2019-20 Offseason Discussion

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,749
The wrong side of the bridge....
These all look reasonable, if somewhat optimistic. The Lakins opener idea is intriguing. Out of curiosity (and I suppose a fair answer would be "buy a subscription and see for yourself"), is she saying Peraza will be better than Holt, or not as good?
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
48,685
These all look reasonable, if somewhat optimistic. The Lakins opener idea is intriguing. Out of curiosity (and I suppose a fair answer would be "buy a subscription and see for yourself"), is she saying Peraza will be better than Holt, or not as good?
"Meanwhile, Peraza played second, third, short, left field and center field for the Reds last season. Of his 141 games played, 78 were at second. He projects as a decent utility infielder, but not much more than that. He’s also coming off his worst year at the plate, hitting .239 with a .631 OPS."
 

shaggydog2000

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2007
6,957
The two AAA leagues used the same ball as MLB last year, so you could say that about all 2019 MLB stats also, and what's even worse is we have no idea if the balls will change again this season (I guess theoretically they could have informally told the clubs but can you imagine if that leaked?).

There were some absolutely crazy PCL numbers last year, Taylor Widener went from a 2.75 ERA in 137 innings in AA in 2018 and a top 100 MLB prospect to a 8.10 ERA in 100 innings in the PCL in 2019. Justus Sheffield went from a 2.56 ERA in 88 innings in the IL in 2018 to a 6.87 ERA in 55 innings in the PCL in 2019, a year older and the same level and he got hammered with the new balls, they had to send him back to AA for a few months even.
The PCL is pretty nuts offensively anyway. I'm sure the changed ball didn't help, but lots of prospects have looked like HR hitting studs in the PCL one season, just to have it disappear the minute they moved to a different league. Hitting 20 HR there doesn't mean much to me. To put his numbers in perspective, he had a .178 ISO, which sounds nice, but put him 56th of 78 qualified PCL hitters. I'm guessing he's not a newly minted slugger.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
11,452
The PCL is pretty nuts offensively anyway. I'm sure the changed ball didn't help, but lots of prospects have looked like HR hitting studs in the PCL one season, just to have it disappear the minute they moved to a different league. Hitting 20 HR there doesn't mean much to me. To put his numbers in perspective, he had a .178 ISO, which sounds nice, but put him 56th of 78 qualified PCL hitters. I'm guessing he's not a newly minted slugger.
Probably not but if he hits for any power at all he's going to be a starting 2b. It's the one knock on him.
 

Teachdad46

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
Oct 14, 2011
122
Vermont
Actually, no, unless you’re planning on ignoring all 2019 MLB numbers too. Is the ball why Porcello and Happ both sucked last year? Maybe, but both guys are getting dumped anyway (Porcello already let go, Happ will follow soon).

It was a big factor, especially in the PCL, but just another thing to keep in mind when looking at stats.
But both have signed for eight digit dollars for 2020.
 

nattysez

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
4,229
Jen McCaffrey's predictions on the year ahead on The Athletic this AM (I am just copying the headlines, but each has a paragraph of explanation on the site):

1. Martin Perez is better than expected, and Jose Peraza is no Brock Holt replacement
2. Rich Hill signs in spring training and wins a key game later in the year
3. After a bounce-back year, Chris Sale’s contract extension looks like one of Dave Dombrowski’s final gifts to the Red Sox
4. Mitch Moreland re-signs on one-year, $3 million deal
5. But Bobby Dalbec takes over first base by June 1
6. The Red Sox trade David Price to the Dodgers
7. Travis Lakins starts 20 games as an opener
8. Darwinzon Hernandez leads the team in saves, gradually taking over the closer role
9. Mookie Betts remains in Boston the entire season
10. Jackie Bradley Jr. remains in Boston, too
Respectfully, this seems like something dashed off to fill a content gap over the holidays. There is very little explanation provided for most of her assertions. Her explanation of Mookie staying is that a Price trade can get the team close to where they want to be budget-wise, which is contrary to just about every report to date.
 

geoduck no quahog

not particularly consistent
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2002
11,749
Seattle, WA
Need to stop using the World Series as an indicator of success. I'd rather use playoff appearances.

Under that metric, the most successful teams in 16 seasons since/including the 2004 Red Sox victory are:

Yankees (12)
Dodgers (11)
Cardinals (10)
Red Sox (9)

The remainder?

Braves (7)
Astors / Twins / A's / Cubs / Angles (6)
Phillies / Indians / Rays / Nats / Rangers / Tigers (5)
Rockies / Brewers / Giants (4)
Diamondbacks / Orioles / Mets / Pirates / Reds (3)
White Sox / Padres / Tigers / Royals / Blue Jays(2)

29 teams have made the playoffs since 2004. Yankees, Dodgers and Cardinals have done well, with the Dodgers recent success standing out (7 appearances in a row - no one else more than 4 in that time frame)

Apparently payroll matters.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
11,628
Maine
Respectfully, this seems like something dashed off to fill a content gap over the holidays. There is very little explanation provided for most of her assertions. Her explanation of Mookie staying is that a Price trade can get the team close to where they want to be budget-wise, which is contrary to just about every report to date.
That's exactly what it is. They're predictions. I don't think they're meant to be taken all that seriously. Or at least, they're not supposed to be seen as well-informed rumors and speculation.

As for her prediction about Mookie and a Price trade, I don't see why she's incorrect to suggest that a Price trade alone can get them close. Cot's has them at roughly $229M right now with their arbitration estimates for guys like Mookie, JBJ, ERod, etc. Remove Price's full deal (a $32M cap hit) and they're over $10M below the first cap of $208M. So there's room to eat a bit of his money and still get under the cap, and room to play around the margins with some of the arbitration salaries to create some wiggle room as well. Getting under the luxury tax thresholds absolutely should not require trading both Mookie and Price.

And frankly, if they're eating more than $10M AAV to move Price, they're much better off keeping him IMO.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
11,452
Really?

Sorry to disagree, but I'm going to say the Red Sox have had a more successful 21st century than the Yankees have.
He's true in a sense. Without actually knowing the results, if someone said the Yankees made the playoffs 12 times and the Giants 4 and asked me who won the most WS, I'd pick the team with more playoff appearances every time.

WS titles since 2004 with the amount of times they made the playoffs.
Redsox 4/9
Whitesox, 1/2
Cardinals 2/10
Philly 1/5
Yankees 1/12
Giants 3/4
Royals 1/2
Cubs 1/6
Astros 1/6
Nationals 1/5

Most of the teams who have won the WS since 2004 have made the playoffs semi regularly. Poor Dodgers.

edit: it also shows the issue with taking playoff appearances over WS titles. Variance is crazy in small sample sizes and these are incredibly small sample sizes.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
48,685
I think the point that success is more nuanced than 1 winner and 29 losers is a good one, the Dodgers are not the Orioles.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
11,452
Sure, with limited information it is easy to jump to bad conclusions.

Ask a Yankee fan which team has been more successful . . .
It's a weird question because I think the only time it would matter is hiring a GM. Would you rather hire the GM with a winning percentage of 60.0% over the last 20 years with 18 playoff appearances and 1 WS title or the GM with a winning percentage of 45% with 2 playoff appearances and 2 WS wins in 20 years?

As fans, we'd rather have the 2 WS but we would also rather have the first GM.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
11,452
To put it another way, who is the more successful GM, Billy Beane or Ben Cherington?

How far does a WS take you?
 

nattysez

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
4,229
That's exactly what it is. They're predictions. I don't think they're meant to be taken all that seriously. Or at least, they're not supposed to be seen as well-informed rumors and speculation.

As for her prediction about Mookie and a Price trade, I don't see why she's incorrect to suggest that a Price trade alone can get them close. Cot's has them at roughly $229M right now with their arbitration estimates for guys like Mookie, JBJ, ERod, etc. Remove Price's full deal (a $32M cap hit) and they're over $10M below the first cap of $208M. So there's room to eat a bit of his money and still get under the cap, and room to play around the margins with some of the arbitration salaries to create some wiggle room as well. Getting under the luxury tax thresholds absolutely should not require trading both Mookie and Price.

And frankly, if they're eating more than $10M AAV to move Price, they're much better off keeping him IMO.
I believe that's 229 for 18 players. So getting to 197 for 17 players after a Price trade leaves you with 11m for 9 players (including a new starter). Add in Moreland for 3 as she suggests and you're at 8m for 8 guys. If all you're trying to do is get a team on the field, I guess that'll work in theory. If you want to field a viable team, you need a lot more room to operate, which is why Mookie and/or JDM are on the block.
 

Danny_Darwin

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
1,557
To put it another way, who is the more successful GM, Billy Beane or Ben Cherington?

How far does a WS take you?
Brian Sabean vs. Andrew Friedman might be a less-controversial version of the question. (Although let’s also not forget that the Dodgers lost a seven-game WS featuring two one-runs games against a team that we now know was stealing signs)
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
45,086
1. Martin Perez is better than expected, and Jose Peraza is no Brock Holt replacement
2. Rich Hill signs in spring training and wins a key game later in the year
3. After a bounce-back year, Chris Sale’s contract extension looks like one of Dave Dombrowski’s final gifts to the Red Sox
4. Mitch Moreland re-signs on one-year, $3 million deal
5. But Bobby Dalbec takes over first base by June 1
6. The Red Sox trade David Price to the Dodgers
7. Travis Lakins starts 20 games as an opener
8. Darwinzon Hernandez leads the team in saves, gradually taking over the closer role
9. Mookie Betts remains in Boston the entire season
10. Jackie Bradley Jr. remains in Boston, too
Those are big words.

(Sorry—couldn’t help myself. Try the veal!!)
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,749
The wrong side of the bridge....
I believe that's 229 for 18 players. So getting to 197 for 17 players after a Price trade leaves you with 11m for 9 players (including a new starter). Add in Moreland for 3 as she suggests and you're at 8m for 8 guys. If all you're trying to do is get a team on the field, I guess that'll work in theory. If you want to field a viable team, you need a lot more room to operate, which is why Mookie and/or JDM are on the block.
The $229M ($226M for CBT purposes, actually) includes a line item of $4.6M for "0- to- 3-year players", which I assume is a catchall for pre-arb guys on the 26-man TBD. The total for the 18 identified players in the spreadsheet, plus minor-league 40-man guys and benefits, is $222M.

Looking at the pre-arb guys most likely to make the Opening Day roster in the absence of further moves, the only one who looks likely to make significantly more than the ML minimum is Devers. If they pay him $1M for that monster season he just had, that leaves $3.6M for 7 guys, which is not that far off. Make it $5M and the total for the 8, again in the absence of further moves, would be about $6M. So that brings the actual CBT nut up to maybe $228M. Trade Price (assuming, hypothetically, that they don't subsidize him at all) and that becomes $197M, leaving them approximately $10M to upgrade one or more of those 8 extra slots. Trading somebody else would certainly give them more breathing room, but it doesn't appear to be an absolute necessity.

Please correct me if I'm erring here.
 

HangingW/ScottCooper

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
1,988
Scituate, MA
The $229M ($226M for CBT purposes, actually) includes a line item of $4.6M for "0- to- 3-year players", which I assume is a catchall for pre-arb guys on the 26-man TBD. The total for the 18 identified players in the spreadsheet, plus minor-league 40-man guys and benefits, is $222M.

Looking at the pre-arb guys most likely to make the Opening Day roster in the absence of further moves, the only one who looks likely to make significantly more than the ML minimum is Devers. If they pay him $1M for that monster season he just had, that leaves $3.6M for 7 guys, which is not that far off. Make it $5M and the total for the 8, again in the absence of further moves, would be about $6M. So that brings the actual CBT nut up to maybe $228M. Trade Price (assuming, hypothetically, that they don't subsidize him at all) and that becomes $197M, leaving them approximately $10M to upgrade one or more of those 8 extra slots. Trading somebody else would certainly give them more breathing room, but it doesn't appear to be an absolute necessity.

Please correct me if I'm erring here.
That's how I understand it. Cots has them over the competitive balance tax at an estimated $18,566, 667 right now. This includes many assumptions, but at this point trading an unsubsidized Price with no salary coming back would put them well under the threshold.
 

P'tucket rhymes with...

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2006
10,564
The Coney Island of my mind
The $229M ($226M for CBT purposes, actually) includes a line item of $4.6M for "0- to- 3-year players", which I assume is a catchall for pre-arb guys on the 26-man TBD. The total for the 18 identified players in the spreadsheet, plus minor-league 40-man guys and benefits, is $222M.

Looking at the pre-arb guys most likely to make the Opening Day roster in the absence of further moves, the only one who looks likely to make significantly more than the ML minimum is Devers. If they pay him $1M for that monster season he just had, that leaves $3.6M for 7 guys, which is not that far off. Make it $5M and the total for the 8, again in the absence of further moves, would be about $6M. So that brings the actual CBT nut up to maybe $228M. Trade Price (assuming, hypothetically, that they don't subsidize him at all) and that becomes $197M, leaving them approximately $10M to upgrade one or more of those 8 extra slots. Trading somebody else would certainly give them more breathing room, but it doesn't appear to be an absolute necessity.

Please correct me if I'm erring here.
That looks right, although the "trading Price without a subsidy" is a pretty big if. Off loading $20m/yr puts them right back up against the ceiling or a little over, so it seems possible if not likely that it's going to take at least one other unappealing move to get some breathing room. I'd vote JBJ off the island along with Price if they get stuck with part of Price's salary, but that's just me.
 

Green Monster

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2000
2,134
CT

Apparently the Sox were in on Travis Shaw but couldn't commit $4M before moving salary.....Sounds like they might have more financial restrictions than some of us thought.
 

effectivelywild

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
267

Apparently the Sox were in on Travis Shaw but couldn't commit $4M before moving salary.....Sounds like they might have more financial restrictions than some of us thought.
Well....Shaw to backup Devers? Play both corner positions off the bench? Third is one of the few positions where we have a heavily discounted well above average player. Not sure why we would sign him, unless you are thinking he could play first. To be fair, he was OPSing ~120 the two years before last, but unless you think he is a going to post at least ~100 OPS the next season, not sure where he fits.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
20,640
Shaw would have been a 1B platoon with Chavis/Dalbec, I guess.

I hope this Price trade goes through sometime this week so this freeze can be over. and boy the spring training conference with ownership will be awkward.
 

Green Monster

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2000
2,134
CT

MA native Steve Chisek is interested in the Red Sox. Not clear how interested the Sox are in him. Personally he seems like he could be a solid addition if they can make the numbers work. Not a high profile closer, but gets guys out (although not via the preferred strike out). He has over 130 saves on his resume and would offer some depth and experience to the bullpen. At 33yo potentially a mentor for some of the younger guys (Barnes, Hernandez, Workman).
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
11,628
Maine

MA native Steve Chisek is interested in the Red Sox. Not clear how interested the Sox are in him. Personally he seems like he could be a solid addition if they can make the numbers work. Not a high profile closer, but gets guys out (although not via the preferred strike out). He has over 130 saves on his resume and would offer some depth and experience to the bullpen. At 33yo potentially a mentor for some of the younger guys (Barnes, Hernandez, Workman).
I think he'd have to take a significant pay cut for the Sox to be interested (he's not made less than $4M in the last five years, mostly around $6M). And I'm not sure how much mentoring guys like Barnes and Workman really need, considering they're 30+ themselves and have been pitching in the majors for 4-5 years now.
 

Green Monster

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2000
2,134
CT
I think he'd have to take a significant pay cut for the Sox to be interested (he's not made less than $4M in the last five years, mostly around $6M). And I'm not sure how much mentoring guys like Barnes and Workman really need, considering they're 30+ themselves and have been pitching in the majors for 4-5 years now.
Agreed, most likely a long shot until when/if a trade happens and frees up some salary.... With the mentor angle, I was thinking mostly towards closing games. Barnes & Workman have 22 career saves combined. Perhaps more applicable towards Hernandez, Houck or any other kids that end up rounding out the pen.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
20,640
Twins just put their eggs in the Rich Hill & Homer Bailey basket. another destination for Price probably off the table.
 

JM3

lurker
Dec 14, 2019
53
A bit of an exaggeration, no? Casas, Dalbec, Jimenez, Groome etc.
A bit, but not a huge exaggeration. Casas is the most highly regarded of those & he's barely a top 100 prospect. That's pretty meager for 4 years of drafts.

According to Bleacher Report, they have the 30th ranked farm system (out of 30 teams). By comparison, they were #4 when DD took over after the 2015 draft.

I don't think it's out of line to say that the organization could have done a better job keeping the farm system productive in terms of acquisition & player development during his tenure. The lack of organizational depth was one of the biggest problems last season.
 

Jack Rabbit Slim

Member
SoSH Member
May 19, 2010
1,092
I have been rethinking a Price/Myers swap with the Padres. My first (and second) reaction to the suggestion of taking back Wil Myers was disgust since Price’s value relative to his contract is much higher imo. But the huge gap between Myers’ salary and AAV the next three years makes me think it is possible to come to a reasonable agreement.

Price has 3/96 remaining and by the deals signed so far, I would posit that he is worth about $60M of that, so about $36M underwater.

Myers has 3/67.5 remaining and would likely get a 1 year deal @ 2-3M at best on the market. So say his deal is $60M underwater. The big factor here is that while his salary is big, his AAV is “only” $13.83M due to heavy backloading of the contract.

So my proposal would be Price for Myers + $24M.

Why the Red Sox would do it: Main reason is it would cut $25M AAV off the CBT number the next three years. While Myers would still be overpaid, he isn’t completely worthless. While he has become replacement level against RHP, he still put up good numbers against LHP the last two years so he could fill a bench spot and platoon with Beni in LF or a LHH 1B (Moreland/Thames).

Why the Padres would do it: Price definitely has his risks, but he is also one of the few SP still available with real top of the rotation upside. Myers wouldn’t be a starter for them (Pham in LF, Grisham in RF, Hosmer @ 1B), so they would essentially be adding a mid-to-top of the rotation SP for 3/52.5, roughly what Keuchel received.

I would also be tempted to ask about a JBJ/Margot swap. JBJ is the better player even in his bad years and has shown all-star caliber upside not too long ago. Margot is nothing special but could fill CF adequately (while cutting an additional $9M of AAV) and still has room for growth at only 25 years old. The Padres (more so Preller) are entering a win now mode, so while Margot’s three arb years are more valuable than 1/11 for JBJ, perhaps the chance at an upgrade makes it worth it with just a minor prospect added from the Sox.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
A bit, but not a huge exaggeration. Casas is the most highly regarded of those & he's barely a top 100 prospect. That's pretty meager for 4 years of drafts.

According to Bleacher Report, they have the 30th ranked farm system (out of 30 teams). By comparison, they were #4 when DD took over after the 2015 draft.

I don't think it's out of line to say that the organization could have done a better job keeping the farm system productive in terms of acquisition & player development during his tenure. The lack of organizational depth was one of the biggest problems last season.
There are others that know better than I, but I'll go out on a limb and say that Moncada, Kopech and Devers were part of that #4 ranked farm system that DD inherited. It's not like he squandered that talent, the first two netted us Sale and the last has become your power hitting, every day third baseman. Yes not a lot to shout about since then, but I still grade the last couple of drafts as incomplete.
 

JM3

lurker
Dec 14, 2019
53
There are others that know better than I, but I'll go out on a limb and say that Moncada, Kopech and Devers were part of that #4 ranked farm system that DD inherited. It's not like he squandered that talent, the first two netted us Sale and the last has become your power hitting, every day third baseman. Yes not a lot to shout about since then, but I still grade the last couple of drafts as incomplete.
Yeah, they were all top 10, plus ERod, Margot, etc. All prospect lists for the most part should be fully turned over within 4 years.

Agree that they can't really be fully judged yet, but the consensus of experts whose job it is to judge these things is that it's not looking promising.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
Yeah, they were all top 10, plus ERod, Margot, etc. All prospect lists for the most part should be fully turned over within 4 years.

Agree that they can't really be fully judged yet, but the consensus of experts whose job it is to judge these things is that it's not looking promising.
Yeah I guess part of my point is that Moncada, Kopech, Devers (and I'll add Rodriquez and Margot) all played an important part in the 2018 championship. Not so much you, but others often point to DD trading away the farm and leaving the cupboards bare. It makes me nuts when you consider the guys dealt for the return of Sale and Kimbrel and the fact that DD kept the young core intact while making those acquisitions. Yes, the restocking of the farm has been less than hoped for at this point, but when comparing the farm system he inherited to what he left behind I think it's also important to cite what he did with what he inherited.
 

JM3

lurker
Dec 14, 2019
53
Yeah I guess part of my point is that Moncada, Kopech, Devers (and I'll add Rodriquez and Margot) all played an important part in the 2018 championship. Not so much you, but others often point to DD trading away the farm and leaving the cupboards bare. It makes me nuts when you consider the guys dealt for the return of Sale and Kimbrel and the fact that DD kept the young core intact while making those acquisitions. Yes, the restocking of the farm has been less than hoped for at this point, but when comparing the farm system he inherited to what he left behind I think it's also important to cite what he did with what he inherited.
Yeah, I don't really think we disagree on that at all. I don't think DD did a bad job, & trading those guys away, & keeping the ones they did (except maybe Swihart), really paid off. The problem is that in 4.5 years he didn't replace all those awesome assets he was dealt, so the payroll got top heavy & there weren't any more good young players ready to step in, & there wasn't even the organizational depth to replace injured players last year. DD was excellent at cashing chips in & putting together a great team, but there aren't any chips left, so the organization needed to go in a different direction, & I think they made a smart choice hiring Bloom. Of course, we'll see if it actually works out.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
11,628
Maine
I have been rethinking a Price/Myers swap with the Padres. My first (and second) reaction to the suggestion of taking back Wil Myers was disgust since Price’s value relative to his contract is much higher imo. But the huge gap between Myers’ salary and AAV the next three years makes me think it is possible to come to a reasonable agreement.

Price has 3/96 remaining and by the deals signed so far, I would posit that he is worth about $60M of that, so about $36M underwater.

Myers has 3/67.5 remaining and would likely get a 1 year deal @ 2-3M at best on the market. So say his deal is $60M underwater. The big factor here is that while his salary is big, his AAV is “only” $13.83M due to heavy backloading of the contract.

So my proposal would be Price for Myers + $24M.

Why the Red Sox would do it: Main reason is it would cut $25M AAV off the CBT number the next three years. While Myers would still be overpaid, he isn’t completely worthless. While he has become replacement level against RHP, he still put up good numbers against LHP the last two years so he could fill a bench spot and platoon with Beni in LF or a LHH 1B (Moreland/Thames).

Why the Padres would do it: Price definitely has his risks, but he is also one of the few SP still available with real top of the rotation upside. Myers wouldn’t be a starter for them (Pham in LF, Grisham in RF, Hosmer @ 1B), so they would essentially be adding a mid-to-top of the rotation SP for 3/52.5, roughly what Keuchel received.

I would also be tempted to ask about a JBJ/Margot swap. JBJ is the better player even in his bad years and has shown all-star caliber upside not too long ago. Margot is nothing special but could fill CF adequately (while cutting an additional $9M of AAV) and still has room for growth at only 25 years old. The Padres (more so Preller) are entering a win now mode, so while Margot’s three arb years are more valuable than 1/11 for JBJ, perhaps the chance at an upgrade makes it worth it with just a minor prospect added from the Sox.
Am I misunderstanding your proposed trade, or are you suggesting that the Padres would kick in $24M with Myers to acquire Price? That seems....overly optimistic. I would think the Sox would jump at the chance to net ~$25-27M in cap savings by moving Price. It seems unlikely that they'll be able to find a taker who wouldn't require them kicking in way more than $5-7M per year.

Which is why I very much doubt that it's something the Pads do.
 

Jack Rabbit Slim

Member
SoSH Member
May 19, 2010
1,092
Am I misunderstanding your proposed trade, or are you suggesting that the Padres would kick in $24M with Myers to acquire Price? That seems....overly optimistic. I would think the Sox would jump at the chance to net ~$25-27M in cap savings by moving Price. It seems unlikely that they'll be able to find a taker who wouldn't require them kicking in way more than $5-7M per year.

Which is why I very much doubt that it's something the Pads do.
Yes, you read it correctly. Part of this proposal is the report that Preller has essentially been told to produce a winning team this year or be fired. I also think you are underestimating how awful the Myers contract is for the Padres - $22.5M/yr for replacement level production from a bench player. Nobody is taking on that contract, even for no return. Getting the Red Sox to pay 65% of it and getting a good SP in return might seem pretty tempting. To me, the Padres options are paying $22.5M for little to no value or paying $40M for a guy who is a year removed from pitching like an ace through the playoffs and leading his team to a championship. For a team looking to make a leap, adding a 2-4 WAR starter for $17M doesn't sound that bad.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
Yeah, I don't really think we disagree on that at all. I don't think DD did a bad job, & trading those guys away, & keeping the ones they did (except maybe Swihart), really paid off. The problem is that in 4.5 years he didn't replace all those awesome assets he was dealt, so the payroll got top heavy & there weren't any more good young players ready to step in, & there wasn't even the organizational depth to replace injured players last year. DD was excellent at cashing chips in & putting together a great team, but there aren't any chips left, so the organization needed to go in a different direction, & I think they made a smart choice hiring Bloom. Of course, we'll see if it actually works out.
Yeah I think we're fairly similar in how we see things. There's one other POV that I have pertaining to this issue. Another way of fortifying the farm is through the trading of MLB level assets similar to what it seems Bloom is trying to do now. Other than last season's trade deadline that wasn't really much of an option for DD as he was building toward a championship prior to '18, won it in '18 and trying to defend in '19. Perhaps DD could/should have pulled the trigger at the deadline last year, but there was still a slight shot at defending.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
11,628
Maine
Perhaps DD could/should have pulled the trigger at the deadline last year, but there was still a slight shot at defending.
Generally, I agree with you. I would take this a step further and say more than having a slight shot at defending, I think DD didn't pull the trigger on "rebuilding" deals at the deadline because the team didn't really have much in the way of tradeable commodities. At least, ones that could be moved without essentially throwing up the white flag on the next 2-3 years, outraging the fanbase, or both. It was (and still is to an extent) a roster with guys who are young and relatively inexpensive pieces to build around (Devers, Benintendi, ERod), young and expensive cornerstone pieces (Bogaerts, Betts), veterans on long and expensive deals that limit the market (Price, Sale, Eovaldi, Martinez), and guys with short-term contracts who were either underperforming their salary or injured (Pearce, Moreland, Porcello, JBJ).

In short, DD might have been able to trade some guys, but it's unlikely he'd have yielded much in the way of prospects. Certainly not prospects that would have elevated the ranking of the farm system significantly.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
11,452
Generally, I agree with you. I would take this a step further and say more than having a slight shot at defending, I think DD didn't pull the trigger on "rebuilding" deals at the deadline because the team didn't really have much in the way of tradeable commodities. At least, ones that could be moved without essentially throwing up the white flag on the next 2-3 years, outraging the fanbase, or both. It was (and still is to an extent) a roster with guys who are young and relatively inexpensive pieces to build around (Devers, Benintendi, ERod), young and expensive cornerstone pieces (Bogaerts, Betts), veterans on long and expensive deals that limit the market (Price, Sale, Eovaldi, Martinez), and guys with short-term contracts who were either underperforming their salary or injured (Pearce, Moreland, Porcello, JBJ).

In short, DD might have been able to trade some guys, but it's unlikely he'd have yielded much in the way of prospects. Certainly not prospects that would have elevated the ranking of the farm system significantly.
His handling of the farm system is the main reason why he had no tradeable commodities. There's also something inherently flawed with big FA signings anyway. Mid contract, all those young, cheap players that allowed you to sign that big ticket FA aren't so cheap anymore. It's basically impossible to balance a budget when you have 4-5 players making over 60% of the $208m figure.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
11,452
The math is actually perfect for 2020. $208 million cap, 26 players. $8 million per roster spot. This team has too many players making way over that figure to balance it out.