Francisco Lindor a Fit for the Boston Red Sox?

[JoeBrady]

2 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

If you are signing them, you are getting the initial few seasons

I see no reason to fear a quick decline by Lindor any more than Bregman, Alonso, Schwarber, etc.  In fact, imho, Lindor will out-perform them.

[JoeBrady]

2 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

trading for FA paid players at or near the point of decline hurts the budget

That's all relative.  In a perfect world, you would go after guys like Harper, who should be prime for half of his seasons.  But most FAs don't give you that option.  No matter what you do, there will be a deferred acquisition cost.  Harper is still signed to age 38, Bogaerts to age 40 or so, Soto to age 40.

TBH. I hardly even consider Lindor's contract that big a drag.

[drewski6]

2 hours ago, JoeBrady said:

The idea remains that, if we wanted to sign guys until they were 36-37, we shouldn't object to trading for guys until they are 36-37.  Or from a more philosophical perspective, any player that plays at the level of the guys I mentioned, are either signed until age 36-37, or free agents to be, or unavailable, or prohibitively expensive.

So maybe dont go into FA or trading out of fear of overpaying.  This feels a little counter towards your gotta give to get.

"Any (stars) are either signed until age 36-37, or free agents to be, or unavailable, or prohibitively expensive"

Yet somehow stars in their prime do get traded or signed or moved.  And yes they cost a lot. And yes there is risk in that.  But I dont turtle at the cost of what we have to give up to get a star, I get excited at what we are getting.

I get plenty of fans look at it from the other way.  A couple of my friends , when I text them about potential players we could trade for, they start getting real nervous.  When I see RS make big trade , I get excited clicking the link....I have friends who hate it and click out of fear.  They read big trade and get nervous about who we gave up.

[drewski6]

8 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

That's all relative.  In a perfect world, you would go after guys like Harper, who should be prime for half of his seasons.  But most FAs don't give you that option.  No matter what you do, there will be a deferred acquisition cost.  Harper is still signed to age 38, Bogaerts to age 40 or so, Soto to age 40.

TBH. I hardly even consider Lindor's contract that big a drag.

Agreed that sometime having to carry someone for a couple years on the back end of their contract when theyve aged to the point that the contract is now underwater is cost of doing business, but that doesnt meant that you should target players at that inflection point because their prospect cost would be cheaper.  You take it all into account, but sometimes, you just pay the prospect cost to get a star with more prime years ahead (if available)

[JoeBrady]

34 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

You take it all into account, but sometimes, you just pay the prospect cost to get a star with more prime years ahead (if available)

That's why I said it is all relative.  Einstein told me that when we went to school together (he helped me with science and I helped him in math).  All these things balance out.  You can more prime years from Harper and Soto, but you have to give twice as many years as Bregman and Alonso.

In the case of Lindor, here are my key inputs:

• He's hit well since he returned from injury, so I see no performance issue.
• He's averaged 158 GS over the past 4 years, so I see little l/t injury risk.
• He's averaged a consistent 6.0 bWAR over those 4 years, so I see no near-term aging risk.
• At a discounted $22M, I see him as a relative bargain compared to last years FAs.
• I'm not concerned about the loss of Mayer.  If we have Arias, Lindor & Durbin for the next 4+ years, Mayer would have no slot.
• I'd gladly wager he'll have a higher bWAR next year than Bregman, Alonso or Schwarber.
• And he is at the position that needs the highest upgrade.

[mvp 78]

1 hour ago, JoeBrady said:

I see no reason to fear a quick decline by Lindor any more than Bregman, Alonso, Schwarber, etc.  In fact, imho, Lindor will out-perform them.

What a great argument! 

[notin]

20 hours ago, vegasbob said:

Williams had a very good final season too, after a poor one in 1959. and he had to play the field in order to hit

 

The greatest hitter of all time just might be an exception to some sweeping generalizations…

[notin]

Lindor for Campbell, Bello and Phillips.

Works on BTV, and if I’m the Mets, I prefer some underwater contracts that stand a chance at resurfacing over taking on what’s left of Trevor Story