moonslav59

I do think the tax paid matters to JH. Even when we go over the line, it's usually by just a little, and the tax is tiny.

We don't need to assume bad trades are necessary. We could trade Duran ($7.8M) and Crawford ($2.7M) for a $3-6M pitcher and save $5 to 7M. Dump Hicks and pay all but $3-5M and we're under the line. No bad trades. Done deal. I still think trading for KMarte's near $15M AAV makes more sense. He's a better batter, too.

I gave some examples. MY point is that if one year is what's holding things up, then cut back $10M from the deal but add an option year with a $15-20M buyout and the same AAV for that year. If it's not enough, well we tried sweetening the pot a little without committing that "extra year." Get creative. Give massive deferrals. Whatever.

Highly doubtful. I'm glad we brought some "CWS culture" onto our team with Crochet. Do you really believe this culture implication?

Houck ($4.1M) and Oviedo ($1.55M) agree to pre-arb contracts.

100%. I've also pointed out that JH has a history of recognizing when a window is opening wide AND we are a key player or two away from having a really good shot at a ring and spending more. Often times, it has not been a long stretch of spending more, and we've seen cut backs immediately after a ring season. I agree, the time is now. (I thought last year was, too, and if we didn't trade Devers, maybe we go much further.) Does Jh see what I see? I sure as hell don't know. I can just hope he does and repeats his pattern. Another 3 year run at mega-spending, like with DD would be nice, too, but I don't expect it.

They are certainly famous for fixing a value level and not going over it. They also do that for their own players reaching or nearing free agency. They've been right on a lot of those calls, but of course we remember Adrian Beltre and Derek Lowe more than Pedro & Ellsbury bolting.

I think Suarez may take 2 years. If he gets 3 years, he moves to 1B, when Contreras bolts. I'm not thrilled about Suarez, his high K rate and his defense, but his shorter term deal fits the plan B requirements for the budget and no large or long limits. Gray, Contreras and Donovan are better than what we have, so I could care less about having 3 guys from the Cards or any team..

I'm pretty certain on Peterson, too, and that's why I asked. The big downside is just the one year of control. Maybe we extend him. I'm not high on Vientos, at all, but he's better than DHam, Sogard & Eaton. He'll probably outhit Romy, too.

I think adding an option year with a hefty buyout is like insurance to Breggie.

I said "coulda" not that you did. I actually said you said "the opposite." NOT the same. You have always assumed there was a reasonable offer Bogy would have taken, earlier. We have no idea what he'd have agreed on as the minimum. I wouldn't be surprised if DD offered the most JH would allow. We were maybe lucky Bogey said yes. "Offered more" is vague and easy to say. You also argued we "should have" offered more the year before he bolted. I agreed, but we don't know what his agents were asking for, not what he'd have accepted. He bolted after 2022. Would you be happy, now had we offered (at the end of 2021) and he accepted an extension for $180M/6 that kicked in after 2022? (Note: he's had a 104 OPS+ since 2023.)

I think Suarez is the back-up plan. If it's Donovan, it better not be a big package.

The more money and years worked.

Your comment I responded to started with this: Never make your final offer first, as they say. To me, that was an all encompassing statement that did not (fully) apply to the Lester situation. I thought I'd bring it up.

I really like KC, a lot. I'm trying to avoid trading Duran, because I'm not sure we'll add the big bat infielder we need. That leaves DH for our 4th OF'er and NOT Campbell (or Yoshida/Casas/Romy.) Trading a top 4 OF'er makes the most sense, as I don't think KC's trade value is worth his upside value or predicted value, but I might trade him, now, for the right piece. We need 2 good pieces or one high quality piece.

I see the benefit of pulling the ball to maximize power, but I hope it's not at the expense of knowing when it's the right time to go oppo.

I agree that that was their position on a maximum offer. I don't think it was "competitive," but I think they viewed it as such. At some point, to get real good talent, you have to bite the bullet and overpay. More importantly, you have to correctly identify who that guy should be. When we signed Price, I could think of no surer bet that he seemed to be. They go burned. The Story and Yoshida signings were not "the guys" in anybody's view, failed as well. I can see why JH & Co. are gun shy. I get it, and maybe they just haven't seen the right guy come along. they seemed to be willing to go super large and long on Soto, but again fell significantly short of paying what it took to get him. As far as I know, we haven't come close to a similar FA offer, and I can't help but think, they money was "there" for Soto, so where did it go? (Or was that offer just for show?)

I'm not allowed to talk about other related topics?

The answer on being a top 5 revenue streaming team is an answer. You may not like it or think it's a valid reason, but it is an answer with merit. My issue is why people think this one specific owner of a business should forgo trying to maximize profits, when that is how the world works. Reality is being asked to be suspended, because we want a team that wins more. We deserve it more than others, because we pay more to watch the games than others. That rings hollow, to me, but I can understand the reasoning. It's the way of the world\, right now: me, me, ME!

I do not want Bichette to be "THE GUY" we break the mold on. He lacks the power we need. He's not that good on defense. We have to -once again- project how he'll be at 2B defense. While he's been amazingly consistent as a hitter, except for the bad half season in '24, he has not really had a great season at the plate. At 28, maybe he will. Maybe at 29 or 30. His age is his biggest plus, and to me, that's not a top priority selling point. Other than 2024, he's been between .800 and .840 since 2020. 121-129 OPS+ is nice but not mega large and long worthy, to me. I'd give him 2-3 more years than Bregman, but Breggie should really only get a 2-3 year deal. I'd give Breggie 4, if it's not too big, but I doubt he'd take it. I'd give Bichette 6 years, but no way would I give him the AAV othes will surely offer. If it takes $30M x 4 to get Breggie or $28M x 6 to get Bichette, I'd probably pass, but I guess it might depend on what Suarez gets or the cost of trading for a talented 3Bman (or 2Bman.). $25-26x 5 for Breggie? $26-27M x 7 for Bichette?

I'm not sure what problem we are trying to solve?

Even if they were 99.9% sure he'd never take a 3 year deal, it can't hurt to check-in. The whole "made a competitive offer" is highly subjective. Most of us would not call an offer we feel has no chance of being accepted "competitive," but that term keeps popping up. Perhaps it is media generated and sometimes not the official team statement, but it sure feels like they view their offers as being competitive.

Some context on the Lester events: Pedey had signed what almost everybody felt was a team discount deal. Lester had stated he was willing to take a hometown discount. While I agree that first offer was borderline offensive, the real issue was there was no timely follow-up offer I heard about. Their final off, IMO, was just meant to placate the fans. I think they knew he'd say no. That doesn't mean the offer was not close to being fair, but the whole process was not going to make Lester feel like he was wanted.

Coulda said the same about Bogey, but you said the opposite. Do you still wish we offered and Bogey accepted a 6 year offer?

Me, too, but I was pushing Kimmi's button. I could see a 4 year deal with an absurdly high buyout for year 5. Like $116M/4 with a $24M option and $14M buyout. Basically, $130M/4 or $140M/5