A Realistic View of the 2025 Red Sox: Part I

[notin]

2 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Blocking: -4 Jeffers and -12 Wong

Framing: both -7

Throwing: Jeffers +2 and Wong 0 (Jeffers had better pop time in '24.)

DRS (fangraphs)

-4 Jeffers

-14 Wong

 

At best he’s a mild step up from Wong.  Like going from meningitis to influenza…

[Bellhorn04]

2 hours ago, notin said:

Were you posting here in March?

Hey, I'm not saying Henry and Kennedy won't do their best to kill our optimism over the next 5 months.

But in October we can still have optimism.   

[moonslav59]

2 hours ago, notin said:

At best he’s a mild step up from Wong.  Like going from meningitis to influenza…

I'd hope for a better defensive "step up," but I think the 28 HR/650 PA power is a big step forward for our RHBs.

Also, Wong has hit LHPs worse than RHPs: .727 to .686, so maybe Jeffers could give us a boost vs LHPs that Wong could not.

[oldtimer]

4 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

The vast majority of our key returning players are pre-prime or prime. That is something to be optimistic about, along with the 3-5 promising prospects beating down the MLB door.

By April, only these guys are end of prime or post-prime, and none are really super-key players, except Story and maybe Hendriks, if we don't add top RP'ers:

31 Yoshida

32 Story & Fulmer

34 Refsnyder

36 Hendriks

I think it's unrealistic to think we don't get some major boost from Anthony, Campbell, Mayer, Fitts or Guerrero. It might be unrealistic to expect two to be full timers, as well.

Yes, we lose Pivetta, Jansen, Martin and O'Neill. We need to add more than Gio, Hendriks and Fulmer to come close to replacing them and adding more value to improve on 81-81. They do offer some hope and some value, and should help, but we need 2-3 major additions to get significantly better. (I'd like 4, but 3 might be the limit.)

I'd add a top closer/RP'er and set up man.

Add a #2 SP'er.

Add a catcher with some RHB pop. (Trade for Jeffers?)

That could be enough.

I'd like to point out one more thing: while we lose O'Neill's 473 PAs at an .847 OPS and team leading 31 HRs, he did knock in just 61 batters, and we also lose or should see way less PAs from these guys, which is more PAs than O'Neill gave us:

.706 Smith (278 PAs)

.633 Valdez (223)

.575 McGuire (158)

.623 Jansen (96)

.410 Dalbec (93) + .455 Cooper (75)

.451 Reyes (64) + .584 Westbrook (48)+ .650 Sogard (86)

How many PAs DHam .697 (317) and Grissom .465 (114) get and how well they do could be a big factor, but the hope is that Story .733 (106) eats up most of the scrub IF PAs from 2024 and some of Rafaela's IF PAs. Campbell and Mayer offer some better hope than many listed above. Romy as the back-up 1Bman may do better than Cooper & Dalbec, but maybe not Dom Smith.

Getting a catcher like Jeffers could boost our RHB power and greatly improve on McGuire and jansen's production in 2024. It would also allow Wong to be more of a back-up catcher and 1Bman.

If Anthony and Campbell can improve on Rafaela's OF production, on offense, that could be the boost we need to overtake the loss of O'Neill, all by itself.

We do have a lot of "ifs," but having so many promising "ifs" is not a bad thing, and it's not like many are long shots. Many have already shown a lot of promise, such as Casas, Abreu and even Wong & DHam, to some extent. Duran, Devers and Ref vs LHPs are proven producers. Rafaela could take a step back, but we have Anthony & Campbell.

To me, adding a solid RHB Catcher with pop is all the offense needs to project better production for 2025. That does not mean we get it, but on paper, it should be better. (I hate depending on Story, but having Mayer and the return of DHam, Grissom, Romy and maybe Campbell improves the depth, too.)

 

After watching the Dodgers edge out the Padres, it made me think that both these teams are loaded with big name hitters and they also have excellent defensive teams. Despite those attributes, both teams were largely shutdown by exceptional pitching. In the case of the Dodgers, they had injuries among their starters and were relying on a very capable and deep bull pen.  
To me there are two seasons. One where a team has to make the playoffs and the second for the team to succeed in the playoff. In the first, a loaded team can beat up enough on average pitching and the second where they have to have outstanding pitching while eking out wins with defense, speed and what hitting they can find. Hitters who have low strike out rates and put the ball in play are especially valued.
The Sox currently have one of the poorer defenses in baseball, had too many players with high strike rates and were not deep on the pitching side. Those who believe ownership will spend enough to be competitive with teams like the Dodgers or Padres are just dreaming. Better to find ways to improve team speed and defense as much as possible from within and filling one or two position players while plowing the most money into at least one quality starter and greatly strengthening the BP. 
Suggestions:
1. Take Devers off 3rd and mainly DH him while trading Yoshida.to clear space
2. Fill 3rd with a FA with defensive chops and is a RH hitter. Devers as backup
3. Leave Story at short and back him up with Mayer 
4. Fill 2nd from the minors with Cambell while keeping Grissom as alternate.
5. Leave Casas at 1st with Devers as backup
6. I’m happy with Duran and Abreu and think it’s time for Anthony in the outfield. Refsnyder as backup. Return Rafaela to minors to work on hitting.
7. Wong as primary catcher (not great defensively) and add a FA backup catcher. Teel isn’t ready.
That gives us speed and improves the defense. I am willing to risk that all the prospects will hit. What do we have to lose? Another last place finish?
8. Spend on at least one quality starter and multiple relief arms. My preference is for younger arms as I don’t expect we can move the needle forward enough in one season to compete for it all.
 

[moonslav59]

MLBTR reports...

The Red Sox are nearing a deal to hire Taylor Smith for an unspecified analytics-based role in the club’s front office, according to MassLive.com’s Sean McAdam and Chris Cotillo.  Smith could be joining the ranks as an assistant general manager, which would presumably also come with some type of VP title like Boston’s other four assistant GMs under chief baseball officer Craig Breslow.

[moonslav59]

Just now, moonslav59 said:

MLBTR reports...

The Red Sox are nearing a deal to hire Taylor Smith for an unspecified analytics-based role in the club’s front office, according to Sean Adams.  Smith could be joining the ranks as an assistant general manager, which would presumably also come with some type of VP title like Boston’s other four assistant GMs under chief baseball officer Craig Breslow.

 

[Hugh2]

4 hours ago, notin said:

I wouldn’t agree Yoshida’s contract is preventing the Sox from getting a frontline starter.  I think that ship has sailed.

The Sox payroll is down some $50mill or so from its peak.  You don’t drop that much payroll if you’re continually re-investing…

Saying payroll is down $50 million from it's peak is a little misleading. 

Sox have have always spent up to or over the luxury cap, even this past year their payroll for luxury tax purposes was only $11 million under the cap.  Those "peaks" were years the Sox went over, but even then they always dipped under.  The Sox have never paid the 3rd year penalty....never.  Minus the absence of deciding to go over the cap the Payroll is right where it's always been, right at the cap. 

[Hugh2]

45 minutes ago, oldtimer said:

After watching the Dodgers edge out the Padres, it made me think that both these teams are loaded with big name hitters and they also have excellent defensive teams. Despite those attributes, both teams were largely shutdown by exceptional pitching. In the case of the Dodgers, they had injuries among their starters and were relying on a very capable and deep bull pen.  
To me there are two seasons. One where a team has to make the playoffs and the second for the team to succeed in the playoff. In the first, a loaded team can beat up enough on average pitching and the second where they have to have outstanding pitching while eking out wins with defense, speed and what hitting they can find. Hitters who have low strike out rates and put the ball in play are especially valued.
The Sox currently have one of the poorer defenses in baseball, had too many players with high strike rates and were not deep on the pitching side. Those who believe ownership will spend enough to be competitive with teams like the Dodgers or Padres are just dreaming. Better to find ways to improve team speed and defense as much as possible from within and filling one or two position players while plowing the most money into at least one quality starter and greatly strengthening the BP. 
Suggestions:
1. Take Devers off 3rd and mainly DH him while trading Yoshida.to clear space
2. Fill 3rd with a FA with defensive chops and is a RH hitter. Devers as backup
3. Leave Story at short and back him up with Mayer 
4. Fill 2nd from the minors with Cambell while keeping Grissom as alternate.
5. Leave Casas at 1st with Devers as backup
6. I’m happy with Duran and Abreu and think it’s time for Anthony in the outfield. Refsnyder as backup. Return Rafaela to minors to work on hitting.
7. Wong as primary catcher (not great defensively) and add a FA backup catcher. Teel isn’t ready.
That gives us speed and improves the defense. I am willing to risk that all the prospects will hit. What do we have to lose? Another last place finish?
8. Spend on at least one quality starter and multiple relief arms. My preference is for younger arms as I don’t expect we can move the needle forward enough in one season to compete for it all.
 

So, you won't to roll the dice on Alex Bregman.  I would nominate Bregman for the "most likely to be the next Trevor Story" award.  I would be very nervous about paying him. 

I think Story/Mayer/Campbell alone will make the defense much better.  Keeping Rafaela in CF and having continuity at 1B will also go a long way.  I suspect the Sox will sign a guy like Jansen and Teel will be ready mid season. 

Defense isn't going to go from awful to superb in one season, but it could get much better next year. 

[notin]

32 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

So, you won't to roll the dice on Alex Bregman.  I would nominate Bregman for the "most likely to be the next Trevor Story" award.  I would be very nervous about paying him. 

I think Story/Mayer/Campbell alone will make the defense much better.  Keeping Rafaela in CF and having continuity at 1B will also go a long way.  I suspect the Sox will sign a guy like Jansen and Teel will be ready mid season. 

Defense isn't going to go from awful to superb in one season, but it could get much better next year. 

f*** Bregman, that whiny little prick.  (I call him a “little prick, but he’s much bigger than me.)  Problem is, however, finding better options.  Free agency has little else besides Eugenio Suarez…

Hamilton is the Sox best defensive 2b. And he did hit surprisingly well.  

[moonslav59]

20 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Saying payroll is down $50 million from it's peak is a little misleading. 

Sox have have always spent up to or over the luxury cap, even this past year their payroll for luxury tax purposes was only $11 million under the cap.  Those "peaks" were years the Sox went over, but even then they always dipped under.  The Sox have never paid the 3rd year penalty....never.  Minus the absence of deciding to go over the cap the Payroll is right where it's always been, right at the cap. 

Yes. I've said this several times. The big difference was just how steep the drop was from 2019 to 2020, and then when you factor inflation, it took a few years to come close to where we once were.

The other major factor is that a few teams started going nutty with spending and passes the Sox. Our ranking dropped quite a bit as a result.

I'll go by cots end of season budget and the percentage gain or drop:

+15% 2003 to 2004

-11% to 2005 (down the same $14M as from 2003 to 2004)

+18% to '06

+13% '07

-5% '08

-5% '09

+21% '10

+2% '11

-3% '12

+5% '13

-5% '14

+10% '15

+8% '16

-6% '17

+22% '18

-1% '19

-25% '20

+12% '21

+16% '22

-6% 23

Nothing seems way out of place, recently, when you look at the trends. The biggest drop was before 2020, but one of the bigger 2 year jumps was from 2020 to 2020.

Two year jumps:

34% 2005>2007

28% 2020>2022 (This probably surprises many)

24% 2009>2011

21% 2017>2019

7% 2014>1016

Largest 2 year drops:

-23% 2018>2020 (By far, the largest drop and a clear impact.)

-10% 2007>2009

-6% 2022>2024

 

 

 

[Hugh2]

14 minutes ago, notin said:

f*** Bregman, that whiny little prick.  (I call him a “little prick, but he’s much bigger than me.)  Problem is, however, finding better options.  Free agency has little else besides Eugenio Suarez…

Hamilton is the Sox best defensive 2b. And he did hit surprisingly well.  

Suarez doesn't exactly strike me as a guy who's going to get better, if anything his age 33 season on will be worse.  He could be less valuable than Yoshida. 

There's a very thin market at the position side this winter after Juan Soto

[moonslav59]

I'd rather try Campbell or Mayer at 3B and use the money at Closer, SP, set-up man and catcher.

Maybe Grissom could work out at 3B, if he could hit well enough.

I do not see why we'd spend huge money on Bregman, when we have several infielders that we need to find out about.

We are not going to move Devers off 3B, unless we trade Casas, and that is very unlikely.

Just find a hitting catcher on a 1 year deal and spend on pitching.

[notin]

2 hours ago, Hugh2 said:

Saying payroll is down $50 million from it's peak is a little misleading. 

Sox have have always spent up to or over the luxury cap, even this past year their payroll for luxury tax purposes was only $11 million under the cap.  Those "peaks" were years the Sox went over, but even then they always dipped under.  The Sox have never paid the 3rd year penalty....never.  Minus the absence of deciding to go over the cap the Payroll is right where it's always been, right at the cap. 

MLB payroll sites on the Internet are more variable than weather sites.  So who knows what the actual numbers are.

But according to Sportrac, per Baseball Prosoectus, Sox payroll dropped $65mill from 2019 to 2024, using opening day payrolls.  (Final numbers from 2024 are not in, but will go up due to adding 3 players plus any incentives, etc.)

Henry is clearly not investing like he used to, but that’s not exactly news…

[moonslav59]

2 hours ago, notin said:

MLB payroll sites on the Internet are more variable than weather sites.  So who knows what the actual numbers are.

But according to Sportrac, per Baseball Prosoectus, Sox payroll dropped $65mill from 2019 to 2024, using opening day payrolls.  (Final numbers from 2024 are not in, but will go up due to adding 3 players plus any incentives, etc.)

Henry is clearly not investing like he used to, but that’s not exactly news…

No doubt, this "dip" by JH was steeper and seemingly longer than others, but there was a pretty big uptick in the middle of the 2019 to 2024 budgets.

Not counting the huge dip in 2020 and the rise to 2021, JH also increased spending from 2021 to 2022 by $26M, according to cots "opening day 26 man" and $30M on the EOY 40 man numbers.

Up $30M from 2021 to 2022 was the same as the rise from 2016 to 2018 or 2019.

cots has the CBTax going from $239M in 2018/$244M in 2019 to $223M in 2024. That does not seem as shocking as I expected, despite inflation.. We dropped $13M from 2016 to 2017, which is almost the same drop.

 

[Larry Cook]

15 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Nobody knows what any of the Fab Four can contribute in 2025.

I'm pessimistic about 2025 for a few reasons:

1) We played .420 ball after the ASB, and it can't be chalked up to an abnormal number of injuries.

2) Health status of Devers and Yoshida.

3) From an 81-81 team, we lose O'Neill, Pivetta, Jansen and Martin. 

4) I think there's a good chance the brain trust surveys all this and decides 2025 is another punt year.

There are better times ahead, but I don't think they start in 2025, based on all the negative factors and uncertainty, and the "patient" approach we have seen. 

 

I think we played worse after the all star break because our starters were not going deep enough into games and between injuries and a lack of depth, we burned up our bullpen arms. 
 

plus offensively, our youngsters crashed into the wall 

good days are ahead of we get 2 quality starters  and 2 quality relievers. 

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

6 hours ago, Larry Cook said:

I think we played worse after the all star break because our starters were not going deep enough into games and between injuries and a lack of depth, we burned up our bullpen arms. 
 

This has been an annual tradition since the Red Sox hired Bloomslow and intentionally didn't invest in enough quality depth while team-building in every single offseason since their last championship six years ago.

And the past will continue to repeat itself every summer until the current -- or a new ownership -- decides to go for it again.

[Bellhorn04]

15 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Yes. I've said this several times. The big difference was just how steep the drop was from 2019 to 2020, and then when you factor inflation, it took a few years to come close to where we once were.

The other major factor is that a few teams started going nutty with spending and passes the Sox. Our ranking dropped quite a bit as a result.

I'll go by cots end of season budget and the percentage gain or drop:

+15% 2003 to 2004

-11% to 2005 (down the same $14M as from 2003 to 2004)

+18% to '06

+13% '07

-5% '08

-5% '09

+21% '10

+2% '11

-3% '12

+5% '13

-5% '14

+10% '15

+8% '16

-6% '17

+22% '18

-1% '19

-25% '20

+12% '21

+16% '22

-6% 23

Nothing seems way out of place, recently, when you look at the trends. The biggest drop was before 2020, but one of the bigger 2 year jumps was from 2020 to 2020.

Two year jumps:

34% 2005>2007

28% 2020>2022 (This probably surprises many)

24% 2009>2011

21% 2017>2019

7% 2014>1016

Largest 2 year drops:

-23% 2018>2020 (By far, the largest drop and a clear impact.)

-10% 2007>2009

-6% 2022>2024

 

 

 

But you NEVER take into account the growths in baseball revenues and franchise values, which are much more pertinent than the inflation rate in the economy as a whole.

In March 2019 Forbes valued the Red Sox franchise at 3.2 billion.

In March 2024 Forbes valued the Red Sox franchise at 4.5 billion.

A tidy little 40% increase in 5 years.

You keep attributing our fall in the payroll rankings to other teams going "nutty".

Any chance increases in revenue have a lot to do with the "nutty"?

No offense moon, but when it comes to these payroll analyses, you produce a lot of numbers but you only give one side of the picture.  And you seem to be trying to paint Henry and his "restraint" in a more favorable light than is deserved.

 

[Hugh2]

14 hours ago, notin said:

MLB payroll sites on the Internet are more variable than weather sites.  So who knows what the actual numbers are.

But according to Sportrac, per Baseball Prosoectus, Sox payroll dropped $65mill from 2019 to 2024, using opening day payrolls.  (Final numbers from 2024 are not in, but will go up due to adding 3 players plus any incentives, etc.)

Henry is clearly not investing like he used to, but that’s not exactly news…

Numbers are less convoluted after the fact but still confusing because there is a difference between cash payroll and luxury tax payroll which calculates AAV.  I'm not sure comparing two arbitrary years provides much if one is a season after winning the world series where they had the #1 payroll in the league. 

Boston has a history of going over and then under the luxury tax, it's variable.  It was only two years ago they were over.  But if you use the AAV then in 2019 they spent $229 vs. $225.  I could say payroll is down $4 million.  Which isn't much in a reset year vs. a contending year.  Also that year was a high, how much did they spend a few years prior to that? does a 3 year window set the precedent for several decades in Boston? I would say no. 

All of this is mute, because I think the Sox could spend more, should spend more, and will spend more. 

Also it's also mute, because even if cash payroll is down, they still spend up to the luxury tax limit every year and they're sitting more than $60 million below it, so clearly they spending their money somewhere this offseason

I'm just not sure people are going to like how they spend their money. 

[moonslav59]

54 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

But you NEVER take into account the growths in baseball revenues and franchise values, which are much more pertinent than the inflation rate in the economy as a whole.

In March 2019 Forbes valued the Red Sox franchise at 3.2 billion.

In March 2024 Forbes valued the Red Sox franchise at 4.5 billion.

A tidy little 40% increase in 5 years.

You keep attributing our fall in the payroll rankings to other teams going "nutty".

Any chance increases in revenue have a lot to do with the "nutty"?

No offense moon, but when it comes to these payroll analyses, you produce a lot of numbers but you only give one side of the picture.  And you seem to be trying to paint Henry and his "restraint" in a more favorable light than is deserved.

 

I haven't mentioned it in quite a while, but I used to say it often. The big money made on baseball, by the owners, is when they sell the team.

I am not defending JH's lack of spending. I'm just pointing out that the trend is not much different from his past, and that one of our biggest percentage increase in budget came from 2020 to 2022, yet people act like he has been on a 5 straight year slash and burn mission.

I also pointed out that we saw the biggest cut in his era from 2019 to 2020, so that dampens the following uptick, and then some, and not just inflation matters, but the other "nutty" owners made baseball budget inflation more than the national average.

I do not give just one side, at all. I'm just countering with facts that disprove what many others keep saying, over and over. We don't need to tell lies to criticize what JH did and has been doing. There are plenty of truths to pick apart, and I'm right there on that, too.

He could and should spend more. Max may be right about how he should spend it (not all on 2-3 players,) but I do think there are times when you have to pay to get the best, and to get the team over top.

Playing it halfway hardly ever works. (2013 did.) I have often railed against that strategy. Either go for a full rebuild or go for glory: halfway keeps a team mediocre for longer.

Looking at the budget increase from 2020 to 2022, of course it rings hollow. We lost Kimbrell, Betts, Price,  Porcello and others without replacing them even in half kind. Then, we lost Beni, ERod, JD and Bogey and the budget went up: whoop-dee-doo. It didn't feel like we were adding to the talent, although many of them were aging, anyway.

I'm not happy with JH since 2019, but I'm not going to hate on the guy that brought us 4 rings, and yes he did, despite what Old Red wants to believe. There is a lot of gray area in my opinions, and it's not all black and white. I'm happy JH took over the team. I'm happy we focused on rebuilding a sustainable farm and am seeing results, already. I could go on and say "You ignore the good" and "only try and paint everything as negative," but that gets us nowhere.

I'm hopeful, JH sees a window as being open now. I fear he thinks 2026 or 2027 is "better," but I'm thinking he might start spending more, soon. As I've said for about a year, I'm not expecting it. It's still a "sham" in my eyes, which hardly sounds like I'm praising JH & Co by saying that more than Red says, "I keep telling you guys..."

It has hurt too much of the time, following this team since 2019. 2021 seems more and more like a fluke than anything to praise JH & Co for. We've had 5 years of letdowns. That's on JH as much as anyone. We also have 4 rings in his 24 year era. We had zero in the 30 years I followed the Sox before JH. It's not all bad, either.

[mvp 78]

17 hours ago, Hugh2 said:

Saying payroll is down $50 million from it's peak is a little misleading. 

Sox have have always spent up to or over the luxury cap, even this past year their payroll for luxury tax purposes was only $11 million under the cap.  Those "peaks" were years the Sox went over, but even then they always dipped under.  The Sox have never paid the 3rd year penalty....never.  Minus the absence of deciding to go over the cap the Payroll is right where it's always been, right at the cap. 

Since the reinstatement of the luxury tax/CBT in 2003, here are the years the Sox were under:

2003

2008

2009

2012

2013

2014

2017

2020

2021

2023

2024

This is the first time where they've been under for 4 out of 5 years. 

 

[Bellhorn04]

31 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I haven't mentioned it in quite a while, but I used to say it often. The big money made on baseball, by the owners, is when they sell the team.

I am not defending JH's lack of spending. I'm just pointing out that the trend is not much different from his past, and that one of our biggest percentage increase in budget came from 2020 to 2022, yet people act like he has been on a 5 straight year slash and burn mission.

I also pointed out that we saw the biggest cut in his era from 2019 to 2020, so that dampens the following uptick, and then some, and not just inflation matters, but the other "nutty" owners made baseball budget inflation more than the national average.

I do not give just one side, at all. I'm just countering with facts that disprove what many others keep saying, over and over. We don't need to tell lies to criticize what JH did and has been doing. There are plenty of truths to pick apart, and I'm right there on that, too.

He could and should spend more. Max may be right about how he should spend it (not all on 2-3 players,) but I do think there are times when you have to pay to get the best, and to get the team over top.

Playing it halfway hardly ever works. (2013 did.) I have often railed against that strategy. Either go for a full rebuild or go for glory: halfway keeps a team mediocre for longer.

Looking at the budget increase from 2020 to 2022, of course it rings hollow. We lost Kimbrell, Betts, Price,  Porcello and others without replacing them even in half kind. Then, we lost Beni, ERod, JD and Bogey and the budget went up: whoop-dee-doo. It didn't feel like we were adding to the talent, although many of them were aging, anyway.

I'm not happy with JH since 2019, but I'm not going to hate on the guy that brought us 4 rings, and yes he did, despite what Old Red wants to believe. There is a lot of gray area in my opinions, and it's not all black and white. I'm happy JH took over the team. I'm happy we focused on rebuilding a sustainable farm and am seeing results, already. I could go on and say "You ignore the good" and "only try and paint everything as negative," but that gets us nowhere.

I'm hopeful, JH sees a window as being open now. I fear he thinks 2026 or 2027 is "better," but I'm thinking he might start spending more, soon. As I've said for about a year, I'm not expecting it. It's still a "sham" in my eyes, which hardly sounds like I'm praising JH & Co by saying that more than Red says, "I keep telling you guys..."

It has hurt too much of the time, following this team since 2019. 2021 seems more and more like a fluke than anything to praise JH & Co for. We've had 5 years of letdowns. That's on JH as much as anyone. We also have 4 rings in his 24 year era. We had zero in the 30 years I followed the Sox before JH. It's not all bad, either.

I take issue with calling the spending of the teams that have passed us as "nutty" without adding any context of increases in revenues and franchise values.  Maybe it's the Red Sox who are actually being "nutty".   

[notin]

2 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

But you NEVER take into account the growths in baseball revenues and franchise values, which are much more pertinent than the inflation rate in the economy as a whole.

In March 2019 Forbes valued the Red Sox franchise at 3.2 billion.

In March 2024 Forbes valued the Red Sox franchise at 4.5 billion.

A tidy little 40% increase in 5 years.

You keep attributing our fall in the payroll rankings to other teams going "nutty".

Any chance increases in revenue have a lot to do with the "nutty"?

No offense moon, but when it comes to these payroll analyses, you produce a lot of numbers but you only give one side of the picture.  And you seem to be trying to paint Henry and his "restraint" in a more favorable light than is deserved.

 

Now I admit my source was questionable, but it seems like you’re arguing against the Sox re-investing and investing.  I know it’s more complicated than my simplified viewpoint, but there usually is something to simplified viewpoints.  

 

For a little clarification, are the Sox re-investing in this franchise or not?  Sometimes it seems to me like their spending splurges are more related to PR than to actual baseball…

[moonslav59]

52 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

I take issue with calling the spending of the teams that have passed us as "nutty" without adding any context of increases in revenues and franchise values.  Maybe it's the Red Sox who are actually being "nutty".   

I stand by teams like the Mets, Rangers and Dodgers exploding with their spending. I call it going "nutty."

As much as I think JH should spend more and could spend like they did, I do not think I should criticize him for not going to their extremes.

With the revenue the Sox make, and how rich JH is, he can and should spend more. I have never argued otherwise.

That does not mean we have to lie about his spending trends- not that you have, but we increased spending by 28% from the super low point in 2020 to 2022. Thatw as the second highest % increase under JH. When people say he is not spending or is continually cutting the budget, it's just not true. That's not taking him off the hook or "defending him," but it is the truth.

I've been highly critical of JH without inventing falsehoods. He let Betts go, and that is unforgivable, IMO. I was for paying Betts $400M/14, so I'm not some skimpy budget fan. I think JH decided he did not want to risk losing Betts and would not pay what he thought he'd get. (I think he got less than JH expected.) 

For some reason, JH decided to go into rebuild mode. I hated it.

[Bellhorn04]

18 minutes ago, notin said:

Now I admit my source was questionable, but it seems like you’re arguing against the Sox re-investing and investing.  I know it’s more complicated than my simplified viewpoint, but there usually is something to simplified viewpoints.  

 

For a little clarification, are the Sox re-investing in this franchise or not?  Sometimes it seems to me like their spending splurges are more related to PR than to actual baseball…

We've talked plenty of times about whether signing free agents is for PR or baseball purposes.

I guess my position is that it can easily be both.  From Manny Ramirez to Koji Uehara to J D Martinez, the Red Sox have had free agent signings that have been instrumental to championships.   

The elephant in the room issue is that Henry has clearly made a decision to keep payroll down the last few years, and not a single one of us knows if that's because he's being smart and waiting until the time is right, or because his focus is no longer on field success but strictly profit and capital growth.  

 

[Bellhorn04]

19 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I stand by teams like the Mets, Rangers and Dodgers exploding with their spending. I call it going "nutty."

OK, let's pick the Dodgers.  Can you explain exactly what makes their spending nutty?  Do you have information that it's causing them financial problems? If so we'd all love to have it.  If you want to keep calling it nutty you kind of have to back it up.

[notin]

8 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

OK, let's pick the Dodgers.  Can you explain exactly what makes their spending nutty?  Do you have information that it's causing them financial problems? If so we'd all love to have it.  If you want to keep calling it nutty you kind of have to back it up.

Maybe because they committed $700mill to an elite DH largely due to his two-way abilities despite his having had TJ twice already?

His debut in LA was historic, but a $700mill DH is the reason luxury taxes exist.  How many seasons before his third and final TJ ends his pitching career once and for all?

I’ll set the over under at 3.5.  And then I’ll take the under…

 

[Bellhorn04]

6 minutes ago, notin said:

Maybe because they committed $700mill to an elite DH largely due to his two-way abilities despite his having had TJ twice already?

His debut in LA was historic, but a $700mill DH is the reason luxury taxes exist.  How many seasons before his third and final TJ ends his pitching career once and for all?

I’ll set the over under at 3.5…

 

Yeah, I get that this seems nutty in our little world, but it doesn't address the actual question-can Ohtani be beneficial to the Dodgers financially in spite of the massive cost and risk?   

You and I don't have the answer to that.  Personally I think the Dodgers must have calculated that the answer is yes.

[Bellhorn04]

There's talk that Soto might get as much as $600 million.

Great player, but that seems nutty even to me.

But we're talking about a world that none of us can really comprehend, frankly.

[moonslav59]

33 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

OK, let's pick the Dodgers.  Can you explain exactly what makes their spending nutty?  Do you have information that it's causing them financial problems? If so we'd all love to have it.  If you want to keep calling it nutty you kind of have to back it up.

Why does "nutty" have to mean causing financial trouble?

They are spending way more than most teams and have even outdone themselves with the Ohtani and Yamo singings.

It's nutty compared to other teams and even quite extreme for their own history. They used to spend a ton back in the mid 2010's, but they went under $190M in 2018. $187 to $267 is a massive increase. On CT Tax, they were at $205 in 2019 and are now at $352M. You seriously can't understand why anyone could see that as going nutty on spending in a short time? Just from 2023 to 2024 they went from $268>$352- a 31% increase. Who else does that besides the Mets and maybe TEX did that, ever?

Let's not argue semantics. 3 teams vastly increased their spending, and that is just part of the reason we dropped in ranking. Of course, JH's recent cuts is also a major factor.

Last winter Dodger spending:

$700M/10 Ohtani

$325M/12 Yamo

$140M/10 Will Smith

$136M/5 Galsnow (This one alone is more than most teams did w one guy.)

I'd like you to explain why this is not nutty? This blows away any winter any team has ever had, except for maybe that year the Yanks signed something like 5 out of the 11 QO FAs.

[notin]

28 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

There's talk that Soto might get as much as $600 million.

Great player, but that seems nutty even to me.

But we're talking about a world that none of us can really comprehend, frankly.

Hey if you’re going to call that nutty, you have to back it up!! :)