SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Update: Red Sox sign Napoli for one year, $5m
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Jan 17, 2013 17:58:25 GMT -5
I'm on the side that a QO next off-season is a possibility. If he puts up big numbers and shows no problems with the hip, a team will make him an offer, even if it's only two years. Look at JD Drew, the shoulder they had a 52 day battle over never ended up being an issue. Obviously it's a different situation (Drew ended up with a lot more money), but a good, healthy year would make things look a lot different.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Jan 17, 2013 19:55:35 GMT -5
If he puts up big numbers and shows no problems with the hip,...a good, healthy year would make things look a lot different. Napoli is coming off a series of good, healthy years with no hip problems, didn't receive a QO, and signed for $5M plus incentives in a year where his main free agent competition was Adam LaRoche. How does one more healthy year help him if, as Cafardo reports, the hip could go at any time?
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Jan 17, 2013 20:15:47 GMT -5
who is DFA'd or released or traded?
|
|
|
Post by buffs4444 on Jan 17, 2013 21:26:53 GMT -5
Going from $39M guaranteed to $5M is a pretty clear sign the hip is fubar. Still hoping for a young 1B acquisition to hedge bets. Right now one errant throw to first could lead to Mauro Gomez starting games in Boston, and that's not a good thing. Hopefully they can acquire a young player with potential that can fill the LF/1B slot like LoMo rather than filler like a Carp or Trumbo.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jan 17, 2013 21:42:23 GMT -5
I disagree with DMaineah's assessment of the Napoli signing. There's very little downside of signing Napoli. At worst the Sox are out $5 million if he never even has an AB for the Sox - that won't sink their payroll.
On the plus side his hip issues might not surface this season and the Sox might get a .350 OBP from him to go along with 25 - 30 HRs. Maybe a performance like that gets a qualifying offer resulting in another season of Napoli or somebody signing him which would give the Sox a draft pick.
The concern I do share with DMaineah is what happens if Napoli does go down and misses a lot of the season? The Sox have yet to answer that question, but I think they will.
In a scenario where the Sox think Napoli will most likely withstand the rigors of the season, Casey Kotchman would make a nice complement (like Mientkiewicz was to Millar) and he's a late inning glove and LH bat off the bench. Of course, if the Sox had World Series dreams, you'd hate to have Kotchman getting regular ABs as the 1b if Napoli does go down.
If it's getting a LH bat with some pop who can play LF or 1b, Mike Carp would be of interest.
Another avenue could still be Smoak. The Sox could stash him at AAA and have him ready if Napoli breaks down. Also Smoak could finally have the switch turn on and be a good option for this year perhaps but next year too if he does mature as a hitter.
Or if this season ends and the Sox don't want to take their chances with Napoli, Justin Morneau becomes a free agent after this season. He might be a nice stopgap until somebody steps forward as the Sox 1b of the future (Shaw?). Obviously, I'd prefer Konerko on a short deal, but I think he'll be with the ChiSox for the rest of his career.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Jan 18, 2013 10:59:24 GMT -5
He might be a nice stopgap until somebody steps forward as the Sox 1b of the future (Shaw?). quote] Are people really banking on Travis Shaw to be the long term answer when this is the scouting report: "Ceiling of an average regular on a second division team." Honest question to those who know more about Shaw (and scouting) than I do. I don't think that sounds promising as an everyday starter for the Boston Red Sox.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,826
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Jan 18, 2013 12:09:22 GMT -5
He might be a nice stopgap until somebody steps forward as the Sox 1b of the future (Shaw?). quote] Are people really banking on Travis Shaw to be the long term answer when this is the scouting report: "Ceiling of an average regular on a second division team." Honest question to those who know more about Shaw (and scouting) than I do. I don't think that sounds promising as an everyday starter for the Boston Red Sox. I personally can't see Travis Shaw being the starting 1st basemen for the Sox. I hope I'm wrong, and I know John Kruk didn't look like an athlete....but every time I see him.....I don't see it. Maybe I've only seen him on bad days.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Jan 18, 2013 12:35:59 GMT -5
Napoli is coming off a series of good, healthy years with no hip problems, didn't receive a QO, and signed for $5M plus incentives in a year where his main free agent competition was Adam LaRoche. How does one more healthy year help him if, as Cafardo reports, the hip could go at any time? We really don't know how the hip affected his market this year, because by the time that came out the Red Sox had already reportedly agreed to a deal with him and other clubs had moved on and filled their open holes. His potential market shrunk considerably. Mainly though, this is the first anyone has heard of this hip condition. We don't know if it just happened, maybe could improve with proper training, or conversely is degenerative (and how fast that is happening). If he were to prove it doesn't limit his mobility this season and can handle first defensively AND the physical doesn't look worse next year, then a team could be interested in him for $13m+ for a year or two. I'm not sure how likely that is all things considered, but I think it's within the realm of possibilities. Plus he's coming off a fairly down season last year at the plate, and though one up season shouldn't have a huge impact, it can make a free agent look a lot more appealing.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Jan 18, 2013 12:36:11 GMT -5
I'm thinking Shaw could be an Erik Hinske type for us. Back up 1B/3B at an acceptable level and learn to play LF too.
|
|
|
Post by bighead on Jan 18, 2013 12:39:41 GMT -5
If he puts up big numbers and shows no problems with the hip,...a good, healthy year would make things look a lot different. Napoli is coming off a series of good, healthy years with no hip problems, didn't receive a QO, and signed for $5M plus incentives in a year where his main free agent competition was Adam LaRoche. How does one more healthy year help him if, as Cafardo reports, the hip could go at any time? If I were a GM, which I am not, there would be a set of guidelines in place on wherther or not to sign a FA with compensation attached (or offer my own a QO) with the current rules in place. The draft has become too important under the new CBA. Clearly it would not be something you follow 100% of the time but it would be something that you would try to stick to in most cases. 1. Complete player - stealing this from Cashman...obviously if a 5 tool player is available you don't concern yourself with the pick. 2. Position - A closer or 5th starter would be questionable sign while an up the middle defender or a clean up hitter would be more acceptable. 3. Age - over 33 would not be a good bet. 4. Length of contract - anything less than a player worth a 3 year deal would be suspect. 5. AAV - is the player worth the AAV or more of the qualifying offer? Seems a pretty obvious concern. 6. Health concerns - see #s 2 & 3 7. FA alternatives - guage the difference in value between the compensation player and a non-compensation FA. 8. Minor league pipeline - obviously there aren't many can't misses but if you have a Bogaerts type on the verge you'd think twice. 9. 1st round pick protected Napoli 1. No 2. No 3. Maybe 4. No 5. Maybe 6. NO 7. Unknown at this point 8. Unknown (WMB to 1B/Bogaerts to 3B a possibility). 9. Hope not or we'll be in for a long summer That doesn't look like Napoli adds up to a good bet to offer or sign elsewhere with compensation to me.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jan 18, 2013 13:55:17 GMT -5
He might be a nice stopgap until somebody steps forward as the Sox 1b of the future (Shaw?). quote] Are people really banking on Travis Shaw to be the long term answer when this is the scouting report: "Ceiling of an average regular on a second division team." Honest question to those who know more about Shaw (and scouting) than I do. I don't think that sounds promising as an everyday starter for the Boston Red Sox. I don't think anybody is banking on Travis Shaw - which is why I placed a question mark after his name. But looking at his numbers, I think he has a shot at being better than the scouting report. I'm certainly no statistical genius, but looking at his history, he takes a lot of walks. Even when he struggled in AA, he was still having tough ABs. He has some pop, and I noticed he had a lot of doubles. Does this mean he'll be any better than Ben Broussard or Eric Hinske? No, but it means that I wouldn't write him off. He might be better than anticipated. If he has a big year this year, I'd struggle to see how he couldn't be the 1b of the future. I wish he were Anthony Rizzo and I doubt he'll be that good, but Shaw might still be a good OBP decent power kind of 1b who's LH, something our lineup could use in the middle of the order.
|
|
|
Post by remember04 on Jan 18, 2013 14:04:40 GMT -5
If he puts up big numbers and shows no problems with the hip,...a good, healthy year would make things look a lot different. Napoli is coming off a series of good, healthy years with no hip problems, didn't receive a QO, and signed for $5M plus incentives in a year where his main free agent competition was Adam LaRoche. How does one more healthy year help him if, as Cafardo reports, the hip could go at any time? The Red Sox won't be trying to resign Josh Hamilton as their number one off season plan.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 18, 2013 14:37:32 GMT -5
Napoli is coming off a series of good, healthy years with no hip problems, didn't receive a QO, and signed for $5M plus incentives in a year where his main free agent competition was Adam LaRoche. How does one more healthy year help him if, as Cafardo reports, the hip could go at any time? If I were a GM, which I am not, there would be a set of guidelines in place on wherther or not to sign a FA with compensation attached (or offer my own a QO) with the current rules in place. I'm confused - what does offering your own player a QO have to do with signing a player whose former team offered im one and he declined? If it's your own player, you don't lose a draft pick or anything.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Jan 18, 2013 14:44:41 GMT -5
If I were a GM, which I am not, there would be a set of guidelines in place on wherther or not to sign a FA with compensation attached (or offer my own a QO) with the current rules in place. I'm confused - what does offering your own player a QO have to do with signing a player whose former team offered im one and he declined? If it's your own player, you don't lose a draft pick or anything. I believe, and I might be wrong, that bighead was saying that Texas was afraid that Napoli would accept the QO and that Texas wanted every dollar available to sign Hamilton.
|
|
|
Post by bighead on Jan 18, 2013 17:56:45 GMT -5
If I were a GM, which I am not, there would be a set of guidelines in place on wherther or not to sign a FA with compensation attached (or offer my own a QO) with the current rules in place. I'm confused - what does offering your own player a QO have to do with signing a player whose former team offered im one and he declined? If it's your own player, you don't lose a draft pick or anything. If you were doing in the hopes that somebody else will sign him like the Yanks did with Swisher and Soriano. If you wouldn't be willing to give up a pick for them then there is a good chance that another team will not either. This is all provided you don't want the player to accept the QO.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 18, 2013 18:26:31 GMT -5
I'm confused - what does offering your own player a QO have to do with signing a player whose former team offered im one and he declined? If it's your own player, you don't lose a draft pick or anything. If you were doing in the hopes that somebody else will sign him like the Yanks did with Swisher and Soriano. If you wouldn't be willing to give up a pick for them then there is a good chance that another team will not either. This is all provided you don't want the player to accept the QO. I guess that makes sense, but wouldn't it have more to do with what you know the player is going to look for in FA? The deadline to accept the QO is so early that it has more to do with what the player wants than what the market will bear. Look at how it almost bit Soriano in the rear. Personally, I think if he had any other agent he'd have been screwed. The deadline to accept is early November - by then, very very little has happened. And if he declines and doesn't get any offers, it's not like there's a downside to the offering team. When making the QO, the downside (in your proposed situation in which you want the player to decline) is the risk that he accepts and stays for 1 year, $14 million or so. When signing a player who has declined a QO, the downside is that you lose a draft pick. They're very different analyses. For the former, you need to ask if you're willing to live with that player accepting and having to pay him for one season. For the latter, you need to weigh the benefit of signing the player with the loss of the pick and associated signing bonus money.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Jan 19, 2013 15:37:51 GMT -5
I'm confused - what does offering your own player a QO have to do with signing a player whose former team offered im one and he declined? If it's your own player, you don't lose a draft pick or anything. If you were doing in the hopes that somebody else will sign him like the Yanks did with Swisher and Soriano. If you wouldn't be willing to give up a pick for them then there is a good chance that another team will not either. This is all provided you don't want the player to accept the QO. I like your idea of having a valuation process to determine whether or not you should submit a QO. The failure in your logic is thinking that other teams will value your player at a similar level as you value the player. In reality player valuation from team to team is drastically otherwise players would commonly be offered the same contracts in FA by all 30 teams.
|
|
|
Post by bighead on Jan 19, 2013 18:40:35 GMT -5
If you were doing in the hopes that somebody else will sign him like the Yanks did with Swisher and Soriano. If you wouldn't be willing to give up a pick for them then there is a good chance that another team will not either. This is all provided you don't want the player to accept the QO. I like your idea of having a valuation process to determine whether or not you should submit a QO. The failure in your logic is thinking that other teams will value your player at a similar level as you value the player. In reality player valuation from team to team is drastically otherwise players would commonly be offered the same contracts in FA by all 30 teams. Good point. I think there is a failure in the logic of the QO rules in general too. Its similar to the political idea that was thrown around recently that anybody making 250K is rich without taking into account the cost of living in the person/couple's primary residence. The average of the top 125 players? Wouldn't it make more sense to be the average of the top X number of players at each FAs position. If the idea is to nab compensation for the departing FA an not actually retain them, on the current 25 man roster I would only offer the following players a QO when their current deal is up or reach FA: Lester Buchholz Doubront Pedroia Middlebrooks provided his career is as expected from the SSS Ellsbury Hanrahan if he was lights out this season Drew if the had a legit career resurgence
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Jan 19, 2013 20:17:24 GMT -5
Good point. I think there is a failure in the logic of the QO rules in general too. Its similar to the political idea that was thrown around recently that anybody making 250K is rich without taking into account the cost of living in the person/couple's primary residence. The average of the top 125 players? Wouldn't it make more sense to be the average of the top X number of players at each FAs position. If the idea is to nab compensation for the departing FA an not actually retain them, on the current 25 man roster I would only offer the following players a QO when their current deal is up or reach FA: Lester Buchholz Doubront Pedroia Middlebrooks provided his career is as expected from the SSS Ellsbury Hanrahan if he was lights out this season Drew if the had a legit career resurgence Your logic regarding what a qualifying offer should be (not to mention your politics) is flawed. The cost of signing a qualifying free agent and the "payment" for losing a qualifying free agent are the same regardless of position, so the QO should also be the same regardless of position. A significant reason for getting away from the position-by-position designation for what determined draft pick compensation was that there were so many free agent relievers losing millions and going unsigned because teams would have had to give up a draft pick to sign them. Having a qualifying offer stay at a set dollar amount ensures that the free agent is worth enough to minimize the off-setting value of the lost pick.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,826
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Jan 19, 2013 20:28:28 GMT -5
It is my hope that both Napoli and Drew have MONSTER years and we decide to roll the dice on giving them a QO, and if they turn it down we win........and if they were so damn good and they accept, we have them around for another year if necessary.
Now for Napoli, he would have to put up some pretty fancy numbers to get a QO........like 30+ homers, 90+ RBI's, an OPS of well over 800, and be adequate at 1st.
For Drew, he would have to get close to the range he had defensively, play at least 145 games, collect 50+ extra base hits, and be a consistent force offensively.
Either player could do something like this. Will they? Probably not, but if they do, our offense will be well above average.
If they do, we may pick up a couple of nice early picks!
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Jan 19, 2013 20:34:56 GMT -5
Also, you guys are way over-thinking the entire Qualifying Offer situation. There really is no need to set hard-and-fast rules about when to give a player the QO and when not to. It should be taken on a case-by-case bases and made at that time. The decision process is fairly simple:
1.) Would you want the player back on a 1 year/$13M ish deal?
If yes, then give him a QO. If no, then:
2.) How likely is it the player will accept the QO if offered?
If it highly likely than don't give him a QO. If it is highly unlikely then make the offer. If there is uncertainty then weight the potential benefit (the added draft pick) with the potential cost (the difference between your valuation of the player and $13M) and make the appropriate decision.
And I think the scenarios where there is uncertainty over whether a player will accept or decline the QO are fairly rare. The two sides talk and there is a good idea of what the player is seeking prior to the offer having to be made. Remember - this is PRE-free agency. It doesn't matter what the player ends up getting it matters what they think they are worth and can get on the open market before anyone has made an offer.
|
|
|
Post by bighead on Jan 19, 2013 22:10:08 GMT -5
Good point. I think there is a failure in the logic of the QO rules in general too. Its similar to the political idea that was thrown around recently that anybody making 250K is rich without taking into account the cost of living in the person/couple's primary residence. The average of the top 125 players? Wouldn't it make more sense to be the average of the top X number of players at each FAs position. If the idea is to nab compensation for the departing FA an not actually retain them, on the current 25 man roster I would only offer the following players a QO when their current deal is up or reach FA: Lester Buchholz Doubront Pedroia Middlebrooks provided his career is as expected from the SSS Ellsbury Hanrahan if he was lights out this season Drew if the had a legit career resurgence Your logic regarding what a qualifying offer should be (not to mention your politics) is flawed. The cost of signing a qualifying free agent and the "payment" for losing a qualifying free agent are the same regardless of position, so the QO should also be the same regardless of position. A significant reason for getting away from the position-by-position designation for what determined draft pick compensation was that there were so many free agent relievers losing millions and going unsigned because teams would have had to give up a draft pick to sign them. Having a qualifying offer stay at a set dollar amount ensures that the free agent is worth enough to minimize the off-setting value of the lost pick. Flawed I suppose if you think wage scales should be flattened regardless of contribution.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jan 20, 2013 11:16:37 GMT -5
[Flawed I suppose if you think wage scales should be flattened regardless of contribution. When the Red Sox are deciding if they should give Drew a QO, they're going to value him as a shortstop. I really can't comprehend why you think there's a need some some sort of positional adjustment.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Jan 21, 2013 14:15:59 GMT -5
It is my hope that both Napoli and Drew have MONSTER years and we decide to roll the dice on giving them a QO, and if they turn it down we win........and if they were so damn good and they accept, we have them around for another year if necessary. Now for Napoli, he would have to put up some pretty fancy numbers to get a QO........like 30+ homers, 90+ RBI's, an OPS of well over 800, and be adequate at 1st. For Drew, he would have to get close to the range he had defensively, play at least 145 games, collect 50+ extra base hits, and be a consistent force offensively. Either player could do something like this. Will they? Probably not, but if they do, our offense will be well above average.If they do, we may pick up a couple of nice early picks! Even if neither of them have monster years, the Red Sox' offense should still be well above average.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jan 21, 2013 14:53:57 GMT -5
I see 4 potential qualifying offers, although 3 of them are more likely not to happen. I would guess statistically the expected amount of QO would be 1.5.
Ellsbury - Any situation in which he is not worth a qualifying offer would be an outlier.
Napoli - has the offensive potential to warrant an offer. Is a major injury concern. Also playing in a hitter friendly park
Drew - SS seems to be in demand, and hard to find a good SS with offensive and defensive skills. Would have to prove a lot to consider turning down a QO
Hanrahan - for some reason people overpay for saves. Think this is one of the reasons he was already named closer. Is unlikely, but not unthinkable
|
|
|