Sox owners want to be under cap in '20

sean1562

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 17, 2011
2,778
trading xander right after signing him to a team friendly deal would probably ensure that every young prospect that we ever have goes to free agency every single time. i would 100% rather keep xander then throw a 10/300 mil plus deal at mookie betts. the guy took a below market deal to stay here. trading him away and rewarding the guy who is going to free agency no matter what doesnt seem like a good idea
 

keninten

lurker
Nov 24, 2005
561
Tennessee
trading xander right after signing him to a team friendly deal would probably ensure that every young prospect that we ever have goes to free agency every single time. i would 100% rather keep xander then throw a 10/300 mil plus deal at mookie betts. the guy took a below market deal to stay here. trading him away and rewarding the guy who is going to free agency no matter what doesnt seem like a good idea
Mookie would not sign back with the Sox if they traded Xander first
 

sean1562

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 17, 2011
2,778
Yea he’s def go to free agency, and then he isn’t even guaranteed to return. Stabbing a beloved player in the back right after he commits to the franchise would sour me on the team more than not doling out the second largest fa contract in baseball history
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
11,460
trading xander right after signing him to a team friendly deal would probably ensure that every young prospect that we ever have goes to free agency every single time. i would 100% rather keep xander then throw a 10/300 mil plus deal at mookie betts. the guy took a below market deal to stay here. trading him away and rewarding the guy who is going to free agency no matter what doesnt seem like a good idea
They kinda did that with Bronson Arroyo and it didn't hurt them. Well, outside of Wily Mo Pena sucking.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
9,175
They kinda did that with Bronson Arroyo and it didn't hurt them. Well, outside of Wily Mo Pena sucking.
Not sure the two situations are all that analogous. For one, Xander is a much higher profile player now than Arroyo was at that time. Anyway, Bogaerts is not going anywhere; they're not going to eviscerate both their lineup and their defense chasing dragons.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
14,286
like Carl Everett? Darren Oliver did have a 20 year career in the league, 3/4th of it spent in the AL
Oliver didn't become useful til after his Sox time. But if the salary implications of dumping an opted-in JD makes it significantly more likely that they can deal with the rest of the roster, then I think the offensive drop off from him to another DH in 2020 will be worth it. Ultimately, 2020 will depend almost solely on whether Sale, Price and Eovaldi can pitch in the Major Leagues. But taking both the cash outlay and the uncertainty of JD's options out of the picture probably helps the FO plan otherwise, including on how far to go with Betts.
 

Dewey'sCannon

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
689
Maryland
I'm starting to think that even if JD opts in, he'll be the one traded, not Mookie. Maybe Sam Kennedy's comment that it would be "difficult" to keep both and get under the cap was really a message to Boras that JD opting in doesn't necessarily mean he'll be playing for the Red Sox in 2020. Which probably increases the likelihood of him opting out, since he will have more control over where he ends up - so long as he thinks he'll be able to do as well as the 3/62 he has left on his current deal.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Great point. It really makes no sense for the Red Sox to be trading anyone currently on the roster and paying part of their salary to play elsewhere. That's what you do with players who aren't contributors when healthy, and every potential albatross on the payroll is entirely tied to the player's health and ability to take the field.

When healthy, David Price is a big time contributor and likely to be of more value to the Red Sox pitching for them at $31M AAV than pitching elsewhere while still costing them $10M+. Same goes for Sale and frankly, Eovaldi too. I don't think you can or should trade any of them unless their entire salary is being cleared off the books.
In his four boston seasons he's had two years shortened by injury where he's registered fewer than 2 bWAR -- meaning he's giving them less than $18m value on the market while costing $31. Personally, I think as he gets older, if the Sox can get him and 2/3 of his salary out the door, they can do something better with the $20m savings, including the short-term urgency to getting under the LT and signing Betts.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
I would too.
I'm just throwing that out there as a way to pull back the spending but also add some affordable long term pieces. X and Devers are my favorite two players- even more than Betts... but I could see something like this happening. Like I said.... not advocating.
You're right in pointing out that Xander is probably the second-most valuable guy on the team right now because of his contract. But while he would bring back a lot of prospect value, I don't see how that uncertain value is a good substitution for the realized value X brings, even before all the other problems discussed here get factored in. [And I'll add, they probably have a leg up on signing guys from the Dutch Antilles, which they can kiss goodbye if they do X like this.]
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
28,484
AZ
The short answer is no. He cannot negotiate a buyout with the FO to circumvent the luxury tax. If that were possible no team would ever need to insure player contracts. The Mets insured David Wright's contract and only had to pay 25% of the contract's value when it was determined that he could no longer play due to spinal issues. Pedroia's contract is not insured. If Pedroia retires he would get nothing. If he doesn't retire, the Red Sox only choice would be to release him and pay him the entire balance of his contract. I don't believe there is any middle ground.
Could he retire and then sign a contract to be an assistant bench coach for two years for $25 million?
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
43,034
deep inside Guido territory
MLBTR came out today with their arbitration predictions.

JBJ: $11 million
Leon: $2.8 million
Owings: $3 million
Betts: $27.7 million
Workman: $3.4 million
Wright: $1.5 million
Rodriguez: $9.5 million
Barnes: $3.0 million
Hembree: $1.6 million
Benintendi: $4.9 million
M. Hernandez: $700,000
G. Hernandez: $1 million

 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
3,821
Boston, MA
Would JBJ get an $11 million contract from anyone on the free agent market? I feel like a 90 OPS+ guy with a good glove would have a hard time finding a guarantee over half that amount. I think you have to non-tender him and let him go or see if you can bring him back on a friendlier deal.
 

The Gray Eagle

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
13,320
Dumping Owings, Gorkys, Wright, and Leon sheds $8.3 million, and replacing them with 4 minimum salary guys costs a little over $2 million, so you save about $6 million from that.

If you dumb Hembree too, that makes the total savings about $7 million for 5 guys.

After that, we only need to dump another $25 million or so from an 84-win team-- we should be really good next year!
 

JBJ_HOF

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2014
360
Would JBJ get an $11 million contract from anyone on the free agent market? I feel like a 90 OPS+ guy with a good glove would have a hard time finding a guarantee over half that amount. I think you have to non-tender him and let him go or see if you can bring him back on a friendlier deal.
He would absolute kill that contract on the open market. There would be a big trade market for him, you'd get something interesting for sure, but you'd be worse off and need to get someone to replace him that is a worse player and costs more.

This is why they need someone like Bloom to come in here and make some creative deals.
 

brandonchristensen

mad photochops
SoSH Member
Feb 4, 2012
25,680
Dumping Owings, Gorkys, Wright, and Leon sheds $8.3 million, and replacing them with 4 minimum salary guys costs a little over $2 million, so you save about $6 million from that.

If you dumb Hembree too, that makes the total savings about $7 million for 5 guys.

After that, we only need to dump another $25 million or so from an 84-win team-- we should be really good next year!
Our offense will be fine, good enough to be a postseason team.
If our aces come back and pitch like their career lines, or even close, we are in great shape.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,403
Dumping Owings, Gorkys, Wright, and Leon sheds $8.3 million, and replacing them with 4 minimum salary guys costs a little over $2 million, so you save about $6 million from that.

If you dumb Hembree too, that makes the total savings about $7 million for 5 guys.

After that, we only need to dump another $25 million or so from an 84-win team-- we should be really good next year!
Replacing Leon with a replacement level catcher would likely be a marginal improvement.

Owings and Gorkys suck. No loss there.

I’d actually tender Wright unless it’s obvious he’ll never be physically able to perform again.

He would absolute kill that contract on the open market. There would be a big trade market for him, you'd get something interesting for sure, but you'd be worse off and need to get someone to replace him that is a worse player and costs more.

This is why they need someone like Bloom to come in here and make some creative deals.
Obviously you’re a bit biased here, but look at the evidence from last off-season. Adam Jones had nothing but a 1-year, $3 million contract offer. Brett Gardner only got $7.5 million. Avasail Garcia only got $3.5 million. Robbie Grossman got $2 million. Defense only players like Austin Jackson were never signed.

Jackie Bradley may get a Brett Gardner contract, better defense and worse offense about offsetting. I can’t see him getting more. And the Red Sox don’t need a CF. They just need a corner outfield candidate. So there will be other nontender and trade candidates that will be cheap and a better balance of offense and defense in this strikeout heavy era.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
48,685
He would absolute kill that contract on the open market.
What do you think he would get? I can't think of any good comparisons from the last few years, Dexter Fowler, Cain and Pollock were all decidedly better offensively heading into FA. 3/30 maybe? I think he has a little trade value but not a ton.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
48,685
Obviously you’re a bit biased here, but look at the evidence from last off-season. Adam Jones had nothing but a 1-year, $3 million contract offer. Brett Gardner only got $7.5 million. Avasail Garcia only got $3.5 million. Robbie Grossman got $2 million. Defense only players like Austin Jackson were never signed.
None of these are good comparisons, though. The only relevant one is Gardner and he was 5 years older and has said lots of times publicly he far prefers staying in NY to going anywhere else. Bradley's main selling point is his superlative CF defense, you need to compare him to other CFs.
 

The Gray Eagle

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
13,320
Replacing Leon with a replacement level catcher would likely be a marginal improvement.

Owings and Gorkys suck. No loss there.
Right, I listed the obvious easy moves that save a little money. How do we cut $25 million more after that though? That's the question, and the answer is why we're probably not competing next year if they really try to get anywhere near the first luxury tax line.

Unless our new GM, whoever he is, will be a magician. David Copperfield for GM? Penn & Teller?
 

Ale Xander

Lacks black ink
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
26,281
Cain's a good comp. He was 31 when he signed. But JBJ is 29. I don't think Pollock and Fowler are in the same ballpark as JBJ defensively.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
48,685
Cain's a good comp. He was 31 when he signed. But JBJ is 29. I don't think Pollock and Fowler are in the same ballpark as JBJ defensively.
Cain had 20.5 bWAR in the 4 years before FA, 8.4 the 2 years before. JBJ has 12.6 the last 4 years, 4.1 the last 2 years.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,403
None of these are good comparisons, though. The only relevant one is Gardner and he was 5 years older and has said lots of times publicly he far prefers staying in NY to going anywhere else. Bradley's main selling point is his superlative CF defense, you need to compare him to other CFs.
The Red Sox don’t need to pay a premium for CF defense. There aren’t really any good straight comps out there AFAIC.

Go the other way — which contending team needs a defense only starting center fielder? None of them. He has no market.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
1,913
Would JBJ get an $11 million contract from anyone on the free agent market? I feel like a 90 OPS+ guy with a good glove would have a hard time finding a guarantee over half that amount. I think you have to non-tender him and let him go or see if you can bring him back on a friendlier deal.
He absolutely would. He was really pretty excellent at the plate from May 20 on. I know we do this sort of thing every year, but he’s hardly the problem.

I think he’d get 3/$30 or so if he were on the open market now. Another option is to extend him for something modest that can bring down his 2020 AAV — tacking on 2/$16 for a total of 3/$27m. Benny isn’t an option for center and if Mookie’s gone too it could get pretty clunky out there.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
48,685
I think he’d get 3/$30 or so if he were on the open market now. Another option is to extend him for something modest that can bring down his 2020 AAV — tacking on 2/$16 for a total of 3/$27m. Benny isn’t an option for center and if Mookie’s gone too it could get pretty clunky out there.
This all makes total sense to me, except I don't think he would agree to postpone FA for 2/16 more, especially watching what Mookie is doing in a similar situation.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,403
He absolutely would. He was really pretty excellent at the plate from May 20 on. I know we do this sort of thing every year, but he’s hardly the problem.

I think he’d get 3/$30 or so if he were on the open market now. Another option is to extend him for something modest that can bring down his 2020 AAV — tacking on 2/$16 for a total of 3/$27m. Benny isn’t an option for center and if Mookie’s gone too it could get pretty clunky out there.
Which contending team needs a defense only CFer and has $30 million lying around? Yankees- nope. Indians—nope, Twins—nope Rays — nope. A’s — nope. Angels— nope. Astros — nope, Dodgers - nope. Cards —nope. Nats—nope. Mets—nope. Braves — nope, Phillies — nope,

Cubs or White Sox maybe? Mariners?Rangers.?
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
1,913
Which contending team needs a defense only CFer and has $30 million lying around? Yankees- nope. Indians—nope, Twins—nope Rays — nope. A’s — nope. Angels— nope. Astros — nope, Dodgers - nope. Cards —nope. Nats—nope. Mets—nope. Braves — nope, Phillies — nope,

Cubs or White Sox maybe? Mariners?Rangers.?
Bradley’s market isn’t limited to contenders. His defense is an ancillary benefit to building and developing a pitching staff, and he’s one of the most durable center fielders in MLB (1st in CF innings in 18-19; 3rd from 17-19).

I think the Diamondbacks, Orioles, Reds, Cubs, White Sox, Mariners, Rangers, Tigers, A’s and Blue Jays could all be interested. The Phillies may actually need a center fielder (depending on what happens with Herrera) and the Mets have a bad defensive one in Nimmo. I also wouldn’t fully count out the Astros, who may want to move Springer to a corner or think they’ll be priced out of keeping him.

Remember too that the ball could be dejuiced next year resulting in lessened average fly ball distance, which means outfield defense could be even more valuable.
 
Last edited:

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
7,095
Yesterday was a good day for the Red Sox, in the sense that there's probably a slightly higher chance now that the Braves or Dodgers might have just a little more interest in a subsidized trade for a playoff-tested pitcher like Price or Eovaldi.
 
Jul 15, 2005
2,000
Chicago
If JD opts out, trade JBJ and let their FAs walk, they have a reasonable chance to get under $208 and a reasonable chance to be competitive, depending on the health of their SPs. But if JS doesn't opt out, they would have to trade JBJ, lets and FAs walk AND make a Punto-type deal involving one or more of the SPs, which is what Sam Kennedy probably means when he says it would be "difficult" to get under 208 with both JD and Mookie (and I don't think they really have any intention of trading Mookie). And if they make that Punto-type deal, that also probably kills any chance at competitiveness in 2020 because of the resulting holes in the pitching staff. Which is maybe why they are leaving themselves wiggle room on the 208 (a goal not a mandate).

So I think they are really hoping that JD opts out.
ok, let's start the Punto-esque trade rumors start now Dodgers and Braves collapse and they have CBT room to take on the bad contracts
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
20,640
Yesterday was a good day for the Red Sox, in the sense that there's probably a slightly higher chance now that the Braves or Dodgers might have just a little more interest in a subsidized trade for a playoff-tested pitcher like Price or Eovaldi.
the Braves also need an RF with Markakis being a FA (and he was bleh anyways).

Mookie for their top pitching prospect? I heard they have a couple.
 

BJBossman

lurker
Dec 6, 2016
271
Which contending team needs a defense only CFer and has $30 million lying around? Yankees- nope. Indians—nope, Twins—nope Rays — nope. A’s — nope. Angels— nope. Astros — nope, Dodgers - nope. Cards —nope. Nats—nope. Mets—nope. Braves — nope, Phillies — nope,

Cubs or White Sox maybe? Mariners?Rangers.?
I disagree on the Indians. They need OF help anywhere they can get it. And for 1/11 or so even they might we willing to take a shot.

I strongly disagree on the Mets. They have no CF. Bradley is EXACTLY what they need. A minimal risk good defensive CF to play Conforto and Nimmo on the corners, keep McNeil in the INF and worry about the bullpen and 5th starter spot.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,403
I disagree on the Indians. They need OF help anywhere they can get it. And for 1/11 or so even they might we willing to take a shot.

I strongly disagree on the Mets. They have no CF. Bradley is EXACTLY what they need. A minimal risk good defensive CF to play Conforto and Nimmo on the corners, keep McNeil in the INF and worry about the bullpen and 5th starter spot.
If the Mets want to upgrade their CF from Nimmo, and play him in a corner with Conforto, they can trade JD Davis, who’s have no eole in the case, for someone much much better than Jackie Bradley.
 

Ford Frick's Asterisk

Member
SoSH Member
May 5, 2017
645
I disagree on the Indians. They need OF help anywhere they can get it. And for 1/11 or so even they might we willing to take a shot.

I strongly disagree on the Mets. They have no CF. Bradley is EXACTLY what they need. A minimal risk good defensive CF to play Conforto and Nimmo on the corners, keep McNeil in the INF and worry about the bullpen and 5th starter spot.
The Indians need offense from a corner outfielder and have a limited budget. They love Oscar Mercado and will also have Bradley Zimmer healthy and competing for a MLB job (not to mention Greg Allen as a 5th outfielder). There is zero chance they acquire or spend money on a starting center fielder this winter... especially not one who's going to hit like a pitcher for 2-3 months of the season.
 

BJBossman

lurker
Dec 6, 2016
271
If the Mets want to upgrade their CF from Nimmo, and play him in a corner with Conforto, they can trade JD Davis, who’s have no eole in the case, for someone much much better than Jackie Bradley.
That's fine.

But that's NOT what you said in what I quoted.

The Mets have a big hole in CF, at least defensively.

I'm also curious what the Mets do with Dom Smith because they have enough corner OFs as is. They need to send him somewhere to fill another hole.
 

BJBossman

lurker
Dec 6, 2016
271
The Indians need offense from a corner outfielder and have a limited budget. They love Oscar Mercado and will also have Bradley Zimmer healthy and competing for a MLB job (not to mention Greg Allen as a 5th outfielder). There is zero chance they acquire or spend money on a starting center fielder this winter... especially not one who's going to hit like a pitcher for 2-3 months of the season.
The indians went to the WS with a platoon of Chisenhall/Guyer in RF.

Getting really good defense out of RF can be valuable (see Adam Eaton in Chicago pre-Nats trade). Give him a cheap platoon guy and you can steal a useful spot for the lineup.

CLE isn't a perfect fit, but it's not a hard no either. But they will probably cheap out again.
 

ElcaballitoMVP

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 19, 2008
3,323
If the Mets want to upgrade their CF from Nimmo, and play him in a corner with Conforto, they can trade JD Davis, who’s have no eole in the case, for someone much much better than Jackie Bradley.
Or they could use JD Davis in a separate deal to fill another hole, like the bullpen.
 

Ford Frick's Asterisk

Member
SoSH Member
May 5, 2017
645
The indians went to the WS with a platoon of Chisenhall/Guyer in RF.

Getting really good defense out of RF can be valuable (see Adam Eaton in Chicago pre-Nats trade). Give him a cheap platoon guy and you can steal a useful spot for the lineup.

CLE isn't a perfect fit, but it's not a hard no either. But they will probably cheap out again.
I've been a hardcore Indians fan for about 35 years. It's the hardest of nos… that with the offensive upgrade they need in either LF or RF – holes that killed their chances this year – they would add a center fielder who can't hit and would tap into their limited off-season budget unless he's nontendered and no one wants him. As I said, they have 3 center fielders – Mercado's a 24-year-old who just had a better season than JBJ, and Zimmer is a younger, much cheaper version of JBJ who might have more offensive upside now that's he finally healthy again. That's not cheaping out, it's choosing not to waste limited resources to acquire a downgrade.
 

geoduck no quahog

not particularly consistent
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2002
11,752
Seattle, WA
Re: Henry's claim that the Red Sox lost money last year.

From a Forbes article last year (I can't locate current valuations)

Red Sox Revenue (albeit 2018): $484,000,000
Red Sox Athlete Payroll (incl tax) for 2019: $242,269,000
Operating and Other Expenses: ?????? (anyone know?)

Team Value (per Forbes): $3,200,000,000

Purchase Price (2002): $380,000,000

Potential ROI: $2,820,000,000 (not including profits from 2002-2019)

Maybe he should sell?

(Please chime in and correct numbers)
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
11,460
Re: Henry's claim that the Red Sox lost money last year.

From a Forbes article last year (I can't locate current valuations)

Red Sox Revenue (albeit 2018): $484,000,000
Red Sox Athlete Payroll (incl tax) for 2019: $242,269,000
Operating and Other Expenses: ?????? (anyone know?)

Team Value (per Forbes): $3,200,000,000

Purchase Price (2002): $380,000,000

Potential ROI: $2,820,000,000 (not including profits from 2002-2019)

Maybe he should sell?

(Please chime in and correct numbers)
According to a link from the article you posted, the Sox made $84 million in profit from 2018. https://www.forbes.com/mlb-valuations/list/#tab:overall

I imagine quite a lot of that was from a WS run. I wouldn't be all that shocked if the team lost money this year but I doubt it was very much.

This article could be dated, but it suggests a playoff run is worth $20-50 million. http://thefieldsofgreen.com/2014/10/02/how-much-value-does-a-postseason-appearance-hold-for-mlb-franchises/

Using that article, the Sox made 47.5 million in the playoffs last year. Add inflation and all that and it probably goes up to $60-65 million. I really wouldn't be surprised if the Redsox lost money this year because they didn't make the playoffs.

edit: Last year, the Redsox PLAYERS divided a $32 million pool from the playoffs. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/25/how-much-money-the-2019-world-series-champions-will-earn.html
 
Last edited:

BoSox Rule

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
2,169
If you told me the Red Sox lost money last year and the sky was red, but one of those is a lie, I’d be more inclined to believe that the sky was red.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
9,175
It's all in the bookkeeping. Neither that gain nor any loss means anything in terms of if the team actually was profitable or not
Not sure I agree. The article specifically mentioned operating profit, and it's not hard to envision that the Sox could have lost money on an operating basis in 2019.

I agree that a one year "operating loss" is likely meaningless. However, it's a question as to how they could handle the same loss over the next 10 years. Or if future revenues come in less than projected. It would be interesting to see a cash flow statement.

Not defending their sudden desire to get under $208M despite shelling out big $$ to Sale and Eovaldi. Just saying that the answer could be more complicated than "there's no way they could be losing money".
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
17,759
where I was last at
An unrealized capital gain isn't income BUTT (big but)

Doing some QnD calculator work, a purchase price of $380 million, a present value of about $3.2 billion, 16 years equates to an annual IRR of over 14%, or an estimated $44 million in untaxed gains in the current year, and rising going forward.

As argued elsewhere, you can tolerate some meager earnings or even an operating loss, but you don't want to starve the golden goose, because you need the eggs.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Missing an “R”
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Unless you or I work there we have no idea what expenses they do or don't charge against the team as opposed to charging to Liverpool, FSG, or any of a number of other entities.

Capitalization of expenses and Depreciation are other black holes that may or may not reflect actual current costs.

I wouldn't be surprised if creative accounting could drop or raise expenses by 100 million in a season
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
11,460
Unless you or I work there we have no idea what expenses they do or don't charge against the team as opposed to charging to Liverpool, FSG, or any of a number of other entities.

Capitalization of expenses and Depreciation are other black holes that may or may not reflect actual current costs.

I wouldn't be surprised if creative accounting could drop or raise expenses by 100 million in a season
Would you be all that surprised if the 2019 revenue was $80m+ less than the 2018 revenue?

If you just go by the Forbes article, it's not hard to envision a scenario where the Redsox lost money in 2019. How accurate Forbes is, I don't know. One thing I do know is that making the playoffs is worth a lot of money to everyone involved.

Even if they didn't lose money, their profit margin shrunk a lot.

edit: Of course going into 2019, it was basically a given that they wouldn't make as much profit as 2018 but it's a way to spin it.
 
Last edited: