Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

moonslav59

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    109,013

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    164

 Content Type 

Profiles

Boston Red Sox Videos

2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospect Rankings

Boston Red Sox Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Boston Red Sox Fan Guides & Resources

2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Boston Red Sox News, Rumors & Analysis

2026 Boston Red Sox Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by moonslav59

  1. moonslav59
    I'm not sure about "soon," but likely at some point near his mid thirties. After 5 years, he'll only be 32- the same age as JD, and nobody wants him gone anytime "soon."
  2. moonslav59
    I don't either, and I've been one of his biggest supporters from the (horrible) start. We have serious pitching needs and may need more cap space than we have.
  3. moonslav59
    He needs to renounce his Jeter fandom or be traded.
  4. moonslav59
    Well, it's not obvious that is the purpose. We might keep Betts as $10M might be a bargain by then, if he's still producing. To me, the pay structure I suggested matches up more to him projected value by year than just paying him $32.3M x 12 years, and it helps the player. It also assumes we can find a trade partner, if he sucks by then, but then again, if we offer to pay his full contract as I mentioned we could theoretically do, then that would be an obvious skirting around paying taxes- but still not likely illegal, unless the rules change by then.
  5. moonslav59
    No doubt. I think it hasn't sunk in yet, for me.
  6. moonslav59
    Agreed, and I have him lower than Mata, but how certain are we about Casas?
  7. moonslav59
    True, but some sort of tax has been around since 1997, and even if it goes away, we might still be able to cut salary by Trading an aging Betts making $10M a year. If there's no tax anymore, than that's one more point in favor of locking Betts up long term.
  8. moonslav59
    Why should they or the union care. Front-loading a contract helps the player. The money he makes can be put to use and earn interest. As far as I know, there are no rules against it, and I do know some players get deferred payments long after they retire. That seems worse than my idea. Worse than my idea to have Pedey tear up his contract owing him $25M over the next 2 years, retire, then sign him to a $26M lifetime services contract.
  9. moonslav59
    I think there has only been 1 thirteen year deal.
  10. moonslav59
    Very risky, yes, but like I said, if he has an AVV of $32.3M ($420/13), but only get's paid $10M a year the last 3 years, we could trade him AND PAY EVERY DOLLAR to the other team. We'd save $22.3M on the lux tax budget each of his last 3 years. That $30M lost was really paid for his earlier years, when he was, in theory, underpaid.
  11. moonslav59
    My top rankings might look like this: 1. Downs 2. Casas 3. Mata 4. Jimenez 5. Dalbec 6. Ward 7. Groome 8. Wong
  12. moonslav59
    Ward should be higher than Chatham, too and probably #7 or 8. Without a true position, it's hard to value Wong.
  13. moonslav59
    Yes, and some context. Not too long before, Pedey signed a "hometown discount" deal, and Lester had expressed a willingness to accept a hometown discount deal. The worst part about the offer was that we did not quickly follow it up with a better offer. Okay, we offer Betts $300M/10, and he says he wants $420M/10. How can it hurt to counteroffer $330/10 or $350/10 and see what he says? Maybe he counters $390/10 or $420/12. Now, we may feel like we can come to an agreement. Now, if we think $330/10 is the most we'll ever pay, then I can see why we could decide to trade him.
  14. moonslav59
    What would a package of JBJ, Chavis & Duran get us, in terms of a SP'er who may be getting paid much more than JBJ, and the team wants to cut budget? Or, just JBJ and Chavis, since we may need OF depth after trading JBJ? This is assuming a try to be more competitive for 2020. Assuming a look at 2021 and beyond... What could we get for this? JBJ & Workman? JBJ, Workman & Chavis?
  15. moonslav59
    Song can't play for a while. Plawecki is probably over-valued, but it's hard to place value of catcher defense and handling of the staff- just like Leon.
  16. moonslav59
    Betts has power, too, and many players add power as they get into their mid to late 30's. Plus, my offer is not about getting value from him at ages 38-40. It's about lowering the AVV and front end loading it drastically allows us to trade him and save tens of millions on the lux tax budget.
  17. moonslav59
    For what it's worth here are the trade values for Sox players on the website, remember value includes salary and years of control as big factors: (Highlighted in red means I think the number is higher than actual value.) 128 Devers 89 Bogey 48 Verdugo 39 Beni 29 ERod 26 Vaz 22 Casas 22 Downs 20 Dalbec 18 Chavis 12 Mata 12 Barnes 12 Duran 11 D Hernandez 9 Jimenez 6 Lugo, JD, Taylor, Walden 5 Workman, Chatham, Ward 4 Wong, Song, Groome 3 Murphy, Perez, Decker, Houck, Plawecki, Gonzalez 2 Bonaci, Cannon, Howlett, Wilson, Arauz, Flores 1 Lopez, Chacon, Esplin, Feliz, Marcano, Rafaeta, Vaughan, Lin, Bello, Netzer, peraza, Politi, Brannen, Northcut, Zeferjahn, Diaz, Hart, Liu, Aybar, Castellanos, Crawford, Ockimey, Perales, Poyner, Ramirez 0.0 to 0.5 Hall, Reyez, Baldwin, Feltman, Moreland, JBJ, Shawarn and more -9.8 Sale -14.3 Castillo (his pay) -24.8 Pedey -29.0 Eovaldi (owed $41M)
  18. moonslav59
    Ok, maybe he's not worth $20M at ages 38-40. You could scale it so he's at $10M a year by then, and if he's not worth it, trade him and pay all $10M, and it still saves us $22M on the lux tax line. (The lux tax line goes to the new team, and all that counts for us is what we pay them.)
  19. moonslav59
    I see it this way, in real dollar value to a team like Boston, betts might be worth this much at these ages: (BTW, the trade value site had him worth 50 which is counting the $27M he makes, this year.) 28: $55M 29: $50M 30: $45M 31: $40M 32: $35M 33: $35M 34: $30M 35: $25M 36: $25M 37: $20M 38: $20M 39: $15M 40: $15M That's $420M/13. Maybe $15M will be an overpay, but $40M at age 31 might be an underpay.
  20. moonslav59
    1) You're wrong on the numbers: $420M/12 is not $35M a year. 2) I said front end load it, so by year 9-11, he's making only $20M a year and could possibly trade him, then. 3) He might be pretty dam good at ages 38-41.
  21. moonslav59
    If that were true, he'd never have gone over the tax line and certainly not the $40M line. He's a winner like no other owner we've had in my lifetime. I just don't understand all the criticism he gets over deciding he'll spend less here and there. BTW, even when he spends less, we're almost always a top 3-5 spender. What's the beef?
  22. moonslav59
    The first taxes began in 1997. 1997 No tax 1998 $2.2M 1999 $.02M 2000 No tax 2001 No tax 2002 No tax Henry era begins 2004 $3.2M 2005 $4.2M 2006 $497K 2007 $6.1M 2008 No 2009 No 2010 $1.5M 2011 $3.4M 2012 No (last place) 2013 No 2014 No (last place) 2015 $1.8M (last place) 2016 $4.5M 2017 No 2018 $9.4M 2019 $9.4M There is no reason to think this sort of pattern won't continue.
  23. moonslav59
    The Sox have a long history, since Henry took over, of spending very big, then resetting or spending less for just 1-2 years, then returning to biggest or 2nd biggest spender status. We may not make anymore signings like Price for a while, but I think we go back over the tax line as early as 2021. We may never go over the $40M line again.
  24. moonslav59
    I bet he'd sign $420M/13 ($32.2 AVV). The guy might actually play 13 more years at a decent level, if not we still paid him the same amount.
  25. moonslav59
    $11-12M is very significant, even as prices and tax lines keep going up.
×
×
  • Create New...