A Realistic View at 2021: Part I

[moonslav59]

Victorino, Gomes, and Napoli are the exact types of deals I'm looking for this season. Mitch Moreland comes to mind.

 

While agree with your theory on avoiding super large and long deals, one can make a firm case that just about every ring we have since 2004 was, at worst, aided by the signing of a long term FA, and at best, seeing the long term signing as an essential aspect of winning the ring.

 

On that "other site," I started one of the most responded to posts in history called, "No Manny- No Rings." (Later, I stared threads called "No Papi- No Rings" and "No VTek- No Rings," too). Without Manny's deal, IMO, we don't win in 2004 or 2007.

 

One can argue Papi's 4 year extension in 2005 does not qualify as a long term deal, but clearly he helped us win in 2004, 2007 & 2013. The same could be said of Beckett's 4 year deal in 2010 and our 2013 ring.

 

JD Drew's 2007 contract for 5 years can be debated and was for years.

 

John Lackey's 5 year deal in 2009 certainly was a key component in the 2013 season.

 

David Price's long term deal seemed essential to our 2018 ring.

 

Yes, the list of bad and mediocre long term signings by the Sox is long- perhaps longer than the good list, but long term deals have played an essential role in all of our championships.

 

Moncada's large signing bonus and tax netted us Chris freakin' Sale.

 

Castillo was a total waste.

 

CC & Pablito's deals, too.

 

Dice-K gave us 2-3 decent to very good seasons.

 

AGon helped us dump CC & Beckett and paved the way to the 2013 championship by allowing us to sign Vic, Napoli, Drew, Gomes & Dempster.

 

Pedey's extension was not needed for the 2013 ring season, and he was not an essential part of the 2018 season, but that deal was not a total dissaster.

 

 

 

[moonslav59]

There are very few free agent contracts given to premier players that aren't at least one or two years too long.

 

Exactly. You don't get a to FA unless you overpay or give too many years.

 

Even the Manny deal, the best of our mega signings, ended poorly.

[moonslav59]

The Red Sox hitters would have had better numbers if they were allowed to bat against Red Sox pitchers... but maybe not verse vice-a.

 

One could argue the opposite for pitchers we signed.

[Bellhorn04]

Exactly. You don't get a to FA unless you overpay or give too many years.

 

Even the Manny deal, the best of our mega signings, ended poorly.

 

Manny's deal didn't even end all that poorly, really. It was a messy exit, but we got J-Bay in the trade.

[Bellhorn04]

The Red Sox hitters would have had better numbers if they were allowed to bat against Red Sox pitchers... but maybe not verse vice-a.

 

Our offense ended up with decent overall numbers. JDM was the only big disappointment. Verdugo was great, JBJ had a strong finish, Dalbec chipped in late etc.

[moonslav59]

Manny's deal didn't even end all that poorly, really. It was a messy exit, but we got J-Bay in the trade.

 

True, but my point was, he was not wanted on the team at the end.

 

Note: we ended up getting Workman as a comp pick for losing J Bay, and now we have Pivetta & Seabold from the Workman-Hembree trade.

[Bellhorn04]

True, but my point was, he was not wanted on the team at the end.

 

It was more a case that he wanted out, no?

 

It wasn't a lack of productivity. He posted a .926 OPS with us that year.

[moonslav59]

It was more a case that he wanted out, no?

 

It wasn't a lack of productivity. He posted a .926 OPS with us that year.

 

It was mostly about his option years, but he also wanted out after some shenanigans by management. They pretty much accused him of confusing which knee was injured and faking an injury.

 

At the end, it was clear neither wanted the other.

 

Sad ending, but it worked out okay for the Sox.

 

(BTW, we are still paying him until 2026.)

[Kimmi]

I liked the Vic signing, despite knowing and saying it was a year too long, but a 3 year deal being a year too long beats the hell out of a 7 year deal that is 3 years too long.

 

The first Napoli deal was a steal, due mainly to health concerns that kept the price & years low.

 

I was not a big fan of the Drew signing, because of my wishes for Iggy becoming our FT SS.

 

I hated the Dempster deal, and we lucked out when he retired.

 

I like all of those deals because they were all short term. I agree about Victorino's deal being a year too long, but as you implied, if a 2 or 3 year deal doesn't work out, a team can eat that contract a lot easier than it can eat a 7 year contract.

 

I really liked the Dempster deal. Maybe he didn't pitch as well as we would have liked, but he made most of his starts and kept the team in the game most of the time. Additionally, he is reported to have been a great leader team leader. That's a deal I'd do all over again in a heartbeat.

[Kimmi]

While agree with your theory on avoiding super large and long deals, one can make a firm case that just about every ring we have since 2004 was, at worst, aided by the signing of a long term FA, and at best, seeing the long term signing as an essential aspect of winning the ring.

 

On that "other site," I started one of the most responded to posts in history called, "No Manny- No Rings." (Later, I stared threads called "No Papi- No Rings" and "No VTek- No Rings," too). Without Manny's deal, IMO, we don't win in 2004 or 2007.

 

One can argue Papi's 4 year extension in 2005 does not qualify as a long term deal, but clearly he helped us win in 2004, 2007 & 2013. The same could be said of Beckett's 4 year deal in 2010 and our 2013 ring.

 

JD Drew's 2007 contract for 5 years can be debated and was for years.

 

John Lackey's 5 year deal in 2009 certainly was a key component in the 2013 season.

 

David Price's long term deal seemed essential to our 2018 ring.

 

Yes, the list of bad and mediocre long term signings by the Sox is long- perhaps longer than the good list, but long term deals have played an essential role in all of our championships.

 

Moncada's large signing bonus and tax netted us Chris freakin' Sale.

 

Castillo was a total waste.

 

CC & Pablito's deals, too.

 

Dice-K gave us 2-3 decent to very good seasons.

 

AGon helped us dump CC & Beckett and paved the way to the 2013 championship by allowing us to sign Vic, Napoli, Drew, Gomes & Dempster.

 

Pedey's extension was not needed for the 2013 ring season, and he was not an essential part of the 2018 season, but that deal was not a total dissaster.

 

 

 

I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying. I guess my question is whether we could have won those rings without those specific players. Could another, less expensive player have filled the gap? Maybe, maybe not.

 

I understand the necessity signing free agents. I even understand the need to sometimes sign a player to a long term contract. Four year contracts, maybe even five, I'm usually fine with. I was fine with JD's contract. Even though it's sometimes unavoidable, my very strong preference is to not go longer than that.

[Kimmi]

Exactly. You don't get a to FA unless you overpay or give too many years.

 

Even the Manny deal, the best of our mega signings, ended poorly.

 

My preference is to overpay in money and give fewer years.

[oldtimer]

I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying. I guess my question is whether we could have won those rings without those specific players. Could another, less expensive player have filled the gap? Maybe, maybe not.

 

I understand the necessity signing free agents. I even understand the need to sometimes sign a player to a long term contract. Four year contracts, maybe even five, I'm usually fine with. I was fine with JD's contract. Even though it's sometimes unavoidable, my very strong preference is to not go longer than that.

 

I'm with you on length of contracts. I would tend to use a sliding scale of length on contract based on the age at signing. If a player is younger than the period of peak performance I would be more likely to go beyond 5 years if it was deemed necessary to sign the player. When players are 30 and over, I would elect to limit offers on a sliding scale with 5 years being the absolute limit. Pitchers with a lot of wear and tear on their arms become more risky than field players and probably should have a maximum of 3 year contracts offered. The Price deal involved too much money and the 7 years far too long. We might well have gotten a pitcher good enough to help us win at less money and a shorter contract.

[moonslav59]

My preference is to overpay in money and give fewer years.

 

The theory makes total sense, and your response about maybe not needing the big stars to win it all has merit, too, but I don't see us winning in 2004 or 2007 without Manny.

 

The 2007 team had 3 players with 4 or more year contracts: Manny, Papi and JD Drew.

 

I understand you point about "overkill" like the 2018 team, but I think there has to be an occasional big splurge deal along with a mess of deals like the ones you like.

[Kimmi]

I'm with you on length of contracts. I would tend to use a sliding scale of length on contract based on the age at signing. If a player is younger than the period of peak performance I would be more likely to go beyond 5 years if it was deemed necessary to sign the player. When players are 30 and over, I would elect to limit offers on a sliding scale with 5 years being the absolute limit. Pitchers with a lot of wear and tear on their arms become more risky than field players and probably should have a maximum of 3 year contracts offered. The Price deal involved too much money and the 7 years far too long. We might well have gotten a pitcher good enough to help us win at less money and a shorter contract.

 

Very sound reasoning in this post, Oldtimer.

[Kimmi]

The theory makes total sense, and your response about maybe not needing the big stars to win it all has merit, too, but I don't see us winning in 2004 or 2007 without Manny.

 

The 2007 team had 3 players with 4 or more year contracts: Manny, Papi and JD Drew.

 

I understand you point about "overkill" like the 2018 team, but I think there has to be an occasional big splurge deal along with a mess of deals like the ones you like.

 

I don't really disagree about the possible need for an occasional big splurge. That type of deal really should be the exception, however, and not the norm.

[moonslav59]

I don't really disagree about the possible need for an occasional big splurge. That type of deal really should be the exception, however, and not the norm.

 

Since we are talking about 5-7 year deals, maybe 4, how often is "the exception?" Every 4-7 years?

 

Basically having one on the books at any given time, but never 2 or more?

[moonslav59]

I'm not saying I am for this idea, but since big splash signings like Bauer and Springer seem unlikely, what about this...

 

We trade Vaz to TB for Kiermaier & Yarbrough and Fairbanks.

 

We sign Realmuto & another SP'er and call it a winter day.

[mvp 78]

I'm not saying I am for this idea, but since big splash signings like Bauer and Springer seem unlikely, what about this...

 

We trade Vaz to TB for Kiermaier & Yarbrough and Fairbanks.

 

We sign Realmuto & another SP'er and call it a winter day.

 

I stay away from large contracts for catchers.

[a700hitter]

I stay away from large contracts for catchers.

Can Realmuto play another position?

[mvp 78]

Can Realmuto play another position?

 

Started 20 games at 1b. Not sure his bat is good enough for that position.

[a700hitter]

Started 20 games at 1b. Not sure his bat is good enough for that position.

The guy can hit. He is significantly better than anyone who has played 1B for the Red Sox in several seasons.

[moonslav59]

I stay away from large contracts for catchers.

 

I agree. I learned my lesson after hoping we got Mauer back in the day.

 

Look at Posey, too.

 

Only a very select few age well.

[mvp 78]

According to Bob Nightengale of USA Today, MLB owners and executives would like the season delayed until May, "even if it means shortening the season to 140 or fewer games."

 

Here we go again. The stated reasoning is the desire for players and team personnel to be vaccinated for COVID-19, which is a reasonable goal. The thought is that the general population could have access to the vaccine at some point in the spring. However, it's also convenient that by delaying and shortening the season, owners would also be paying the players less money. It's hard to see the players taking much interest in another pay-cut after making just one-third of their salaries this past season. One compromise could be pushing the end of the regular season back along with an increase in scheduled seven-inning doubleheaders, thus ensuring the players their full salaries, but that would also mean pushing the playoffs back to November. There should be more clarity in the weeks ahead, but right now it appears unlikely that spring training will start on time.

[notin]

Can Realmuto play another position?

 

Probably.

 

He was drafted as a shortstop and actually debuted in the Marlins' system as a 3B (for one game). But as he was a backup catcher in high school, the Marlins decided to play him there...

[moonslav59]

The issue is that Realmuto is a great hitting catcher, but he is not so great, in comparison, at 1B.

 

He's not worth mega dollars & years as a 1Bman.

[notin]

The issue is that Realmuto is a great hitting catcher, but he is not so great, in comparison, at 1B.

 

He's not worth mega dollars & years as a 1Bman.

 

He is very athletic, especially by catcher standards. He could probably transition to corner OF or 3B easily enough. Far less athletic catchers have done so...

[moonslav59]

He is very athletic, especially by catcher standards. He could probably transition to corner OF or 3B easily enough. Far less athletic catchers have done so...

 

He's never hit over 25 Hrs and never had an OPS over .825.

 

For an OF'er, 3B or 1B, that's not great enough to sign for a mega deal, IMO.

 

As a catcher, those are great numbers.

 

[Kimmi]

Since we are talking about 5-7 year deals, maybe 4, how often is "the exception?" Every 4-7 years?

 

Basically having one on the books at any given time, but never 2 or more?

 

I'm not sure there's a set rule on how often the exception is. That would depend on a lot of factors. The more cost-controlled players a team has, the more flexibility it has to take on those longer contracts. I am not necessarily opposed to having more than one longer term contract on the books at one time, as long as the team maintains financial flexibility and does not become handcuffed.

[moonslav59]

I'm not sure there's a set rule on how often the exception is. That would depend on a lot of factors. The more cost-controlled players a team has, the more flexibility it has to take on those longer contracts. I am not necessarily opposed to having more than one longer term contract on the books at one time, as long as the team maintains financial flexibility and does not become handcuffed.

 

I guess, ideally, if you have more than one at any given time, you'd want one expiring soon.

[Swiharts Ghost]

He's never hit over 25 Hrs and never had an OPS over .825.

 

For an OF'er, 3B or 1B, that's not great enough to sign for a mega deal, IMO.

 

As a catcher, those are great numbers.i

 

 

He doesnt strike me as fleet of Foot .I do love this player though for what he is a fantastic catcher .