Bellhorn04
-
Posts
54,674 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
75
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
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by Bellhorn04
-
Post-Prime Porcello is projected (say that five times fast) to have an fWAR of 1.9 in 177 innings in 2021. That's a dollar value of about $15 mill. I would gladly take him for $8-9 million.
-
Post-prime = gradual regression, not instant death.
-
From 2008 to 2012, Dempster's fWAR was never lower than 2.6. How did that make him project as a 4-5 starter? C'mon, go ahead and admit it: you think the FanGraphs values are bunk.
-
The only good shuffleboard is the table version you find in drinking establishments, and best played while drinking copiously.
-
Exactly. If you believe in FanGraphs methodology for pitchers, getting Porcello for $10 million or less should be a solid value.
-
Another one for ya, moon, along the same lines. Ryan Dempster. You've often said how much you hated that signing. But if you look at Dempster's fWAR's for the preceding years with the Cubs, it was not a bad signing at all. Is it fair to say you don't really buy into the FanGraphs valuations?
-
1) In 2020, he made $10 million. I highly doubt he'll be looking for much more than that-probably less, I'm guessing. 2) As you posted above, even in 2019, he was worth $14.2 million, and that was a 4-year low. So why are you so down on him?
-
In times like these, I'm actually looking forward to his next blasting of the owners.
-
moon, I'll pose this one to you directly. In 2020 Porcello had an fWAR of 1.7 in a 60 game season, equivalent to a 4.6 fWAR in a full season. So tell me again why you say he's no good any more?
-
Porcello is one of those guys who almost always has a higher fWAR than bWAR. His advanced numbers always look better than his standard numbers. (That trend continued in 2020.) For his career he has a 4.40 ERA and a 98 ERA+. With the Red Sox, 4.43 ERA and 102 ERA+.
-
I'm guessing a guy like Boras would much rather negotiate than play shuffleboard.
-
Folks that only look at ERA or ERA +/- will argue that Porcello only had one season for us, 2016, in which he was a $20 million pitcher.
-
I think the bottom line is that the Dodgers clearly got a tidy pandemic discount.
-
He might be having too much fun to retire until he really has to.
-
I'm not so sure Mookie would have been open to the deferred money thing if negotiations weren't taking place during a pandemic.
-
No, it's not that. The big deal is that in the last CBA they changed the rules so that present values would actually be calculated and AAV's would be based on present value. I think the first time any of us became aware of it was with Sale's extension.
-
We're almost due for a Scott Boras tirade, methinks.
-
Technically, the Dodgers deal pays him 7 million more, for 2 years more, if he's still playing at ages 39 and 40. But I'm inclined to think that if Mookie was really ready to negotiate a deal with the Sox they would have gone as high as 350 million maybe?
-
I agree about 2018, but to be fair, we did win the division 3 years in a row so we had multiple shots at it, at least. The Dodgers signing of Mookie wouldn't be heralded as such a slam dunk win if they didn't win it this year. But his extension doesn't even start till next year, so that would be more a case of fans being fans.
-
There is a much simpler way of expressing it: "A dollar today is worth more than a dollar tomorrow." Us accountants live by this principle. Always trying to defer tax liabilities and such.
-
I do remember some talk about that. But let's look at the actual numbers. Porcello's extension was for 4/82.5 million. How much more than 82.5 million could he have expected to get on the free agent market, is the question. I can't imagine it was a huge amount. I think this might be a valid example, but that the differences involved were not very large.
-
All this stuff is open for debate and there are no simple answers, because every strategy entails its own risks. In 2013, Ben did that mid level free agents thing, right? And it worked brilliantly, for one year. Victorino is a classic example. 3 years/39 million. He was fantastic for one year and useless for two. Good signing or not? I don't complain about it because he helped us get a ring. But if we didn't get the ring it would look pretty bad.
-
The Red Sox are still paying Manny, I think. It's one of those things that usually only the accountants know about. Speaking of accountants, the lower AAV for the deferred money is of course based on present value discounting of future cash flows at an imputed interest rate.
-
I get the philosophy too. I'm just not sure it's possible to put that particular one into practice.
-
But in the history of free agency signings, are there any where it was reported that the player agreed to take a higher AAV for fewer years?
