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
-
This is the one thing we'll never know, unless Mookie fesses up about it one day, but I think there's a very good chance this is true. And I think he settled for a chunk less than he was hoping to get in free agency.
-
I enjoy the back-and-forth jibber-jabber here, myself. A lot of it is just pointless, and a lot of it is redundant as heck. It's just banter, really.
-
So we could have kept Mookie and re-set the tax. But that still wouldn't have guaranteed signing him as a free agent, so what would be the point of not trading him and getting something for him?
-
Cot's has our non-prorated 2020 payroll for tax purposes at about 198.5, or 9.5 below the threshold. If you reverse the Dodgers trade Add back Mookie 27 Add back Price 15 Total 42 That would put us over by 32.5 Subtract JBJ 11 Subtract Perez 6 Total 17 Still over by 15.5
-
I agree with you. But there was a narrative that one of the big reasons they traded Mookie was to re-set the tax. (See the first post in this thread.) Another part of that narrative that you may recall was the idea that after we re-set the tax, we would be in a better position to sign Mookie as a free agent.
-
As harmony might say, there is a wide range of possible outcomes.
-
Here's one way to look at it. Spilt the 12 year deal in two: First half covers Mookie from age 28.5 to age 34. Second half covers from age 34.5 to age 40. The first half should be very good to great. It's that second half that's scary. It's 6 years of well past prime years still on the books at $30 million per year.
-
It's all about the narrative that "we had to trade Mookie in 2020 to re-set the tax rate". We didn't go over in 2018 and 2019 just because of DD's spending. We went over because of Ben's spending too - especially in 2018 - with about $55 million of dead money still on the books. And we went over because Henry authorized it - he wanted to go for broke, so to speak. If you want to assign blame for the tax situation, there's no way you can leave out Ben or JH.
-
The ones who said they wouldn’t care if it was a 20 yr rebuild were lying their asses off, of course.
-
Henry didn't just sign the checks - as notin says, he set the spending budget.
-
You left out Pablo for 2019 - that was his final year.
-
In 2018 the tax threshold was 197 million and the Red Sox payroll was 240 million, so they were over by 43 million. Biggest contracts: From DD Price 31 JDM 22 Kimbrel 13 Sale 12.5 Total 78.5 From Ben Hanley 22 Porcello 20.625 Pablo 19 Pedey 13.75 Total 75.375 Considering that Porcello was the only one of Ben's to contribute in 2018, you can easily make a case that Ben was more responsible for exceeding the threshold that year. If we didn't go over in 2018, the whole tax scenario would have changed.
-
2018 was the first year of exceeding the tax threshold, so that's the first year that matters.
-
If you really buy into the theory that it was the tax concerns that prevented the Red Sox from keeping Mookie, then you have to blame Cherington too. Because a big chunk of the money on the payroll in 2018 and 2019 was carried over from Ben, and a big chunk of that chunk was dead money.
-
No other choice than what? The only reports we've ever had, and they're not confirmed, of course, are that the Red Sox offered either 300 or 310, and Mookie came back with 420. But the fact is that none of us know if there were any other negotiations that may have led Henry and Werner to conclude that it just wasn't happening. And I think it was you who floated the idea that after negotiations with Mookie stalled, they pivoted to the extensions with Sale and Bogaerts.
-
Thanks, harmony.
-
Blaming it on Henry or blaming it on DD are probably both wrong. I think what happened is that Mookie played hardball from Day One and gave every reason to think he was heading all the way to an epic Free Agency. Which put the team in the position of either trading him or getting one last meaningless season for nothing.
-
I don't necessarily disagree with you. The real question is the methodology they're using to value some of these players with little or no MLB numbers to base on. How much weight gets placed on what? With Houck, you would think his speculative value would have taken a leap.
-
Ha ha! Henry has brought us 4 WS, and we've always had the highest or 2nd-4th highest payrolls. Of course he can be and is questioned. But if choosing to support someone who has done the above makes you a boot-licker, I'm guilty as charged.
-
But notin said he does everything but make contact.
-
And some pretty good trades, too.
-
Perhaps the answer is that he eked out a fWAR of 0.1 in 15 games. When you consider that 1 fWAR is equal to $7-8 million in free agent dollars, I guess it makes sense. I think there is a bit of an issue doing valuations based on such small samples, though.
-
Why exactly is Chavis way over rated?
-
We talk about these guys almost like they're sub-humans or something LOL
-
No, harmony likes to respond with the Jamie Moyer trade.
