Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

moonslav59

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    104,974

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    131

 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

  1. moonslav59
    Maybe- maybe not. Teams that have sold in the past have tended to not spend big beforehand or trade away big salary commitments. At least that's how I see it. Maybe, I'm wrong.
  2. moonslav59
    I think one of them was Ole Red.
  3. moonslav59
    He doesn't do well with context or clarifications.
  4. moonslav59
    Split the difference and sign on the dotted lines.
  5. moonslav59
    I think we will spend more, and may leave a buffer for deadline deals, if needed. A Devers extension that begins in 2023, which might be a good idea, if if lessens the yearly tax line hits after 2023, could put us close to the tax line, by itself. (Maybe adding $12-16M more than his arb of $17.5M.) We should have enough for Devers and Andrus, or just start the Devers deal in 2024.
  6. moonslav59
    None- either way.
  7. moonslav59
    1. It was 10 m9onths ago. 2. If he was thinking of selling the team, he might have begun planning on it 10 months ago or longer. (Maybe not.) Nowhere did I say signing Story means he will not sell. Nice strawman, again.
  8. moonslav59
    Nor Story to 6 years, less than 10 months ago.
  9. moonslav59
    The Sox may not be done spending. A Devers extension would likely put them neat top 6, if it starts in 2023. A trade for a big salary could happen. 13th is something new and concerning, if new stay there. The amount of teams going nutty with spending has grown. That may be more of the reason we may drop in the spending rankings than us spending significantly less. We kinds figured we would reset, but most felt we'd spend up close to the line, without going over.
  10. moonslav59
    Sounds like "Fire Bloom Part II."
  11. moonslav59
    Workman was pretty good before he was traded,
  12. moonslav59
    I have Crawford slightly ahead or Wink, who is ahead of Seabold. Where Mata and Walter fit in may depend on how well they do in ST'ing and AAA to start the season.
  13. moonslav59
    Even if we sign Andrus or trade for someone like Rojas, I think Arroyo is on the opening day 26. I also think he has some trade value, although not much. He won't get DFA'd, IMO.
  14. moonslav59
    I told you: I know nothing about the "hitter friendly" parks in the minors. You were the one that brought it up, and it turned out he hit way more homers on the road. The sample size, after the trade, was rather small, and he only had 38 games in AAA before the trade. Maybe the numbers at WOO are meaningful and telling. Maybe, not. I tend to think a players larger sample sizes are more meaningful, but certainly any way to project is speculation. The guy can hit. Can he hit MLB pitching? Nobody knows, but continue with your pessimism, if you choose.
  15. moonslav59
    Agreed. Rafaela, maybe, but they want ML ready guys, and he may be a year away.
  16. moonslav59
    Indeed but why trade for a 2B/3Bman, unless we are moving Devers or want to move/DFA Arroyo? Trade for MRojas not Wendle. Sign Andrus not a 2Bman.
  17. moonslav59
    Indeed, and if you miss on a few, the misses will never be like Sale, HRam, Pablito, Crawford...
  18. moonslav59
    What's all the fuss about Wendle? We need a SS.
  19. moonslav59
    I doubt MIA would take this deal, but I do think it would make sense to both teams: To MIA: Dugo, Duran, Murphy and Dalbec To BOS: AGarcia, Luzardo & M Rojas
  20. moonslav59
    1. Georgia 2. TCU 3. Mich 4. Alabama 5. Ohio St 6. Tennessee 7. Florida St. 8. Washington 9. Oregon 10. Tulane 11. USC 12. Notre Dame 13. Utah 13. Ore St 14. LSU 15. Clemson
  21. moonslav59
    You are all but willing a Sox-MIA trade involving a SP'er to happen.
  22. moonslav59
    Apparently, Sox scouts have longed for Yoshida for years, and the timing matched up better with JD's departure than Schwarber's timing did, but your point is well-taken. Who do we not sign, if we added Schwarber? Wacha, Hill and Strahm don't even equal his AAV. With Bogey going, the Story signing makes more sense than Schwarber.
  23. moonslav59
    They do seem to have a way of placing value that differs from other teams. If the Yoshida reports are true, it proves their formula is not short-changing everyone, and they did offer more for Turner, Jansen, Martin and Kluber than other GMs. They've always seemed a bit tough on their own stars as they reach prime.
  24. moonslav59
    I have no idea. Niko's sample size in POR, this year was rather small, but I do share your concerns. BTW, he still had a .366 OBP in POR. It was his slugging that took the deeper dip. The K rate rise is surely an issue.
  25. moonslav59
    Still, nothing longer than 5 years, and only one deal longer than 2. Since the Price signing, nothing has been longer than ... 6 Story 5 Sale, Yoshida, JD 4 Nate, Porcello, Whitlock 3 Bogey (opt out), Vaz Am I missing anyone?
×
×
  • Create New...