337 replies to this topic

[86spike]

Rumors, news, dramatic reenactments, shaddow puppets...

all are welcome here.

[86spike]

a little summary with a couple of interesting process changes since last year:

NEW YORK (AP)— Derek Jeter, Carl Crawford and Jayson Werth head a list of 142 players who have become free agents following the World Series.

Ace pitcher Cliff Lee also joins the group Monday night after he and the Texas Rangers lost to San Francisco in five games. First baseman Aubrey Huff is one of five players from the champion Giants on the list.

Paul Konerko, Mariano Rivera, Victor Martinez, Jim Thome and Manny Ramirez also are free agents.

Under an agreement between players and owners announced Sept. 30, players no longer need to file for free agency. Teams now have only a five-day exclusive negotiating period with their own free agents, down from 15 days.

Clubs and players also must decide on options in free agents’ contracts this week.

[yecul]

Per Gammo: http://hardballtalk....ictor-martinez/

Victor Martinez unlikely to stay with Sox. Tigers are the likely top suitor.

[gammoseditor]

Per Gammo: http://hardballtalk....ictor-martinez/

Victor Martinez unlikely to stay with Sox. Tigers are the likely top suitor.

The Tigers have the 19th pick in the first round. It's also the first pick that isn't protected. The top 15 are protected plus an extra three picks to teams that did not sign first round pick in the top 15 last year.

[RedOctober3829]

No surprise here, but will Bill Hall be back on the bench next year at a lower number?

The Red Sox, as expected, have told Bill Hall they will reject the $9.25 million option but want him back. Hall is expected to see what's available for a starting job, but could return to Boston.

Link

[wutang112878]

The Tigers have the 19th pick in the first round. It's also the first pick that isn't protected. The top 15 are protected plus an extra three picks to teams that did not sign first round pick in the top 15 last year.

Good luck to them if they sign him to a 4+ year deal, and thanks for the pick. I can understand overpaying in years or AAV for a good player that would push you into contention or over the top or a great franchise type player, but the Tigers arent that close and Victor is very good but isnt a franchise guy.

[judyb]

The Tigers have the 19th pick in the first round. It's also the first pick that isn't protected. The top 15 are protected plus an extra three picks to teams that did not sign first round pick in the top 15 last year.

It looks like the only free agents ranked higher than Martinez are Lee, Jeter, Rivera, Soriano, and Werth.
http://www.mlbtrader...s-rankings.html

[BosRedSox5]

Okay, what if we do the stocking up on picks move and:

Offer arb to Beltre and Martinez and allow them to sign elsewhere.

Re-sign Ortiz to a reasonable extension.

Re-sign Varitek.

Trade redundancy in the farm system (Lars/Rizzo, Kalish/Riddick, Lavarnway/Expo... you get the idea) for Dan Uggla and convert him to 3B.

Let Riddick/Kalish compete for LF or CF whichever Jacoby leaves open.

It's never going to happen, but we'd be flush with draft picks and pretty decent on the field.

[nvalvo]

Okay, what if we do the stocking up on picks move and:

After watching Brian Sabean turn a bunch of good draft picks into a championship-caliber rotation, I like this idea.

[The Boomer]

Okay, what if we do the stocking up on picks move and:

Offer arb to Beltre and Martinez and allow them to sign elsewhere.

Definitely.

Re-sign Ortiz to a reasonable extension.

Reasonable being the operative word.

Re-sign Varitek.

OK as a backup and tutor.

Trade redundancy in the farm system (Lars/Rizzo, Kalish/Riddick, Lavarnway/Expo... you get the idea) for Dan Uggla and convert him to 3B.

More likely than redundant prospects, I would trade a redundant starter (i.e. Dice-K) to the NL West for a disappointing but experienced catcher needing a change of scenery. Ianetta and Martin would be my targets. Would Dice-K and one of those redundant prospects get either of them? Doubront (assuming he comes back recovered from his injury) will better develop as the # 5 ML starter. Shifting Youks to 3B and acquiring a 1B or leaving him at 1B and acquiring a 3B without sacrificing prospects would be a better plan IMO.

Let Riddick/Kalish compete for LF or CF whichever Jacoby leaves open.

This would be my preference.

It's never going to happen, but we'd be flush with draft picks and pretty decent on the field.

Edited by The Boomer, 02 November 2010 - 09:48 PM.

[sodenj5]

After watching Brian Sabean turn a bunch of good draft picks into a championship-caliber rotation, I like this idea.

The Sox already have 2 really, really good home grown pitchers with Lester and Buchholz and with guys like Kelly and Ranaudo in the system, they certainly have the makings of having a similarly formidable homegrown rotation in a few years.

[wutang112878]

Okay, what if we do the stocking up on picks move and:

It's never going to happen, but we'd be flush with draft picks and pretty decent on the field.

I like this baseball wise, but business wise with the amount of money coming off the books I think the 'operations' side of the Red Sox force Theo to make at least one big move. Alternatively, if Theo tells them to screw he could go with this plan and spend most of the money on minor bullpen upgrades and we would really have a pitching and defense team next year.

[Rough Carrigan]

After watching Brian Sabean turn a bunch of good draft picks into a championship-caliber rotation, I like this idea.

You've got to be able to make the picks. If you can't see who has real talent then it doesn't matter how good your picks are or how many of them you have.

Tim Lincecum was available to ANY team the year before the Giants picked him in the first half of the first round. But, the Red Sox, like everyone else, turned their noses up at paying him a bonus of about half of what Renaudo got. The Indians took Lincecum in something like the 8th round and tried to get him to sign for less but he wouldn't. He went back to college and had pretty much the same year as the year before and then got picked in the first round by the Giants.

Yes, pretty much everybody missed on him the first time but there was really no excuse. He was the same guy a year later. I guess that doesn't really indict the Red Sox scouting department comparatively except that it was pretty amazing that the team that luxuriated in 6 years of Pedro's pitching wouldn't take a chance on a small righty.

[Pandemonium67]

Well, Lincecum was picked in the 48th round first time around, but he was planning to go to college. Once his brilliant college career ended, SF got him with the 10th overall pick.

Believe me, this gets brought up often in Seattle. The M's had the 5th pick and chose Brandon Morrow instead of the guy right in their backyard. (It probably wouldn't have turned out like this, but I suppose you could speculate that the M's could've had Felix, Lincecum and Cliff Lee this year).

[nvalvo]

The Sox already have 2 really, really good home grown pitchers with Lester and Buchholz and with guys like Kelly and Ranaudo in the system, they certainly have the makings of having a similarly formidable homegrown rotation in a few years.

Exactly.

You've got to be able to make the picks. If you can't see who has real talent then it doesn't matter how good your picks are or how many of them you have.

Of course. I think our amateur scouts hit at pretty similar rates to most of the well-run teams. This is why picking three or four times in the first round, like we were able to do when we took Lowrie, Ellsbury and Buchholz in 2005 (along with misses like Hansen and — perhaps I'm premature here — Bowden), is so tantalizing.

Well, Lincecum was picked in the 48th round first time around, but he was planning to go to college. Once his brilliant college career ended, SF got him with the 10th overall pick.

Believe me, this gets brought up often in Seattle. The M's had the 5th pick and chose Brandon Morrow instead of the guy right in their backyard. (It probably wouldn't have turned out like this, but I suppose you could speculate that the M's could've had Felix, Lincecum and Cliff Lee this year).

I understand the story. The point, to me, is that SF has missed on some high-profile FA signings (Zito, Rowand), but by developing pitching and making savvy trades (Alderson for Freddy Sanchez, Bowker for Lopez), they were able to overcome those mis-allocated resources. I worry that the team may be getting too FA heavy, and I would like to get more pre-arb players into the mix. If Martinez and Beltre leave, we'll have a great opportunity to get younger. I am bullish on Daisuke, and neither expect nor want him to be dealt, but I would probably be in favor of a deal that brought back a young catcher.

Edited by nvalvo, 03 November 2010 - 01:12 AM.

[Eric Van]

Okay, what if we do the stocking up on picks move and:

Offer arb to Beltre and Martinez and allow them to sign elsewhere.

Trade redundancy in the farm system (Lars/Rizzo, Kalish/Riddick, Lavarnway/Expo... you get the idea) for Dan Uggla and convert him to 3B.

Dan Uggla is exactly a year younger than Adrian Beltre.

So your concept here is to trade a couple of prospects to vastly downgrade 3B, and then take the two draft picks, and hope to recoup the value of the prospects you traded ... three or four years down the line, after shelling out additional signing bonuses.

You have the inside track on signing one of the best 3B in the game, a guy who has averaged $18.2M of value the last seven years despite playing five of them in a ballpark he was the worst possible fit for. For reasons I've explained ad nauseam, he can almost certainly be signed for less than that. There's no scenario in which letting him go is better in the short or long run.

Honestly, I think if Beltre had won the Triple Crown and MVP the folks who were skeptical of his signing would be even more adamant about letting him walk, because they'd be worried he wouldn't be able to do it again. The Beltre supporters predicted he'd be great, the detractors thought he would be bad, and now it appears as if there was literally nothing Beltre could have done to change the detractor's minds. In fact, the better he performed, the stronger the detractors would want to let him go for fear we'd end up being stuck paying for a fluke season. I mean, if he'd hit .400 with 70 HR, you'd be absolutely apoplectic over the thought of re-signing him, right? Isn't that a little bit fucked in the head?

[TomTerrific]

Honestly, I think if Beltre had won the Triple Crown and MVP the folks who were skeptical of his signing would be even more adamant about letting him walk, because they'd be worried he wouldn't be able to do it again. The Beltre supporters predicted he'd be great, the detractors thought he would be bad, and now it appears as if there was literally nothing Beltre could have done to change the detractor's minds. In fact, the better he performed, the stronger the detractors would want to let him go for fear we'd end up being stuck paying for a fluke season. I mean, if he'd hit .400 with 70 HR, you'd be absolutely apoplectic over the thought of re-signing him, right? Isn't that a little bit fucked in the head?

EV, I'm usually with you, and yes, you were right about Beltre, but this last one is a bit of an exaggeration, no? If he hit .400 with 70 HR, my impression is it would clearly drive his asking price above his expected value. I can't imagine there wouldn't be at least one dolt of a GM that would offer him an outrageous contract we wouldn't want to match.

[Eric Van]

EV, I'm usually with you, and yes, you were right about Beltre, but this last one is a bit of an exaggeration, no? If he hit .400 with 70 HR, my impression is it would clearly drive his asking price above his expected value. I can't imagine there wouldn't be at least one dolt of a GM that would offer him an outrageous contract we wouldn't want to match.

"Driving his asking price above his expected value" is only possible if you have removed the most recent season from the estimation of his expected value.

Now, sometimes you do want to do that. It might be Brady Anderson probably juicing and then deciding he didn't like the PED side effects, it might be Norm Cash corking his bat ... these were fluke seasons which by definition are seasons no one saw coming. And yes, fluke seasons can mislead dolt GMs.

But no 2010 season by Beltre could possibly be regarded as a fluke because he had already had an outrageously great one at age 25. No 2010 season by Beltre could possibly be regarded as a fluke because folks like me spent all winter slicing and dicing numbers and kept concluding that he would be great.(and you can bet that some of those people were in the Sox F.O.). A great Beltre 2010 is evidence that his 2004 was more or less for real and that there was something particularly bad about playing for the Mariners (ballpark, weather, coaching, lineup, clubhouse, travel schedule, drinking water) that held his numbers down severely. (It's possible that when players play in a park ill-suited for them, they sometimes change their approach to fit the park in a way that hurts their road numbers. Bill Mueller never got to utilize a Fenway stroke till he came here and that seemed to work much better on the road, too.)

So there is no reason to remove 2010 from the estimation of his expected value (it does need to be tweaked downward slightly because he had some BABIP luck, but as I earlier figured, we're talking about it being at worst a $26M season instead of a $28). So the better he played in 2010, the more it' should be taken as evidence that he's really good. .400 / 70 was obviously an exaggeration ... but if he had matched or somewhat exceeded his LA numbers (in a way that would be typical for a pair of seasons at age 31 and 25), that would constitute a stronger case for re-signing him, not a weaker one. You would only start discounting part of his numbers if he went beyond what you would have expected of him at age 31 based on his age 25 -- and it's quite possible that other GMs would discount them as well.

The bottom line is that Beltre has had two incredible seasons and in between had five merely good ones (at the plate), all of which were with the Mariners at Safeco. Every interested GM has to wonder whether Beltre in his ballpark will be Safeco 2, or not. Except us.

Edited by Eric Van, 03 November 2010 - 06:59 AM.

[NickEsasky]

"Driving his asking price above his expected value" is only possible if you have removed the most recent season from the estimation of his expected value.

Now, sometimes you do want to do that. It might be Brady Anderson probably juicing and then deciding he didn't like the PED side effects, it might be Norm Cash corking his bat ... these were fluke seasons which by definition are seasons no one saw coming. And yes, fluke seasons can mislead dolt GMs.

But no 2010 season by Beltre could possibly be regarded as a fluke because he had already had an outrageously great one at age 25. No 2010 season by Beltre could possibly be regarded as a fluke because folks like me spent all winter slicing and dicing numbers and kept concluding that he would be great.(and you can bet that some of those people were in the Sox F.O.). A great Beltre 2010 is evidence that his 2004 was more or less for real and that there was something particularly bad about playing for the Mariners (ballpark, weather, coaching, lineup, clubhouse, travel schedule, drinking water) that held his numbers down severely. (It's possible that when players play in a park ill-suited for them, they sometimes change their approach to fit the park in a way that hurts their road numbers. Bill Mueller never got to utilize a Fenway stroke till he came here and that seemed to work much better on the road, too.)

So there is no reason to remove 2010 from the estimation of his expected value (it does need to be tweaked downward slightly because he had some BABIP luck, but as I earlier figured, we're talking about it being at worst a $26M season instead of a $28). So the better he played in 2010, the more it' should be taken as evidence that he's really good. .400 / 70 was obviously an exaggeration ... but if he had matched or somewhat exceeded his LA numbers (in a way that would be typical for a pair of seasons at age 31 and 25), that would constitute a stronger case for re-signing him, not a weaker one. You would only start discounting part of his numbers if he went beyond what you would have expected of him at age 31 based on his age 25 -- and it's quite possible that other GMs would discount them as well.

The bottom line is that Beltre has had two incredible seasons and in between had five merely good ones (at the plate), all of which were with the Mariners at Safeco. Every interested GM has to wonder whether Beltre in his ballpark will be Safeco 2, or not. Except us.

Well don't all other GMs have to wonder is his BABIP is sustainable, how well he will age (especially defensively), and if perhaps his 2010 season was another possible PED aided contract push before handing him a lucrative long term contract?

I think most people here would want Beltre back for 1-2 years, but most worry about years 3,4, and possibly 5.

[The Boomer]

I would prefer that they follow through with the "bridge" concept. The bullpen and catching ought to be the main priorities this offseason. Overall, they need to go with younger players. A committment to a healthy Salty with another relatively young catcher is the way to go IMO. I have a gut feeling that Rizzo could credibly leap to the majors at 1B bumping Youks to 3B although I expect they will sign somebody as a one year corner infield buffer. Lowrie, if he isn't the SS, will be way better IMO at 3B than Uggla or somebody like that. Kalish and Reddick seem ready too although Nava is fine in reserve if one of them needs to start next season at AAA. Frankly, Beltre provides the template for how they should approach free agency. If there is a corner infielder (not a Type A free agent) with a similar profile who needs to prove himself in a one year deal with an option (Berkman?) that makes more sense. Papi will be signed only under this same concept. Adrian Gonzalez realistically won't be available, if at all, until the trade deadline. By then, Rizzo or Anderson or both might be ready. If you can send Dice-K to the NL West for Ianetta, Martin or somebody like that, I would jump on that. IMO Doubront won't be much of a downgrade, if any, in the rotation at minimmum cost. Possibly sooner rather than later, Kelly and Reynaudo might tempt Sox management to trade away Beckett and Lackey (who should be better next season IMO). It makes more sense to see them continue to get younger and give opportunities to their bluechip prospects. In many ways, this will be one of the most interesting and important offseasons in quite a while because we will definitely find out how much confidence management has in their internal scouting and development. Beltre was arguably the most cost effective free agent signing last winter and I expect that Sox management, if they delve into free agency, will attempt to duplicate this concept rather than overpay for anyone.

Edited by The Boomer, 03 November 2010 - 07:54 AM.

[BucketOBalls]

Well don't all other GMs have to wonder is his BABIP is sustainable, how well he will age (especially defensively), and if perhaps his 2010 season was another possible PED aided contract push before handing him a lucrative long term contract?

I think most people here would want Beltre back for 1-2 years, but most worry about years 3,4, and possibly 5.

Not to mention that Beltre's style is based on being able to hit homers from one knee and race across the infield, barehand a ball and throw flat-footed to first. When those stupendous reflexes decline a little it could get ugly quick in years 3,4,5.

[Super Nomario]

Not to mention that Beltre's style is based on being able to hit homers from one knee and race across the infield, barehand a ball and throw flat-footed to first. When those stupendous reflexes decline a little it could get ugly quick in years 3,4,5.

Those who've studied career arcs have found the opposite is true - it's the guys who only have a little athletic ability who can't afford to lose any. If Beltre loses a step or two he can get some more strength, if he loses a little reflexes he can become more selective, etc.

[Bdanahy14]

Those who've studied career arcs have found the opposite is true - it's the guys who only have a little athletic ability who can't afford to lose any. If Beltre loses a step or two he can get some more strength, if he loses a little reflexes he can become more selective, etc.

I had a lengthy discussion with a pal on this the other day in regard to Crawford. I was arguing your point, but couldn't find any of the studies that point towards the fact. Do you happen to have a link?

[djhb20]

"Driving his asking price above his expected value" is only possible if you have removed the most recent season from the estimation of his expected value.

I don't understand this at all. You don't think it's possible that a GM out there is baseball-world would overreact to a good season and pay more than a player is worth? And, indeed, that the probability of that happening goes up as a player's season gets better? Even for a legit good season?

If, as was suggested, he hit .400 with 70HR, you don't think that some GM would be willing to pay him more than his expected-value going forward? This statement only makes sense if you believe that, as a free-agent-to-be's stats get better, GMs are no more likely to overestimate value. This may be, but since we've consistently seen GMs over the years underestimate the risk of injury, underestimate the rate at which players age, and overestimate true ability, I find it hard to believe.

There's really no better example of the "winner's curse" than free agency. Sure, some guys outplay their contracts; it's not amazingly rare or anything. But, generally, free agents get more than they end up being worth on the field, don't they?

It may be fucked in the head, as you said, but it seems not surprising that:

(a) Beltre could perform very well;
(b) This could confirm to you that he is very good; and
© This means you are hesitant to sign him as a free agent.

And there's nothing specific about Beltre in there. This wouldn't surprise me for any player. Indeed, it wouldn't surprise me for people to have been more interested in signing him following a bad year (or an injury-plagued year) for similar reasons. Not sophisticated GMs will misvalue players. This is surely amplified for "fluke" good and bad seasons. But, I don't understand why we'd think this isn't also true for "legit" seasons. The Winner's Curse is pretty well-established in common-value bidding situations (or even mixed common- and private-value bidding situations), which is what free agency is.

And yes, fluke seasons can mislead dolt GMs.

Even good, non-fluke seasons can mislead dolt GMs (and good ones). And, maybe you meant something else. But I find it very hard to believe what you wrote above.

[Super Nomario]

I had a lengthy discussion with a pal on this the other day in regard to Crawford. I was arguing your point, but couldn't find any of the studies that point towards the fact. Do you happen to have a link?

Here's an old SoSH thread discussing it: http://sonsofsamhorn...-james-concept/
Here's an article that quotes James' NHBA: http://www.fangraphs...le-skills-cust/

[SoxFanSince57]

I assume that Bill Hall will find a starting gig somewhere.

“Yeah, we’d love to have Bill Hall back in the right circumstances. He really, I thought, blossomed this year in a super utility role. He played so well, in fact, especially in terms of his power production that he might attract interest from a number of teams as an everyday player and get more substantial playing time. And if that happens, I’m sure that would be of interest to Billy. If later in the offseason, he’s in a position to consider a super utility role and based on the moves we’ve made with our everyday players, that type of player makes sense on our roster, I’m sure we’ll be talking. He was nothing but a great teammate while he was here and a contributing player.”

Theo on Bill Hall

[MHead81]

From Gordon Edes today at ESPNBoston.com

The Red Sox, as expected, have contacted agent Scott Boras regarding their interest in free-agent outfielder Jayson Werth, according to a baseball source. There was no word yet on whether the team was pursuing outfielder Carl Crawford, although that would appear to be a no-brainer.

Several teams have already indicated interest in two other Boras clients, third baseman Adrian Beltre and catcher Jason Varitek.

This is all very early in the process, and the Beltre and Werth negotiations are expected to be protracted.

http://sports.espn.g...tory?id=5780299

[mabrowndog]

Newsday's Ken Davidoff ranks his top 31 MLB Free Agents and takes some wild stabs at where each will end up, for how long, and for how much. Sox-relevant content:

3. Jayson Werth , OF Arguably the best righty-hitting outfielder in the game. Prediction: Red Sox, Five years, $90 million.

5. Adrian Beltre , 3B Signed a "pillow"� contract with the Red Sox after a subpar 2009, and now he's fully awake. Prediction: Athletics, Three years, $40 million.

8. Victor Martinez , C Not a great receiver, but a great bat at the toughest position to fill. Prediction: Tigers, Four years, $45 million.

28. John Buck , C Enjoyed a well-timed career year. Prediction: Red Sox, Two years, $10 million.

31. Felipe Lopez , IF His dreadful 2010, including a release by the Cardinals, will deflate his value. Prediction: Marlins, One year, $1 million.

Thoughts:

* I think the $16M projected AAV for Werth is about right, but I'll be shocked if he gets five years from Boston (or anyone for that matter).
* If the Tigers offer 4/$45M to Victor, then vaya con dios.
* I can't help but think a 3/$40M deal for Beltre is one the Sox can and should match or exceed in dollars, but not in years.
* I posted on Buck in the Catchers Thread.

Also, FWIW, Davidoff also has Manny going to Detroit for 1 year and $4M, which would be an absolute bargain. Frankly I don't see him signing for less than twice that.

Oh, and Joaquin Benoit, who ought to be a top bullpen target of the Sox this winter, is nowhere to be found in his rankings.

Edited by mabrowndog, 08 November 2010 - 02:27 PM.

[Yaz4Ever]

Mark, I agree Davidoff is off on the number of years the Red Sox will give to Werth. I could see 3 years, $45-48 million. It wouldn't break my hear to lock him in for 4-5 years, but that's not in Theo's track record. Also, I think the $16M AAV would be a bit high for a contract guaranteeing that much time.

How Joaquin Benoit is not listed in the top 31, I can't explain. Not a top 20 guy for sure, but somewhere around 27-30 would be a reasonable expectation.

1 year/$4M for Manny?? Wow. I honestly think he's simply retire if his prospects were that low.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, Beltre should be our number one target right now. Hopefully, Theo is working hard at retaining his services. I was not a fan of signing him when Theo did last winter, but I fully admit I couldn't have been more off-base on that. Beltre, Buck, Werth, and Benoit would be a very nice winter. Upping the ante and going for Crawford, or even better Adrian Gonzalez via trade, would significantly improve things. Sign the first four and bring back a healthy Pedroia and Youks, count on Beckett and Lackey giving us at least 2 wins more (each) and .5-1 runs lower in their ERA and we are uber competitive in this division - especially if Crawford ends up on the west coast.

[Bob Montgomery's Helmet Hat]

Newsday's Ken Davidoff ranks his top 31 MLB Free Agents and takes some wild stabs at where each will end up, for how long, and for how much. Sox-relevant content:


Thoughts:

* I think the $16M projected AAV for Werth is about right, but I'll be shocked if he gets five years from Boston (or anyone for that matter).

Granted, I still use a slide rule, but 5 yrs/$90M comes out to an AAV of $18 million when I do the math. And that seems high to me.

Edited by Bob Montgomery's Helmet Hat, 08 November 2010 - 02:50 PM.

[E5 Yaz]

Daviddoff:

2. Carl Crawford , OF A career-high 19 homers could alleviate fears about his reliance on speed. Prediction: Angels — Six years, $96 million.

3. Jayson Werth , OF Arguably the best righty-hitting outfielder in the game. Prediction: Red Sox — Five years, $90 million.

There isn't a chance in hell that Boras lets Werth sign for a penny less than Crawford. Boras, as usual, will stall until the player he doesn't represent (Crawford) gets his deal ... then come in with Werth at a higher number, to show potential clients that he gets them top dollar.

[kazuneko]

* I think the $16M million projected AAV for Werth is about right, but I'll be shocked if he gets five years from Boston (or anyone for that matter).
* I can't help but think a 3/$40M deal for Beltre is one the Sox can and should match or exceed in dollars, but not in years.

Actually, what seems to stand out most about Davidoff's article is its logical inconsistency...which makes me think all of what he says is best ignored.
How is it, for example, that he has Werth going for 18 million per year (not $16 million) over 5 years while only sees Beltre (born within a month of Werth) getting 3 years for less than half what Werth gets.
Umh, Beltre has had a better career, was at least as good offensively in 2010 and plays far better defense at a far more important position. Also, as you note, if Beltre is actually willing to consider 3 years 40 million from Oakland than why not just return to Boston for 3 years 45 million (which Theo would almost certainly consider)? I think Beltre will actually sign for far more than that and it won't be with Oakland. Actually, I'd be pretty surprised if he didn't get 5 years and he if didn't end up back in the city he supposedly never wanted to leave in the first place (LA..this time with the Angels).

[Eric Van]

Newsday's Ken Davidoff ranks his top 31 MLB Free Agents and takes some wild stabs at where each will end up, for how long, and for how much. Sox-relevant content:

Good to know that the CHB is not the only guy who gets paid to write about baseball who doesn't know jack about the game. The notion that the Sox would rather spend $90M on Jayson Werth than $45M on Adrian Beltre goes beyond the merely laughable in the direction of Moe, Larry, and Curly.

E5Yaz -- it's good to see at least some of last winter's Beltre skeptics change their minds. And as I've said elsewhere, I don't think there has ever been an off-season priority of Theo's as high as re-signing him.

[E5 Yaz]

E5Yaz -- it's good to see at least some of last winter's Beltre skeptics change their minds. And as I've said elsewhere, I don't think there has ever been an off-season priority of Theo's as high as re-signing him.

Whatcha talkin bout Willis?

[yecul]

And as I've said elsewhere

You've talked about Beltre previously?

[mabrowndog]

Granted, I still use a slide rule, but 5 yrs/$90M comes out to an AAV of $18 million when I do the math. And that seems high to me.

I really need to lay off the Robitussin and Nyquil for the rest of the day. And yeah, $18M is definitely a reach.

[Savin Hillbilly]

Mark, I agree Davidoff is off on the number of years the Red Sox will give to Werth. I could see 3 years, $45-48 million. It wouldn't break my hear to lock him in for 4-5 years, but that's not in Theo's track record.

Au contraire, mon frere.

OK, so Werth is about 6 months older than Drew was, but still....Theo has shown that he will sign guys in their 30s to 5-year contracts. In fact, he's shown that he will sign guys in their 30s with significant injury histories to 5-year contracts.

[Bowlerman9]

Au contraire, mon frere.

OK, so Werth is about 6 months older than Drew was, but still....Theo has shown that he will sign guys in their 30s to 5-year contracts. In fact, he's shown that he will sign guys in their 30s with significant injury histories to 5-year contracts.

Is that the exception or the rule?

At that time, the Sox had no prospects ready to play RF, Nixon was a shell of his former self and not very useful anymore, and Drew was the one and only good RFer on the market.

Currently, the Sox have 3 major league OFers (Drew, Cameron, Ellsbury) and two prospects in waiting (Reddick and Kalish).

I'd say the JD Drew contract will be the exception and not the rule.

[JakeRae]

Is that the exception or the rule?

At that time, the Sox had no prospects ready to play RF, Nixon was a shell of his former self and not very useful anymore, and Drew was the one and only good RFer on the market.

Currently, the Sox have 3 major league OFers (Drew, Cameron, Ellsbury) and two prospects in waiting (Reddick and Kalish).

I'd say the JD Drew contract will be the exception and not the rule.

Building on these points, Drew had a career .286/.393/.512 line at the time of his signing. Werth is a career .272/.367/.481 hitter. If we want to just look at the 4 years prior to signing, Both players have better lines, but the approximately .050 gap in OPS remains. Drew was .292/.408/.528. Werth is .282/.380/.506.

Even if we assume their defense is a wash (which is a favorable assumption for Werth) Drew was a significantly better player, when signed, than Werth is right now. Of course Theo will give a 5-year contract to the right player. But, is Werth that player? If he costs 5/90, my guess is the answer is a relatively easy no.

[Lose Remerswaal]

Daviddoff:

2. Carl Crawford , OF A career-high 19 homers could alleviate fears about his reliance on speed. Prediction: Angels — Six years, $96 million.

3. Jayson Werth , OF Arguably the best righty-hitting outfielder in the game. Prediction: Red Sox — Five years, $90 million.

There isn't a chance in hell that Boras lets Werth sign for a penny less than Crawford. Boras, as usual, will stall until the player he doesn't represent (Crawford) gets his deal ... then come in with Werth at a higher number, to show potential clients that he gets them top dollar.

It is a higher per year for Werth than Crawford, so couldn't this work?

[Buzzkill Pauley]

E5Yaz -- it's good to see at least some of last winter's Beltre skeptics change their minds. And as I've said elsewhere, I don't think there has ever been an off-season priority of Theo's as high as re-signing him.

I'm pretty sure winning the Matsuzaka signing derby was higher on the priority list, as the 2006 season was a total pitching cluster**** with no more Wells, no chance of Clement becoming the pitcher he was hoped to be, no way of knowing whether Lester would beat cancer, no clue how to fix Beckett, and no answers how Papelbon's shoulder injury would restrict him going forward.

That particular signing didn't work out as hoped, but ended with a World Series win the following season anyway.

I was wrong about Beltre, and am not sorry to have to admit it. Though much of his gain is attributable due to a BABiP higher than his career average by .037, I think he would likely provide an average OPS of ~.850 over the next 4 years. Still, if the Sox don't sign Beltre, there are other, though perhaps less palatable or obvious, options. The core players are coming back, and hopefully will rebound. That did not seem likely in Nov. '06.

[bosockboy]

I would say the Schilling courtship in 2003 was the highest priority item of his regime....he knew he had to get him if he wanted to beat the Yankees...period.

[Eric Van]

I would say the Schilling courtship in 2003 was the highest priority item of his regime....he knew he had to get him if he wanted to beat the Yankees...period.

I think it's fair to say that the Schilling and Dice-K courtships were at least the equal of Beltre in terms of desire, and in G38's case definitely surpassing it. But any time you are filling one spot in a rotation, there are alternatives that are reasonble. I really think that all the alternatives to re-signing Beltre are in some ways unpalatable*. So re-upping Beltre will not match the pleasure or excitement of landing Schill or Dice-K, but I think it will easily surpass them in the relief that they don't have to go to a Plan B. So in the sense of avoiding the headache of dealing with the failure, it may be the highest priority. It is admittedly a different mix of emotions and motivations.

*It's not just that you're a weaker team with Youkilis at 3b and X at 1B, but that you have money to spend and only Crawford or Werth to spend it on -- and I think it's clear that, taken in isolation, there is no pressing need to upgrade the outfield this year, and that furthermore neither Werth nor Crawford is anything close to a perfect fit.

[Rudy Pemberton]

*It's not just that you're a weaker team with Youkilis at 3b and X at 1B, but that you have money to spend and only Crawford or Werth to spend it on -- and I think it's clear that, taken in isolation, there is no pressing need to upgrade the outfield this year, and that furthermore neither Werth nor Crawford is anything close to a perfect fit.

The biggest issue I have with re-signing Beltre is that it likely takes you out of the running for Gonzalez, Pujols, or Fielder if any of them become available as FA's. Now, there's certainly risk in waiting for those guys to become FA's, but there's no way in hell SD and Milwaukee bring back those two, and there doesn't appear to be an opening in NY for them. I'm not really big on Fielder (no pun intended), but would love AG or Pujols. Wouldn't want to have to trade for AG, though. The ideal situation, IMO, is signing a stop-gap like Overbay to play first for a year, move Youks to 3rd, and then plan on landing one of the 1B FA's. It's a risk for sure, though, and it weakens the team for a season most likely.

[Toe Nash]

The biggest issue I have with re-signing Beltre is that it likely takes you out of the running for Gonzalez, Pujols, or Fielder if any of them become available as FA's. Now, there's certainly risk in waiting for those guys to become FA's, but there's no way in hell SD and Milwaukee bring back those two, and there doesn't appear to be an opening in NY for them. I'm not really big on Fielder (no pun intended), but would love AG or Pujols. Wouldn't want to have to trade for AG, though. The ideal situation, IMO, is signing a stop-gap like Overbay to play first for a year, move Youks to 3rd, and then plan on landing one of the 1B FA's. It's a risk for sure, though, and it weakens the team for a season most likely.

Fielder isn't much of a defensive first baseman. He would slot into our DH spot nicely if Ortiz leaves after 2011. I don't see why signing Beltre would prevent that, unless you think they couldn't afford him, which is only the case if they re-sign Beltre and add Werth and spend a bunch of money on the pen. And even then they could probably afford Fielder since they have Drew's and Papelbon's salaries coming off the books.

I agree that it would make a Gonzalez acquisitionuseless, unless Youk's defense has deteriorated such that he deserves to be the DH.

Edit: If Pujols becomes available you make room for him and worry about it later.

Edited by Toe Nash, 09 November 2010 - 09:57 AM.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Fielder certainly would fit as DH, but he's really the least attractive (no pun intended) target among the three, IMO. Ultimately, though, it is probably an overreaction on my end. With Papi gone at that point, you could always rotate Youkilis and whoever is signed b/w DH and 1B, I guess.

[bosockboy]

With Youk's ability to play 3B, a rotating DH platoon of Gonzalez/Beltre/Youkilis makes a ton of sense. I don't think signing Beltre ends the pursuit of another bat. I would think, though, that if that were in the plans, it would be hard to sign both Beltre and Werth/Crawford if they knew they were waiting to sign Gonzalez for 160 million or so.

[JMDurron]

*It's not just that you're a weaker team with Youkilis at 3b and X at 1B, but that you have money to spend and only Crawford or Werth to spend it on -- and I think it's clear that, taken in isolation, there is no pressing need to upgrade the outfield this year, and that furthermore neither Werth nor Crawford is anything close to a perfect fit.

I am completely with you on the first part here (Beltre at 3B and Youkilis at 1B is superior to all alternatives), but I might quibble with your assertion that "there is no pressing need to upgrade the outfield this year." You must have a more optimistic appraisal of Cameron's ability to bounce back from multiple injuries at age 38 than I am, and/or are more certain of Kalish's ability to stick as a starting OFer in 2011 than I am. I would absolutely make Adrian Beltre priority #1 by a large margin, and believe that neither Werth nor Crawford are as ideal (or likely) fits on this roster at the $ they will command compared to Beltre, but there is some room (and arguably, need) to upgrade one of the OF positions.

[Eric Van]

The biggest issue I have with re-signing Beltre is that it likely takes you out of the running for Gonzalez, Pujols, or Fielder if any of them become available as FA's. Now, there's certainly risk in waiting for those guys to become FA's, but there's no way in hell SD and Milwaukee bring back those two, and there doesn't appear to be an opening in NY for them. I'm not really big on Fielder (no pun intended), but would love AG or Pujols. Wouldn't want to have to trade for AG, though. The ideal situation, IMO, is signing a stop-gap like Overbay to play first for a year, move Youks to 3rd, and then plan on landing one of the 1B FA's. It's a risk for sure, though, and it weakens the team for a season most likely.

If Gonzalez were a crappy fielder, you'd sign him in an instant to be Papi's successor at DH, right? So the reason you wouldn't sign him is that he's too good. OK, so you would pay for defense that you wouldn't be using if you had him and Youk split 1B and DH, but this team can afford to do that. The way Youk plays, spending time at DH might be good for him, and as bosockboy points out, ditto for Beltre.

Furthermore, if Beltre is out for a very prolonged time (q.v. Ellsbury, Cameron, Pedroia, Youkils 2010), you have the option of playing Youk at 3B and Gonzalez at 1B, and now you can plug in any bat you can find at DH rather than Marco Scutaro's or whoemever else is your back MI, without killing your 1B defense, too. That is taking the potentially huge bonus of Youk's ability to play 3B and making sure it's workable (if a Beltre injury meant Fielder or Dun at 1B and Youk at 3B, you might prefer to go Lowrie 3B, Scutaro / reserve MI at SS instead. Of course, if Anderson or Rizzo is still around, they could play 1B and Fielder or Dunn could stay at DH ... but maybe they're not around, or maybe there's a better DH option ).

I actually think this the plan: corner the market on All-Star Adrians*.

Ellsbury
Pedroia
Gonzalez
Youkilis
Choo? (big trade next winter featuring Lars or Rizzo)
Beltre
Lowrie
Kalish
Saltalamacchia

That would score some runs.


*There have only been 8 Adrians in MLB history and Beltre and Gonzalez are the only All-Stars.

[Eric Van]

I am completely with you on the first part here (Beltre at 3B and Youkilis at 1B is superior to all alternatives), but I might quibble with your assertion that "there is no pressing need to upgrade the outfield this year." You must have a more optimistic appraisal of Cameron's ability to bounce back from multiple injuries at age 38 than I am, and/or are more certain of Kalish's ability to stick as a starting OFer in 2011 than I am. I would absolutely make Adrian Beltre priority #1 by a large margin, and believe that neither Werth nor Crawford are as ideal (or likely) fits on this roster at the $ they will command compared to Beltre, but there is some room (and arguably, need) to upgrade one of the OF positions.

Here's a way of looking at this rationally, maybe.

Imagine that Cameron was the only guy that got hurt. His 3.9 lost WAR would still give us a worse injury load than the Rays or Yankees -- in fact, only the Twins, Rangers, and Phillies would have been hurt more by position player injuries. But the other 11 wins worth of injuries? Didn't happen. (Note that that number doesn't even include Varitek since he was a backup.)

So, the Sox won 100 games and won the division by 6 or 7 games and went deep into the playoffs if not actually all the way. With a crappy pen, which you're fixing, and with the B/L/M rotation disappointment.

You expect Cameron returning to be an upgrade to Darnell McDonald, and you have Kalish and maybe Reddick as alternatives. Do you still think there's any kind of need to make that OF better?

Or put it this way: what's the difference going to be between Crawford / Werth and the best of Cameron, Kalish, and Reddick? Is it worth the extra salary, which would almost certainly put you over the tax limit, even for a year, to say nothing of the long range commitment? Does it substantially increase the odds of making the playoffs, or is it the equivalent of using your closer to protect a 4-run lead?

The key is that neither signing would be a good long-term move (IMO), and since there's no pressing need now, you pass. (If Beltre walks, it's a different story.)