moonslav59

He should get 40+ starts and many late inning replacements.

$6.5M x 2 is a lot to pay for someone, unless we play on playing him at least 35-40% off the time.

With JD at DH full time, I thought the main reason, and to me the only justifiable reason, we got Moreland was to allow us to legitimately keep HRam's option from vesting and to have Moreland at 1B for 2019, after HRam leaves- perhaps as a transition to Travis or Ockimey in 2019 or 2020.

He will be too expensive for a below average fielding SS. I think we try to keep Sale, Betts & JBJ.

I think we lose Bogey, but I agree with the rest, in general.

I think they wanted Vaz as the starting catcher all along, but he was not quite ready for opening day. It wasn't a knee-jerk reaction to Swi's firtt 8 games. Just my opinion. (I happen to think they made the right choice.)

Teams looking to spend next year will be looking at Machado and others, not HRam. Aging DH's with injury histories and inconsistent seasons are not worth more than $12M very often, if ever.

I'm just saying what I think. I'm not saying good thinsg about you and notin to pump you guys up. I really think both of you bring a lot to the conversation and make me rethink my own opinions and philosophy about Red Sox baseball. I can see the point that if HRam truly deserves to play over Moreland vs just about all RHPs and every LHPs, and we short him to keep him from vesting, it would be an ethical issue and might hamper future signings with clauses like that from happening here, but to me, HRam would have to be the clear choice for me to let him vest. If there's any gray area, I'm going with Moreland, Swihart, Nunez or JD at 1B or DH over HRam which would keep HRam under 497. I respect your opinion and do think you're bright, despite disagreeing with me on many issues.

I'm a big Wright fan, but I'm not penciling him in as Pom's replacement next year. If we have HRam's contract on the books next year, we can't keep Pom or replace him (in kind) through free agency. We just can't. The arb raises will eat up Kimbrel's lost contract ($13M), and we can save $4M by trading or DFA'ing Holt and Leon next winter to pay for the rest of the arb raises and Sale's $1M option raise. That leaves Pom's $8.5M and Kelly's $3.9M coming off the books and needing replacement. Assuming we stay near $39M over the luxury tax again, maybe not a good assumption, we will not be able to sign anyone as good as these two for the same money. Assume we can replace Kimbrel and Kelly from within the system, maybe a pen like this: C Smith R2 Thornburg R3 Barnes R4 Workman R5 Scott R6 Hembree R7 Maddox/Elias/Buttrey or maybe Wright ...that leaves about $12M to replace Pom. Maybe a Lance Lynn type will go for $12M again next year, but who knows? I can't see us getting close to resetting the luxury tax, even when we lose Pablo's money. Things look similar after 2019 as well..

At the time we signed HRam, I thought he was going to be our new 3Bman, then the shocking Pablo signing rattled my bones. Many experts felt we got HRam for cheap, but I'm fine with judging signings in hindsight, as long as we do it consistently. It was a bad signing. We needed pitching more, at the time, but we did still need hitting. I could see the reasoning behind waiting for the following winter, when big starters were plentiful on the market. In hindsight, the signing was very bad. I'm actually one of the few posters who thinks HRam will do well this year, but since Moreland is a better defender, by far, and he does pretty well vs RHPs, so I'd give Moreland a significant amounnt of playing time at 1B vs righties. That should keep HRam from vesting, but there's reason enough to do it, even if HRam did not have the vesting option. HRam will have to be having a hell of a season, including vs righties, for me to play him enough to get 497 PAs, which is just 56 more than we gave him last year.

My choice of wording was wrong and inflamatory. I apologize. My point about Travis maybe being someone who steps up and wrestles a FT job away from HRam?Moreland was that it doean't really help our budget for 1 to 2 years. If we had a SP'er step up and win a slot, then we'd save bigtime on not having to re-sign or replace Pom with a FA. Same with someone to replace Smith or Thornburg as they move into Kimbrel's vacated slot in the pen. The areas we need the most Immediate help look barren on the farm (SP3, RP2, RP4)

The way HRam has been playing for us, he's owed nothing. Moreland's been better or equal to HRam on offense vs RHPs, and he's a better defender by a long shot. I don't see playing Moreland vs 30-50% of RH'd starters as "the wrong thing to do," even if HRam had not vesting option. My view may change, if HRam is way outplaying Moreland vs righties, but I'll speak to that, if and when it happens. (By the way, I think notin is one of the smartest and most insightful posters on this board... next to maybe you. Thanks for the compliment, even if unintended. )

HRam does not have the right to play, especially vs RHPs. One could certainly justify starting the season with a strict platoon: Moreland vs RHPs and HRam vs LHPs... not becuase of HRam's option, but because of the 3 year numbers by both players. When we signed Moreland, I thought that was the plan. If we paid $6.5M x 2 for a strict back-up 1Bman, then the deal sucked more than I thought at the time. 2015-2017 vs RHPs .782 Moreland .767 HRam (last 2 years shows HRam with better numbers vs RHPs .783 to .746) I don't see this as rinky dinky. I thought the signing of Moreland was actually meant to improve our team by allowing him to play. Look, I hated the Moreland signing, but those here who liked or loved it, and I think you liked the signing, seem to now want to keep him from playing. Sure, if HRam starts to rake vs RHPs, he'll play, but shouldn't he have to earn that first? I'd start the season off holding my nose and starting Moreland vs at least half the RH'd starters. If you consider Moreland to be even with Hram vs RHPs, his fielding at 1B gives him the clear and justifiable edge. That's what we signed him for. We want to be careful with HRam's feelings, but what about Moreland's?

That is a horrible thing, and it seems to happen everywhere, even at ND, where I attended.

You might be right. I looked at the wording and could not find anything on international pool money lost, except for signing a QO FA. I guess 10 picks is not so bad without the pool money lost, but it does or could affect our future beyond 2018 along with the 75% tax on all money spent over the $40M mark for a second year over the limit team.

So then the NCAA is not corrupt. I feel better now watching it.

I'm not "justifying" corruption. I love watching the passion and energy this tournament provides. It sucks that my watching the games puts money in the pockets of the wrong people, but it's a choice I make and will keep making. I love the game of basketball, and March Madness is the best!

What's the chances any Sox player starts out on the 60 day DL? (Q2: can a 60 day DL be made retroactive to, say, March 15th?) How about Pedey? ERod? I think Pom and Thornburg look like 15 day DLs. Hernandez might take longer, but he might not be a 60 day player. I'm not sure what good it does us, other than being able to add someone to the 40 man roster, but when a player returns, we then have to DFA/trade someone.

It wasn't about thinking Swi's bat was elite. He was our best option for LF at the time as we had just missed out on obtaining Beltran at the last minute of the trade deadline.

This was tongue and cheek and directed towards natick. Of course Swihart is tradeable. Of course JT is worth way more than Swihart.

I think the point is that we need a prospect to step up at a position where we lose someone next year, in order to maximize the benefit. Moreland is signed next year, and if several posters get their way, HRam will be back, too, no matter how well Travis is doing.

Well put. (Note: we might still have JD Martinez in 2021, but only if he's not been doing too well.)

Yes, we can afford to bench $29M in 2018 and $6.5M or $29M in 2019, so Travis can get a look-see. Yes, Travis could be one of those pieces we are looking for to get us beyond "the cliff", but too bad he won't give us any salary relief until 2020, assuming we let HRam vest like some here are unconcerned with.

I doubt anyone would even pay $12M for HRam next year after he hits .886 in 2018. There are better choices. Several players better than HRam just signed one year deals.

It's very likely that if we have HRam's $22M on the books next year, and we want to keep "the window" open for 2019, we will go over the $40M mark and see penalties imposed that grealyt affect our future beyond 2019. Draft pick moved down. International pool money significantly reduced, not to mention a huge tax imposed on Henry's wallet that might make him less likely to spend big beyond 2019.