Did IBC start the MLB trend?

[Guardians]

"GMs have become so enamored with the building process that they miss opportunities now," writes SI's Tom Verducci. "Prospects ... become the unspent coins of the realm."

https://www.si.com/mlb/2019/07/31/acqui ... uperpowers

Seems we've been in this posture as a league for quite some time, as prospect value usurped veteran value long ago.

[Athletics]

Or could it be that some owners seem to think that their veterans have contract surplus value in a non contract league?

[Yankees]

Seems we've been in this posture as a league for quite some time, as prospect value usurped veteran value long ago.

Had a conversation with a friend today that reminded me of this. I think this statement is incredibly short-sighted. Every team is in a different stage of their life cycles and thus value different things, well, differently. This whole league had like 4 teams winning it every year, so most other teams built for the future...which is about to pay off for a TON of teams. I think we’re about to hit a pretty big run of parity in the next few years in the IBC.

If you’re winning you prioritize real players. If you’re close, you start to prioritize real players in smart moves while holding tight to your young talent. If you suck, you are rebuilding. Red Sox, Rays, Braves, Mets, Cards, White Sox, Indians, DBacks, Astros, and Rangers are all teams poised to contend in the IBC...and the Royals and Rockies have already made that leap. Add in you’d always imagine the teams that have contended will continue to figure it out...I think a lot of people have done a lot right in our league. Saying they somehow missed just feels inaccurate.

[Yankees]

Like this article WAY more than the one above: https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news ... g-it-safe/

[Athletics]

Like this article WAY more than the one above: https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news ... g-it-safe/

Can you paraphrase for those of us that don't want pay to open the gate?

[Yankees]

I posted, but better to paraphrase for sure...and please tell me what I missed for those that read it.

Essentially he's saying GM's are way to indecisive. The safest thing a GM can do is win. The second safest is win-ish...so a lot of the GM's play the win-ish game and use resources to remain competitive while not going for it when they have the opportunity. GM's would rather control assets than make bold moves. They'd rather win the long-term WAR championship than make an effort to actually win a real title.

[BlueJays]

Like the Cardinals, who aim every year to be .500 and pray to the baseball gods that somehow they will luck into the playoffs. Hasn't worked so far. Oh, and give away Tommy Pham for nothing. Too much risk that they'd project to be higher than .500.

It's hard to say, there are a few baseball executives that seem to know what they're doing. The rest seem pretty dumb.

Honestly with as much as teams are investing in generating their own metrics and projection systems, I think they've paralyzed themselves. I see it in racing all the time. Race teams are slaves to their simulation software to the point that nobody ventures outside of their comfort zone and seem to have forgotten the basics. It's become a magic 8 ball that they can only ask specific questions and get a yes or no. They aren't paying attention to vehicle behaviors to know where the peaks and valleys are across the map. They slightly shuffle one way and the other and use that as the anecdote that will justify making the same decision over and over again.

Teams have become slaves to their systems. They are ok with mediocrity as long as they stay the course and hope that somehow doing the same thing as everybody else will yield better results than the rest.

[Astros]

Like the Cardinals, who aim every year to be .500 and pray to the baseball gods that somehow they will luck into the playoffs. Hasn't worked so far. Oh, and give away Tommy Pham for nothing. Too much risk that they'd project to be higher than .500.

It's hard to say, there are a few baseball executives that seem to know what they're doing. The rest seem pretty dumb.

Honestly with as much as teams are investing in generating their own metrics and projection systems, I think they've paralyzed themselves. I see it in racing all the time. Race teams are slaves to their simulation software to the point that nobody ventures outside of their comfort zone and seem to have forgotten the basics. It's become a magic 8 ball that they can only ask specific questions and get a yes or no. They aren't paying attention to vehicle behaviors to know where the peaks and valleys are across the map. They slightly shuffle one way and the other and use that as the anecdote that will justify making the same decision over and over again.

Teams have become slaves to their systems. They are ok with mediocrity as long as they stay the course and hope that somehow doing the same thing as everybody else will yield better results than the rest.

I think, as evidence by doing nothing at the deadline while being in first, Cardinals ownership is more worried about being in contention and keeping people coming to the stadium, and more importantly for their pocketbooks, Ballpark Village, than they are making the playoffs. Oh shucks we just missed out again, come back next year! Been that way since 2016, zero deadline moves and missing out by a game or two

[Giants]

It was interesting with the Giants this year when they were staring down the barrel of a full-scale rebuild, which I've never experienced in my lifetime, and attendance started to go down. As much as I've applauded teams for tearing down (as I love to do when I play video games) the idea of my team saying "eh, we aren't trying for the next couple years but wait for the young guys" was shockingly unappealing to me. Given the inherent randomness of the playoffs and the prices tickets cost I actually think I prefer my team take the Cardinals approach to the Astros. The trick is making sure you don't become the Phillies and wait too long to stop being good.

[Athletics]

It was interesting with the Giants this year when they were staring down the barrel of a full-scale rebuild, which I've never experienced in my lifetime, and attendance started to go down. As much as I've applauded teams for tearing down (as I love to do when I play video games) the idea of my team saying "eh, we aren't trying for the next couple years but wait for the young guys" was shockingly unappealing to me. Given the inherent randomness of the playoffs and the prices tickets cost I actually think I prefer my team take the Cardinals approach to the Astros. The trick is making sure you don't become the Phillies and wait too long to stop being good.

I hold the opposite feeling (I wanted to see them tear it down), but I get why they did not, they can't sell enough current pieces to make it worth while to do. Belt, Crawford, and Longoria all have contracts that are basically underwater. MadBum and Posey are the face of the current franchise and trading them was always going to be a no go unless the team was where the current Tigers sit. And outside of the pen, there haven't been many other highlight players to talk about. Given that they are top market team with a fan base that is nothing like an East Coast Win or Die mindset, they can get away with the being meager/thrifty and hoping to clear out the bad contracts over the next two years before they splurge again when Bart, Ramos, and others are ready to be the core.

[Giants]

I should add that I suspect they offered both Brandons around the league and did not get anything interesting offered, and I suspect that Buster was worth more to Tullar in the IBC than he would be to an MLB GM thanks to that sim magic. That makes a full scale tear down more difficult!