The expectation gap
Super-reader Paul Covert asked an excellent question: given that I noted the early opening of annual expectation-lowering season, and Dave wrote at length about his belief the team would spend early and often, is there a difference of opinion?
There is, I think. My own opinion of the Lincoln-Thiel interview (go Art! woooo!) and the Times article that followed is that the team:
– wants to demonstrate for the fans that they’re serious about signing some big players
– knows that persuing them isn’t going to cut it this year, they’re going to have to land someone
– at the same time, wants to lower expectations in two ways: first, to give themselves room to only get one, and not remake the team entirely, and second, to set themselves up in case of failure
The lowering expectations game is no-lose for the team. If they lower expectations and then meet them, that’s okay. But if they sign one guy, everyone’s excited and happy. Two guys, if it miraculously happens, everyone loves them for going soooo far to get these guys.
In general, I agree with Dave that the team understands the need to go get someone to help turn the team around. I am less sure, though, that when it comes time for someone to call up Scott Boras in the midst of a heated bidding war, ready to quote a year and a figure they think will win a contract, that they’ll finish dialing before they find some reason to delay.