Elktonnick

The goal is to get below the LT. If you get below the LT by X dllrs you can't spend X dllrs on FAs and expect to stay under the LT in 21. You will be back to where you started. Moreover if you trade Betts he isn't coming back. A far simpler plan is trade JBJ and Cushner, DFA Leon and Hembree do not resign Porcello and I believe you are at about 24 million in savings.

You may want to reread your post. The way I understand your post you want to trade Betts to cut payroll and get below the LT and then you want to spend the money saved on signing Free Agents is that correct?

Listen to the MLB radio you can hear them your self. The last one I heard was Sean Casey. But the real issue the Sox don't need to trade Betts at all. There will be a backlash. While I am not a season ticket holder, I know the Red Sox are reaching out to their season ticket holders especially those who have not renewed. One complained to me that it now costs 500 dllrs for a family of four to see the average game. At those prices the Sox need attractions like Betts or they can suffer the same fate as other teams who have seen attendance decline.

And look what happened to Os pitching. Apples to Oranges in any case. BTW that deal was made at the trade deadline if I am not mistaken.

That is your logic not mine. Quite frankly I have always avoided playing the trading game because the average fan simply doesn't have access to all the information to make a rational proposal. It is the same reason that I have a professional financial advisor handle my portfolio than do it myself. IMO and those of virtually every professional baseball analyst the Red Sox would get pennies on the dollar by trading Betts now. If the team does trade Betts the team actually would have more leverage closer to the trade deadline when contenders are likely to offer more than they would now. Plus I think the fan base would be more likely to accept a Betts trade if the Sox are not a contender then they would now. So I am of the opinion make your run next year and see where we stand come trade deadline time.

If such proposals are realistic then they will be pursued. The problem is these forums come up with trade proposal all the time. Most if not all are unrealistic. It is easy to come up with proposals when one has no responsibility for their execution or their consequences. The fact is trading Betts will have consequences some which may be unintended and unforeseen.

I guess that means you can't name a team or the players that would be realistic. So you are really advocating a salary dump.

Such a deal would be for the Braves and not very good for Boston. Incarte injury history last year makes him problematic and the two pitchers are unlikely to be major league ready if at all in the near term.

I am with you, so do I

What makes you think we would get a ML ready player for Betts that would allow the team to remain a contender. It would be a one year rental. Which team would be willing to give whom for one year of Betts. It would more convincing if you had a specific team and players in mind.

I am with you. The object is to win championships. The team as it currently is, is a contender. Of course they would be a better contender with a couple additions. Betts may not want to play in Boston after next year as some have reported. So he may be gone after the 2020 season in any case. But he is a Red Sox for next season. It is highly unlikely that Boston would reap any where near his value if they trade him this off season. If they were to trade him without adequate return that would allow the team to contend in 2020 Henry would suffer a tremendous backlash. Fans will not tolerate the Sox not fielding a competitive team just because the owner sets an artificial budget limitation while he charges the highest prices in baseball for tickets. Some think that fans will continue to fill Fenway regardless. I think that would be wishful thinking. Ten years ago NASCAR twice a year was drawing over 100,000 spectators per race to Dover (DE) for their races. In 2016 they removed over 30,000 seats at the racetrack because demand for tickets collapsed. This past month they announced that they were going to remove another 29,000 seats because demand for NASCAR continues to slide. I know Major League Baseball and the Boston Red Sox aren't NASCAR but both are competing for the sport fans dollar. Red Sox ownership needs to keep that in their mind as they go about their drive to reduce payroll.

While there is a great deal of chatter concerning trading either Betts or JD or both, I think the Sox will take a real.hit with its fan base unless they net a real haul that keeps them in contention. There is already a backlash against the Sox raising ticket prices yet again. Trading one of these two will further antagonize fans without solid return. It is hard to imagine Boston getting solid value for essentially a one year rental that would keep the fans happy paying the exorbitant ticket prices for a team unlikely to contend.

I am with you. If Sale Price and Eovaldi are healthy, this team contends with a couple of minor additions. I want Bloom and Co not to practice "preemptive capitulation". Go for it until it you are obviously are out of it.

Certainly opens the doors to lot of interesting possibilities

Jeff Passan just tweeted that JD will not opt out. If true that is a surprise to me. I thought he would Peter Abraham confirms that JD will not opt out.

Quite frankly, I think baseball at the front office level is pretty much a very tight circle. Personality issues rarely see the light of day. A former classmate of my mine who played a number years at the major League told me there is lot that goes on as to why players and others may come and go that have absolutely nothing to do with performance and never see the light of day.

While the end result may have afforded Boston the opportunity to take a different approach, the reporting coming from numerous sportswriters including Peter Gammons makes it clear the decision was not over substance. Allegedly Henry had concerns about DDs communication style even before they won in 2018. Chris Russo the bombastic Mad Dog of MLB radio and TV said that there rumors of DDs personal style offending ownership all over baseball for several months in 2018. He said that he was surprised that DD lasted as long as he did. The answer was that Henry wanted the title and was. willing to accept a certain level of disharmony until the on the field results no longer made it acceptable.

You are spot on. DD was hired to do exactly what he did. After the win Henry promised to renew DD's contract then after their dismal 2019 start he changed his mind, none of which had anything to do with the state of the farm. If you believe Boston sportswriters such as Dan Shaughnessy it had to do with DDs communication style. The whole business of the state of the farm is interesting but irrelevant as to why DD is no longer in Boston.

amen

I certainly concur I also think the improvement in the level play in college baseball and the rise of the independent leagues have changed the landscape as well. Teams believe that don't need as long to develop their top prospects now as in years past.

That is funny because I am not angry about Bush being hired. I merely would have preferred some one from outside the organization. Bush certainly may prove to be fine or he could prove to be another dud, only time will tell. BTWI am not arguing against a strong farm system nor I am arguing for one but again pointed out that DD used the farm system as Henry thought he would namelyto get players to clinch the deal and win the title. What I did say was the farm system needs to be only strong enough to produce a few players periodically. The NATs farm system was ranked 17th this past year and 20th last year, clearly below average as farm systems go but good enough to suit their purposes. Again the goal of a major league franchise is not to have the best farm system but rather to win titles. The former does not necessarily lead to the latter and most fans have no idea how good a particular farm system is and could care less. It is a bit off the topic but the big controversy facing the minor leagues is MLBs proposal to eliminate minor league teams, " According to Baseball America. MLB has proposed eliminating 25 percent of minor league teams, dropping the total number of clubs from about 160 to approximately 120.Oct 19, 2019" I guess MLB doesn't consider a strong minor league system to be that important after all. If they did it seems to be an odd way to show it.

Ah Dr Talc, I presume.

I was trained in debate. I confess it was a long time ago. Our rhetoric instructor taught us irony, sarcastic and sardonic techniques were not only acceptable but would score better than blunt less witted rejoinders. What has happened in today's America is the we have lost the art of reasoned debate as we have seen by what is happening on today's campuses. Moreover I have lived all over the world. So I know cultural sensitivity. What I am saying is in my neighborhood growing up sarcasm was how we argued. It is also used quite freely in Spain and Argentina. I know I have had many fun times debating my Argentine and Spanish friends when we lived there. Unfortunately here in America we not only have lost the art of debate but of conversation as well. So sad. We have become an uptight prig of a nation dominated by boring folks who think exchanging tweets is having an intelligent conversation.

LOL!!! Without being so crude. You know they used to say the best debaters are those who can tell their opponents to "go to hell" in such a way that they look forward to the trip.

No they use sarcasm as a legitimate rhetorical debate device.