I was joking. Hence the smiley.But they couldn't afford 5/125 with Encarnacion's $20m on the books.
I was joking. Hence the smiley.But they couldn't afford 5/125 with Encarnacion's $20m on the books.
Perhaps this is where "NewKnee" fits into the plans LF/2B/3BSo if they "revisit" this JBJ/Encarnacion deal, who is the third starting outfielder? Sign someone like Carlos Gonzalez? Seems like that would approach spending more than just waiting out Martinez.
Yeah, the timing and the fact it didn't even get leaked until now is just too suspect.Stating the obvious perhaps, but this feels like it was leaked to put pressure on JDM.
It's actually EE/Bruce and Hanley at 1B against JDM/Bradley and re-signing Moreland (while releasing Hanley I guess?).JBJ for a 35 year old Encarnacion, then a 3 year deal for Jay Bruce is better than signing JD Martinez and keeping JBJ?
That's plausible, but still a good deal for the Tribe, I think.Spitballing -- what about JBJ and a subsidized Hanley (about half-price?) for Encarnacion/modest prospect.
Getting Hanley off the roster clears a more obvious role for EE, and the size of the subsidy helps mitigate the value difference between JBJ and EE. Cleveland gets some power to replace Encarnacion at DH.
Of course the big risk for the Tribe would be what if Hanley's 2019 option vests...
Edit: I really suck at this, as I'm sure I'll learn shortly.
Well, you'd have to factor in the commitment length aspect as well. If all you care about is the offense and your projections have EE being the only visible/attainable alternative that is somewhat close to JDM there next year, keeping it at cheaper 2 years (even on an older guy) has it's surface appeal.So we consider acquiring EE via trade for his age 35-36 seasons yet dont want to pay JDM past 34. Got it.
If we had 100% certainty that JDM would still be a >130 wRC+ hitter at ages 33 and 34, I think the Sox would pull a hamstring running to the bank to cough up for his age 35-36 seasons at an AAV of just over $20M.So we consider acquiring EE via trade for his age 35-36 seasons yet dont want to pay JDM past 34. Got it.
One way you could up the players' share of operating revenue is by raising minimum salaries and forcing teams to pay higher wages for "team control" seasons. This would have the secondary effect of unfreezing the free agent market.Do you really think a guy with 4-5 years of team control left is going to go on strike because a few free agents aren't signing the 100 million dollar+ offers they have?
Sure, but there is no reason the league would re-open a collective bargaining agreement they just finished a little more than a year ago and make major changes to it just because some not incredible free agents aren't signing their $100 million offers. I think Tony Clark realizes he messed up, and so do the agents for these not exactly elite free agents, but the overwhelming majority of players aren't affected, and teams certainly aren't complaining. There are lots of ways we can make the distribution of wealth between controlled players, free agents, and teams more "fairly", but we have years before it will actually be something that happens, and the reality may be different then after more years under this system.One way you could up the players' share of operating revenue is by raising minimum salaries and forcing teams to pay higher wages for "team control" seasons. This would have the secondary effect of unfreezing the free agent market.
Well, there's one reason -- a strike.Sure, but there is no reason the league would re-open a collective bargaining agreement
The players can't go on strike until the CBA expires - if they tried to before that, it'd be an unfair labor practice and they'd probably end up owing damages to the owners. So pretty much zero chance of a strike before then.Well, there's one reason -- a strike.
Clark may have fucked up but it's not like the players lose all their leverage. They can renegotiate the CBA.
For as slowly as the FA hitter market has moved, the better relievers are all but gone. Would like to see them add Watson. A Kimbrel/Smith/Kelly/Watson back end is a playoff bullpen. Coupled with what hopes to be a top-notch rotation, they should be near the best in the league in the pitching department.Per Heyman, the Sox are in on Tony Watson:
I just don't see the point of spending that much on the next to last guy out of the pen.
I think this would signal an end of the Brock Holt era, if true.Ian Browne suggesting something could be close with the Sox and Nunez.
http://rotoworld.com/player/mlb/4433/eduardo-nunez
"MLB.com's Ian Browne reports that the Red Sox and free agent Eduardo Nunez are talking and could be close to a new deal."
Would love to see that happen.Ian Browne suggesting something could be close with the Sox and Nunez.
http://rotoworld.com/player/mlb/4433/eduardo-nunez
"MLB.com's Ian Browne reports that the Red Sox and free agent Eduardo Nunez are talking and could be close to a new deal."
If they sign JDM, I would prefer a bench of Holt, Leon, Swihart and Moreland (Nunez starting at 2B and Ramirez/Moreland timeshare at 1B). Marrero gets bumped as they have plenty of IF depth (Nunez, Holt, Hernandez, Lin). Brentz also isn't needed for LF as Holt/Swihart can cover LF, as well as JDM when he doesn't DH.I think this would signal an end of the Brock Holt era, if true.
A 2-year deal signals to me that Pedroia’s knee is not where the team hoped it would be.Happy news finally. I think it's the end for Holt if JDM comes in. Otherwise maybe Leon ? Hard to see keeping Swihart in this scenario unless he catches.
It's a one year plus an option. Very likely it's a player option, which doesn't really scream Pedroia insurance for 2019.A 2-year deal signals to me that Pedroia’s knee is not where the team hoped it would be.
Did Dr Nick do his surgery?A 2-year deal signals to me that Pedroia’s knee is not where the team hoped it would be.
Or Holt is toast.A 2-year deal signals to me that Pedroia’s knee is not where the team hoped it would be.
I think Hanley is right - if he hits, he plays. Even if they sign JD (not a given), if he's hitting he'll get his ABs, and I seriously doubt it would be a platoon. When healthy and "on", he's a better hitter than Moreland, so I'd expect him to be in the lineup at 1B more often than not - they can always bring Moreland in for late-inning defense. And he'd get some time at DH on days when JD is in LF when one of the OFs sit.
I think the chances they trade JBJ are slim to none.
I didn't mean to suggest that Moreland would only be used for late inning defense - only that, if he hits, Hanley would be the starter at 1B more days than Moreland on days when JD is DHing (assuming a JD deal is forthcoming).As bad as I think the Moreland signing was, I don't think they did it with the intention of using him for late inning defense. And they knew JDM was a strong possibility.
Depends on what you want an athlete that no longer runs much as part of his sport to look like. "In shape" is a shifting goal depending on what you want to do athletically.gotta say, that's the best looking shape Hanley's been in since he's been on the Sox. Doesn't look like a meathead lifter.
I suppose. I thought his bulk wasn't a great help to a baseball swing. He looks more like a supple leopard for sure though. If you get the reference.Depends on what you want an athlete that no longer runs much as part of his sport to look like. "In shape" is a shifting goal depending on what you want to do athletically.