- This topic has 151 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 21 seconds ago by
.
-
Posts
-
There is nothing preventing the Pirates from being the Brewers except lots of great decisions over time and a little luck. But they cannot become the Dodgers – at least not in the next 10 or 20 years – no matter what. It would take a huge population shift.
The Dodgers can trade away all their prospects and have it not matter because they can always just buy whoever they want in free agency. Prospects for them are trade capital. For a team like the Brewers, prospects are their lifeline for the future. Sure, they could “go for it” and trade them for Skubal. But they know that puts their future in jeopardy. For the Dodgers, it has almost no impact whatsoever on their future. They didn’t go for it at all. They just continued to use their strategic advantage to their favor. That’s not “smart” or “aggressive”. It’s just the obvious thing to do in their situation. Why not do it when there’s almost only upside?
Giving up a prospect or two doesnt hurt a teams future that much. Jus5 the same as those prpspects dont guarantee anything.
Giving up the wrong prospect can have a huge impact on a team’s future. It just depends. We don’t know which ones the Tigers wanted from Milwaukee or how Milwaukee felt about them.
Well i would assume they might have wanted their number 1 at least, milwaukee didnt want to do it. If you are trying to win it all, you take the chance. The only way milwaukee looks like a winner here is if they win the world series this year or the prospect turms out to be albert pujols, bob gibson type player. My guess neither one of those things happen.
Consider all the downstream impacts that happened when the Cardinals traded Sandy Alcantara and Zac Gallen to Miami for Ozuna. Or the fact that they did that at all because of the death of our Taveras a couple years prior. Imagine if Taveras hadn’t lost his life and Alcantara and Gallen led the rotation for years. It doesn’t have to be Pujols to make a big impact (although obviously that one would have been catastrophic had he been traded). It’s not just the talent that can leave, it can also be the cost-control of that talent that allows a team to sign a free agent or two to supplement a team.
I do agree with you that Milwaukee could have been aggressive if they wanted to really go for it and they chose not to. Going for it at the right moment is probably their only chance to be a winner. But, they do have far more to lose than the Dodgers. Even if Skubal gets hurt, the Dodgers still have a rotation full of all-star talent and those prospects lost meant little to their future since almost none of their prospects ever make the team.
Oh i agrer they have more to.lose than the dodgers but not that much more. Like i said, any prospectd they gave up more than likely make zero difference and the brewers have to think kind of like the cardinals did for many years, factor the division they are in. Like i said, if you are playing to win the last game of the season, risk have to be taken. Otherwise when you lose, you open yourself up to questions. We will see if they do anything with another team but best player is def off the board
The Dodgers can trade away all their prospects and have it not matter because they can always just buy whoever they want in free agency. Prospects for them are trade capital.
Why don’t the Mets or Yankees or Red Sox or Cubs or Angels or Phillies have all of this trade capital? Are the Dodgers truly the only team wealthy enough to have a smart enough front office to have a loaded farm system? I really find that hard to believe.
There is nothing preventing the Pirates from being the Brewers except lots of great decisions over time and a little luck. But they cannot become the Dodgers – at least not in the next 10 or 20 years – no matter what. It would take a huge population shift.
There is nothing stopping the Mets or Yankees or a couple of other teams from becoming the Dodgers except they just don’t have the capability to make the right decisions often enough. I don’t care how much money the Dodgers get from TV. They are still not wealthier than the Mets. They just aren’t.
I also dont hold with accounts thar taveras death really waa the blow people say it was. For lots of reasons it wasnt good. But taveras struggled during his time in mlb. Im sure he would have turned out fine but im not sure he was ever going to be the kind of player anything close like pujols. Mismanagement of our minors was the blow that hurt our organization.
I think you’re missing the point GScottar. I agree with everything you said. There are 4-7 other teams that also have similar resources to the Dodgers and who could be just as good but haven’t made the quality decisions the Dodgers have. The Dodgers have been smart and done a great job with everything they’ve been given and the Mets have squandered most everything. Good for the Dodgers. The point is that the 10 little guys out there basically have no chance anymore. The “Haves” just have so many more resources today than the “have-nots” and there is no end in sight because at this point, the Dodgers model is perfectly sustainable for the long future. I’m not concerned about the Dodgers being better than the Cubs or Yankees. That’s fine. Good for them. I’m not even really concerned about them being better than the Cardinals or all the teams in the middle, although there is a big disparity in resources there. My concern is that a team like the Pirates has no chance to ever win (or next to no chance) from game 1 of the season every season. Even if they do nearly everything perfectly and they get extremely lucky like the Brewers have done, they still are heavy underdogs with almost zero chance. I think that’s bad for baseball both short and long-term. The good news is it can be fixed and hopefully will be.
I do hope I’m wrong and the Brewers or Rays show up big in the postseason. A little guy hasn’t won in a long time.
Jnevel, I hope the world series is between the Brewers and Rays also. That way we can finally put to bed all of this discussion about the Dodgers ruining baseball, which I think is a false narrative. The fact that the Brewers and Rays have consistently been better than than big market teams like the Mets, Angels, and Giants for the last several years means that small market teams can compete.
Of course then people say that yes the small market teams can compete in the regular season but they can’t compete in the postseason. I would argue they can. The Rays have been to the world series twice. They didn’t win but they got to the world series which isn’t easy. The Rays and Guardians have both been to the world series since the Cardinals last made an appearance.
And willie makes a good point about the Brewers. They should have been all over Skubal this deadline. I’m sure they tried but they didn’t try hard enough. They had plenty of draft capital to do that trade. You are correct in that it is a bigger risk for them to deplete their farm than it is the Dodgers but flags fly forever. This was their big chance. The Dodgers did not want to face Misiorowski and Skubal in a playoff series.
I am glad to see the Rays make the trade for Peralta. They are going for it. Good for them. Both the Rays and Brewers have excellent farm systems. They should use that farm as trade capital from time to time.
I’m listing the 10 lowest revenue teams and how many years it’s been since they won a pennant and number of years since they won a world series. If there was parity, you would think they would average around 5-7 years for each since this is 1/3 of the teams. (Note that the Nationals probably are not bottom 1/3, but they were in Forbes last figures and the Pirates are listed just ahead of them so I’m swapping them):
A’s: 26 / 37 years
White Sox: 21 / 21 years
Rays: 6 / (N/A) years
Marlins: 23 / 23 years
Rockies: 19 / (N/A) years
Tigers: 14 / 42 years
Royals: 11 / 11 years
Twins: 25 / 25 years
Reds: 36 / 36 years
Pirates: 47 / 47 yearsThese teams win a WS on average about once every 30 years and that number is going up. They win a pennant on average about every 15 years. The Rays are the outlier as well as the one flukey Royals win. Note that the Brewers are not in the bottom 10 (although close).
All thats true jnenel, but its also more the reason why you go all in while you have your chance. I dont think the pirates are well ran, thats their biggest problem. A few other teams on your list are in that boat. Some of had oppoetunity but just didnt perform when they needed to. Reds,marlins, and twins had some chances. You can throw tigers on there as well. Championships and pennants arent guaranteed and they dont earn them just by playing so many years that the odds should favor them.
If you are a Rays or Rockies fan, you have never seen your team win a World Series.
Odd are pretty good that if you’re a Pirates or Tigers fan, you don’t ever remember seeing your team win a World Series. Similar for Reds and A’s. And, it’s been over a whole generation for the White Sox, Twins, and Marlins. Just that one Royals win in the past 20 years providing any hope.
The other 4 middle teams that are also close to the bottom 1/3 are the Brewers, Guardians, Diamondbacks, and Nationals. They’ve had a little more success on the Pennant side but not so many World Series in the past 25 years for them either (just the Nationals with one – and Arizona had their one and only title 26 years ago).
The top 10 teams in terms of the most resources have won 18 of the past 25 seasons. One third of the teams with about three quarters of the wins. Plus lots of pennants in there too.
That could be because they are better run (they generally are). However, they are better run because they have more resources to pay for better coaches, better GMs, better analytics, better facilities, and better equipment.
The problem with baseball isn’t the Dodgers. They are just a symptom showing up as the easiest example to point at. The problem is the disparity in resources of the haves and have-nots. While it has always been this way to a degree, the gap has vastly grown in recent years due to TV contracts and the sale of merchandise. I think it’s a problem. I understand why some may look at it and see it differently.
If winning a world series is the only definition of success then that is one way to look at it I suppose. Pretty high bar though. I mean the Yankees of all teams haven’t won a world series since 2009. The Mets haven’t done it since 1988. It is hard to do.
If you look at win % since 2011 the top 10 are:
1. Dodgers .598
2. Yankees .567
3. Cardinals .539
4. Braves .538
5. Rays .537
6. Brewers .536
7. Guardians .536
8. Red Sox .527
9. Astros .519
10. Cubs .509There are several large market teams like the Mets, Phillies, Giants, Angels, and Blue Jays not on that list.
My point is that there are more pragmatic ways to address revenue disparity than going for a salary cap that will not happen. I mean I suppose shutting the game down will address the revenue gap since zero times zero equals zero but that is really shooting yourself in the foot.
A better solution is to tighten up the current CBT system. Make the tax penalties hurt. A first time payer pays 100% tax on any amount over the limit. No easing into it. Second time payer pays 150% tax. Third time payer pays 200%. Take away a draft pick each year a team goes over the limit starting with a first rounder. Eventually even a team like the Dodgers will reach the proverbial puke point.
I just don’t want to see a shutdown over something that has almost zero chance of happening. Take the existing system and make it tougher. There is a better chance of the MLBPA accepting that, along with a salary floor.
I agree that tightening up the CBT threshold would help but all that does is put more money in wealthy teams’ owners pockets or it has them spending more on coaches, GMs, facilities, etc, which are not counted against the CBT (which gives them a lot of the same advantages they have today). I believe sharing more revenue is the best solution (with a salary floor which forces that revenue gets spent). Like you, I also don’t think a salary cap is the right solution. That mostly just harms the players.
And of those 10 winning % clubs, only 1 is a bottom 10 revenue team (Rays). I do agree that having money doesn’t necessarily make you win. Lots of wealthy people and wealthy owners of companies throughout the history of the world have learned that lesson the hard way. But it certainly gives you some advantages in life, which make winning easier to do.
There’s an old rather lengthy joke that applies here… A man is walking along with God and asks him will we ever see another 30 game winner? God answers no, not in your lifetime. He then asks will we ever see another 400 hitte Again God answers, no, not in your lifetime. Finally he asks will we ever see Revenue sharing in baseball. God shakes his head and says No, not in MY lifetime…
Finally he asks will we ever see Revenue sharing in baseball. God shakes his head and says No, not in MY lifetime…
There is already revenue sharing in baseball. That’s why teams like the A’s, Marlins and Rays don’t spend to market their product, because they are supported by the other teams that do.
Cubs get stronger.
The Cubs are acquiring RHP Kevin Gausman from the Blue Jays for INF Ty Southisene (Cubs No. 13 prospect per @MLBPipeline) and OF Brett Bateman (Cubs No. 21), per source. @Ken_Rosenthal and @MitchBannon were on it.
— Mark Feinsand (@Feinsand) August 3, 2026
Phillies add an oft-traded former batting champion.
Phillies are trading for three-time batting champion Luis Arraez of the San Francisco Giants and right-reliever Kaleb Kilian. The Giants will receive starter Ramon Marquez, the Phillies’ No. 4 prospect and reliever Marty Gair. https://t.co/iPGhXIEUgm
— Bob Nightengale (@BNightengale) August 3, 2026
I guess I buck the consensus sentiment here because I’m elated skubal chose LAD over Milwaukee- don’t like them or their fans. And the last thing I want to see in a half empty Busch is thousands of more brewers fans. In case you don’t know they hate us – just not as much as the cubs. Hope they get an early postseason exit.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.