A Realistic View at 2023: Part I

[mvp 78]

If we assume that the Red Sox want to re-set every third year, what this really does is make the re-set years 2024 and 2027 instead of 2025 and 2028.

 

Of course a plan to re-set every third year might be questionable in itself.

 

If the Sox are in serious WS contention, resetting to get under a luxury tax calculation would be unseemly.

[jad]

If the Sox are in serious WS contention, resetting to get under a luxury tax calculation would be unseemly.

 

Exactly. Resetting is not a step toward a championship. It is a way to cut down on expenses and make more money for ownership. It's fine to be in favor of ensuring that fabulously rich people remain fabulously wealthy. But it's delusional to imagine increasing the bank of owners and investors has anything to do with making their businesses or their products better.

[notin]

No, I meant if we give him the option.

 

No way he takes the $4M.

 

 

General consensus is the opposite.

 

Sox decline. Paxton exercises…

[Bellhorn04]

Exactly. Resetting is not a step toward a championship. It is a way to cut down on expenses and make more money for ownership. It's fine to be in favor of ensuring that fabulously rich people remain fabulously wealthy. But it's delusional to imagine increasing the bank of owners and investors has anything to do with making their businesses or their products better.

 

On the other hand, expecting rich people to be willing to lose money to make us happy is pretty delusional too.

[notin]

If we assume that the Red Sox want to re-set every third year, what this really does is make the re-set years 2024 and 2027 instead of 2025 and 2028.

 

Of course a plan to re-set every third year might be questionable in itself.

 

 

It is. I’m hoping if it’s all about continued resets, they at least occur after bad seasons…

[jad]

If the Sox are in serious WS contention, resetting to get under a luxury tax calculation would be unseemly.

 

Exactly. Resetting is not a step toward a championship. It is a way to cut down on expenses and make more money for ownership. It's fine to be in favor of ensuring that fabulously rich people remain fabulously wealthy. But it's delusional to imagine increasing the bank of owners and investors has anything to do with making their businesses or their products better.

[notin]

Exactly. Resetting is not a step toward a championship. It is a way to cut down on expenses and make more money for ownership. It's fine to be in favor of ensuring that fabulously rich people remain fabulously wealthy. But it's delusional to imagine increasing the bank of owners and investors has anything to do with making their businesses or their products better.

 

 

Somebody give jad a nudge!!

 

(Are “broken record” jokes completely outdated?)

[Hugh2]

If we assume that the Red Sox want to re-set every third year, what this really does is make the re-set years 2024 and 2027 instead of 2025 and 2028.

 

Of course a plan to re-set every third year might be questionable in itself.

 

I think you mean 2024 and 2027 instead of 2023 and 2026. The Sox are either resetting this year or next.

[Hugh2]

Exactly. Resetting is not a step toward a championship. It is a way to cut down on expenses and make more money for ownership. It's fine to be in favor of ensuring that fabulously rich people remain fabulously wealthy. But it's delusional to imagine increasing the bank of owners and investors has anything to do with making their businesses or their products better.

 

You do know if they don't reset they end up losing up to hundreds of millions a year? A billionaire isn't coming along to make no money every year just for our excitement.

[Bellhorn04]

I think you mean 2024 and 2027 instead of 2023 and 2026. The Sox are either resetting this year or next.

 

No, I meant what I said. Because we paid tax for 2022, our Year 3 would be 2024. If we didn't go over this year it would be 2025.

[mvp 78]

Exactly. Resetting is not a step toward a championship. It is a way to cut down on expenses and make more money for ownership. It's fine to be in favor of ensuring that fabulously rich people remain fabulously wealthy. But it's delusional to imagine increasing the bank of owners and investors has anything to do with making their businesses or their products better.

 

Yes, I don't root for the owner's wallet. If the main concern is not hurting the farm due to ongoing penalties, I get it a little, but not if you are within arm's reach of a WS.

[mvp 78]

General consensus is the opposite.

 

Sox decline. Paxton exercises…

 

I guess that depends on his health. If he's not going to be ready for April 1, he exercises the option. If he'll be ready, maybe he chooses FA?

[mvp 78]

You do know if they don't reset they end up losing up to hundreds of millions a year? A billionaire isn't coming along to make no money every year just for our excitement.

 

They don't "lose." They'll just make less.

[moonslav59]

If we assume that the Red Sox want to re-set every third year, what this really does is make the re-set years 2024 and 2027 instead of 2025 and 2028.

 

Of course a plan to re-set every third year might be questionable in itself.

 

I don't think the Sox have ever gone 3 straight years over the line, and now the penalties are even stiffer than under Theo's reign. I'm going to assume it is a top priority, but not set in stone. If they think "this is the year," whenever that year is, they may break the rule.

 

I'm not sure it is locked into 3 years, either. If they don't feel "this is the year," they may reset after 1 or 2 years. As we stand, right now, they may view 2024 as a better chance at being "the year" than 2023, so they may re-set, this winter.

 

If the reset has to happen by year 3, then the team may be looking at the optimal 2 year window and think '24-'25 looks better than '23-'24.

 

Who knows?

 

If I had to pick which window looks better, I'd go with '24-'25, but management has other concerns to deal with- like fans ready to not renew their NESN subscriptions or season tickets. That is real issue.

 

The big question, IMO, is whether top management thinks we can re-set, this winter, and still put a team on the field that attracts fan attention enough to reach their financial profit goal.

[moonslav59]

General consensus is the opposite.

 

Sox decline. Paxton exercises…

 

The consensus is Paxton takes $4M?

[Bellhorn04]

They don't "lose." They'll just make less.

 

Is it impossible to lose?

[moonslav59]

They don't "lose." They'll just make less.

 

Exactly, but what business owner chooses to make $100M less, if he spends maybe $91M, instead of $90M?

[Bellhorn04]

Regardless of financial loss, if you keep going over the tax limits there are talent penalties too, which are not to be taken lightly. It's a pretty tough system to beat.

[Hugh2]

No, I meant what I said. Because we paid tax for 2022, our Year 3 would be 2024. If we didn't go over this year it would be 2025.

 

If we stay over next year it will be the third year over the tax line, which means they're going to get under.

 

Wait....do they lose revenue sharing AFTER 3 years? like....they can spend over for 3 but get under for the 4th? or do they need to reset on the 3rd year. I'm not sure. Maybe you're right on this.

[Bellhorn04]

If we stay over next year it will be the third year over the tax line, which means they're going to get under.

 

Wait....do they lose revenue sharing AFTER 3 years? like....they can spend over for 3 but get under for the 4th? or do they need to reset on the 3rd year. I'm not sure. Maybe you're right on this.

 

2022 is our Year 1 for tax. We didn't pay tax for 2021.

 

So 2023 would be Year 2.

 

2024 would be the Scramble to Get Back Under year.

 

Just like they paid tax for 2018 and 2019 and scrambled to get under for 2020.

Edited October 28, 2022 by Bellhorn04

[mvp 78]

Is it impossible to lose?

 

I think they'd stop themselves before they truly overspent and "lost" money. They aren't going to have a 500M payroll like some have suggested.

[mvp 78]

Exactly, but what business owner chooses to make $100M less, if he spends maybe $91M, instead of $90M?

 

A business owner that wants a better chance at hoisting a WS trophy in November?

[mvp 78]

Regardless of financial loss, if you keep going over the tax limits there are talent penalties too, which are not to be taken lightly. It's a pretty tough system to beat.

 

I understand the talent penalties and have said as much every f***ing time I bring it up. I'm just saying if you are on the cusp of a WS, you don't take a step backwards to cut payroll and worry about the penalties. Unless you have a great farm that can make up for the payroll loss, you can't cry poor, cut salary and then fall out of playoff contention if the team's "window" is still open.

[Hugh2]

I think it might be substantially more than 100 million. It's going to be about 48% of their revenue. Probably a little less than 48% because I'm guessing the Sox make more money than the average MLB team.

[Bellhorn04]

A business owner that wants a better chance at hoisting a WS trophy in November?

 

Didn't work very well for the Dodgers and Mets this year, in spite of enormous payrolls and great regular seasons.

 

You've got the Crapshoot Factor on top of everything else.

 

It's a tricky game.

[moonslav59]

Regardless of financial loss, if you keep going over the tax limits there are talent penalties too, which are not to be taken lightly. It's a pretty tough system to beat.

 

Even without the penalties, the system has changed to hamper richer teams from drafting and signing lower picks to big contracts or signing as many of the best IFAs as possible.

 

This was a major reason I felt the upcoming "cliff" was all but certain. Many said, in a cavalier manner, "all we have to do is rebuild the farm, and we'll be fine," like it was easy and could be done overnight. The other aspect on rebuilding a farm, is that even if you do rebuild it overnight, it still takes a few years for the prospects to mature and start contributing to the big club in meaningful ways, especially when you primarily draft HS players in the upper rounds.

 

One of the main reasons I give Bloom a pass on the 2022 ML club results, is that I think he has exceeded my expectations on rebuilding the farm more quickly, deeply and strongly than I imagined anyone could. Of course, the high draft pick after the disastrous 2020 season helped, and many of DD's prospects have risen by more than I expected, but he also did not trade them away. His prospects added via trade have not really panned out, yet, but we may get something from Wink, German, Seabold, Wong, RHern, Downs and others still in the lower ranks of the farm (Binelas, hamilton, de la Rosa, Wallace and more.)

 

I've said this before, but I think it needs repeating: since the Devers call-up in 2017, the only significant prospects called up or traded have been Houck, Dalbec and Duran. Since the the start of 2022, here is a list of prospects called up or expected to be called up at some point in 2023. Not all have or will succeed, but the sheer number and promise of some is very encouraging, to me...

 

Some ML Experience:

Bello

Casas

Crawford

Winckowski, Seabold, Wong, Kelly, German, Ort, Downs

 

No ML Experience, so far:

Rafaela

Mata

Walter

E Valdez

Murphy

RHern

Politi

Granberg

TWard ('24?)

W Abreu ('24?)

 

That's over 15 players with maybe 5 or 6 looking very promising and another 5 or 6 looking like they may fill some lesser roles adequately.

 

 

[Hugh2]

Actually, scratch that, it's whatever their revenue share refund would have been. If they stay over for 3 years they become a disqualified market and 1/2 the money goes back into the pool and 1/2 goes to a players benefits fund.

 

I think the big take away is there are very harsh penalties for staying over the line for a prolonged period of time. It's very narrow-sighted and naive to just sit around and say "well it ain't my money". If we are going to have intellectual, realistic, and rational baseball conversations moving forward then it should be under the assumption that the Boston Red Sox are going to go under the luxury tax line either this off-season or the next.

[notin]

Regardless of financial loss, if you keep going over the tax limits there are talent penalties too, which are not to be taken lightly. It's a pretty tough system to beat.

 

Easiest way to beat it is to simply not go over ever. It does make it more difficult to win the title, but with the extra wild card, it’sa little easier to get into the postseason than it was in years past…

[mvp 78]

Didn't work very well for the Dodgers and Mets this year, in spite of enormous payrolls and great regular seasons.

 

You've got the Crapshoot Factor on top of everything else.

 

It's a tricky game.

 

But they got to the playoffs. If the Mets start cutting salary, they will be less likely to get into the playoffs. The Dodgers are just a juggernaut with a great farm system. It's a crapshoot, but you need to get into the playoffs first. Having a great team punches your ticket early on.

[mvp 78]

Easiest way to beat it is to simply not go over ever. It does make it more difficult to win the title, but with the extra wild card, it’sa little easier to get into the postseason than it was in years past…

 

It takes a combination of fiscal responsibility, a strong farm system and luck. The Sox have been a mixed bag in that regard.