Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

Hitch

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,020

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

 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 Hitch

  1. Hitch
    The offer might not come off the table, but the Sox might pivot to Bo as well, or just call it a day and go with Raf in 2nd, or a multitude of other directions. Bregman is converted. He will have suitors. I very much hope he has few and we get him cheap. I see little reason to think that likely though.
  2. Hitch
    Everyone you've mentioned there is his market, expect probably Jays. I imagine there's others, too. If he had no market he'd take the money.
  3. Hitch
    One year absolutely. I think businesses should do this occasionally. They do it with Liverpool every now and then. But with the length of contracts FA's are looking for, one year overspends are difficult if we're going up to the revenue level, in say, this year.
  4. Hitch
    Agreed on both counts. But that will fire up the 'they're cheap' shouts.
  5. Hitch
    It does feel more and more like this, yes.
  6. Hitch
    Okay, but let's not get tied up on the labeling. The point which I have to keep making is that they aren't going to want to put themselves in a position where making bad decisions puts them in the red. Breggie signs. Duran is traded. Bit short on the bullpen for my liking however. I would think there will be other trades yet mind, and also Breggie will be asked to defer some.
  7. Hitch
    I know right, almost like it's tied to the higher ticket pricing. Yeah, you missed the point.
  8. Hitch
    That's a problem for me. But depends on the player that takes us over it.
  9. Hitch
    I don't know if owners were still saying that in particular in '25, but I certainly don't begrudge a reaction after Covid devastated revenues across every industry outside of the pharma one. Totally agree with the second part. Completely on them. But as we've seen time and time again - they're not infallible or geniuses. So there's every chance they spend extra, get it wrong and then revenues dive again because the product is poor. Yet now we have record pay roll. It's absolutely sensible that they would give themselves buffers. And yet, I'll say it again for the zillionth time. They should definitely spend more than they currently are. I fully expect them to go up near $260. Higher, and you're into draft pick territory so it's on a case by case basis then, depending on who we would add.
  10. Hitch
    Well, I don't tend to leap into people's minds and discuss what they said at home in 2003 Bel. We're quite clearly talking about what is said in here. For Christ sake. Let's just let it lie. 3 days of watching people tie themselves up in knots on this subject is quite enough for me.
  11. Hitch
    It make sense to me that he hasn't. Whatever this offer is, he clearly has a market. You give the others a bit of time to beat it.
  12. Hitch
    They bitch about him A LOT. I'm not saying it isn't deserved, but he's also the easy target.
  13. Hitch
    I've been on this board since 2013 and lingered a lot longer before that. I don't recall any such conversations before 2024. And certainly not when they were $100m lower in the 2021 and 2022.
  14. Hitch
    I can't remember off the top of my head if that affects our draft picks. But I'd want us to spend below anything that does that. And of course multiple times over the LT's mean punishments on drafts and platers with QO attached to them too.
  15. Hitch
    FSG's wealth is tied up in all their sports and media properties - if they sold them they'd be worth billions. But when they're holding the, that wealth is obviously only in the abstract. It's not the Red Sox's 'related real estate'. The wealth belongs to all the media and sporting institutions. Yes, they have the revenue to go over the 2nd threshold but how far should they go? As I've mentioned several times over the past three days, two years out of the last three (pre 2024), they have had almost $100m less per year. So if they go up to their revenue markers and get it wrong (IE - spend unwisely) and the revenue drops again, what then?
  16. Hitch
    Yes, we'll most certainly have to disagree.
  17. Hitch
    Almost certainly not. But what did they waste in trying?
  18. Hitch
    I'd like to know how they are doing this - losing draft picks and being punished in drafts for their spending, yet still having great farm systems consistently. Whatever it is they are doing development/draft wise - I hope we're looking to emulate.
  19. Hitch
    They hate Kennedy. They blame a lot on him. And might be right. Did they believe it was real, though? The offer?
  20. Hitch
    Just felt like a weird segue. We were talking about Bregman and then all of a sudden you're replying to me as if we're having a conversation about Lester.
  21. Hitch
    I'd be absolutely fine with people expecting them to be around 4th/5th in spending if that's the parameters of the conversation (simply revenue streams), but we know only too well that every single conversation around this up until about a month or so ago was about Henry is a billionaire and that they're rolling in it. There is and was an expectation they should dip into their pockets. Yes, your second paragraph sums it up. I just find the hypocrisy and bullsh*t hard to stomach on times. But again, that said, now is the time they should be spending more.
  22. Hitch
    You must be kidding? That's all we hear around here is that Henry is a billionaire and should be spending more. The revenue thing is a relatively new angle. Before then it was ALL about Henry's wealth. But yes, revenue is one part that should dictate spend. They took $100m less in both 2021 and 2022 seasons than they did in 2024. So if they went up to their absolute cap and spent another $100m on long term contracts and then revenues dip again, what then? Expect the owners to cover it with their own money?
  23. Hitch
    Personally, I'd prefer Bo for 7 than I would Bregman for 5. But any higher on either would make me queasy.
  24. Hitch
    I think they would have been fairly happy if he'd accepted that 3 year deal. It's not too risky and worth seeing if he wanted to take it. But they clearly did not feel they should go further. Which again, fine by me.
  25. Hitch
    We were discussing Bregman. Nothing to do with Lester. With Lester they just flat out screwed it up.
×
×
  • Create New...