Register now to remove this ad

Page 2 of 400 FirstFirst 12341252102 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 5994

Thread: A Realistic View at 2018: Part II

  1. #16
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,024
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    Moon I'm little confused with your position.

    I'm all for responsible spending.

    It's my hope Hanley's contract does not vest.
    I hope Carson Smith can take over the closer's role.
    We go without either Pom or Porcello for 2019. It's probably easier to just let Pom go this year and Porcello next year.

    That saves $43M (Hanley, Pom and Kimbrel). You throw Wright or Johnson into starting rotation in 2019, Price, Sale, Porcello, E Rod, Johnson/Wright is a rotation you can win with. Sign a cheap 1 year deal do platoon at 1B.

    We can't have it all.
    Now, I'm confused. I thought you wanted us to stay near or over by $40M plus, when you said, "Starters will require real money but it's doable."

    If we want to keep the window open, we will become the Yankees we hated for decades.

    If we don't keep spending $4)M or more over the limit beyond 2019, we will see a steep decline in competitiveness, IMO.

    I'd love to see us stay competitive forever, and that's why I prefer a more balanced approach, but we're at where we are now, and our options are limited.

    I don't think Henry will be the biggest spender for more than 3 years. That's why I'm a "cliff dweller". I wouldn't mind seeing him spend and spend, but I'd feel like a hypocrite, if I didn't point out the paradox us Sox fans might face.

  2. #17
    Deity Bellhorn04's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Halifax
    Posts
    46,964
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    Now, I'm confused. I thought you wanted us to stay near or over by $40M plus, when you said, "Starters will require real money but it's doable."

    If we want to keep the window open, we will become the Yankees we hated for decades.

    If we don't keep spending $4)M or more over the limit beyond 2019, we will see a steep decline in competitiveness, IMO.

    I'd love to see us stay competitive forever, and that's why I prefer a more balanced approach, but we're at where we are now, and our options are limited.

    I don't think Henry will be the biggest spender for more than 3 years. That's why I'm a "cliff dweller". I wouldn't mind seeing him spend and spend, but I'd feel like a hypocrite, if I didn't point out the paradox us Sox fans might face.
    Things are different now. Being a big spender makes you good for the game.

  3. #18
    Deity Bellhorn04's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Halifax
    Posts
    46,964
    Can we move the Holt argument over here?

    Alex Cora made a statement that some folks may have missed: he plans to make extensive use of his bench this year, because he believes in keeping guys fresh and rested.

    That sounds like we'll be seeing a lot of Holt, and Swihart.

  4. #19
    Deity
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    41,306
    Quote Originally Posted by Bellhorn04 View Post
    Can we move the Holt argument over here?

    Alex Cora made a statement that some folks may have missed: he plans to make extensive use of his bench this year, because he believes in keeping guys fresh and rested.

    That sounds like we'll be seeing a lot of Holt, and Swihart.
    I could see that being more applicable to Moreland and Swihart than the utility infielder and the backup catcher. ...

  5. #20
    Deity Bellhorn04's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Halifax
    Posts
    46,964
    Quote Originally Posted by notin View Post
    I could see that being more applicable to Moreland and Swihart than the utility infielder and the backup catcher. ...
    Like it or not, about 37% of Holt's innings have been in the outfield.

  6. #21
    Legend Nick's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    6,997
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    Now, I'm confused. I thought you wanted us to stay near or over by $40M plus, when you said, "Starters will require real money but it's doable."

    If we want to keep the window open, we will become the Yankees we hated for decades.

    If we don't keep spending $4)M or more over the limit beyond 2019, we will see a steep decline in competitiveness, IMO.

    I'd love to see us stay competitive forever, and that's why I prefer a more balanced approach, but we're at where we are now, and our options are limited.

    I don't think Henry will be the biggest spender for more than 3 years. That's why I'm a "cliff dweller". I wouldn't mind seeing him spend and spend, but I'd feel like a hypocrite, if I didn't point out the paradox us Sox fans might face.
    I think there are several ways to go about our business.

    We maybe too hung up about building the future with 'our' players. I doubt I'm going to feel bad winning using different players. So here we go....

    Betts maybe a good trade bait after this season. Say it's going to cost us $18M after he lead us to World Series win. Can we get a young, controllable pitcher for him who is major league ready? You also let Pom go, may be his market value is $20M. You take that money and go sign Harper. You gain additional cliff hanger time by postponing permanently having to sign Betts.

    Betts $18M $22M $33M
    Pom $20M $20M $20M

    Harper $33M $33M $33M
    Kid SP $500 $500 $4M

    We can take the Tampa Bay approach and trade out some of our players.

    Keeping everyone together is unrealistic. We need to think outside of the box.

  7. #22
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,024
    Quote Originally Posted by notin View Post
    I could see that being more applicable to Moreland and Swihart than the utility infielder and the backup catcher. ...
    ...and Nunez, once Pedey returns.

    The thing about keeping Holt on the back of the bench, is that allows for coverage, in case of a late inning injury, or a PH by Nunez, Moreland or Swihart that might allow Holt to go in on defense at 8 positions. He's also a very good heads-up base runner. To me, that's the main value Holt brings to the team- not his offense and not his defense.

  8. #23
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,024
    Quote Originally Posted by Bellhorn04 View Post
    Like it or not, about 37% of Holt's innings have been in the outfield.
    That shouldn't happen this year. JMart will be getting time in the OF, especially at NL parks. Once Pedey returns, we will be scrambling to get Nunez playing time, and he's actually a better defender in LF than any IF position. IF HRam is raking, we may even want to use Moreland or Swihart in LF over Holt.

  9. #24
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,024
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    I think there are several ways to go about our business.

    We maybe too hung up about building the future with 'our' players. I doubt I'm going to feel bad winning using different players. So here we go....

    Betts maybe a good trade bait after this season. Say it's going to cost us $18M after he lead us to World Series win. Can we get a young, controllable pitcher for him who is major league ready? You also let Pom go, may be his market value is $20M. You take that money and go sign Harper. You gain additional cliff hanger time by postponing permanently having to sign Betts.

    Betts $18M $22M $33M
    Pom $20M $20M $20M

    Harper $33M $33M $33M
    Kid SP $500 $500 $4M

    We can take the Tampa Bay approach and trade out some of our players.

    Keeping everyone together is unrealistic. We need to think outside of the box.
    I'd like to keep Betts, but your theory could work, if we trade the right guy, at the right time for the right players. It will probably take some out-of-the-box thinking to rebuild while staying highly competitive, since we will not likely have many top prospects to trade for high quality replacements for guys like Betts or Pom. Trading Betts would just create a new hole or seriously compromise our great OF defense by moving JD to LF at Fenway and maybe RF away.

    Like I said, it's not impossible, but I have a hard time putting faith in a new out-of-the-box philosophy or praying some miracles develop from a farm long away from top 7 picks and a system that allowed rich teams to raid hard to sign young players and international players.

  10. #25
    TalkSox Ascended Master mvp 78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    65,866
    I'd rather have Betts than Harper.

  11. #26
    Deity Bellhorn04's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Halifax
    Posts
    46,964
    Quote Originally Posted by mvp 78 View Post
    I'd rather have Betts than Harper.
    +1000

  12. #27
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,024
    Quote Originally Posted by mvp 78 View Post
    I'd rather have Betts than Harper.
    ...and maybe we can extend him early and get a slight hometown discount by paying him a little more than he'd get in arb years early in the contract.

  13. #28
    Legend Nick's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    6,997
    It doesn't have to be Betts.

    As Moon has laid out eloquently, something has to give at some point. We're already at second penalty phase. The trouble is that penalty rate keeps going up. We probably have two years of keeping this team as is.

    We just need to let 2018 play out and keep our eyes open.

  14. #29
    TalkSox Ascended Master mvp 78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    65,866
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    It doesn't have to be Betts.

    As Moon has laid out eloquently, something has to give at some point. We're already at second penalty phase. The trouble is that penalty rate keeps going up. We probably have two years of keeping this team as is.

    We just need to let 2018 play out and keep our eyes open.
    They'll be fine. They can keep the band together if they want. Pablo and Hanley will be off the books soon.

  15. #30
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,024
    Quote Originally Posted by mvp 78 View Post
    They'll be fine. They can keep the band together if they want. Pablo and Hanley will be off the books soon.
    Their contract expirations are not going to be enough for arb raises and re-signings.

    For example, Pom is being paid $8.5M. To keep him in 2019 or replace him, in kind, through free agency will cost probably more than $15M a year... maybe $20M+.

    We may be able to stay highly competitive after losing Kimbrel in 2019 and Porcello in 2020, but we'll need prospects coming up to take Smith/Thornburg's slot, or we'll need Steven Wright or Brian Johnson to pitch like Pom.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •