moonslav59

"over exaggerating" Kinda like a "hypothetical scenario".

Betts might be looking for a 10 year deal after becoming a FA, so he may want a 14 year deal from us , if we approached him now.$350M/10 + $50M/4= $400M/14.

Maybe the same goes with Branch and Theo.

I would, if I knew how.

I doubt any of our catchers, as the feature player of a trade, is going to net us a top pitcher. Maybe we could get a decent set-up guy, but I'm not sure that's a good idea.

I would too. 1955 NCAA Championship 1956 NCAA Championship 1956 Olymic Championship 56-57 NBA Championship 57-58 Lost in finals of NBA Championship even though they out-scored the Hawks led by Bob Petite and Cliff Hagen 58-59 NBA Championship 59-60 NBA Championship 60-61 NBA Championship 61-62 NBA Championship 62-63 NBA Championship 63-64 NBA Championship 64-65 NBA Championship 65-66 NBA Championship 66-67 Lost Div Finals (player-coach) 67-68 NBA Championship (player-coach) 68-69 NBA Championship (player-coach) That's 11 NBA championships, 2 college championships and an Olympic Gold Medal in 15 seasons. 14 total in 15 seasons! Never going to be matched.

I am too, but I just wanted to bust his balls a lil bit.

That's another big worry. I think, if you project $35M x 6 after his contract runs out and add the $50 estimated arb costs, it comes to about $260M/10, but with more money up front, which to me is huge for a guy making $575K vs $5M early on. Invest the money wisely. Buy a house or two, and you'll be much better off later and also in the near future. Plus, the $26M luxury tax might hurt now, but it could be very nice 6-10 years from now.

One downside to locking him up now is the luxury tax implications. If we pay him $30M a year and all of it is taxed, it's like paying him $45M a year!

Catchers usually mature much slower. Vaz just turned 26. VTek was 30-32 when he became plus-plus on D.

It's probably best to hold onto Swihart (if and) until his value rises. I do think he may be the best talent we have that we can also do without next year and going forward, but if Vaz never gets over .600, I'll be kicking myself for years. With all DH Papi gone, Hernandez, Dubon, Travis and others looking fine, maybe Holt could be part of a package that nets us a significant talent. I wouldn't trade both Swihart and Holt, because we need ML ready LF depth beyond Young. I'm super high on Moncada, but I like Devers too, so maybe he'll be the one that is the center point of a big trade this winter. (I wouldn't include Holt in a Moncada package due to the need for 3B depth, once Moncada is gone.) Devers may be 1 or 1.5 years away. We won't get much for Owens and/or Johnson, and I'd hate to trade Kopech or Groome after losing Espi. We might be able to trade Pom or Buch with other pieces for a better starter, but I can't think of a match. It sounds good in theory, but name a better starter we can for Pom, Swihart and Owens. Who can we get for Moncada, Swihart and Pom?

Something happened last year beyond Leon's hot streak. It looked like Vaz was in the dog house over something. I've heard some rumors, but I don't want to repeat things that may not be true. I've always been super high on Vaz. His defense is supposed to already be plus, so at his age, I'm thinking maybe he'll be one of the best on D real soon. I don't worry as much as others about offense from the catcher, SS and to some extent CF, but sub .600 is pushing even my parameters. I'm think Vaz should be able to hit over .675, but I'm hopeful for .700-.750 before too long. I don't expect Leon to be over .750 next year, but I doubt he's below .650 either. He did have an .856 OPS in the minors back in 2012, so maybe he can do much better than his .654 minor league career mark.

If it was so "easy" why wasn't it done earlier. Come on! EASY?!?!? The man got death threats!

That's really what I'm trying to do, or they may be a similar salary dump like Garza that would allow us to get a choir boy instead of an evil dude. Maybe someone could counter with another idea. I'm trying to keep my mind off the next 4 years.

We may lose out on EE, Morales and Beltran. We may have to go to plan x, y or z.

It's important to the fan, but really, how is taking a 70 win team that won a WS 30 years ago any easier than taking an 70 win team that hasn't won in a 100 years froma GM's perspective?

They haven't won but one ring. I've heard "dynasty" too much over recent years. Theo's not the only GM to take a 70 to 75 win team to a championship in 5 years. Some have done it quicker. I think the curse hype has gone to far.

Betts has 4 years of team control- one at pre-arb cost. He may end up costing us $46-50M for those 4 years ($800K, $5M, $15M & $25M) Signing him to $150M/6 is like giving him $50M in each of his last two seasons. Giving him $300M/10 is like giving him $250M/6. I'd rather give him $300M. He might jump at a deal that gives him more money up front. year 1: $5M (not $800K) year 2: $10M (not $5-7M) year 3: $18M (not $15M) year 4: $25M (same) 5: $30M (not $35M) 6: $31M (not $35M) 7: $32M (not $35M) 8: $33M (not $35M) 9: $34M (not $35M) 10: $35M (same) Basically, $255M/10. He actually makes about $5M less on my offer, but he can make money with the upfront money by investing wisely and way outperform the other track.

I'm not into listening to my team sing in a choir. Just win, baby!

Read my first sentence. Now, Owens and Johnson are not going to crack our rotation. I put the odds at more than 100:1. I'm not high on Shaw like others here, and if I traded him, I might then go after Frazier or Turner (FA). The only real significant players we're giving up are 2 years of Pom and 5 years of Swihart, which people are telling me is worth no more than Salty was when we traded for him. I suspect the Brewers would say no. Thornburg is not just a "set up guy". He's a top set-up guy. Braun can play LF when we play in NL parks. EE can play 1B, but then HanRam is benched.

Branch couldn't just go out and sign an established player like Lester. That shouldn't be held against him. It should count in his favor. Just the fact that he thought outside the box and signed Jackie Robinson is something he should get enormous credit for. He set up the minor league system when there was none. Just because it was long ago, doesn't mean his value should be discounted.

I'm fine with your opinion. Here's the argument for Branch: Had Branch Rickey retired from baseball in 1942, before he ran the Dodgers, before he signed Jackie Robinson, his record as a general manager would still be enough to warrant consideration as the greatest GM in the game’s history. By that time he had already built one of history’s best organizations, winning six pennants and four World Series while completely revising baseball player development and instruction and inventing the farm system model that is still in place nine decades later. When you add in his Brooklyn years, both the building of one of baseball’s best and most iconic teams and his historic and courageous act to integrate the game, it is a relatively easy call. Branch Rickey first envisioned an organized “farm system” as a solution to the high cost of buying minor league players. A team could instead sign amateur players (for much less money) and then assume the cost of developing the players on teams under its control. Rickey became a legendary talent evaluator, able to make decisions quickly on players. Among other things, he valued speed and youth. No sentimentalist, he tried to trade players before they started to decline rather than after. With his huge farm system, he believed he could fill the holes created when he traded his veterans away. From 1926 to 1946 the Cardinals won nine pennants and six World Series. Rickey did not have complete control of the club — Breadon hired and fired the managers, for example — and the relationship between the two men had become a bit strained by the early 1940s. When the Dodgers offered an ownership stake and more authority in October 1942, Rickey moved to Brooklyn. (Sound familiar?) Rickey could not do much with the war going on — all his players were in the service — but he worked on building his farm system to be ready. In 1943 alone the Dodgers signed Rex Barney, Duke Snider, Gil Hodges, and Ralph Branca. Over the next couple of years Brooklyn added Carl Erskine and Clem Labine, two other mainstays of Dodger teams to come. The most important event of Rickey’s career, of course, was the signing of Jackie Robinson in October 1945. After losing a pennant playoff in 1946, the Dodgers won NL pennants in 1947 and 1949 and then lost in 1950 on the season’s final weekend. Unlike the prewar teams, by 1950 the Dodgers had several good players in their twenties and more on the way. In late 1950 Rickey began to sense that his position had weakened with his partners and decided to cash in his stake and take a job running the Pittsburgh Pirates. Walter O’Malley bought Rickey’s share and gained control of the club. The core of talent Rickey left behind won four more pennants and the 1955 World Series. The acolytes he left, including Buzzie Bavasi and Al Campanis, built on Rickey’s foundation to create and maintain baseball’s model organization for another four decades.

I guess, if you're and expert on baseball history, then no. I didn't know much about Rickey, but after reading the article, I can see why someone might think he is the best. I remember Gillick as being great too. I'm just saying that the fa ct that the Cubs and Sox had such long stretches of never winning a ring, does not mean Theo started from zero. Clearly, the rebuilding of the Cubs was a very remarkable thing, but the Sox had a strong core when he got here, and many of the early moves were attributed to Larry L (Schilling and Beckett/Lowell). I'm not trying to rain on Theo's parade. The guy is a genius, but I also respect history, and there have been GMs that revolutionized the game and GM position plus won more rings. Does that make them better than Theo? I don't know, but I do question the importance given to reversing long curses.

I do think Swihart can and will improve on defense as a catcher. I don't think he's as bad as many think he is right now. He's got a plus arm (strong & accurate) and with sub 2.0 pop times. He's had good to very good CS% over his career in the minors (39%) and majors (28%). To me, throwing out runners is just a small fraction of a catcher's value on defense, but the rest is harder to quantify. I'll leave it to soxprospects.com to rate: Field: ... Athletic behind the plate with quick feet and lateral movements. Frames well, and athleticism provides mobility for excellent blocking skills on balls in the dirt. Future plus defense with plus athleticism... ...and this is why I think he still has high value right now, despite an injury that he should be able to recover from 100% quickly.

He hits better than Vasquez and most likely Leon, and within a couple of years I believe will be close to their ability in defense. He's only a year younger than Vaz. Believing he catches up with Vaz on defense, assumes Vaz does not get much better on D as Swi theoretically improves.