moonslav59

No, and maybe I'll kick myself for ever wanting such a long deal, but maybe if we front end structure it, we could deal him towards the end, if it's not working out. I'm thinking Betts at 39-40 might be a steal at "just" $20M a decade from now.

I totally understand this position, but to me, Mookie is probably worth $300+M/6 (not on the open market as a FA but in reality), so giving him $120M for the last 6 years is not bad.

I'd rather have Gonsolin than Downs. As for the prospect, I'd like Cartaya. I'd be fine with the deal as presented here. Maybe we can dump Price in another deal.

Plus, the game is so damn fun!

I understand his point, and it is valid. So is the position that him opting out before the expected decline begins is valid. Hoping to trade him could work, but who knows?

Good points, but maybe we can trade for a decent pitcher with a big contract (but not too big to move us past the reset line).

To me, the drop off from Betts to Verdugo will be greater than the drop off from Price to whoever we can afford with the freed up salary space. Like I said, there's not much left to sign for 2020, but I suppose we could trade for someone else's lesser salary dump pitcher, still reset and be better off than by losing Betts. I guess I don't have as much faith in Price as many here seem to have, and while I realize he may have a 3-4+ WAR season, and we could look back with a big heart ache "what if?", but I'd not even stop at trading Betts & Price. I'd also trade 1 year guys like JBJ and Workman (the perfect sell high player). I'd consider 2 years guys as well, but not ERod. I'd try to extend him with the money saved by dumping Price and/or Eovaldi. I'd try to bring Betts back, but if we get outbid, we'd have a lot of budget space to let Bloom do his thing. We might not even be all that bad in 2020 without Betts, Price, Eovaldi, Workman and JBJ, depending on who we get back, but our 2021 and beyond outlook could and should look a lot better.

Yes, but that is a different point than the one we are talking about now, which was the debate before the season began. Some had the position that even if Price had a great year, we hoped he'd opt out. Others did not. Both positions have validity. 700 not only thinks one does not, he calls it foolish to hope for an opt out.

Ouch!

Sorry. My bad.

So, trading Betts for Verdugo is not "punting," but trading Price for a bag of balls is? I'm not sure I agree.

He is likely to help more than hurt in 2020, but his contract is killing us for 3 more years. If I wouldn't sign him for $32M x 3, then it makes sense to trade him for a bag of balls. His net value is negative. There isn't much on the market to sign and replace him with, but getting rid of that contract would improve our long term outlook by allowing us to make more of the types of moves you, Bloom and I like.

Yet, you want us to keep Price for his last 3 years. (Welcome back, Kimmi!)

I'm fine with trying to remain somewhat competitive in 2020 via Verdugo or some combination of Gonsolin, Stripling and a prospect like Ruiz, Cartaya or Gray, but I want us to look stronger in 2021 and beyond with a reset under our belts. I'm not totally writing off 2020, but we've spent 3-4 years in a row making moves geared towards "this year" at the expense of the "beyond this year." It's time to switch gears and start making moves that improve the extended future- perhaps at the expense of "this year." It's what we did in 2012, and we ended up winning in 2013, so all may not be lost, but we need to help our future out.

You keep acting like I don't get your point- like if I just understood what you mean, I'd have to agree. I totally understand your point, now as I did then, and it's a good one, but it's not the only factor in taking a position on whether it would be good for the Sox, if Price opted out or not, even had he had a great season before the opt out. Try to understand my point, for once. It is just as valid as yours, if not more so.

So, if he was a FA, you'd be okay with us signing him to $96M/3?

There is no reason to expect healthy seasons from Sale,Price and Eovaldi. Yes, we lost 1/5th of our rotation (Porcello), but much more than 1/5th of the IP from our top 5 SP'ers. 2019 IP as a SP'er (team; 806) 203 ERod 174 Porcello (22% of SP'er IP/ 25% of top 5 SP'er IP) 147 Sale 107 Price 54 Eovaldi (We really lost 1/4th of our rotation with Porcello leaving.) 2018 (871 total) 191 Porcello (22% of SP'er IP/ 27% of top 5 SP'er IP) 176 Price 158 Sale 123 ERod 50 Eovaldi Expecting healthy seasons from even 2 of our 3 questionable SP'ers is a stretch. Expecting repeat seasons from Workman, Taylor and Walden may be an even bigger stretch. We have no significant incoming support for 2 years in a row, and please don't count 2 weeks from Chavis in 2019 as a boost to our 2020 outlook.

I'll take the former, especially how they played in 2018. It's not even close, IMO.

That's some sick humor! Many felt our pen actually over performed their expectations in 2018 and 2019. We are mainly pinning our 2020 hopes on a return to form of Barnes, a rebound from Hembree and Brasier and continued career year-like seasons from Workman, Taylor & Walden. Or, maybe D Hern gains some control or someone like Houk pulls a Buttrey.

We are talking about why we should trade Betts and Price, and your argument was that we are "very similar" to the 2018 team and should go for one last hurrah at the expense of the extended future. We are NOT that close to the 2018 team and even got worse from the 2019 team. These are part of the reasons supporting trading some players. Of course, we should be worse in 2020 without Betts and Price (and maybe others), but the diea is to get ourselves better positioned for 2021 and beyond.

Comparing runs scored between 2018 and 2019 needs some context. The whole league went on a Home Run rampage- except us, although we did have more. HRs per team 186.2 in 2018 225.9 in 2019 (21.3% increase) (Sox went up at a 17.8% increase.) Runs per team 721.0 in 2018 782.2 in 2019 (8.5% increase) Sox Runs: 876 to 901 is a 2.3% increase. We failed to keep pace with the league increase in runs from 2018 to 2019. That's not to say our offense is bad or will be in 2020. I expect it to be top 4 or 5, as is, but we were 4th in the AL, last year and still finished way out of the race. We were first in 2018. 9 of the top 11 teams in runs scored from 2018-2019 were 2019 teams.

Missing the 2018 Kelly & Kimbrel makes the pen look much worse, as well. Missing Holt, Nunez, Kinsler, Pearce and others make our depth and flexibility look worse. Having no manager is worse than what Cora did for the 2018 team. Where are we better or even equal?

No, it was not "very" similar. We are missing 4 of our top 9 pitchers by IP from 2018 (Porcello #1, Pom #7, Kelly #8 & Kimbrell #9), and 2 others (Johnson #5 & Velazquez #6) will not make the opening day roster and may not pitch at all for the Sox, this year. Also, no Wright #13 with a 2.68 ERA in 54 IP. We are missing 7 of our top 15 batters by PAs (all over 140 PAs). We are missing the manager. Yes, we have some big stars remaining from that team, and guys like ERod, Devers and Vaz can legitimately be projected to have way better seasons than 2018, but questions and declines from 2018, based on age or health concerns, can and probably should be expected from most of the others. (listed by most 2018 PAs or IP) 1. Beni .830 OPS 2. JD 1.031 3. Betts 1.078 4. Bogey .883 (could very well do better) 5. JBJ .717 (???) 8. Moreland .758 By IP 2. Price 3.58 (176 IP in 2018) 3. Sale 2.11(158) 5. Johnson 4.17 (Not even on 40 man roster) 6. Velazquez 3.18 (Pipe dream to repeat) 10. Barnes 3.65 (62 IP) 11. Hembree 4.20 (60) 12. Eovaldi 3.33 (54 & playoff hero) 14. Workman 3.27 (41) Expected to do better than 2018 15. Brasier 1.60 (34) This is a vastly different team with way less depth and no current manager.

Yes, but an assumption does not mean I am projecting no deals or injuries. It was only an exercise in showing where we stand, right now. And, it doesn't look all that good, does it?.

Certainly not foolishness. Just because a pitcher does great one year does not mean it is expected he continue for 3 more. Both positions were based on speculation. His contract was for too many years. Hoping he did well and opted out is a valid position to hold. It's fine to disagree, but it's certainly not a foolish position based on past histories of pitchers after his age at the time of the opt out.