Derek
Table Setter
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2009
- Messages
- 18,221
- Reaction score
- 31,606
- Points
- 148
True, whatever attendance shifts we’d see would be very short-term.I don't buy that it impacts attendance. We can sign Lindor and it might be a tiny bump now. We let him go and a few folks get mad. Sure.
But does anything think that if we are 62-100 after signing Lindor attendance wont drop? While if we let him walk but win the WS it won't go up?
We sign Lindor and it will be on to the next complaint: but they didn't sign Bieber! ARam! Reyes! Clev! You start chasing stars and the fans that want you to chase stars will keep wanting you to chase more stars!
A great player like Lindor is going to get 11ish% of the ABs. He'll have less than that impact on the defense (given the increase in Ks).
THE key to building and maintaining a franchise is to develop from within.
Hold on to your stars as long as you can while you win. When you don't win, trade the ones heading to FA.
Rinse. Repeat.
Use FA only to fill holes in an otherwise stable ship.
But you CAN NOT be afraid to let players walk. It sure beats paying them 35 mil a year in their late 30s!
Unless the team comes out and maintains a 100+ win pace throughout the year, even a team with a re-signed Lindor will return to typical attendance rather quickly.
And if you’re telling me fans will come out even less if the team is still winning 90+ without Lindor, I don’t believe that.
Whatever we do needs to be with winning in mind. I don’t know which way I lean because I don’t know all the details.