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.
Qualifying Offers for 2023
|
Post by brendan98 on Sept 7, 2022 13:21:19 GMT -5
I apologize if this has been discussed elsewhere, moderators feel free to move or delete if it has, but I was wondering what the thinking behind who the Sox should put the Qualifying Offer on, and who would likely acccept/decline.
As I see it, there are 3 realistic possibilities - JD, Wacha and Eovaldi.
I'd like to see the Sox offer on Wacha and Eovaldi, and let JD walk.
I think if we did offer it to JD he'd accept, I am really uncertain whether or not Wacha or Eovaldi would accept or decline.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Sept 7, 2022 13:27:29 GMT -5
I apologize if this has been discussed elsewhere, moderators feel free to move or delete if it has, but I was wondering what the thinking behind who the Sox should put the Qualifying Offer on, and who would likely acccept/decline. As I see it, there are 3 realistic possibilities - JD, Wacha and Eovaldi. I'd like to see the Sox offer on Wacha and Eovaldi, and let JD walk. I think if we did offer it to JD he'd accept, I am really uncertain whether or not Wacha or Eovaldi would accept or decline. Thoughts? I can't imagine they'd use it on 2 pitchers who'd likely both accept. You'd be looking at roughly $65 mil combined for your top 3 starters. IMO, it's a one or the other situation. You can add Xander to the QO lock in the group.
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Sept 7, 2022 13:30:36 GMT -5
The QO pick is going to be like 140 overall, 400k slot. With a better reward, a team might gamble and offer a guy they don't really want to accept. With this pick, you pretty much just offer if you want them to accept.
I would guess their line for a good value on a 1 year/19 million contract is probably in the 2.5-3 WAR range. I don't think you can find a way to expect that from Wacha. Eovaldi probably yes, unless they don't like the medicals. JD is not close.
|
|
|
Post by seamus on Sept 7, 2022 13:49:25 GMT -5
I feel like giving Wacha a QO is risky. He's putting up a really good year, but he's 30 and coming after three bad seasons. He's also outperforming his FIP by quite a bit, probably thanks to a career low BABIP in the .240s. I think if you can sign him to something like 1/12 or 2/20, that's fine, but 1/~19 would be really risky considering all the other demands on the team's purse strings this winter. I think there's a good chance he'd take that deal - as long as he didn't completely bottom out or blow out his arm, he'd probably get enough in his subsequent to handily trump whatever multiyear deal a team would offer now based on just this one season.
I'd be more open to giving Eovaldi the QO, assuming his health situation checks out such that the team thinks he can provide 25+ starts next year, given his pretty good track record over the last couple of years. I think Eovaldi would decline and try to secure a longer deal, but maybe it would give the team the leverage necessary to secure something like 3/48?
JD would likely accept a QO offer given that 1/~19 probably beats whatever pillow contract he might otherwise be able to secure. My guess is that a losing club without a dedicated DH signs him for something like 1/15 and hopes he can mentor some young hitters before getting hot enough to be flipped at the deadline.
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Sept 7, 2022 13:57:38 GMT -5
IDK, I think there's a chance Wacha declines it, he might of played himself into some money. If that's wrong....maybe we want him year on a one year deal.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxpride34 on Sept 7, 2022 14:00:33 GMT -5
Wouldn't offer on any of those 3. JD is old and washed up. Wacha is too risky and could easily revert to the pre 2022 wacha who posted an era over 5. Nate just can't stay healthy. Its looking like 2021 was clearly an outlier as the injuries have popped back up this season. Instead of overpaying for older, mid level starters, take that money and make a serious run at edwin diaz. Adding a lock down closer will make a far bigger difference and really help the pen. Diaz, Whitlock and Schrieber would by as good as any trio in the league.
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Sept 7, 2022 14:16:39 GMT -5
Wouldn't offer on any of those 3. JD is old and washed up. Wacha is too risky and could easily revert to the pre 2022 wacha who posted an era over 5. Nate just can't stay healthy. Its looking like 2021 was clearly an outlier as the injuries have popped back up this season. Instead of overpaying for older, mid level starters, take that money and make a serious run at edwin diaz. Adding a lock down closer will make a far bigger difference and really help the pen. Diaz, Whitlock and Schrieber would by as good as any trio in the league. Diaz is projected to be the first $100m closer, I wouldn't hold your breath. The closest he'll come to being a Red Sox is when Dombrowski didn't pull the Dalbec for him trigger in 2019
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,200
Member is Online
|
Post by cdj on Sept 7, 2022 14:38:06 GMT -5
Wacha could revert but I do not remember his change up being so nasty, this could be a legitimate development. He’s also not really all that old, I wouldn’t *hate* the gamble
Probably would backfire though
Depending on Nate’s medicals I’d offer him one
No to JD
|
|
|
Post by Soxfansince1971 on Sept 7, 2022 14:42:12 GMT -5
IMO, Bogaerts and Wacha receive QOs, and JD and Eovaldi do not. Bogaerts and Wacha have played well enough for the Red Sox to want back. Bogaerts would reject the QO (although imo he and the Red Sox will work something out), And Wacha will accept a QO. It is a big raise for him, but more importantly I do not see many, if any teams giving up a draft choice for him. Eovaldi has had too many injuries and his velocity is down. JD has hit .224 with an OPS under .700 for over the last 80 games (not a sss), so it is time to move on.
|
|
|
Post by seamus on Sept 7, 2022 15:25:28 GMT -5
IDK, I think there's a chance Wacha declines it, he might of played himself into some money. If that's wrong....maybe we want him year on a one year deal. Here's how I'd think about it from his perspective: Wacha's most lucrative multiyear deal would probably top out at something like 3 years and 30-35m. Largely on the strength of one year, I just can't see a team going higher than 10-11 AAV for three years, and even that might be overstating how ambitious a team might be for a pitcher in his 30s with a spotty track record. If he takes a 1/19 deal, all he needs to do to attain the equivalent of that lucrative deal is get 2/10-15, which is a pretty run-of-the-mill contract for an established veteran. Maybe my assumptions are wrong, but once you factor in the NPV of $19m and the anchoring effect of such a deal in future contact negotiations, I just have a hard time envisioning a scenario where Wacha isn't better off accepting a QO. So then the question is whether the Sox want to spend $19m on Wacha, to which my answer is: "...eh?" Like, it's hard to have a bad one-year deal, but that just seems like a contract that could limit your other options depending on how ownership wants to handle the CBT and is unlikely to provide surplus value.
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Sept 7, 2022 15:29:37 GMT -5
IDK, I think there's a chance Wacha declines it, he might of played himself into some money. If that's wrong....maybe we want him year on a one year deal. Here's how I'd think about it from his perspective: Wacha's most lucrative multiyear deal would probably top out at something like 3 years and 30-35m. Largely on the strength of one year, I just can't see a team going higher than 10-11 AAV for three years, and even that might be overstating how ambitious a team might be for a pitcher in his 30s with a spotty track record. If he takes a 1/19 deal, all he needs to do to attain the equivalent of that lucrative deal is get 2/10-15, which is a pretty run-of-the-mill contract for an established veteran. Maybe my assumptions are wrong, but once you factor in the NPV of $19m and the anchoring effect of such a deal in future contact negotiations, I just have a hard time envisioning a scenario where Wacha isn't better off accepting a QO. So then the question is whether the Sox want to spend $19m on Wacha, to which my answer is: "...eh?" Like, it's hard to have a bad one-year deal, but that just seems like a contract that could limit your other options depending on how ownership wants to handle the CBT and is unlikely to provide surplus value. If I'm his agent, the starting point is the Matz deal. 4/44, and Wacha's 2022 was better than any season Matz had
|
|
|
Post by seamus on Sept 7, 2022 16:22:46 GMT -5
Here's how I'd think about it from his perspective: Wacha's most lucrative multiyear deal would probably top out at something like 3 years and 30-35m. Largely on the strength of one year, I just can't see a team going higher than 10-11 AAV for three years, and even that might be overstating how ambitious a team might be for a pitcher in his 30s with a spotty track record. If he takes a 1/19 deal, all he needs to do to attain the equivalent of that lucrative deal is get 2/10-15, which is a pretty run-of-the-mill contract for an established veteran. Maybe my assumptions are wrong, but once you factor in the NPV of $19m and the anchoring effect of such a deal in future contact negotiations, I just have a hard time envisioning a scenario where Wacha isn't better off accepting a QO. So then the question is whether the Sox want to spend $19m on Wacha, to which my answer is: "...eh?" Like, it's hard to have a bad one-year deal, but that just seems like a contract that could limit your other options depending on how ownership wants to handle the CBT and is unlikely to provide surplus value. If I'm his agent, the starting point is the Matz deal. 4/44, and Wacha's 2022 was better than any season Matz had Aside from Matz being left-handed, he also had a better track record in times of both health and performance over the preceding 3-4 years. There's a reason that Matz got 4/44 while Wacha got 1/7, after all, and I would be surprised if Wacha's long-term projections have changed enough that teams are now going to offer 4/44 after what what may be an outlier year of ~130 IP. He might get it, but it seems dodgy enough that he may be willing to take the big one-year deal, betting on himself that he could get at least the 3/25 in a subsequent contract he'd need to match the Matz deal overall. Point is, I think there's at least a strong enough possibility that he'd take it that it's not like Bogaerts where you offer the QO just to have the draft pick insurance. With Wacha, you need to actually be okay paying 1/19 for him. That just seems steep to me - I'd rather say, "Pleasure doing business with you" and try to find another guy in that "show me" range of 6-8m that might pop while applying those savings towards a big signing.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 7, 2022 16:44:14 GMT -5
I think folks are overthinking it. First question is will they take it. If the answer is no (Bogaerts), then you offer it, no question. If the answer is yes, then will you be ok with the player on a one-year deal at that amount? On that, with JD, I might not. I think there's a decent chance they don't offer. With Wacha and Eovaldi, I'd probably be ok with it. They need to sign or re-sign two starters anyway. Who is going to be available that you'd want that much more? www.mlb.com/news/mlb-2022-23-free-agents-by-position Maybe Bassitt but dude's older than Eovaldi, which surprised me. Like I'm not sure I'd be upset about missing out on anyone there because the Red Sox were "stuck" with Wacha.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Sept 7, 2022 17:20:37 GMT -5
Something to consider with Wacha is that he hasn't eclipsed 127 innings in the past 5 years (he wouldn't have come close in 2020 with a full season). He has altered his pitch mix and seems like a true 2/3 starter when he's out there, but he isn't out there enough to be depended upon.
Eovaldi also has dependability issues, but has greater upside. If his arm is healthy (some worry given the velocity drop) then I'd take him over Wacha for a season.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 7, 2022 17:21:13 GMT -5
I think folks are overthinking it. First question is will they take it. If the answer is no (Bogaerts), then you offer it, no question. If the answer is yes, then will you be ok with the player on a one-year deal at that amount? On that, with JD, I might not. I think there's a decent chance they don't offer. With Wacha and Eovaldi, I'd probably be ok with it. They need to sign or re-sign two starters anyway. Who is going to be available that you'd want that much more? www.mlb.com/news/mlb-2022-23-free-agents-by-position Maybe Bassitt but dude's older than Eovaldi, which surprised me. Like I'm not sure I'd be upset about missing out on anyone there because the Red Sox were "stuck" with Wacha. I dunno, that's a big chunk of payroll to just run out the same starting rotation as this season. Add in Kiké's extension and then either a Xander re-signing or a Correa/Turner type replacement and they're basically down to just enough money left to get a second-tier right fielder and a couple of bullpen arms. We'd be looking at running out basically the same roster as 2022, without even enough left over to bring back Paxton.
The difference would be they could hope to get some more value out of Bello and Casas, and hope for better health. Still, it's hard for me to believe that Bloom doesn't have some ideas for a bigger shakeup than that.
|
|
|
Post by xdmo on Sept 7, 2022 17:23:45 GMT -5
The Sox asking for the moon on Eovaldi might be the best answer to "if the Sox will give him the QO."
I'm pretty positive the answer is yes to that one, or why do you value him that high at the trade deadline?
|
|
|
Post by redsoxpride34 on Sept 7, 2022 18:20:02 GMT -5
The Sox asking for the moon on Eovaldi might be the best answer to "if the Sox will give him the QO." I'm pretty positive the answer is yes to that one, or why do you value him that high at the trade deadline? I don't think the sox price for Eovaldi at the deadline was influenced by the QO. I think the reason they placed such a high ask on him was because they wanted the deadline to be viewed in one of two ways. 1) They moved guys because the value they got offered was so good they couldn't pass it up 2) They were choosing to hold onto guys because they thought they could make a so called run at the playoffs still. It was all about saving face and pushing a narrative. They likely felt it was too risky to fall in the middle and make trades that might end up backfiring on them or look bad to the fans like most of the ones they have made to date.
|
|
|
Post by xdmo on Sept 7, 2022 18:30:55 GMT -5
The Sox asking for the moon on Eovaldi might be the best answer to "if the Sox will give him the QO." I'm pretty positive the answer is yes to that one, or why do you value him that high at the trade deadline? I don't think the sox price for Eovaldi at the deadline was influenced by the QO. I think the reason they placed such a high ask on him was because they wanted the deadline to be viewed in one of two ways. 1) They moved guys because the value they got offered was so good they couldn't pass it up 2) They were choosing to hold onto guys because they thought they could make a so called run at the playoffs still. It was all about saving face and pushing a narrative. They likely felt it was too risky to fall in the middle and make trades that might end up backfiring on them or look bad to the fans like most of the ones they have made to date. I kind of hate the argument of making the playoffs. Yeah maybe that what was the case, but it was the wrong call. Some years, it's okay to tell the fans that you have to reset. 2022 was one of them. One of the reasons why this team has been successful under the John Henry era. They would reset in bad seasons. Why couldn't the Sox just make a fair deal (with Eovaldi) like they did with the Hosmer deal with the Padres? That was viewed as a fair deal in a time where the Padres were desperate to unload any type of salary for Hosmer. The only reasoning I could only come up with is the QO, and the fact that the Sox felt very secure locking up Eovaldi for one more season.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 7, 2022 19:46:57 GMT -5
For context, some contracts from this offseason
Matz 4/44 Gray 4/56 Desclafani 3/36 Wood 2/25 Kikuchi 3/36
If Wacha thinks 3/36 or so is possible, is he accepting the QO?
|
|
|
Post by keninten on Sept 7, 2022 19:52:48 GMT -5
For context, some contracts from this offseason Matz 4/44 Gray 4/56 Desclafani 3/36 Wood 2/25 Kikuchi 3/36 If Wacha thinks 3/36 or so is possible, is he accepting the QO? If I was Wacha, I`d take the 1/19 over 3/36.
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Sept 8, 2022 6:31:24 GMT -5
IDK, I think there's a chance Wacha declines it, he might of played himself into some money. If that's wrong....maybe we want him year on a one year deal. Odds are he would reject. Hes going to get a multi year deal somewhere else. If he gets 3/36 he's probably taking it.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 8, 2022 7:16:30 GMT -5
For context, some contracts from this offseason Matz 4/44 Gray 4/56 Desclafani 3/36 Wood 2/25 Kikuchi 3/36 If Wacha thinks 3/36 or so is possible, is he accepting the QO? If I was Wacha, I`d take the 1/19 over 3/36. So there's a chance of that, for sure. Would just need to get 2/17 the following year to make it worth it. The question is whether he can get up to, say, the 4/44 type of deal, as well as whether he recognizes that he may never have as good a bargaining position as he will have this offseason.
|
|
|
Post by agastonguay13 on Sept 8, 2022 7:47:49 GMT -5
I'd give it to all 3, honestly. The $233m cap is irrelevant, it's the cap+$40m threshold that is important to stay under. Yeah, there's a chance they all 3 accept it, but that's not for sure, or even 50/50 honestly, IMO. If they all do accept, it's also not a guarantee that they all 3 perform poorly next season, and the're all on 1-year deals.
I'd obviously much rather lock them up to a cheaper 1 year deal NOW, a la Hernandez, for maybe less than the QO $ and keep that option intact for next season, but we've seen the type of players they've brought in with their new draft strategy, a couple extra picks and some extra cash to throw at next season's Blaze Jordan or Roman Anthony wouldn't be awful, especially considering there is no longer a penalty for teams signing QO free agents, the teams they leave just get picks added.
End of the day, I feel like they could very creatively structure Bogaerts and Devers' new deals to ensure that this season's cap number can afford 3 potentially accepted qualifying offers and still bring in pieces from outside the organization.
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Sept 8, 2022 7:51:10 GMT -5
Wacha is young enough to get a good deal if he has another good season but old enough to maybe never get a good deal if he has a crappy season. Wacha can be good but not great, I'd be semi-surprised if he didn't take 3/36. And if you think Wacha can stay healthy, or give you two good seasons out of 3, you can probably get him a little bit cheaper than that by offering him the QO if he wants to accept and the Sox dangle more total money.
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Sept 8, 2022 8:19:50 GMT -5
I'd give it to all 3, honestly. The $233m cap is irrelevant, it's the cap+$40m threshold that is important to stay under. Yeah, there's a chance they all 3 accept it, but that's not for sure, or even 50/50 honestly, IMO. If they all do accept, it's also not a guarantee that they all 3 perform poorly next season, and the're all on 1-year deals. I'd obviously much rather lock them up to a cheaper 1 year deal NOW, a la Hernandez, for maybe less than the QO $ and keep that option intact for next season, but we've seen the type of players they've brought in with their new draft strategy, a couple extra picks and some extra cash to throw at next season's Blaze Jordan or Roman Anthony wouldn't be awful, especially considering there is no longer a penalty for teams signing QO free agents, the teams they leave just get picks added. End of the day, I feel like they could very creatively structure Bogaerts and Devers' new deals to ensure that this season's cap number can afford 3 potentially accepted qualifying offers and still bring in pieces from outside the organization. The 233 cap is definitely relevant, being the 2nd yr over, they'll be taxed at 30% on overages. If we want them to make a splash the following season, it'd hit at 50%
|
|
|