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.
Let’s Go Shopping - 2020-21 FAs
|
Post by greenmonster on Oct 1, 2020 16:07:01 GMT -5
Can't this be said every year? Some of the players projected to be FA's after next year will sign new deals, get hurt, etc. The field will continue to be thinned so the farther you look ahead the better it appears.
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Oct 1, 2020 16:19:02 GMT -5
Eric, I'm a huge fan of downs I think he is a stud. But if I have a chance at DJ without a QO to sign him up for 3 or 4 years I take it. I do not see his aav being that high for the type of player your getting. If the yanks throw a QO his way though I'm out as you said. Go with the patch up move until downs takes the reins. I'll be pretty bummed if the sox do not make an attempt at signing DJ if there is no QO though.
|
|
|
Post by juanfatj on Oct 1, 2020 18:37:49 GMT -5
Probably not in the cards for the sox next year, but Ozuna would really make the top of the lineup tuff: Verdugo Devers Ozuna X Martinez
|
|
|
Post by soxin8 on Oct 1, 2020 18:43:05 GMT -5
Judge, Sanchez, Voit, Torres, Green, Urshela all in line for nice increases and Stanton sticking around for the next 7 years. Tanaka, Paxton & DJ potentially off the books as FA's and team option on Gardner I would expect not to be picked up. They have some work to do, but I would still be surprised if they didn't offer DJ a QO. Tanaka & Paxton most likely not, but if anyone it will be DJ. It certainly looks like they are stuck with the Stanton contract, especially in the current economy. But even now, there is always the possibility of a white knight coming to the rescue. Especially possible if they included someone like Frazier or Dominguez, which they might consider under extreme circumstances. Maybe someone like Cohen for the Mets would be interested to make a splash. I wouldn't even suggest this except Toronto moving the Vernon Wells and Alex Rios contracts were something I never thought possible. www.bluebirdbanter.com/2017/1/21/14346424/blue-jay-history-vernon-wells-tradewww.bluebirdbanter.com/2012/8/10/3234405/today-in-blue-jay-history-jays-give-alex-rios-to-white-sox
|
|
|
Post by electricityverdugo99 on Oct 1, 2020 18:43:07 GMT -5
I admittedly wasn't paying complete attention to the presser, but my recollection is Kennedy said they lost $100M this past year, not that they thought it would be next year as well. Is that they actually lost a 100 million or lost out on a 100 million in revenue? Either way that shouldn't do much because they had almost 90 million in profits the year before Gerry mentioned that the Sox anticipate that the Sox will continue to lose a extra 100 million dollars next season. They lost 100-200 million in 2020 (guessing), whether it was them splitting even or losing that additional revenue. The 90 million made in 2019 isn't going to make up for that. That money might be already gone. That quote from Kennedy is going to be very ominous this off season. Maybe no team offers the QO this off season. It's real money offered and maybe no one in the league has room for it. Not a completely unreasonable scenario either in this financial climate. Anticipate the strangest spending in league history this off season.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 1, 2020 19:58:59 GMT -5
I'm on the record for being on a big fan of LeMahieu and his fit on our roster over the next 2-3 year window. That said, I'm quite opposed to signing a free agent with QO attached so that will be an interesting decision for the Yankees to make given their financial situation. I don't know that they can afford to bring him back (or that it would be in their best interest with pitching needs), but if they feel like his market is strong enough and confident he'll find another home then they may just offer him a QO anyways. I believe they only stand to gain a pick after the 4th round though so it may not be worth the risk? If LeMahieu is offered a QO, the next guy up for me is Jurickson Profar. He's somewhat quietly entering the FA market for the first time at the age of only 28. He's now gotten full-time at bats for 3 consecutive years counting this abbreviated season. While doing so in each of those three seasons, he's kept his K% under 15% with an ISO over .150 and has been worth 5.4 fWAR over his last 1314 PAs (~2.5 fWAR per 600 PAs). Importantly, he's versatile defensively having played at least a game at every infield and outfield position in the last three years (primarily LF and 2B this year). That versatility would allow him to start at a position of need next year (ideally 2B), and potentially move around to fit the needs of the roster if our prospects can prove to outplay AAA within the next 2-year window. What do you do with Chavis and Arroyo? Keeping all three either means that Chavis and JDM are your 4th outfielders, when you have to have a guy who can play RF in Fenway (and hence CF), or you have a bench with no LH hitter, and Chavis is your only plan B at 1B if Dalbec struggles or gets hurt. I'm high on Chavis's bat as an everyday player, but it plays much better at 2B than at 1B. So I don't think either of those options are acceptable.
I think the obvious answer is to sell high on Arroyo. But if he turns out to be really good, the end result might be poor in terms of bang-for-buck. And then you have a big problem finding PT fo Chavis. It pretty much dooms you to selling low on him and letting someone else discover that he's a first-division starter at 2B if he plays regularly. Going into the last little stretch, I was onboard with your numbers regarding Chavis but what I saw statistically when he played everyday at the end was a changed Chavis. He appears to have sold out power for contact. The strikeouts reduction was a positive but at what cost ? If that's the Chavis plan, I would'nt be sold on him since his primary benefit is power. I'm more for using your statistics to sell Chavis than to keep him. I'd package Chavis, $$ and another player for a starting second baseman then use Arroyo and Munoz as bench. That would also help in the 40 man roster.
|
|
|
Post by soxaddict on Oct 1, 2020 20:15:33 GMT -5
I'm on the record for being on a big fan of LeMahieu and his fit on our roster over the next 2-3 year window. That said, I'm quite opposed to signing a free agent with QO attached so that will be an interesting decision for the Yankees to make given their financial situation. I don't know that they can afford to bring him back (or that it would be in their best interest with pitching needs), but if they feel like his market is strong enough and confident he'll find another home then they may just offer him a QO anyways. I believe they only stand to gain a pick after the 4th round though so it may not be worth the risk? If LeMahieu is offered a QO, the next guy up for me is Jurickson Profar. He's somewhat quietly entering the FA market for the first time at the age of only 28. He's now gotten full-time at bats for 3 consecutive years counting this abbreviated season. While doing so in each of those three seasons, he's kept his K% under 15% with an ISO over .150 and has been worth 5.4 fWAR over his last 1314 PAs (~2.5 fWAR per 600 PAs). Importantly, he's versatile defensively having played at least a game at every infield and outfield position in the last three years (primarily LF and 2B this year). That versatility would allow him to start at a position of need next year (ideally 2B), and potentially move around to fit the needs of the roster if our prospects can prove to outplay AAA within the next 2-year window. Same. I’d be shocked if Chaim doesn’t push hard for Profar. With his age, versatility and previous top prospect pedigree, he’s gotta be at the top of his wish list, IMO.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,990
|
Post by jimoh on Oct 1, 2020 20:29:11 GMT -5
Is that they actually lost a 100 million or lost out on a 100 million in revenue? Either way that shouldn't do much because they had almost 90 million in profits the year before Gerry mentioned that the Sox anticipate that the Sox will continue to lose a extra 100 million dollars next season. They lost 100-200 million in 2020 (guessing), whether it was them splitting even or losing that additional revenue. The 90 million made in 2019 isn't going to make up for that. That money might be already gone. That quote from Kennedy is going to be very ominous this off season. Maybe no team offers the QO this off season. It's real money offered and maybe no one in the league has room for it. Not a completely unreasonable scenario either in this financial climate. Anticipate the strangest spending in league history this off season. Is there any real evidence that Sox ownership cannot just absorb a couple of years of 100M losses like me absorbing the loss of a sock in the dryer? I have plenty of other socks. Quotes from management are not necessarily frank expressions of how they feel: they could be rhetorical positions. Certainly some teams will have to limit their spending, but apart from the luxury tax, do we?
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 1, 2020 20:34:44 GMT -5
Gerry mentioned that the Sox anticipate that the Sox will continue to lose a extra 100 million dollars next season. They lost 100-200 million in 2020 (guessing), whether it was them splitting even or losing that additional revenue. The 90 million made in 2019 isn't going to make up for that. That money might be already gone. That quote from Kennedy is going to be very ominous this off season. Maybe no team offers the QO this off season. It's real money offered and maybe no one in the league has room for it. Not a completely unreasonable scenario either in this financial climate. Anticipate the strangest spending in league history this off season. Is there any real evidence that Sox ownership cannot just absorb a couple of years of 100M losses like me absorbing the loss of a sock in the dryer? I have plenty of other socks. Quotes from management are not necessarily frank expressions of how they feel: they could be rhetorical positions. Certainly some teams will have to limit their spending, but apart from the luxury tax, do we? Yes, they absorbed money at the trade deadline.
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,837
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Oct 1, 2020 20:54:18 GMT -5
No biz takes a humongous loss with the attitude, "But we made a profit last year, so it's even-steven, all good." Investors want returns every year.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 1, 2020 20:57:41 GMT -5
No biz takes a humongous loss with the attitude, "But we made a profit last year, so it's even-steven, all good." Investors want returns every year. No biz doesn't invest money in assets for the future.
|
|
|
Post by orion09 on Oct 1, 2020 21:18:42 GMT -5
Is there any real evidence that Sox ownership cannot just absorb a couple of years of 100M losses like me absorbing the loss of a sock in the dryer? I have plenty of other socks. Quotes from management are not necessarily frank expressions of how they feel: they could be rhetorical positions. Certainly some teams will have to limit their spending, but apart from the luxury tax, do we? Just because the Sox are valued at several $BB doesn't mean they have the liquidity on hand to cover multiple $100M losses. We've lately heard owners commenting that baseball is a low-margin business and I suspect that's mostly true. They rely on cashflow from gate receipts, TV, merch to pay players' salaries. I'm sure they have some cash on hand, but that's more of a buffer for emergencies like this - not necessarily something that's sustainable long-term.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 1, 2020 21:19:03 GMT -5
I don't believe the Sox will exceed the tax threshold but I do believe they will spend their 30-40 million. I don't believe they will spend most of that in the free agent market, I believe they will spend it in the trade arena. 30-40 million is a lot to work with when most clubs will be looking to reduce costs. If the Sox are expecting to lose money next year, most other teams are likely to think that way as well.
Since Henry made his fortune in the commodities market like Cohen, I'd guess (but don't know) that he's very liquid.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,990
|
Post by jimoh on Oct 1, 2020 21:40:08 GMT -5
I think people are right that the Red Sox will look for smart trades. But I think that some key low or mid priced FA signings will both help the team and make it easier to make trades. Bill Mueller, Shane Victorino, Kevin Pillar, Martin Perez. They need one more Perez to make Pivetta the #6 or 7 starter. Maybe Ozuna for a splurge. But no loss of draft picks until the 2022 draft.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 1, 2020 22:03:11 GMT -5
I also think agents in general will be holding off until MLB makes a decision on Cohen. That's likely to have a major impact direct or indirect on all free agents. Why rush ?
|
|
|
Post by electricityverdugo99 on Oct 1, 2020 22:44:40 GMT -5
Gerry mentioned that the Sox anticipate that the Sox will continue to lose a extra 100 million dollars next season. They lost 100-200 million in 2020 (guessing), whether it was them splitting even or losing that additional revenue. The 90 million made in 2019 isn't going to make up for that. That money might be already gone. That quote from Kennedy is going to be very ominous this off season. Maybe no team offers the QO this off season. It's real money offered and maybe no one in the league has room for it. Not a completely unreasonable scenario either in this financial climate. Anticipate the strangest spending in league history this off season. Is there any real evidence that Sox ownership cannot just absorb a couple of years of 100M losses like me absorbing the loss of a sock in the dryer? I have plenty of other socks. Quotes from management are not necessarily frank expressions of how they feel: they could be rhetorical positions. Certainly some teams will have to limit their spending, but apart from the luxury tax, do we? Not sure, but it makes Chaim Bloom's job even more harder. Rather than absorbing money, he may have to get even more creative. Just to expand on the 2021 free agency period- I imagine that every single one of the multi year deals this free agency will be heavily back loaded. If teams like the Sox expect a revenue loss again in 2021, then they're going to hope and pray for a vaccine to this virus by 2022 and start paying real money by then (when fans can pack the ballparks again). Example- The Red Sox sign DJ LeMahieu to a 3 year 45 million dollar deal. 5 million for 2021. 20 million in years 2 and 3.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 2, 2020 5:50:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Oct 2, 2020 10:45:57 GMT -5
Do you have the exact quote from Kennedy about the $100mil per team? I've seen it references as 'each major league team lost more than $100mil in 2020'(masslive.com) and also that 'the Red Sox (had) more than 100mil in losses' (boston globe). If the more than $100mil for each team is correct, then the losses are much worse than stated above. But Manfred is reporting a loss (assuming in revenue) closer to 3bil rather than the originally thought 4bil. As the players lost ~2.5bil in income, and there were many teams who cut other personnel, it's possible the fallout isn't nearly as bad as anticipated (assuming 2021 shows recovery). I'm curious if the small market teams end up being better off than the others as they rely far less on gate revenue. And if the wealth distribution changes during the pandemic, it could lead to infighting among owners.
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Oct 2, 2020 11:25:22 GMT -5
Do you have the exact quote from Kennedy about the $100mil per team? I've seen it references as 'each major league team lost more than $100mil in 2020'(masslive.com) and also that 'the Red Sox (had) more than 100mil in losses' (boston globe). If the more than $100mil for each team is correct, then the losses are much worse than stated above. But Manfred is reporting a loss (assuming in revenue) closer to 3bil rather than the originally thought 4bil. As the players lost ~2.5bil in income, and there were many teams who cut other personnel, it's possible the fallout isn't nearly as bad as anticipated (assuming 2021 shows recovery). I'm curious if the small market teams end up being better off than the others as they rely far less on gate revenue. And if the wealth distribution changes during the pandemic, it could lead to infighting among owners. I can not see any other way for mlb to spread the money then too cut the amount lower market teams are getting. If money is not coming in they will be more at risk not less. No way the big market teams stand bye when the bottom feeders are getting the same old payments when they are getting porked on revenue.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 2, 2020 12:57:19 GMT -5
He said every MLB team lost $100M. I was on the call.
|
|
|
Post by foreverred9 on Oct 2, 2020 14:18:49 GMT -5
That makes sense based on what I'm seeing. I shared the Braves financials in the layoffs thread over here: forum.soxprospects.com/post/427948/threadThe Braves through June had a 73M loss on their books and they post losses in Q4 (26M in 2018 and 44M in 2019). We'll get the Q3 numbers around November 10th but I doubt they're going to make a profit in Q3. imgur.com/a/64EUleo
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 2, 2020 14:44:23 GMT -5
To be clearer, he referenced what the Braves posted publicly. It was something like "every MLB team lost-what'd the Braves financials say !00 million?" or something like that. Not implying he's being untruthful or something like that, but he was saying that the Braves' financial situation, which is public, was true across the game.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 3, 2020 12:28:57 GMT -5
Yeah every team is different and not all revenue is counted, it's only the money counted for revenue sharing.
Example its estimated the Red Sox owners make 180 million a year off of NESN in profits. That's on top of the 104 million the Red Sox count as revenue due to licencing fees.
They can reduce the 104 million going to Red Sox based on games, yet our Owner is still getting that money. Everyone didn't ditch TV and they are getting monthly fees for NESN. They are still getting add revenue, it likely went up as more people stayed home and watched more TV. The Red Sox team won't see that money, yet our owner will.
It's why Baseball is so messed up. The Red Sox profits per year aren't just for the team, it's also NESN. Our owner owns both and they are 100% tied together. Accounting wise it might not look that way, yet they are. It's why we did things like Sandoval and Ramirez signings. Too many bad years in a row hurt NESN ratings so he spends to bring them up. They've been smart and brought NESN to streaming TV with Youtube TV.
The Red Sox team could show losses and our owner can still make money on his Red Sox investments for 2020
|
|
|
Post by soxin8 on Oct 3, 2020 15:33:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Oct 3, 2020 20:48:30 GMT -5
There are deff some interesting options for the bullpen and starters on the market.
|
|
|