Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

notin

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    53,663
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    45

 Content Type 

Profiles

Boston Red Sox Videos

2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking

Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker

News

2026 Boston Red Sox Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by notin

  1. Assuming equal pay, I’d take Price. I might regret that in year three, but I am confident about the first two...
  2. Closest example I can think of was Bernie Williams nearly signing with Boston. Unless you want t count Andy Pettitte signing with Houston...
  3. The big dilemma is - if the Sox trade Price, it will likely involve paying lots of cash and getting nothing back. Resetting is possible, maybe even probable,but not guaranteed. Can the Sox trade Price, replace Price, reset, keep Mookie, and still be competitive in 2020?
  4. Price in his limited innings was still worth more fWAR than Roark. Although it is possible the Sox add a reliever or two and use the opener strategy. That “reliever” might be a buy low starter, like Buchholz or Shelby Miller or Alex Wood who comes in and pitches innings 3-6 after 2 by, say, Darwinzon Hernandez...
  5. For some reason I thought he was a free agent. Either way, don’t really want him..
  6. Here’s the thing. If you trade Price/Bradley and go $8-12mill under the tax line, then you replace Price (2.4 fWAR). Tanner Roark (2.0 fWAR) costs $12mill, and I expect any other 2.0 fWAR pitcher to cost similarly, which now potentially puts you back over. Or means the team is probably worse, which turns into “Why keep Betts?” And that’s assuming someone take Price with only $12mill paid. It’s going to take an interesting deal to make trading Price worthwhile. Also Marisnick cannot be traded until mid-June (?). But Bradley might be replaced cheaply enough with a defensive non-hitter like Cesar Puello...
  7. Not only can it not be enforced, Curt Flood specifically fought against it...
  8. That does pose the question of who replaces Price and Bradley. They won’t be free...
  9. Luis Robert will be their CF and is an early favorite for ROY
  10. Well that is his salary next year...
  11. If the organization is heading in the direction for all the things you mentioned, I’m not so sure those topics are all that irrational for us to discuss...
  12. Casas was in high school 2 years ago. Can he get that first at bat in Portland before we start referring to him as being on the doorstep?
  13. It does make me wonder about Disney’s fascination with making animals compete in the world of professional sports. One can only wonder what pitches they turned down. “OK this is a story about a chipmunk who becomes a professional wrestler on the WWE circuit. It’s called ‘The Iron Cheeks’. Whaddaya think? Huh? $200 million to start?”
  14. I will agree that it was very questionable why it was largely ignored by the Academy, the same snobbish boors who refused to acknowledge the cinematic masterpiece known as “Most Valuable Primate”...
  15. If you’re posting on this forum on 12/30, your fandom is probably not so casual But there are thousands of fans who turned off NESN during the Hobson and Valentine eras and went back to their productive, fulfilling lives. . The Sox aren’t worried about appeasing fans like me; I’ll be watching. But they do want those other fans to be just a little less productive and fulfilled for 3 hours a day 162 times. And for many, the only way to get them to turn NESN back on is by winning lots and lots of games. I do think the Sox might have to deal Betts for 2 reasons 1) easy attainment of financial goal and 2) the return is less likely to suck. Many point out this will cause the team to lose fans, but it won’t if they win. Dealing Nomar for a slightly above average SS and a bench bat 1b certainly didn’t hurt this team, despite neither player being even close to his equal. It actually can be done. But... it is worth noting most deals of a superstar don’t get much back...
  16. One bad year. He was a good bounce back candidate. I don’t mind missing out on Shaw as much as I mind learning he was too expensive...
  17. What any of us want to spend never mattered anyway. But not being able to afford Travis Shaw is not a good sign. They might lose casual fans. But teams that aren’t winning always lose casual fans. If the team wins, they’ll come back...
  18. Mostly because we couldn’t afford Travis Shaw. If the Sox add a LHH 1b, it might wind up being Greg Bird (ugh)...
  19. Sure, removing salary in order to get under the luxury tax limit is beyond a rumor at this point. It’s a goal, not a mandate, except that it was apparently a mandate. I would agree dealing Price in the end won’t do much to this goal...
  20. Yeah but it’s a different perspective. They’re buying. We’re dumping/selling...
  21. Wouldn’t be the first time. The Urias-Davies trade earlier this off-season was about as off as they’ve had...
  22. Does anyone else want to pay Price $96mill over 3 years?
  23. Unfortunately - and I like an active off-season, too - it looks like he is trying to do the "Win while spending less" strategy. That means that he has to unload saalry and either 1) get rid of a big chunk of money while getting nothing back or 2) unload high saalries and get a decent prospect or two. So far, Bloom is reportedly trying option 2 with David Price, but no one wants Price. Not even under option 1. And that is a big reason he has not done much. MLBTR reported he had to bow out of the Travis Shaw negotiations because they were too pricey at $4mill. $4mill!??!?!?! Mu guess would be it simply is not worth it to deal Price and Bloom has to deal Mookie...
  24. They were. But then so were the Dodger-Lindor rumors...
×
×
  • Create New...