Red Sox 2025 Season Review/Offseason Preview Thread

[JoeBrady]

1 hour ago, Old Red said:

I agree, and as I’ve said many times that Raffy was the last man standing after Mookie, and Bogey left.

I don't think so.  Both were destined for 3B.  I think they took the position that it had to be one or the other, and they chose Devers for age purposes.

[JoeBrady]

50 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

But we think we know the 2030 roster and how great it will be. Ok. 

I didn't say it would be great.  I said we had more current, locked-in talent than any team in BB.  If there was long-term gambling sites, I'd gladly bet we have a better team than either Philly or Toronto in 2030.

[mvp 78]

6 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

I think its going to be 5/180(ish) with enough deferred that it feels more like 5/150(ish). To compensate for the deferrals (which help team), there will also be concessions from the team (to help Bregman). 1. No trade clause 2. prob opt-outs but not every year. Maybe 1 opt-out after yr 3.

Bregman has said he wants this to be his last contract. I'm not sure if he wants opt outs built in. 

[drewski6]

2 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

This would put the Sox at the third threshold for just signing Bregman. It makes no sense. 

How much runway until that third threshold? If we have like 35m until that threshold, then signing Bregman at 40m , we can get under that amount by deferring (like last contract)

I think hes open to deferrals, I think he opted out because he wants more than 2 yrs guaranteed not because he wanted to axe the deferrals.
 

 

 

[drewski6]

I also think staying below the second tax line is a preference not a requirement

[drewski6]

1 minute ago, mvp 78 said:

Bregman has said he wants this to be his last contract. I'm not sure if he wants opt outs built in. 

theres other concessions we can make to replace the opt-outs if he doesnt want it.  Didnt we offer schilling help selling his house lol

IF Bregman starts deferring money to help the team get under the second threshold, NTC at minimum.

[JoeBrady]

49 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

See people like you who would run a business "LESS FOR EMPLOYEES, JACK UP PRICES, MORE FOR MEEEE"

More nonsense.  I've worked with people that switch suppliers because of penny differences in the price of lumber.  Our supply chain folks traveled all over the world to discuss vendors and price and delivery.  I've had meetings with our German engineers where they discussed the cost of electricity per pound of product down to like 5 decimal places.  I've seen demos where our engineers sold products used to recover raw materials from off-spec electrical devices.  We hired really good engineers to design heat re-capture.  Crude oil washing.

Everyone of our suppliers drove down our costs, and every customer wanted us to drive down their cost.  That was just automatic.

[drewski6]

3 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

More nonsense.  I've worked with people that switch suppliers because of penny differences in the price of lumber.  Our supply chain folks traveled all over the world to discuss vendors and price and delivery.  I've had meetings with our German engineers where they discussed the cost of electricity per pound of product down to like 5 decimal places.  I've seen demos where our engineers sold products used to recover raw materials from off-spec electrical devices.  We hired really good engineers to design heat re-capture.  Crude oil washing.

Everyone of our suppliers drove down our costs, and every customer wanted us to drive down their cost.  That was just automatic.

Anecdotal. Weak.

Also, the fact that one person switched suppliers over a miniscule difference in cost does not dispute my submission that not every company is out there purely to max profits. Mine isnt. 

[JoeBrady]

44 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Your homophobia, boot-licking, and fascist streak is what bothers me, not your facts. 

1. I'm not homophobic whatsoever.  I said I disliked gay-baiting, and most gays probably agree.
2. I'm curious what makes you think I'm a fascist.  I'm probably on the Left 40% of the time.
3. Glad to see you admit that my 'perceived' political views is what is driving you.  That's what is wrong with America, but fortunately, neither the far left nor the far right own the political landscape.

[JoeBrady]

42 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

We can all have a silly, fun time, but let's try to get along though. Ok? 

There is not a single person in the world I don't get along with.  Plenty that I disagree with, but none that I couldn't have a beer with.

[JoeBrady]

26 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

if we're projecting -0.5 per year, when does the decline happen? He declined 0.7 from 24 to 25. Maybe the 26 projection is overstated and he's already in the decline? 

Too many variables.  I have no choice but to use the FG projection for 2026.  After that, while I know the declines are not precisely 0.5, I think it's close enough for discussion purposes.  I assume he is already in decline but so is half of baseball.

[JoeBrady]

19 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Bregman has said he wants this to be his last contract. I'm not sure if he wants opt outs built in. 

I don't think opt-outs will be an issue.  He just doesn't have enough worthwhile productive time left.  Basically, two good years, one mediocre, and two declining years.  Even if he wanted an opt-out after year 3, that value would be diminimus.

[Old Red]

1 hour ago, mvp 78 said:

Nobody left from the 2019 roster.

2020: Houck

2021: Whitlock, Duran, Wong

But we think we know the 2030 roster and how great it will be. Ok. 

It’s all make believe if that’s what you like.

[mvp 78]

42 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

How much runway until that third threshold? If we have like 35m until that threshold, then signing Bregman at 40m , we can get under that amount by deferring (like last contract)

I think hes open to deferrals, I think he opted out because he wants more than 2 yrs guaranteed not because he wanted to axe the deferrals.
 

Per SP:

Sox are at 243.44

2nd Threshold 264

3rd Threshold 284

[mvp 78]

34 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

1. I'm not homophobic whatsoever.  I said I disliked gay-baiting, and most gays probably agree.
2. I'm curious what makes you think I'm a fascist.  I'm probably on the Left 40% of the time.
3. Glad to see you admit that my 'perceived' political views is what is driving you.  That's what is wrong with America, but fortunately, neither the far left nor the far right own the political landscape.

Let's NOT go down this road. Thanks. 

[moonslav59]

6 hours ago, Hitch said:

I'd be absolutely fine with people expecting them to be around 4th/5th in spending if that's the parameters of the conversation (simply revenue streams), but we know only too well that every single conversation around this up until about a month or so ago was about Henry is a billionaire and that they're rolling in it. There is and was an expectation they should dip into their pockets. 

Yes, your second paragraph sums it up. I just find the hypocrisy and bullsh*t hard to stomach on times. 

But again, that said, now is the time they should be spending more.

100%.

I've also pointed out that JH has a history of recognizing when a window is opening wide AND we are a key player or two away from having a really good shot at a ring and spending more. Often times, it has not been a long stretch of spending more, and we've seen cut backs immediately after a ring season.

I agree, the time is now. (I thought last year was, too, and if we didn't trade Devers, maybe we go much further.) Does Jh see what I see? I sure as hell don't know. I can just hope he does and repeats his pattern. Another 3 year run at mega-spending, like with DD would be nice, too, but I don't expect it.

[drewski6]

32 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Per SP:

Sox are at 243.44

2nd Threshold 264

3rd Threshold 284

Team penalties (draft picks moved back) start at 284.

No way we sign Breg and stay under 264 without moving money. And no, im not willing to start making bad trades to get under it.

Payroll gonna have to be higher than 264.

IF you can get Bregman down to 30m CBT hit, that puts us at 273.44, So the excess charge for being above second threshold (264) will be about 1m (calculated as follows: the only thing the 264 does is increase dollars spent thereafter from a 30% tax to a 42% tax, so if we are at 273(ish) thats 9m above the second like, so that 9m is taxed at 42%, but it would be taxed at 30% if the second threhold never existed)

So pretty much that second threshold existing costs an additional 1m.  I dont thik its a must be under number. Again, the baseball penalties start at 284. I can see 274 after Breg. And I can see them picking up a reliever for 6 on top and going in at around 280.

[drewski6]

24 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Let's NOT go down this road. Thanks. 

I told you I would chill, and Ill honor that and not rebut.

[mvp 78]

10 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Team penalties (draft picks moved back) start at 284.

No way we sign Breg and stay under 264 without moving money. And no, im not willing to start making bad trades to get under it.
 

Sox are willing to make other trades to get under it though. 

[mvp 78]

9 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

I told you I would chill, and Ill honor that and not rebut.

[drewski6]

you pay an extra 12% in tax after crossing the 264m.

As a second yr CBT payer, we will pay a 30% tax on 244-264, and an additional 12% is applied after 264m.

So if the Red Sox wind up at 275, thats 11m above the 264, and 12% of 11m is what 1.3M?

We need to trade players to prevent this 1.3m excess tax?

This 264m threshold is very minor.

The major ones are 244 and 284, I think people just want to pick a number for a budget.

[moonslav59]

12 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Team penalties (draft picks moved back) start at 284.

No way we sign Breg and stay under 264 without moving money. And no, im not willing to start making bad trades to get under it.

Payroll gonna have to be higher than 264.

IF you can get Bregman down to 30m CBT hit, that puts us at 273.44, So the excess charge for being above second threshold (264) will be about 1m (calculated as follows: the only thing the 264 does is increase dollars spent thereafter from a 30% tax to a 42% tax, so if we are at 273(ish) thats 9m above the second like, so that 9m is taxed at 42%, but it would be taxed at 30% if the second threhold never existed)

So pretty much that second threshold existing costs an additional 1m.  I dont thik its a must be under number. Again, the baseball penalties start at 284. I can see 274 after Breg. And I can see them picking up a reliever for 6 on top and going in at around 280.

We don't need to assume bad trades are necessary. We could trade Duran ($7.8M) and Crawford ($2.7M) for a $3-6M pitcher and save $5 to 7M. Dump Hicks and pay all but $3-5M and we're under the line.

No bad trades. Done deal.

I still think trading for KMarte's near $15M AAV makes more sense. He's a better batter, too.

[moonslav59]

5 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

The major ones are 244 and 284, I think people just want to pick a number for a budget.

I do think the tax paid matters to JH. Even when we go over the line, it's usually by just a little, and the tax is tiny.

[drewski6]

3 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I do think the tax paid matters to JH. Even when we go over the line, it's usually by just a little, and the tax is tiny.

Yes , slipping over 244 has big consequences , even just 1m because then the next year the % of tax paid after 244 goes up significantly. Slipping over 284 (even just 1m) has moderate consequences (draft picks move back). Slipping over 264m is very little consequences, because unlike the other 2 mentioned thresholds there are no future detriments (higher % next year, or loss of draft picks) beyond just having to pay slightly more that year. 

Even if you go up to 283.9.  Thats an extra 20m above 264, and its taxed at 42% instead of 30% (244-263.9 = 30%, 264-283.9 = 42%)

So its an extra 12% on 20m, which is like what? 2.4M
 

The 264m threshhold is barely a thing. The 244m threshhold is major, the 284 is somewhat major, the 264 is not worth sweating.

[drewski6]

It makes 0 sense to put a hard stop budget at 264

[JoeBrady]

1 hour ago, mvp 78 said:

Per SP:

Sox are at 243.44

Per Cots, we are at $239.77.  While that's not a huge difference, in the realm of the 2nd threshold, it's huge.  To get to $263.99, we have either $20.5 or $24.2 to offer Bregman.  Getting a contract down from, say the $25M-28M range, down to $24.2M, it is simply matter of adding one dead-money year to the contract.

[JoeBrady]

1 hour ago, mvp 78 said:

Let's NOT go down this road. Thanks. 

Not a problem at all.  So long as I am not referenced, I have no problem ignoring him.

[JoeBrady]

46 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

it's usually by just a little, and the tax is tiny.

We exceeded in 2019 by $22M, or roughly 11% of the first threshold.  Extrapolated to 2026, that's a total of ~$270M.  My guess is that we come in slightly under the $264M and re-assess at the trade deadline.

[mvp 78]

7 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

Per Cots, we are at $239.77.  While that's not a huge difference, in the realm of the 2nd threshold, it's huge.  To get to $263.99, we have either $20.5 or $24.2 to offer Bregman.  Getting a contract down from, say the $25M-28M range, down to $24.2M, it is simply matter of adding one dead-money year to the contract.

I'm believing the Sox Payroll guy a lot more than I'm believing Cots. 

There are also other players that the Sox want to sign (left handed reliever) and moves they'll want to make during the season that will increase the payroll. 

Getting it to 260 for the Bregman signing and not dumping anyone else, almost assures them that they go over the 2nd threshold or are not signing anyone else and aren't making a splash at the trade deadline. 

[mvp 78]

3 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

We exceeded in 2019 by $22M, or roughly 11% of the first threshold.  Extrapolated to 2026, that's a total of ~$270M.  My guess is that we come in slightly under the $264M and re-assess at the trade deadline.

Per Cots

2019 CBT 1 206M, CBT 2 226M, CBT 3 246 M

Sox Payroll: 243M, 13M in tax paid