sk7326
-
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
-
Law's deep dive comes next week ... he's already pointed out that the Red Sox farm was beset by injuries last year, and of course like many teams (say the Cubs) they used a lot of their blocked depth to build a WS winner. He likes the last few drafts and the work on the international front. When most of your talent is towards single-A your ranking will be low, but with a large range of outcomes.
-
Vazquez is their most likely scenario for getting good defensive catching with a non-embarrassing level of offensive production.
-
I doubt that matter much. The money is a non-issue, but the chance to play is not. There are places I imagine with more vacancies and in more advantageous places (like Pomeranz going to a pitcher friendly place like SF).
-
The Cubs did - and it makes sense, since you are sending guys who were blocked to help the major league team. I mean Michael Kopech did not throw a pitch for the Red Sox - but there is a strong argument he helped the Red Sox as much as he would have had we kept him. (and I am ignoring his UCL injury, which nobody is reponsible for) That is DEFINITELY true with Moncada. Certainly they provided more value than just collecting fleas for less than minimum wage on the farm.
-
I tend to think it is more cyclical - based on where a team is in that cycle. That and economic realities - the teams that can afford to add salary will do so.
-
You look at MLB's team rankings (which weights prospect quality) The ten playoff teams rank: Cubs (29), Red Sox (28), Yankees (24), Brewers (23), Guardians (19), Rockies (18), Dodgers (11), A's (9), Astros (5), Braves (2) So 6 teams in the bottom half of prospect rankings, 4 in the top half. So the correlation of this year's prospect rankings aren't that useful.
-
2018 ESPN Prospects Stuff (Sox Related)
sk7326 replied to sk7326's topic in Red Sox Minor League Talk
FIRST ENTRY IN ESPN'S STUFF: Keith Law on 15 guys who just missed the Top 100 http://insider.espn.com/mlb/insider/story/_/id/25833101/just-missed-top-100 -
I couldn't care less about the cliff. This team is set to be very good by having a lot of young core talent. The ownership can clearly afford to make clear eyed decisions on them. If they suddenly turn into the Oakland A's, they will deserve all the derision they get. Now I don't think that will happen.
-
Those were teams that thought they'd be competitive - they were trying. People make mistakes - that is different than not trying.
-
I don't know. We'll see. Henry has tried pretty hard to put a winner out there. I don't see a ton of reasons that it won't continue to some degree or another.
-
It will help to the degree that currently the conditions which infect Machado/Harper will still infect Betts, who'll be two years older when he hits UFA status. If a dozen teams are not falling over themselves to sign 26 year old superstars, I don't know what to tell you. It's a deeply flawed system. Bradley I worry about less - I can see the Red Sox not getting into a bidding war there.
-
Owner happy owners are not spending money - stop the presses! Werner was a notorious cheapskate in San Diego - this is not revelatory.
-
It is up after 2021 ... the next CBA will make it easier to spend money because the current condition does not work for the players or the media partners frankly. Even if that means a significant increase in the minimum salaries. (which is quite overdue anyway) Again - any system where a 26 year old superstar is not having a dozen team falling over themselves to sign him is one that needs fixing.
-
Given the current issues with the CBA - I have serious doubts of the cliff condition every happening.
-
No team which has had the amazing fertility of our system the last few years has that sort of talent at the ready all the time ... it would be inefficient for everybody involved
-
That is fair. Really the question is whether Vazquez can get to something closer to his 2017 level. At least watching the postseason, he was putting together good at-bats, even if he did not always get good mileage from them. Swihart is still the ceiling guy of the three but at this point it might have to be better explored by some other team.
-
Actually ... from Keith Law's chat ...
-
A 1.353 WHIP is ... not good. That said, I would have had no problem signing him to a prove-it deal. San Francisco gives him a better chance to prove it though - it's a pretty forgiving place for a fly ball pitcher. The chance for a rotation spot was higher in SF too, which matters. If the Sox gave him the same deal but with some real questions about whether he'd crack the rotation, what can you do.
-
The Sox - if the Forbes numbers are a worthwhile indicator - are over 50%. The Yankees are at around 29%. These are choices. How the league can get to a leaguewide 50% will be the interesting thing - without more revenue sharing it will be hard. If you used a traditional salary cap, a floor number would still be about $140M which some teams would have trouble sustaining.
-
The Mariners had zero before the Paxton and Diaz sell-offs
-
Probably not. The only thing I think is certain is the Padres at #1.
-
I don't think he means (I hope!) hide from the IRS. But perhaps he means hiding profit from the Red Sox in some other part of Fenway's portfolio. (like Liverpool FC or whatever other entities the hold company owns) Now, in terms of the relevant point (getting more money to players and avoiding a strike in 2021), like the NBA or NFL, the players and teams have to come up with an auditable, mutually agreed on definition of "revenue" for determining what should be spent on major league players. I agree with skepticism of, say, Forbes' evaluation of team revenue, that it is possible that some of Steinbrenner's revenue from the Yankees might be reported on another one of his holdings. But that means that the players share might be even lower than the 44% I could calculate. Management needs to get ahead of this, because two more offseasons like this will not be good for player-owner relations (and thus, the probability of us watching people play major league baseball)0.
-
It varies but of course they do. They contract with their aramark/HMS/whomever (or local restaurants in some cases) to operate the facilities. Now, I am whether they pay said vendor a flat fee or get share profits is a case by case thing. But the teams definitely get revenue from the concessionaire.
-
Both Vazquez and Swihart will have some trade value, though the former has more as a single asset. Swihart has 2 years of control left and is a good change of scenery candidate. Vazquez is clearly at worst a low end starter, and in October showed evidence that he could be an above average one.
-
Yes - just pointing out that he (and Steinbrenner) are much further from the breakeven, let alone bankruptcy, level than they ever let on. These large market teams are very very profitable.