JD and the opt out

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
27,088
Newton
We can all agree that JDM opting out is not only the best-case scenario for the Sox trying to cut payroll but also absolutely essential if they want to keep Mookie, yes? I don't want to lose him either, but barring some kind Punto-esque salary dump of Price, etc., I don't see how it's possible otherwise.
 

Green Monster

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2000
2,277
CT
I think JD has been a great addition to the Red Sox. Not only an extremely productive hitter but an outstanding teammate that makes others around him better as well. The Sox got two great seasons from him. If JD had signed a 2/$50M deal with the Sox it would have been touted as a huge win for the Red Sox having avoided paying a premium for a player heading into their mid-thirties. If JD opts out the prudent thing to do is wish him well and reallocate the money.
 

Yelling At Clouds

Post-darwinian
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,434
We can all agree that JDM opting out is not only the best-case scenario for the Sox trying to cut payroll but also absolutely essential if they want to keep Mookie, yes? I don't want to lose him either, but barring some kind Punto-esque salary dump of Price, etc., I don't see how it's possible otherwise.
So there you have it: the opt-out benefits the team.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,188
So combined, Sale and Price went from:

2018
- Sale: 4.88 support, 2.22 allowed (net: +2.66)
- Price: 5.47 support, 3.84 allowed (net: +1.63)

to

2019
- Sale: 3.90 support, 4.89 allowed (net: -0.99)
- Price: 4.48 support, 4.78 allowed (net: -0.30)

For Sale then, it represented a net drop of 3.65 runs per nine innings. For Price, it represented a net drop of 1.93 runs per nine innings.

Yeah, no wonder this team wasn't the same. Holy smokes.
I don't understand the meaning of Sale and Price's run support. A pitcher has zero control over that; it's 100% random. The team as a whole scored 25 more runs in 2019 than 2018, good for 4th in the AL (they were first in 2018). And the gap between 4th and 5th was larger than the gap between 1st and 4th.

Yes, run support influences a pitcher's run/loss record, but that's meaningless. But the pitchers do control runs allowed and innings pitched. Both Sale and Price were far worse in runs allowed, and Price pitched way fewer innings in 2019 while Sale did not pitch anywhere enough to fill the gap.
 

TomBrunansky23

Member
SoSH Member
May 4, 2006
772
Crapchester, NY
JDM will also have a qualifying offer attached, I don't see how he can top his current deal in this marketplace but I guess we'll see soon enough.
I think that if this is how it goes, JD is going to be staying in the Stephen Drew/Craig Kimbrel suite until mid-summer. Maybe he doesn't care, but he will still be foregoing half a season"s salary.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
8,005
Boston, MA
I don't understand the meaning of Sale and Price's run support. A pitcher has zero control over that; it's 100% random. The team as a whole scored 25 more runs in 2019 than 2018, good for 4th in the AL (they were first in 2018). And the gap between 4th and 5th was larger than the gap between 1st and 4th.

Yes, run support influences a pitcher's run/loss record, but that's meaningless. But the pitchers do control runs allowed and innings pitched. Both Sale and Price were far worse in runs allowed, and Price pitched way fewer innings in 2019 while Sale did not pitch anywhere enough to fill the gap.
Pitcher's won/loss record is not meaningless. It ties quite closely to the team's record in the games that the pitcher started. If you're interested in how the Red Sox lost 24 more games than they did last year, checking out the RS/RA in games for individual pitchers tells part of the story.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,671
I don't understand the meaning of Sale and Price's run support. A pitcher has zero control over that; it's 100% random. The team as a whole scored 25 more runs in 2019 than 2018, good for 4th in the AL (they were first in 2018). And the gap between 4th and 5th was larger than the gap between 1st and 4th.

Yes, run support influences a pitcher's run/loss record, but that's meaningless. But the pitchers do control runs allowed and innings pitched. Both Sale and Price were far worse in runs allowed, and Price pitched way fewer innings in 2019 while Sale did not pitch anywhere enough to fill the gap.
The only relevance is that it explains why the Sox were:

Sale games
- 18-9 in 2018
- 10-15 in 2019
Difference of 7 games in the standings.

Price games
- 22-8 in 2018
- 10-12 in 2019
Difference of 8 games in the standings.

So obviously the starting pitcher doesn't control run support. It's just that the vast difference in run support, combined with deteriorating pitching performance by these two guys, led to vastly different records for the Red Sox when these guys pitched from 2018 to 2019. 15 game difference in the standings. 15 game difference puts the 2019 Sox at 99 wins, FWIW.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,877
Maine
I don't understand the meaning of Sale and Price's run support. A pitcher has zero control over that; it's 100% random. The team as a whole scored 25 more runs in 2019 than 2018, good for 4th in the AL (they were first in 2018). And the gap between 4th and 5th was larger than the gap between 1st and 4th.

Yes, run support influences a pitcher's run/loss record, but that's meaningless. But the pitchers do control runs allowed and innings pitched. Both Sale and Price were far worse in runs allowed, and Price pitched way fewer innings in 2019 while Sale did not pitch anywhere enough to fill the gap.
I only brought up run support versus runs allowed because the poster I was responding to suggested that having the two pitchers back on 2018 form wouldn't matter if the offense dipped as a result of JDM opting out. The point I was trying to make was that the 2018 versions of those pitchers may have benefited from the high powered offense, but weren't reliant on it to give the team a chance to win games. So a return to form should be a net positive for the team regardless of the offense's firepower.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,677
What is JDM’s projected market?

Here is the 2020 situation for all AL teams:

Angels - Ohtani/Pujols
Astros - Alvarez
A’s - Khris Davis
Blue Jays - open if Tellez plays first
Indians - open if they play Reyes in OF

Mariners - Santana/Vogelbach
Orioles - open/Nuñez
Rangers - Choo
Rays - Choi/Lowe/Aguilar/Meadows
Royals - Soler
Tigers - Cabrera
Twins - Cruz (assuming option gets picked up)
White Sox - wide open
Yankees - Andujar/Voit/Stanton/?

A lot could change but I can’t see any teams besides the White Sox preferring JDM over what they have, and a lot of the guys they’re currently playing at DH are unmovable.
 

Dewey'sCannon

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
870
Maryland
I think those numbers seem too low. He doesn't have to have a particular great year this year for that to be a mistake. Taking 4/84 means that he doesn't think he will have a good enough year this year to get just 3/60 next year in free agency. I think he thinks more highly of himself and is willing to bet on himself. It would be one thing if this year's contract was a straight $23.5 million deal and there were no injury protection, but he has plenty of back stop to earn his $23.5 million this year and then do it again next year.
I think you misunderstood me. I wasn't saying that this is what JD would sign for - I was saying that as long as he thinks he gets at least this much as a FA, he will opt out. If Boras doesn't think he'll get at least 4/80+, then he will opt in for at least another year on his current deal with the Sox.

But if you're saying that he wouldn't opt out even if there was a deal out there for 4/84, because adding a year and $21 million would not be enough, and that he's willing to gamble that if he waits another year he could do better, well, I think that's a bit of a gamble on both his performance in 2020, his age, and whether the market may be better next offseason that this one. And of course he won't really know what offers are out there, and for how many years, unless and until he opts out. I was merely setting the floor for what JD and Boras might see as the flex point on their decision.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,841
AZ
I think you misunderstood me. I wasn't saying that this is what JD would sign for - I was saying that as long as he thinks he gets at least this much as a FA, he will opt out. If Boras doesn't think he'll get at least 4/80+, then he will opt in for at least another year on his current deal with the Sox.

But if you're saying that he wouldn't opt out even if there was a deal out there for 4/84, because adding a year and $21 million would not be enough, and that he's willing to gamble that if he waits another year he could do better, well, I think that's a bit of a gamble on both his performance in 2020, his age, and whether the market may be better next offseason that this one. And of course he won't really know what offers are out there, and for how many years, unless and until he opts out. I was merely setting the floor for what JD and Boras might see as the flex point on their decision.
Yeah, I was kind of saying the latter. In other words, I think we're disagreeing! I think the safety net of having the two years after next year for another almost $38 million if he needs it makes a one year gamble next year more palatable, so that I think if he thinks 4/84 is a reasonably probable result of going to free agency now, he probably stays. But you have convinced me that my guess of 4/95 was maybe too high. We'll never know and I'm probably just wasting everyone's time to play the guessing game about "what does he need to think he might get to leave." So, just a small point. I'm leaning toward thinking that he's going to stay. I'm almost always wrong though . . . .
 

geoduck no quahog

not particularly consistent
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2002
13,024
Seattle, WA
The 2019 Red Sox had three players in the top 15 for league OPS+ (Devers was #16). JDM's 140 was good for #8

Not to go all DH on this, but the Red Sox losing anyone in that category solely due to money makes me sick. Per Forbes, the Red Sox are the 3rd highest valued team in baseball at $3.2B, behind the Yankees ($4.6B) and Dodgers ($3.3B) - this, in a market substantially smaller than the (albeit shared) NYC and LA markets. Don't cry for me, John Henry. From that same article, the Sox exceed both the Yankees and Dodgers in revenue/fan (no one comes close to the Giants).

Betts is a generational player, but JDM is certainly one of the best hitters in baseball - one that protects the hitters before him and clearly increases stress on the pitchers. Put another way, Martinez has adequately filled a huge hole left by the departure of Ortiz and, emotions aside, would any team quibble over extending a 31 year old David Ortiz if they could afford him? In Papi's own words:

“I’ve got to give it to J.D., man,” Ortiz said. “J.D. is like the center, the mother (hen). He’s the one who everybody is like getting feed(back) from because he’s a psychopath. This dude is in another level of being good and wanting to be better. That’s one thing I enjoy the most when I’m around here: just watch the way he handles himself and the way he helps the rest of the squad. That’s what makes a difference year after year after year."
So sorry, it's not my money, but the Boston fan base pays top dollar (directly and indirectly) for a championship-ready team. 2019 saw a really good lineup that generally featured 8 home-grown players and now there's talk of not being able to afford 2 of the best. Yes, I'm not addressing pitching because my brain can only work one track at a time, but I find it hard to reconcile long term cost impacts for a sport that's constantly growing in revenue and a team whose value grows every year.

If Betts is going to leave the team (which I think is unfortunately a foregone conclusion), losing JDM would be a travesty.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,671
I could be wrong, but I don't think the main issue with the $$ is that JH and company can't "afford" to spend to keep JDM and MB, but rather that the penalties for going over the luxury tax mean a lessened ability to draft and sign young players (like the international draft). That catches up with an organization.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
71,137
I could be wrong, but I don't think the main issue with the $$ is that JH and company can't "afford" to spend to keep JDM and MB, but rather that the penalties for going over the luxury tax mean a lessened ability to draft and sign young players (like the international draft). That catches up with an organization.
They're two different lines, though. The $248M line (next season) is what you're talking about, and that indeed does have a baseball impact. But BOS is talking about trying to get under the lowest line, $208M (next year), and that has no direct baseball impact, it is solely about spending less money (and would also infuriate me if I were a Sox fan at this point in their cycle).
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2001
24,625
Not to go all DH on this, but the Red Sox losing anyone in that category solely due to money makes me sick. Per Forbes, the Red Sox are the 3rd highest valued team in baseball at $3.2B, behind the Yankees ($4.6B) and Dodgers ($3.3B) - this, in a market substantially smaller than the (albeit shared) NYC and LA markets. Don't cry for me, John Henry. From that same article, the Sox exceed both the Yankees and Dodgers in revenue/fan (no one comes close to the Giants).
They're two different lines, though. The $248M line (next season) is what you're talking about, and that indeed does have a baseball impact. But BOS is talking about trying to get under the lowest line, $208M (next year), and that has no direct baseball impact, it is solely about spending less money (and would also infuriate me if I were a Sox fan at this point in their cycle).
This absolutely infuriates me. I get it, John Henry doesn't want to lose money. I totally understand that and that's his prerogative. And if he doesn't really want to lose money, then he can sell the team now and make another $3 billion. I am very happy that under his stewardship the Boston Red Sox won four world champions, but if John Henry would rather save $40 million, then he should go do something else. Does this make me an irrational fan? Maybe. Does this paint me as ungrateful? Probably.

But the bottom line is that I'm not a fan of John Henry's money. I don't really care all too much to what happens to it, because I don't think that John Henry is going to end up living in a dumpster. But I am a fan of the Boston Red Sox and what Henry is saying is that fans essentially have to choose between him being slightly more rich and the Red Sox being competitive, I'll take the latter every fucking day. Getting rid of Mookie and JD sucks.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
71,137
I do think that it is valid for a team to try to get under the bottom tax line and reset the tax rate every handful of years, but that needs years of preparation or it will almost certainly end up causing much more personnel disruption than is necessary. Ownership seemingly changing their mind overnight about this is what I'd be scared of/quite pissed off about as a BOS fan.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,671
They're two different lines, though. The $248M line (next season) is what you're talking about, and that indeed does have a baseball impact. But BOS is talking about trying to get under the lowest line, $208M (next year), and that has no direct baseball impact, it is solely about spending less money (and would also infuriate me if I were a Sox fan at this point in their cycle).
Ok fair point. Then yeah, losing Mookie because billionaires don't want to lose a few more million is pretty tough to take as a Sox fan, especially when they absolutely can compete for a championship for the next few years.
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
8,469
New York City
But the bottom line is that I'm not a fan of John Henry's money. I don't really care all too much to what happens to it, because I don't think that John Henry is going to end up living in a dumpster. But I am a fan of the Boston Red Sox and what Henry is saying is that fans essentially have to choose between him being slightly more rich and the Red Sox being competitive, I'll take the latter every fucking day. Getting rid of Mookie and JD sucks.
Honestly even if the strategy for a while had been "we need to get under the tax threshold in Year [X]" I could maybe live with it, despite your statements above being entirely right. What is really infuriating (as jon abbey notes) is that they splurged on an utterly unnecessary extension for Chris Sale last offseason only to then come back this year and complain about payroll, which makes absolutely no sense.

The conspiracy theorist in me wonders if they decided last offseason they don't think or want to keep Mookie for whatever inane reason and intentionally signed Sale to the unnecessary extension so they could then claim letting Mookie go was part of an effort to get under the various tax thresholds as opposed to them just being cheap/not thinking Mookie is worth it. But if that was the plan they obviously massively miscalculated because literally every Red Sox fan sees right through their bullshit.

The more rational side of me hopes this is all just posturing in an effort to get JDM to opt-in and/or a (rather weak) attempt to lower Mookie's ask in contract negotiations.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2001
24,625
Honestly even if the strategy for a while had been "we need to get under the tax threshold in Year [X]" I could maybe live with it, despite your statements above being entirely right. What is really infuriating (as jon abbey notes) is that they splurged on an utterly unnecessary extension for Chris Sale last offseason only to then come back this year and complain about payroll, which makes absolutely no sense.
Right. And if you believe what Henry said at the same press conference when he talked about how he DD didn't have the same philosophy on budget, then why would he let him spend to sign Eovaldi and Pearce, not to mention Sale. Especially since Henry is supposed to be able to see the future of the marketplace and had a pretty strict rule about signing pitchers who are on the other side of 30 to long-term, long cash deals.

Yeah, in the glow of the World Series, it would have sucked to see Eovaldi and Pearce walk away. And it might have been shitty for Sale to take his arm and go elsewhere, but if it came down to not losing Betts and JD, that's a trade I would make every day. And I like Chris Sale a lot, but for the last few years, the dude is basically running on fumes when it comes to August and is pretty much hamburger when September rolls around.

I'm just not sure where this mania to lower payroll came from. And why now?
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
Sox Revenue didn't meet expecations? The looming recession? Yankee jealousy?
Looming recession? Unemployment just dropped to 3.5 percent and the previous two months of jobs numbers were revised up. There was a 300.billion increase in federal spending in the last budget deal. Interest rates falling is boosting home sales. The high employment numbers mean state budgets are flush and their spending will increase. The government is going to hire hundreds of thousands of people to work on the 2020 census, further tightening labor markets. Trade deals with Mexico, Canada, and now Japan if Congress does the right thing.

Maybe there will be a baseball recession, as the commissioner continues to badmouth the game on a regular basis and make changes to appease non-fans, but the national Economy only looks bad to people with a vested interest in seeing a recession
 
Last edited:

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,841
AZ
Honestly even if the strategy for a while had been "we need to get under the tax threshold in Year [X]" I could maybe live with it, despite your statements above being entirely right. What is really infuriating (as jon abbey notes) is that they splurged on an utterly unnecessary extension for Chris Sale last offseason only to then come back this year and complain about payroll, which makes absolutely no sense.

The conspiracy theorist in me wonders if they decided last offseason they don't think or want to keep Mookie for whatever inane reason and intentionally signed Sale to the unnecessary extension so they could then claim letting Mookie go was part of an effort to get under the various tax thresholds as opposed to them just being cheap/not thinking Mookie is worth it. But if that was the plan they obviously massively miscalculated because literally every Red Sox fan sees right through their bullshit.

The more rational side of me hopes this is all just posturing in an effort to get JDM to opt-in and/or a (rather weak) attempt to lower Mookie's ask in contract negotiations.
I think it is posturing. Or more like negotiating in the press. The money will be there if the deal is right.
 

stepson_and_toe

New Member
Aug 11, 2019
386
For the most part, those hundreds of thousands to be hired for the 2020 census are pretty much short-term: 5-10 weeks.
 

RobertS975

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
367
The mania to lower payroll comes from the increasingly draconian luxury tax if you fail to drop below the LT threshold for at least one year. It might actually impact the bottom line to pay a player $30M and be forced to pay an extra $20M LT because of that salary.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
Looming recession? Unemployment just dropped to 3.5 percent and the previous two months of jobs numbers were revised up. There was a 300.billion increase in federal spending in the last budget deal. Interest rates falling is boosting home sales. The high employment numbers mean state budgets are flush and their spending will increase. The government is going to hire hundreds of thousands of people to work on the 2020 census, further tightening labor markets. Trade deals with Mexico, Canada, and now Japan if Congress does the right thing.

Maybe there will be a baseball recession, as the commissioner continues to badmouth the game on a regular basis and make changes to appease non-fans, but the national Economy only looks bad to people with a vested interest in seeing a recession

Microeconomics will continue to drive owners’ decisions, as it always has. Whether owners expect the national economy to be in recession in 2021 is at most a peripheral issue.

You can’t really evaluate JDM’s market without looking closely at the finances of the half-dozen or so teams that might realistically be bidders for his services. That said, we know that all MLB teams derive most of their revenue from gate receipts and local-TV rights. We know that paid attendance has been a bit soft in recent years. And while local-TV revenues have been stronger than ever, we know the long-term sustainability of that is doubtful; teams that own their own TV networks or have expiring contracts in the next few years probably are planning for a decline in TV revenues in the medium term. I think these concerns loom larger for a guy like Mookie who’s going to get a 10-year deal, but they could also affect the market for a guy like JDM on the margin.
 

Green Monster

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2000
2,277
CT
Elvis Andrus does NOT opt out of the 3/$43M remaining on his contract.
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/10/elvis-andrus-opt-out-clause-rangers.html
Obviously his market and situation is different than JD's but I was a little surprised by this given that he is also represented by Boras. My expectation is that Boras will always take the FA route. Perhaps this is a preview of a changing approach and an indication of what JD might do, or maybe Andrus just really likes Texas??
 

Manramsclan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
3,374
Elvis Andrus does NOT opt out of the 3/$43M remaining on his contract.
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/10/elvis-andrus-opt-out-clause-rangers.html
Obviously his market and situation is different than JD's but I was a little surprised by this given that he is also represented by Boras. My expectation is that Boras will always take the FA route. Perhaps this is a preview of a changing approach and an indication of what JD might do, or maybe Andrus just really likes Texas??
Elvis Andrus had a 78 OPS+ and 1.9 WAR last year. Boras or no, I don't see how him taking a guaranteed $43 M has anything to do with JD Martinez.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,444
Elvis Andrus does NOT opt out of the 3/$43M remaining on his contract.
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/10/elvis-andrus-opt-out-clause-rangers.html
Obviously his market and situation is different than JD's but I was a little surprised by this given that he is also represented by Boras. My expectation is that Boras will always take the FA route. Perhaps this is a preview of a changing approach and an indication of what JD might do, or maybe Andrus just really likes Texas??
Is it already the time of year when we have the Boras discussion about the myth that he always takes his guys to FAs again?

I swear, it comes earlier every year.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Is it already the time of year when we have the Boras discussion about the myth that he always takes his guys to FAs again?

I swear, it comes earlier every year.
Climate change.

Elvis Andrus does NOT opt out of the 3/$43M remaining on his contract.

Obviously his market and situation is different than JD's but I was a little surprised by this given that he is also represented by Boras. My expectation is that Boras will always take the FA route. Perhaps this is a preview of a changing approach and an indication of what JD might do, or maybe Andrus just really likes Texas??
As Manram suggested, I think it's simply an indication that Andrus is a fringe-average, declining player who's unlikely to find a better deal on the open market than the one he's got.

Saying Boras will always take the FA route is saying he's a shitty agent, because only a shitty agent would apply a one-size-fits-all approach to every client and market situation. He has a reputation for being an aggressive risk-taker, but there are good risks and dumb risks. Andrus opting out would have been a dumb risk. JDM opting out would be a bold risk, but not a dumb one. Even in a relative off year, he was a borderline elite hitter, and though his age is a bit of a red flag I don't think we saw any sign this year of obvious decline in batting skills that would portend a fall off a cliff, as long as he's healthy. It seems far more plausible that he could find somebody to beat 3/$66M than that Andrus could find somebody to beat 3/$45M.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
Didn’t Martinez miss time with some back problems this year? Those usually don’t go away. A team giving Martinez more than his remaining Red Sox contract would be playing a hugely risky game.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Didn’t Martinez miss time with some back problems this year? Those usually don’t go away. A team giving Martinez more than his remaining Red Sox contract would be playing a hugely risky game.
He played 146 games and came to the plate 657 times. Hard to paint that as a harbinger of durability issues.

And while back problems may not "go away", I don't think they very often become career-threatening, do they? I think for most people they come and go, and you lose a few games here and there.
 

sean1562

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 17, 2011
3,651
Also doesn’t his contract have a clause where injury issues turn the last few years into mutual options? So if he is worried about that, maybe trying to get more years now makes sense? Regardless I don’t think he’s opting out
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
21,672
Rogers Park
Does anyone know when the deadline for Martinez to declare his intentions is?

I’ve heard people here in Chicago eagerly speculating that if he opts in, Boston might trade him to the White Sox for salary relief and a B prospect.
 

dano7594

New Member
Jul 15, 2005
106
The qualifying offer deadline is tomorrow as well, I was thinking 5:00 PM. For some reason I cannot find a time on that. Anyway my point being I would assume JD has until midnight tomorrow, is there a possibility of the opt out post QO deadline?
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
I didn’t realize they’d be able to slap a QO on him and pick up a draft pick if he goes elsewhere. That makes me even more indifferent to whether he stays or goes. Thanks for 2018 JD, you were great.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,605
So combined, Sale and Price went from:

2018
- Sale: 4.88 support, 2.22 allowed (net: +2.66)
- Price: 5.47 support, 3.84 allowed (net: +1.63)

to

2019
- Sale: 3.90 support, 4.89 allowed (net: -0.99)
- Price: 4.48 support, 4.78 allowed (net: -0.30)

For Sale then, it represented a net drop of 3.65 runs per nine innings. For Price, it represented a net drop of 1.93 runs per nine innings.

Yeah, no wonder this team wasn't the same. Holy smokes.
Are these run support numbers calculated per start or just for the innings Price or Sale were actually in the game?
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
71,137
I didn’t realize they’d be able to slap a QO on him and pick up a draft pick if he goes elsewhere. That makes me even more indifferent to whether he stays or goes. Thanks for 2018 JD, you were great.
The pick you get now in these situations is dependent on whether you received revenue sharing and where you are in terms of the luxury tax, so I believe that the Sox, like the Yankees, only get a pick after the 4th round of the draft in these situations this winter. They'll still extend the QO to JDM if he opts out since there is zero chance he takes it, but it's not a first round pick coming back anymore.
 

IpswichSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
2,794
Suburbs of Washington, DC
This isn't relevant to JD, but I was on MLB's website researching the qualifying offer, and I didn't realize teams can make QOs only under two conditions.The first is widely known: players must spend the entire season on that team's roster. But I didn't know about the second condition: players must not have received a qualifying offer previously in their careers. Link

I guess that would apply to someone like Garrit Cole, who this month will decline Houston's QO. If Cole's new deal include opt-outs, Cole can't be given a QO by his new club if he opts-out, which would increase the value of the opt-out for the player. especially the way the last couple off-seasons have gone for free agents.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
6,430
Is there a betting pool somewhere for whether JDM opts in/out?
I think he's gone and will likely get a 4 year deal somewhere for less AAV. Once that first shoe drops, the rest of the picture starts to come in to focus (I think they'll only try to deal Mookie if JDM opts in. I think they'll trade JBJ in either situation). I'm actually a bit nervous about this....
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
71,137
This isn't relevant to JD, but I was on MLB's website researching the qualifying offer, and I didn't realize teams can make QOs only under two conditions.The first is widely known: players must spend the entire season on that team's roster. But I didn't know about the second condition: players must not have received a qualifying offer previously in their careers. Link

I guess that would apply to someone like Garrit Cole, who this month will decline Houston's QO. If Cole's new deal include opt-outs, Cole can't be given a QO by his new club if he opts-out, which would increase the value of the opt-out for the player. especially the way the last couple off-seasons have gone for free agents.
There will be a new CBA with new rules by the time Cole is ready to opt out again.