Predicting LT payroll

[moonslav59]

I'm big on planning for the future, but I think now is the time to give some of that away (not all or even most) and get something really good for a 2-3 control period.

[mvp 78]

43 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

We don't know if he can regain those numbers, but he does have a decent track record over nearly 400 IP.

Throw out the book when you are 29 and coming off TJS. The first year back can be a roller coaster. 

[mvp 78]

43 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I'm big on planning for the future, but I think now is the time to give some of that away (not all or even most) and get something really good for a 2-3 control period.

If that's the case, the Sox should be all in on some of these FA guys and not care about the last 2-3 years of the contract. Pack the guys in now and make the run. It's not what they are doing. Henry seems very hesitant to do much before the dumb 2027 lockout that we all know is coming. 

[Hugh2]

14 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Throw out the book when you are 29 and coming off TJS. The first year back can be a roller coaster. 

This is a good point, who knows what we will get. 

One thing that has me optimistic is he should have been fully recovered for a while and with a full offseason.  Maybe the innings get limited at the end of the year but he should be fine.  If the stuff has ticked up he's going to make a lot of people eat crow around here. 

The dream scenario is he pitches like a stud and returns a draft pick. 

[mvp 78]

19 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

This is a good point, who knows what we will get. 

One thing that has me optimistic is he should have been fully recovered for a while and with a full offseason.  Maybe the innings get limited at the end of the year but he should be fine.  If the stuff has ticked up he's going to make a lot of people eat crow around here. 

The dream scenario is he pitches like a stud and returns a draft pick. 

I don't know the point in paying for a TJS guy to rehab and have an up and down year afterwards. It'd make more sense to pay cheaply for the year AFTER rehab plus an additional year to get the benefit of a healthy pitcher rather than what they are doing now. 

[drewski6]

2 hours ago, Hugh2 said:

We like shiny new object kids because we know that they're cheap.  If the Sox actually acted like the 3rd largest market in the country they'd use that to augment a team of FA talent mixed in with the youth. 

That's how LA does it, they sign big time guys but they actually develop and bring up their own young talent as well.  Also, when I have a "roman anthony" as my "shiny new toy" I've been on him for 3 years....the FA Shiny new Toy crows literally has a new toy they want every month.  So that analogy doesn't really apply to the prospect model. 

My concern is that you are taking this personally, and that was not my intent.  Just a vibe Im getting from this rebuttal.  I am not sure if you were on boston.com and apologies if you were as Hugh and Im not remembering.

But Im new here but ive been fan posting for 20 years.  And what Im talking about is the people getting all giddy presenting a depth chart 4-5 years down the line.  All homegrown.  And I dont mind that.  But some of these depth charts were like (in 2002) a 2005 OF of Ellsbury, Westmoreland, Wily Mo. And im like wheres manny? And they are like what would you rather have in 2004 Manny making $x as he declines or Willy Mo!!!!  Ready to move on from Manny. (Maybe these names arent 100% right, maybe willy mo wasnt a thing till after, but the gist)

Okay, but then 2005 came and these people are suddenly ready to move away from the dudes they were giddy about last time, because now they cant wait for 2010 with an OF of x,y,z (all current prospects in 2005). Then 2010 comes and its I cant wait for 2015 because x,y,z.

You bring up Roman.  First of all, Roman is kind of an exception because he was #1 prospect so thats irregular / special and the stuff Im talking about (that bothers me) is regular.  Im not saying never look down the line.  Im embrace cyclicality.  Yes, we should have been focusing on 2025 in 2023.  Thats just logical.  Because thats where we were in the cycle.  And if you are thinking well, I think our best years are in front of us.  And I really dont want to be signing guys who are going to be drags when Roman is hitting his prime. I know its been 6 years, but I honestly think its not time to go after those expensive free agents.  If this is your mindset, okay.  Im fine with it.  My point is that if we flash forward and its now 2029.  And Roman is a monster (in a good way).  At that point, I dont want to start reading well we cant sign this free agent because while he'll be good for the next 7 years, it will take a 10 year contract and im worried about those back end years.  Or even worse. I dont want to read omg i cant wait until 2034 because omg look at this next crop of 21 year olds!!  I wont be mad but ill roll my eyes and think how long did we jsut wait for roman?

My only point is that there is a time to prioritize the short term.  To act like the window is now.  Whether the window is now , I can understand an argument that it isnt (Anthony is 21) and I can understand an argument that it is (I cant comfortably assume Crochet will be this awesome and healthy)

For years Ive literally said buy or sell, I dont care, jsut not both.  Now I find myself wanting to buy and the reason is not wanting to waste any of Crochet's window.

[Hugh2]

1 minute ago, drewski6 said:

My concern is that you are taking this personally, and that was not my intent.  Just a vibe Im getting from this rebuttal.  I am not sure if you were on boston.com and apologies if you were as Hugh and Im not remembering.

But Im new here but ive been fan posting for 20 years.  And what Im talking about is the people getting all giddy presenting a depth chart 4-5 years down the line.  All homegrown.  And I dont mind that.  But some of these depth charts were like (in 2002) a 2005 OF of Ellsbury, Westmoreland, Wily Mo. And im like wheres manny? And they are like what would you rather have in 2004 Manny making $x as he declines or Willy Mo!!!!  Ready to move on from Manny. (Maybe these names arent 100% right, maybe willy mo wasnt a thing till after, but the gist)

Okay, but then 2005 came and these people are suddenly ready to move away from the dudes they were giddy about last time, because now they cant wait for 2010 with an OF of x,y,z (all current prospects in 2005). Then 2010 comes and its I cant wait for 2015 because x,y,z.

You bring up Roman.  First of all, Roman is kind of an exception because he was #1 prospect so thats irregular / special and the stuff Im talking about (that bothers me) is regular.  Im not saying never look down the line.  Im embrace cyclicality.  Yes, we should have been focusing on 2025 in 2023.  Thats just logical.  Because thats where we were in the cycle.  And if you are thinking well, I think our best years are in front of us.  And I really dont want to be signing guys who are going to be drags when Roman is hitting his prime. I know its been 6 years, but I honestly think its not time to go after those expensive free agents.  If this is your mindset, okay.  Im fine with it.  My point is that if we flash forward and its now 2029.  And Roman is a monster (in a good way).  At that point, I dont want to start reading well we cant sign this free agent because while he'll be good for the next 7 years, it will take a 10 year contract and im worried about those back end years.  Or even worse. I dont want to read omg i cant wait until 2034 because omg look at this next crop of 21 year olds!!  I wont be mad but ill roll my eyes and think how long did we jsut wait for roman?

My only point is that there is a time to prioritize the short term.  To act like the window is now.  Whether the window is now , I can understand an argument that it isnt (Anthony is 21) and I can understand an argument that it is (I cant comfortably assume Crochet will be this awesome and healthy)

For years Ive literally said buy or sell, I dont care, jsut not both.  Now I find myself wanting to buy and the reason is not wanting to waste any of Crochet's window.

I violenty disagree with this post.  I certainly do not take it personally. 

I don't disagree with you, not completely.  I just don't agree that we have to trade away guys like Mayer to "go for it now" sure you have to trade away high end prospects sometimes but we've already done a lot of htat lately.  I think you can do too little of that, but I think you can also do too much.  We've traded more top 20 prospects in the last 2 years than I can remember.  We traded two of our #1 draft picks in consecutive years plus two other guys to get Crochet.  That's great, I love that move but you have to agument that with FA and developing your own guys.  If you don't, then you're shortening your window to a couple years or being the Padres. 

I reject the notion that we have competitive windows, you should always be competitive, the FO just really messed this team up after it broke up the 2018 squad. 

You can not spend money on groceries and be malnurished, conversely you can spend all your money on one big feast and then still be malnurished the rest of the year.  You need to retain assets, because maybe you need moves to make in 2027, 2028, 2029 etc etc etc.  

And I'm sorry, Marte for as good as he is, is nowhere CLOSE to the guy you throw all your chips in and go all in.  

[Hugh2]

Lets try this with more brevity. 

If the Sox should be "all in" and they've traded a record number of top 20 prospects in the past two years............shouldn't the focus be on signing guys and spending some money?

[Hitch]

3 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

Doesn't free up that much money and significantly takes away from the offense. 

It frees up almost $13m for this year alone, and will be even more next year with Duran's arb raise. Add that to the $46m we have before hitting the 2nd bar and we'd have a better rotation with plenty of firepower ($59m) to get the two big bats we need.

[Hitch]

3 hours ago, Hugh2 said:

 

Okay first of all, let's take the hyperbolic language out of it - nobody is saying we should trade away all our youngsters. But when you build a good to great farm, which we did, you need to spend some of it at opportune times and and keep the players you want to fill holes. We're at that time now.

I think a probable road block in this discussion is that you likely see Mayer as someone to depend on next year, like he is ready to man either 2nd or 3rd. I don't. 

Right now I see us needing two bats. If we go out there with Mayer on a base I think we're asking for trouble. So if he's there or not, I still see us needing the same. So I don't have much issue in including him in some deals.

My personal preference would be to keep him and leave him develop further in AAA, but I'm fine with trading him for our needs too.

[drewski6]

15 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Lets try this with more brevity. 

If the Sox should be "all in" and they've traded a record number of top 20 prospects in the past two years............shouldn't the focus be on signing guys and spending some money?

"all in" is not really an expression I use for a few reasons.  Mainly because it can mean different things to different people.  I would prefer to be less black/white. Im a live in the gray kind of guy.

If I think we have a very good core, I am more willing (than I would otherwise be) to sign a guy to an 8 year deal, who I think will be overpaid in those final 2 years.
Im more willing to make a deadline trade or an offseason trade

I do not want to trade off everyone, I just want to be say 75% focused on the present when I think we are "in a window" ; whereas, if I feel we arent in a window, I may be more focused on the long term outlook.

[Hitch]

27 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Lets try this with more brevity. 

If the Sox should be "all in" and they've traded a record number of top 20 prospects in the past two years............shouldn't the focus be on signing guys and spending some money?

They should be doing everything. They have a ridiculous amount of pitching depth - they should be trading some. They should also sign free agents. It's not either/or.

[Hitch]

3 hours ago, drewski6 said:

I have been beating the drum, since before I knew of your existence (the boston.com days) that the best approach to roster building is cyclical.  (Not to imply I was ahead of the curve or that you are parroting me, or that I deserve a point - I dont sports forum scorekeep)  but I want to do more than just like this post, I want to vocalize or type-out (you cant hear my vocals) my extreme agreement with the bold.

There is a time to prioritize the future nad there is a time to prioritize the present.  This is like my only rigid (uncompromising belief)

I could even be convinced that our window isnt 100% open (Im not there currently).  But the point is that its possible to convince me that we are not quite yet in the "win now" phase, but you just cannot (well, not you but you know what I mean)....One cannot convince me that it is appropriate / strategic to always be looking 5 years down the road. 

My concern with the posters who in my opinion go a bit too far on prospect excitement, loving the youth, always thinking about prospects, penciling in our 2030 lineup and being like OMG!!....My concern is that in my experience, and this goes back to the boston.com days - my concern is that Ive just heard it all before.  There are some people who in 2010 presented an all homegrown lineup for 2014 and were like omg this team is gonna be soooo good, then in 2014 has a 2018 lineup filled with all new homegrowns (omg , this team is gonna be sooooo good), then in 2018 showing 2022.  And its not as clean/consistent as Im implying, but its certainly true that some people are so excited for the "next group", and the problem is that when that "next group" arrives, those people are on to the next "next group".

Someone said something about how posters have "shiny new object" syndrome when we express wanting that next free-agent.  But I honestly see "shiny new object" syndrome more with the "work in the kids" crowd than I see it from the "sign free-agents" crowd.

 

I'm probably someone that could be more described as a 'prospect lover'. I'm certainly loathe to lose them most of the time. But as I, and you also, have said over and over, now is the time. We just signed one of the best pitchers to an extension. Don't waste him - try and win now. Dealing prospects is always painful, but you have to roll the dice. 

Deal from strength and go for it when the window is open. It's blowing in the wind right now.

[mvp 78]

35 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Lets try this with more brevity. 

If the Sox should be "all in" and they've traded a record number of top 20 prospects in the past two years............shouldn't the focus be on signing guys and spending some money?

Is it really a record number? 

[mvp 78]

18 minutes ago, Hitch said:

It frees up almost $13m for this year alone, and will be even more next year with Duran's arb raise. Add that to the $46m we have before hitting the 2nd bar and we'd have a better rotation with plenty of firepower ($59m) to get the two big bats we need.

Trade Sandoval - 9M

Trade 1/2 Masa's contract - 9M 

That saves you more than making the other deal. 

[Hitch]

12 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Trade Sandoval - 9M

Trade 1/2 Masa's contract - 9M 

That saves you more than making the other deal. 

Well yes, we may as well throw Hicks in there, too!

We're not going to get anyone to take those off our hands. 

[drewski6]

20 minutes ago, Hitch said:

Okay first of all, let's take the hyperbolic language out of it - nobody is saying we should trade away all our youngsters. But when you build a good to great farm, which we did, you need to spend some of it at opportune times and and keep the players you want to fill holes. We're at that time now.

I think a probable road block in this discussion is that you likely see Mayer as someone to depend on next year, like he is ready to man either 2nd or 3rd. I don't. 

Right now I see us needing two bats. If we go out there with Mayer on a base I think we're asking for trouble. So if he's there or not, I still see us needing the same. So I don't have much issue in including him in some deals.

My personal preference would be to keep him and leave him develop further in AAA, but I'm fine with trading him for our needs too.

I think Im a little less hesitant to trade Mayer than you are, but my point with this post right now, is that I prefer to talk about the high level strategies than the actual players.

When I say theres a time to focus on a compete window, Im not thinking super specfiically.  To some extent sure, so like when I see people multiple prospects in one category player x  AND one of tolle, early, harrison and im like those three are individuals and im way more willing to part with harrison than tolle (for example). And certainly when it comes to players we're getting. I have my dudes around the league who i especially like. Maybe becasue I had em on a fantasy team, maybe because i like playing with them in the show, maybe because they are my style of hitter (attack mistakes) or pitcher.

But I appreciate how you are willing to converse from a more philosophical level. I like how you can talk about concepts (with or without specifics).

I like talking about baseball players, but I LOVE talking about baseball philosophies and concepts and evolutions

[JoeBrady]

3 hours ago, drewski6 said:

Yes, while I dont hate the trade, my issue with it or at least how it has been presented (by a few people) as a money-saver is that Duran at 8m is adding to the offense at very good value. So i have a hard time believing we'll be able to stretch that 8m saved far enough to compensate for even the loss of Duran, never-mind painting the freeing up of Durans money as a way to "improve" the offense.  

think of in terms of a choice:

• Duran + Romy
• Marte + Yoshida

The difference between starting Duran over Yoshida won't be as much as starting Marte over Romy/Hamilton.

[JoeBrady]

4 hours ago, Hugh2 said:

I've been a firm believer that Patrick was a lock for the rotation, the 4th or 5th spot.

I think the addition was made before Early and Tolle advanced.  Back then, it made sense to me.  Now, I think I'd rather save the money and start one of the kids in his place.

[JoeBrady]

3 hours ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

While the prospects ferment, I've never believed teams in a rebuild shouldn't use resources to sign or trade for an ace pitcher.

I was a huge fan of bringing in Snell and Montgomery two years ago.  I actually think aging pitchers are better bets than aging hitters, but none are sure things.

[mvp 78]

24 minutes ago, Hitch said:

Well yes, we may as well throw Hicks in there, too!

We're not going to get anyone to take those off our hands. 

Guarantee they could get rid of Sandoval and have someone take his full contract. Moving Hicks or Masa wouldn't be as big of a deal as people make it out to be. Henry just doesn't want to eat the salary. 

[Hugh2]

1 hour ago, drewski6 said:

"all in" is not really an expression I use for a few reasons.  Mainly because it can mean different things to different people.  I would prefer to be less black/white. Im a live in the gray kind of guy.

If I think we have a very good core, I am more willing (than I would otherwise be) to sign a guy to an 8 year deal, who I think will be overpaid in those final 2 years.
Im more willing to make a deadline trade or an offseason trade

I do not want to trade off everyone, I just want to be say 75% focused on the present when I think we are "in a window" ; whereas, if I feel we arent in a window, I may be more focused on the long term outlook.

I think we can 100% be focused on the presetn without trading Mayer+ for Marte. 

I'm not convinced we can't keep Mayer and still trade for Marte. 

[drewski6]

42 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

think of in terms of a choice:

• Duran + Romy
• Marte + Yoshida

The difference between starting Duran over Yoshida won't be as much as starting Marte over Romy/Hamilton.

Why is that my choice?

If you are asking if I would trade Duran for Marte - thats a separate question.  And the answer is yes.  But hes not the first guy I offer.  But my point was that I dont think its wise move Duran for the purposes of freeing up 8m.

My "choice" is rotations infield/outifeld/and DH

Sometimes cedanne plays infield, sometimes masa plays first, sometimes duran DHs. I embrace versatility.

I believe positions are for dinosaurs.

They are barely a thing in basketball, and I think baseball is moving in the same directon. You want to find a way to get your best 9 bats on the field, but you do NOT prioritize ideal defensive alignment.

Cedanne plays some infield, Duran DHs some, Masa plays some first, guys move around depending on who is hot, who is healthy, if its a righty or lefty pitcher.  As long as our defense isnt awful, I really dont care.

[Hugh2]

1 hour ago, Hitch said:

Okay first of all, let's take the hyperbolic language out of it - nobody is saying we should trade away all our youngsters. But when you build a good to great farm, which we did, you need to spend some of it at opportune times and and keep the players you want to fill holes. We're at that time now.

I think a probable road block in this discussion is that you likely see Mayer as someone to depend on next year, like he is ready to man either 2nd or 3rd. I don't. 

Right now I see us needing two bats. If we go out there with Mayer on a base I think we're asking for trouble. So if he's there or not, I still see us needing the same. So I don't have much issue in including him in some deals.

My personal preference would be to keep him and leave him develop further in AAA, but I'm fine with trading him for our needs too.

Well I can't really respond to this seeing how the "hyperbole" is blank.  But if I had to guess, I'd guess I counter that with something because I"m certainly not trying to be hypoerbolic. 

It's funny, because it almost feels like youre' making an argument to keep Mayer.  He plugs up a hole, and trading him away creates another hole.  So we are literally at the time to keep a guy like Mayer and go out and either A.) trade assets you don't need RIGHT NOW or B.) sign a free agent. 

If you keep Mayer in AAA, you have 3 roster holes in just your infield alone.  I've heard the argument to let him cook in AAA a bit more.  They're strong and compelling, but at this point I think you just let him finish cooking at the MLB level, bat him 9th vs. LHP and sit him versus some.  If one guy in the bottom of your lineup is killing you then your team is crap and 100% NOT "In that time now" mode. 

[Hugh2]

47 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

I think the addition was made before Early and Tolle advanced.  Back then, it made sense to me.  Now, I think I'd rather save the money and start one of the kids in his place.

Maybe, but you know guys are going to advance, so it's not like they should of been a shocker. 

 

[drewski6]

3 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

I think we can 100% be focused on the presetn without trading Mayer+ for Marte. 

I'm not convinced we can't keep Mayer and still trade for Marte. 

I agree.  Im offering pitchers cuz we have too many.

Harrison + Dobbins + Fajardo

Why Fajardo ? Because I just now learned hes a dude, never heard that name before.  But I see him on sox prospects and its like finding a $20 in your pocket.

[mvp 78]

8 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

I believe positions are for dinosaurs.
 

Rafaela career Outs Above Average:

2B: 0 (221 Innings)

SS: -8 (692 Innings)

CF: 22 (1,167 Innings)

Rafaela's only value is playing CF. 

[Hugh2]

43 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

I agree.  Im offering pitchers cuz we have too many.

Harrison + Dobbins + Fajardo

Why Fajardo ? Because I just now learned hes a dude, never heard that name before.  But I see him on sox prospects and its like finding a $20 in your pocket.

I like that analogy

[JoeBrady]

2 hours ago, drewski6 said:

For years Ive literally said buy or sell,

I've been saying this forever.  The most important job for a GM and owner is where they are in the time/space continuum.  Trading for Sale and signing Price were the right moves.  Once we got to 2019, with a mediocre record, high payroll, and no farm, we absolutely needed to rebuild.  No doubt at all in my mind.

Today, we should loosen up.  Anything less than $269,999,999 will be disappointing.  We're too close.

That said, the signings and trades need to make some sense.  I don't mind taking a loss on a deal, but it can't be huge.  IMO, Mayer-Marte will be a l/t loss but a solid s/t win.  Bregman at $150M/6 will be cringe-worthy, but not until Year 4.

[drewski6]

2 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

I've been saying this forever.  The most important job for a GM and owner is where they are in the time/space continuum.  Trading for Sale and signing Price were the right moves.  Once we got to 2019, with a mediocre record, high payroll, and no farm, we absolutely needed to rebuild.  No doubt at all in my mind.

Today, we should loosen up.  Anything less than $269,999,999 will be disappointing.  We're too close.

That said, the signings and trades need to make some sense.  I don't mind taking a loss on a deal, but it can't be huge.  IMO, Mayer-Marte will be a l/t loss but a solid s/t win.  Bregman at $150M/6 will be cringe-worthy, but not until Year 4.

150/6, I will be able to convince myself is 150/5 with a free year tacked on....I dont think I would cringe. 180/6 and im getting nervous.