Bregman to sign 5 yr 175 million deal with the Cubs

[Randy Red Sox]

2 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

I could care less what others think. The Sox 26, 40 and system as a while is way better now than a few years ago.

Our longer term outlook looks as good as anytime since 2017.

I guess that counts for nothing, because we failed to grossly overpay Breggie.

i dont know how many times i need to state that i did NOT want Bregman on a long term deal but i will state it AGAIN now.

[Randy Red Sox]

5 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

I really hate giving up a lot for one and dones, but maybe we can extend Hoerner.

I think it's more likely we make some minor trade for Vientos or just sign W Castor and a decent RP'er.

I'm not confident we do anything bold. I'm not giving up hope, either.

on the fence again covering both sides

[JoeBrady]

2 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Again, I'm not high on Vientos, at all.

This is the gambling instinct in me.  He averaged 31 HRs/600 ABs the past two years, albeit with contact issues.

[notin]

53 minutes ago, Randy Red Sox said:

i dont know how many times i need to state that i did NOT want Bregman on a long term deal but i will state it AGAIN now.

Looking at it this way.

The Sox could field a lineup today, if the put Rafaela at 2b and Duran in CF.  It’s not ideal, but no one is out of position.

If they sign Bregman (OPS+ of 121 in the last 3 seasons), then they have no place to play one OF, most likely Duran (OPS+ of 123 in the last 3 years).

Once the Sox get an INF and move Duran, THAT is likely where the offensive hit takes places…

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, JoeBrady said:

That's probably right on Casas, but my guess is that the NYM want to see him healthy.

That is the big block. Also, once we see him healthy, we may decide we want to keep him.

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, Randy Red Sox said:

on the fence again covering both sides

I have no idea what they will do.

I am on one side: add a big bat and maybe a #2 SP'er. I won't be "okay" with not doing that.

If they don't, I'm not right or wrong.

If they go half way and add enough to make us slightly better than we are now and than we were in 2025, I'll be happier than I am now, but will still be upset they didn't take  advantage of this window, fully.

If I knew JH would spend more in the future, I'd be more upset with out lack of spending, but I happen to think he won't, so I'm not going get all torn up over not grossly overpaying for Bregman- knowing our hands would be tied for 5 years- about the length of our window, BTW.

I'd be happy with Suarez and a trade like Duran for Lodolo. I think that gets us to top 6.

[moonslav59]

55 minutes ago, notin said:

Looking at it this way.

The Sox could field a lineup today, if the put Rafaela at 2b and Duran in CF.  It’s not ideal, but no one is out of position.

If they sign Bregman (OPS+ of 121 in the last 3 seasons), then they have no place to play one OF, most likely Duran (OPS+ of 123 in the last 3 years).

Once the Sox get an INF and move Duran, THAT is likely where the offensive hit takes places…

That type of reasoning could also be used with the idea of DHing Duran over a Masa/Casas/Campbell/Romy mix.

Trading Duran for a Lodolo type SP'er would give us a much bigger gain in the rotation than we lose at DH.

[JoeBrady]

10 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I'd be happy with Suarez and a trade like Duran for Lodolo. I think that gets us to top 6.

I think that's the ticket.  I don't think it's fair value for Duran, but the fit is beautiful.  Just random minutiae:

• Lodolo's H/A splits are very high with a .831/.598.  Can leaving Cincy take the next step forward?
• Lodolo is HR-prone, but again, it's 37/21 H/A
• His games at NYM, Philly, what I consider higher spotlight games, are .472, .559, and .596.  It's a SSS, but might indicate that he might do well in Fenway's spotlight.
• At age 28, and two years left, and limited career earnings, he could be a candidate for a small extension.  He's had a couple of injuries, which makes him riskier, but maybe more apt to take some guaranteed money.

[moonslav59]

4 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

I think that's the ticket.  I don't think it's fair value for Duran, but the fit is beautiful.  Just random minutiae:

• Lodolo's H/A splits are very high with a .831/.598.  Can leaving Cincy take the next step forward?
• Lodolo is HR-prone, but again, it's 37/21 H/A
• His games at NYM, Philly, what I consider higher spotlight games, are .472, .559, and .596.  It's a SSS, but might indicate that he might do well in Fenway's spotlight.
• At age 28, and two years left, and limited career earnings, he could be a candidate for a small extension.  He's had a couple of injuries, which makes him riskier, but maybe more apt to take some guaranteed money.

I only mention Lodolo or the like, because I know CIN ha surplus SP'ers and a great need to improve their offense, plus an OF need. BTV agrees that Duran for Lodolo is an overpay. Maybe we can get a prospect or RP'er added in- maybe not. Maybe BTV overrates Duran. 

I'd do the trade straight up.

We might need a third team, but I'd give Duran and Crawford for Ryan. BTV calls that a Sox overpay, too.

There are other trade matches we may not even know about. Brez might like some pitcher I don't care for or don't even know about or think is available. I'm not high on Alcantara or Gore, and I would not give Duran for either one.

Maybe we trade Campbell for Keller (3 yrs and not real cheap but not expensive either) or Singer (one year). I doubt he gets us even the one year Bubic.

Pablo Lopez ahs health concerns. Luis Castillo is costly and aging. Would SEA take Campbell and Hicks for him? How about Duran and Masa? We could maybe afford Suarez by doing that one.

I'm sure there are double these opportunities out there.

That doesn't mean I'm confident we do one.

 

[JoeBrady]

1 hour ago, moonslav59 said:

Maybe we can get a prospect or RP'er added in- maybe not.

I would do it if they threw in Petty.  There is no way to project him, but he was really good not so long ago.

[moonslav59]

12 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

I would it if they threw in Petty.  There is no way to project him, but he was really good not so long ago.

At this point, if we added a bat like Suarez, I'd trade Duran straight up for Lodolo. 

Maybe force them to take Hicks at half price or Masa at 1/3rd price. CIN is not a big spender.

[Old Red]

4 hours ago, Randy Red Sox said:

read the whole report. Sox weren't really close on the overall offer.

Heavy deferrals bringing the value down lower than Bregman liked seemed to be a sticking point.

[moonslav59]

18 minutes ago, Old Red said:

Heavy deferrals bringing the value down lower than Bregman liked seemed to be a sticking point.

Maybe we'd have had him with the no trade clause.

I'm glad we didn't give it to him and he's with the Cubs.

I pretty sure JH woulda just limited the budget for 5 years had we signed him.

[Old Red]

The Cubs come to Boston in late Sept to close out the 2026 season. I’m pretty sure Bregman will get a loud and long not so good reception.🤫

[Old Red]

1 minute ago, moonslav59 said:

Maybe we'd have had him with the no trade clause.

I'm glad we didn't give it to him and he's with the Cubs.

I pretty sure JH woulda just limited the budget for 5 years had we signed him.

I agree on all.

[moonslav59]

11 minutes ago, Old Red said:

I agree on all.

That must be painful for you to say... LOL!

🤣

[Old Red]

12 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

That must be painful for you to say... LOL!

🤣

Not at all. I said when Bregman was signed last year that the three years was the right length on the contract.

[Hugh2]

In a vacuum, I can't blame the Sox for not wanting to pay that amount for Bregman.  In a vaccum I see merit in setting a value on guys and not getting desperate to overpay for them. 

But in the aggregate, looking back year over year and missing out on pretty much every higher mid tier to high tier free agent that fits there needs is unforgivable. 

Maybe Bregman isn't the guy, but at some point you have to move out of your comfort zone a little. Having Bregman for one year was fine, but giving up a high draft pick for a guy is not good business and now they're pretty much in a position of Bo or bust.  I get they can still trade for a guy, but you can't build your entire team trading for guys, at some point you're going to run out of ammunition. 

[Hugh2]

9 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Maybe we'd have had him with the no trade clause.

I'm glad we didn't give it to him and he's with the Cubs.

I pretty sure JH woulda just limited the budget for 5 years had we signed him.

If that was the hang up....IF it was the hang up, that's a little strange to me.  It feels more often than not guys are willing to waive their no trade clause. 

[mvp 78]

4 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

In a vacuum, I can't blame the Sox for not wanting to pay that amount for Bregman.  In a vaccum I see merit in setting a value on guys and not getting desperate to overpay for them. 

But in the aggregate, looking back year over year and missing out on pretty much every higher mid tier to high tier free agent that fits there needs is unforgivable. 

Maybe Bregman isn't the guy, but at some point you have to move out of your comfort zone a little. Having Bregman for one year was fine, but giving up a high draft pick for a guy is not good business and now they're pretty much in a position of Bo or bust.  I get they can still trade for a guy, but you can't build your entire team trading for guys, at some point you're going to run out of ammunition. 

The Sox had a big offer out there, I guess they just didn't want to take it one step further to adjust their deferrals and add a no trade clause. Sox just do the "take it or leave it" thing and players always end up leaving.

[mvp 78]

4 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

If that was the hang up....IF it was the hang up, that's a little strange to me.  It feels more often than not guys are willing to waive their no trade clause. 

Breggie wanted this deal to be his last team. He saw the Sox trade Devers away midseason. I think he knew they would also be willing to spin Breggie to another club at some point. 

Going back to AGon and CC, the Sox have only given partial no trade clauses. Why? "Organizational philosophy." 

[moonslav59]

9 hours ago, Old Red said:

Not at all. I said when Bregman was signed last year that the three years was the right length on the contract.

The "I agree with you" part, silly!

[Hugh2]

23 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Breggie wanted this deal to be his last team. He saw the Sox trade Devers away midseason. I think he knew they would also be willing to spin Breggie to another club at some point. 

Going back to AGon and CC, the Sox have only given partial no trade clauses. Why? "Organizational philosophy." 

Seems silly to me, 

I'm not saying it doesn't happen, because it does, and perhaps my perception is wrong here but I feel like the vast majority of the time players do not waive their no trade clause. 

[moonslav59]

23 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Breggie wanted this deal to be his last team. He saw the Sox trade Devers away midseason. I think he knew they would also be willing to spin Breggie to another club at some point. 

Going back to AGon and CC, the Sox have only given partial no trade clauses. Why? "Organizational philosophy." 

I wonder of "organizational philosophy" is JH or the whole group or just Brez.

[Old Red]

10 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

The "I agree with you" part, silly!

It’s not like we haven’t agreed on something before. It may have not been many times, but there has been a few. 

[mvp 78]

12 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I wonder of "organizational philosophy" is JH or the whole group or just Brez.

If it goes back to AGon and before, it's obviously JH. 

[moonslav59]

14 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

If it goes back to AGon and before, it's obviously JH. 

It sure looks that way. Is this the first time it's been stated by the media or anyone that it is a team policy?

[mvp 78]

38 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Seems silly to me, 

I'm not saying it doesn't happen, because it does, and perhaps my perception is wrong here but I feel like the vast majority of the time players do not waive their no trade clause. 

What's the silly part? That Bregman wanted a no trade clause or that the Sox wouldn't give one? 

[Hugh2]

13 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

What's the silly part? That Bregman wanted a no trade clause or that the Sox wouldn't give one? 

That the Sox wouldn't give him one. 

[mvp 78]

Just now, Hugh2 said:

That the Sox wouldn't give him one. 

Ok, then yes, very silly of the Sox. Sometimes you have rules that you need to move on from. This seems like one of them.