moonslav59

$40M tax and $40M contract cost in the year you do not re-set. It's still an $80M savings in this scenario where there is never any taxes for going over the $40M line. It would be worse, if the team went over the $40M line, and of course, less if the team doesn't go $40M over every year. Is an $80M savings worth having one season where you spend $40M less than the norm and maybe not be highly competitive? That's the big question. Remember, that one reset year (2021), the team can still spend $210M, and in theory should still be pretty good.

Assuming Holt starts at 2B and Pedey never plays another game, we still have Nunez as our super utility IF'er. Both Holt & Nunez can play OF in a pinch as well as does JD. I'm not worried about our bench with Holt (or Nunez) becoming a starter.

Yes, weaken DH, too!

If you really equate the two histories, then fine. I don't.

Yes, and keeping all 4 of our current farm options (Chavis, Ockimey, Travis & Dalbec) makes some sense, but trading one may not matter, if one of the other 3 steps up.

A 50% tax on $40M is $20M a year. re-setting not only saves the full $60M for the reset year ($40M not spending on contracts + $20M in taxes at 50%) , but it saves $12M the next year and $8M the 2nd year (in taxes) over the limit after the reset. It's about an $80M savings over 3 years.

Going from a 50% tax to none for one year, then 20%, then 30% is pretty significant. Let's take a three year sample (starting in 2019) without even going over the $40M line: 2019: $246M + $12M tax (30% of $40M)= $258M 2020: $248M + $20M tax (50% of $40M)= $268M 2021: $250M + $20M tax (50% of $40M)= $270M 2022 and 2023 would be similar to 2021 ($270+M x 3= $810M) Now, make 2021 the reset year: 2021: $210M + no tax= $210 2022: $250M + $8M (20% tax)= $258M 2023: $250M + $12M (30% tax)=$262M Total: $730M for these 3 years Maybe $80M might not seem like a lot from our view of Henry's wallet size, but I guess it matters to him. $80M equals signing a player to $27M x 3 years. Now, he loses Pablo and Castillo's contracts before these years arrive, and hopefully, no current big contract player becomes dead weight, but even just staying near the $40M line for many years in a row, without re-setting, can become pretty costly.

True, but he's gotten better vs righties as he's aged. Pearce actually had more PAs vs RHPs (131) than LHPs (120) last year. OPS Year vs RHPs/LHPs 2018: .828/.959 2017: .767/.730 (249 PAs v R/99 v L) 2016: .795/1.028 (207/95 PAs) 2015: .765/.623 (201/124) career: .743/.852 (1548/908 PAs)

I don't think he's all that great at 3B, so manybe 1B is his final landing spot, but we're not yet sure Devers sticks at 3B either, so keeping Chavis does make some sense. I guess it comes down to how good we (and more importantly DD) thinks he is and can become. If you think he can be a plus at 3B or 1B in 2020, then find other guys to trade, but Chavis might be our best winter trading chip that wouldn't take away from our big league roster.

You can have too many injured pitchers.

I want dependable pitchers. That's not a radical or absurd idea. I thin he gets a ML deal from someone, and no that doesn't mean I don't offer him a minor league deal in the mean time, but my philosophy is to try and get minor league depth you can count on being there, when needed. If we sign Buch to a minor league deal, I'd be fine with him in AAA. He would offer a hope and a prayer, in case we need something from the farm. I'd rather have the Fister type guys.

Umm, Velazquez did go 7-2 and stayed healthy all year (pretty much). No doubt, Clay has upside, when healthy, but I'm done with him. Too many let downs. BTW, the team went____ in their 2018 starts.... 9-4 Johnson 5-3 Velazquez 8-8 Buchholz Also, maybe Johnson and Velazquez will never have a 1.04 WHIP or an ERA near 2, but I doubt they have these numbers either.... 2017: 0-1 12.27/2.591 in 7.1 IP 2016: 8-10 4.78/1.328 in 139 IP 2014: 8-11 5.34/1.386 in 170 IP 2012: 11-8 4.56/1.326 in 189 IP Buch is a crap shoot. If he'll take a minor league deal, there's no harm, but I'd still rather sign someone more dependable.

There is a long history of GMs guaranteeing money to oft-injured players coming off a good looking season or half season, including us taking Buch's option.

To me, this is a horrible idea. RF defense is extremely important. We'd be going from the best to the worst in one stroke. I like how Holt bulked up and looks more durable. I'm hopeful Nunez gets his knee in shape. Outside hopes like Pedey, Hernandez, Lin and Quiroz add to the chances 2B will be fine, as is.

We do have a little issue with having too many marginal players who are out of options (Cuevas, Swihart, Hembree, Johnson & Workman). I'm not sure how much value these players have in other GM's minds, and many teams are facing roster crunches this winter and may not be looking for a 2 for 1 type deal involving 2 out-of-options players. In theory, I'd like to see us trade for a solid RP'er or 6th starter type (assuming we sign Eovaldi) that is better than Johnson/Velazquez. I could see us trying something like this and throwing in Chavis, Ockimey or Travis might help improve the returning player's value a little bit: Johnson, Swihart & Chavis for a better 5/6 starter. Hembree, Swihart & Cuevas for a better RP'er.

If Pedey does not make the 25 man roster, there is room for Leon & Swihart, but I think we trade Swihart with another player (hopefull an out-of-options player) for a RP'er. Since we have Pearce, Holt and Nunez, we don't need Lin, Chavis or Travis to replace Swihart or Leon.

Yes, and even .825 vs LHPs and some decent number vs righties, when he faces them is worth the $6M/1.

I heard somewhere we were just barely over the $40M mark this year. My guess is the official number will show we ended up just under the $40M over line. That might be evidence that the Boston bean counters are hard at work trying to keep us under that top line. The draft penalty is not severe, and if you go just barely over the tax on a small amount over is very small, so in that sense going over the $40M line in and of itself is not earth-shattering, but going over by a lot may take its toll. My guess is DD is not being forced to stay under the $40M line, but it is a high priority not to go way over it. My guess is, upper management has already chosen a season where they plan to reset. I think it will be the 2021 season, so any new contract that runs through 2021 will be very carefully scrutinized with that in mind, and the fact that any 2021 salaries on the books may prevent re-signing some of our best young stars. At some point, it will likely become a juggling act for DD. I'm not calling out anyone who thinks Henry will just keep sending and spending through 2021 and beyond, but re-setting the tax for just one year would save Henry a ton of money for many years afterwards. I'm thinking that is the plan, and my suggestions and projections are based on that foundational belief.

Assuming my numbers are close, and DD will try to stay under the $40M line, signing Pearce might amount to this: Pearce $6M per Eovaldi $16M per Familia $9M per vs No Pearce Eovaldi $16M per Ottavino $8M per Cody Allen $7M per (or Kelly)

Plus, next year we have Pearce for the full season- not just 2+ months/

Last winter, Buch was coming off worse numbers over 2 years. He pitched well in 16 starts last year- enough for some desperate GM to throw him a bone (ML deal).

He'll get a ML deal somewhere. Not here.

I figure we are at about $215M with arb costs. If we want to stay under the $40M line ($246M total counting player benefits), we have about $31M to spend. Assume we save $4-6M for mid season deals, we may have about $25M to spend. $16M x 2 or 3 yrs Eovaldi $9M x 2 or 3 yrs Familia/Ottavino/Miller

Porcello is a horse. 10 years with never being under 27 starts or 162 IP. 8 straight seasons over 175 IP amd 28+ GS'd. He's started 31+ times in 7 of the last 8 seasons. Even if you throw out Keuchel's first season, he has been under 175 IP in 3 of the last 6 seasons. I'm not saying Keuchel is a slacker or injury prone, but I wouldn't call him a workhorse.

Oops, fixed it.