|
Post by Jimmy on Apr 8, 2024 22:51:42 GMT -5
They are only $15M below the luxury tax now… which seems reasonable for a year where they’re not top tier??? Sneaky it seems like they are one extension away from “wow they spent up to the luxury tax in a year where they aren’t super competitive.” Almost want to give ownership a little credit here for dealing with the BS, if you want to save $5M for the deadline I’m not sure a $10M signing makes you that much more competitive for this season. If you’re spending money but for the long term I’m with it. If a Casas extension takes them to the luxury tax without going over they’re doing a lot of things right…
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Apr 9, 2024 6:05:28 GMT -5
S/O to Stats for basically calling it (this was his guess before they announced the years and money, coming to 8/50.3).
|
|
|
Post by trotman on Apr 9, 2024 7:29:10 GMT -5
I doubt if it's any big secret that this makes me happy, good for the Sox, goof for Rafaela. Let's out Brave the Braves. My preferred list of more extensions: 1. Houck (Ace potential slider). 2. Crawford. (Always been solid, more very good games than bad, adjusts well). 3. Wong. (Underrated and it take two catchers). 4. Abreu. (Solid two way player with a Dewey like arm and great pitch selection. Enough range to play anywhere in the outfield). 5. Winckowski. (Seems like a good candidate for a Whitlock style extension). 6. Maybe Grissom, time will tell but we should know this year. I left off Casas because we have several 1B/DH candidates either here or down under. I also doubt if he'll sign, tough to sign a player who is already financially secure no matter how much he says he wants to play his entire career in Boston. The Braves extensions have limited risk either because they're 1. Acuna 2. Signed super young and are FA by 30/31 (Albies, Harris, Strider) or 3. star players who have a longer contract to spread the AAV (Matt Olson, Austin Riley, Sean Murphy).
Aside from Casas and maybe Grissom, I don't think our candidates fall into the same realm. The first 3 guys are in their late 20s and are pre-arb. With elbows exploding daily teams do not want the risk of signing a pitcher into their 30s when they already have team control. The flip side is teams probably have more leverage for pitchers to sign extensions early with the added injury risk. It will be interesting to see how the landscape changes for starting pitchers. It sure feels like teams will have more leverage for all but the elite pitchers. 1. Houck - 27 y.o., Pre-Arb, FA in 2028 at 32: Potentially if FO expects him to pop off. 2. Crawford - 28 y.o, Super-2, FA in 2029 at 33: Don't want the risk. Even if he pops it's safer to sign an extension closer to free agency. 3. Wong - 27 y.o., Pre-Arb, FA in 2029 at 33. Assuming Teel is the starter I would prefer to dumpster dive for a RHH catcher. There is always a handful of options each year similar to Wong. Not worth the risk. 4. Abreu - 24 y.o., Pre-Arb FA in 2030 at 31. So little experience. Maybe in a few years? 5. Winckowski - 25 y.o, Pre-Arb, FA in 2029 at 30. Seems like a dime a dozen. 6. Grissom - 23 y.o., Pre-Arb, "time will tell but we should know this year". Agreed My Other Options; 1. Casas - 24 y.o., FA in 2029 at 29. Quirky could be our best offensive threat this year. 2. Tyler O'Neill - 28 y.o. (crazy when you see the ages above), FA in 2025 at 30, injury prone but good when healthy. RHH needs get worse as our prospects graduate. Edit: 3. Pivetta
|
|
|
Post by bishop on Apr 9, 2024 8:16:48 GMT -5
Devers obviously plus Yoshida at DH plus Jordan plus pretty much anybody that outgrows their position. Left handed first basemen pretty much litter all of baseball. Yoshida isn’t likely to be on the team when this really becomes an issue, and again Jordan isn’t really good enough to be factoring into these discussions. The fact that you stopped the list at 3 and then had to resort to “well others will outgrow their positions and you can find first basemen anywhere” doesn’t really give credit to the notion that any player that grows off a position will have to clear the offensive bar for first base or DH, and any external option is going to cost just as much for similar if not lesser production. To me, the best arguments against a Casas extension are Devers’ inevitable move to first and the glut of position player prospects the team has coming up potentially necessitating a rotation DH spot. That being said, Casas was probably a top 20 offensive player in baseball the second half of last year, if you can get a reasonable deal done I think you jump on it and figure out the position logistics later. I think the best argument against a Casas extension is that he seemingly wants to be paid as a top 20 offensive player. I hope he proves he is and I hope we lock him up, but mostly I just hope he proves he is for now
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Apr 9, 2024 11:06:12 GMT -5
This seems like a good utility number. What does he have to hit to be worth the value? I can't imagine it's that high.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Apr 9, 2024 11:11:47 GMT -5
The other enormous difference between the Braves extensions and these two is that the Braves extensions have been for much better value. Would you rather have (healthy) Strider or Bello at the same money? Rafaela got more than Albies (but less than Harris).
I like the idea of these extensions but... I want to wait to see the structure here before concluding anything.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Apr 9, 2024 11:13:04 GMT -5
This seems like a good utility number. What does he have to hit to be worth the value? I can't imagine it's that high. For this to net out to neutral vs what he would have gotten anyways probably like an 80 wRC+ assuming his defense is truly elite
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Apr 9, 2024 14:20:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by orion09 on Apr 9, 2024 14:48:37 GMT -5
ZiPS has him averaging a 101 OPS+ and 2.3 WAR over the course of the 8 year deal.
|
|
|
Post by bojacksoxfan on Apr 9, 2024 15:13:39 GMT -5
It’s strange that ZiPS sees him as a ridiculously consistent 250+ hitter, but if he is that you’d think he’d actually be better than averaging 2.3 WAR per season. Hopefully he gets there because that seems a bit high for a median projection.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Apr 9, 2024 15:15:57 GMT -5
It’s strange that ZiPS sees him as a ridiculously consistent 250+ hitter, but if he is that you’d think he’d actually be better than averaging 2.3 WAR per season. Hopefully he gets there because that seems a bit high for a median projection. ZiPS is conservative on his defensive value. If he actually hits that well and his defense is indeed among the best in baseball he would be much more than a 2.3 WAR player.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Apr 9, 2024 19:30:59 GMT -5
I'm mustering mild positivity about this extension, but I'll be honest: I find it a little odd to commit $50 million to a guy who hasn't yet proven he can hit at all in the major leagues, and about whom serious questions remain in that department.
I'm choosing to take this as a good sign that they're confident the bat will prove out. And the risk here is not *that* high. But... <gulp>.
|
|
|
Post by bishop on Apr 9, 2024 21:02:39 GMT -5
I'm mustering mild positivity about this extension, but I'll be honest: I find it a little odd to commit $50 million to a guy who hasn't yet proven he can hit at all in the major leagues, and about whom serious questions remain in that department. I'm choosing to take this as a good sign that they're confident the bat will prove out. And the risk here is not *that* high. But... <gulp>. I get year to year was an option and fair to question how much upside they're buying out here and in Bello's, but the risk is... a $6m AAV hit for a really good 4th OF/utility guy with his defense, versatility and speed? We've had so much dead money on the books this century I'm not worried if his hit tool never improves and we're overpaying a bench guy by a couple million, especially one who fills several valuable roles on a 26 man roster.
|
|
|
Post by orion09 on Apr 10, 2024 1:12:09 GMT -5
I'm mustering mild positivity about this extension, but I'll be honest: I find it a little odd to commit $50 million to a guy who hasn't yet proven he can hit at all in the major leagues, and about whom serious questions remain in that department. I'm choosing to take this as a good sign that they're confident the bat will prove out. And the risk here is not *that* high. But... <gulp>. On the flip side, the criticism has been that the Sox don’t extend their young players, or wait too long (until they’ve made enough money and are committed to testing free agency). Maybe they could’ve waited a year or so…. but I think part of extending young players is taking shots like this early in their career, with the expectation that not all of them will work out. Still a better value bet than most 8 year FA deals IMO.
|
|
|
Post by keninten on Apr 10, 2024 1:20:10 GMT -5
Better to miss on a few of these contracts than a big one.
|
|
|
Post by pappyman99 on Apr 10, 2024 6:29:03 GMT -5
The other enormous difference between the Braves extensions and these two is that the Braves extensions have been for much better value. Would you rather have (healthy) Strider or Bello at the same money? Rafaela got more than Albies (but less than Harris). I like the idea of these extensions but... I want to wait to see the structure here before concluding anything. I feel this is both true but with the context of what the Braves were doing was money ballish in that they found flaw in the market (specifically the financial market of baseball) that the league and players are now catching up too. I’d imagine these contracts only get more expensive moving forward. Feel like the market is turning to the players and saying yeah we will take a risk and pay for your future value, but we are moving on from overpaying you all for past value once they are in their 30s At least that is how it looked to me
|
|
bg23
Rookie
Posts: 114
Member is Online
|
Post by bg23 on Apr 10, 2024 6:30:43 GMT -5
If Rafaela had proven he could hit at the major league level he would be looking at a 9 figure extension given the defensive floor. That uncertainly is baked into the dollar value of the extension. There is risk that Rafaela never hits and isn't worth the contract, but there is also the opportunity for him to hit a high end offensive outcome and become a star. I am glad they extended him because even the risk of underperformance does not hurt them much long term as far as payroll.
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Apr 10, 2024 7:18:24 GMT -5
I'm mustering mild positivity about this extension, but I'll be honest: I find it a little odd to commit $50 million to a guy who hasn't yet proven he can hit at all in the major leagues, and about whom serious questions remain in that department. I'm choosing to take this as a good sign that they're confident the bat will prove out. And the risk here is not *that* high. But... <gulp>. Thats the norm now. Colt Keith and Jackson Chourio are the most recent examples. I think the White Sox did this too with Eloy and Robert there's a few more examples out there. But there's certainly a risk on these deals but the age of the player would probably make a deal easier to swallow.
|
|
|
Post by greenmonster on Apr 10, 2024 8:04:33 GMT -5
Has this deal been officially announced by the Red Sox or is this still mostly rumor based?
edit: I am not suggesting it isn't true
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Apr 10, 2024 8:21:10 GMT -5
I'm mustering mild positivity about this extension, but I'll be honest: I find it a little odd to commit $50 million to a guy who hasn't yet proven he can hit at all in the major leagues, and about whom serious questions remain in that department. I'm choosing to take this as a good sign that they're confident the bat will prove out. And the risk here is not *that* high. But... <gulp>. To me, he profiles so well as a backup that there's just not much downside there. Even if he doesn't hit at all, to the point where he's confined to the bench (and I'm one of those people who is concerned that's a real possibility!), the versatility and defense play. He's probably putting up 0.5 to 1.0 WAR seasons on the bench. It's just hard to see a Chris Singleton type of situation where it's just a total loss.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,080
|
Post by cdj on Apr 10, 2024 8:25:35 GMT -5
If Rafaela had proven he could hit at the major league level he would be looking at a 9 figure extension given the defensive floor. That uncertainly is baked into the dollar value of the extension. There is risk that Rafaela never hits and isn't worth the contract, but there is also the opportunity for him to hit a high end offensive outcome and become a star. I am glad they extended him because even the risk of underperformance does not hurt them much long term as far as payroll. I think this is exactly it He’s going to have value no matter what with that glove and speed, I think it’s smart to lock him up before he shows he can hit big league pitching too. Like you said if he had done that we are talking 9 figs
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Apr 10, 2024 8:37:10 GMT -5
Okay you all convinced me. I am upgrading from 'mild positivity' to 'moderate positivity.'
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Apr 10, 2024 8:48:53 GMT -5
i am firmly in the "I have no idea whether this will be a good deal, because he has only played 1 month (barely) and any forecasting model doesn't have enough data to be that informative" camp. Honestly, this feels forced a tad bit.
Hope he becomes studly in his baseball performance, though.
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Apr 10, 2024 9:33:31 GMT -5
The downside certainly seems minimal, even if he ends up being more of a super sub utility guy his defense will provide value but it's no slam dunk he makes this extension look good when we look back on it in 8 years. Don't think it was really a necessary move but not upset at it either.
|
|
|
Post by trotman on Apr 10, 2024 10:45:43 GMT -5
The downside certainly seems minimal, even if he ends up being more of a super sub utility guy his defense will provide value but it's no slam dunk he makes this extension look good when we look back on it in 8 years. Don't think it was really a necessary move but not upset at it either. I agree with the downside and the lack of necessity. I'm coming around to being more positive on the move. As others have said, he'll be age 30 at the end of the contract so the defense shouldn't slip too much. $6.25AAV is easy to hide or worst case just remove from the 40. At such a low AAV this move is just a blip even if it fails. Plus money will be different in near the end of the contract. I do think the economics of the extensions will change drastically in the next few years. We have a copycat league so everyone will try to be the Braves. Maybe the pendulum swings back due to risk.
|
|