notin

“Potential” certainly has value, but it also carries significant risk. Let’s not equate “potential” with “quality”...

Hamels got $18mill, so it’s not an unreasonable comp. Trading for Price gives teams the chance to dump another (hopefully) lesser contract, unlike the signing of Hamels did...

He’s not all that cheap. He made $1.9mill last year and probably gets $2.5 mill or so this year. That’s not expensive, but career bench players can be had for less. His appeal was that Cora knows him and apparently likes him. Keon Broxton is a better defensive player with intermittent yet powerful hitting skills and made minimum wage last year. Go get him, Bloom!!

He’s also joking in a snarky way. As you have used the simulator, you know: 1. It wouldn’t reject a trade if the values differed by 1. Not even if they were 1 and 0. 2. It actually does not allow 7 for 1 trades. It stops at like 5 (?) and says it’s unrealistic. (As per your comment, is Pache really “quality”? He’s “potential” and nothing more.)

That’s a good comeback. I always think these “Winning Formula Checklist” posts are dumb, but no one ever listens. “You can’t win without an ace.” “You can’t win without a closer.” “You can’t win without XXXXX.” I think too many sports fans and sportswriters don’t understand the meaning of the word “can’t “. The ace one always lead to the same argument. Random poster: You can’t win without an ace Me: What about the Royals in 2015? Who was their ace Random poster: That was different. They had a great pen. Me: That’s not different. That’s the whole f***ing point!!

The Padres have a glut of outfielders yet they keep trading them for more outfielders...

Rays get OF Hunter Renfroe, minor leaguer INF Xavier Edward, and another prospect for Tommy Pham and minor league SS/P Jake Cronenworth...

Maybe that logic will make Price (3 years $96mill) look like a good trade target?

Maybe because as Red Sox fans, we are a bit spoiled by our excessive budget? If it means anything, Dave Dombrowski clearly shares your view about the trade value of minor leaguers. And he has used it to build several successful teams. If the Sox deal away a prospect who works out elsewhere, they can fill the void with an expensive free agent. Bye bye Kopech and Buttrey. Hello, Eovaldi and Kimbrel. But not every team can do this. Think Pittsburgh misses Austin Meadows and Tyler Glasnow? How are they going to replace them? (Probably by dealing Starling Marte.) For some teams, those non-major leaguers are essential components of the future, and when they don't work out, bad things happen. But when you have a budget, that is a necessary risk. And really, even when a GM does employ the Dombrowski method for a successful team, the eventual lack of those not-yet-ready-for-prime-time players can create several years of a weak performing and expensive franchise. Dombrowski has a habit of leaving teams in that state, as well...

There are plenty of realities in trades that the simulator can never catch. What it does s compare projected WAR at some dollar value vs projected salary for every player. If the financial WAR number is greater, the player has a positive trade value and so on. It can’t determine need or team strategy or anything personal about the player and doesn’t to my knowledge incorporate NTCs. It just tells you if a trade is fair from a performance vs money standpoint. Funny thing, the Braves probably reject your Acuna trade, because it would cost them something like $70mill. The simulator doesn’t take self-imposed team payrolls into account either. One thing it does do is not allow 7 players for 1 player trades. Also it has a range for acceptance, and a $1mill difference always works. And apparently there is some logic where a team getting a high value player has to give up a player with something like 50% or so of his value. You know - getting something good back. To prevent those 4 quarters for a dollar trades fans make up on their own and think are fair. The kicker,’most trades probably don’t match up on it. That’s ok. Bad trades happen. Most trades are probab;y worse for one team. Ever read the posts on MLBTR on a thread about a trade? The deal can be 10 minutes old, but inevitably someone will ask which team won the trade? The simulator answers for that guy. It also really accepts trades that are equal financially (the guys who wrote it worked in finance). Frankly, I see better and more realistic trade proposals on that page than in any MLB.com article. Those guys are ALWAYS overestimating what a player can get. And here is the funny part - when reality kicks in and that trade doesn't happen, fans blame the GM!!! “Ian Browne said Bloom could get Lux, May, Ruiz and a house in Malibu for Betts. But our stupid GM settled for Tony Freakin' Gonsolin and Julio Urias!! Fire Bloom!!!”

They are. And he has a similar backstory to Papi in that neither seemed to be well-regarded early in their careers...

And Adam Stern! Using it to get someone lke Rutledge is fine. But a player like Stern was exactly why I don't like it. While Stern was not likely to suddenly become the next Andy Van Slyke, getting selected meant he spent a year sitting on on the bench and not getting any better, and for the Sox the act of keeping him on the bench brought him a year closer to arbitration and free agency in the event he actually did work out. And in the case of Stern that year on the bench killed any career momentum, which is not uncommon. With Rutledge? He had a clear bench role to fill and no one cared how little he played. Not even Mrs. Rutledge. So if you have a clear role for a player, or if you plan on starting a player, select away. But if the plan is to get a hidden gem prospect, it's really not that great at all...

Because Marisnick is such a unique talent. I say, bring on Broxton!!

What I’m reading here is you’re attempts to discredit the thing really just show me your missing the point of it’s usefulness. Don’t be one of those people who launches into attempts to discredit everything they don’t like or understand. Please. I enjoy your other posts...

I like my simple Eovaldi and Bradley to Texas for Odor and Mazara. Knocks off about $15mill towards luxury tax. Not a fan of Odor (who, ironically or not, stinks) but I think this deal works for both teams...

Think he can maintain that for 14 seasons? Or until age 40? I mean, Cody Ross had a higher OPS and OPS+ for Boston than Dustin Pedroia, but I think we all get why...

But even then, you’re only focusing on the Red Sox. Plenty of teams have engaged in massive free agent spending without winning anything...

To be fair, those contracts were comparatively smaller, but so were payrolls. Jack Clark, for example, only made $5.8mill from the sox, but it was considered a big contract. And remember the financial albatross Dan Duquette acquired - Mike Lansing? Well, he only made $12.5mill for 2 years in Boston. Or roughly what the Sox paid Mitch Moreland...

It shouldn't be too tough to find the next Jake Marisnick. The only real question is - why would you want to?

1) Not many draft picks tie up $200 million over 7 years. 2) Most of the free agents can be lined to titles? I guess that's true if you forget about all the free agents that didn't. The Sox have been employing this strategy for a few decades, and it's only recently worked. and plenty of other teams have employed it and failed...

And how many rings does Yoda have? You know he's voiced by Grover from Sesame Street, right?

Not always and you know that. It is, however, the surgery that has a shelf life of about 600 innings before another one is needed...

So... if the Sox don't think they can trade, say Eovaldi, they should just give up?

Well, it does help. But the problem with free agency that every GM has known about forever is it involves making long term commitments for short term goals. How any free agents have signed big mega longterm six plus year deals and actually been god the entire time? It's pretty rare. I know this. You know this. Do we think GMs don't? Does anyone really think Matt Klentak just gave $118mill to Zack Wheeler expecting this oft-injured TJ-surgery repeat customer to actually pitch all 5 years like he has for the last two? Do we all think Klentak expects 12 good year from Bryce Harper? Of course he doesn't. But when he goes out and spends on these players, while he hopes to improve his team's chances, he definitely tells his fanbase "money is not an object on our end." Look at the Carl Crawford signing. Total bust. One of the worst ever. But were you or were you not excited the day the Sox signed him? Whether or not that excitement is ever justified doesn't change the fact that it did exist at one point...

While I can agree with that, the word has come on down from on high. Get under the limit. Sure, they say it's a goal and not a mandate. But that also means trying to get under is a mandate.