moonslav59
-
Posts
103,577 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
128
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
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by moonslav59
-
You'd rather have Devers at $300M/10 than $300M/12? He'd be 37 or 38 for his 12th year. He could still be good, then, and we'd save $5M a year on the tax budget for 10 years.
-
It's what I'd give them for 10 years, so giving 12 or 14 just lowers the AAV for tax purposes, and who knows, maybe they'll still be productive in years 11-12 or 11-14.
-
That's a big chunk of the winter spending budget on someone we need to improve on 2022 while in his post-prime years. I really like Nate, and will be eternally grateful for what he did in 2018, but sometimes, it's just time to cut ties.
-
The problem is with Nate's health. He's never been a horse. He's getting older. He scares the hell out of me, even at a 1 year QO.
-
You want us to sign Bogey and Devers, right? What is the most you'd offer for each? If they end up getting more, elsewhere, will you blame Bloom for not signing them? If we could trade Devers for players like Dugo and Wong, would you do it?
-
You won't name the closer. Is that it? We stay the same at SS and 3B, improve at Closer and still have a huge hole in RF, the rotation and pen depth, but thanks for being vaguely specific.
-
Agreed, and that's one reason I'd go up to $300M/12 for Devers.
-
Unless we get a good SS, that team is not much better than 2022. Gallo> JBJ & Co. 2 RP"ers > Strahm No replacements for Wacha and Hill.
-
My point was signing Correa might get more people to pay for NESN and tickets. Of course, we'd have to win more to keep the anxious fans happy for 2023.
-
No doubt. This market is not all that great. I could see us making 2 impact moves, this winter, that set us up to do better in 2023 but also beyond. Maybe, sign Devers and Correa, and then go shorter term everywhere else, reset and go big in 2024. Getting Correa might make the anxious fans happy enough to wait it out for 2024. Would they be happier signing Correa over just bringing Bogey and Devers back and trotting out, basically the same team in 2023? So, maybe extend Devers, sign Correa and shorter term guys like Gallo or Conforto, Nate and 3 decent RP'er. Not sure that placates the anxious fans.
-
That being said, most of us see only 4-6 high need slots to fill, which is way less than we've been looking at, the last few winters. At most, I see 4-5 high need areas and 3-4 moderate need areas. In past winters we had more like 17-20 before 2020, 12-15 for 2021 and 10-12 last winter. With way more money to spend, in theory, and less major slots to fill, I'm optimistic we can improve, while still keeping our sites on the longer term outlook. We have a lot of promising prospects coming up real soon and in 1.5-3 seasons, too.
-
Well, $300M/12 is $25M a year. It's much longer than Nimmo's suggested $22M x 5, and the ages would be Nimmo 30-34/ Devers 27-38, if the deal started in 2023. If Prime is 27-30, we'd get 4 years of prime with Devers vs 1 for Nimmo. Of course, the downside would likely be 4 years of post prime from Nimmo v 8 for Devers. The AAV difference would be just $3M more for Devers for 5 years, then $25M for the last 7 years. We might get Devers for less, but I just used that as an example.
-
To quote Ole Red, "Where did I ever say _____?"
-
Indeed, and unless you think 2023 is "the window," what I think is best for the team, and maybe not the short-term view fans, would be to trade him, if an only if, we are pretty certain we can't extend him.
-
He does have to keep the masses happy, to some extent, of he loses a boatload of money. Maybe more money than it would take to sign Devers.
-
My question was what posters here thought was worst. I think the restless Sox fans would not be happy with trading Devers or letting him walk, and since the trading one comes first, I guess the here and now only fans dislike that one the most. To each his own. I'd prefer to keep Devers, even on an overpay. My second choice would be to trade him for something better than a comp pick.
-
Probably not this winter. It looks like Correa of Bogey are the two brightest possibilities.
-
Thanks for the info. Bogey's comp pick barely cancels the 5th rounder lost by signing a QO FA.
-
Devers is a stud.
-
Why is looking better to the public your top criteria? I want what is best for the team, and if we know Devers will walk, I'd prefer we trade him rather than get one more year out of him and watch him walk for a comp pick that is not what it used to be. Both options suck, and maybe even extending him will suck, too, in the long run. If we had a farm like the Astros, maybe we'd be able to stomach losing top stars like their fans do.
-
"Fair market value," to some posters, seems to be whatever the craziest GM ends up paying. If Seager was our player, should we have matched the Rangers' offer, just to meet market value on our star? Should we have paid market value to keep Pedro, Ellsbury and other former Sox stars?
-
I'd still pull the trigger on Devers- just as I would have for Betts, but I am fully aware of the consequences. (I doubt it would take $360M/12 to get Devers, though.)
-
Top games, today: #4 TCU at #18 Texas #9 Alabama at #11 Ole Miss #1 Georgia at Miss. St. #2 Ohio St. v Indiana #3 Michigan v Nebraska (Notre Dame plays Navy)
-
That's a no-brainer, IMO. $22M x 5 for Nimmo vs $28M x 7 for Bogey is not as easy a choice. Those xtra 2 years will not be prime years. That extra $6M a year gets us a nice RP'er or 2 decent ones. Close call, there.
-
If this costs us $60M a year AAV, that's over 25% of the player salary budget. What kind of team can we put around them? JH would have to greatly change his spending habits to make this work. Will he?
