moonslav59
-
Posts
104,763 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
130
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 moonslav59
-
I've been arguing 3 SP'ers added makes the most sense and creates a top 3 pen in MLB, but almost everyone disagreed. I'd like better quality than the 3 you listed, but your suggestion will likely be better than what I expect we end up with in 2 pitchers. Signing 3 might also allow us to trade Pivetta, Crawford, Houck, Whitlock or Winckowski for a really good 2Bman or in a package for a 2Bman and catcher or an even better pitcher. Would the Sox even consider: 90/5 Imanaga 63/3 Stroman 36/2 Giolito That's a total of $56M AAV, which puts us right at the first tax line. We could afford an upgrade at 2B and C and stay under the second line, or trade a pitcher for a 2Bman and try to stay under the line for a big splurge in 25.
-
Certainly, that makes sense, too. I guess what "blows my socks off" means is what matters. If Snell is saying $264M/8, you'd offer that? ($33M x 8) If Monty is saying $217M/7, you'd do it? ($31M x 7) They may get more than this by waiting. Maybe not.
-
Post of the week.
-
Monty and Snell might be telling teams, no matter what you offer, we are waiting until after Yamo.
-
I heard that, too. Maybe Imanaga, Belllinger and Chapman, instead.
-
So, 60% is "convincing?"
-
Is Stroman going to make way more than Giolito? We know most of these MLBTR projections will be significantly higher, but here are their comp values: 200/7 Snell (maybe he gets 250/8? 150/6 Monty (maybe he gets 200/7?) 85/5 Imanaga (maybe 100/5?) 44/2 Giolito 44/2 Stroman 26/2 Clevinger 22/2 Lorenzen & Manaea 15/1 Montas Signed already: 150/6 Nola for 172/7 (the AAV was close) 90/4 Gray for 75/3 (AAV was close) 42/3 Lugo for 45/3 (very close) 40/3 Flaherty for 14/1 (years were way off) 36/3 Wacha for 32/2 (higher AAV, 1 less year) 36/2 Maeda for 24/2 (overestimated his value) 82/4 ERod for 80/4 (almost exact) 20/2 Mahle for 22/2
-
If it comes down to Cohen thinking nobody will outbid me, I agree 100%. We are not sure he is thinking this. It seems like he will be or should be, but we don't know. Why didn't he outbid TEX for deGrom? He could have afforded Verlander, Scherzer and deGrom. Why is Ohtani a Dodger? Obviously, Cohen sets limits on how high he'll go. Obviously, if he truly views Yamo as "his guy," he will be his guy. I don't doubt that. What we don't know, is if he has some sort of calculation like this: "I like Yamo at $325M/10, but if it goes higher, I'll pivot to Monty and Snell, combined for about the same total money but a higher AAV, after all, I don't care about the Lux Tax. I think Snell plus Monty have more value and split the risk on two." How is this not a possible scenario?
-
He very well may do that. I just said, I'm not convinced. That's not some bold write off on Cohen. Others are meeting with him twice, too. If I had to bet, I'd say he'll sign with the Mets, but I am "not convinced." Would you bet on the Mets vs the rest of the teams combined? Would you say the Mets have a 51% chance? 66%? 75%? 90%? 99%? What percent do you view as "not being convinced?" Just off the top of my head, I might lay the odds at: 40% NYM 12.5% NYY 12.5% LAD 10% TOR 10% BOS 8% SFG 7% PHI In reality, there are probably only 2-3 teams still in it, as we speak, but we don't know who is 100% out. It's likely more like: 55% NYM 25% NYY 20% LAD or some sleeper like TOR, BOS, SFG or PHI... and not some split odds by 7 teams Tell me why this seems way off the mark.
-
Why do you see Giolito as better than Stroman?
-
We have yet to see, if he's willing to pay that every season. There is also the posting fee and draft and bonus pool penalties to consider.
-
Where did I even hint he's not serious? I just said I'm not convinced he will "blow everyone away." There is a difference. He could be 100% serious, but some other owner has okay'd going beyond absurd with an even higher 2nd or 3rd offer. There has to be a point where every owner says, "enough is enough, he's yours." Cohen could be dead serious, but still reach that point. (I seriously doubt JH is the guy to do this to Choen, but LAL or TOR might. Maybe PHI or SFG surprise Cohen.
-
I like the analogy. I would not bet on it. I would guess, no. I am hoping, yes.
-
Yes, correct. The less than expected results from the previous winter's splurge did not deter TEX. I do think there was a perception that Tex might not have a second mega splurge in a row, at this time, last year, and I thought we were talking about who was perceived to be in on big FA targets, last winter. We are now trying to see if the Mets will not be deterred by crappy 2023 results, and the fact that they dumped salary, last summer. I'm not convinced Cohen is looking to blow everyone away for Yamo, but signing a 25 year old ace fits the plans of any team looking to win it all in 2024, 2025, 2026 or later (or all.)
-
We understand the set definitions of the terms used. I'm just saying, it goes against intuition to look at my examples of picther A & B and say the guy who misses the mitt by a wide margin, almost every time has "better control" than I guy who misses the mitt by 1/2 inch almost every time, but always to the non K-zone side has "poor control." The word control has long-standing connotations to it from other uses of the word. I'm fine with using two terms to distinguish between two different areas of pitcher analyzation, but it just seems counterintuitive to me to say pitcher A had better control than pitcher B, because more of his way off the mitt pitches end up being stikes. I'm not trying to start an argument or lobby for a change in terms, but it's hard for me to think a guy who misses the mitt by as much as "A" does to say he has great control.
-
I did not say I agreed with him.
-
That is very concerning, especially if you factor in a healthy Duvall all year. I do think the numbers might be a bit deceiving, as a healthy Story would probably have been our #2 bWAR guy behind Devers. 4.6 Abreu (6.1 bWAR, but 85 PAs is way too small to pro-rate like this.) 4.3 Duran (4.0 bWAR pro-rated) 3.4 Duvall (3.0 bWAR) 3.1 Devers (3.5 bWAR) 2.7 Casas (2.5) 2.0 Verdugo (2.7) 1.8 Reyes (1.4) 1.2 Turner (2.2) 1.0 McGuire (-1.0) 0.9 EValdez (0.0) 0.8 Wong (3.6) 0.8 Story (3.2 bWAR projection) 0.7 Rafaela (0.7) 0.7 Yoshida (0.7) 0.5 Refsnyder (0.5) I know we should never count on 100% health, but here are the pro-rated fWARs of the 2023 Sox to 650 PAs: Projected: Yoshida replaces Turner at DH (some loss, unless Yoshi rebounds) More of Duran, Rafaela & Abreu plus O'Neill replace Duvall & Dugo(hard to project) Casas and Story should improve. Wong & McGuire might improve. 2B is TBD, but it should not be hard to improve.
-
I think he meant their first seasons w TEX.
-
Yes, I said Wikelman and Perales don't compare to Kopech or A Sanchez, so that's why I mentioned some of our young MLB pitchers as additions to the package, instead. BTW, Anibal Sanchez was ranked 3rd on soxprospects.com before the Beckett & Lowell trade. He was no thow-in, either. Mayer plus Crawford or Houck (plus maybe a 3rd decent prospect like Wikelman or Perales) might be somewhat comparable to HRam & Sanchez or Moncad & Kopech.
-
I'm saying what if this happens 90% of the time? Catchers rarely set the target right down the middle.
-
I guess if you come very close to the target set by your catcher, but always to the non K-zone side. You have "command," because you just barely miss the target, but poor control, because it's often outside the K zone.
-
Let's say the catcher puts his mitt right on the edge of the K zone, but close enough that the ump will call a strike 99% of the time, if you hit the mitt every time. Pitcher A misses the mitt by 1/2 inch, but to the K zone side. Pitcher B misses the mitt by 1/2 inch, but to the out of zone size. In theory, Pitcher A has great control and good to great command. Pitcher B has horrible control but good to great command, as he misses the mitt by the same amount as pitcher A. Is this correct? It just seems off to me, for some reason, although I get the definitions applied by people who analyze pitchers.
-
Bell's gonna love this hypothetical: Pitcher A aims for the middle of the plate, no matter where his catcher wants him to throw. He misses the target every time, but is off by just enough that almost all his pitches are near the edge of the K zone but are in the strike zone. (He's maybe 8-12+ inches off target every pitch.) We say he has great control but poor command, as he significantly misses the mitt almost every time. Pitcher B aims for the target set by the catcher's mitt and misses within an inch or two almost every time, but often to side that makes him miss the K zone. He misses the K zone more than pitchers A, and we say he has bad control, because of all the out-of-K zone pitches he throws, but he has good command, because he is almost always within an inch or two of the intended target. I get the distinction and connotations attached to each word, but it rubs me the wrong way to say pitcher A has better control of his pitches.
-
I said, I get it. I just think the word choice was wrong, but it's not worth trying to change it, now.
-
Slot: $364M Bonus: $600K Not much, but nearly double.
