Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

sk7326

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    7,647

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 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 sk7326

  1. sk7326
    I think the innings eater could be his floor. If you think you can get him for 2/24 or something, there is probably more upside with him than other pitchers in that end of the pool. You can argue about whether we should be shopping in that end, but that is a different deal.
  2. sk7326
    Yes. Though I'd expect the winning offer for him to have an opt-out after 5 or 6 years.
  3. sk7326
    I am skeptical as well, but hope to be wrong. I don't know if this management is willing to sign these uber-long deals to manipulate AAV calculations. That said, they did do it for Devers - but I don't think they had "manipulate AAV" in mind.
  4. sk7326
    7/172 is a good number ... I think the way to look at these deals now is to look at AAV for n-2 years. We know the length of the deals is as much to mitigate luxury tax concerns as anything.
  5. sk7326
    People are buying high on him - that is very true. Friends don't let friends cite pitcher wins though.
  6. sk7326
    I was soured a little - though some of the thing with Bogaerts was self inflicted by Boston.
  7. sk7326
    You have to bet on scouting of course. But is it possible/likely that you can get ~20 WAR or so out of him over the first 5 years of the deal? Sure. Then it's not a lemon - but more "fine".
  8. sk7326
    Oh there is risk ... but again, 25 year old premium FAs just don't get to the market. I'd also argue the opt out is not terrible for Boston If Yamamoto is a star, Boston will have to pay sticker price, but they still get the excess value of 5 years If Yamamoto is solid, not spectacular - it would likely justify the AAV for the early term and Boston can let someone else pay the sticker price If Yamamoto is awful, you're effed - but the opt out has nothing to do with that
  9. sk7326
    I'd rather see if you can get a decent prove-it with Amed Rosario or Tim Anderson.
  10. sk7326
    I kind of expect some deal like 9/270 with an optout after year 5 or 6. If Yamamoto is good, he will want at least one other huge payday.
  11. sk7326
    They should have passed on Yoshida, signed Duval to play LF and then did the SS thing you advise.
  12. sk7326
    2023 was a broken hand, 2021 was a torn calf muscle. Last year was back problems. I'd say the back is the most problematic.
  13. sk7326
    The rumors of him going to Philadelphia make sense - Trout is a flags fly forever move, and the Sox just are not there. The Red Sox roster right now also doesn't have the flexibility that you'd like to be able to get Trout his 500+ PAs ... and let's be clear, Trout is still a 5 win player if you could get that many PAs but that has been a struggle. Honestly, Trout would be a buy low move worth trying if the team did not have Yoshida on the roster.
  14. sk7326
    I do think there is a both/and aspect to this. The league is falling over themselves for a 25 year old free agent, which is just something that doesn't happen. But yeah the Red Sox need to explore all avenues. They have to end up with at least 2 reliable starters from this.
  15. sk7326
    All of the ideas for SS were bad - and let's face it if Kike hit, they could have held their noses some. But Kike turning back into a pumpkin after 2021 offensively combined with THAT defense was ho-ho-horrendous.
  16. sk7326
    Bloom was sacrificed due to public displeasure. That's really been the common thread with Henry's actions with the baseball operation. If people watch less NESN then somebody has to get fired. The biggest reason Bloom is not here to see his work through is that fans didn't like him. (and some of that was self inflicted)
  17. sk7326
    Entering 2016 (which is the benchmark here) There was no Benintendi yet Hanley Ramirez was one of the worst regulars in the league the year before Bradley was promising Rotation was interesting. But the team was coming off of two losing seasons, so the burden of proof was higher. 2013 - at least for me was a case of a bunch of good players who had been good - just needing to get healthy or return to form. Lester had a bad 2012 but there was reason to believe it was an outlier ... and it was. John Lackey was coming off of TJS, so there was risk - but there was a good pitcher there. Buchholz ditto. Dempster I expected Pivetta-esque performance. For me, I looked at the 2011 team - and the major reason for the collapse was injuries. 2012 collapsed because of injuries - the bad vibes was a bonus. If the group could only stay healthy, they were going to be pretty good.
  18. sk7326
    2016 because I trusted the good players less. That said ALL of them (and I'll include 2002 who was a good team too) were teams that looked pretty solid on paper. The 2023 team was betting on the third wild card position for any sort of positivity.
  19. sk7326
    Firing vs resigning is really a matter of corporatespeak now - it's always reported as parting ways. Ultimately Epstein was the only guy (and I'm not even sure there) whose departure ownership was not okay with happening.
  20. sk7326
    Epstein also sort of left in 2006.
  21. sk7326
    I will disagree about 2013. Going from Bobby V to a functional human being as manger combined with simply our good players staying healthy I thought put the roster at least on the Wild Card map ... the free agents we brought in all worked out, but you look at the caliber of returning players on the 2013 team compared to 2021 and it's not trivial. Injuries and unexpected performance are common reasons for things to happen or not happen - but we all know that. All a GM can do is put out a product where the median outcomes set the team up for success. Now, what is funny is that I am optimistic about the future - particularly with the young position players in the system and the future roster. What Bloom did might very well bear fruit. But the team - the bleeping Boston Red Sox - did not have to wander through a hopeless malaise either in the interim. We don't have to imagine the world where the Red Sox could turn over positions on the fly - it happened between 2004 and 2007.
  22. sk7326
    I think the trade in division hesitation is purely PR ... but it does seem to cause problems.
  23. sk7326
    Well, first - it's baseball. Your superpowers to build a champion are inherently limited. But every single season between 2002 and, honestly 2019 - the Red Sox entered the season with at least a semi-realistic contender (a realistic path to 90 wins) on its hands ... you know "if we are healthy and a couple of breaks go our way". 2021 came out of nowhere and the seasons since were the first seasons under Henry's ownership where the team did not have a plausible road to a 90 win season.
  24. sk7326
    Oh neither am I. But when you get vibes based commentary and pooh poohing of analytics like some of the carnival barkers like that, you're just not following your industry.
  25. sk7326
    We are almost certainly more educated about the industry than Felger and Mazz are.
×
×
  • Create New...