moonslav59
-
Posts
105,510 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
136
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
-
The trade looks pretty good for both sides, now. We only lost 1/3 of a season of Betts and got Verdugo and a couple good prospects. The Dodgers won a ring and didn't even have to pay Price anything, this year. (neither did we.)
-
As much as I like Morton, he doesn't seem like someone to sign for "the long term."
-
Exactly. The Sox are not looking for one year players.
-
I don't think we plan to move Devers to 1B just yet, either. I used to think it was an interesting and maybe worthy idea, but I've seen some extended time frames of plus play by Devers at 3B and very quick reflexes. I'm not for acquiring Bryant or any other 3Bman. Getting Bryant to play LF makes little sense, too.,
-
I agree on every point made here despite it all being just speculation.
-
The BTV site approved this trade: Dalbec & CHatham to ATL for Inciarte +$2M Langeliers (good catching prospect) Wright Wilson
-
Agreed, and a reasonable extension would have to be part of any deal. Weird no talk of moving Devers to 1B to make room for Bryant at 3B.
-
Very true. It's also possible they were prepared to go after him as a free agent, had he reached it-not saying they would have or likely would have gotten him. The re-set order certainly made it more difficult to keep him, especially if there was also a directive to reign in spending beyond the re-set. We just re-set, and there are no signs we plan on jumping over the tax lines, this year.
-
Had we kept him, that price was sure to drop during these economic times, as it did with the Dodgers.
-
Are you saying that the "coffee boy" statement was the only juvenile statement made by those who are hyper critical of Ben? I see very little difference between the hypercritical Ben and hypercritical DD crowds, teams or whatever you want to call the groupings, in terms of juvelinility.
-
Like "the other side" refrains from "juvenile jabs" at the "coffee boy" and his supporters and occasional defenders.
-
That's what they said about Price, too. Small sample sizes have small meanings, Jacko. You know this to be true. (Not that I'm high on Happ- I'm not.)
-
Yes, but I liked the trade, and I felt it made more sense. I was just pointing out that we could have kept Mookie & reset.
-
Yeah, we'd have to dump Price or Eovaldi (or maybe JD), which wouldn't really affect our future going forward, as compared to as it is now. (Also, Pillar, Moreland + Peraza= $10M.)
-
Yeah, we'd have to dump Price or Eovaldi (or maybe JD).
-
His 2020 season was an arb year-his last. They had every right to keep him for 2020. (BTW, he did sign with the Dodgers before hitting free agency.) Of course, there was no guarantee he re-signs here, so that's why my "best case scenario" involved trading him, letting him reach free agency, then re-signing him.
-
Yes, that was part of the narrative, but it doesn't mean it was right. While it would have been difficult to reset and keep Betts, it was entirely possible. Would not having JBJ and Perez while keeping Betts have made much of a difference in 2020- the reset year? The real issue would have been going significantly over the line (after a reset) starting in 2021, assuming we tried to win in 2021. Yes, Ben's spending was less than 50% of the reason, but still a big chunk, we went over in 2018, but his influence fell sharply in 2019 and was a small part of 2020. I had held out hope that we might have been able to acquire Verdugo, Downs & Wong for Betts, dump half of Price's salary and STILL Re-sign Betts for 2021 and beyond. We could have afforded it after the reset, but we'd likely not have much left to spend on pitching, unless Henry agreed to go over the second tax line. We might have tried to dump Eovaldi and a a few lessers like Barnes or Vaz.
-
Ben was responsible for part of the budget issues that put us over the tax lines in 2018 and 2019, but again, we could have reset AND kept Betts.
-
We could have kept Betts and reset, so I'm still not sure why 2018 is so connected to 2020. I get the 3rd year stiffer penalties, so 2018 set that in motion. I agree, Ben's deals played a part in the budget mess of 2019 and 2020, but it wasn't as great as you seem to be saying it was.
-
We actually could have kept Betts and reset in 2020, even without dumping Price, JD or Eovaldi. (No JBJ and Perez.)
-
By the time Mookie was traded, HanRam was off the books for over a year & Pablito had just come off the books. Castillo didn't count against the tax and had just one year left. Pedey still remained for 2020 & 2021. Looking at the 2019 & 2020 budgets, the Ben influence was a small percent. 2019 Tax budget: 31 Price 22 JD 21 Porcello 17 Eovaldi 15 Sale 14 Pedey 12 Bogey 9 JBJ 7 Moreland 2020 pre-adjusted 26 Sale 22 JD 20 Bogey 17 Eovaldi 14 Pedey 11 JBJ 8 ERod 7 Perez 2018: HRam was on his last year: (Actual Dollars-not tax budget) 31 Price 24 JD 23 HRam 21 Porcello 18 Pablo 15 Pedey 13 Kimbrel 12 Sale 11 Betts 9 Pom 7 Bogey
-
I still can't figure out why Chatham is at 4.9.
-
They obviously work on projected performance and projected or known salary. When I look to suggest trades on that site, I look at trying to even out the value by giving away players I think are rated higher than I value them. I'm not saying the site is perfect.It is far from perfect, but I also think Chavis is duplicated value with Dalbec being better. (I have actually suggested some trades involving Dalbec and us keeping Chavis (maybe sign a Moreland type for dirt cheap).
-
Gettys whiffs more than both- way more than Chavis.
-
Not in the minors: K/PAs Gettys .312 Dalbec .298 Chavis .256 If you look at K/AB in the minors (which discounts the BB rate): Dalbec .350 Gettys .343 Chavis .283
