|
Post by mredsox89 on Feb 23, 2014 0:10:13 GMT -5
If college coaches want to hurt the Phillies, they certainly can. That's where this could bite Philadelphia. Will it, who knows. But it doesn't take much to get on a coaches bad side. They certainly want to limit any risk of draft eligible guys who decide to come back. Since the Phillies have a history of turning guys in, I can certainly see coaches pushing kids away from that organization
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Feb 21, 2014 23:37:33 GMT -5
Lot of talent here in Coral Gables this weekend for UM/UF. Not necessarily a ton of MLB draft talent on UM's side, at least from the upper class guys, but a loaded immediate impact freshman class.
Canes finally took one from UF to open the series. Just the 3rd win in the last 17 meetings for the Canes. Looking for a series win for the first time since 2009, and they've played at least 3 every year since
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Feb 19, 2014 23:59:09 GMT -5
Everything about the Wetzler story is terrible. The rule in general is terrible. How they expect kids to come to a well rounded decision when they're barely allowed to speak to anyone is mind blowing, and has to change at some point soon.
As usual, the NCAA takes it's leisurely time. It selectively enforces rules and selectively decides how long it will take to come to an agreement.
The Phillies turning Wetzler in is the worst part of the story. I don't care if he burned the Phillies. You don't do this to someone if they decide not to sign. I would imagine that there will be some brushback from college juniors and even some HS kids who, prior to the draft, may just say they have no interest in negotiating with Philly.
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Feb 16, 2014 17:42:52 GMT -5
The O's have to make a 40-man move to announce the signing. Wonder if we get Almanzar back yet. They said a few days ago that they planned on giving him significant playing time during Grapefruit league action due to guys recovering from injuries. No clue if that means they won't keep him, but maybe noteworthy?
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Feb 13, 2014 0:50:02 GMT -5
I have no clue who any of those guys the Yanks signed are... but it makes me wonder how are they spending so much on IFA's if the system has a hard ceiling spending limit? Are they all over 27 years old? How is this within the rules? Sent from my SGH-T999 using proboards "Teams that go 15 percent or more over will pay a 100 percent tax on the overage and won't be able to sign any player for a bonus of more than $250,000 in the 2014-15 signing period." Believe that will be the result.
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Feb 4, 2014 15:48:04 GMT -5
Sources: The Mets have made an offer to Stephen Drew.
Sources: The Mets have not made an offer to Stephen Drew.
Sources are awesome during the offseason
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Feb 3, 2014 19:15:44 GMT -5
Chris what type of weekend rotation does UVA return? Trivia question for the board. What was the last ACC school to win the National Championship and what year? It's one of those stats that amazes me. Eventually the conference has to win, right? Going to school at UM and seeing ACC baseball for the past 6+ years, it's always remarkable that it hasn't happened yet. With how regularly the top of the conference appears in Omaha, it's got to only be a matter of time
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Jan 23, 2014 15:23:34 GMT -5
Jason Mastrodonato ?@jmastrodonato 1m Jon Lester: "I understand to stay in Boston, you're not going to get a free agent deal. You're just not."
He's said all the right things since the end of the season. I still buy that he takes a Pedroia type discount to stay in Boston, but I would certainly understand if he goes elsewhere to take the absurd $ top end pitchers have been given
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Jan 13, 2014 19:41:25 GMT -5
Yea, there is no way the Yanks stay under if they sign Tanaka. They'll barely stay under even without him, unless they go near min on a SP. They're also pretty much locked into having nearly no space to add throughout the season if they actually do become competitive.
There isn't even anything they can really do to save any money at this point. No one making big money has a contract anywhere near attractive enough for them to move without sending massive money. Maybe they can move someone like Ichiro and cover half his deal, but even that won't give them nearly enough to make any sort of major move and still stay under.
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Jan 11, 2014 14:15:05 GMT -5
So here are my questions: The original suspension was for violating the banned substance policy AND obstructing the investigation. Is it plausible that they reduced it to 162 games because they're essentially taking off the 50 games for the banned substance violation? Maybe they believe in federal court they have a better chance of proving the obstruction than the banned substance violation. I'm not a lawyer so I really have no idea... but it seems logical to me. The only real reason I think they picked 211 was because it was a full season plus whatever was left of the 2013 season at the time of the suspension No one really thought 211 would ever get passed arbitration, but I think 162 is more than most thought would come out of arbitration given the lack of a failed test
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Jan 11, 2014 12:02:18 GMT -5
A-rod suspended for a full season according to reports Gives them a chance to get under 189, especially if they don't get Tanaka. Ugh Hey, it also loses them their best 3B with no obvious replacement on the market. So there's that. Yea. I'm not really concerned with the Yankees for 2014 even if they get Tanaka, andI had pretty much assumed A-rod would get at least 100 anyways. It actually puts the Yankees in a very odd situation. They've been given that miraculous chance to seemingly get under 189, but now have to balance that with trying to be competitive. My guess is they still go all in on Tanaka. Bigger question is this. If they don't get him, do they then go into $ save mode and make sure to not go over 189?
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Jan 11, 2014 11:47:04 GMT -5
A-rod suspended for a full season according to reports
Gives them a chance to get under 189, especially if they don't get Tanaka. Ugh
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Dec 23, 2013 0:57:48 GMT -5
With the luxury tax at 189 through the 2016 season, it will be interesting to see how teams spend their money beyond that. Have to believe that it goes up even more with the influx of $ into the game
How do they calculate it btw? I know it's an agreed upon amount in the CBA, but did they just pull a number out of the air, or was it calculated based on revenue, etc?
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Dec 18, 2013 14:12:31 GMT -5
Morales to COL for Jonathan Herrera, potentially inching closer to a no on Drew I'd say this is a thread closing deal. edit: unless he has options. At the very least this probably makes it impossible for Drew to return if WMB stays
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Dec 18, 2013 13:50:13 GMT -5
Morales to COL for Jonathan Herrera, potentially inching closer to a no on Drew
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Dec 15, 2013 18:30:25 GMT -5
I'm a little surprised people are concerned about this. Holt is a young(ish) guy who I think deserves a utility role if the alternative is a scrub veteran. If there is anything that can be had on the cheap during the year it's a utility guy. Don't get me wrong, I value a really good utility player, but I don't feel one was available via free agency. I think the real reason people are "concerned" is that the team doesn't exactly have many other question marks. I mean what other things are there to fix with this team right now? Maybe a question in LF. Maybe getting Drew back and moving WMB? Maybe moving one of the back end SP? It's not like they have a massive hole anywhere on their roster. They've picked up a catcher, have their guy back at 1B, have arguable the #1 prospect in baseball to take over at SS, and a legit prospect to fill the hole in CF
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Dec 13, 2013 0:45:51 GMT -5
No need to sign any of the RFA's still available and give up a pick, as none of them are worth the huge contract they demand. Let Ben build us deeper through the picks. I think they should wait until there is someone available who'd be worth going over, such as Stanton, CarGo, Tulo etc. If they go after Tanaka, I wouldn't mind. He probably wouldn't cost more than $12 to 14m. I just wouldnt want to give him a long deal, I'd offer 4 years. I think they should go over the cap once it makes sense, just not now for mediocre over-paid FA's. I'd be stunned if he signed for anywhere near 12 or 14 and 4 years. I don't think that's even in the ballpark anymore given how low the posting fee is. When it was rumored to be $50M, I could have seen 5x14 or something similar for a total investment of $120M. But now that he will essentially be a FA to all teams who are willing to put up $20M, he will be able to push his actual contract towards the $20M a year mark
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Dec 13, 2013 0:43:43 GMT -5
I was going off Fangraphs FWIW. But his peripherals (FIP and XFIP) weren't all that different from 2011 and 2012 but his ERA was almost a run and a half higher. He didn't look very good in 2012, but I don't think he was nearly as bad as it is made out to be. From what I can gather, the difference in WAR is that BR bases a lot of it off runs allowed whereas Fangraphs goes off FIP. So therefore Fangraphs has 11/12 as fairly similar seasons where BR has them as vastly different years. I tend to lean more towards FIP
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Dec 12, 2013 23:24:56 GMT -5
The thing with Lester is that even when he hasn't been great, he's still been very good. 6 consecutive years of 3+ WAR and 6 consecutive years of 190+ innings. Certainly nothing about him rings "likely to get hurt" or likely to put in a complete stinker of a season.
Kershaw is on another level, and he will get 25-30 per year. Shields has put up similar numbers over the last 6 to Lester, but being a few years older and a RHP will likely be half a level below Lester at this point. Lester will likely be the #2 pitcher available (3 if Tanaka is there next year) and will get $20M per for 5+ years.
No matter how many arms near MLB ready the Sox have, there's very little chance any of them are #1 starters for a few years, and would likely be into the prime of their career at the end of a Lester extension, which would actually work well
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Dec 12, 2013 21:44:10 GMT -5
Agree with jmei. This team is at a point where marginal improvements can be a big difference in the long run. Adding a win or two has a major marginal effect. It's not like it takes them from average to a tick above. They are at a point where they are already one of the top teams in the league, and small improvements are all that it takes. Certainly pass if it requires 3 years, I'd even be a bit hesitant at 2 years but realize it might be what it takes. I think Drew + Xander is significantly better than Xander + WMB, and that doesn't even take into account the hopeful L/R matchups if they maintain all 3.
If the total $ for 2 years falls beneath the QO value, then you make the move. At that cost, if he performs even at a moderate level with plus defense, he could be very easily be an attractive choice to a team in need of a SS at the deadline or after the 2014 season
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Dec 12, 2013 17:59:53 GMT -5
He said on WEEI a week or so ago after the Ellsbury deal that he knows he would probably have to take a bit less money than he could get on the open market to stay with the Sox, similarly to his last deal.
As much as I'd like to them not have to wait until after the 2014 season to sign him, it would be very difficult to get it done now due to it boosting up his AAV. I could see them getting it done halfway through the season or something like that so that it does't take away much of their potential relief under 189
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Dec 12, 2013 11:53:39 GMT -5
Stay under the cap unless it's for that one "elite" guy. Because the minute you go over the cap, you can expect the team to tighten the budget to get back under. Of course I want the best product out on the field, but I also know that if they can build from within, they'll have more money in the next 3-5 years to potentially spend on guys that come up, and/or be able to flip low cost guys for prime players prior to getting to FA
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Dec 10, 2013 16:03:56 GMT -5
Value of the long ball apparently in ARI. Mind blowing that they gave up that much for a guy like Trumbo. But with guys with power, all you need is one team to believe it's ultra important/a major need and you can score big time
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Dec 8, 2013 22:13:32 GMT -5
I'd be really pissed if we spent all that $ on Choo. Don't think Ben is that dumb. I can't imagine them going 7 years or $100M+ on Choo when they didn't go there for Ellsbury Plus, the only way they can add payroll or at least anything beyond $5 AAV is by trading Dempster and/or Peavy
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Dec 6, 2013 22:57:58 GMT -5
We need to get one more pick by having Drew sign somewhere else and then I am very happy. That's where I'm at. End up with picks 26, 32 and 33 to add to system, and either trade WMB now or part year through it for an OF, give Cecchini the 3b job in August. Bradford on WEEI just now: "If I had to guess right now, it seems like Drew will be back to Boston at a discount" Interesting. At what point, if any, does this offset the lack of a draft pick?
|
|