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
    After teasing fans, you'd think they would, and they have plenty of prospects as good as Graterol. They can also trade Maeda for a prospect to replace the one they give us.
  2. moonslav59
    Sox salaries coming off the books over the next 3 years: After 2020: $11M JBJ $6.5M Perez (option) $3.5M Workman $2.5M Moreland (option) After 2021: $13.8M Pedey $????M ERod $4.5M Vaz (option) $??M Barnes $??M Hembree After 2022: JD Eovaldi Beni
  3. moonslav59
    We must really not want Maeda.
  4. moonslav59
    Me, too, and if he does, the deal looks even better.
  5. moonslav59
    Exactly. Even SD wanted us to take Myers to get Betts.
  6. moonslav59
    The Angels have had a payroll of between $146-$166M the last 5 years. Yes, you can't win by paying anyone Trout money with that payroll, but maybe you can if you spend that much on one guy and also spend $186-$243M the last 5 years. Could the Angels win had they spent $40-100M more on other players around Trout? I get the argument, and I know it's a big risk. Not spending that much on Betts makes sense, but I'd do everything I can to keep him. (I doubt it takes $420/10. He would probably sign for $400/13.)
  7. moonslav59
    He's a good defender and may end up hitting better than JBJ. There are plenty of Margots in MLB.
  8. moonslav59
    Just tell him you'll offer $1M over the top bidder next winter.
  9. moonslav59
    Goes well with this thread.
  10. moonslav59
    Lol
  11. moonslav59
    Nobody pays full first asking price, but if you would, why did you say $375M/10? If he said no to that, we're in the same boat as saying no to $300M.
  12. moonslav59
    If he extends for $400M/10, then your suggested $375M was too low, right?
  13. moonslav59
    Certainly not about the same topic.
  14. moonslav59
    I'd have offered that and more, but I think he'df hold out for free agency on that offer, too.
  15. moonslav59
    Time for a 2 year deal on him, too. Lower the AVV for 2021. I'd even see if he'd go for 3+ years.
  16. moonslav59
    It's not a bad opening offer, but I do think he's worth way more. I doubt he gets $420M/10. The middle ground is $360M/10. I'd be happy to get him at that.
  17. moonslav59
    I know. What took 'em so long?
  18. moonslav59
    Maybe he never really "had it," and it was just a fluke that opposing teams took so long to figure out how to get him out.
  19. moonslav59
    3 arbs after a down year is not very threatening either. If he does great after being traded and gets paid more, is that a bad thing?
  20. moonslav59
    Do we know, if a counter offer was made, or if the Betts camp set a price and said offer this now or we're 100% going to free agency? Maybe $300M/10 is the most we'd ever offer. If that is true, I think it's a mistake but certainly reasonable, and if so, trading him had to happen.
  21. moonslav59
    We don't know what others will offer Betts next winter. We don't know the $300M deal we offered Betts was our top offer. We don't know what was said to Mookie or his agent about next winter. I'm not saying we can or will bring him back next winter, but if we reset, we'll have a better chance than if we kept him and did not reset. The mega tax would make it impossible to re-sign Betts. Maybe, Bloom & Co. know there is no way we will re-sign Betts. If that's true, trading him was the right thing to do. Maybe Bloom & Coo think we might have a chance but money will be tight. Trading him HAD to be done, in this case. Maybe Bloom & Co.think we will make a strong play for Betts next winter. Trading him was still the right thing to do to lessen the total cost of the offer we make. Offering $400M/10 is one thing, but asking us to pay a 50% tax on most or all of it, even for a few years, makes the idea all but impossible.
  22. moonslav59
    He most likely will not even be a top 30 player in 7 years, but one never knows. I'm all for paying Betts what it takes without getting absurd. I'd go for 12-13 years to bring down the AVV, and front end load it to make it easier to trade him, if he declines too steeply. Something like.... $42M x 5 years, then $35M x 2 years, $30M x 2 years and $20M x 4 years. That's $420M/13.
  23. moonslav59
    I read it is $3.4M this year and $6.6M in 2021. It will count as $5M a year on the Lux tax. This will save us about $1.6M on next years budget, when we may go back over the tax line. Good deal, Bloom!
  24. moonslav59
    He had 2 arbs left after this year. Is the $10M total for this year and next or $10M for 2021 + 2022, or is it $10M a year for both 2021 and 2022?
  25. moonslav59
    We can still pay Betts next winter. This deal had to be made. It will still be made- in some form or another.
×
×
  • Create New...