Chris Sale traded to Braves

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, mvp 78 said:

C'mon man. He completely tanked payroll to get under the cap. In 2022, they barely went over the CBT. To call that one of the biggest increases in his tenure just ignores so much context that it's an absurd argument. 

Come on, what? I mentioned the big tank before and that the increase did not come close to replacing those we lost before.

The fact remains, the spending has not been on one steady downward trend, and the Devers & Story signings are two of the largest given our by JH. It still sucks. I'm pissed, too, but there is no evidence that cuts will continue onwards and onward.  Recent evidence shows otherwise.

Why does the truth hurt so much?

Again, I'm not sugar coating anything. I'm pissed at the whole sham, but I keep hearing posters  say JH will not sign anyone to a huge contract, when the  largest deal in Sox history just began, this year. The Story signing  was 2 years ago. Why do we have to ignore those signings to make our points?

There is plenty of truthful things to say to make a JH-damning point.

My whole point about bringing this up is to ask what evidence shows JH will keep cutting and cutting the budget, and again, I'm not denying it might happen, but what is the basis for this belief?

JH has shown that he cuts, when he thinks the chances are low for a ring and splurges or spends more when he thinks we are approaching a window. He has cut right after a ring year and spent more after one, too. There is no way to predict. If anything, his trend is to keep going up and down.

True, no cut was as massive as the one before 2020, and that set us so far back, that any increase is largely a mirage. I've even made the point that the rise in the budget from 2018 to 2019 was a mirage, as it only reflected rising costs of the same players we kept, while letting Kimbrel and Kelly go with no suitable replacements. I maintain the "cutting" really began in 2019, and that's what caused the rift between JH and DD. The downturn has been about 6 years long, with some superficial jumps in spending to try and placate fans and season ticket holders.  I've called it a sham. "Come on," what?

Nothing is as black and white as some want to think it is.

[Bellhorn04]

17 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Come on, what? I mentioned the big tank before and that the increase did not come close to replacing those we lost before.

The fact remains, the spending has not been on one steady downward trend, and the Devers & Story signings are two of the largest given our by JH. It still sucks. I'm pissed, too, but there is no evidence that cuts will continue onwards and onward.  Recent evidence shows otherwise.

Why does the truth hurt so much?

Again, I'm not sugar coating anything. I'm pissed at the whole sham, but I keep hearing posters  say JH will not sign anyone to a huge contract, when the  largest deal in Sox history just began, this year. The Story signing  was 2 years ago. Why do we have to ignore those signings to make our points?

There is plenty of truthful things to say to make a JH-damning point.

My whole point about bringing this up is to ask what evidence shows JH will keep cutting and cutting the budget, and again, I'm not denying it might happen, but what is the basis for this belief?

JH has shown that he cuts, when he thinks the chances are low for a ring and splurges or spends more when he thinks we are approaching a window. He has cut right after a ring year and spent more after one, too. There is no way to predict. If anything, his trend is to keep going up and down.

True, no cut was as massive as the one before 2020, and that set us so far back, that any increase is largely a mirage. I've even made the point that the rise in the budget from 2018 to 2019 was a mirage, as it only reflected rising costs of the same players we kept, while letting Kimbrel and Kelly go with no suitable replacements. I maintain the "cutting" really began in 2019, and that's what caused the rift between JH and DD. The downturn has been about 6 years long, with some superficial jumps in spending to try and placate fans and season ticket holders.  I've called it a sham. "Come on," what?

Nothing is as black and white as some want to think it is.

But the Red Sox rankings in payroll have never been lower than they were in 2023 and 2024.  It's clearly new territory.  You keep attributing this to other teams "going nutty", while ignoring the context of rising revenues.

No one is accusing Henry of going Carl Pohlad on us.  But things are not the same as they were, for reasons none of us are privy to.  We know the Sox reached out to RedBird Capital for a major cash infusion because of COVID losses, and that is one of the possible explanations.  RedBird has a 10% stake in FSG, and they are strictly venture capitalists, and they probably command a hefty dividend on their investment.

There's also the massive new investment in real estate, of course.

Henry is pinching the payroll and he has his reasons.

 

[Bellhorn04]

Sam Kennedy's announcement back in January that the payroll was probably going to be lower than the previous year didn't get the attention it deserved.  That was Sam saying the quiet part out loud.  After all the stuff about how the budget isn't set in stone and it was being left up to Breslow, and with plenty of unsigned free agents still out there, Sam was fessing up to the reality of the situation.

[Randy Red Sox]

On 10/30/2024 at 6:34 PM, moonslav59 said:

Your idea of a 4-5 makes it look like there are zero 2's and 3's. To say "at best" makes it even worse. It's like you see him as a 6th SP.

How many pitchers are #1's?

I'd say about 30.

#2's? about 30 (one for each team)

#3s? yup, 30 more.

You are saying there are 90-120 better SP'ers than Flaherty?

I'd say you are way off.

Of the 125+ Pitchers with 120+ IP, Flaherty placed:

17th WHIP

22nd in FIP and ERA

24th in ERA-

29th i fWAR

Can you name even 60 pitchers better than him?

He's a #2, at worst.

Okay, okay, 2024 was a fluke, you say: how about 2021 to 2024 (130+ pitchers with 300+ IP) Flaherty places...

63rd ERA and 73rd in FIP (about a #3)

64th ERA- (top #3)

77th in fWAR (about a #3)

I'm fine thinking he's a good #3 with #2 upside. He's not a 4/5.

 

 

HE is probably a #3 I'll admit but he's far too inconsistent to be a 1 or 2. I wouldn't even be kicking tires on him unless he's still out there in February.

[Randy Red Sox]

On 10/31/2024 at 5:56 AM, Bellhorn04 said:

Get ready for some Burnes/Fried Interest Kings fun...

we can all go sleep until December.  The MLB FA process is a joke and takes forever to develop. Worst FA period of any of the major sports.

[Randy Red Sox]

20 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Come on, what? I mentioned the big tank before and that the increase did not come close to replacing those we lost before.

The fact remains, the spending has not been on one steady downward trend, and the Devers & Story signings are two of the largest given our by JH. It still sucks. I'm pissed, too, but there is no evidence that cuts will continue onwards and onward.  Recent evidence shows otherwise.

Why does the truth hurt so much?

Again, I'm not sugar coating anything. I'm pissed at the whole sham, but I keep hearing posters  say JH will not sign anyone to a huge contract, when the  largest deal in Sox history just began, this year. The Story signing  was 2 years ago. Why do we have to ignore those signings to make our points?

There is plenty of truthful things to say to make a JH-damning point.

My whole point about bringing this up is to ask what evidence shows JH will keep cutting and cutting the budget, and again, I'm not denying it might happen, but what is the basis for this belief?

JH has shown that he cuts, when he thinks the chances are low for a ring and splurges or spends more when he thinks we are approaching a window. He has cut right after a ring year and spent more after one, too. There is no way to predict. If anything, his trend is to keep going up and down.

True, no cut was as massive as the one before 2020, and that set us so far back, that any increase is largely a mirage. I've even made the point that the rise in the budget from 2018 to 2019 was a mirage, as it only reflected rising costs of the same players we kept, while letting Kimbrel and Kelly go with no suitable replacements. I maintain the "cutting" really began in 2019, and that's what caused the rift between JH and DD. The downturn has been about 6 years long, with some superficial jumps in spending to try and placate fans and season ticket holders.  I've called it a sham. "Come on," what?

Nothing is as black and white as some want to think it is.

The reason we ignore these is because Story was ONLY signed because Henry wouldn't buck up for XB and the Devers extension was ONLY done because of the Mookie fiasco and the uproar that would have followed had Devers left as well. NOTHING can convince me otherwise on these 2 signings. 

[Randy Red Sox]

On 10/31/2024 at 5:52 AM, mvp 78 said:

People get very upset over the definition of what is and isn't an "ace." On here, people will always use that word to denote Roger, Pedro, Sale and peak Beckett. It may not be a fair term to put on every pitcher that is put in the #1 spot.

I don't think Flaherty should be the #1 guy in the rotation. Houck shouldn't either. I think they need someone else to be the #1 guy to lead the staff. 

Sox need to go after a young stud like Crochet of the CWS. That team is going nowhere and likely will be looking to deal him. How about a package of Campbell and Duran and a lesser prospect?  Anthony can replace Duran and we have options [ Mayer, Grissom [UGH] ]for 2B.

[Randy Red Sox]

On 10/31/2024 at 5:52 AM, mvp 78 said:

People get very upset over the definition of what is and isn't an "ace." On here, people will always use that word to denote Roger, Pedro, Sale and peak Beckett. It may not be a fair term to put on every pitcher that is put in the #1 spot.

I don't think Flaherty should be the #1 guy in the rotation. Houck shouldn't either. I think they need someone else to be the #1 guy to lead the staff. 

Sox need to go after a young stud like Crochet of the CWS. That team is going nowhere and likely will be looking to deal him. How about a package of Campbell and Duran and a lesser prospect?  Anthony can replace Duran and we have options [ Mayer, Grissom [UGH] ]for 2B.

[Randy Red Sox]

On 10/31/2024 at 5:52 AM, mvp 78 said:

People get very upset over the definition of what is and isn't an "ace." On here, people will always use that word to denote Roger, Pedro, Sale and peak Beckett. It may not be a fair term to put on every pitcher that is put in the #1 spot.

I don't think Flaherty should be the #1 guy in the rotation. Houck shouldn't either. I think they need someone else to be the #1 guy to lead the staff. 

Sox need to go after a young stud like Crochet of the CWS. That team is going nowhere and likely will be looking to deal him. How about a package of Campbell and Duran and a lesser prospect?  Anthony can replace Duran and we have options [ Mayer, Grissom [UGH] ]for 2B.

[notin]

9 minutes ago, Randy Red Sox said:

Sox need to go after a young stud like Crochet of the CWS. That team is going nowhere and likely will be looking to deal him. How about a package of Campbell and Duran and a lesser prospect?  Anthony can replace Duran and we have options [ Mayer, Grissom [UGH] ]for 2B.

So four years of Duran coming off an MVP caliber season for two years of Crochet, because the first half of his first season as a starter was good?!!

 

I like Crochet, but I wouldn’t give up Duran alone for him. Let alone adding Campbell.  (Chicago, in full blown tank mode, likely wouldn’t want Duran anyway.)

 

BTV gives Crochet a surplus value of $40.2mill.  Campbell alone has a value of $38.6mill, and Duran had a surplus value of $71.4mill, meaning in this trade, the Sox give up $100mill for $40.2mill.  And the BoSox have add a lesser prospect, too?

 

BTV does equate Crochet in value to Kyle Teel ($40.4 mill)…

[Randy Red Sox]

1 minute ago, notin said:

So four years of Duran coming off an MVP caliber season for two years of Crochet, because the first half of his first season as a starter was good?!!

 

I like Crochet, but I wouldn’t give up Duran alone for him. Let alone adding Campbell.  (Chicago, in full blown tank mode, likely wouldn’t want Duran anyway.)

 

BTV gives Crochet a surplus value of $40.2mill.  Campbell alone has a value of $38.6mill, and Duran had a surplus value of $71.4mill, meaning in this trade, the Sox give up $100mill for $40.2mill.

 

BTV does equate Crochet in value to Kyle Teel ($40.4 mill)…

I was only throwing out ideas. I like Duran but 1} this was likely his career best season and 2] we have excess depth in the OF. Maybe sub Abreu for Duran? I don't think the Sox can afford to give up Teel because Wong is not a long term answer given his poor defence.

[moonslav59]

2 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

But the Red Sox rankings in payroll have never been lower than they were in 2023 and 2024.  It's clearly new territory.  You keep attributing this to other teams "going nutty", while ignoring the context of rising revenues.

No one is accusing Henry of going Carl Pohlad on us.  But things are not the same as they were, for reasons none of us are privy to.  We know the Sox reached out to RedBird Capital for a major cash infusion because of COVID losses, and that is one of the possible explanations.  RedBird has a 10% stake in FSG, and they are strictly venture capitalists, and they probably command a hefty dividend on their investment.

There's also the massive new investment in real estate, of course.

Henry is pinching the payroll and he has his reasons.

 

To be clear, I have said that a few owners "going nutty" only accounts for some of the reason for us dropping in the rankings- NOT the whole reason. Surely, JH's tightening of the budget is also a major reason for the drop. There are more teams going over the CBT line than before, so there is merit to my point and position.

We increased our budget from $180M to $195M from 2021 to 2022. That was one of JH's biggest increases, but we dropped from 3rd to 6th in the rankings. Clearly, other teams' spending has a strong influence on our drop in rankings. I keep feeling like I have to keep saying that I am not trying to let JH off the hook by providing  some facts  that try to put it all in context.

A BIG PART OF OUR DROP IS ON HENRY! I fully support this position and am pisses as hell at him for this.

On "noone is accusing JH of going Pohlad," i disagree, and the couple posters who keep saying they think JH will continue to cut and cut until we are a small market like spender is who most of my posts are directly responding to.

They say JH will never hand out a massive contract again, during the same season we just paid Devers way more than the Price deal. The Story deal from 2 years ago was also one of the Sox highest 5 or 6 FA contracts in history. We paid more for Yoshida than Pablo, HRam, Lackey, Porcello and others. Within the context of losing Betts, Bogey, JD, Porcello, Sale, Price and others, it's clearly still a step down in spending big on single players, but it's not fully stopping on big deals as some say or imply. Then, they say, "Well, JH had to keep Devers after losing Betts and Bogey," and that is very true, but did JH or did he not spend very large and long on a player? The answer is yes. Will he again? I don't know.

They say we have been cutting "every year," and we have not. I showed how JH has always gone up and down and asked why they feel it is a surity it will always go down, from here on out. I even provided the context behind the big jump from 2020 to 2022 as being a mirage, since the cut was so deep from 2019 to 2020, that it wipes out the increase, afterwards, and that the general trend has been down since even 2018 (not 2019.) I've lengthened the time of cuts a year more than they did by showing that I think 2019 was an actual "cut" budget, because we let Kimbrel and Kelly go and the increase in the budget was just paying more to arb guys plus the Nate re-sign.

I think I am giving a fair and balanced account of what JH has done, recently, since 2018 and over his whole era. I'm not defending him, but I'm also not out to crucify him, either. There are several posters, here, that wanted him gone, yesterday. I'm not saying they are wrong for wanting that, or that they have no reason for wanting that, but I disagree that now or yesterday is the time for that.

My position is and has been, I don't know if JH will spend big again. I'm not sure why or how my position can be viewed as wrong or slanted. I'm not the one(s) predicting what JH is going to do or not do.

[Bellhorn04]

moon, I just don't think you're placing enough emphasis on where we stand payroll-wise compared to other teams and compared to our revenues.  Those are the most important barometers IMHO.  None of this happens in a vacuum. 

It's just a point of disagreement, that's all.  I do think you generally try to be fair all the way around.  

[notin]

23 minutes ago, Randy Red Sox said:

I was only throwing out ideas. I like Duran but 1} this was likely his career best season and 2] we have excess depth in the OF. Maybe sub Abreu for Duran? I don't think the Sox can afford to give up Teel because Wong is not a long term answer given his poor defence.

If you like BTV, they say you can go a lot less for Crochet.  He’s not worth as much as you think, and probably for these three reasons.

1. Only 2 years of control left.  This is actually huge, and why pitchers like fellow 2024 breakout SPs Tanner Houck and Cristopher Sanchez are worth more in trades.

2. Crochet’s second half was miserable, with an ERA of 5.12.  As this was his only season as a starter, how much does this guy really have?

3. One TJ already.  A second one takes out his two remaining seasons…

[Bellhorn04]

Yeah, I'm not really interested in Crochet.  Lots of question marks.  With guys like Burnes and Fried, they have at least proven themselves over multiple seasons.

[notin]

20 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Yeah, I'm not really interested in Crochet.  Lots of question marks.  With guys like Burnes and Fried, they have at least proven themselves over multiple seasons.

Crochet feels risky.  For Abreu+, I’m in (as is everyone who doesn’t work for the White Sox), but for Campbell+, I’m hesitant.

Im still fully on board with the Nick Martinez and Tanner Scott combo over either Burnes or Fried.  And maybe Snell, too…

[Randy Red Sox]

1 hour ago, notin said:

Crochet feels risky.  For Abreu+, I’m in (as is everyone who doesn’t work for the White Sox), but for Campbell+, I’m hesitant.

Im still fully on board with the Nick Martinez and Tanner Scott combo over either Burnes or Fried.  And maybe Snell, too…

i guess you are ok with the constant revolving door with the Sox.  Both are relievers and you can almost guarantee Martinez to be a 1 yr guy since he always gets an opt out clause and exercises it. Myself I'd like to see some guys here on a longer term basis. With Fulmer and Hendricks on board to replace Martin and Janssen along with the return of Whitlock I don't think the team thinks they need to add as much to the BP as this board thinks they do.  I can see them simply adding a LH reliever which may in fact end up being Scott depending on how the market goes for him.

I don't see any scenario where they spend on either Burnes or Fried. I can see the Dodgers being in on one of those 2 and the Yankees in on the other.

[moonslav59]

2 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

moon, I just don't think you're placing enough emphasis on where we stand payroll-wise compared to other teams and compared to our revenues.  Those are the most important barometers IMHO.  None of this happens in a vacuum. 

It's just a point of disagreement, that's all.  I do think you generally try to be fair all the way around.  

I pay attention to our ranking, but don't feel the need to repeat what has been said, over and over.

I never implied the reason we are in the middle tier now is only because other owners have gone "nutty." I know JH is the major reason. I do think, that if he spent as much as is minimally to moderately reasonable, we'd still be about 5th to 9th- not 1 to 3 as we were for such a long period.

We have never dropped this low, under JH. That is true. Maybe I need to say that more often, but it seems like something everyone knows and says over and over.

My point is about trying to predict where JH is going is impossible. While I agree, that a change happened after 2018, many saw it coming. Nobody expected it to last 5-7 years, and I do agree a long term down trend has been underway, but the ups and downs are still going on. What's wrong with pointing that out, and when I do, I always try to provide context.

The fact is, we were 3rd in spending in 2021, according to Steve the Ump. We were 6th in 2022, despite adding $15M to the budget. 2021 and 2022 were not a decade ago. They were within the 5-7 year overall decline since 2018. It's not unreasonable to ask those who think budget cuts are going to continue what evidence supports this belief? 2 years in a row of cuts? JH has done that numerous times in 20+ years.

Again, I'm not defending JH. I'm not saying he won't cut the budget, even more, this winter and maybe the next, too. I'm only saying we don't know.

I'll be more surprised if he spend up to the tax line than if he cuts more. We have so much coming off the books, this winter and I'm sure JH views Gio, Hendriks and Fulmer as  like this coming winter spendings & additions, without adding to the current budget. I do also think if Brez spends wisely, we can improve without spending more than 2024, but why should we bet on that? I want us to spend more, just like everyone else. It bothers me, when we don't. It bothers me that we keep dropping in the rankings. I'm not optimistic JH spends big again, but I am optimistic that our young roster is improving before our eyes and should keep improving for 2-3 more year or more. I'm hopeful JH & Co see this, too and will spend when the feel we are 2-3 key pieces away from being a top contender.

I think we can be there in 2025 with 3 major additions. My guess is, they do not see it as "the time" to splurge. They probably see 2026 or 2027 as the best time and will try to pull a sham on us again, this winter.

[notin]

41 minutes ago, Randy Red Sox said:

i guess you are ok with the constant revolving door with the Sox.  Both are relievers and you can almost guarantee Martinez to be a 1 yr guy since he always gets an opt out clause and exercises it. Myself I'd like to see some guys here on a longer term basis. With Fulmer and Hendricks on board to replace Martin and Janssen along with the return of Whitlock I don't think the team thinks they need to add as much to the BP as this board thinks they do.  I can see them simply adding a LH reliever which may in fact end up being Scott depending on how the market goes for him.

I don't see any scenario where they spend on either Burnes or Fried. I can see the Dodgers being in on one of those 2 and the Yankees in on the other.

Well, let’s not write Martinez’ contract for him.  And Tanner Scott is a LHRP.

But the Sox would be better off taking advantage of some of the underrated players and extending Houck and Crawford as opposed to signing Burnes, Fried or Snell so they can have the privilege of being unable to pay for Houck’s better years because they’re still paying for Max Fried’s waning years…

[notin]

6 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Sam Kennedy's announcement back in January that the payroll was probably going to be lower than the previous year didn't get the attention it deserved.  That was Sam saying the quiet part out loud.  After all the stuff about how the budget isn't set in stone and it was being left up to Breslow, and with plenty of unsigned free agents still out there, Sam was fessing up to the reality of the situation.

But on the bright side, Sam is a Full Throttle Liar…

[moonslav59]

47 minutes ago, Randy Red Sox said:

i guess you are ok with the constant revolving door with the Sox.  Both are relievers and you can almost guarantee Martinez to be a 1 yr guy since he always gets an opt out clause and exercises it. Myself I'd like to see some guys here on a longer term basis. With Fulmer and Hendricks on board to replace Martin and Janssen along with the return of Whitlock I don't think the team thinks they need to add as much to the BP as this board thinks they do.  I can see them simply adding a LH reliever which may in fact end up being Scott depending on how the market goes for him.

I don't see any scenario where they spend on either Burnes or Fried. I can see the Dodgers being in on one of those 2 and the Yankees in on the other.

Crochet is risky, but worth the pursuit. My beef is the 2 years of team control and not a long record of success. MLB is full of one year wonders that go nowhere, fast.

Crochet missed 2022 due to injury and could easily join the revolving door of Sox failed additions, although he sure looks better than Gio, Richards, Kluber and others did, at the times we added them. However, Kluber looked okay for one year, too, plus he had a great history from years before. Gio might have sucked at the end of 2023, but he did have several years of success, compare to one from Crochet.

Crochet doe not even have a minor league record to look at. He basically went from college to MLB, right out of the gate (12 IP in minors.) His college career was just 132 IP with a 4.38 ERA.

Don't get me wrong, I'd like Crochet in our 2025 rotation, but he is a risk, for sure.

[moonslav59]

I think Nick Martinez realizes this is the time to get years and dollars.

I think he, along with maybe Flaherty and Kikuchi might be in our price range, and if we do get Scott, we won't be spending real big on a SP'er. (Maybe a trade for a cheaper one?)

[notin]

49 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I think Nick Martinez realizes this is the time to get years and dollars.

I think he, along with maybe Flaherty and Kikuchi might be in our price range, and if we do get Scott, we won't be spending real big on a SP'er. (Maybe a trade for a cheaper one?)

Trading is a tough method, because the Sox want everyone that other teams would ask for to be unyouchable.  As far as I can tell, the only worthwhile players the Sox would move are Abreu and Hamilton.  Nice players both, but would any team unloading pitching need a RF and a 2b?

 

One strong possibility on all fronts is the Twins.  Word on the cyber streets is they’re looking to move the contract of Pablo Lopez (3 years $65.2mill.)  And the Twins also have vacancies in RF and 2b.  (To be fair, they had the vacancy at 2b for most of not all of last season.  And Lopez (38.6) is a good match for Abreu (30.3) and Hamilton (11.4).   

[moonslav59]

If our winter budget is limited, as most of us expect it will be,  and we need 3-4 kep additions, we could use Abreu, DHam and maybe Wink to add complimentary pieces like a catcher and a decent RP'er. This allows the FA money to be spent on 2 players, not 4.

Maybe we can sign Scott and Martinez and see what the best is we can get for Abreu and DHam, leaving us with this:

SP: Houck, Martinez, Bello, Crawford, Gio & Criswell SP/RP

(AAA: Fitts, Priester, Dobbins, Gambrell, I Coffey, Drohan, Wikelman, AA Sandlin)

RP: Scott, Hendriks, Whitlock, Slaten, __trade__, Fulmer, Guerrero

(AAA: Penrod, Bernardino, Weissert, I Campbell, Kelly, Booser, Shugart, Kwiat.)

C: __trade__, Wong (AAA: Teel)

1B: Casas (AAA: Gasper/Jordan)

2B: Grissom, E Valdez (AAA: Campbell, Sogard)

SS: Story, Romy (AAA: Mayer)

3B: Devers (AAA: Meidroth)

LF: Duran v R/ Ref v L (AA: Castro)

CF: Rafaela v R/ Duran v L (AA: Jh Garcia)

RF: Anthony (AA: Sikes)

DH: Yoshida/Ref if not in LF (AAA: Hickey/Jordan)

We can platoon Ref in LF or DH, or a little of both. We can wait until someone goes on the 60 Day, to add Campbell or Mayer to the 40 and 26. We can start with EValdez in AAA and have Sogard or someone else as #26.

I think, even trading Abreu and Dham and not replacing O'Neill, still leaves us with enough quality and depth at every position, assuming Story and Mayer are not hurt, at the same time.

[moonslav59]

29 minutes ago, notin said:

Trading is a tough method, because the Sox want everyone that other teams would ask for to be unyouchable.  As far as I can tell, the only worthwhile players the Sox would move are Abreu and Hamilton.  Nice players both, but would any team unloading pitching need a RF and a 2b?

 

One strong possibility on all fronts is the Twins.  Word on the cyber streets is they’re looking to move the contract of Pablo Lopez (3 years $65.2mill.)  And the Twins also have vacancies in RF and 2b.  (To be fair, they had the vacancy at 2b for most of not all of last season.  And Lopez (38.6) is a good match for Abreu (30.3) and Hamilton (11.4).   

I'd even add to the Pablo trade to get him.

Offer their choice from Wink, Mata, Shugart, Wikelman or maybe even penrod, Kelly, I Campbell or Weissert.

Word is they are also considering trading one of their arb pitchers (Ober or Ryan.) I'd work hard to nab Pablo and one of them, and would then consider trading Mayer or Campbell to make it happen.

[moonslav59]

While I really like The Dugo for Fitts (and others) and Yorke for Priester trades, I think we need to look for higher level young pitching that who they are.

I doubt we part with Anthony, Campbell, Mayer, Teel or Monty, and I'm not sure Arias, Cespedes, Bleis and Jh Garcia, even if combined can bring back what we need. Better than Fitts or Priester? Probably, but not a #2 or 3.

Pitchers like Pablo Lopez, Gausman or Luis Castillo might need less of a return package, due to their contracts, but with an assumed tight budget for Brez, this winter, I'm not sure we can make their contracts fit. Most are cheaper than a FA would cost, now, but  not by a lot. It might look better to keep the kids and just sign a tier two SP'er like Martinez, Flaherty or Kikuchi.

I like the idea of trading for an ace and spending the FA money on Scott or Estevez plus another good one like Hoffman, Holmes or ____.

[notin]

12 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I'd even add to the Pablo trade to get him.

Offer their choice from Wink, Mata, Shugart, Wikelman or maybe even penrod, Kelly, I Campbell or Weissert.

Word is they are also considering trading one of their arb pitchers (Ober or Ryan.) I'd work hard to nab Pablo and one of them, and would then consider trading Mayer or Campbell to make it happen.

If the Twins move Lopez, would they still want to move Ryan and/or Ober?

 

Lopez’ contract was written to be traded.  4 years $73.5 mill, but a jump from $8mill in 2024 to $21.75mill in 2025.  The Twins clearly don’t want to  pay that bump.  It’s like Sandy Alcantata’s contract - huge bump this year the Marlins do NOT want to pay.

 

I suspect both will be marketed this off-season, and both might move.  With one coming to Boston, hopefully.  I know Alcsntara missed 2024 recovering from TJ, but I doubt the Marlins hold him and hope he rebuilds value. Recovery from TJ isn’t some big mystery anymore and it clearly scares no one.  (Fellow Marlin Jesus Luzardo is recovering from back surgery and is more likely to get a chance to prove himself.)

One of Lopez or Alcántara works for me.  Both have talent and get paid enough that acquiring them shouldn’t be crazy, and both deals are short enough to not be huge problems…

[moonslav59]

10 minutes ago, notin said:

If the Twins move Lopez, would they still want to move Ryan and/or Ober?

 

Lopez’ contract was written to be traded.  4 years $73.5 mill, but a jump from $8mill in 2024 to $21.75mill in 2025.  The Twins clearly don’t want to  pay that bump.  It’s like Sandy Alcantata’s contract - huge bump this year the Marlins do NOT want to pay.

 

I suspect both will be marketed this off-season, and both might move.  With one coming to Boston, hopefully.  I know Alcsntara missed 2024 recovering from TJ, but I doubt the Marlins hold him and hope he rebuilds value. Recovery from TJ isn’t some big mystery anymore and it clearly scares no one.  (Fellow Marlin Jesus Luzardo is recovering from back surgery and is more likely to get a chance to prove himself.)

One of Lopez or Alcántara works for me.  Both have talent and get paid enough that acquiring them shouldn’t be crazy, and both deals are short enough to not be huge problems…

I think MIN can get better than Abreu + DHam from some other team. I'm not sure adding Wink or Priester, or even Fitts will be a better offer than they get, elsewhere, but am not onboard with giving up Campbell, Mayer or Anthony for Lopez. I'd have to think hard about Teel, but maybe any two from Arias, Bleis and Cespedes might work.

Would you give Abreu & Arias for Lopez?

[notin]

57 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I think MIN can get better than Abreu + DHam from some other team. I'm not sure adding Wink or Priester, or even Fitts will be a better offer than they get, elsewhere, but am not onboard with giving up Campbell, Mayer or Anthony for Lopez. I'd have to think hard about Teel, but maybe any two from Arias, Bleis and Cespedes might work.

Would you give Abreu & Arias for Lopez?

Maybe they can get more, but from a team willing to take on Lopez’ entire contract?

 

And yes, Arias over Hamilton is absolutely not a deal breaker for me…

[Randy Red Sox]

5 hours ago, notin said:

Well, let’s not write Martinez’ contract for him.  And Tanner Scott is a LHRP.

But the Sox would be better off taking advantage of some of the underrated players and extending Houck and Crawford as opposed to signing Burnes, Fried or Snell so they can have the privilege of being unable to pay for Houck’s better years because they’re still paying for Max Fried’s waning years…

i never said to sign either Fried or Burnes. Check the facts on Martinez.  He is WELL KNOWN to take short term contracts with opt out clauses and at least recently has always exercised his opt out.