moonslav59

He's a gamble, but so is any signing. He can give affordable long term control- something almost any team wants. If he sucks, it won't be a big budget issue, except for the years.

Kikuchi seems like the best fit for what you need and want, budget-wise. If he was a righty, I'd be suggesting we sign him.

No me. I still "blame" Ben for this ring.

That pretty much sums it up. Choice 3 is the obvious choice, but when you have so many top players fighting for every open job, you don't get those 1 year signees beating down DD's door. I was surprised by Pearce jumping on a one year deal so quickly.

It's very difficult these days. It was much easier back when Theo was running the team. We maxed comp picks, raided the international market and drafted players who fell in the draft due to "signability" issues. We can't do anything like that anymore. Our draft picks will be lower than low, especially, if we keep going $40M over the limit. The international pool shrinks the more you win and spend. Signing slot money takes away from top prospects falling due to wanting more money. It's easy to just say, we need to be smart and "maximize personnel," but those hard decisions will have to include deciding not to extend Sale or Porcello or Bogey, and maybe even 2 of those 3. We still had a good farm when we won in 2004. We did again in 2007. Betts, Bogey and JBJ were still prospects in 2013. Those were the days. I doubt we ever see them again. I think it's pretty much either/or and the key is to try and minimize the rebuild time periods by trying to keep some semblance of balance. Right now, our farm-ML club talent levels are about as out of whack as can be. I'm not complaining. It was necessary, and it worked. I'm thrilled the window DD created wasn't just a 1-2 year thing. The window was (is) actually about 4-5 years long! Great job, DD!

I think this is wishful thinking. 2022 is a long way away. The economy might crash by then. Hell, we could all be dead from global warming that far away! (LOL). I doubt the limit goes to $250M that quickly. A while ago, I thought Henry (and DD) might decide to reset teh year after we win a ring, but with the team we had last year, it would be a crime to not try one or two more years. I do think we reset after 2020. We'll still spend just under the limit and may not be too bad, but we won't compete that year. We reset the tax and spend big the next year and budda-bing, we're back in the race. The biggest problem with my theory is that after 2020 is when Betts becomes a FA. That works great for a reset, as losing his last arb year contract will almost get us under by itself, but he's the one guy out of everyone, I want to keep most. So, in order to keep him, we'd have to plan out current contracts to end after 2020 (like Eovaldi, a closer, or whatever). It might mean not signing Sale or Porcello or Bogey the year before, so we can later afford Betts. That kind of goes against the idea of keeping the window open for 2020 as it weakens our chances that year. It's a tough call. Looking at the books and going on the assumption we want to keep Betts at all costs, it might make more sense to reset after 2019 or 2021, and not 2020. Hard to know.

Of course! The only argument that might ever have been able to be made, is if he traded all these farm pieces and we never won a ring. That argument is out the window. DD deserves all the praise in the world. The farm trade off was well worth it. There's no arguments left. Game over. Scoreboard.

How many of those 8+ year deals were given to 28 year olds?

Wow! I thought they were cost-cutting.

Iagree, even if he never learns to field or not strike out so much.

Most players play a conference championship game. If they eliminated those games in favor of going to 8 teams, then I don't think players or coaches would complain, but then you lose a lot of big game money for those extra games not played.

I'm fine with 4, but 8 would give us 4 more meaningful games. I really don't think Ohio St or UCF can say they deserve to be #1. The system was designed to not leave out anyone who has a claim to the championship not to let teams with no claims have a chance at upsetting a big team and win it all with 3 straight upsets.

I agree, and that's why I'm fine with DD's approach of sacrificing the future for win(s) now. Go through a rebuilding period (hopefully just 1-2 years) and be back on top again.

My position, all along, has been that we re-set after 2020 (so actually, the 2021 season). With that in mind, we may start letting someone go after 2019- like Porcello or Sale...maybe both, but then we might as well just reset after 2019. If we sign Eovaldi to 3-4 years, he's on the books for 2020, and that will mean someone else goes, or we trade him. If we sign Eovaldi and a closer and keep Sale, Porcello, Bogey et all, we'll be over $300M by 2020.

Yes, and actually this was the only year Henry really blew past the luxury limit. He had previously stayed very close to it, before. Eventually, IMO, he will ask Dd to reset the tax. I think it will be only for one year. Even that year, we could spend just $1 less than the limit and hopefully not be too bad.

I totally agree, but contratcs will sky rocket for some of our younger players nearing final arbs and free agency. I'm not sure Henry is willing to pay for a $300+M budget plus the massive taxes for being over 3 straight years (by 2020).

Yup. I'm not saying they'd hit .205, but they could probably still field better than Nunez and Holt.

The jury is still out on some deals...like Buttrey for Kinsler, but not really any of the major ones, except maybe Pom.

I was kind of half-joking, although his bat would outweigh the differential between his defense and Nunez at 2B. Holt is not all that great on defense, either. A hobbled Pedey is an unknown on D. Yes, I'd prefer Travis at 3B on D over Devers and Nunez.

You also see guys like Ozzie Smith and Omar Vizquel play forever. They could probably still play today.

Our best hope for a ML player by 2019 to 2020 are probably these: Age 23 Chavis (upside a 6 on soxprospects.com) 21 D Hernandez (6) 23 Dalbec (6) 22 Houck (6) 23 Chatham (5) 24 Shawaryn (5) 24 Lakins (5) maybe... 20 Groome (6) 21 Feltman (6) 22 Duran (5)

When it comes to the Sox, I think I'm a pretty big optimist. When the team is doing poorly, it sometimes feels like I'm one of just a select few that try to keep the faith. There are many examples of me thinking we will have a good to great year, and we sucked or did much worse than I expected. I've had times I was very optimistic about our farm and particular players like Cecchini, Owens, Iggy, Kalish, and even guys like Linares and Longhi. I'm actually pretty high on some of our very young prospects, but I guess what kind of bugs me is that I was put down quite a bit for being super high on Espinoza, because he was so far away and a long shot, and now I'm being criticized for not believing in prospects as far away as Espi was and who are not even close to being a top 20 nationally ranked prospect, like he was. I really like Mata and have hopes for Casas and Flores. I may not be as high on Feltman as some seem to be, but I do think he might give us some help in the next 2 years. Danny Diaz is so young (17). There are others like Groome and Houck. Dalbec and D Hernandez. I just don't see anyone jumping out (or up). I hope someone does next year. Actually, I hope 3 or 4 do, but I won't be surprised, if we have 0-1 in the top 100 mid season rankings or pre-season 2020.

Plus, he was a 7th pick in the draft. We won't be seeing any of those for a while (not that it is bad thing!).

How about Travis Shaw at 2B for us?

Good points, as always, but Betts doesn't have to deal with the Machado's of the world trying to take him out.