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.
Red Sox $4.5m over CBT in 2022
|
Post by notstarboard on Sept 23, 2022 23:30:46 GMT -5
Why do you need to be creative when you already have a perfectly serviceable 1B making league minimum and the top 1B prospect in all of baseball at AAA? Investing heavily there would not have made sense. Vogelbach's platoon splits are pretty ludicrous, so the second Casas was ready he'd have been unrosterable. A $1 million deal for a guy you intend to DFA after ~2 months is a bit different, since it's more like a $3 million deal pro-rated. It's exactly breaking the bank, but it's not efficient either. Turns out it would have been a good value regardless, but he was coming off a -0.1 fWAR season in 258 PA for Milwaukee and had really only had one even kind of okay season, a 1.2 fWAR in 558 PA for Seattle back in 2019. He's a career 1.9 fWAR player and 1.3 of that is this year.
In Bloom's position last offseason I would rather have had Franchy platoon there; he's already paid for, plays other positions, and can pinch run. He also has options left, so you get to preserve the depth when Casas comes up.
WITH THAT SAID, with the hindsight of knowing the team finished $4.5 million over the LT, yeah, sign as many Vogelbachs as you want.
But remember the last top AAA first base prospect in baseball, Spencer Torkelson? He has virtually face-planted in MLB in his first year despite the vast bulk of professional evaluators rating him one of the top overall prospects in baseball, not just at first base. And when I say face-planted, the guy who went 1/1 is a -0.7 fWAR player with a .613 OPS after nearly 400 PAs. And no one ever had Casas rated higher than Torkelson. This isn't to say Casas will be a bust. In fact, he may be a regular All Star, and so may Torkelson. But prospect development isn't linear, and the transition from AAA to MLB is said to be the most difficult jump in levels in professional sports. Plus, if Bloom is bringing Tampa's player development philosophies to Boston, they prefer to have position players and starting pitchers go through an entire year at AA and AAA as part of that process. Sometimes, an outlier will play his way up to MLB faster than that - or injuries at the MLB level may for management's hand, but that's their overall philosophy. Anyway, that's why Bloom may wish to be creative when certain prospects who they project to get 5-6 years or more as MLB starters, no matter how good they are projected to be, start getting close to majors. I don't see the need to get creative to patch holes that don't appear to exist before holes that do (RF, bullpen). Dalbec was one of the best hitters in the majors after the ASB in 2021 and had been good enough to be a starter over his first season plus, especially at his salary. With him in the fold and that top AAA prospect waiting in the wings, I don't see that as a hole. It's hard to assume Dalbec would have the worst season of his career and Casas would simultaneously go down with a multi-month injury.
|
|
|
Post by notstarboard on Sept 23, 2022 23:37:04 GMT -5
I guess as I age I've become more of a casual Sox fan. Help me understand why Boston would only be over the CBT by $4.5 million. What's the financial/draft pick benefit to have sliced another $5 million and gotten under that threshold, especially when Boston was a long shot to make the postseason? Or, at least, the $4.5 million wasn't worth the marginal difference it'd have made in reaching the postseason. What does being over the CBT mean for the next year, two years, or three years? It would seem to me that if Boston wanted/needed to go over it, they would not only spend BIG but also do so with it being a great chance to make the playoffs and possibly win their division. I would recommend you listen to the latest episode of the SP podcast! Chris and Ian spent some time discussing the team finishing over the tax, including the penalties for going over.
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Sept 24, 2022 10:05:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 24, 2022 10:25:19 GMT -5
Apparently the fact that the Red Sox *upgraded* at catcher is not going to stop anyone from criticizing the team for being both buyers and "sellers" at the deadline.
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,421
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Sept 24, 2022 10:43:47 GMT -5
Apparently the fact that the Red Sox *upgraded* at catcher is not going to stop anyone from criticizing the team for being both buyers and "sellers" at the deadline. C’mon. First, that remains to be seen beyond a short sample. Second, they didn’t get Johnny Bench. If there is a marginal upgrade, no one is going to look back and say “mission accomplished” to 2022. Diekman also cost a pretty decent part of that sliver they went over by… so even getting a good return for him is still making lemonade from lemons.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 24, 2022 11:37:14 GMT -5
Apparently the fact that the Red Sox *upgraded* at catcher is not going to stop anyone from criticizing the team for being both buyers and "sellers" at the deadline. C’mon. First, that remains to be seen beyond a short sample. Second, they didn’t get Johnny Bench. If there is a marginal upgrade, no one is going to look back and say “mission accomplished” to 2022. Diekman also cost a pretty decent part of that sliver they went over by… so even getting a good return for him is still making lemonade from lemons. All I'm saying is that it does not take a whole lot of analytical acumen to understand the logic of the Red Sox' approach at the trade deadline, whether one liked that approach or those particular moves or not. Yet it's proven to have gone over the heads of an awful lot of people.
Like there are people who claim to have known the future and that the Red Sox should have sold everyone at the trade deadline because their 30% playoff odds per fangraphs were actually 0% because the team was flawed in its very essence. I'm not talking about them. I'm talking about the way this mlbtraderumors article, for instance, expresses confusion about an approach that just wasn't that confusing, and seems even less confusing given what we've learned since the beginning of August about Vazquez' and McGuire's respective value.
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,421
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Sept 24, 2022 11:46:10 GMT -5
C’mon. First, that remains to be seen beyond a short sample. Second, they didn’t get Johnny Bench. If there is a marginal upgrade, no one is going to look back and say “mission accomplished” to 2022. Diekman also cost a pretty decent part of that sliver they went over by… so even getting a good return for him is still making lemonade from lemons. All I'm saying is that it does not take a whole lot of analytical acumen to understand the logic of the Red Sox' approach at the trade deadline, whether one liked that approach or those particular moves or not. Yet it's proven to have gone over the heads of an awful lot of people.
Like there are people who claim to have known the future and that the Red Sox should have sold everyone at the trade deadline because their 30% playoff odds per fangraphs were actually 0% because the team was flawed in its very essence. I'm not talking about them. I'm talking about the way this mlbtraderumors article, for instance, expresses confusion about an approach that just wasn't that confusing, and seems even less confusing given what we've learned since the beginning of August about Vazquez' and McGuire's respective value.
What is funny to me is that many thought they had almost no chance when the season opened, still thought that at the deadline, and have been proven right. But that was over many people’s heads, I guess.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 24, 2022 11:54:08 GMT -5
All I'm saying is that it does not take a whole lot of analytical acumen to understand the logic of the Red Sox' approach at the trade deadline, whether one liked that approach or those particular moves or not. Yet it's proven to have gone over the heads of an awful lot of people.
Like there are people who claim to have known the future and that the Red Sox should have sold everyone at the trade deadline because their 30% playoff odds per fangraphs were actually 0% because the team was flawed in its very essence. I'm not talking about them. I'm talking about the way this mlbtraderumors article, for instance, expresses confusion about an approach that just wasn't that confusing, and seems even less confusing given what we've learned since the beginning of August about Vazquez' and McGuire's respective value.
What is funny to me is that many thought they had almost no chance when the season opened, still thought that at the deadline, and have been proven right. But that was over many people’s heads, I guess. Almost no one *here* thought they had almost no chance; not a single person predicted a sub-.500 season. So I don't know what "many people" you're referring to.
In any case, if the weather forecast says there's a 30% chance of rain (roughly the Red Sox' playoff odds at the beginning of the season per fangraphs at the trade deadline, I meant; they were 60% at the beginning of the season), and then someone says "that is wrong; there is a 0% chance of rain," and then it doesn't rain, that does not prove that person right. The forecaster also said it probably wouldn't rain! The certainty about the outcome was never justified.
Anyway, again, those aren't even the people I'm talking about.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Sept 24, 2022 13:20:06 GMT -5
Apparently the fact that the Red Sox *upgraded* at catcher is not going to stop anyone from criticizing the team for being both buyers and "sellers" at the deadline. C’mon. First, that remains to be seen beyond a short sample. Second, they didn’t get Johnny Bench. If there is a marginal upgrade, no one is going to look back and say “mission accomplished” to 2022. Diekman also cost a pretty decent part of that sliver they went over by… so even getting a good return for him is still making lemonade from lemons. McGuire has been better than Vazquez on a rate basis since he came into the majors in 2018 (654 PA for him). It’s not the smallest sample. Also the point is that they were trying to remain equally competitive in 2022 and get better in 2023, which they achieved with the catcher swap sequence.
|
|
|
Post by theburn on Sept 24, 2022 13:45:45 GMT -5
C’mon. First, that remains to be seen beyond a short sample. Second, they didn’t get Johnny Bench. If there is a marginal upgrade, no one is going to look back and say “mission accomplished” to 2022. Diekman also cost a pretty decent part of that sliver they went over by… so even getting a good return for him is still making lemonade from lemons. McGuire has been better than Vazquez on a rate basis since he came into the majors in 2018 (654 PA for him). It’s not the smallest sample. Also the point is that they were trying to remain equally competitive in 2022 and get better in 2023, which they achieved with the catcher swap sequence. Does McGuire have the leadership skills Vazquez has? How about relationships with the manager and teammates? I'm not being facetious here; they're legitimate questions.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 24, 2022 15:01:51 GMT -5
Holy smokes, I wonder if Bloom would've traded for Castillo if he knew he could extend him for four years of free agency at that rate?
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 24, 2022 15:35:41 GMT -5
Apparently the fact that the Red Sox *upgraded* at catcher is not going to stop anyone from criticizing the team for being both buyers and "sellers" at the deadline. Marginal upgrade on a losing team, max innings he's ever played and he's having a career year. So, yes, full props. We'll see how he does if he's the guy they want behind the plate for 120 games per year. Meanwhile, Wong seems like a liability back there, even as a backup.
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Sept 24, 2022 16:48:08 GMT -5
Holy smokes, I wonder if Bloom would've traded for Castillo if he knew he could extend him for four years of free agency at that rate? I Doubt it, it'd have cost probably mayer+. The reds got a really good package for Castillo. The Mariners did just get a good deal to get him signed tho for sure.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Sept 24, 2022 18:00:41 GMT -5
Holy smokes, I wonder if Bloom would've traded for Castillo if he knew he could extend him for four years of free agency at that rate? I Doubt it, it'd have cost probably mayer+. The reds got a really good package for Castillo. The Mariners did just get a good deal to get him signed tho for sure. This. The Sox aren't in the kind of shape to lose their best prospects for a very good but not spectacular pitcher. The Ms are going for it because it's been 20 years since they made the postseason. They can't wait for tomorrow. They gave up huge talent in that deal.
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,837
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Sept 24, 2022 20:44:30 GMT -5
C’mon. First, that remains to be seen beyond a short sample. Second, they didn’t get Johnny Bench. If there is a marginal upgrade, no one is going to look back and say “mission accomplished” to 2022. Diekman also cost a pretty decent part of that sliver they went over by… so even getting a good return for him is still making lemonade from lemons. All I'm saying is that it does not take a whole lot of analytical acumen to understand the logic of the Red Sox' approach at the trade deadline, whether one liked that approach or those particular moves or not. Yet it's proven to have gone over the heads of an awful lot of people.
Like there are people who claim to have known the future and that the Red Sox should have sold everyone at the trade deadline because their 30% playoff odds per fangraphs were actually 0% because the team was flawed in its very essence. I'm not talking about them. I'm talking about the way this mlbtraderumors article, for instance, expresses confusion about an approach that just wasn't that confusing, and seems even less confusing given what we've learned since the beginning of August about Vazquez' and McGuire's respective value.
The concept hasn't gone over anyone's head. We all understand the idea of trying to use the deadline to improve the current team and add pieces for the future. Those of us who are critical of it just thought it was unlikely to work, that there was a good chance we'd end up with nothing - no PS spot, no significant adds for the future, and no escape from the LT. Unfortunately, that's exactly what happened. I agree with manfred when he says let's wait to see what we have in McGuire. He looks like he could be a nice, low-salaried piece as the strong side of a C platoon the next few years. But it's early to say we've "learned" what his value is after 29 games.
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,837
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Sept 24, 2022 21:13:20 GMT -5
C’mon. First, that remains to be seen beyond a short sample. Second, they didn’t get Johnny Bench. If there is a marginal upgrade, no one is going to look back and say “mission accomplished” to 2022. Diekman also cost a pretty decent part of that sliver they went over by… so even getting a good return for him is still making lemonade from lemons. Like there are people who claim to have known the future and that the Red Sox should have sold everyone at the trade deadline because their 30% playoff odds per fangraphs were actually 0% because the team was flawed in its very essence.
A few thoughts on the PS odds at the deadline: - Even if one believes they had a 30 percent chance at the deadline (actually 28.8 percent on Aug. 1, but it's unclear to me whether that's at the end of play on Aug. 1 or the beginning of play), it was still unwise to pass up a chance to enhance their chances in future years when they'll have a better team. That 28.8 percent is just not enough for me.
- The 28.8 percent represented the chance of just qualifying for the PS. The FG crunch gave them a just a 5.6 percent chance of winning a DS, a 2.3 percent chance of winning the CS and a .8 percent chance of winning the WS. For me, those odds count more than the chances of making the PS.
- The FG odds are not Gospel. It's perfectly Ok for those of us who watch the team every night to have thought they were not playoff bound. It's also perfectly Ok for others to have had the opposite feeling at the deadline - that the 28.8 percent undersold their chances.
|
|
|
Post by orion09 on Sept 24, 2022 22:19:39 GMT -5
I’m fine with the hybrid “make the team better” approach at the deadline. I’m not fine with exceeding the luxury tax by $4.5M, which feels like borderline malpractice. If you’re going to go over, you sign a decent right fielder. Otherwise, you find a way to sneak under the tax. The difference in slot value between 3x 2nd round comp picks and 3x 4th round comp picks is about $1.2M, or roughly equivalent to the 60th pick. Maybe not a lot in absolute terms, but the Sox should be looking for every opportunity to buy draft talent, since they’re at a disadvantage compared to teams that receive revenue sharing. It’s become a lot harder since the Theo days, where you could have 3 first round comp picks.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Sept 25, 2022 8:52:25 GMT -5
All I'm saying is that it does not take a whole lot of analytical acumen to understand the logic of the Red Sox' approach at the trade deadline, whether one liked that approach or those particular moves or not. Yet it's proven to have gone over the heads of an awful lot of people.
Like there are people who claim to have known the future and that the Red Sox should have sold everyone at the trade deadline because their 30% playoff odds per fangraphs were actually 0% because the team was flawed in its very essence. I'm not talking about them. I'm talking about the way this mlbtraderumors article, for instance, expresses confusion about an approach that just wasn't that confusing, and seems even less confusing given what we've learned since the beginning of August about Vazquez' and McGuire's respective value.
The concept hasn't gone over anyone's head. We all understand the idea of trying to use the deadline to improve the current team and add pieces for the future. Those of us who are critical of it just thought it was unlikely to work, that there was a good chance we'd end up with nothing - no PS spot, no significant adds for the future, and no escape from the LT. Unfortunately, that's exactly what happened. I agree with manfred when he says let's wait to see what we have in McGuire. He looks like he could be a nice, low-salaried piece as the strong side of a C platoon the next few years. But it's early to say we've "learned" what his value is after 29 games. Everyone agrees that it was unlikely to get them to the playoffs. However, they had nothing to offer that would have gotten them significant adds for the future, other than maybe Bogaerts but with his NTC they had zero leverage there. Where people disagree is that the trade off of getting a marginal prospect for an injured Eovaldi was worth completely giving up on the season. The LT piece I still feel they could/should have gotten under, but the penalties really aren’t all that substantial especially if they intend to resign Bogaerts and not sign any other QO guys.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Sept 25, 2022 13:08:41 GMT -5
I’m fine with the hybrid “make the team better” approach at the deadline. I’m not fine with exceeding the luxury tax by $4.5M, which feels like borderline malpractice. If you’re going to go over, you sign a decent right fielder. Otherwise, you find a way to sneak under the tax. The difference in slot value between 3x 2nd round comp picks and 3x 4th round comp picks is about $1.2M, or roughly equivalent to the 60th pick. Maybe not a lot in absolute terms, but the Sox should be looking for every opportunity to buy draft talent, since they’re at a disadvantage compared to teams that receive revenue sharing. It’s become a lot harder since the Theo days, where you could have 3 first round comp picks. ^This.
Once you've decided that you're going tp shed CV's salary (and what he meant to the team as it's longest tenured member), you have to make priority #1 getting under the CBT and fit everything else around that. Fine, get better and try to inspire the team to play like they did in June (for you 28.8 percenters, that's still their only month with a winning record -- add in the fact that at the deadliine they still hadn't won a single intra-divisional series, even vs. the O's), but don't be foolish.
I don't know which is worse: miscalculating their tax situation or refusing to unload a high-salary guy like JDM or Eovaldi for a sub-par return because the other team knew they needed to do so to get under, but they're both criminally irresponsible.
It appears that Chaim leaned too far in the direction of being a "player's GM," indulging their egos that were telling them they were just a hot streak away from getting back in it, in which case let him go do that in Denver. I've been an in-Chaim-we-trust guy for a while because he obviously is really good at what he does well (like signing Wacha and Refsnyder or identifying McGuire as a trade target) but not getting under the tax with this team is simply a capital offense. Off with his head.
|
|
|
Post by briam on Sept 25, 2022 18:23:39 GMT -5
I’m curious if those who are defending the decision to stay over the CBT for a 28.8% playoff chance will feel different when the Red Sox choose not to go over the tax in one of the next two years when, theoretically, they’ll have a much better chance at winning a title.
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Sept 25, 2022 18:39:47 GMT -5
I’m curious if those who are defending the decision to stay over the CBT for a 28.8% playoff chance will feel different when the Red Sox choose not to go over the tax in one of the next two years when, theoretically, they’ll have a much better chance at winning a title. I mean, I kinda expect them to not go over next year, so I'm not going to be upset when they don't
|
|
|
Post by xdmo on Sept 25, 2022 21:11:17 GMT -5
I’m curious if those who are defending the decision to stay over the CBT for a 28.8% playoff chance will feel different when the Red Sox choose not to go over the tax in one of the next two years when, theoretically, they’ll have a much better chance at winning a title. I mean, I kinda expect them to not go over next year, so I'm not going to be upset when they don't Wait??? Why? Theoretically speaking, the next 3 years is where the Sox should be spending money. Soto, Xander, and Devers are free agents in this time. One of these three players should be soaking up a lot their payroll. Next year is very important for Devers/Xander decisions.
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Sept 25, 2022 23:14:18 GMT -5
I mean, I kinda expect them to not go over next year, so I'm not going to be upset when they don't Wait??? Why? Theoretically speaking, the next 3 years is where the Sox should be spending money. Soto, Xander, and Devers are free agents in this time. One of these three players should be soaking up a lot their payroll. Next year is very important for Devers/Xander decisions. Not going over in 2023 has nothing to do with the FA class of Soto, Devers, and Ohtani. They can easily operate with the same payroll next season and just reallocate where it's spent and compete, IMO. Take Price's 13 mil, spread it around, probably not spending $20m at DH, spend it on two $10mil guys. Even if they do give new deals to Xander and Devers, how much more does that even add to the books next year? A Devers extension probably kicks in after his last arb year, and how much higher than 20 is Xander getting?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 27, 2022 11:51:33 GMT -5
Because those were the two they could've moved to get under the CBT. That said, draft thread. Yes that's one argument, but the context here is someone suggesting they should have played as poorly as possible to help their draft position. And others have definitely made the argument that they should have sold off at the deadline in order to add prospects. But also I think trading Wacha and not adding Pham would've gotten them close to the CBT, no?
Moved from the draft thread. Based on the math, this would probably have worked. Nice find. However, it also would've been so completely throwing in the towel that at that point you should just move JDM for anything anyway, right? And while Wacha had value, he also, in theory, may get a QO, so you'd need to get more value than that pick for him.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 27, 2022 12:12:25 GMT -5
Yeah, and of course I wouldn't have done this, and as I've said a bunch of times I think it would be really unusual (if not unprecedented?) for a team to fully wave the white flag on a season when they were just 2 games out of a playoff spot. But for the people who did want to give up, I think this means the whole "why not trade Eovaldi/JDM" question is irrelevant since they could have gotten under the CBT without doing that anyway.
On the other hand, I just remembered that my own prediction before the trade deadline was that they would try to move JDM with the sort of lateral move they ended up doing with Vazquez and McGuire - save some money without weakening the team and add a prospect or two in the bargain. That would have made a lot of sense! In theory it would have meant accomplishing everything the team did accomplish at the trade deadline and getting under the CBT to boot. But I suspect the market for JDM was just really dry; there were certainly enough red flags with him that by the beginning of August *I* wasn't expecting much from him for the rest of the season. So maybe that was just never a path to getting under the CBT.
|
|
|