Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

Bellhorn04

Community Moderator
  • Posts

    55,149
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    76

 Content Type 

Profiles

Boston Red Sox Videos

2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospect Rankings

Boston Red Sox Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Boston Red Sox Fan Guides & Resources

2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Boston Red Sox News, Rumors & Analysis

2026 Boston Red Sox Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Bellhorn04

  1. Here it is: Beginning in the 2017-18 offseason, any team that is over the luxury tax threshold and signs a Major League free agent that has rejected a qualifying offer will lose $1 million from their international signing pool in the following signing period. A team that is not over the luxury tax would only forfeit $500,000 of its signing pool in the subsequent period. So once again, this has nothing to do with the number of times in a row you've exceeded the threshold.
  2. 15 full seasons, I think.
  3. a) Trade Price this offseason, with the other team paying $18 mill a year or so. JDM opts out at the end of the year. c) JBJ is gone.
  4. We still haven't seen the real proof that it's a mandate to get below 208. We've certainly seen that it's a mandate to curb spending.
  5. True, although his teams did make it to 4 Series.
  6. a) "It's a goal, not a mandate." They could re-set in 2021, or 2022...
  7. No, the draft implications come in if you exceed the first threshold by 40 million, regardless of whether it's the first time or tenth time in a row.
  8. No, I don't buy that argument at all. As the rules stand now (and they may change after 2021), re-setting gets you a lower tax rate for 2 years. That's it. How does that decide the fate of an 8 or 9 year mega-contract?
  9. It's just been a badly run team.
  10. I know that. Earl Weaver was a very smart man and he has some great quotes about the game. But he would know better than anyone that having a stacked rotation doesn't guarantee a thing. In 1971 he had 4 20 game winners, but they lost to the Pirates anyway.
  11. If he wants to go to free agency there's nothing we can do about it. But it doesn't mean we have to wave him goodbye.
  12. Mookie has no case for getting more money than Trout. He's a great player but he's Avis and Trout is Hertz.
  13. Sorry, but that's a bad argument. There are numerous pitchers in the Hall of Fame that never won a WS.
  14. It doesn't mean the season is over, but it's hard to envision a scenario in which we get better by doing it.
  15. It became the de facto Red Sox offseason thread. And the relevance of the title has been enhanced by the fact that nothing big has happened yet.
  16. And the front office has insisted their top priority is a competitive team. So it's kind of a Catch-22.
  17. Cole pitched a great game in Game 5.
  18. And the front office has been insistent that they're not punting this season.
  19. This isn't a bridge year, it's a chess year.
  20. Trading Betts would really grind the gears of a lot of fans. It's one of those things that changes history. It means that on the back of his baseball card there will always be another team besides Boston. I'll be very surprised if they do it. Not shocked though, I guess.
  21. 81 games is a severe penalty. By comparison: Aroldis Chapman 30 games Steven Wright 15 games
  22. Sox have signed Kevin Plawecki as backup catcher.
  23. Injuries are an awful thing.
×
×
  • Create New...