-50 was on all contracts over $20M/yr. The mega deals- $25+M worked out better than 50-50.)
    I think the Scherzer and Verlander contracts are good, and the rest of the ones I looked at are are iffy or still up in the air. ARod's last contract was bad. Kershaw might end up being worth his contract overall, but the last 2 years he was not, and he still has 2 years remaining.

    As I mentioned before, even if a player is worth the contract on the whole due to some strong early years, it's tough to deal with the contract during the last 3-4 years. And even when the player is living up to the contract, that one player cannot carry the team alone.

  10. #100
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    20,286
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    There's no shortage of good players....what do you with Devers after signing Betts to 10 year, $350M contract? Chris Sale will still be on the books. I rather Sox be nimble. For me, JD's contract is great. If he's not injured, he'll opt out after 2020. He would have been well worth it for 3 years and he earned his pay.
    Completely agree.

    In an ideal situation, you would have the next great player ready to step in from the farm when previous great player becomes too expensive to retain. Continuing to sign players to mega contracts just continues the cycle of having lost money on the books.

  11. #101
    Quote Originally Posted by Kimmi View Post
    Completely agree.

    In an ideal situation, you would have the next great player ready to step in from the farm when previous great player becomes too expensive to retain. Continuing to sign players to mega contracts just continues the cycle of having lost money on the books.
    I think poor value on the back end of long contracts is the price you pay for tying up a great player. Not many of those on Moon's list turned out to be great contracts, but teams have to take a shot sometimes at the investment -- to ensure some combo of competitiveness and continuity with their fanbase. The guys you can count on with proven track records are a safer bet than continually rolling the dice by recycling through unproven prospects. The latter is a reality for small market clubs.

    The next great player is never guaranteed. The next Mookie Betts may never be a Red Sox, unless they sign a guy like Soto or Acuna when they hit free agency in their primes. In the meantime, we know what we have in Mookie.

  12. #102
    Deity Bellhorn04's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Halifax
    Posts
    23,480
    Quote Originally Posted by Kimmi View Post
    Completely agree.

    In an ideal situation, you would have the next great player ready to step in from the farm when previous great player becomes too expensive to retain. Continuing to sign players to mega contracts just continues the cycle of having lost money on the books.
    But in reality great players like Mookie Betts are rare. And even acquiring Mookie involved blind luck, considering it was in the 5th round.
    Championships since purchase by John Henry group: Red Sox 4 Yankees 1

  13. #103
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    20,286
    Quote Originally Posted by 5GoldGloves:OF,75 View Post
    I think poor value on the back end of long contracts is the price you pay for tying up a great player. Not many of those on Moon's list turned out to be great contracts, but teams have to take a shot sometimes at the investment -- to ensure some combo of competitiveness and continuity with their fanbase. The guys you can count on with proven track records are a safer bet than continually rolling the dice by recycling through unproven prospects. The latter is a reality for small market clubs.

    The next great player is never guaranteed. The next Mookie Betts may never be a Red Sox, unless they sign a guy like Soto or Acuna when they hit free agency in their primes. In the meantime, we know what we have in Mookie.
    I think that operating like a small market club has a lot of merit. Just because we are a big market club does not mean that we have to spend like drunken sailors. I understand that signing free agents is necessary. I also understand that there are times when we have to hand out a somewhat big contract. That should be the exception, however, not the norm. I don't understand the thinking that we shouldn't be doing something because we're not a small market club.

    I love Xander's extension. That's how you ensure competitiveness and continuity, not by signing someone to a mega contract like the one Mookie is going to get.

    I understand that the next great player is not guaranteed. However, the stronger the farm system, the greater the chance of graduating those great players.

  14. #104
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    20,286
    Quote Originally Posted by Bellhorn04 View Post
    But in reality great players like Mookie Betts are rare. And even acquiring Mookie involved blind luck, considering it was in the 5th round.
    I'm not talking about every player being the caliber of Mookie Betts.

    Guys like Pedroia, Xander, and Devers will do.

  15. #105
    Legend S5Dewey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    ME
    Posts
    6,413
    Quote Originally Posted by Kimmi View Post
    Completely agree.

    In an ideal situation, you would have the next great player ready to step in from the farm when previous great player becomes too expensive to retain. Continuing to sign players to mega contracts just continues the cycle of having lost money on the books.
    I agree in theory but it takes a lot of courage to operate that way. Can you imagine what the outcry would be if Devers is playing solid defense and has an OPS of ~1.00 and the Sox trade him the year before he become a FA because there's another player in Pawtucket (Worcester) who's playing well?
    It's a mere moment in a man's life between the All-Star game and the Old Timer's game.
    -Vin Scully

Posting Permissions

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