2012. Adding Valentine was punting the year. No doubt. It was solely to put the wood to those uppity players, Popeye's Chicken and Xbox.Originally Posted by jacksonianmarch
2012. Adding Valentine was punting the year. No doubt. It was solely to put the wood to those uppity players, Popeye's Chicken and Xbox.
Sox punting this year like: http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-h...horribly-wrong
Cooooooooome onnnnnn and make the trade with the Dodgers already what is the issue ??? Get seager and a Pitching prospect and Joc for Price and Betts just freaking do it so we can start talking shit to the Yankees
The issue is the Dodgers don't want to pay that much for Betts AND Price.
They Print money and keep losing in the World Series ....they can afford it .
Can we stop the Joc talk? Please!
The guy has one year left and gets us nowhere. Plus, he's basically a platoon player. His estimated $9M arb does not sweeten the financial burden all that muc for the Dodgers.
The obvious stumbling block is the money. As much as I don't really want Pollock and Kelly, they do have a chance at rebounding and are better than just sending cash to LA to offset Price's bloated contract.
Pollock is owed $51M/3, but his $12M x 3 luxury tax burden is a big help for the Sox budget plans. Kelly is owed $21M/2 (assuming he gets the $4M buyout on a $12M 3rd year), but his lux number is $8.3M x 2. Together, these two cost $73M, which is more than what is needed to offset Price's value and contract of $96M/3. Betts is worth more than $27M, so no offset is needed there. The problem is, the Dodgers don't want to pay mega taxes either.
Dodger cost:
Year 1: $59M (Price $32M + Betts $29M/ Lux tax cost is $58M)
Year 2: $32M Price ($31M LUX)
Year 3: $32M Price ($31M LUX)
Sox cost:
Year 1: $23.5M (Pollock $15M + Kelly $8.5M/ Lux is $20.3M)
Year 2: $26.5M (Pollock $18M + Kelly $8.5M/ Lux is $20.3M)
Year 3: $22M (Pollock$13M + $5M buyout + $4M Kelly buyout/ Lux is $12M)
The Differential (Dogers pay this much more than the Sox):
Year 1: $35M ($28M on Lux line) Essentially, the Dodgers are paying $27M for Betts and $8M for Price but no longer have Pollock & Kelly.
Year 2: $5M ($11M Lux) Dogers are paying $5M for Price in 2021 (no Pollock/Kelly)
Year 3: $10M ($9M Lux) Dodgers are paying $10M for Price (no Pollock)
To me, including Pollock & Kelly cancels out the Price contract vs worth, so we need some good prospects returned in the deal.
When you say it's gonna happen now
When exactly do you mean?
No one really wants Joc Pederson. Except maybe Mrs. Pederson. Maybe.
The only reason to include him is to offset some cash. And he is cheaper than Pollock
Taking Pollock improves the cash flow for the Dodgers and allows us to get a better prospect(s).
I doubt Betts & Price for Pederson gets us anything more.
When you say it's gonna happen now
When exactly do you mean?
And that’s the only reason to take the oft-injured Pollock. But that also depends how generous LA gets.
How did a thread with such an unappealing title draw responses totaling 63 pages ... and counting?
Steady contributions from the West Coast?
Or not...,
So if the Sox trade Betts and Price, and then deal Bradley in another trade, how long will it take for the first article about the Sox trading away all their black players and who writes it?
I don't know, but John Henry should be haunted by his own legacy if they make those trades.
The King of TalkSox has Spoken.
Well, it seems like the only reason stopping the deal is the money, so yes- it's the "only reason."
Ofcourse, I'd rather have 1 year of Joc than 3 of Pollock, but the Dodgers need more cash or salaries off their books.
When you say it's gonna happen now
When exactly do you mean?
Then let's trade 'em for Upton or include Walden or Chavez in the deal... LOL.
When you say it's gonna happen now
When exactly do you mean?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote