Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

Hugh2

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,725

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

 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

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Hugh2

  1. Hugh2
    I think it depends on the player. There's a large list and it's always growing of all-star players who hit a wall when they turn 30.
  2. Hugh2
    It all depends on when the contract kicks in. If the Contract doesn't start until 2024 then yes the AAV should only be 17.5 The way it was originally reported made it sound like an 11 year deal, but since appease to have been wrong. I'm still not 100% certain, as these things tend to be but I'm sure we will have some clarification soon. It may be out there right now as I've yet to wrap my head around the sports news this morning.
  3. Hugh2
    With me that's a possible big red flag with Bogaerts. Now he could have a monster year and quell some of those fears. But his power has declined, and his offense has been on a decline with his ISO dropping every year for the past 5 years. His offensive value was largely turned out by his ability to still draw walks and a BABIP .30 points higher than his career average last year. A lot of his value last was also tied to his defense, which apparently was dramatically helped by the shift. He loses that advantage moving forward, and if he continues to lose a step he could soon be a corner infielder with fading power. I would not be surprised if Bogaerts bounced back and had a great year, but he could just as easily be on the brink of a steep decline. Dont' get me wrong, Bogaerts offense is still elite for a short stop, but if he's not a short stop and/or that trend continues then thats a lot to think about for 11 years.
  4. Hugh2
    Devers got what?... $30 million more than Bogaerts in total? a little more AAV but in the back half of the deal the Sox are paying for his age 32-36 seasons, so that's like paying him another 5/$156 after his age 31 season, after his age 32 season SD is paying Bogaerts 9/$229 until he is 41 catching that back half at ages 37-41. This is why you don't put the opt-outs in. Sometimes it's unavoidable, but maybe that's how teams save in the short run. I hope the Sox do a better job from here on out identifying young players who would be willing to take deals early in their professional careers.
  5. Hugh2
    I believe this is correct and it kicks in after last season. I got it twisted.
  6. Hugh2
    Yes, but I believe this deal actually buys out the arb year. Sox are still under.
  7. Hugh2
    As I said earlier this offseason, and many times over the years. What the Sox FO has done in recent years is not the best predictor of the future. I often use the Lester to Price signings as examples. My point was, to not be surprised if the Sox opened up the wallet after they failed with Bogey. It’s like the offense has ran the ball 3x in a row; I was never sold that a 4th time was coming.
  8. Hugh2
    I’ve been so wrong this off-season I’m taking the victory lap on this one.
  9. Hugh2
    Only off by $20 million
  10. Hugh2
    Now….don’t wait 6 years to work on Bello and Casas. They can wait a year, but start licking guys up early
  11. Hugh2
    Called it
  12. Hugh2
    Doesn’t matter
  13. Hugh2
    And just talking doesn’t mean it ends in rainbows. But talking is talking at the very least.
  14. Hugh2
    No but it could have gone to arbitration. It didn’t go to arbitration because they’re talking. They’re talking doesn’t mean a deal gets done…but they are talking.
  15. Hugh2
    Devers was projected to get $16.9 in arbitration, the extra 600 is negligible. He got about what he was projected too. The fact that they got it done shows they’re talking. Who knows at this point. Devers holds all the cards and the Sox hate this game.
  16. Hugh2
    At this point, you're going to either have to grossly overpay for Devers or trade him. It's a lose-lose. The lesson here should be.......now go out and extend guys like Casas/Bello within the next year.
  17. Hugh2
    No, I just think teams are jumping on the agent bandwagon and using the Sox as fake interest to get another team to up the anti. Personally I was advocating for a trade with Miami.
  18. Hugh2
    As your King of s***** predictions this off-season I’d love to provide another one. Miami will trade Lopez (or another SP not named Alcantara) to another team that involves them receiving a top 3b/OF/1B big bat prospect in the deal. That will not be Tristan Casas and the Boston RedSox.
  19. Hugh2
    I think there’s a difference between excuses and a reason. There’s a reason for everything. Saying something like “The Red Sox misread the market” is fact. Perhaps it’s conjecture and not fact but it feels obvious to me. But! I do agree that if the people you hire are showing a track record of misreading the market, then start hiring people who can. In terms of Raffy, I think it’s a hindsight reaction to say “well if they aren’t going to get a return for one year then we should have traded him longer ago”. Well, you’re only one step closer to, let’s trade everyone before they get to arbitration years. Even if a guy is determined to get to FA (and many are and may chose to never sign extensions) having 2-3 years of a premium player is worth it to an organization that is expected to compete year in and year out. It’s like the old saying goes “a bird in hand is worth two in the bush”
  20. Hugh2
    Oh. A Yankees fan. Telling another baseball fan to not “live in the past” Oh the irony.
  21. Hugh2
    I don’t like banking on this, but I think it’s perfectly plausible that Verdugo bounces back in 2023 both offensively and defensively
  22. Hugh2
    Or two year
  23. Hugh2
    Pretty sure I defended it, at the time it looked like they could make the playoffs, and it looked like they would get healthier down the stretch. Holding onto JDM, and Eovaldi (as bad as it looks now) was a perfectly defensible position. It fits the “sustainable competitiveness” that is their plan. While one could argue in many ways this plan has been poorly executed in theory I’ve always been for it. This is why I’m generally labeled a bloom lover in here.
  24. Hugh2
    To be true, I defended the position at the time for this very same reason. They took a similar strategy In 2021 and it paid off, but they also had a lot more luck on the health front. Which oddly enough seems to be this team’s strategy. They’re banking on being healthy. It still looks horrible in hindsight, but that’s the key word there….hindsight.
  25. Hugh2
    At the end of the day the Sox still net two picks from Losing Bogaerts/Eovaldi. Being tax payers doesn’t change that, with me it’s the reduced bonus pool money that stings. They will have 1 million less to spend than they otherwise could have. It’s always worth it to go over if you have a shot at winning a World Series. Sox guessed wrong and paid a steep price.
×
×
  • Create New...