moonslav59

It all comes down to the Yoshida situation. As long as we cannot or will not trade him and refuse to play him in LF (not a bad choice,) we have our hands tied. We'd have to trade Casas to move Devers to 1B. I think the catcher position might be less complex, but it's not like teams want to trade a catcher. It is a position with very few plus-plus players. Only a handful of teams have 2 or more decent batting and defensive catchers. Wong is a plus hitting catcher, so there are not many out there that would stay even on O or improve it while being a much better defender. STL is looking to cut salary and has decent catcher depth in Pages and Herrera. Trading for Willson would help fix the RHB issue, but maybe only slightly improve the defense. He's owed $18M x 3, so maybe we would not have to give much up to get him. We could also try to get one of their other catchers, HOU has a very good defensive back-up catcher in Caratini, but he only has one year of control. They will not trade Y Diaz. Who else is out there? (I still think we should have just signed Jansen, but maybe Narvaez can impress us.) Scott seems like the easiest fix to our major need areas. We don't have to give up anything and would still be under the tax line. It might force a Crochet extension to start in 2026 or 2027, but it looks like the best idea to me. If the price comes down on Bregman, or he takes a 1 year deal to rebuild value, maybe he'd like to come to Fenway to boost his numbers for next winter's market. A one year deal would likely put us over the tax line.

A 104 OPS+ is not really "stopped hitting," but he is likely to keep falling, and maybe even sharply. 2023-2024 Arenado Rankings at 3B: 7th in fWAR (6.2, aided by his plus-plus D) 6th on D and 14th on O at 3B 12th in OPS .757 14th wRC+ 107 and 14th in wOBA at .257 He's been about average on offense among starting 3B. The issue is a continuing trend. The MLB 3B average was a 97 wRC+ and a .701 OPS

Of course a team can get much better by seriously upgrading a position that is already pretty good, but it makes sense to assess your team, on paper, by identifying your weakest areas, identifying any in organization solutions possible, and then prioritizing which fixes are most needed and most easily fixed. That depends on who is available on the FA market or via trade. To me, we started the winter wit these major needs, put in order by me: 1. Pen and not just replacing Jansen & Martin, because it sucked, even with them, esp 2nd half of '24. 2. Rotation and not just replacing Pivetta. 3. Catcher defense. 4. Corner IF defense 5. RHB, which could be a catcher or 3Bman that fixes #3 or #4, at the same time. What did we do, so far? #1 We added Chapman & Wilson and are counting on Hendriks & Whitlock and depth to make 2025 better. I'd say that is being overly optimistic, and we need to do better than just a slight improvement on paper, even if almost everything goes right. #2 I was not thrilled with the Buehler and Sandoval signings (about $40M spent on 2024 and 2025 for one pitcher each year,) but I was pleasantly shocked that we added more than one SP'er. We essentially added Crochet, Buehler, Giolito and 1/2 Sandoval for 2025 and Crochet & Sandoval for 2025. I call this as a surprising and major improvement. A+ to Brez & Co, here. #3, #4 and #5 have seen nothing. Maybe Narvaez can replace Jansen's defense, but we still could use a boost at any or all of these need areas as well as a closer addition. I put our needs like this, now: 1. Closer 2. RHB (since fixing defense is complicated by Yoshida's contract and entrenchment at DH.) 3. Defense at 3B, 1B and C (in that order, since I like Narvaez.) Adding a plus RHB at C or 3B could fix #2 and part of #3 with one move or signing. Signing someone like Alfonso and trading Casas for a closer or Catcher or a catcher and decent RP'er might work, but we'll have added a ton of money to a position (1B) that was not a weak area on offense. To me, the easiest fix might be to sign Scott and trade Abreu for a good defensive catcher or a RHB, or both, if we add more to the trade, like Abreu and Cespedes for Willson Contreras. Give the RF job to Anthony or put Rafaela out there and Anthony in CF.

Nobody can possible like the defense by Casas or Devers or Wong, Yoshida and Ref. Some accept it more easily than others, and when their offense is good enough to outweigh the poor or awful defense they can overlook the defense. The problem with having 4 guys who are best utilized as a DH is obvious: only one can be the DH on any given day. Yoshida mucks up the whole works. It's hard to just dump $18M x 3 years, just to improve 1B defense by moving Casas to DH. If we knew Devers was way better on defense at 1B than Casas, adding a 3Bman could fix two corner IF defense issues with one move, but we don't know this. Also, to do this, we'd have to pay a cost to add a 3Bman (money for Bregman or Arenado or players to trade for someone else.) Plus, we'd have to find a taker for Yoshida- newsflash: there are none, or GASP... play Yoshida in LF, which now turns that position into a weak D spot. I doubt a Yoshida for Arenado trade can happen. STL would not save enough money, and that is the whole reason they want to trade him. That forces the talk to trading Casas. To me, we won't get back what Casas is worth, so it's a no, to me. That forces running back the same corner IF issues on D. YUCK!

To me, Wilson may be gone by August. He's over-the-hill and wasn't all that good in '24. Scott is great vs RHPs, too, so I don't see having Scott, Chapman and Wilson as being unbalanced. Scott is a closer. He also has pitched about 75 IP in both of the last 2 seasons. That's 20-25 innings more than many closers and 10-20 innings more than most of them. He will basically get two Jansen deals- back to back, but he's way younger than Jansen. Just do it! He'd turn Hendriks and Chapman into decent set-up guys, instead of having to find which one could be an oka closer. He'd turn Slaten and Whitlock into high leverage 6th to 8th inning guys, with Whitlock able to go 2 innings. It would push Wink and Wilson down one peg and into more comfortable medium leverage roles. The 8th RP'er could end up being our 6th starter, a SP'er from AAA, like Criswell, Fitts or Priester, used to eat up many innings or someone like Guerrero. I could see rotating the 8th guys between Criswell, Priester, Fitts and maybe Dobbins or Fulmer (who needs to be added to the 40, first- maybe when Sandoval is placed on the 60.) Once we use one of these guys for 3-6 innings, we demote them and call up a fresh arm who is ready to do teh same, if needed, the next day or whenever. Keep cycling them.

We gotta shoot for longer, but yes, this type of deal make sense to Crochet. I guess the term "hefty" is what is debatable. Giving him $52M x 2 for those last 2 years, as you suggested) is too much, IMO. Maybe $70M/2 for the two added year, plus the $20M expected in arbs, so $90M/4 or $94 (starting now) might be acceptable to both sides. I'd try like hell to lock him up through prime. It is a major reason we got him in the first place, IMO. We gave up a lot due to his age and upside. was it worth trading 3 top 8 prospects for 2 arb years and a major overpay on 2 more years? Would $40M/yr for 4 added years be better? ($160M + $20M for 2 arb years= $180M/6) He becomes a FA at age 31. I still think $200M/8, counting the 2 arb years might be best for both sides, but that number might have to include an opt out. If the opt out was after year 4 or 5, it's a better offer for the Sox than yours. If the op out is after 3, I'm not so sure it's a good deal for the Sox, but it's better than no deal, and that was my original point. No deal vs an early opt out deal.

Making him the DH or co-DH with Devers, helps improve the 1B defense but keeps his bat around.

But Casas is cheap and will continue to be cheap through his arb years, if he keeps missing time. To me, he's poised for a major bust out year, if he can just stay healthy.

I did list those two in a seperate paragraph and mentioned they just missed a little time. The first 6 I listed should be viewed very differently, indeed. Sandoval & Murphy were paired, because they will likely start 2025 on the 60 Day IL. Gio and Hendriks were paired, because both missed all of 2024 and should be ready b y opening day. Buehler and Whitlock were paired, because they both pitched in 2024, although Whitlock was out after April and may miss opening day. (He should not be out longer than 15-30 days, so maybe no 60 Day for him. (Gio says he is close to being at the same place in their rehab progressions,) I admit, I have been piling on. I hate these types of signings: Buehler, Hendriks & Sandoval, but they do offer an enormous upside without a huge cost. $20M for Buehler is not cheap, nor is $18M for 1 to 1.5 seasons of Sandoval, but these guys can pitch better than that cost, and so can Hendriks. I'm a big fan of Whitlock and think he is a lot better than some seem to think he is. He could make up for the loss of the 2024 Jansen and Martin combo, all by himself- not in IP, but in dominance. Our pen has a lot of potential, but I'm not optimistic enough RP'ers reach that potential and make our pen a plus or major plus. I'd love to see us add Scott, but Estevez or a couple others guys left might be enough.

My guess is BOS is insisting on including Yoshida and the money exchange is the issue. STL is looking to save serious money, so taking Yoshida and some cash may not be saving them enough. The more I've thought about Arenado, the less I want him. His bat looks to be ready to drop off a cliff, and we'd be stuck with two Yoshidas. At least Arenado's D is good, but I'd say no without Yoshida. We may think about adding someone, other than Helsley, who is owed a lot, but we don't need Mikolas ($17.7M x 1 and $18.6 lux tax cost) or Matz ($12.5M and $11M tax cost.) Although Willson Contreras is not very good on D, he's better than Wong. He's a damn good RHB. The problem is, he's owed what Yoshida is owed ($18M x 3 and $17.5M on lux tax line.) Arenado + Contreras costs $45M in '25, $40M in '26 and $33M in '28 (counting COL's $5M payments over the first 2 years. The AAV would be: $43>$43>43. If we got Contreras included, I would not pay anything off Yoshida's deal, so in a sense, STL saves the full Arenado contract. Maybe we give them Rafaela, who is the only guy we can spare who is owed any large amount of money ($48M/7 remaining.) They may want Fitts or Priester or maybe even more, along with Rafaela, but I'm not sure how much they'd want or how much I'd give. Is Contreras really a major upgrade over Wong- projected over the next 3 years? (Wong had 4 years left- 3 as arbs.) Yoshida + Rafaela cost: $19M in '25, then $20>22M, then no Yoshida w Rafaela owed $40M/4 w option. The net cost of Yoshida+ Rafaela for Arenado + Contreras: -$26M in '25, $20M in '26 and $11M in '27, then we go plus by not paying Rafaela and Wong, but we are without a catcher and OF'er. So, does anyone like this trade? Yoshida, Rafaela and Cespedes for Contreras & Arenado with no cash involved. 1. L Duran LF/CF 2. R Contreras C 3. L Casas 1B/DH 4. L Devers 1B/DH 5. R Story SS 6. L Abreu RF/ R Refsnyder LF 7. R Campbell 2B 8. L Anthony CF/RF 9. R Arenado 3B Bench: Wong, Abreu/Refsnyder, DHam and Grissom/Romy

He will probably ask for an opt out after 2027 (3rd year) and maybe we end up having to settle on after 2028 (year 4.) Ideally, we just pay him a little more to give up on the opt-out demands, assuming he does that. If there was ever a player to want and need an opt out, he fits the profile.

2023-2024 fWAR: 4.5 Scott, 4.0 Clase, 3.8 Jax & Helsley, 3.6 Hoffman (Chapman is 8th) He's let up just 6 HRs in 146 IP.

To me, he fills a big need for us and is not a mega contract like Bregman.

It all depends on trusting his last 2 seasons and not much before that. The guy pitched 150 IP in relief (avg 75 a yr.) 2.04 ERA and 1.05 WHIP He had nasty numbers vs RHPs, too ,569 OPS Against in '24 (.415 v L) .499 v R in '23 and .587 v L He has been one of MLBs best RP'ers for 2 solid years. He's 30. I'd give him $68M/4 or $80M/5

When you figure Scott might make $64M/4, $33M/3 looks nice. Hoffman does not have a real long success story- like just 2 years, and he just turned 32 a couple days ago, but I'd have topped this deal ($35M/3?) Edited: I just read this... (maybe not) https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2025/01/orioles-pulled-out-of-agreement-with-jeff-hoffman-after-flagged-physical.html

Hoffman signs with Jays for $33M/3, and will likely be their closer. (Smaller AAV than Chapman.)

Yes. My offer is a big risk and doubles down on the chance it turns into a colossal bust. I get the risk. We made the trade, due mainly to his age and skillset. We rolled the dice on health and durability. If he bolts after two, it was a bad trade. We gotta give more to get him to say yes- and not $52M x 2.

I think everyone agrees. It gets tough when a player insists on one. I assume Bogey did. JD did. Price did. My priority is based on thinking Crochet is the real deal and is so young. I want to get him for as many years into prime as possible without an absurd overpay. It's risky as hell, due to his health and lack of a long record of success and durability, but we just gave up a lot to roll the dice on him. It seems weird that now, we second guess him and try to hedge our bets against the worst that might happen. We can't go absurd on making sure we extend him, at any cost, but we chose this guy as "our guy." We have to land him, longterm. If it gets absurd or he refuses fair offer, the next priority is get him to commit to as many years before any opt out- again without going absurd with dollars.

Yes, the threat of injury is why he's not going to get an extension at $35-40M a year, 2 years before he would lose the team control at arb prices. It's the main reason he'd sign, now. Every pitcher must worry a major injury could ruin his career and severely cut into his ability to make big money. It's not easy weighing all the risks and rewards to come up with a number that Crochet would agree to.

That's like $52M a year for the two extra years. I'd rather offer $200M/8 (including buying out arb years,) which comes to about $180M/6 for the extended years or $30M x 6 years. You know, there is also a chance he gets hurt but not like Sale- all but one year. Maybe he's only hurt for 2027 and 2028.

I mentioned that risk on an earlier post, and it is a major concern, especially a career ending one, or one where he never repeats 2024, again. All 6-8 year deals are an enormous risk. All have a risk of injury- some more than other. Crochet has the added risk of not having a long stretch of success or proven durability. I fully understand this and worry, like all of us. I can understand all that don't want to give a ton of guaranteed money to him, but IMO, I'd rather put my risk on a guy who will be 27 when the extension kicks in vs 30-32, like most FAs. Burnes and Fried are enormous risks, They are both proven. They both have proven durability. They both are on their way out of prime, before the halfway point of their contract. Crochet's 6 year extension will be almost entirely within prime. He would start the 6th year at age 32. To me, that adds the value.

Yes, you never gave up on our chances. You thought we could win it all from day one.

There was a major shift from 2023 to 2024 with 3rd time opportunities and success. OPS Against 3rd time through (PA sample size) 2023>2024 .937 (85) Houck .765 (195) (2024: .510 1st, .614 2nd) 1.142 (49) Crawford .720 (170) (2024: .677 1st, .709 2nd) .861 (156) Bello .780 (164) (2024: .787 1st, .622 2nd) Pivetta was the exception: .670 (69) to .808 (101) 2024: .642 1st, .751 2nd

The guy really mashed over his first two sesasons, mainly in 2020 and the second half of 2021. .959 first 92 PAs of career (2020) .895 middle 316 PAs of 2021 (.867 in last 345 of '21) Total for first 545 PAs (156 games 2020-2021) .243 33 94 (.819 OPS) That's a pretty nice start to a career, despite the 195 Ks in 156 games.

Cole turned 30 the first year of his deal. Crochet will turn 28 the first year. Cole had 3 really good years under his belt and 3-4 decent ones, when he signed. His worst years were his last 2 with PIT. He would not have gotten a great deal had he become a FA then, which was when he was the age Crochet will be (27-28.) He was 19-22 4.12 w a WHIP of 1.32. It was his 2 really good seasons with HOU that skyrocketed his FA value to $324M/9. Crochet does not deserve that ($36M x 9,) now. If he has two great years, he might come close, especially with inflation. He signed 4 seasons ago. We are going to have to pay Crochet for him to accept it.