Offseason rumors

Status
Not open for further replies.

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
17,261
But it’s bound by war if you want to win. The salary structure won’t change as a result of some extra eyeballs.
Not exactly. There is no cap on player salaries. There is simply how much you are willing to pay for the players + how much you are willing to pay for the tax (plus once you're more than $40m over the tax threshold there are non-financial penalties).

Let's say your payroll would otherwise be just under the tax threshold for 2024 & would be $236,999,999 (we'll call it $237m). But you see the opportunity to add Ohtani for $41m per year & remove a $1m player, putting you at a $277m payroll. The cost of Ohtani isn't actually $41m in the first year, because $40m of it is taxable. Using the Red Sox as an example, since they reset this past year, their marginal rates are lower & they would pay a 20% tax on the 1st $20m & 32% on the 2nd $20m, for a total tax payout of $10.4m. In that scenario, Ohtani's $41m contract actually costs his team $51.4m per year, & the total payroll cost would be $287.4m.

Let's say the same scenario repeats itself in 2025 when the tax threshold is $241m & the team is again willing to go right up to that financial only threshold. The rate increases to 30% on the first $20m & 42% on the next $20m for a total of $14.4m tax, a marginal cost of $55.4m for Ohtani's contract, & an overall payroll of $281m with a payroll cost of $295.4m.

& then in 2026, the team has a decision. Do we want to be a 3-time repeater, or do we want to duck back under the threshold & make some of these taxes less onerous? As a 3-time repeater in 2026 when the tax threshold will be $244m, then the marginal cost of that tax becomes 50% for the 1st $20m & 62% for the next $20m, meaning that tax burden would now be $22.4m, & Ohtani's contract is now costing you $63.4m. So you have a choice. Do you cut from your team meaningfully somewhere else, do you move on from your expensive player, or do you just pay the tax? The overall payroll would be $284m with a payroll cost of $306.4m. The more revenue your expensive player is making you, the more palatable paying $306.4m for your team would be. If another player provided just as much WAR as Ohtani, but didn't bring in the outside revenue, the owner is far less likely to greenlight continuing to run payrolls at that level & would be more likely to insist on a reset.

Now, a reset may be a reality regardless, & in a lot of ways this whole exercise is an oversimplification, but the salary structure absolutely can change if your most expensive player is also making you a ton of revenue.
 

catomatic

thinks gen turgidson is super mean!!!
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
3,491
Park Slope, Brooklyn
I don't think Ohtani will even consider a deal that isn't 100% guaranteed.
Yeah, that seems inevitable, I was mostly just playing with the hypothetical. IE; if multiple desirable landing spots hedge and pivot to a creatively structured contract — what would that look like? But yes, likeliest is everybody works on the assumption of him being all the way back in ‘25 and pitching once more.
 

The Gray Eagle

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
17,242
On Ohtani: With a team with 2 huge holes in the rotation, with a terrible defense and several hitters here long-term who should probably be DHs, a lineup that is really lefthanded, some really impressive positional prospects in the minors who are almost all LHH, and not many high-end starting pitching prospects-- the major move would be to pay huge, huge money for another LH-hitting DH?
In the big picture, that just doesn't make much sense.

Go big on Yamamoto instead, he fits here far better and solves way more problems.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
62,828
As more of a casual fan than most here, I love the idea of signing Ohtani. Yes, it’s probably not the best use of resources for roster construction, but winning it all seems like such a crapshoot anyways and getting to root for the best player of all time for years and years would be super fun.
 

jbupstate

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2022
630
New York, USA
On Ohtani: With a team with 2 huge holes in the rotation, with a terrible defense and several hitters here long-term who should probably be DHs, a lineup that is really lefthanded, some really impressive positional prospects in the minors who are almost all LHH, and not many high-end starting pitching prospects-- the major move would be to pay huge, huge money for another LH-hitting DH?
In the big picture, that just doesn't make much sense.

Go big on Yamamoto instead, he fits here far better and solves way more problems.
Could not agree more. Let someone else win the offseason by signing Ohtani. Yamamoto potentially solves the greatest problem of needing an Ace. Doesn’t cost anything but money. AND has the potential to bring us some advertising dollars.
 

The_Powa_of_Seiji_Ozawa

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2006
8,182
SS Botany Bay
In the last couple of years, I have not watched many games. I follow the team and keep up with everything that's happening, but too many other interests and claims on my time have displaced a lot of my gameday viewing. Ohtani would change that. The Sox would once again be must-see tv for me, even if they are the Angels East. I know it's irrational and perhaps not good for the long term, but from an entertainment perspective, that's where I'm at. Thankfully for the Sox I am not the GM. I agree with others, though, that Ohtani is most likely bound for the Dodgers.
 

Laser Show

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 7, 2008
5,099
As more of a casual fan than most here, I love the idea of signing Ohtani. Yes, it’s probably not the best use of resources for roster construction, but winning it all seems like such a crapshoot anyways and getting to root for the best player of all time for years and years would be super fun.
that’s my exact stance on this. I don’t think it’s the best fit roster wise at all but I would be absolutely over the moon if it happened.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
72,560
Mann, I wish *something* would happen soon.
The rule 5 protects were Tuesday, the non-tender decisions are today, then GMs can move on to other business. The Braves traded 5 guys for Aaron Bummer last night, but you probably mean Sox-specific moves.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,858
Could not agree more. Let someone else win the offseason by signing Ohtani. Yamamoto potentially solves the greatest problem of needing an Ace. Doesn’t cost anything but money. AND has the potential to bring us some advertising dollars.
Ohtani would potentially solve the problem of needing an ace as well. It would just be in 2025 and beyond. And he’d deliver an elite middle-of-the-order bat in the meantime. If ownership goes for him, and I don’t really think they will, they’d have to commit to spending beaucoup dollars. I get the roster construction angle but I also want entertainment and there isn’t a more entertaining player in MLB.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
6,843
I dunno... the excitement of Pedro- who pitched only 20% of games created an incredible buzz around the Sox that infected the entire organization even when he wasn't pitching. When Chris Sale was first with the Sox it was pretty amazing to see that guy and it also had a bigger effect than just when he pitched. From what I've seen of Yamamoto... the guy will also be thrilling to see when he's starting. People seem to be discounting that having a genuine young dominant ace would be incredibly thrilling too.
Yamamoto makes more sense short term, long term.... and frees up extra money for other needs. Some team (I think the Yankees or Cubs) are going to throw out $210 for 7 years for Yamamoto. I think the Sox still need to beat that for him.
 

ElcaballitoMVP

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 19, 2008
3,970
On Ohtani: With a team with 2 huge holes in the rotation, with a terrible defense and several hitters here long-term who should probably be DHs, a lineup that is really lefthanded, some really impressive positional prospects in the minors who are almost all LHH, and not many high-end starting pitching prospects-- the major move would be to pay huge, huge money for another LH-hitting DH?
In the big picture, that just doesn't make much sense.

Go big on Yamamoto instead, he fits here far better and solves way more problems.
If Ohtani is only a DH for the duration of his contract, sure, this makes complete sense. But, AFAIK, there hasn't been anything to say he won't be back on the mound next year. We're talking about maybe the hardest working player in all of baseball and a top of the rotation starter when healthy.

As for the lineup being really lefthanded, it is, but that can be solved via trade (Verdugo and/or Duran). Just throwing some names out there, a lineup of say Ohtani, Rafaela, Devers, Gurriel/Teoscar, Casas, Story, Yoshida, Urias, Wong would be pretty well balanced (and you can reorganize that lineup however you best see fit, such as Story in the 2 hole if he bounces back).

It's certainly a tricky offseason if they go this route, as they'll need to get creative to find starting pitching for '24. Spitballing again, something like a Duran trade bringing in a Bieber type and Verdugo in a deal for a back end starter, you're looking at a Bieber, Bello, Sale, Pivetta, back end SP from the Verdugo trade with Houck, Crawford, and maybe Whitlock as SP depth. Is that enough? I won't argue with you if you say no, but going this route sets them up with Ohtani at the top of the rotation and top of the lineup in '25, assuming he's healthy.

But I get where you're coming from, and I don't totally disagree. I'm not saying they should sign Ohtani or that going the Yamamoto route isn't a good option, but there's a way they can make it work if they do go get the best player in baseball.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
14,134
If you take 1 WAR as being worth 8 million as per Fangraphs, Ohtani has been worth 124 million as a hitter in the past three seasons. So basically if you sign him at anything over 40 million, you would very likely not get any surplus value from him exclusively as a hitter in his prime years to make up for the inevitable decline. Now, if you're reasonably confident he could pitch at 80% of the level he has demonstrated thus far for, say, 2025, 2026 and 2027, then 50 million AAV being a good deal is absolutely on the table.
Gotcha.

Without doing much research and given some of the deals recently given out, was sort of figuring 10/400M as a floor just as a hitter. In that case, 10/500M might make sense. That 100M for pitching might end up being mostly wasted or an incredible deal, massive range of outcomes on the pitching side of things.

Of course, 10/500M may still not get it done anyway....
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Not exactly. There is no cap on player salaries. There is simply how much you are willing to pay for the players + how much you are willing to pay for the tax (plus once you're more than $40m over the tax threshold there are non-financial penalties).

Let's say your payroll would otherwise be just under the tax threshold for 2024 & would be $236,999,999 (we'll call it $237m). But you see the opportunity to add Ohtani for $41m per year & remove a $1m player, putting you at a $277m payroll. The cost of Ohtani isn't actually $41m in the first year, because $40m of it is taxable. Using the Red Sox as an example, since they reset this past year, their marginal rates are lower & they would pay a 20% tax on the 1st $20m & 32% on the 2nd $20m, for a total tax payout of $10.4m. In that scenario, Ohtani's $41m contract actually costs his team $51.4m per year, & the total payroll cost would be $287.4m.

Let's say the same scenario repeats itself in 2025 when the tax threshold is $241m & the team is again willing to go right up to that financial only threshold. The rate increases to 30% on the first $20m & 42% on the next $20m for a total of $14.4m tax, a marginal cost of $55.4m for Ohtani's contract, & an overall payroll of $281m with a payroll cost of $295.4m.

& then in 2026, the team has a decision. Do we want to be a 3-time repeater, or do we want to duck back under the threshold & make some of these taxes less onerous? As a 3-time repeater in 2026 when the tax threshold will be $244m, then the marginal cost of that tax becomes 50% for the 1st $20m & 62% for the next $20m, meaning that tax burden would now be $22.4m, & Ohtani's contract is now costing you $63.4m. So you have a choice. Do you cut from your team meaningfully somewhere else, do you move on from your expensive player, or do you just pay the tax? The overall payroll would be $284m with a payroll cost of $306.4m. The more revenue your expensive player is making you, the more palatable paying $306.4m for your team would be. If another player provided just as much WAR as Ohtani, but didn't bring in the outside revenue, the owner is far less likely to greenlight continuing to run payrolls at that level & would be more likely to insist on a reset.

Now, a reset may be a reality regardless, & in a lot of ways this whole exercise is an oversimplification, but the salary structure absolutely can change if your most expensive player is also making you a ton of revenue.
This is an interesting explanation. Is there any sort of reliable estimate on what the outside revenue looks like for Ohtani? Here is one but it sounds insane:

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2023/05/how-much-revenue-does-shohei-ohtani-actually-generate.html
 

Jack Rabbit Slim

Member
SoSH Member
May 19, 2010
1,305
One thing I haven't seen mentioned - I believe the Angels were using a 6-man rotation to accommodate Ohtani starting. Given the continual lack of starting pitching from the farm, doesn't it seem like Boston is somewhat uniquely a poor fit for Ohtani?
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
21,522
Maine
One thing I haven't seen mentioned - I believe the Angels were using a 6-man rotation to accommodate Ohtani starting. Given the continual lack of starting pitching from the farm, doesn't it seem like Boston is somewhat uniquely a poor fit for Ohtani?
I don't think a 6-man rotation is contingent on having depth of pitching in the farm system. The Sox have employed a 6-man rotation at various points the last couple years. It was mostly a function of having "too many" starters who couldn't be optioned out or easily sent to the bullpen (particularly vets like Sale, Paxton, Kluber, Hill, Wacha, etc). If they could do it then, no reason they couldn't do it 18 months from now if they have Ohtani.

Right now they've got six guys on the roster who could conceivably be in the starting rotation next season (Sale, Bello, Pivetta, Houck, Crawford, Whitlock). We expect them to add at least one and likely two starters this winter. If they do that, that would still leave them with six potential starters entering 2025 (Sale and Pivetta expire) plus any prospects that might emerge plus they can always add from the free agent/trade market.

There are plenty of arguments to be made against signing Ohtani. I don't think the potential need to use a 6-man rotation is much of one.
 

Sin Duda

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
956
(B)Austin Texas
I don't think a 6-man rotation is contingent on having depth of pitching in the farm system. The Sox have employed a 6-man rotation at various points the last couple years. It was mostly a function of having "too many" starters who couldn't be optioned out or easily sent to the bullpen (particularly vets like Sale, Paxton, Kluber, Hill, Wacha, etc). If they could do it then, no reason they couldn't do it 18 months from now if they have Ohtani.

Right now they've got six guys on the roster who could conceivably be in the starting rotation next season (Sale, Bello, Pivetta, Houck, Crawford, Whitlock). We expect them to add at least one and likely two starters this winter. If they do that, that would still leave them with six potential starters entering 2025 (Sale and Pivetta expire) plus any prospects that might emerge plus they can always add from the free agent/trade market.

There are plenty of arguments to be made against signing Ohtani. I don't think the potential need to use a 6-man rotation is much of one.
It also fits team makeup if you consider his starter role as a bonus. Same bullpen and bench volumes. And if he needs to miss a start due to fatigue, no problem.
 

Jack Rabbit Slim

Member
SoSH Member
May 19, 2010
1,305
I don't think a 6-man rotation is contingent on having depth of pitching in the farm system. The Sox have employed a 6-man rotation at various points the last couple years. It was mostly a function of having "too many" starters who couldn't be optioned out or easily sent to the bullpen (particularly vets like Sale, Paxton, Kluber, Hill, Wacha, etc). If they could do it then, no reason they couldn't do it 18 months from now if they have Ohtani.

Right now they've got six guys on the roster who could conceivably be in the starting rotation next season (Sale, Bello, Pivetta, Houck, Crawford, Whitlock). We expect them to add at least one and likely two starters this winter. If they do that, that would still leave them with six potential starters entering 2025 (Sale and Pivetta expire) plus any prospects that might emerge plus they can always add from the free agent/trade market.

There are plenty of arguments to be made against signing Ohtani. I don't think the potential need to use a 6-man rotation is much of one.
As you state, when they have used a 6-man rotation in the past it was a temporary measure because they had 6 pitchers that needed to start at that time. This is far different than committing to a 6-man rotation for the full season where you need to have 6 pitchers that can be reasonably expected to give 25+ starts. Not impossible to plan for, just more money committed to the rotation versus other areas. This is where a supply of cheap starting pitching from the farm would negate a lot of the concern.

As far as the pitchers already on the team, the whole reason the Sox are looking for multiple starters is that most of those pitchers are not consistently good or healthy enough to hand starting roles to. I don't see how Whitlock/Houck/etc. are not good enough for a 5 man rotation but are good enough for a 6 man.

You are right it is not the biggest concern when it comes to signing Ohtani, but I think it is a significant one considering the Sox farm system.
 

shaggydog2000

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2007
11,929
This is an interesting explanation. Is there any sort of reliable estimate on what the outside revenue looks like for Ohtani? Here is one but it sounds insane:

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2023/05/how-much-revenue-does-shohei-ohtani-actually-generate.html
That has nothing to do with money the team would make if they sign Ohtani though, it's more like the BS estimates they create when teams make a new stadium proposal and promise they will pay for themselves from including every single piece of economic activity that could possibly have to do with the stadium being built and used. As if people who traveled from Japan to the US and also caught an Angels game while they were here wouldn't have traveled somewhere anyway and spent money.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
That has nothing to do with money the team would make if they sign Ohtani though, it's more like the BS estimates they create when teams make a new stadium proposal and promise they will pay for themselves from including every single piece of economic activity that could possibly have to do with the stadium being built and used. As if people who traveled from Japan to the US and also caught an Angels game while they were here wouldn't have traveled somewhere anyway and spent money.
Oh right, OK, I couldn't totally tell what they were talking about. And on further exploration I don't see any estimates of what his excess value means to the team, except for wags saying "he's worth $500m" and "he should get $70m a year".
 

RobertsSteal

New Member
Jul 15, 2005
64
Northampon, MA
As you state, when they have used a 6-man rotation in the past it was a temporary measure because they had 6 pitchers that needed to start at that time. This is far different than committing to a 6-man rotation for the full season where you need to have 6 pitchers that can be reasonably expected to give 25+ starts. Not impossible to plan for, just more money committed to the rotation versus other areas. This is where a supply of cheap starting pitching from the farm would negate a lot of the concern.

[snip] I don't see how Whitlock/Houck/etc. are not good enough for a 5 man rotation but are good enough for a 6 man.
This has me wondering about something a bit off the wall.

For context, we’ve seen a shift in bullpen usage over the past 10 or so years to the point that starters pitch half the game now. And many of those “failed starters” have been repurposed as 1-2 inning relievers (lately even some going 3+ as swingmen/bulk guys). Many of those repurposed relievers have been revelations—picking up velocity and/or sharpening up a smaller repertoire of pitches.

Ok, this is the curiosity / potential next innovation. If a starter only had to go 25 starts per year because of a 6 man rotation, could we expect a similar uptick in performance as the “failed starters”? For the same 150 innings (30 starts @ 5 innings now), you’d get guys going 6 innings per start. That would reduce the load on the bullpen, right? So you could theoretically carry one less arm in the pen. And perhaps the starters benefit from / avoid injuries because of the extra day of rest between starts.

Forgive me if this has been debunked on the board already. Seemed like an interesting thought experiment in this slow news cycle, one that has relevance to a potential Ohtani strategy.

Smarter minds, please weigh in!
 

Tokyo Sox

Baka Gaijin
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 16, 2006
6,215
There
View: https://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN/status/1725593701009994168

Source: Pitcher Yoshinobu Yamamoto expected to be posted Monday. That means the 45-day negotiating window for MLB teams will start Tuesday
He's currently in the US for a physical, and will be officially posted once that's completed.

In the meantime, he's golfing with Tacchan:
https://redbirdrants.com/posts/yoshinobu-yamamoto-cardinals-lars-nootbaar-are-golfing-together-what-does-it-mean-01hfcrcvz3pn
Unfortunately for Cardinals fans, it's most likely that Nootbaar and Yamamoto are golfing in Southern California and not St. Louis. Nootbaar typically spends his offseason in the Los Angeles area, so if Yamamoto is there to meet with any Major League team, it's most likely the Dodgers who have expressed tremendous interest in acquiring the 25-year-old ace.
 

GPO Man

New Member
Apr 1, 2023
571
As more of a casual fan than most here, I love the idea of signing Ohtani. Yes, it’s probably not the best use of resources for roster construction, but winning it all seems like such a crapshoot anyways and getting to root for the best player of all time for years and years would be super fun.
If you can a player like Ohtani, you get him. Figure everything else out after.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,421
On Ohtani: With a team with 2 huge holes in the rotation, with a terrible defense and several hitters here long-term who should probably be DHs, a lineup that is really lefthanded, some really impressive positional prospects in the minors who are almost all LHH, and not many high-end starting pitching prospects-- the major move would be to pay huge, huge money for another LH-hitting DH?
In the big picture, that just doesn't make much sense.

Go big on Yamamoto instead, he fits here far better and solves way more problems.
This is where I'm at. Don't get me wrong. If they signed Ohtani, it would take me about a nanosecond before I was totally pumped and jacked for that. BUT...I don't think it's what they need the most, especially given their current roster situation.
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
2,795
That seems like an insane move. They would have ~ $125-135M for 4 players in their 30's with significant investment needed in their pitching staff.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,421
This has me wondering about something a bit off the wall.

For context, we’ve seen a shift in bullpen usage over the past 10 or so years to the point that starters pitch half the game now. And many of those “failed starters” have been repurposed as 1-2 inning relievers (lately even some going 3+ as swingmen/bulk guys). Many of those repurposed relievers have been revelations—picking up velocity and/or sharpening up a smaller repertoire of pitches.

Ok, this is the curiosity / potential next innovation. If a starter only had to go 25 starts per year because of a 6 man rotation, could we expect a similar uptick in performance as the “failed starters”? For the same 150 innings (30 starts @ 5 innings now), you’d get guys going 6 innings per start. That would reduce the load on the bullpen, right? So you could theoretically carry one less arm in the pen. And perhaps the starters benefit from / avoid injuries because of the extra day of rest between starts.

Forgive me if this has been debunked on the board already. Seemed like an interesting thought experiment in this slow news cycle, one that has relevance to a potential Ohtani strategy.

Smarter minds, please weigh in!
Interesting idea. The issue, though, is that the main reason guys only go 5 innings now isn't really because of performance. It's because of the "third time through the order" penalty. No matter how well guys are pitching, managers nowadays don't want them to face the other team's lineup that third time. So going 6 innings still likely - even if a guy is doing well - brings them into that third time through the lineup more often. So what this would take would be managers deciding the hell with worrying about this - if a guy is pitching well, leave him in. Like the "old days". Analytics says that's a bad idea, so it would take a manager flipping off the analytics and going by what he sees out there. And that may run counter to the entire organization's analytic philosophy (which it seems everyone has adopted).
 

RobertsSteal

New Member
Jul 15, 2005
64
Northampon, MA
Interesting idea. The issue, though, is that the main reason guys only go 5 innings now isn't really because of performance. It's because of the "third time through the order" penalty. No matter how well guys are pitching, managers nowadays don't want them to face the other team's lineup that third time. So going 6 innings still likely - even if a guy is doing well - brings them into that third time through the lineup more often. So what this would take would be managers deciding the hell with worrying about this - if a guy is pitching well, leave him in. Like the "old days". Analytics says that's a bad idea, so it would take a manager flipping off the analytics and going by what he sees out there. And that may run counter to the entire organization's analytic philosophy (which it seems everyone has adopted).
Makes perfect sense. So interesting how much the game has changed in such a short time.

As I typed that I was thinking back to the late 70s when I first started watching the Sox. I was thinking the game hadn’t changed much until the past 10 years, especially around pitcher usage.

Then it occurred to me that LaRussa really changed things with the closer role back in the 80s and how bullpen usage really shifted the starter’s role, eg, far fewer complete games. And then how the stolen base seemed to almost disappear — at least relative to the Ricky/Vince Coleman era. Times, as Bob said, they are a changing.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,421
Makes perfect sense. So interesting how much the game has changed in such a short time.

As I typed that I was thinking back to the late 70s when I first started watching the Sox. I was thinking the game hadn’t changed much until the past 10 years, especially around pitcher usage.

Then it occurred to me that LaRussa really changed things with the closer role back in the 80s and how bullpen usage really shifted the starter’s role, eg, far fewer complete games. And then how the stolen base seemed to almost disappear — at least relative to the Ricky/Vince Coleman era. Times, as Bob said, they are a changing.
Don't get me wrong - I'm totally in favor of starters going longer, even as it takes them into the lineup a third time. You may lose a few more games because of runs scored off the starter but I believe it will keep the bullpen a lot fresher, which will end up saving them games over the course of 162. That's just my hypothesis...I don't know how to prove it.
 

Archer1979

shazowies
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
8,187
Right Here
The Dodgers would be insane to do this. The money alone is prohibitive as @burstnbloom pointed out even if Trout and Ohtani were healthy.

Ohtani's on-field appeal is obviously two roster spots for the price of one. Problem is that the two positions are pitcher and DH. If he were just a free agent pitcher coming off that injury, how much would you be willing to pay? Add that up to what a good DH would cost, that's what you pay for Ohtani.

Trout's injury also raises questions for his future.

This would be like the Punto trade except the beneficiary would be the Angels.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,414
The Dodgers would be insane to do this. The money alone is prohibitive as @burstnbloom pointed out even if Trout and Ohtani were healthy.

Ohtani's on-field appeal is obviously two roster spots for the price of one. Problem is that the two positions are pitcher and DH. If he were just a free agent pitcher coming off that injury, how much would you be willing to pay? Add that up to what a good DH would cost, that's what you pay for Ohtani.

Trout's injury also raises questions for his future.

This would be like the Punto trade except the beneficiary would be the Angels.
I imagine the unsaid part is that the Angels would be eating a lot of his deal, even moreso if top prospects are involved.
 

Hendu for Kutch

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2006
6,938
Nashua, NH
Could Angels ownership stomach not just losing both Ohtani and Trout in one off-season, but losing them both to a team in the same city? That seems like a pretty tough PR pill to swallow for an ownership group that is already pretty unpopular.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,414
Could Angels ownership stomach not just losing both Ohtani and Trout in one off-season, but losing them both to a team in the same city? That seems like a pretty tough PR pill to swallow for an ownership group that is already pretty unpopular.
In for a dime, in for a dollar. Worrying about PR is part of the reason the Angels are here in the first place. Trout’s next few years are far more valuable to another team, they need to take advantage of that.
 

Hendu for Kutch

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2006
6,938
Nashua, NH
In for a dime, in for a dollar. Worrying about PR is part of the reason the Angels are here in the first place. Trout’s next few years are far more valuable to another team, they need to take advantage of that.
I agree that they should, my question is whether they have the stones to do it? I have my doubts, based on the way they handled the trade deadline.
 

E5 Yaz

polka king
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
91,853
Oregon
cross-posting from the other thread

Would Trout agree to go to the Dodgers? If it becomes clear they are going to trade him, he can pick his team ... and the chance to go to the Phillies might be too tempting to pass up
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,858
cross-posting from the other thread

Would Trout agree to go to the Dodgers? If it becomes clear they are going to trade him, he can pick his team ... and the chance to go to the Phillies might be too tempting to pass up
Hard to know. Both situations make sense for him on paper. Philly would allow him to finish career with his local team. LAD would allow him to stay in Southern California. Both would offer good situations on the field with stars he’s probably friendly with. There may be family considerations as well.
 

E5 Yaz

polka king
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
91,853
Oregon
Hard to know. Both situations make sense for him on paper. Philly would allow him to finish career with his local team. LAD would allow him to stay in Southern California. Both would offer good situations on the field with stars he’s probably friendly with. There may be family considerations as well.
True, but it's more than just the local team that would draw him there
"I was born in Vineland and raised in Millville. I met my wife, Jessica, in Millville, and my parents and siblings and in-laws still live in the area. I could put down roots anywhere in the country, but Jessica and I make south Jersey our off-season home and always cherish the time we get to spend there."
https://www.nbcsportsphiladelphia.com/mlb/philadelphia-phillies/mike-trout-is-building-a-golf-course-in-south-jersey/271900/#:~:text="I was born in Vineland,we get to spend there."
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,858

Mike473

New Member
Jul 31, 2006
91
They didn't let Chaim go for "more of the same".
For sure. It just popped into my mind that maybe the new plan doesn't include any immediate major changes but more gradual changes over the next few years. This is a strange offseason because the overall team building philosophy is very unclear. Who knows where we go from here.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
14,134
You are right it is not the biggest concern when it comes to signing Ohtani, but I think it is a significant one considering the Sox farm system.
I don't think there is any value in getting too far into the weeds about # of innings per year, a 5 vs 6 man rotation, the current Sox farm system etc.

Ohtani is going to be valued at 80+% on his bat, and the range of pitching outcomes is massive. You are mainly hoping he is healthy enough to give you a few years of good to elite pitching at some point during the contract. You don't even know when that will be or what the rest of the Sox pitching will look like, you'll just figure out the details at that point.

Worrying at all about the current state of the pitching in the farm system or a 5 vs 6 man rotation is missing the plot here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.