The off-season

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,095
I missed the part where I said it was an absurd notion. I simply asked a question.

Having said that, it strikes me that J.D. is the type of player who stays in a rebuild, and Victor is the type who goes, short of a big overpay.
He's also a free agent after next year.
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,816
Honolulu HI
Why would the Tigers want to trade J.D. Martinez? He's due to make less than $12 million next season.
Reportedly because they don't think they can afford to resign him (he's a free agent at the end of 2017). That said, there is a good chance they would prefer to trade Verlander and/or V-Mart and use that money to resign JD Martinez at the end of the year.
 

Lowrielicious

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 19, 2011
4,328
Unless JBJ, Bentendo or Mookie are going the other way then JD is going to DH in this scenario? given his "fielding" then that probably the best place for him. I definitely wouldn't want to see him trying to handle Fenways RF.
 

johnnywayback

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2004
1,421
Unless JBJ, Bentendo or Mookie are going the other way then JD is going to DH in this scenario? given his "fielding" then that probably the best place for him. I definitely wouldn't want to see him trying to handle Fenways RF.
Yes, he would DH, which would be fine, except you're then committed to another year of Hanley at 1B. That worked out okay last year, maybe even better than anyone had anticipated, but I don't know why you'd want to press your luck.
 

Lowrielicious

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 19, 2011
4,328
Yes, he would DH, which would be fine, except you're then committed to another year of Hanley at 1B. That worked out okay last year, maybe even better than anyone had anticipated, but I don't know why you'd want to press your luck.
Wouldn't moving Hanley to full time DH and expecting him to hit just as well in that role as a full time position player be just as risky seeing as he hasn't done it before?
There have been more than one instance of a player not being comfortable in the full time DH role.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Wouldn't moving Hanley to full time DH and expecting him to hit just as well in that role as a full time position player be just as risky seeing as he hasn't done it before?
There have been more than one instance of a player not being comfortable in the full time DH role.
Maybe, but in 155 Career PA as a DH, .331/.381/.634
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
I apologize if this was discussed elsewhere, but I wonder if Clay's future may be brighter if he became a reliever. I'm thinking about how well Andrew Miller is doing now that he's strictly coming out of the pen.
It's possible, I guess, but Buchholz has always seemed like a quintessential SP type in that he doesn't have any single killer pitch, but succeeds by mixing several good pitches. Both in 2016 and for his career, his splits show that he actually gets more effective with each time through the order. This characteristic is wasted when he's coming out of the bullpen. I know he did really well out of the bullpen this year, but I'm not sure how predictive that is.
 

sean1562

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 17, 2011
3,620
when will wilson ramos be in playing shape? a good buy low DH. i dont see him having any future as a catcher
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
when will wilson ramos be in playing shape? a good buy low DH. i dont see him having any future as a catcher
I think it's 50/50 the Nats give him a qualifying offer which makes it tougher to buy low (not to mention, most other teams will be thinking the same thing). He is/was by far the best catcher on the market at a thin position.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,368
It's possible, I guess, but Buchholz has always seemed like a quintessential SP type in that he doesn't have any single killer pitch, but succeeds by mixing several good pitches. Both in 2016 and for his career, his splits show that he actually gets more effective with each time through the order. This characteristic is wasted when he's coming out of the bullpen. I know he did really well out of the bullpen this year, but I'm not sure how predictive that is.
Just to add, those of us in the "prefer Pomeranz in the bullpen" camp see Drew's repertoire playing better in that role. He shows a more effective fastball as a reliever, which is good in itself, but also means he'll throw a smaller % of curveballs and lessen the chances of a Mike Norris-style blowout.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,298
deep inside Guido territory

NDame616

will bailey
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
2,313
Just to add, those of us in the "prefer Pomeranz in the bullpen" camp see Drew's repertoire playing better in that role. He shows a more effective fastball as a reliever, which is good in itself, but also means he'll throw a smaller % of curveballs and lessen the chances of a Mike Norris-style blowout.
We just traded our number 1 pitching prospect for him. Putting him in the bullpen now is giving up on him as a starter, and the optics of that are not good (and the Red Sox do care about the optics)

I think Pomeranz without question goes into the year with a guaranteed spot in the rotation unless he pitches himself out of it, in spring training or April/May.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,470
Somewhere
On the hitting side, just filling in the bench with capable platoon guys and defensive subs should be enough, right? I'm thinking along the lines of Moss, Alvarez, Lind as far as bats are concerned. I don't see what signing Matt Holliday does for the Sox (he's right handed and has declined considerably over the last two seasons). Beltran makes sense given his performance last year, but he's still a major risk.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
BP Boston posted an article this morning outlining the offseason. Their solution is to sign Kenley Jansen and an older hitter like Beltran or Holliday. Their reasoning is to stay somewhat flexible knowing that they need to save money for Betts/Bogaerts extensions and also stay in the mix for upcoming stronger FA classes.

http://boston.locals.baseballprospectus.com/2016/10/31/the-red-sox-could-benefit-from-a-frugal-winter/
I think this pretty much covers it. The only place they should be willing to splurge on a contract is the bullpen, and Jansen is obviously the most attractive name out there. I don't know if you can make that work with Kimbrel on the roster, but maybe Kimbrel or Jansen are willing to be the Andrew Miller of the Sox next year.

Outside of that, you'd need to move players out to make room for any other big names at any other positions. Maybe Dombrowski flips Pomeranz in big trade, or tries to sell high on Porcello or something, but I think the roster is mostly set. Replace Tazawa, Koji and Ziegler, maybe try to improve the bench and call it a winter.

Going into the year with Kimbrel, Smith, Kelly, Hembree, Layne, and Ross (with Robbie Scott, Cuevas, Light, etc in the minors) means adding Jansen or Melancon (I want absolutely no part of Chapman) makes the pen a real strength.
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
19,863
St. Louis, MO
I think this pretty much covers it. The only place they should be willing to splurge on a contract is the bullpen, and Jansen is obviously the most attractive name out there. I don't know if you can make that work with Kimbrel on the roster, but maybe Kimbrel or Jansen are willing to be the Andrew Miller of the Sox next year.

Outside of that, you'd need to move players out to make room for any other big names at any other positions. Maybe Dombrowski flips Pomeranz in big trade, or tries to sell high on Porcello or something, but I think the roster is mostly set. Replace Tazawa, Koji and Ziegler, maybe try to improve the bench and call it a winter.

Going into the year with Kimbrel, Smith, Kelly, Hembree, Layne, and Ross (with Robbie Scott, Cuevas, Light, etc in the minors) means adding Jansen or Melancon (I want absolutely no part of Chapman) makes the pen a real strength.
Smith will be ready by August at best, so he really doesn't count, and Layne is a Yankee. But yes Jansen should be a priority. Also, Pat Light is a Twin.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
I don't know if you can make that work with Kimbrel on the roster, but maybe Kimbrel or Jansen are willing to be the Andrew Miller of the Sox next year.
While potential ego factors can still obviously be an issue, I'm not sure this essentially matters as much these days as it used to, right? I mean at the end of the day this has always kind of boiled down to a money thing imo, and the current market has been somewhat trending away from a "get saves to get paid as a RP" formula.

From a perspective of what we need as a team and where we currently stand as a competitor, I personally like the concept of a Jansen/Beltran off-season a lot. Assuming LA doesn't go bonkers to keep their guy of course, and a turning 40 this spring Beltran is mostly looking year to year at this point.

It just makes sense overall, regardless how much some might try and twist a splurge on the former into being something that it's really not (a product of all the FO personal leaving, and DD being more "reckless" as a result of that).
 
Last edited:

DanoooME

above replacement level
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2008
19,831
Henderson, NV
Are folks willing to go 5/$75M for Jansen? On top of Kimbrel's deal? Because I think that's the starting point for his services, even with Melancon and Johnny Bullets (Chapman) on the market.

Edit: And here's why, these guys are all aiming to break Papelbon's record setting contract and I think there will be a huge bidding war for their services (Dodgers, Cubs, Yankees, Angels, Mariners, and others with closer issues, but that's the top of the market)
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
Smith had surgery later than I thought (and sorry about the Layne gaffe... sleep has been elusive the last couple of weeks. I'll be more careful), but BC covers it. Should be back on the field before June, and back closer to 100% around August unless something goes wrong.

To answer DanoooMe's question, if Jansen is willing to sign as a relief ace, I'm comfortable with that commitment. He's arguably the best reliever in baseball (with Britton being the main competition for that title). Having two years of him and Kimbrel at the end of games would be phenomenal.

As for the Beltran suggestion, I think I'd rather use existing assets to rotate through the DH spot than to bet on Beltran not falling off a cliff. Unless he'll sign a heavily incentive laden deal, it seems that using that spot in the lineup to rest players regularly and get players like Young semi-regular at bats has more upside.

Not to mention, if some of the prospects on the cusp kick down the door (Moncada, Sam Travis who is expected to be ready for the start of the season), it would be nice to have the option to use that DH slot to fit them into the lineup.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,368
We just traded our number 1 pitching prospect for him. Putting him in the bullpen now is giving up on him as a starter, and the optics of that are not good (and the Red Sox do care about the optics)

I think Pomeranz without question goes into the year with a guaranteed spot in the rotation unless he pitches himself out of it, in spring training or April/May.

Optics? To their credit, one of the hallmarks of the H/W/L ownership (as compared to other teams) has been their grasp of sunk costs and willingness to let baseball ops and the manager proceed as needed.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
Are folks willing to go 5/$75M for Jansen? On top of Kimbrel's deal? Because I think that's the starting point for his services, even with Melancon and Johnny Bullets (Chapman) on the market.
Opposed to mostly standing pat, or buying into some surface notion that we'd alternatively be saving money for the mega free agent deal on top of Price's a year or 2 from now? Absolutely. In fact I'd personally be less vehemently opposed to adding Chapman at that as some others here seem to be....but that's just me.

The team is in a good place right now, but it can and should be better. Plus writing off last season's roller coaster ride of pitching woes with another round of selling the potential Buchholz/Kelly contribution solution would be borderline criminal. DD isn't going to do that. The bullpen is probably the "easier" fix there, and as Snod pointed out having two years of Jansen/Kimbrel at the end of games would be phenomenal.
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,723
I've been beating the Jansen drum as much as anyone, but after this postseason and considering their finances I can't see the Dodgers letting him walk.
 

DanoooME

above replacement level
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2008
19,831
Henderson, NV
Opposed to mostly standing pat, or buying into some surface notion that we'd alternatively be saving money for the mega free agent deal on top of Price's a year or 2 from now? Absolutely. In fact I'd personally be less vehemently opposed to adding Chapman at that as some others here seem to be....but that's just me.
.
Or spread that money around to 2 or 3 relievers that can help in front of Kimbrel, like Brett Cecil, Greg Holland, and Neftali Feliz, just to name a couple. Don't nitpick the specific names, the point is you could fill the pen with good pitchers without having to blow a huge wad on Jansen AND still need to sign another $8-$10M per year worth of relievers.
 

Lowrielicious

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 19, 2011
4,328
Or spread that money around to 2 or 3 relievers that can help in front of Kimbrel, like Brett Cecil, Greg Holland, and Neftali Feliz, just to name a couple. Don't nitpick the specific names, the point is you could fill the pen with good pitchers without having to blow a huge wad on Jansen AND still need to sign another $8-$10M per year worth of relievers.
This is the smart route to me as it also won't cost a draft pick.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
Or spread that money around to 2 or 3 relievers that can help in front of Kimbrel, like Brett Cecil, Greg Holland, and Neftali Feliz, just to name a couple. Don't nitpick the specific names, the point is you could fill the pen with good pitchers without having to blow a huge wad on Jansen AND still need to sign another $8-$10M per year worth of relievers.
I'm not completely opposed to that concept, but a lot there boils down to exactly what kind of contracts/commitments we are talking about when that spread is made. Liking a lesser guy now and liking the same guy in the heat of free agency when the actual multi year #'s start getting thrown around isn't always the same thing.

Generally speaking if you are giving me the option of signing 3 different lesser relievers at 3-4 years/$25m+ a pop, or just paying the premium on 5 years of Jansen....atm I'll probably putting that $$$ behind the latter there.
 

johnnywayback

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2004
1,421
I don't think bullpen depth is the problem. Assuming we bring back Koji, we have six spots accounted for: Kimbrel, Uehara, Kelly, Barnes, Ross, Wright/Buchholz (with Smith coming back at some point as a bonus). Adding one to that group probably means you lose Heath Hembree, who is out of options, but that's not the end of the world. Uehara, Kelly, and Barnes all seem like better bets to me than any of the Cecil/Holland/Feliz group, and adding two new guys would mean we either don't re-sign Koji or we only have one spot for Kelly/Barnes.

So I'm for adding one guy who would be in line for an Opening Day slot. Who?

You could certainly make an argument for a second "closer" type -- Uehara/Smith --> Kimbrel --> Jansen would be a fun way to end games -- but if we're following the Indians' example and not the 2015 Royals', we should be looking for someone who can be flexible on length and timing of appearance. And, if possible, you'd also like a 2nd lefty.

I suggested Travis Wood upthread. Brett Cecil didn't pitch longer than an inning all of 2016 (neither did Wood, really, but he has gone longer in the past), but if you believe in Ross, you could use Cecil as the LOOGY and Ross more flexibly. Trevor Cahill isn't a lefty but fits the usage profile.

Meanwhile, we could maybe try to cash Hembree for the 2014 model of Hembree (a young guy with options who would be a better Pawtucket stash than Kyle Martin, although maybe Kyle Martin is 2014-Hembree).
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,298
deep inside Guido territory
I don't think bullpen depth is the problem. Assuming we bring back Koji, we have six spots accounted for: Kimbrel, Uehara, Kelly, Barnes, Ross, Wright/Buchholz (with Smith coming back at some point as a bonus). Adding one to that group probably means you lose Heath Hembree, who is out of options, but that's not the end of the world. Uehara, Kelly, and Barnes all seem like better bets to me than any of the Cecil/Holland/Feliz group, and adding two new guys would mean we either don't re-sign Koji or we only have one spot for Kelly/Barnes.

So I'm for adding one guy who would be in line for an Opening Day slot. Who?

You could certainly make an argument for a second "closer" type -- Uehara/Smith --> Kimbrel --> Jansen would be a fun way to end games -- but if we're following the Indians' example and not the 2015 Royals', we should be looking for someone who can be flexible on length and timing of appearance. And, if possible, you'd also like a 2nd lefty.

I suggested Travis Wood upthread. Brett Cecil didn't pitch longer than an inning all of 2016 (neither did Wood, really, but he has gone longer in the past), but if you believe in Ross, you could use Cecil as the LOOGY and Ross more flexibly. Trevor Cahill isn't a lefty but fits the usage profile.

Meanwhile, we could maybe try to cash Hembree for the 2014 model of Hembree (a young guy with options who would be a better Pawtucket stash than Kyle Martin, although maybe Kyle Martin is 2014-Hembree).
I agree with you about the bullpen depth not being a problem. They have enough low risk/high upside guys such as Barnes, Kelly, and Hembree. They need another elite-level back end of the bullpen arm so the aforementioned guys can slot back into lower leverage roles. Jansen is the perfect candidate for this.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
Until he says otherwise, the assumption has to be that Koji is done rather than he's returning. The guy is going to be 42 at the start of next season, and he's been dealing with injuries and stamina issues for the last two years. I think Dombrowski has to go forward as if he won't be back even if he signs a new contract for 2017, if only because you don't want to build your bullpen around the idea that Koji will be a central part of it. Anything you get from him should be a bonus to an already strong pen.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
Yep. If he's in the mix for the 8th inning next year, something is wrong. His stuff is greatly diminished from 2013 and at his age and there is zero reason to believe it will bounce back. He's basically 100% smoke and mirrors at this point.

His four seam fastball velocity is down to 87.35 mph and the vertical movement on his splitter is down .65 inches from his peak. The wheels are going to come off soon if he doesn't retire. Especially if that velocity drops anymore. It's averaging a loss of .6825 mph per season since 2013.

If he wants to come back, that's great. But he should be doing so with the understanding that he's a low leverage pitcher until he proves otherwise.
 

Minneapolis Millers

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,753
Twin Cities
Obviously, if money is no object, then getting Jansen would be great. I just doubt that they're going to want $40M committed to the bullpen. I favor getting a 2d-tier guy like Cecil or Wood. I'd be ok with "just" resigning Koji and hoping he can last at least until Smith returns. But that still leaves the Taz spot open (unless he returns, but I agree with others that he looks cooked).

A lot depends on how they view Smith for 2017. If they expect him to be the equivalent of a 2d half late inning trade acquisition, they might just try to patch things in the offseason and plan to overpay in a mid-season trade if the need is there, much like both the Tribe and the Cubs did this year.

When I'm having a particularly pleasant dream about the pen, I see Kelly finally emerging as Wade Davis 2.0. But eventually I wake up...
 

PapaSox

New Member
Dec 26, 2015
230
MA
I like the Jansen idea if either he or Kimbrel will settle in at least a shared closer/setup role. If they both want to close then going with a flexible 2nd option would be fine. Don't have a favorite but a lefty would be nice. I'm good with adding one arm as there seems to be enough depth.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
While potential ego factors can still obviously be an issue, I'm not sure this essentially matters as much these days as it used to, right? I mean at the end of the day this has always kind of boiled down to a money thing imo, and the current market has been somewhat trending away from a "get saves to get paid as a RP" formula.
Mostly yes, though saves are still a thing in arbitration (as well as ERA) so if Andrew Miller and Santiago Casilla's cases were settled by an arbitrator, salaries would be artificially closer even though Miller is a billion times better.

I don't think free agents would care as much as much as pre-arb guys about save opportunities, since ace relievers are getting paid well as free agents. I would think if Miller were a free agent this year, he would earn as much as Jansen regardless of closer status.
 

Dewey'sCannon

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
870
Maryland
If they are looking for a high-leveage guy to join Kimbrel, I think they should consider Melancon - likely cheaper than Jansen, and no loss of a draft pick because he was traded mid-season (so no possibility of a QO, which Jansen will likely get).
 

Soxfan in Fla

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2001
7,187
If they are looking for a high-leveage guy to join Kimbrel, I think they should consider Melancon - likely cheaper than Jansen, and no loss of a draft pick because he was traded mid-season (so no possibility of a QO, which Jansen will likely get).
Great idea. He pitched fantastic in his first Boston tour of duty [/sarcasm]
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
21,481
Rogers Park
Great idea. He pitched fantastic in his first Boston tour of duty [/sarcasm]
One way to think about his year in Boston is that he allowed a 2.400 OPS in his first 18 batters faced, and a .597 thereafter.

5 HR in his first 6 outs; 3 HR in the remaining 43 IP.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,470
Somewhere
What is Rutledge's status after knee surgery? Could the Sox conceivably use him as the weak side of a platoon with Pablo? They could then bump Shaw to exclusive RHP-only platoon guy at 3B/1B/DH whenever needed.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
So many bandwidth trees died in vain
Barring the unpredictable upgrade path (and given this probably makes trading for a notable starter a little less likely), picking up Clay's option there essentially just increases the chance DD goes out and splurges on one of the big bullpen arms imo.

That debate will have nothing on the new one if it ends up being Chapman lol.
 

vadertime

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
1,600
Rhode Island
What is Rutledge's status after knee surgery? Could the Sox conceivably use him as the weak side of a platoon with Pablo? They could then bump Shaw to exclusive RHP-only platoon guy at 3B/1B/DH whenever needed.
He was activated off the 60 Day DL and out-righted. So either he signs a minor league deal and is a non-roster invite to spring training or he catches on elsewhere.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,276

They’re on to 2017.

The conclusion of the World Series immediately sets in motion the start of offseason player movement, beginning with the onset of free agency for all eligible players and a host of decisions about player options. The Red Sox, as expected, exercised the $13.5 million option on Clay Buchholz and declined the $3.75 million option on Ryan Hanigan.

Those moves help to define the Sox’ commitments for 2017 which, in turn, gives some sense of what kind of resources they might have for the forthcoming season, while painting a picture of a bit less financial freedom than one might anticipate.



Start with this: According to a major league source, the Red Sox spent roughly $215 million to $220 million on actual team payroll in 2016. For Major League Baseball’s luxury tax calculations, that number will come in under that figure (it doesn’t include, for instance, most of the roughly $20 million paid to Allen Craig or Rusney Castillo, both of whom spent most to all of the season off of the 40-man roster), but the Red Sox will end up paying the luxury tax for the second straight year, having gone well past the $189 million threshold.

Meanwhile, even with the retirement of David Ortiz and the free agency of Koji Uehara, Junichi Tazawa, and Brad Ziegler, the Sox’ salary commitments for 2017 already appear to be close to what they spent last year, based on the expectation that they’ll want to preserve roughly $10 million for in-season roster moves.

Right now, the Red Sox have roughly $136 million in guaranteed commitments to players as calculated for luxury tax purposes (which use average annual values of the life of a contract, rather than a single year). However, Craig and Castillo are not part of that calculation so long as they are not on the 40-man roster. They’ll nonetheless cost the team an additional $24 million in paychecks.

On top of that, the Sox have eight players who, as of right now, appear likely to open the year on the big league roster who are arbitration-eligible. Based on the projections of MLBTradeRumors.com, that group will account for roughly another $23 million.

Add to those projections pre-arbitration-eligible players like Mookie Betts, Travis Shaw, and Eduardo Rodriguez, and then tack on another $10 million or so for in-season moves and an additional $13.5 million for the contribution that every team must make to MLB’s medical benefits pool, and the present commitments start to near what the Sox spent in 2016.
What if, for instance, the Red Sox want to make a run at Edwin Encarnacion, a long-term deal in excess of $20 million a year? Unless they want to push their 2017 payroll well beyond its 2016 levels, they’d likely need to trade a contract as something of an offset. There would certainly be a market for Buchholz at a relatively affordable one-year, $13.5 million salary. The team could also get more creative and examine whether a team would take on the remaining two years (with a vesting option for a third) of Hanley Ramirez’s salary or if, in a poor market for third basemen beyond Justin Turner, a team might take on half of the remaining obligation to Pablo Sandoval to create payroll space.

But unlike a year ago, when the Red Sox took on significant payroll (more than $45 million to Price, Kimbrel, and Chris Young, with a modest offset from trading Wade Miley), Sox additions to address their holes this winter may come with a requirement for some subtraction – even assuming that the team plans to maintain something close to, or even beyond, their team-record expenditures on major league payroll in 2016.

In other words, as MLB’s GM Meetings next week help to set up the offseason dominos, the fascination surrounding the Sox will be as much related to the players whom they might trade as the ones whom they target as additions.
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/redsox/2016/11/04/red-sox-may-not-have-lot-financial-wiggle-room-this-offseason/ndMC5vW0CmcpvCcxjvSIIM/story.html
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
While he focuses on total outlay as opposed to AAV for luxury tax calculations, it's important to remember that the CBA is getting renewed and the $189M cap is almost certainly going to rise.