One additional quick point. If you are a team that is a clear seller, why not wait until after the season during the Winter Meetings to sell? Better yet, if you knew you were likely going to be a seller this season (e.g. the White Sox) why not sell during the Winter Meetings LAST year when your assets were more valuable to the market instead of needlessly diluting their value by waiting until July or until your key pitcher needs TJS? To what end? If you need a rebuild, then start rebuilding now not later with better pieces.
What economic theory suggests that having fewer bidders at a time compressed auction (where some of the buyers have a small realistic chance of making noise and will likely offer less) results in an increased return? Wouldn't waiting until more buyers believe in the off-season - true or not - that they have a chance in the upcoming season if they add a few pieces be the superior selling strategy? Isn't having more bidders and competition the clearly right approach? Hope springs eternal in December - not July - for many teams.
I just can't for the life of me, understand why teams feel compelled to sell at a discount in July versus the off-season. Thanks again.
I wonder if the thinking is that teams are more willing to bid prices up as the season plays out, and buyers emerge because they know who is good. (And, maybe more importantly, who is in a good POSITION.) I could see teams being less willing to commit as buyers before the season than after they've played a few months and feel like there's a situation in the standings to take advantage of. (But as a seller, I agree that you can probably know with certainty that you will suck before a season begins if you have a bad roster.)
Maybe you’re right…but on Baseball Trade Values, a commentator - “ShaquilleOatmeal” - talking about the Rays/Orioles trade captured my highly emotional state tonight perfectly with - and I’m paraphrasing “…the Rays aren't even having [an] auction. These are some [BS] returns for 3 a WAR OF and the guy who finished 5th in CY voting in 2023. This is just taking the stuff to the street and putting a curb alert on Craigslist.”
As always, absolutely love the analytical approach to an emotional business issue. However, there's simply too much buying and not enough selling or standing pat for me. You heard this when MLB's postseason expansion was said to "surely increase buying at the deadline." Why should that be true? Why would adding more incrementally bad teams who are not going to win the World Series stimulate buying and suppress selling at the deadline? It shouldn't - in any rational market.
What is playing one or two additional postseason games really give a club? In the immortal words of Edwin Starr, "absolutely nothing. Say it again, y'all."
Say it again indeed. Say it again Angels by buying to "go all in" for Ohtani as the media wildly applauded - as you got worse and sabotaged your franchise for a decade. Say it again Washington by holding onto Harper when he was becoming a FA and still took his talents to Citizens. Say it again Giants when you clung to Bumgarner with an old roster as you told yourselves "they're sayin' there's a chance." Congrats Diego for "winning" the World Series simply by grabbing Soto.
Here is the question for me - let's be kind and rewind and use history. How many teams who bought at the deadline played in the WS (although that alone didn’t do a whole lot for the Guardians in 2016...still, let's use that measure) and materially improved their WS projection percentage after the deadline as a result of buying? My assumption is that number is really, really small and the teams that do go to the World Series are the top 4 to 6 percentage teams before the deadline over and over again - regardless of what they do at the deadline. You can probably segment that data down further...i.e. teams with at least a 60% chance at the title at the deadline etc.
It's the sports version of a three-card monte table. "Damn. You were so close. Try one more round."
This year's buyers depending on price? At most, Philadelphia, LA and NYY...maybe Baltimore, Minnesota and Atlanta, although I would do nothing if their GMs. That’s it, but I wouldn't criticize any of them for standing pat. Everone else is just depleting their rosters and jeopardizing their future for absolutely nothing. My gut (without analysis) says the upside of the deadline is very small and the downside potentially very large.
One final thought. The NFL is very different. When the championship is determined by a single game and not a series...anything can happen just by getting there. A single bad call, a dropped pass, an injury etc. - and you can hoist the trophy. In football your focus is on winning your Conference, and a trade at the deadline can be very impactful. Not so in baseball it would seem.
One additional quick point. If you are a team that is a clear seller, why not wait until after the season during the Winter Meetings to sell? Better yet, if you knew you were likely going to be a seller this season (e.g. the White Sox) why not sell during the Winter Meetings LAST year when your assets were more valuable to the market instead of needlessly diluting their value by waiting until July or until your key pitcher needs TJS? To what end? If you need a rebuild, then start rebuilding now not later with better pieces.
What economic theory suggests that having fewer bidders at a time compressed auction (where some of the buyers have a small realistic chance of making noise and will likely offer less) results in an increased return? Wouldn't waiting until more buyers believe in the off-season - true or not - that they have a chance in the upcoming season if they add a few pieces be the superior selling strategy? Isn't having more bidders and competition the clearly right approach? Hope springs eternal in December - not July - for many teams.
I just can't for the life of me, understand why teams feel compelled to sell at a discount in July versus the off-season. Thanks again.
I wonder if the thinking is that teams are more willing to bid prices up as the season plays out, and buyers emerge because they know who is good. (And, maybe more importantly, who is in a good POSITION.) I could see teams being less willing to commit as buyers before the season than after they've played a few months and feel like there's a situation in the standings to take advantage of. (But as a seller, I agree that you can probably know with certainty that you will suck before a season begins if you have a bad roster.)
Maybe you’re right…but on Baseball Trade Values, a commentator - “ShaquilleOatmeal” - talking about the Rays/Orioles trade captured my highly emotional state tonight perfectly with - and I’m paraphrasing “…the Rays aren't even having [an] auction. These are some [BS] returns for 3 a WAR OF and the guy who finished 5th in CY voting in 2023. This is just taking the stuff to the street and putting a curb alert on Craigslist.”
I guess if you don’t laugh, you’ll cry…
As always, absolutely love the analytical approach to an emotional business issue. However, there's simply too much buying and not enough selling or standing pat for me. You heard this when MLB's postseason expansion was said to "surely increase buying at the deadline." Why should that be true? Why would adding more incrementally bad teams who are not going to win the World Series stimulate buying and suppress selling at the deadline? It shouldn't - in any rational market.
What is playing one or two additional postseason games really give a club? In the immortal words of Edwin Starr, "absolutely nothing. Say it again, y'all."
Say it again indeed. Say it again Angels by buying to "go all in" for Ohtani as the media wildly applauded - as you got worse and sabotaged your franchise for a decade. Say it again Washington by holding onto Harper when he was becoming a FA and still took his talents to Citizens. Say it again Giants when you clung to Bumgarner with an old roster as you told yourselves "they're sayin' there's a chance." Congrats Diego for "winning" the World Series simply by grabbing Soto.
Here is the question for me - let's be kind and rewind and use history. How many teams who bought at the deadline played in the WS (although that alone didn’t do a whole lot for the Guardians in 2016...still, let's use that measure) and materially improved their WS projection percentage after the deadline as a result of buying? My assumption is that number is really, really small and the teams that do go to the World Series are the top 4 to 6 percentage teams before the deadline over and over again - regardless of what they do at the deadline. You can probably segment that data down further...i.e. teams with at least a 60% chance at the title at the deadline etc.
It's the sports version of a three-card monte table. "Damn. You were so close. Try one more round."
This year's buyers depending on price? At most, Philadelphia, LA and NYY...maybe Baltimore, Minnesota and Atlanta, although I would do nothing if their GMs. That’s it, but I wouldn't criticize any of them for standing pat. Everone else is just depleting their rosters and jeopardizing their future for absolutely nothing. My gut (without analysis) says the upside of the deadline is very small and the downside potentially very large.
One final thought. The NFL is very different. When the championship is determined by a single game and not a series...anything can happen just by getting there. A single bad call, a dropped pass, an injury etc. - and you can hoist the trophy. In football your focus is on winning your Conference, and a trade at the deadline can be very impactful. Not so in baseball it would seem.
Thanks again for a really enjoyable read.