Red Sox sign Ranger Suarez. 5 years $130 Million

[Old Red]

5 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

Nothing that hasn't been said before, or that doesn't make 100% sense.  We wouldn't go as high as Chicago, and we wouldn't give him a no-trade.  Like it or not, those are the facts.

No one is disputing those facts. The question is what role did Brez have, or didn’t have in making them the facts, and has been the question all along to me.

[drewski6]

19 minutes ago, Old Red said:

No one is disputing those facts. The question is what role did Brez have, or didn’t have in making them the facts, and has been the question all along to me.

Im only disputing the notion that the Red Sox intentionally refused to match the cubs offer because I think thats different from incorrectly not believing the cubs had made an offer

There was never a time when Breslow like declined to match the cubs offer because he never gave himself the opportunity. He was screaming that the cubs offer was a fake offer right up until Breg signed with the cubs and prob still after.

Which I agree with Moon, is funny.  Its incompetent but those 2 things arent mutually exclusive.

In any case, if Breslow was telling the owners "hey its fine, got him right where we want him. Dont worry about the cubs offer, its fake" and then um, 24 hrs later Bregman is a cub and is pointing out how Breslow was being dense

Well, then certainly, Breslow burned up a lot of his leash and security.  ANd now I do expect him gonezo if we step back this year which I think is quite likely cuz we cant hit.  I just hope it doesnt cost us Cora

Clown around and find out

In any case, Alt Facts Joe Bradys version of events that like Beslow drew a hard line in the sand and intentionally knew the cubs offer was real but declined to meet it because hes genius at pegging value and knew that the contract would wind up underwater had he matched - well thats just an alt facts version of events and simply believing what you want to believe , which is kind of alt facts joes M.O.

In either case , have to run to trivia with a group of friends because people actually like me and we'll prob win third week in a row.  Have fun with Alt Facts Joe and his admittedly ugly wife. Ill catch you tomorrow.

Great job policing the nonsense last night and though, Old Red. Mean that sincerely.
 

[Duran Is The Man]

1 hour ago, moonslav59 said:

Truth on bad communicators often lose top talent in an organization.

I look at the results of all the choices Brez has made and the bad ones made some sense at the time, and I liked the Sale trade when it happened (well a few days later) so I try not be two-faced and bash him for trying to fix 2B by ridding us of just one more oft-injured pitcher who just happened to win the Cy Young the next year.

He's done an almost total makeover of the pitching staffs at every level of the system. Almost all is still TBD, but on paper, I like what I see. That's been a sore spot for the Sox since I can remember.

The Priester trade looked bad in 2025 but is really very much TBD. Since he was no great known commodity when we dealt him, it's hard to say that was horrible.

The Buehler signing was one of his highest dollar choices that completely stunk.

Almost every other major to moderate move looks from pretty good to great, except for the few that are still TBD.

I think we are on an upward trend, and Brez is a major part of that. (The core left to him is also a significant part, too.)

If hsi stiffness and poor communication skills messes up somethings, and it becomes a bigger minus than his pluses, then I'm fine with saying bye-bye.

you forgot to mention that he traded Sale and Devers for a bag of peanuts. horrible trades.

[moonslav59]

6 minutes ago, Duran Is The Man said:

you forgot to mention that he traded Sale and Devers for a bag of peanuts. horrible trades.

I mentioned the Sale trade. After it happened, it took me a couple days to think it was worth it. It turned out to be bad.

I've spoken about the Devers trade too much to mention. I shoulda mentioned it on that post.

[JoeBrady]

2 hours ago, drewski6 said:

mr insulted billie eilish becasue shes gay and then tripled down that she isnt gay.  Shes still gay btw.

I didn't insult Ms. Eilish because she is gay.  I accused her of gay-baiting.  I resent that type of pandering.  In regard to her she is dating, I could paste the links, but you won't read them.  But she's dating Nat Wolff.  But, like all other things, if you do some research, and find out I am wrong, you can provide me a link and I will apologize if I am wrong.

[JoeBrady]

2 hours ago, Old Red said:

No one is disputing those facts. The question is what role did Brez have, or didn’t have in making them the facts, and has been the question all along to me.

IMHO, the no-trade probably comes from someone higher-ranking.  IRT the salary, I assume that JH sets the budget and mostly allows Breslow to spend how he sees fit.  I would make the same assumption with most teams.

[JoeBrady]

2 hours ago, drewski6 said:

Have fun with Alt Facts Joe and his admittedly ugly wife.

You are one remarkably damaged little person.

[moonslav59]

4 hours ago, Old Red said:

No one is disputing those facts. The question is what role did Brez have, or didn’t have in making them the facts, and has been the question all along to me.

I thought all accounts answered that question.

[Old Red]

5 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Projecting again?

"Bothered?

Words matter. Words have meaning.

I know, I know- cue-- "You're overanalyzing..."

Words matter? Words have meaning? Yes they do, and I’ve heard many the last week, or so actually talking to people, listening to other sports venues, and reading on here. Botched, Bungled, Messed UP, Misread the room, and my favorite played GO FISH to name a few. What’s yours?🤫

[moonslav59]

9 minutes ago, Old Red said:

Words matter? Words have meaning? Yes they do, and I’ve heard many the last week, or so actually talking to people, listening to other sports venues, and reading on here. Botched, Bungled, Messed UP, Misread the room, and my favorite played GO FISH to name a few. What’s yours?🤫

I've heard the same. It's "all accounts," except yours, since you wont say what you think- only crowdspeak.

[Old Red]

9 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

I've heard the same. It's "all accounts," except yours, since you wont say what you think- only crowdspeak.

Congratulations guys I think you set the record yesterday on how many times the word BOTCHED was used in a post. Not only that I think you’ve created a new game show WHERE’S THE BOTCH? Great job.!🤓

 

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, Old Red said:

Congratulations guys I think you set the record yesterday on how many times the word BOTCHED was used in a post. Not only that I think you’ve created a new game show WHERE’S THE BOTCH? Great job.!🤓

 

By all accounts "Where's the botch" will be a hit game show.

[Old Red]

7 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

By all accounts "Where's the botch" will be a hit game show.

Only On here.🤫

[moonslav59]

8 minutes ago, Old Red said:

Only On here.🤫

One could name this site, "Who botched it?"

[drewski6]

12 hours ago, JoeBrady said:

I didn't insult Ms. Eilish because she is gay.  I accused her of gay-baiting.  I resent that type of pandering.  In regard to her she is dating, I could paste the links, but you won't read them.  But she's dating Nat Wolff.  But, like all other things, if you do some research, and find out I am wrong, you can provide me a link and I will apologize if I am wrong.

Joe, I have never heard the term gay-baiting until I herd it from you. And Im not exactly sheltered.  Im a man about town and if you come to Providence, you'll find me (no, that is not an invitation). Ive got stakes in bars, season tickets to the friars, trivia champ of providence, plenty of friends from all walks of life.

Im pretty confident that these weird terms are used by a certain population a lot of whom live in parents basements (maybe not you though) and post on dark corners of the internet (certainly you).

Normal people dont stew in their resentment that somebody who is bi or on the queer spectrum may be dressing/behaving in a way that shows off a little queerness.  Oh, the horror.  I say, do you girl! Get that money!

Ive got plenty of acquaintances in my life who would agree with you on a lot of things because 2026 social dynamics are weird - but even they (while just as bigoted as you are) dont talk like this.  I dont mind people being gay just dont flaunt it!  Homophobia has kind of evolved.  But like you're trapped in like this late 80s weird version of homophobia.  And I can tell because you resent when queer people act queer (your words) ,you think somebody cant be on a spectrum and date a man, you do your own researach on peoples sexuality vs just take her word for it, you bring up her sexuality to discredit her.  

Did you know that bigotry against ones gender expression is bigotry and homophobia.  Did you not have to take these courses, I have to take this like yearly training at work and it talks about how you shouldnt attack how someone expresses their sexuality which is exactly what you are doing here.

In corporate America, even what you have written here is no-doubter bigotry and HR would like a word.

[Hitch]

15 hours ago, drewski6 said:

In either case , have to run to trivia with a group of friends because people actually like me and we'll prob win third week in a row.  Have fun with Alt Facts Joe and his admittedly ugly wife. Ill catch you tomorrow.
 

This is f***ing ugly man, and incredibly thin-skinned. 

[Hugh2]

20 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

That's where he plays now and their taxes are pretty high, so his contract ultimately is impacted by CA law. 

Yes but my point was Ohtani was telling other teams the same thing.  That he wanted the deal structured in a such a way, he would have had a similar deal whether he signed in LA, or NY or Toronto.  His motivation was largely about the team acquiring him to be able to work the luxury tax for competitive reasons 

[JoeBrady]

2 hours ago, drewski6 said:

But like you're trapped in like this late 80s weird version of homophobia. 

You simply don't understand.  I consider it a version of stolen valor.  Several groups have suffered enormously from prejudice over the years.  Among them being Native Americans, African-Americans, and gays.  When people wrongfully claim to be in any of those groups, they are giving themselves a share of the suffering they never had to endure.

If you thinking that type of claim is okay, that's your opinion.  I'm never going to agree with.

[mvp 78]

24 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

You simply don't understand.  I consider it a version of stolen valor.  Several groups have suffered enormously from prejudice over the years.  Among them being Native Americans, African-Americans, and gays.  When people wrongfully claim to be in any of those groups, they are giving themselves a share of the suffering they never had to endure.

If you thinking that type of claim is okay, that's your opinion.  I'm never going to agree with.

I'm sorry that drewski was a dingus to you. Please, can we move on from this discussion? 

[notin]

18 hours ago, drewski6 said:

Im only disputing the notion that the Red Sox intentionally refused to match the cubs offer because I think thats different from incorrectly not believing the cubs had made an offer

There was never a time when Breslow like declined to match the cubs offer because he never gave himself the opportunity. He was screaming that the cubs offer was a fake offer right up until Breg signed with the cubs and prob still after.

Which I agree with Moon, is funny.  Its incompetent but those 2 things arent mutually exclusive.

In any case, if Breslow was telling the owners "hey its fine, got him right where we want him. Dont worry about the cubs offer, its fake" and then um, 24 hrs later Bregman is a cub and is pointing out how Breslow was being dense

Well, then certainly, Breslow burned up a lot of his leash and security.  ANd now I do expect him gonezo if we step back this year which I think is quite likely cuz we cant hit.  I just hope it doesnt cost us Cora

Clown around and find out

In any case, Alt Facts Joe Bradys version of events that like Beslow drew a hard line in the sand and intentionally knew the cubs offer was real but declined to meet it because hes genius at pegging value and knew that the contract would wind up underwater had he matched - well thats just an alt facts version of events and simply believing what you want to believe , which is kind of alt facts joes M.O.

In either case , have to run to trivia with a group of friends because people actually like me and we'll prob win third week in a row.  Have fun with Alt Facts Joe and his admittedly ugly wife. Ill catch you tomorrow.

Great job policing the nonsense last night and though, Old Red. Mean that sincerely.
 

The thing is, agents counter all the time with fake offers in hopes of getting teams to bid against themselves.  Boras was using that exact strategy on the Yankees with Bellinger while he was trying to get Breslow to up his bid.  Sometimes it’s real, but sometimes it’s just a blatant lie to get more money and even then it probably works.  No idea how often.

Breslow had no way of knowing if it was real or not.  Hes probably dealt with this exact same tactic from Boras before 

The good part is at least they pivoted to Suarez and landed him.  If they signed Bregman, that probably doesn’t happen.  So, yes he failed to land Bregman because he chose not to bid against himself.  Is that a bad thing?  And he wound up with a pretty good Plan B almost immediately.  Is that a bad thing?

Not sure why tjis is an issue at all…

[mvp 78]

25 minutes ago, notin said:

The thing is, agents counter all the time with fake offers in hopes of getting teams to bid against themselves.  Boras was using that exact strategy on the Yankees with Bellinger while he was trying to get Breslow to up his bid.  Sometimes it’s real, but sometimes it’s just a blatant lie to get more money and even then it probably works.  No idea how often.

Breslow had no way of knowing if it was real or not.  Hes probably dealt with this exact same tactic from Boras before 

The good part is at least they pivoted to Suarez and landed him.  If they signed Bregman, that probably doesn’t happen.  So, yes he failed to land Bregman because he chose not to bid against himself.  Is that a bad thing?  And he wound up with a pretty good Plan B almost immediately.  Is that a bad thing?

Not sure why tjis is an issue at all…

R Suarez is not a Plan B as he doesn't replace Bregman. Very weird pivot for this team. Not a bad move, but the Sox still have a big hole to fill in the IF. 

[Old Red]

6 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

R Suarez is not a Plan B as he doesn't replace Bregman. Very weird pivot for this team. Not a bad move, but the Sox still have a big hole to fill in the IF. 

I agree getting Ranger was not a pivot from Bregman. Nice addition to the pitching staff, but not a 3B/2B, which is needed, or a power bat.

[moonslav59]

8 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

R Suarez is not a Plan B as he doesn't replace Bregman. Very weird pivot for this team. Not a bad move, but the Sox still have a big hole to fill in the IF. 

The pivot did seem weird, but not bad. Maybe we trade Bello for Paredes or Donovan and they view it as Suarez + Paredes/Donovan > Bregman + Bello. You may disagree, but it no longer looks "weird."

[mvp 78]

6 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

The pivot did seem weird, but not bad. Maybe we trade Bello for Paredes or Donovan and they view it as Suarez + Paredes/Donovan > Bregman + Bello. You may disagree, but it no longer looks "weird."

So Paredes or Donovan is the pivot then. That pivot hasn't yet happened. Just be honest about that then. 

[moonslav59]

11 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

So Paredes or Donovan is the pivot then. That pivot hasn't yet happened. Just be honest about that then. 

I guess if you only view it as a positional pivot, I suppose, yes. I think when the pivoted (financially and valuewise) from Bregman to Suarez, they knew they'd be getting a 3B/2Bman somehow and now had an added trading chip from SP'er depth that increased by one with the Suarez signing. (They may aslo trade an OF'er and keep the SP'er depth value.

I'm honest about it. Not agreeing with your narrow view of a "pivot" is not being dishonest.

[moonslav59]

27 minutes ago, Old Red said:

I agree getting Ranger was not a pivot from Bregman. Nice addition to the pitching staff, but not a 3B/2B, which is needed, or a power bat.

I'm sure you'll accuse me of saying I'm over analyzing your chosen words, but on page one of this very thread, you wrote...

"Yes I would say this most likely was a pivot, and wouldn’t have happened if Bregman would have signed."

[Old Red]

4 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I'm sure you'll accuse me of saying I'm over analyzing your chosen words, but on page one of this very thread, you wrote...

"Yes I would say this most likely was a pivot, and wouldn’t have happened if Bregman would have signed."

Yes that was two weeks, but I don’t know if it was an actual so called pivot. I don’t know if Ranger was on their so called big board, or something that just occurred to someone like O’Halloran who was praised for making the deal. 

[moonslav59]

15 minutes ago, Old Red said:

Yes that was two weeks, but I don’t know if it was an actual so called pivot. I don’t know if Ranger was on their so called big board, or something that just occurred to someone like O’Halloran who was praised for making the deal. 

So, by all accounts, you botched your statement day one.

😝

[Old Red]

26 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

So, by all accounts, you botched your statement day one.

😝

To use pivot yes, but I don’t think it was a planned pivot, because as we all know Breggie was Plan A, and I don’t know if there was ever a Plan B.

[moonslav59]

13 minutes ago, Old Red said:

To use pivot yes, but I don’t think it was a planned pivot, because as we all know Breggie was Plan A, and I don’t know if there was ever a Plan B.

I find it hard to believe they missed out on Breggie, and then began thinking about Suarez and signed him that quickly.