Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeyman576
Mookie Betts(12/365)(1 pennant)
Francisco Lindor(10/341)(0)
Fernando Tatis Jr(10/341)(0)
Bryce Harper(13/330)(0)
Giancarlo Stanton(13/325)(0)
Corey Seager(10/325)(0)
Gerrit Cole(9/324)(0)
Manny Machado(10/300)(0)
Alex Rodriguez(10/275)(1)
Nolan Aranado(8/260)(0)
Alex Rodriguez(10/252)(0)
Miguel Cabrera(8/248)(0)
Albert Pujols(10/240)(0)
Robinson Cano(10/240)(0)
Joey Votto(10/224)(0)
David Price(7/247)(1)
Clayton Kershaw(7/215)(3)
Christian Yelich(9/215)(0)
Prince Fielder(9/214)(0)
Max Scherzer(7/210)(1)
Top 25 Contracts in money value in MLB history.
Bold=in my opinion a bad signing(to this point).
|
No real arguments there. I just don't see which teams were upset this postseason while trying to buy a title, having fallen victim to teams who using analytics better... Looking at my team (Dodgers), and tying it into this...
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeyman576
Obviously young talent needs to be part of a sucessfull strategy. It just seems a lot of big market teams primary strategy revolves around signing big free agents. And looking at a lot of the free agent signings from 3-4 years ago they seem to be rather hit or miss.
|
STARTING POSITION PLAYERS
C - Smith, homegrown, 27 yrs old
1B - Freeman, free agent signing who didn't make your list but had a great 1st season with LA, 32
2B - Lux, homegrown, 24
SS - T Turner, acquired via trade, 29
3B - Muncy, signed as a castaway free agent, 31
LF - Taylor, acquired as a nobody for a nobody, 31
CF - Bellinger, homegrown, 26
RF - Betts, acquired via trade, 29
DH - J Turner, signed as a non-marquee free agent, 37
KEY RESERVES
OF - Thompson, reacquired journeyman, 31
C - Barnes, homegrown, 32
IF - Alberto, non-marquee/journeyman free agent, 29
STARTING PITCHERS
Urias - homegrown, 25
Kershaw - homegrown, 34
Anderson - acquired as non-marquee free agent, 32
Heaney - acquired as non-marquee free agent, 31
Buehler - homegrown, 27
(I won't go thru the bullpen but let's just say it's a mostly young-ish collection of players who were castoffs from other teams, with no marquee free agent signings among them.)
Overall, I'd say that's a pretty good mix of young guys & vets, and a very solid record of developing both their own players and castoffs. If you don't count re-signing their own players, Freeman is the only marquee free agent in the group.
As for the other upset victims, it'd be hard to criticize the Braves given that they won it all last year and had a $200m payroll (8th in MLB) this year. I mean, they won the title last year with $162m payroll (11th in the league) and then spent some - essentially to replace departed free agents - to try to defend their title.
The Mets, perhaps, might be your legitimate target. I dunno. Highest payroll in baseball. But still, that got them 101 wins. Were they beaten by better analytics? Perhaps. But it sure seems like the Padres have been willing to spend big bucks on marquee players recently. Maybe their high-dollar players just came thru better than NY's. Or maybe their low-salary guys outperformed NY's... Or maybe both...