The 2025 postseason, post-Red Sox

[moonslav59]

21 minutes ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

They all could've batted clean-up for the '25 Sox, and I'm not on pot.

It has to be something stronger than pot. Glad you admitted to it. That is the very first step to recovery.

[Kimmi]

22 hours ago, Old Red said:

It’s not just relying on so many young players, but relying on them to be good, which most likely all will not turn out as good as many on here have been dreaming about for years now. Mookie, Bogey, and Raffy all won championships playing for the Red Sox, and all turned out being good players. How many of the current crop of youngsters will be as good, and how many of championships will they win? Time will tell. Anything short of Championships after all the hype will be a failure IMO. Casas, and Mayer has broken down at early ages, which isn’t a good sign.

 

I don't necessarily agree that anything short of a championship will be a failure, but I don't disagree with the rest of your post.   Our young players are largely unproven, so we really don't know what to expect from them.  It wouldn't be a bad idea to add an established, veteran player or two.  We need to at least improve our depth.

[Kimmi]

22 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

IMO, we have a clear window. That window can go on for 4+ more years. I just don't feel like this is the time we establish a plan based on just hopes and a few minor upgrades that you can get by limiting how large and long you go on FAs.

Hopes on less injuries.

Hopes on younger players improvements outweigh any step-backs.

Hopes on hitting on minor signings, when our record has not been too good with them.

Okay, maybe we find the next Bregman, who will take a massive overpay on a 1 year deal, but remember, he got the opt out, so if he sucked, we'd have been stuck for 2 more years at $40M each.

With all due respect, and I get your point, I feel we just have to go large and long on at least one guy and maybe moderately large and long on a second guy. We can't fiddle around, this winter. We lost Devers, Bregman, Giolito, Wilson, Matz, Refsnyder and maybe Lowe. Yes, we also lost some guys that look like addition by subtraction- like Buehler, but unlike past seasons, the pluses way outweigh the minuses we are losing from the 2025 roster.

IMO, we need to do more than just try to get back to status quo and then pray for  the kids to carry us farther. To get back to status quo, we need to stay even with 1000 PAs lost by Devers, Bregman & Ref plus the IP's by Gio and a few others. Just doing this almost certainly means adding 1-3 guys on big contracts or trading some of the future for more cost effective replacements. That's before even addressing trying to get better on paper.

This is not the time for rolling the dice on just the kids.

I get it.  I think the FO should spend and be willing to exceed the luxury tax limit if the right deals come along.  The only part I disagree with is going large and long on a player.

My priority would be starting pitching over position players.  If we added a #2 pitcher, I'd be okay with adding some solid veteran depth in position players and otherwise, going status quo.  

[Kimmi]

3 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

And tonight he'll also pitch.

Freakin' Dodgers...

Goodbye 2027 season.

The Dodgers are ruining baseball.  

[moonslav59]

6 minutes ago, Kimmi said:

I get it.  I think the FO should spend and be willing to exceed the luxury tax limit if the right deals come along.  The only part I disagree with is going large and long on a player.

My priority would be starting pitching over position players.  If we added a #2 pitcher, I'd be okay with adding some solid veteran depth in position players and otherwise, going status quo.  

To me, I don't see a plan based on marginally upgrading 4-6 positions through low to moderate deals that are short in length and pretty much guarantee we get no very high quality players, unless by trade. Sure, we might find the next Bregman one and done type signing, but those are not too common and are often not that successful, either.

I know some here disagree, but I don't really want to upgrade Anthony in LF, Rafaela in CF, Abreu in RF and Narvaez at catcher. If Story does not opt out, he's a lock at one position- hopefully 2B. I'd add Duran to the list, but with 3 OF'ers and his value lowered by moving im to DH. I think he'll be part of a package to land us a #2 SP. Let's assume that happens, and we look to do thing your way.

We can upgrade at 1B, 2B, 3B and DH but no long deals. To do that and still get quality, you have to sign guys that are either too old to get more than 3 years- like...

3B: E Suarez (34 or maybe to play 1B) or who? Urshela at 34 or Vargas at 34? Moncada at 31 for 3 years?

1B: Santana (40) Turner (41) or J Bell (33) Maybe we can get Hoskins (33) at 3 years

2B: Iggy (36) or Adam Frazier (34) Are they better bets than a Romy/DHam platoon? Maybe we talk B Lowe (31) into a 3 year deal. G Torres (29) and Wili Castro (29) will get 4+.

DH: Schwarber is 33, but he's getting 4+, so who? Ozuna at 35?

Even if we spend over the tax line, you want us to spend on these guys?

Maybe Suarez at $18M x 3, Hoskins at $15M x 3 and Ozuna at $14M x 2? Then, what to do with Yoshida, and we'd still need Mayer at 2B or go with Romy-DHam.

I just don't see that as enough to get us over the top. We were better with Devers, Bregman, Gio, Ref & Matz. It's not getting better, unless everything goes right.

I think we need to bite the bullet on one guy and hope he's not the next David Price. Maybe, he can be the next JD Martinez- the last big FA bat signing. (Story was kinda glove with some bat and $140M/6 was long but not all that large.)

Trade for a #2 SP. DO NOT GO LARGE AND LONG ON A SP'er!

Then, plan A:

Sign one large and long on  big bat (Alonso, Schwarber) and another good bat (Hoskins, Suarez, Polanco, Bichette or Bregman)

Plan B: one from Bregman or Suarez and then one from Polanco or Bichette and then a decent 1B guy like Bell or Suarez. That's three from the tier below Alonso and Schwarber. I seriously doubt we do this (or plan A.)

Plan C: Sign Alonso or Schwarber plus Merrill Kelly (2 yrs) and then trade for K Marte.

[drewski6]

1 hour ago, Kimmi said:

The Dodgers are ruining baseball.  

Like Notin said, the jays just committed 500m and were finalists on ohtani and soto offering them ginormous contracts themselves.

Its not like the dodgers, payroll wise, are super far out in front.  Really its the big 5 of Dodgers, Mets, Yanks, Phils, Jays leaving everyone else in the dust.

But again, your blame (my opinion) is better placed on the other 25 owners, the greedy billionaires club who buy, hoard, and use beloved franchises as nothing more than cash cows because who doesnt need a third yacht!

[drewski6]

blame the dodgers because they spend hundreds of millions in penalties to other clubs who pocket the hundreds of millions for the competitive imbalance and not the owners of the pirates is wild.

If they voted, the owners would vote against the salary cap because nobody loves teh dodgers spending more than the 25 members of the greedy billionaires club because they get to pocket the penalties!!!

[drewski6]

john henry use to have passion for our sox. now he uses the sox as a cash generating vehicle so he can expand his growing collection of franchises.

[drewski6]

john henry likes it when the sox get a good free agent, but he loooooves it when the dodgers do it because they are already in the penalty, so it juices the nice check he receives from teams that still care (about 5 of them) incurring penalties.

[moonslav59]

14 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Like Notin said, the jays just committed 500m and were finalists on ohtani and soto offering them ginormous contracts themselves.

Its not like the dodgers, payroll wise, are super far out in front.  Really its the big 5 of Dodgers, Mets, Yanks, Phils, Jays leaving everyone else in the dust.

But again, your blame (my opinion) is better placed on the other 25 owners, the greedy billionaires club who buy, hoard, and use beloved franchises as nothing more than cash cows because who doesnt need a third yacht!

I have to ask: what if every owner was like the "big 5?"

[moonslav59]

8 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

john henry likes it when the sox get a good free agent, but he loooooves it when the dodgers do it because they are already in the penalty, so it juices the nice check he receives from teams that still care (about 5 of them) incurring penalties.

I'm not sure every team gets these funds.

[Bellhorn04]

4 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

It's absolutely disgusting. Could you imagine if the underdog Canadian team with the 500M 1b and the 255M payroll won? It's not like they were finalists for the bidding wars of Ohtani or Soto or anything. 

For the record, I'm rooting against the Dodgers much more than I'm rooting for the Jays.      

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

1 hour ago, Bellhorn04 said:

For the record, I'm rooting against the Dodgers much more than I'm rooting for the Jays.      

I don't hate the Dodgers for spending, because after all, they have a 25-year agreement with SportsNet LA for $8.35 BILLION through 2039. 

Great point by Drewski on the other owners reaping the tax penalties from LA, so we might as well forget anyone -- players, agents, owners -- ever advocating for a salary cap.

As a Red Sox fan (especially this decade) of course I'm jealous, but I say this for fans of every MLB team: forget about a cap, but there definitely should be a salary shoe -- I don't care if it's a freakin flipflop -- something on the floor where even the most miserably miserly owners are required to invest... or get the hell off of our baseball lawn.

[notin]

4 hours ago, Duran Is The Man said:

after trading Devers, the Sox were 24th in home runs -of any kind. nice job Brez.

They were 37-36 with Devers and 52-37 without him.  Would you be happier with more home runs and fewer wins?

[notin]

2 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

I have to ask: what if every owner was like the "big 5?"

Season tickets would cost $5,000,000,000 apiece?

[moonslav59]

12 minutes ago, notin said:

Season tickets would cost $5,000,000,000 apiece?

 

12 minutes ago, notin said:

Season tickets would cost $5,000,000,000 apiece?

Kinda what I was getting at. I'm not sure I'd like every owner being like the Dodgers and Mets owners.

[moonslav59]

16 minutes ago, notin said:

They were 37-36 with Devers and 52-37 without him.  Would you be happier with more home runs and fewer wins?

That was one promise they did keep, perhaps out of luck. They said they win more.

[moonslav59]

2 hours ago, drewski6 said:

Its not like the dodgers, payroll wise, are super far out in front.  Really its the big 5 of Dodgers, Mets, Yanks, Phils, Jays leaving everyone else in the dust.

There are a few issues with this idea:

1. According to SPOTRAC, the drop off between #2 (NYM) and #3 NYY is $37M, while the drop between #5 TOR and #6 HOU is just $23M.

2. The drop between #4 PHI and #5 TOR is $35.

It's seems like the arbitrary line drawn was wrongly placed.

It's more like LAD & NYM are in a class by themselves, with NYY and PHI in group farther away from TOR than TOR is from HOU. The Vladdy deal does seem to separate TOR from a team that refuses to go that large and long on any of their stars. Many have bolted- from Springer to Correa to Verlander & Cole, and they traded Tucker, last winter. In that sense, the line is valid.

In reality, it looks kinda like this:

 

2- $340-350M LAD & NYM 

2- $290-305M NYY & PHI

 

1- $255M TOR

 

2- $225-235 TEX & HOU

 

5- $200-215+ ATL, SDP, CHC, LAA, BOS

 

5- $155-175M+ SFG, ARI, SEA (#15 at $165M), BAL, DET

6- $120-130M+ KCR, STL, MIN, COL, MIL, COL, MIL, CIN

 

2- $100-110M WSH & CLE

5- $65-85M+ TBR, PIT, CWS, ATH, MIA

[moonslav59]

It's interesting to see SPOTRAC's 2026 budgets before any additions (rounded off):

240 LAD $230 NYM

210 ATL

195 SDP & TOR

190 PHI & NYY

165 BOS at #8 & CHC

160 HOU

150 TEX

140 SFG

125 LAA

120 MIL

100 ARI, SEA, KCR

75 COL

70 STL

60 TBR, CIN

50 MIN

45 WSH, ATH, CWS, CLE

30 PIT

20 BAL, MIA

 

 

 

[Duran Is The Man]

1 hour ago, notin said:

They were 37-36 with Devers and 52-37 without him.  Would you be happier with more home runs and fewer wins?

i'd be happier if "the f***ing stiff" hadn't traded Devers for garbage.

[Old Red]

1 hour ago, moonslav59 said:

That was one promise they did keep, perhaps out of luck. They said they win more.

I think the starting pitching especially Crochet, Bello, and Gio being good over an extended period of time had a lot more to do with the winning record than Devers leaving.

[moonslav59]

4 minutes ago, Old Red said:

I think the starting pitching especially Crochet, Bello, and Gio being good over an extended period of time had a lot more to do with the winning record than Devers leaving.

Yes, It was not from the trade that made the promise come true. 

[moonslav59]

54 minutes ago, Duran Is The Man said:

i'd be happier if "the f***ing stiff" hadn't traded Devers for garbage.

It's gets way worse if the stiff doesn't spend the Devers' money.

[Duran Is The Man]

2 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

It's gets way worse if the stiff doesn't spend the Devers' money.

that's what i'm afraid of.

[moonslav59]

7 hours ago, Duran Is The Man said:

that's what i'm afraid of.

Some say the extensions was that money, but not me.

If we don't spend right up to the tax line, at minimum, the sham is continuing.

[moonslav59]

Go JAYS!!!

[drewski6]

14 hours ago, Duran Is The Man said:

that's what i'm afraid of.

I think theyll spend it, but it wont be for top talent.  For example after they "interest king" on top names, they come empty, more than anything for a refusal to commit years necessary

So then they realize they are coming up empty, so they make some panic 1 yr splashes and overpay mediocre and hurt people because those guys are willing to take 1 or 2 year deals, but the AAV ends up being high enough that they can say they spent the money.  

My fear is just a revolving door of mediocre players on short term contracts

[moonslav59]

26 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

I think theyll spend it, but it wont be for top talent.  For example after they "interest king" on top names, they come empty, more than anything for a refusal to commit years necessary

So then they realize they are coming up empty, so they make some panic 1 yr splashes and overpay mediocre and hurt people because those guys are willing to take 1 or 2 year deals, but the AAV ends up being high enough that they can say they spent the money.  

My fear is just a revolving door of mediocre players on short term contracts

Exactly. The players who sign for 1 or 2 year deals do so for a reason. They usually are not the tried and true high quality players. Bregman was a bit of an exception, but the one and done means we just bought time for 1 season.

[Kimmi]

23 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

To me, I don't see a plan based on marginally upgrading 4-6 positions through low to moderate deals that are short in length and pretty much guarantee we get no very high quality players, unless by trade. Sure, we might find the next Bregman one and done type signing, but those are not too common and are often not that successful, either.

I know some here disagree, but I don't really want to upgrade Anthony in LF, Rafaela in CF, Abreu in RF and Narvaez at catcher. If Story does not opt out, he's a lock at one position- hopefully 2B. I'd add Duran to the list, but with 3 OF'ers and his value lowered by moving im to DH. I think he'll be part of a package to land us a #2 SP. Let's assume that happens, and we look to do thing your way.

We can upgrade at 1B, 2B, 3B and DH but no long deals. To do that and still get quality, you have to sign guys that are either too old to get more than 3 years- like...

3B: E Suarez (34 or maybe to play 1B) or who? Urshela at 34 or Vargas at 34? Moncada at 31 for 3 years?

1B: Santana (40) Turner (41) or J Bell (33) Maybe we can get Hoskins (33) at 3 years

2B: Iggy (36) or Adam Frazier (34) Are they better bets than a Romy/DHam platoon? Maybe we talk B Lowe (31) into a 3 year deal. G Torres (29) and Wili Castro (29) will get 4+.

DH: Schwarber is 33, but he's getting 4+, so who? Ozuna at 35?

Even if we spend over the tax line, you want us to spend on these guys?

Maybe Suarez at $18M x 3, Hoskins at $15M x 3 and Ozuna at $14M x 2? Then, what to do with Yoshida, and we'd still need Mayer at 2B or go with Romy-DHam.

I just don't see that as enough to get us over the top. We were better with Devers, Bregman, Gio, Ref & Matz. It's not getting better, unless everything goes right.

I think we need to bite the bullet on one guy and hope he's not the next David Price. Maybe, he can be the next JD Martinez- the last big FA bat signing. (Story was kinda glove with some bat and $140M/6 was long but not all that large.)

Trade for a #2 SP. DO NOT GO LARGE AND LONG ON A SP'er!

Then, plan A:

Sign one large and long on  big bat (Alonso, Schwarber) and another good bat (Hoskins, Suarez, Polanco, Bichette or Bregman)

Plan B: one from Bregman or Suarez and then one from Polanco or Bichette and then a decent 1B guy like Bell or Suarez. That's three from the tier below Alonso and Schwarber. I seriously doubt we do this (or plan A.)

Plan C: Sign Alonso or Schwarber plus Merrill Kelly (2 yrs) and then trade for K Marte.

I'm with you on being good with our outfielders, catcher, and Story if he doesn't opt out.  As far as the other infield positions, I am hoping for solid production from at least 2 out of Mayer, Campbell, and Casas.  Wishful thinking maybe, but they are what keeps me from feeling the need to go large on a position player.

I'd like Schwarber as a DH.  I wouldn't go 4+ years for him, but maybe 3 years at a higher AAV.

[Kimmi]

23 hours ago, drewski6 said:

Like Notin said, the jays just committed 500m and were finalists on ohtani and soto offering them ginormous contracts themselves.

Its not like the dodgers, payroll wise, are super far out in front.  Really its the big 5 of Dodgers, Mets, Yanks, Phils, Jays leaving everyone else in the dust.

But again, your blame (my opinion) is better placed on the other 25 owners, the greedy billionaires club who buy, hoard, and use beloved franchises as nothing more than cash cows because who doesnt need a third yacht!

Again, I'm not condoning any of the owners being cheapskates.  Any team that doesn't spend a minimum set amount on payroll should lose their revenue sharing. 

There is no reason for the Red Sox not to spend near the luxury tax limit every year.  I just don't want to see any Soto-like contracts coming our way.

IMO, the Dodgers are the team that started and perpetuated this recent ludicrousness in baseball contracts. I don't like the other teams signing monster contracts either.  But yes, I blame the Dodgers.  Also, how Shohei didn't even get so much as a slap on the wrist with his gambling interpreter, I have no clue.