I want to break out some discussion because this has been on my mind for a very long time and it's worth discussion and getting other viewpoints.Again, for me the crux of this is an emotional issue. They traded Mookie. They had a horrible year last year, after a terrible disappointing 2019. They had to do something to get the fans back on their side, and in the first half they did exactly that. They looked to have a wonderful rebound year. But they seem strangely resigned to seeing that ebb away over the second half. Bloom and Cora don't seem to mind that they lost 10 games in the standings to Tampa in a single month. I simply don't understand the nonchalance. They deal with "Wait till next year" is that most of the time, next year never comes. The future is always brighter than the present, then it becomes the present and the can is kicked further down the road. We're seeing this happen in Seattle, where the M's are having a pretty good season but DiPoto seems content to bank on a future that perpetually remains 2 years away.
The basic question is: Can the "Tampa Bay" method of team-building work elsewhere?
The Rays have achieved something incredible over the last 15 years or so. Despite having a microscopic payroll, little to no attendance at their games, and a tiny fanbase, they have put together 11 winning seasons over the last 14 years, winning 3 divisional titles and making the playoffs 6 times and the World Series twice. They have nearly no ability to re-sign their stars to larger second contracts and often trade their established players the moment they come close to getting bigger money. They have won by innovating extremely radical strategies: extreme use of the shift in both infield and outfield, employing an opener for many games before going to their bullpen, and more recently by rigid adherence to not allowing their starting pitchers to see a lineup for a third time. They have an extremely advanced analytic department, and frankly what they've accomplished is incredible and should be deeply admired. Many of their front office staff have since taken positions elsewhere in baseball and I'm sure owners LOVE the idea of winning 96 games a year on a $65 million payroll, so they're anxious to bring the TB method to their own teams. As we know Chaim Bloom was brought here from Tampa to be the GM.
At the same time, I am highly skeptical the Tampa Bay method will work elsewhere.
The Rays operate under unique circumstances that apply to no other franchise. Their attendance and fan base is so small that the front office can operate in a near-vacuum of observation, so if they decide to trade a good and popular player, they will receive almost no backlash or criticism for it. If they try an unusual strategy like an opener, they can do so in the comfort that really, no one in the area much cares, so if it fails it will be quickly forgotten. These are luxuries that other teams do not have. If the Rays trade a superstar because they can't or won't pay him, the reaction is a shrug. If another team trades a superstar (for the purposes of this exercise we'll call him Bookie Metts) instead of paying him, the reaction is a national backlash against the trading team and will include scorn and derision, fan backlash and attendence dropoffs and media rating declines. These are legitimate damages that most teams cannot well afford.
My hypothesis: The ability to make baseball moves without any sort of fan or media scrutiny is a major advantage for the Rays that no other team has, and thus attempts to replicate what they do will fail elsewhere without a significant change in actual baseball strategies.
Anyone as old as I am will remember when the Sox tried the Bill James-approved bullpen-by-committee experiment in 2003. In theory it's a fine idea. In reality, human psychology (players and managers prefer to have set roles) and fan and media reaction to any failures in the system (Opening Day 2003 was a disaster and it never worked all that well afterwards) prevented such an experiment from succeeding. Perhaps it would have failed anyway since the players weren't likely good enough, but in Boston such a quick setback to the idea quickly caused a firestorm and ended the experiment quickly. In Tampa, they can try that, or an opener, or radical shifts with impunity because the backlash simply isn't there to any real extent.
There's a ton of points to touch on here but I needed the brain dump to get the discussion started.