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 was going to make the same argument BUT he supposedly did say last year that any team trading for him better offer him an extension if they want him to pitch in the post season. He might be open to an extension. It's also very possible that this deal was done with Boston KNOWING what it would take to extend him and we can expect an extension announced at some point this offseason. Or not.
  2. Hugh2
    I think there's a good chance he's extended by opening day.
  3. Hugh2
    Once again, as I've been saying over and over again and even today in another thread. People will not like the cost to trade for elite cost controlled talent. You also won't like what it will cost to pay someone like Burnes. I guarantee you will hate it a lot less when this team is in the playoffs
  4. Hugh2
    Are AAA stats predictive of what a guys MLB career will be? Bobby Dalbec is calling....he wants his MVP.
  5. Hugh2
    Because they're developing Clayton Kershaws, Julio Urias, and Walker Buehlers. If Tanner Houck, Bryan Bello, and Crawford were on that level do you think we'd be sitting around here having the same conversation? Every teams needs are different but the strategy is sound. Lock up your young talent, invest in free agency where you have holes. If you don't want to be the highest bidder then be ok eating s*** for dinner, because that's all you'll get......left overs. Or Garret Crochet, lets see what the extension looks like.
  6. Hugh2
    People are still going to be shocked when Pivetta gets $60 million plus.
  7. Hugh2
    Oh, but to answer your question. It's 12 years and that was just last year.
  8. Hugh2
    Are you seriously trying to make the argument that the Dodgers don't spend heavily on free agency???
  9. Hugh2
    Yes and LA actually pays free agents premium money too. Corey Klubers are a lot easier to hide when you also signed Max Frieds of the world.
  10. Hugh2
    No. I recognize that teams that win have more than one good player on them. Even teams like LA have young cost controlled talent around their premium paid stars. And if I'm trading those guys I want control, or a guy who is going to sign an extension. Given how low their payroll got this offseason coupled with having a top heavy MLB ready strong farm (#1 by some measure) It makes all the sense in the world to me to go out and just pay guys. WTF would I want to trade all my prospects for a guy I'm just going to have to pay anyways? If people want to justify Henry's penny pinching and champion never signing premium free agents then that's their prerogative, but I'd like to be competitive again. What makes you think Cambell and Grissom are the same? Also, why give up on Grissom? he's still young, but what was his highest ranking?
  11. Hugh2
    You said we don't have to give up top prospects for 1-2 years for a pitcher. I disagree, certainly for two years I disagree. For two years, someone is giving up one of their top prospects.
  12. Hugh2
    The A's have to get their payroll up to $110 million I believe. Their situation is certainly unique, and a bad point of comparison but still.....how s***** would it feel to lose Corbin Burnes to the A's. It's really starting to feel like we are getting s***** presents under our Christmas tree this year.
  13. Hugh2
    Moon....how can you possibly look at what's going on in the market and still undersell the cost of pitching? Put yourself in a teams position holding onto an ACE with two years of control. I would demand a teams top prospect, or one of their top prospects for them. And if we don't pay it someone else will. We keep losing these free agents because there's always ONE team willing to spend more. The trade market works the same way. If the front office has that mentality they will get beat out for trades as well. And we will be sitting here twiddling our thumbs come March talking about how this is the year Nick Pivetta becomes and ACE.
  14. Hugh2
    So you'd trade 6 years of a guy who might be the best player on your team for the next 6 years for 2 years of a pitcher with injury concerns? So what do you do in 2027? now you're down a pitcher again, and you have an additional hole to fill because you've traded away Campbell+ and it will be plus, a bird in hand is worth two in the bush. I don't care what BTV says but Campbell gets you 1/2 way there. This team sucks because they don't want to spend money, not spending money creates holes, trading everyone away plugs those holes up for a year or two, but developing them can at least buy you a 6 year window at some point. I would be upset if they don't spend money this year, but I'd consider it a much bigger insult and slap in the face to Sox fans to trade away their future that they've endured 4 years of suck for for a guy that will be on this team for 2-3 years. I'm sorry, If I'm trading for a guy I'm extending him. If you're not extending a guy it's not worth trading for him. That's my argument, any no man made outa straw in that.
  15. Hugh2
    Surgery is still surgery and even though there's a high success rate a decent amount of players never return to peak performance. And if he does, his price tag goes through the roof, If Alcantara comes back and looks like he did in 2022 he'd be looking at $300 million plus in free agency, actually if the inflation rate for top of the market doesn't slow down in the next two years you can make an argument for contract pushing over $360 million for Alcantara If you're trading for two years of a guy you're just going to have to pay anyways, why not just pay a guy now and save the prospects? If the Sox aren't willing to pay the price now, when will they be? If they have no desire to pay top dollar, their best bet is keeping and developing young talent and trying to lock up their own. Count me out.
  16. Hugh2
    I remember suggesting the Corbin Burnes might approach 280-300 million during the season and was crucified, so badly I convinced myself it was dumb. But I'm reminding of what I tell myself time after time, Always take the over in the market for pitching. The cost has gone up, is going up, and will only continue to go up. Back of the rotation starters like Pivetta are going to be getting $20 million per year or close to it. While I don't think Burnes eclipses $300 million he's probably getting around $250 if not more. If you trade for Crochet, you're not extending him if he's not getting around $30 million per year, even buying out those 3 years. Otherwise, why wouldn't he just bet on himself when he sees what these guys get? It would look really bad, if you traded away guys like Mayer/Abreu/Crawford to trade for Crochet, and in a year or two he goes down. I'd rather of just signed Burnes or Fried, at that point at the very least you've just burnt money, and not money and the players. Ownership obviously thinks very different than I do.
  17. Hugh2
    I agree that I think it's generally assumed that no one is untouchable for the right price. I say Roman Anthony is 100% untradeable and I wouldn't even think about it. But if the Tigers came calling and said "hey we really like Roman we will give you Skubal for him" then obviously you do a 180. I like to think of untouchable in terms of FIT. You can pay for guys like Devers making $30 million a year by having guys on team control play next to them. If Prime Jason Varitek was your catcher under team control, someone like Teel becomes more tradeable, now I consider Mayer a better prospect but from that perspective in terms of needs he's more movable than Teel (although up the middle is still a big need) The thing is, I can see a spot for all of these guys to slide into. Mayer > Short stop, Campbell > 2nd base Anthony > RF/CF and Teel > catcher.
  18. Hugh2
    Go back to the original plan. Pitching pitching and more pitching. I have faith in the young kids locking down the position side of things. But I have zero faith in the pitching being much better without outside help.
  19. Hugh2
    For reasons I've already stated, the Betts deal is in a sense comparable to Sotos deal. If you pay him for 3 more years accounting for age and add in the inflation rate the past 5 years you get over 700 million. Here's the reality. If Soto is still playing like an MVP 5 years from now no one is going to be calling this a bad contract. I suspect in my lifetime I'm going to see all stars regularly being paid $100 million dollars a year.
  20. Hugh2
    Interesting point, I also wonder how that inflation rate holds going back further? I'd suspect the rate of inlfation comes down but is still much higher than the national average. Shane Victorino would probably get $150 million 5 years in this market. Bregman is probably going to get more than that, probably closer to Adames money. Not comparing any of those players.
  21. Hugh2
    You said the contract was a done deal, only the team option years were being worked out. What happened to that 384 dollar contract? I thought those were the facts......and not up for dispute?
  22. Hugh2
    I was convinced to want Soto, 6 weeks ago I had sole interest in adding to the pitching staff. It's an emotional blow to not land Soto, but a perfectly viable offseason is there for the taking.
  23. Hugh2
    Makes you wonder what someone like Mookie would get today if he reached free agency at the age of 26. Probably over 750 million. As disappointed as I am, and I am, it's easy to see that money and say oh well I don't want to pay that. But that's where the market is going. Baseball player inflation is high, about 11% the past decade. That and paying for youth adds a premium as well. Lets take Mookie as an example. 1.11^5=1.68 That's the inflation adjustment from 2025 to 2020. Take Mookies 365*1.68 and you get $613 million dollars. But that was for 12 not 15 years. Mookies contract today, adjusting for inflation and years would be $766 million dollars. I'm not saying we made the wrong decision not outbidding the Mets, but MY MAIN POINT here is this is where the cost for premium players as gone. I get betting on the wrong guy can burn a hole in your roster, but at some point if you're a billionaire owner you have to place your bets somewhere. John Henry is like....playing the table minimum at the high roller table.
  24. Hugh2
    At this point Soto is either signing here or not, I don’t care what we or anyone else throws in. I firmly believe above the $700 million mark any team is just bidding against themselves. He’s going where he wants to play. I will be dissatisfied, but I also recognize the emotions attached to this. I want call it a failed offseason or rage against ownership until spring training has come around and they’ve failed to add pitching. They really still need two elite arms.
  25. Hugh2
    In 15 years from now the CBT will be well above 400 million and elite players will be pushing $100 million a year. He’s probably opting out after a year anyways so who cares. 2025: $65 2026: $65 2027: $60 2028: $60 opts out 2029-2039 $47.5/year i think it’s finally getting leaked today. Boras wants Soto signed so the winter meetings can be about all his other clients
×
×
  • Create New...