moonslav59

It's all averaged in on the AAV, but if the deal technically starts in 2024, I think the "signing bonus" cannot be given, now. I think it is being called an extension, so it starts, now. $30.1`M x 11 on the tax line. $17.5M + $20M signing bonus for 2023.

36 is not really that far beyond prime, and that will be his age, year 11. Most of his years will be before age 32. It's a great deal, on paper.

Where do we rank, now in 2023 salary?

Does the deal officially start in 2024 or will the lux tax hit go from $17.5M to $30.1M for 2023? I'm seeing conflicting reports. If it counts for 2023, we have about $10M left under line one, and it now makes sense why we didn't spend much more, earlier. $10M may still be enough to sign Andrus or trade for a contract, but we will likely keep something for the deadline.

A great point. They rolled the dice. Has Sale stayed sale for just 4 of the 5 years on the deal, it was a bargain for the team. Had we waited sand he pitched great in 2019, he'd have cost us a Price like deal, or more.

So much for "All my posts are perfect."

Jake essentially played 5 seasons in BOS. Betts 5 1/3. Devers 5 1/3 before his extension. BTW, I wasn't defending their choices, including the Sale extension- just pointing out that they seem to feel it worth extending acquired players more than their own.

Being any kind of plus as a value after a recent signing is actually a good thing on BTV.

I don't think they traded for Lowell, thinking they'd end up extending him. He was force fed to the Sox, like we did with Price to LA, but he did well, and we extended him for 3 years. When we traded for Porcello, they obviously liked him, and a 4 year extension confirmed that. My point was, it should not be surprising that players we acquire from other teams are guys we value highly and are likely extension material.

That's one plus for the Marlins to accept the offer. There is a chance Houck is better than Pablo over the next 2 years, alone. I'd bet on Lopez, but it is no slam dunk. I'd rather have 4 years of Luzardo, even if his upside is lower. BTV accepts: Dugo & Murphy for Luzardo, Garcia & Rojas. No Houck. No Rafaela. Would you trade Houck and Rafaela for Luzardo, Rojas and Bleier? (BTV accepted)

Oh, I didn't know we weren't counting 3 or 4 year extensions. "Give me a break?" is rather harsh. The Lowell and Beckett extensions were as long as Bogey's turned out to be. Papi and Porcello got 4 years- Papi's with a 5th year club option. The fact is, we seem to extend added players more often than our own big stars, even if not for as long as you think should count.

2 years of control really bothers me. I'd rather have 5 years of Houck and 6 for Rafaela. I'd trade Rafaela, Murphy (Dalbec?) and Dugo for Luzardo & Rojas.

I think they wanted Bogey at a lower price than he'd ever accept, and maybe part of the reason was they did not see him as our SS for much longer.

I guess it should not be surprising that big named players we trade for or acquired elsewhere are valued more highly: Papi: extended numerous times Beckett: extended Lowell: extended AGon: extended Sale: extended Porcello: extended

It does look like not only a mistake, but a big one, but I still think time will tell. Some felt not locking Jake up for less than what the Yanks ended up paying him was a big mistake. Like I said, I'd have signed him to $180M/7 and would not have been upset had we gone a bit higher. If $170M/6 was acceptable to Bogey, I do view it as a mistake not to have gotten it done, but we won't know for sure until the time is up.

That was a narrative, but there were more narratives than just homegrowns. Had we signed Correa, instead of Devers, there would be little talk of "homegrown." There was a building narrative about JH going cheap or at least not willing to sign the best of the best and pay top market value for anyone- not just homegrown. A few were even saying JH's time was up. BTW, while the Sale, Nate and Bogey extensions were signed before DD left, all these contracts started after 2018: 2019 (Nate) & 2020 (Sale & XB.) Also, Vaz's contract started in 2019 with a 2022 option. The actually drop off in large and long contracts was just 2021 up to March 2022, when we signed Story. It was a false narrative all along, and if you look at JH's history of resetting and sometimes staying under the tax line for 2 and even 3 years, once, this was not out of the ordinary. It was the lack of no new signings since those DD extensions that raised a flag, but they were deceiving due to their kick-in dates.

I still wish he wore earplugs, last deadline.

It certainly make signing Devers large and long vs Bogey look like the right choice from day one. Of course, signing both looked like the top choice, and budget wise, it seems we could have done that, especially had we locked up Bogey a year or two ago, but maybe the plan all along was Devers over Bogey, and Bogey stays only if he accepts a lower deal than he'd ever agree to.

It certainly makes sense to ask if Yoshida can replace Bogey's bat, but we also have to think about how Bogey would have aged, and if the big RBI production drop was just some sort of fluke. Last 1204 PAs: 38 HRs, 111 XBHs and 152 RBI. 2018-2019 in 1278 PAs: 56 HRs, 156 XBHs and 220 RBI. Which Bogey would we see it 2023? I'm not trying to bad mouth him out the door. I sincerely wish we had kept him around. He certainly is not the question mark on offense than Yoshida is, but I think between Yoshida and Turner, these two can match or exceed the 2022 production from Bogey and JD. The big question is, can they match anything close to the 2018-2019 versions of those two, and that is probably more like what we may need them to do.

No doubt. I'd have done that. My highest suggested offer was not far from anyone else's. Hell, even Red suggested $168M/6. If Bogey would have taken that is anybody's guess. If the answer is no, then a lot of the talk, here is moot. If it's yes, then time will tell on the "mistake" aspect of that choice. (Now, I'd guess XB will easily earne $170M/6, but $280M/11...?) $160M/6 or even $170M/6 looks like a bargain, now, but I'm not sure the Sox would sign him to that, even now, given the massive Devers contract and Story still on the books.

The narrative went way beyond that, and calls for JH to go were starting. The fact is, he has always cycled spending and resets. True, they seem to be way more open to extending players they traded for (AGon, Sale, Porcello & Nate) than their own players (Pedey & Bogey,) but there was a building narrative that JH had gone cheap and that the talk of trying to stay competitive through the rebuild was all a lie.

I'm not so sure the thinking all along was they were never going to pay Devers and Bogey for 6+ years, each. This signing, to me, makes the Bogey bolt more understandable. They would have taken XB on a shorter, more team friendly deal, but never as large and or long as BorA$$ was looking for, and rightfully so. I wish we had kept Betts, XB and Devers and not Sale & Nate, but I'm not sure JH would ever have agreed to 3 mega large and long deals, at the same time.

Thanks... $331M/11 Devers (Extension) $217M/7 Price $160M/8 Manny $154M/7 AGon (Extension) $145M/5 Sale (Extension) $142M/7 Crawford $120M/6 Bogey (Extension- opted out after 3 yrs) $110M/5 JD $110M/8 Pedroia (Extension) $95M/5 Sandoval $90M/5 Yoshida (plus posting fee) $88M/5 HRam $83M/4 Porcello $83M/5 Lackey $73M/7 R Castillo $70M/5 JD Drew ($103M/6 Dice K counting posting fee) ($63M+ Yoan Moncada bonus + tax)

That's about what I expected, last winter, so to me, this is great news- maybe $2-4M more than a year ago. It could have been $30.1M x 11, but I'm not sure that $1M for 10 years matters much.

Of all the Sox free agents, Devers was "THE ONE" to bring back, especially if more than 2-3 years. He's the only one that should get better in 2023. We have a very solid line-up. Our D should be improved, despite some issues at corner OF. Our pen is vastly improved. The rotation is filled with questions and uncertainty, but we can't just focus on losing 69 starts, basically 2 FT SP'ers like Nate, Wacha and Hill, but also replacing the 34 starts from Wink, Crawford, Seabold and Davis. I'm optimistic that the increase from 20 GS'd to maybe 60 from Bello + Whitlock can be a big help in replacing about 40 of those 69 GS'd. Kluber can fill in the rest and help upgrade over those 34 starts by sketchy depth. We also have Mata and Walter to add to the mix. Counting on more than 2 GS from Sale + Paxton might be the biggest area of concern, but we almost replaced all the missing GS'd before we even reach these two + Mata/Walter/Murphy and the returning Wink/Craw/Seab. I'm not all that optimistic about the rotation, but there is some reason to think it might not be as bad as many seem to think it will/should be.