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 hammerhead on Jan 21, 2013 15:14:07 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. Exactly.... and why would either side want to de-value a player , by assigning different wages depending on difficulty of position. The players association and ownership came to this CBA agreement so teams could stay competitive with there own FA's and would be compensated with a draft pick if a player walks. They aren't going to intentionally devalue a player by slotting him into a certain range. This is pretty simple, these Qualifying Offer deals write themselves, you simply look at the player, if he's in the top 125 overall best players than you offer him the QO. Is he someone worth retaining on a one year deal equal to the average pay of those 125 players. I suppose there are some marginal/fringy type players , but most are pretty cut and dry.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 22, 2013 15:26:38 GMT -5
Per Speier, here are the incentives in Napoli's contract: Active roster bonuses $500,000 each for 30, 60, 90, 120 days on the active roster
Plate appearance bonuses $500,000 each for 300, 325, 350, 375 plate appearances $1 million each for 400, 475, 550, 625 plate appearances
Catch-all bonus If Napoli is active for a minimum of 165 days in 2013, he will get the full $8 million in incentives for a total of $13 million
Basically, unless he spends roughly a month or more on the DL, he'll collect the full $13m.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Jan 22, 2013 18:28:07 GMT -5
I think it is a good job by Napoli and the front office to reach a fair deal, given the AVN diagnosis.
|
|
|
Post by jioh on Jan 22, 2013 21:15:02 GMT -5
Brett Favre was diagnosed with AVN when drafted in 92. sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=21363572005 quote: "To this day, it bothers me from time to time, but before the draft I did MRIs for Atlanta, I did MRIs for Seattle, went through all kind of evaluations at the combine. A lot of teams were apprehensive because of that." "Wolf [GM] said that the team doctor at the time, Clarence Novotny, recommended flunking Favre on his physical. But he said Novotny was not an orthopedist, so he had surgeon Patrick McKenzie, now the team doctor, examine Favre. Wolf said McKenzie told him that in four or five years Favre could have some problems with his hip, but there was no danger of it deteriorating immediately."
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Jan 23, 2013 6:43:15 GMT -5
Brett Favre was diagnosed with AVN when drafted in 92. sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=21363572005 quote: "To this day, it bothers me from time to time, but before the draft I did MRIs for Atlanta, I did MRIs for Seattle, went through all kind of evaluations at the combine. A lot of teams were apprehensive because of that." "Wolf [GM] said that the team doctor at the time, Clarence Novotny, recommended flunking Favre on his physical. But he said Novotny was not an orthopedist, so he had surgeon Patrick McKenzie, now the team doctor, examine Favre. Wolf said McKenzie told him that in four or five years Favre could have some problems with his hip, but there was no danger of it deteriorating immediately." It should be noted that Favre was 21 when he was drafted. Napoli is 31.
|
|
|
Post by honkbal on Jan 23, 2013 10:21:56 GMT -5
It should be noted that Favre was 21 when he was drafted. Napoli is 31. But then shouldn't it also be noted that the disease wasn't ever cured and he played with it until he was 41?
|
|
|
Post by lancect on Jan 23, 2013 10:55:29 GMT -5
It will be interesting in how they use him positionally. We know that he has the potential to be damaged goods. 15 interleague games that Ortiz needs to play in and Napoli and the versatility to catch. In addition, Lackey will probably put pressure on Farrell to have his buddy Napoli catch him. Their numbers together in Anaheim were comparable to when Mathis (Angels defensive version of David Ross) caught Lackey and I bet he's already looking forward to have a comfort zone with Napoli catching. How will Farrell handle this?
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jan 23, 2013 11:15:48 GMT -5
Short Answer: I don't think the #5 starter has the power to tell the manager that the first baseman is going to be the catcher.
Longer Answer: If Napoli is going to be a once-a-week catcher, having him catch Lackey makes some sense, as they already have a relationship. That's especially true when facing a lefty, because a lineup with both Napoli and Gomez in it is probably optimal. But if Napoli isn't going to catch, then Lackey's feelings on the subject really won't mean very much.
|
|
|
Post by jioh on Jan 23, 2013 11:38:00 GMT -5
It should be noted that Favre was 21 when he was drafted. Napoli is 31. But then shouldn't it also be noted that the disease wasn't ever cured and he played with it until he was 41? We also know that Napoli has not had this problem for more than one year, since it was not on MRIs a year ago. When Favre was 21, he had been being tackled since he was about 7, and may have had it for years before it was spotted with those 1992 MRI machines. I think the Favre example makes me feel cautiously optimistic about Napoli. Certainly we have no reason to assume his mobility will be limited on day one, which is one thing we have been fearing. 1b is a lot easier than QB.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 23, 2013 12:07:50 GMT -5
Given that Napoli is a poor defensive catcher, who says Lackey WANTS Napoli to catch him?
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jan 23, 2013 13:32:50 GMT -5
Given that Napoli is a poor defensive catcher, who says Lackey WANTS Napoli to catch him? They're friends, apparently. Still, this strikes me as the same reasoning that Andre Ethier would shine in Boston because he and Dustin Pedroia are buds. Napoli caught Lackey in Anaheim about as often as one would expect a part-time catcher. If Lackey wasn't demanding Napoli to catch back when a) Napoli was a catcher, and b) Lackey was the type of elite pitcher who is allowed to choose his catcher, I don't think it's going to be an issue in 2013.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Jan 23, 2013 15:28:03 GMT -5
I understand why both parties (Napolii and the Sox) decided to not do anything contractually for a 2nd year, but even if Nap has a nice year, his camp will be right back where they are now. Liked to have seen a 2nd year option with say a $500,000 buy-out.
Hate thinking that we will be back playing "who's on 1st" next year in November.
|
|
|
Post by mainesox on Jan 23, 2013 16:05:32 GMT -5
I understand why both parties (Napolii and the Sox) decided to not do anything contractually for a 2nd year, but even if Nap has a nice year, his camp will be right back where they are now. Liked to have seen a 2nd year option with say a $500,000 buy-out. Hate thinking that we will be back playing "who's on 1st" next year in November. If Napoli has a good enough year where you want him back as the 1B just offer him the qualifying offer; maybe it's a couple million more than an option year would have been, but so what? And that way you at least get a draft pick if he doesn't stick around.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Jan 23, 2013 16:45:56 GMT -5
Short Answer: I don't think the #5 starter has the power to tell the manager that the first baseman is going to be the catcher. Longer Answer: If Napoli is going to be a once-a-week catcher, having him catch Lackey makes some sense, as they already have a relationship. That's especially true when facing a lefty, because a lineup with both Napoli and Gomez in it is probably optimal. But if Napoli isn't going to catch, then Lackey's feelings on the subject really won't mean very much. I'm assuming you're talking about this happening ONLY during interleague and on the road games, because if it's not that situation, Napoli could just play 1st and Gomes could play RF.
|
|
|
Post by bentossaurus on Jan 23, 2013 17:57:07 GMT -5
Gomez not Gomes.
|
|
|
Post by remember04 on Jan 23, 2013 18:41:36 GMT -5
I understand why both parties (Napolii and the Sox) decided to not do anything contractually for a 2nd year, but even if Nap has a nice year, his camp will be right back where they are now. Liked to have seen a 2nd year option with say a $500,000 buy-out. Hate thinking that we will be back playing "who's on 1st" next year in November. If Napoli has a good enough year where you want him back as the 1B just offer him the qualifying offer; maybe it's a couple million more than an option year would have been, but so what? And that way you at least get a draft pick if he doesn't stick around. This and lets face it, Napoli isn't our long term replacement at 1B anyway. The next time the Sox are capable of making a serious run at the World Series Napoli will probably at best be a role player for us or most likely playing somewhere else. He's an above average stop gap basically.
|
|
|
Post by hammerhead on Jan 24, 2013 7:59:51 GMT -5
I don't know about you guys, but I don't want a guy who is going to be depended on to be one of our main thumpers in the lineup and who has bad hips anywhere near the catching position.
If I'm Farrell/Ben C. I make Napoli our 1stbaseman / occasional DH against lefties and that's it. He can be your emergency catcher, for example if Ross and Salty get hurt in the 15th inning you give him an inning or two behind the plate.
It's not like he's adding much needed defense behind the plate anyway....
|
|
|