Betts or Martinez?

[TylerD]

Sorry late to the thread

 

Keep both. Problem solved.

[notin]

How about... (Lux tax $)?

 

Betts ($28M/1)

Eovaldi ($17M x 3)

Chavis & Walden

 

for

Syndergaard ($10M + last arb)

Familia ($10M x 2)

Jed Lowrie ($10M x 1)

 

 

 

I'd be better with that, but I don't think the Mets can afford it,,,

[moonslav59]

I'd be better with that, but I don't think the Mets can afford it,,,

 

They're adding $15M next year but more afterwards.

 

I guess we could send some cash or take on Ramos's $9.5M x 1.

[moonslav59]

The trade simulator accepted this trade:

 

Eovaldi, JBJ, Chavis, Duran

 

to CLE for

 

Kluber, Hand, Santana, Carrasco & Luplow

 

It looks like overkill, but CLE would save a lot of money in 2020, but not the next 2 years.

 

Santana $20M (Lux) + option ($17.5M w $500K buyout)

Kluber $16.5M + option ($14M w $1M buyout)

Carrasco $11.75M x 3 + option ($14M w $3M buyout)

Hand $6.6M + option ($10M w $1M buyout)

$54M in 2020 Total

$14M min (w 3 buyouts) to $53M (no buyouts) in 2021

$12M in 2022

 

CLE gets:

$17M x 3 Eovaldi

$11M x 1 JBJ

$28M in 2020 total (Save $26M)

$17M in 2021

$17M in 2022

 

The Sox would have to then trade Price or Betts to have any chance at resetting, or trade Martinez & Santana or Kluber.

 

[cp176]

The trade simulator accepted this trade:

 

Eovaldi, JBJ, Chavis, Duran

 

to CLE for

 

Kluber, Hand, Santana, Carrasco & Luplow

 

It looks like overkill, but CLE would save a lot of money in 2020, but not the next 2 years.

 

Santana $20M (Lux) + option ($17.5M w $500K buyout)

Kluber $16.5M + option ($14M w $1M buyout)

Carrasco $11.75M x 3 + option ($14M w $3M buyout)

Hand $6.6M + option ($10M w $1M buyout)

$54M in 2020 Total

$14M min (w 3 buyouts) to $53M (no buyouts) in 2021

$12M in 2022

 

CLE gets:

$17M x 3 Eovaldi

$11M x 1 JBJ

$28M in 2020 total (Save $26M)

$17M in 2021

$17M in 2022

 

The Sox would have to then trade Price or Betts to have any chance at resetting, or trade Martinez & Santana or Kluber.

 

 

I think that the majority of fans would be extremely surprised if both Betts and Martinez were not in the lineup. i think that the ultimate goal remains to win games not to save money. Moves might be made but I'm betting that they will be made with an eye toward improving our team now.

[moonslav59]

I think that the majority of fans would be extremely surprised if both Betts and Martinez were not in the lineup. i think that the ultimate goal remains to win games not to save money. Moves might be made but I'm betting that they will be made with an eye toward improving our team now.

 

I think any trade we make will be based on making the team better, except for maybe the one or two we make to get under the tax line, assuming we go that route.

 

Trading JBJ will likely not make us "better now," but he just has one year of team control, so it seems he will be the guy dealt to put us barely under the luxury tax line. Any further moves will require a delicate balance of money, if we indeed try to stay under all year.

 

I get the reasons why we want to stay competitive, or at least appear competitive to fans and viewers, and I'd very much like us to stay competitive or semi-competitive every year, but I fear trying to stay marginally competitive my hamper efforts or extend the time period it takes for us to become highly competitive.

 

In my opinion, trying to get to highly competitive as quickly as possible without harming the extended future is a worthy goal. The whole budget- luxury tax issue is

what mucks up mostly short but also long term plans, and us fans not really knowing how firm the commitment is to reset makes it hard for us to suggest or discuss reasonable or possible moves we can make to improve the team now and or for 2021 and beyond.

 

I seriously doubt we trade both Betts and JD, except maybe at the deadline, if we are out of it. Trading even one seems like a less than 50-50 idea, again unless it's at the deadline.

 

More likely, we trade JBJ, stay near the line and make the big choice in July.

Edited December 8, 2019 by moonslav59

[notin]

I think that the majority of fans would be extremely surprised if both Betts and Martinez were not in the lineup. i think that the ultimate goal remains to win games not to save money. Moves might be made but I'm betting that they will be made with an eye toward improving our team now.

 

Hopefully. But that doesn't make the two goals exclusive.

 

We've seen plenty of times before where players were traded because of money for teams whose primary goal was winning games...

[notin]

I think that the majority of fans would be extremely surprised if both Betts and Martinez were not in the lineup. i think that the ultimate goal remains to win games not to save money. Moves might be made but I'm betting that they will be made with an eye toward improving our team now.

 

Personally, I think the goal is to be within striking distance of the cap, and if the season starts out horribly wrong, to bail in July to get below and deal everything possible, starting with the HOF candidate guarding Pesky Pole. Luxury tax calculations are made at the end of the season, not the beginning, so starting out under the limit is actually probably not worth it anyway...

[moonslav59]

Hopefully. But that doesn't make the two goals exclusive.

 

We've seen plenty of times before where players were traded because of money for teams whose primary goal was winning games...

 

We saw it in 2012 and won a ring the next season.

[jacksonianmarch]

2013 was ripe for the picking and the Sox were unbelievably lucky. The only powerhouse was Detroit (made by DD) and they folded under the bright lights. Right now you’ve got a dropping but still formidable Houston team and you have quite possibly the best team in the AL in your division, especially if the Yanks get Cole. You’re going to have trouble having to play NY and TB 38 times in the regular season. Toronto will be scrappy. Baltimore will suck, so that helps.

 

When the yanks started to get too expensive with guys being paid for past performance, we did have one “last gasp” season in 2015 where we made the WC game. Maybe this is the last gasp season? Really, it took from 2013-2016 to build another title contender. We had a bad farm and were over budget with long term deals. We then compounded it by signing Ellsburg and getting nothing out of it, but so be it

[moonslav59]

2013 was ripe for the picking and the Sox were unbelievably lucky. The only powerhouse was Detroit (made by DD) and they folded under the bright lights. Right now you’ve got a dropping but still formidable Houston team and you have quite possibly the best team in the AL in your division, especially if the Yanks get Cole. You’re going to have trouble having to play NY and TB 38 times in the regular season. Toronto will be scrappy. Baltimore will suck, so that helps.

 

When the yanks started to get too expensive with guys being paid for past performance, we did have one “last gasp” season in 2015 where we made the WC game. Maybe this is the last gasp season? Really, it took from 2013-2016 to build another title contender. We had a bad farm and were over budget with long term deals. We then compounded it by signing Ellsburg and getting nothing out of it, but so be it

 

So, let's hope the Cole signing starts the whole process over again.

[jacksonianmarch]

So, let's hope the Cole signing starts the whole process over again.

 

If we keep our farm churning out talent, then we can weather any storm. I’d rather use our wallets than our farm to acquire talent

[moonslav59]

If we keep our farm churning out talent, then we can weather any storm. I’d rather use our wallets than our farm to acquire talent

 

Funny how you expect your farm to stay good as you win and spend, but you talk about how it's nearly impossible for us to do so.

[jacksonianmarch]

Funny how you expect your farm to stay good as you win and spend, but you talk about how it's nearly impossible for us to do so.

 

It’s harder when you’re good. The Yanks have had a pretty big advantage in the IFA realm for years as we were the first major power in the DR, which is where I’m looking at. Going through the draft is really hard when you’re hit with the financial burden of the back end.

 

That being said, baseball significantly suppressed mediocre teams. Starting out with zero farm, no money and a mediocre squad is a horrible way to build a farm. Also I’m not looking to rebuild a club in Ny . I’m now looking to sustain one, big difference. A great team needs a farm to fill the gaps. A rebuilding team is looking for a new core.

[cp176]

Personally, I think the goal is to be within striking distance of the cap, and if the season starts out horribly wrong, to bail in July to get below and deal everything possible, starting with the HOF candidate guarding Pesky Pole. Luxury tax calculations are made at the end of the season, not the beginning, so starting out under the limit is actually probably not worth it anyway...

 

I think that one of the obvious financial goals that this team has is to stay under the cap. I do not think that it is the primary goal nor do I think that it should be. With that being said, it might be possible that our GM and management feels that trading either Martinez, Betts or whoever else might make us more competetive than we are now based on the return.

[cp176]

I think any trade we make will be based on making the team better, except for maybe the one or two we make to get under the tax line, assuming we go that route.

 

Trading JBJ will likely not make us "better now," but he just has one year of team control, so it seems he will be the guy dealt to put us barely under the luxury tax line. Any further moves will require a delicate balance of money, if we indeed try to stay under all year.

 

I get the reasons why we want to stay competitive, or at least appear competitive to fans and viewers, and I'd very much like us to stay competitive or semi-competitive every year, but I fear trying to stay marginally competitive my hamper efforts or extend the time period it takes for us to become highly competitive.

 

In my opinion, trying to get to highly competitive as quickly as possible without harming the extended future is a worthy goal. The whole budget- luxury tax issue is

what mucks up mostly short but also long term plans, and us fans not really knowing how firm the commitment is to reset makes it hard for us to suggest or discuss reasonable or possible moves we can make to improve the team now and or for 2021 and beyond.

 

I seriously doubt we trade both Betts and JD, except maybe at the deadline, if we are out of it. Trading even one seems like a less than 50-50 idea, again unless it's at the deadline.

 

More likely, we trade JBJ, stay near the line and make the big choice in July.

 

The key for me here is that I don't know that a perception of our team being highly competitive as opposed to competitive makes much of a difference. being competitive always gives us a chance. Many teams that enter a season considered highly competitive just don't get the job done.

[moonslav59]

It’s harder when you’re good. The Yanks have had a pretty big advantage in the IFA realm for years as we were the first major power in the DR, which is where I’m looking at. Going through the draft is really hard when you’re hit with the financial burden of the back end.

 

That being said, baseball significantly suppressed mediocre teams. Starting out with zero farm, no money and a mediocre squad is a horrible way to build a farm. Also I’m not looking to rebuild a club in Ny . I’m now looking to sustain one, big difference. A great team needs a farm to fill the gaps. A rebuilding team is looking for a new core.

 

One major reason your farm got good was because you drafted lower than now, and you had a fire sale. That ain't happening anytime soon.

 

Your farm will continue to decline each year, unless you get lucky.

 

If you end up going over the max line at some point or having to make a summer trade, it will decline more quickly.

 

If we reset and finish in the middle tier again, our farm should get better as yours gets worse. BTW, we were pretty damn goos at IFA signings before DD and that year we got suspended from signings.

 

[moonslav59]

Price for Myers?

 

This from MLBTRs...

 

As expected, the Padres are hoping to trade pricey and underperforming outfielder/first baseman Wil Myers, Jayson Stark of The Athletic reports. The Padres appear highly motivated to part with Myers, according to Stark, who adds that there’s even a willingness on the team’s part to attach prospects from its loaded farm system if it would encourage someone to take the veteran off its hands. Kevin Acee of the San Diego Union-Tribune reported back in September that the Padres would “likely” be willing to eat half of the $60MM left on Myers’ contract to get rid of him. At this point, it’s unknown whether the amount’s still in that ballpark. Myers, who turns 30 on Tuesday, has another three years left on his deal.

[notin]

While I do think a Price-Myers swap makes sense, it doesn’t say San Diego is willing to take back contracts.

 

It does say they would attach prospects (presumably not named Gore). I wonder if Eovaldi for Myers, LHP Adrian Morejon, and 1b/OF Josh Naylor works for them.

 

Sox only knock $4mill of the AAV, but fill multiple holes in the process...

[moonslav59]

While I do think a Price-Myers swap makes sense, it doesn’t say San Diego is willing to take back contracts.

 

It does say they would attach prospects (presumably not named Gore). I wonder if Eovaldi for Myers, LHP Adrian Morejon, and 1b/OF Josh Naylor works for them.

 

Sox only knock $4mill of the AAV, but fill multiple holes in the process...

 

There has been some talk that SD is possibly looking to sign a SP'er, so maybe they can spend "the difference" on Price. They may not want Price, though.

[notin]

There has been some talk that SD is possibly looking to sign a SP'er, so maybe they can spend "the difference" on Price. They may not want Price, though.

 

If the Sox dealt Price for Myers, the Padres get a veteran SP for 3 years at a net cost of about $9mill per.

 

If the Sox dealt Eovaldi for Price, the Padres get a veteran SP for 3 years and save roughly $5mill per year in the process.

 

I could see them going for either option...

[moonslav59]

If the Sox dealt Price for Myers, the Padres get a veteran SP for 3 years at a net cost of about $9mill per.

 

If the Sox dealt Eovaldi for Myers, the Padres get a veteran SP for 3 years and save roughly $5mill per year in the process.

 

I could see them going for either option...

 

I doubt the Sox would take on more salary with the Eovaldi-Myers trade, despite it actually lowering the lux tax budget by $3.17M a year x 3.

 

Maybe SD pitches in $5M a year to even out the trade, and we save $8.2M a year on the lux tax. Add that to JBJ's $11M, and we'll have about $22M to spend this winter and stay under.

 

I wonder if SD would take price + $2M a year for Myers- making his net cost just $7M a year. We save $7M but $15M on the Lux Budget.

[notin]

How about this:

 

Padres get: Nathan Eovaldi

 

Red Sox get: Wil Myers, Manny Margot, Cal Quantrill and $5mill.

 

This is one of those deals that works out on the simulator, but I really doubt San Diego would go for. But if I was Bloom, I’d try. It fills two holes (1b and CF) and saves about $6-7mill in AAV for the Sox, and provides a replacement for Eovaldi...

[moonslav59]

How about this:

 

Padres get: Nathan Eovaldi

 

Red Sox get: Wil Myers, Manny Margot, Cal Quantrill and $5mill.

 

This is one of those deals that works out on the simulator, but I really doubt San Diego would go for. But if I was Bloom, I’d try. It fills two holes (1b and CF) and saves about $6-7mill in AAV for the Sox, and provides a replacement for Eovaldi...

 

I'd do it. I think we save even more on the lux tax, right?

 

Maybe SD would take JBJ and keep the $5M.

[notin]

I'd do it. I think we save even more on the lux tax, right?

 

Maybe SD would take JBJ and keep the $5M.

 

San Diego already has a glut of outfielders.

 

Their current depth chart has Grisham, Cordero and Pham starting with Margot and Myers on the bench. They might prefer Margot as a 4th outfielder, but if they do, his projected salary ($2.1mill) is much more palatable than Bradley's ($11mill). Also, as Margot bats right-handed, he presents an opportunity to platoon with Corder or Grisham should the need arise.

 

I do think they would lso be amenable to swapping Josh Naylor in that deal. They seem satisfied with Hosmer at 1B for reasons even science cannot explain, and Naylor is a lousy outfielder. He is a good hitter, but if the Sox took him and Myers, that pushes Myers to RF and Betts to CF, and might make the Sox the worst defensive team in MLB.

 

Maybe Naylor can be dealt for a CF?

 

Or the Sox can go with the questionable defensive lineup of C: Vazquez 1B: Myers 2B: Chavis 3B: Devers SS: Bogaerts LF: Naylor CF: Benintendi RF: Betts

 

I don't like Benintendi in CF either. But Myers is just horrific in the outfield...

Edited December 10, 2019 by notin

[jacksonianmarch]

How about this:

 

Padres get: Nathan Eovaldi

 

Red Sox get: Wil Myers, Manny Margot, Cal Quantrill and $5mill.

 

This is one of those deals that works out on the simulator, but I really doubt San Diego would go for. But if I was Bloom, I’d try. It fills two holes (1b and CF) and saves about $6-7mill in AAV for the Sox, and provides a replacement for Eovaldi...

 

Why would the Padres sell low on Quantrill? He's had one MLB season under his belt and is a former top prospect. They aren't selling him for Eovaldi, even if they get to dump Myers. The only way this would be somewhat feasible is if the sox sent back a nothing prospect and ate the Myers contract

[moonslav59]

Why would the Padres sell low on Quantrill? He's had one MLB season under his belt and is a former top prospect. They aren't selling him for Eovaldi, even if they get to dump Myers. The only way this would be somewhat feasible is if the sox sent back a nothing prospect and ate the Myers contract

 

MLBTRs suggested the padres might add a prospect or two to dump Myers.

[moonslav59]

San Diego already has a glut of outfielders.

 

Their current depth chart has Grisham, Cordero and Pham starting with Margot and Myers on the bench. They might prefer Margot as a 4th outfielder, but if they do, his projected salary ($2.1mill) is much more palatable than Bradley's ($11mill). Also, as Margot bats right-handed, he presents an opportunity to platoon with Corder or Grisham should the need arise.

 

I do think they would lso be amenable to swapping Josh Naylor in that deal. They seem satisfied with Hosmer at 1B for reasons even science cannot explain, and Naylor is a lousy outfielder. He is a good hitter, but if the Sox took him and Myers, that pushes Myers to RF and Betts to CF, and might make the Sox the worst defensive team in MLB.

 

Maybe Naylor can be dealt for a CF?

 

Or the Sox can go with the questionable defensive lineup of C: Vazquez 1B: Myers 2B: Chavis 3B: Devers SS: Bogaerts LF: Naylor CF: Benintendi RF: Betts

 

I don't like Benintendi in CF either. But Myers is just horrific in the outfield...

 

Myers should play 1B for us. Maybe JBJ would just be dealt elsewhere.

[notin]

Why would the Padres sell low on Quantrill? He's had one MLB season under his belt and is a former top prospect. They aren't selling him for Eovaldi, even if they get to dump Myers. The only way this would be somewhat feasible is if the sox sent back a nothing prospect and ate the Myers contract

 

Well, according to the blurb on MLBTR, they are willing to include prospects and possibly eat up to half of what Myers is owed. "Giving up prospects" doesn't mean "scraping the bottom of the minor league system for warm bodies to include' The goal is to give up something enticing. Teams do include good prospects/players sometimes just to unload a contract. The Pirates included Reese McGuire, who was a twice-ranked prospect by Baseball America, just so they could unload the final 1.5 years of the contract of Francisco Liriano.

 

As a Yankee fan, you might like to play the "give up money rather than prospects" game. But not every team has the luxury of giving up as much money as the Yankees. And as many prospects don't turn out as good as hoped anyway, sometimes using them as currency becomes as good as getting something for free. And the insanely deep farm system that Preller has built is now being used against him by ownership, who has insisted that the parent club perform better and that the farm be used to make sure this happens.

 

I do think the Sox will have to eat the Myers contract, and also are unlikely to get Margot, who is still useful to the Padres. However, if the Padres were willing to keep their cash and include the redundant Josh Naylor, count me in.

Edited December 10, 2019 by notin

[notin]

Myers should play 1B for us. Maybe JBJ would just be dealt elsewhere.

 

I think a Bradley/Andriese trade is about the best the Sox could hope for if they don't eat to eat any salary. And even then, it's not a guarantee the Dbacks won't insist on some cash...