notin

Judge figures to keep a few teams guessing until mid-December at the earliest…

The bottom line for the Mets is - do they think Bassitt is worth $19mill? If they do, they pick up the option. If Bassitt declines on his end, the Mets were already prepared once to offer Bassitt $19mill, so why not do it again? Either they get him for a rate they already offered once before, or they get draft compensation. Now accepting it and weighing it against the market is a concern for Bassitt. But not sure if the Mets really care. From their standpoint, the QO is easy…

Bloom might trade Verdugo. We all assumed Benintendi would be playing LF in 2021, but with 2 years of control left, Benintendi was traded. We all assumed Renfroe would be in RF for 2022, but with 2 arbitration years left, Renfroe was traded. We all assume Verdugo will be in LF or RF for 2023. Not sure which but definitely one of them. But Verdugo has two arb years left…

So apparently Bassitt has a $19 mill mutual option. If that’s the case, if the Mets exercise their option and Bassitt declines, 100% he gets a QO. Now if the Mets are the ones to decline, obviously he gets no QO. This gets easy when the option is the same value as the Qualifying Offer…

I only pick Bassitt as I see him as a shorter term contract and a guy not o imply to get a QO. But he might want 5 years. Really it comes down to which of these two have more budget-friendly demands. Eovaldi is more talented but carries much, much more risk. Bassitt, with less wear and tear on his arm and fewer surgeries in his past, is the safer play.

So apparently rings have a statute of limitations but flags fly forever, Focus on flags! Not rings! Jury is still out on trophies…

Bogaerts has to be signed and will be counted for under the available spending money. Devers has a year of arbitration left and any extension likely won’t kick in until 2024…

Do we really know if the Sox are going under the cap this year or next? If 2023 and 2024 are wildly successful, think they dial back? The increased revenue from a successful team can more than cover the cost of the penalties….

Absolutely correct on pitching. But if you look at Houston, Atlanta, Milwaukee, Cleveland and Tampa, you don’t see a lot of expensive free agent starters. (Verlander and? Anyone?). You see a pipeline of pitchers coming up from the minors. The Sox aren’t doing that, and can’t use the alternative of bringing in guys like Price and extending aging guys like Sale. The problem with spending on starters is they’re very expensive, older, more fragile, and rarely live up to their deals. If you want to stay competitive like those teams, you need to keep the pitching pipeline moving and do the spending on the safe position players, preferably while they’re still younger…

I have touting Nimmo longer than anyone. I do doubt the Sox target him because he is very likely to get a QO, and I think the Sox limit QO free agents to anyone worth surrendering two draft picks for, if anyone at all. (Bogaets being the obvious exception as he won’t cost them any draft picks.). Is Nimmo a player worth giving up two draft picks for? I would be surprised if they ranked him that way. But they might. Not sure. The non-QO pitching market is probably headlined by Bassitt, Syndergaard (who is ineligible due to mid-season trade), and Wacha. Eovaldi is s borderline QO candidate, but it doesn’t matter, since, like Bogaets, he can be re-signed. If the Sox avoid QO players altogether, bullpen should be the big focus. The only pitcher likely to get one is Diaz. So pitchers like Rafael Montero and Michael Fulmer make for great targets. And once Bogaerts opts out, the Sox have only $80mill committed for 2023 before arbitration raises. So figure roughly $90-100mill after once Devers, Pivetta and Verdugo cases are settled. So depending on the budget, they will have money. But the question is - who should they spend it on? If they can get a DH for $8-12 mill AAV, that still leaves sufficient budget to grab a SP and 2-3 RPs. The rotation as of today figures to have Pivetta, Sale, Paxton (who is expected to exercise his $4mill player option), and Bello. Sale and Paxtton are certainly iffy, but their existence also can’t be ignored. IMO the Sox need 2 SPs even if Whitlock moves to the rotation, which I expect but don’t approve of. But I don’t think you can expect Rodon or deGrom to come to Boston. Bassit? Sure. He’s much more likely, at probably $12-15mill AAV. The other starter is more likely via trade, and the primary candidates will come from the arbitration eligible pitchers on small market teams. Best place to look? Miami…

Bottom line - helluva lot closer than Story plus Barnes. Also it occurred pre-reset, meaning Betts over those two was actually possible. Of course, reality did tell a slightly different story, but hey not like the people I’ve been arguing are fans of accurate history…

He’s due to ask about Flexen again soon…

Why not? They play 162 games this year. They have some holes but free agency isn’t going to give as many solutions as fans want, especially if they avoid any player(s) that receive a QO. If that’s the case, you have to take the holes free agency gives you, which will likely be bullpen and DH and maybe 1or 2 others…

Seriously?

Getting older but he’d be a good 1-2 year solution. Might even solve the Sox leadoff problems…

Carvel cakes are made from space age polymers

Revisionist history. Story and Barnes were both signed after resetting the tax limit. If the Sox needed the money to keep Betts, they shouldn’t have signed Sale ($145mill) Land Bogaerts ($120mill). That’s EXACTLY what Mookie accepted. But even that is slightly revisionist. DD signed both of them after negotiations with Betts broke down. They were the consolation prize for not signing Betts.

But the important thing is we don’t go out and make abrasive posts about other forum members and then follow up with posts about our exemplary treatment and respect of others. I do the first part. I’m no saint. I also don’t pretend to be one…

At least it want Fudgie the Whale…

The postseason is largely a crapshoot. Philly was definitely helped by San Diego taking down the Mets and Dodgers. But again, the two teams have basically the same record over two seasons. Neither team was in some elite starting point as good or bad. (It’s blatantly false to say Bloom tore down the 2018 champions.). Both teams have had one good postseason run. Phillies got one round further. But Recency Effect and biases make up the difference…

And they really didn’t draft all that well. They had the number one overall pick 3 years in a row and totally flopped on two of them…

Last year it was practically the opposite. The real bottom line is both teams have fared similarly over the past two seasons. The only difference is the biases…

Not my numbers. Actual MLB records. And the Phillies watched the Sox in the ALCS just one year ago from their couches. Both teams have fared similarly over the last two seasons. That is a fact. And last year’s 82-80 Phillies wouldn’t have look so good playing in the 2022 AL East, where 82 wins is a last place record compared to those other 4 teams.

If it was Cookie Puss, I shudder at the thought of a 3 hour drive…

Misleading? Bloom took over a team that was 84-78 in 2019. Dombrowski took over a team that was 81-81 in 2019. (He wasn’t in charge for 2020 yet, but those 60 game seasons don’t tell you much. Philly finished 28-32 that year, but that’s not a far cry from the 2022 team’s record of 30-30 after 60 games.). Bottom line - Dombrowski wasn’t taking over some last place team that couldn’t compete. Not sure why the starting point is so different. Unless all of that “all that matters is wins and losses” is only used when it fits one side or the other. What is misleading is saying Bloom was tearing down the 2018 team. He tore down a 2019 team that got 24 games worse in the standings and was saddled with a slew of questionable contracts…