Red Sox sign Patrick Sandoval
- Thread starter RedOctober3829
- Start date
Exactly. CAA was telling all of MLB last summer that Crochet wanted an extension. At the very least CAA gave indicative amounts of price/ext. levels to White Sox mgmt in July. When Getz put GC on the trade market they would have passed along those figures & probably had updated #s.
Not sure why, but there is some unnecessary pearl-clutching around here regarding the Crochet extension.
I agree that it is really disappointing that we are at March 31st and this is the final roster.
The Crochet extension talk last summer was primarily about him trying to control where he went and how he was used. Let's not forget that the extension talk was in combination with a promise (threat?) that he would not pitch in the post-season without one. He was trying to protect himself in his first season as a full time starter when he was clearly on an innings/pitch limit (as evidenced by how he was deployed over the final 2 months of the season). I really don't see that as being all that instructive of how he feels five months later with all that concern entirely in the rearview mirror. There's no reason to think that any of the numbers that might have been discussed are still valid now.
Bottom line point I was trying to make is that an extension this winter is not guaranteed and not getting it done isn't any kind of failure on management's part. It takes two to get it done and maybe, just maybe Crochet is going to gamble on himself rather than potentially leave money on the table.
The level of discourse in this thread is shockingly low for this place. A small dollar signing for a pitcher like this has significant merit on its own and given where the payroll sits, it shouldn't have any impact on the "BIG MONEY" signings a very loud group of posters are screeching about constantly.
The bullying and dishonesty by some of the more veteran posters on this board in this thread is really disappointing. I don't believe any of you think this signing means they won't acquire another pitcher.
A smart front office should always be identifying opportunities to acquire assets at an efficient value. That's all this is, and projecting all of your grievances about how ownership has managed the payroll for 6 pages is pathetic. There is about 1 page worth of posts about the pitcher and his potential value, and 5 about your gripes about ownership. This place used to be way better.
The bullying and dishonesty by some of the more veteran posters on this board in this thread is really disappointing. I don't believe any of you think this signing means they won't acquire another pitcher.
A smart front office should always be identifying opportunities to acquire assets at an efficient value. That's all this is, and projecting all of your grievances about how ownership has managed the payroll for 6 pages is pathetic. There is about 1 page worth of posts about the pitcher and his potential value, and 5 about your gripes about ownership. This place used to be way better.
3rded. I know the John Henry is cheap thread rubs some people the wrong way, but at least it's a thread some of this is filtered to so it's one I and others can ignore. It's a real topic, but it pollutes too many other threads.
So no one is allowed to wonder if signing a guy, who has mixed data about his effectiveness, and who most likely won’t pitch this season, is the best use of what we know to be limited resources?
Only cheering for 2026 AAV is an acceptable response?
*edit* I do get that the broader topic of cheapness and all that can be a slog when it’s in every thread. But there is also a legit discussion to be had about the merits of this specific transaction.
Only cheering for 2026 AAV is an acceptable response?
*edit* I do get that the broader topic of cheapness and all that can be a slog when it’s in every thread. But there is also a legit discussion to be had about the merits of this specific transaction.
Last edited:
If CAA/Crochet felt concerned about innings pitched + future pay 5 months ago, $2.9M isn't going to change their stance now. That was the most aggressive we've heard from an agent about IP/extension since Matt Harvey/Boras a decade ago (we saw how that worked out for the pitcher).
If they were vocal about not gambling 29 months before UFA then they are not going to change their stance at the 24-month mark, especially if a $100M+++ deal is plunked down in front of them.
I'm not guaranteeing the extension will get done in fans' preferred time frame. BUT all these $300M-$500M threats are pure hyperbole.
Really? Should they not sign him? What is your scenario? His arm is literally going to fall off and he will have no value for the contracts duration? Is there precedent for this? Is it more likely for him because of age?
Is that what you mean by albatross?
No one is saying that. People have had reasonable arguments in this thread about that. It's the other stuff that sucks. This should be obvious.
Sure. I'm not sure what they see in the signing, but obviously they saw something. Instead of arguing about the merits, value, other options etc that many on here truly want to discuss, and as a long time lurker..read. But you have to wade through the same arguments that are none of those. So the real discussion gets lost.
I get it. Look, until this front office makes a real financial commitment this offseason this ongoing discussion is going to continue. It has been hovering over the franchise for several years now. I understand that some find it annoying. It’s also the key dynamic that may prevent this club from being an actual title contender this season. And when we’ve missed the playoffs 5 times in the past 6 years, that’s what people are going to talk about.
Specially regarding Sandoval, folks like me are concerned that potentially tossing $18 million overboard is not the best use of what might be self-inflicted limited resources. Plus, I don’t know if this dude is worth it.
It's not 18 million, any more than they'd be writing a check for 700M today if they got Soto. It's 5 million.
Not at all. More of that please. If they were up against a very tight budget then I'd be on the WTF train as loudly as anyone. I don't believe that to be the case from all the very loud "they're going to spend" noises we've heard from all over MLB which seems very obvious. I do get that some may be tired of them making these moves but I think it speaks more to the fact that it's very hard to find acceptable pitching that isn't cost prohibitive rather than being more aggressive in free agency.
Last edited:
Want to say I’ve done my best to stay in the Cheap thread with such topics and I respect our shared desire to raise up from the talk radio.
Sorry to disappoint.
I definitely believe it impacts their FA pitching decision, though doesn’t dictate it. Imho, no Crochet or equivalent trade forces their FA hand…just as market pressure forced their hand with Devers. With Crochet, pressure is off and they can sit on wallet if right deal doesn’t come along.
My fundamental belief is billionaire John Henry literally isn’t motivated by winning any more. He has done that and knows he can win using up his money and frankly finds it boring. I’ve had a weird career and interacted with more freaky geniuses than most people so I’m probably just projecting that onto a guy I’ve never met.
Whatever, he wants to win cheap and clever and that’s what drives our boat.
This isn’t to say they won’t sign another FA or two by the way, they very well might.
Yeah, as Joe Dokes said, I just don't see it that way. They extended Devers for 300 million dollars. They're clearly willing to spend where they feel appropriate. This is a depth signing for the future. They targeted this guy because they think they can get him back to what he was. If they can't, then by all means we can complain.
And what's kept them out of the playoffs is that the guys they HAVE spent on have all gotten injured or haven't been effective. Sale, Giolito, Story, Yoshida--none of these guys could stay on the field. They had like 50 million on the shelf last year and still got to 81 wins.
At the end of the day, we are all fans and want to see the Red Sox do well. That said, I will be conducting a concert with the world’s smallest violin for that everyone feels sad about some of the commentary that permeates pretty much every thread these days. There really is only one entity to blame for it. For all of you annoyed about it, I’m actually just as annoyed that there isn’t more outrage.
It’s great that many of you are satisfied with the results of the past 5-6 years. Keep hope alive whistfully glancing at the facade behind home plate while watching the Netflix specials, paying some of the highest ticket prices in MLB and $30/month for a NESN app made with a Commodore 64. It’s definitely your right as fans.
For the rest of us, there is real frustration that we’re paying Boston prices for a Cincinnati Bengals type product. John Henry and his pals seem very content to fill their bank accounts while deluding many of you into thinking they truly care about competing for a championship with the team-building equivalent of the hidden ball trick.
Boston is a big market franchise currently being run by bargain basement shoppers. The passion for sports in this town is greater than any other place in this country. People are literally thirsting for a winner and as year by year rolls by as we watch the playoffs from the sidelines, frustration is bound to grow. I’m really not asking them to throw money around like drunken sailors, but some competitive baseball after Labor Day would be nice.
It’s great that many of you are satisfied with the results of the past 5-6 years. Keep hope alive whistfully glancing at the facade behind home plate while watching the Netflix specials, paying some of the highest ticket prices in MLB and $30/month for a NESN app made with a Commodore 64. It’s definitely your right as fans.
For the rest of us, there is real frustration that we’re paying Boston prices for a Cincinnati Bengals type product. John Henry and his pals seem very content to fill their bank accounts while deluding many of you into thinking they truly care about competing for a championship with the team-building equivalent of the hidden ball trick.
Boston is a big market franchise currently being run by bargain basement shoppers. The passion for sports in this town is greater than any other place in this country. People are literally thirsting for a winner and as year by year rolls by as we watch the playoffs from the sidelines, frustration is bound to grow. I’m really not asking them to throw money around like drunken sailors, but some competitive baseball after Labor Day would be nice.
I think the hand wringing about ownership is completely justified. On the surface, a signing like this is fine. If Sandoval comes back off the injury at the level he once was, it’s a good value signing. However, after the last couple of years that all they did was these types of signings and not extending themselves for higher quality options I think fans are correct to approach this with apprehension. If they go to camp without another significant SP or RH bat acquisition, fans have every right to be upset. Personally, I will wait for the other shoes to drop then my opinion will change depending on the action or inaction taken. In a nutshell, don’t come out and say you’re prepared to spend a lot of money and not do it.
I agree with the idea that Sandoval could be a good signing. The pitch data posted shows that he has an incredibly strong changeup. Bailey and Breslow will obviously change his pitch mix to highlight that more and move away from his fastball.
That bullying and dishonest extends to both sides of the JWH argument. There is some toxic negativity but there’s at least as much toxic positivity in all of these threads
Hyperbole? a 28 year old top 5 pitcher goes to free agency. Wouldn't his AAV be somewhere between what Blake Snell $36.5 and Zack Wheeler $42 just signed for? Gerrit Cole was 29 when he signed his 9/324 5 yrs ago. This isnt opinion. This is what will happen. At that point the market will dictate what he gets, and it will be within your hyperbolic range, no matter what "hardball" you think the Red Sox can play. BTW even if he had Tommy John in the spring and never pitched for the Red Sox. He would still get $100M when he became a free agent. Not to mention there is inurance against possible future earnings such as Scherzer took out if he wants to.
This is his leverage for the current extension (which I believe has to be agreed to in principle) and every month that goes by with out him being injured it increases. if that +++ = another $100m+ than I think you are right, given the 2 remaining arb years.
I agree with this also I am not sure why people think this signing doesn't preclude the Red Sox not signing Burnes. I can't see the Red Sox spending 18 million for a reclamation project and not giving that project a spot in the rotation. The Red Sox already have Crochet, Houck, Bello, and Crawford going into 2026. Why would they pay 18 million for someone to not to take the fifth spot if Burnes gets signed? I don't think there was a great rush to sign a guy who isn't going to start throwing for six months.
I think outside of Roki, it is pretty safe to say the Red Sox rotation for the next two years Is going to be Crochet, Houck, Crawford, Bello, Gioloto/Sandoval which isn't terrible. Most likely that is a top third rotation. They are more likely going to above .500 next year.
I agree with this, but what if they go get someone who is cost controlled say Jared Jones? Then you are looking at a top 3-5 rotation. Also while I don't fully understand why Sandoval in a vacuum, he does become an asset once healthy and after this year would be on a 1/12.5. That has a lot of value to the Red Sox, and to trade.
when I was younger, I used to reactively post to most everything that was posted on this site, usually with the monikers, "Have you followed the team since 1963" or "Did you ever pitch for a Division One team as I did?" Then, as I grew older, I realized that I knew way less than many of you. It also happened in the classroom. I started listening to the kids and realizing that I was learning so much from them. At nearly 70, I am at the point that I listen much more these days, take it in and process it, and add its spice to the mix. Carry on.
Dollar amount on short term deals almost don't matter. This front office is obviously willing to go above the cap to field a sustained, winning team. By offsetting long-term risk they may need to overpay slightly on shorter deals. This will give them the flexibility to dip back under the cap if a reset is necessary. The danger isn't going over the cap, it's remaining over the cap for a prolonged period and by how much.
Pitching depth is our biggest addressable problem by a county mile. Particularly with the most recent version of a playoff game involving, at minimum, four pitchers. Team defense probably comes in at second, but there isn't a ton that you can do with the long term pieces that we have in place. (exception being C - obviously being an area of addressable need)
Pitching depth is our biggest addressable problem by a county mile. Particularly with the most recent version of a playoff game involving, at minimum, four pitchers. Team defense probably comes in at second, but there isn't a ton that you can do with the long term pieces that we have in place. (exception being C - obviously being an area of addressable need)
As with any reclamation project, it comes down to performance. If we get 2021-2022 Sandoval, we’re happy. If we get 2023-2024 Sandoval, it’s a meh move. Since we all agree that the economics of this deal don’t preclude further, bigger moves, I fully expect to see bigger FA signings before the season starts.
There are very useful guys still remaining. They all only cost money and maybe a pick if a QO guy. Let’s see some more proof of a willingness to spend and assume some FA risk outside of these short deals.
There are very useful guys still remaining. They all only cost money and maybe a pick if a QO guy. Let’s see some more proof of a willingness to spend and assume some FA risk outside of these short deals.
I'd say that part of the reason you don't know "if this dude is worth it" is that there's been very little objective discussion of his merits as a pitcher.
Money-wise, I would think that at this price tag it's the equivalent of signing a guy to a minor league deal.
There you go being all reasonable again!! People need to get a fucking grip.
Please. Being (even very) upset with the past few years is fine, but the constant destruction of baseball conversation, particularly given the fact that it's before Christmas and we've already seen the start of the upgrade with the acquisition of one of the best young LHP in the game, is bullshit. No one's thoughts on the way ownership operated over the past few years is a mystery. What's been going on here with the non-stop whining about it in every thread is terrible, no good, and very bad. There are appropriate places to express one's displeasure, but the permeation of it in every thread needs to stop yesterday.
My concern is for the quality of the site and conversation here, and right now it's beyond putrid.
Exactly. It's why a lot of the better, more invested posters have abandoned this place.
Totally agree with this. It's truly absurd. Virtually every acquisition, or even report of interest, triggers this kind of response now.
Doesn't every MLB pitcher have "mixed data about his effectiveness"? Corbin Burnes's K% has declined each of the last five years, and was below league average in 2024 until a few high strikeout games in mid/late September.
The Sandoval signing seems like what the Rangers did with Tyler Mahle last winter. He's the most recent comp, a 29-year-old (one year older than Sandoval) rehabbing from TJS getting a 2-year deal with an eye toward pitching a full season in year 2.
Looking at Sandoval and Mahle's age 24-27 seasons, they're very similarly effective.
Lastly, I don't see that this shows that we're done. We've heard a lot of chatter, from Gammons and elsewhere, about other GMs saying Breslow has been the most aggressive in trade discussions. If anything, this looks like Crawford and another piece would be on the move for an SP upgrade.
BOS is the #8 TV market in the country, behind NY, LA, CHI, PHI, DAL/FW, HOU and ATL. Ten teams play in those seven markets.
BOS was 12th in the MLB in tax payroll ($226mm) in 2024. Eight of the eleven teams with larger tax payrolls were from larger US TV markets, and Toronto has a larger market than Boston also. Only SF (#10) and SD (#30) are from smaller TV markets.
So, I'm not sure why you think that Boston should have a top 4-6 payroll (assuming you believe BOS is never going to match LAD/NYM/MFY in payroll).
The Red Sox are top 5 in revenue every year. Their operating income is generally top 5 as well. They’re the 3rd most valuable franchise in MLB. Those are far more relevant metrics for analyzing player personnel spend than media markets.
The fan base is far more rabid than fans in, say, Dallas or Houston. Solely looking at media market simply doesn’t take into account the entirety of the operation so I don’t know why you wouldn’t expect the Red Sox to be near the top 5 every year given the financial position of the organization.
That's all well and good, but the issue isn't that people want to talk about that, it's that every single fucking thread devolves into a referendum on ownership. It's senseless, unnecessary, and is wrecking this place. I mean for example, this conversation absolutely should not be taking place in this thread. It's beyond asinine.
Have you considered that the problem isn't one group of posters or another?
Most here are fans of the team who want to see them do well. Some of us are messageboarding bad because we don't agree with some fantastical plan that isn't likely to yield a lot of bites at the competitive apple. We each want different things but the people who just love the Red Sox no matter what and the prospect lovers have to accept others who just want the team to win - at any cost.
@JohntheBaptist made a great post about this upthread. *We* aren't the problem and even you can magically block everyone you don't agree with, this topic isn't likely to go away until the Sox put some money into this team.
We have been here a quarter century. When a topic continually rears its head across threads over a period of time, we need to accept it. And with each datapoint of a transaction, its probably going to come up. But again, these people just want the Sox to play meaningful baseball.
You are going to use fan rabidity (whatever that means) as justification for the owners to spend more money? HOU had higher attendance than BOS in 2024, and TEX was approximately the same attendance. Perhaps we should assess talk radio call volume? Sounds like BS; money talks.
According to Forbes, BOS was 8th in operating income in 2023. NYM was last, by a huge margin. MFY was 24th. LAD was 17th. I don't see operating income as a relevant factor, as everyone cooks their books differently.
According to Forbes, BOS was 4th in revenue in 2023, behind MFY, LAD and CHC, and 3rd in franchise value. So, some justification to increase spending but not into the top 3. $25mm in additional payroll last year would have placed BOS 8th. $45mm in additional payroll last year would have placed BOS 5th. Somewhere in between sounds about right.
Essentially, if the Red Sox had not traded Sale, they would have almost there.
No, I’m using the publicly available financial metrics to justify spending more. You were going off media markets and I was disagreeing with that premise. I also didn’t bring the sarcasm that you felt necessary to inject into your post.
Perfect example of someone being antagonistic for no particular reason, yet, the “negative” posters will be the ones getting denounced.
Hey who do you guys think will be the opening day SP this year? The opening day cleanup hitter? The opening day closer if it's a save situation?
So it's all about money and not talent? People would stop crying and whining if they gave Fried 220 mil, but trading for a younger, better pitcher that leaves more dollars to be spent elsewhere doesn't count? I mean come on. You don't trade for a guy like that and stop there.
After the "full throttle" debacle, do people really, honestly believe that Breslow would have come out with "Ready to Deliver", if they didn't intend to back that up? All evidence points to more to come, and it's not even Christmas. Can't change the past, but it's pretty obvious the window for sustained success is now wide open, and every time this ownership has found itself in that position, they've invested, to the tune of 4 WS titles in 20 years. If Henry's wallet stays in his pocket for the remainder of the off season that's a different story, but again, I see no way they pull back the football again after the Full Throttle bullshit, and after acquiring what I consider to be the best available starter, which again is a move they don't make in a vacuum.
And it's not about having the ownership discussion on the site, it's valid and has its place. I'll reiterate, though, that having this discussion in this thread about a minor/middling transaction that will not affect larger moves is beyond asinine, and sucks right out loud.
Apologies to all posters who don't want to discuss Sandoval in the context of overall budgeting and ownership commitment while we have nothing else to talk about 3 months from Spring Training....
But I'm not sure it's as simple as just saying the economics of this deal will not preclude future deals. I get we have to fill out a roster, diversify, have pitching depth etc.
I do think it's fair to wonder if cycling through these pitching reclamation projects are in fact hampering our ultimate "best and final" offers to some of the top free agents.
In the end, these players are making binary yes/no decisions on which offer to take. If we are coming in 2nd, 3rd, or 4th place on a lot of these guys while also taking yearly 10-20M fliers on back of the rotation and/or injured guys, I think it's reasonable to wonder if that's the best plan every year.
Maybe it is, pitching depth matters and it's hard to get good FA pitching without paying through the nose. Being stuck with AAA guys at the end of the year can be the difference in a playoff run and an out of contention September. But it's also not always trivial to be throwing around 5% of the budget on a guy to rehab/maybe pitch if you are simultaneously refusing to up your best offer on a top FA.
Last edited:
The Sandoval signing is quite interesting, the kind of thing that seems counter-intuitive and definitely outside the box. It’s reasonable for a first-pass reaction to be “This doesn’t make sense to me. They’re good with pitching, so what the hell are they seeing here?”
Below are four interesting and well-argued posts from the first page of this thread in which the posters attempt to answer that question. Your opinions about ownership and the strategies the front office have employed are well known. We all know how you feel about that topic. But what would be interesting in this thread, about the Sandoval signing, is what you think about the merits of the signing and the pitcher.
The posters below have presented a lot of rich raw material for debate and discussion. What do you think about the ideas they have laid out?
If you remain skeptical about the signing after reading these posts, and a few others like them, *that* would be interesting to hear. Tell us why you believe it’s not a good signing.
I agree with your first point. The Crochet acquisition is something we have wanted them to do. Go out and either use prospect capital or money to acquire a top of the rotation starter. That is exactly a move that needed to be made and was. It was a fair trade for both sides and it should signal more to come because of the low price tag Crochet brings at least for this year.
However, we've all been snakebitten in the past couple of years especially last year when Werner uttered the full throttle comments and again with Sam Kennedy's comments this year. The frustration from me and I'm sure others is that ownership continues to come out and say they will invest more into the major league team and ultimately come up well short. They are putting out the expectations before moves are made. They are only setting themselves up for fan backlash and external criticism if they don't back their claims up with action. I think the Sandoval signing is triggering these same feelings because in the past couple of seasons this kind of signings for short dollars has been the extent of what they've done in free agency going back to Lucas Giolito, James Paxton, and Garrett Richards.
As I said above, this move should be able to lead to other moves. They have plenty of money to spend to even get to the first LTT. But, until they actually go out and spend big again I think fans are justified to have their collective guard up because of the lack of big investments in the recent past.
I also agree with you that every thread can't lead to this kind of discussion. We do need to be better.
I don't think it really affects their ability to spend at the top of the market on free agent pitching because they never really intended to. It was a fool me once, fool me twice situation between Price and Sale.
The strategy, as I see it, is more likely to spread out risk over a few guys -- extending Bello, with his upside, at a nice price as they did, extending Crochet at 7/175 or whatever, maybe bringing back Pivetta or adding Buehler. We can do that and improve the team substantially without blowing our load on Burnes, whose peripherals have been declining for years now and is due for the inevitable missed year that hits just about every pitcher.
The nice thing about getting a guy like Sandoval there's no opportunity cost in terms of roster space. You throw him on the 60 day DL and you can carry other pitchers on the roster until he's ready to be activated. By the time he's ready probably some other poor suckers arm has blown up and he's on the 60 day DL, so you don't lose anyone by activating him, and you're getting him now so you don't have to trade pitching prospects at the deadline for Kikuchi or whoever. And again, the starting staff was good last year, what they need is another bullpen guy and an upgrade on Yoshida/Wong, IMO.
I'll add that even when the Sox were top of the league in spending it wasn't because they'd signed a bunch of megadeals, it was because they had a lot of mid-level guys (again, spreading out the risk). That 2018 team, which was #1 in all of baseball, had one huge deal with Price (and we have one now, Devers), and then a bunch of smaller contracts, JD being the next highest at 23 million. (notice also the Yankees only spent 180 million that year after Ellsbury/Sabathia/Teixeria came off the books...were they cheaping out?)
Obviously it'd be great if we were the Yankees, buying Gerrit Cole one year, Stroman the next, extending Giancarlo to a horrifyingly long extension, and then what the hell, add Fried after that too, but we're not.
That's just not the world we live in. I think that's what @Rasputin was talking about earlier in terms of "living in reality." Remember also that the cost of signing Burnes might be extending someone like Campbell or Anthony.
What's going to happen instead is extensions: to Anthony, Campbell, and maybe to Casas and Abreu and Mayer and Grissom, and they'll do their very best with Crochet, and we'll pretty quickly be a 200 million+ team again.
Personally, I don't expect them to live at the top of the market but they're not even doing the mid-level deals you're talking about. Teoscar Hernandez, if reports are correct, wants 3 years at around $25 million/year. That's mid level in this market. Jack Flaherty or Walker Buehler would be a mid-level type of deal. They have plenty of room if they want to go out and make a couple of bigger signings plus sign young guys to extensions.
Houck has to be the guy. He earned it. Also I wouldn't want them to put Crochet out front, let him ease into the team and the role.