rjortiz

The $25 million AAV made me wonder what Lester's trade value would be. How many prospects would you offer for someone you'd control for only a year? What happens to the David Price trade market? They won't get an elite prospect for him. It also made me think of how valuable Bogaerts would be if he was offered for trade. Bradley Jr. has to be pretty valuable as well. Would he be worth more than Price? It sounds absurd, but if he's league average in CF in 2014, and improves to a 3 WAR player by 2016, that's a pretty useful piece to have making the minimum.

"You are the least indicated to say this," is not only grammatically wrong, but it's redundantly confusing. Indicated is a past tense verb, and since you said used "you are" it started in the present tense, so you shouldn't switch tenses. Also, to indicate is to point something out. To say means to communicate. Even in the proper tense your sentence would have meant, "You are the least to point out to communicate this." Makes zero sense. Use a different word than indicate. I know you are not a native speaker, so don't take this the wrong way. I'm an English major, so I love reconstructing sentences.

Sounds like he was trying to say, "You are the least inclined to say this," but I don't know what he was responding to make him say that. Was it about calling out SoxSport? If it was then that sentence still makes no sense.

Not many of his posts stand out in my mind, but I was interested what he had to say to my response to his claim that Drew at 1/9 was a bad signing. He just kept posting along the lines of "don't sign Drew," with minor alterations and of course no new points that addressed any of mine.

The only problem I have with him is that he doesn't defend his arguments from the responses of other people. He just repeats his original point. It's almost like he has the entire board on ignore.

That would be an interesting study. How many more hits does Jeter prevent compared to an actual statue?

He'll be my favorite player in 2014. Especially when he's hitting .210 with virtually no range at SS.

Red Sox had a RD record of 100-62. They led the AL in runs per game by a comfortable margin. They can experience a big regression, and still be projected to win at least 90 games. The rotation has no weakness, the bullpen is still going to be outstanding, and the offense should still be at least above average. I know you are projecting for all the young players to faceplant, but they all have good upside. I noticed you didn't bring up defense at all. The defense is projected to be above-average at every position except LF. They were good catching the ball last year, and that should carry over in 2014. They will see a little regression, but they are still the favorites in the East.

Post your projections for all four hitters.

I don't think Drew's bat plays as well at 3B, plus how he'd handle that switch is anyone's guess.

I love the arbitrary numbers getting tossed around. How do you even arrive at those odds?

You do realize that your new lineup would make our OF defense substantially worse? Bradley would have to be absolutely horrendous with the bat to justify that switch, and even at that level Gomes would probably have to be hitting .300/.400/.500.

You could ask the 2009 Yankees the same question. They added Burnett, Sabathia, Teixeira, Pettite, Marte, and traded for Swisher. I have no idea why people think this doesn't help win games. The Yankees have the ability to have a $200 million payroll. They have no young free agent players to lock up, so it makes perfect sense to spend the money and field a winning team. They had so many holes that all this spending won't make them a lock for the playoffs, but they are substantially better after this free agent binge. This doesn't mean that it comes at the expense of player development. The long-term solution for the Yankees is to have massive payrolls with plenty of young talent coming up the pipe. I should mention the last team with a spending binge who won the World Series. How about Victorino, Gomes, Drew, Napoli, Ross, Dempster, Uehara, and Hanrahan? That's about $67 million. Does that qualify?

That makes sense. The Red Sox luxury tax rate reset after last year, so they wouldn't be taxed very much at all.

Overpaying players limits how much damage they can do with their budget in future years. Paying top dollar for the decline years of Teixeira, Sabathia, and Jeter hurt their chances at re-signing Robinson Cano. Had they not been bailed out by MLB with the A-Rod suspension saga, they probably would have been unable to sign Tanaka. However, I think this only applies to blatant overpays by the Yankees. $15 million isn't $15 million to the Yankees. They can throw those out there like they are $10-$12 million range. I wonder what you sound like to a A's fan. I know they are spending a lot of money, but a $18 million difference in payroll isn't enough for you to whine about, and it certainly isn't enough to have them called the $panks. I'm going to start calling the Red Sox the Red $ux from the perspective of a Rays fan every time the Red Sox sign a free agent, or make a trade. After all, the difference between the $ux and the Rays is far greater than the difference between the $ux and the Yankees. Hate the Yankees all you want, but could you come up with something more clever than $panks? If you absolutely have to use it, could you limit to once every 100 posts? I haven't seen a post of yours where they weren't called a nickname a 12-year-old would be proud of. I'd probably be less bothered by the nickname if there were a bigger gap between payrolls. It's really hard to feel sorry for a team whose payroll is $180 million. 1 out of 5? I can think of Okajima, Uehera, Iwakuma, Nomo, and Darvish, and Okajima is a stretch. I wonder who made the flop list besides Igawa, Matsuzaka, and Irabu? I'm not doubting the validity of your claim, but if there's 5, or 4, if you don't count Okajima, we would still need 13 more pitchers to make the claim true. I can guarantee that there's going to be a lot of pitchers we've never heard of. This is why that 1 out of 5 claim is not a good argument. It assumes that Tanaka has an equal chance of success as all other Japanese pitchers. Most of them are probably not very good, so you have to assume that Tanaka has a higher chance of success compared to Koichi Taniguchi. Haha, not exactly the greatest source. That's a little disingenuous. He shouldn't be penalized because he's the last player to sign a contract. You could figure out what his real adjusted salary after the luxury tax if you wanted to do the math. There's so many things wrong with this post. You want to create a hole in RF, to fill some other mystery hole on the roster? Plus, you want to trade a top prospect with 6 years of team control left? Plus, you want to play Daniel Nava in RF full-time, who is supposedly not a hole in RF. The only way this would remotely make sense is if that Bradley was traded for Stanton, and you just forgot to write Stanton as our RF.

I've said that I think the rotation is good. Nova, Sabathia, Kuroda, and Tanaka is a good group of starters, and Phelps, or Pineda aren't awful options as the fifth starter. My point is that the track record of power pitchers in their mid 30's is pretty damning. The odds are against him to rebound to ace status. Looks like Sabathia's real trainer was Heisenberg. Must have been on meth to lose that much weight.

Why does he keep touting the 86 wins? It was actually 85 wins, and they allowed more runs then they scored. That's a better indicator of their talent level, which was around 79 wins. Also, who are these stars he's talking about? Jeter, Rodriguez, Teixeira, Granderson, and Nova? None of them are even close to all-stars. Teixeira and Jeter were complete negatives when they tried to play. Rodriguez and Granderson were somewhat useful, but they're gone. Nova is good, but he's not a star. I'll tell you who is a star. Robinson Cano. Where does he play now?

I can see Brendan Ryan, Chris Stewart, and Zollo Almonte (or whatever his name really is) as regulars in their lineup come June. Maybe Lyle Overbay will make a return appearance.

For $10 million, he'd probably provides enough value playing 108 games. If he were a 2 WAR player it would be a good signing, and he'd also be nice insurance in case WMB flops. I've been beating this dead horse for the last week, but it's a moot point. The Red Sox don't have the space under the luxury tax, and $10 million for one year won't get the deal done. I think even the people who want Drew back acknowledge this. They are simply arguing that if he's available that low, he'd be worth it, and it's hard to disagree with that. If WMB and Bogaerts are lighting it up, they can trade him for something of use. If WMB, or Bogaerts gets hurt, he's a great option to back up. If he has another monster year, the Sox can slap him the QO again. If he completely bombs next year, it's only a one year deal. There's no downside to this. The only wrong argument was from Dojji who wanted to give Drew 2/26, which would put the team over the tax, and could damage Bogaerts long term stay at SS. He was the one advocating that Drew should get 3/45, so take his arguments as you will. The only possible argument I can think of against this move is that maybe the Red Sox want enough room to make a big splash at the deadline. I can go along with that line of thinking.

I think even the Yankees have a limit, and I think they're over $200 million with Tanaka. I'm curious how much more money they have available. I'm not too worried about it, because they're aren't any options to be had. The only one I can think of is Stephen Drew, and he still wouldn't make them favorites in the East. The other alternative is to make some trades, but that won't happen. That farm system is atrocious. It's going to be hilarious when the 35 and ups on the roster show their age, and either Ellsbury or McCann goes down. They'll be fighting to stay out of the cellar. They spend a lot of money this offseason, but they've built one of the riskiest teams in MLB.

A good post has to achieve a basic level of understanding. I have no idea what fourth sentence even means. As for Lester rebounded, so Sabathia can too. That's extremely lazy. It looks like he just compared him to another left-handed starter. I could say, Barry Zito had a bad year and continued to decline, so Sabathia will too. It's the exact same argument in reverse, and exactly as lazy and fallacious. If I took his point seriously, I would point out that Lester was only 29, and despite the high ERA, it could be attributed to a spike in home runs allowed. His FIP and XFIP were better, so a rebound could have been expected. Looking at Sabathia, he will turn 34 this season, his fastball is well down from his peak years, and he's overweight. I expect him to pitch better this year, but I don't think it will be a huge turnaround. He probably won't see his pitches leave the yard as frequently, but that diminished fastball is going to get hit more often than it used to. I've always liked Sabathia, and I think he can survive with diminished stuff, but probably as third starter material.

Peralta didn't have compensation attached to him, and the numbers say that he's been a better fielder than Drew. Wildly inconsistent with the bat, but has had some good offensive seasons. He also took away the only landing spot that made any sense for Drew as a SS. Also, the Cardinals probably overpaid for Peralta. How many other teams would have gone that high for a PED user, and also needed a SS? Drew's value might be $13 million, but he'll only land that kind of AAV on a short-term deal. It's not his fault. He just is a free agency where only two teams might be interested, and one of those want him at 2B. If Toronto offers him 2/26, he should take it, because that's probably the best offer on the table. I should add that I think you were refuting the $7 million comment. I agree that that is way too low of an offer, but I don't think the Peralta comparison is fair. I do agree about playing time distribution, but I think it's a moot point, because the Red Sox don't have the money to make him a competitive offer. I think they only have $9.2 million under the luxury tax, which won't get it done. I think he goes to Toronto for about 2/24.

I had already assumed he was pitching for the Yankees, and still thought they were the third best team in the East.

Garbage and jealousy? Why would I be jealous? I have nothing against a team I play no part in. I've also never met Teixeira, or any Yankee for that matter, so I have nothing against them. The Yankees get the same reaction out of me as the Twins do. I even call out that idiot who calls them the $pankees. I didn't call a 2.7 WAR an average year. I called it a down year. I predicted that he could be average this year, although I think he's going to struggle recovering from injury, and getting a year older. Also, is he really an elite defender at 1B? After adjusting for his position, he's considered a below average fielder on fangraphs. Depends on how much of an upgrade you think Jeter will be. I don't think he's going to exceed a WAR of 1. I guess that would still represent an upgrade.

It wasn't going to be hard to upgrade that offense in 2013, but they upgraded from way below average to just below average. It's extremely prone to multiple decline years. Also, is it even possible for that lineup to make it through the season intact? What do you mean by solid? Average? They can be average if Jeter, Soriano, Beltran, and Teixeira all defy age related decline. There's a lot of risk with these guys. I doubt they can all do it. Even if they are solid with the bats, can any one of them catch a baseball? It looks like the strategy is to make the opposing team hit the ball to left-center field. 85 wins, but they outperformed their RD by 6 games, so they were lucky to have a winning record. The Yankees have definitely improved. I think they are in the mix for the Wild Card, and could win the division if everything breaks right. I just don't see them getting enough of them to do that.