237 replies to this topic

[IpswichSox]

Not to be Clintonian here, but Lucchino could be speaking the technical truth if he's defining the team's budget beyond those line items used to calculate the luxury tax. But the question was clearly asked in the context of the luxury tax, and if Lucchino was instead trying to make a sleight of hand by referencing the team's global budget, then he's a very bad man.

But if he was referring to the luxury tax threshold, then it begs the obvious question: WTF have we been doing all winter?

[Savin Hillbilly]

But if he was referring to the luxury tax threshold, then it begs the obvious question: WTF have we been doing all winter?

The obvious answer would seem to be, "losing at chicken."

[SoxScout]

Lucchino sounds absolutly pissed off on MLB Radio.

Saying "highest payroll in history of the Red Sox" multiple times.

"PEOPLE NEED TO LOOK AT FACTS."

"Just goes to show you can't please sports writers."

"I can't wait for Monday, we have differing opinions on Ortiz in this marketplace, so lets see what happens."

"Varitek and Wakefield have both been invited to spring training, it's in their hands, they need to make a decision on retirment." <-- I hate this. Why can't they cut the cord? If these guys show up they become nothing but distractions.

Edited by SoxScout, 10 February 2012 - 04:24 PM.

[HangingW/ScottCooper]

No hard #s yet, but it looks like the Sox agreed to terms with all their non-arbitratrion eligible guys

http://www.weei.com/...ancon-15-others

[sfip]

Bump. Where are the Red Sox compared to the threshold for luxury tax penalties now that they've traded Youk?

[In my lifetime]

Bump. Where are the Red Sox compared to the threshold for luxury tax penalties now that they've traded Youk?

The RS are reported to be paying 5.5 of the 6.6 M contract remaining + Chicago is stuck with his 1M buyout. Lillibridge is being paid 500,000 salary. So the move saves about 1.1 + ~250k = 1.35 million now and another million when the team option is refused. It still leaves them significantly over.

[ScubaSteveAvery]

Ken Rosenthal is reporting on Twitter that the Red Sox are $10 million over the luxury tax threshold.

Sources: #RedSox about $10M over luxury-tax threshold. Would want teams to include cash in trades, forcing them to give up better players.

https://twitter.com/...721416742092800

Another wrinkle in the "what do the Red Sox do at the trade deadline" scenarios.

[Corsi]

Since it'll be their 3rd year in a row over the tax, they'll be subject to a 40% tax for each dollar over the threshold.

Edited by Corsi, 07 July 2012 - 05:04 PM.

[ScubaSteveAvery]

I'm not seeing a lot of places they can cut to get under $10 million outside trading Daisuke (which opens up lots of other problems in the rotation). Ross is at $3 million, Sweeney is at $1.75, and Cook is at $1.5. But I'd be reluctant to get rid of Ross or Sweeney who provide some pop, especially with Crawford getting set back. I'm not sure anyone will take Cook in a trade other than a pure salary dump. Also, if teams want better players in return, then is it worth it giving up mid-level or so prospects to save a few million?

[Rudy Pemberton]

I'd be shocked I there's a team out there willing to take on Dice-K's contract. Injured pitchers who haven't been effective in years don't tens to have too much value.

Honestly, there's no way they can get below the threshold. How did this happen? No kind of long term planning done on Yawkey Way?

Have a lot less respect for Theo, seeing the mess he left this organization in. What a shit show, that's only going to get worse.

How long until Henry sells?

[Bob Montgomery's Helmet Hat]

I'd be shocked I there's a team out there willing to take on Dice-K's contract. Injured pitchers who haven't been effective in years don't tens to have too much value.

Honestly, there's no way they can get below the threshold. How did this happen? No kind of long term planning done on Yawkey Way?

Have a lot less respect for Theo, seeing the mess he left this organization in. What a shit show, that's only going to get worse.

How long until Henry sells?

I'm curious as to what you mean by this. Really, what is going to get worse?

[Rudy Pemberton]

I'm curious as to what you mean by this. Really, what is going to get worse?

Well, I'm assuming that revenues are decreasing, so payroll will decline if anything. I'd assume that the teams two most productive hitters, Ortiz and Ross, will not be back next year. Ellsbury will not be extended, and could be traded.

I mean, if the team is looking to trim payroll, how is that a good thing? Lots of money ties up in unproductive players, maybe those guys suddenly get healthy and perform, but does the rest of this season, and the near term future, look real bright to you?

[The Gray Eagle]

The one thing really dragging this organization down is the hideous Crawford contract. It was a disaster from day one and will only get worse.

The franchise needs to work on moving that albatross as soon as possible. It will be difficult and painful, and will involve taking back someone else's trash and possibly even throwing more talent in along with it, but it has to be done.

The team should have done a real search for a great GM after Theo left, instead of just promoting the good lieutenant who was part of the braintrust who approved the Crawford fiasco. A new GM might have been able to move that contract at some point (probably not this year, but at some point) but Cherington is no doubt more interested in having Crawford get back and hoping that he plays well than in admitting defeat and trying to move that hideous contract.

Unfortunately, I don't believe that ownership wanted a powerful GM, at all, that's why there was no search. And they won't be interested in biting the bullet and dumping Crawford, even next year. And that contract is dragging down this entire franchise and will for the next six years.

[Hendu's Gait]

I'm not seeing a lot of places they can cut to get under $10 million outside trading Daisuke (which opens up lots of other problems in the rotation). Ross is at $3 million, Sweeney is at $1.75, and Cook is at $1.5. But I'd be reluctant to get rid of Ross or Sweeney who provide some pop, especially with Crawford getting set back. I'm not sure anyone will take Cook in a trade other than a pure salary dump. Also, if teams want better players in return, then is it worth it giving up mid-level or so prospects to save a few million?

Sweeney has a career SLG below .400. That's below both Shoppach and Aviles.

[ToeKneeArmAss]

The one thing really dragging this organization down is the hideous Crawford contract.

John Lackey resents this post.

[JMDurron]

The one thing really dragging this organization down is the hideous Crawford contract. It was a disaster from day one and will only get worse.

I'd argue that nearly every big money contract on this roster is a potential underperformer/albatross, and that focusing on Crawford is blaming the forest on a tree.

By 2012 salary, according to Cot's:

Adrian Gonzalez - $21.857 million through 2017. At age 30, is halfway into a season where his power has completely vanished. Looking strictly at what the future contract/production value ratio is likely to be, it's just as bleak as Crawford to have a singles-only, below league average OPS+ at 1B for over 20 million for 6 seasons, starting at age 30.

Carl Crawford - I think we all get this one

Josh Beckett - $17 million per year through 2014. At age 32, we're in the midst of 2 out of 3 seasons where the real results don't seem to be matching up with the peripherals. Setting aside the media-fueled personality crap, the batting practice sessions with the Yankees and only average performance from 2010-2012 (105 ERA+, no 200+ IP seasons, real ERA above 4) make the return on investment look like what the organization thought they could live with from Lackey, because Beckett was going to be an ace/anchor ahead of Lackey. Well, if Beckett is no better than what Lackey should have been, then 17M seems like something of an overpay.

John Lackey - $15.950 million per year through 2014, followed by the "you were useless before, now you're cheap!" option year in 2015. Not obscene for what he was supposed to be (and what Beckett just might be now), but we all have seen what he has been so far.

David Ortiz - $14.575 million. Earning his money. Most likely feels like a stranger in a strange land in this regard.

Kevin Youkilis - $12.250 million in 2012, now gone.

Daisuke Matsuzaka - $10.333 million in 2012, then FA. 2007-2008 is a different discussion, but he's more or less worthless now until he proves otherwise. The best case scenario is what Beckett has been doing lately, or what Lackey was supposed to do.

Dustin Pedroia - $8.250 million in 2012, then $10.250 million in 2013-14. No complaints when healthy, but does his playing style represent a continual risk to his health? Currently bringing below average production in 2012 due to playing through injury.

I'm not going through the entire roster, but the next 4 by 2012 salary are Ellsbury (injured), Jon Lester (now league average!), Bobby Jenks, and Andrew Bailey.

What is dragging this organization down is not the Carl Crawford contract, it's the complete and utter failure of the expensive players acquired by FA (Crawford, Lackey, Matsuzaka, Jenks), players acquired by trade (Gonzalez, Bailey), and the homegrown talent or longer-term players who were extended (Beckett, Youkilis, Ellsbury, Lester) completely failing to perform to the organization's expectations. If you pick any single one of those contracts and wipe it out, the organization is not significantly better off, IMO, because of the rest of the failure still left behind. Pedroia and Lester don't strike me as long-term performance risks, but when the 36-year-old DH is literally the only player on the payroll who makes more than $3 million who is producing like he is supposed to (arguably even better than that, really), exactly what the hell could be changed to fix that? This is a bigger issue than the Carl Crawford contract.

Obviously, Adrian Gonzalez going on a tear and Pedroia coming back healthy changes a fair bit of this outlook, but as of today, every potential avenue of player acquisition or retention has failed to pan out, speaking strictly in terms of production for 2012 and onward. This is not an argument that Gonzalez, Matsuzaka, Beckett, or anyone else necessarily should not have been acquired based on the information available to anyone at the time, it's an argument that this ship has about 9 anchors attached to it, and people are spending way too much time focusing on one particular anchor.

[The Gray Eagle]

The difference between Crawford's contract and all the others except for Gonzalez's is the length and total that we still owe.

Adrian's could conceivably turn out as bad as Crawford's, because he is owed a ton of money for ages as well, but at least he projects as someone who could be a good hitter for a long time, unless this power drain becomes permanent.

We will owe Crawford over $100 million AFTER this season is over. That is what is so horrible about it. All the other contracts you list will be faded memories for years and Carl will still be owed $50 million more.

I think Adrian will get his power back at sime point. This franchise is utterly fucked if he never does, but he does have a great track record of offensive production in a low-offense environment.

[Rasputin]

The one thing dragging this team down is injuries and it's not like it's the same guy or one guy everyone could expect to be injured, it's different guys different injuries.

I mean, really.

2010 Ellsbury gets busted ribs, Cameron gets a busted everything, Youks, Pedroia, Buchholz
2011 Dice K, Doubront, Buchholz, and come September, pretty much everyone, Youks, Beckett
2012 Ellsbury and Crawford have combined for seven games and on two separate occasions we've had eight outfielders on the roster.

Since the start of the 2011 season we've had Rich Hill, Dice K, John Lackey have Tommy John surgery and I got the real good feeling I've missed someone.

I mean, fuck, the 2010 finished six games out of the wild card because they went 42-41 the last half of the season when they were just trying to hang on long enough to get players healthy who weren't getting healthy.

The 2011 team was on a hundred game pace until all the little injuries caught up to the big injuries and we fielded a goddamn little league team for a month.

I mean, fuck, if this team had just had normal injuries for the past three seasons there's a whole lotta post season play and a decent chance at some hot hot duck boat lovin'

[tonyarmasjr]

The difference between Crawford's contract and all the others except for Gonzalez's is the length and total that we still owe.

Adrian's could conceivably turn out as bad as Crawford's, because he is owed a ton of money for ages as well, but at least he projects as someone who could be a good hitter for a long time, unless this power drain becomes permanent.

We will owe Crawford over $100 million AFTER this season is over. That is what is so horrible about it. All the other contracts you list will be faded memories for years and Carl will still be owed $50 million more.

I think Adrian will get his power back at sime point. This franchise is utterly fucked if he never does, but he does have a great track record of offensive production in a low-offense environment.

What's so horrible about any of those contracts is paying so much for nothing. If any of those guys perform at the level of an above average player, the contract doesn't look so bad (Beckett is the example). And if 3/4 of them do, the team coasts into the playoffs the last couple seasons. But 2012 has seen below average play and less for all those guys except Beckett, Ortiz, and Lester.
Paying $20 million a year for an above average player sucks, and I think most people agreed Crawford's contract was a huge overpay at the time. I also think most of us would be ecstatic if we got an above average player for the $28 million spent on Lackey and Youk this year. But I also think there was no one who thought Crawford would put up 0 WAR in his first season and a half. And it just doesn't make sense to me to think that'll be how he performs going forward. I don't know how to explain away last year (except blaming it on an adjustment period and an injured wrist), but the guy's been an above average player throughout his career. We can say all we want about how Fenway may affect his value as both a hitter and fielder, but there's no way it should affect him to the point that he becomes an average or worse player for the next 5 years. I don't understand the thinking that it seems a lot of people have that he's a $142 million black hole.

Edited by tonyarmasjr, 07 July 2012 - 11:09 PM.

[Rasputin]

I don't understand the thinking that it seems a lot of people have that he's a $142 million black hole.

It's the same reason people thought Carl Everett was the worst piece of humanity on the planet, why they think Dan Duquette was a bad GM, why they think Mike Aviles is terrible.

They take something negative, in this case that he's overpaid, and combine it with something negative that is completely short lived and make it out that it's the most important thing ever.

Either that or they're just dumb, I can't be bothered to figure it out.

[The Gray Eagle]

Carl Everett was a jackass, Dan Duquette was a good GM, and Mike Aviles has a terrible OBP.

Carl Crawford isn't just overpaid, he's owed over $110 million more through 2017. He's going to be horribly overpaid for ages, and plays a position where a cheap platoon can do the job for you, or you can stick a guy with a much better OBP who costs way less for way less commitment. John Lackey will be long gone when Carl Crawford will be most overpaid, and that $20 million will drag this team down every single year between now and then.

We've already seen penny pinching this season even though we're already $10 million over the luxury tax limit. His salary has already kept us from improving the roster this year, and will only continue to do so.

The combination of the length of his deal, and the fact that he is a speed player in his 30s who can only play LF, is just lethal going forward. The Red Sox have lots of overpaid players, but most of them will be gone in two years. And most of them play positions that are hard to fill, not what should be the easiest position to fill in baseball.

Edited by The Gray Eagle, 07 July 2012 - 11:30 PM.

[JMDurron]

The one thing dragging this team down is injuries and it's not like it's the same guy or one guy everyone could expect to be injured, it's different guys different injuries.

You're actually not answering the same question, IMO. More specifically, I think my answer to "what is dragging this team down?", which is "underperformance by nearly every high salary player on the roster!" leads to another question. That question is "Why is there underperformance by nearly every high salary player on the roster?!?", and your answer is "Injuries!" I don't think you're wrong, I think you're just one step further down the question chain, as opposed to answering the same question.

[OttoC]

...Carl Crawford isn't just overpaid, he's owed over $110 million more through 2017. He's going to be horribly overpaid for ages, and plays a position where a cheap platoon can do the job for you, or you can stick a guy with a much better OBP who costs way less for way less commitment....

While 202 PA is a small sample, Daniel Nava's OBP this year is 60 points higher than Crawford's career mark (and is 29 points higher than Crawford's single-season best); Nava's SLG for the year is only 4 points below Crawford's career mark; Nava's OPS this year is 57 points higher than Crawford's career mark (and Crawford has only surpassed Nava's mark in one season).

In other words, the Red Sox seem already to have someone who can outplay Crawford at a tiny fraction of his cost. I thought the signing was stupid when it was made but I never guessed just how bad it would turn out. The club will be lucky if they can trade him even if they absorb 90% of the remaining contract cost.

.I think it is time for a complete sweep, from the owners, on down.

[lexrageorge]

While 202 PA is a small sample, Daniel Nava's OBP this year is 60 points higher than Crawford's career mark (and is 29 points higher than Crawford's single-season best); Nava's SLG for the year is only 4 points below Crawford's career mark; Nava's OPS this year is 57 points higher than Crawford's career mark (and Crawford has only surpassed Nava's mark in one season).

In other words, the Red Sox seem already to have someone who can outplay Crawford at a tiny fraction of his cost. I thought the signing was stupid when it was made but I never guessed just how bad it would turn out. The club will be lucky if they can trade him even if they absorb 90% of the remaining contract cost.

.I think it is time for a complete sweep, from the owners, on down.

Really? You mean the same owners who oversaw the first 2 WS Titles in 86 years? Those owners? All because of one bad contract?

As noted in this thread and others, there are a lot of players who are underperforming their salaries. Crawford is one example (and the worst), Lackey is a close 2nd, but there are many others. This is bad, but it's also fixable over the longer term.

[JMDurron]

While 202 PA is a small sample, Daniel Nava's OBP this year is 60 points higher than Crawford's career mark (and is 29 points higher than Crawford's single-season best); Nava's SLG for the year is only 4 points below Crawford's career mark; Nava's OPS this year is 57 points higher than Crawford's career mark (and Crawford has only surpassed Nava's mark in one season).

In other words, the Red Sox seem already to have someone who can outplay Crawford at a tiny fraction of his cost. I thought the signing was stupid when it was made but I never guessed just how bad it would turn out. The club will be lucky if they can trade him even if they absorb 90% of the remaining contract cost.

.I think it is time for a complete sweep, from the owners, on down.

There is a difference between "outhit" and "outplay" that you're overlooking here. Crawford brings defensive range that Nava can't hope to match. It's hard to say how much baserunning/stealing speed Crawford will have post-hamstring injuries, but it seems unlikely that he would not be more of a threat on the bases as well. As for the slugging, including Crawford's first two seasons when he was clearly not yet ready to face MLB pitching seems a tad unfair. Taking Crawford's 2004-2011 averages, Crawford's average slugging (.455) is 18 points higher than Nava's 2012 number (.437) so far, and far above Nava's career mark of .399.

[tims4wins]

This is true, but let's not forget that Crawford looked horrible in the field last year, and put up a negative UZR (-2.8/150). Clearly the sample isn't large enough on Nava but for his career he is at a UZR of -2.2/150. It's only 800 innings though so less than a full season's worth. But unless Crawford returns to being the defensive player he was in his pre-Boston days, then we can't say he's all that much better defensively than Nava.

Plus, y'know, Crawford makes 50 times more than Nava, so even if Nava is a little worse defensively, he's still far more valuable.

[allaboutthesox]

Really? You mean the same owners who oversaw the first 2 WS Titles in 86 years? Those owners? All because of one bad contract?

As noted in this thread and others, there are a lot of players who are underperforming their salaries. Crawford is one example (and the worst), Lackey is a close 2nd, but there are many others. This is bad, but it's also fixable over the longer term.

Agreed. It is just the timing of the contracts. To think Theo broke his own rules (long term contracts) on two players who haven't turned out the way we would have hoped for or have liked. The two that obviously stand out the most are Lackey and Crawford. At this point, the Sox just need to start looking more to the future and hope to get better production from these players next year. There is very little the Sox players, management, and owners can do about this situation right now. The Sox are not in any kind of position in which they can offload some of these bloated contracts without it being very painful for the organization.

In the long run will most of the bigger contracts (Lackey and Crawford in particular) prove to be a bad investment? Possibly, however I do not think this organization needs a "clean sweep". Just needs a spring cleaning of its finances and get back to smart investment in players.

Edited by allaboutthesox, 08 July 2012 - 05:55 PM.

[MikeM]

This is bad, but it's also fixable over the longer term.

I'd say the more appropriate term there is "manageable", while looking at one more winter of thrifty type spending (after re-signing Ortiz eats up most of our financial flexibility).

At the core, the decision to build this franchise so heavily around a LF/1B combo going forward is probably going to suck any way you slice it though. While likely taking us out of the running on most/all of the "elite of the elite" free agents that hit the market the next half decade or so. That's the reality we now face in all this, imo.

Personally, i'd have felt more comfortable in seeing Ben get outed with Theo, to be absolutely certain we flushed out whatever mindset was in place that concluded signing Carl Crawford as anything but the worst possible scenario. But that is what it is right now, and while Ben is taking some after-flack on the trading front this past winter, i essentially don't have an issue with anything i saw him do. So in all fairness, what he does when he actually has the money/resources to throw around remains to be seen.

[OttoC]

Really? You mean the same owners who oversaw the first 2 WS Titles in 86 years? ...

The owners have either been proponents of some bad moves--players/manger/GM--or they told people that they were hired to run the team and to get on with it. I think that either way the owners bear a lot of responsibility and this is now the fifth year since the club has produced.

[Rasputin]

The owners have either been proponents of some bad moves--players/manger/GM--or they told people that they were hired to run the team and to get on with it. I think that either way the owners bear a lot of responsibility and this is now the fifth year since the club has produced.

You have an odd definition of "produced."

The 2008 Sox were one game away from the World Series and had they won that game, they'd have been favored in the World Series.

The 2009 Sox won 95 games and happened to get eliminated in the post season. It sucks but it happens.

The only seasons you can reasonably argue they haven't produced are 2010, 2011 and so far in 2012. 2010 the Sox probably make the post season without the injuries. 2011 the Sox definitely make the post season without the injuries. And if the 2012 Sox don't make the post season the #1 culprit by far is the injuries.

A little more injury luck and the Sox have post season trips in eight of nine seasons and a good chance at three championships in seven years.

Blame the owners for the contracts all you want but it's not the contracts that are keeping people off the field and it's not the contracts that made Crawford suck for 2011 and Gonzales suck for 2012 or, for that matter, Lackey suck for 2010 and 2011.

[sfip]

Bump. Can someone, anyone, give some input regarding the luxury tax threshold if Beckett and/or Gonzalez leave(s)?

[Hee-Seop's Fable]

Well if Gonzales, Crawford, and Beckett all go with 36 games left of the season, that would lop off about $13M of this years payroll, less whatever and however the cash going to LA is structured. Cots has the net payroll at $175.25M pre-deal, so that should get them under the $178M once gross payroll and benefits are added up. No doubt they'd be under in '13 short of some complete insanity on the FA market.

edit- correct '12 threshold amount

Edited by Hee-Seop's Fable, 24 August 2012 - 11:31 PM.

[SoxScout]

Speier busts out his calculator: http://fullcount.wee...ed-sox-payroll/

[OCD SS]

The key has to be resetting the damn tax threshold. I firmly believe that if ownership knew what the new CBA was going to bring, then we wouldn't have seen the money given to Crawford (and maybe even Adrian Gonzalez). No matter what the FO cannot defer getting under the CBT while they try to look competitive to increase season ticket sales. Luckily if they're making such a sweeping gesture that sends their 3 largest contracts (or just the top 3 on Cots, depending on how you compare Beckett and Lackey) I think it's safe to assume they got the message.

[JimBoSox9]

For tax penalty purposes, is it the payroll on 9/30 that matters, making so the Sox re-set this year now? Not that there any chance of them being over the threshold in 2012, but it just moves any potential multiple-time-offender penalties one year further down the road after the rebuild is complete.

[Hee-Seop's Fable]

For tax penalty purposes, is it the payroll on 9/30 that matters, making so the Sox re-set this year now? Not that there any chance of them being over the threshold in 2012, but it just moves any potential multiple-time-offender penalties one year further down the road after the rebuild is complete.

I'm almost certain they do a careful calculation of total payroll liabilities actually paid out over the course of the season well after the season (and I'm certain it includes cash sent away to cover payroll dumps), so this still gets them under the '12 LT threshold given the volume leaving and the length of time remaining in the current season. And as I said, they'd have to spend like idiots to get over $178M in 2013 as well. So it allows them to save for a GFIN year in '14 or beyond when it's justified.

[JimBoSox9]

Thanks. If that's the case, don't we really not know whether they'll be under the cap for 2012 until we know how much cash is going to LA in the deal?

[Hee-Seop's Fable]

Absolutely. But only if it's most of the $10M leaving this year would it flummox the 2012 number. Either way it's largely a small problem that's ownership's concern, because I can't see any way they get over $150M in 2013 either way. They've found a miracle way to make good on Henry's desire to exploit youth as the new key asset.