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 dangermike on Oct 13, 2020 10:08:07 GMT -5
Since we have payroll flexibility and some areas on the roster to hide people why can’t we take on some bad deals? Chris Davis, Cueto, Odor, Cano, Zimmerman? They all need to be paid for 2 seasons which should line up with our finances and prospect development. Why not see if cueto can spin it in the bullpen or something and get a good prospect out of it
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 13, 2020 13:42:50 GMT -5
Given how I expect money to be at such a premium this off-season, you'd have to be getting one heck of a package to take on contracts that big that run for two years.
|
|
|
Post by soxaddict on Oct 15, 2020 2:47:05 GMT -5
Since we have payroll flexibility and some areas on the roster to hide people why can’t we take on some bad deals? Chris Davis, Cueto, Odor, Cano, Zimmerman? They all need to be paid for 2 seasons which should line up with our finances and prospect development. Why not see if cueto can spin it in the bullpen or something and get a good prospect out of it A bad contract with only one year left, sure. The Sox should absolutely flex their financial muscles and buy some prospects. Dexter Fowler, Gregory Polanco, Alex Cobb, Jesus Familia, Danny Duffy, Anibal Sanchez, Craig Kimbrel, Andrew Miller are some names that fit that profile. I expect teams to be more aggressive about shedding payroll this offseason.
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Oct 15, 2020 5:53:46 GMT -5
The opportunity in free agency to get players on cheap short deals is high. So to take on what would be considered a bad contract would need a legit prospect attached and I dont see a team doing that. If they take on bad contracts I see it as another tank year. With the team they have now a couple smart moves could put you in the hunt. I don't know why you risk that for a bad contract. With the upcoming draft the red sox are about to add at least 2 prospect too their top 20 just in the draft. I think it would be wise to stay away from teams dumping salary unless your getting top 100 pitching prospects back.
|
|
|
Post by greenmonster on Oct 16, 2020 15:20:33 GMT -5
Do you do either of these....
take on Roughned Odor's remaining contract (2/$25M) to get Lance Lynn? Lynn would be a solid add to the rotation (30+ GS, 200+ IP). He has 1/$9.4M remaining before becoming a FA in 2022.
take on Greg Polanco (1/$11.6M w 2022 team opt) to get Joe Musgrove entering arb2 estimated at $3.5M
what cost controlled player(s) from the Sox would it take?
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Oct 16, 2020 16:03:50 GMT -5
Do you do either of these.... take on Roughned Odor's remaining contract (2/$25M) to get Lance Lynn? Lynn would be a solid add to the rotation (30+ GS, 200+ IP). He has 1/$9.4M remaining before becoming a FA in 2022. take on Greg Polanco (1/$11.6M w 2022 team opt) to get Joe Musgrove entering arb2 estimated at $3.5M what cost controlled player(s) from the Sox would it take? I'd say the odor and Lynn deal, the red sox would be giving up next to nothing bcs it would be a huge salary dump. Odor brings very little value but lynn covers that for the salary impact. The red sox might even want a swap of prospects where the sox get the better of it bcs of odor being on a two year deal. The second deal of Musgrove and polanco I think the sox might have to send a top ten prospect bcs of the years of control left on Musgrove. Id be in for the second deal.
|
|
|
Post by soxaddict on Oct 17, 2020 5:51:51 GMT -5
Do you do either of these.... take on Roughned Odor's remaining contract (2/$25M) to get Lance Lynn? Lynn would be a solid add to the rotation (30+ GS, 200+ IP). He has 1/$9.4M remaining before becoming a FA in 2022. take on Greg Polanco (1/$11.6M w 2022 team opt) to get Joe Musgrove entering arb2 estimated at $3.5M what cost controlled player(s) from the Sox would it take? I'd say the odor and Lynn deal, the red sox would be giving up next to nothing bcs it would be a huge salary dump. Odor brings very little value but lynn covers that for the salary impact. The red sox might even want a swap of prospects where the sox get the better of it bcs of odor being on a two year deal. The second deal of Musgrove and polanco I think the sox might have to send a top ten prospect bcs of the years of control left on Musgrove. Id be in for the second deal. The Sox could probably get a prospect in the 6-10 range from Texas along with Lynn and Odor for next to nothing. To get Musgrove along with Polanco would probably cost the Sox one of Downs, Casas, or Dalbec. Instead of Musgrove, they could possibly get James Taillon and Kyle Crick for Chavis.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 17, 2020 15:40:22 GMT -5
You really need to nail down what a bwar will cost on the free agent market before you can try and figure out deals. Then what teams have to spend and their goals.
Why would Texas trade a prospect in the 6-10 range to unload Odor and Lynn?
|
|
|
Post by soxaddict on Oct 17, 2020 22:43:46 GMT -5
You really need to nail down what a bwar will cost on the free agent market before you can try and figure out deals. Then what teams have to spend and their goals. Why would Texas trade a prospect in the 6-10 range to unload Odor and Lynn? I wouldn’t consider a deal from Texas without a prospect thrown in. Is one year of Lynn at $8m worth paying $27m to Odor over the next two years?
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Oct 17, 2020 23:52:54 GMT -5
That's why I said before there is no reason to take on bad contracts unless your blown away with prospects. This free agent market is wide open. I do not see why bloom would take on a bad contract after already resetting the cap. When you can get good deals and put a strong team on the field next season.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 18, 2020 0:02:00 GMT -5
You really need to nail down what a bwar will cost on the free agent market before you can try and figure out deals. Then what teams have to spend and their goals. Why would Texas trade a prospect in the 6-10 range to unload Odor and Lynn? I wouldn’t consider a deal from Texas without a prospect thrown in. Is one year of Lynn at $8m worth paying $27m to Odor over the next two years? I get that from the Red Sox point of view, yet why would Texas trade two good assets just to dump money? A team trying to go for it, looking for that one extra piece maybe, yet why would Texas do that?
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Oct 18, 2020 7:12:01 GMT -5
I wouldn’t consider a deal from Texas without a prospect thrown in. Is one year of Lynn at $8m worth paying $27m to Odor over the next two years? I get that from the Red Sox point of view, yet why would Texas trade two good assets just to dump money? A team trying to go for it, looking for that one extra piece maybe, yet why would Texas do that? They are trying to drop salary there was an article about it a couple weeks ago. Shedding over 20mil in salaries just for the next season would be a big start. Lets not pretend odor is a serviceable player, hes has been pretty bad.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 18, 2020 17:51:10 GMT -5
I get that from the Red Sox point of view, yet why would Texas trade two good assets just to dump money? A team trying to go for it, looking for that one extra piece maybe, yet why would Texas do that? They are trying to drop salary there was an article about it a couple weeks ago. Shedding over 20mil in salaries just for the next season would be a big start. Lets not pretend odor is a serviceable player, hes has been pretty bad. They are cutting 64 million without doing anything. Add another 9 million with Lynn and they don't have to get rid of any salary with a 100 million budget. I'm sure they want to dump him, yet is money worth two good assets on a rebuilding team? Wouldn't you just keep the 6-10 prospect, pay down Lynn's deal and get another good prospect? calltothepen.com/2020/10/04/texas-rangers-payroll-cuts-not-as-extreme-as-they-sound/They are cutting payroll for 2021, they don't have to dump guys for that to happen though.
|
|
|
Post by soxaddict on Oct 20, 2020 4:52:43 GMT -5
That's why I said before there is no reason to take on bad contracts unless your blown away with prospects. This free agent market is wide open. I do not see why bloom would take on a bad contract after already resetting the cap. When you can get good deals and put a strong team on the field next season. I'm not suggesting a deal with Texas is a good one, I was just stating what it I think it would take. IMO, there are much better trade partners. The Pirates are always good trade partners. Gregory Polanco has one year left at $11.6M, with a $3M buy out in 2022. The luxury tax hit is $7M. The Sox could easily get a couple of good players or prospects for taking him. Sure, he's got a history of injuries, but he was healthy in 2020. He could be a decent LH bat off the bench, which the Sox need. If he sucks, he comes off the books in 2022 anyway. IMO, another team that will cut payroll is the Cubs. I read that after their arbitration players, payroll will be in the upper $180s. The core of that team only has one more year. Bryant, Rizzo, Baez and Schwarber are all free agents after 2021. What if the Sox took Craig Kimbrel $16M ($14.33 luxury tax). The Sox should be able to get Baez or Bryant and a prospect for next to nothing. Both off the books in 2022.
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Oct 20, 2020 9:28:01 GMT -5
That's why I said before there is no reason to take on bad contracts unless your blown away with prospects. This free agent market is wide open. I do not see why bloom would take on a bad contract after already resetting the cap. When you can get good deals and put a strong team on the field next season. I'm not suggesting a deal with Texas is a good one, I was just stating what it I think it would take. IMO, there are much better trade partners. The Pirates are always good trade partners. Gregory Polanco has one year left at $11.6M, with a $3M buy out in 2022. The luxury tax hit is $7M. The Sox could easily get a couple of good players or prospects for taking him. Sure, he's got a history of injuries, but he was healthy in 2020. He could be a decent LH bat off the bench, which the Sox need. If he sucks, he comes off the books in 2022 anyway. IMO, another team that will cut payroll is the Cubs. I read that after their arbitration players, payroll will be in the upper $180s. The core of that team only has one more year. Bryant, Rizzo, Baez and Schwarber are all free agents after 2021. What if the Sox took Craig Kimbrel $16M ($14.33 luxury tax). The Sox should be able to get Baez or Bryant and a prospect for next to nothing. Both off the books in 2022. I'm sorry, are you saying the sox could get a star off a down year AND a prospect for just taking on Kimbrel?
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Oct 20, 2020 11:24:29 GMT -5
They are trying to drop salary there was an article about it a couple weeks ago. Shedding over 20mil in salaries just for the next season would be a big start. Lets not pretend odor is a serviceable player, hes has been pretty bad. They are cutting 64 million without doing anything. Add another 9 million with Lynn and they don't have to get rid of any salary with a 100 million budget. I'm sure they want to dump him, yet is money worth two good assets on a rebuilding team? Wouldn't you just keep the 6-10 prospect, pay down Lynn's deal and get another good prospect? calltothepen.com/2020/10/04/texas-rangers-payroll-cuts-not-as-extreme-as-they-sound/They are cutting payroll for 2021, they don't have to dump guys for that to happen though. That article is extremely questionable guy said they are waiving odor, this is not the NFL guy is guaranteed money for the next two seasons. As for the 100mil number that is the only time ive heard it mentioned. From more reliable sources word is they are dropping significant salary. If they are only trying to get down to 100mil then everything you said is spot on but that is not the rumors flying. This off-season will show which owners are only in this for profit and not operating a competitive team. A team like texas could easily drop significant more payroll to keep the owners losses lower. We will see.
|
|
|
Post by soxaddict on Oct 20, 2020 12:40:38 GMT -5
I'm not suggesting a deal with Texas is a good one, I was just stating what it I think it would take. IMO, there are much better trade partners. The Pirates are always good trade partners. Gregory Polanco has one year left at $11.6M, with a $3M buy out in 2022. The luxury tax hit is $7M. The Sox could easily get a couple of good players or prospects for taking him. Sure, he's got a history of injuries, but he was healthy in 2020. He could be a decent LH bat off the bench, which the Sox need. If he sucks, he comes off the books in 2022 anyway. IMO, another team that will cut payroll is the Cubs. I read that after their arbitration players, payroll will be in the upper $180s. The core of that team only has one more year. Bryant, Rizzo, Baez and Schwarber are all free agents after 2021. What if the Sox took Craig Kimbrel $16M ($14.33 luxury tax). The Sox should be able to get Baez or Bryant and a prospect for next to nothing. Both off the books in 2022. I'm sorry, are you saying the sox could get a star off a down year AND a prospect for just taking on Kimbrel? Absolutely. No way the Cubbies are going to exceed the luxury tax threshold for a third straight year. They couldn’t trade Bryant this season, I don’t see why it would be any easier this off-season. There are some articles suggesting, however unlikely, the Cubs could even non-tender Bryant. So yeah, I think any team willing to take on dead money, such as Kimbrel, this off-season could score some dividends.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 20, 2020 15:49:38 GMT -5
They are cutting 64 million without doing anything. Add another 9 million with Lynn and they don't have to get rid of any salary with a 100 million budget. I'm sure they want to dump him, yet is money worth two good assets on a rebuilding team? Wouldn't you just keep the 6-10 prospect, pay down Lynn's deal and get another good prospect? calltothepen.com/2020/10/04/texas-rangers-payroll-cuts-not-as-extreme-as-they-sound/They are cutting payroll for 2021, they don't have to dump guys for that to happen though. That article is extremely questionable guy said they are waiving odor, this is not the NFL guy is guaranteed money for the next two seasons. As for the 100mil number that is the only time ive heard it mentioned. From more reliable sources word is they are dropping significant salary. If they are only trying to get down to 100mil then everything you said is spot on but that is not the rumors flying. This off-season will show which owners are only in this for profit and not operating a competitive team. A team like texas could easily drop significant more payroll to keep the owners losses lower. We will see. That article links another one saying the same thing, they likely won't go above 100 million, yet also only have 63 million currently on the books. They can trade Lynn and be around 80 million if they wanted too. That's basically a 50% reduction in payroll without doing much at all. We waived Sandoval. If I was Texas I'd waive Odor over giving away two good assets to remove his salary and frankly you might not even be able to do that.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 20, 2020 16:03:13 GMT -5
I'm sorry, are you saying the sox could get a star off a down year AND a prospect for just taking on Kimbrel? Absolutely. No way the Cubbies are going to exceed the luxury tax threshold for a third straight year. They couldn’t trade Bryant this season, I don’t see why it would be any easier this off-season. There are some articles suggesting, however unlikely, the Cubs could even non-tender Bryant. So yeah, I think any team willing to take on dead money, such as Kimbrel, this off-season could score some dividends. Not wanting to and not finding the right offer isn't the same as the Cubs couldn't trade him. They could have easily traded him this year. Who knows about now after he had a bad year, yet them not trading him wasn't because they couldn't do it. Why can't they pay the tax for a third year? The difference isn't huge if you barely go over, it's not the NBA when shit goes crazy. They have a wealthy owner and are all in on winning with a rebuild not far off.
|
|
|
Post by soxaddict on Oct 21, 2020 2:40:54 GMT -5
Absolutely. No way the Cubbies are going to exceed the luxury tax threshold for a third straight year. They couldn’t trade Bryant this season, I don’t see why it would be any easier this off-season. There are some articles suggesting, however unlikely, the Cubs could even non-tender Bryant. So yeah, I think any team willing to take on dead money, such as Kimbrel, this off-season could score some dividends. Not wanting to and not finding the right offer isn't the same as the Cubs couldn't trade him. They could have easily traded him this year. Who knows about now after he had a bad year, yet them not trading him wasn't because they couldn't do it. Why can't they pay the tax for a third year? The difference isn't huge if you barely go over, it's not the NBA when shit goes crazy. They have a wealthy owner and are all in on winning with a rebuild not far off. You’re right. I’m sure they could have easily traded him, but possibly didn’t find the right offer or decided to go for it. Just sayin, by all reports it appears they’re going to slash payroll for 2021. IMO, Bryant will be one they will attempt to move. They absolutely could pay the tax for a third year, but reports say they won’t.
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Oct 21, 2020 6:15:32 GMT -5
That article is extremely questionable guy said they are waiving odor, this is not the NFL guy is guaranteed money for the next two seasons. As for the 100mil number that is the only time ive heard it mentioned. From more reliable sources word is they are dropping significant salary. If they are only trying to get down to 100mil then everything you said is spot on but that is not the rumors flying. This off-season will show which owners are only in this for profit and not operating a competitive team. A team like texas could easily drop significant more payroll to keep the owners losses lower. We will see. That article links another one saying the same thing, they likely won't go above 100 million, yet also only have 63 million currently on the books. They can trade Lynn and be around 80 million if they wanted too. That's basically a 50% reduction in payroll without doing much at all. We waived Sandoval. If I was Texas I'd waive Odor over giving away two good assets to remove his salary and frankly you might not even be able to do that. Most teams do not waive players like the red sox have done esp a guy due the money odor is for two more years. All I am saying is the owner of middle market teams is not likely to take two seasons of red on the books instead of trying to dump a player like odor with prospects attached. If you scroll up I'm against taking any contract on for prospects but there will be plenty of teams looking to dump money with few to take those contracts on. Essentially, if your trying to dump bad contracts your going to pay big in prospects this season. The red sox are basically the only team that can take bad contracts on without it effecting the bottom line.
|
|
|
Post by bellhorndingers21 on Oct 21, 2020 10:38:05 GMT -5
Do you do either of these.... take on Roughned Odor's remaining contract (2/$25M) to get Lance Lynn? Lynn would be a solid add to the rotation (30+ GS, 200+ IP). He has 1/$9.4M remaining before becoming a FA in 2022. take on Greg Polanco (1/$11.6M w 2022 team opt) to get Joe Musgrove entering arb2 estimated at $3.5M what cost controlled player(s) from the Sox would it take? Polanco had the 13th highest average exit velocity this year. What does that mean? Probably nothing, this year was weird. But picking up players with high exit velocity readings seems to be a Tampa strategy so why not if it nets the Red Sox some pitching or a prospect.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 21, 2020 15:05:44 GMT -5
Not wanting to and not finding the right offer isn't the same as the Cubs couldn't trade him. They could have easily traded him this year. Who knows about now after he had a bad year, yet them not trading him wasn't because they couldn't do it. Why can't they pay the tax for a third year? The difference isn't huge if you barely go over, it's not the NBA when shit goes crazy. They have a wealthy owner and are all in on winning with a rebuild not far off. You’re right. I’m sure they could have easily traded him, but possibly didn’t find the right offer or decided to go for it. Just sayin, by all reports it appears they’re going to slash payroll for 2021. IMO, Bryant will be one they will attempt to move. They absolutely could pay the tax for a third year, but reports say they won’t. He should have traded Bryant because now he's in trouble, he just went from having crazy value to negative value. He literally ran the Cubs into the ground the same way he did the Red Sox. I guess the Rickets family invested heavily in the area around the Stadium in things like Hotels. So they are getting hit extra hard. All there eggs in one basket type crap.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 21, 2020 15:29:57 GMT -5
That article links another one saying the same thing, they likely won't go above 100 million, yet also only have 63 million currently on the books. They can trade Lynn and be around 80 million if they wanted too. That's basically a 50% reduction in payroll without doing much at all. We waived Sandoval. If I was Texas I'd waive Odor over giving away two good assets to remove his salary and frankly you might not even be able to do that. Most teams do not waive players like the red sox have done esp a guy due the money odor is for two more years. All I am saying is the owner of middle market teams is not likely to take two seasons of red on the books instead of trying to dump a player like odor with prospects attached. If you scroll up I'm against taking any contract on for prospects but there will be plenty of teams looking to dump money with few to take those contracts on. Essentially, if your trying to dump bad contracts your going to pay big in prospects this season. The red sox are basically the only team that can take bad contracts on without it effecting the bottom line. That is right, a lot of teams are stupid. Just look at Baltimore still playing Chris Davis, which is exactly what the Ranger are likely to do with Odor. Yeah a lot of teams just don't cut players, they also don't pay crazy high prices to just dump salary unless it's teams trying to win at all costs. That's not the Rangers. I don't disagree that the cost would be very high to move him. I disagree that the Rangers would pay it just to dump salary when they don't have too. They are lucky with a ton of money coming off the books and other guys they can move. If they move him it likely will involve flipping one bad contract for another. It's like the Red Sox trying to dump Eovaldi versus Price last year or them trying to trade Sandoval versus just releasing him. Odor would be very hard in a normal year, it's basically impossible this year. I wouldn't say the Red Sox are the only team that can without effecting the bottom line. More like the only owner that might be willing to increase his losses if it makes sense. Yet given that, there are much better ways to spend that money than a guy who likely offers you nothing next year. We won't have that much money to burn. 12.3 million might be close to the top of the market on one year deals. What would Odor get on the free agent market? A one year minor league tryout deal? I just don't see how the Rangers offer us something that makes sense for both sides compared to what else will be out there.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 23, 2020 8:45:46 GMT -5
|
|
|