Red Sox sign Alex Bregman

[moonslav59]

2 hours ago, notin said:

Why?  Yoshida’s contract is hardly prohibitive.  Especially if people live in a fantasy world that if the Sox save that money, they’ll spend it elsewhere…

Of course the idea is fully based on spending Yoshida's money elsewhere, as in the guy we get back- Castillo.

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, notin said:

So you think the lateral move from Crawford to Castillo that includes unloading three pitching prospects - two of which have already debuted in MLB - is reasonable?

You see Crawford and Castillo as "lateral:" many do not. His BTV value is brought down by the contract, as Crawford's is not. Adding Yoshida cancels out Castillo's contract.

[Bellhorn04]

8 minutes ago, notin said:

It’s not necessary to move either one.  This is a Strawman argument.  

If Devers, Casas and Yoshida are all healthy, and Bregman replaces Devers at third, there's no room for all 3 in the lineup.  

I get your argument that Yoshida would be a good insurance policy against injury, but that's the only argument I can see in favor of keeping him under this scenario.

[Old Red]

15 minutes ago, notin said:

… which is a dumb criticism of a player who still has all his options.

And if he’s clogging up the lineup, isnt that a problem created by Cora?

Like I said yesterday as the roster stands today  I think Bregman starts at 2B, and Masa is not a problem, but any additions like Campbell as a 2B, and Bregman moves to 3B, and Raffy has to go somewhere 1B/DH, and Masa is the odd man out. Most posters on here want Masa moved dumb criticism, or not. Like I’ve said many times the Red Sox are playing the hand they have dealt themselves, and the addition of Bregman gives them a new hand.

[moonslav59]

45 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

OK, so we'd have to take a closer look at how they valued Crawford.  But I don't see it as unfair that Crawford's status as a starter or reliever is still somewhat up the air.  I don't think that's necessarily a 'loophole'.  

Exactly. He's not good enough to be projected as a 30 GS pitcher on the Sox.

I'll do Crawford a favor and use his best cherry-picked sample size: 2023-2024:

fWAR:  5.7 Castillo, 4.3 Crawford

FIP: 3.86 Castillo (3.81 xFIP), 4.31 Crawford (4.34 xFIP)

ERA-: 89 Castillo, 97 Crawford

K-BB%: 19.1 Castillo, 17.2 Crawford

Now, one can project age decline by the 32 year old Castillo and age incline by Crawford, but I don't see this as a sideways move. Castillo would be our #3, while Crawford is our #5 or 6 (4 tops.)

[moonslav59]

Thinking 4 players out of 13, who are best suited to DH and are on our current 26 man roster is too much is hardly dumb criticism. And, that's not even counting awful defensive players like Wong and Grissom, who don't fit the DH role, either.

Yoshida, Refsnyder, Casas and Devers can all be viewed at DH first players. 

The team gets better replacing Yoshida with a player who fills another need or upgrades one that is already decent. It's constructive criticism, whether Yoshida has value or not.

[moonslav59]

15 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

If Devers, Casas and Yoshida are all healthy, and Bregman replaces Devers at third, there's no room for all 3 in the lineup.  

I get your argument that Yoshida would be a good insurance policy against injury, but that's the only argument I can see in favor of keeping him under this scenario.

There is one way: Yoshida and Ref platoon LF, Duran plays CF and Abreu-Rafaela platoon RF.

Yoshida essentially replaces Rafaela's bat vs RHPs, as Rafaela becomes the 4th OF'er against righties. That is a clear plus on O, but also a clear minus on D. If the game is at Fenway, maybe the minus on D is not so bad. In parks like Yankee stadium, maybe they play RF, but the hit on D is real. The gains on D at 3B and maybe 1B and RF likely outweigh the worse D by having Yoshida play OF in 70% of the games.

[Old Red]

21 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

You see Crawford and Castillo as "lateral:" many do not. His BTV value is brought down by the contract, as Crawford's is not. Adding Yoshida cancels out Castillo's contract.

If Seattle turned down Casas/ Yoshida for Castillo I don’t think subbing Kut Man for Casas would even come close to closing the deal.

[moonslav59]

2 minutes ago, Old Red said:

If Seattle turned down Casas/ Yoshida for Castillo I don’t think subbing Kut Man for Casas would even come close to closing the deal.

I don't either, and that is one reason I suggested adding Fitts and or Priester.

I was just giving my opinion on a trade suggesting, and not commenting on the likelihood of the deal. I was a bit surprised that SEA fan,  harmony, seemed open to the idea of this trade.

The deal is NOT happening, but I'm always open to talking what ifs...

[notin]

38 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Of course the idea is fully based on spending Yoshida's money elsewhere, as in the guy we get back- Castillo.

So what’s in this deal for Seattle?  Saving $18mill over 3 years?

[harmony]

12 minutes ago, Old Red said:

If Seattle turned down Casas/ Yoshida for Castillo I don’t think subbing Kut Man for Casas would even come close to closing the deal.

FWIW Baseball Trade Values assigns surplus values of $29.8 million for Triston Casas and $29.7 million for Kutter Crawford:

https://www.baseballtradevalues.com/trades?q=red+sox&page=1

 

[harmony]

2 minutes ago, notin said:

So what’s in this deal for Seattle?  Saving $18mill over 3 years?

The Seattle savings would be less with the escalating arbitration salaries for Kutter Crawford, who has a 2025 salary of $2.75 million as a Super Two in the first of four arbitration seasons.

The Mariners would get another DH candidate in Masataka Yoshida, a bottom-of-rotation starter and a lottery ticket for the infield.

[Old Red]

16 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I don't either, and that is one reason I suggested adding Fitts and or Priester.

I was just giving my opinion on a trade suggesting, and not commenting on the likelihood of the deal. I was a bit surprised that SEA fan,  harmony, seemed open to the idea of this trade.

The deal is NOT happening, but I'm always open to talking what ifs...

I think the Red Sox interest in the Castillo ship has sailed when Seattle said NO on Casas, and won’t be coming back.

[Old Red]

12 minutes ago, harmony said:

FWIW Baseball Trade Values assigns surplus values of $29.8 million for Triston Casas and $29.7 million for Kutter Crawford:

https://www.baseballtradevalues.com/trades?q=red+sox&page=1

 

BTV doesn’t have a clue what Seattle would do. How many teams out there would want the Kut Man over Casas?

[notin]

34 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

There is one way: Yoshida and Ref platoon LF, Duran plays CF and Abreu-Rafaela platoon RF.

Yoshida essentially replaces Rafaela's bat vs RHPs, as Rafaela becomes the 4th OF'er against righties. That is a clear plus on O, but also a clear minus on D. If the game is at Fenway, maybe the minus on D is not so bad. In parks like Yankee stadium, maybe they play RF, but the hit on D is real. The gains on D at 3B and maybe 1B and RF likely outweigh the worse D by having Yoshida play OF in 70% of the games.

Curse that MLB rule that teams have to use the same lineup at Yankee Stadium that they use in home games.

If it’s a minus in certain parks, it’s Cora’s fault for deploying it.  And fans need to let go of their unrealistic “these are the starting nine” expectations.  Teams simply do not do that anymore.  Backup players make millions of dollars and get playing time primarily to not rust.  The resting of regular starters is not as important as many believe.  
 

All off-season, fans wanted this team to be the Dodgers, a team that spends heavily, clogs their lineup, stockpiles depth, and blocks prospects.  The second the Red Sox do these things, we have a bunch of people trying un-Dodger the team and get back to 9 obvious starters and 4 obvious bench players, one of whom must be that all important backup first baseman.  Teams can have their entire season derailed without one…

[notin]

14 minutes ago, Old Red said:

BTV doesn’t have a clue what Seattle would do. How many teams out there would want the Kut Man over Casas?

San Francisco.  Weak back end to the rotation.  Super duper 1b prospect debuting this year.

 

Pribably a few others….

[Old Red]

10 minutes ago, notin said:

Curse that MLB rule that teams have to use the same lineup at Yankee Stadium that they use in home games.

If it’s a minus in certain parks, it’s Cora’s fault for deploying it.  And fans need to let go of their unrealistic “these are the starting nine” expectations.  Teams simply do not do that anymore.  Backup players make millions of dollars and get playing time primarily to not rust.  The resting of regular starters is not as important as many believe.  
 

All off-season, fans wanted this team to be the Dodgers, a team that spends heavily, clogs their lineup, stockpiles depth, and blocks prospects.  The second the Red Sox do these things, we have a bunch of people trying un-Dodger the team and get back to 9 obvious starters and 4 obvious bench players, one of whom must be that all important backup first baseman.  Teams can have their entire season derailed without one…

Fans wanted the Red Sox to be like the Dodgers? Fans wanted to see the Red Sox clog up their line up? How many of the Good Red Sox teams going back to 1967 didn’t have pretty much everyday lineups? How many of the recent bad teams didn’t have mostly everyday lineups?  If Story, Casas, and Grissom, and Masa for that matter hadn’t gotten hurt, and turned out better last year the Red Sox would have had a mostly everyday lineup.

[notin]

1 hour ago, moonslav59 said:

You see Crawford and Castillo as "lateral:" many do not. His BTV value is brought down by the contract, as Crawford's is not. Adding Yoshida cancels out Castillo's contract.

I was going by WAR and age.  I actually thought the two pitchers were closer in age…

[Old Red]

13 minutes ago, notin said:

San Francisco.  Weak back end to the rotation.  Super duper 1b prospect debuting this year.

 

Pribably a few others….

What should the Red Sox do if Seattle gave the Red Sox two options on a trade for Castillo? Masa/Kut Man, or Masa/Casas? Do you have to go to BTV to decide?🙈

[notin]

2 minutes ago, Old Red said:

Fans wanted the Red Sox to be like the Dodgers? Fans wanted to see the Red Sox clog up their line up? How many of the Good Red Sox teams going back to 1967 didn’t have pretty much everyday lineups? How many of the recent bad teams didn’t have mostly everyday lineups?  If Story, Casas, and Grissom, and Masa for that matter hadn’t gotten hurt, and turned out better last year the Red Sox would have had a mostly everyday lineup.

All off season, absolutely fans on this board wished we were more like the Dodgers, largely probably due to their recent success.  I get wanting to be as successful, but that formula does include lots of depth, (and apparently playing players in new positions - not sure if that’s as necessary as the depth).  Now the Sox have some solid position player depth and can withstand injuries, and people want to break it up, because the lineup “is clogged” or our defense at Fenway won’t work in Yankee Stadium…

[notin]

5 minutes ago, Old Red said:

What should the Red Sox do if Seattle gave the Red Sox two options on a trade for Castillo? Masa/Kut Man, or Masa/Casas? Do you have to go to BTV to decide?🙈

I’d go Crawford, but Seattle probably wants neither.  And Allen Castro won’t change their minds…

[moonslav59]

55 minutes ago, notin said:

So what’s in this deal for Seattle?  Saving $18mill over 3 years?

I've said I don't see SEA saying yes to the deal, and that is why I suggested I'd add Fitts and or Priester, but yes, they save $18M and would use it. We'd get a pitcher who is much more useful to us than Yoshida is.

It was not a deal based on some fictional spending teh savings elsewhere. the spending was in the deal, itself.

[moonslav59]

1 minute ago, notin said:

I’d go Crawford, but Seattle probably wants neither.  And Allen Castro won’t change their minds…

The Castro part was suggested as being changed to Fitts or Priester.

Nobody knows if SEA likes Crawford or Fitts/Priester, but maybe Crawford's HR issues would be hidden in SEA.

Do you really view Castillo as "sideways to Crawford?"

Even if you do, doesn't adding Yoshida without his nearly full cost being paid as being reasonable?

[notin]

1 hour ago, Bellhorn04 said:

If Devers, Casas and Yoshida are all healthy, and Bregman replaces Devers at third, there's no room for all 3 in the lineup.  

I get your argument that Yoshida would be a good insurance policy against injury, but that's the only argument I can see in favor of keeping him under this scenario.

So you think the Sox should prepare for a best case scenario as opposed to a worse case one ?

[Bellhorn04]

1 minute ago, notin said:

So you think the Sox should prepare for a best case scenario as opposed to a worse case one ?

I'm pretty agnostic about it, frankly.  There are a lot of questions no one has the answer to yet, starting with whether they have any intention of moving Devers off third.

I do have some confidence in Breslow and Cora to figure things out more rationally than any of us.

[Old Red]

5 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

I'm pretty agnostic about it, frankly.  There are a lot of questions no one has the answer to yet, starting with whether they have any intention of moving Devers off third.

I do have some confidence in Breslow and Cora to figure things out more rationally than any of us.

I’m sure everyone watched the Red Sox press conference today introducing Bregman (how about when Bregman put that Red Sox hat on Borasses head? It didn’t stay long), but the two key words today was Roster Construction, which was used more than once. That will decide who plays where. Remember. Roster Construction.

[notin]

1 minute ago, moonslav59 said:

The Castro part was suggested as being changed to Fitts or Priester.

Nobody knows if SEA likes Crawford or Fitts/Priester, but maybe Crawford's HR issues would be hidden in SEA.

Do you really view Castillo as "sideways to Crawford?"

Even if you do, doesn't adding Yoshida without his nearly full cost being paid as being reasonable?

Does this deal do anything except make the Sox more expensive?

It depletes both offensive depth and pitching depth.  The Sox get what else?  They get to bump their fifth starter (Giolito?) to the bullpen at the cost  of three starting pitchers on the 40man roster,  all to do what? Force Cora to employ a defensive lineup he already has?

[Bellhorn04]

1 minute ago, Old Red said:

I’m sure everyone watched the Red Sox press conference today introducing Bregman (how about when Bregman put that Red Sox hat on Borasses head? It didn’t stay long), but the two key words today was Roster Construction, which was used more than once. That will decide who plays where. Remember. Roster Construction.

I'm sure I'll get sick of hearing Roster Construction, but it does beat Bridge Year or Full Throttle, I guess. 

[Old Red]

19 minutes ago, notin said:

All off season, absolutely fans on this board wished we were more like the Dodgers, largely probably due to their recent success.  I get wanting to be as successful, but that formula does include lots of depth, (and apparently playing players in new positions - not sure if that’s as necessary as the depth).  Now the Sox have some solid position player depth and can withstand injuries, and people want to break it up, because the lineup “is clogged” or our defense at Fenway won’t work in Yankee Stadium…

More like the old Red Sox would be more like it, but now salaries have gone out of whack, and teams have passed the Red Sox, and the Red Sox aren’t one of the Big boys anymore. I don’t think Yoshida is considered any kind of depth. 

[Old Red]

2 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

I'm sure I'll get sick of hearing Roster Construction, but it does beat Bridge Year or Full Throttle, I guess. 

I don’t know if Brez came up with that, or Sam?