2026 Red Sox/MLB Season Thread

[byennie]

I really don't care if NYY wins or not at this point.  I do find it interesting that 3 of the final 4 teams will all have below league average team salaries:

CWS   #24 or CLE #30
TB      #28
MIL    #19
LAD     #2

LAD is below NYM is spending (per Spotrac) but I am not sure how all the deferred money figures into that.  It is really amazing to me how many teams make bad spending decisions.  LAD, when deferred spending is accounted for, I assume would be the biggest spender.  They seem to be able to spend well, but not many other teams.

It definitely speaks to parity in MLB.

The Dodgers are hard to pin down. You can't really say anything was misspent, unlike NYM, with their extreme success. On the other hand, any metric that shows other teams are close in spending isn't really realistic. They have over 2 billion dollars in deferred money on the books, and are basically gaming the system.

Ohtani, Betts, Yamamoto, Skubal (TBD), Tucker, Snell, Freeman are all on mega deals among the biggest in all of MLB... and they still have room for $32M for Glasnow, $20M for Teoscar, $16M for Scott, $16M for Smith, $14M for Diaz, $12M for Edman, $10M on Muncy...

By next season they'll have roughly 7 guys making an average of $50M each, and 7 more guys making an average of $20M, which includes 3 different league MVPs, 2 multi-time Cy Young winners, and two more guys in the running for those honors. Every single one of which they bought.

[slamtheking]

I really don't care if NYY wins or not at this point.  I do find it interesting that 3 of the final 4 teams will all have below league average team salaries:

CWS   #24 or CLE #30
TB      #28
MIL    #19
LAD     #2

LAD is below NYM is spending (per Spotrac) but I am not sure how all the deferred money figures into that.  It is really amazing to me how many teams make bad spending decisions.  LAD, when deferred spending is accounted for, I assume would be the biggest spender.  They seem to be able to spend well, but not many other teams.

It definitely speaks to parity in MLB.

The Dodgers are hard to pin down. You can't really say anything was misspent, unlike NYM, with their extreme success. On the other hand, any metric that shows other teams are close in spending isn't really realistic. They have over 2 billion dollars in deferred money on the books, and are basically gaming the system.

Ohtani, Betts, Yamamoto, Skubal (TBD), Tucker, Snell, Freeman are all on mega deals among the biggest in all of MLB... and they still have room for $32M for Glasnow, $20M for Teoscar, $16M for Scott, $16M for Smith, $14M for Diaz, $12M for Edman, $10M on Muncy...

By next season they'll have roughly 7 guys making an average of $50M each, and 7 more guys making an average of $20M, which includes 3 different league MVPs, 2 multi-time Cy Young winners, and two more guys in the running for those honors. Every single one of which they bought.

to me, that's the biggest problem -- LA has such a staggering financial advantage that only a NY could even think of trying that approach.  teams like the Brewers can't afford to keep the young players that they develop and turn into good players.  it's a revolving door for them with relying on a youth movement that has to outperform their contracts.  once they reach arbitration, the trade clock is ticking -- and most likely to one of those high-spending franchises

[Roy H.]

At least the Dodgers spend a large portion of the revenue they bring in.  The Red Sox don't.

https://www.reddit.com/r/KCRoyals/s/OjIT7Bu6ZS

[byennie]

At least the Dodgers spend a large portion of the revenue they bring in.  The Red Sox don't.

https://www.reddit.com/r/KCRoyals/s/OjIT7Bu6ZS

Indeed, the Dodgers are just the new Yankees (money-wise). In the past, Boston competed by spending less, but a lot. These days, we turn $100M in profit for ownership and the excuse is that we should emulate teams like Milwaukee or Tampa Bay. In other words, why spend your revenue when you can just play moneyball and shed a cool billion for the owners over a decade.

[SparzWizard]

Dodgers on the verge of elimination! Down 0-3 to the Brewers, 3peat hopes dwindling

[SparzWizard]

Dodgers got swept in classic LA fashion. No more 3peat. Yikes.

[Vermont Green]

Dodgers got swept in classic LA fashion. No more 3peat. Yikes.

Moneyball reins.

I don't know how this is all going to impact the offseason CBA discussions between the owners and the players association/union.  It seems that this makes the argument that the big spenders are ruining the competitive balance, a harder argument to make.  And since very few teams can spend like the big spenders, more teams will be trying to do it the MIL way.  They really don't have any choice.

As to the Dodgers, they looked like a tired old team.  They did make the NLCS, that is not exactly a bad season, but it was WS or bust for them.  And to get swept, wow.

You know the Red Sox ownership/management is watching.  I think the Red Sox can be something in between MIL and LAD, I think they have to.  You have to build some parts of your roster the moneyball way.  I think the Sox have done that.  But the Sox are not MIL so they can do some level of big money spending too.  But you have to be smart about who you spend the big money on.

[slamtheking]

Dodgers got swept in classic LA fashion. No more 3peat. Yikes.

Brewers have kept me waiting 44 years to get back to the WS.  doing it by smoke and mirrors.  a bunch of mediocre hitters coming through in the clutch and a bullpen that's been fantastic.  need to just win 4 more

[Roy H.]

Dodgers got swept in classic LA fashion. No more 3peat. Yikes.

Moneyball reins.

I don't know how this is all going to impact the offseason CBA discussions between the owners and the players association/union.  It seems that this makes the argument that the big spenders are ruining the competitive balance, a harder argument to make.  And since very few teams can spend like the big spenders, more teams will be trying to do it the MIL way.  They really don't have any choice.

As to the Dodgers, they looked like a tired old team.  They did make the NLCS, that is not exactly a bad season, but it was WS or bust for them.  And to get swept, wow.

You know the Red Sox ownership/management is watching.  I think the Red Sox can be something in between MIL and LAD, I think they have to.  You have to build some parts of your roster the moneyball way.  I think the Sox have done that.  But the Sox are not MIL so they can do some level of big money spending too.  But you have to be smart about who you spend the big money on.

I don't think we can be complete prisoners of the moment, though.  The Dodgers have won three World Series since 2020, and have made the playoffs every season since 2013.

In the American League, the Yankees, Astros and Red Sox ranked 1st, 3rd and 4th in payroll, and all made the playoffs.  In the National League, the Dodgers, Phillies, Braves, Cubs and Padres ranked 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th in payroll.

[Donoghus]

Give me the midwest World Series.  Guardians-Brewers.  Two long suffering fanbases and two working class cities.  Would be entertaining to see.  Knock the Rays out of this.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

Dodgers got swept in classic LA fashion. No more 3peat. Yikes.

Moneyball reins.

I don't know how this is all going to impact the offseason CBA discussions between the owners and the players association/union.  It seems that this makes the argument that the big spenders are ruining the competitive balance, a harder argument to make.  And since very few teams can spend like the big spenders, more teams will be trying to do it the MIL way.  They really don't have any choice.

As to the Dodgers, they looked like a tired old team.  They did make the NLCS, that is not exactly a bad season, but it was WS or bust for them.  And to get swept, wow.

You know the Red Sox ownership/management is watching.  I think the Red Sox can be something in between MIL and LAD, I think they have to.  You have to build some parts of your roster the moneyball way.  I think the Sox have done that.  But the Sox are not MIL so they can do some level of big money spending too.  But you have to be smart about who you spend the big money on.

I don't think we can be complete prisoners of the moment, though.  The Dodgers have won three World Series since 2020, and have made the playoffs every season since 2013.

In the American League, the Yankees, Astros and Red Sox ranked 1st, 3rd and 4th in payroll, and all made the playoffs.  In the National League, the Dodgers, Phillies, Braves, Cubs and Padres ranked 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th in payroll.

Good point. Once in a while a small-market team goes all the way, such as the 2015 Royals, but they almost never sustain that success. Big spending doesn't guarantee titles, but titles almost always require big spending.

[Vermont Green]

Dodgers got swept in classic LA fashion. No more 3peat. Yikes.

Moneyball reins.

I don't know how this is all going to impact the offseason CBA discussions between the owners and the players association/union.  It seems that this makes the argument that the big spenders are ruining the competitive balance, a harder argument to make.  And since very few teams can spend like the big spenders, more teams will be trying to do it the MIL way.  They really don't have any choice.

As to the Dodgers, they looked like a tired old team.  They did make the NLCS, that is not exactly a bad season, but it was WS or bust for them.  And to get swept, wow.

You know the Red Sox ownership/management is watching.  I think the Red Sox can be something in between MIL and LAD, I think they have to.  You have to build some parts of your roster the moneyball way.  I think the Sox have done that.  But the Sox are not MIL so they can do some level of big money spending too.  But you have to be smart about who you spend the big money on.

I don't think we can be complete prisoners of the moment, though.  The Dodgers have won three World Series since 2020, and have made the playoffs every season since 2013.

In the American League, the Yankees, Astros and Red Sox ranked 1st, 3rd and 4th in payroll, and all made the playoffs.  In the National League, the Dodgers, Phillies, Braves, Cubs and Padres ranked 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th in payroll.

I don't disagree, but it is pretty clear that top spending does not automatically correlate to winning titles.  Here are the numbers on the last 10 or so WS winners and their rank in terms of spending:

2025   LAD      1ST
2024   LAD      3RD*  (Deferred money factors in)
2023   TEX      4TH
2022   HOU     8TH
2021   ATL     10TH
2020   COVID
2019   WAS    7TH
2018   BOS     1ST
2017   HOU   17TH
2016   CHC     5TH
2015   KC      13TH

Of course spending is a factor in team success, but it does not dominate the equation like one would think, at least it has not recently.  Teams that "moneyball" well do about as well as teams that spend a lot.  I think if you want to maximize your chances, you need to do both and do both well.  LAD can win titles by just spending, I am not sure many other teams can.  Even NYY has done a good job of developing players.  They spend too, too often on old pitchers, but they do both.

BOS needs to do both and do both well.  They can't be LAD and there is no need for them to be MIL.  I think BOS has developed pretty well lately, both pitching and position players.  Their big spending as not been has good.

[Vermont Green]

Dodgers got swept in classic LA fashion. No more 3peat. Yikes.

Moneyball reins.

I don't know how this is all going to impact the offseason CBA discussions between the owners and the players association/union.  It seems that this makes the argument that the big spenders are ruining the competitive balance, a harder argument to make.  And since very few teams can spend like the big spenders, more teams will be trying to do it the MIL way.  They really don't have any choice.

As to the Dodgers, they looked like a tired old team.  They did make the NLCS, that is not exactly a bad season, but it was WS or bust for them.  And to get swept, wow.

You know the Red Sox ownership/management is watching.  I think the Red Sox can be something in between MIL and LAD, I think they have to.  You have to build some parts of your roster the moneyball way.  I think the Sox have done that.  But the Sox are not MIL so they can do some level of big money spending too.  But you have to be smart about who you spend the big money on.

I don't think we can be complete prisoners of the moment, though.  The Dodgers have won three World Series since 2020, and have made the playoffs every season since 2013.

In the American League, the Yankees, Astros and Red Sox ranked 1st, 3rd and 4th in payroll, and all made the playoffs.  In the National League, the Dodgers, Phillies, Braves, Cubs and Padres ranked 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th in payroll.

Good point. Once in a while a small-market team goes all the way, such as the 2015 Royals, but they almost never sustain that success. Big spending doesn't guarantee titles, but titles almost always require big spending.

If all the LAD deferred money was accurately accounted for, I suspect that LAD spent way more than anyone else in getting these last 2 WS titles.  To me, that ability and willingness to spend that much more than anyone else is as much of an outlier as teams like KC and HOU winning titles.  This year is going to be another year where a low spending team wins.

In 2018, when BOS won the WS and was the top spender (based on cash), they only spent $35M more than SF.  It wasn't like the current LAD.  Trying to buy championships, even when spending like LAD, is no guarantee.  If you take LAD out of the equation due to how much more they spend relative to everyone else, spending becomes much less of a predictive factor.  It is still a factor, of course, but plenty of teams spend and go nowhere because they do not spend well or smart.  Some teams moneyball well, other teams not so much.

[Roy H.]

Dodgers got swept in classic LA fashion. No more 3peat. Yikes.

Moneyball reins.

I don't know how this is all going to impact the offseason CBA discussions between the owners and the players association/union.  It seems that this makes the argument that the big spenders are ruining the competitive balance, a harder argument to make.  And since very few teams can spend like the big spenders, more teams will be trying to do it the MIL way.  They really don't have any choice.

As to the Dodgers, they looked like a tired old team.  They did make the NLCS, that is not exactly a bad season, but it was WS or bust for them.  And to get swept, wow.

You know the Red Sox ownership/management is watching.  I think the Red Sox can be something in between MIL and LAD, I think they have to.  You have to build some parts of your roster the moneyball way.  I think the Sox have done that.  But the Sox are not MIL so they can do some level of big money spending too.  But you have to be smart about who you spend the big money on.

I don't think we can be complete prisoners of the moment, though.  The Dodgers have won three World Series since 2020, and have made the playoffs every season since 2013.

In the American League, the Yankees, Astros and Red Sox ranked 1st, 3rd and 4th in payroll, and all made the playoffs.  In the National League, the Dodgers, Phillies, Braves, Cubs and Padres ranked 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th in payroll.

Good point. Once in a while a small-market team goes all the way, such as the 2015 Royals, but they almost never sustain that success. Big spending doesn't guarantee titles, but titles almost always require big spending.

If all the LAD deferred money was accurately accounted for, I suspect that LAD spent way more than anyone else in getting these last 2 WS titles.  To me, that ability and willingness to spend that much more than anyone else is as much of an outlier as teams like KC and HOU winning titles.  This year is going to be another year where a low spending team wins.

In 2018, when BOS won the WS and was the top spender (based on cash), they only spent $35M more than SF.  It wasn't like the current LAD.  Trying to buy championships, even when spending like LAD, is no guarantee.  If you take LAD out of the equation due to how much more they spend relative to everyone else, spending becomes much less of a predictive factor.  It is still a factor, of course, but plenty of teams spend and go nowhere because they do not spend well or smart.  Some teams moneyball well, other teams not so much.

Is there a good reason not to have a salary cap? 

[Vermont Green]

Is there a good reason not to have a salary cap?

Once the WS is over, I am sure we will be hearing a lot about that.  It certainly seems that sports franchise owners need something to protect themselves from themselves.  I suspect that the MLBPA will have plenty of reasons not to have a cap, including it is bad for players.

Is competitive balance a good (or good enough) reason to have a salary cap?

Both of these are good questions, I can't answer either definitely.  But I will say that team owners do seem to need some form of guardrails or things tend to go off the rails.