359 replies to this topic

[bosockboy]

The question I think is whether it is more damaging to go over the tax barrier and take a financial hit....or to risk not making the postseason for a third straight year (and fourth year without a postseason win). That's a long stretch for as much talent as we have.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Is it possilble that there would be some other way to "adjust" contracts to make this work? Signing Ortiz to a two year/18$ deal with deferred money? or possibly having Crawford or Gonzalez restructure their deals to defer/ add option years etc. etc.

If you're Ortiz and can make $15m in arb, why in the world would you accept 2 years for just $3m more? You'd probably have to go to 3 years, $30m on Ortiz for it to make sense for him.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Is not at all what I said. A Youkilis trade would be used to upgrade RF not just make room for Oswalt. And clearing Scutaro's $6MM probably still leaves them a bit short.

Sure, but those trade ideas you mention don't save the team any money, isn't that the point? Sox have Sweeney, McDonald, and Kalish at some point which should be better than what they had in RF last year. If they trade Youkilis, they start Aviles, I'd assume and then are even shallower at infield depth. Ultimately, if they planned on trading Youkilis, I think they would have kept Lowrie. I'm just really opposed to getting rid of your best players to improve back end of rotation, while acknowledging Youks is getting older and has some real health concerns.

If you have to trade one of your starting positional players to sign a starting pitcher with questions of his own, don't.

[bosockboy]

Sure, but those trade ideas you mention don't save the team any money, isn't that the point? Sox have Sweeney, McDonald, and Kalish at some point which should be better than what they had in RF last year. If they trade Youkilis, they start Aviles, I'd assume and then are even shallower at infield depth. Ultimately, if they planned on trading Youkilis, I think they would have kept Lowrie. I'm just really opposed to getting rid of your best players to improve back end of rotation, while acknowledging Youks is getting older and has some real health concerns.

If you have to trade one of your starting positional players to sign a starting pitcher with questions of his own, don't.

Agreed. Trading Youkilis to make room for a higher end starter, sure. Oswalt is no lock to stay healthy and his transition to the AL East could be dicey. That's not worth trading Youkilis for. Robbing Peter to pay Paul. Maybe there is a team out there who would value Youkilis highly enough to overpay, but just scanning the league I think the best you could come up with might be Youk to the Phils for Polanco and Mayberry. You have to take back Polanco's 5.4 million and in turn you get a RHH OF to boot. Polanco is coming off a pretty awful year and you'd only cut Youk's salary in half doing that.

[Carl Everetts Therapist]

How about an option of going with a rotation of

Beckett
Lester
Buch
Bard
Aceves

And then picking up one more bullpen ace.... K-rod or similar, former closer who needs a place to prove he's still viable as a big time pitcher... Throw out a 1 year 4mill price tag and try and go at it from the backend and have a lock down bullpen.

Bard is a risk converting to a starter, but Aceves started as recently as last season and was respectable...

The problem with putting both in the rotation is that you weaken your 6th/7th inning role that Aceves was so good at.

[bosockboy]

http://fullcount.wee...ign-roy-oswalt/

Which almost certainly means trading Kevin Youkilis. Which shouldn't be hard since he can be traded as a 3B or a 1B and you can use it to address RF. The Brewers and the Indians are looking for a 1B. Youkilis for Corey Hart would make sense if Hart wasn't making $9MM in 2012. Then there is Youkilis for Choo which would be fucking awesome but probably not likely.

But then of course you are left with Avlies or Punto full time at 3B. And I'm not smart enough to figure out which scenario (Youk traded for a RF - sign Oswalt - Aviles/Punto @ 3B or doing nothing) would net them more wins.

EDIT: added link

If you could trade Youkilis for a RF, be able to sign Oswalt and a Betemit to play 3B....I'd be on board. That's a lot to pull off, though.

[Savin Hillbilly]

If you could trade Youkilis for a RF, be able to sign Oswalt and a Betemit to play 3B....I'd be on board. That's a lot to pull off, though.

Betemit is a terrible defensive player who can't hit lefties. I don't want any part of him except as a platoon DH, and that's irrelevant to our 2012 needs.

[SumnerH]

Is it possilble that there would be some other way to "adjust" contracts to make this work? Signing Ortiz to a two year/18$ deal with deferred money?

Deferred money doesn't help as far as the luxury tax goes--the tax is based on the average annual value of the contract.

[Carl Everetts Therapist]

What about trading Youks for a starting pitcher instead of signing Oswalt?

I would do a Youks for Cole Hamels and be satisfied with Aviles at third, hell I'd throw in a prospect or two. Or how about trading a package centered around Lars Anderson ++ to the Pirates for cost controlled Jeff Karstens?


I think this is a chance for Ben to get creative and see what he can pull off....

[E5 Yaz]

What about trading Youks for a starting pitcher instead of signing Oswalt?

I would do a Youks for Cole Hamels and be satisfied with Aviles at third, hell I'd throw in a prospect or two.

Awfully generous of you. It will take more quality than just Youk to get Hamels

[bosockboy]

What about trading Youks for a starting pitcher instead of signing Oswalt?

I would do a Youks for Cole Hamels and be satisfied with Aviles at third, hell I'd throw in a prospect or two. Or how about trading a package centered around Lars Anderson ++ to the Pirates for cost controlled Jeff Karstens?


I think this is a chance for Ben to get creative and see what he can pull off....

They would probably require us to take back Polanco and his 5.4 million as well. But I doubt they move Hamels. Greinke is a possibility, but a very slight one.

[C4CRVT]

One could argue that the decrease in the likelihood of a successful season from Oswalt to (Padilla, Aceves, Cook, Silva and Wilson) is not likely to be particularly meaningful to the overall outcome of the season. Here's what (IMO) has to go right for that to be true:

• Reasonably full healthy and effective seasons out of the big 3.
• Successful conversion of Bard perhaps paired with a healthy emergence of Matsuzaka to cover the "#4 SP" spot
• One of the remaining (or a combination of) 5 SP options above being a passable #5 starter.
• The offense remaining one of the top 3 run producing units in the league.

#4 seems like more than 85% likelihood. #3 seems like a 70% chance. #2 seems like a 70% chance and #1 seems like a 60% chance.

Oswalt having a season better than one of the remaining 5 SP options is probably like a 65% chance which may not be worth the risk of going over the cap (for whatever reason the FO is sticking to that barrier). The bigger drop-off happens when the depth gets tested by one of the big 3 going down which seems like we should be planning for. Bard as the #3 with Padilla #4 and Aceves #5 seems like a decent bet to happen at some point in the season which scares the bejeesus out of me. I can't quite conceive of the FO going into the season with this as the plan.

I'm sure that there are folks here who have better/ more accurate numbers. These seemed like good rough numbers from having following the RS for +/- 12 years.

I continue to think that the FO is combing through the league for a #4 type pitcher on a team friendly deal that can be acquired for prospects. Either that or the salary dump/trade.

Edited by C4CRVT, 16 January 2012 - 03:17 PM.

[Kramerica Industries]

Cole Hamels is a pipe dream but why is gavin floyd not a real option? He is exactly the type of pitcher they need.

They dont need an ace, they need a pitcher to throw 200 league average innings.

[rembrat]

I mentioned Gavin Floyd back on page 1 of this topic but that was before the Sox turned into the Rays. Floyd makes $7MM next year so they would have to clear some cash.

[TheoShmeo]

At this point, I'd be very surprised if the Sox went out and acquired an expensive starter like Oswalt before opening day absent a total shit show during ST.

They seem determined to cull their 4th and 5th starters from Bard, Aceves, Cook, Padilla, Silva, Miller, Doubront and perhaps others. They also seem unwilling to spend the dollars necessary to get a quality starter now. Creating budgetary room by trading someone like Youks or Ellsbury doesn't seem like a realistic option since they have no one obvious to take their place. Valentine has also mentioned the notion of back filling during the season if it becomes apparent that they need to upgrade, I believe.

While I'd rather that they had a prettier picture to start the season, I'm OK with this approach. Oswalt is an attractive option but he's a health risk. I would have liked Kuroda but Cashman beat Ben to the punch. And I think we tend to overrate the importance of having the optimal set up on day one.

Edited by TheoShmeo, 17 January 2012 - 09:20 AM.

[E5 Yaz]

The Hamels pipe dream may have just gone up in smoke.

The Phillies avoided arbitration with Cole Hamels, agreeing to a $15MM deal with award incentives, tweets Jon Heyman of CBS Sports.

[Corsi]

Source: #RedSox still showing interest in Gavin Floyd.

https://twitter.com/#!/jonmorosi/status/159688719371218944

[RedOctober3829]

Source: #RedSox, after trading Marco Scutaro, have intensified pursuit of free agent Roy Oswalt. @MLBONFOX

https://twitter.com/#!/jonmorosi/status/160884284033466368

[RedOctober3829]

Free-agent closer Ryan Madson settled for a one-year contract with the Reds. Might another Scott Boras client, right-hander Edwin Jackson, do the same?
It’s possible, major league sources say. And if Jackson indeed is willing to sign for one year, his options would multiply.
The Red Sox likely would consider Jackson on a one-year deal, just as they are considering free-agent righty Roy Oswalt. Remember, they signed another Boras client, third baseman Adrian Beltre, to a one-year, $10 million contract in 2010. Both sides benefited; Beltre produced the second-highest OPS of his career, then landed a five-year, $80 million deal with the Rangers.

The Red Sox are not pursuing Astros left-hander Wandy Rodriguez, who would be guaranteed $36 million over the next three seasons if traded.

http://msn.foxsports...uestions-012312

[Carl Everetts Therapist]

I think between Floyd, Jackson and Oswalt that Oswalt makes the most sense on a 1 year deal. He has a history and chance to be top of the rotation. The draw back to Floyd is that you'd need to give up talent to get him and the downside of Jackson is mediocrity.

They all have pro's and Con's

Jackson is younger and more durable than Oswalt, but is the upside there.

[The Boomer]

I don't see any mention of the Prince Fielder 9 years at more than $23 million per season deal just concluded by the Tigers. This makes me wonder if they have an arbitration eligible young starter or reliever that they will now be willing to trade to save money. Phil Coke? Colin Ballester? A 20's something pitcher with projectible upside seems more in line with the team's offseason strategy.

[SoxScout]

Team options are not part of the luxury tax, so Floyd would come in at $3.9M for this year, but as soon as the Sox pick up his option that will get readjusted up to a $5M tax hit in 2011 and 2012.

[SoxScout]

JIM BOWDEN

Red Sox have made offers for Edwin Jackson and are presently in discussions with him and prefer him over Roy Oswalt according to source

Well, that's interesting.

[Buzzkill Pauley]

Well, that's interesting.

Well, I must say I prefer him over Oswalt, too. I just thought Jackson's price was going to be so high that the only way he'd be signable was to blow through the CBT threshold, ditch Ortiz, or trade Youkilis.

[Carl Everetts Therapist]

Jackson would be perfect, because he is younger, doesn't have the injury history and has AL East experience....

but how much will he cost? how many years?

I'd take a Rotation of

Beckett
Lester
Bucholz
Jackson
Bard or Aceves or Padilla

Thats a pretty solid top five that could theoretically give you a ton of innings

[rembrat]

Dave Cameron in his chat said he expected the Redsox to sign either Oswalt or Jackson. Jackson on a 1yr deal is more attractive given his sure durablity and knowledge of the league. Plus being compensated when he signs a long term deal next year.

[RedOctober3829]

Well, that's interesting.

It'd be stupid not to offer Jackson a contract considering there's not much of a market out there for him. Really hope they sign him to a multi-year deal.

[Carl Everetts Therapist]

So the Sox made offers to Oswalt and Jackson?

Is there any chance that they say "to hell with the Luxury tax" and sign both? I assume they made both offers and if one excepts they tear up the other.

How about a rotation of

Beckett
Lester
Buch
Jackson
Oswalt

with a pen of

Bailey
Aceves
Melancon
Bard
Albers
Morales
Doubront

That's a sick Rotation with plenty of Depth and a great bullpen

Edited by Carl Everetts Therapist, 25 January 2012 - 03:27 PM.

[TheoShmeo]

So the Sox made offers to Oswalt and Jackson?

Given their desire to stay under or near the luxury tax threshold and the rather large hole they still have at SS, it's hard to imagine them signing both of these starters. My guess is that the offers were delivered with the warning that an offer was made to both of them and that the signing of one will terminate the offer to the other.

[SeanBerry]

I agree with Theo that they won't sign both but CET makea a great point that should (and I feel NEED) to sign both. The Yankees look so strong with all that pitching depth and Rays are only better. The only the Red Sox put themselves in the top echelon of teams (heading into ST anyway) to to get both and if you can lock down both on 1 year deals, this would be a great way to have this team recover from what has been an awful offseason.

[mabrowndog]

It'd be stupid not to offer Jackson a contract considering there's not much of a market out there for him. Really hope they sign him to a multi-year deal.

Considering he's a Boras client, I'd say the odds of that are about nil.

[OttoC]

I keep seeing rumors that Oswalt doesn't want to come to Boston.

[Red(s)HawksFan]

I agree with Theo that they won't sign both but CET makea a great point that should (and I feel NEED) to sign both. The Yankees look so strong with all that pitching depth and Rays are only better. The only the Red Sox put themselves in the top echelon of teams (heading into ST anyway) to to get both and if you can lock down both on 1 year deals, this would be a great way to have this team recover from what has been an awful offseason.

I doubt they could sign both even if they wanted to. Not for budget reasons, but because after the first guy signs, the second guy is going to walk. The Sox don't have two rotation spots to give these guys. They can promise one the 4th spot, but after that, all they can offer is the opportunity to compete for the 5th spot. These guys, and their agents, aren't stupid.

All the Red Sox pitching acquisitions so far have been geared toward moving Bard to the rotation, having a bunch of people (Padilla, Silva, Cook, Aceves, Doubront, Tazawa, etc) compete for the fifth spot, and hoping Matsuzaka can come to the rescue at mid-season to supplant the weak link. If they sign one of Oswalt/Jackson, that bumps Bard into the mix of people competing for the fifth spot. I don't see the Red Sox bumping him any further than that.

Maybe Bard is ultimately going to end up back in the bullpen, but not without a fair tryout as a starter during spring training. Neither Oswalt or Jackson are going to want to sign to on to a situation in which they have to compete for a job in spring training, and we already know that Oswalt, at least, has other offers out there. Surely Jackson can become, if he isn't already, an option for those teams pursuing Oswalt should Oswalt sign here. So really, no matter how much we wishcast it, there's no chance the Red Sox end up with both pitchers.

[Comeback Kid]

Edwin Jackson seems to be generally underrated and underappreciated and could be a nice value for the Red Sox.

Oswalt definitely has more name recognition for whatever that's worth but I would be wary of his health and his transition to the AL.

[Carl Everetts Therapist]

I doubt they could sign both even if they wanted to. Not for budget reasons, but because after the first guy signs, the second guy is going to walk. The Sox don't have two rotation spots to give these guys. They can promise one the 4th spot, but after that, all they can offer is the opportunity to compete for the 5th spot. These guys, and their agents, aren't stupid.

All the Red Sox pitching acquisitions so far have been geared toward moving Bard to the rotation, having a bunch of people (Padilla, Silva, Cook, Aceves, Doubront, Tazawa, etc) compete for the fifth spot, and hoping Matsuzaka can come to the rescue at mid-season to supplant the weak link. If they sign one of Oswalt/Jackson, that bumps Bard into the mix of people competing for the fifth spot. I don't see the Red Sox bumping him any further than that.

Thats right these guy's agents aren't stupid... That's why if the Sox offered the best deal dollar wise, they'd take it. It wouldn't matter what the other guy did.

And if for some strange reason the sox did get both, bard would simply slot back to the pen. Padilla, Silva, Cook and the like can go shit in there hats or battle it out for the long role. They aren't getting a rotation slot over Oswalt and Jackson (if both were signed) and neither would Bard.

I don't think it will happen simply because I don't think the money is there, but if it did I'm quite sure that they could be fit into the rotation without a second thouight

[PrometheusWakefield]

Isn't Jackson expected to have a lower annual rate than Oswalt anyway, just for more years?. I feel much more comfortable going into the season with Jackson as a #4 than Oswalt, given his age. I still think he could be the best FA value of the offseason.

[The Boomer]

Isn't Jackson expected to have a lower annual rate than Oswalt anyway, just for more years?. I feel much more comfortable going into the season with Jackson as a #4 than Oswalt, given his age. I still think he could be the best FA value of the offseason.

If he comes for 1 year and costs less than older Kuroda that might be true. However, they will probably try to dump some more salary to pay for even this one year. I don't think that the luxury tax concern is a negotiating ploy. While I could see them going over for part of the stretch run if in contention, I expect it would be for only part of a season for someone like Jackson (or maybe better) for whatever they need whether it's a postional or pitching deficit.

[E5 Yaz]

I keep seeing rumors that Oswalt doesn't want to come to Boston.

If so, please link to them so that we can all see them

[someoneanywhere]

The perfect contract for Edwin Jackson is a one-year deal, with option(s) that substantially but not unreasonably escalate salary based on performance. I doubt, as Doggie notes above, that Boras would advise him to do that, but from the Sox perspective it would make sense.

I realize a lot of you are down on this offseason. I happen to think Mr. Cherington -- aside from being caught napping by the Blue Jays-White Sox trade -- is doing quite well, and quite shrewdly at that.

[OttoC]

If so, please link to them so that we can all see them

Read the Red Sox have intensified their pursuit of Roy Oswalt thread in this forum.

[Savin Hillbilly]

I realize a lot of you are down on this offseason. I happen to think Mr. Cherington -- aside from being caught napping by the Blue Jays-White Sox trade -- is doing quite well, and quite shrewdly at that.

Did I miss something? How did Ben get caught napping by that trade? Was he offered a similar deal and forgot to check his messages, or something?

[someoneanywhere]

Did I miss something? How did Ben get caught napping by that trade? Was he offered a similar deal and forgot to check his messages, or something?

Santos for Molina on December 6. Ben said he had no idea Santos was available -- and Santos would have been the cheap but (I think) powerful weapon to replace Pap. Bailey is fine. I just think Santos would have been finer.

[RedOctober3829]

Cardinals checked in on edwin jackson, who ended the yr with them and is talking to #redsox. Also has multiyr offer from 3rd team

https://twitter.com/#!/JonHeymanCBS/status/162551206470877185

[rembrat]

He wasnt availabe but AA kept calling and calling until Williams finally changed his mind. Atleast thats how the story goes. I dont think Ben was the only GM caught by surprise.

Edwin Jackson has a multi year offer sitting there. All signs point to the O's.

JonHeymanCBS: Cardinals checked in on edwin jackson, who ended the yr with them and is talking to #redsox. Also has multiyr offer from 3rd team

http://twitter.com/J...551206470877185

Edited by rembrat, 26 January 2012 - 10:22 AM.

[PrometheusWakefield]

The perfect contract for Edwin Jackson is a one-year deal, with option(s) that substantially but not unreasonably escalate salary based on performance. I doubt, as Doggie notes above, that Boras would advise him to do that, but from the Sox perspective it would make sense.

I don't understand why you would go 1 year with Jackson. Our primary financial concern is getting under the salary cap for this year. Giving him a 1 year deal would require a higher AAV than a four year deal. Also, the guy is 27 with three years of established, consistent performance. I have no problem going 4 years with Jackson and I think that would be the only way to get something done given our budget constraints for 2012.

[someoneanywhere]

I don't understand why you would go 1 year with Jackson. Our primary financial concern is getting under the salary cap for this year. Giving him a 1 year deal would require a higher AAV than a four year deal. Also, the guy is 27 with three years of established, consistent performance. I have no problem going 4 years with Jackson and I think that would be the only way to get something done given our budget constraints for 2012.

We don't know what his asking price is -- and he's not so good that we have to offer him if it is beyond our threshold.

The guy has always had a rep as an innings eater with occasional flashes of something more. I buy that something more -- I buy performance -- by holding out the carrot of bigger paydays ahead.

[Rudy Pemberton]

I realize Jackson is only 28, but 4 years to a guy with a career ERA of 4.46 seems risky. It was a long time ago, but he wasn't particularly good when he pitched in the AL East and he looks terrible by Eric Van's favorite metric (849 / 849 / 893 OPS by 3-4-5 hitters). He's intriguing on a 1-year, re-establish value contract but on a long term deal this guy scares the shit out of me.

[Rasputin]

I don't understand why you would go 1 year with Jackson. Our primary financial concern is getting under the salary cap for this year. Giving him a 1 year deal would require a higher AAV than a four year deal. Also, the guy is 27 with three years of established, consistent performance. I have no problem going 4 years with Jackson and I think that would be the only way to get something done given our budget constraints for 2012.

Because Becket, Lester, Buchholz, Bard, Lackey, Jackson is six starting pitchers. Beckett, Lester, Buchholz and Lackey are all signed through 2013 or later already.

Because you have a bunch of guys going into their arb years that you're going to want to keep.

Because Youks isn't under contract for 2013 and there's no guarantee Middlebrooks will be ready.

[Red(s)HawksFan]

I don't understand why you would go 1 year with Jackson. Our primary financial concern is getting under the salary cap for this year. Giving him a 1 year deal would require a higher AAV than a four year deal. Also, the guy is 27 with three years of established, consistent performance. I have no problem going 4 years with Jackson and I think that would be the only way to get something done given our budget constraints for 2012.

Another problem with a long term deal is the Sox are already committed to four starters for significant dollars through 2015. To sign someone like Jackson to a multi-year deal to fill a hole for one season is the kind of financial mistake that put them in their current dilemma in the first place.

Edit: Or what Ras said.

Edited by Red(s)HawksFan, 26 January 2012 - 11:59 AM.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Because Youks isn't under contract for 2013 and there's no guarantee Middlebrooks will be ready.

Red Sox do have an option on Youkilis for '13.