Dombrowski: SP likely from FA. Which should we sign?

Your preference?

  • Cueto

  • Chen

  • Gallardo

  • Greinke

  • Iwakuma

  • Price

  • Samardzija

  • Zimmermann

  • Other...

  • None


Results are only viewable after voting.

DanoooME

above replacement level
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2008
19,831
Henderson, NV
They can spend whatever they want. The assumption that they will not cross the luxury tax line is not necessarily a correct one and many people here that follow the teams finances closely believe they will, in fact, do that. Henry himself last offseason said he'd be willing to go over it to bring Lester back and that they would certainly consider crossing over it even if it was only for one season. If they sign a Price for $30, they can almost meet that alone with Ortiz, Hanigan and Koji coming off the books and that doesn't even consider Buchholz at another $13M option that he may or may not prove worth gambling on, the young SP making a Miley expendable and not many holes to fill going into 2017. Factor in that the luxury line will almost certainly be rising for 2017 and it's not hard to see that the Sox aren't nearly concerned as the $189M number as some here believe they are, since they almost certainly can get back under it a yer later.

I think HillBilly's antennae perked up because it's just strange wording. It's not like a family having more money to spend on Christmas this year because mom won the 50/50 at the church fundraiser. So to say they have a tremendous amount of money to spend this offseason seems odd or implies that he has some kind of insider knowledge that they are planning to go the route of LAD or NYY and completely blow through the cap line with no plans to pay it mind going forward, like they used to.
Another factor in this is the Collective Bargaining Agreement expires on December 1, 2016, so after next season, there's likely going to be changes. What that involves we don't know yet, but a reasonable expectation would be a raising of the luxury tax number and ownership may be willing to go over the $189M now anticipating an increase in that LT number that will be easier to get under in the future and reset their tax level based on a higher ceiling.

There's also always the possibility they massively change or even scrap the entire system and it all may become moot, although I would think both sides wouldn't want to make major changes at this point given the prosperity of the game and everyone in it over this last agreement.

Which brings up an interesting tangent. We usually hear 12-18 months in advance of the end of a CBA that negotiations have started on the next one. It's odd we haven't heard anything about it at all up until now.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
“@Buster_ESPN: Today’s column: Red Sox viewed as the most formidable bidding force for David Price — but is that enough? https://t.co/IlOSVyswXY + links.”

Can someone give a summary of the Price section?
 

Manuel Aristides

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2009
224
“@Buster_ESPN: Today’s column: Red Sox viewed as the most formidable bidding force for David Price — but is that enough? https://t.co/IlOSVyswXY + links.”

Can someone give a summary of the Price section?
Basically, Buster is hearing the Red Sox are prepping to throw stupid money at Price. Olney implying that Price maybe doesn't want to come to Boston-- he doesn't say anything about the Ortiz feud specifically, but I think that's what he's getting at? From there, just examples of other players (Sabathia to NYY) who were lured to cities they didn't love for big money, and other guys who turned down slightly bigger contracts (Lester from SF) to go somewhere they were comfortable. Pretty benign article all around.
 

GaryPeters71

New Member
Jul 29, 2005
168
North Easton, Mass.
Gammons on David Price to Boston speculation
http://www.gammonsdaily.com/peter-gammons-boras-samson-war-leaves-marlins-in-the-balance-black-friday-shopping/

Ken Rosenthal and Tom Verducci both speculated that David Price will end up with the Red Sox. They are not alone. From last Friday to Tuesday I heard the same thing from a half-dozen GMs, one of whom said “I just think that Dombrowski loves him and he is part of the job Dave took.” Hey, Dombrowski’s manager in Detroit, Brad Ausmus, called Price “the best pitching teammate I’ve ever been around,” a thought seconded by Joe Maddon. Another NL GM Tuesday speculated “Boston will go $30-40M above anyone else.”

Price has been understandably humorous on Twitter. Some feel he is uneasy about Boston, but David is so sophisticated, so talented and so intelligent he will make the best of any situation. Rosenthal and Verducci made well-thought guesses on Price’s whereabouts. I have thought the same thing for nearly a week, but that is not a “the deal is close” thought.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,032
Oregon
A statement which could be attached to every Buster Olney article ever written.
Which only shows that Olney tends to play it more down the middle than those who write as though their sources are more connected than others. Olney's basically saying the same thing as Gammons did in his piece -- that they keep hearing Price-to-Boston, but they aren't ready to say it's a sure thing.

At this time in the silly season, I appreciate those type of reports more than I do those intended to generate fan fervor
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
Which only shows that Olney tends to play it more down the middle than those who write as though their sources are more connected than others. Olney's basically saying the same thing as Gammons did in his piece -- that they keep hearing Price-to-Boston, but they aren't ready to say it's a sure thing.

At this time in the silly season, I appreciate those type of reports more than I do those intended to generate fan fervor
There's certainly something to be said for it. I just find that Olney *always* plays right down the middle. I certainly admit I still click and read him, but I think benign is an apt description. If your typical article is "well maybe this happen or maybe it won't, here's some links from local beat guys" five days a week, I'm kind of bleh to read it. I'm not necessarily saying he should be a rumor monger or stir the pot and be sensational like some guys, but I kind of come out of reading most of his articles and just feeling like he told me nothing new. I do appreciate that when he throws out trade possibilities or something like that he puts a nice big disclaimer that he's making it up in his own head and it's totally speculating on his own. Others wouldn't be so clear or would go so far as to cite an "unnamed source".
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,300
deep inside Guido territory
While Price enjoyed his time with the Blue Jays and is open to returning to Toronto, the Jays are not expected to be a major factor in his free agency, sources say. So, how will all this play out? It's too early to say. But Price, 30, values comfort even more than most players. He had that in Tampa Bay. He eventually found it in Detroit. And he felt it almost immediately in Toronto. The Red Sox, then, might be the toughest sell for Price, given the complexities of his past relationships with their fan base and biggest star,David Ortiz. By contrast, the Cubs and Giants could hold particular appeal. The Cubs project a fun vibe with their youthful roster and spirited manager, Price's old skipper in Tampa Bay, Joe Maddon. The Giants, under manager Bruce Bochy, long have had one of the strongest clubhouse cultures in the game. As I wrote recently, "Price probably does not consider the Red Sox his first choice. But if the Sox outbid the Cubs by say, $30 million, hello Boston."
http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/david-price-red-sox-cubs-cardinals-dodgers-giants-hot-stove-rumors-free-agent-rosenthal-112515
 

geoduck no quahog

not particularly consistent
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2002
13,024
Seattle, WA
Lester's Contract / Price at (say) 210/7

30: xxx,xxx,xxx / 30,000,000
31: xxx,xxx,xxx / 30,000,000
32: 25,000,000 / 30,000,000
33: 25,000,000 / 30,000,000
34: 27,500,000 / 30,000,000
35: 27,500,000 / 30,000,000
36: 20,000,000 / 30,000,000
37: option @ 25,000,000 / xxx,xxx,xxx

Price would be $25M premium over Lester age 32 through age 36 + $60M to get his 30-31 age years.

We can play with this, but the Cubs are into Lester for $155M and (in this speculative case) would need to add another $210M for Price = $365M for 2 pitchers or $52M/year
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,423
Not here
I'm pretty sure I don't want to outbid everyone by 30-40 million to get Price and I'm not remotely sure I want someone who would require that.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,051
Florida
Great point, though I imagine Price's agent will use it as a floor, not a ceiling. And with the number of big spenders involved, I have a hard time believing that Price's deal will come in at the low end of expectations.
Agreed. Although the really scary thing for me is a belief that you potentially added an extra year (or left out some money) on to your speculative offer of 8/$250m. The get-it-done" floor for us is going to be higher then the Scherzer contract or Kershaw extension if we do indeed fall outside his preference list of teams. That has always been a given here (imo), and those type of record setting bump ups usually don't come without their groan-worthy increase rates.

I like that DD plans to be more aggressive where Ben wasn't last winter, but at the same time you don't want him to be the GM out there signing Robinson Cano. No doubt it's a fine line to walk, but man.......this blow everybody out of the water talk has me nervous.
 

Manramsclan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
3,371
Reading this thread and others on the board, there is a distinct voice emerging: I don't want to pay the price in prospects for an ace but I'm not sure that I want to pony up $250 M for an ace in FA (Greinke & Price being the only that fit the latter description). The reasoning for both is sound, including the speculation that we'd have to overpay in prospects to get one of the starters already under control or overpay in dollars to overcome a perceived dislike of our fanbase/teammates etc.

The only aspect missing is that the Red Sox cannot afford to go into the season without an ACE. Not a Zimmerman or a Cueto but a Gray, a Sale, a Price, a Greinke. Given the pressure brought on by the 3 last place finishes, the moves in Baseball Ops it's a near certainty that the Red Sox will acquire an ace starting pitcher. The only question in my mind is this: Will they overpay with cash? or Will they overpay with prospects?

We should start getting comfortable with one or the other. Personally, I'd rather they overpay with cash, but if they don't land a FA starter of their liking, I think it's a near inevitability that DD will enter the trade market aggressively.
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,816
Honolulu HI
[QUOTE="Price values comfort even more than most players. He had that in Tampa Bay. He eventually found it in Detroit. And he felt it almost immediately in Toronto. The Red Sox, then, might be the toughest sell for Price" [/QUOTE]

If Rosenthal is correct about this - and if it is really true that the Sox are poised to be the most aggressive bidders for free agent pitching- could that potentially lead to the Sox signing Greinke? While Price might value comfort, Greinke has been very clear what the number one factor is for him: "It's (money) the number 1 thing. I could play for the worst team if they paid the most. ... If the last-place team offers $200 million and the first-place team offers $10, I'm going to go for the $200-million no matter what team it was" ( Greinke, soon after signing with the Dodgers in 2013).
 

curly2

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 8, 2003
4,887
Tell me, who was the ACE of the 2007 Red Sox, going into the season? 2013, same question.
The answer you're seeking is probably "nobody," which could be technically correct. But it also could be:

2007: Beckett if he pitches the way he's capable of, or Schilling if he can turn back the clock.
and
2013: Lester, if at 29 he can recapture the form he had from 24-27.

In both cases, there was a clear-cut guy who had demonstrated ace-level ability but had had a poor year the season before. And, I think, there was a good reason to suspect that guy, Beckett in 2007 and Lester in 2013, could get back to the level he'd pitched at before.

The 2016 Sox rotation, as it exists now, has one guy who's pitched like an ace at times in the majors in Buchholz, but his health and durability make him a question mark.
 

KillerBs

New Member
Nov 16, 2006
911
I disagree that the Sox "cannot afford to go into the season with an ACE". It sure wouldn't hurt, true, but it could be that the best option for the team (not just in 2016 but beyond) is to not sign OR trade for the proverbial ace. Of course. the primary concern with splurging on Price Greinke Cueto or Zimmermann is that it will eat up payroll room that will likely be needed as soon as 2017. Now if it just means that the Sox are going to settle in with a 200-220M annual payroll, it becomes much easier to countenance. But if not, you gotta wonder if signing Price or Greinke now costs us Mookie or Xander or Edro or a needed 1B a few years down the road.

If they arent committed to jacking the payroll at least another 25-35 mill more or less permanently, then I would rather they get one cheap from the qualifying offer second tier (Gallardo, Iwakuma, Lackey Samardzija). I worry that the DDski feels he needs to get this ACE to satisfy fans' expectations, which he helped to create with some of his earlier comments.
 

geoduck no quahog

not particularly consistent
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2002
13,024
Seattle, WA
[QUOTE="Price values comfort even more than most players. He had that in Tampa Bay. He eventually found it in Detroit. And he felt it almost immediately in Toronto. The Red Sox, then, might be the toughest sell for Price"
Sounds like bullshit to me. There is absolutely no indication that the Red Sox clubhouse is anything but a great place to reside. I imagine Ortiz keeps the place loose (particularly the Spanish speakers) and there are certainly a bunch of assclowns on the bench and in the dugout. Did anyone get the impression the Red Sox were a miserable bunch last year? It's easy to be all rah-rah and loosey-goosey when you're winning - or not expected to win. It's impressive to maintain a pleasurable workplace when you're expected to win but don't. I think the Yankees, Giants and Red Sox certainly fit that bill.
 

Manramsclan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
3,371
Tell me, who was the ACE of the 2007 Red Sox, going into the season? 2013, same question.
What Curly said.

The answer you're seeking is probably "nobody," which could be technically correct. But it also could be:

2007: Beckett if he pitches the way he's capable of, or Schilling if he can turn back the clock.
and
2013: Lester, if at 29 he can recapture the form he had from 24-27.

In both cases, there was a clear-cut guy who had demonstrated ace-level ability but had had a poor year the season before. And, I think, there was a good reason to suspect that guy, Beckett in 2007 and Lester in 2013, could get back to the level he'd pitched at before.

The 2016 Sox rotation, as it exists now, has one guy who's pitched like an ace at times in the majors in Buchholz, but his health and durability make him a question mark.
The aspect of my post which I think you are missing, and perhaps is not clear, is that I think that the Front Office and particularly ownership feels this way. ("We need an ACE.") I liked the approach last year but it didn't work. They need to improve and a marginal improvement isn't worth what they might pay for it. All ace talk aside (What is an ace? Are there more than 10 in MLB? Even 5?), the fact remains that the Red Sox current set of starters is not good enough and ownership and the whole league knows it. DD has already shown that he believes the current Sox roster is worth the investment of future pieces to obtain top tier talent for certain trophy-head positions like closer. I think they will overpay one way or another for a number 1 starter, that is unless DD can strike gold with a Scherzer-like acquisition again.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
In both cases, there was a clear-cut guy who had demonstrated ace-level ability but had had a poor year the season before. And, I think, there was a good reason to suspect that guy, Beckett in 2007 and Lester in 2013, could get back to the level he'd pitched at before.
But there was also good reason to suspect they couldn't. Looking at Beckett going into 2007, the clear narrative was that he had benefited from a pitcher's park and a crappy division, but wasn't up to Fenway and the AL East.

As for Lester in 2013, the narrative was that his velocity was down, his K rate had gone down for three straight years, he was giving up a lot of hard contact, and he was never going to be that 2009-2010 guy again. Remember there were rumors of dealing him for Wil Myers in the offseason that year, and IIRC some people around here thought we should jump on that. That's not how you talk about your ace.

I'm playing devil's advocate here to a degree; I think acquiring a #1 pitcher is a good idea, but not if we have to pay a stupid price for him. And I think it's wrong to imagine that not acquiring that #1 guy dooms us. We could contend with the starters we've got. It'll just take a bit more luck. And at least one of those starters, maybe two, has the potential to play that ace role next year.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
The answer you're seeking is probably "nobody," which could be technically correct. But it also could be:

2007: Beckett if he pitches the way he's capable of, or Schilling if he can turn back the clock.
and
2013: Lester, if at 29 he can recapture the form he had from 24-27.

In both cases, there was a clear-cut guy who had demonstrated ace-level ability but had had a poor year the season before. And, I think, there was a good reason to suspect that guy, Beckett in 2007 and Lester in 2013, could get back to the level he'd pitched at before.

The 2016 Sox rotation, as it exists now, has one guy who's pitched like an ace at times in the majors in Buchholz, but his health and durability make him a question mark.
In light of manramsclan's declaration of which pitchers are and aren't good enough to satisfy the need for an "ACE", I don't think Beckett pre-2007 or Lester pre-2013 fit the bill as "ACE" of the staff. Schilling maybe fits if it not for the fact that he was 40 years old and clearly wasn't the same pitcher he had been in 2004, let alone during his prime Phillie/DBack years.

Beckett had had one 200 inning season prior to 2007, which was that mediocre year in 2006. Before that, he had quality performances but missed time as well (never topped 180 IP). Lester's pre-2013 resume was much stronger by comparison, but his closest comp amongst the current crop is probably Zimmermann who, per manramsclan, is not good enough to satisfy this supposed need.
 

Green Monster

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2000
2,277
CT
QUOTE "Price values comfort even more than most players. He had that in Tampa Bay. He eventually found it in Detroit. And he felt it almost immediately in Toronto. The Red Sox, then, might be the toughest sell for Price" QUOTE

So in other words.......He has been comfortable every place he has played.
 

HangingW/ScottCooper

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,493
Scituate, MA
7/$210 with opt out after 3 years.
2016: $32 mil
2017: $33 mil
2018: $33 mil
2019: $28 mil
2020: $28 mil
2021: $28 mil
2022: $28 mil

New CBA after 2016 right? I'm sure the cap goes up from $189 and probably gets reset regardless. I'm guessing they have little opposition to going well beyond the luxury cap in 2016 if they're considering Price at all.
 

Manramsclan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
3,371
In light of manramsclan's declaration of which pitchers are and aren't good enough to satisfy the need for an "ACE", I don't think Beckett pre-2007 or Lester pre-2013 fit the bill as "ACE" of the staff.
Josh Beckett also had a postseason in 2003 where he was the difference between winning a World series, and not winning a world series.

Lester's pre-2013 resume was much stronger by comparison, but his closest comp amongst the current crop is probably Zimmermann who, per manramsclan, is not good enough to satisfy this supposed need.
Zimmermann has a career FIP of 3.40 in the National League while Jon Lester has a career 3.51 FIP with most of the time in the AL East. Methinks these are not created equal.

I am not the lone voice in the wilderness suggesting that Zimmermann might not fare well in the American League.
 

Omar's Wacky Neighbor

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
16,628
Leaving in a bit to the studio :)
QUOTE "Price values comfort even more than most players. He had that in Tampa Bay. He eventually found it in Detroit. And he felt it almost immediately in Toronto. The Red Sox, then, might be the toughest sell for Price" QUOTE

So in other words.......He has been comfortable every place he has played.
And/or, he acclimates really REALLY well.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
For the Red Sox to be good in 2016, they'll need Buchholz to be good. And if Buchholz is good, they'll pick up the second $13 million option for 2017.

Incidentally, I can't believe I'm writing 2017 in a post.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,423
Not here
For the Red Sox to be good in 2016, they'll need Buchholz to be good. And if Buchholz is good, they'll pick up the second $13 million option for 2017.

Incidentally, I can't believe I'm writing 2017 in a post.
Thing is, depending on the pitching acquisition and if some of the other guys (Hi Rick Porcello) perform more to the expectations established by their career norms, we could be perfectly fine if Buchholz doesn't do shit.

Price, Porcello, Rodriguez, Kelly, Miley, would be a decent rotation with a fair degree of upside and a downside mitigated by Owens and Johnson. I'm not suggesting they do that, mind you, because I've got qualms about Kelly, but if there's a good trade to be made with Buchholz, we could manage.
 

Manramsclan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
3,371
As did John Lackey, twice. And dozens of other guys that wouldn't fit your standards.
Please list the "dozens of other guys who wouldn't fit" my standards. That should be a really interesting list.

John Lackey likely would have had the best season of any Boston Red Sox SP had he not been traded for the corpse of Allen Craig and the dubious upside of Joe Kelly. Also likely that the Red Sox might have been a borderline playoff team if that was the case and the whole scenario would be different. Either way, at the end of 2015, nobody was going to be handing out a $100 Million contract to John Lackey.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
Please list the "dozens of other guys who wouldn't fit" my standards. That should be a really interesting list.
Well, what exactly are you looking for, because you seem to moving the goalposts a bit. You started with basically "we need a bonafide ACE and these guys - one of whom just won a WS - aren't good enough, despite being maybe a slight half step down from the top name guys". It was pointed out that the Sox won two WS with guys that weren't ACE heading into the year (Lester, Beckett), in an effort to show that it's not necessary to have the top ACE level guy heading into a year (for multiple reasons). Then Beckett's 2003 was cited, then Lackey, and on we went.

You could make a case for a lot of teams having SPs that "made the difference", but it's really a pretty general statement, so yeah, I could easily come up with plenty of names, but it depends on what you mean by "made the difference". Let's start with Derek Lowe for one. Beckett, Lester, Lackey. Jose Rijo. Dave Stewart. Frank Viola. Madison Bumgarner. None of these guys were considered ACES heading into their WS year. There are plenty more depending on how you want to define your terms.

Citing anyone's postseason record as some kind of qualifying factor is kind of foolish. You can't out of one side say "Beckett wasn't an ACE but he was the man in 2003" and then out of the other say "Price is an ACE, even though his postseason history sucks".

I really would love to add Price or Greinke and I could give two shits about the money involved. But saying we need them - or Gray or Sale - while Zimmermann or Cueto won't do is just kind of shortsighted and focused way too much on classifications and ignoring the difference in cost for marginally better returns.
 

NDame616

will bailey
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
2,315
Sounds like bullshit to me. There is absolutely no indication that the Red Sox clubhouse is anything but a great place to reside. I imagine Ortiz keeps the place loose (particularly the Spanish speakers) and there are certainly a bunch of assclowns on the bench and in the dugout. Did anyone get the impression the Red Sox were a miserable bunch last year? It's easy to be all rah-rah and loosey-goosey when you're winning - or not expected to win. It's impressive to maintain a pleasurable workplace when you're expected to win but don't. I think the Yankees, Giants and Red Sox certainly fit that bill.
Of course it's bullshit. Reports surface essentially telling everyone "Price is going to the Red Sox, so you really shouldn't bother inquiring" and right away a conflicting report says "well, he MAY go to the Red Sox but he may not be really cool with that clubhouse.... but he really isn't all about the top dollar.....unless the Red Sox grossly outbid everyone else for him."

Ortiz and Pedroia, by all accounts, are great clubhouse guys and lead the team. Farrell to a fault is "a player's manager". We have a strong core group of young ballplayers who by all account are good guys. Anyone talking negatively about this clubhouse is squarely talking out of their rectum.
 

jimbobim

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2012
1,558
I'm guessing the implication about comfort in Boston is about the media scrutiny rather than the clubhouse atmosphere.
Nail on head. Now once he signs the contract that value number will bring it's own healthy amount of industry scrutiny. On top of that will inevitably be the extra Boston "blame/scrutinize the highest paid guy" first flavor. This includes the thorough and extensive dissecting of every frustrated quote and public misstep. I mean Pedro F'ing Martinez even drew criticism for being a "diva".Throw in a dollop of"ace" expectations and the constant comparison to Lester and it makes some sense that Price might prefer the NL in either SL or San Fran.

Now the Yankees answered these similar concerns with an opt out for CC. Price would seemingly be in a position to demand one from Boston.
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
8,681
I'm guessing the implication about comfort in Boston is about the media scrutiny rather than the clubhouse atmosphere.
I'm guessing that the Chicago media could get ornery if the Cubs fail to win the championship that everyone expects, and especially if Price's streak of less-than-dominating October performances continues.
 

Green Monster

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2000
2,277
CT
2016: $32M
2017: $32M
2018: $32M
Opt Out
2019: $29M
2020: $29M
Opt Out
2021: $26M
2022: $26M

Potential outcomes would be 3/$96M, 5/$154M, or 7/$206M......If Price opts out it essentially falls in line with the Sox strategy of paying a premium for shorter contract. If not, the front loading offers them some risk reduction as he declines in the later years.

edit: math
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,105
Totally. If he's opting out of that deal after 3 years it has been a damned successful contact. I wouldn't hesitate at all to offer an opt out if Price or Greinke want one.

The logic is that an opt-out is never a good deal for the club, because if the player opts out, it means he has positive trade value, and the club is getting nothing in return for that. That is, in the world where Greinke didn't have an opt-out, the Dodgers could get something positive in return if they traded him, but instead they are getting nothing or signing him to less club friendly extension. It makes sense, but I still think the opt outs are good for the team, because while trading Greinke sounds great in theory, but in reality, the Dodgers would never trade him right now in that scenario. That's a fantasy baseball type move and even the most analytic-minded teams don't operate that way. Granting the opt out takes the heat off the team -- people would be furious in LA if they traded Greinke, but it's much more understandable if they simply didn't want to grant him a 6 year, 180 million deal.
 
Last edited:

Montana Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 18, 2000
8,881
Twin Bridges, Mt.
2016: $32M
2017: $32M
2018: $32M
Opt Out
2019: $29M
2020: $29M
Opt Out
2021: $26M
2022: $26M

Potential outcomes would be 3/$96M, 5/$154M, or 7/$206M......If Price opts out it essentially falls in line with the Sox strategy of paying a premium for shorter contract. If not, the front loading offers them some risk reduction as he declines in the later years.
Yep, sign me up for that deal. Here's a pretty good article discussing Opt Outs. The benefits for the player and the team plus a look at the history of them.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/02/opt-out-clauses-mlb.html
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Don't throw me in the briar patch!! I'd love to pay 3/90 for Price.
Of course, anybody would. But remember that's the best-case scenario. The worst-case scenario remains exactly the same as it would be without an opt-out. The team retains all the downside risk, while losing control of the upside.

Which is fine, as long as the team gets something in return, namely, slightly more favorable terms. In Price's case, if DD could use an opt-out as the sweetener to overcome any hesitations about coming to Boston, and in the process reduce or even eliminate any need to overpay in years or AAV, that would be ideal.
 

jasvlm

New Member
Nov 28, 2014
177
Price would be a great short term investment, but it is unlikely that he'll take less than 7 years/200 mil. The back end of the deal will be ugly, and I don't know that Henry and DD have the stomach for that kind of contract. I see it as much more likely that they go shorter term with someone like IWakuma, who is still a very good pitcher, and try to fill the ace role with a trade candidate. I'd take someone like Iwakuma at 3/45 or Kazmir at 4/80 and leave out some of the longer term risk inherent in an ace contract. I do fully realize that Price/Greinke level starters are going to be expensive, but I'd still rather have shorter contract obligations with pitchers who are 80-90% of an ace than pay the full freight. Too much risk with pitchers to go that long.
 

twibnotes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
20,232
Can someone explain to me why DD and Farrell have announced that they are going to sign a FA ace? I realize the price will be sky high regardless, but I don't know why you would ever declare anything publicly other than "we are going to do what's best for the team" (Belichick style)

I have this hopefully irrational fear that the Sox, having stated their intention to the fans, will pay through the nose for whoever is left, e.g., Cueto.
 

edoug

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
6,007
The Sox need an ace and to say anything else would be simply ridiculous. They may very well lose out on Price or Greinke and it would be a major failure. Even if they are the highest bidders. They have to accept that risk. You'll rarely find a time where a football coach says something publicly that is worth anything.
 

The Boomer

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2000
2,232
Charlottesville, Virginia
Can someone explain to me why DD and Farrell have announced that they are going to sign a FA ace? I realize the price will be sky high regardless, but I don't know why you would ever declare anything publicly other than "we are going to do what's best for the team" (Belichick style)

I have this hopefully irrational fear that the Sox, having stated their intention to the fans, will pay through the nose for whoever is left, e.g., Cueto.
I don't see Cueto as "whoever is left". While likely his career year, his 2014 season was one of the best by any pitcher in the last decade:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/c/cuetojo01.shtml

His sss with KC in the AL and his sss in post-seasons notwithstanding, Cueto could be more cost effective than Price with an appropriate contract and won't cost the Sox their #12 first round 2016 amateur draft pick. He might be a more realistic acquisition than Price but if he is too expensive. I'm not sure that the Sox ought to sign any of the remaining free agents unless perhaps the market for Smaradzija or another second tier free agent pitcher is a more cost effective bargain. I have a hard time seeing them give up their premium first round amateur draft pick for any free agent who will cost them this.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
I don't see Cueto as "whoever is left". While likely his career year, his 2014 season was one of the best by any pitcher in the last decade:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/c/cuetojo01.shtml

His sss with KC in the AL and his sss in post-seasons notwithstanding, Cueto could be more cost effective than Price with an appropriate contract and won't cost the Sox their #12 first round 2016 amateur draft pick. He might be a more realistic acquisition than Price but if he is too expensive. I'm not sure that the Sox ought to sign any of the remaining free agents unless perhaps the market for Smaradzija or another second tier free agent pitcher is a more cost effective bargain. I have a hard time seeing them give up their premium first round amateur draft pick for any free agent who will cost them this.
I agree with you, but for what it's worth, Price won't cost them a draft pick either (but Samardzija will). For that reason alone, I would expect it to come down to Price and Cueto as far as who the Sox pursue most aggressively.
 

HangingW/ScottCooper

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,493
Scituate, MA
Of course, anybody would. But remember that's the best-case scenario. The worst-case scenario remains exactly the same as it would be without an opt-out. The team retains all the downside risk, while losing control of the upside.

Which is fine, as long as the team gets something in return, namely, slightly more favorable terms. In Price's case, if DD could use an opt-out as the sweetener to overcome any hesitations about coming to Boston, and in the process reduce or even eliminate any need to overpay in years or AAV, that would be ideal.
That's why I like the idea of it. It provides non-monetary value to the player. It's a separator in the "all else is equal" conversation of contracts. More importantly, I think in a perfect world, we would all much prefer Price on shorter years, even if it means his departure a year or two before his decline.