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.
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 24, 2020 22:00:22 GMT -5
Hmmm wheels are turning. It wouldn't surprise me to see the Sox playing shuffle when there will be a flurry and with the hope of finding hidden gems on the waiver wire.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Oct 26, 2020 14:59:04 GMT -5
More moves! Red Sox roster is now at 35.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 26, 2020 16:00:00 GMT -5
So these, plus JBJ hitting free agency, take care of the IL guys. No real surprises.
|
|
|
Post by electricityverdugo99 on Oct 26, 2020 16:25:12 GMT -5
After releasing Pedrioa and most likely clearing Kyle Hart through waivers, the Sox will need to clear 4 spots still for Groome, Mata, Seabold, Wong, Potts, and Rosario.
Still a lot of shuffling that needs to be done.
My guess is that they try to sneak Walden and Brewer through waivers soon too.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 26, 2020 18:08:40 GMT -5
Well the Peraza non-tender will take care of one.
Hall, Springs, Covey, Hart, Brewer, Walden are all potential guys to waive. Brewer and Walden might not be needed, at least for R5.
|
|
|
Post by electricityverdugo99 on Oct 26, 2020 18:28:55 GMT -5
Alright. So after all those guys are outrighted and sent to AAA (unless they get claimed), then the Sox 40 man roster will be at about 39 or 40 before they can actually start making moves.
There's going to be trades down the line to clear more room or to upgrade.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,939
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 26, 2020 19:37:49 GMT -5
Outrighting to AAA instead of DFA'ing, once a player clears waivers, is a complicated rule thing that Chris just sorted out. If I did my research right, Hart can be outrighted and kept in the org.
I'm not sure that outrighting guys who can declare free agency immediately or a week later necessarily means they have an interest in keeping them in the org. I had Leyer, Kickham, and Troggs on myu list of guys they wouldn't keep around and Lin and Godley on the list of guys they would.
And I just figured out why they cleared Godley through waivers when they could have just non-tendered him later. Godley now knows that no one will put him on a 40-man roster, so that will make re-signing him easier, if I'm right about their interest.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,939
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 26, 2020 19:54:50 GMT -5
Well the Peraza non-tender will take care of one. Hall, Springs, Covey, Hart, Brewer, Walden are all potential guys to waive. Brewer and Walden might not be needed, at least for R5. Other possibilities are a Brice non-tender (because no one can claim him on waivers) and Puello, and of course the Pedroia situation.
That's 10 candidates, although I think that Springs is very likely to survive this round.
So they can keep 2 of the other 9 and still have room for the 6 additions plus a Rule 5 guy. One thing you may well see is Pedroia keeping his spot through the draft, buying them time to work out a graceful way to announce his retirement and figure out his FO role thereafter. Note that whoever survives this round is being put on waivers later, when they start signing free agents, so there is little to be lost by keeping him around
for a while.
I'll go with my prediction that everyone else named here but Springs will be cut and they'll claim someone from waivers as other teams are trimming. Stock could go in favor of a second waiver claim, too.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 26, 2020 19:55:04 GMT -5
My issue with Godley was that his IL trip was for forearm strain. That's not a good thing.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 26, 2020 22:11:18 GMT -5
Outrighting to AAA instead of DFA'ing, once a player clears waivers, is a complicated rule thing that Chris just sorted out. If I did my research right, Hart can be outrighted and kept in the org. I'm not sure that outrighting guys who can declare free agency immediately or a week later necessarily means they have an interest in keeping them in the org. I had Leyer, Kickham, and Troggs on my list of guys they wouldn't keep around and Lin and Godley on the list of guys they would. And I just figured out why they cleared Godley through waivers when they could have just non-tendered him later. Godley now knows that no one will put him on a 40-man roster, so that will make re-signing him easier, if I'm right about their interest. Reminder primer meant for everyone, not just as a response to Eric (who probably knows most of this, I figure). DFA: This is a thing you do to remove someone from the 40-man that gives you time to then actually do something with the player. This could include trading the player, placing the player on outright waivers, or releasing him. When the team isn't playing, there isn't a point to DFA'ing a guy because you can just do whatever thing you want to do with him. Outright waivers: Player is placed on waivers and if he clears, can be outrighted to the minors. If the player has 5 years' service time, he can refuse the assignment (or in other words, force the team to release him). The effect is he still gets paid. If the player has 3 years of service time and/or has been outrighted previously, he can elect to become a free agent, although that means he doesn't get paid the rest of his contract (more relevant during the season, of course) Non-tender: Essentially, not offering a contract to a player eligible for arbitration. This is done in December. This allows you to remove a player from the roster without exposing him to waivers. Peraza will likely be non-tendered. Covey and Brice are also candidates. Now, as for these players: Triggs, Kickham, and Godley were outrighted and elected free agency. Kickham and Godley had been outrighted previously. I guess Triggs passed 3 years during the season. Lin and Leyer were outrighted to AAA and couldn't elect free agency. However, they're going to become free agents 5 days after the World Series anyway, so it's really a moot point. It's possible the team could have interest in re-signing these players (the fact that Tapia was apparently put through waivers with them makes me more inclined to say this, although of course he was claimed). Leyer is a guy they've shown a lot of interest in (invited to the rookie development program last offseason, NRI, etc.), so I could see strong interest in him as well. Well the Peraza non-tender will take care of one. Hall, Springs, Covey, Hart, Brewer, Walden are all potential guys to waive. Brewer and Walden might not be needed, at least for R5. Other possibilities are a Brice non-tender (because no one can claim him on waivers) and Puello, and of course the Pedroia situation.
That's 10 candidates, although I think that Springs is very likely to survive this round.
So they can keep 2 of the other 9 and still have room for the 6 additions plus a Rule 5 guy. One thing you may well see is Pedroia keeping his spot through the draft, buying them time to work out a graceful way to announce his retirement and figure out his FO role thereafter. Note that whoever survives this round is being put on waivers later, when they start signing free agents, so there is little to be lost by keeping him around
for a while. I'll go with my prediction that everyone else named here but Springs will be cut and they'll claim someone from waivers as other teams are trimming. Stock could go in favor of a second waiver claim, too.
Yeah Pedroia had been mentioned, which is why I hadn't said him, but probably should have. Straight up forgot Puello, so good call there. Covey is a non-tender candidate as well - I forgot he's arb eligible. There are many options. By "draft" you mean the deadline to protect players from Rule 5, not July, I presume?
|
|
|
Post by jkfer98 on Oct 26, 2020 22:46:35 GMT -5
Nothing official, but based on some tweets tonight, it seems like the Sox wont be picking up Martin Perez's option for next year.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 26, 2020 23:12:27 GMT -5
The further we got from the season, the more I got on board with that plan. RSS put it well: locking in a back-end guy before the market even opens because it's "safe" isn't really what the team needs right now. At one point I would've seen it as them being supremely confident in Houck to be one of the top 5 guys entering the year, but I think they could be gunning to take advantage of a team-friendly market and pick up a couple new arms with higher upside for not much more money, if more at all.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Oct 26, 2020 23:27:51 GMT -5
Outrighting to AAA instead of DFA'ing, once a player clears waivers, is a complicated rule thing that Chris just sorted out. If I did my research right, Hart can be outrighted and kept in the org.
I'm not sure that outrighting guys who can declare free agency immediately or a week later necessarily means they have an interest in keeping them in the org. I had Leyer, Kickham, and Troggs on myu list of guys they wouldn't keep around and Lin and Godley on the list of guys they would.
And I just figured out why they cleared Godley through waivers when they could have just non-tendered him later. Godley now knows that no one will put him on a 40-man roster, so that will make re-signing him easier, if I'm right about their interest. Step one to me not paying off on Godley. Can’t get to whatever WAR the bet was from the minors (or the IL for that matter).
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 26, 2020 23:58:15 GMT -5
The further we got from the season, the more I got on board with that plan. RSS put it well: locking in a back-end guy before the market even opens because it's "safe" isn't really what the team needs right now. At one point I would've seen it as them being supremely confident in Houck to be one of the top 5 guys entering the year, but I think they could be gunning to take advantage of a team-friendly market and pick up a couple new arms with higher upside for not much more money, if more at all. I'm basically under those assumptions except substitute the part about Houck to a willingness to go over the cap because, under the assumption that picking up his option doesn't tie their hands, Perez and a lot of cash would make one primo trade chip.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,939
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 27, 2020 2:49:13 GMT -5
Nothing official, but based on some tweets tonight, it seems like the Sox wont be picking up Martin Perez's option for next year. Care to share those? MLBTradeRumors has nothing.
|
|
|
Post by electricityverdugo99 on Oct 27, 2020 4:04:45 GMT -5
Nothing official, but based on some tweets tonight, it seems like the Sox wont be picking up Martin Perez's option for next year. Care to share those? MLBTradeRumors has nothing. I think there are 3 reasons why the Sox declined the option- -Martin Perez wasn't good last year according to the peripherals. -Every dollar counts this off-season and locking in guaranteed money to end of the roster pieces is how you get in trouble with needing money later in the off-season. The Sox can always bring Perez back for lesser dollars. -I'm pretty sure there was no buyout in declining the option. The Sox lost nothing but giving Perez up to the worst market in perhaps baseball history this off-season coming.
|
|
|
Post by jkfer98 on Oct 27, 2020 7:07:47 GMT -5
Going on Section 10 and basically saying "I will play in Boston for any dollar amount" might not have helped him lmao
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,939
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 27, 2020 11:59:32 GMT -5
Care to share those? MLBTradeRumors has nothing. I think there are 3 reasons why the Sox declined the option- -Martin Perez wasn't good last year according to the peripherals. - Every dollar counts this off-season and locking in guaranteed money to end of the roster pieces is how you get in trouble with needing money later in the off-season. The Sox can always bring Perez back for lesser dollars. -I'm pretty sure there was no buyout in declining the option. The Sox lost nothing but giving Perez up to the worst market in perhaps baseball history this off-season coming. There's a $500K buyout. If they do that, then they are shopping for two FA starters, not one. They will include him on the list of candidates.
The only way they lose out is if he ends up being one of their top two choices, and someone else is willing to pay more than $6.35M for him (per Chris' note), forcing us to match that offer or lose him.
He signed last year for $6M and had a season where all his advanced metrics were worse, and COVID drove next year's market prices down. So the second criterion above will not be met.
By turning down the option, they will either a) keep him for less money than $6.85M, or b) fill his roster spot with someone better and more cost-effective.
I don't think the part I bolded is a factor in their thinking. I think they have money to spend and will go above the tax limit if they need to. It's simply that turning down the option is a win-win move.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 27, 2020 13:38:17 GMT -5
Eric, just FYI, he hit performance bonuses that raised his 2021 option to $6.85M.
Your point stands, obviously, and I'm inclined to agree, but just a heads up.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,939
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 27, 2020 18:04:55 GMT -5
Eric, just FYI, he hit performance bonuses that raised his 2021 option to $6.85M. Your point stands, obviously, and I'm inclined to agree, but just a heads up. Makes it stronger. Picking up the option is giving him an even bigger raise after a down season, in a down market.
It's quite possible that what they were trying to do with him to realize his upside is a work-in-progress and that they are very likely to re-sign him. It's also possible that they exhausted the things they wanted to try and are hopeful they can find two better starters. We have no way at all of knowing where they stand on that spectrum.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Oct 28, 2020 15:34:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by electricityverdugo99 on Oct 28, 2020 18:22:10 GMT -5
At least they got to keep Covey. He's got a tiny bit of upside left. Probably not much. He's 28 or 29 in 2021.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,939
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 28, 2020 20:26:35 GMT -5
So, 31 + 6 additions - Perez = 36, so 3 more cuts to add 6, and have room for a Rule 5 guy.
I think one of those is a Brice non-tender. It looks like he did not clear waivers, while Peraza and Godley did.
Hall is the likeliest cut of the remainders and is in fact a surprise to still be here. Hart, Brewer, and Walden are candidates for the final guy, and I think it's likelier than not that they add one or two bodies via waiver claims and cut extra guys.
I'm trying to remember -- if a guy is claimed on outright waivers and you pull him back, can't you then try to shop him to the claiming team plus teams that were lower down on the waiver priority list? (And how long is the time window to rescind waivers? If it's a day or two, you would do the shopping in that window.) So it may be possible that one of the four guys gets dealt for a nothing prospect, as Brice was to us.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,148
|
Post by cdj on Oct 28, 2020 20:51:44 GMT -5
How in the hell is Matt Hall still on this roster lol
He’s legit competition for worst Sox pitcher since Zach Stewart’s cameo
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 28, 2020 20:53:55 GMT -5
And Pedroia but they might hold that slot until just before the Rule 5. They are near the top of the totem pole for waiver claims.
At one point Kennedy said no decision would be made on Pedroia until after they talk to him.
|
|
|