And the off season begins (2018-19)

[notin]

I disagree on the "neighborhood" play. They have to have something unique. Coming back to Boston is a guarantee that he will play the short side of a platoon. He will get offers where he is gonna start against everyone. His experience and production could easily carve out a COF, 1B, or DH role on another squad. He would need to get a total package in Boston that guarantees him more years and more total dollars. Think about it. If he is offered a 1 yr deal in Baltimore to show the kids how it's done, he'd start 150 games injuries aside. He would take that over a 1 yr deal in Boston just because his value will rise. If he gets a 2 yr deal in Cleveland to be their everyday 1b, he'd take that over a 2 yr deal to be a platoon man in Boston. The sox need to offer him a larger package over a longer term for him to type cast himself into a lower earning role. Like I said before, I see him signing a 2 yr $15 mil deal on the open market to start. Maybe the sox give him a 3 yr $18 mil deal. Saves $1.5 mil AAV and offers Pearce an extra year and $3 mil more for his age 38 season. You're not getting him on a 1 yr deal unless he truly takes a discount

 

This operates on the asssumption that any team will give Pearce 150 or so starts, which is a lot for a player who has never started more than 77 times in a season. While he may have some “veteran leadership”, even teams like Baltimore do already have veteran players.

 

I don’t think the Sox have to offer anything unique. Any team offering him a role that involves 150 starts is the team already making the unique offering...

[Bellhorn04]

Let's hear your guesses.

Team - Years - Contract

 

Manny Machado:

LA Dodgers / 11 (player opt out after 4) / $379.5MM

 

Bryce Harper:

Phillies / 8 (player opt out after 3) / $264MM

 

I'll guess

 

Machado - Yankees 350 mill

Harper - Dodgers 350 mill

[notin]

Unfortunately I agree with Jacko on this one. Compare Pearce to Kendrys Morales. That's about the level of production Pearce would provide overall as a fulltime starter and Pierce is a superior defender. Morales is starting.

 

 

And yet both players are the same age, yet Morales has started 150 games or more every year of his career in which he was not injured or holding out and Pearce never has. Not sure why he would suddenly be viewed as a full time player at age 35 when he wasn’t from ages 24 thru 34...

[notin]

good point.

 

if i'm pearce:

- I played for the team i grew up rooting for

- I was the WS MVP and got the hero welcome in a parade

- was an awesome memory that me and my dad will never forget

- I am 35 and this will be my last contract - show me the $$$

 

I’m not sure Pearce is all about playing for the Sox. He was drafted by them in 2004 and didn’t sign. As he was a junior in college at the time, presumably he figured he could get more money elsewhere.

 

I look at it this way. In signing, factors for him could include money, years (guaranteed and option), playing time or role, geography, and chance at winning.

 

How do you think he ranks those 5 factors (and am I forgetting any) when making a decision?

 

I’m guessing money and years are 1 and 2, and I’m not sure in what order. I could see playing time or role as a big factor. As he’s been a career journeyman, not sure if he cares about geography.

 

Thoughts?

[Slasher9]

I’m not sure Pearce is all about playing for the Sox. He was drafted by them in 2004 and didn’t sign. As he was a junior in college at the time, presumably he figured he could get more money elsewhere.

 

I look at it this way. In signing, factors for him could include money, years (guaranteed and option), playing time or role, geography, and chance at winning.

 

How do you think he ranks those 5 factors (and am I forgetting any) when making a decision?

 

I’m guessing money and years are 1 and 2, and I’m not sure in what order. I could see playing time or role as a big factor. As he’s been a career journeyman, not sure if he cares about geography.

 

Thoughts?

 

i think for Pearce the factors will be:

$$$ #1 thru #5 (basically nothing else i write after this even factors in)

#6 years

#7 geography

#8 playing time

#9 strength of team to make playoff run

[Slasher9]

I'll guess

 

Machado - Yankees 350 mill

Harper - Dodgers 350 mill

 

10 years for both?

[Slasher9]

I’m not sure Pearce is all about playing for the Sox. He was drafted by them in 2004 and didn’t sign. As he was a junior in college at the time, presumably he figured he could get more money elsewhere.

 

I look at it this way. In signing, factors for him could include money, years (guaranteed and option), playing time or role, geography, and chance at winning.

 

How do you think he ranks those 5 factors (and am I forgetting any) when making a decision?

 

I’m guessing money and years are 1 and 2, and I’m not sure in what order. I could see playing time or role as a big factor. As he’s been a career journeyman, not sure if he cares about geography.

 

Thoughts?

 

also, my original post you replied to may have been slightly confusing.

my point was...he already accomplished the playing for the sox thing and winning the ws thing. this next contract is all and only about the cash money.

[kenmeister]

I'll guess

 

Machado - Yankees 350 mill

Harper - Dodgers 350 mill

 

I think both teams will regret those contracts. Both of these guys are over-valued.

[notin]

also, my original post you replied to may have been slightly confusing.

my point was...he already accomplished the playing for the sox thing and winning the ws thing. this next contract is all and only about the cash money.

 

That would neither surprise me or make Pearce unique... or

[Bellhorn04]

10 years for both?

 

Probably, yes.

[Tedballgame]

Probably, yes.

Any teams giving out 10 year contracts will regret them in about 5. They hardly ever work. The closest one working was Manny and it was 8 years. Manny produced year after year. Pujols? Nope. I know Harper and Machado are younger but 10 years is a long time. Injuries, decline, being a jerk (Machado) can all make 10 year contracts risky.

[Kimmi]

And part of it is an agent and the players union pressuring a player to get the max contract.

 

You are right. That's a fair point.

[Kimmi]

good point.

 

if i'm pearce:

- I played for the team i grew up rooting for

- I was the WS MVP and got the hero welcome in a parade

- was an awesome memory that me and my dad will never forget

- I am 35 and this will be my last contract - show me the $$$

 

Now see, if I'm Pearce, I'm going with nostalgia.

 

I want my last hurrah to be with the team that I love.

[Kimmi]

Let's hear your guesses.

Team - Years - Contract

 

Manny Machado:

LA Dodgers / 11 (player opt out after 4) / $379.5MM

 

Bryce Harper:

Phillies / 8 (player opt out after 3) / $264MM

 

I think Machado signs with the Yankees.

 

And my feeling is, thank goodness neither will sign with the Sox.

[harmony]

Any teams giving out 10 year contracts will regret them in about 5. They hardly ever work. The closest one working was Manny and it was 8 years. Manny produced year after year. Pujols? Nope. I know Harper and Machado are younger but 10 years is a long time. Injuries, decline, being a jerk (Machado) can all make 10 year contracts risky.

In December 2013 I displayed rare anger when the Seattle Mariners signed Robinson Cano to a 10-year, $240 million contract but Cano has posted 20.7 fWAR, valued at $163.7 million, in the first five seasons of his Seattle contract. Steamer projects Cano with a 2019 WAR of 3.0, which would again justify Cano's annual salary of $24 million.

 

It's the final years of Cano's contract that are concerning unless Cano ages like "big brother" David Ortiz:

 

https://nesn.com/2016/08/robinson-cano-on-big-brother-david-ortiz-every-player-would-love-to-have-his-career/

[oldtimer]

Now see, if I'm Pearce, I'm going with nostalgia.

 

I want my last hurrah to be with the team that I love.

 

Playing for a team that may well repeat in the World Series has a monetary value that can be exploited and also there is a winners share. Nothing to sneeze at for a guy that hasn't been getting lucrative contracts.

[Kimmi]

Playing for a team that may well repeat in the World Series has a monetary value that can be exploited and also there is a winners share. Nothing to sneeze at for a guy that hasn't been getting lucrative contracts.

 

My feeling is that these guys have enough money that they should be able to comfortably leave some money on the table. In other words, it shouldn't have to be all about the money. As I posted earlier, it probably has more to do with ego with a lot of the players than it does with the actual extra money.

[sk7326]

I think both teams will regret those contracts. Both of these guys are over-valued.

 

They're not ... and it's not an efficient market anyway. 26 year olds of this caliber just don't hit the open market. Any ten year deal is hard to swallow, but you are buying their entire projected peak.

 

I expect they will sign 8-10 year deals with an opt-out after 3 of 4 years. In the past these clauses have seemed stupidly pro-player ... but in a case like this it makes sense for everyone to some degree.

[sk7326]

My feeling is that these guys have enough money that they should be able to comfortably leave some money on the table. In other words, it shouldn't have to be all about the money. As I posted earlier, it probably has more to do with ego with a lot of the players than it does with the actual extra money.

 

If the Red Sox offer Pearce $2M, he will laugh in their face as well he should. If they offer $5M and a bunch of other people are offering $7M or something - then the other factors will probably kick in. If I were in his position I would want to be paid fairly - maybe not top dollar, but not insultingly so either. (like lester 4/70)

[Kimmi]

If the Red Sox offer Pearce $2M, he will laugh in their face as well he should. If they offer $5M and a bunch of other people are offering $7M or something - then the other factors will probably kick in. If I were in his position I would want to be paid fairly - maybe not top dollar, but not insultingly so either. (like lester 4/70)

 

I don't disagree with any of this sk. I'm not looking for Pearce or any player to be lowballed or disrespected. The Sox will have to be in the same ballpark.

[moonslav59]

Pearce has been better vs Righties than Moreland over the past 3 seasons. It didn't stop Cora from starting Moreland almost exclusively against RHP

 

Hmmm....

 

Games started by Pearce with Boston:

 

21 vs RHPs

 

15 vs LHPs

 

(not counting the playoffs)

[jacksonianmarch]

And how many of those were due to Moreland’s injury

[moonslav59]

Do teams really promise a guy like Pearce he will be guaranteed a FT position?

 

Now, that's not to say, he and his agent might look at team rosters and determine what place he should play more often, but this is likely his last big contract, so he is probably not looking for someone to assure him 150 starts, so he can put up a big year and get a bigger contract later.

 

I'm not saying he doesn't want to play everyday, but players who are looking for that (contractually) are usually doing so to increase future contract value. They sign one year deals.

 

Pearce is probably going to sign with the highest bidder, unless the numbers are close. If someone goes 3 years, we probably can't compete.

 

I'd love to have him back, but even if we do re-sign him, it's not lock he keeps doing very well with us as he ages out.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[moonslav59]

And how many of those were due to Moreland’s injury

 

IDK, it was your point to defend.

 

Clearly, Pearce was signed to platoon, but he did pretty good vs righties. That may have played into more playing time- not just injuries to Moreland.

[notin]

Playing for a team that may well repeat in the World Series has a monetary value that can be exploited and also there is a winners share. Nothing to sneeze at for a guy that hasn't been getting lucrative contracts.

 

But guaranteed money is just that - guarantees.

 

He can’t exploit being part of a back-to-back championship team if they don’t repeat...

[moonslav59]

We can afford Pearce, if we can find someone to take Moreland and pay his contract ($5.5M x 1).

 

2016-2018

vs RHP

.789 Pearce (597 PAs)

.755 Moreland (1248 PAs)

vs LHPs

.908 Pearce (314 PAs)

.725 Moreland (290)

 

Chavis could provide a platoon, if needed, or we could try to get JD to play 1B some. (Ockimey bats LH'd.)

 

 

 

[notin]

We can afford Pearce, if we can find someone to take Moreland and pay his contract ($5.5M x 1).

 

2016-2018

vs RHP

.789 Pearce (597 PAs)

.755 Moreland (1248 PAs)

vs LHPs

.908 Pearce (314 PAs)

.725 Moreland (290)

 

Chavis could provide a platoon, if needed, or we could try to get JD to play 1B some. (Ockimey bats LH'd.)

 

 

 

 

I’m fine with using Swihart or Chavis as the platoon. Pearce is actually a very inconsistent player whose OPS+ is either under 100 or over 130 and never in between. This means it is possible to sign Bad Pearce, and I’m fine with him leaving here a hero...

[sk7326]

It makes perfect sense to offer Pearce a 1 year deal and see if he can do better in the market.

[moonslav59]

I’m fine with using Swihart or Chavis as the platoon. Pearce is actually a very inconsistent player whose OPS+ is either under 100 or over 130 and never in between. This means it is possible to sign Bad Pearce, and I’m fine with him leaving here a hero...

 

I don't think Swihart's bat will ever be good enough to play the long side of a 1B platoon.

 

Chavis might deserve a look, and if he doesn't work, then try to trade for next year's Steve Pearce.

[moonslav59]

It makes perfect sense to offer Pearce a 1 year deal and see if he can do better in the market.

 

Pearce might view 2018 as the best he can do, and this is the time to max out on his biggest contract dream amount possible.