Jump to content
Click here to check out our updated free agents rankings, now up to 150 players and sortable by position! ×
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

moonslav59

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    109,029

  • 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
    First time we very disagreed! Going on the assumption we let Mookie walk and get just a comp pick for him, It would feel worse than losing Fisk, Lynn and Burleson combined. We got nothing for Fisk, who went on to have a great career with the CWS, but his best years were with us. We ended up getting Frank Tanana and Joe Rudi for Lynn, and while that was not a good trade, we did get some quality in return. We got Carney Lansford & Mark Clear for Burleson & Hobson and later got Tony Armas for Lansford. My point was meant as hyperbole, but I don't think it was that far from being accurate.
  2. moonslav59
    Certainly, there is a big risk in any 12 year contract. Injury is the worst case scenario.It helps that Betts plays in a spacious RF half his games, and that he plays the OF not IF or catcher. Betts will be 26 next season and would be 37 in the final year of a 12 year contract. That means 7 of the 12 years would be during ages 26-32. Also, the 5 seasons at ages 33-37 are not severely post prime like many 8-10 year deals have been in the past. I get the concerns, and I'd be very worried over a 12 year deal, but I think Betts is the guy that would make it worth it, even if he missed some time for injuries.
  3. moonslav59
    That is an option, but I think keeping Betts during the reset year of 2020, would keep fans interested enough. We let 2-3 from Bogey, JD, Sale and Porcello walk, and then extend or re-sign Betts and some other big names for 2021 and beyond- maybe keeping the cliff to a 1 year thing.
  4. moonslav59
    I hate long term deals, but like the Price deal, I feel it is necessary. To compare a long term deal for Betts to others that have gone horribly wrong, like Pujols and Miggy is not really fair. Betts is much younger and is the heart and soul of our team. Letting Betts walk will be worse than letting Fisk, Lynn and Burleson go combined.
  5. moonslav59
    Another strategy is to pay them more in their arb years than they'd normally make, so they get more money "now" or upfront and less in the last 2-3 years, which makes it easier to trade the player, if the need arises. Or, offer $31M x 12, which is $372/12, but if the money is invested well, more upfront money may make up the difference in total pay over 12 years. I'd give him an opt out after 5 or 6 years. The problem with extending him now is that his new AVV will hurt the 2019 ans 2020 budget more than his arb costs, but it would help lessen the AVV cost for the next 10 years.
  6. moonslav59
    My take is that DD has a limit.It might not be a strict "don't go over the $40M line" limit, but I think he will try to stay under or very close to that line. The only exception, in my opinion, is if he can get a solid closer or RP'er on a 1 year deal. While it does not seem probable that any solid RP'er might sign a 1 year deal, if a few are left late in the signing period, maybe one takes a big paycheck for one year as a way to reset his value by hoping for a big and visible season with the 2019 champions.
  7. moonslav59
    We were lucky, with the JD signing, big spending teams were resetting last winter, but soon we will be resetting. This year, the resetting Dodgers made the World Series, and the resetting Yankees were extremely competitive. Let's see how we do during our reset year (after 2019 or 2020?).
  8. moonslav59
    Losing Porcello and replacing him with Shawaryn/Johnson/Velazquez/Wright is a huge drop off. I'm not sure we can sign Bogey and a replacement for Sale and still be under the limit. Replacing Moreland and Pearce with Chavis/Dalbec might work, but it's a gamble. No Nunez or Holt, so what, Lin plays 2B? JD may opt out.
  9. moonslav59
    I was assuming a reset after 2019, and with the signing of Eovaldi to 4 years and the idea of signing 2 RP'ers to 2+ year deals, we'd be saying good bye to several key players.
  10. moonslav59
    I know I swore off watching the NBA after last season's playoff fixing of the games, but my Bucks have the best record in the NBA as we approach the halfway point of the season. There's a long way to go!
  11. moonslav59
    I wouldn't be so sure about signing a big FA RP'er this winter.
  12. moonslav59
    That will hurt a lot, but I think we are going to be really good next year. Here is our schedule for 2019: 09/02 - at Louisville 09/14 - New Mexico 09/21 - at Georgia 09/28 - Virginia 10/05 - Bowling Green 10/12 - USC 10/26 - at Michigan 11/02 - Virginia Tech 11/09 - at Duke 11/16 - Navy 11/23 - Boston College 11/30 - at Stanford Only a couple patsies.
  13. moonslav59
    The biggest issue next year is we lose a lot of talent on the defensive end and clearly the second string will have to mature quickly. We lose Dexter Williams (best RB) and Boykin Miles (best WR), but pretty much all the rest of the offense returns, including QB Book. Yes, on defense, we lose some key talent, but only 3 starters on defense were seniors (Tillery, Coney and Asmar). Our whole Dbackfield returns. The Irish depth charts shows 10 of the 11 back-ups on D are under class men. https://www.ourlads.com/ncaa-football-depth-charts/depth-chart/notre-dame/91487
  14. moonslav59
    The replay killed us.
  15. moonslav59
    . If we are going to reset after 2019, your plan basically means we'll have to totally blow things up after 2019 while having a nice pen and nothing else for 2020 and beyond. (Yes, I'm exaggerating.)
  16. moonslav59
    My Domers took it on the chin, today. Maybe next year.
  17. moonslav59
    No, not adding is adding.
  18. moonslav59
    Are any of these guys possible RP'er trade targets? K-BB% 30.0 Oliver Perez 29.6 Corey Knebel 29.2 Kirby Yates 26.9 Jose Leclerc 26.7 Will Smith 26.7 Jose Castillo (26.3 Kimbrel) 26,2 Juan Nicasio 24.7 Richard Rodriguez (24.6 Ottavino FA) (24.5 Barnes) 23.6 Jace Fry
  19. moonslav59
    Yes, and closers, if they do well, get paid more than set-up men and 6th starters. That's a nice incentive. I don't see Johnson, Velazquez or Wright being asked to close, but any of our current RP'ers would probably jump at the chance to be named the closer or to just have a chance to win it: Thornburg Brasier Barnes Hembree (doubtful he can improve enough to win the role and do well in it) If we add a quality pitcher to this mix and leave some budget space for the summer, in case nobody shows they can close, we should be fine. Or, we end up using Eovaldi as a closer for the playoffs.
  20. moonslav59
    There's a higher tax and another drop of 10 slots for the next year's draft. That's a couple things. The 2nd and third years at $10M is what really might be the biggest problem. We will be faced with many decisions concerning the budget, especially if we choose to reset after 2019 or 2020. $10M might not seem like much, but when we are scrambling to scrounge dollars to keep as many of our young stars, $10M might make as big difference. The Pearce contract is over after 2019, so he has no affect on the choices after 2019 and 2020. Yes, his cost in 2019 might end up making us go over the $40M line, if we sign someone like Ottavino, but if that is the case, then my guess is the $40M line was not a big issue to begin with. To me, it's not just about the tax and draft penalties for 2019, it's about 2020 and 2021, too.
  21. moonslav59
    Even Ottavino puts us over the $40M line, which doesn't mean we won't sign him. To me, it will be more about the years he gets. Ottavino might end up being the best we can get through free agency for a somewhat limited cost, but free agency is not the only way to get solid RP'ers. I doubt we look to trade Moreland or Nunez to free up the space for Ottavino, but that might be one way to stay under the line.
  22. moonslav59
    DD might have looked at the current closer market and how many are available through free agency and seen there will be a surplus avfter all the major openings are filled. The price may drop on whoever is leftover, and DD will swoop in at a bargain rate. I don't see many big spending teams in need of a closer. Someone might be "left out." If that doesn't materialize, DD will have a plan B or C, which would likely be a trade of Chavis or Dalbec plus another prospect or Swihart.
  23. moonslav59
    You don't see any harm from the budget angle?
  24. moonslav59
    Well said. I wouldn't be surprised, if the guy DD brings in is not a big name or experienced "closer." It might be just a very good pitcher to add to the current mix of pitchers vying for the closer role. We may roll the dice like this and save some money for a summer deal.
  25. moonslav59
    It's addition by not adding.
×
×
  • Create New...