Early Trade deadline deals the selling Sox should make

[Old Red]

1 minute ago, Hugh2 said:

Because after this season he's a free agent. 

He has a mutual option for 28, which means BOTH him and the team have to exercise it......which hardly ever happens in such scenarios. 

He was a free agent after last year. Also I’m fully aware of his contract, but like I said he was a FA last offseason, and signed back with Boston.

[Old Red]

1 minute ago, Hugh2 said:

It's not a slam dunk that Chapman and the Sox wouldn't both exercise the option for 2028 but it's pretty close to it.  He will be 39 in 2027.  If he's still good, and the Sox would want to exercise the option some team out there would pay more than 12.7 million for one year. 

Why would we assume he would be here for 2027?

I not assuming either way, and there is still games to be played this year before a decision has to be made on trading him, or not.

[Hugh2]

2 minutes ago, Old Red said:

He was a free agent after last year. Also I’m fully aware of his contract, but like I said he was a FA last offseason, and signed back with Boston.

Yes, FREE AGENT is not the same thing as having a mutual option.  The whole point of this exercise in determining who to sell is to list the expiring contracts. 

ADD: I've also edited my comment to state the mutual option is for next year 2027, not 2028.  I wasn't quick enough for you. 

[Hugh2]

1 minute ago, Old Red said:

I not assuming either way, and there is still games to be played this year before a decision has to be made on trading him, or not.

Oh, absolutely 100% 

We could be living in a completely different world in 5-6 weeks from now. 

But if we are sitting here at the end of July and the Sox are sub .500 and not competing for a wild card they need to sell.  No more of this hugging the line crap. 

[Old Red]

Just now, Hugh2 said:

Yes, FREE AGENT is not the same thing as having a mutual option.  The whole point of this exercise in determining who to sell is to list the expiring contracts. 

Either way he can still sign back with Boston if he wants too. The Yankees traded him one year, and signed him back the next. That could happen too. 

[Old Red]

3 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Yes, FREE AGENT is not the same thing as having a mutual option.  The whole point of this exercise in determining who to sell is to list the expiring contracts. 

That I agree with.

[Bellhorn04]

56 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

I was wrong on Contreras, but Chapman is much more certain to be gone after this season.  

Without much playoff hope in 2026.....what should we keep Chapman and lose him for nothing?

Chapman's option for 2027 is also a vesting option, if he pitches 40 innings and passes a year end physical he is retained for 2027 at $13 million. 

[Hugh2]

8 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Chapman's option for 2027 is also a vesting option, if he pitches 40 innings and passes a year end physical he is retained for 2027 at $13 million. 

No, it's a vesting mutual option.  If it doesn't vest theres no option.  It's either a mutual option or no option at all and mutual options are almost never exercised by both parties. 

[Sthpaw777]

2 hours ago, Hugh2 said:

could be, but what are the odds? less than 10% certianly.  For all practical purposes I'd consider him here 

if you’re offered a good deal you take it. With one year team option he’ll have more value. I’d definitely listen to offers

[Hugh2]

6 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

No, it's a vesting mutual option.  If it doesn't vest theres no option.  It's either a mutual option or no option at all and mutual options are almost never exercised by both parties. 

Correction: it's a mutual option IF it does not vest, which is almost certainly the case if it does not.  If Chapman doesn't hit 40 IP something seriously went wrong. 

If the option vests, certainly Chapman is going to earn himself much more than 12.7 per year given the year he's having this year.  Even at his age, if he performs at this level all year someone is giving him 20 million for a year. 

[Old Red]

6 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Correction: it's a mutual option IF it does not vest, which is almost certainly the case if it does not.  If Chapman doesn't hit 40 IP something seriously went wrong. 

If the option vests, certainly Chapman is going to earn himself much more than 12.7 per year given the year he's having this year.  Even at his age, if he performs at this level all year someone is giving him 20 million for a year. 

To much worrying about this, and worrying about that. He did get 20 million this year after the year he had last year, so it’s far from a certainty he would get that next year.

[Hugh2]

10 minutes ago, Old Red said:

To much worrying about this, and worrying about that. He did get 20 million this year after the year he had last year, so it’s far from a certainty he would get that next year.

Who is worrying? I'm not worrying.  I think the liklihood that Chapman opts into a contract are extremly small and he should be considered a guy not part of this core post 2026 and should be traded......if we are sellers. 

[mvp 78]

1 hour ago, Hugh2 said:

It's not a slam dunk that Chapman and the Sox wouldn't both exercise the option for 2027 but it's pretty close to it.  He will be 39 in 2027.  If he's still good, and the Sox would want to exercise the option some team out there would pay more than 12.7 million for one year. 

Why would we assume he would be here for 2027?

If he gets to 40 innings this season, the contract becomes guaranteed.

[mvp 78]

50 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

No, it's a vesting mutual option.  If it doesn't vest theres no option.  It's either a mutual option or no option at all and mutual options are almost never exercised by both parties. 

Nope. 

[Old Red]

2 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

If he gets to 40 innings this season, the contract becomes guaranteed.

That’s the way the contract reads. Pretty straightforward.

[Hugh2]

7 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

If he gets to 40 innings this season, the contract becomes guaranteed.

Guaranteed to whom?

Doesn't Chapman have the option to decline the option and go to free agency and get more money?

What are the odds he picks it up?

If there's more money for him on the open market is going to stay here because this team is such a winner?

[Hugh2]

Do we actually believe Chapman is going to exercise that option?

 

[mvp 78]

Just now, Hugh2 said:

Do we actually believe Chapman is going to exercise that option?

 

He doesn't need to. If he pitches 40 innings, the contract is guaranteed. 

[Old Red]

1 minute ago, Hugh2 said:

Guaranteed to whom?

Doesn't Chapman have the option to decline the option and go to free agency and get more money?

What are the odds he picks it up?

If there's more money for him on the open market is going to stay here because this team is such a winner?

You keep thinking there’s going to be more money out there.🤔

[mvp 78]

https://nesn.com/boston-red-sox/news/red-soxs-aroldis-chapman-responds-trade-rumors/49c907a04dbcb3202115eb92

Chapman's contract has a vesting option for next season. The option vests with at least 40 innings pitched and a passed physical. If he does not hit that mark and pass a physical, he will have a mutual option for next season. 

[notin]

48 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Guaranteed to whom?

Doesn't Chapman have the option to decline the option and go to free agency and get more money?

What are the odds he picks it up?

If there's more money for him on the open market is going to stay here because this team is such a winner?

He signed a contract with a clause guaranteeing him a second year if he reaches 40 IP.  His chance to decline ended when pen met paper…

[Hugh2]

Just now, notin said:

He signed a contract with a clause guaranteeing him a second year if he reaches 40 IP.  His chance to decline ended when pen met paper…

Oh.....is it a team option?

[Hugh2]

49 minutes ago, Old Red said:

You keep thinking there’s going to be more money out there.🤔

How much would an elite closer get paid in free agency for one year? 

Probably more than $13 million.  

I don't think.....I'm pretty certain there is. 

[Hugh2]

Isn't that how options typically work? you have the "OPTION" but not the "OBLIGATION" to take a certain course of action. 

Unless someone can correct me and show me where I'm wrong and this mutual option that becomes a teams option if he pitches over 40?   That doesn't make sense but for good measure I've been looking into this and that does not seem to be the case. 

The odds are very strong that Chapman walks out that door at seasons end and is not coming back. 

A closer pitching at an elite level is one of the most highly coveted things at the trade deadline, and if this team is out of it, it would be roster malpractice to not trade him. 

[Old Red]

9 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Isn't that how options typically work? you have the "OPTION" but not the "OBLIGATION" to take a certain course of action. 

Unless someone can correct me and show me where I'm wrong and this mutual option that becomes a teams option if he pitches over 40?   That doesn't make sense but for good measure I've been looking into this and that does not seem to be the case. 

The odds are very strong that Chapman walks out that door at seasons end and is not coming back. 

A closer pitching at an elite level is one of the most highly coveted things at the trade deadline, and if this team is out of it, it would be roster malpractice to not trade him. 

Well he didn’t walk after last year, so I see no evidence he would do it after this year. Pure speculation either way at best.

[Hugh2]

2 minutes ago, Old Red said:

Well he didn’t walk after last year, so I see no evidence he would do it after this year. Pure speculation either way at best.

They gave him a contract extension in season not during FA. 

[notin]

27 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Oh.....is it a team option?

Vesting.  It triggers automatically when certain criteria is met.  Neither side has the chance to decline, as was agreed upon last year…

[notin]

23 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Isn't that how options typically work? you have the "OPTION" but not the "OBLIGATION" to take a certain course of action. 

Unless someone can correct me and show me where I'm wrong and this mutual option that becomes a teams option if he pitches over 40?   That doesn't make sense but for good measure I've been looking into this and that does not seem to be the case. 

The odds are very strong that Chapman walks out that door at seasons end and is not coming back. 

A closer pitching at an elite level is one of the most highly coveted things at the trade deadline, and if this team is out of it, it would be roster malpractice to not trade him. 

This option does appear to be an obligation.

Occasionally vesting criteria does trigger a player option or a team option.  Not unheard of, but doesn’t appear to be the case here.  Both sides apparently agreed this one year deal becomes a two year deal at 40 IP.  And that makes sense, since Chapman is 38 years old and before this, hasn’t had a multi-year deal in years.

Hes still worth exploring deals, and the option could be within a short distance of vesting by the deadline, which might make him a more attractive target.  Or a lesser one given his age…

[Hugh2]

5 minutes ago, notin said:

This option does appear to be an obligation.

Occasionally vesting criteria does trigger a player option or a team option.  Not unheard of, but doesn’t appear to be the case here.  Both sides apparently agreed this one year deal becomes a two year deal at 40 IP.  And that makes sense, since Chapman is 38 years old and before this, hasn’t had a multi-year deal in years.

Hes still worth exploring deals, and the option could be within a short distance of vesting by the deadline, which might make him a more attractive target.  Or a lesser one given his age…

Do you have a link?

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

3 hours ago, notin said:

Four more RHH power hitters is most definitely a lofty expectation and probably less than the Sox actually need.  Even one more might make a substantial difference.   

SIX is the actual number of starting positions that we listed as woeful in the batting order: C, 2B, SS, 3B, LF, DH.

I know it's unreasonable to expect that many replacements to have consistent pop (beyond the warning track) or even swing righty to take advantage of the home park where the Red Sox can't win this year...

... but expecting just one new guy to make that much difference is just as unreasonable; the pitching and D have been good, but come on -- I'm not looking at just eeking into a Wild Card but what has been traditionally needed on legit Boston World Series contenders.

Check out the individual OPS+ leaders for the '18, '13, '07 and '04 (even '03) squads. Seems like they all had five or six batters pushing 120+ -- or 20% above average, which bb-ref considers All-Star quality.

The '26ers have only Contreras and Rafaela over 120 OPS+. "Wanted: three or four batters who reach base more than usual and don't often stop at first base." Better plan on running that ad in the MLB Classifieds through the next two winters and deadlines at least...