2011-2012 Offseason Thread

[jung]

pfff... that would be awesome

 

Won't be awesome if he is wearing somebody else's uniform.

[iortiz]

Won't be awesome if he is wearing somebody else's uniform.

 

You bet

[seabeachfred]

Fred.

 

Why the hell would the Red Sox have exercised Scutaro's option if they were just going to dump his salary??

 

They dumped his salary so that they could pick up a SP.

 

No matter how dumb you think the Sox FO is, they are still professionals and are entirely capable of putting together a winning team. I hardly think this FO has seen the Sox get eaten up by injuries the past 2 years, finish in 3rd in the East, and all of a sudden give up on putting together a winning team?

 

Come on man. They are going to get a SP, and it's likely going to be Oswalt. The writing is all over the wall.

 

It makes a helluva lot sense the way you put it SFForsyth, but if I'm reading things right we still do not have that 8 million dollars to spend on Oswalt unless you know something I don't, and to be honest with you, after reading all the posts that say this and that I have to tell you that I'm not sure which end is up anymore on this topic. Rivernator presented his list of the Red Sox budget and I didn't see 8 million left over for Roy without going over the LT. So what am I missing? Will Oswalt come down from his request or will we be able to pare off more money so we can sign him?

 

Unlike others, I have a high regard for Aviles and think he can play as adequate a shortstop as Scutaro did and hit better, so if we could get Roy we would have strengthend our team both on the mound and at the plate. Again, though, unless Rivernator or Palodiois can come up some figures to prove that point I still don't know if we have the money to sign the guy. Let me know where I've gone astray my friend.

[Palodios]

I didn't see 8 million left over for Roy without going over the LT. So what am I missing? Will Oswalt come down from his request or will we be able to pare off more money so we can sign him?

 

Fred, what you're missing is that the Red Sox are going over the luxury tax. They went over by several million last year, and signing Oswalt, and another 2-3 million dollar player will put them pretty much exactly where they were last year.

[a700hitter]

Fred' date=' what you're missing is that the Red Sox are going over the luxury tax. They went over by several million last year, and signing Oswalt, and another 2-3 million dollar player will put them pretty much exactly where they were last year.[/quote']Then what was the point of dumping Scutaro? It's not like they got anyone good for him.

[seabeachfred]

If we sign him' date=' I want to believe that our FO sees enough fuel in his tank to face next season.[/quote']

 

Reports are that Roy is feeing pretty chipper these days. No seemingly back problems and the guy when healthy is a horse on the mound, a tough competitor who wouldn't think twice in knocking someone one their ass. I have to preface this with IF---if we could get a healthy Oswalt and our "Big Three" can stay healthy and give us banner seasons we could challenge any team in my opinion. I'm just as impatient as you and others are to just get this done.

[jung]

Well the problem with assuming that it will be Oswalt is that he seems stuck at $8M at this point which by all accounts is already a bargain and the Sox don't have $8M unless Lackey's option credit for this year will be more than people have been talking about. I do think they will get somebody.

- either the credit for Lackey will be big enough and they get Oswalt

-the credit does not give them enough for Oswalt and they get somebody else

- Oswalt capitulates further and takes less than $8M from somebody, possibly the Sox

 

Although, unless you want to account for nobody with a better shot at a WS being in the running besides the Sox, if you were Oswalt. close to the end of your career, would you want to join what turned out to be a basket case of a team in 2011?

[iortiz]

Fred' date=' what you're missing is that the Red Sox are going over the luxury tax. They went over by several million last year, and signing Oswalt, and another 2-3 million dollar player will put them pretty much exactly where they were last year.[/quote']

 

If true, we should take in consideration what Jung said.

 

They may end up there but it makes no sense that they would be aiming to end up there. If that is the case' date=' they just sent off a player that could help them for the difference between being $4M over and $10M over. I do not think they are comfortable with the idea of being any amount over this year and will continue to make every effort to stay under.[/quote']

 

I think that Fred's concerns are very legit. I mean, if we are going to end up over the cap anyway, why do we give up Scutaro?

[seabeachfred]

Fred' date=' what you're missing is that the Red Sox are going over the luxury tax. They went over by several million last year, and signing Oswalt, and another 2-3 million dollar player will put them pretty much exactly where they were last year.[/quote']

 

Are you sure of that Palodios? If so, my question has been answered and I plead guilty to listening to the wrong people. All I've heard from many posters is that we are NOT going over the LT and that's that. Apparently that tax is pretty high unless I'm wrong on that one too. I don't know where you got your information my friend but I feel a whole hell of a lot better now that I've heard this. It means that our chances of getting Roy are now very good, and brother we can sure use him in our rotation.

[jung]

Frankly I think we are more fixated on Oswalt than the Sox have been. If they wanted him that badly I think they would have simply bitten the bullet, swallowed the error in having offered Ortiz arbitration and signed him for $8M.

 

I think they want another pitcher. I am not at all convinced it turns out to be Oswalt.

[User Name]

Jon Paul Morosi of FOX Sports (via Twitter) heard from multiple sources today who doubt that the Red Sox will make a play for Hanley Ramirez after trading Marco Scutaro to the Rockies. However, the club is looking at both pitchers and position players now, according to a source (Twitter link).

 

If they really had to trade Scutaro to free up salary, then that makes no sense.

[Palodios]

Then what was the point of dumping Scutaro? It's not like they got anyone good for him.

 

Teams have budgets. Numbers that they like to stick to. They still have profit margins that they would like to remain at, even if you don't necessarily agree with those margins. Just because they can afford to break the luxury cap doesn't mean they can afford to bust it.

[Elktonnick]

Frankly I think we are more fixated on Oswalt than the Sox have been. If they wanted him that badly I think they would have simply bitten the bullet, swallowed the error in having offered Ortiz arbitration and signed him for $8M.

 

I think they want another pitcher. I am not at all convinced it turns out to be Oswalt.

 

Oswalt would be fine but if there is another ML ready starter out there who can be a nbr 4 or 5 then I am ok with that.

[User Name]

I still think they're actually below the cap, because they can exercise/have exercised the Lackey option.

 

Otherwise, moving Scutaro quite simply makes no sense.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Are you sure of that Palodios? If so' date=' my question has been answered and I plead guilty to listening to the wrong people. All I've heard from many posters is that we are NOT going over the LT and that's that. Apparently that tax is pretty high unless I'm wrong on that one too. I don't know where you got your information my friend but I feel a whole hell of a lot better now that I've heard this. It means that our chances of getting Roy are now very good, and brother we can sure use him in our rotation.[/quote']

 

From my understanding, they just need to be under by 2013 or 2014 because the new bargaining agreement increased the penalties for going over the LT. So that's why a 1 year deal for Oswalt is so beneficial for the Sox.

 

This actually works out well, because look at all the money coming off the books:

 

Lackey a chance to have his option exercised, taking the AAV down by about $2-3mm.

It clears Ortiz's $12.5mm deal.

Likely, Middlebrooks will be ready, so we will let Youkilis leave, which will give us another $10.5mm freed up.

DiceK's $8.7mm will be off the books.

Jenks will be gone, that's $6mm off the books.

 

So that's about $40mm off the books in AAV alone by 2013. If the Sox are only $8-10mm over the LT threshold right now, then they'll be more than able to clear it in 2013 with all the money off the books, and will actually be able to drop around $30mm to FA.

 

If Lavarnway takes over at DH, Iggy takes over at SS, and Alex Wilson takes over in the bullpen, we will good money to spend on a SP.

 

And guess who becomes a FA in 2013? Oh, yeah, Cole Hamels.

[jung]

Teams have budgets. Numbers that they like to stick to. They still have profit margins that they would like to remain at, even if you don't necessarily agree with those margins. Just because they can afford to break the luxury cap doesn't mean they can afford to bust it.

 

I have not brought this up in awhile. Stopped because I did not think anybody gave a rats ass anyway. However the Sox bottom line has really suffered from the big salary increases of the last couple years. They don't generate anything like the kind of revenue that the Yanks generate and I do think that is one of the things that have gone into what I think is a mandate that they stay below the cap and get themselves back to a 0% tax rate sooner rather than later.

[iortiz]

Teams have budgets. Numbers that they like to stick to. They still have profit margins that they would like to remain at' date=' even if you don't necessarily agree with those margins. Just because they can afford to break the luxury cap doesn't mean they can afford to bust it.[/quote']

 

Yes, but 6M? C'mon... JH spends those millions any given Sunday

[Elktonnick]

From my understanding, they just need to be under by 2013 or 2014 because the new bargaining agreement increased the penalties for going over the LT. So that's why a 1 year deal for Oswalt is so beneficial for the Sox.

 

This actually works out well, because look at all the money coming off the books:

 

Lackey a chance to have his option exercised, taking the AAV down by about $2-3mm.

It clears Ortiz's $12.5mm deal.

Likely, Middlebrooks will be ready, so we will let Youkilis leave, which will give us another $10.5mm freed up.

DiceK's $8.7mm will be off the books.

Jenks will be gone, that's $6mm off the books.

 

So that's about $40mm off the books in AAV alone by 2013. If the Sox are only $8-10mm over the LT threshold right now, then they'll be more than able to clear it in 2013 with all the money off the books, and will actually be able to drop around $30mm to FA.

 

If Lavarnway takes over at DH, Iggy takes over at SS, and Alex Wilson takes over in the bullpen, we will good money to spend on a SP.

 

And guess who becomes a FA in 2013? Oh, yeah, Cole Hamels.

 

From my understanding, they just need to be under by 2013 or 2014 because the new bargaining agreement increased the penalties for going over the LT. So that's why a 1 year deal for Oswalt is so beneficial for the Sox.

 

That was the explanation I heard from Steve Buckley and Dan Shaughnessey about two weeks ago

[Palodios]

Are you sure of that Palodios? If so' date=' my question has been answered and I plead guilty to listening to the wrong people. [/quote']

 

Why are you listening to posters about things that you should listen to actual baseball sources for? Here is a quote from our good friend Ben Cherington:

 

“We’re certainly mindful of (the luxury tax threshold), and with every acquisition we take that into account,” Cherington said. “I can’t comment on where we’re going to be or whether we’re going to be over or under, but as everyone knows we’ve gone over it in the past and so ownership has had a willingness to go over it in the past. If we feel it’s the right thing to do, we’ll just have to take every decision that comes and look at the effect on the team on the field and the effect on the payroll and figure out what makes sense.”[/Quote]

 

He made some really good efforts to stay under this year. Bailey and Melancon were very good moves to push them in direction, but I don't think they're done yet.

[User Name]

Why are you listening to posters about things that you should listen to actual baseball sources for? Here is a quote from our good friend Ben Cherington:

 

This point can also be applied to the Wakefield/Varitek situation.

[iortiz]

I still think they're actually below the cap, because they can exercise/have exercised the Lackey option.

 

Otherwise, moving Scutaro quite simply makes no sense.

 

This is exactly my point. If they were going to end up over the cap anyway, why did we give up Scu?

[jung]

From my understanding, they just need to be under by 2013 or 2014 because the new bargaining agreement increased the penalties for going over the LT. So that's why a 1 year deal for Oswalt is so beneficial for the Sox.

 

Sounds logical but it is all stuff the Sox know and yet Oswalt is not here yet. So I can only assume at this point that the Sox have made getting under a priority for this year. You can compile many different formulas that that can make the argument either way. However until they spend the money I am inclined to think they don't want to spend the money and go over this year.

[Palodios]

Yes' date=' but 6M? C'mon... JH spend those millions any given Sunday [/quote']

 

Actually, with the luxury tax we're talking closer to 8-9 million. To put that into perspective, roughly 3 million tickets to Fenway are sold every year, so they would have to raise every ticket by $3 to make up for the difference.

[Palodios]

THE PATS ARE GOING TO THE SUPERBOWL!!!!!

[a700hitter]

Teams have budgets. Numbers that they like to stick to. They still have profit margins that they would like to remain at' date=' even if you don't necessarily agree with those margins. Just because they can afford to break the luxury cap doesn't mean they can afford to bust it.[/quote']It just seems that there is much bang for the buck getting rid of Scutaro's $6 million if we are still going to go over the cap anyway. In the overall Sox operating budget, it doesn't seem like a lot.

[a700hitter]

Actually' date=' with the luxury tax we're talking closer to 8-9 million. To put that into perspective, roughly 3 million tickets to Fenway are sold every year, so they would have to raise every ticket by $3 to make up for the difference.[/quote']or 2,000 bricks.

 

BTW: I want the Sox to give me a $3 rebate for for every ticket for Jenks.

[jung]

THE PATS ARE GOING TO THE SUPERBOWL!!!!!

 

What has happened to Brady lately? They could have salted this game away about five times if Brady's decision making was more like what we have grown accustomed to seeing. Christ he just about kept the Ravens in the game.

 

Congratulations Pats...I think! I hate the Ravens...glad to see them gone. Go Pats!

[iortiz]

It just seems that there is much bang for the buck getting rid of Scutaro's $6 million if we are still going to go over the cap anyway. In the overall Sox operating budget' date=' it doesn't seem like a lot.[/quote']

 

IMO we would have lost more with Scu's departure than the 6M.

 

Assuming that we go like this, of course. (without Scu and/or SP and over the cap...the worst scenario, IMO.)

[iortiz]

or 2,000 bricks.

 

BTW: I want the Sox to give me a $3 rebate for for every ticket for Jenks.

 

[SoxFanForsyth]

This is exactly my point. If they were going to end up over the cap anyway' date=' why did we give up Scu?[/quote']

 

We need to wait for their follow up move before we rip into them.

 

The FO may have put a limit on the amount they were willing to go over the LT. If they said "We are going to stay under $188mm this year", well then the move makes all kinds of sense.

 

Every team has a budget and has to set limits. The things is, we don't know all of these intricacies of the budgeting process. So just because they were over the LT by maybe $4mm doesn't mean they were willing to go over by $12mm. They may have been willing to go over by $6-8mm, which is why this deal would have worked out.