Dombrowski picked up Addison Reed last July for Jamie Callahan, Stephen Nogosek and Gerson Bautista. Each was intriguing but none were considered a top prospect.
Potential Trade Deadline Targets
- Thread starter thepriceisright
- Start date
According to Ken Rosenthal, the Mets are open for business and are willing to listen on pretty much any player.
He noted that Familia is set to be a free agent and the Mets are unlikely to give him a qualifying offer, so he could be a target.
Wilmer Flores is controllable through 2019 and has a career .493 SLG% against lefties. If Nunez doesn’t get his shit together, he could be a target.
He noted that Familia is set to be a free agent and the Mets are unlikely to give him a qualifying offer, so he could be a target.
Wilmer Flores is controllable through 2019 and has a career .493 SLG% against lefties. If Nunez doesn’t get his shit together, he could be a target.
Roughly $2.6M for Reed, $2M for Ziegler. Both acquired on July 31 so they got 2+ months out of each. Per Cot's, they've got about $1.6M in space before they hit the max threshold.
Familia, since he was brought up, is making $7.925M this year. At the deadline (7/31) he'll still be due roughly $2.5M. So to get him, they'd need for the Mets to eat some of the salary or they'd need to shed close to a million dollars somewhere else. Something tells me the Mets will find a taker who will take on the whole remainder of salary and still offer a better prospect than the Sox can.
Says the people putting gospel stock in that extremely tight Cots estimate, and many of whom who were also consistently adamant all of 2017 that the Sox wouldn't spend over the LT period in 2018.
What DD would or wouldn't spend at the deadline, in the event he feels there is a convincing reason/situation to flex our financial muscle in a GFIN scenario, is really anybody's guess at this point. Especially when we are still a month out from even getting that clearer picture on whether we'll even need a major upgrade or not.
It's an entirely different threshold with different penalties.
If something unthinkable happens—like if the Mets call and say Syndergaard is yours if you take back David Wright—then perhaps you consider exceeding it. But every visible move the team has made since the new CBA was reached strongly suggests they believe exceeding the secondary tax is lava.
You have an alternative source for salary numbers that says the Sox aren't tight up against the $237M threshold? If the Cot's estimate is wrong, it's probably only by a few hundred thousand dollars because their player benefits figure is admittedly an estimate.
And who was arguing that the Red Sox were going to stay under the threshold in 2018? They were trying and succeeded in staying completely under in 2017 so their penalties would be the minimum for 2018. Problem is now that they're in danger of triggering the max possible penalty in terms of tax (62.5% as opposed to the 32% they're in line to pay now) AND dropping in next year's draft and losing international signing bonus pool money. That's not something they're going to do for a marginal upgrade. If something big and irresistible comes along (like the Angels offer Trout for JBJ straight-up) then sure they might bite the bullet and go over $237M. But that's a pipedream within a pipedream.
I'm aware. Hence the amount of time I spent talking about here this past winter in the process of us spending right up to that threshold entering the season.
Ok, let's begin at the start of this past off season then. Give me some examples of these "every visible move the team has made" that would strongly suggest that. To me each one, and especially added as a whole, actually makes a stronger case for suggesting the opposite. DD is more all-in with the idea of our 2018 success then he is with a surface desire to avoid that 2nd tier LT hit imo.
There are multiple threads dedicated to analyzing the unprecedented second-tier CBA penalties and our moves and non-moves in relation to them, so I'm not sure I'd wanna rehash it again here. You're correct in that I have no idea what the Red Sox will do.
Wait. The cash considerations for Filia count in the team's favor against the cap?
I don't have the the alternative source that ultimately matters here, no. But my point wasn't that Cots' estimate is a bad one. It's that you are putting a gospel amount of stock in something that only needs to be less then 1% off to completely negate that proposed budget hard line, and which indeed represents a margin of error Cots has certainly been off on previously in regards to all those complicated 'extras' that go into the final tally figure. To my knowledge and since I started following it 10+ years ago, those beginning to mid year estimates have never been a "to within a couple 100K" reliable.
Which most of the time isn't really even a projection issue at that, since conventional wisdom in these cases would usually draw the conclusion that from a more logical standpoint....the Sox would of never spent themselves that close to a LT threshold entering a contending season that they had every intention of avoiding in the first place. But I guess having entered into the bizzaro world where the Sox are now MLB's new albatross spender, and outspending the MFY by $70m at that, has messed with a lot of long standing and default narrative foundations.
Last edited:
The only figures that are an estimate are the benefits number and the amount paid to guys who spend most of their time optioned to the minors rather than drawing full big league salary. But as those estimates add up to only ~$17M or so (per Cot's calculation), to be off by even 5% is still less than a million dollars.
As for your bizarro world, we are in a whole new world. The secondary threshold the Red Sox are up against is something entirely new, at least in the sense that it is no longer purely money at stake. That changes the equation significantly if we're going to compare to past years.
In past years, the Yankees and Dodgers have both spent far more excessively relative to the tax threshold than the Red Sox have so far this year, but their penalty was only money. It didn't really impact anything beyond the owners' bottom line (and we all know that they, including the Red Sox ownership, have cash to burn), whereas now it impacts future years via the draft and international signing bonuses. For a team in the Red Sox position, marginally increasing their chances of a World Series now is not worth impacting the strength of the farm system in 2020 and beyond.
But hey, maybe they'll go ahead and do it anyway. I choose to believe that will happen when they actually do it, rather than expect them to do it and set myself up for disappointment when they don't.
The return isn’t awe inspiring. Nats 10th and 11th rated prospects and a lottery ticket arm.
I don't get what KC is doing. Why not wait til the deadline when the market heats up? Looks like they got fleeced. His ERA is 1.05
Slightly off topic kind of but is there a good reference or link or even book that details how the baseball players career works and the front office considerations
What I mean is as a non American coming to the game 'from the outside' admittedly long ago I don't have a good feel for how salaries and contracts and options work
It seems a lot of the time people propose trades or deals that are derided because thus or that Option or salary concern etc
I think it's high time for me to put in some effort to get a better feel for why such and such a deal is good because say that player is FA next year, this one has 2 years before arb, this one has no options left etc
Probably need to start digging a little bit more into the minor league system too to understand why this or that player might allow you to jettison the guy above him in the majors etc
What I mean is as a non American coming to the game 'from the outside' admittedly long ago I don't have a good feel for how salaries and contracts and options work
It seems a lot of the time people propose trades or deals that are derided because thus or that Option or salary concern etc
I think it's high time for me to put in some effort to get a better feel for why such and such a deal is good because say that player is FA next year, this one has 2 years before arb, this one has no options left etc
Probably need to start digging a little bit more into the minor league system too to understand why this or that player might allow you to jettison the guy above him in the majors etc
MLB contracts are probably the simplest in any sport.
1) They are fully guaranteed. A 5 year $100m deal means the player will receive all $100m, even if released or traded.
2) During negotiations, players or teams can ask for an option year (or more than one). 5 years/$100m + 1 player option for $15m would mean the player may elect to enter free agency at the end of 5yrs or continue with his current team for 1/$15m. Same goes for team options and then there are mutual options where both parties need to agree.
3) Many larger contracts have “no trade” clauses which means the player chose to restrict his team from trading him to either all teams or one team or many teams. This is uncommon in small deals.
4) Players and teams can also negotiate “opt out.” An opt out allows the described party to cancel the contract at a certain date. This usually happens from the player side when they think they can get a bigger or longer contract before they get too old. From a team side, it can act as a way to protect themselves from a bad contract.
I recommend reading a few of the big contracts in baseball at a high-level. It will give you an idea of the types of salaries going to pitchers and hitters. It’s very simple.
Someone else can take up trade valuation and luxury tax implications.
I think Lapa should be considered for membership just for approaching the issue like that and asking that question.
Anyone want to do rookie contracts, arbitration, and service time?
Disclosure: @lapa I'm an American with degrees in economics, law, and political science and I check in with the people on this board to follow contracts. Don't even get me started about the NBA; I don't understand a lick of it. I think it's cool we're doing this.
Anyone want to do rookie contracts, arbitration, and service time?
Disclosure: @lapa I'm an American with degrees in economics, law, and political science and I check in with the people on this board to follow contracts. Don't even get me started about the NBA; I don't understand a lick of it. I think it's cool we're doing this.
Thanks! I think it's super interesting and obviously a huge part of the game, including roster management like callups / options etc, I think there was recently a thread where someone mentioned a trade then someone else said but yeah he's out of options because of this or that so now he's worth much less to this or that team. Maybe should break this out to a separate thread so as not to derail the original discussion too much
If I read this correctly, a very big if, I think you may be right.
http://www.mlbplayers.com/pdf9/5450407.pdf
Any cash consideration that is included in the Actual Club Payroll of the payor Club shall be subtracted from the Actual Club Payroll of the payee Club in the same Contract Year in which it is added to the payor Club’s Actual Club Payroll. Notwithstanding the foregoing, an assignee Club may not receive an aggregate credit against its Actual Club Payroll(s) for cash consideration received in an assignment that exceeds the sum of (a) the total amount of the acquired Player(s) Salaries that are included in the Club’s Actual Club Payroll(s) following the assignment, and (b) any cash consideration paid by the assignee Club to another Club in a subsequent assignment of the acquired Player(s) that is attributable to those Players.
This is usually the easiest way to find out which Red Sox players can be optioned to the minors and which ones are arbitration eligible or about to become free agents or how much service time they have.
http://www.soxprospects.com/40man.htm
And their list pages explain how some of the rules work.
http://www.soxprospects.com/sitemap.htm
The only way I've ever managed to figure out which players on other teams are out of options is to search their transactions history to count how many times they've been optioned before, that doesn't always work because some players can be optioned 4 times, and sometimes players get optioned and spend less than 20 days in the minors that season, and that option doesn't count as having been used that season, although if the player has only been optioned 1 or 2 times, then you do know they can be optioned at least until they have 5 years of service time and the right to refuse an optional assignment.
I guess the question is if the cash considerations are included in the payroll or not? I would think the money sent to offset a major league contract would be, but I'm not sure if that works the same way for a minor league contract.
The Rockies would have to eat most of LeMahieu's contract, and even then I'm not sure it's worth the marginal upgrade. They would basically improve just as much by playing Holt at 2b full time and benching Nunez.
Asdrubel Cabrera is the better overall bat and makes the same. I'd rather have him.
Asdrubel Cabrera is the better overall bat and makes the same. I'd rather have him.
There are 2 cases where the term "options" are used, which makes it confusing for folks trying to understand what's going on.
- Contract options are cases where the team or player (or both) can extend their current contract by an additional year.
- Minor league options are more complicated, but whenever a player on the 25 man major league roster is sent to the minors, they are considered to be "optioned" to the minors. In general, a player can only be optioned to the minors in 3 different seasons, and can only be optioned within 6 (I believe) seasons of being added to the 40-man roster, and there are exceptions as well. When a player can no longer be optioned to the minors, he is said to be "out of options", which means he would have to be "designated for assignment" and placed on irrevocable "outright waivers" in order to be sent to the minors again. Teams can claim such players during the waiver period, in which case the player would become property of the claiming team. If noone claims the player, the player is said to "clear" waivers, and the player can be optioned to the minors, although in some cases the player can also refuse the assignment and become a free agent.
@lapa I also use Spotrac to get a clean visual guide of who's making what and for how long their contracts are.
http://www.spotrac.com/mlb/boston-red-sox/yearly/payroll
http://www.spotrac.com/mlb/boston-red-sox/yearly/payroll
Not only is Cabrera the better hitter, he can also play 3b and SS. The one thing LeMahieu has going for him is he's been slightly better vs lefties in his career than Cabrera, and that is a team need... but how much of that is Coors Field? Last year the Mets were basically trying to dump Cabrera and the Redsox were one of the possible destinations.
Asdrubal Cabrera had a nice April but he's hitting .133/.192/.333 over his last 78 PAs, and .230/.257/.412 since May 1. He's selling out for power and it's going to catch up with him, and he's not a defensive asset. I'd pass.
Thanks for linking that and reminding me that Rusney has a $14M option in 2020.
I wonder if he'll take that.
It's 78 PA so I'm not sure it tells you much at all. He also sold out for power back in 2015 and it hasn't caught up to him yet.
Last year in the 2nd half, Cabrera hit .307/.367/.462 in 284 PA. He's 32 and going to be a FA after this year and will probably be pretty cheap to acquire prospect wise. If the choice is between him and LeMahieu, I'd much rather have Cabrera.
I'd probably pass on both too depending on the cost but if the Mets were willing to pay enough of Cabrera's contract and only wanted Chad De La Guerra in return, sign me up all day.
It's not an option; he can opt-out of the deal after 2019, same as Price after this year. It will be an interesting question but there's no way he's going to make $13.5M in any other way in 2020, but it frees him to go somewhere to play in the majors since he's never getting a shot here.
This is a joke.
#RedSox interested in upgrading bullpen, but in order to acquire San Diego LHP Brad Hand, source says the #Padres’ likely asking price would be a young everyday player, such as Rafael Devers. @MLBNetwork @MLB
#RedSox interested in upgrading bullpen, but in order to acquire San Diego LHP Brad Hand, source says the #Padres’ likely asking price would be a young everyday player, such as Rafael Devers. @MLBNetwork @MLB
Fair enough. I'm reasonably certain one of the Jays, O's, or Pirates will give up Pearce, Valencia, or Rodriguez just to liberate the roster spot. I think those guys fit better with our weakness vs. LHP, but YMMV.
If we have the cap space for one meaningful acquisition, my ideal get is Adam Ottavino.
Last edited:
They could also deal Velazquez, who is signed for something like $545k and is controllable (thus of some value). That would clear $150-200k.
Is there a reason a team would use a player opt-out that only affects one season vs. a standard player option? Doesn’t it ultimately have the same outcome or is there some difference I’m missing? Usually when I think opt-out its a one time decision affecting multiple years.
Of course BOS wouldn't give up Devers for Hand, but if you look at how that tweet is worded, I think it's actually pretty reasonable given the possibilities in the BOS organization, unless you can assemble a prospect package from BOS that would top what other teams will certainly be offering for Hand (the top reliever on the market who is under contract through 2021).
Another team will have a better package for Hand and the Sox aren’t creating a big hole for a setup man. They will likely add someone that isn’t a big name for depth. The bullpen is pretty good as is.
Hand is signed for three years beyond this one; I would ask for Devers too. Two years go, the Yankees got Gleyber Torres for three months of Aroldis Chapman.
Yeah, that was a special case in which Theo/the Cubs were unusually desperate given the franchise history, plus Gleyber looked blocked at the big league level by Russell and Baez.
Nevertheless, Hand is only under control for two years more than Devers, and is far more proven. It's a reasonable ask.
Given the Red Sox' financial and organizational situations there is no way in hell they would trade Devers for a reliever.