moonslav59

Alcantara might be the closest comp. He was 25 when he signed. He had some success and under 500 IP, before signing. The differences: He was facing the first of 3 arb seasons and added 2 years of control. That's not a big difference, but going for 4 or more years after team control runs out is a pretty big step and should cost much more than the 2 years Alcantara got. The two years were at $17.3M, each. Would it have been a higher AAV had he got 4 years. What would be the "adjustment" for that? Now, take that adjusted number and index for inflation. Is $20M too low? Is $28M too high? Is about $25M about right? If you multiply Alcantara's $17.3 x 4, it would be about $70M- no adjustments. I'm not thinking $80M/4 is a proper adjusted number. There is a reason most arb players who extend only add 1-2 years, not 4-6. That is what really makes our suggested offers unique.

Both Devers and Casas hit so well, they far outweigh their poor defense. It's not even close. I think Casas is one healthy season away from being a 40-120 batter. Clearly 1B and 3B are not the reason we play .500 ball, but there is a way to keep their bats in the line-up, while greatly improving the corner IF defense. Corner IF defense may not be the highest priority or even top 5, but it should be something we consider fixing, if we can find a way to do it, without creating a new issue, or causing the net value of our team to get worse. I'm fine with keeping them where they are, if we address some other areas, adequately- like closer, catcher defense and a power RHB. Another RP'er might be my #4, but to me, corner IF is #5 and is high enough to consider finding ways to fix it, without losing the two bats- Devers and Casas from the line-up. i've discussed, over and over how the Yoshida at DH FT issue causes a major headache, when considering a Devers-Casas timeshare at 1B/DH, and maybe that's reason enough to just run back that part of the 2024 team.

To me, the main issue with Devers D is his arm accuracy. That is not such a big issue at 1B. No, he's not 6-4. No, we don't know how well he scoops bad throws, but he seems okay on grabbing hot shots and has shown decent range, at 3B. Maybe he turns out to be as bad as Casas on D. It's hard to imagine him being worse, but if he's even, he can share time with Casas at 1B and DH, assuming Yoshida is traded or plays LF (not ideal.) I have been saying this all winter long, and for years have been saying we should move him or think about it. I'm pretty sure I was one of the first posters to be in favor of moving him off 3B, but I'm not sure on that. I am sure I have talked about moving him off 3B for over 3 years.

Signing Vlad is one thing, but I'm not trading value for a guy I have to pay $450M to, next winter.

Be serious. You know how long I have been saying move devers off 3B. You've mocked me for that for years. Now, you ask if I just figured it out?

No- never said we did. The idea is to try to get better by first identifying your highest need areas, and then to try to fix a few. It's not rocket science. Of course we can still win with Devers at 3B, and 3B D is not our highest need ara.

The lack of MLB experience makes Yamo sort of a comp, but he does have way more IP. The age is closer for Yamo than some others. Nobody is saying Crochet should get $324M/12, so we realize the comp is not equal, but it can be used as a scale to try and better figure out about how much Crochet should get. No matter where you look for a comp, some sort of adjustment has to be made, for age, more or less arb years remaining, recent success and IP numbers and more. No match comes close, so maybe trying to use the comp method is not the way to go.

Since he might get $20M in arbs for 2025+2026, you are really giving him about a $150M/4 extension. That is extremely high. I was thinking $150M/6 starting in 2027, and add the $20M for 2025-2026 arb buy outs, and it would be $170M/8. I'd go up to $180 or maybe even 190M/8 starting in 2025- knowing full well it is a huge risk and unprecedented for anyone close to his current profile. That basically comes to $180M/6 or $25-$28M a year for the after arb years. I can see how that looks way too high to many of you, and it looks close to full FA value for a proven SP'er, but his contract would end at around age 30-32 and not be starting there.

Not easy. We have been talking about this for months. We could pay $$12M a year out of the $18M and maybe still not find a taker.

This is exactly what many do. They extend to get 1-2 more years of guaranteed money, in case the get hurt or decline, but set it up so they still get their big chance to enter the FA market a reasonable age. Trying to extend Crochet a bit farther will and should cost more than just 1-2 years of added control. If we get Crochet to sign a 6 year deal, starting with and buying out the 2025 salary and the 2026 arb year, he'd still be a FA at just age 30. He can still get a hefty desal like Burnes and Fried, assuming he does well and shows durability. Not many pitchers had the chance to sign a 6 year extension at age 25 and still have the opening for an even bigger payday at age 30. He'll be set for life, even if he ends up sucking and getting no more deals after this one. His downside is that if he's great for the Sox in '25 and '26, he could have signed for way more than what our extension will be, but that the gamle from his perspective. The Sox, would be taking the bigger risk, of course. If he gets hurt or sucks, we are stuck with a 6 year deal.

Good stuff. It is really hard finding an apples to apples situation. There is always some sort of major difference: age, arb years remaining when extended, amount of IP under their belt, injuries and more. Berrios was 27 in 2021 and had 850 IP. His last arb was going to be 2022, so the NOV '21 signing bought out just 1 arb year. While Crochet will be 27, when his arbs are done, it's not the same as Berrios, and his IP'd are way less. I'm not sure about their injury comp. Berrios did get $131M/7, and with inflation that might be something like $160-170M/7, now and maybe more in 2 years. Alcantara signed NOV '21, as well, but his case is much different. His $56M/5 looks like Bello's. Sandy had just finished his pre-arb years and had 3 arb years bought out, and added 2 years of control. He was 25, like Crochet but had almost 500 IP. Finding comps is a useful way to try and set a value, but this case seems too unique to follow that method. Comparing him to Yamamoto is too far off, too. The IP thing always comes back to make Crochet's future value equation much more speculative. His injury situation beats nobody in these comps. His age does for most. Judging his current level of skills is also not a sure thing, and who can say his stuff is the same as Yamo, Alcantara, Berrios, Strider, Strasburg and others mentioned, recently. He does look better than Bello, who got $55M/6 way before his arbs were even starting.

Vlad is a beast of a hitter, and should age well. It still shocks me to see he turns just 26, soon. To me, it's all about the money, and the fact that we already have devers signed to $313M and both fit the 1B/DH profile, which to me give very limited positional value. I'd love his RH'd bat paired with Devers. It could be Manny/Papi-esque. I'm just not sure we should tie up $75M a year on two 1B/DH types, when we already have an $18M x 3 DH only guy on the roster. Now, we are talking almost $97M on 3 DHs. Knowing how cheap JUH has become, there won't be any money left for other higher importance positions.

Good thing they shut him down: it really extended his career! LOL

Yes, we are told again and again, why can't we be more like LAD, then that extending Crochet like nobody has ever done before is a bad idea.

And, when someone is months away from their big payday, will they tell the team about a sore arm?

Starting an exploratory committee on exploring options.

Could be a lot of fun, if this works out on both fronts.

Here are the international free agents the Red Sox have signed so far Dorian Soto, SS, Dominican Republic Harold Rivas, OF, Venezuela Eliezer Alfonzo, SS, Venezuela Hector Ramos, SS, Dominican Republic Sadbiel Delzine, RHP, Venezuela Christopher Cordero, RHP, Dominican Republic Jhorman Bravo, SS, Venezuela Jainer Almanzo, RHP, Colombia Soto is the most notable name among Boston's signings so far. The 16-year-old ranks No. 8 on MLB Pipeline's list of top international prospects. He leads the pack with a $1.4 million signing bonus and has been tabbed as "advanced for his age" in multiple skills, according to SoxProspects. The six-foot-three switch-hitter may not be able to stick at shortstop long-term, but his offensive profile is the key here. Delzine is the top arm among the Sox's international signings so far this winter. The six-foot-five righty can already miss bats with his changeup and his curveball has high potential. SoxProspects believe he has the highest potential "for any Red Sox IFA pitcher in recent history" at the time of his signing.

JH has to be shaking his head on so many swings and misses. Sure, the odds of missing go up when you spend $10M/1 or $18M/2, instead of larger deals, but our record on $10+M deals is pathetic. While Gio had some big Qs, when we signed him, one was not health, so that one seems like just bad luck, but knowing our record, had he stayed healthy, he probably would have done worse than Criswell, anyway.

But hey, cheer up, we graduated from $10M/1 guys like Kluber and Richards to a $20M/1 like Buehler. We graduated from $10M/2 injury projects like Paxton and Hendriks to an $18M/2 Sandoval. We traded good young talent for Crochet and not Wink and Verdugo. The sky is JH's limit!

Yes, and I'm not trying to change your opinion. Certainly a larger sample size is more valid for knowing how good someone is, and in many cases, depending on age, it is often a useful tool in projecting how good someone will be. I think Yamamoto will be good, but there is a lot more doubt for him vs someone like Kershaw, when he signed at age 26. I do think differing ways of judging someone have pluses and minuses, and I have never said going by longer recent sample sizes is a worse way of projecting how good someone will be vs looking more at age and very recent smaller sample sizes and skillset. There are plenty of examples of getting it wrong (like w Price) and how we could have gotten it right (Lester.) No way is a surefire bet, or everyone would use that method. I know I could be terribly wrong about Crochet. I have very serious doubts and concerns, for exactly the reasons you, other and even I have posted about his small sample size. I think I was the first to point out he never pitched over 35 IP, all the way back through college, until 2024. Had we signed Fried (as I wanted us to, instead of Buehler & Sandoval) I'd be very concerned, too, but more about age decline or possible career ending injury, which tends to happen more to pitchers over 30 than those 24-29. We pick our poisons.

The post said: Casas and Wink for Arenado, Helsley & Herrera. (Not sure it was based on anything but someone's whim.

Yup, and even adding one year of Helsley is a "no," for me. Add Herrera and I start listening.

I explained "the world" comment was hyperbole. Do I need to explain what that word means? Of course the 897 IP in Japan matters. No, I'm not "star struck." I'm not a gambling man, but I think Crochet is a better gamble than a 30-31 year old guy with a long record of success and IP nearing an almost certain decline period. Yamo had no comp for his situation. None. His contract has no comp, unless you count the two-way Ohtani. His age had very little comp. My point is, so what? Every case is different and we pick and choose what we value most, somewhat and least. I'm looking at Crochet's age, his skillset and yes, a very small sample size, and I happen to think the other factors outweigh the unknown created by the small sample size. It's also unknown if Fried and Burnes will decline like most pitchers who move into post-prime years. It's unknown who will get hurt, but we tend to place more injury risk on those with injury history or who are getting older. A lot is unknown, when you have to project future value and durability. I'm going with the young guy. I'm not suggesting insane money, but I'm not afraid of giving something that has not been given before (like Yamo,) just because very few pitchers are at this point by age 25. Many that were in similar situations, never got extended, and I'm sure many fizzled out, some did okay and some went on to greatness, and likely got much more than the numbers some of us are suggesting. No matter who we pay, it's a dice roll, just as the $324M/12 on Yamamoto was.

We know the number. It is zero MLB IP before signing. (Yes he had over 800 in Japan starting at like age 18. His deal was still made on mostly speculation and observation of his skill level.