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 pedrofanforever45 on Jun 12, 2019 14:30:19 GMT -5
I'm at the opposite end of this. Mookie is going to get his 300+ million unless he has a career threatening injury at this point. He's a consistently really good player at this point with consistently great defense. The Sox are the the ones that are in a lose-lose situation. He's easily worth 280-320 million over 9-10 years in free agency. If they give him the money, Betts probably declines defensively and becomes less valuable over the course of the contract. If they trade him within this season or the next season, they take a step back for the future. Betts really put the Sox in a tough situation when he turned down not one, but 2 extension offers and opted for the most money possible. Now they have to overpay him or trade him in the next 12-19 months. Pretty sweet how a substantial portion of sports fans now actively root for their team's profit margins over paying a generational talent what he's worth. I'm not rooting for anyone here. I just told it the way it is, dude. Bregman took practically the same extension Mookie got by taking the 6/100 contract. Some players sign early, Mookie didn't.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jun 12, 2019 14:31:42 GMT -5
Not a rhetorical question, still waiting for an answer. John Henry signing me to a $350M contract won't change his standard of living either. He doesn't do it because it's dumb. You're not Mookie Betts.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jun 12, 2019 14:33:00 GMT -5
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. 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. 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] I don't recall many people thinking that the Sox had an albatross contract with Pedroia when he signed. He was performing up to his contract until Machado wrecked his career on 1 play. Pedroia didn't suddenly become ineffective because he lost his skills. He was injured badly and it destroyed his career. That's kind of like saying the Twins overpaid for Kirby Puckett because he went blind and suddenly he couldn't perform, which is what happened to him if I remember correctly.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 12, 2019 14:36:04 GMT -5
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. He has a history of breaking down. Not only that, but Price not opting out means he wasn't going to get more than what he is currently making. Do you think Sale is worth that much more than Price if Price didn't think teams weren't going to offer him what he got now? They're making roughly the same now. I admit Sale is 3 years younger, but... Chris Sale's contract: AAV 27.5 with 30 million owed to him each of the next 3 years David Price contract: AAV 31.75 with 31 owed this year then 32 owed to him over the next 3 years. How much more do you think Sale would get over Price, especially if he breaks down and struggles again late in the season and/or gets injured? He got security and his odds of making that much more than what we was offered weren't great.
|
|
|
Post by dirtdog on Jun 12, 2019 14:36:31 GMT -5
TB sure didnt look invinceable vs Oakland.
|
|
|
Post by dirtdog on Jun 12, 2019 14:38:24 GMT -5
Also, I'm a bit of a conspiracy theorist, but I wonder if there's some sort of gentleman's agreement about the luxury tax. Like, "you can go over and pay penalties, but we really want parity and if you continue to abuse and go over then we'll start looking more into a hard cap". Its also been a nice excuse to slow the growth of players contracts. Cap has to be collectively bargained and I am pretty sure the players have figured out they got snookered on the last CBA.
|
|
|
Post by dirtdog on Jun 12, 2019 14:40:44 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. Ask the Dodgers how happy they are with Kelly's appearances? Relievers are like penny stocks, too many busts.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 12, 2019 14:41:34 GMT -5
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. 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. Not sure who you're asking here or who made claims that Mookie was selfish or that this would hurt Henry financially? I don't recall many people thinking that the Sox had an albatross contract with Pedroia when he signed. He was performing up to his contract until Machado wrecked his career on 1 play. Pedroia didn't suddenly become ineffective because he lost his skills. He was injured badly and it destroyed his career. That's kind of like saying the Twins overpaid for Kirby Puckett because he went blind and suddenly he couldn't perform, which is what happened to him if I remember correctly.[/quote] No, when he signed it was considered a great deal. This board, among others, were elated. It's still a bad contract in hindsight. Just like Gordon Hayward. Victim of circumstance for sure, but the contract is still an albatross. It doesn't get better because of how their careers were derailed. The fact is, the team would in a second cut Pedroia if they could get that money back. In the end, it was a deal that worked out for Pede. Let's also not get too crazy here. He became the first second baseman in Major League Baseball to cross the $100 million threshold and I don't think he was a free agent at the time so he traded in his market value for some security as well.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 12, 2019 14:42:38 GMT -5
Sale is throwing about 10 mph faster now than when he signed the contract. Of course he'd get more now. He has a history of breaking down. Not only that, but Price not opting out means he wasn't going to get more than what he is currently making. Do you think Sale is worth that much more than Price if Price didn't think teams weren't going to offer him what he got now? They're making roughly the same now. I admit Sale is 3 years younger, but... Chris Sale's contract: AAV 27.5 with 30 million owed to him each of the next 3 years David Price contract: AAV 31.75 with 31 owed this year then 32 owed to him over the next 3 years. How much more do you think Sale would get over Price, especially if he breaks down and struggles again late in the season and/or gets injured? He got security and his odds of making that much more than what we was offered weren't great. Regardless, he was pitching in the mid 80s in spring training because he didn't want to fade towards the end of the season this year. We'll see if that works. He has always worked so hard that he could never not break down because he didn't rest enough in the offseason. He shouldn't be throwing 99 in spring training like he did every year before this one. He pretty much showed up to spring training almost ready to start the season. I'd give him 6-7 years now and not think twice. He only got 5, which is a huge discount in years for a 30 year old.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 12, 2019 14:43:05 GMT -5
Also, I'm a bit of a conspiracy theorist, but I wonder if there's some sort of gentleman's agreement about the luxury tax. Like, "you can go over and pay penalties, but we really want parity and if you continue to abuse and go over then we'll start looking more into a hard cap". Its also been a nice excuse to slow the growth of players contracts. Cap has to be collectively bargained and I am pretty sure the players have figured out they got snookered on the last CBA. True, but they might be for a cap if it means implementing a floor.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 12, 2019 14:46:34 GMT -5
No, when he signed it was considered a great deal. This board, among others, were elated. It's still a bad contract in hindsight. Just like Gordon Hayward. Victim of circumstance for sure, but the contract is still an albatross. It doesn't get better because of how their careers were derailed. The fact is, the team would in a second cut Pedroia if they could get that money back. In the end, it was a deal that worked out for Pede. Let's also not get too crazy here. He became the first second baseman in Major League Baseball to cross the $100 million threshold and I don't think he was a free agent at the time so he traded in his market value for some security as well. So, absent inventing a time machine to both see the future and change the past, what exactly are you bitching about?
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 12, 2019 14:48:50 GMT -5
He has a history of breaking down. Not only that, but Price not opting out means he wasn't going to get more than what he is currently making. Do you think Sale is worth that much more than Price if Price didn't think teams weren't going to offer him what he got now? They're making roughly the same now. I admit Sale is 3 years younger, but... Chris Sale's contract: AAV 27.5 with 30 million owed to him each of the next 3 years David Price contract: AAV 31.75 with 31 owed this year then 32 owed to him over the next 3 years. How much more do you think Sale would get over Price, especially if he breaks down and struggles again late in the season and/or gets injured? He got security and his odds of making that much more than what we was offered weren't great. Regardless, he was pitching in the mid 80s in spring training because he didn't want to fade towards the end of the season this year. We'll see if that works. He has always worked so hard that he could never not break down because he didn't rest enough in the offseason. He shouldn't be throwing 99 in spring training like he did every year before this one. He pretty much showed up to spring training almost ready to start the season. I'd give him 6-7 years now and not think twice. He only got 5, which is a huge discount in years for a 30 year old. I mean, we'll never really know, but there was also concerns about his shoulder and they never really addressed what was ailing him last season. I do wonder if there's something medically worrisome that would have gotten out had Sale elected to be a free agent. IIRC, he asked the Red Sox to be mum about it. Unfortunately, I can't read the article, but see the article here: Chris Sale requested shoulder details be kept quiet
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 12, 2019 14:49:19 GMT -5
Cap has to be collectively bargained and I am pretty sure the players have figured out they got snookered on the last CBA. True, but they might be for a cap if it means implementing a floor. I believe that well over 60% of major league players are making the league minimum. Significantly raising the minimum is the easiest and fairest way to raise the floor without teams handing out stupid one-off contracts just to get over an arbitrary floor.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jun 12, 2019 14:49:25 GMT -5
Based on Cora's pregame news conference today it seems like Shawaryn has been shifted to the bullpen full time. The Sox think he stuff is better in short stints. So the Sox fifth starter is Brian Johnson maybe? Like I have no clue at this point and there's not many options left.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 12, 2019 14:49:41 GMT -5
No, when he signed it was considered a great deal. This board, among others, were elated. It's still a bad contract in hindsight. Just like Gordon Hayward. Victim of circumstance for sure, but the contract is still an albatross. It doesn't get better because of how their careers were derailed. The fact is, the team would in a second cut Pedroia if they could get that money back. In the end, it was a deal that worked out for Pede. Let's also not get too crazy here. He became the first second baseman in Major League Baseball to cross the $100 million threshold and I don't think he was a free agent at the time so he traded in his market value for some security as well. So, absent inventing a time machine to both see the future and change the past, what exactly are you bitching about? About how the Red Sox are bound to win 93 games and I'll be in self-banishment forever. I'm saying his contract is an albatross. Why is it so hard to grasp this concept? His fault? Not really. 9 games in 5 years? That's not a great deal. I'm sure Dombrowski would cut him if he could, but he can't (I mean, he could, but he'd owe him anyways). Calling his contract an albatross is not a slight on the player or his character. His knee blew out. It sucks, but now they're stuck paying a guy who can't play. He also was the first 100+ million 2B and signed an extension, not as a free agent, so his hometown discount wasn't that crazy of a deal. He traded in some value for security to play for a winning team that he enjoyed being a part of, but the deal itself wasn't that big of a discount.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 12, 2019 14:51:48 GMT -5
True, but they might be for a cap if it means implementing a floor. I believe that well over 60% of major league players are making the league minimum. Significantly raising the minimum is the easiest and fairest way to raise the floor without teams handing out stupid one-off contracts just to get over an arbitrary floor. Probably, the point is, I can see MLB wanting to institute a cap, but wouldn't be able to without a floor. Raising the minimal wage is fine since it gets you there. My little theory, which is completely self thought is that the luxury tax is a way to keep big market teams in check and if they abuse this system then we might need to reevaluate a hard cap.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 12, 2019 14:53:56 GMT -5
Regardless, he was pitching in the mid 80s in spring training because he didn't want to fade towards the end of the season this year. We'll see if that works. He has always worked so hard that he could never not break down because he didn't rest enough in the offseason. He shouldn't be throwing 99 in spring training like he did every year before this one. He pretty much showed up to spring training almost ready to start the season. I'd give him 6-7 years now and not think twice. He only got 5, which is a huge discount in years for a 30 year old. I mean, we'll never really know, but there was also concerns about his shoulder and they never really addressed what was ailing him last season. I do wonder if there's something medically worrisome that would have gotten out had Sale elected to be a free agent. IIRC, he asked the Red Sox to be mum about it. Unfortunately, I can't read the article, but see the article here: Chris Sale requested shoulder details be kept quietHe obviously doesn't have a lingering structural shoulder issue because he wouldn't be able to strike out 17 in 7 innings if he did. IMO, he has an inflammation issue with overuse, which I would bet my house on the fact that it's extensively treated with Toradol injections, which have the horrible side effects of stomach ulcers and intestinal bleeding (remember the stomach issue stories?).
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 12, 2019 14:57:58 GMT -5
So, absent inventing a time machine to both see the future and change the past, what exactly are you bitching about? About how the Red Sox are bound to win 93 games and I'll be in self-banishment forever. I'm saying his contract is an albatross. Why is it so hard to grasp this concept? His fault? Not really. 9 games in 5 years? That's not a great deal. I'm sure Dombrowski would cut him if he could, but he can't (I mean, he could, but he'd owe him anyways). Calling his contract an albatross is not a slight on the player or his character. His knee blew out. It sucks, but now they're stuck paying a guy who can't play. He also was the first 100+ million 2B and signed an extension, not as a free agent, so his hometown discount wasn't that crazy of a deal. He traded in some value for security to play for a winning team that he enjoyed being a part of, but the deal itself wasn't that big of a discount. So what? I'd sign him or anyone like him to the same contract every time because at the time when the contract is signed, you cannot ever know that a player is going to have a career-ending injury 2-3 years from now. I only judge contracts based on what was known at the time they were signed because that is the only fair judgement. It's not anywhere close to as stupid as the Hanley or Pablo contracts, each of whom was always going to have a hard time living up to it.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 12, 2019 14:59:01 GMT -5
I mean, we'll never really know, but there was also concerns about his shoulder and they never really addressed what was ailing him last season. I do wonder if there's something medically worrisome that would have gotten out had Sale elected to be a free agent. IIRC, he asked the Red Sox to be mum about it. Unfortunately, I can't read the article, but see the article here: Chris Sale requested shoulder details be kept quietHe obviously doesn't have a lingering structural shoulder issue because he wouldn't be able to strike out 17 in 7 innings if he did. IMO, he has an inflammation issue with overuse, which I would bet my house on the fact that it's extensively treated with Toradol injections, which have the horrible side effects of stomach ulcers and intestinal bleeding (remember the stomach issue stories?). Which, again, is likely and a fair assumption. It just was never fully made clear what the heck was going on with him and he asked the team to refrain from reporting it. We'll need to see how Sale does August/September to see if this new regime works. They babied him all last year and failed. This was a new, different approach than what they tried last season. I don't think the risk/reward for Sale was there for him to enter free agency. I believe I remember both he and Price commented on the market last year and that they wanted no part of that.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 12, 2019 15:01:14 GMT -5
About how the Red Sox are bound to win 93 games and I'll be in self-banishment forever. I'm saying his contract is an albatross. Why is it so hard to grasp this concept? His fault? Not really. 9 games in 5 years? That's not a great deal. I'm sure Dombrowski would cut him if he could, but he can't (I mean, he could, but he'd owe him anyways). Calling his contract an albatross is not a slight on the player or his character. His knee blew out. It sucks, but now they're stuck paying a guy who can't play. He also was the first 100+ million 2B and signed an extension, not as a free agent, so his hometown discount wasn't that crazy of a deal. He traded in some value for security to play for a winning team that he enjoyed being a part of, but the deal itself wasn't that big of a discount. So what? I'd sign him or anyone like him to the same contract every time because at the time when the contract is signed, you cannot ever know that a player is going to have a career-ending injury 2-3 years from now. Never said I wouldn't sign a player like that to that deal. Pablo Sandoval wasn't an albatross until we saw him play. I called his contract an albatross because as of June 12th, 2019, he's an albatross. It was a great deal at that time, but due to unfortunate circumstance, he now can't play baseball and is owed for 3 more years. It's a bad contract that was good at the time. Literally all I said about that. Which, funny story, Pablo has a 1.2 WAR and an .876 OPS right now.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 12, 2019 15:01:22 GMT -5
He obviously doesn't have a lingering structural shoulder issue because he wouldn't be able to strike out 17 in 7 innings if he did. IMO, he has an inflammation issue with overuse, which I would bet my house on the fact that it's extensively treated with Toradol injections, which have the horrible side effects of stomach ulcers and intestinal bleeding (remember the stomach issue stories?). Which, again, is likely and a fair assumption. It just was never fully made clear what the heck was going on with him and he asked the team to refrain from reporting it. We'll need to see how Sale does August/September to see if this new regime works. They babied him all last year and failed. This was a new, different approach than what they tried last season. I don't think the risk/reward for Sale was there for him to enter free agency. I believe I remember both he and Price commented on the market last year and that they wanted no part of that. They didn't baby Sale at all last year. In fact, that one Oriole game he pitched is the one that they practically admitted ruined the rest of the season for him because he came back way too fast.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,501
|
Post by nomar on Jun 12, 2019 15:02:47 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. Yeah, and not to mention we have arguably the best pitcher in the league to pitch a wild card game.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jun 12, 2019 15:05:11 GMT -5
Which, again, is likely and a fair assumption. It just was never fully made clear what the heck was going on with him and he asked the team to refrain from reporting it. We'll need to see how Sale does August/September to see if this new regime works. They babied him all last year and failed. This was a new, different approach than what they tried last season. I don't think the risk/reward for Sale was there for him to enter free agency. I believe I remember both he and Price commented on the market last year and that they wanted no part of that. They didn't baby Sale at all last year. In fact, that one Oriole game he pitched is the one that they practically admitted ruined the rest of the season for him because he came back way too fast. He pitched 158 innings. The years prior to that: 208.2 226.2 214.1 www.masslive.com/sports/2019/02/chris-sale-must-learn-from-2018-boston-red-sox-season-when-velocity-was-at-record-high-adjust-as-mlb-free-agency-approaches-christopher-smith.htmlThe only thing that they mention to your point is that sale was he threw very hard in June and July, which he seems back to doing this year anyways.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 12, 2019 15:06:49 GMT -5
They didn't baby Sale at all last year. In fact, that one Oriole game he pitched is the one that they practically admitted ruined the rest of the season for him because he came back way too fast. He pitched 158 innings. The years prior to that: 208.2 226.2 214.1 Right, he was hurt last year, not babied.
|
|
|
Post by dirtdog on Jun 12, 2019 15:08:28 GMT -5
Tomase apparently floating a why the Red Sox might blow up the team story.
|
|
|