A Realistic View at 2021: Part I

[Bellhorn04]

Regardless of whether the Red Sox hope to contend in 2021, the pitching-thin Sox need to keep Nathan Eovaldi instead of trading the righthander when his contract is under water.

 

Admit it, you just like typing 'under water'.

[moonslav59]

Even if his contract is too high, it's a better value to keep him on staff (where you have a HUGE need) than to dump his contract for a poor performing offensive player and some lottery tickets. You only trade Eovaldi if you don't want to contend next year.

 

Yaz is hardly Lottery tickets, and we need a CF'er. He's better than Pillar and JBj combined and costs less.

 

With the money saved at filling CF and in the longoria-Eovaldi lux tax balance we sign a better SP'er than originally planned.

 

We improve CF and SP at the same lux tax cost.

 

It IS about contending, next year PLUS Yaz has 4 years of team control to Eovaldi's 2.

 

Win, win, win!

 

Okay, Longoria is a loss.

 

 

Win, win, win, loss.

[moonslav59]

Regardless of whether the Red Sox hope to contend in 2021, the pitching-thin Sox need to keep Nathan Eovaldi instead of trading the righthander when his contract is under water.

 

Why? He'll be on the IL all year.

 

Get what you can before he gets hurt.

 

You guys keep acting like it's a given he'll pitch- let alone pitch well for the next 2 years.

 

(Sure, I'm acting like it's a given he doesn't, but history is on my side.)

 

Plus, my main reason for suggesting these type deals is to IMPROVE our pitching by freeing up money to get better or more pitching.

 

By not having to spend on CF or 2B AND by reducing our player contract costs and/or lux tax cost, we can sign another pitcher to replace Eovaldi and/or sign 2 much better pitchers than we originally had the budget to sign before the trade.

Edited October 15, 2020 by moonslav59

[Bellhorn04]

Why? He'll be on the IL all year.

 

Get what you can before he gets hurt.

 

You guys keep acting like it's a given he'll pitch- let alone pitch well for the next 2 years.

 

(Sure, I'm acting like it's a given he doesn't, but history is on my side.)

 

The highly esteemed Baseball Trade Values projects that he will earn 2/3 of his contract.

[harmony]

Why? He'll be on the IL all year.

 

Get what you can before he gets hurt.

 

You guys keep acting like it's a given he'll pitch- let alone pitch well for the next 2 years.

 

(Sure, I'm acting like it's a given he doesn't, but history is on my side.)

 

Plus, my main reason for suggesting these type deals is to IMPROVE our pitching by freeing up money to get better or more pitching.

 

By not having to spend on CF or 2B AND by reducing our player contract costs and/or lux tax cost, we can sign another pitcher to replace Eovaldi and/or sign 2 much better pitchers than we originally had the budget to sign before the trade.

The Red Sox would need to find a trade partner looking to WEAKEN its pitching while assuming a cumbersome contract.

[Bellhorn04]

The Red Sox would need to find a trade partner looking to WEAKEN its pitching while assuming a cumbersome contract.

 

moon's trades were accepted by BTV, so the pluses and minuses evened out...

[moonslav59]

The highly esteemed Baseball Trade Values projects that he will earn 2/3 of his contract.

 

And what of the guys we get back in trade? Plus the guy we can sign with the saved money?

[moonslav59]

The Red Sox would need to find a trade partner looking to WEAKEN its pitching while assuming a cumbersome contract.

 

No. I was trading Eovaldi to another team for a CF'er and 3Bman. If Eovaldi is as great as everyone thinks, he'd be helping them. SF would also save money while we save tax budget money.

 

We strengthen our pitching by having more budget space to spend on pitching.

[harmony]

Admit it, you just like typing 'under water'.

That's the kindest phrase under the circumstances.

 

Albatross, which is used and misused in baseball circles, should be avoided at all costs.

[harmony]

No. I was trading Eovaldi to another team for a CF'er and 3Bman. If Eovaldi is as great as everyone thinks, he'd be helping them. SF would also save money while we save tax budget money.

 

We strengthen our pitching by having more budget space to spend on pitching.

If Nathan Eovaldi is as flawed as you and I think, a trade partner may have little interest. Period.

 

The Red Sox should treat Eovaldi as sunken cost and hope for the best.

[moonslav59]

If Nathan Eovaldi is as flawed as you and I think, a trade partner may have little interest. Period.

 

The Red Sox should treat Eovaldi as sunken cost and hope for the best.

 

Longoria is "sunken cost," too.

 

Both sides are swapping risks for financial gains- one in tax budget- the other in overall cost.

 

SF improves their pitching, if Eovaldi stays healthy. If he doesn't they save a ton money and could care less about the whole Longoria left open. Their loss is 4 yrs of Yaz. If anyone says "No", it would be SF not Boston, IMO.

 

Boston takes on Longoria's back-end loaded contract but saves $6M a year on lux tax budget (2 yrs). They fill the CF gaping hole with a pre-arb player. The savings they gain their and on the lux tax with the Eovaldi-Longoria swap let's them improve their pitching.

[Bellhorn04]

Longoria is "sunken cost," too.

 

Both sides are swapping risks for financial gains- one in tax budget- the other in overall cost.

 

SF improves their pitching, if Eovaldi stays healthy. If he doesn't they save a ton money and could care less about the whole Longoria left open. Their loss is 4 yrs of Yaz. If anyone says "No", it would be SF not Boston, IMO.

 

Boston takes on Longoria's back-end loaded contract but saves $6M a year on lux tax budget (2 yrs). They fill the CF gaping hole with a pre-arb player. The savings they gain their and on the lux tax with the Eovaldi-Longoria swap let's them improve their pitching.

 

The absolute cost matters to Henry too, I think. I'm sure he didn't feel great about Castillo's salary just because it was no longer included in the tax numbers.

[notin]

Why? He'll be on the IL all year.

 

Get what you can before he gets hurt.

 

You guys keep acting like it's a given he'll pitch- let alone pitch well for the next 2 years.

 

(Sure, I'm acting like it's a given he doesn't, but history is on my side.)

 

Plus, my main reason for suggesting these type deals is to IMPROVE our pitching by freeing up money to get better or more pitching.

 

By not having to spend on CF or 2B AND by reducing our player contract costs and/or lux tax cost, we can sign another pitcher to replace Eovaldi and/or sign 2 much better pitchers than we originally had the budget to sign before the trade.

 

NOBODY has carried the "Eovaldi is going to get hurt" banner higher than I have. Eovaldi himself has emailed me and told me to please stop (OK, not true.)

 

But at this point, if the Sox ae going to deal Eovaldi for another "bad" contract, it better be someone who can contribute, because resources are not going to be unlimited and the Sox need pitching and plenty of it.

 

Make this deal, and next off-season you'll be proposing other deals to sell of Longoria for a sunken contract.

 

I still think the smartest move is to shift Eovaldi to the bullpen, where a 60-70 IP workload is more manageable...

[notin]

The absolute cost matters to Henry too, I think. I'm sure he didn't feel great about Castillo's salary just because it was no longer included in the tax numbers.

 

Hey, Rusney is a free agent and a centerfielder. Just sayin'...

[Bellhorn04]

I still think the smartest move is to shift Eovaldi to the bullpen, where a 60-70 IP workload is more manageable...

 

It's not a terrible idea. But I think if you're paying a guy $17 million you should be trying to get more for your money. And he's an injury risk whether he's starting or relieving.

[notin]

It's not a terrible idea. But I think if you're paying a guy $17 million you should be trying to get more for your money. And he's an injury risk whether he's starting or relieving.

 

Why?

 

History has shown Eovaldi lacks the durability to be that guy. Just because the last guy overpaid is no reason to force the situation on him.

 

I mean, if you paid Ferrari dollars for a broken down '67 Mustang, would you still drive it like it was a Ferrari just because it costs the same?

 

Now he might be an injury risk regardless of the role. But the one thing that has ended the careers of more pitchers than anything else is pitching. Make him do it less, and you reduce the risk of him getting hurt...

Edited October 15, 2020 by notin

[moonslav59]

NOBODY has carried the "Eovaldi is going to get hurt" banner higher than I have. Eovaldi himself has emailed me and told me to please stop (OK, not true.)

 

But at this point, if the Sox ae going to deal Eovaldi for another "bad" contract, it better be someone who can contribute, because resources are not going to be unlimited and the Sox need pitching and plenty of it.

 

Make this deal, and next off-season you'll be proposing other deals to sell of Longoria for a sunken contract.

 

I still think the smartest move is to shift Eovaldi to the bullpen, where a 60-70 IP workload is more manageable...

 

Yaz can't contribute?

 

Look, I can see how there are better choices than Longoria. I chose him, because he has a huge gap between what he's being paid and his AVV.

 

Someone like Belt or Pollock is likely a better way to explain the type of deal I'm suggesting.

[moonslav59]

The absolute cost matters to Henry too, I think. I'm sure he didn't feel great about Castillo's salary just because it was no longer included in the tax numbers.

 

Agreed, and the tax on $10-20M for first and second year overages is not as much as what Longoria is owed.

 

My idea was more about the theory on trading Eovaldi for a lesser sunken value plus someone who can fill an open slot for cheap.

 

Odor is probably not "that guy" either, but to me it's not so much the sunken value guy we get back, except if he's paid like Longoria and no money is added, but the guy we get with him.

[harmony]

I get that, but SF would give more to us, if we took Longoria over Belt. (Of course, I would prefer Belt, if the return was the same.)

The mention of Brandon Belt makes me sad.

 

About eight years ago at Spring Training a friend and I were sitting on the berm at Goodyear Ballpark when a Brandon Belt homer landed on a bounce in my friend’s lap.

 

My friend suffered a fatal heart attack last month.

[notin]

Yaz can't contribute?

 

Look, I can see how there are better choices than Longoria. I chose him, because he has a huge gap between what he's being paid and his AVV.

 

Someone like Belt or Pollock is likely a better way to explain the type of deal I'm suggesting.

 

Yaz might be able to contribute, but if you take Longoria, you're essentially paying $26 million for a 30 year old outfielder with less than 600 career at bats and a so-so minor league track record that includes a career sub-.800 OPS at every level above A ball. And weakening the pitching to boot by dealing Eovaldi.

 

I think if the Sox take a bad deal, there is no point offsetting it by dumping Eovaldi unless (really good) pitching is coming back. Otherwise, take on that deal to get a good player with more control and on the right side of 30...

[moonslav59]

Yaz might be able to contribute, but if you take Longoria, you're essentially paying $26 million for a 30 year old outfielder with less than 600 career at bats and a so-so minor league track record that includes a career sub-.800 OPS at every level above A ball. And weakening the pitching to boot by dealing Eovaldi.

 

I think if the Sox take a bad deal, there is no point offsetting it by dumping Eovaldi unless (really good) pitching is coming back. Otherwise, take on that deal to get a good player with more control and on the right side of 30...

 

The more I think about it, we'd need some money coming with Longoria to make the deal "worth it."

 

Part of the idea is that with money saved, we'd get "pitching back" via a bigger FA spending budget.

[moonslav59]

The mention of Brandon Belt makes me sad.

 

About eight years ago at Spring Training a friend and I were sitting on the berm at Goodyear Ballpark when a Brandon Belt homer landed on a bounce in my friend’s lap.

 

My friend suffered a fatal heart attack last month.

 

Sorry to hear this.

 

My condolences.

 

[Bellhorn04]

Why?

 

History has shown Eovaldi lacks the durability to be that guy. Just because the last guy overpaid is no reason to force the situation on him.

 

I mean, if you paid Ferrari dollars for a broken down '67 Mustang, would you still drive it like it was a Ferrari just because it costs the same?

 

Now he might be an injury risk regardless of the role. But the one thing that has ended the careers of more pitchers than anything else is pitching. Make him do it less, and you reduce the risk of him getting hurt...

 

Others have suggested the Red Sox make Sale a reliever for the same reasons.

[notin]

Others have suggested the Red Sox make Sale a reliever for the same reasons.

 

That was before his surgery. And it might be a consideration down the road.

 

But right now, the rebuilt Sale might be able to put the struggles of 2018 and 2019 behind him if the surgery rectifies his problem. Unlike Eovaldi, Sale has shown he actually does have the durability to handle starting for a full season. Eovaldi has only topped 154 IP one time in his career, and that was back in 2015. Since then, he threw 154 IP in 2016, and seen in plummet since.

 

Sale might actually be back healthy and the Sox can try to verify that. Eovaldi does not appear he can ever reach that level again despite multiple surgeries and multiple chances...

[Bellhorn04]

That was before his surgery. And it might be a consideration down the road.

 

But right now, the rebuilt Sale might be able to put the struggles of 2018 and 2019 behind him if the surgery rectifies his problem. Unlike Eovaldi, Sale has shown he actually does have the durability to handle starting for a full season. Eovaldi has only topped 154 IP one time in his career, and that was back in 2015. Since then, he threw 154 IP in 2016, and seen in plummet since.

 

Sale might actually be back healthy and the Sox can try to verify that. Eovaldi does not appear he can ever reach that level again despite multiple surgeries and multiple chances...

 

All conjecture.

 

As I've said before, Eovaldi's last two extended absences were needed to remove 'loose bodies' which were likely related to the last TJ surgery. I've never heard of this happening to any other player. It could be just bad luck or sloppy surgery?

 

His arm might or might not be perfectly sound now.

 

Same with Sale.

[notin]

All conjecture.

 

As I've said before, Eovaldi's last two extended absences were needed to remove 'loose bodies' which were likely related to the last TJ surgery. I've never heard of this happening to any other player. It could be just bad luck or sloppy surgery?

 

His arm might or might not be perfectly sound now.

 

Same with Sale.

 

Conjecture? What am I conjecting? (A much needed new word. Feel free to use it.)

 

Prior to his problems first arising in 2018, Chris Sale has thrown below 192 IP one time in his career as a starter. It's worth it to see if the surgery worked and he is rebuilt.

 

Eovaldi threw 199 IP as a starter in 2015 and has seen his IP decline rapidly every year since. From 2017 through 2019, Eovaldi threw 178 IP total. How many season s cut short by injury does he need to have to prove this point?

 

That he struggles to throw a full season as a starter is not conjecture; it's a conclusion...

[moonslav59]

All conjecture.

 

As I've said before, Eovaldi's last two extended absences were needed to remove 'loose bodies' which were likely related to the last TJ surgery. I've never heard of this happening to any other player. It could be just bad luck or sloppy surgery?

 

His arm might or might not be perfectly sound now.

 

Same with Sale.

 

Eovaldi has also missed starts "here and there" for numerous other reasons.

 

When is the last time he has gone 5 straight months without missing a start?

[mvp 78]

Eovaldi has also missed starts "here and there" for numerous other reasons.

 

When is the last time he has gone 5 straight months without missing a start?

 

When was the last time he pitched 80% of the season? I think we already answered that.

[notin]

When was the last time he pitched 80% of the season? I think we already answered that.

 

We did? When was that? 60 game seasons don't count...

[moonslav59]

When was the last time he pitched 80% of the season? I think we already answered that.

 

These seasons with lost time were not always TJ or floating body related.

 

That was the point I was trying to make.

 

I think he pitched 4 straight months in 2016 and 2018, but you have to go back to 2014 and 2015 to find the only seasons he pitched 5 straight. (I'm not even sure he didn't have to skip a start in those seasons, but I won't complain about 27 and 33 GS'd those two years way back when.