|
Post by johneaztec on Jul 30, 2021 10:04:01 GMT -8
Sometimes, your best deals are the deals that weren't made. We'll know if that's true at the end of the year, and if Hassell turns out to be a gem. Little more complicated than that. Sometimes, and sometimes it's as simple as that.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 30, 2021 10:33:24 GMT -8
Little more complicated than that. Sometimes, and sometimes it's as simple as that. It's not in this case though. The Padres have missed out on multiple players now because of one constant. And it will likely take more time to evaluate the contribution of Hassell. But the Padres were willing to move him.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jul 30, 2021 10:47:42 GMT -8
Sometimes, and sometimes it's as simple as that. It's not in this case though. The Padres have missed out on multiple players now because of one constant. And it will likely take more time to evaluate the contribution of Hassell. But the Padres were willing to move him. Could that "constant" have been the contract of a certain infielder?
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Jul 30, 2021 10:48:16 GMT -8
Sometimes, and sometimes it's as simple as that. It's not in this case though. The Padres have missed out on multiple players now because of one constant. If this is basically the team through the rest of the year, and Hosmer, et al, helped in carrying the team into the playoffs and perhaps the World Series and winning it by getting big hits, etc, then maybe it was a deal that was better not done. Stranger things have happened. Glad we still have Hassell. Would have loved to get Sherzer of course, though.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Jul 30, 2021 10:49:16 GMT -8
It's not in this case though. The Padres have missed out on multiple players now because of one constant. And it will likely take more time to evaluate the contribution of Hassell. But the Padres were willing to move him. Could that "constant" have been the contract of a certain infielder? Of course, and I agree. His contract handcuffs the Padres, unfortunately, but that's not Hosmer's fault.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 30, 2021 10:54:15 GMT -8
It's not in this case though. The Padres have missed out on multiple players now because of one constant. And it will likely take more time to evaluate the contribution of Hassell. But the Padres were willing to move him. Could that "constant" have been the contract of a certain infielder? Correct. Fair or otherwise, the inability to get below the CBT is a problem because they won't exceed it next year. The fact they were willing to eat 45 million dollars and trade away a likely top 20 prospect next season says a lot. The team is just in a really tough spot.
|
|
|
Post by junior on Jul 30, 2021 12:10:33 GMT -8
The team is in a tough spot of their own making. Can't be down on one player simply because management neglected to think n moves ahead when they made the original contract …
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Jul 30, 2021 12:18:50 GMT -8
Could that "constant" have been the contract of a certain infielder? Correct. Fair or otherwise, the inability to get below the CBT is a problem because they won't exceed it next year. The fact they were willing to eat 45 million dollars and trade away a likely top 20 prospect next season says a lot. The team is just in a really tough spot. That's not surprising if you can get a guy like Sherzer. It actually says a lot about Sherzer and his obvious value, so let's put that into perspective. They're not going to offer that to anybody.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 30, 2021 12:29:10 GMT -8
The team is in a tough spot of their own making. Can't be down on one player simply because management neglected to think n moves ahead when they made the original contract … You absolutely can. This is categorically false if you know the circumstances behind the Hosmer signing.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 30, 2021 12:30:25 GMT -8
Correct. Fair or otherwise, the inability to get below the CBT is a problem because they won't exceed it next year. The fact they were willing to eat 45 million dollars and trade away a likely top 20 prospect next season says a lot. The team is just in a really tough spot. That's not surprising if you can get a guy like Sherzer. It actually says a lot about Sherzer and his obvious value, so let's put that into perspective. They're not going to offer that to anybody. Hassell was not involved in the Scherzer deal. He was involved in the Gallo deal. The Padres agreed to send 45 million dollars and Hassell for Gallo. The Rangers wanted the Padres to pick up the entire amount.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Jul 30, 2021 12:34:01 GMT -8
That's not surprising if you can get a guy like Sherzer. It actually says a lot about Sherzer and his obvious value, so let's put that into perspective. They're not going to offer that to anybody. Hassell was not involved in the Scherzer deal. He was involved in the Gallo deal. The Padres agreed to send 45 million dollars and Hassell for Gallo. The Rangers wanted the Padres to pick up the entire amount. Ok. What did they offer for Sherzer?
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 30, 2021 13:20:08 GMT -8
Hassell was not involved in the Scherzer deal. He was involved in the Gallo deal. The Padres agreed to send 45 million dollars and Hassell for Gallo. The Rangers wanted the Padres to pick up the entire amount. Ok. What did they offer for Sherzer? Enough to where both teams agreed on the exchange of names. Once the information was leaked by Washington, the Dodgers swooped in to take Turner.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Jul 30, 2021 13:41:01 GMT -8
Ok. What did they offer for Sherzer? Enough to where both teams agreed on the exchange of names. Once the information was leaked by Washington, the Dodgers swooped in to take Turner. Sucks.
|
|
|
Post by junior on Jul 30, 2021 14:36:38 GMT -8
The team is in a tough spot of their own making. Can't be down on one player simply because management neglected to think n moves ahead when they made the original contract … You absolutely can. This is categorically false if you know the circumstances behind the Hosmer signing. Please detail them, then…
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 30, 2021 14:54:44 GMT -8
Enough to where both teams agreed on the exchange of names. Once the information was leaked by Washington, the Dodgers swooped in to take Turner. Sucks. Leaks are not uncommon, but leaks after the preliminary stage are considered...bad form? I guess is the way to put it.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 30, 2021 15:06:26 GMT -8
You absolutely can. This is categorically false if you know the circumstances behind the Hosmer signing. Please detail them, then… Sure. Ron Fowler was infatuated with the idea of Hosmer in 2018. He wanted a prestigious name to bring into the clubhouse to sell the fanbase that they were serious about moving on from the reload failure in 2015. Hosmer was considered the first step in the process to legitimize the Padres as a big time player in free agency. Fowler went to dinner with Hosmer and was just over the moon with him. The Padres as a result bid against themselves in giving him an eight year deal, as the only other team involved was Kansas City and they weren't meeting the eight year demand at any point. It's an obvious overpay in present terms, but Fowler didn't anticipate being in the market for Manny Machado the following year. (And realistically, how could you?) It was more than double the largest contract in franchise history to that point. It was a completely unexpected move prior to it actually happening. Machado was destined for the White Sox before Yonder Alonso got involved and steered him to San Diego. This isn't a failure to plan ahead, it's the direct result of a bankrupt and broken system of inequity that exists in baseball. The Dodgers have a massive budget on R&D alone, to go along with a huge analytics department and never-ending piles of cash to throw at players. They combine player development, massive resources and creative front office strategists. Going over the CBT does nothing for them - Their payroll is north of 280 million dollars, which is more than 70 million above the next closest team. The Padres simply don't have the ability to spend on that level, and they never will. It's as cut and dry as that when you have to navigate financial minefields with the aggression that the Padres do. The gaps have to be made up elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Jul 30, 2021 15:52:16 GMT -8
Please detail them, then… Sure. Ron Fowler was infatuated with the idea of Hosmer in 2018. He wanted a prestigious name to bring into the clubhouse to sell the fanbase that they were serious about moving on from the reload failure in 2015. Hosmer was considered the first step in the process to legitimize the Padres as a big time player in free agency. Fowler went to dinner with Hosmer and was just over the moon with him. The Padres as a result bid against themselves in giving him an eight year deal, as the only other team involved was Kansas City and they weren't meeting the eight year demand at any point. It's an obvious overpay in present terms, but Fowler didn't anticipate being in the market for Manny Machado the following year. (And realistically, how could you?) It was more than double the largest contract in franchise history to that point. It was a completely unexpected move prior to it actually happening. Machado was destined for the White Sox before Yonder Alonso got involved and steered him to San Diego. This isn't a failure to plan ahead, it's the direct result of a bankrupt and broken system of inequity that exists in baseball. The Dodgers have a massive budget on R&D alone, to go along with a huge analytics department and never-ending piles of cash to throw at players. They combine player development, massive resources and creative front office strategists. Going over the CBT does nothing for them - Their payroll is north of 280 million dollars, which is more than 70 million above the next closest team. The Padres simply don't have the ability to spend on that level, and they never will. It's as cut and dry as that when you have to navigate financial minefields with the aggression that the Padres do. The gaps have to be made up elsewhere. Yes, and the blame goes to the organization for making the deal obviously, not Hosmer.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 30, 2021 16:01:48 GMT -8
Sure. Ron Fowler was infatuated with the idea of Hosmer in 2018. He wanted a prestigious name to bring into the clubhouse to sell the fanbase that they were serious about moving on from the reload failure in 2015. Hosmer was considered the first step in the process to legitimize the Padres as a big time player in free agency. Fowler went to dinner with Hosmer and was just over the moon with him. The Padres as a result bid against themselves in giving him an eight year deal, as the only other team involved was Kansas City and they weren't meeting the eight year demand at any point. It's an obvious overpay in present terms, but Fowler didn't anticipate being in the market for Manny Machado the following year. (And realistically, how could you?) It was more than double the largest contract in franchise history to that point. It was a completely unexpected move prior to it actually happening. Machado was destined for the White Sox before Yonder Alonso got involved and steered him to San Diego. This isn't a failure to plan ahead, it's the direct result of a bankrupt and broken system of inequity that exists in baseball. The Dodgers have a massive budget on R&D alone, to go along with a huge analytics department and never-ending piles of cash to throw at players. They combine player development, massive resources and creative front office strategists. Going over the CBT does nothing for them - Their payroll is north of 280 million dollars, which is more than 70 million above the next closest team. The Padres simply don't have the ability to spend on that level, and they never will. It's as cut and dry as that when you have to navigate financial minefields with the aggression that the Padres do. The gaps have to be made up elsewhere. Yes, and the blame goes to the organization for making the deal obviously, not Hosmer. It's not Hosmer's fault he signed the contract, but what happened afterwards is on him. The distraction statements, the lack of wanting to improve on a consistent basis, the failure to buy in to the team philosophy. It's ironic that Dave Cameron was hired by the Padres as he was one of the most vocal opponents of the original deal.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Jul 30, 2021 16:13:30 GMT -8
Yes, and the blame goes to the organization for making the deal obviously, not Hosmer. It's not Hosmer's fault he signed the contract, but what happened afterwards is on him. The distraction statements, the lack of wanting to improve on a consistent basis, the failure to buy in to the team philosophy. It's ironic that Dave Cameron was hired by the Padres as he was one of the most vocal opponents of the original deal. I'll go by what his teammates say about him, and what type of clubhouse guy he is. Are you saying he was a distraction to the team that resulted in losses? Are you saying he's not a team guy? I don't believe that for a minute, based on what I've heard. What's the significance behind hiring Cameron in terms of Hosmer? What's the correlation?
|
|
|
Post by junior on Jul 30, 2021 16:18:04 GMT -8
Well, it's all over for now. The best the Padres can do at this point is to hope they can move Hosmer and his contract and make some trades this winter.
|
|