Kimmi

I'm not being personally insulting. My post was a satirical comment on the absurdity of satirical comments on a baseball forum.

I don't think it's a mandate, just a preference. I think that Dombrowski is much more willing to both part with prospects and to hand out a big contract than Ben was. I think that Henry realized that the team will have to do one or the other this offseason to get a #1 starter, regardless of how much it is going to cost. From what I've been reading, it sounds like Dombrowski will be given the green light on one big free agent contract this offseason. I think the Sox has a deep enough farm that they could make a trade for a #1 and still leave the farm in good shape.

Bingo.

No one is suggesting that picking up Clay's option settles the team's pitching questions for next season, or even comes close. It's a start, and a very good one. If the team decides to keep Clay, he can be a very key piece in the rotation. The key in that case is to make sure there is a viable back up plan for Clay if/when he hits the DL. I believe the Sox have that back up plan in Owens. If the team decides to trade Clay, who knows what piece the Sox can get back to help the team next season or beyond? I understand everyone's frustration with Clay. I get frustrated with him as well. So much talent that seems to go unreached every year. But if you put aside personal frustration or dislike for Clay, it should be very easy to see that picking up his option was an easy decision to make.

As I said in my previous post to you, the suggestion is not that Clay should get $25 mil a year or that Price should get $50 mil a year. The suggestion is that based on the value the player provided to his team last season, a one year contract at $13 mil is a very good contract for Clay, and one that pretty much everyone thinks was a no brainer to pick up.

Supposedly, the players' union is strongly encouraging players to decline the qualifying offers. No one has accepted a QO to date. I think owners are on to this, and are therefore going to extend more and more QOs to "borderline" players. The number of QOs given this year is up to 20 or 25 (I can't recall), when it's been 12 or 13 the past 2 years. To me, it doesn't make any sense why the union would encourage these borderline players to not accept. It seems like all the benefit in those cases goes to the owners.

Why resort to an intelligent response that adds to the baseball discussion or refutes my point when you can take a cheap shot? Oh, because you don't have one.

Yes, Price was worth roughly $50 million to his team the past few years. That doesn't mean that teams are going to pay $50 mil a year for him in free agency, just like it doesn't mean teams are going to pay $25.3 mil a year for Clay. I am not in any way suggesting that a team would pay that much per year for either player. What it does mean is that a one year contract for Clay at $13 mil is a very good value and a very good risk to take. $25 mil a year is also a good risk to take for Price, just not for 9 years.

It all depends on what the costs end up being. If it's going to strip the farm to get a young stud for about 3 years, then hundreds of millions of dollars to try to extend that stud, signing the free agent for "just money" might be the preference for some teams.

I pretty much agree with what you're saying. I would hate to lose Swihart, but with Betts and Bogaerts being mostly untouchable, plus our potential depth at catcher if Vazquez is healthy and he doesn't embarrass himself with the bat, trading Vazqez makes the most sense. That said, here is the latest speculation from Gammons, which sounds like the Sox would rather not trade Swihart:

Most teams cannot afford to sign someone like Price or Greinke. Clay is a very good pitcher when he's healthy, and if he's healthy, $13 million is really a bargain. Other GMs know this. They also know the frustration that comes with Clay, but they know that his contract is worth the risk. As far as cutting those numbers in half, are you talking about how much he was worth? He was worth $25.3 mil in 2015, even though he only pitched half the time. No need to cut anything in half.

This is the importance of having depth, and another reason why picking up Clay's option is a no brainer. As I've said many times, you can't plan on Clay being the ace or on him giving the team a full season. This is what having someone like Owens in AAA is for.

There are owners who prefer signing big ticket free agents rather than trading away their prospects. They would rather give up "just money" rather than giving up propects plus money. I'm sure there are several owners who would rather have Price than Carrasco, for instance. Cafardo was simply stating what Henry's preference is. He did not say that the Sox would definitely go that route nor did he rule out the other route.

If he doesn't stay with the Jays, whom I'm hearing are cutting payroll, then the Cubs make the most sense to me.

When Henry says his preference is to get a young pitcher via trade, he is not implying that he expects to get something for little or nothing. He knows that it will cost him one way or another. I don't think it was a command given to Dombrowski either, only a statement of his preference. The Sox farm system is deep enough right now that the Sox can afford to given up prospects, some of whom are "blocked" anyway, without hurting the long term outlook of the farm. They can probably afford the prospects more than they can afford the rich contract at the moment. I am all about developing the farm and hoarding those prospects, but this is a time where I think the Sox would be better off making a trade rather than handing out a big contract to a free agent.

Has Henry not stated that he prefers young, cost-controlled pitchers? That is not just Cafardo's opinion, that is something that Henry has said. Cafardo is not saying that Henry ruled out signing Price to a big contract or that the Sox would definitely be getting a #1 via trade. All he stated was what Henry's preference is, which Henry has made publicly known.

That could be the case. If the difference in cost is that significant, I suppose the Sox might sign Cueto. Price's projected deal is almost twice Cueto's projected deal, both in dollars and years. It certainly gives reason to pause.

I guess that depends on one's definition of mediocre. I don't think either of those seasons were mediocre, by any means. As I just posted above, look at how much he was worth in those two seasons based on his WAR.

Clay's value, per Fangraphs, the last 3 years has been $20.8 mil, $11.1 mil, and $25.3 mil. A half season of excellent is worth well more than $13 mil, and a full season of mediocre is worth almost that. It has been reported that several teams are already inquiring about Clay. They know how good a value his contract can be, and they know that he is well worth the risk of $13 million.

First off, when I talk about catcher defense, the most important component to me is how well the catcher handles the pitching staff, including game management and pitch framing. Blocking pitches in the dirt would be next. Caught stealing % is the area of a catcher's defense that I'm probably the least worried about. It is not worth as much in runs saved defensively as the ability to handle the staff. So yes, I think it's quite possible that a catcher could be 26, 27, or 28 years old before he has it all together defensively. Maybe his caught stealing won't improve a great deal, but his game management could and should. Secondly, the scouting reports I've read have been favorable in terms of Swihart's defense. He is not supposed to be as good as Vazquez is, but he is supposed to be good enough defensively that when you combine that with his offense, he is supposed to be the better overall catcher between the two. He should be above average to good with some more development, not a defensive liability. Thirdly, the guy is 23 and was forced into a situation well before he was ready. Seriously, are you going to write him off defensively based on such a small sample under less than ideal conditions? Please.

I can see the Sox signing O'Day, but I am not sensing a large interest in Cueto. As you said, too much of an injury risk for the amount of money and years he will cost. I also can't see the Sox giving up their draft pick plus tons of money for Greinke. To me, it sounds like either Price or a trade.

I found the article where I read that. It was Carfardo, and here is the pertinent quote: Here is the link if you want to read the article: https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/11/06/red-sox-look-for-ace-deck-isn-exactly-stacked/r5iIp53scugSPxAGboDEtO/story.html I don't know what Cafardo is basing his statement on, but I'm guessing he's basing it on the fact that Henry is on record stating many times that his preference is for young, cost-controlled pitchers versus handing out large contracts to pitchers in their 30s. Like I said before, it's no secret as to what Henry prefers.

Here's a summary of Sox roster moves:

Exactly Thank you for making the point that I was trying to make, and being able to do it so succinctly.

Fair enough. My "mediocre at worst" was in reaction to your "mediocre at best" statement. Recent history also shows that he can be much better than mediocre. He is a wild card, but IMO, he is very much worth the risk of $13 mil.