Well, we believe in exit velocity, bat flips, launch angles, stealing home, the hanging curveball, Big League Chew, sausage races, and that unwritten rules of any kind are self-indulgent, overrated crap. We believe Greg Maddux was an actual wizard. We believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment protecting minor league baseball and that pitch framing is both an art and a science. We believe in the sweet spot, making WARP not war, letting your closer chase a two-inning save, and we believe love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good, too.
Let’s start with an easy one: Dodgers or the field and why?
Robert Murray: It would be foolish not to pick the Dodgers at this point, right? They have assembled the best team in baseball history and likely aren’t done adding to the roster, with both Clayton Kershaw and Enrique Hernandez looming as realistic targets. Baseball is played on the field, not on paper, so anything can happen. But they are an obvious pick to repeat as World Series champions.
Adam Weinrib: I will also pick the Dodgers, and no team I’d entertain from “the field” plays in the American League. That said, everyone has compared these current Dodgers to the Yankees of old based on the perception that they’re “buying everyone”. Which “Yankees” are we talking about here? That was mostly 2002-2009 post-dynasty, and it took a whole lot of free agent busts before they finally won it all in the last year of that era. Plus, I’m not positive I’d guarantee 150 innings from a single member of the Dodgers’ rotation at the moment.
Only problem with that logic? They didn’t have a rotation last year, either, and sprinted through the Fall Classic in 5.
Zachary Rotman: The boring but only correct answer is to pick the Dodgers. They’re deeper, more talented, and should be healthier than the team that just won the World Series. It wouldn’t be impossible for an upset to take place. That’s what makes baseball great. An upset is just really hard to predict, unfortunately.
Mark Powell: If I had to choose today, I’d pick the Dodgers. However, I wouldn’t sleep on the field, either. Since 1995, nearly 50 percent of World Series champions had a top-5 payroll. That’s not the overwhelming majority, but it does show how much money and, thus, talent plays into putting together a winning roster. I know none of this is shocking to the average reader. If I had to pick a team in ‘the field’, it’d be one of the three NL East contenders – Braves, Mets, or Phillies – assuming they don’t cannibalize each other, which is a very real possibility.
Chris Landers: I’m very tempted to take the field, just because the regular season is a marathon and the postseason is a crapshoot (not to mention how much injury risk the Dodgers have taken on in that star-studded rotation). And maybe if the Mets, Yankees, Phillies or someone else had kept their foot on the gas pedal this winter, I would. As it stands, though, it’s hard to see how any team as currently constituted could hang with L.A. in a seven-game series.
The Dodgers didn’t necessarily break baseball, but with the CBA set to expire soon, who’s most to blame for MLB’s lack of financial parity?
Robert Murray: Other owners not being willing to spend. The Collective Bargaining Agreement. There’s a lot of factors here that are contributing toward baseball's lack of financial parity. It’s going to be talked about extensively at the next CBA negotiations and, in the words of one executive, the Dodgers’ extreme spending this offseason “may actually make MLB do something to make this league competitively balanced.”
Adam Weinrib: Two things are true at the same time here. The Dodgers have several unique financial advantages that no other MLB team can match: ownership structure, Shohei Ohtani being a one-of-one superstar with both recruiting and earning power that allowed him to defer $680 million, and a premium location. Of course, that financial might has nothing to do with Tanner Scott and Kirby Yates; your owner can afford those contracts, too. But he didn’t.
Zachary Rotman: Adam hit the nail on the head, here. Nobody can replicate exactly what the Dodgers are doing right now due to all of their advantages, but that isn’t stopping other teams from making moves. The realistic solution is for owners to simply spend money that they absolutely do have. You’re telling me no team could’ve afforded to pay the likes of Tanner Scott or Kirby Yates? No team could’ve given Blake Snell a sixth year or Teoscar Hernandez a fourth? Offering market value to free agents going up against the Dodgers will not work with how desirable of a destination they currently are. Going above and beyond is how teams will beat the Dodgers, and there isn’t a single team incapable of doing that for a single free agent that Los Angeles has signed.
Mark Powell: As a fan of a small-market team in Detroit, I tend to agree here. The Tigers made the playoffs on borrowed time and could very well lose Tarik Skubal to free agency in a few years. What have they done to increase their urgency so far this winter? Next to nothing, and I don’t believe Alex Bregman is coming our way. Every contender should be adding to their roster in some way, shape, or form, even if that doesn’t mean signing Juan Soto. Spare me the theatrics.
As far as solutions go, I doubt the players want a salary cap, and the MLBPA is extremely powerful in this sport. I’m a proponent of a salary floor, but I doubt cheap owners would play ball. We’re stuck with this system, whether we like it or not, so it’s up to the owners to step up.
Chris Landers: The problem isn’t the Dodgers. Yes, as Adam alluded to, Los Angeles is operating on a level that the game has never really seen before; but the reason that the gap between them and everyone else is because the league’s 29 other ownership groups have let go of the rope. And I’m not just talking about the Reds, Pirates or any other team that finds itself undercapitalized and too illiquid to run their teams like anything but a profit-driving business. I’m including the Yankees here as well, who have no excuse to be treating the final luxury-tax threshold as a hard cap right now. MLB owners got too comfortable, convinced that they could squat on a constantly appreciating asset with no repercussions in perpetuity. The Dodgers called them on it, and it’s not on L.A. to make the rest of the league get its act together.
While the 2025 Baseball Hall of Fame class should be celebrated, 2026…leaves a lot to be desired. Give me your way-too-early predictions:
Adam Weinrib: Carlos Beltrán and Andruw Jones in a two-man class, the dullest since Hank O’Day, Jacob Ruppert, and Deacon White in 2013. They were all deceased. The speeches were silence.
Of the 2026 newbies, I expect Cole Hamels to stick around an additional year, but nobody else will, and we’ll see a whole bunch of blank ballots. Chase Utley will rise up into that undeniable zone where we know he’ll be elected, but we don’t know when. Expect a charge from King Felix Hernández and Dustin Pedroia, too. Players with high peaks whose careers were cut short deserve love, too. Not instead of players who were great with longevity, but concurrently. Andy Pettitte won’t get in before Year 10, but will earn serious momentum heading into the Eras Committees. Bold take? That love will also lead to a re-appreciation of David Cone’s case.
Zachary Rotman: I too believe that Carlos Beltran and Andruw Jones will earn the necessary votes to get in thanks to the upcoming HOF class. Of the 2026 additions, I expect only Cole Hamels and Ryan Braun to stick around for longer than one year, but neither will come particularly close to getting in. What will really be interesting is which players among those currently on the ballots will see massive bumps. Chase Utley feels like a given, and others like Felix Hernandez, Dustin Pedroia, and even David Wright probably will too.
Mark Powell: I agree on the premise that Beltran and Jones will be the only members of next year’s class, and they are deserving of Cooperstown status. Beltran will be the first person associated with the Houston Astros sign-stealing scandal to be elected to the Hall of Fame, even though it was very late in his career. That alone feels like a bold prediction, and possibly makes a statement for candidates to come like Jose Altuve.
Chris Landers: I’ll join the chorus here in predicting a two-man class of Beltran and Jones, while I also expect Chase Utley and first-timer Cole Hamels to put themselves in good position in 2027 and beyond. I also wouldn’t count out a late charge from Alex Rodriguez: This ballot’s lack of star power is just dying for something to talk about, and while other steroid cases like Manny Ramirez (destined to fall short in his final year of eligibility) seemed like lost causes, A-Rod might become something of a lightning rod next winter.
Scott Boras is doing the thing again, waiting until close to spring training to land a deal for some of his top clients. Is his wait-and-see approach bad strategy or smart business acumen?
Robert Murray: Boras is very good at what he does, but he has a history of some players waiting out free agency in hopes of a big contract and falling short. That could happen here with Bregman and Pete Alonso, and result in them testing free agency again next offseason. But all it takes is one team for Bregman (the Red Sox?) or Alonso (Blue Jays?) or an injury during spring training for that to change.
Is waiting out free agency to the extent he’s done in the past something I’d do? Probably not. But that said, we don’t know what offers he’s had or the level of interest his clients have generated. So who am I to judge?
Adam Weinrib: I’d say it lands somewhere in between. It’s far more likely to land a premium deal for a big bat than a pitcher, and that bat is also likelier to stay healthy without an extended spring training. The Red Sox waited until mid-February to sign JD Martinez in 2018, then finally relented and paid market value for a DH who led them almost directly to a World Series. Bregman and Alonso have a precedent for success right there.
Zachary Rotman: As Robert noted, it’s really hard to judge based on the fact that we really don’t know much about what guys like Bregman and Pete Alonso have been offered. With that being said, though, the reported three-year offer from the New York Mets to re-sign Alonso worth between $68 million and $70 million feels more than fair. That offer would give Alonso the third-highest AAV among first basemen and the fifth highest in total value among those signed as first basemen according to Spotrac (guys like Bryce Harper, Kris Bryant, and Willson Contreras don’t count in that regard). The fact that the Mets reportedly included opt-outs would give Alonso a chance to potentially cash in next offseason as well. Perhaps a desperate team gives Alonso a better offer or gives Bregman the long-term deal he’s coveted, but it feels as if Boras’ approach will come back to bite him, especially if the Mets pursue a different corner infielder (in Alonso’s case).
Mark Powell: To quote Robert Murray above, Scott Boras is very good at this. I am not an MLB agent nor do I have any desire to become one. That being said, the cases of Jordan Montgomery and Snell last season are a warning to players who feel they need preparation and routine to prepare for an arduous MLB schedule ahead. Players, not their agent, have the right to suggest to Boras that they’d rather not play hardball this late in the process. My guess is that Bregman and Alonso have full trust in Boras – trust that he has earned over the years. It’s easy to take shots at the most front-facing agent in the industry, but if we’re being honest, it’s nitpicking.
Chris Landers: I realize that this is a boring answer, but: It depends! There seems to be an ever-widening gap between how the league values pitchers in free agency and how it values position players. Pitching is, put simply, a lot harder to find and develop, and it’s less reliant on the sort of outlier athleticism that typically makes hitters age so poorly on their big contracts. If there’s a criticism to be made of Boras, it’s that he doesn’t seem to have updated his priors to reflect this new reality; someone like Alonso, for example, should be trying to maximize as much as he can on a year-by-year basis, knowing that teams simply aren’t going to give him seven or eight years the way they would’ve even a decade ago. When he has a winning hand, Boras is still the gold standard; but teams have gotten smarter, and Boras needs to do the same.
Robert Murray's notebook: Blue Jays and Cubs going through the motions
- The Toronto Blue Jays continue to show interest in free agents Max Scherzer and Pete Alonso, sources say.
- Free-agent infielder Jon Berti and the Chicago Cubs are in agreement on a one-year, $2 million contract, sources say. He gets $1.3 million in incentives.