Offseason rumors

[nvalvo]

Another name I’m not too keen on, even if he is an excellent pitcher: Blake Snell.

He’s pitched 180-190 innings twice in his career. He’s never pitched more than 128.2 in an other season. He’d be good to have, but I’m not giving him silly money, and I’m not counting on him to be “the ace”.

I'm with you on this. He has succeeded despite a pretty high walk rate (4.1 BB/9) by striking out 11 or 12 per 9 and suppressing hits. He's also played his entire career in two of the league's best pitchers' parks. If we were to bring him into the world's greatest BABIP park in front of a defense that we will hopefully have improved to league average, well, a lot more of those walks would start scoring.

 

[Rovin Romine]

This just isn't true. The Sox' poor run is not because of the Sale contract, it's because the farm system went like 5 years with little to no production. Teams win all the time with dead money on the books. The Yankees always have at least one bad deal on the books -- Giambi, Teixeira, Ellsbury, Stanton. The Astros this year spent 48 million on Jose Abreu, Lance McCullers, and Michael Brantley, who combined for exactly 0.1 WAR. The Rangers paid Jacob DeGrom 37 mil this year.

Dead money is the cost of doing business for teams who swim in the deep end of the FA pool. If they all go bad at the same time, that's a tough hole to dig out from. But one bad deal? A good team can weather that storm.

Price, Hanley, Sandoval, Porcello. Then later Sale. Or you can go earlier and look at Crawford, Lackey, and Dice-K.

Point is, there's almost never only one bad deal. The point is to avoid putting your marginal advantage (the $50M you're going to spend above, say, Cleveland or whomever) into a potentially cracked basket.

But again, I'm sort of agnostic on YY. It depends on what their internal suggest his production will be v. the actual contract he's willing to sign.

***
The greater issue is really "What can be done to make the club competitive, now and in the future?" Signing or trading for guys with huge ? marks in the 2024 pre-season is probably not the way to best do that. Mostly because this team isn't just one player away from a deep and sustained post-season run. So you can't burn your margin on two of those guys (for the next 7 years) in the hopes that one might pan out.

The caveat for the "one player away" is that we might be with health and coaching. I mean, Houck or Whitlock could still catch fire as a starter. But I don't think you adopt a "throw everything at one guy" approach if your plan is that one of them absolutely will catch fire.

 

[nvalvo]

The idea that the Red Sox weren’t competitive for a few years because of Chris Sales contract is ridiculous. They won 92 games in 21, when he provided $0.9 bWAR (he was at 1.7 this past year). That same year, they paid $30M to Dustin Pedroia and David Price. If we remove Sale, their payroll was still pretty high. Feels like a pretty lame excuse to me.

Good post. It's really the Sale + Price + Pedroia deadweight plus a gap in the productivity of the farm as the poor 2012–2014 drafts and the international signing penalties came home to roost.

 

[pdub]

Price, Hanley, Sandoval, Porcello. Then later Sale. Or you can go earlier and look at Crawford, Lackey, and Dice-K.

Point is, there's almost never only one bad deal. The point is to avoid putting your marginal advantage (the $50M you're going to spend above, say, Cleveland or whomever) into a potentially cracked basket.

But again, I'm sort of agnostic on YY. It depends on what their internal suggest his production will be v. the actual contract he's willing to sign.

***
The greater issue is really "What can be done to make the club competitive, now and in the future?" Signing or trading for guys with huge ? marks in the 2024 pre-season is probably not the way to best do that. Mostly because this team isn't just one player away from a deep and sustained post-season run. So you can't burn your margin on two of those guys (for the next 7 years) in the hopes that one might pan out.

The caveat for the "one player away" is that we might be with health and coaching. I mean, Houck or Whitlock could still catch fire as a starter. But I don't think you adopt a "throw everything at one guy" approach if your plan is that one of them absolutely will catch fire.

Personally, I think the Price, Hanley, Sale, and Porcello deals were all worth it. Those guys all contributed to a ring, so to me it was worth it no matter what.

 

[nvalvo]

The caveat for the "one player away" is that we might be with health and coaching. I mean, Houck or Whitlock could still catch fire as a starter. But I don't think you adopt a "throw everything at one guy" approach if your plan is that one of them absolutely will catch fire.

This is also a good point. There is a lot of latent upside on the roster, both in young players who have shown tantalizing streaks, and in older players (especially Sale and Story) who have been high-end contributors in the past and could be again.

 

[Big Papi's Mango Salsa]

This just isn't true. The Sox' poor run is not because of the Sale contract, it's because the farm system went like 5 years with little to no production. Teams win all the time with dead money on the books. The Yankees always have at least one bad deal on the books -- Giambi, Teixeira, Ellsbury, Stanton. The Astros this year spent 48 million on Jose Abreu, Lance McCullers, and Michael Brantley, who combined for exactly 0.1 WAR. The Rangers paid Jacob DeGrom 37 mil this year.

Dead money is the cost of doing business for teams who swim in the deep end of the FA pool. If they all go bad at the same time, that's a tough hole to dig out from. But one bad deal? A good team can weather that storm.

The poor run the past decade hasn't been "just" because of Sale's contract or "just" because of the farm system not bearing fruit. Those have certainly both been large factors. But largely sitting out free agency, having some very poor trade results and depending on incredibly undependable starting pitching have also been factors. I'm sure there are others I'm missing. To say it's "one" thing or the other misses the point that there are a lot of slices of blame pie to go around - some slices are of course bigger than others.

I'm not riding the Ohtani train and here's why. The Sox greatest needs ATM is top line pitch and defense. While the Sox have the cash to be players in this year's FA market I'm questioning the wisdom of potentially paying $40 M plus for a guy who might never again be the pitcher that he once was and might not be dependable as an outfielder.

I'm in complete and total agreement with this take @YTF.

Ohtani is - at least in my opinion - the greatest baseball player that has ever played in the majors. (His injury history might stop him for achieving that title for some, but if he continues on anything like the path he's been on, I don't see how anyone else would take that mantle from him.)

However, the Red Sox have several players on their roster that could (and possibly should) slide into a DH role and - certainly not while matching Ohtani with the bat - could provide a very high level DH. Devers is 1st in that list, Yoshida is probably 2nd. Casas could certainly do that, but he made enough strides at 1b this year - and is young enough - that I'd certainly slide one of those two into the DH role first. This isn't to say "but where would we play him" - that's dumb - it's a different argument. It's saying we have very good options of players that are limited defensively but quite good offensively that could slide into that role.

They don't have that kind of expected production in house for starting pitchers or RHH top/middle of the order bats. This is where they need to focus their efforts.

Ohtani is awesome. But since he won't be able to pitch in 2024, he doesn't fit the needs of the roster at the MLB (or prospect limitations from the minor league level) that the Red Sox need to address first.

(That said, if Breslow wants to trade Duran, Mayer, Yorke, Bleis, Houck, Verdugo and Cespedes for "Dylan Cease and Logan Gilbert" and then give Ohtani 1/2 a billion dollars to roll with Rafaela - CF, Yoshida - LF, Ohtani - DH, Devers - 3b; Story - SS; Casas - 1b; Abreu - RF; Wong - C; Rosario - 2b with Bello, Gilbert, Cease, Crawford and some combination of Sale/Murphy/Pivetta/Chawson injury flier X" at the 5, and the thought that Ohtani joins the 2025 rotation, be my guest.)

 

[Trapaholic]

Critical time for the organization right now. With Nola signed and YY posted, feels like there will be a flurry of activity between now and Christmas. They're going to have to "overpay" in some form. The Red Sox, as currently constituted, need at least 2 starting pitchers.

We saw a lot of dumb, uninspired baseball last summer. This ran the gamut from lousy defense to baserunning. The lack of even average starting pitching killed the team. This bubbled over in the Bear Claw game.

We do not want to see moves made out of desperation, but it may be time to get desperate.

 

[cantor44]

Personally, I think the Price, Hanley, Sale, and Porcello deals were all worth it. Those guys all contributed to a ring, so to me it was worth it no matter what.

Sale contributed to a ring before the misguided extension the Red Sox gave him. The Sale TRADE was worth it, not the extension. And yes, as has been said, a high-spending team can work around a couple of bad contracts, especially if the roster includes good players newly off the farm. Though it is not tough to speculate that extending Sale had an impact on the possibility (or willingness or capacity) of extending Betts, and this is where the Sale extension may have had a bigger impact than "one bad contact" that the team had to absorb.

I know this is hypothetical. Though if a Betts extension would have been more likely without the Sale extension, then the Sale extension can be seen as somewhat emblematic of the last era (of mostly losing). Not the only factor by far, but still an important factor.

 

[Rovin Romine]

Personally, I think the Price, Hanley, Sale, and Porcello deals were all worth it. Those guys all contributed to a ring, so to me it was worth it no matter what.

The saving grace of the Sox in the 21st century is they go on these runs every-so-often and win it all. But each contending club is fairly different, and there was one overt and several quasi tear-down and rebuilds, mostly centered around key players with large contracts.

But I think one could argue that with more judicious signings, the 4 years from 2016-2019 should have produced more than one WS appearance.

 

[pdub]

Sale contributed to a ring before the misguided extension the Red Sox gave him. The Sale TRADE was worth it, not the extension. And yes, as has been said, a high-spending team can work around a couple of bad contracts, especially if the roster includes good players newly off the farm. Though it is not tough to speculate that extending Sale had an impact on the possibility (or willingness or capacity) of extending Betts, and this is where the Sale extension may have had a bigger impact than "one bad contact" that the team had to absorb.

I know this is hypothetical. Though if a Betts extension would have been more likely without the Sale extension, then the Sale extension can be seen as somewhat emblematic of the last era (of mostly losing). Not the only factor by far, but still an important factor.

Oops, you're right regarding the extension. My mistake. Regarding Betts, I don't know how much the Sale extension affected things, but I suspect not much because ownership must have known that Betts' extension was coming up and that he would break the bank, but they still extended Sale.

 

[Cassvt2023]

1. The Red Sox need a massive spark in the organization.
2. The Red Sox need a #1 starting pitcher.
3. The Red Sox have tons of money available to spend.
4. Yamamoto looks every bit like a stud starting pitcher.
5. Yamamoto is only 25 years old. He's not one of these 30 year old pitchers that is hitting free agency.

Lots of teams will try to sign him. But he should be far and away the #1 priority for Boston, and they should back up the Brinks truck for him. Whatever it takes. Yes. That.

He fills by far their biggest need. He only costs money. A crap ton of money, yes, but only money. Which the Sox have lots of at this point. And he's still young so you'd be getting the best years of him.

Is he a risk? Of course. We don't KNOW how he will adjust to MLB. We don't KNOW that he will hold up physically (he's not big). We don't KNOW that this contract won't come back to bite the Sox. But it's exactly the kind of situation that they try to save money FOR. They have lots of offense. They have a decent bullpen. They need starting pitching and this guy is the best SP available.

Whatever it takes, Craig. Get it done.

Agree 100% with everything you stated @BaseballJones. I posted something very similar here a couple days ago. I'm wondering if 9/252 million would get it done, even if his agent demanded an opt out clause in there somewhere. Just get him to Boston and worry about that down the road.

 

[LogansDad]

This is true of literally every player ever.

Sure, and literally every player ever has never gotten the $50M+ that some a throwing around for Ohtani.

I love him. Would love to have him on the Sox. That doesn't mean there isn't a limit.

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

The Red Sox need to put a good team out on the field. That’s all. How they accomplish that, who cares? I’m a little nervous about the desire for a big splash or an exciting move to win the offseason. They just need to improve the team, and then show it on the field. Breslow and team need to ignore the noise; whatever is said in December is long forgotten by mid-summer.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Personally, I think the Price, Hanley, Sale, and Porcello deals were all worth it. Those guys all contributed to a ring, so to me it was worth it no matter what.

Technically Hanley got a ring in 2018, but he was released in May of that season, so I'm not sure how much he really contributed. The other three definitely contributed to the 2018 championship and you won't hear me say a bad word about the contracts it took to get them on that team. Sale's current contract/extension came after that title, so it's perfectly fair game for criticism though.

 

[sezwho]

"the Red Sox are not a big market team" is an absurd statement.

I think it depends what you mean by big. We used to be big, like top of the market big. Now they are not competitors at this level (Yankees Dodgers Mets), they weren't in the prior year, and it remains to be seen where we will be next.

Look, we aren't the Rays or even Cardinals, but living more at the "upper middle class" level like the Texas teams or Philly or SF or...is where we are now. Its like Henry's 200ft yacht was awesome when he bought it but the new guys showed up at the marina with 250-350 footers.

edit - I recognize calling Sale's contract the end of all things RS was a large oversimplification, but the larger premise remains that I don't trust them to spend out of bad contract situation(s).

 

[Big Papi's Mango Salsa]

I think it depends what you mean by big. We used to be big, like top of the market big. Now they are not competitors at this level (Yankees Dodgers Mets), they weren't in the prior year, and it remains to be seen where we will be next.

Look, we aren't the Rays or even Cardinals, but living more at the "upper middle class" level like the Texas teams or Philly or SF or...is where we are now. Its like Henry's 200ft yacht was awesome when he bought it but the new guys showed up at the marina with 250-350 footers.

edit - I recognize calling Sale's contract the end of all things RS was a large oversimplification, but the larger premise remains that I don't trust them to spend out of bad contract situation(s).

I mean, to be fair, they've had one season (and it was last season) that they weren't in the top 6 in spending in the past 4 years (I'm going to call 2020 a season, at least in terms of what they spent, not in terms of the validity of results from that season).

In 2020 the Red Sox were 4th in spending (LAD, NYY, ChC); in 2021 they were 6th (LAD, NYY, NYM, Phi, HOU); in 2022 they were 6th again (LAD, NYM, NYY, Philly and SD). They didn't spend LAST YEAR, but to say they simply haven't spent recently is not correct. They've absolutely spent. Now - to question if what they spent it on was any good and should have reasonably been expected to be good enough to contend for titles - is absolutely fair. But they have spent.

Hopefully they will continue to spend, and hopefully in a departure of most of those 4 seasons, it will be on players that lead to playoff appearances.

https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/payroll/2022/

 

[chrisfont9]

Sale seems fairly dispositive. A chronically injured key player ties up 10-15% of your overall payroll resources, and gives you average to replacement level production for the limited time they're active. Meanwhile they tie up a 40 spot and you never quite know whether you should cut bait or continue to roll out stopgap replacements.

In isolation that won't do it, but you have to figure the above always happens. So now combine it with a random injury to another key player, or a couple of underwhelming signings.

The point is, it's eating heavily into your margin for success.

Sure, though you can just keep spending nowadays, and also the length of the deal will bring the team into higher CBT realms. If the team feels like it is seeing extra revenue because of his fame in Japan and elsewhere, that helps too.

In every team sport there's a debate as to whether you should emphasize top stars or overall depth. IMO baseball is the hardest choice. But Ohtani is such a unique case that I'm all for him coming on. [Which is super important, I'm sure Shohei is waiting to hear from me and us before picking between the Dodgers and Mariners.]

 

[jon abbey]

But Ohtani is such a unique case that I'm all for him coming on. [Which is super important, I'm sure Shohei is waiting to hear from me and us before picking between the Dodgers and Mariners.]

SEA doesn’t seem to actually be going after Ohtani:

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2023/11/report-mariners-not-expected-to-sign-shohei-ohtani.html

 

[chawson]

Another name I’m not too keen on, even if he is an excellent pitcher: Blake Snell.

He’s pitched 180-190 innings twice in his career. He’s never pitched more than 128.2 in an other season. He’d be good to have, but I’m not giving him silly money, and I’m not counting on him to be “the ace”.

Snell is not really my guy, but I'm warming up to him. It's interesting that his success is much less team-dependent than other pitchers. He allows very few balls in play, compared to say, Montgomery.

Maybe that's attractive for a team with bad defense?

Downstream from that, Snell doesn't give up a lot of deep fly balls, particularly to left field. In 742 batters faced, Snell gave up 12 balls in the air that traveled >310 feet to left (i.e. the distance of the Monster). Montgomery, for example, gave up 24 in 777.

A starting pitcher who strikes everyone out and limits his hard-hit fly balls to our park's deepest dimensions? Not a bad fit.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

I think it depends what you mean by big. We used to be big, like top of the market big. Now they are not competitors at this level (Yankees Dodgers Mets), they weren't in the prior year, and it remains to be seen where we will be next.

Look, we aren't the Rays or even Cardinals, but living more at the "upper middle class" level like the Texas teams or Philly or SF or...is where we are now. Its like Henry's 200ft yacht was awesome when he bought it but the new guys showed up at the marina with 250-350 footers.

edit - I recognize calling Sale's contract the end of all things RS was a large oversimplification, but the larger premise remains that I don't trust them to spend out of bad contract situation(s).

Have they ever really been a team that spends itself out of bad contract situations? Arguably the only example of that might be the Dombrowski era in which he had to work around overpay/dead money deals to the likes of Sandoval, Ramirez, and Pedroia and he did so by signing Price and trading for Sale and Kimbrel. But even then, he was greatly aided by the high yield of (relatively) cheap players from the farm like Betts, Bradley, Benintendi, Bogaerts, Vazquez, ERod, Devers, etc.

Other than those 2-3 years, the modus operandi of the Henry-era front offices has been to spend to and occasionally slightly over the luxury tax thresholds. Theo didn't really operate at the top of the market or hand out record-setting type deals until the very end of his run (Crawford/Gonzalez). Cherington didn't spend his way out those deals, the Dodgers bailed him out with the Punto deal then hovered around the cap same as Theo did.

I don't think we should be holding ownership to the standard of what Dombrowski did when other than that brief period, they've never really operated that way.

 

[Pedroia's Itchy Nose]

This is true of literally every player ever.

Isn't that a bit disingenuous though? Yes, clearly every player has question marks. There is a minimum baseline of injury and performance risk that is going to be present for every player. It's ridiculous to just handwave away the variations in that risk between players. Bigger and longer contracts are riskier than smaller and shorter ones, and both of the players under discussion are potentially in line for very long, very large contracts. Furthermore, both players have a higher than average degree of uncertainty about injury risk/performance downside. There is a substantial likelihood that Ohtani will never pitch again, and if he doesn't there is the question of whether he can transition to playing outfield vs. being stuck at DH. There's just a massive difference in the value Ohtani provides as a two way player vs. as an average outfielder vs. as a DH. There is no other player that carries those kinds of question marks. Yamamoto is a bit more "normal" but the variation that comes along with transitioning from NPB to MLB is substantial. Plenty of "can't miss" NPB players have failed to live up to the hype after coming to the MLB. Trying to project Yamamoto's performance and injury risk coming from NPB has much wider error bars than a player that has reached free agency through the MLB.

So yes, every player does come with variance and risk. But these two have an unusually high level of variance and risk and it would be crazy to dismiss that fact.

 

[Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat]

A starting pitcher who strikes everyone out and limits his hard-hit fly balls to our park's deepest dimensions? Not a bad fit.

Well, to be fair, he strikes everyone out other than all the batters he walks.

 

[chawson]

Well, to be fair, he strikes everyone out other than all the batters he walks.

Too true.

I don't have time today but I'm curious to dig into the numbers and see how Snell's pitches miss, and whether a catcher with different pitch framing skills might affect that. Could be nothing.

 

[brandonchristensen]

How do you cripple a franchise these days? I’d argue that Stanton is the worst contract going and the Yankees are more or less OK, or at least not held back by finances alone. Also you are flipping from all in to no way because of a UCL? People get those fixed all the time.

Stanton isn’t 40-50M a season. Shohei will probably get a contract that takes him into his 40s.
Just doesn’t seem like it will pay off in the long run. Maybe I’m wrong.

 

[Rovin Romine]

Sure, though you can just keep spending nowadays, and also the length of the deal will bring the team into higher CBT realms. If the team feels like it is seeing extra revenue because of his fame in Japan and elsewhere, that helps too.

In every team sport there's a debate as to whether you should emphasize top stars or overall depth. IMO baseball is the hardest choice. But Ohtani is such a unique case that I'm all for him coming on. [Which is super important, I'm sure Shohei is waiting to hear from me and us before picking between the Dodgers and Mariners.]

I'm sure there are side benefits to the club on some of these deals (player fame/ticket sales) and I'm also certain the particulars of the deal(s) matter.

I don't think Ohtani is an outlier though. He may be the best overall player ever by some kind of mixed criteria. But he's neither the best hitter nor the best pitcher. And you only get to do one thing at any given pairing in the game. So we'd be getting a really good hitter. We'd be getting a really good pitcher. All in one body.

Suppose an equal hitter is worth 10 (units, not dollars). An equal pitcher is worth 10. So. . .what's Ohtani's value to the club? 20. (Plus intangible fame-y things.)

But the risk is that a single injury (and Ohtani is and has previously been injured) docks the club 20 units of production, as opposed to just 10. And you can still have a "just 10" injury, as happened last season.

I'm with you in that you don't say "no" to such a player under ideal circumstances. I just wouldn't if there's a 25 or 30 unit salary attached to that 20 of production. Plus the injury risk.

When you extend that 25 or 30 unit salary over a decade of seasons. . .yeah, I think you have to say no. Especially if you have a soft cap of 120 salary units to spend every year, and so your outlay on the player is between 15-20% of your budget.

 

[iddoc]

The number of recent first-ballot HOF types who were albatrosses to their teams for much of their 30s is sobering. Griffey Jr, Pujols, Cabrera, and now maybe Trout.

 

[Sandy Leon Trotsky]

I'm sure there are side benefits to the club on some of these deals (player fame/ticket sales) and I'm also certain the particulars of the deal(s) matter.

I don't think Ohtani is an outlier though. He may be the best overall player ever by some kind of mixed criteria. But he's neither the best hitter nor the best pitcher. And you only get to do one thing at any given pairing in the game. So we'd be getting a really good hitter. We'd be getting a really good pitcher. All in one body.

Suppose an equal hitter is worth 10 (units, not dollars). An equal pitcher is worth 10. So. . .what's Ohtani's value to the club? 20. (Plus intangible fame-y things.)

But the risk is that a single injury (and Ohtani is and has previously been injured) docks the club 20 units of production, as opposed to just 10. And you can still have a "just 10" injury, as happened last season.

I'm with you in that you don't say "no" to such a player under ideal circumstances. I just wouldn't if there's a 25 or 30 unit salary attached to that 20 of production. Plus the injury risk.

When you extend that 25 or 30 unit salary over a decade of seasons. . .yeah, I think you have to say no. Especially if you have a soft cap of 120 salary units to spend every year, and so your outlay on the player is between 15-20% of your budget.

Perfect. This is exactly the situation unfortunately... I'm 100% certain that the Sox aren't "in" on Ohtani unless there's a market collapse for him, which really there kinda sorta seems like there might be for these exact reasons- and that he may never pitch again and may not be useful in the OF despite his "athleticism". I wouldn't say that JD Drew was an athlete like Ohtani but he was a pretty great OF'er. There's a lot more to being a good OF than just athleticism.... and it's very likely Ohtani has that extra smarts/intuitiveness that a corner OF has, but there's little more than speculation at this point on it. But honestly, I don't think it's a concern. He's going to the Dodgers, Yankees, Mets or Cubs. It's just not a need for the Sox right now short or long term with the existing roster they have.
Yamamoto, on the other hand is exactly a key piece to what ails the Sox roster. If they did nothing else but add him to the rotation, they're a 90-92 win team IMO. Add another starter, Montgomery or ERod via FA or someone else similar via trade and they're a 93-95 win team. I don't see adding Ohtani to the existing roster and doing nothing else making up that big of a difference.

 

[jon abbey]

Hahahaha, a market collapse for Ohtani! Please remember that you wrote that once his deal is announced.

 

[Sandy Leon Trotsky]

Hahahaha, a market collapse for Ohtani! Please remember that you wrote that once his deal is announced.

People were saying $60M a year for multiple seasons in mid-season. Now it's looking closer to $40M. That's a collapse at this point. Maybe it will go crazy back up again but I don't think it'll hit closer to that high point than the low point.

 

[chrisfont9]

Stanton isn’t 40-50M a season. Shohei will probably get a contract that takes him into his 40s.
Just doesn’t seem like it will pay off in the long run. Maybe I’m wrong.

Heh well GMs get hired and fired on the basis of such decisions, so yeah.

 

[Rovin Romine]

Hahahaha, a market collapse for Ohtani! Please remember that you wrote that once his deal is announced.

Do you think there's a chance he takes a lucrative 1 year "show me" contract to allow his arm to heal up if the top dollars are not there?

 

[BigSoxFan]

Perfect. This is exactly the situation unfortunately... I'm 100% certain that the Sox aren't "in" on Ohtani unless there's a market collapse for him, which really there kinda sorta seems like there might be for these exact reasons- and that he may never pitch again and may not be useful in the OF despite his "athleticism". I wouldn't say that JD Drew was an athlete like Ohtani but he was a pretty great OF'er. There's a lot more to being a good OF than just athleticism.... and it's very likely Ohtani has that extra smarts/intuitiveness that a corner OF has, but there's little more than speculation at this point on it. But honestly, I don't think it's a concern. He's going to the Dodgers, Yankees, Mets or Cubs. It's just not a need for the Sox right now short or long term with the existing roster they have.
Yamamoto, on the other hand is exactly a key piece to what ails the Sox roster. If they did nothing else but add him to the rotation, they're a 90-92 win team IMO. Add another starter, Montgomery or ERod via FA or someone else similar via trade and they're a 93-95 win team. I don't see adding Ohtani to the existing roster and doing nothing else making up that big of a difference.

The Sox wouldn’t just sign Ohtani and do nothing else though. There would be other moves. I get the roster construction points and injury risk concerns but this is the guy who had the highest OPS in MLB last year and is smack dab in his prime. And he did a lot of this without any lineup protection. I think his bat is elite and I’d gladly pay in the $40M for it alone.

 

[jon abbey]

People were saying $60M a year for multiple seasons in mid-season. Now it's looking closer to $40M.

This isn't the stock market, none of those numbers have any basis in reality. Yes, he had a major arm injury in the second half of the season, but he is still almost certainly going to sign the biggest deal in MLB history (currently Trout at 12/426.5).

 

[jon abbey]

Do you think there's a chance he takes a lucrative 1 year "show me" contract to allow his arm to heal up if the top dollars are not there?

That made me literally laugh out loud.

 

[cantor44]

The Red Sox need to put a good team out on the field. That’s all. How they accomplish that, who cares? I’m a little nervous about the desire for a big splash or an exciting move to win the offseason. They just need to improve the team, and then show it on the field. Breslow and team need to ignore the noise; whatever is said in December is long forgotten by mid-summer.

I'm right with you. Though they do need to add some all-star caliber talent to be a good team that can contend. So, any way you achieve that, it's gonna create some kinda splash.

 

[JM3]

I think there's almost a 0% chance we sign Ohtani. & he's not a great fit for our roster. But I couldn't imagine not being extremely excited if they did it, for a lot of reasons (commitment to spend, buzz, having a unicorn playing for your favorite team, etc.).

 

[EvilEmpire]

So when will the first opt out be after Ohtani signs so he can get get another bite at the apple if he wants it, while have lifetime security if he doesn't?

Year two? Year three?

 

[BigSoxFan]

So when will the first opt out be after Ohtani signs so he can get get another bite at the apple if he wants it, while have lifetime security if he doesn't?

Year two? Year 3?

Year 2 seems too early but he seems to have a lot of leverage so it will be interesting to see. These kinds of contractual details could play a material role. Someone is going to cave to basically every demand. And it certainly won’t be the Sox.

 

[Rovin Romine]

That made me literally laugh out loud.

If you're laughing because you think it's likely he's going to get a massive offer from someone, that's fair.

But what I actually asked was if you thought he'd take a one-year IF what he viewed as a top contract wasn't there. Like does he have that mentality?

Or to bridge the following:

So when will the first opt out be after Ohtani signs so he can get get another bite at the apple if he wants it, while have lifetime security if he doesn't?

Year two? Year 3?

Take an offer with an early opt-out so he can pursue whatever he views as a top contract.

 

[chrisfont9]

I'm sure there are side benefits to the club on some of these deals (player fame/ticket sales) and I'm also certain the particulars of the deal(s) matter.

I don't think Ohtani is an outlier though. He may be the best overall player ever by some kind of mixed criteria. But he's neither the best hitter nor the best pitcher. And you only get to do one thing at any given pairing in the game. So we'd be getting a really good hitter. We'd be getting a really good pitcher. All in one body.

Suppose an equal hitter is worth 10 (units, not dollars). An equal pitcher is worth 10. So. . .what's Ohtani's value to the club? 20. (Plus intangible fame-y things.)

But the risk is that a single injury (and Ohtani is and has previously been injured) docks the club 20 units of production, as opposed to just 10. And you can still have a "just 10" injury, as happened last season.

I'm with you in that you don't say "no" to such a player under ideal circumstances. I just wouldn't if there's a 25 or 30 unit salary attached to that 20 of production. Plus the injury risk.

When you extend that 25 or 30 unit salary over a decade of seasons. . .yeah, I think you have to say no. Especially if you have a soft cap of 120 salary units to spend every year, and so your outlay on the player is between 15-20% of your budget.

By some measures he actually is the best hitter (OPS & slugging this year when his counting stats were down a bit) and at least in one season was a top three pitcher. I take your point, the potential reward is high but if you pay the market rate for that reward, then the risk is equally high. So how do teams assess risk? What's an acceptable outcome? Can he propel them to the playoffs (and have a strong chance at a title) in four of the presumed 10 years? Are we for that scenario? It's just so outside how we normally think of roster construction and salary management that I have no idea what the answer is.

 

[jon abbey]

If you're laughing because you think it's likely he's going to get a massive offer from someone, that's fair.

But what I actually asked was if you thought he'd take a one-year IF what he viewed as a top contract wasn't there. Like does he have that mentality?

There is zero chance he will not sign a gigantic contract this winter. Please bump this post if I am wrong.

 

[chrisfont9]

There is zero chance he will not sign a gigantic contract this winter. Please bump this post if I am wrong.

The only variable here is health, but IMO it sounds like he has a very fixable injury. Does he provide his medicals up front? I wonder if this will get bogged down in MRIs -- in which case he will sign a massive contract a bit later than we might otherwise expect. Which has lots of implications for the market! Gonna be a wild ride...

 

[jon abbey]

View: https://twitter.com/Nati_Sports/status/1727004676355129372?s=20


Nati Sports

@Nati_Sports

The #Reds are engaged in active trade talks with the Boston Red Sox regarding 2B Jonathan India (Nothing imminent right now) The last time the Reds traded with the Red Sox they dealt Tommy Pham in 2022 for Cincinnati native (and current Red) Nick Northcutt RHP Tanner Houck is a name rumored and the Reds would require prospects additionally. RHP Wikelman Gonzales is an intriguing prospect from the Reds perspective. The Red Sox possess a relatively deep farm system and have room to add free agents this cycle.

 

[Rovin Romine]

By some measures he actually is the best hitter (OPS & slugging this year when his counting stats were down a bit) and at least in one season was a top three pitcher. I take your point, the potential reward is high but if you pay the market rate for that reward, then the risk is equally high. So how do teams assess risk? What's an acceptable outcome? Can he propel them to the playoffs (and have a strong chance at a title) in four of the presumed 10 years? Are we for that scenario? It's just so outside how we normally think of roster construction and salary management that I have no idea what the answer is.

I don't think there's any chance the Sox sign him under any scenario.

But no, I don't think this is really all that hard for teams. You know his likely hitter value, and you know his likely pitcher value. You know where your club is. You know how much money you have to spend.

He's a fantastic player, and for the right team might be a difference maker. Or, more Angels. Because two epic players, plus some good support staff and some eh players do not a playoff contention team make.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

View: https://twitter.com/Nati_Sports/status/1727004676355129372?s=20


Nati Sports
@Nati_Sports

The #Reds are engaged in active trade talks with the Boston Red Sox regarding 2B Jonathan India (Nothing imminent right now) The last time the Reds traded with the Red Sox they dealt Tommy Pham in 2022 for Cincinnati native (and current Red) Nick Northcutt RHP Tanner Houck is a name rumored and the Reds would require prospects additionally. RHP Wikelman Gonzales is an intriguing prospect from the Reds perspective. The Red Sox possess a relatively deep farm system and have room to add free agents this cycle.

Is this really suggesting that Houck for India wouldn't be enough for the Reds to say yes? I hope I'm reading that wrong because Houck would be a significant over-pay by himself. I'd do Gonzales for India but the Reds would probably want more. Frankly though, I don't get the interest in India.

 

[Average Game James]

View: https://twitter.com/Nati_Sports/status/1727004676355129372?s=20


Nati Sports
@Nati_Sports

The #Reds are engaged in active trade talks with the Boston Red Sox regarding 2B Jonathan India (Nothing imminent right now) The last time the Reds traded with the Red Sox they dealt Tommy Pham in 2022 for Cincinnati native (and current Red) Nick Northcutt RHP Tanner Houck is a name rumored and the Reds would require prospects additionally. RHP Wikelman Gonzales is an intriguing prospect from the Reds perspective. The Red Sox possess a relatively deep farm system and have room to add free agents this cycle.

Houck PLUS prospects feels like an overpay. Heck, just Houck might be an overpay. Not that BTV is gospel, but they have Houck as 2.5x more valuable than India (19.5 vs. 7.7).

 

[JM3]

View: https://twitter.com/Nati_Sports/status/1727004676355129372?s=20


Nati Sports
@Nati_Sports

The #Reds are engaged in active trade talks with the Boston Red Sox regarding 2B Jonathan India (Nothing imminent right now) The last time the Reds traded with the Red Sox they dealt Tommy Pham in 2022 for Cincinnati native (and current Red) Nick Northcutt RHP Tanner Houck is a name rumored and the Reds would require prospects additionally. RHP Wikelman Gonzales is an intriguing prospect from the Reds perspective. The Red Sox possess a relatively deep farm system and have room to add free agents this cycle.

I couldn't imagine trading either Houck or Wikelman for India, let alone both.

I also question the validity of this source & their inability to spell Gonzalez.

They are a big India fan, though.

View: https://twitter.com/Nati_Sports/status/1727006737927163996

 

[Fishy1]

Agree with @JM3 . I mean, would we have sent Houck or Wikelman off for Luis Urias after 2022 or 2021? Very similar players in my book: pop and a good eye for their position, but middling contact and defensive vaue.

If we sent off a reliever or a middling prospect, I wouldn't be mad, but it would be kind of crazy to give up Houck or Wikelman for the likes of India.

 

[BaseballJones]

From that tweet: "RHP Tanner Houck is a name rumored and the Reds would require prospects additionally."

Prospects, plural. So Houck plus at least two prospects for India? I mean, he's fine. 105 ops+ for his career. A huge rookie season (4.1 bWAR) followed by -0.3 and +1.4.

He's just 26 and has several more years of team control. So yeah, you could do worse than have him as your everyday 2b. But also...Houck PLUS prospects, plural? No thanks at that price.

 

[SouthernBoSox]

Yea

I couldn't imagine trading either Houck or Wikelman for India, let alone both.

I also question the validity of this source & their inability to spell Gonzalez.

Big India fan, though.

View: https://twitter.com/Nati_Sports/status/1727006737927163996

Is India even an upgrade over current platoon? I doubt its significant if it is and certainly not something the Red Sox will ship off pitching for.

Edit: and to further the point he was AWFUL at fielding last year. 8th Percentile in OOA. He's right handed with some pop so I get it, but from a fielding standpoint it makes very very little sense.