2014 Roster Projections

[User Name]

Not mine. Scout's. My opinion, like everybody else's on this board, matters very little, since we are neither FO members nor scouts.

[mvp 78]

Not mine. Scout's. My opinion, like everybody else's on this board, matters very little, since we are neither FO members nor scouts.

 

Yeah Jeets... Yeah Jeets...

[vjcsmoke]

I think that signing Napoli or not is going to shape the Red Sox offseason. Once they confirm that he is in the fold, then they don't need to go after a power bat or do anything drastic.

 

XB will likely to take over at SS. And at catcher if we don't give Lavarnway the shot, maybe we look for a veteran to platoon with Ross. WMB - well he might turn out ok for us, I don't think we desperately need a 3B at this point if the plan is to keep Middlebrooks.

 

JBJ will likely platoon CF in a timeshare with a mid class to cheap veteran outfielder. I'm thinking Beltran might be a fit on a short term deal. He certainly must be hungry for glory after coming up short with the Cardinals.

[marklmw]

I think that signing Napoli or not is going to shape the Red Sox offseason. Once they confirm that he is in the fold, then they don't need to go after a power bat or do anything drastic.

 

XB will likely to take over at SS. And at catcher if we don't give Lavarnway the shot, maybe we look for a veteran to platoon with Ross. WMB - well he might turn out ok for us, I don't think we desperately need a 3B at this point if the plan is to keep Middlebrooks.

 

JBJ will likely platoon CF in a timeshare with a mid class to cheap veteran outfielder. I'm thinking Beltran might be a fit on a short term deal. He certainly must be hungry for glory after coming up short with the Cardinals.

 

If the Sox sign Beltran they might as well just sign Ellsbury instead for 3-5m more. I cannot picture Beltran playing right or center at Fenway.

[User Name]

If the Sox sign Beltran they might as well just sign Ellsbury instead for 3-5m more. I cannot picture Beltran playing right or center at Fenway.

 

Ellsbury for 3-5 million more? Are you serious mark? Beltran will be lucky if he pulls in half the total contract ellsbury gets.

[marklmw]

Ellsbury for 3-5 million more? Are you serious mark? Beltran will be lucky if he pulls in half the total contract ellsbury gets.

Beltran earned 26/2 for his last contract. Will he get the same I do not know. You mentioned Ellsbury signing for 6 years at an average of 18 per. 13+5 = 18. So 2 years of Beltran would offset 2 years of Ellsbury + 5m per year. Ellsbury is a premier lead off player. Which would you prefer to have UN? Anyway UN ... what kind of deal do you think Beltran will sign ... he is connected to a lot of teams. I think he will get a similar 26/2 deal that he just came off.

Edited November 18, 2013 by marklmw

[marklmw]

I know that baseball is business but in the post season we had Gomes playing because it was said that he lit a spark with the team or some nonsense along these lines. Ellsbury helped deliver 2 championships over the past 6 seasons. Should not management consider that Ellsbury brings the same something to the team that Gomes brings and then some. Just saying. There are a lot of superstitions in baseball and not signing Ellsbury over a couple of million per seems like a mistake. That being said I really like JBJ and if JBJ were not with the Sox Dojji would be drooling over him.

[sk7326]

Tim Hudson to Giants - strong signing after the Lincecum face plant. Hudson going into a division of hitter's graveyards bodes well.

[marklmw]

Tim Hudson to Giants - strong signing after the Lincecum face plant. Hudson going into a division of hitter's graveyards bodes well.

 

Great ... Hudson made the right decision.

[sk7326]

I know that baseball is business but in the post season we had Gomes playing because it was said that he lit a spark with the team or some nonsense along these lines. Ellsbury helped deliver 2 championships over the past 6 seasons. Should not management consider that Ellsbury brings the same something to the team that Gomes brings and then some. Just saying. There are a lot of superstitions in baseball and not signing Ellsbury over a couple of million per seems like a mistake. That being said I really like JBJ and if JBJ were not with the Sox Dojji would be drooling over him.

 

Gomes was in because Farrell liked him over Nava for whatever reason. I will refuse the appeal to authority ("Well we don't have the info the manager does" and the like) and say it was somewhat suboptimal, but not by a margin that killed anybody.

 

Ellsbury I think we are just talking about some very large dollar figures - and if ownership is concerned about the luxury tax, which is their prerogative, that is a legitimate concern. The Red Sox are doing some due diligence, and they do have a little bit of leverage here. They have a substitute with potential, a fan base that will not punish them for the short term - winning a title will sell enough pink hats to assure that at last early - and a team without essentially no real holes. Yes, catcher is a problem since you'd get a lot of passed balls without one - but replacement level is so low that being below average there doesn't really hurt you that badly.

 

The number of teams that need a guy like him AND can pay the price is not high - just matching teams with need, I'd put the Rangers at the top of the list, but yes the Yankees are always a factor. That said, some more imaginative options to me might be San Francisco or Anaheim (who is in that arms race with the Dodgers for SoCal moolah). Frankly if I were Pittsburgh, the marginal revenue calculations could favor a high dollar, short offer, although I'd be surprised if that ever happened. (they were a playoff team who got zero from their RF spot for most of the season, the marginal boost Ellsbury could give might actually create a business case).

[marklmw]

Ruiz staying with Philly on a 3 /26M deal. Crazy. This helps the Sox as Ruiz > Salty so we can conceivably sign Salty 3 / 21? Comments?

[sk7326]

Ruiz staying with Philly on a 3 /26M deal. Crazy. This helps the Sox as Ruiz > Salty so we can conceivably sign Salty 3 / 21? Comments?

 

A really bad re-sign for Philly (a 2 year deal made some sense ... for somebody else, assuming the PED suspension and horrifying 2013 and age did not frighten you). A lot of "GM under pressure" in these moves. Once you realized he was not serious about dealing Lee, it is hard for a Philly fan to have a ton of hope for the near term.

[mvp 78]

A really bad re-sign for Philly (a 2 year deal made some sense ... for somebody else, assuming the PED suspension and horrifying 2013 and age did not frighten you). A lot of "GM under pressure" in these moves. Once you realized he was not serious about dealing Lee, it is hard for a Philly fan to have a ton of hope for the near term.

 

According to Phillies fans on twitter, they need to reassemble the 2009 team.

[User Name]

Beltran earned 26/2 for his last contract. Will he get the same I do not know. You mentioned Ellsbury signing for 6 years at an average of 18 per. 13+5 = 18. So 2 years of Beltran would offset 2 years of Ellsbury + 5m per year. Ellsbury is a premier lead off player. Which would you prefer to have UN? Anyway UN ... what kind of deal do you think Beltran will sign ... he is connected to a lot of teams. I think he will get a similar 26/2 deal that he just came off.

 

Let's say Beltran signs for 3/45 and Ellsbury signs for 6/100. Explain how Ellsbury costs "3-5 million more".

[sk7326]

According to Phillies fans on twitter, they need to reassemble the 2009 team.

 

LMAO ... let's put it this way, the Ryan Howard contract will be the flag bearer for ho-ho-horrendous deals for the next couple of decades

[marklmw]

Let's say Beltran signs for 3/45 and Ellsbury signs for 6/100. Explain how Ellsbury costs "3-5 million more".

 

If Ellsbury signs for 6/100 = 16.666M per. Beltran would be 15M per. Based on your assumptions Ellsbury is only costing 1.666M more per. We were not on the same page ... I was talking per year and you were talking total contract. Pretty hard to compare a 3 year contract against a 6 year contract. For the 3 years of Beltran it will cost the Sox only 4.8M more to have Ellsbury for the first 3 years.

[User Name]

If Ellsbury signs for 6/100 = 16.666M per. Beltran would be 15M per. Based on your assumptions Ellsbury is only costing 1.666M more per. We were not on the same page ... I was talking per year and you were talking total contract. Pretty hard to compare a 3 year contract against a 6 year contract. For the 3 years of Beltran it will cost the Sox only 4.8M more to have Ellsbury for the first 3 years.

 

Except that you can't look at it like that, because not only will Ellsbury be on payroll three more years, he will be on the roster three more years. It's definitely not the same impact.

[marklmw]

Except that you can't look at it like that, because not only will Ellsbury be on payroll three more years, he will be on the roster three more years. It's definitely not the same impact.

I have to disagree ... there is no way that Ellsbury is singing a 3 year deal at age 30. Beltran is 37 years old. I am making this argument under the assumption that the Sox want to stay under the luxury cap. I think going out the next three years is enough for forecasting. Will 16.6M be overpaying for Ellsbury at age 33 vs. 15M for Beltran at 37?

Based your your contract assumptions UN ... who would you prefer to sign ... Ellsbury or Beltran?

[Palodios]

Except that you can't look at it like that, because not only will Ellsbury be on payroll three more years, he will be on the roster three more years. It's definitely not the same impact.

 

I do see his point though. Would this team rather have a LF/DH at ages 37, 38 and 39 or a CF for ages 30-35 ?

 

One of the comparisons I keep seeing is Johnny Damon. When he went to free agency, he was two years older than Ellsbury is. Even on a 6 year deal, they would only have Ellsbury till he's 35 years old.

 

Edit -- technically 36 and two weeks. But he'll have just turned 36 when the contract is at its end.

Edited November 19, 2013 by Palodios

[User Name]

I have to disagree ... there is no way that Ellsbury is singing a 3 year deal at age 30. Beltran is 37 years old. I am making this argument under the assumption that the Sox want to stay under the luxury cap. I think going out the next three years is enough for forecasting. Will 16.6M be overpaying for Ellsbury at age 33 vs. 15M for Beltran at 37?

Based your your contract assumptions UN ... who would you prefer to sign ... Ellsbury or Beltran?

 

You clearly misunderstood what i just said.

 

I am presenting a scenario where Ellsbury signs a 6-year deal and Beltran signs a 3-year deal, and i am using what i believe is the lowest possible AAV Ellsbury will get.

[User Name]

I do see his point though. Would this team rather have a LF/DH at ages 37, 38 and 39 or a CF for ages 30-35 ?

 

One of the comparisons I keep seeing is Johnny Damon. When he went to free agency, he was two years older than Ellsbury is. Even on a 6 year deal, they would only have Ellsbury till he's 35 years old.

 

I'm not talking about age, or preference for player A or B. I am talking merely payroll impact here. You are both inserting a secondary argument here.

[Bellhorn04]

I do see his point though. Would this team rather have a LF/DH at ages 37, 38 and 39 or a CF for ages 30-35 ?

 

One of the comparisons I keep seeing is Johnny Damon. When he went to free agency, he was two years older than Ellsbury is. Even on a 6 year deal, they would only have Ellsbury till he's 35 years old.

 

Damon got 52 million. Ellsbury is projected to get more than double that. The difference in financial risk is huge.

[marklmw]

You clearly misunderstood what i just said.

 

I am presenting a scenario where Ellsbury signs a 6-year deal and Beltran signs a 3-year deal, and i am using what i believe is the lowest possible AAV Ellsbury will get.

 

I understand completely what you meant UN ... If we can sign Ellsbury for 6/100 let's get it done today! Especially if the option is Beltran or Ellsbury.

[Palodios]

I'm not talking about age, or preference for player A or B. I am talking merely payroll impact here. You are both inserting a secondary argument here.

 

No argument here. For some reason I thought Ellsbury was much older than he really is, but in fact, he was 29 years old as recently as a month or two ago.

[sk7326]

I do see his point though. Would this team rather have a LF/DH at ages 37, 38 and 39 or a CF for ages 30-35 ?

 

One of the comparisons I keep seeing is Johnny Damon. When he went to free agency, he was two years older than Ellsbury is.

 

With Ellsbury, I think the valuation comes down to basically one question. Is he injury prone, or just caught a couple of freaky breaks. If you can slough off the injuries, then he could be a pretty solid bet for the next 3 years at least as a quality CF, between the athleticism and the approach. But if a team doesn't want to, I get it. I don't think there are 30 HR seasons in his future - between "fluke rule" and the scouting explanation (he just started to feast on a pitch which teams don't throw him much anymore), but he is no slap hitter. The trick is trying to get teams to see his injury history his way.

[User Name]

Damon got 52 million. Ellsbury is projected to get more than double that. The difference in financial risk is huge.

 

Thank you. This is what i'm trying to get at.

[marklmw]

Damon got 52 million. Ellsbury is projected to get more than double that. The difference in financial risk is huge.

 

Damon was making 13M per and that contract began 8 years prior to the 2014 season. 13M in 2006 is probably closer to 20M in today's baseball dollars.

Damon averaged 23 SB's over his 4 years in NY. Furthermore a 6 year contract for Ellsbury is similar to the 4 year contract with Damon. Damon began his contract with NY at age 32. Ellsbury will begin the 2014 at age 30. So I have to disagree about the financial risk that you speak of.

[jung]

Even if you decide that Ells injury history is freaky which I at best only in part believe might be true, you have him playing CF. While CF is a big piece of the total value package Ells represents, CF chews up the best athletes in baseball. It grinds them to dust over time and there is little that I see in Ells that tells me he will avoid that. CF compounds the problem of basically relying on his athleticism to such a great degree. Athleticism is part and parcel of the game that Ells plays. As such while 29 sounds young, ain't necessarily so for a CF that is as reliant on maintaining his athleticism as Ells. If he had an arm, then he could transition to RF when he was done with Center or I should say when Center is done with him. As it is now, its basically LF for Ells when he is done in Center.

[User Name]

ESPN's Jayson Stark reports that the Red Sox were in on Ruiz until the very end, which is what caused Phillies GM Ruben Amaro Jr. to guarantee the third year and give a slight boost in terms of average annual value

 

Per MLBTR

[Bellhorn04]

Damon was making 13M per and that contract began 8 years prior to the 2014 season. 13M in 2006 is probably closer to 20M in today's baseball dollars.

Damon averaged 23 SB's over his 4 years in NY. Furthermore a 6 year contract for Ellsbury is similar to the 4 year contract with Damon. Damon began his contract with NY at age 32. Ellsbury will begin the 2014 at age 30. So I have to disagree about the financial risk that you speak of.

 

It's the length that magnifies the risk into an unacceptable one. Just use an extreme example like Pujols. If his contract was 3 years at 24 million all you can lose is 72 million. But it's 10 years. If he gets injured or falls off the map performance-wise now, the Angels are looking at a possible loss of close to 200 million, which is crippling.