moonslav59

Skubal is almost 2 and half years older and has almost triple the ML innings as Crochet, but it will be interesting. One could argue Skubal is the best pitcher in the AL or even MLB. 1st in AL fWAR from '23-'24. 1st in MLB in ERA- at 62 Blows everyone away in FIP (2.35) and is 2nd in xFIP and xFIP-

Crochet seems open to extending with the Sox... " “There have been conversations with my agent and the front office, just kind of getting a feel for one another,” Crochet said, as relayed by Cotillo. “Staying in Boston long-term is something that has a lot of merit in my mind and something I think would be awesome. In the meantime, I’m just focusing on spring and getting ready for the upcoming season, trying to stay focused one day at a time. When something’s presented, then we’ll attack it.”"

I'm not "sure" he'll be good. I have the same concerns as everyone. When we made the trade I brought up the whole "never pitched over 35 innings in a season, even through college, until 2024." The thing to me is, I'm just as unsure about how well Fried, Burnes and other pitcher choices might have been. In fact, I think I feel a little more sure about expecting them to decline over their 8 year deal than a Crochet 8 year deal (2 arb+ 6 extension.) It's a huge risk. It very well may be unprecedented. I'm high on the age thing. I'm high on his skills. The risk will always be there on any signing, just like the "sure bet" Price 7 year deal... NOT! I can understand others not wanting to touch this, and maybe we can get him for less than what I suggested, since it might be the first offer, like this in ML history.

From what other teams have been getting for 1Bmen in trade, I don't think it's worth the swap out. Are we so sure Alonso will outhit Casas over the next 4 years? I'm not so sure he even outhits him vs LHPs.

Signing Alonso means no signing someone else. I'd rather sign Scott, and he'll be cheaper.

Giving up 3 of our top 8 prospects is not "the reason" I want to extend him. That is just a symptom of just how much the Sox FO loves this guy. Hey, they could be wrong. The whole FO liked Yoshida a couple years back. Sure, different FO, but still can be fallible. I'm not sure how many really good pitchers were poised to reach free agency at age 27, so finding comps only highlights how special this guy is, to me. We extended Bello significantly earlier in the progression than Crochet is. He got $9.2M x 6, but that includes more arb years bout out. That's apples and oranges to Crochet, but they will pay him $19M in 2029 plus a $1M buy out on his $21M option in 2030. Bello did not have a season like Crochet, before we extended him, either. Most of the early arb extensions given in MLB are to everyday players. I get the uniqueness of my suggested types of offers, but that age 27 keeps jumping out at me. He could still earn his contract, while missing a year or 1.5 years to injury, and be young enough to bounce back. Strasburg was the same age as Crochet will be, but he's apples to oranges, too, since he had racked up several good years before signing, and he signed during his last arb year, not before his second to last one. Maybe notin can help on this. These deals all had more arb years left, and I'm not sure how many extra years were added on control, but other than Bello, there was... $53M/6 Hunter Greene $75M/6 Spencer Strider Wander Franco is no shining example of large & long extensions during early arb years, but he got $182M/11.

I'm only for trading for Arenado, if they take Yoshida. I know he has been in decline. I mentioned he's poised to fall of a cliff. I just pointed out that 104 is not even below average.

Shouldn't the fist big FA contract after Price, for 6+ Years be somebody we look and say, "Wow! Now there is someone we really need!" Not a guy we say, "Uh, oh- now we have to play him out of position or risk pissing off our $313M man. Not a guy where we have to bench a $54M/3 DH to get Devers to 1B/DH. Not a guy who has hit just .795 in a very long sample size of 5 years as he turns 31 on opening day. If they sign Bregman to play 2B, I'm jumping ship on Brez & Co.

Crochet did have a 164 ERA+ in 73 IP, before 2024. Certainly, his career is a small sample size, and one could call him one step above a "suspect," but we gave up 2 of our top 8 prospects, including our two last top picks. Either we believe in this guy or we don't. Sure, wait a year. That's the easy hedge thing to say. If he does great, for get about JH affording what he asks for. Bye-bye. If he is decent, maybe we can talk similar type deals, as now. If he sucks, you guys can all throw it in my face. I'm all in on trying to lock this guy up before he's worth much more, but fully realizing I could be doubling down on a what could end up being a bad trade.

DD revisited.

Ohio St is looking really good. Texas was no slouch. I think ND played better than the score indicated, and not just counting those bad calls. They had to play with their back-up QB for a while and stopped Penn St very well, except for Singleton. No WR caught a pass, all game. That is some lock-down coverage! I really like our coaching, too. We seem confident but not cocky. Our GB play is not great, but he seems to get it done, when needed. Our running game is better than it looked vs Penn St, but their D was tough on the runs. I hate Ohio St almost as much as Alabama. We gotta beat their ass!

A no extension makes the trade look like a loss, to me. I know it depends on what we get for 2 years of Crochet at a low cost vs how well the prospects do over the next 6-7 years. What is Crochet worth for 6 years, starting in 2027? Why is rolling the dice on guessing that worth and riskier than guessing Fried's production value from ages 31 to 38? Sure, he is a much more proven commodity, right now, and Crochet's project value is way more speculative, but how many 31 year old pitchers give 7+ years work out well? Why would Fried have been a better risk? It might have cost us $220M/8 to get him, but my $160M/6 offer seems too risky for you guys. Either Crochet is good, or he is not. An injury could hurt is value, but he would not be a 33 or 34 year old pitcher trying to come back from a major injury or surgery. He's by 27 or 28. I'm not saying you guys are wrong, but I'd roll the dice with a younger pitcher. I'd give him more than $160M/6, if he gave up on any opt outs before age 30. I might even offer close to Fried's deal starting at age 27 (2027), instead of Fried's deal starting at 31. Maybe $200M/8 gets it done, (actually $220M/10 counting buying out the 2 arb years at $20M/2.) That's an AAV of $22M for 10 years with no opt outs. You would say no?

And if the Mets want to replace the loss of Alonso with Valddy, we will outbid them? We can't count on outbidding anyone for anyone. We probably have a better chance at winning the Bregman offer, since the Yanks, Mets and Dodgers are not in the mix. I'm not saying we should do it. I have serious reservations on signing a .795 guy, even if we play him at 3B and somehow move Yoshida to make room for Casas/Devers at DH. We aren't getting equal value back by trading Casas, and Casas is a better hitter than Bregman, maybe even against LHPs, going forward. Gasp, gasp, the only real option, upon signing Bregman is this: Sign Bregman to play 3B, move Devers to a 1B/DH share with Casas and go with a Yoshida-Ref platoon in LF. Duran plays FT CF. Abreu and Rafaela platoon RF, until Anthony wins the job. 1. Duran CF 2. Bregman 3B 3. Casas DH/1B 4. Devers 1B/DH 5. Story SS 6. Yoshida-Ref DH 7. Abreu-Rafaela RF 8. Campbell or DHam-Grissom 2B 9, Wong0Narvaez C That's a decent line-up and an improved defensive team, as the upgrade at 3B outweighs the loss in LF. (Remember, we are also replacing O'Neill's D with more OF time from Rafaela. Maybe the total OF D remains about the same.) Personally, I do not think Bregman is the guy to pick to spend the most FA money on since Price.

It goes up, if he sucks or gets hurt in 2025?

Famous last words. If he does great, he's not going to extend, or he'll want the world plus the moon. The reason he'd sign for less money now, is that his future is more unknown and the injury risk.

If he does well. it means we get one more good season out of him (2027.) I realize the long term risk is major, but this is not price an a 7 year deal at age 30. It's a 7 year deal to guy who starts at age 25. Even if gets hurt and misses 1.5 years, he could still shine afterwards, as his deal runs out the year he is 30 turning 31. If he just plain sucks or underperforms, then yes, I made a bad situation way worse, but it's no different than signing Fried to 6-8 years. Your offer of $52M x 2 as a 2 year extension is a big risk, too, if he underperforms or gets hurt, early. You are willing to risk $105M/2 but not $160M/6. That's $55M/4 more. which could be a great deal, if he is good and $55M more lost, if not, and he refuses the opt out. I'd risk $55M to get one or two more years before an opt out. You are already paying him about $4250M more for those 2 years than my suggested offer. My offer: $20M over 2 arb years then $160M/5 ($32M x 5) after with a forced optout after 2017 vs extension. Your is $20M over 2 then $105M/2 with no opt out. My offer costs $733M less than yours, if he does not opt out after 3 years, but 1 less year. My offer would cost $41M less than yours after 4 years, assuming he did not opt out, but we'd be on the hook for 3 more years at $96M. I'm not assuming a major injury or even a decline means it will be a total wash out of $96M. Can you tell me why he deserves $52.5M x 2 for year 3 & 4, before we even play 2025? He could get hurt in 2027 and we get nothing for $105M. Under my deal, he could get hurt for any 2 years of the 5 year extension and we pay $160M for 3 years not 5, which comes to your AAV. of $52.5M

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.