|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Sept 9, 2022 16:48:55 GMT -5
You don't think it's reasonable to assume the team could be in a position compete during the year 2024? I have more faith in Bloom than the typical Boston fan, but if it's taking you 5 years to turn around a franchise unafraid of spending 200 million + I feel you're doing something wrong. Huh? No I am saying the opposite. Get costs down in 2023 and reset so you can go into 2024 on the last year of Sale’s deal and be ready to roll and spend for a few years. Otherwise you go into 2023 needing to reset in 2024 after going over the cap for two mediocre teams in 2022 and 2023. It makes way more sense to go for it once the jays, rays and yanks start to lose some wind out of their sails. Ok that makes more sense, but thinking about Chris’s coment I think I agree with him. The penalties for the first threshold are Pennie’s on the dollar. If they went right up to the next threshold we’re taking about 5.7 million dollars. I don’t think that means the Sox won’t ever reset, but it’s not contingent on rebuilding. They probably go over next year. |
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Sept 9, 2022 16:54:16 GMT -5
In other words going over the cap now doesn’t prevent them from going over in the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Sept 9, 2022 17:31:20 GMT -5
This offseason should be Red Sox news every day.
|
|
|
|
Post by RedSoxStats on Sept 9, 2022 17:53:00 GMT -5
The Red Sox don't care about paying the luxury tax at all. They do care about losing revenue sharing rebates, which happens when you stay over the CBT for 3 consecutive years or longer. The Sox will be under the tax in 2023 or 2024.
|
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Sept 9, 2022 19:17:33 GMT -5
This offseason should be Red Sox news every day. It will be. 85% of that will be BS from agents using them as leverage, but you'll get your wish of Sox news every day. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 9, 2022 21:48:26 GMT -5
The Red Sox don't care about paying the luxury tax at all. They do care about losing revenue sharing rebates, which happens when you stay over the CBT for 3 consecutive years or longer. The Sox will be under the tax in 2023 or 2024. Forgot about this. Good call. |
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Sept 10, 2022 13:25:39 GMT -5
Huh? No I am saying the opposite. Get costs down in 2023 and reset so you can go into 2024 on the last year of Sale’s deal and be ready to roll and spend for a few years. Otherwise you go into 2023 needing to reset in 2024 after going over the cap for two mediocre teams in 2022 and 2023. It makes way more sense to go for it once the jays, rays and yanks start to lose some wind out of their sails. Ok that makes more sense, but thinking about Chris’s coment I think I agree with him. The penalties for the first threshold are Pennie’s on the dollar. If they went right up to the next threshold we’re taking about 5.7 million dollars. I don’t think that means the Sox won’t ever reset, but it’s not contingent on rebuilding. They probably go over next year. Why would they go over next year when they can reset next year with a mediocre team? Then go into 2024 on year 1 of a 3 year limit and only one more year of Sale’s deal left. At the same time, the Yankees will still have 4-5 years of the Stanton deal and maybe a monster Judge deal as well. THAT is the time to push your chips in. |
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 10, 2022 13:37:24 GMT -5
Ok that makes more sense, but thinking about Chris’s coment I think I agree with him. The penalties for the first threshold are Pennie’s on the dollar. If they went right up to the next threshold we’re taking about 5.7 million dollars. I don’t think that means the Sox won’t ever reset, but it’s not contingent on rebuilding. They probably go over next year. Why would they go over next year when they can reset next year with a mediocre team? Then go into 2024 on year 1 of a 3 year limit and only one more year of Sale’s deal left. At the same time, the Yankees will still have 4-5 years of the Stanton deal and maybe a monster Judge deal as well. THAT is the time to push your chips in.I'm not saying you're right or wrong about whether this would be the right approach, but Bloom has made it pretty clear that he's never going to "push his chips in." He's going to try to build a good team in 2023 and in 2024 and in 2025 and in 2026 and not bet it all on a single window of opportunity. |
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 10, 2022 16:02:14 GMT -5
Why would they go over next year when they can reset next year with a mediocre team? Then go into 2024 on year 1 of a 3 year limit and only one more year of Sale’s deal left. At the same time, the Yankees will still have 4-5 years of the Stanton deal and maybe a monster Judge deal as well. THAT is the time to push your chips in.I'm not saying you're right or wrong about whether this would be the right approach, but Bloom has made it pretty clear that he's never going to "push his chips in." He's going to try to build a good team in 2023 and in 2024 and in 2025 and in 2026 and not bet it all on a single window of opportunity. If he doesn't build a playoff team in 2023, he won't have to worry about 2024, 2025 and 2026. |
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Sept 10, 2022 16:13:16 GMT -5
Why would they go over next year when they can reset next year with a mediocre team? Then go into 2024 on year 1 of a 3 year limit and only one more year of Sale’s deal left. At the same time, the Yankees will still have 4-5 years of the Stanton deal and maybe a monster Judge deal as well. THAT is the time to push your chips in.I'm not saying you're right or wrong about whether this would be the right approach, but Bloom has made it pretty clear that he's never going to "push his chips in." He's going to try to build a good team in 2023 and in 2024 and in 2025 and in 2026 and not bet it all on a single window of opportunity. I forgot about the revenue sharing, otherwise of course you do…5 million dollars is peanuts staying under the second threshold. But yeah, they are probably going to want to reset either this year or next |
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Sept 11, 2022 11:09:03 GMT -5
I'm not saying you're right or wrong about whether this would be the right approach, but Bloom has made it pretty clear that he's never going to "push his chips in." He's going to try to build a good team in 2023 and in 2024 and in 2025 and in 2026 and not bet it all on a single window of opportunity. I forgot about the revenue sharing, otherwise of course you do…5 million dollars is peanuts staying under the second threshold. But yeah, they are probably going to want to reset either this year or next Yeah, so Im saying it should be next year we reset since the team is t that good. Thats better than being forced to do so in 2024 and also not great timing when you factor in the situations our competitors are in. |
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Sept 12, 2022 7:03:44 GMT -5
I forgot about the revenue sharing, otherwise of course you doâ¦5 million dollars is peanuts staying under the second threshold. But yeah, they are probably going to want to reset either this year or next Yeah, so Im saying it should be next year we reset since the team is t that good. Thats better than being forced to do so in 2024 and also not great timing when you factor in the situations our competitors are in. Teams losing out on revenue share is effectively a massive tax on all their revenue and not just a few million slapped on the tax threshold overage. Thinking this over and I'm officially changing my position on this. Getting under next year seems likely and a goal of the Red Sox. It almost makes sense to punt a Devers extension into next year. The difference between his arbitration and a raise was probably your starting CFer next year (Kiké). They still have a lot of money to play with if they were going to spend right up to but not over the first tax threshold. I also doubt they give a QO to both Nate and Wacha but I don't think it's totally out of the question. If they like the medicals on Nate and they feel it's probable at least one them would reject and both would be willing to work out a lower AAV on a 2/3 year deal it can still possible me thinks but not probable. Call it 25/75 at this point. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 12, 2022 8:16:04 GMT -5
Yeah, so Im saying it should be next year we reset since the team is t that good. Thats better than being forced to do so in 2024 and also not great timing when you factor in the situations our competitors are in. Teams losing out on revenue share is effectively a massive tax on all their revenue and not just a few million slapped on the tax threshold overage. Thinking this over and I'm officially changing my position on this. Getting under next year seems likely and a goal of the Red Sox. It almost makes sense to punt a Devers extension into next year. The difference between his arbitration and a raise was probably your starting CFer next year (Kiké). They still have a lot of money to play with if they were going to spend right up to but not over the first tax threshold. I also doubt they give a QO to both Nate and Wacha but I don't think it's totally out of the question. If they like the medicals on Nate and they feel it's probable at least one them would reject and both would be willing to work out a lower AAV on a 2/3 year deal it can still possible me thinks but not probable. Call it 25/75 at this point. In theory, though, if they get an extension done, then the one arb season will bring down the AAV for the rest of the deal. If you are already going over next year, then that little bit more next year helps later. |
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Sept 12, 2022 8:34:12 GMT -5
Teams losing out on revenue share is effectively a massive tax on all their revenue and not just a few million slapped on the tax threshold overage. Thinking this over and I'm officially changing my position on this. Getting under next year seems likely and a goal of the Red Sox. It almost makes sense to punt a Devers extension into next year. The difference between his arbitration and a raise was probably your starting CFer next year (Kiké). They still have a lot of money to play with if they were going to spend right up to but not over the first tax threshold. I also doubt they give a QO to both Nate and Wacha but I don't think it's totally out of the question. If they like the medicals on Nate and they feel it's probable at least one them would reject and both would be willing to work out a lower AAV on a 2/3 year deal it can still possible me thinks but not probable. Call it 25/75 at this point. In theory, though, if they get an extension done, then the one arb season will bring down the AAV for the rest of the deal. If you are already going over next year, then that little bit more next year helps later. True, I suppose if they're already going over then maybe this offseason is the time to get a Devers extension done. But also it's only probably going to save them what, 1.5 million a year or so? Not significant, but I suppose it's nothing to sneeze at either. |
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 12, 2022 10:49:28 GMT -5
Well, if they don't reset this year, they will likely be out on the Ohtani sweepstakes after 2023 because his floor will likely be around $50M-55M a year.
|
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Sept 12, 2022 10:51:12 GMT -5
In theory, though, if they get an extension done, then the one arb season will bring down the AAV for the rest of the deal. If you are already going over next year, then that little bit more next year helps later. True, I suppose if they're already going over then maybe this offseason is the time to get a Devers extension done. But also it's only probably going to save them what, 1.5 million a year or so? Not significant, but I suppose it's nothing to sneeze at either. Keep in mind - if they agree to an arbitration number with Devers first, they can still sign an extension this off-season but choose to apply it to the following season to save that ~1.5mil in tax, if they wish. They used to have to wait until after the season starts to make the extension official, but they changed that rule a few years ago. So the extension shouldn't impact their plans. |
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Sept 12, 2022 10:53:56 GMT -5
Well, if they don't reset this year, they will likely be out on the Ohtani sweepstakes after 2023 because his floor will likely be around $50M-55M a year. That may be, but seeing as Ohtani truly isn't driven by money, having a poor season due to an unwillingness to spend likely takes you out of it as well. Even the east-coast location may take us out of it. I wouldn't hold your breath on a 2023 Ohtani holiday surprise. |
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Sept 12, 2022 11:48:50 GMT -5
Offer to JD Wacha Eovaldi and Xander. Worst case is that all 4 leave and you get a ton of draft capital. Best case is that you're paying about 80 million for 4 players in 2023.
|
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Sept 12, 2022 11:50:26 GMT -5
Well, if they don't reset this year, they will likely be out on the Ohtani sweepstakes after 2023 because his floor will likely be around $50M-55M a year. There is zero chance this organization is paying 50 million a year for any player. None. Ohtani should have no bearing on what they do in the offseason because they probably aren't going after him anyways. Hell this team has been low balling the potential batting champ and Devers on contract offers. They'll probably offer Ohtani something like 35 a year and he'll reject it. |
|
ematz1423
Veteran
Posts: 5,383 
Member is Online
|
Post by ematz1423 on Sept 12, 2022 12:19:40 GMT -5
Offer to JD Wacha Eovaldi and Xander. Worst case is that all 4 leave and you get a ton of draft capital. Best case is that you're paying about 80 million for 4 players in 2023. Worst worse case scenario JD accepts it and continues his decline even further and you waste 20 mil on a subpar DH who offers no defensive value. there's noway I'm offering the QO to JD if I'm Bloom. |
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Sept 12, 2022 12:24:22 GMT -5
Offer to JD Wacha Eovaldi and Xander. Worst case is that all 4 leave and you get a ton of draft capital. Best case is that you're paying about 80 million for 4 players in 2023. This would imply that Xander is going to turn down his option but accept arbitration. This would not be a rational choice. |
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 12, 2022 12:36:35 GMT -5
Offer to JD Wacha Eovaldi and Xander. Worst case is that all 4 leave and you get a ton of draft capital. Best case is that you're paying about 80 million for 4 players in 2023. The best case scenario for you involves spending $40 million on bringing back two guys who have each provided less than 1 WAR this season, and who will be 35 and 33 years old respectively? |
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Sept 12, 2022 13:38:48 GMT -5
Offer to JD Wacha Eovaldi and Xander. Worst case is that all 4 leave and you get a ton of draft capital. Best case is that you're paying about 80 million for 4 players in 2023. Worse case is three of those guys not named Xander accept those offers, and all three are either hurt or suck. Not highly unlikely, and a good chance 2 out of three are going to stink or be injured. I'm ok with Wacha/Nate being offered QO's if you are comfortable with Michael and you like the medicals on Nate. Even that might be too much for some in here to like, and that's fair, but certainly there's no way JD gets one. |
|
|
|
Post by bosoxkc on Sept 12, 2022 14:47:04 GMT -5
Rotation
Sale
Wacha 3/40
Eovaldi 3/40 (or trade for young 2/3)
Manea 5/120
Bello
Bullpen
Closer 3/30
Late inning 2/14
Houck
Whitlock
Barnes
Crawford
Schneider
German
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,200
Member is Online
|
Post by cdj on Sept 12, 2022 14:50:46 GMT -5
Rotation Sale Wacha 3/40 Eovaldi 3/40 (or trade for young 2/3) Manea 5/120 Bello Bullpen Closer 3/30 Late inning 2/14 Houck Whitlock Barnes Crawford Schneider German Who do you think Sean Manaea is exactly? I’d give him 2/20. I don’t think he’s getting half of 5/120. That’s a bigger deal than Robbie Ray got coming off of a Cy Young |
|
