The 2021-2022 Offseason Thread

[Old Red]

So did they lie when they said they wanted to keep Devers long term?

 

It seems your interpretation of what they said at that "Gospel" press conference is at odds with other statements they made.

 

Look, I'm not saying they will make a big signing. I'm thinking there is a good chance they don't. I'm not taking a position they will. I just said they "might," and you ask me for proof of why I believe it "might happen." I can't prove something might possibly happen.

 

I ask again, do you really think there is NO chance we sign anyone for more than 2 years? If you think there is a 0.001% chance, is that a "might?"

 

 

 

 

Saying they want to keep Devers long term, but not ponying up $300M, or so to keep him to me is not a lie. You may feel different.so far they have stuck to what they said at the press conference in my opinion about following last years plan. You may have a different opinion, and that’s fine too. Like I said before they got their 2 yr man in JBJ.

[notin]

Saying they want to keep Devers long term, but not ponying up $300M, or so to keep him to me is not a lie. You may feel different.so far they have stuck to what they said at the press conference in my opinion about following last years plan. You may have a different opinion, and that’s fine too. Like I said before they got their 2 yr man in JBJ.

 

To be fair, Bloom really didn’t have a chance this possession yet. The Sox - and really, most of the top tier payroll teams - didn’t spend much, probably because they wanted to wait and see what the implications were…

[Tedballgame]

Dan Shaughnessy didn't vote for Big Papi for the Hall Of Fame. What a dick! I hate that guy. He hates all Boston teams and does whatever he can to write negative articles about the players, teams and owners.

[Old Red]

Dan Shaughnessy didn't vote for Big Papi for the Hall Of Fame. What a dick! I hate that guy. He hates all Boston teams and does whatever he can to write negative articles about the players, teams and owners.

 

Did he say why?

[Bellhorn04]

Dan Shaughnessy didn't vote for Big Papi for the Hall Of Fame. What a dick! I hate that guy. He hates all Boston teams and does whatever he can to write negative articles about the players, teams and owners.

 

It's worse than that. For the second year in a row, Shaughnessy's only vote was for Jeff Kent.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

To be fair, Bloom really didn’t have a chance this possession yet. The Sox - and really, most of the top tier payroll teams - didn’t spend much, probably because they wanted to wait and see what the implications were…

 

Here's where I need help from posters good at math. The players want the tax penalty threshold to be increased, so teams will be able to spend more on free agents, while the owners want to keep it lower, to protect themselves from themselves. But until they settle upon a number, some GMs and CBOs are reluctant to use their budgets.

 

And yet, eight different clubs still thought it was worth it to sign names from the list of Top 10-rated free agent pitchers: Seattle-Ray, Mets-Max, Cubs-Stroman, Jays-Gausman, Angels-Thor, Stros-Verlander, Tex-Gray, St.Loo-Matz. Some pretty big markets on that list.

 

For those who have so far abstained, won't an eventual assumed tax compromise make it even easier for them to splurge?

 

Meanwhile, are we to believe that LA, NY and Boston are trying to outsmart each other by not reinforcing rotations with the best available arms? Maybe when the dust clears they'll bid it out for injured Rodon or older injured Kershaw ... the suspense is partially somnambulant.

[Bellhorn04]

Here's where I need help from posters good at math. The players want the tax penalty threshold to be increased, so teams will be able to spend more on free agents, while the owners want to keep it lower, to protect themselves from themselves. But until they settle upon a number, some GMs and CBOs are reluctant to use their budgets.

 

And yet, eight different clubs still thought it was worth it to sign names from the list of Top 10-rated free agent pitchers: Seattle-Ray, Mets-Max, Cubs-Stroman, Jays-Gausman, Angels-Thor, Stros-Verlander, Tex-Gray, St.Loo-Matz. Some pretty big markets on that list.

 

For those who have so far abstained, won't an eventual assumed tax compromise make it even easier for them to splurge?

 

Meanwhile, are we to believe that LA, NY and Boston are trying to outsmart each other by not reinforcing rotations with the best available arms? Maybe when the dust clears they'll bid it out for injured Rodon or older injured Kershaw ... the suspense is partially somnambulant.

 

To add to that, the Rangers acted like things are better than ever financially, didn't they, investing an insane $500 million in Seager and Semien.

[mvp 78]

Here's where I need help from posters good at math. The players want the tax penalty threshold to be increased, so teams will be able to spend more on free agents, while the owners want to keep it lower, to protect themselves from themselves. But until they settle upon a number, some GMs and CBOs are reluctant to use their budgets.

 

And yet, eight different clubs still thought it was worth it to sign names from the list of Top 10-rated free agent pitchers: Seattle-Ray, Mets-Max, Cubs-Stroman, Jays-Gausman, Angels-Thor, Stros-Verlander, Tex-Gray, St.Loo-Matz. Some pretty big markets on that list.

 

For those who have so far abstained, won't an eventual assumed tax compromise make it even easier for them to splurge?

 

Meanwhile, are we to believe that LA, NY and Boston are trying to outsmart each other by not reinforcing rotations with the best available arms? Maybe when the dust clears they'll bid it out for injured Rodon or older injured Kershaw ... the suspense is partially somnambulant.

 

It's obvious that the owners are making good money off of these teams. Why else would there be a rush to sign FA's prior to the CBA expiring? Does this show that the owners believe the luxury tax penalties will either go away or at least the threshold would go up higher?

 

It seems like there are a few strata of baseball owners:

 

1. large market, flushed with cash (LAD, BOS, NY, SF)

2. mid level teams that alternate between spending and being thrifty (TOR, ChiSox, TEX, DET, SD)

3. smaller market teams that rarely spend anything (PIT, TBR, OAK, MIA, CLE)

 

How do the ownerships work together when it seems like there are competing interests in terms of how to manage payroll? Why would teams like LAD ever be ok with a luxury threshold? Is there something the lower level teams have in their back pocket that keeps their interests at the forefront?

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

It's obvious that the owners are making good money off of these teams. Why else would there be a rush to sign FA's prior to the CBA expiring? Does this show that the owners believe the luxury tax penalties will either go away or at least the threshold would go up higher?

 

It seems like there are a few strata of baseball owners:

 

1. large market, flushed with cash (LAD, BOS, NY, SF)

2. mid level teams that alternate between spending and being thrifty (TOR, ChiSox, TEX, DET, SD)

3. smaller market teams that rarely spend anything (PIT, TBR, OAK, MIA, CLE)

 

How do the ownerships work together when it seems like there are competing interests in terms of how to manage payroll? Why would teams like LAD ever be ok with a luxury threshold? Is there something the lower level teams have in their back pocket that keeps their interests at the forefront?

 

I still don't understand: if the tax threshold is going to go up -- which makes it easier to spend -- than what were some big money teams waiting for?

 

And even if say, LA, the Yankees and Red Sox know something that no one else does, would new changes to the structure really penalize clubs for transactions that happened before the lockout?

[Bellhorn04]

I still don't understand: if the tax threshold is going to go up -- which makes it easier to spend -- than what were some big money teams waiting for?

 

And even if say, LA, the Yankees and Red Sox know something that no one else does, would new changes to the structure really penalize clubs for transactions that happened before the lockout?

 

I don't know that there's much expectation of the tax threshold going up significantly.

 

It was 210 million, and the owners wanted to reduce it to 180. My guess is they settle for a small increase from 210 million.

[mvp 78]

I still don't understand: if the tax threshold is going to go up -- which makes it easier to spend -- than what were some big money teams waiting for?

 

And even if say, LA, the Yankees and Red Sox know something that no one else does, would new changes to the structure really penalize clubs for transactions that happened before the lockout?

 

I have no answers. It's hard to pick apart what the owners want.

[moonslav59]

Do you know for sure they offered Baez any kind of contract, or are you going off rumors? If they did offer a contract for what, and how long?

 

I don't know, and neither do you, but I do think there is a good chance the rumors are correct, and I seriously doubt if they made an offer, it was for 1-2 years.

[Tedballgame]

It's worse than that. For the second year in a row, Shaughnessy's only vote was for Jeff Kent.

 

His voting privileges should be revoked. Jeff Kent??? Are you kidding me. He can't vote for one of the most beloved athletes in Boston history? Based upon what? His conjecture? Shaughnessy has always been a dick, and always will be a dick. I don't know why any Boston sports fan reads any of his trash. He is as bad as Tomase and Reimer.

[moonslav59]

Saying they want to keep Devers long term, but not ponying up $300M, or so to keep him to me is not a lie. You may feel different.so far they have stuck to what they said at the press conference in my opinion about following last years plan. You may have a different opinion, and that’s fine too. Like I said before they got their 2 yr man in JBJ.

 

Wanting to keep Devers long enough expresses a willingness to offer a 3+ year contract. Whether they offer enough to get him is another story.

 

The point is about there being a firm commitment or a mandate not to sign anyone to more than 3 years. There seems to be some evidence they are willing to make 3+ year offers.

 

Again, I am thinking they probably will not offer enough money to get any longer term players, this winter, except for MAYBE Suzuki, but I think it "might" happen.

[Bellhorn04]

His voting privileges should be revoked. Jeff Kent??? Are you kidding me. He can't vote for one of the most beloved athletes in Boston history? Based upon what? His conjecture? Shaughnessy has always been a dick, and always will be a dick. I don't know why any Boston sports fan reads any of his trash. He is as bad as Tomase and Reimer.

 

Shaughnessy always makes me think of Ted Williams's classic description of Boston media as "Knights of the Keyboard".

[Bellhorn04]

Wanting to keep Devers long enough expresses a willingness to offer a 3+ year contract. Whether they offer enough to get him is another story.

 

The point is about there being a firm commitment or a mandate not to sign anyone to more than 3 years. There seems to be some evidence they are willing to make 3+ year offers.

 

Again, I am thinking they probably will not offer enough money to get any longer term players, this winter, except for MAYBE Suzuki, but I think it "might" happen.

 

It's very possible that they remain in somewhat of a holding pattern this year, with so much money (and talent) coming off the backs after 2022.

 

I tend to agree that if they do make a splash it will be Suzuki.

[moonslav59]

I don't know that there's much expectation of the tax threshold going up significantly.

 

It was 210 million, and the owners wanted to reduce it to 180. My guess is they settle for a small increase from 210 million.

 

Could they come up with a threshold between $180-210M but with exceptions granted for keeping your own players?

[moonslav59]

It's very possible that they remain in somewhat of a holding pattern this year, with so much money (and talent) coming off the backs after 2022.

 

I tend to agree that if they do make a splash it will be Suzuki.

 

I certainly think what Old Red is saying could very well be this winter's plan, but I do think they will make a move, if they think the player is a long term fit and the money is reasonable. (I think Suzuki might fit that role.)

 

I'm not sure I believe the Story rumors.

Edited January 20, 2022 by moonslav59

[mvp 78]

Could they come up with a threshold between $180-210M but with exceptions granted for keeping your own players?

 

What's the definition of "own players?" What if you traded for the player the previous deadline?

[Bellhorn04]

Could they come up with a threshold between $180-210M but with exceptions granted for keeping your own players?

 

They could, but I question whether anyone wants to make things any more complicated, especially with time such a factor.

 

It'll be interesting to see what happens, but I have a feeling it'll be pretty much same old, same old.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Extending Devers to keep him in Boston for his prime would signal two things: the Sox are being true to their word that they want to retain homegrown stars they deem part of a core of sustained title contenders, and that they're willing to spend.

 

Even the Rays committed big bucks to a player this offseason... Wander Franco, who only played a few months in the bigs. For all we know, Bloom could be waiting for his own top prospects to make the Show, before offering any longterm contracts (at reasonable market prices).

 

I'm not saying Bloom is a disciple of Tampa-style blueprints, but it is ridiculous for anyone to think he was hired to be something he was not...

[moonslav59]

What's the definition of "own players?" What if you traded for the player the previous deadline?

 

That's for them to determine. Maybe they would not count any players with less than 1 year of team ownership. Just a thought to "compromise."

[moonslav59]

Extending Devers to keep him in Boston for his prime would signal two things: the Sox are being true to their word that they want to retain homegrown stars they deem part of a core of sustained title contenders, and that they're willing to spend.

 

Even the Rays committed big bucks to a player this offseason... Wander Franco, who only played a few months in the bigs. For all we know, Bloom could be waiting for his own top prospects to make the Show, before offering any longterm contracts (at reasonable market prices).

 

I'm not saying Bloom is a disciple of Tampa-style blueprints, but it is ridiculous for anyone to think he was hired to be something he was not...

 

Maybe he was forced to be someone he was not while in Tampa.

 

If given a bigger budget there, maybe we'd have seen a "different" Bloom.

 

I do think he has different tendencies than someone like DD, for sure.

[Bellhorn04]

I'm not saying Bloom is a disciple of Tampa-style blueprints, but it is ridiculous for anyone to think he was hired to be something he was not...

 

Well, as some of us keep pointing out, Bloom was a protege of Andrew Friedman, who is now the biggest spender in baseball.

[notin]

Extending Devers to keep him in Boston for his prime would signal two things: the Sox are being true to their word that they want to retain homegrown stars they deem part of a core of sustained title contenders, and that they're willing to spend.

 

Even the Rays committed big bucks to a player this offseason... Wander Franco, who only played a few months in the bigs. For all we know, Bloom could be waiting for his own top prospects to make the Show, before offering any longterm contracts (at reasonable market prices).

 

I'm not saying Bloom is a disciple of Tampa-style blueprints, but it is ridiculous for anyone to think he was hired to be something he was not...

 

 

Of course the Tampa Style blueprint does often involve extending players ridiculously early in their careers, something they did with not only Franco, but also Evan Longoria and Matt Moore…

[notin]

Well, as some of us keep pointing out, Bloom was a protege of Andrew Friedman, who is now the biggest spender in baseball.

 

Succeeding in a small market with a little budget is very often a stepping stone to getting a large market/large budget job. Friedman is one example. Closer to home, it was why the Sox hired Dan Duquette and almost hired Billy Beane…

[moonslav59]

I think Bloom will spend big, at some point- maybe not this winter, but he almost has to, next winter.

[moonslav59]

Speaking of Rusney...

 

MLBTR:

 

The Nationals signed former Red Sox outfielder and one-time top prospect Rusney Castillo to a minor league deal earlier this month. The 34-year-old Cuban defector, who spent 2021 playing for NPB’s Tohoku Rakuten Goldean Eagles, will most likely begin the season with Triple-A Rochester but could be given a chance to compete for a bench role.

[notin]

Speaking of Rusney...

 

MLBTR:

 

The Nationals signed former Red Sox outfielder and one-time top prospect Rusney Castillo to a minor league deal earlier this month. The 34-year-old Cuban defector, who spent 2021 playing for NPB’s Tohoku Rakuten Goldean Eagles, will most likely begin the season with Triple-A Rochester but could be given a chance to compete for a bench role.

 

Rusney did turn out to be a bust, but it really would have been nice to see him stay healthy and play an actual season. The guy was credited with 17 DRS in just 793 innings. For some perspective, last year’s MLB leaders (Michael Taylor and Adam Duvall) were credited with 19 DRS in over 1100 innings. A healthy Rusney could easily have been one of the best defensive outfielders in MLB…

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Well, as some of us keep pointing out, Bloom was a protege of Andrew Friedman, who is now the biggest spender in baseball.

 

While it's good business for an owner (no matter how rich), to hire a guy who's a proven success on a limited budget, maybe it doesn't make as much sense to then also toss him the keys to the safety deposit boxes. But yes, it could be a recruiting incentive, even pointing to prior mentors to make promises... with of course, qualifiers:

 

the job is yours, provided if you get to the World Series, that you'll force your manager to bench all his top home run hitters against lefties -- or make him yank his starting pitcher throwing a shutout in an elimination game after two times through the order.