moonslav59

The Price and JD signings were huge, and both did well to very well as long as DD was with BOS. No doubt there was a shift. We went from letting Lester bolt, because he was over 30, but then paid Price way more than anyone else to that date. He made more than Pablo + HRam in total dollars. The thing is, that was about it. We seem to remember that he spent money, left and right on free agents. He really did not. I know Nate counts as a FA signing, although I view it as an extension, but even counting it as a FA signing during his last year w BOS, Nate was just the 11th highest paid FA in Sox history. Guess who the next ranked one is? Mitch Moreland at #34 at just $13M/2 in 2018! (These FA signings don't count Dice-K, Rusney or Moncada.) Price was and still is #1 in total dollars given. JD was 6th. DD's main reason for success, IMO, was his trade success, and some of his additions were high-salaried. The guy rarely missed on his trades, and when he did, they were minor misses like Thornburg and some other RP'er I forgot. His budgets got high due in large part to players from trades and rising arb costs.

Some rigidity has changed since the Devers extension. Many said they only extended him because of the backlash after losing Betts and Bogey. True or not, that should not matter. We did it, and that marked a change. The Devers "Dump" as I call it, and it was more than just a salary dump- I know that- kinda undid that, but they did sign a player to $313M/10, when the previous record was $217M/7 (for Price, who we also dumped... hmmm...) Another seemingly rigid undoing cam with long extensions given to pre-arb young players, so maybe we would not see so many stars bolting to free agency in their prime year. To me, this is a huge change in philosophy that has brightened our future and long term future. That brightness does not shine away some of our dark philosophies and choices made, and I'm not so sure some of our choices have been as bad as they seem to be everytime a FA "of interest" is grossly overpaid by some other team. We need only look at our largest contracts given out to see how many have been clear success stories. I hate seeing us lose Bregman. I think he made a big and positive difference to the team. He helped other players get better and improve their approaches to the game. In some ways, that's priceless. I get it. We have a big hole to fill, and we still haven't filled the Devers canyon. I think Contreras fills the loss of Bregman's bat, but we still need a 3Bman and the power bat we lost with Devers. I realize winning teams can be constructed in various way, but our ring seasons have pretty much followed two major events: 1. Our top SP'ers stayed relatively healthy, and we had two aces or near ace types. 2004: Pedro & Schilling 2007: Beckett & Schilling 2013: Lester & Lackey 2018: Sale & Price (+ Porcello coming off a Cy Young win) 2. We had 2 big power bats or several 25+ HR types. 2004: Manny 43/ Papi 41 (4 others w 17+) 2007: Papi 35/ Manny 20 + Lowell 21 2013: Papi 30/ Napoli 23 + Middy 17 in 94 gms (Okay, this is pushing it) 2018: JD 43/Betts 32 (Bogey 23 + Devers 21) Looking at 2016, we might have 1 ace and 1 near ace, but we have no power bat projected to hit 30+ HRs. We may end up with nobody at 25+.

And not only 2 (or 3) years vs 5, but also $23-27M vs whatever you want to call what Breggie got ($32-35M.) I hate the big drop in D. I hate the loss of Bregman's clubhouse leadership and influence on young players, but how high is too high? If CHC paid him $200M/5, we'd have people saying why not $205M/5 and "it's just $1M more a year!"

I'm glad we made the playoffs, and if I smoked em, I'd have lit a fat one the day we made the playoffs. It's not enough to say we did better last winter than the 5 or 6 before. I'm 100% in on the idea that the moment is now. The window is wide open. I'm not going to ignore good changes started last winter. I hope they continue. I'm not optimistic, right now.

I understand posters don't want to count that extension, as well as Campbell's and Anthony's as "spending more," not the somewhat pricey contracts for Gray and Contreras, but it is spending. For years, perhaps the biggest beef by posters has been letting our top young talent bolt via free agency. I keep hearing I am "ignoring" this and that, which I don't think I am. I fully realize we are spending way less than our revenue ranking, but I could easily say that some might be ignoring the enormously beneficial shift we've made towards keeping the best of our best: Crochet, Chapman, Anthony, Rafaela, Bello and hopefully we can soon view Campbell as a great extension. Saying this does not erase the harmful philosophies this FO has adhered to- like not giving no trade clauses and not going the "extra" extra mile to sign FAs we really know we need. I'm not happy with that either, but within the context of other factors, I still think we are very close to being a top contender. IMO, we still have time and options this winter to get there. Am I confident we do it? HELL NO! I have no idea what these guys will do. We know more about what they won't do with every passing day, and that sucks, for sure. I wish we had come closer to getting Alonso than we did. I can't bring myself to say or think I wish we'd given Breggie $180M/5. That's not the same as saying I'm glad he's gone. We are clearly worse without him. That being said, I'm not going to ignore what I think is a fact: had we signed Breggie for 5 years, we'd have been bigger misers for the next 5 years, and that would hurt- maybe more than how much Breggie helps- maybe not. There is a trade off. People can scream all they want, "Well, JH can and should just spend more," but I'm not going to believe he will just so I'm happy for the moment we sign Bregman. I'm trying see the trade-off we'd have made. I'm fine if others don't see it like I do. I know I often view things way differently than others, and not just on sports issues.

Yes, I was responding to GG's post about us never signing big FAs, and gave examples of last winter's two to three signings. Then I got hell for pointing out that we do win some bidding wars. It's not refuting your claim.

Yes, and I'm sure the Sox ownership group studies what their customers want and need and find the price and production points that keep them just happy enough to keep "buying their product." Maybe a good analysis is the cigarette companies. They have customers that are hooked for life, no matter what you do.

Not sure why this matters, but I'm sure some beer companies make way more money and profits than others based on similar revenue vs expenditure ratios.

The AAV is one thing, and that does seem to matter a lot to JH & Co. Bute he's making $175M and playing 5 seasons. That matters, too. It's not much more than Alonso, but we missed on Alonso by a long shot.

I never got the impression they were sure to land Bregman.

I know people are bummed out. We lost on a FA once more, but that offer was very fair. It shows they will go 5 years for someone over 30. I'm sure some will think they never intended to win the bidding and this was all for show. Still, if we never win a bidding war on a top quality player, it won't ever seem to matter. We've also been wrong on some of our most recent larger signings, and that hasn't/doesn't help. Had Buehler done great, maybe we wouldn't be so sour on shorter term deals. Had Bregman sucked and not opted out, we'd be bummed we signed him for 3 years.

Making that point does not refute the other. I responded to the point about not signing any top FA, every year. I'm not arguing against the spending vs Revenue point made by saying the truth.

Yup. That is a great point. I'm not defending stingy. I'm just not going to say we don't sign anyone "every year."

The lower AAV matters, but we can't say Breggie is making $30M a year.

Indeed, that was one goal, but so was adding a big bat. Contreras helped with the corner IF defense, and they probably thinks he has enough power to at least make up for the Breggie loss, but who makes up for losing Devers? I'd rather have Bregman than Suarez. Alonso and Suarez would be about the same AAV as Contreras and Bregman, but the D would be way worse, granted.

I mentioned them and the no trade clause, earlier. I'd have given deferrals to Alonso, too, if needed.

I can't see the Sox basing any model on the surety that they will outbid everybody for anybody.

I'm talking about what just about every GM says, when they do not sign someone they pursued. I think the anger over no signings is spilling over into areas where maybe it doesn't matter much, to me.

They had to know they might miss out on Breggie. Mt worry now is what is their next plan?

I agree he deserves more, and my suggested top offer reflected that. I feel our need for power is overwhelming. Offering $5M more to Alonso is $160M/5. I said I was fine with our $165M/6 for Bregman and would not have been upset if we matched the $175M/5 deal he took. I never said Alonso deserves more money than Breggie.

I mentioned the defense, so how is that "ignoring" it?

No doubt. He seemed pretty standard on this one, to me.

"Another winter of not signing top talent?" Last winter we signed Bregman (highest AAV in team history) Buehler (highest FA Pitcher AAV since Price) and Chapman (who many of us felt was not enough.)

That's one way to look at it. I thought Alonso fit our power need, and while there are many ways to build a WS team, the last 4 Sox ring teams had 2 power bats. This one has none, and Breggie added would still have left us with none. It's a close call, but to me Alonso's offense has been more consistent, and he's a little younger. OPS+ last 5 yrs: 134 Alonso (133>146>123>122>144) 123 Bregman (113>134>122>116>128) The defense part goes heavily to Breggie, and it's harder to add a good 3Bman than a 1Bman, as the Contreras trade showed. We have Contreras, now, anyway, so it matters little. I'm not upset about Alonso, either, because of Contreras. If we lose out on Suarez or trading for a #2, I'll look back at Polanco as the one we could have done something about- maybe Suarez, too.

Doesn't every GM say something similar after not submitting the winning bid? No matter what he says or does he's wrong.