Kimmi
-
Posts
27,883 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
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 Kimmi
-
I understand that we have to fill in the gaps somehow, either through free agency or through trades. I also understand that we're likely not getting an impact guy on a 4-year deal. It doesn't mean that I have to like it. -
Not too long ago, I thought that any deal over 4 years was too long, especially for any player already in their 30s. These days, contracts have become so outrageous that a 4-year contract is almost considered a short-term deal. And there is seemingly no end in sight to the outrageousness. A 30-year old player is already considered past his prime. Not that he can't still have some very good years left, but you're paying for past performance. Extending your young players before they reach free agency is now the way to go.
-
That's the ticket right there.
-
Higher payroll correlates to more wins in the regular season. Thus more teams with higher payrolls make the postseason than teams with lower payrolls. Thus, more teams with higher payrolls win the WS than teams with lower payrolls. Beyond that, the playoffs are still largely a crapshoot. At any rate, I'm not looking for the Red Sox to have a payroll in the bottom 50% of teams. I really think they need to reinvest most, if not all, of the money saved from Devers' contract. Just don't sign a superstar to an insane contract. I am a strong believer that you start with a strong farm and a solid, home-grown core, then fill in the gaps through trades or free agency. Not the other way around.
-
If payroll is right around the luxury tax limit every year, going over now and then, they are spending enough on payroll, IMO. It wouldn't make me feel any better that the excess revenue is going make a player a $300M millionaire. And when that contract inevitably becomes an albatross, the team becomes strapped. I know it will never happen, but that excess revenue should be passed on to fans as lower ticket prices, or passed on to the everyday workers like clubhouse attendants and grounds crew as higher salaries.
-
Therein lies the dilemma. But it's certainly better than offering a 28 or 30 year old a 10 year contract based on past performance. IMO
-
OK
-
Sure, but you don't have to spend like LAD to be sustainable.
-
All other things being equal, I will root for the small market team. That said, I'm not condoning being cheapskates. There's a reasonable middle ground in there somewhere.
-
To build a sustainable contender or to win a WS.
-
There are also teams that spent boatloads this season and failed to make the playoffs. There are teams who didn't spend boatloads and did make the playoffs. AND, the playoffs are a crapshoot.
-
I understand the frustration, Drew. I really do. I just can't get on board with that kind of spending. I don't think it's necessary.
-
Just because they can doesn't mean they should. I'm not saying that Henry shouldn't spend. IMO, the Red Sox should spend around the luxury tax limit every year, with a willingness to go over the limit every once in a while. What I am saying they shouldn't do is hand out those 10 year monster contracts. There are better ways to spend money.
-
I prefer to go with a higher AAV and fewer years than the other way around, even though it costs you more against the luxury tax. Breslow needs to make good on repurposing some of the Devers money. Two players at $25M AAV for 3-4 years works for me. Whether that's doable or not is another question.
-
Good choice, IMO.
-
Once upon a time, the Yankees used to get every free agent that they wanted (except for Cliff Lee), because they would just outbid everyone like drunken sailors. I can't be the only one who remembers how much Red Sox fans hated that and criticized the Yankees for "buying" their championships. We all thought Yankees fans were spoiled and entitled. I hate to say it, but somewhere along the line we, the awesome Red Sox fans that we are, became spoiled and entitled. Henry is spending plenty of money.
-
Yes, I prefer the Rays team-building philosophy over just throwing the most money at every superstar player there is. If the team is winning, fans will come (except for Rays fans for some reason.) The Red Sox started winning mid season, and Red Sox fans were back at Fenway in full force. You can build a perennial contender without all those monster contracts. If it were up to me, I'd go almost all home grown, and fill in the holes with solid, 2nd tier players.
-
What a moment for him last night, bruised knee and all. That place exploded. You gotta love it, although had that been against the Red Sox, I wouldn't be loving it so much.
-
Last night's game was a really good game. I feel bad for the Mariners, but unfortunately, only one team can win. I just hope the Blue Jays go on to beat the Dodgers.
-
I don't disagree about adding a power bat, only because it's rather risky depending on guys like Anthony or Casas who have the potential, but aren't proven yet. I just disagree about having to go large, meaning contract-wise. What I'd really like to see is guys who can put the ball in play when it's called for.
-
We love those crazy Canadians!
-
You don't have to spend like the Dodgers to have a legitimate contender. I know I'm in the minority, but the Dodgers current spending, and the monster contracts given to superstar players really turns me off to the business side of baseball. I'm not saying the Red Sox should go cheap, but honestly, I prefer the Rays philosophy over the Dodgers. When Friedman first went to the Dodgers, I was a huge fan. Not so much anymore.
-
I'd like to see the Mariners get to the World Series, only because they've never been there, but I'm good with the Blue Jays winning too. I agree with you in thinking that the Jays have a better shot at beating the Dodgers. I'm excited for Game 7 tonight. I hope it's a close game. The series has been a good one, but the individual games really haven't been that close, except for Game 1. Go American League!
-
My point was not about who is the best pitcher out of the group, it's about not having to acquire the "Shiny New Toy" when the cost is going to be so prohibitive. I'm not against the Sox spending, either in dollars or in trade packages, but I think there are better approaches to building a very good team than always looking for that superstar.
-
I'm happy for you Harmony. Enjoy the game!
