moonslav59
-
Posts
105,846 -
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
-
Just have baseball writers choose the Nobel Prize this year, and it could happen!
-
One way to help even the playing field a bit would be for the visiting team to share the gait for games they play away. They could also share the TV money, for the games they play in all stadiums. When the Yanks play the Rays in Yankee stadium, the Rays get squat, and they are half the players on the field. Teams that draw a lot away would be rewarded. Home TV revenues would be slashed in half, but teams would get half of the gait and TV revenues from their away games. This would help the small market teams, and it just seems fair to me as well.
-
Can you name one time an owner sold a MLB team for a loss? I guess you can say there is a risk, but it never happens. I know it's problematic to count rising team value as a profit or something the players should get a share of. The players won't give back money, if the team owner loses money on a sale of the team. I get that. My point is, the owner are making way more profit than is reported. I'm not sure why you seem to want to neglect that piece of the debate. It's been a while, but I clearly recall the player's union arguing over the fudged numbers MLB gave them concerning their profit numbers, and how they left out certain revenue streams.
-
Yes, I thought that was obvious.
-
Not really. We'd be paying who we replace him with something pretty close to that. The Swihart part of any trade I have suggested is not for salary relief: it's for trying to get a RP'er and ending all doubts about who our two catchers will be this year. Ideally, I'd trade Moreland& Swihart or Nunez & Swihart, but I doubt we'd get any value back, except possibly salary relief, if we can find someone to tale on their contracts. More likely, a salary clearing deal would include Holt, Vazquez or, God forbid, Porcello. I hate to trade youth, but the best way to get a decent RP'er might be by trading Johnson or Velazquez plus Chavis or Dalbec, and if adding Swihart improves the return, then add him. I might just prefer trading Swihart and Shawaryn for the best we can get, and wait for a summer deal. if needed.
-
I'm thinking the same thing.
-
Leon does much better with Sale & Price, and I DO NOT want to trade Leon, but I don't think Leon can catch a lot of games at this point in his career. If I felt he could catch 100-115 games a year, I'd feel better about trading Vaz. I think Vaz had a bad year, last year- on O and D. I think he's better in both areas, and we'll see it this year, but that's just my opinion. I also see Vaz as our catcher 2-3 years from now. I'm not sure Leon can last that long, so if we trade Vaz, we'll be looking for a catcher in free agency while we're looking to reset the budget. I think we should trade Swihart.
-
The problem with some of the positions you mention as possible targets of cutting back on to create budget space for the pen is that there is no market for Moreland and his contract. I doubt we look to trade Pearce, and I think we'd have to wait anyways. We won't save anything by trading Swihart or Leon, so trading Vaz is the only sacrifice that might create some budget space for the pen. IMO, trading Vaz would make some of our pitchers worse, if they had to pitch to Swihart, so we lose at more than just the catcher position. Utility IF'er is not something many teams are willing to pay the money Nunez is making. That means Holt would be traded. Trading one of our 5 starters, so we can afford a closer would just create a bigger hole, IMO. Price is paid too much, ERod would not free up enough money for Kimbrel. That leaves Porcello or Sale. Who do you trade to create the $14-16M space needed for Kimbrel? Name names. Sale Porcello Vaz Holt A combination?
-
Then trade Porcello and sign Kimbrel, or trade Porcello for a solid closer. Is that a better area to "economize?" How about trading Bogey or JD? My guess is, if we were missing one of those guys, you'd be saying we can't afford to economize at SP'er, SS or clean-up hitter...
-
Yes, and I'm sure they'd love to add a decent starter to that list, knowing one or two are likely to fail, get hurt or under perform.
-
Because we get a pre-arb very good RP'er, and we have Dalbec for 2020.
-
Maybe we end up trading for someone better than Brach or Strickland.
-
I agree. Kimbrel may still have several good years left in him, but the gamble is too big... bigger than the gamble to go with what we have.
-
I doubt other GMs are as high on Wright, Johnson, Velazquez and Shawaryn as many Sox fans seem to be, but a decent or near decent starter may be more valuable to some teams than a better than decent reliever.
-
One could argue we already went beyond insanity last year by spending $40M more than anyone else and then spending nearly the same again the next year, only to get some fans pissed off you didn't spend more. There's no Wal-mart greeter in this story.
-
I was joking.
-
Could this work? (Assuming the Marlins trade Realmuto) Trade: Blake Swihart, Jhonathan Diaz & Raniel Raudes to MIA For: (LHP) Adam Conley ($1.1M & 3 arbs left) Trade: Hector Velazquez (pre-arb), Michael Chavis (AAA), Mike Shawaryn (AAA) to OAK For: (RHP) Lou Trivino (pre-arb) Probably not enough of an offer, right?
-
60 Padres and 40 Braves
-
Okay, maybe my terminology is wrong, but when the CBA is negotiated, this money is never part of the pie to be split up. It's not "hidden" in the sense that most is known, but it's not part of the equation. Many owners probably make more money when they sell their team than they did all the years owning it combined. (BTW, I still think owners have ways to hide revenue or profits. The players unions of all sports often have a hard time believing the numbers the owners give them.)
-
Probably means the Yanks aren't even top 15.
-
Talk to a tax lawyer. There's a long list.
-
When the teams report how much they make, it is often less than the full amount the owner actually makes off the team, after everything related to the team is counted. Some profits are sunk back into the team, so it is not actually a profit anymore, but the re-investment into the team greatly increases the value of the team. When the owner sells the team, a fantastic profit is earned. That profit does not go to the players and is not reported as anual team income. These are just two ways money made by the owner is not counted as team profits when players are asking for a bigger share. I'll stop now, it you will.
-
Some do for sure, but some can hide profits legally or sink the money back into the company making it more valuable for when it is sold.
-
I was thinking more in lines of a cliff...LOL.
-
You think he'll have them top 10?
