Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

moonslav59

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    107,222

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    144

 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 Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by moonslav59

  1. moonslav59
    I think some green font colors are needed, here.
  2. moonslav59
    If Yoshida can replace Bogaerts’ bat, this team could actually be better than last year’s… And, IMO, Turner should outhit the 2022 JD. Casas should easily out hit and defend our 1Bmen of 2022. A healthy Kike and Story can gives a boost on O & D. The pen is way better, even without Whitlock. It will likely come down to the rotation and Yoshida.
  3. moonslav59
    How about the first Q? I went into this winter wondering, if we could extend Bogey or Devers, and I wished it was Devers: check. I hoped we could replace Bogey's bat, elsewhere: check. I hoped we'd add defense at SS as a bridge to mayer: unchecked. I hoped we'd fix the pen and add a solid #2 SP'er. Half-checked.
  4. moonslav59
    I'm waiting for someone to say we signed him, so we could trade him.
  5. moonslav59
    No, they should have locked him up, when his stock was high. So, we lock up Casas at 8M x 10 and Bello at $9M x 10, and we squeak under the tax line in 2023, and even the Bloom bashers would have to say something good about him for 3 minutes.
  6. moonslav59
    2 questions: How many, here, thought we even had a 50% chance at extending Devers? How many now view this winter's moves as a success, overall?
  7. moonslav59
    Prepare to be surprised, once again.
  8. moonslav59
    Extending them, now, starting in 2023, would allow the tax hit to be lower going forward, while still keeping us under the tax line for 2023.
  9. moonslav59
    I told you he responded to crybaby fans. Sometimes, they may serve a positive purpose.
  10. moonslav59
    The same for 2023, yes, but this is huge. No opt outs. No no-trade clause. The monkey is off our backs. Big sigh of relief, and not just for fans. We still have about $17M under the tax line, so maybe the 2023 roster is not quite set. I still think w etrade for Rojas or Mateo and shouldn't have to much up for either. I'd like to see us have a better defensive RF'er, but I'm okay with L- Dugo and R- Ref. I think Yoshida & Turner can make up for the loss of offense from Bogey & JD, and in terms of RBI production, maybe a lot more. The pen is better. The rotation is the big question.
  11. moonslav59
    There is one report the deal is $331/10 and not $332M/11.
  12. moonslav59
    I doubt JH would ever have signed both Devers & Bogey, so IMO, we should be happy we signed the right one.
  13. moonslav59
    Since the Devers extension kicks in, next year, we might be at about $17M under the 2023 tax line. That could probably be just enough to add Andrus and Fulmer.
  14. moonslav59
    It's cream, not milk.
  15. moonslav59
    I certainly feel a lot better about this winter, now. It looks like a team-friendly deal, especially in light of the recent mega deals just signed. It's no longer a dream... DEVERS FOREVERS !!!!
  16. moonslav59
    I thought they might start the extension, this year, but apparently it begins in 2024. Does that mean we will spend more, this year, to get us close but not over the tax line?
  17. moonslav59
    He will be just 31 years old when year 6 begins, making the majority of this 11 year deal within prime. That's what makes extending Devers a better idea than 11 years for Bogey, or maybe even 6-7 years for Bogey.
  18. moonslav59
    My prediction on mea culpas: zero.
  19. moonslav59
    Of course you did not. If you had, he would not have signed it.
  20. moonslav59
    MLBTR just reported, a Devers' deal is done! $332M/11 Includes a $20M signing bonus that greatly improves the true value of the deal. The is not a no trade clause.
  21. moonslav59
    I know this one excites many, here... I can't wait to watch McGuire "expose himself" as the catcher of our future and to show fans just how much catcher intangibles matter.
  22. moonslav59
    Exactly what I predicted all along!
  23. moonslav59
    But, what about all the shift- aided stuff you told us all about? No metric sheet needed for that?
  24. moonslav59
    I don't either, but we both know it will happen. Sidenote: had Lester sucked after that fiasco, there would be no ongoing discussions about that "mistake," except maybe some posters saying maybe letting Bogey go might be a good thing, like it was with Lester, Jake and others.
  25. moonslav59
    I'm not as fixated on fault and blame as some, but it does often serve a purpose, when constructive and measures are taken to avoid repeating obvious mistakes by the parties directly involved. I'm not sure about what purpose fans assigning blame has, except to satisfy some internal need some of us have. This is NOT the same as thinking nobody is to blame, as you have accused me of believing. My answer: Neither side found a meeting point. Of course, I wish Bloom, JH & Co. had offered Bogey a fair offer that would have turned out to be less than what this exploding market has created, and the $168M/6 deal you suggested seems about as high as I'd have gone. I'm not sure Bogey/BorA$$ would have accepted that or not, so not knowing the answer to that question makes it hard for me to blame any side more than the other. I also think we can't really say any mistake was made or not, until we see what Bogey produces over the next 6, 7, 8 or 11 years. Assigning blame or fault, now, is premature and "overanalyzing," IMO.
×
×
  • Create New...