And the off season begins (2018-19)

[moonslav59]

If you take emotions out of it, Betts has the most value in a trade. We can probably get two cost controlled players at two positions, one being a starting pitcher.

 

If we win it all in 2019, I can reset and see us rebuild. Won't we get draft compensation for losing Xander, Sale, Porcello and Martinez? Trade away JBJ and Betts. And hope Pedey retires. Hell you might as well trade E Rod who will still have two years left and definitely have some value.

 

Build a team around Devers and Beni. Under this scenario, we have less than $70M tied up. Year later you can re-sign Betts when he becomes a FA.

 

I think fans will understand, as long as we win it all again in 2019.

 

When your over the luxury tax limit the comp picks are not very good.

 

Look what we are getting for Kimbrel.

[moonslav59]

I would say that Sale and Bogey are the 2 most likely not to be retainable.

 

I agree. JBJ is probably 3rd.

 

We may let Porcello walk.

[oldtimer]

When your over the luxury tax limit the comp picks are not very good.

 

Look what we are getting for Kimbrel.

 

I noticed the banner on TV today indicated the Sox were definitely over the $40 million and will be penalized by moving our pick down 10 spots. Can't see going over again in 2019.

[moonslav59]

I noticed the banner on TV today indicated the Sox were definitely over the $40 million and will be penalized by moving our pick down 10 spots. Can't see going over again in 2019.

 

We're about $5M from the max line now.

 

It might be hard to stay under.

[Northern Star]

To follow up on my point to Kimmi, she's right about investing $300 mil in one player, but on the other hand, that's where the game is going. If they were to invest in any one player, I think most fans want it to be Betts. I think fans like Kimmi want to put all these very sensible economic handcuffs on the Sox, but it's not a sensible economic game. We know Boston can't keep everyone, but they can't let everyone walk and start over either. I think someone on this board said it a while back, there's no rebuilding in Boston.

[Kimmi]

Sense in baseball terms, or sense in big market baseball team terms?

 

Sense in teams facing a pending cliff terms.

[Kimmi]

If you take emotions out of it, Betts has the most value in a trade. We can probably get two cost controlled players at two positions, one being a starting pitcher.

 

If we win it all in 2019, I can reset and see us rebuild. Won't we get draft compensation for losing Xander, Sale, Porcello and Martinez? Trade away JBJ and Betts. And hope Pedey retires. Hell you might as well trade E Rod who will still have two years left and definitely have some value.

 

Build a team around Devers and Beni. Under this scenario, we have less than $70M tied up. Year later you can re-sign Betts when he becomes a FA.

 

I think fans will understand, as long as we win it all again in 2019.

 

I think you hit the nail on the head when you said to take the emotions out of it. Everybody loves Mookie and wants him back, including myself. But signing him to the type of contract that I think he's going to command is really not the smartest thing to do, for a couple of reasons. I can certainly understand why some fans feel like he needs to be re-signed no matter what cost.

 

It really will be interesting to see how Henry and Dombrowski handle things next year.

[Kimmi]

When your over the luxury tax limit the comp picks are not very good.

 

Look what we are getting for Kimbrel.

 

Even more reason to trade Mookie before he possibly walks.

[Kimmi]

To follow up on my point to Kimmi, she's right about investing $300 mil in one player, but on the other hand, that's where the game is going. If they were to invest in any one player, I think most fans want it to be Betts. I think fans like Kimmi want to put all these very sensible economic handcuffs on the Sox, but it's not a sensible economic game. We know Boston can't keep everyone, but they can't let everyone walk and start over either. I think someone on this board said it a while back, there's no rebuilding in Boston.

 

You don't have to let everyone walk. Keep some of the players who won't cost as much to keep. We can keep 2 or 3 players for cost of Mookie.

[Bellhorn04]

I think fans like Kimmi want to put all these very sensible economic handcuffs on the Sox, but it's not a sensible economic game. We know Boston can't keep everyone, but they can't let everyone walk and start over either. I think someone on this board said it a while back, there's no rebuilding in Boston.

 

Well put, Star. I'm an accountant and in my profession we have some very conservative principles. But in the fairly insane world of MLB you can't be strictly conservative. You need to make some aggressive moves. The Sox have largely been following that philosophy, going back as far as the signing of Manny Ramirez. And I would say it has paid off quite handsomely.

[Bellhorn04]

How are we going to replace them? It takes either money or prospects. If we're resetting, we won't have the money. And we don't have the prospects.

 

Let me clarify. notin was presenting a scenario of losing them all and replacing none of them. I'm saying that scenario isn't happening. I'm not saying we'll be able to replace them all. I know that's not possible.

[Bellhorn04]

You don't have to let everyone walk. Keep some of the players who won't cost as much to keep. We can keep 2 or 3 players for cost of Mookie.

 

But if Mookie is a consistent 8-9 WAR player, 35 million is a bargain, per FanGraphs.

[oldtimer]

Well put, Star. I'm an accountant and in my profession we have some very conservative principles. But in the fairly insane world of MLB you can't be strictly conservative. You need to make some aggressive moves. The Sox have largely been following that philosophy, going back as far as the signing of Manny Ramirez. And I would say it has paid off quite handsomely.

 

I imagine a business the size of the Red Sox has developed an economic model which accounts for how much you can afford to pay for players on the 25 man roster and how much you can pay for those filling out the 40 man roster. I would imagine the amounts are developed into some sort of pyramid, with the best making the most and on down. Clearly starting pitchers and star players are those who will get the most. Like other businesses, they live in a competitive world which establishes the expected value of the players in ML ball.

 

One could argue the Sox made concious decisions to incur penalties of both Luxury tax and depletion of our minors program in order to win a world series. Making bad decisions like Hanley, Panda and others certainly hampered what the Sox can do within the confines of any model they have developed. I also believe that the Pedey deal was a mistake and perhaps also the Price deal, although it paid off this year. There are going to be some decisions that will be shown not to work since each of them carries a risk. It's up to management to make the fewest mistakes in having the risk implode on them. Think of Thornburg and Smith. It happens.

 

How does this thinking apply to Mookie? Clearly if you pay him $35 million a year, we will have to pay others less and perhaps lose some of our best other assets. The second part of this is what if you give Mookie a long term guaranteed contract of 8 to 10 years. A lot can happen in that length of time and perhaps an injury, illness or loss of ability leave the team limiting it's options and also not having a star player. DD and the front office is not stupid and knows all of this. They will do a risk/reward evaluation and make a decision that should be in the best interest of the club and I am fine with that. The only thing which gives me pause is the contract given to Pedey based on what appears to be sentimentality and the contract to Price which seems to have been a high risk. I don't pin other contracts like Panda's on the current management.

[Bellhorn04]

I imagine a business the size of the Red Sox has developed an economic model which accounts for how much you can afford to pay for players on the 25 man roster and how much you can pay for those filling out the 40 man roster. I would imagine the amounts are developed into some sort of pyramid, with the best making the most and on down. Clearly starting pitchers and star players are those who will get the most. Like other businesses, they live in a competitive world which establishes the expected value of the players in ML ball.

 

One could argue the Sox made concious decisions to incur penalties of both Luxury tax and depletion of our minors program in order to win a world series. Making bad decisions like Hanley, Panda and others certainly hampered what the Sox can do within the confines of any model they have developed. I also believe that the Pedey deal was a mistake and perhaps also the Price deal, although it paid off this year. There are going to be some decisions that will be shown not to work since each of them carries a risk. It's up to management to make the fewest mistakes in having the risk implode on them. Think of Thornburg and Smith. It happens.

 

How does this thinking apply to Mookie? Clearly if you pay him $35 million a year, we will have to pay others less and perhaps lose some of our best other assets. The second part of this is what if you give Mookie a long term guaranteed contract of 8 to 10 years. A lot can happen in that length of time and perhaps an injury, illness or loss of ability leave the team limiting it's options and also not having a star player. DD and the front office is not stupid and knows all of this. They will do a risk/reward evaluation and make a decision that should be in the best interest of the club and I am fine with that. The only thing which gives me pause is the contract given to Pedey based on what appears to be sentimentality and the contract to Price which seems to have been a high risk. I don't pin other contracts like Panda's on the current management.

 

I think the Price contract is a perfect example of the kind of high-risk signing that can make or break. Was it a good move or bad move? The jury is still out, I suppose. But Price was integral in winning it all this year, and as another poster here keeps saying, flags fly forever.

 

Plus at the end of 2018 Price looks like the real David Price, healthy and happy, with a rejuvenated pitching approach, and maybe a guy who can be a huge asset in his remaining 4 years. But who knows? The risk and uncertainty are still there.

[notin]

I think the Price contract is a perfect example of the kind of high-risk signing that can make or break. Was it a good move or bad move? The jury is still out, I suppose. But Price was integral in winning it all this year, and as another poster here keeps saying, flags fly forever.

 

Plus at the end of 2018 Price looks like the real David Price, healthy and happy, with a rejuvenated pitching approach, and maybe a guy who can be a huge asset in his remaining 4 years. But who knows? The risk and uncertainty are still there.

 

The flag does fly forever, but if this team doesn’t repeat in 2019 and goes into a playoff-free slump that lasts an incredible two seasons, 2018 will be long-forgotten and the Price contract a massive hindrance...

[Bellhorn04]

The flag does fly forever, but if this team doesn’t repeat in 2019 and goes into a playoff-free slump that lasts an incredible two seasons, 2018 will be long-forgotten and the Price contract a massive hindrance...

 

Aha. Well, 2018 should not be long-forgotten. What's the point of it all if a magical, perfect season is quickly forgotten?

 

What you're describing is a neurotic need for constant gratification that by definition cannot be satisfied - the type of mentality you see on game threads. We've already had d-money check in to say he's not very excited with our offseason so far!

[Fan_since_Boggs]

While I couldn't find Eric Van's defense of Brian Johnson, he had the following to say about Swihart. He believes the Red Sox will keep Swihart and will move Sandy Leon.

 

My biggest issue with trading Swihart is that it’s sell-low. Before his injury, he hit reasonably well. In just under 400 PA, he was worth 1.8 fWAR and he OPSed just over .710 in 103 games. He was unfairly demoted because, you know, John Farrell. His defense needed work, but he’s always had a strong arm and good pop times. His framing and calling has clearly gotten better. Given his use this year and erratic playing time, I’m inclined to put down the overall 64 wRC+ as a product largely of that, particularly since his performance improved quite a bit after Vazquez went down. He had 6 2b and 3 hr while hitting .250 in the second half, vs just 4 2b while hitting .207 in the first half. I think all the time off probably hurt him to start the year, too. Extrapolate his second half numbers over 400-450 PA (and I think that’s absolutely reasonable given that they were quite similar to his early-career numbers), and you’re looking at .250 with 25 or so 2b and 10-15 HR. And given that he’s still had just 600 MLB PA, he’s probably got a bit more coming. He hits a good number of LD (24% career, though that’s prob not stabilized yet, the eyeball test supports it), so his high career BABIP of .342 is probably less fluke and more just his batted ball style (the good speed obviously helps). He hits to all fields with a 40/30/30 breakdown. What all of that says to me is that he’s probably a true-talent .260-.275/.330/.400 hitter, which is quite good for a catcher. I can easily see him OPSing .800 at peak. He has a plus arm, plus pop times, throws runners out at 35-40%, and is a good base runner despite being a catcher. He’s also an above-average framer. He probably needs a lot of work calling games, and he has intermittently had problems blocking the ball. But I also think all the tools to be an above-average *defensive* catcher are there. And if it all comes together (and I really don’t think he’s all that far away, plus he’s still young for a C), you’re talking an above-average overall C who’s a 2.5-3 WAR player, possibly more. Again, pre-injury he was worth 1.8 fWAR/400 PA, or 2 fWAR per 450 PA/110-115 games...as a called-up-early-due-to-need 23 y/o. I just don’t see any way it makes sense to trade an asset like that at his near-lowest value, especially not for a team trying to limit future expenditures to extend their own players.

 

What folks are forgetting is that when he was the #17 prospect in MLB he was viewed as Buster Posey light, and a guy whose ceiling was borderline All-Star. That really hasn't changed in terms of perceived tools. telson's 2-3 WAR projection is just extrapolating from what he's actually accomplished; it's much closer to what teams could reasonably expect, rather than what they hope for.

 

I do think it's possible given that he projects to be much better than the fourth best option out there, and there are six teams who need a starting catcher. I think it'll be rendered moot because it makes more sense to trade Leon.

 

I would trade Swihart over Leon, but I want a top prospect back for him. If I can't get that on the trade market, I would trade Leon instead.

 

Due to the fact that Wheeler is signed for only one year, a Swihart and B.Johnson for Wheeler trade would make sense for the Mets. It would make less sense for the Red Sox unless they can extend Wheeler's contract beyond this season.

Edited December 16, 2018 by Fan_since_Boggs

[notin]

Aha. Well, 2018 should not be long-forgotten. What's the point of it all if a magical, perfect season is quickly forgotten?

 

What you're describing is a neurotic need for constant gratification that by definition cannot be satisfied - the type of mentality you see on game threads.!

 

Also the mentality I saw all through 2014.

 

Too many fans can’t watch or handle it when their team isn’t winning, but losing is 50% of sports...

[Bellhorn04]

While I couldn't find Eric Van's defense of Brian Johnson, he had the following to say about Swihart. He believes the Red Sox will keep Swihart and will move Sandy Leon.

 

 

 

I would trade Swihart over Leon, but I want a top prospect back for him. If I can't get that on the trade market, I would trade Leon instead.

 

Due to the fact that Wheeler is signed for only one year, a Swihart and B.Johnson for Wheeler trade would make sense for the Mets. It would make less sense for the Red Sox unless they can extend Wheeler's contract beyond this season.

 

Leaving salaries out of it, the Mets trading Wheeler for Swihart and Johnson would be like us trading Porcello for a backup catcher or utility guy, and a #5/6 starter/long reliever. You just don't do things like that.

[Fan_since_Boggs]

Leaving salaries out of it, the Mets trading Wheeler for Swihart and Johnson would be like us trading Porcello for a backup catcher or utility guy, and a #5/6 starter/long reliever. You just don't do things like that.

 

If the Red Sox needed a starting catcher, trading one year of Porcello (and eliminating his 20 mil dollar contract) for a cost-controlled catcher with starting ability would make perfect sense.

[notin]

While I couldn't find Eric Van's defense of Brian Johnson, he had the following to say about Swihart. He believes the Red Sox will keep Swihart and will move Sandy Leon.

 

 

 

I would trade Swihart over Leon, but I want a top prospect back for him. If I can't get that on the trade market, I would trade Leon instead.

 

Due to the fact that Wheeler is signed for only one year, a Swihart and B.Johnson for Wheeler trade would make sense for the Mets. It would make less sense for the Red Sox unless they can extend Wheeler's contract beyond this season.

 

The chances of getting a top prospect for Swihart are nil. Dombrowski tried to pry a good prospect from teams already and failed. And Swihart hasn’t enhanced his worth at all since.

 

Some people love Johnson. No idea why. He isn’t good. And the Mets trading Wheeler for the pair makes ZERO sense, especially since neither has much going for them beyond control and cost. But by that argument, the Sox could also have traded Marcus Walden for Paul Goldschmidt. After all, Walden is cheap and controllable.

 

And do you honestly think for a second if the Mets made Wheeler available, the best offer they’d get is Johndson and Swihart?

[OH FOY]

Losing an inning eater like Porcello, is the last thing I would do. You never go through a season without, injuries to the Pitching staff. You got to have at least 1 steady starter.

 

Last year Sale's Shoulder, 2 years ago Price, E-Rod always seems to be out long Periods. Not me, I want Rick.

Edited December 16, 2018 by OH FOY!

[notin]

While I couldn't find Eric Van's defense of Brian Johnson, he had the following to say about Swihart. He believes the Red Sox will keep Swihart and will move Sandy Leon.

 

 

 

I would trade Swihart over Leon, but I want a top prospect back for him. If I can't get that on the trade market, I would trade Leon instead.

 

Due to the fact that Wheeler is signed for only one year, a Swihart and B.Johnson for Wheeler trade would make sense for the Mets. It would make less sense for the Red Sox unless they can extend Wheeler's contract beyond this season.

 

Eric Van makes way to big of a deal about 1.5 fWAR 4 years ago for Swihart and ignores the fact that Caleb Joseph posted 1.4 fWAR that same year in roughly the same playing time. Joseph was non-tendered by the Orioles of all teams and is currently a free agent.

 

Any reason the Mets should be willing to surrender an extremely good SP in Wheeler for a complete gamble in Swihart when Caleb Joseph is available for a minor league deal?

[dgalehouse]

I think there remains a feeling that Swihart has the potential to be more than he has demonstrated to date. On the other hand , Sandy Leon is what he is , despite having acquired a fan club of sorts here on TalkSox.

[notin]

I think there remains a feeling that Swihart has the potential to be more than he has demonstrated to date. On the other hand , Sandy Leon is what he is , despite having acquired a fan club of sorts here on TalkSox.

 

Sandy Leon is a typical MLB backup catcher - good glove, no bat. There are plenty of Sandy Leon’s scattered around MLB.

 

Swihart does have more potential, but it’s really been so long since he did anything, it’s getting to be less and less potential every year. Sure injuries have been a factor, but they are also part of why he has less potential than he did 4 years ago. Can he be dealt? Sure. But not for much . 27yo wild cards who haven’t made it yet but we’re once too prospects are as superfluous in MLB as backup catchers. But hey, teams took shots on the Dustin Ackley’s of the world. Just not heavy shots...

[Nick]

Losing an inning eater like Porcello, is the last thing I would do. You never go through a season without, injuries to the Pitching staff. You got to have at least 1 steady starter.

 

Last year Sale's Shoulder, 2 years ago Price, E-Rod always seems to be out long Periods. Not me, I want Rick.

 

We're poised to go for it again in 2019. Why would you trade Porcello or any of the other four? Chances are more likely that one of the starters will be injured at some point than all five being healthy the entire year. I wouldn't take that risk.

 

I really don't think our catching situation will get any worse than 2018. I think there's some upside to that position. Hopefully Vaz will stay healthy the whole year.

Edited December 16, 2018 by Nick

[moonslav59]

Even more reason to trade Mookie before he possibly walks.

 

The best teams in the league will have players like Betts- players making $30M a year.

 

Letting Betts walk will be a big mistake.

 

I can see, if we were a team that has a $120M budget, a guy like Betts can not carry a team like that on his shoulders, but we will likely be a team spending close to the line everyb year. It will be tough for a couple years paying Price and Betts, but you don't trade or let walk the heart and soul of your team.

 

This would be worse than trading Lynn and Burleson and letting Fisk walk, combined.

[moonslav59]

If the Red Sox needed a starting catcher, trading one year of Porcello (and eliminating his 20 mil dollar contract) for a cost-controlled catcher with starting ability would make perfect sense.

 

I can't disagree anymore.

 

Trading a solid pitcher like Porcello- the rock of our rotation for even the best catcher in MLB would be a big mistake. Now, if the money saved by trading Porcello would allow us to sign a key player or two, we would not have been able to do otherwise, I'll listen.

 

Catcher OPS is about the least important aspect of a catcher's portfolio.

 

[OH FOY]

I can't disagree anymore.

 

Trading a solid pitcher like Porcello- the rock of our rotation for even the best catcher in MLB would be a big mistake. Now, if the money saved by trading Porcello would allow us to sign a key player or two, we would not have been able to do otherwise, I'll listen.

 

Catcher OPS is about the least important aspect of a catcher's portfolio.

 

Couldn't agree more. The Pitchers on this Staff, are part of the Sandy Leon Fan Club too. All rave about him as a Game caller.

[moonslav59]

We're poised to go for it again in 2019. Why would you trade Porcello or any of the other four? Chances are more likely that one of the starters will be injured at some point than all five being healthy the entire year. I wouldn't take that risk.

 

I really don't think our catching situation will get any worse than 2018. I think there's some upside to that position. Hopefully Vaz will stay healthy the whole year.

 

I agree.

 

If you look at 2018, as compared to other seasons or the league norm, we actually stayed pretty healthy. Wright's injury hurt, but he was our 5/6 starter, and we ended up getting Eovaldi for pretty cheap out of the need created by some SP'er injuries.

 

GS'd in 2018

 

33 Porcello (and some want to trade Porcello)

30 Price

27 Sale

23 ERod

11 Pom

4 Wright

(15 starts from our 5/6 slot pitchers along with losing Sale for the last 2 months were our biggest losses in the rotation, except maybe losing ERod for the about months.)

 

13 Johnson

11 Eovaldi

8 Velazquez

1 each from Cuevas & Beeks