Ahh, my bad. This piece from last March said he had only one remaining, so I extrapolated.German actually still has an option, Cashman told us recently.
What happened in last year's playoffs has zero relevance to the argument you are trying to make.What is hyperbolic about my statements? The Red Sox used starters as set up men, and ultimately to close out the World Series, in the playoffs last year because their bullpen sucked. They’ve since lost (or will lose) two of the four relievers they did feel comfortable using in the playoffs. Everyone in the pen other than Barnes and Brasier is a spare part. Brandon Workman would have been nontendered by the Yankees, he’s currently 3rd on the Red Sox bullpen depth chart.
I’ve seen this movie before. It doesn’t end well.
Teams tend to carry eight relievers now, I don't think this is an issue. Holder has options but also has a fairly safe roster spot. Kahnle also is a huge question mark who is not really worthy of a roster spot if he doesn't figure his shit out, but this is another reason for NY to go after Ottavino as he is great with analytics etc. and best friends with Kahnle from their COL days, so NY could get a kind of 2-for-1 there potentially.Ahh, my bad. This piece from last March said he had only one remaining, so I extrapolated.
Still, that’s 10 pitchers (Severino, Paxton, Sabathia/Gray, Tanaka, Happ, Chapman, Britton, Green, Kahnle, Betances) that have to stay on the major league roster. Signing Ottavino would mean they’d have one spot to cycle guys like Montgomery, German, Acevedo, Adams, Holder, Cessa, etc.
Assuming an infield of Andujar, Tulo or Didi, Torres, and Voit; Stanton at DH and Gardner/Hicks/Judge in the outfield, carrying eight relievers would mean a bench of Romine, LeMahieu, and Bird/4th outfielder and that’s it.Teams tend to carry eight relievers now, I don't think this is an issue. Holder has options but also has a fairly safe roster spot. Kahnle also is a huge question mark who is not really worthy of a roster spot if he doesn't figure his shit out, but this is another reason for NY to go after Ottavino as he is great with analytics etc. and best friends with Kahnle from their COL days, so NY could get a kind of 2-for-1 there potentially.
I don't think LeMahieu sits the bench. I think the starting infield will be Andujar, Torres, LeMahieu, and Voit/Bird. They didn't pay LeMahieu $12 million a year to be a super utility player off the bench. Tulowitzki is a total unknown and may not even make the team.Assuming an infield of Andujar, Tulo or Didi, Torres, and Voit; Stanton at DH and Gardner/Hicks/Judge in the outfield, carrying eight relievers would mean a bench of Romine, LeMahieu, and Bird/4th outfielder and that’s it.
Cashman’s obviously not done, but adding another multi-year reliever contract without doing anything else seems unlikely.
You may be right, but Torres is as bad a defensive shortstop as Andujar is a third baseman. I don’t think they’d do this.I don't think LeMahieu sits the bench. I think the starting infield will be Andujar, Torres, LeMahieu, and Voit/Bird. They didn't pay LeMahieu $12 million a year to be a super utility player off the bench. Tulowitzki is a total unknown and may not even make the team.
Is Machado’s defense worth $29M/year more than Andujar’s?Off topic, but FWIW, I think NY's infield right now is LeMahieu at 3B, Tulo, Torres and Voit. If they sign Machado, I think LeMahieu goes to 1B, Voit goes to DH, and Andujar is traded. I think Cashman's emphasis for infielders is defense over offense, and because of this, I will be surprised if Andujar remains their starting 3B.
The Padres are evidently very interested in him, presumably as a 3B.What is Andujar's value in a trade right now.... the word is out that he's mostly fitted to be a DH. Which, of course, can be highly valuable. I'm asking... not insinuating anything at all.
This FG article suggests that his ultimate destination may be the outfield.What is Andujar's value in a trade right now.... the word is out that he's mostly fitted to be a DH. Which, of course, can be highly valuable. I'm asking... not insinuating anything at all.
This is all off topic, but the comparison I have been using for a few months now is Ryan Braun, who also played his entire rookie season at 3B and hasn't played another game there since.This FG article suggests that his ultimate destination may be the outfield.
I wasn’t really looking for an answer.Is Machado’s defense worth $29M/year more than Andujar’s?
I did give you one, though, in the other thread.I wasn’t really looking for an answer.
Why would it be preposterous? They could always trade for a reliever or two during the season. That may make more sense given they are so close to the tax threshold.I agree that last year’s playoffs aren’t relevant in that the Red Sox aren’t going to use starting pitchers as set up men during the regular season. Thus, the fact that the bullpen didn’t hurt the Sox in the playoffs isn’t relevant either. Right now, Brandon Workman (or Hembree, I like Workman better) is the Red Sox 3rd best relief pitcher and what we are calling their second best relief pitcher is a 30-year-old career minor league journeyman who has about 30 good major league innings to his credit. It would be preposterous to enter the season with that being the case.
They‘ve got plenty of time and plenty of ways to rectify that situation. I would feel a lot better about it if they weren’t $6 million from breaching the top tax threshold or we’re giving a clear indication that they were ok going over it. I suppose not doing so is good negotiating though.
This seems especially likely to be their thinking because of the impending decisions regarding Bogaerts/Betts/Bradley. If they can't sign those guys, they'll still need to replace them, and they probably can't do it via trade, given the state of the farm. So they're likely to be taking on at least a couple of big new position player contracts over the next 2-3 years, and they would presumably like to get under the tax threshold at some point in that process to reset things. Signing a reliever to a substantial multiyear deal won't make that easier, and having some promising bullpen arms tantalizingly close to ready might make it seem a worthwhile gamble to avoid such a deal this year if they can. That would point to a strategy of replenishing the pen via guys like Madson or Axford who might be available on one-year deals.Why would it be preposterous? They could always trade for a reliever or two during the season. That may make more sense given they are so close to the tax threshold.
Let the season play out for a few months and see where they are with Smith, Thornsburg, Feltman, Darwinzon and everyone else then respond accordingly.
Edgar's time at 3rd base was a casualty of the turf at BC Place in a meaningless exhibition game.Or Edgar Martinez, who spent a few years at 3rd before the Mariners gave up. There have been plenty of guys with the bat to stick but who couldn't handle the hot corner.
1. Because after 2019 they are either going to have a $300 million payroll (to sign Sale and Boegarts will take $55 million, Betts will get a $10 million raise, Bradley will get a huge raise, Rodriguez will get a huge raise) or take a significant step backward. They need to go all out to win this year.Why would it be preposterous? They could always trade for a reliever or two during the season. That may make more sense given they are so close to the tax threshold.
Let the season play out for a few months and see where they are with Smith, Thornsburg, Feltman, Darwinzon and everyone else then respond accordingly.
Which competitors have improved significantly?3. It’s great to have been the best team in 2018. Their competitors have improved significantly, they have gone backwards. Winning the Division matters. You do not want to play the gimmick game because you won 101 games and the Yankees won 102. And, 2019 may be their last chance to win for a while.
You’re not seriously suggesting that the Yankees additions of Happ for a full year and James Paxton for minor leaguers are not massive upgrades to their biggest weakness are you? And, unlike the Sox, they still have $250-$300 million to spend, plus young players and prospects that could bring back superstars as well.Which competitors have improved significantly?
They lost Robertson, which is not insignificant. CC's health is very tenuous. Paxton had a career high this past season with 160IP. You want to argue they've improved, fine, but "significantly" is debatable.You’re not seriously suggesting that the Yankees additions of Happ for a full year and James Paxton for minor leaguers are not massive upgrades to their biggest weakness are you? And they still have $250-$300 million to spend.
The Yankees have clearly improved. Their biggest weakness was starting pitching and however you want to look at last season's Paxton.... the Sox just signed a guy with a much more worrisome resume to be a full time starter, and still haven't been able to address their biggest weakness.They lost Robertson, which is not insignificant. CC's health is very tenuous. Paxton had a career high this past season with 160IP. You want to argue they've improved, fine, but "significantly" is debatable.
You also said competitors, plural. I don't see how Houston or Cleveland improved significantly.
They're probably about equal but Paxton hasn't had any serious arm issues. Regardless, I don't think Eovaldi is the pitcher to worry about. It's the ace who missed a few weeks and came back throwing 93. On that same note, though Sale is more of a sure thing than Severino, I think they both have huge question marks going into the season that are far more stressful than whether or not Eovaldi or Paxton will miss 15 games during the year.Saying Eovaldi is more of an injury risk than Paxton is silly.
For 2019, perhaps, but if both guys pitched for my team and I was holding long-term contracts for both, I'd be a lot happier about Severino's situation, because while he does look a ticking Tommy John time bomb at the moment, at least there's a better-than-slim chance he comes out the other end of that process as a solid, effective pitcher, even if somewhat less than 100% of his old self. Sale's situation OTOH seems like the kind of thing that could easily dog him for the rest of his career, making him subject to annual DL stints and/or periods of ineffectiveness.On that same note, though Sale is more of a sure thing than Severino
They lost Robertson, which is not insignificant. CC's health is very tenuous. Paxton had a career high this past season with 160IP. You want to argue they've improved, fine, but "significantly" is debatable.
You also said competitors, plural. I don't see how Houston or Cleveland improved significantly.
They signed Morton too. They will be formidable, but as always have a razor thin margin for error.The Rays won 90 and they look like they are going to be much better after some savvy additions that added power and defense: Zunino, Heredia and Diaz. I imagine they’ll be shoring up their pitching from guys on the 40-man and the DL.
I think they are legitimate contenders in the East. Not a lot has to go wrong for NY or Boston or right for them before they’re right in it.
One could argue the loss of Robertson could make that pen weaker.This is an illogical argument.
It'll be interesting to see if teams are better prepared for their use of "openers" instead of starters most games. Did they catch teams a bit by surprise last year? Were teams as geared up to face TB's set up guy in the 1st inning? Just curious.They signed Morton too. They will be formidable, but as always have a razor thin margin for error.
I'm not really sure I understand what Heredia adds or why he's a savvy addition. He seems like a pretty mediocre player, with neither speed nor power to offer on the offensive side (just good contact and decent plate discipline, which are offset a bit by pretty terrible batted ball numbers), and decent but ordinary outfield defense. It's hard to see him having a bigger role with the Rays than the short end of a platoon with Keiermaier. What am I missing?The Rays won 90 and they look like they are going to be much better after some savvy additions that added power and defense: Zunino, Heredia and Diaz. I imagine they’ll be shoring up their pitching from guys on the 40-man and the DL.
Maybe early on they caught teams by surprise, but once it became a thing, I would think it's something easily prepared for. And the Rays were much better in the last four months of the season than the first two, so teams had to have seen the strategy coming. I don't think their success with using the opener was about the element of surprise so much as simply executing a plan that maximized their roster's effectiveness.It'll be interesting to see if teams are better prepared for their use of "openers" instead of starters most games. Did they catch teams a bit by surprise last year? Were teams as geared up to face TB's set up guy in the 1st inning? Just curious.
I don't mean to suggest he's some great player, but he posted excellent OBPs in Cuba and in the minors, and has had low BABIPs (possibly due to do poor contact, possibly not). I think he was a cheap upside play, and I think it might pay off.I'm not really sure I understand what Heredia adds or why he's a savvy addition. He seems like a pretty mediocre player, with neither speed nor power to offer on the offensive side (just good contact and decent plate discipline, which are offset a bit by pretty terrible batted ball numbers), and decent but ordinary outfield defense. It's hard to see him having a bigger role with the Rays than the short end of a platoon with Keiermaier. What am I missing?
If — say — Ryne Stanek posts a few more years like his most recent (81 Ks in 66 IP, a decent number of walks, very few hits, 10 GF, 29 GS), I think he'll do just fine. He has the statistical profile of a setup man or a lower-tier closer.Regarding the Rays, and other clubs that may use the opener model, I want to see how willing those pitchers will be to be used in that manner after an off-season of agents and family members telling them that under that system, they will all be paid as middle relievers when it comes time for arbitration or free agency.
I've been advocating for a "we don't need a big-ticket reliever" approach, but even I wouldn't go this far. I fully agree with those who say that the bullpen right now, as is, is just a shade too shallow and weak. We need at least one more arm. It just doesn't necessarily need to be a closer, and certainly not a Kimbrel-level closer.I’m totally okay going forward with what they got.
isn't any major reliever signing at this point going to put us over 246?$18K is too much even for one year. It’ll put the Sox over the 2nd threshold, no?
I’m totally okay going forward with what they got.
Lakins is on the 40-man, turns 25 in June, and has over 80 innings in the high minors. It would be bizarre if he's not in the plan. Ditto for Feltman, who many were anticipating would get called up last year. You could make an argument that Hernandez is not "in the plan" in the sense that the club added him to the 40-man only to protect him from Rule 5, and with no intention of calling him up this year under any circumstances. And that's possible. But given the current buzz about him, the fact that he's already 22 (not that young for a hot pitching prospect with big-league stuff to see their first MLB action), and the fact that he'll be starting the season in Portland and could well be in Pawtucket by midsummer, I think it's probably a bad idea to rule Darwinzon out for 2019. I won't be surprised if he stays in the minors all year--but I won't be surprised to see him in Fenway, either, even if it's only for a September cuppa joe.Lakins, Feltman, and Hernandez should have to force their way into the plan, not start there.
I believe the pre-arb salaries are listed at the bottom under "Club Control". The $237.5M should include everything, so they would have $8M to sign a reliever and stay under.isn't any major reliever signing at this point going to put us over 246?
EDIT: yeah, what Plympton said. I'm seeing we're at 243 right now after the exact arbitration figures (Cots has us at 237, but pre-arbitration salaries are yet to be added)
the issue would be how much you tie up into 2020+ as you'll want to get below the 2nd threshold next year