moonslav59
-
Posts
103,690 -
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
-
$5M AAV assuming we pay the $8M buyout that does not count on the tax line. It’s $12M x 2 on the AAV if we take the option minus whatever Renfroe gets in2 Arbs. That might be $24M - $14M or more or less likely less. Then add what we pay fro a RHd bat to platoon with JBJ or suffer his poor splits. -
Sounds like a good plan.
-
Exactly, and neither do we. We could both be wrong on this one. JBJ could outplay Renfroe in’22, or one or both prospects could end up outplaying Renfroe’s 2 remaining years by themselves.
-
Lmao.
-
It implies I added up the projected pluses and minuses and think it’s a net negative, so I scratch my head wondering why we make a net negative trade, in my opinion. Yes, there are connotations of not understanding, so that term might not have been the best choice. I will refrain from using that term for this trade going forward, in hopes you can now sleep at night. Hello
-
I can see that position, but I think we could have traded Renfroe for a cheap RPer or OFer and not paid either of these two. It would make signing Suzuki or Story easier, financially. Even if you just count the $5M more for JBJ x 2 years, that’s $10M, then add the cost of Paxton to our initial offer to ERod and it’s gets much closer. I know it’s more complicated than just looking at 2022 and 2023 AAV comps, but certainly some sort of upgrade could have been possible. We did not have to pay Renfroe. We could have easily traded him for a prospect or not offered him the web, if we thought he’d be a zero WAR player in ‘22.
-
If I don’t like a trade, I say it’s a head-scratcher. Is that the issue, here? If I start saying I dislike the trade, that changes everything for you?
-
We apparently made a shorter term offer. The $24M paid to JBJ added to our initial offer makes it a bit closer but maybe not quite equal. It’s not $77M vs $24M Also, if you sub out Wacha or Paxton, too, it gets closer to even..
-
This very well could be the plan. I think these prospects were the key to the deal- one way or another.
-
No. I know yours and others positions and respect them. You can’t handle me disagreeing. You equate understanding with agreeing. I don’t like the trade. I can see how it might work out, if JBJ hits over .680 or so and or a prospect dies well, but I think the trade will be a bad one, despite hearing and understanding the opposing views. Why is that so hard for you to grasp? FYI, I liked several moves Bloom made last year that flopped. I know I can be wrong on this one, too, but I also know maybe you will be instead of me.
-
The fact that I said if we go over the tax line proves I don’t view it as definite. Yes, certain strawman
-
I’m very confident about 2022. My dislike of one deal is taking on monumental meanings to you.
-
I never said definite. You are making strawman arguments, again.
-
I think he is more concerned about the budget than any of us. That’s why he signed Wacha, Hill and Paxton and not ERod, too or instead. I’ve said over and over again, I’m going on the assumption we stay under or near the tax line. I’ve said I could be wrong, but until I see us go over significantly I’m going on that assumption. It’s not some whacky assumption, and I’m fine if you and others disagree, but stop painting my position like it’s some wild and crazy one. I dislike this trade, mostly for monetary reasons. If you think it’s a capital offense, then shoot me.
-
That may be the case, and I’ve said this deal looks better if we start spending more and more, but looking at the bargain basement pitchers we just signed, I have my doubts.
-
Maybe you do. You can’t at least understand the point I’ve had to repeat 10 times. Agree to disagree but don’t act like you don’t know my position.
-
After all this, you don’t know? I guess I will repeat it again: It’s about the money on a tight budget. That’s like 10 times, dude!
-
I’ve already said this might be the case and everything changes. If we go over the tax line in2023, this deal looks better, to me, but still not a good one, unless the prospects do well.
-
Where did I say that? I’ve repeated over and over why I think Bloom-made this deal. Do I need to again?.
-
JBJs option would have to be decline for his salary not to count towards 2023. That’s an expensive buy out of $8M. That doesn’t count on the 2023 tax budget, but that’s more than any tax we might pay!
-
I think at least one will be on theML roster by 2023.
-
I’m not giving it a D- or F. I’m just surprised Red did not give him an F. I have said over and over it’s about the prospects. That is the value, plus an upgrade in D, which I have been screaming for. To me, the money aspect turns this into a head scratcher. I don’t think this was a good deal, but it might be one.
-
Should we expect career norms at his age?
-
Yes, but not for a back up OFer! Sign Suzuki and trade Renfroe for a cheaper or equal salary pitcher, and we still have $5M in AAV to spend on 2B or the pen.
-
ERod? The money spent on JBJ adds a year on our offer for him, right? The AVV argument is even more solid, if you don’t look long term. Wacha + JBJ = ERod. ?
