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.
Red Sox Acquire Adalberto Mondesi and PTBNL for Josh Taylor
|
Post by julyanmorley on Jan 24, 2023 15:35:52 GMT -5
I kinda like the idea of trying to extend Mondesi in ST. When a player's future earnings have tons of variance, there's an opportunity for the team to step in and sell overpriced insurance in the form of a team friendly contract. Mondesi is kinda close to being out of the league, but it also wouldn't be that surprising if he managed another 3 seasons as an every day player before he retires. Maybe you can get him for something like 2/8 with a team option.
|
|
|
Post by bosoxnation on Jan 24, 2023 15:42:51 GMT -5
I kinda like the idea of trying to extend Mondesi in ST. When a player's future earnings have tons of variance, there's an opportunity for the team to step in and sell overpriced insurance in the form of a team friendly contract. Mondesi is kinda close to being out of the league, but it also wouldn't be that surprising if he managed another 3 seasons as an every day player before he retires. Maybe you can get him for something like 2/8 with a team option. I 100% agree with this. He led the league in triples not too long ago. We need baserunning and if he can get healthy we can revive his career.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Jan 24, 2023 15:45:55 GMT -5
I might be misunderstanding something in the process here, but once they didn't non-tender him wasn't he guaranteed a contract? And whether or not they agreed on a number before a hearing it was going to be somewhere around $1M. Honestly I have no idea how it works if they DFA a guy before an arbitration number so maybe you're right. From what I've read, the luxury tax hit becomes fully guaranteed once you tender a contract with the new CBA. Versus the last CBA where only a portion was only taken into account with the luxury tax hit if a player gets cut in spring training. The contract (and luxury tax hit) become guaranteed upon the team and player agreeing to a contract before arbitration takes place. However, an arbitration ruling does NOT guarantee the contract, which could still be waived while providing 30 days pay (or 45 if within 15 days of the start of the season), just like in the previous CBA. This is why so many contract agreements came in below the projected numbers (players taking a discount in order to receive a guaranteed contract). I went into more detail here: forum.soxprospects.com/post/584185/threadAs the Red Sox guaranteed Taylor's contract within the past 2 weeks, he wasn't the next man up to be DFAd, unless something happened within that timespan to change their minds.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jan 24, 2023 15:51:49 GMT -5
I might be misunderstanding something in the process here, but once they didn't non-tender him wasn't he guaranteed a contract? And whether or not they agreed on a number before a hearing it was going to be somewhere around $1M. Honestly I have no idea how it works if they DFA a guy before an arbitration number so maybe you're right. From what I've read, the luxury tax hit becomes fully guaranteed once you tender a contract with the new CBA. Versus the last CBA where only a portion was only taken into account with the luxury tax hit if a player gets cut in spring training. The contract (and luxury tax hit) become guaranteed upon the team and player agreeing to a contract before arbitration takes place. However, an arbitration ruling does NOT guarantee the contract, which could still be waived while providing 30 days pay (or 45 if within 15 days of the start of the season), just like in the previous CBA. This is why so many contract agreements came in below the projected numbers (players taking a discount in order to receive a guaranteed contract). I went into more detail here: forum.soxprospects.com/post/584185/threadAs the Red Sox guaranteed Taylor's contract within the past 2 weeks, he wasn't the next man up to be DFAd, unless something happened within that timespan to change their minds. If this is the case then wouldn't the non-tender deadline be totally meaningless? I believe you, but I can't find anything online that confirms or denies what you're saying, and if you're right then I'm confused about the non-tender deadline. Do you have any links you can share? ADD: Also, separately, isn't it possible that the Red Sox were having trade discussions for Taylor, and so even though he was lower on their internal totem pole of relief candidates, they had to agree to a deal with him or else lower their bargaining position in trade discussions by indicating they may not keep him anyways?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2023 15:52:15 GMT -5
For those wondering on his health status after a late April ACL tear, this was the most up to date info I could find (from late August): amp.kansascity.com/sports/mlb/kansas-city-royals/article264590151.html“The 27-year-old switch-hitter is rehabbing back home in the Dominican Republic. He’s still in regular contact with Royals rehab coordinator Jeff Blum, who continues to direct Mondesi’s rehab from KC, according to Picollo. The Royals plan to have Mondesi working with their staff in the U.S. in the next few weeks as his rehab will start to gear towards preparing for the start of next season. The expectation at this point is that Mondesi will be ready for spring training 2023. By the start of March, he’ll be 10 months removed from his injury and surgery.“
|
|
|
Post by wingman478 on Jan 24, 2023 15:57:14 GMT -5
I might be misunderstanding something in the process here, but once they didn't non-tender him wasn't he guaranteed a contract? And whether or not they agreed on a number before a hearing it was going to be somewhere around $1M. Honestly I have no idea how it works if they DFA a guy before an arbitration number so maybe you're right. From what I've read, the luxury tax hit becomes fully guaranteed once you tender a contract with the new CBA. Versus the last CBA where only a portion was only taken into account with the luxury tax hit if a player gets cut in spring training. The contract (and luxury tax hit) become guaranteed upon the team and player agreeing to a contract before arbitration takes place. However, an arbitration ruling does NOT guarantee the contract, which could still be waived while providing 30 days pay (or 45 if within 15 days of the start of the season), just like in the previous CBA. This is why so many contract agreements came in below the projected numbers (players taking a discount in order to receive a guaranteed contract). I went into more detail here: forum.soxprospects.com/post/584185/threadAs the Red Sox guaranteed Taylor's contract within the past 2 weeks, he wasn't the next man up to be DFAd, unless something happened within that timespan to change their minds. Yeah his contract might not all be guaranteed, but the luxury tax hit is still guaranteed.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 24, 2023 16:02:00 GMT -5
Mondesi is kinda close to being out of the league, but it also wouldn't be that surprising if he managed another 3 seasons as an every day player before he retires. Mondesi was a 1 fWAR player in 2021 in an injury hampered season. He's also 27. He's nowhere close to being "out of the league" or retiring.
|
|
ematz1423
Veteran
Posts: 5,302
Member is Online
|
Post by ematz1423 on Jan 24, 2023 16:15:49 GMT -5
Mondesi is kinda close to being out of the league, but it also wouldn't be that surprising if he managed another 3 seasons as an every day player before he retires. Mondesi was a 1 fWAR player in 2021 in an injury hampered season. He's also 27. He's nowhere close to being "out of the league" or retiring. Completely agree here, it isn't a question of talent with Mondesi from what I can see checking out his Fangraphs page. 2018 he was 2.5 fWAR in 75 games, 2019 2.5 in 102 games, 2020 1.4 in 59 games during the shortened season of only 60 games and as you point out 2021 .9 fWAR in just 35 games. He's only 27 years old going into the season, health permitting he's probably got plenty more seasons left in him. I mean just looking at Iglesias and Andrus as the presumptive other options the Sox had at MI at this stage in the offseason, Andrus is 34 and Iglesias is 33. I'd consider the three of them all roughly in the same tier of player at this stage in their career but I'd say Mondesi offers more upside than either of them. He's been a rather solid SS when he's been able to stay on the field. His K% is going to drive the board bonkers at times that's for sure but I'm pretty interested to see what Mondesi can bring to the team this year. I would not be surprised in the slightest if at the end of the 2023 season we are looking at Mondesi as one of Bloom's better moves of the offseason.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 24, 2023 16:18:47 GMT -5
Context on how good he is: From 2018 - 2022 he's been a 4 WAR/150 games guy. It's not that he's been a part time player put in strategic spots either, he was just either in the minors or injured the times he was out. Mondesi is a really good player, and someone who should benefit from rule changes (fast ground ball pull/switch hitter), the big question mark is health. He has 59 games in minors since 2018, so he's been injured a crazy amount not even counting last year?
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Jan 24, 2023 16:40:44 GMT -5
Hard to be upset if this is for depth and "you never know" wishful thinking, easy to be upset if he's meant a starter.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jan 24, 2023 16:42:23 GMT -5
Things to like - Switch Hitter- Plus speed. Can readily steal a base prior to the shorter bases. - Has played 2B/SS/3B - Appears solid defensively although not sure what advance metrics might suggest Areas of concern - Coming off of ACL injury - Has never been great getting on baseYour second point in the "concern" category cancels out your first point in the Like category. This guy is a first-rate, third-rate player. Late-inning defensive replacement type and not much else. Like a few other guys they have on this team, his best year was five years ago and he looks like a sub-1 WAR player right now. Also wonder if the ACL injury has compromised his range any.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jan 24, 2023 16:46:15 GMT -5
We now have 3 PTBNLs coming. This one, along with the Seabold and Hoy Park DFA trades. These are like 7th-round draft picks in the NFL. They are almost always meaningless. Almost.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Jan 24, 2023 16:47:00 GMT -5
Would have preferred Iglesias TBH. A better hitter (.272 lifetime) and a good fielder. Perhaps not as flash as Mondesi but he stays on the field more often. And he won't sprain an ankle pushing the laundry basket.
|
|
ematz1423
Veteran
Posts: 5,302
Member is Online
|
Post by ematz1423 on Jan 24, 2023 16:49:00 GMT -5
We now have 3 PTBNLs coming. This one, along with the Seabold and Hoy Park DFA trades. These are like 7th-round draft picks in the NFL. They are almost always meaningless. Almost. But what if one of the PTBNLs turns into the MLB equivalent of Brock Purdy!
|
|
|
Post by agastonguay13 on Jan 24, 2023 16:54:52 GMT -5
I mean, Realistically, they're looking for a 1-2 year stopgap at SS until their top prospect develops. There's no reason to spend valuable resources on a stopgap for a team that doesn't realistically see itself in the picture to contend for a World Series, BUT, there is value in moving an injury prone member of a bullpen that you've bolstered this off-season for a PTBNL and someone who fills a position of need, is in a contract year, and has the potential to be a valuable trade chip at the deadline should he remain healthy/productive and you find yourself out of contention. Lots of the moves this winter seem to have been made with this in mind, and I'm very ok with it.
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Jan 24, 2023 16:57:51 GMT -5
Had no idea that Raul Mondesi is sitting in prison right now on an 8 year political corruption sentence.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jan 24, 2023 16:58:31 GMT -5
Context on how good he is: From 2018 - 2022 he's been a 4 WAR/150 games guy. It's not that he's been a part time player put in strategic spots either, he was just either in the minors or injured the times he was out. Mondesi is a really good player, and someone who should benefit from rule changes (fast ground ball pull/switch hitter), the big question mark is health. He has 59 games in minors since 2018, so he's been injured a crazy amount not even counting last year? A bunch of injuries in 2021, he played all of 2020 and he started in the minors in 2019.
|
|
|
Post by rico6 on Jan 24, 2023 17:04:34 GMT -5
These are like 7th-round draft picks in the NFL. They are almost always meaningless. Almost. But what if one of the PTBNLs turns into the MLB equivalent of Brock Purdy! I guess that would be Purdy lucky.
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,387
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Jan 24, 2023 17:04:53 GMT -5
Would have preferred Iglesias TBH. A better hitter (.272 lifetime) and a good fielder. Perhaps not as flash as Mondesi but he stays on the field more often. And he won't sprain an ankle pushing the laundry basket. I get this, but to me, Iggy has a ceiling that simply affirms the Sox as being long-to-no-shots. He also has a floor that keeps them ok, granted. Mondesi has a ceiling that adds to the if-all-goes-well finger crossing (with a lower floor but at least no greater expense). If the Sox are going anywhere, they need some career years. Here is a guy who has the potential to have an impact career year (odds? Low. But not zero!).
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Jan 24, 2023 17:04:56 GMT -5
If this is the case then wouldn't the non-tender deadline be totally meaningless? I believe you, but I can't find anything online that confirms or denies what you're saying, and if you're right then I'm confused about the non-tender deadline. Do you have any links you can share? ADD: Also, separately, isn't it possible that the Red Sox were having trade discussions for Taylor, and so even though he was lower on their internal totem pole of relief candidates, they had to agree to a deal with him or else lower their bargaining position in trade discussions by indicating they may not keep him anyways? No, the non-tender deadline is meaningful because a team who tenders a contract would have to pay 30 day termination pay if they choose to non-tender the same player. This is how it has been for many years. It's definitely possible they were discussing trades, probably likely, but that isn't the same as a DFA. If they knew he had trade value, agreeing to contract could help as it gives the other team certainty. But they were never planning to DFA after guaranteeing the contract, that would be poor financial management. More likely they planned to keep him OR they already had 1-2 trades in-hand prior to the guarantee. The information is out there - see RedSoxPayroll (below) also confirming what I'm saying (and read the link I posted if you want more details). Yeah his contract might not all be guaranteed, but the luxury tax hit is still guaranteed. No, that isn't what this is saying. This is saying what I'm saying. His contract was guaranteed once he and the team agreed to terms, this is new to the current CBA. The Luxury/collective bargaining tax matches the payment on single-year contracts unless there are options or deferrals. Please read the link I sent previously if you want more details. Add: the guarantee upon agreement is new to this CBA. Previously it was always 30-day or 45-day termination. There isn't much discussion of the second part because it isn't new.
|
|
|
Post by rico6 on Jan 24, 2023 17:08:33 GMT -5
We now have 3 PTBNLs coming. This one, along with the Seabold and Hoy Park DFA trades. I think they are all PTBNLs or Cash. Could be a collection of unannounced cash coming. Darwinian Hernandez was just a cash trade as well. Maybe the Sox are getting back the cash considerations they sent to KC with Benintendi. Or maybe enough to off-set the difference between Taylor's salary and Mondesi's salary.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 13,963
|
Post by cdj on Jan 24, 2023 17:08:35 GMT -5
Orioles made a similar pick-up in Mateo and it worked out well for them
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jan 24, 2023 17:19:25 GMT -5
If this is the case then wouldn't the non-tender deadline be totally meaningless? I believe you, but I can't find anything online that confirms or denies what you're saying, and if you're right then I'm confused about the non-tender deadline. Do you have any links you can share? ADD: Also, separately, isn't it possible that the Red Sox were having trade discussions for Taylor, and so even though he was lower on their internal totem pole of relief candidates, they had to agree to a deal with him or else lower their bargaining position in trade discussions by indicating they may not keep him anyways? No, the non-tender deadline is meaningful because a team who tenders a contract would have to pay 30 day termination pay if they choose to non-tender the same player. This is how it has been for many years. It's definitely possible they were discussing trades, probably likely, but that isn't the same as a DFA. If they knew he had trade value, agreeing to contract could help as it gives the other team certainty. But they were never planning to DFA after guaranteeing the contract, that would be poor financial management. More likely they planned to keep him OR they already had 1-2 trades in-hand prior to the guarantee. The information is out there - see RedSoxPayroll (below) also confirming what I'm saying (and read the link I posted if you want more details). Yeah his contract might not all be guaranteed, but the luxury tax hit is still guaranteed. No, that isn't what this is saying. This is saying what I'm saying. His contract was guaranteed once he and the team agreed to terms, this is new to the current CBA. Please read the link I sent previously if you want more details. His salary isn't high enough that I'm convinced they wouldn't have DFA'd him if they thought he was the lowest reliever on the totem pole and no trade worked out. They still could try to trade him and shed the salary if DFA'd, or someone could have claimed him. He's not making very much more than the minimum, so I don't think the delta there is enough to buy that agreeing on a salary indicates he was definitively above others in the DFA order. For Brasier this argument might be a little more convincing though.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jan 24, 2023 17:21:04 GMT -5
Would have preferred Iglesias TBH. A better hitter (.272 lifetime) and a good fielder. Perhaps not as flash as Mondesi but he stays on the field more often. And he won't sprain an ankle pushing the laundry basket. I get this, but to me, Iggy has a ceiling that simply affirms the Sox as being long-to-no-shots. He also has a floor that keeps them ok, granted. Mondesi has a ceiling that adds to the if-all-goes-well finger crossing (with a lower floor but at least no greater expense). If the Sox are going anywhere, they need some career years. Here is a guy who has the potential to have an impact career year (odds? Low. But not zero!). Rolling the dice with several guys like that makes more sense when you build in redundancy, too, which they have.
-Will Story have a speedy recovery? -Will Duvall stay relatively healthy? -Will Arroyo stay relatively healthy? -Will Mondesi stay relatively healthy?
Because of the redundancy they've built in (thanks largely to Kiké's positional flexibility) they only need affirmative answers to two of these questions to be in decent shape at the up-the-middle positions. That's a much better proposition than going with high injury risk guys at CF and SS and needing both of them to be healthy all season.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Jan 24, 2023 17:27:47 GMT -5
These are like 7th-round draft picks in the NFL. They are almost always meaningless. Almost. But what if one of the PTBNLs turns into the MLB equivalent of Brock Purdy! Would be great if we could redirect 2/3 of the PTBNLs to the third team and get one real prospect back. Sadly, value doesn't work that way
|
|
|