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.
6/10-6/13 Red Sox vs. Rangers Series Thread
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 12, 2019 11:16:16 GMT -5
He would be the last guy on my list to trade in any potential deal unless there was a package that made it worth it. He's not great, but he could be a part of a good bullpen if used in the 7th inning and is on the cheap. If they could get something reasonable then definitely. I just think he's worth a lot more to the Red Sox than any other team. I could be wrong, teams do silly things at the deadline. It would be nice to be the team that benefits from all that craziness for once. I would love it if a team got incredibly stupid and offered up their farm system for a player in a desperate effort to win, like Tampa.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 12, 2019 11:20:52 GMT -5
If they could get something reasonable then definitely. I just think he's worth a lot more to the Red Sox than any other team. I could be wrong, teams do silly things at the deadline. It would be nice to be the team that benefits from all that craziness for once. I would love it if a team got incredibly stupid and offered up their farm system for a player in a desperate effort to win, like Tampa. That only happens when teams trade with the Yankees. They got a better return for a Chapman rental than the White Sox got for Sale.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Jun 12, 2019 11:22:58 GMT -5
I hate tanking if that means deliberately trying to lose for some future benefit. It's dishonest and manipulative. IMO there ought to be severe penalties for doing so (how to prove) or jiggering the draft/other in a way that assures no benefit accrue to folding while still fostering competitive balance.....something akin to what the NBA attempts to do balancing interests.
If what is meant is changing course and building for the future with trades and salary structure adjustments, that's fine. Maybe that is too nuanced but I want integrity in the process.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 12, 2019 11:25:09 GMT -5
I would love it if a team got incredibly stupid and offered up their farm system for a player in a desperate effort to win, like Tampa. That only happens when teams trade with the Yankees. They got a better return for a Chapman rental than the White Sox got for Sale. Boy, isn't that the depressing truth? Though at least the Red Sox were the beneficiaries of the buy in that case.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jun 12, 2019 11:25:29 GMT -5
If they could get something reasonable then definitely. I just think he's worth a lot more to the Red Sox than any other team. I could be wrong, teams do silly things at the deadline. It would be nice to be the team that benefits from all that craziness for once. I would love it if a team got incredibly stupid and offered up their farm system for a player in a desperate effort to win, like Tampa. Tampa doesn't need to offer up their farm system to win. They're quite capable of winning as they are now (assuming a healthy Glasnow and Snell by October).
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 12, 2019 11:27:36 GMT -5
I hate tanking if that means deliberately trying to lose for some future benefit. It's dishonest and manipulative. IMO there ought to be severe penalties for doing so (how to prove) or jiggering the draft/other in a way that assures no benefit accrue to folding while still fostering competitive balance.....something akin to what the NBA attempts to do balancing interests. If what is meant is changing course and building for the future with trades and salary structure adjustments, that's fine. Maybe that is too nuanced but I want integrity in the process. Sometimes, it's just how you win, unfortunately. Though we can be thankful that baseball has the least need to tank than other sports. The draft just isn't the same as the NBA or NFL.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 12, 2019 11:28:23 GMT -5
I would love it if a team got incredibly stupid and offered up their farm system for a player in a desperate effort to win, like Tampa. Tampa doesn't need to offer up their farm system to win. They're quite capable of winning as they are now (assuming a healthy Glasnow and Snell by October). I think that's the point though. Imagine this team with JD Martinez mixed in for a couple of guys who won't help this year?
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jun 12, 2019 11:35:50 GMT -5
I don't get the point about relief appearances. If starters, Kimbrel, and Kelly made 56% of relief appearances in the playoffs last year, then the starters, Barnes, and Workman can make 56% of appearances this year, if it comes to it. They'd probably be better than Kimbrel was too. Also I don't understand the idea that the closer by committee hasn't worked (as mentioned by someone else above). We could have made Barnes the closer and he'd have a bunch of saves. He also would have appeared in much lower-leverage situations against weaker hitters and been less valuable to the team. Efficient bullpen usage has been one of the real strengths of the Red Sox. The problem is that the bullpen stinks after the top 3 guys. But based on Cora's usage of the bullpen in last year's playoffs, a top-heavy bullpen might not be such a liability.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 12, 2019 11:39:37 GMT -5
I hate tanking if that means deliberately trying to lose for some future benefit. It's dishonest and manipulative. IMO there ought to be severe penalties for doing so (how to prove) or jiggering the draft/other in a way that assures no benefit accrue to folding while still fostering competitive balance.....something akin to what the NBA attempts to do balancing interests. If what is meant is changing course and building for the future with trades and salary structure adjustments, that's fine. Maybe that is too nuanced but I want integrity in the process. Sometimes, it's just how you win, unfortunately. Though we can be thankful that baseball has the least need to tank than other sports. The draft just isn't the same as the NBA or NFL. There's not much evidence that winning is obtainable only through tanking in baseball. Some of the players being discussed for possible trades may never be replaced again. Why would they possibly also punt on 2020 in June of 2019? They cannot possibly be better in 2020 with a Mookie Betts or even JDM trade.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Jun 12, 2019 11:48:51 GMT -5
Man, I can’t believe some of the names people throw out to trade. Hard to complain about ownership’s priorities or player loyalty when fans treat their team so cynically.
Sox are having a rough go, but a lot of these guys were essential to kicking @ss last year and can be again — if not this year, next year.
I’d hate to play in an environment where less than half a season removed from a dominant title run I was being kicked while down.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 12, 2019 12:18:11 GMT -5
Sometimes, it's just how you win, unfortunately. Though we can be thankful that baseball has the least need to tank than other sports. The draft just isn't the same as the NBA or NFL. There's not much evidence that winning is obtainable only through tanking in baseball. Some of the players being discussed for possible trades may never be replaced again. Why would they possibly also punt on 2020 in June of 2019? They cannot possibly be better in 2020 with a Mookie Betts or even JDM trade. How do you even know that trading JD means you're punting on 2020? The Rays traded Chris Archer and are better for it in 2019. JD is a phenomenal talent, but he is getting older and his contract signing was held up to health concerns. He's had some back issues this year already. Do I expect him to be what he is now in 2020? Sure. I also suspect he would also play less OF. Holding onto JD also means you're likely losing Betts after 2020. So if you're for retaining JD then you're also for letting Betts walk after the 2020 season. It's also not like you can't trade away the pieces you retain to get another star either. Why is it assumed that what you get back is what you're moving forward with? If a team is over-paying for a star in the middle of a pennant run you can then flip those assets in the off-season for other proven commodities or hold onto them if you really believe in the talent.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 12, 2019 12:19:50 GMT -5
Man, I can’t believe some of the names people throw out to trade. Hard to complain about ownership’s priorities or player loyalty when fans treat their team so cynically. Sox are having a rough go, but a lot of these guys were essential to kicking @ss last year and can be again — if not this year, next year. I’d hate to play in an environment where less than half a season removed from a dominant title run I was being kicked while down. It's a business. The players express as much time and time again. It's not just the fans either. Arroyo took a "hometown discount" only to get shipped out by his buddy soon after. Pedroia was thought to have taken one, but now his contract is looking like an albatross.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 12, 2019 12:25:29 GMT -5
Man, I can’t believe some of the names people throw out to trade. Hard to complain about ownership’s priorities or player loyalty when fans treat their team so cynically. Sox are having a rough go, but a lot of these guys were essential to kicking @ss last year and can be again — if not this year, next year. I’d hate to play in an environment where less than half a season removed from a dominant title run I was being kicked while down. Mookie has turned down at least one huge contract (maybe two?) and has more or less said that he's hitting free agency no matter what. There were articles that indicated that JDM is going to opt out, I believe his agent alluded to JDM wanting to opt out to right the wrongs of his previous contract. I get your point about being cynical to an extent, but how much loyalty do guys deserve when they essentially say they're leaving on the first bus out of town? Hired guns are hired guns. FWIW, the players are in full control of how these narratives play out. You don't see Sale or Bogaerts' names in this thread, do you? That's an excellent point as well.
|
|
|
Post by kingofthetrill on Jun 12, 2019 12:44:00 GMT -5
I think it shows how spoiled we've been as a fan base that people want to rush into selling and tanking the instant we fall a couple games out of a wild card spot. Looking at the talent on this team, I still see no reason to believe their best baseball isn't yet to come. I think with the way the draft system is designed that it is beneficial to mix a bad year in once in a while to get better draft picks and more money to allocate to them. In addition, with chasing teams like the Yankees (and Rays) and Houston, I certainly wouldn't want to spend prospects on players to maybe grab a wildcard spot and a one game playoff into a road series. I'm not necessarily saying fire sale now (certainly by the deadline unless something changes), but at the same time we might have some pieces that we could net a prospect for as well as secure a better spot in the draft. I mean I think we'd be MORE spoiled if we expected to win the World Series every year like we were the Patriots.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Jun 12, 2019 12:56:24 GMT -5
Man, I can’t believe some of the names people throw out to trade. Hard to complain about ownership’s priorities or player loyalty when fans treat their team so cynically. Sox are having a rough go, but a lot of these guys were essential to kicking @ss last year and can be again — if not this year, next year. I’d hate to play in an environment where less than half a season removed from a dominant title run I was being kicked while down. Mookie has turned down at least one huge contract (maybe two?) and has more or less said that he's hitting free agency no matter what. There were articles that indicated that JDM is going to opt out, I believe his agent alluded to JDM wanting to opt out to right the wrongs of his previous contract. I get your point about being cynical to an extent, but how much loyalty do guys deserve when they essentially say they're leaving on the first bus out of town? Hired guns are hired guns. FWIW, the players are in full control of how these narratives play out. You don't see Sale or Bogaerts' names in this thread, do you? Saying you will hit free agency is not “leaving on the first bus.” It is leveraging your big moment of power to get the most for your labor. If the Sox pony up, Mookie stays. But why take less? Pedey took less, gave it all, and now he’s described as an albatross.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 12, 2019 13:03:50 GMT -5
Mookie has turned down at least one huge contract (maybe two?) and has more or less said that he's hitting free agency no matter what. There were articles that indicated that JDM is going to opt out, I believe his agent alluded to JDM wanting to opt out to right the wrongs of his previous contract. I get your point about being cynical to an extent, but how much loyalty do guys deserve when they essentially say they're leaving on the first bus out of town? Hired guns are hired guns. FWIW, the players are in full control of how these narratives play out. You don't see Sale or Bogaerts' names in this thread, do you? Saying you will hit free agency is not “leaving on the first bus.” It is leveraging your big moment of power to get the most for your labor. If the Sox pony up, Mookie stays. But why take less? Pedey took less, gave it all, and now he’s described as an albatross. Pede is an albatross. He was paid 16 million last year to play in 3 games. He was paid 15 million this year to play in 6 games this year. He's signed for 2 more at 13 and 12 million per year and is likely to never play again. That's 56 million for 9 games in 5 years. If the Red Sox weren't paying Pedroia or Pablo right now, they'd likely have Craig Kimbrel. The Red Sox have offered Mookie contracts. Mookie is the one who has explicitly stated he wants to test the market and set the standard for others.Edit: Slash that. I just tried Googling it and now might be thinking of conjecture from someone like Tony Mazz or what have you. Still, he has said the following: And He sees baseball and Boston as a business. He claims he likes it here, but is going after the top dollar unless the Red Sox blow him away, which they haven't done. No clue what that means and what was offered. He's risking his security for total value. Trout would have made more if he were a free agent.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Jun 12, 2019 13:15:53 GMT -5
Saying you will hit free agency is not “leaving on the first bus.” It is leveraging your big moment of power to get the most for your labor. If the Sox pony up, Mookie stays. But why take less? Pedey took less, gave it all, and now he’s described as an albatross. Pede is an albatross. He was paid 16 million last year to play in 3 games. He was paid 15 million this year to play in 6 games this year. He's signed for 2 more at 13 and 12 million per year and is likely to never play again. That's 56 million for 9 games in 5 years. If the Red Sox weren't paying Pedroia or Pablo right now, they'd likely have Craig Kimbrel. The Red Sox have offered Mookie contracts. Mookie is the one who has explicitly stated he wants to test the market and set the standard for others.Edit: Slash that. I just tried Googling it and now might be thinking of conjecture from someone like Tony Mazz or what have you. Still, he has said the following: And He sees baseball and Boston as a business. He claims he likes it here, but is going after the top dollar unless the Red Sox blow him away, which they haven't done. No clue what that means and what was offered. He's risking his security for total value. Trout would have made more if he were a free agent. Fine, obviously they haven’t gotten what they hoped out of Pedey. I’m guessing he’ll retire and you’ll keep the money remaining. But... if they HADN’T paid him, you say they’d have Kimbrel. Maybe. But what would you have done, let him walk like Lester? When he signed, he was still the MAN. It’d be like letting Jeter go. I prefer rooting for a team with a culture that keeps its legends. Edit: I’d add that I am guessing letting Pedey walk would not do wonders for clubhouse culture.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 12, 2019 13:24:53 GMT -5
Pede is an albatross. He was paid 16 million last year to play in 3 games. He was paid 15 million this year to play in 6 games this year. He's signed for 2 more at 13 and 12 million per year and is likely to never play again. That's 56 million for 9 games in 5 years. If the Red Sox weren't paying Pedroia or Pablo right now, they'd likely have Craig Kimbrel. The Red Sox have offered Mookie contracts. Mookie is the one who has explicitly stated he wants to test the market and set the standard for others.Edit: Slash that. I just tried Googling it and now might be thinking of conjecture from someone like Tony Mazz or what have you. Still, he has said the following: And He sees baseball and Boston as a business. He claims he likes it here, but is going after the top dollar unless the Red Sox blow him away, which they haven't done. No clue what that means and what was offered. He's risking his security for total value. Trout would have made more if he were a free agent. Fine, obviously they haven’t gotten what they hoped out of Pedey. I’m guessing he’ll retire and you’ll keep the money remaining. But... if they HADN’T paid him, you say they’d have Kimbrel. Maybe. But what would you have done, let him walk like Lester? When he signed, he was still the MAN. It’d be like letting Jeter go. I prefer rooting for a team with a culture that keeps its legends. Edit: I’d add that I am guessing letting Pedey walk would not do wonders for clubhouse culture. Eh. Players come and go all the time. I remember being ecstatic when he stayed, but the contract blew up in their face. The FO didn't let Lester walk, as much as they gave him a ludicrously low offer that he didn't want to continue negotiations from that point onward. So, instead, they traded him with a half-season left on his deal. The result of which you got Porcello who was a major piece in a championship team (well, they got Cespedes who they flipped for Porcello). Teams that hang onto players for too long for sentiment tend to have some rough years as a result. Bill Belichick is the master of trading away players a year too early rather than a year too late. The only guy he couldn't move was Brady and that worked fine as well. The Celtics moved on from Paul Pierce and they got an incredible return on investment when he and Garnet clearly looked to be at the end. I also don't know if Pede or Lester were in the same stratosphere as Jeter and Ortiz either.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Jun 12, 2019 13:31:41 GMT -5
Fine, obviously they haven’t gotten what they hoped out of Pedey. I’m guessing he’ll retire and you’ll keep the money remaining. But... if they HADN’T paid him, you say they’d have Kimbrel. Maybe. But what would you have done, let him walk like Lester? When he signed, he was still the MAN. It’d be like letting Jeter go. I prefer rooting for a team with a culture that keeps its legends. Edit: I’d add that I am guessing letting Pedey walk would not do wonders for clubhouse culture. Eh. Players come and go all the time. I remember being ecstatic when he stayed, but the contract blew up in their face. The FO didn't let Lester walk, as much as they gave him a ludicrously low offer that he didn't want to continue negotiations from that point onward. So, instead, they traded him with a half-season left on his deal. The result of which you got Porcello who was a major piece in a championship team (well, they got Cespedes who they flipped for Porcello). Teams that hang onto players for too long for sentiment tend to have some rough years as a result. Bill Belichick is the master of trading away players a year too early rather than a year too late. The only guy he couldn't move was Brady and that worked fine as well. The Celtics moved on from Paul Pierce and they got an incredible return on investment when he and Garnet clearly looked to be at the end. I also don't know if Pede or Lester were in the same stratosphere as Jeter and Ortiz either. Well, I hate the Patriots so that comp doesn’t work for me. I think some things are actually more important than winning. How you win matters. It is fine to see things otherwise, obviously, but I pull for players more than jerseys. JBJ is a good example: he’s up and down, mostly down this year, but I love him.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jun 12, 2019 13:56:07 GMT -5
So your complaint should be with the Red Sox for not paying the tax, not with Betts for not giving billionaires a discount. You know how people always ask why players go for the highest offer, when the extra ten or twenty million won't make a real difference in their standard of living? How much do people think signing Betts to a $350m extension would effect John Henry's standard of living? Not a rhetorical question, still waiting for an answer.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Jun 12, 2019 14:21:44 GMT -5
Saying you will hit free agency is not “leaving on the first bus.” It is leveraging your big moment of power to get the most for your labor. If the Sox pony up, Mookie stays. But why take less? Pedey took less, gave it all, and now he’s described as an albatross. Your point was that they deserve loyalty, my point is that they do not. Sure, they're not technically leaving on the first bus, but they know they're probably not coming back and don't seem all that concerned by it. Honestly, if they were that interested in the fan base exuding loyalty don't you think they would say things that created that kind of loyalty? It's not hard, or complicated. Sale did it. They're posturing in the media for max dollars which is fine and their prerogative, but posturing for max dollars does not create or deserve loyalty. If Mookie wants to max his value (which he has repeatedly stated in as many words) then there's very little reason for the organization to do anything other than maximize his value to it. There's very little reason as a fan to expect anything different, and it's perfectly reasonable to be disappointed in their eventual, likely departure. "It's a business" does not translate to "I love you" for most people. Also, Pedey is not an albatross. He's an icon of this franchise and deserves better treatment than what he's getting from some. You want to talk about fan loyalty issues this is where you make your stand. Player and fan loyalty is not symmetrical. Our investment is we care until football season; they make a living like this. Would you have Mookie say to his wife “I am passing on that $100 million to show message boards Ilove them”? There is a difference between loyalty to team and family. And sure I agree — $200 mill, 300... either is plenty. But what would fans have to give up that equates to that show of loyalty? Edit: let’s recall three starts into the season people were calling Sale’s contract a mistake. How about this: players who take less than market value don’t get bashed for playing below the level they aren’t getting paid for?
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 12, 2019 14:23:06 GMT -5
Eh. Players come and go all the time. I remember being ecstatic when he stayed, but the contract blew up in their face. The FO didn't let Lester walk, as much as they gave him a ludicrously low offer that he didn't want to continue negotiations from that point onward. So, instead, they traded him with a half-season left on his deal. The result of which you got Porcello who was a major piece in a championship team (well, they got Cespedes who they flipped for Porcello). Teams that hang onto players for too long for sentiment tend to have some rough years as a result. Bill Belichick is the master of trading away players a year too early rather than a year too late. The only guy he couldn't move was Brady and that worked fine as well. The Celtics moved on from Paul Pierce and they got an incredible return on investment when he and Garnet clearly looked to be at the end. I also don't know if Pede or Lester were in the same stratosphere as Jeter and Ortiz either. Well, I hate the Patriots so that comp doesn’t work for me. I think some things are actually more important than winning. How you win matters. It is fine to see things otherwise, obviously, but I pull for players more than jerseys. JBJ is a good example: he’s up and down, mostly down this year, but I love him. I mean, that's fine if you root for the players more than the laundry. I just want to see the team win and sometimes that means you have to cut bait with players. Also, Pedey is not an albatross. He's an icon of this franchise and deserves better treatment than what he's getting from some. You want to talk about fan loyalty issues this is where you make your stand. Icon or not (I personally actually hate him), how can you say his contract isn't an albatross? 9 games in 5 years. If the Red Sox could cut him, they would. In the end, Pede got a great deal. Albatross isn't a negative word. He is vastly overpaid for his value. I also disagree with you about Sale doing it. He got the comfort of security. There was no way he was getting Price money which is also why Price opted back in. If anything, the Red Sox showed him loyalty instead of waiting to see if he broke down or not and just gave him a fair market deal. You know how people always ask why players go for the highest offer, when the extra ten or twenty million won't make a real difference in their standard of living? How much do people think signing Betts to a $350m extension would effect John Henry's standard of living? Not a rhetorical question, still waiting for an answer. Not sure who you're asking here or who made claims that Mookie was selfish or that this would hurt Henry financially?[/quote]
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 12, 2019 14:23:51 GMT -5
You know how people always ask why players go for the highest offer, when the extra ten or twenty million won't make a real difference in their standard of living? How much do people think signing Betts to a $350m extension would effect John Henry's standard of living? Not a rhetorical question, still waiting for an answer. We've already had this argument 1000 times. It wouldn't affect John Henry at all. But it would affect the quality of team that the Red Sox put on the field. Fans want to see the best team. They don't want to see one player make so much money that the rest of the team suffers for it. Who gives a flying f*** about John Henry's finances in these arguments? It's really not that hard to understand. For the 1001st time, no one is rooting for the billionaires. When it comes to money, the only players I root for are the ones who have to worry about eating and paying rent when they are done playing. And while they are playing.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 12, 2019 14:26:57 GMT -5
Your point was that they deserve loyalty, my point is that they do not. Sure, they're not technically leaving on the first bus, but they know they're probably not coming back and don't seem all that concerned by it. Honestly, if they were that interested in the fan base exuding loyalty don't you think they would say things that created that kind of loyalty? It's not hard, or complicated. Sale did it. They're posturing in the media for max dollars which is fine and their prerogative, but posturing for max dollars does not create or deserve loyalty. If Mookie wants to max his value (which he has repeatedly stated in as many words) then there's very little reason for the organization to do anything other than maximize his value to it. There's very little reason as a fan to expect anything different, and it's perfectly reasonable to be disappointed in their eventual, likely departure. "It's a business" does not translate to "I love you" for most people. Also, Pedey is not an albatross. He's an icon of this franchise and deserves better treatment than what he's getting from some. You want to talk about fan loyalty issues this is where you make your stand. Player and fan loyalty is not symmetrical. Our investment is we care until football season; they make a living like this. Would you have Mookie say to his wife “I am passing on that $100 million to show message boards Ilove them”? There is a difference between loyalty to team and family. And sure I agree — $200 mill, 300... either is plenty. But what would fans have to give up that equates to that show of loyalty? Edit: let’s recall three starts into the season people were calling Sale’s contract a mistake. How about this: players who take less than market value don’t get bashed for playing below the level they aren’t getting paid for? I don't believe for a second Sale would have gotten any more than what he got by taking the contract now. The offer was a leap of faith by the Red Sox.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 12, 2019 14:29:10 GMT -5
Player and fan loyalty is not symmetrical. Our investment is we care until football season; they make a living like this. Would you have Mookie say to his wife “I am passing on that $100 million to show message boards Ilove them”? There is a difference between loyalty to team and family. And sure I agree — $200 mill, 300... either is plenty. But what would fans have to give up that equates to that show of loyalty? Edit: let’s recall three starts into the season people were calling Sale’s contract a mistake. How about this: players who take less than market value don’t get bashed for playing below the level they aren’t getting paid for? I don't believe for a second Sale would have gotten any more than what he got by taking the contract now. The offer was a leap of faith by the Red Sox. Sale is throwing about 10 mph faster now than when he signed the contract. Of course he'd get more now.
|
|
|