Bellhorn04
-
Posts
54,899 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
76
Content Type
Profiles
Boston Red Sox Videos
2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking
Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker
News
2026 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by Bellhorn04
-
No it is. -
Very doubtful. And it would only be a pitcher who is under control beyond this year.
-
I'm very glad that I'm a golf fan along with being a Sox fan. There's always something going on in golf and hardly any of it causes me any pain.
-
Besides Spieth and Johnson, other guys I liked going into this - most are obvious. Rickie Fowler Henrik Stenson Justin Rose Louis Oosthuizen (won here in 2010) Paul Casey (runner-up here in 2010) Luke Donald - dark horse pick
-
There's going to be some wild weather for this one. You can't bet against Spieth right now. Nice to see Dustin Johnson get off to a good start too.
-
One of the guiding principles of AAV calculations seems to be that only the money that is guaranteed to the player at the outset of the contract is counted. With Buchholz's options there are buyout amounts that the club has to pay if they decline the options - those are the only amounts Buchholz is guaranteed to receive, and they are factored into the AAV amounts.
-
Right - Buch's is a team option so it's a standalone.
-
If his option is picked up he would count as $13 million for 2016. The option year is treated as a standalone 1 year contract.
-
Buchholz's option isn't counted. Only guaranteed money counts for luxury tax purposes.
-
There are a lot of unexplainable things in baseball. One is how much a pitcher's performance can change going from one league or environment to another. Look at how bad A. J. Burnett's numbers were when he was with the Yankees, and how good they are in the National League. Then there's a guy like Javier Vazquez, who had great numbers with more than one NL team and terrible numbers with more than one AL team.
-
I agree. You can't blame men for being obsessed with the beauty of the female form, though.
-
This is true.
-
Trade Nap and Vic even if they have to pay 90% of what's left of their salaries. Get ready to play a lot of kids, including Castillo, the rest of the way. Don't trade Koji.
-
But when they cut Lackey and Lester loose they knew it was going to leave a big hole at the top of the starting rotation, and they should have seen it all coming from the beginning of the 2014 season. They had a large amount of time to plan for all this. It was very premeditated, or it should have been.
-
I thought one of our areas of strength was money.
-
Hypothetically, the Red Sox had at least 5 options by which they could have retained or acquired a #1 or #1/2 starter. 1) Not trade Lackey. 2) Sign Lester. 3) Sign Scherzer. 4) Sign Shields. 5) Trade for Hamels.
-
But Ortiz is almost 40, and on borrowed time one would think. And guys like Napoli have been known to fall off the cliff at around this point in their careers. The projections seem to be based on optimism, without much consideration for 's**t happens'.
-
Men are simple creatures.
-
Then we need a new set-up man. Trading Koji might get us a nice prospect. But trading any good pitcher also adds to our to-do list for 2016.
-
Lynn, Rice, Dewey, Fisk - that was a once-in-a-millennium crop, or once-in-forever. And of course none of them were pitchers. For our #1 pitchers in the 70's we had to trade for Tiant and Eck. There's almost always been a problem producing pitching.
-
To me the projections that we would have the top offense in the AL, or one of the top offenses, may have been faulty. In 2014 we scored 3.91 runs a game, tied for 3rd worst in the league, and we had an OPS+ of 92, 2nd worst in the league. It baffles me a little how we were going to go from that to the top of the league with the additions we made. But I haven't looked at the projections.
-
Then we need a closer for next year.
-
Anyway, it seems kind of odd for us to be trying to pin all the blame on one or the other when they are both well below expectations.
-
Didn't you expect this team to score more than 4.2 runs a game?
-
If: The offense was expected to be top of the pack and instead it's middle of the pack. The pitching was expected to be middle of the pack and instead it's bottom of the pack. Are they not roughly equally responsible?
