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.
Rusney or no Rusney? CBT is the issue
|
Post by jmei on Oct 26, 2017 7:45:41 GMT -5
I think you're misconstruing the argument. It's not aggressiveness, it's what time horizons matter most to you-- how you weigh 2018 production versus 2023 (and beyond) production, what discount rate you apply to future wins, etc. If you're weighing present/near-future wins more heavily (as the Sale trade would suggest), it implies a greater willingness to sacrifice, say, 10 spots of draft order in exchange for a better fourth outfielder.
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Oct 26, 2017 7:46:16 GMT -5
Ok, I feel dumb just typing these words so be kind but didn't Castillo play 2B in Cuba? Was he considered an adequate defender there? Would it hurt to at least get him some versatility there to start the season in Pawtucket or over the winter?
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 26, 2017 8:57:36 GMT -5
I think you're misconstruing the argument. It's not aggressiveness, it's what time horizons matter most to you-- how you weigh 2018 production versus 2023 (and beyond) production, what discount rate you apply to future wins, etc. If you're weighing present/near-future wins more heavily (as the Sale trade would suggest), it implies a greater willingness to sacrifice, say, 10 spots of draft order in exchange for a better fourth outfielder. That is the nuanced version of the initial argument, yes. Sale is signed to a reasonable deal for multiple years though. It's a weird choice to use that deal to try to make that argument, because it's a deal that is/was defensible as a straight value trade. Ok, I feel dumb just typing these words so be kind but didn't Castillo play 2B in Cuba? Was he considered an adequate defender there? Would it hurt to at least get him some versatility there to start the season in Pawtucket or over the winter? It's not a dumb question at all and I'm a little surprised it didn't come up sooner. As I understand he was not considered good there (I'm guessing nobody here has actually seen him play there), and it's now been about seven years since he was at the position.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Oct 26, 2017 10:04:36 GMT -5
Mookie is also a 2nd baseman by trade. If an internal move is made to keep production in the lineup wouldn't it be better to have him move there during Pedey's recuperation and have Castillo man RF?
Not advocating this strategy, as it's been a long time since Mookie played infield. Just mentioning it as a possibility. Rather have Nunez there, but that's another story.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 26, 2017 10:26:05 GMT -5
Also Sale's contract is perhaps the most team-friendly in the game for a player who isn't pre-arb or arb. He's being paid less than half of what he's worth. Saying that they should add Castillo at $10M because they traded for Sale at $13M is like saying because you got a new sportscar for the price of a new sedan, they should also buy a used Ford Pinto for the same amount. Acquiring Sale is smart because it SAVES money relative to his value. The $237M mark is not nearly as close as you're saying it is, umassgrad. They're at roughly $208M after the arb guys - even adding JD Martinez, a SP at the level they'd be likely to add a guy (in other words, not Alex Cobb), and a RP, they're not at $237M. Rusney Castillo is not such a great 4th outfielder that it's worth pushing your first rounder back 10 spots so that you can have him instead of random 4th OF number 2. Except they spent $63M to acquire Moncada, and trading him for Sale means they lose the ability to recoup that up-front cost. So really, they're paying Sale $34M a year.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 26, 2017 10:45:11 GMT -5
OK, responding to the several points in this thread:
1) Definitely missed umassgrad's point. Definitely not nonsense. My bad there. I don't necessarily agree, but it's not nonsense.
2) Moncada's bonus is not the same thing as Castillo's contract. Moncada's bonus was never, ever going to count against the CBT. If you add Castillo, his money WILL count against the CBT. Other than my misinterpretation of umassgrad's point (my bad again), we're talking about the CBT here.
3) Yes, they're all in on this window, as umassgrad and others have pointed out. To make my point clear, what I'm saying is that I do not believe that Rusney Castillo as your 4th outfielder getting <300 PAs will add so much more value than an option that's far cheaper that it's worth going past the $237M threshold to use him there. If you fit him under? Whatever. If you're already over? Sure why not. What I will allow is that if one of the outfielders suffer a major injury and Castillo is the best replacement option, then you definitely go for it.
4) I think the door is closed on either Betts or Castillo playing 2B. It's been years since either did it, and again, I don't think we should confuse trying to find a spot for Castillo is close to the same thing as trying to make a spot for Betts when he was coming up, for example.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,888
|
Post by nomar on Oct 26, 2017 13:05:10 GMT -5
Turns out that “no Rusney” has been the answer the entire time.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 26, 2017 18:56:18 GMT -5
If you look at the expected difference in return between, say, the 25th pick and the 35th pick in the draft, it's not much at all-- less than a couple million dollars' worth of value, if I'm remembering correctly. As such, I don't think the $237M threshold draft pick penalty should be much of a deterrent for a team that expects to contend for the playoffs.
(Note, however, that only the top six picks are "protected" and the expected value of the penalty gets disproportionally stiffer the higher you pick (going from 7 to 17 is a much bigger penalty than going from 25 to 35). As such, you'd have to factor in the probability of next year's team being worse than expected and the draft pick penalty being more severe than expected.)
As such, assuming that Brentz leaves in minor league free agency (which I recognize may be a significant assumption for some, but which I think is the most likely outcome), I think Castillo is head and shoulders better than their next best currently-available fourth outfielder options. Even over just 300 PAs, Castillo is probably a half-win to a win better than, say, Barfield, and thus worth adding even if adding him puts them over the $237M threshold.
|
|
|
Post by coachmac on Oct 27, 2017 8:08:18 GMT -5
Two points about Castillo: Cora has been a big advocate for Castillo.Rusney played for Cora's winter league and on multiple occasions the new Sox skipper proclaimed him mlb ready. A second point is that he only costs $4M more than young and provides a tremendous upgrade over Young.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 27, 2017 8:18:14 GMT -5
Two points about Castillo: Cora has been a big advocate for Castillo.Rusney played for Cora's winter league and on multiple occasions the new Sox skipper proclaimed him mlb ready. A second point is that he only costs $4M more than young and provides a tremendous upgrade over Young. This is getting into the Middlebrooks vs. Sandoval range though, right? Where people defended the Sandoval at the time by saying "well they can't just put Middlebrooks there again." There are a ton of outfield depth options out there, it's not like "oh no, Castillo or we're stuck with Young or Barfield." For, say $4-5 million, they can get a decent upgrade on what Young provided in 2017. And again, I'll reiterate that I'm on board with Castillo - I think he's pretty good! I think their best value play is to trade him to a team that needs a starting center fielder because theoretically he'd be worth more to them than the Red Sox, and it could help them supplement a position of deeper need. Failing that, I think they should protect him. But they have options other than internal ones.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 27, 2017 13:48:27 GMT -5
I'm not sure they can sign a free agent that is better than Castillo for $4-5M, and the marginal luxury tax hit (maybe even including the draft pick penalty) is less than that. I'm probably not bullish than most on Castillo, though.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 27, 2017 14:08:51 GMT -5
At $4 million I think they're coming out ahead, no? The tax on the $6 million gap between Castillo and the free agent is about $2.55 million (42.5%), plus about $2 million for the difference in value from dropping ten spots? My math could be off here.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 27, 2017 17:27:20 GMT -5
At $4 million I think they're coming out ahead, no? The tax on the $6 million gap between Castillo and the free agent is about $2.55 million (42.5%), plus about $2 million for the difference in value from dropping ten spots? My math could be off here. If you think that Brentz's season was not, e.g., an episode of Game of Thrones or The Walking Dead*, then I'm pretty sure that keeping Brentz and trading Castillo gives you more net value than vice versa (including, of course, the mysterious scenarios where they let Brentz sign an MLB contract as a FA instead of protecting him and dealing him). I'm onboard with dealing Castillo for that reason. *Which is to ask the question: was this for real, or fantasy?
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,888
|
Post by nomar on Oct 28, 2017 0:49:51 GMT -5
I hope for Castillo’s sake someone is willing to eat his deal. Any CBA is bound to hurt a select few, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t root for the victims. I hope Castillo finds a team that is willing to take the chance, and that he proves us wrong.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 28, 2017 5:25:18 GMT -5
At $4 million I think they're coming out ahead, no? The tax on the $6 million gap between Castillo and the free agent is about $2.55 million (42.5%), plus about $2 million for the difference in value from dropping ten spots? My math could be off here. Fair point, and it makes $5M a useful benchmark-- if they sign a free agent outfielder, he needs to be either cheaper than $5M or better than Castillo.
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Oct 28, 2017 6:22:44 GMT -5
I think the timing is right to take a look at him and they have a handful of others too. The timing is right. There are some minor openings. I rather mak a major move at the trade deadline.
I don’t want to do what Cherrington did a couple of years ago he needed offense and went after the top two guys. There was very little that offseason,I feel we gonna get stuck with a bidding war with JD Martinez and in a yer or two looking to dump him. Why force it. Maybe Rusney and Chavis with help from a Swihart gives you some punch . I am not delusional. I don’t see Martinez answering all of the offense issues also. I think that also these kids will bounce back without Farrell which is a good thing. I mean who the hell sits Devers in game two against Houston what a dumb ass move. I hope Cora picks a good bench coach.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 28, 2017 9:04:44 GMT -5
I hope for Castillo’s sake someone is willing to eat his deal. Any CBA is bound to hurt a select few, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t root for the victims. I hope Castillo finds a team that is willing to take the chance, and that he proves us wrong. I'm probably the lone wolf here but if Castillo or no Castillo doesn't change whether or not we go over the limit, I'd prefer Castillo over pretty much everyone else as the 4th outfielder, including Brentz.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 28, 2017 11:09:37 GMT -5
I see some people think other teams would want to trade for Castillo. Which I agree with, but not with his contract. 3 years 35.5 million left. You are going to have a hard time getting a team to take the whole contract. If you eat money, it goes against your cap numbers. If a team did, it thinks he's a starting caliber type player. At 4-5 million you are going to be getting a risky player. The reason we paid up for Young was because he was seen as a less risky player. If Castillo is valued at 11 million a year, I don't want to see what 4-5 million gets me. It probally gets you a player like Young coming off a down year.
My thought process is that you can't trade Castillo without eating a lot of money, which would effect your cap. The other option is that you pay him while he's stuck in the minors.
I also can't be alone in wanting to get something out of our 72 million dollar investment. I want to see him play.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 30, 2017 12:40:23 GMT -5
I see some people think other teams would want to trade for Castillo. Which I agree with, but not with his contract. 3 years 35.5 million left. You are going to have a hard time getting a team to take the whole contract. If you eat money, it goes against your cap numbers. If a team did, it thinks he's a starting caliber type player. At 4-5 million you are going to be getting a risky player. The reason we paid up for Young was because he was seen as a less risky player. If Castillo is valued at 11 million a year, I don't want to see what 4-5 million gets me. It probally gets you a player like Young coming off a down year. My thought process is that you can't trade Castillo without eating a lot of money, which would effect your cap. The other option is that you pay him while he's stuck in the minors. I also can't be alone in wanting to get something out of our 72 million dollar investment. I want to see him play. I think you're slightly overstating how bad the remaining contract really is. He only needs to be a 2-WAR player or so to be worth the salary. The problem with the Red Sox is that he wouldn't be starting - if he's starting, he's far more likely to give you that kind of value - as well as the rest of their CBT situation, not the contract in itself, necessarily. Also, the reason they signed Young was not because he was less risky than Castillo - his signing had nothing to do with Castillo. Castillo was supposed to win the starting LF job in 2016, and Young was signed to be the 4th outfielder. Then Castillo sucked, which set off a chain of events that included "Brock Holt, MLB starting left fielder," "Blake Swihart, MLB starting left fielder," "Chris Young, MLB starting left fielder against pitchers of both handedness," "pre-2017 Bryce Brentz, MLB starting left fielder," and so on, until Benintendi came up in August to stop the bleeding. It's funny - the parallels to the 2017 3B situation are eerie. And for reference on the money, $4-6M last year got you Rajai Davis, Colby Rasmus, or Ben Revere. Adding infielders it got you Trevor Plouffe or Mitch Moreland. You can get value for $4-6M - it just comes with some risk
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Oct 30, 2017 13:09:36 GMT -5
Yeah, looking at Castillo's remaining contract, the closest FA signing comparables I can find in the past couple of years are Gerado Parra (signed for 3 years/$27.5M) and Denard Span (signed for 3 years/$31M). So its not like Castillo is making Cespedes money, or really even Josh Reddick or Alex Gordon money. Its far from a bad contact if a team thinks he can be their starting CF.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Oct 30, 2017 13:32:27 GMT -5
Yeah, looking at Castillo's remaining contract, the closest FA signing comparables I can find in the past couple of years are Gerado Parra (signed for 3 years/$27.5M) and Denard Span (signed for 3 years/$31M). So its not like Castillo is making Cespedes money, or really even Josh Reddick or Alex Gordon money. Its far from a bad contact if a team thinks he can be their starting CF. The problem with those comparisons is that each of those players were major league players when they got their contract. Stop for a second, look at Rusney's age (30), his performance these past 3 years (almost all in AAA) and his frequent injuries (120, 103, 96 games over past 3 years) and ask 'how much would I offer this guy on a contract?' Nobody offers him his current remaining deal (35.5M over 3 years). He very well may perform well enough to be worth the deal over the next 3 years, but given the risk of injury and that he may be a 4th OFer (although we all hope better) I think it's clear his contract makes him a negative asset.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 30, 2017 14:26:22 GMT -5
I see some people think other teams would want to trade for Castillo. Which I agree with, but not with his contract. 3 years 35.5 million left. You are going to have a hard time getting a team to take the whole contract. If you eat money, it goes against your cap numbers. If a team did, it thinks he's a starting caliber type player. At 4-5 million you are going to be getting a risky player. The reason we paid up for Young was because he was seen as a less risky player. If Castillo is valued at 11 million a year, I don't want to see what 4-5 million gets me. It probally gets you a player like Young coming off a down year. My thought process is that you can't trade Castillo without eating a lot of money, which would effect your cap. The other option is that you pay him while he's stuck in the minors. I also can't be alone in wanting to get something out of our 72 million dollar investment. I want to see him play. I think you're slightly overstating how bad the remaining contract really is. He only needs to be a 2-WAR player or so to be worth the salary. The problem with the Red Sox is that he wouldn't be starting - if he's starting, he's far more likely to give you that kind of value - as well as the rest of their CBT situation, not the contract in itself, necessarily. Also, the reason they signed Young was not because he was less risky than Castillo - his signing had nothing to do with Castillo. Castillo was supposed to win the starting LF job in 2016, and Young was signed to be the 4th outfielder. Then Castillo sucked, which set off a chain of events that included "Brock Holt, MLB starting left fielder," "Blake Swihart, MLB starting left fielder," "Chris Young, MLB starting left fielder against pitchers of both handedness," "pre-2017 Bryce Brentz, MLB starting left fielder," and so on, until Benintendi came up in August to stop the bleeding. It's funny - the parallels to the 2017 3B situation are eerie. And for reference on the money, $4-6M last year got you Rajai Davis, Colby Rasmus, or Ben Revere. Adding infielders it got you Trevor Plouffe or Mitch Moreland. You can get value for $4-6M - it just comes with some risk I don't think I am. What would he get on the open market? No where near 3 years and 35.5 million. While not a great example, it's like saying a team would give Brentz a 3 year 35.5 million deal because they thought he could be a 2 war player. Maybe a team thinks that, but they won't pay him that. You really need a solid track record to get 35.5 million over 3 years. Castillo just doesn't have that. I agree Young had nothing to do with Castillo. He got that much because he was seen as a safer bet to produce compared to other 4th OF options. We also wanted him and signed him early. There are always deals on free agents, but playing time matters. From what I heard we had no chance at Plouffe last year at that contract. He wanted playing time. You could have signed him, but not on the cheap. It's the same for a bunch of players, they take less so they can get playing time. Now you could wait out the market and hope a player that can help you is there and will accept the offer because he has no choice. That is not DD and you run the risk of not getting a player you need. Nevermind more times than not you get what you pay for, hence the risky part. Plouffe for example was -.4 war last year. So yea he was cheap, but he wasn't very good. For every good deal in that range I bet there are 2-3 bad ones.
|
|
|
Post by Addam603 on Oct 30, 2017 16:19:56 GMT -5
In related news, the Sox are bringing back Aneury Taveras. That gives them Taveras, Barfield, Castillo, (probably) Mars, and a bit of Tzu-Wei Lin in the Pawtucket outfield. Injuries will happen, but that’s crowded. Throw in some of possibility of Sam Travis and Blake Swihart and playing time could be hard to come by. Depth is always a good thing, and not all of those guys will get time in the outfield if at all, but if they can afford it then Castillo belongs out of there.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 30, 2017 16:28:43 GMT -5
Yeah, being a two-win player really is a fairly high bar to clear. For instance, per Fangraphs projections, only 39 outfielders project to be two-win players. As a point of comparison, Benintendi projects to put up 2.2 WAR (which is also what he came in at in 2017). I'd be surprised if any team were willing to take on his entire contract for the reasons wcsoxfan stated above. Easy to forget about Castillo's age and injury issues. Maybe a team selects him in Rule 5 knowing that they can return him to the Red Sox at any time and just be on the hook for his prorated salary. That said, he comes much cheaper to the Red Sox, and the $4-5M free agent alternatives come with their own risk-- see, e.g., the 2017 performances of the aforementioned Rajai Davis (0.3 rWAR, 0.0 fWAR), Colby Rasmus (1.2 rWAR, 1.1 fWAR) and Ben Revere (0.2 rWAR, 0.0 fWAR).
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 30, 2017 16:43:34 GMT -5
Castillo doesn't have a huge amount of risk given his defensive ability. He's at least a 1 win player even if he can't hit a lick. He has 1.4 fWAR in 99 career major league games and about half a season of plate appearances. Since then, it looks like he learned how to hit enough to at least be an average hitter.
|
|
|