Jump to content


Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?

SOSH

Happy Patriots Day.  I expect some heavy usage today so please if there are any problems just let me know via twitter @sonsofsamhorn.  thanks folks.  nip

Photo

Roy Oswalt expected to join a team midseason


  • Please log in to reply
196 replies to this topic

#51 HangingW/ScottCooper

  • 990 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 11:30 AM



"alexspeier: ...that Scutaro costs $7.67M in CBT payroll in '12 (Oswalt $?) and #rockies were only team willing to pay entire salary http://t.co/15DvqqWJ"


How is this even possible. The original contract was 2/$12.5 million and that included the $1.5 million buyout or $6 million option? Shouldn't that have made his AAV $5.67?

#52 rembrat


  • SoSH Member


  • 20515 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 11:42 AM

Follow the link to the write up. Alex Speier does a great job of making sense of everything.

#53 RedOctober3829


  • SoSH Member


  • 14479 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 12:23 PM

There's some debate in Texas front office over whether #Rangers really need Roy Oswalt, given team's surplus of starting pitching


https://twitter.com/#!/jcrasnick/status/162585792949137410 mabrowndog is a dingus mabrowndog is a dingus

#54 Corsi


  • Wes Chamberlain's Sasha Rockets


  • 8331 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 02:15 PM

In his baseball video blog, Buster Olney talks about Boston's pursuit of pitching depth and says new GM Ben Cherington has taken a measured approach. He says the Sox have a one-year offer out to Roy Oswalt for "about $5 million" and "seem to be in the same position with Edwin Jackson."

Olney says the Sox clearly "don't want to get locked into any long-term deals, and they're looking at a marketplace where there are very few opportunities, and figure they'll throw a number out there and if they can get an Oswalt or a Jackson at their offer price, they're OK with that. If they can't, I think they're OK with that too considering they have other alternatives at this point with the rotation."

http://proxy.espn.go...fered-oswalt-5m

#55 Marbleheader


  • SoSH Member


  • 6803 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 02:49 PM

Too bad the organization has to be penny-wise now because they were pound foolish with the likes of Lackey and Crawford .

#56 JimD

  • 4414 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 03:35 PM

Too bad the organization has to be penny-wise now because they were pound foolish with the likes of Lackey and Crawford .


I'm just the opposite - I'm glad they've finally woken up, even if the team takes a short-term hit while the poison is expunged from the system.

#57 rembrat


  • SoSH Member


  • 20515 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 03:42 PM

Yea, I don't mind it just as long they are willing to match $8MM at the 11th hour if it comes to that. Signing either Oswalt or Jackson to a 1/$5MM deal would have to qualify as the greatest FA contract* in the modern era.

*Obviously for the organization. Sucks for the player.

Edited by rembrat, 26 January 2012 - 03:53 PM.


#58 HangingW/ScottCooper

  • 990 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 04:23 PM

Instead of this being a savings of $7.67 million for Scutaro, can't the adjustment be made against the 2010 and 2011 luxury tax numbers for Scutaro's deal? It seems silly that you can get a rebate on someone like Lackey on previous years when an option is exercised, but when it goes the other direction you can't "pay more".

In this piece Speier explains that the $500K option for Lackey becomes a club option at the end of the season so his contract is still calculated at 5 years/$82.5, but he had previously explained that were this option to be exercised the Red Sox would receive rebates on prior years.

#59 Pumpsie


  • The Kilimanjaro of bullshit


  • 10571 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 06:08 PM

I'm just the opposite - I'm glad they've finally woken up, even if the team takes a short-term hit while the poison is expunged from the system.


This. The front office is having to clean up Theo Epstein's mess. It always seems to work this way. The new GM comes in, works hard at maximizing value, gains some success, and then starts slinging cash around trying to get that one player to put the team over the top and that always ends in failure and a need to begin the cycle all over again. This happened with Dan Duquette and it happened with Theo Epstein. Cherington is on the front end of that cycle...so this is a good thing for us and the team. Let's hope Cherington helps the team to another championship or two before he starts throwing money away and hamstringing the team for the future. A lot of these moves by Cherington look like the Troy O'Leary/ Tim Wakefield pickups in the early Duquette years and the Bill Mueller/Kevin Millar moves of the early Epstein years. When Cherington starts throwing money at the future Dante Bichettes and Carl Crawfords of the world, THEN get ticked. Not now. This is all good stuff.

#60 maufman


  • SoSH Member


  • 11471 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 06:13 PM

This. The front office is having to clean up Theo Epstein's mess. It always seems to work this way. The new GM comes in, works hard at maximizing value, gains some success, and then starts slinging cash around trying to get that one player to put the team over the top and that always ends in failure and a need to begin the cycle all over again. This happened with Dan Duquette and it happened with Theo Epstein. Cherington is on the front end of that cycle...so this is a good thing for us and the team. Let's hope Cherington helps the team to another championship or two before he starts throwing money away and hamstringing the team for the future. A lot of these moves by Cherington look like the Troy O'Leary/ Tim Wakefield pickups in the early Duquette years and the Bill Mueller/Kevin Millar moves of the early Epstein years. When Cherington starts throwing money at the future Dante Bichettes and Carl Crawfords of the world, THEN get ticked. Not now. This is all good stuff.


Times have changed. Other teams are smarter. Nick Punto isn't going to be another Tim Wakefield or Bill Mueller. The only deal so far this winter that has even a remote chance to turn out like those is the Melancon trade -- which, not coincidentally, is also the deal most likely to blow up in their face.

#61 Marbleheader


  • SoSH Member


  • 6803 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 06:41 PM

I'd really like to see them add some pitching depth. They're only an injury away from Wakefield being under consideration.

#62 The Boomer

  • 1986 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 07:08 PM

Times have changed. Other teams are smarter. Nick Punto isn't going to be another Tim Wakefield or Bill Mueller. The only deal so far this winter that has even a remote chance to turn out like those is the Melancon trade -- which, not coincidentally, is also the deal most likely to blow up in their face.


Punto is their weakest acquisition but where he fits in became more obvious after they dumped the Scutaro contract. Dissing the Punto acquisition out of context isn't fair to Cherington. Punto was pure and simply the classic good glove utility infielder that they lacked in recent seasons. Alex Cora was probably the last middle infielder who fulfilled this role. Was it an overpay? Sure maybe a little but it was no Julio Lugo or Edgar Renteria (who were paid to be starters) overpay. Based on recent seasons, Scutaro's salary for this coming year seemed fair. However, playing at age 37, at least on the cusp of his inevitable decline, he is likely to no longer be worth that money. As many believe, Aviles will give them comparable production for a fraction of Scutaro's cost. I found this chroncile from 1 year ago rehashing the team's SS travails since Nomar:

http://boston.sports...ps-since-nomar/

The method to Cherington's careful and thrifty approach seems discernable to me now. Call it Moneyball 2.0. The market inefficiency not in 2003 (but probably now) tapped out was those high OBP guys (e.g Mueller and Ortiz) who Billy Beane coveted. With many teams already on that bandwagon, that market is now no longer efficient. Emaus is the one winter acquisition with the Moneyball 1.0 profile (high OBP). Sox management is smart enough not to publicize what they now covet but we can reasonably speculate about those trends. It seems like late 20's and early to mid 30's players who were once regulars but, while still in their primes slotted to be role players, can be productive as decent "comeback" players in Boston for their relatively good prices. Sweeney, Ross, Aviles and Shoppach fit this description. Since pitching is so unpredictable, relatively young pitchers (e.g. Bailey, Melancon and Morales) under team control for a few years are cost efficient too, particularly if you don't need to trade much more than utility players to acquire them that way. It will be win-win if Reddick and Lowrie emerge as every day regulars on their new second division teams. For the contending Sox, they still were unlikely to be more than important role players this coming year. If both become regulars, their new teams will get what they bargained for. I don't see how that blows up in their face. If anything, it lays the groundwork for executing other similar trades in the future that can benefit both teams. The Cardinals acquisition of Lance Berkman last winter seems to be the best case paradigm for this strategy of who Cherington goes after. We might need to wait for somebody to write Moneyball 2.0 about Cherington to confirm this theory but I doubt that, until then, they will reveal their trade secrets.

Edited by The Boomer, 27 January 2012 - 12:41 AM.


#63 EvilEmpire

  • 3716 posts

Posted 27 January 2012 - 12:10 PM

Why does Cherington get so much of a bye for all these bad decisions when he presumably played a key role in making them? It's not like he came in from outside the organization. He was Epstein's right-hand man for how long?

While I understand that all the moves Cherington's made over the last few months have inspired a lot of confidence, I don't think the implied assumption that all the bad decisions rest soley on Epstein's shoulders is accurate.

#64 Marbleheader


  • SoSH Member


  • 6803 posts

Posted 27 January 2012 - 12:23 PM

My post was in response to a prior one that treading cautiously with money is a way of cleaning up Theo's mess.

#65 Doctor G

  • 1838 posts

Posted 27 January 2012 - 12:26 PM

Oswalt can't be characterized as low risk given his very well known back problems. Jackson is low risk in terms of injury potential but not in terms of performance in AL East.

#66 Manramsclan

  • 1836 posts

Posted 27 January 2012 - 01:21 PM

It might go without saying but the one aspect of this approach I appreciate is that it is more in line with the discipline that was the hallmark of the early Epstein administration. That long-term big-picture thinking was sometimes tough to swallow (waving goodbye to Pedro & Damon), but in retrospect these moves typically worked out and provided the flexibility to make moves that allowed for the team to retool for the future whether through the draft or FA signings.

(Captain Obvious alert)The Lackey and Crawford signings were two deals that raised eyebrows because they were outside of that approach, and now the team is paying for it. This is the fallout. Not paying a premium for a negligible upgrade in performance now allows for the team stockpile resources to ante up for a FA signing to bring in an impact player. 3 Million here(net estimated savings on SS from the Scutaro signing) , 5 Million there(not extending for Oswalt or Jackson) and pretty soon there is enough short term flexibility to add a better short term or long term asset at the deadline, or if there isn't a player of that type available enter into a better FA market next year.

I understand the frustration, especially those who imagine missing out on Oswalt for a couple of million bucks, but the fact of the matter is dead money is dead money. If Oswalt gets hurt at $5 Million that's an extra $5 Million of dead money. That would make $25 Million of dead money on the payroll in the starting rotation alone.(Lackey and half of a season of Dice K). Oswalt at $8 Million is much worse especially when you consider that the money will likely be taxed heavily. All of sudden the risk profile goes from "$20 Million in dead money to $25 Million" to "$20 Million to $30 Million". It only seems like a "couple of million $" but it adds up very quickly.

Looking to improve the team for the short term at prices that won't limit them in the long term is the right thing for this organization right now. Wait out the poison. It's not just smart business, it's smart from a baseball perspective as well.

#67 AlNipper49


  • Huge Member


  • 32459 posts

Posted 27 January 2012 - 03:16 PM

Dave Dombrowski just told us @mlbnetworkradio that the Tigers are not going to go get Roy Oswalt that is not an option



#68 SoxScout


  • Maalox Territory


  • 30160 posts

Posted 27 January 2012 - 09:56 PM

Jim Duquette

Source - Roy Oswalt and the #Cardinals are close to a deal. #RedSox and #Astros are also still in the mix.

https://twitter.com/#!/Jim_Duquette/status/163087715208925185 mabrowndog is a dingus

#69 bosockboy


  • SoSH Member


  • 6515 posts

Posted 27 January 2012 - 10:10 PM

https://twitter.com/#!/Jim_Duquette/status/163087715208925185 mabrowndog is a dingus


Put up or shut up Ben.

#70 SoxScout


  • Maalox Territory


  • 30160 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 01:20 AM

Looks like its STL after turning down $10M from Detroit. I don't see how we were legit contenders for him if this is really how it played out. Detroit is stacked, plays shitty teams, and in a big park... and he still said no to that. There had to be no shot he was coming here.

#71 Sprowl


  • mikey lowell of the sandbox


  • 19170 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 01:29 AM

Looks like its STL after turning down $10M from Detroit. I don't see how we were legit contenders for him if this is really how it played out. Detroit is stacked, plays shitty teams, and in a big park... and he still said no to that. There had to be no shot he was coming here.


The NL Central has its charms, and now that Pujols and Fielder have moved on and Braun is under suspension, for a pitcher it's more charming than ever.

#72 dynomite

  • 4328 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 01:40 AM

The NL Central has its charms, and now that Pujols and Fielder have moved on and Braun is under suspension, for a pitcher it's more charming than ever.


And if he really does want to stay close to Mississippi, the Cardinals appear to be his second-best option:

Atlanta, GA -- 300 miles driving from Weir, MS
St. Louis, MO -- 440 miles driving from Weir, MS
Fort Worth, TX -- 540 miles driving from Weir, MS
Houston, TX -- 545 miles driving from Weir, MS

I'm happy he's staying out of the American League if he isn't signing with us.

#73 RedOctober3829


  • SoSH Member


  • 14479 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 01:41 AM

Lock the thread and begin the questions of why they traded Scutaro without Oswalt locked up.

The #stlcards have loaded rotation with Oswalt signing #mlb


http://twitter.com/#!/BNightengale/status/163148745960194048

#74 DeJesus Built My Hotrod


  • SoSH Member


  • 9479 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 02:08 AM

Lock the thread and begin the questions of why they traded Scutaro without Oswalt locked up.


http://twitter.com/#...148745960194048


If we are now seriously worried that Boston let go of a 35 year old, good-bet-to-decline Marco Scutaro in a failed bid to acquire a 34 year old, steadily-declining, Roy Oswalt, that tells you a lot about the current state of affairs for the Red Averages.

#75 YTF

  • 3404 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 05:12 AM

Lock the thread and begin the questions of why they traded Scutaro without Oswalt locked up.



http://twitter.com/#!/BNightengale/status/163148745960194048


Honestly, I get the backlash from many here over this and understand the point being made, but I think it was a calculated risk that the team felt they needed to make. You always have to be mindful of the fact there isn't always a lot of demand for the parts you deem to be available. From what WE know there was only one taker for Scutaro's contract and if the Sox signed Oswalt (or anyone else) first they may have seemed to be in a position of desperation and may have needed kick in a few million to move Marco.

#76 Drek717

  • 1784 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 06:03 AM

Lock the thread and begin the questions of why they traded Scutaro without Oswalt locked up.


Probably because as the off-season has drawn on they've become more and more comfortable with the notion that the net difference between Scutaro and Aviles at SS is too small to be worth the very large gap in pay. When you consider that the difference might also be what pushes the team past the luxury tax threshold or would be additional spending after already passing it, that gap only gets more valuable to erase.

#77 Carl Everetts Therapist


  • yossarian


  • PipPip
  • 1558 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 08:19 AM

in the words of Obi-Wan and Yoda

Yoda: "and now things are worse"
Obi-Wan: "He was our last chance"
Yoda: "No, there is another"

Empire Strikes back aside, there is still Edwin Jackson to be signed, although any leverage was just lost. I will be pissed if they don't get either Jackson or Oswalt after the Scutaro deal.... I suppose they could trade for Gavin Floyd, but then you have to go and give up much needed prospects. I will hold out a little hope for Jackson, but I have a sneaking suspicion that this front office wants to use the Scutaro salary clear as wiggle room incase Papi and Aceves;s Arb. contracts are a lot more than expected. I think they plan on slotting bard into the #4 spot and letting Aceves, Padilla, Cook, Silva, Maine, Doubront and Tazawa to fight it out for the 5th spot.

That leaves us dangerously low in the depth department..... If Bard doesn't work out, gets hurt with the new workload and needs to go back to the pen or worse to the DL than 40% of the rotation is dreck

#78 JimD

  • 4414 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 09:06 AM

Lock the thread and begin the questions of why they traded Scutaro without Oswalt locked up.


The payroll flexibility they gained by trading Scutaro's salary didn't expire when Oswalt turned them down.

#79 rembrat


  • SoSH Member


  • 20515 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 09:24 AM

I wonder how they'll make it fit down in St. Louis. Carpenter, Wainwright, Garcia, Lohse, and Westbrook. Lohse is owed $11.875MM IN '12 and Westbrook is owed $8.5MM in '12 with an option and buyout in the following year. Oh, and they both have full NTC.

But I dont blame them for not passing up on a bargin. I'll refrain from attacking Ben here but I'll say that it's becoming more and more clear that there is no set plan. We have to get under, oh wait we dont, but let's trade away a starting shortstop while we're at it, spend $3MM of that on a platoon player and then get ready to cry broke as Jackson signs with the Tigers or O's.

Not a fan of how this is going down.

#80 Rudy Pemberton


  • just plum doesn't understand


  • 27094 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 09:29 AM



That leaves us dangerously low in the depth department..... If Bard doesn't work out, gets hurt with the new workload and needs to go back to the pen or worse to the DL than 40% of the rotation is dreck


40% (at least) of the rotation was dreck last year, and they still should have won 95. Ultimately, the presence of Oswalt, with his own issues, wouldn't have changed that calculus. I think the Sox have addressed their depth issues pretty well. If they break camp with a starting rotation of Lester-Beckett-Buchholz-Bard-Padilla, than you still have a collection of guys like Tazawa, Doubront, Silva, Cook, Germano, Wilson, Miller, and Aceves who could possibly start; with Matsuzaka hopefully back at some point. Granted, guys will get hurt, released, traded but it's a reasonably deep roster of talent. i think it's better than what they had last year, when they really had a perfect storm of bad luck and poor performance and still almost made the playoffs. Adding Jackson would be nice, but I'm not sure it's a must.


#81 bosockboy


  • SoSH Member


  • 6515 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 09:42 AM

"Ben, there is a Scott Boras on line 2. He says its regarding Edwin Jackson."

#82 czar


  • fanboy


  • 3539 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 09:55 AM

"Ben, there is a Scott Boras on line 2. He says its regarding Edwin Jackson."


According to a major league source, the Red Sox would be content in waiting to use any financial flexibility they might have down the road instead of getting in a bidding war for a player like Oswalt (or free agent pitcher Edwin Jackson).


Rob Bradford

#83 The Boomer

  • 1986 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 10:27 AM



40% (at least) of the rotation was dreck last year, and they still should have won 95. Ultimately, the presence of Oswalt, with his own issues, wouldn't have changed that calculus. I think the Sox have addressed their depth issues pretty well. If they break camp with a starting rotation of Lester-Beckett-Buchholz-Bard-Padilla, than you still have a collection of guys like Tazawa, Doubront, Silva, Cook, Germano, Wilson, Miller, and Aceves who could possibly start; with Matsuzaka hopefully back at some point. Granted, guys will get hurt, released, traded but it's a reasonably deep roster of talent. i think it's better than what they had last year, when they really had a perfect storm of bad luck and poor performance and still almost made the playoffs. Adding Jackson would be nice, but I'm not sure it's a must.


I agree! They are right to defer using their financial flexibility later when a more obvious deficit arises. They might try most pitchers on that list if Padilla falters and Bard reaches his starting innings limit before a move back to the bullpen. The dark horse who might surpass them all is Alex Wilson. Surprises occur every season and, given their budget concerns, these lottery tickets aren't necessarily a worse gamble than another large worthless contract for even a single season. It's as likely that they cash one of these tickets for a small (not jackpot) prize as it is they will cash their financial flexibility to fill out their rotation later this season. I have no complaints.

#84 PedroKsBambino


  • SoSH Member


  • 13997 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 10:32 AM

This sort of thing gets posted a lot around here lately. Why does Cherington get so much of a bye for all these bad decisions when he presumably played a key role in making them? It's not like he came in from outside the organization. He was Epstein's right-hand man for how long?

While I understand that all the moves Cherington's made over the last few months have inspired a lot of confidence, I don't think the implied assumption that all the bad decisions rest soley on Epstein's shoulders is accurate.


I haven't seen 'soley' used, but it's pretty unrealistic to suggest that the GM doesn't primarily make the decisions.

#85 bosockboy


  • SoSH Member


  • 6515 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 10:39 AM

I'd prefer Jackson because of the near certainty he can throw 200ish innings....and he's still in play and apparently wants to pitch for us. I think he lands here this week.

#86 BucketOBalls


  • SoSH Member


  • 5643 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 10:47 AM

If we are now seriously worried that Boston let go of a 35 year old, good-bet-to-decline Marco Scutaro in a failed bid to acquire a 34 year old, steadily-declining, Roy Oswalt, that tells you a lot about the current state of affairs for the Red Averages.


It's more the apparent thought process behind it than the result. I'm not broken up about missing on Oswalt as I don't think he would stay healthy anyway. I mean, were they really expecting the Rockies to pull Melancon off the table?

If they had failed to get Oswalt and still wanted to dump Scutaro they could have kicked in a million or 2 and still got most of the benefit really. Hard to think the market for him was actually that bad though.


The payroll flexibility they gained by trading Scutaro's salary didn't expire when Oswalt turned them down.


Of course there is no one worth spending it on. If they somehow get Edwin Jackson on some ridiculously cheap 1 year deal, that would be good...but it seems pretty unlikely.

#87 Rudy Pemberton


  • just plum doesn't understand


  • 27094 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 11:09 AM

If they had failed to get Oswalt and still wanted to dump Scutaro they could have kicked in a million or 2 and still got most of the benefit really. Hard to think the market for him was actually that bad though.


Why is it hard to believe? Presumably, the Sox were the highest bidders on Scutaro when they signed him a few years ago, now he's 36 and there's some question as to whether he can play SS. This time of year, there's very few teams that have positions wide open, and those that do aren't likely to be interested in paying a guy like Scutaro that kind of money. The obvious reply is that they should have traded him earlier, of course, at that point its harder to make a deal because there's FA's available. Sox could have waited until ST, but then teams generally don't have ability to add that kind of salary.

I was initially down on the Scutaro deal; but upon further reflection it seems likely that Aviles can be as productive, and Ross is valuable OF depth, a much better player than McDonald. Added payroll flexibility could come in handy upon the right situation.

It seems unlikely that the Sox didn't get the most value they could for Scutaro, frankly. I think we tend to overrate the value of our own players (as fans of all teams do).

#88 The Boomer

  • 1986 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 11:57 AM

Here are some updates:


"A major league source tells FOXSports.com's Ken Rosenthal that Roy Oswalt was ''not close to signing a deal with the Cardinals'' late Friday night.
This corroborates a report from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch that insists no deal is in place. The Cardinals’ motives for signing Oswalt are unclear, as both Kyle Lohse and Jake Westbrook have full no-trade clauses and limited trade value. Lohse will earn $11.875 million in 2012. Westbrook is set to make $8.5 million.



Roy Oswalt's agent, Bob Garber, told Tim Dierkes of MLB Trade Rumors that there is "no chance" of his client moving to the bullpen.
Garber declined to comment on anything team-specific, but his stance indicates that the Cardinals are indeed the favorites to land Oswalt. Assuming a deal gets done, Kyle Lohse and Jake Westbrook will be candidates to be moved from the starting rotation."

The Cardinals can certainly afford to spread around some of their money not spent on Pujols to sign him. If they are the competition, you need to respect their recognition of the best Moneyball II (market inefficiency) tactics. While the Red Sox have the budget to acquire only former regulars (e.g. Aviles, Shoppach, Sweeney and Ross) as useful bargain priced role players, the Cardinals actually sign former all stars (e.g. Berkman, Beltran and probably Oswalt) as short term but cost effective regulars. Cherington is trying to maneuver so that he can eventually adopt this strategy too when he has the budget for it.

#89 maufman


  • SoSH Member


  • 11471 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 01:24 PM

Why is it hard to believe? Presumably, the Sox were the highest bidders on Scutaro when they signed him a few years ago, now he's 36 and there's some question as to whether he can play SS. This time of year, there's very few teams that have positions wide open, and those that do aren't likely to be interested in paying a guy like Scutaro that kind of money. The obvious reply is that they should have traded him earlier, of course, at that point its harder to make a deal because there's FA's available. Sox could have waited until ST, but then teams generally don't have ability to add that kind of salary.

I was initially down on the Scutaro deal; but upon further reflection it seems likely that Aviles can be as productive, and Ross is valuable OF depth, a much better player than McDonald. Added payroll flexibility could come in handy upon the right situation.

It seems unlikely that the Sox didn't get the most value they could for Scutaro, frankly. I think we tend to overrate the value of our own players (as fans of all teams do).


I agree. Remember, some of us didn't think picking up Scutaro's option was a no-brainer, so his rights obviously weren't worth that much.

If Ben didn't want Scutaro as his starting shortstop, he did well to avoid the $1.5mm buyout.

#90 YTF

  • 3404 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 02:38 PM

"Ben, there is a Scott Boras on line 2. He says its regarding Edwin Jackson."


This and I'm guessing the Sox are going to look for a one year deal. A lot of times this can be looked upon favorably by a player hoping to shine in a down market and get a bigger multi year deal the following season. Problem is I doubt Boras wants any part of Jackson testing these waters in the AL east. Like most Boras clients, he's going to get a multi year deal at dollars that are going to surprise most of us. It doesn't alway hurt to go last.

#91 nvalvo


  • SoSH Member


  • 6665 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 02:45 PM

What if we offered Jackson a sort of Beltre-ish make-good deal, with a low second year salary, with an opt-out? Boras went for that, didn't he?

That could hold down his AAV, and still give him the chance to go back on the market for a bigger deal if he succeeds as we hope he will in year one. It would also avoid the opportunity cost of having a full rotation in the 2012-3 offseason, with a lot of good pitching talent expected to be available in FA.

In the meantime, we get 170+ innings of I'd guess about 95 ERA+ pitching, which would be a big, big help.

#92 EvilEmpire

  • 3716 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 02:57 PM

Less risk for Beltre in a good offensive park on a team that has lots of RBI opportunities. As already mentioned, not so much of a benefit for Jackson if he wants to build value.

#93 Savin Hillbilly


  • SoSH Member


  • 10441 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 07:36 PM

What if we offered Jackson a sort of Beltre-ish make-good deal, with a low second year salary, with an opt-out? Boras went for that, didn't he?

He went for that because Beltre was in uncertain health, coming off a bad year that capped a frustrating five years in a park that could have been designed by Satan to torment him. None of this is particularly like Jackson's situation.

#94 Carl Everetts Therapist


  • yossarian


  • PipPip
  • 1558 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 07:49 PM

He went for that because Beltre was in uncertain health, coming off a bad year that capped a frustrating five years in a park that could have been designed by Satan to torment him. None of this is particularly like Jackson's situation.


All true, but couldn't Jackson come into the AL EAST put up very good numbers as a 4th starter and help himself even more? Wouldn't it be more beneficial to be possibly pitching in the playoffs than say playing in Kansas City and putting up the same numbers? Couldn't he theoreticly come in here with good run support and on a bigger stage earn himself a contract that puts him into the next stratosphere?

He'd be more visable, his name would be out there a ton more...

It all depends on his (and Boras's) own self confidence. If he thinks he's gonna have a good year better to do it in Boston than some small market losing team that nobody watches.

#95 EvilEmpire

  • 3716 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 08:12 PM

If he pitches well enough to put up good numbers in the AL East he will probably have even better numbers someplace else.

#96 nvalvo


  • SoSH Member


  • 6665 posts

Posted 29 January 2012 - 12:39 AM

Less risk for Beltre in a good offensive park on a team that has lots of RBI opportunities. As already mentioned, not so much of a benefit for Jackson if he wants to build value.

He went for that because Beltre was in uncertain health, coming off a bad year that capped a frustrating five years in a park that could have been designed by Satan to torment him. None of this is particularly like Jackson's situation.


I guess so. But that doesn't change that the market doesn't look like it's there for him. Although that could only get worse, next offseason.

#97 EvilEmpire

  • 3716 posts

Posted 29 January 2012 - 12:56 AM

I guess so. But that doesn't change that the market doesn't look like it's there for him. Although that could only get worse, next offseason.


You might be right, but I suspect the market that isn't there for him is an expensive multi-year deal. If and when Boras is willing to take a one-year deal, that whole market changes and more teams will be interested. When and if he is willing to take a cheap one-year deal, that market changes even more. I think the Sox have a good shot, but it really depends what they are willing to spend. That seems hard to even speculate about right now.

#98 The Boomer

  • 1986 posts

Posted 29 January 2012 - 04:35 PM

Now here is something that might make sense:


Joe Strauss of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that the Cardinals are "actively shopping" right-hander Kyle McClellan.
The Cards want to sign veteran Roy Oswalt and are trying to clear payroll space in order to make it happen. Strauss lists the Orioles, Padres and Diamondbacks as having interest in McClellan, who avoided arbitration with the club by agreeing to a $2.5 million contract earlier this month. He could be used as a starter or a reliever with his new team.

McClellan was a poor man's Daniel Bard last spring when he converted from top set up man to starter. He throws hard, would fit within their budget, would be under team control for at least one more year and would enable St. Louis to replace him with Oswalt. He started last season very well before fading down the stretch. He is still in his prime and in some ways would be less of a gamble at his just established price than the free agent alternatives. He also wouldn't cost anywhere near the prospects it would take for Garza or Floyd.

Edited by The Boomer, 29 January 2012 - 04:42 PM.


#99 Alcohol&Overcalls

  • 1181 posts

Posted 29 January 2012 - 08:14 PM

McClellan was a poor man's Daniel Bard last spring when he converted from top set up man to starter. He throws hard, would fit within their budget, would be under team control for at least one more year and would enable St. Louis to replace him with Oswalt. He started last season very well before fading down the stretch. He is still in his prime and in some ways would be less of a gamble at his just established price than the free agent alternatives. He also wouldn't cost anywhere near the prospects it would take for Garza or Floyd.


McClellan might throw hard, but he didn't strike anybody out last season - at all. Even prior to fading down the stretch, he was striking out 5 guys or fewer per 9, and was tossing up a WHIP around 1.3, every month.

Maybe he adjusts better to starting the second time around, but he doesn't really appear to offer much (if anything) more than the guys the Sox already have to try out at the back end. Combine that with any sort of acquisition cost, and I'm not really on board. He's not enough of an improvement over or appreciably different from Aceves at this point, and my inclination is that I'd rather have two completely different lottery tickets than two shots at the same one, if that isn't too tortured.

#100 someoneanywhere

  • 3056 posts

Posted 29 January 2012 - 08:54 PM

in the words of Obi-Wan and Yoda

Yoda: "and now things are worse"
Obi-Wan: "He was our last chance"
Yoda: "No, there is another"


Now dammit cet, if you want to call Starlin Castro "Sterling," I won't say anything. But man, you can't go screwing around with movie dialogue like this. People get upset.

Yoda says "now matters are worse." And Ben says, "That boy is our last hope."

You got to get the words right. Haven't you seen "Bull Durham"?




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users