There is a trade-off between a stable roster that fans like and eventual declines in winning percents that fans won't stand for. All this really means is that there is a profit-maximizing level of roster stability.
Has the duration of roster stability changed since free agency? NO
Reasons:
(1) players move at about the same rate with just a slight increase in the quality of players who do move.
(2) prior to free agency, the period fans ironically refer to as the golden age of roster stability, there was no such thing as player loyalty because it was impossible for players to exercise loyalty at all. Even with the introduction of free agency, many free agents are involuntary because the original teams don't want them.
So it is only the very few superstar free agents who have any chance to exhibit what fans think of as loyalty to their team.
No comments:
Post a Comment