2019-20 Offseason Discussion

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,848
NYC
Aww. I liked Travis! I'll remember him fondly in his player's weekend black unis, which with his trouser-ish pants and everyman looks made him appear like some dude who had just taken the T in from Harvard Square and wandered onto the field...

 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
Just putting it out there, as I did for Brian Johnson, that a DFA here does not mean that Sam Travis is done with the Red Sox. If he passes waivers, they can outright him to the minor leagues and retain his potential services for 2020.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
Wonder if this means Chavis will be the 1st baseman going into camp and Peraza the 2nd baseman. I'm sure they aren't done filling out the roster. Just pretty interesting they'd DFA Travis and expose him to another team that might see something in him. Either way, I just noticed Travis was a 2nd rounder. When is the last time the Sox hit on a 2nd round pick?
 

The Last DiMaggio

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Wonder if this means Chavis will be the 1st baseman going into camp and Peraza the 2nd baseman. I'm sure they aren't done filling out the roster. Just pretty interesting they'd DFA Travis and expose him to another team that might see something in him. Either way, I just noticed Travis was a 2nd rounder. When is the last time the Sox hit on a 2nd round pick?
Maybe Pedroia in 2004.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
Wonder if this means Chavis will be the 1st baseman going into camp and Peraza the 2nd baseman. I'm sure they aren't done filling out the roster. Just pretty interesting they'd DFA Travis and expose him to another team that might see something in him. Either way, I just noticed Travis was a 2nd rounder. When is the last time the Sox hit on a 2nd round pick?
Depends on your definition of "hit". Brandon Workman was a 2nd round pick (2010). Alex Wilson was their 2nd round pick in 2009...he was part of the package that netted Porcello and he was a solid MLB reliever until last season. Justin Masterson was a 2nd rounder in 2006. Then there was, as mentioned, Pedroia in 2004, and Jon Lester in 2002.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
27860

Oh boy color me thrilled. :rolleyes: The Red Sox could deal their best player and one of their best pitchers and net "a prospect and salary relief"?
 

Rusty13

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 3, 2007
5,351
View attachment 27860

Oh boy color me thrilled. :rolleyes: The Red Sox could deal their best player and one of their best pitchers and net "a prospect and salary relief"?
Even worse:
But as the New Year begins, sources say discussions between the Dodgers and Indians remain in roughly the same place they’ve been throughout the offseason: The Indians want infielder Gavin Lux to be part of the Lindor trade, and the Dodgers have refused to include him in any offer for Lindor alone.
As a result, sources say the Dodgers’ negotiations with the Red Sox about acquiring Mookie Betts have become at least as frequent -- and perhaps even more involved -- than their talks with the Indians about Lindor.
The Dodgers’ conversations with the Red Sox are said to be more dynamic than the Dodgers-Indians talks, because Boston appears less insistent on Lux. Also, there exists a very real possibility that a Dodgers-Red Sox deal would include multiple players heading to Los Angeles.
https://www.mlb.com/news/dodgers-mookie-betts-francisco-lindor-rumors
 

Kramerica Industries

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2006
1,031
nh
Fiat Lux!

Or no deal.
I know Lux is the prize, but am I wrong in saying May and a couple secondary prospects isn't a bad haul? Strikeouts are kinda low but he has good command and good stuff. If Bloom thinks May can be a top of the rotation kind of guy It makes some sense. They need good cost controlled pitching.

Im not a prospect expert at all though
 

JCizzle

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 11, 2006
20,532
I would be beyond disappointed if this happens. It's still insane to me that they're even contemplating trading a young, generational talent that is beloved by the fanbase like Mookie. Maybe I'm a fairweather fan, but trading him is one of the few things that they could do that would make me simply stop caring about the team for a period of time. What's the point of becoming attached to players if this happens (and I recognize this is a problem far worse for most fanbases).
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
I know Lux is the prize, but am I wrong in saying May and a couple secondary prospects isn't a bad haul? Strikeouts are kinda low but he has good command and good stuff. If Bloom thinks May can be a top of the rotation kind of guy It makes some sense. They need good cost controlled pitching.

Im not a prospect expert at all though
I like May better than Lux for this team. Thats just me. LA has been really good at developing young arms such as Urias Buehler etc...May looked good in limited time.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,716
I would be beyond disappointed if this happens. It's still insane to me that they're even contemplating trading a young, generational talent that is beloved by the fanbase like Mookie. Maybe I'm a fairweather fan, but trading him is one of the few things that they could do that would make me simply stop caring about the team for a period of time. What's the point of becoming attached to players if this happens (and I recognize this is a problem far worse for most fanbases).
I know this is a touchy subject, but trading Mookie now isn't trading him for the rest of his career, it's just this season. It seems to be very clear that he is going to FA no matter what, so getting talent back for him now, resetting the tax rate by moving him along with Price and signing him back next winter seems like a (realistic) best case scenario right now for BOS, unless you think they can compete for a title this year if they keep Mookie (which I'd say is a long shot currently but not impossible).

Sorry for stating the obvious, but I feel like this possible sequence of events is overlooked in a lot of posts here, maybe Jon Lester saga trauma. There's a good chance they get outbid next winter for him either way, with a more desperate team offering an insane deal (12/456? That's $38M per).
 

JCizzle

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 11, 2006
20,532
I know this is a touchy subject, but trading Mookie now isn't trading him for the rest of his career, it's just this season. It seems to be very clear that he is going to FA no matter what, so getting talent back for him now, resetting the tax rate by moving him along with Price and signing him back next winter seems like a (realistic) best case scenario right now for BOS, unless you think they can compete for a title this year if they keep Mookie (which I'd say is a long shot currently but not impossible).

Sorry for stating the obvious, but I feel like this possible sequence of events is overlooked in a lot of posts here, maybe Jon Lester saga trauma. There's a good chance they get outbid next winter for him either way, with a more desperate team offering an insane deal (12/456? That's $38M per).
Is there any precedent for resigning someone in this fashion? I know it happens somewhat frequently with lower tier players, but I can't think of a star being traded and then turning around and signing back with the old team in ~a year.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,716
Is there any precedent for resigning someone in this fashion? I know it happens somewhat frequently with lower tier players, but I can't think of a star being traded and then turning around and signing back with the old team in ~a year.
Aroldis Chapman did it with NY.
 

Green Monster

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2000
2,277
CT
Is there any precedent for resigning someone in this fashion? I know it happens somewhat frequently with lower tier players, but I can't think of a star being traded and then turning around and signing back with the old team in ~a year.
July 2016 the Yankees traded Aroldis Chapman to the Cubs for Gleyber Torres and two others. He helped the Cubs win the world series. December 2016 he resigned with the Yankees
 

DisgruntledSoxFan77

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 12, 2015
1,885
Quincy
Is there any precedent for resigning someone in this fashion? I know it happens somewhat frequently with lower tier players, but I can't think of a star being traded and then turning around and signing back with the old team in ~a year.
Rick Aguilera. Twins traded him to the Sox, he went back after the season
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
What about the news of the Mets looking to dunp Lowrie and Dominic Smith in a package deal? Send Price back and eat some money to get a potential 1B stud for the next decade. Lowrie could slide into 2nd base and hopefully by the time he's about to get hurt again Boston will have developed an indestructible type of bubble wrap.
 

Yelling At Clouds

Post-darwinian
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,405
Is there any precedent for resigning someone in this fashion? I know it happens somewhat frequently with lower tier players, but I can't think of a star being traded and then turning around and signing back with the old team in ~a year.
Kenny Lofton was traded to the Braves for Marquis Grissom and David Justice prior to the 1997 season, then signed back with Cleveland that offseason. But the fact that I’m reaching back more than 20 years to find a non-closer who did this is maybe telling.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
14,283
Prior to 2014 season, the Cubs signed Jason Hammel for 1/$6m.

During the season (along with Jeff Samarzidja) was traded from Cubs to A's for Addison Russell, Billy McKinney & Dan Straily, & then signed with the Cubs that off-season for 2/$18m was serviceable for those 2 years.

That's pretty much the same thing as Mookie, right? :)
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,660
What about the news of the Mets looking to dunp Lowrie and Dominic Smith in a package deal? Send Price back and eat some money to get a potential 1B stud for the next decade. Lowrie could slide into 2nd base and hopefully by the time he's about to get hurt again Boston will have developed an indestructible type of bubble wrap.
Has Dominic Smith ever been projected as a potential stud? My understanding is that he’s a low-power first baseman in the James Loney mold. Probably a back-end MLB starter while he’s cheap but not something to go wild about.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
Has Dominic Smith ever been projected as a potential stud? My understanding is that he’s a low-power first baseman in the James Loney mold. Probably a back-end MLB starter while he’s cheap but not something to go wild about.
Former 1st rounder was highly regarded in 2016-2017. Kind of fell off in 2018 and 2019. I personally like him but Fangraphs OTOH does not.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
What about the news of the Mets looking to dunp Lowrie and Dominic Smith in a package deal? Send Price back and eat some money to get a potential 1B stud for the next decade. Lowrie could slide into 2nd base and hopefully by the time he's about to get hurt again Boston will have developed an indestructible type of bubble wrap.
Don't the Sox have enough dead money invested at second base, not to mention plenty of capable bodies, to not need to add Lowrie to the mix? And Dom Smith isn't really intriguing enough of a "stud" to make it work for me. Seems like a bad idea.
 

thestardawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2005
862
Section 38, Row 13
I'm not sure I'd consider Smith's 2019 a "Falling off" He hit very well when healthy.

He's touted to be a slick fielding first baseman with the ability to put up high BA. His power has seemed to develop recently as well. If I was the Sox Smith from the Mets and Ruiz from the Dodgers are two young inexpensive position players I would be targeting.
 

johnnywayback

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2004
1,421
What about the news of the Mets looking to dunp Lowrie and Dominic Smith in a package deal? Send Price back and eat some money to get a potential 1B stud for the next decade. Lowrie could slide into 2nd base and hopefully by the time he's about to get hurt again Boston will have developed an indestructible type of bubble wrap.
I don't think the Mets are on the list of teams who might be interested in Price. They already have deGrom, Syndergaard, Stroman, Matz, and Porcello, and I imagine Michael Wacha and Seth Lugo offer as much depth as they're going to need (although they want to keep Lugo in the bullpen).
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
If the Sox deal Betts to LAD and don't get May and Gray back, everything sucks.
I actually wouldn't mind seeing Ross Striping coming back in some sort of deal with the Dodgers. The past two seasons he's been their plug and play pitcher who has preformed well as a starter and out of the pen. Sub 4 era in each of his four seasons (3.51 career in 387 IP) yet he's really never been given the chance at a defined role other than swing man. Coming into his arbitration years now (I believe under contract for this season at $2.3 million) , FA in 2023 so perhaps that might make LA a bit more agreeable to moving him rather than one of the guys with more remaining team controlled years. He's just turned 30, make of that what you will, but to me he looks like the type of pitcher that can fill a current need as well as one for the next couple of seasons at a reasonable cost. Take a look at his B Ref page.
https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/stripro01.shtml
 

amRadio

New Member
Feb 7, 2019
798
I disagree, it's not like Stripling is a loser or something, he has nice peripheral stats, but I don't want him for Mook. K/BB and K-rate in particular make me think he could be a viable starter. But, if the Sox got a 30 year old swing man as the primary return for Betts I would throw up. Stripling has allowed a .725 OPS against and a 3.71 ERA as a starter with LAD, I think he would have a rough transition to the AL East if we asked him to give us 30 starts, but that's just how I look at it. I'd probably prefer one final year of Betts to any package that doesn't bring back May and Gray or Ruiz/Urias/Seager or something.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
Stripling would not be the primary return for Betts. He'd be in place of a mid-level prospect as part of a package that would include at least one more valuable asset such as Downs or Ruiz.
Correct and IMO though L.A. has a lot of young talent they might be willing to include Stripling as part of a package rather than another player with more years of control. And should he pitch well for Boston he could be flipped for more talent at the deadline should the Sox find themselves in a position where it would benefit them to do so.
 

Hee Sox Choi

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 27, 2006
6,133
Thames for 1/3 (1m buyout/4m mutual option) vs. R .254/.348/.529 (122wRC+). Would have been a smart signing.

Stripling is a solid 3rd piece instead of a prospect:
27923
 

high cheese

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2001
135
Gosh I miss Dombrowski - identify need, target player, get it done. You know, building a team to win.

Subtraction by subtraction so far. There are no positives to this offseason with zero chance of upside - in fact, there is pretty much every chance of downside at this rate.

Stinks.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,094
Gosh I miss Dombrowski - identify need, target player, get it done. You know, building a team to win.

Subtraction by subtraction so far. There are no positives to this offseason with zero chance of upside - in fact, there is pretty much every chance of downside at this rate.

Stinks.
This offseason is literally happening because of Dombrowski.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Gosh I miss Dombrowski - identify need, target player, get it done. You know, building a team to win.

Subtraction by subtraction so far. There are no positives to this offseason with zero chance of upside - in fact, there is pretty much every chance of downside at this rate.

Stinks.
I can't tell if this is sarcasm or not.

But if not, consider that Dombrowski's "getting it done" created the situation that is making Bloom look bad to you.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,094
To be fair, the same could be said for 2018.
Yup, not taking away credit for the title, just pointing out that the DD approach goes both ways. It’s great when it works but the downside is what we’re experiencing right now, a team with a subpar farm system and a bunch of bloated salaries. I’ll gladly take the WS title though and deal with this offseason.
 

high cheese

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2001
135
Not sarcasm. What is the situation really? An incredible homegrown core with key additions that produced a ring in 18, had issues last year but could be primed for a reload and run at it this year. Farm system is getting better. Some would rather win Baseball America rankings than rings I get it. Windows like this don’t come around often and you have to go for it when they’re open. Perez, Peraza, Mazza - ugh.

I’m not buying “the situation”.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
Not sarcasm. What is the situation really? An incredible homegrown core with key additions that produced a ring in 18, had issues last year but could be primed for a reload and run at it this year. Farm system is getting better. Some would rather win Baseball America rankings than rings I get it. Windows like this don’t come around often and you have to go for it when they’re open. Perez, Peraza, Mazza - ugh.

I’m not buying “the situation”.
I think its a mix of Dombrowski giving out terrible contracts and not wanting to commit future dollars. That said the team still has a few holes that need to be filled. I mean it's almost the middle of January and we're going into camp with a questionable back end rotation, the same pen as last year and no set first or second baseman. Meanwhile starters like Rich Hill and Jimmy Nelson have come off the books for very little cash and Travis Shaw was signed for nothing. I get that Perez was signed as the #5 but we all know this rotation is fragile. Perez E Rod and Sale are injury prone. Ryan Weber or Hector Valesquez is this teams 6th starter.

I'm not really sure what the overall plan was for this season other than get under $208 million. Was there a plan to fill any holes or are they just counting on Chavis and Dalbec being in the lineup by May 1st?
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
I'm not really sure what the overall plan was for this season other than get under $208 million. Was there a plan to fill any holes or are they just counting on Chavis and Dalbec being in the lineup by May 1st?
What should the plan be? Serious question. The "holes" on the roster are perceptual. It's not as though they don't have someone to play 1B or 2B already. It's just not necessarily who many (most?) fans would prefer to see. It's arguable that would be true no matter what Bloom did this winter. It might just be that the plan is to tweak the roster around the edges while not making large contract investments then see where that takes them. The core of the roster that won 108 games and a title 15 months ago is still there right now. There are roads to take between build an all star juggernaut and tear it all down to the foundation.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
What should the plan be? Serious question. The "holes" on the roster are perceptual. It's not as though they don't have someone to play 1B or 2B already. It's just not necessarily who many (most?) fans would prefer to see. It's arguable that would be true no matter what Bloom did this winter. It might just be that the plan is to tweak the roster around the edges while not making large contract investments then see where that takes them. The core of the roster that won 108 games and a title 15 months ago is still there right now. There are roads to take between build an all star juggernaut and tear it all down to the foundation.
Does anyone know if they've managed to get under the tax threshold? Do they NEED to deal Mookie or JBJ or Price at this point, or do they still have a lot more work to do in order to get under?
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Not sarcasm. What is the situation really? An incredible homegrown core with key additions that produced a ring in 18, had issues last year but could be primed for a reload and run at it this year. Farm system is getting better. Some would rather win Baseball America rankings than rings I get it. Windows like this don’t come around often and you have to go for it when they’re open. Perez, Peraza, Mazza - ugh.

I’m not buying “the situation”.
I find it odd when people talk about the need to exploit "the window" as if 2018 never happened. If you go back to the board as of 2015-2016, you'll see that a lot of us were pinpointing 2018 as the year all the pieces were likely to fall into place for a title run. And sure enough, that's how it played out. They did go for it -- and they did it. But the things they did to do it have consequences, and we're feeling them now.

The club's focus now needs to be on creating the next window -- or it may be a long time before the next one happens. I don't want to relive 1980-85 again if I can help it. Speaking only for myself, I have absolutely no interest in winning Baseball America rankings, except insofar as that helps produce a perennial title contender. (You do realize those two phenomena are not unrelated, right?)

Does anyone know if they've managed to get under the tax threshold? Do they NEED to deal Mookie or JBJ or Price at this point, or do they still have a lot more work to do in order to get under?
They're still over by about $20-25M, I believe. (I think this was discussed upthread.) They need to shed one big contract -- and then some, if they want any flexibility.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/BOS/boston-red-sox-salaries-and-contracts.shtml
The Rusney deal is listed there and is part of their current $234.6m payroll total. But I thought his salary - so long as he was in the minors, which he is - was not part of this calculation. Maybe B-ref's figures here aren't pertaining to the luxury tax but just the raw financials. If it IS part of the luxury tax calculation, damn, what a waste. If not, ok.

To your point @Savin Hillbilly, yeah if they're 100% committed to getting under the luxury tax, then Price or Sale or JD or Mookie needs to go. Ugh.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
I am still not totally freaking out about the $208 number. Kennedy backtracked immediately and said it was a goal and not an ultimatum. I assume the real directive is to stay under $228, to avoid the worst penalties this year. If they get a deal for Price or Betts that makes sense, they’ll take it, but they don’t HAVE to.

Still, they’d be a lot closer to $208 but for 2 things:

1) Dombrowski signed Eovaldi for more than twice the commitment the Rangers made to Lance Lynn. If they’d just outbid the Rangers on Lynn they’d be down $5 or $6 million in AAV relative to Eovaldi.

2) They resigned Sale despite the fact that he’d broken down in the previous two seasons. In all likelihood, they’d have him for 2020 on a 1 year qualifying offer. That would be about $8 million less in AAV. Or they wouldn’t have his giant question mark on the payroll at all and be under $208.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,096
1) Dombrowski signed Eovaldi for more than twice the commitment the Rangers made to Lance Lynn. If they’d just outbid the Rangers on Lynn they’d be down $5 or $6 million in AAV relative to Eovaldi.

2) They resigned Sale despite the fact that he’d broken down in the previous two seasons. In all likelihood, they’d have him for 2020 on a 1 year qualifying offer. That would be about $8 million less in AAV. Or they wouldn’t have his giant question mark on the payroll at all and be under $208.
People criticize DD for depleting the farm system, but I'm fine with all of his trades. It's these two extensions that I hated at the time and hate even more now. People were aghast when I suggested signing Buchholz instead (who singed a 1 year deal for 3 mil) and spreading the Eovaldi money elsewhere, but one year later and we are still waiting for the first season where Eovaldi is good and Buchholz is not better.
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Thinking about the offseason planning, I wonder if part of the plan didn’t revolve around Price or JDM opting out as a way to shed salary. No way to know of course, but the difficulty now may be a matter of Plan C kicking in.

Dombrowski was always quick to add that last lottery ticket into a trade in the interests of wrapping up an off-season plan with the guys he wanted, I just don’t see where many of those guys have panned out (Logan Allen?) except that we’d be able to use them in deals now (or they’d be the back end fuller people would want to upgrade).

I wonder if sustainable model like the Dodgers is only possible in a weak division. The right lock on adding young talent seems to inevitably point to a downturn if the team pushes all their chips in (unless they get unrealistically lucky).
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
The Sale extension was a real head-scratcher. He was coming off a statistically dominant season, one in which he obviously helped the Sox win a World Series.

BUT...

It was clear he was dealing with physical issues. Not throwing with high velocity, not able to give his normal innings, not nearly as effective as he normally was. And they didn't NEED to offer him the extension. They could simply have waited for 2019 to start, see how Sale was, and then make a decision. And if they had seen how 2019 started for Sale, no WAY would they (hopefully anyway!) have given him that lucrative extension.

Now, it's a gigantic question mark as to how he'll perform, and for how long. And he's costing them a fortune for those giant question marks. All could EASILY have been avoided. I wouldn't have had a problem if he came out in 2019 like a house on fire, mowing guys down like CHRIS SALE. But he didn't. Through the end of May, he had put up this line: 12 g, 68.1 ip (5.2 ip per start), 4.35 era, 1.08 whip, 12.9 k/9. Not bad whip and k/9, but the low innings total and high era were warning signs that not all was well with him.
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
8,681
Not sarcasm. What is the situation really? An incredible homegrown core with key additions that produced a ring in 18, had issues last year but could be primed for a reload and run at it this year. Farm system is getting better. Some would rather win Baseball America rankings than rings I get it. Windows like this don’t come around often and you have to go for it when they’re open. Perez, Peraza, Mazza - ugh.

I’m not buying “the situation”.
The biggest element of the 'situation' is that a new contract for Mookie Betts after 2020 will be unaffordable if they cannot get below the luxury tax threshold. Is going for it in 2020 worth that to you?
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/BOS/boston-red-sox-salaries-and-contracts.shtml
The Rusney deal is listed there and is part of their current $234.6m payroll total. But I thought his salary - so long as he was in the minors, which he is - was not part of this calculation. Maybe B-ref's figures here aren't pertaining to the luxury tax but just the raw financials. If it IS part of the luxury tax calculation, damn, what a waste. If not, ok.
No, it's not part of the tax calculation. I think the most reliable number is at Cot's. See the "2020" column in the rightmost section headed "40-man roster - Competitive Balance Tax - AAV", and the row at the bottom labeled "Projected 40-man CBT Payroll." That number of $226.9M obviously incorporates too many estimates (arb, pre-arb, etc.) to be precise, but it's the basic ballpark they're in. You can see that Rusney's salary doesn't carry over into that section--if it did, they'd be over $240M.

View: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vRHU26eqSx5Ei3OAlzcqYreTOpeAEpGIFmXkmcze-c76bh-lioOnk5iyXenZDM3bBpzm6Xp_iRFijdB/pubhtml