Free Agents aren't free, then again nothing for nothing

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Hasn't it already been established that if they release Hanley, they owe him the 2019 option in addition to his 2018 salary? If they're supposed to be hell bent on not triggering that option, then DFAing him doesn't exactly fit with that plan.

And as for the idea of platooning him, in two of the last three years, he's had a reverse platoon split, and overall he doesn't have a very pronounced split at all (.838/.897 career OPS vs R/L). His weak seasons hitting LHP have come in weak seasons overall, and his strong seasons hitting LHP have come when he's hit RHP pretty damn well too. Essentially, if he's hitting well enough to hold up the short side of a platoon, chances are he's hitting well enough to carry a full time position.

I'm just not seeing how they're going to pull off a platoon with him. I can envision, if he's going well, he will outhit Moreland vs RHP. If he's not, he may not warrant a lineup spot even against LHP.

 

[BigPapiMPD34]

Hasn't it already been established that if they release Hanley, they owe him the 2019 option in addition to his 2018 salary? If they're supposed to be hell bent on not triggering that option, then DFAing him doesn't exactly fit with that plan.

And as for the idea of platooning him, in two of the last three years, he's had a reverse platoon split, and overall he doesn't have a very pronounced split at all (.838/.897 career OPS vs R/L). His weak seasons hitting LHP have come in weak seasons overall, and his strong seasons hitting LHP have come when he's hit RHP pretty damn well too. Essentially, if he's hitting well enough to hold up the short side of a platoon, chances are he's hitting well enough to carry a full time position.

I'm just not seeing how they're going to pull off a platoon with him. I can envision, if he's going well, he will outhit Moreland vs RHP. If he's not, he may not warrant a lineup spot even against LHP.

Has it? That doesn't seem to make any sense at all.

 

[soup17]

http://legacy.baseballprospectus.com/compensation/cots/al-east/boston-red-sox/

COTS has nothing about vesting if he is released. Don't know if that is definitive, but it's the best I could find.

 

[MikeM]

I doubt they'd DFA him, and I'm sure they'd be happy to move him to another team even if they have to pay the majority of the freight. But if they can't find a taker, even at 50% of his contract or less, then he'll be the short side of a platoon whether he likes it or not. And honestly, that would probably offer the most bang for their buck with the lineup next year.

Matt Kemp arguably makes a fairly decent comp to Hanley atm, and he's reportedly on the verge of getting a full release with no trade takers being out there. So even in the event we were looking to find any type of salary relief you are probably still running in to the same problem we would in the event of trying to unload Moreland's "reasonable" $6.5m latter. Somebody out there actually has to like the roster fit match up for their team before any type of situational value can even be established. If there isn't then it's simply dead money to us regardless what any projected paper value on a subsidized contract might say otherwise.

That said, I honestly don't understand how anybody can be as gung ho on potentially signing JDM as they might of been yesterday morning. Re-Signing Moreland was essentially a direct attack on the very heart of JDM's core appeal here to begin with, which was always about being the primary piece *helping* to upgrade the lineup and min/max a current 2 year window period. While certainly not losing sight in the process that there is an overwhelming chance that JDM will both see some notable regression next year, and that we'll probably spend the last 2/3 of his contract wishing it didn't exist from a dollars spent to production POV.

By itself and given the non-sugar coated reality that we just punted at 1B, the front end sell of JDM that offers one single lineup upgrade (granted a huge one) at the expensive of notably downgrading our OF defense just isn't tipping the "going for it" scales enough imo. At least in terms of justifying the accompanying amount of being reckless/stupid that comes with it.

 

[BigPapiMPD34]

I also have no idea to prove the theory that it wouldn't vest. But I'm convinced it wouldn't since it doesn't seem logical from a contract/legal perspective. It would give a player an incentive to play poorly to get themselves cut and therefore awarded $22M.

 

[chawson]

I also have no idea to prove the theory that it wouldn't vest. But I'm convinced it wouldn't since it doesn't seem logical from a contract/legal perspective. It would give a player an incentive to play poorly to get themselves cut and therefore awarded $22M.

It does not vest. Speier covered it in October. Been linked a few times on this board.