Predicting LT payroll

[drewski6]

3 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

3.7 fWAR after age 33. How did you scrape this list???

I started off the top of my head, then used internet resources to supplement

[drewski6]

6 hours ago, Hugh2 said:

The problem with this is two fold.

A.) I’m not comparing Polanco to any 23 year old nor am I saying we have to go out and get a youngster instead of him.

B.) comparing a 23 year old to a 33 year old isn’t the same thing as comparing 

23-28 vs. 33-38

Again, Im not talking about Polanco at all.  He was never a target of mine.

My point is that everyone is in a rush to always get younger, and sure , you have a longer window with a 23 year old, but there is a reason why the perennial high drafters rarely go anywhere. And thats because they cant keep their high draft picks before said high draft picks price themselves out of their organization....BECAUSE.....Dudes under 24 just dont dominate sports leagues.

Championships are won , in the vast majority of cases, by men between the ages of 28 and 32.

Understood that if you ahve a 24 with 6 years of control , thats a great window. I get that.  But for the 2026 red sox, if you think that a team that an offense built around RA, Mayer, Casas, Campbell is going to compete with the best offenses, history tells us otherwise.

RA wont hit his prime for another 5 years, that would make a 10+ rebuild with nothing promised on the other end.  Its just not worth it to refuse to compete until we get him. And avoiding free agents or trades for players in their current primes is refusing to compete.

[Hugh2]

5 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Again, Im not talking about Polanco at all.  He was never a target of mine.

My point is that everyone is in a rush to always get younger, and sure , you have a longer window with a 23 year old, but there is a reason why the perennial high drafters rarely go anywhere. And thats because they cant keep their high draft picks before said high draft picks price themselves out of their organization....BECAUSE.....Dudes under 24 just dont dominate sports leagues.

Championships are won , in the vast majority of cases, by men between the ages of 28 and 32.

Understood that if you ahve a 24 with 6 years of control , thats a great window. I get that.  But for the 2026 red sox, if you think that a team that an offense built around RA, Mayer, Casas, Campbell is going to compete with the best offenses, history tells us otherwise.

RA wont hit his prime for another 5 years, that would make a 10+ rebuild with nothing promised on the other end.  Its just not worth it to refuse to compete until we get him. And avoiding free agents or trades for players in their current primes is refusing to compete.

And I was never talking about every oldie, rather specifically Polanco who is even riskier because of his profile.  Poor bat speed, and poor exit velocites.   I want to add guys around Mayer, Casas, Campbell, and Anthony......I'd just be very dissapointed if it was Polanco. 

[drewski6]

10 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

And I was never talking about every oldie, rather specifically Polanco who is even riskier because of his profile.  Poor bat speed, and poor exit velocites.   I want to add guys around Mayer, Casas, Campbell, and Anthony......I'd just be very dissapointed if it was Polanco. 

Well, look at that we've been violently agreeing this whole time (which we both started suspecting yesterday, haha)

Cheers!

Im on the Geno train now, I know hes old as s***, but my buddy was talking about how I wasnt giving him another credit. And how hes an athlete and he'll stay good longer.  Havent looked into his bat speed. I do know that hes old as sh*t and I worry a lot about him at 3b cuz hes about the age where Justin Turner could no longer do it. 

But my buddy tells me I underrate his athleticism, and I trust m ybud. 

[Hugh2]

19 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Well, look at that we've been violently agreeing this whole time (which we both started suspecting yesterday, haha)

Cheers!

Im on the Geno train now, I know hes old as s***, but my buddy was talking about how I wasnt giving him another credit. And how hes an athlete and he'll stay good longer.  Havent looked into his bat speed. I do know that hes old as sh*t and I worry a lot about him at 3b cuz hes about the age where Justin Turner could no longer do it. 

But my buddy tells me I underrate his athleticism, and I trust m ybud. 

VIOLENTLY AGREEING!!!!

I didn't realize I had left my caps locks on but that seemed fitting.  I'm going to use this term more, I like it. 

[UtahSox]

Old dudes definitely won the Dodgers World Series this year.. that’s not even debatable, but all of these teams go into the analytics, and write off the decline of these players in their mid 30s. With modern medicine, our knowledge of travel rest, soft tissue. Guys are playing longer. Yet a lot these teams (RS) walk away from deals for age and let the dodgers have them. Good discussion 

[UtahSox]

What is Red Sox payroll as it currently is constituted? Before signing Bregman or King where do we sit?

[Hugh2]

2 hours ago, UtahSox said:

What is Red Sox payroll as it currently is constituted? Before signing Bregman or King where do we sit?

for LT purposes the payroll is currently at $226.19  according to Sox Payroll. 

https://soxprospects.com/payroll.htm

[Kimmi]

On 12/10/2025 at 5:10 PM, moonslav59 said:

Alonso will be 35 for his last season of this deal. That's to the midpoint of his 30's and no longer. I'd have been fine with a 6th yr added if it brought down the AAV a bit. Instead of $31M x 5, maybe $29M x 6. (He's make $21M in that extra year.)

I would have been okay with signing Alonso to the deal that he received.  It's a year longer than I would have liked, but that's the way of the baseball world these days.

That said, if we can get the 2023 Casas in 2026 for roughly a mere $1.5M, isn't that such a better value?  Perhaps that money is better used elsewhere.

[Nick]

Devers' Payroll savings myth, short term.

No doubt we escaped from the long term deal. A ten year $313.5M deal is good to get out from. 

But in a near terms, specifically for 2026 and 2027, we inherited Jordan Hicks annual AAV of $10M, thus reducing Dever's salary savings to $19M. We did not shed $29M per annum for next two years. 

We're still saddled with Yoshida's $18M for next two years along with $23M for Trevor Story. 

[moonslav59]

On 12/11/2025 at 4:02 AM, Hugh2 said:

But the under 23 guy likely comes with 6 years of team control.  So shouldn’t we really be looking at value from 23-28?

Of course, but that value is much more speculative.

How many 23 year olds who have made it to the bigs last to 28.

Then, how many of those do well.

As a percentage of total players in those age groups, I wonder how the results look.

Also, the thing about Polanco was the 2 year contract.

 

[Hugh2]

2 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Of course, but that value is much more speculative.

How many 23 year olds who have made it to the bigs last to 28.

Then, how many of those do well.

As a percentage of total players in those age groups, I wonder how the results look.

Also, the thing about Polanco was the 2 year contract.

 

What would you rather have.  All else equal and zero other moves being made. Marcelo Mayer for 6 years under team control or Polanco for 2?

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, Hugh2 said:

What would you rather have.  All else equal and zero other moves being made. Marcelo Mayer for 6 years under team control or Polanco for 2?

5 years of K Marte for 6 years of Mayer and 5 years of Harrison.

I would not trade 6 years of Mayer for 2 years of Polanco at $40M.

[Hugh2]

14 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

5 years of K Marte for 6 years of Mayer and 5 years of Harrison.

I would not trade 6 years of Mayer for 2 years of Polanco at $40M.

So Mayer

[moonslav59]

2 hours ago, Hugh2 said:

So Mayer

Well, if Polanco costs as much as Mayer, I'd say it's close to even.

I'd certainly project Polanco to give more production value in the next 2 years than Mayer, and I'm not sure the "window" lasts beyond 2 years.

[Hugh2]

6 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Well, if Polanco costs as much as Mayer, I'd say it's close to even.

I'd certainly project Polanco to give more production value in the next 2 years than Mayer, and I'm not sure the "window" lasts beyond 2 years.

So Polanco?

[notin]

On 12/11/2025 at 11:17 AM, drewski6 said:

Well, look at that we've been violently agreeing this whole time (which we both started suspecting yesterday, haha)

Cheers!

Im on the Geno train now, I know hes old as s***, but my buddy was talking about how I wasnt giving him another credit. And how hes an athlete and he'll stay good longer.  Havent looked into his bat speed. I do know that hes old as sh*t and I worry a lot about him at 3b cuz hes about the age where Justin Turner could no longer do it. 

But my buddy tells me I underrate his athleticism, and I trust m ybud. 

Suarez is less than 2 years older than Schwarber and will very likely sign a deal at least two years shorter.  So if you were already ok with Schwarber.,.

[mvp 78]

10 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

5 years of K Marte for 6 years of Mayer and 5 years of Harrison.

I would not trade 6 years of Mayer for 2 years of Polanco at $40M.

3 years of Marte at 2b and 2 years of declining Marte at 1b for 6 years of Mayer and 5 years of Harrison. Maybe? IDK. 

[mvp 78]

35 minutes ago, notin said:

Suarez is less than 2 years older than Schwarber and will very likely sign a deal at least two years shorter.  So if you were already ok with Schwarber.,.

Suarez would do ok in Fenway. It's not going to move the needle and I don't want him at 3b.

[Hitch]

1 minute ago, mvp 78 said:

3 years of Marte at 2b and 2 years of declining Marte at 1b for 6 years of Mayer and 5 years of Harrison. Maybe? IDK. 

Mayer is incredibly difficult to value. He's shown next to nothing so far outside of good D and injury problems. He's lumped in with Anthony but is nowhere near his level. 

Could he be the next Yoán Moncada? Quite likely. But could he be a star? Also quite possible. 

[mvp 78]

2 minutes ago, Hitch said:

Mayer is incredibly difficult to value. He's shown next to nothing so far outside of good D and injury problems. He's lumped in with Anthony but is nowhere near his level. 

Could he be the next Yoán Moncada? Quite likely. But could he be a star? Also quite possible. 

They rushed him to MLB last season due to need and then he got injured (again). It's a roll of the dice with him. I'm just not as convinced on Marte as most other posters. 

[Hugh2]

I'll still stick to my guns, that if you take 100 Marcel Mayers and compare their age 23-27 seasons to 100 Ketel Martes age 33-37 seasons, the 100 Mayers are going to win every single time. 

Does that not mean some of those 100 Mayers will be out of the sport in a year or two and a complete bust? does it also not mean that Some Martes will continue producing at an elite level and staring down an invite into the hall of fame down the road? yes both are true, but the data clearly shows us how things turn up in the aggregate. 

There's nothing wrong with wanting to trade Mayer for Marte, but don't expect 1/2 of the people out there to agree with you that it's a good strategy to do so.  Personally I see that as a "win now" move where I would personally like to see the Sox trying to win for the next decade and not just the next 2-3 years.  

There's a ton of data out there about the war guys in their mid 20's put up vs. guys in their mid 30's and the reality is Mayer is at an age where value skyrockets and Marte is at an age where it plummets. Again I'm not going to compare 1-1 because I don't have a crystal ball and neither do any of you but I'll take 100 23 year olds careers over 100 33 year olds (from 33 on) every single time.  And I'll be right

[Old Red]

8 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

They rushed him to MLB last season due to need and then he got injured (again). It's a roll of the dice with him. I'm just not as convinced on Marte as most other posters. 

I agree on both. 5 more years plus a player option to age 37 for Marte would be a surprise if the Red Sox made the trade.

[Hugh2]

4 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

I'll still stick to my guns, that if you take 100 Marcel Mayers and compare their age 23-27 seasons to 100 Ketel Martes age 33-37 seasons, the 100 Mayers are going to win every single time. 

Does that not mean some of those 100 Mayers will be out of the sport in a year or two and a complete bust? does it also not mean that Some Martes will continue producing at an elite level and staring down an invite into the hall of fame down the road? yes both are true, but the data clearly shows us how things turn up in the aggregate. 

There's nothing wrong with wanting to trade Mayer for Marte, but don't expect 1/2 of the people out there to agree with you that it's a good strategy to do so.  Personally I see that as a "win now" move where I would personally like to see the Sox trying to win for the next decade and not just the next 2-3 years.  

There's a ton of data out there about the war guys in their mid 20's put up vs. guys in their mid 30's and the reality is Mayer is at an age where value skyrockets and Marte is at an age where it plummets. Again I'm not going to compare 1-1 because I don't have a crystal ball and neither do any of you but I'll take 100 23 year olds careers over 100 33 year olds (from 33 on) every single time.  And I'll be right

Add. I'm not against adding elite talent and taking chances, even on the aging curve.  This is why I've advocated for the signing of a guy like Bo Bichette.  I'd rather overpay for Bo Bichette a little bit than save a few bucks on Marte, pay for his decline, and give up Mayer/Early

[Hitch]

Just now, Hugh2 said:

Add. I'm not against adding elite talent and taking chances, even on the aging curve.  This is why I've advocated for the signing of a guy like Bo Bichette.  I'd rather overpay for Bo Bichette a little bit than save a few bucks on Marte, pay for his decline, and give up Mayer/Early

Which is all well and good in a vacuum. And I'd agree. but if we spend the $30m on Bo, we're pretty much done as it'll leave very little money to spend elsewhere. Whereas if we sign Marte there's still room on the payroll (14.7m on the LT) to get better. 

[mvp 78]

2 minutes ago, Old Red said:

I agree on both. 5 more years plus a player option to age 37 for Marte would be a surprise if the Red Sox made the trade.

I would be surprised if the Sox would want to beat the reported Rays package of Baz (3 years) and Pepiot (3 years). 

[mvp 78]

1 minute ago, Hitch said:

Which is all well and good in a vacuum. And I'd agree. but if we spend the $30m on Bo

Don't worry, they won't. 

[Old Red]

2 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Add. I'm not against adding elite talent and taking chances, even on the aging curve.  This is why I've advocated for the signing of a guy like Bo Bichette.  I'd rather overpay for Bo Bichette a little bit than save a few bucks on Marte, pay for his decline, and give up Mayer/Early

Depends on how many years it takes to sign Bichette. You may be paying for years of decline for both. I don’t think the Red Sox want any long term contracts for any of these guys, and I think the years piece might be holding up the Bregman situation.

[Bellhorn04]

17 hours ago, Kimmi said:

I would have been okay with signing Alonso to the deal that he received.  It's a year longer than I would have liked, but that's the way of the baseball world these days.

That said, if we can get the 2023 Casas in 2026 for roughly a mere $1.5M, isn't that such a better value?  Perhaps that money is better used elsewhere.

I'm now extremely skeptical that Casas can stay healthy.  And frankly his profile as a player is starting to look a bit suspect too.  He's big and slow and not a good fielder.  And he has had some very nasty slumps on O.       

[moonslav59]

2 hours ago, Hugh2 said:

So Polanco?

It's about even, but if the money was the same, and at this moment with the window open wide, I'd have traded 6 yrs of Mayer for 2 years of Polanco... yes. (Close call.)