The 2013-14 MLB Hot Stove Tracker And Spring Training Discussion Thread

chooooo

130 million for Shin-Soo Choo???? MLB desperately needs a salary cap...

2014 Texas Rangers=2009 Philadelphia Phillies as far as giving out ridiculous contracts to unworthy players.

lol 130mil

Originally posted by jrg:
lol 130mil

we got pence as a steal. I think Sabes did the smart thing by signing him before the season ended. Pence probably would command more in the opening market.

Originally posted by Jcool:
130 million for Shin-Soo Choo???? MLB desperately needs a salary cap...

AND THIS. Baseball would be more competitive this way.

Based on how you look at this, the top free agent still out there is Ervin Santana. If he does become available, it is Tanaka. Top position player left is Cruz.

I don't really view Santana as a top free agent due to his somewhat inconsistent history. If he carries over his performance from last season, he will be one heck of a signing. Other than that, he will be an overpaid pitcher like we saw last year with the Cubs signings.

As for Cruz, he is just plainly hurting himself. He teased the Orioles, Mets and Mariners but does not have a home yet. The door apparently closed in a return to Texas. So who will land him? Thinking Brewers.

Originally posted by pdizo916:

Originally posted by Jcool:
130 million for Shin-Soo Choo???? MLB desperately needs a salary cap...

AND THIS. Baseball would be more competitive this way.

I disagree. A salary cap is a communist concept. If you manage your organization well, and make money from your success, you should be allowed to spend it. Its part of why this is a great country.

I think its been proven time and time again that ANY team can win the World Series if theyre well built, have good team chemistry, and get hot at the right time. Obviously the teams that spend more money have better chances at making the playoffs, but part of the reason they had money to spend in the first place was because of previous success.

If there is any rule change, I think a salary FLOOR makes more sense. It would force alot of tightwad owners to actually spend some of their profits on the team. I think the bottom 3rd of MLB teams with low payrolls make more money than you think. They just choose not to put a ton of it back into the team.

Nobody likes when the Dodgers and Yankees use their TV deals to spent 3 times what everyone else is spending, but life isnt fair. I might be for making TV deal money off limits specifically to player payroll spending, just so the top 3 TV market teams wouldnt have bottomless pockets. Otherwise I like that baseball has no cap. The teams that run a great business get rewarded.

The Giants organization has done a fantastic job with the team since they bought them in 1992. They signed Bonds, they built the best stadium in baseball with their own money, and market the team extremely well. Because of the success over the last 20 years, were at the point where we can spend 170 mil on the team. They earned that.

The Yankees have one title in the last 13 years since they began their spending binge. The Angels and Mets have spent truckloads of cash, and have nothing to show for it. It comes down to how you spend your money. The A's and Rays are playoff regulars, despite spending next to nothing.

Whether you have 40 mil to spend, or 240 mil, its about fielding the RIGHT team, and playing well when it matters.

Originally posted by Niners99:
I disagree. A salary cap is a communist concept. If you manage your organization well, and make money from your success, you should be allowed to spend it. Its part of why this is a great country.

I think its been proven time and time again that ANY team can win the World Series if theyre well built, have good team chemistry, and get hot at the right time. Obviously the teams that spend more money have better chances at making the playoffs, but part of the reason they had money to spend in the first place was because of previous success.

If there is any rule change, I think a salary FLOOR makes more sense. It would force alot of tightwad owners to actually spend some of their profits on the team. I think the bottom 3rd of MLB teams with low payrolls make more money than you think. They just choose not to put a ton of it back into the team.

Nobody likes when the Dodgers and Yankees use their TV deals to spent 3 times what everyone else is spending, but life isnt fair. I might be for making TV deal money off limits specifically to player payroll spending, just so the top 3 TV market teams wouldnt have bottomless pockets. Otherwise I like that baseball has no cap. The teams that run a great business get rewarded.

The Giants organization has done a fantastic job with the team since they bought them in 1992. They signed Bonds, they built the best stadium in baseball with their own money, and market the team extremely well. Because of the success over the last 20 years, were at the point where we can spend 170 mil on the team. They earned that.

The Yankees have one title in the last 13 years since they began their spending binge. The Angels and Mets have spent truckloads of cash, and have nothing to show for it. It comes down to how you spend your money. The A's and Rays are playoff regulars, despite spending next to nothing.

Whether you have 40 mil to spend, or 240 mil, its about fielding the RIGHT team, and playing well when it matters.

You're gonna give me s**t about this, but the Cardinals have the 11th ranked payroll in the MLB and consistently compete year in and year out. Which is why I agree with what the bolded above.

Originally posted by jrg:

Originally posted by Niners99:

I disagree. A salary cap is a communist concept. If you manage your organization well, and make money from your success, you should be allowed to spend it. Its part of why this is a great country.

I think its been proven time and time again that ANY team can win the World Series if theyre well built, have good team chemistry, and get hot at the right time. Obviously the teams that spend more money have better chances at making the playoffs, but part of the reason they had money to spend in the first place was because of previous success.

If there is any rule change, I think a salary FLOOR makes more sense. It would force alot of tightwad owners to actually spend some of their profits on the team. I think the bottom 3rd of MLB teams with low payrolls make more money than you think. They just choose not to put a ton of it back into the team.

Nobody likes when the Dodgers and Yankees use their TV deals to spent 3 times what everyone else is spending, but life isnt fair. I might be for making TV deal money off limits specifically to player payroll spending, just so the top 3 TV market teams wouldnt have bottomless pockets. Otherwise I like that baseball has no cap. The teams that run a great business get rewarded.

The Giants organization has done a fantastic job with the team since they bought them in 1992. They signed Bonds, they built the best stadium in baseball with their own money, and market the team extremely well. Because of the success over the last 20 years, were at the point where we can spend 170 mil on the team. They earned that.

The Yankees have one title in the last 13 years since they began their spending binge. The Angels and Mets have spent truckloads of cash, and have nothing to show for it. It comes down to how you spend your money. The A's and Rays are playoff regulars, despite spending next to nothing.

Whether you have 40 mil to spend, or 240 mil, its about fielding the RIGHT team, and playing well when it matters.

You're gonna give me s**t about this, but the Cardinals have the 11th ranked payroll in the MLB and consistently compete year in and year out. Which is why I agree with what the bolded above.

You also have to factor in that teams that are poorly run dont have players worth extending for big contracts, and dont draw big name free agents. The Astros used to spend alot, but theyre in a down cycle. You dont see well run teams that cant win due to lack of spending cash. You either have no cash and find ways to win, like the A's and Rays, or you have no cash and suck at building a winner. I dont see any obstacle blocking a small market team from winning as long as they make smart moves.

The Giants spend $142 million

Originally posted by Niners99:

Originally posted by pdizo916:

Originally posted by Jcool:
130 million for Shin-Soo Choo???? MLB desperately needs a salary cap...

AND THIS. Baseball would be more competitive this way.

I disagree. A salary cap is a communist concept. If you manage your organization well, and make money from your success, you should be allowed to spend it. Its part of why this is a great country.

I think its been proven time and time again that ANY team can win the World Series if theyre well built, have good team chemistry, and get hot at the right time. Obviously the teams that spend more money have better chances at making the playoffs, but part of the reason they had money to spend in the first place was because of previous success.

If there is any rule change, I think a salary FLOOR makes more sense. It would force alot of tightwad owners to actually spend some of their profits on the team. I think the bottom 3rd of MLB teams with low payrolls make more money than you think. They just choose not to put a ton of it back into the team.

Nobody likes when the Dodgers and Yankees use their TV deals to spent 3 times what everyone else is spending, but life isnt fair. I might be for making TV deal money off limits specifically to player payroll spending, just so the top 3 TV market teams wouldnt have bottomless pockets. Otherwise I like that baseball has no cap. The teams that run a great business get rewarded.

The Giants organization has done a fantastic job with the team since they bought them in 1992. They signed Bonds, they built the best stadium in baseball with their own money, and market the team extremely well. Because of the success over the last 20 years, were at the point where we can spend 170 mil on the team. They earned that.

The Yankees have one title in the last 13 years since they began their spending binge. The Angels and Mets have spent truckloads of cash, and have nothing to show for it. It comes down to how you spend your money. The A's and Rays are playoff regulars, despite spending next to nothing.

Whether you have 40 mil to spend, or 240 mil, its about fielding the RIGHT team, and playing well when it matters.

The small market teams have to be almost perfect and have everything their way to win a title. A team like the Yankees and Dodgers can screw up on big contracts and just spend more to overcome those mistakes. They can keep their great players if they want ,unlike a team like the A's that always have to trade them. They make tons of money not because they are good at what they do. They make tons simply because of the cities that they are in and the TV deals that they get because of it.

The NFL is just so much smarter when it comes to running their league than MLB and realizes that a salary cap makes much more sense.

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by Niners99:

Originally posted by pdizo916:

Originally posted by Jcool:

130 million for Shin-Soo Choo???? MLB desperately needs a salary cap...

AND THIS. Baseball would be more competitive this way.

I disagree. A salary cap is a communist concept. If you manage your organization well, and make money from your success, you should be allowed to spend it. Its part of why this is a great country.

I think its been proven time and time again that ANY team can win the World Series if theyre well built, have good team chemistry, and get hot at the right time. Obviously the teams that spend more money have better chances at making the playoffs, but part of the reason they had money to spend in the first place was because of previous success.

If there is any rule change, I think a salary FLOOR makes more sense. It would force alot of tightwad owners to actually spend some of their profits on the team. I think the bottom 3rd of MLB teams with low payrolls make more money than you think. They just choose not to put a ton of it back into the team.

Nobody likes when the Dodgers and Yankees use their TV deals to spent 3 times what everyone else is spending, but life isnt fair. I might be for making TV deal money off limits specifically to player payroll spending, just so the top 3 TV market teams wouldnt have bottomless pockets. Otherwise I like that baseball has no cap. The teams that run a great business get rewarded.

The Giants organization has done a fantastic job with the team since they bought them in 1992. They signed Bonds, they built the best stadium in baseball with their own money, and market the team extremely well. Because of the success over the last 20 years, were at the point where we can spend 170 mil on the team. They earned that.

The Yankees have one title in the last 13 years since they began their spending binge. The Angels and Mets have spent truckloads of cash, and have nothing to show for it. It comes down to how you spend your money. The A's and Rays are playoff regulars, despite spending next to nothing.

Whether you have 40 mil to spend, or 240 mil, its about fielding the RIGHT team, and playing well when it matters.

The small market teams have to be almost perfect and have everything their way to win a title. A team like the Yankees and Dodgers can screw up on big contracts and just spend more to overcome those mistakes. They can keep their great players if they want ,unlike a team like the A's that always have to trade them. They make tons of money not because they are good at what they do. They make tons simply because of the cities that they are in and the TV deals that they get because of it.

The NFL is just so much smarter when it comes to running their league than MLB and realizes that a salary cap makes much more sense.

Baseball has had 9 champions in 13 years. Football has had 8 champions in that same span.

I really do believe that most of the teams that dont spent a ton of money are doing so more because the owner wants to pocket the profits, not because they cant afford it. A salary floor would be ideal, because that would accomplish making smaller market teams more competitive, but not punishing the successful teams.

Originally posted by sincalfaithful:
The Giants spend $142 million

they spend more than twice as much as the A's. That's why the Giants rule the bay area. lol, jk

The Ranger offense is going to be insanely good.