The central narrative running through this chat revolves around teams leveraging short-term moves for long-term gain. Think about how the Cardinals are oscillating between “youth movement” and “one more shot,” or how the Orioles’ prospect-rich farm system will shape their future—but here’s the mind-bender: this isn’t just about the specific players or teams in question. It’s about how the tension between immediate needs and long-term goals might be changing the game at a structural level.
Teams like the Orioles and Braves, by waiting on youth or betting on internal development, might be revolutionizing roster construction, where the future isn’t just a commodity but the key to sustainable success. Think of it as a paradigm shift—teams are moving beyond trying to “win the trade” or “win the season” and instead aiming to “win the next decade.” That means putting massive chips into long-term player development, stockpiling young stars, and potentially missing a few window-closing opportunities now in favor of a bigger future reward.
What if the new competitive advantage is no longer in the immediate stars or even trades, but in outlasting other teams’ cycles of win-now desperation by cultivating long-term, sustainable roster health?
And for the players involved, it could lead to a radical shift in how free agency and contracts are structured, with teams incentivized to build dynasties rather than just get lucky with individual blockbuster signings. It’s not just about players anymore—it’s about how a team evolves within the context of an entire league’s shifting mentality.
Do we really understand that? Because that concept could fundamentally change how front offices think about trading or signing players from now on.
The Mariners are actually doing this, but the optics are bad because they claimed they’d spend & then didn’t. Many free agent hitters understandably don’t want to play there. Thankfully GM Hollander & Jerry haven’t given in to the temptation of making a bad trade just to appease the “just do something” crowd. They are wisely playing the long game. They need to stop commenting on potential spending. Do it when it’s wise, and stand pat when it’s not.
sillywabbit, It’s not really true that the M’s promised to spend, but didn’t. After saying they would spend they signed Ray to a $65M guarantee, with the potential to be $115M. Plus they extended Julio Rodriquez to a $210M guaranteed deal with options that could be worth $470M.
Fans may have thought saying they’d spend would mean pursuing guys like Judge, or Ohtani. They were never going to spend like that, but to say they didn’t spend at all is incorrect, they have.
York, I may be missing something. Sounds like your describing small market teams that focus primarily on scouting, drafting and developing – Tampa, Cleveland, Minnesota, Pittsburgh, AZ etc. Houston did this leading up to their current run of success. KC placed an emphasis on these areas back in the 70s under John Scherholtz. Cleveland was locking up youngsters before hitting free agency in the 90s. These concepts aren’t new, but again, I think I may be missing your bigger point.
York I think every team would like to build a dynasty, but then again, sometimes you have to strike when the iron is hot. Heavily dependent on owner preference too. Some owners are keen on the long game and others are mercurial and more prone to act on short term market fluctuations (gaining edges on the margins.) I don’t think there can ever be a fundamental shift in roster strategy as you talk about because pro-sports is such a “what have you done for me lately?” sort of enterprise. Media,fan expectations combined with the incentivizing of instant gratification makes long term strategic thinking a boring operational stance for an org.
IgSOB, 100% agree. A dynasty happens based on owner preferences (philosophy).
I started following the Orioles in 1965. From then through 1979, they had only one losing season. Dynasty? Maybe. Regardless, that’s a lot of winning baseball. The year in and out common denominator? One owner. Jerald Hoffberger. Why so successful? He did not meddle. Entrusted his baseball people to make the baseball decisions.
Money sure does go along way in possibly having a long run of success in this sport but it’s not the “be all that ends all”. Too many moving parts in a single game that can determine outcome and often from players not making the big money.
To (maybe?) answer the question, “When is the last time a team traded one of their core players at the deadline and then made it to the World Series that year?”…
How about the Giants trading Bengie Molina (when Buster Posey was promoted) in 2010. Molina wasnt a superstar by any means, but he had been one of their better hitters and starting catcher for several years before trading him.
Soto contract tiers from age-26 season onward:
S tier = Hank Aaron, Ted Williams, Ty Cobb’s ~95 WAR
A tier = Chipper Jones and A-Rod’s ~70 WAR
B tier = Rafael Palmeiro and Ichiro’s ~60 WAR
C tier = Mark McGuire and Pujols’ ~53 WAR
D tier = Matt Holliday and Moises Alou’s ~45 WAR
I think anything under 64 WAR is an overpay
“Devers is a proud man who clearly wants to keep playing 3B, and surely feels he can improve his defense. If staying at third was actually promised to him as part of his extension, that’s another kettle of fish that makes the Red Sox look kind of bad.”
They had a good answer in their podcast as well, Bregman has opt outs every single year of his three year contract. Why would Devers consider moving off third for a guy who may only be around for one season? It doesn’t make sense for Devers nor would it make sense for Boston.
Idli Amin, the Last King of Sambar (fka Senator Tankerbell)
I’m not a Giants fan, but Buster Posey might be the least qualified POBO/GM hire in recent memory. Sure, he was the face of the Giants, he’s part of the ownership group (because he was the face of the Giants), and he knows other (older) players. But he’s never worked in a front office or for the league, or as a manager, or even as an assistant hitting coach. Yet no one is saying a word—least of all the people who can’t stop complaining about “DEI” and “wokeness.” In fact, they seem to love the move. Gee, I can’t imagine why.
Only tangentially related, but I always assumed teams would be incentivized to hire more Dominican &/or South American talent evaluators & scouts if for no other reason than in an effort to better recruit the younger international prospects
Have to assume some already do, but for some of the cheaper teams, seems an obvious avenue if they aren’t already doing it
Idli Amin, the Last King of Sambar (fka Senator Tankerbell)
Totally agree. I think that, for the most part, teams that are active in the Latin American international market already do that, but not all of them have great facilities and such. The Orioles famously stayed out of the international market for a long time, but that has changed in recent years, and I believe both they and the Diamondbacks opened brand-new academies in the Dominican Republic in 2024. There are also countries outside of the Western Hemisphere and Asia that show signs of becoming burgeoning baseball hotbeds, such as Uganda, and potentially parts of Europe, like Czechia, and teams that get ahead on places like that would seem to have a long-term advantage. I even read an article on MLB.com a while back about efforts by folks in Pakistan (famously a cricket-playing country) to put together a team that could qualify for the WBC. And as an Indian-American (my parents are immigrants), I would love to see baseball grow in India, just as I’d love to see cricket grow here.
“Kyle” already with the Cease question, my goodness
Hey now Kyle never Ceases to amaze with his hard hitting chat questions!
The central narrative running through this chat revolves around teams leveraging short-term moves for long-term gain. Think about how the Cardinals are oscillating between “youth movement” and “one more shot,” or how the Orioles’ prospect-rich farm system will shape their future—but here’s the mind-bender: this isn’t just about the specific players or teams in question. It’s about how the tension between immediate needs and long-term goals might be changing the game at a structural level.
Teams like the Orioles and Braves, by waiting on youth or betting on internal development, might be revolutionizing roster construction, where the future isn’t just a commodity but the key to sustainable success. Think of it as a paradigm shift—teams are moving beyond trying to “win the trade” or “win the season” and instead aiming to “win the next decade.” That means putting massive chips into long-term player development, stockpiling young stars, and potentially missing a few window-closing opportunities now in favor of a bigger future reward.
What if the new competitive advantage is no longer in the immediate stars or even trades, but in outlasting other teams’ cycles of win-now desperation by cultivating long-term, sustainable roster health?
And for the players involved, it could lead to a radical shift in how free agency and contracts are structured, with teams incentivized to build dynasties rather than just get lucky with individual blockbuster signings. It’s not just about players anymore—it’s about how a team evolves within the context of an entire league’s shifting mentality.
Do we really understand that? Because that concept could fundamentally change how front offices think about trading or signing players from now on.
The Mariners are actually doing this, but the optics are bad because they claimed they’d spend & then didn’t. Many free agent hitters understandably don’t want to play there. Thankfully GM Hollander & Jerry haven’t given in to the temptation of making a bad trade just to appease the “just do something” crowd. They are wisely playing the long game. They need to stop commenting on potential spending. Do it when it’s wise, and stand pat when it’s not.
sillywabbit, It’s not really true that the M’s promised to spend, but didn’t. After saying they would spend they signed Ray to a $65M guarantee, with the potential to be $115M. Plus they extended Julio Rodriquez to a $210M guaranteed deal with options that could be worth $470M.
Fans may have thought saying they’d spend would mean pursuing guys like Judge, or Ohtani. They were never going to spend like that, but to say they didn’t spend at all is incorrect, they have.
York, I may be missing something. Sounds like your describing small market teams that focus primarily on scouting, drafting and developing – Tampa, Cleveland, Minnesota, Pittsburgh, AZ etc. Houston did this leading up to their current run of success. KC placed an emphasis on these areas back in the 70s under John Scherholtz. Cleveland was locking up youngsters before hitting free agency in the 90s. These concepts aren’t new, but again, I think I may be missing your bigger point.
@Angels & NL West
I’m just reviewing the chat and commenting on the general narrative of that specific chat.
York I think every team would like to build a dynasty, but then again, sometimes you have to strike when the iron is hot. Heavily dependent on owner preference too. Some owners are keen on the long game and others are mercurial and more prone to act on short term market fluctuations (gaining edges on the margins.) I don’t think there can ever be a fundamental shift in roster strategy as you talk about because pro-sports is such a “what have you done for me lately?” sort of enterprise. Media,fan expectations combined with the incentivizing of instant gratification makes long term strategic thinking a boring operational stance for an org.
IgSOB, 100% agree. A dynasty happens based on owner preferences (philosophy).
I started following the Orioles in 1965. From then through 1979, they had only one losing season. Dynasty? Maybe. Regardless, that’s a lot of winning baseball. The year in and out common denominator? One owner. Jerald Hoffberger. Why so successful? He did not meddle. Entrusted his baseball people to make the baseball decisions.
Money sure does go along way in possibly having a long run of success in this sport but it’s not the “be all that ends all”. Too many moving parts in a single game that can determine outcome and often from players not making the big money.
To (maybe?) answer the question, “When is the last time a team traded one of their core players at the deadline and then made it to the World Series that year?”…
How about the Giants trading Bengie Molina (when Buster Posey was promoted) in 2010. Molina wasnt a superstar by any means, but he had been one of their better hitters and starting catcher for several years before trading him.
How about the Tulowitski trade would that qualify?
It’s not at WS level but Detriot did trade Flaherty last yr and still made the playoffs.
Soto contract tiers from age-26 season onward:
S tier = Hank Aaron, Ted Williams, Ty Cobb’s ~95 WAR
A tier = Chipper Jones and A-Rod’s ~70 WAR
B tier = Rafael Palmeiro and Ichiro’s ~60 WAR
C tier = Mark McGuire and Pujols’ ~53 WAR
D tier = Matt Holliday and Moises Alou’s ~45 WAR
I think anything under 64 WAR is an overpay
It only took 1 minute for the Cease question, leading to the proverbial Suarez answer.
Great response from Mark on the Devers situation!
“Devers is a proud man who clearly wants to keep playing 3B, and surely feels he can improve his defense. If staying at third was actually promised to him as part of his extension, that’s another kettle of fish that makes the Red Sox look kind of bad.”
They had a good answer in their podcast as well, Bregman has opt outs every single year of his three year contract. Why would Devers consider moving off third for a guy who may only be around for one season? It doesn’t make sense for Devers nor would it make sense for Boston.
The Pirates to sign a 1B, or trade for one?
They traded a starting pitcher for Spencer Horwitz.
That teams roster is so bad, the last thing they need to do is give a roster spot to a back-up 1B…..
Which based on their moves the past 3 years, they just might do.
Hey, it’s Samuel !
I’m not a Giants fan, but Buster Posey might be the least qualified POBO/GM hire in recent memory. Sure, he was the face of the Giants, he’s part of the ownership group (because he was the face of the Giants), and he knows other (older) players. But he’s never worked in a front office or for the league, or as a manager, or even as an assistant hitting coach. Yet no one is saying a word—least of all the people who can’t stop complaining about “DEI” and “wokeness.” In fact, they seem to love the move. Gee, I can’t imagine why.
(here, fishy fishy fishy fishy… )
Only tangentially related, but I always assumed teams would be incentivized to hire more Dominican &/or South American talent evaluators & scouts if for no other reason than in an effort to better recruit the younger international prospects
Have to assume some already do, but for some of the cheaper teams, seems an obvious avenue if they aren’t already doing it
Totally agree. I think that, for the most part, teams that are active in the Latin American international market already do that, but not all of them have great facilities and such. The Orioles famously stayed out of the international market for a long time, but that has changed in recent years, and I believe both they and the Diamondbacks opened brand-new academies in the Dominican Republic in 2024. There are also countries outside of the Western Hemisphere and Asia that show signs of becoming burgeoning baseball hotbeds, such as Uganda, and potentially parts of Europe, like Czechia, and teams that get ahead on places like that would seem to have a long-term advantage. I even read an article on MLB.com a while back about efforts by folks in Pakistan (famously a cricket-playing country) to put together a team that could qualify for the WBC. And as an Indian-American (my parents are immigrants), I would love to see baseball grow in India, just as I’d love to see cricket grow here.