A Realistic View at 2023: Part I

[moonslav59]

Your favorite response when you can’t defend your words. Most times it’s actions speak louder than words, but in your case it’s the other way around. Your words tell the WHOLE story.

 

I say it so often, because it fits the situation, so often with you.

[Old Red]

I say it so often, because it fits the situation, so often with you.

 

You showed your true colors when you made fun of E Rod. Not a good color, or a good look. You were also called out by others. Wow!

[moonslav59]

Oh NO! Called out by others for going overboard with inappropriateness.

 

I'm shaken.

[moonslav59]

If this report is true, it looks like the Whitlock decision has been made, while the Houck choice has not been made:

 

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2022/11/red-sox-planning-to-use-garrett-whitlock-as-starter-in-2023.html

 

The Red Sox are planning to deploy right-hander Garrett Whitlock out of the rotation in 2023, general manager Brian O’Halloran told reporters at the GM Meetings (link via Chris Cotillo of MassLive). O’Halloran added that Tanner Houck could get a look as a starter as well, although that decision hasn’t yet been made.

[moonslav59]

If this report is true, it looks like the Whitlock decision has been made, while the Houck choice has not been made:

 

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2022/11/red-sox-planning-to-use-garrett-whitlock-as-starter-in-2023.html

 

The Red Sox are planning to deploy right-hander Garrett Whitlock out of the rotation in 2023, general manager Brian O’Halloran told reporters at the GM Meetings (link via Chris Cotillo of MassLive). O’Halloran added that Tanner Houck could get a look as a starter as well, although that decision hasn’t yet been made.

 

hit, we told him to plan to be a starter and we expect him to be a starter,” the GM told reporters. “With Tanner, we said something similar. We talked through that he will go through the offseason planning to be a starter and we’ll build him up as such. But there’s a little bit (less) definition around his role and he knows it could go in either direction.” O’Halloran added the decision to move Whitlock to the rotation “was a little bit more clear and definitive” than the situation with Houck, whose role figures to be determined in part by the course of the Boston offseason.

[moonslav59]

If this report is true, it looks like the Whitlock decision has been made, while the Houck choice has not been made:

 

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2022/11/red-sox-planning-to-use-garrett-whitlock-as-starter-in-2023.html

 

The Red Sox are planning to deploy right-hander Garrett Whitlock out of the rotation in 2023, general manager Brian O’Halloran told reporters at the GM Meetings (link via Chris Cotillo of MassLive). O’Halloran added that Tanner Houck could get a look as a starter as well, although that decision hasn’t yet been made.

 

With Whit, we told him to plan to be a starter and we expect him to be a starter,” the GM told reporters. “With Tanner, we said something similar. We talked through that he will go through the offseason planning to be a starter and we’ll build him up as such. But there’s a little bit (less) definition around his role and he knows it could go in either direction.” O’Halloran added the decision to move Whitlock to the rotation “was a little bit more clear and definitive” than the situation with Houck, whose role figures to be determined in part by the course of the Boston offseason.

[moonslav59]

If this report is true, it looks like the Whitlock decision has been made, while the Houck choice has not been made:

 

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2022/11/red-sox-planning-to-use-garrett-whitlock-as-starter-in-2023.html

 

The Red Sox are planning to deploy right-hander Garrett Whitlock out of the rotation in 2023, general manager Brian O’Halloran told reporters at the GM Meetings (link via Chris Cotillo of MassLive). O’Halloran added that Tanner Houck could get a look as a starter as well, although that decision hasn’t yet been made.

 

With Whit, we told him to plan to be a starter and we expect him to be a starter,” the GM told reporters. “With Tanner, we said something similar. We talked through that he will go through the offseason planning to be a starter and we’ll build him up as such. But there’s a little bit (less) definition around his role and he knows it could go in either direction.” O’Halloran added the decision to move Whitlock to the rotation “was a little bit more clear and definitive” than the situation with Houck, whose role figures to be determined in part by the course of the Boston offseason.

 

Before any additions, this may be the rotation, as of now:

 

1. Sale

2. Whitlock

3. Bello

4. Pivetta

5. Paxton/Houck

 

(Big leap of faith on the health front.)

[moonslav59]

The 13 man Red Sox MLB staff before any winter additions- my take:

 

(Assuming the impossible: 100% good health on opening day)

 

SP1 Sale

SP2 Whitlock

SP3 Bello

SP4 Pivetta

SP5 Paxton

 

LR1 Crawford

LR2 Winckowski

 

Closer Houck

SR2 Schreiber

SR3 Barnes

SR4 Taylor

SR5 Kelly

SR6 Brasier/J Reed

 

ML Ready or Near Ready on the Farm

Mata

Walter

TWard

Seabold

Murphy

German

Ort

Wallace

Politi

Thompson

Shugart

DHern

 

 

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

The 13 man Red Sox MLB staff before any winter additions- my take:

 

(Assuming the impossible: 100% good health on opening day)

 

SP1 Sale

SP2 Whitlock

SP3 Bello

SP4 Pivetta

SP5 Paxton

 

LR1 Crawford

LR2 Winckowski

 

Closer Houck

SR2 Schreiber

SR3 Barnes

SR4 Taylor

SR5 Kelly

SR6 Brasier/J Reed

 

ML Ready or Near Ready on the Farm

Mata

Walter

TWard

Seabold

Murphy

German

Ort

Wallace

Politi

Thompson

Shugart

DHern

 

 

 

Of the rotation and bullpen listed, all but Bello, Pivetta and Schreiber are coming off injuries, surgeries or Barnes issues. Fortifying the pitching staff with big leaguers has to be the priority.

 

We already know a line-up with All-Star hitters like X, JD and Raffy can finish dead last without pitching.

 

Sign Rodon, Montero and Eflin while they're still available.

[Old Red]

Oh NO! Called out by others for going overboard with inappropriateness.

 

I'm shaken.

 

That’s the problem your not, and you don’t go overboard on stuff like that. At least MOST people wouldn’t.

[moonslav59]

Of the rotation and bullpen listed, all but Bello, Pivetta and Schreiber are coming off injuries, surgeries or Barnes issues. Fortifying the pitching staff with big leaguers has to be the priority.

 

We already know a line-up with All-Star hitters like X, JD and Raffy can finish dead last without pitching.

 

Sign Rodon, Montero and Eflin while they're still available.

 

Pitching is certainly a top priority. I think trading for an ace makes more sense, due to the the cost and uncertainty of just about every FA pitcher on the market.

 

I agree, we need to add at the very least 3 solid pitchers. Now that Whitlock has been told he will start, the focus shifts more to the pen, but we still need an ace or solid 1/2 type.

[Nick]

Pitching is certainly a top priority. I think trading for an ace makes more sense, due to the the cost and uncertainty of just about every FA pitcher on the market.

 

I agree, we need to add at the very least 3 solid pitchers. Now that Whitlock has been told he will start, the focus shifts more to the pen, but we still need an ace or solid 1/2 type.

 

As always good stuff. Every poster is valued here. I hope some of you can play nicer. Someone has to be the bigger man. We can always ignore some posters. I'm sure I'm on someone's ignore list.

 

As a former CPA, I can't help but to keep track of budget AND the team control that a team has on a player. The company I worked for always had a rolling 5 year budget in addition to the annual budget. It's about bringing the core group together, whoever is in that core group. Devers is NOT in that core group until he signs his extension. Story is, good or bad due to his contract status.

 

Management has shed some light on some things such as naming Whitlock as a starter and maybe Houck as well. Bello is under team control for next six years along with Whitlock if all the options are exercised. Houck is under team control for 5 more years. I'm little more ambivalent about Pivetta as this is his second year of arbitration and I'm not sure if he'll ever be more than a #4 starter. Yes he does gives us innings. But we can't have .500 pitchers 1 through 5. Someone has to step up.

 

I see that Verlander is a free agent. He is someone I'd consider for a two year deal. He's a winner. He recently had his Tommy John so he should be ready to go. Unlike Chris Sale, he looks to be fit and strong. If we can get him for a two year deal (say at $30M), that contract would coincide nicely with Sale. We would shed close to $60M after the 2024 season. Why not reset in 2025? With Verlander, we can ignore Eovaldi and Wacha. Maybe sign Hill to supplement Paxton as emergency starters. (Verlander, Sale, Whitlock, Pivetta, Bello, Houck (?), Paxton, Hill, Crawford, Winchowski, etc). Get couple of more bullpen arms and we'd be set pitching wise.

 

If we have no intention of going after a big money guy, then I'm not sure what Bloom meant be saying we'll be much better.

 

Sigining Verlander to a two year contract would make us competitive, especially in the playoffs. At my age, I'm looking for #5. Everything else is the Yankees.

Edited November 10, 2022 by Nick

[Nick]

Just a fyi on Hosmer contract. He is a Boras client. When he signed his 8 year $144M deal, his first 5 year payout was $21M per annum and the last 3 years are $13M per annum.

 

Many here flippantly say Sox is only liable for the league minimum. That is TRUE.

 

The reason San Diego was willing to trade him and pay his entire salary was to DUPM his remaining luxury tax payroll amount, approximately $5M per year for next three years. Sox are obligated to assume that paper liability.

 

San Diego didn't care about the 'money'. They cared to get rid of his residual luxury tax payroll off their books. That looks Bostonisque.

 

Nicely done. Much better than Bloom getting us into a possible severe tax situation by going over by thin margin. Everyone here knows to go BIG the first time.

Edited November 10, 2022 by Nick

[Hugh2]

If this report is true, it looks like the Whitlock decision has been made, while the Houck choice has not been made:

 

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2022/11/red-sox-planning-to-use-garrett-whitlock-as-starter-in-2023.html

 

The Red Sox are planning to deploy right-hander Garrett Whitlock out of the rotation in 2023, general manager Brian O’Halloran told reporters at the GM Meetings (link via Chris Cotillo of MassLive). O’Halloran added that Tanner Houck could get a look as a starter as well, although that decision hasn’t yet been made.

 

With Whit, we told him to plan to be a starter and we expect him to be a starter,” the GM told reporters. “With Tanner, we said something similar. We talked through that he will go through the offseason planning to be a starter and we’ll build him up as such. But there’s a little bit (less) definition around his role and he knows it could go in either direction.” O’Halloran added the decision to move Whitlock to the rotation “was a little bit more clear and definitive” than the situation with Houck, whose role figures to be determined in part by the course of the Boston offseason.

 

I think the plan with Houck is for him to start if they have a very lackluster offseason on that side of the ball (or injuries). Otherwise they probably prefer him in the pen.

[Hugh2]

Just a fyi on Hosmer contract. He is a Boras client. When he signed his 8 year $144M deal, his first 5 year payout was $21M per annum and the last 3 years are $13M per annum.

 

Many here flippantly say Sox is only liable for the league minimum. That is TRUE.

 

The reason San Diego was willing to trade him and pay his entire salary was to DUPM his remaining luxury tax payroll amount, approximately $5M per year for next three years. Sox are obligated to assume that paper liability.

 

San Diego didn't care about the 'money'. They cared to get rid of his residual luxury tax payroll off their books. That looks Bostonisque.

 

Nicely done. Much better than Bloom getting us into a possible severe tax situation by going over by thin margin. Everyone here knows to go BIG the first time.

 

AAV may matter when the contract is signed but when he is traded it becomes a 3 year 39 million dollar deal. The Padres sent that money over to the Sox making it a min hit for them. So I believe the Luxury tax hit really is only the league min.

[Bellhorn04]

Just a fyi on Hosmer contract. He is a Boras client. When he signed his 8 year $144M deal, his first 5 year payout was $21M per annum and the last 3 years are $13M per annum.

 

Many here flippantly say Sox is only liable for the league minimum. That is TRUE.

 

The reason San Diego was willing to trade him and pay his entire salary was to DUPM his remaining luxury tax payroll amount, approximately $5M per year for next three years. Sox are obligated to assume that paper liability.

 

San Diego didn't care about the 'money'. They cared to get rid of his residual luxury tax payroll off their books. That looks Bostonisque.

 

I don't think San Diego's tax AAV is reduced except by the league minimum amount being paid by Boston.

 

But the info about this in Cot's and Spotrac is either missing or hopelessly confusing.

[notin]

I think the plan with Houck is for him to start if they have a very lackluster offseason on that side of the ball (or injuries). Otherwise they probably prefer him in the pen.

 

I hope that applies to both Houck and Whitlock. The pen has been much better when both of them are in it…

[moonslav59]

I don't think San Diego's tax AAV is reduced except by the league minimum amount being paid by Boston.

 

But the info about this in Cot's and Spotrac is either missing or hopelessly confusing.

 

Cots has Hosmer on SDP's tax budget line as $12.28M, which deducts min salary from his salary.

[Bellhorn04]

Cots has Hosmer on SDP's tax budget line as $12.28M, which deducts min salary from his salary.

 

But it was 8/144 or 18 mill AAV, so it should be 17.28 mill, I think.

[moonslav59]

But it was 8/144 or 18 mill AAV, so it should be 17.28 mill, I think.

 

Yes, you are right. It's a $13M contract per year, from now on, but the tax number was and remains $18M.

 

Another mistake by cots.

[Nick]

I think you are all wrong. And I'm willing to bet on it.

 

San Diego is done except for the monetary hit they have taken, $39M. Hosmer is off the books.

 

San Diego benefited from AAV perspective by paying higher salary amount the first 5 years. The AAV is computed over the life of the contract, or over 8 years. Thus, their annual AAV hit during the first five years were lower than the actual payout amount.

 

I believe the numbers shown for the Sox on cot's spreadsheet is correct.

 

Someone is responsible for the liability and I don't think it's San Diego. Otherwise they would have been penalized twice, once for actual cash and another for the AAV liability.

[Hugh2]

I think you are all wrong. And I'm willing to bet on it.

 

San Diego is done except for the monetary hit they have taken, $39M. Hosmer is off the books.

 

San Diego benefited from AAV perspective by paying higher salary amount the first 5 years. The AAV is computed over the life of the contract, or over 8 years. Thus, their annual AAV hit during the first five years were lower than the actual payout amount.

 

I believe the numbers shown for the Sox on cot's spreadsheet is correct.

 

Someone is responsible for the liability and I don't think it's San Diego. Otherwise they would have been penalized twice, once for actual cash and another for the AAV liability.

 

I'll wager you on this. Might take some digging up and time to verify because the whole luxury tax line and contractual impact is very convoluted. I wager this. The loser.....has to donate $25 to a charity of the other choice.

[Nick]

I'll wager you on this. Might take some digging up and time to verify because the whole luxury tax line and contractual impact is very convoluted. I wager this. The loser.....has to donate $25 to a charity of the other choice.

 

You are on......

[moonslav59]

I think you are all wrong. And I'm willing to bet on it.

 

San Diego is done except for the monetary hit they have taken, $39M. Hosmer is off the books.

 

San Diego benefited from AAV perspective by paying higher salary amount the first 5 years. The AAV is computed over the life of the contract, or over 8 years. Thus, their annual AAV hit during the first five years were lower than the actual payout amount.

 

I believe the numbers shown for the Sox on cot's spreadsheet is correct.

 

Someone is responsible for the liability and I don't think it's San Diego. Otherwise they would have been penalized twice, once for actual cash and another for the AAV liability.

 

The AAV only matters to a team, if they are going over the tax line. It doesn't help or hurt, otherwise.

 

Hosmer signed a $144M/8 year contract that comes to $18M on the tax budget for all 8 years. Nothing changes that, except maybe who it counts against, if a trade happens.

 

Yes, the Padres were paying him $21M for 5 years, and the tax line was only $18M, but it shows $18M for all 8 years, if you look at previous totals on cots.

 

When they traded Hosmer to the Sox, they agreed to pay all but the min salary for the remaining contract. That means they pay the Sox $13M a year minus the min salary, but on the tax line, it should be $18M minus the min salary, as that line never changes. The $18M counts on someone's tax line, and IMO it should be SD, since they are paying almost his whole salary.

[Bellhorn04]

If Nick is right, it would seem to be an egregious blunder by the Sox, because Hosmer would represent $5.72 mill AAV against their tax payroll for 2023. That would be crazy.

[moonslav59]

If Nick is right, it would seem to be an egregious blunder by the Sox, because Hosmer would represent $5.72 mill AAV against their tax payroll for 2023. That would be crazy.

 

That can't be right, but no site explains where that $6M tax budget differential goes.

[Bellhorn04]

That can't be right, but no site explains where that $6M tax budget differential goes.

 

Confounding, isn't it?

[Bellhorn04]

I found the answer on Hosmer. There was a change in the new CBA. The Sox AAV hit is indeed only the $720 K. No way Bloom would have made the trade if it caused tax issues.

 

The comments at the end of this are interesting. We're not the only ones wracking our brains trying to figure out this convoluted crap.

 

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/a-minor-cba-change-could-create-contract-wrinkles/

[moonslav59]

Confounding, isn't it?

 

It has to be on the Padres, but when it comes to MLB, you can't assume the logical answer.

[moonslav59]

I found the answer on Hosmer. There was a change in the new CBA. The Sox AAV hit is indeed only the $720 K. No way Bloom would have made the trade if it caused tax issues.

 

The comments at the end of this are interesting. We're not the only ones wracking our brains trying to figure out this convoluted crap.

 

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/a-minor-cba-change-could-create-contract-wrinkles/

 

Some serious gobble-dee-goop.