Dismiss Notice
Guest, I have a big favor to ask you. We've been working very hard to establish ourselves on social media. If you like/follow our pages it would be a HUGE help to us. SoSH on Facebook and Inside the Pylon Thanks! Nip

2018-19 Offseason Thread

Discussion in 'Red Sox Forum' started by Devizier, Oct 29, 2018.

  1. brandonchristensen

    brandonchristensen mad photochops SoSH Member

    Messages:
    22,711
    Is this the most boring MLB offseason of all time?

    The Harper and Machado watch is horrible and uninteresting at this point. I can’t recall a less interesting off season.
     
  2. bosox79

    bosox79 Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    9,612
    Last year was awful.
     
  3. Pozo the Clown

    Pozo the Clown lurker

    Messages:
    682
    To me, last year was much, much worse. The Sox had a Papi-sized hole to fill in the lineup and the JDM pursuit was proceeding at a Boras-orchestrated, agonizingly-glacial pace. Yankee fans were literally salvitating over the acquisition of MVP Stanton and speculating on the combined 170 dingers that were forthcoming from Stanton/Judge/Sanchez as they pummelled their way to their 28th Championship.

    Personally, I'll sign up for this type of boredom every offseason. I'm quite content to continue to bask in the afterglow of the (arguably) greatest season in Red Sox history. Enjoy it while you can peeps, for even if we repeat in 2019, next offseason (and the one after that) ain't gonna be no sunny-day picnic.
     
  4. brandonchristensen

    brandonchristensen mad photochops SoSH Member

    Messages:
    22,711
    I wasn’t referring to the Red Sox, though maybe I’m in the wrong place, but just MLB as a whole.

    Having no time constraints on Free Agency just drags everything out so long.
     
  5. moondog80

    moondog80 heart is two sizes two small SoSH Member

    Messages:
    5,043


    If this happened, I would want the Red Sox to engage and trade Boagerts if they sign him. You have to be opportunistic. But I expect he will get more.
     
  6. E5 Yaz

    E5 Yaz Transcends message boarding Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    58,371
    You want Machado on the Red Sox?
     
  7. moondog80

    moondog80 heart is two sizes two small SoSH Member

    Messages:
    5,043
    For $175 and 7 years? Yes.
     
  8. chawson

    chawson Well-Known Member Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    1,376
    There's a microscopic chance the Sox get involved, but I'm curious what folks think Xander signs for if he puts up the same year in 2019. 5/$120M? 7/$180M? The Yankees will also ostensibly be in.

    I want one of Lindor, Correa, Seager, Machado, or Bogaerts playing short by 2022 — probably in that order, but it doesn’t matter a ton.

    The primary benefit of signing Machado and trading Bogaerts to the Brewers is that it could net us someone like Woodruff, Nelson, or Corey Ray, which plugs a hole the Sox need to fill soon anyhow.
     
  9. Pozo the Clown

    Pozo the Clown lurker

    Messages:
    682
    Agreed. And I wouldn't trade Bogaerts unless the return was substantial (unlikely based on X only having 1 year of control left and the lack of contenders looking for a SS). For 2019, keep X at short, have Manny man 3rd and send Devers to AAA to work on plate discipline and defense at 3rd AND at 1st.
     
  10. moondog80

    moondog80 heart is two sizes two small SoSH Member

    Messages:
    5,043
    I had the same thought, but it's impossible to say without knowing what Machado ends up at. 7/180 seemed possible a couple of months, I'm not sure anymore.
     
  11. OCD SS

    OCD SS Well-Known Member Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    7,210
    Machado does not appear to be a good defender at SS; X looked better last year (and he looked just average), so I don't think I'd look at MM at SS as he gets older. He should stay at 3B.
     
  12. Red(s)HawksFan

    Red(s)HawksFan Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    10,299
    Why are the Brewers trading for Bogaerts? Their primary need at the moment is starting pitching and they've got a pretty good young and inexpensive shortstop in Arcia. He had a down year last year at the plate, but he's also only 23 and better with the glove than Bogaerts.
     
  13. E5 Yaz

    E5 Yaz Transcends message boarding Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    58,371
    Because it fits a wish-fulfillment narrative
     
  14. nvalvo

    nvalvo Well-Known Member Silver Supporter SoSH Member

    Messages:
    15,884
    Just as an exercise — all of these scenarios are unlikely — I'd say if we end up looking at trade destinations for Bogaerts the Mets, Cardinals, or especially the A's are more likely than Milwaukee. Teams at the fringes of contention, who could be interested in trading some prospect capital to shore up an infield near-term.

    But one year of the right to pay a good regular Arb3 prices isn't going to fetch a ton. He's been worth 4.8, 3.2, and 4.9 fWAR the last three years, and he's under contract for $12m. So project him at 4 WAR, and give that a value of $36m. Less his contract, that's $24m in surplus value: or... about the value of a position player prospect in the back half of the Top 100 or a pitching prospect around #50.

    (Say, Jorge Mateo or Jesus Luzardo from Oakland; I'm imagining the A's are thinking Bogaerts as a bridge to Barreto.)
     
  15. chawson

    chawson Well-Known Member Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    1,376
    Bogaerts to the Brewers has been written about here, here, and here. None of it is hard reporting, but that info wouldn't hit the press.

    Of the 15 or so teams in possible contention, the Brewers have the biggest need by far. Arcia is indeed cheap and young and a solid fielder, but put up miserable offensive numbers last year and Milwaukee finished 30th in MLB in shortstop production (-1.7 fWAR). They also have a glut of pitching, and a small window where hurdling past the Cubs and Cardinals is within reach, and a better prospect in Brice Turang ready in a couple years. Something like Corbin Burnes and a bit part for Xander and Workman would be an interesting trade.

    Per @nvalvo's post, who knows what the Mets would do but my guess is they're probably done collecting infielders. The A's have two more cheapish years of Semien (and Barreto is looked at more as an outfielder these days) while the Cards have DeJong, and both of those guys are 3-4 win players.
     
  16. Red(s)HawksFan

    Red(s)HawksFan Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    10,299
    The first is a blogger with no inside knowledge or sources throwing shit against the wall for clicks, and the other two are bloggers taking that first guy's shit and piggy-backing on it for clicks of their own. In other words, not worth discussing other than in a fantasy, wish-casty, never going to happen in reality kind of way.
     
  17. chawson

    chawson Well-Known Member Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    1,376
    Milwaukee has the worst shortstop production in baseball, the reigning MVP, and just signed another 4-win player to a one-year deal. I recognize that those are speculations and not reports, but I'm not sure what you find so far-fetched.
     
  18. Red(s)HawksFan

    Red(s)HawksFan Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    10,299
    Far fetched is the idea that their shortstop production in 2018 can't be improved upon just by their incumbent 23-year-old SS maturing and continuing on the track he was on after he was re-called in late July (.290/.320/.386 after his return from AAA, plus .333/.353/.606 in the post-season).

    Also, I disagree that the Brewers have a glut of pitching. They have a deep bullpen, but a shaky rotation. I think they're better served finding one more solid starter for the rotation rather than trading their bullpen depth to moderately upgrade at SS.

    Not to mention, I think the idea of the Sox signing Machado and trading Bogaerts is a bit insane on its face, regardless of how interested the Brewers might or might not be.
     
  19. chawson

    chawson Well-Known Member Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    1,376
    Maybe, but he put up that second-half line with a .376 BABIP, a 3.9 BB%, and a 23.4 K%, so I wouldn't bet on it.

    Yes yes, I qualified at the outset that I don't think it'll happen and I don't love Machado at even the very good deal of 7/175 (and I get that folks hate him here, which undergirds the larger point), but I prefer Machado over Bogaerts at roughly the same price.

    I'm less interested in Machado than what happens at shortstop in general. I'm not sure if it's my ideal route, but I would certainly be on board for trading Bogaerts for something we need, then taking advantage of the D-Backs' firesale and trading for Ahmed for the next few years before signing either Lindor, Correa, or Seager when they hit free agency at 26-27. That's far better than signing Bogaerts for 6/150.
     
  20. Plympton91

    Plympton91 bubble burster SoSH Member

    Messages:
    11,652
    The problem with locking up Machado for seven years is that he’s a mediocre shortstop who will have to move to third base in two to four years. The Red Sox have a good and getting better third baseman under their control for 5 more years. The Red Sox do not have a shortstop after this season, unless Chatham breaks out or one of the bonus babies matures really quickly. So it would make more sense to save the money on Machado and put it toward a real long term solution at SS (or sign a cheap shortstop and pay Betts and Sale).
     
  21. chawson

    chawson Well-Known Member Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    1,376
    That is the thing, there are no other free agent shortstops next year besides Xander and Didi, who is definitely not a Fenway hitter.

    The year after there’s Simmons, Semien, Profar, Villar and Ahmed. The first three of those guys are on contenders and likely won’t be available by trade beforehand. The latter two are possible trade targets, but I’m pretty iffy on Villar.
     
  22. Pozo the Clown

    Pozo the Clown lurker

    Messages:
    682
    Undoubtedly, Boras is already salivating over this fact!
     
  23. Papelbon's Poutine

    Papelbon's Poutine Homeland Security SoSH Member

    Messages:
    17,440
    So we’re now trading X and Benny? For Machado and scrapple in LF...yeah I might need to just stay off main board for a bit. If they did either of those I’d have to go route for the Yankees. Jesus.
     
  24. chawson

    chawson Well-Known Member Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    1,376
    Probably a better fit, brain genius.

    Not sure how much clearer I should make it that I'm interested in talking about the full spread of options at short over the next few years, and weighing Bogaerts' extension/contract against the one Machado is about to sign is part of that conversation.
     
  25. Papelbon's Poutine

    Papelbon's Poutine Homeland Security SoSH Member

    Messages:
    17,440
    You’re right, an autocorrect is worth a personal attack. Solid work man. Keep up with your blogs tho, good citing.
     
  26. chawson

    chawson Well-Known Member Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    1,376
    Lol, not talking about the typo, Cop Fetish.
     
  27. Adrian's Dome

    Adrian's Dome Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    4,365
    This is easily your biggest issue when posting.

    You ALWAYS act as if everything in the future is cemented in place. You said it with the starters "we need to do something or else in two years we'll be stuck with only x-x-x and x as options!" and you're doing it now. Whatever a team overpays for Machado right now is irrelevant to any kind of decision the team will be making regarding Bogearts in two seasons.

    By then, the list of options and possibilities will have changed so many times none of us will bother keeping track. How you view and analyze the situation makes zero sense, and no, there is no possibility the Sox end up with Machado, no matter how many trade scenarios you want to create out of thin air in that genius mind.
     
  28. Papelbon's Poutine

    Papelbon's Poutine Homeland Security SoSH Member

    Messages:
    17,440
    You’re welcome to send any further replies to my pm. Otherwise until they update mobile app and I can ignore you, please don’t respond to anything I post. They very bottom line is there used to be a bar here, that you don’t get above most times and half the main board doesn’t anymore.

    And no, don’t respond to this. Have fun with your wish casting and fantasy baseball moves.
     
  29. maufman

    maufman Anderson Cooper x Mr. Rogers Staff Member Dope Gold Supporter

    Messages:
    24,206
    He won’t be responding. Let’s move on.
     
  30. nvalvo

    nvalvo Well-Known Member Silver Supporter SoSH Member

    Messages:
    15,884
    Moving on then...

    Anyone interested in extending a non-roster invite to Delmon Young, who just hit 19 HR in about 250 PA in the VWL? If we could get him on a minor league deal, he’d be LF/DH depth.

    He’s been out of MLB since 2015, and has also played in Australia and Mexico before his MVP-winning Venezuelan campaign. Still only 32!

    (I’m more than half kidding, but this off-season has been sooooooo sloooooooow.)
     
  31. Dewey'sCannon

    Dewey'sCannon Well-Known Member Silver Supporter

    Messages:
    578
    If, for some reason, Machado went for 7/175, then Xander is not coming close to that number next year.

    Given that Xander is at $12M for this year, his final arb year when salaries approach market value, I don't see that he ends up beyond 20/yr as a FA. I'm really hoping we bring him back.
     
  32. Plympton91

    Plympton91 bubble burster SoSH Member

    Messages:
    11,652
    If you have X for $20 million, Betts for $30 million, Price for $30 million, Eovaldi $16 million, Pedroia $16 million whether he plays or not. The only minimum salary starter would be Devers, maybe Chavis. No realistic options for cheap starting pitching on the farm, sale and Porcello sized holes to fill in the rotation. Doesn’t leave a lot of room for the rest of the team.

    This is why they can’t risk 2019. Got to spend what’s needed to go for it this year. Do that and just tear it down in 2020, unless they’re willing to spend $300 million that year.
     
  33. mt8thsw9th

    mt8thsw9th anti-SoSHal SoSH Member

    Messages:
    17,091
    So did you watch Devers this postseason and think to yourself, "you know where this guy needs to be for his age 22 season? AAA"? A touch ironic given Machado's career arc, and his REAL need to work on his plate discipline heading into his age 22 season. Rafael Devers' BB% is higher than Machado's at the same time. Also, it's higher than Machado's for his entire career to date.

    And why are you eliminating some of Devers' value by shifting him to first at 22?
     
  34. moondog80

    moondog80 heart is two sizes two small SoSH Member

    Messages:
    5,043
    Sure it does. That's 112 million. They've spent at least 70 million more each of the past 4 years, and 120 million more this year. There may not be room to add another huge deal, but there will be plenty of room to fill in the holes on a year-to-year basis.
     
  35. Pozo the Clown

    Pozo the Clown lurker

    Messages:
    682
    I watched Devers all season long. Far too frequently, he flailed away at head-high fastballs and breaking balls in the dirt and/or way in or off the plate. Devers has a grand total of 60 plate appearances at the AAA level. 60!!! It's hard to say that he wasn't "rushed" to the majors. He's far from a polished hitter. His offensive upside is still largely untapped. Hopefully, spending time with JDM this offseason will go a long way toward realizing said potential.

    Bear in mind, my post was made in response to the farfetched hypothetical that the Sox sign Machado.

    I stated that Devers should work on his "defense at 3rd AND at 1st" because I don't view positional flexibilty as a value-diminishing attribute. Is he not more valuable if he's capable of manning either corner infield position?
     
    #1435 Pozo the Clown, Jan 17, 2019
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2019
  36. Savin Hillbilly

    Savin Hillbilly loves the secret sauce SoSH Member

    Messages:
    17,974
    The thing is, I have never read any scouting reports that don't essentially say "Devers has the ability to be an average major league third baseman as long as he doesn't lose mobility." We've seen him make spectacular plays. His range is decent, his arm is a cannon. All he needs is consistency, and the way to get that is not to divide his time. He's 22 years old. The more he plays, the better he will almost certainly get. There is no reason not to pencil him in there and leave him there.
     
  37. mt8thsw9th

    mt8thsw9th anti-SoSHal SoSH Member

    Messages:
    17,091
    Machado has zero, and he'd be in the Orioles lineup next year if he wasn't rushed, for whatever that's worth.

    Granted I'm not making a 1:1 between them as Devers isn't quite on Machado's level, but his pedigree isn't too far off (both peaked in the BA top 20, Machado #11, Devers #18; BP 8 and 13), and their paths to the majors would've been similar if not for Duquette getting anxious when Machado was 19 in AA. Devers has nearly twice as many minor league at bats, and about the same number above AA. And that is reflected in his walk rate.

    Sometimes it takes not obsessing over each at bat to realize that his discipline is quite amazing for someone his age, and bound to get better with MLB reps. He's not going to gain anything playing against AAAA types who don't have MLB repertoires.
     
  38. BaseballJones

    BaseballJones goalpost mover SoSH Member

    Messages:
    4,617
    As a 21-year old, Rafael Devers had 21 homers and 24 doubles in 490 plate appearances for one of the best teams baseball has ever seen. He also has a career playoff line of .311/.373/.511/.884 in 51 plate appearances.

    I think unless you're squinting really hard to see the negatives, it's hard not to be optimistic about his future as a baseball player.
     
  39. bosox79

    bosox79 Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    9,612
    They were both bad and not close to average.
     
  40. Savin Hillbilly

    Savin Hillbilly loves the secret sauce SoSH Member

    Messages:
    17,974
    Depends on which metric you look at. Bogaerts has had an increasingly large gap between DRS and UZR in recent years, and last year's difference was particularly ginormous (-19 to +1). For his career, his DRS per 150 starts has been -10.4; his UZR per 150 is -0.3. My eyeballs say the truth is in between, but closer to UZR. "Fringe-average" seems about right.
     
  41. nattysez

    nattysez Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    3,422
    This is pretty frustrating. Anyone have a ballpark in terms of how much money the team made last year?



    Edits:

    Forbes pegged annual revs at $453m per year as of April 2018, with $86m in income.

    This article mentions that higher NESN ratings after a WS win = higher revenues in 2019.
     
    #1441 nattysez, Jan 18, 2019
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2019
  42. moondog80

    moondog80 heart is two sizes two small SoSH Member

    Messages:
    5,043
    They had the highest payroll by 30 million. I think we can’t reasonably expect that every year.
     
  43. StuckOnYouk

    StuckOnYouk Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    2,928
    They should spend at least 1 million more than the New York Yankees every single year.

    Look at what happened when we finally outspent them. 108 wins and a WS title
     
  44. DeadlySplitter

    DeadlySplitter Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    16,123
    https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/...FmdL/story.html?p1=Article_Recirculation_Pos1

    I mean, lots of words just being thrown around right now, take it all with a grain of salt.
     
  45. crow216

    crow216 Dragon Wangler SoSH Member

    Messages:
    12,461
    "How much money you're willing to lose" is a really specific and odd choice of words. Is he trying to communicate that they're operating at a loss?
     
  46. Plympton91

    Plympton91 bubble burster SoSH Member

    Messages:
    11,652
    They’re not, but I don’t think we should hold them to that standard. Being above the threshold costs them $10s of millions in revenue sharing, those are “losses.”

    This ownership has been fantastic beyond my wildest dreams. They’ve got a team that is a heavy favorite to be at least the wild card. A stacked a deep rotation. A well above average lineup that can be great. The pen is a casualty of the cost of the rotation and lineup and Cherington’s mistakes.

    Henry has spent plenty. Dombrowski is on the hook for allocating it the way he’s chosen to. For example, They could have taken a different strategy, and traded a slightly subsidized Porcello to the Reds and used the savings to get Britton and Brach. That transferred the question mark to starter #5 (Velazquez, Johnson, Wright) instead of the pen. We’ll have to see how that allocation choice works out.
     
  47. Savin Hillbilly

    Savin Hillbilly loves the secret sauce SoSH Member

    Messages:
    17,974
    I suspect he's using that phrase to mean "how much you're willing to overpay for the value you get." The luxury tax penalties boil down to paying more per unit productivity than teams that stay below the tax level. That's "losing" money in a relative sense, even if the bottom line remains black.
     
  48. Papelbon's Poutine

    Papelbon's Poutine Homeland Security SoSH Member

    Messages:
    17,440
    Cite for Porcello to Reds? Haven’t seen that.
     
  49. Plympton91

    Plympton91 bubble burster SoSH Member

    Messages:
    11,652
    It’s an example. The Reds took on $10 million for Tanner Roark, who isn’t as good as Porcello, so they were willing to accept at least that much payroll to improve their staff.

    But The larger point is They’ve got a $20 million 4th starter and now both Henry and Dombrowski are saying publicly that they don’t want to spend a lot more to improve the bullpen. That’s a choice they’re making. We’ll see how it works out for them.
     
  50. Papelbon's Poutine

    Papelbon's Poutine Homeland Security SoSH Member

    Messages:
    17,440
    It’s posturing. If they really are at $237M or whatever was cited already, they’re going over that second threshold at some point with mid season acquisitions.
     

Share This Page