Offseason rumors

6-5 Sadler · Jan 7, 2024

jbupstate said:
Snell is an excellent pitcher. The years don’t bother me and I would be happy if he was on the team. The issue is he doesn’t pitch deep into games and that’s a problem for this version of the Sox. They need lots of quality innings.

Best hope would be a trade for a horse and to sign Snell. Grabs innings and some high quality.

Yeah I would be pumped if they managed to get Snell. At first I was concerned about the innings but I almost think it’s a feature not a bug. Snell doesn’t go deep into games because he tends to pitch around guys. This runs up his pitch count but it also limits the number of balls that are put in play against him. Not necessarily a bad thing when pitching in front a below average defense in an offensive-oriented home park.

I’m not really concerned about the contract either as long as it stays reasonable (I don’t see him getting $200M). Contracts to free agent pitchers in his price range (call it $120M to $180M) and age range (30-32) have historically done okay. SSS obviously but Lester, Darvish, and Lee were all good values; Cueto less so as he collapsed after year one of the deal.

BigSoxFan · Jan 7, 2024

BringBackMo said:
Legitimate question for you: Do you think the bolded comment above in any way represents what I and others have been advocating? Is this what you think I want?

Everyone here wants the Red Sox to field a consistently competitive team. The arguments around here generally break along how to achieve that. It is quite clear that Breslow wants good young pitchers. You want that, and I want that, too. The question at hand is what to do if the good young pitchers he wants are not available to him this off-season. Should he sign pitchers he doesn’t want on six or seven year deals to six or seven year deals? Should he trade for controllable good pitchers that he doesn’t believe are actually controllable or good? Or should he sign good older pitchers to short term deals that allow the Sox to compete while he continues the hunt for long term solutions?

Everyone here wants the same thing—good pitchers who will be with the Sox for many years and set them up for consistent success. And perhaps Breslow will be able to deliver that in the next six weeks. That’s what we’re all hoping for. The question is what should the Red Sox do if he *isn’t* able to deliver it in the next six weeks?

No, it’s not what I think you want. We all want the same thing. We all have different valuations of pitchers. That’s all. I am making zero judgments on your viewpoints nor am I pretending to know what you want. Sorry for the throwaway line.

loneredseat · Jan 7, 2024

BringBackMo said:
The question is what should the Red Sox do if he *isn’t* able to deliver it in the next six weeks?

Fire him! Just kidding.

BringBackMo said:
Should he sign pitchers he doesn’t want on six or seven year deals to six or seven year deals? Should he trade for controllable good pitchers that he doesn’t believe are actually controllable or good? Or should he sign good older pitchers to short term deals that allow the Sox to compete while he continues the hunt for long term solutions?

Of these options, I think the answer is option number one, and option number three as well. Concerning option number one I don't think it's so much that he doesn't want these players, he just doesn't want to pay more than he has to for them. And for option number one I like Montgomery. I like his consistency, his innings, and his post season success. Plus, he projects to cost less than Snell. I really don't know who for option number 3. Moving Kenley for salary space I think is fine but I hope they hold onto Yoshida because I think he still has a high ceiling, and because I like him. I really hope this:

RS2004foreever said:
Bello
Giolito
Houck
Pivetta
Crawford

is not an option.
If we finish off the off season with the moves we've made and a staff of
Montgomery
Bello
Giolito
Stroman (ish)
Crawford/ Pivetta
I'd be really excited about the team.

SouthernBoSox · Jan 7, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/willsammon/status/1743988033785839890?s=46

For 14mm AAV.

I think the market in general is much much softer than what people think.

It’s a really bad crop of free agents.

Petagine in a Bottle · Jan 7, 2024

Eh, Manaea is a 1-2 win pitcher, this seem about right. I imagine Paxton will sign for a similar type of deal. I’m not sure it tells us much about Snell, Montgomery, or Stroman- that being said, most teams aren’t really spending so it seems possible that if you wait, maybe you can get one of those guys on a more team friendly deal. The risk is you can’t, of course.

BringBackMo · Jan 7, 2024

CalSoxGal said:
But isn't Snell's biggest wart his age coupled with the length of contract he's seeking? So the Sox have to consider not only what difference he would make now, but also what difference--good or bad--he might make 6 or however many years from now. If he would accept a 2 or 3 year deal, that would be an entirely different story.

It’s possible that Breslow shares your opinion. Snell is an excellent pitcher and would make the Red Sox better. He’s also entering his age 31 season. It’s hard to know what the Sox think of him because they really don’t leak. Will be interesting to see what they do.

BringBackMo · Jan 7, 2024

BigSoxFan said:
No, it’s not what I think you want. We all want the same thing. We all have different valuations of pitchers. That’s all. I am making zero judgments on your viewpoints nor am I pretending to know what you want. Sorry for the throwaway line.

Thank you for the response, and I definitely didn’t mean to single you out. I enjoy the good faith arguments you make and you’re a fun person to debate the issues with.

HfxBob · Jan 7, 2024

SouthernBoSox said:
View: https://twitter.com/willsammon/status/1743988033785839890?s=46

For 14mm AAV.

I think the market in general is much much softer than what people think.

It’s a really bad crop of free agents.

Compared to which crop of free agents, though? Is there an expectation of better crops in future years?

BigSoxFan · Jan 7, 2024

BringBackMo said:
Thank you for the response, and I definitely didn’t mean to single you out. I enjoy the good faith arguments you make and you’re a fun person to debate the issues with.

Likewise. Truthfully, Burnes is my guy next year assuming no injuries this year. I don’t begrudge those scared of a big Snell commitment. I don’t really fully trust him either. End of the day, it comes down to price. I’d take any of the Snell, Montgomery, Imanaga, Stroman group. They’d all be a very nice addition to the staff. Imanaga is my choice factoring in expected cost but I also do have a fondness for Japanese pitchers, which could cloud my judgment a bit. Luzardo via trade is another who interests me but if the price requires one of our top 3, it gets harder to support.

Max Power · Jan 7, 2024

loneredseat said:
Fire him! Just kidding.

Of these options, I think the answer is option number one, and option number three as well. Concerning option number one I don't think it's so much that he doesn't want these players, he just doesn't want to pay more than he has to for them. And for option number one I like Montgomery. I like his consistency, his innings, and his post season success. Plus, he projects to cost less than Snell. I really don't know who for option number 3. Moving Kenley for salary space I think is fine but I hope they hold onto Yoshida because I think he still has a high ceiling, and because I like him. I really hope this:

is not an option.
If we finish off the off season with the moves we've made and a staff of
Montgomery
Bello
Giolito
Stroman (ish)
Crawford/ Pivetta
I'd be really excited about the team.

It's unlikely the team is going to add two additional starters from where they are now. The more likely rotation is

SP???
Bello
Giolioto
Pivetta
Houck/Crawford/Whitlock

I know they said they wanted to get two starters this offseason and traded away Sale, but it seems like they didn't really consider Sale as dependable enough to be part of the projected rotation.

SouthernBoSox · Jan 7, 2024

Max Power said:
It's unlikely the team is going to add two additional starters from where they are now. The more likely rotation is

SP???
Bello
Giolioto
Pivetta
Houck/Crawford/Whitlock

I know they said they wanted to get two starters this offseason and traded away Sale, but it seems like they didn't really consider Sale as dependable enough to be part of the projected rotation.

I think people need to stop listing Crawford in with Houck and Whitlock.

He looks like a very good starter with very interesting underlying metrics. He’s closer to Bello than he is being out of the rotation imo.

wraymondo · Jan 7, 2024

I would be delighted if the Sox managed to land Snell if it were followed by a trade for someone like Burnes. A lot of great points have been made about Snell in that he is a 2x CYA winner and generally keeps the ball in the yard but there are still some red flags to consider before making a long-term commitment.

Outside of his 2 CYA seasons, he has never eclipsed 130 IP and has never garnered any CYA consideration or made the all-star team (take that for what you will). Furthermore, his FIP (3.44) while respectable, was over a run higher than his ERA (2.25) and he mustered an eye-popping 99 BBs. Snell is capable of some exceptionally high "highs" but I fee that enduring his lows, which aren't terribly low in a vacuum but seem to be more the rule than the exception, would give me pause insofar as making a 5-year+ offer.

Another offseason of ancillary moves would be frustrating given the last several years but making moves just to appease the (justifiably, imo) vocally disillusioned fans would be unwise and I feel that signing a guy like Snell would be a move borne of appeasement rather than wisdom.

RS2004foreever · Jan 7, 2024

What strikes me about this discussion is how much of a difference ONE starter makes. So right now you have
Bello
Giolito
Crawford (I am guilty of under-appreciating him)
Pivetta
Houck
If you do this:
Cease/Imanaga/Montgomery/Snell
Bello
Giolito
Crawford
Pivetta

Your rotation is actually pretty good. I think we may also be underestimating how good Giolito might be.

loneredseat · Jan 7, 2024

Max Power said:
It's unlikely the team is going to add two additional starters from where they are now.

I understand that this is the way that it's likely to be but I don't understand why. Shedding Kenley's contract (or most of it) would give them room to add two.

RS2004foreever said:
I think we may also be underestimating how good Giolito might be.

I agree but I think that there are questions surrounding him. I feel like he could be a big hit or a big miss. Another reason why I prefer the dependability of Montgomery over Snell.

OCD SS · Jan 7, 2024

BigSoxFan said:
There is literally a 2 time Cy Young Award winner available this year. Montgomery is another clearly good pitcher. I just have concerns about his age and the potential length of contract. Imanaga has really good stuff by all accounts and was highly successful in Japan.

Next year has some good guys too but are the Sox going to pony up for them? Why not lock in one of these guys this year and another next year? We know they have the money to do so.

We’ve covered the warts on Snell/ Montgomery/ Imanaga well enough, the real question is the later, is any SP going to be worth paying at FA rates? I suspect that the Sox are staying out of the top of that market and are hoping to land someone who isn’t an ace/ SP1 (or even 2) now, but could develop into that. After all, the aces they’ve had have never been FAs, they’ve all been extended under team control.

I think they’ll spend at the middle tier of FA where the risk is less and try to build long term with young players.

flymrfreakjar · Jan 7, 2024

SouthernBoSox said:
I think people need to stop listing Crawford in with Houck and Whitlock.

He looks like a very good starter with very interesting underlying metrics. He’s closer to Bello than he is being out of the rotation imo.

I feel the same way and really hope he ends up in the rotation. I would be disappointed if he ended up more of a 6th guy again.

Fishy1 · Jan 7, 2024

flymrfreakjar said:
I feel the same way and really hope he ends up in the rotation. I would be disappointed if he ended up more of a 6th guy again.

Thirded. He, Pivetta and Bello provided the backbone of a good rotation. Three guys giving you an ERA of around 4 (especially with park and defense factored in) is absolutely necessary for a good rotation. Giolito should offer as a floor the same value. We're hoping for the same or better from Houck or Whitlock. That's what makes this conversation so confusing: all of these guys have the potential to be a solid #3 or #4 starter for 150 innings or so even if they haven't achieved that yet, and some of them have fulfilled that potential already.

I think it's good to carry a lot of these guys -- some of them will end up in the bullpen, others will get hurt, etc. But because they have such a surplus of them, it also makes sense to deal from that position. You've got solid cost-controlled pitching and a pipeline of solid young players, but not the aces or superstars.

CalSoxGal · Jan 7, 2024

There really are solid arguments being made for either signing or not signing Snell or Montgomery, and whether it makes sense this year. (I'm not completely sure what I prefer, but I'm not the one making the decision, and I can change my mind tomorrow.)

I don't think we know where Breslow stands on these types of contracts. John Henry is on record as being wary of them, but--and I could be wrong about this--I seem to recall he made that comment some time ago, i.e. before David Price and the Sale extension. Which would indicate he can be convinced to override his reticence.

And of course all this is without even considering whether Snell or Montgomery (or any other free agent for that matter) has the slightest interest in signing with Boston.

I do agree it appears the market is not as robust as everyone was assuming, but who knows how it will ultimately end. We will just have to wait and see. And with the Boras clients, it could be a long wait.

cantor44 · Jan 7, 2024

Fishy1 said:
Thirded. He, Pivetta and Bello provided the backbone of a good rotation. Three guys giving you an ERA of around 4 (especially with park and defense factored in) is absolutely necessary for a good rotation. Giolito should offer as a floor the same value. We're hoping for the same or better from Houck or Whitlock. That's what makes this conversation so confusing: all of these guys have the potential to be a solid #3 or #4 starter for 150 innings or so even if they haven't achieved that yet, and some of them have fulfilled that potential already.

I think it's good to carry a lot of these guys -- some of them will end up in the bullpen, others will get hurt, etc. But because they have such a surplus of them, it also makes sense to deal from that position. You've got solid cost-controlled pitching and a pipeline of solid young players, but not the aces or superstars.

I'm going to fourth this and add the obvious: those 3 give you a solid 3, 4, 5 ....Now to get a 1 and a 2. Is Giolito a 2? He was a couple of years ago. Can he get back there? Uncertain. What is certain is that the team doesn't have an SP1 or perhaps even a 2 at present. I still hope they sign Snell or Montgomery and maybe make a trade, too. It's odd saying that feels "unreasonable" when just a few years ago it would be a solid bet the team would do just that.

Fishy1 · Jan 7, 2024

cantor44 said:
I'm going to fourth this and add the obvious: those 3 give you a solid 3, 4, 5 ....Now to get a 1 and a 2. Is Giolito a 2? He was a couple of years ago. Can he get back there? Uncertain. What is certain is that the team doesn't have an SP1 or perhaps even a 2 at present. I still hope they sign Snell or Montgomery and maybe make a trade, too. It's odd saying that feels "unreasonable" when just a few years ago it would be a solid bet the team would do just that.

I think there's a good chance they're gonna grab one guy and hope someone else emerges from the pack. Giolito, Bello, Crawford, Whitlock, and Houck -- any of these guys could emerge as a number 2 for a season or more. Bello's got the pure stuff, and with better infield defense could be a monster. Crawford has a terrific peripherals and is only going into his third season. Whitlock too has terrific peripherals and could be healthy for a full season for once. Houck could put it all together.

I would totally understand though if the decided to try for a "sure thing" and signed two people. I just think it's going to be awfully hard to do without going out and getting someone on the wrong side of 30, where the wheels can fall off at any moment. And I think they've had about their fill of those kinds of contracts.

bosockboy · Jan 7, 2024

It’s almost impossible to win if you aren’t willing to eat some money later in a contract. It’s just the cost of winning now.

Manny’s 8/160 at the time is a good example. The last couple years were rough but they got 2 rings out of it.

Just pay the piper for a starter.

John Marzano Olympic Hero · Jan 7, 2024

OCD SS said:
We’ve covered the warts on Snell/ Montgomery/ Imanaga well enough, the real question is the later, is any SP going to be worth paying at FA rates? I suspect that the Sox are staying out of the top of that market and are hoping to land someone who isn’t an ace/ SP1 (or even 2) now, but could develop into that. After all, the aces they’ve had have never been FAs, they’ve all been extended under team control.

I think that the real question is whether Snell, Montgomery and Imanga are better than what the Sox currently have in their rotation. In other words, would adding one of SIM make the Sox a better team in 2024 and beyond?

I am not definite on this answer like I was about Yamamoto but I think it’s a yes. Therefore my hope is that the Sox land one of these pitchers. For all of the reasons written about here, none of these players are a slam dunk; but they’d probably make the staff better.

The Sox are in desperate need of someone (really two people) who can do that. Money is just money and every contract is moveable.

wraymondo · Jan 7, 2024

bosockboy said:
It’s almost impossible to win if you aren’t willing to eat some money later in a contract. It’s just the cost of winning now.

Manny’s 8/160 at the time is a good example. The last couple years were rough but they got 2 rings out of it.

Just pay the piper for a starter.

I agree with your general sentiment here but not when it pertains to this particular free agent class. Not sure Snell, Montgomery or Imanaga would represent an addition comparable to the pitching-equivalent of Manny Ramirez.

Red(s)HawksFan · Jan 7, 2024

bosockboy said:
It’s almost impossible to win if you aren’t willing to eat some money later in a contract. It’s just the cost of winning now.

Manny’s 8/160 at the time is a good example. The last couple years were rough but they got 2 rings out of it.

Just pay the piper for a starter.

I get what you're saying but I'm not sure citing Manny is a great example of eating money later to get production early. He was productive right to the end of his Sox days (6.5 years into his 8 year deal). He put up 2.5 bWAR before the trade in 2008. Sure he was trouble off the field (the assault of Jack McCormick chief among them) but on the field he was worth every penny through his final game. His contract also only carried through his age 36 season so it was hardly a gigantic risk on the back end.

If you want a comp, it's more like David Price. They got ~3 years worth of solid performance in his four years, a championship, and managed to only have to pay for half of his final three years, most of which he was no longer even a starter.

HfxBob · Jan 7, 2024

wraymondo said:
I agree with your general sentiment here but not when it pertains to this particular free agent class. Not sure Snell, Montgomery or Imanaga would represent an addition comparable to the pitching-equivalent of Manny Ramirez.

Manny was an all-time win in the free agent signing department, just as Pedro was an all-time win in the trade department. Successes of that magnitude are pretty rare.

bosockboy · Jan 7, 2024

Red(s)HawksFan said:
I get what you're saying but I'm not sure citing Manny is a great example of eating money later to get production early. He was productive right to the end of his Sox days (6.5 years into his 8 year deal). He put up 2.5 bWAR before the trade in 2008. Sure he was trouble off the field (the assault of Jack McCormick chief among them) but on the field he was worth every penny through his final game. His contract also only carried through his age 36 season so it was hardly a gigantic risk on the back end.

If you want a comp, it's more like David Price. They got ~3 years worth of solid performance in his four years, a championship, and managed to only have to pay for half of his final three years, most of which he was no longer even a starter.

Better example yes.

chrisfont9 · Jan 7, 2024

wraymondo said:
I agree with your general sentiment here but not when it pertains to this particular free agent class. Not sure Snell, Montgomery or Imanaga would represent an addition comparable to the pitching-equivalent of Manny Ramirez.

Personally I don't think that such an equivalent is available too often. Pitchers at the top of the market are just so much more volatile in their year to year performance than hitters. There are a few guys who you just know are going to perform as expected, but they usually aren't available. The good news is that there are always second and third tier guys who might elevate their performance into an elite role. Remember what Eovaldi was when he first came to the Sox? A high-ceiling guy with only one above average season and two TJs. I'm sure someone, especially the teams, have numbers about the correlation between spending and SP performance, and I strongly suspect it looks pretty different from the same metrics for position players.

zenax · Jan 7, 2024

I think Houck belongs in the 'pen. Although he has almost four times as many IP as a starter (4.17 ERA, .680 OPS), his numbers as a reliever look a bit better (2.68 ERA, .570 OPS).

E5 Yaz · Jan 7, 2024

zenax said:
I think Houck belongs in the 'pen. Although he has almost four times as many IP as a starter (4.17 ERA, .680 OPS), his numbers as a reliever look a bit better (2.68 ERA, .570 OPS).

His numbers as a reliever are roughly the same as they are for his first time through the order (.253, .571)

Red(s)HawksFan · Jan 7, 2024

zenax said:
I think Houck belongs in the 'pen. Although he has almost four times as many IP as a starter (4.17 ERA, .680 OPS), his numbers as a reliever look a bit better (2.68 ERA, .570 OPS).

Most pitchers numbers look better as a reliever, so I'm not sure it's all that instructive. A 4.17 ERA and .680 OPS is not a terrible starter by any means. In fact it's a bit above league average in any given season.

phineas gage · Jan 7, 2024

Fishy1 said:
I think there's a good chance they're gonna grab one guy and hope someone else emerges from the pack.

Agree, but I think they are also going to bring Paxton back.

Yelling At Clouds · Jan 7, 2024

I’ve noticed a weird strain of people wanting some combination of Paxton, Duvall, and Turner to come back. I mean, I guess, but is the goal to win 78 games for a third year in a row?

simplicio · Jan 7, 2024

None of those three is particularly responsible for us being shitty last year, so what's your point?

absintheofmalaise · Jan 7, 2024

HfxBob said:
Compared to which crop of free agents, though? Is there an expectation of better crops in future years?

Here's a list of free agents after the 2024 season. Starters with their age after the 2023 season:
Shane Bieber (30)
Walker Buehler (30)
Corbin Burnes (30)
Luis Cessa (33)
Alex Cobb (37)*
Gerrit Cole (34)* – can opt out of remaining four years and $144MM, though Yankees can void by adding a $36MM salary for 2029
Patrick Corbin (35)*
Anthony DeSclafani (35)
Nathan Eovaldi (35)* – $20MM player option if Eovaldi meets certain conditions
Jack Flaherty (29)
Chris Flexen (30)
Max Fried (31)
Kyle Gibson (37) – option
Lucas Giolito (30) – can opt out of remaining one year, $19MM. If he does not opt out, Red Sox have $14MM club option with fewer than 140 innings pitched, or there’s a mutual option worth $19MM with 140+ IP. Both options include a $1.5MM buyout
Marco Gonzales (33) – $15MM club option (no buyout)
Andrew Heaney (34)
Kyle Hendricks (35)
Merrill Kelly (36) – $7MM club option with a $1MM buyout
Yusei Kikuchi (34)
Chad Kuhl (32)
Joey Lucchesi (32)
Jordan Lyles (34)
Lance Lynn (38) – $11MM club option with a $1MM buyout
Sean Manaea (33) – can opt out
Nick Martinez (34) – can opt out of remaining one year, $12MM
Wade Miley (38) – $12MM mutual option with a $1.5MM buyout
John Means (32)
Frankie Montas (32)
Charlie Morton (41)
Freddy Peralta (29) – $8MM club option with a $1.5MM buyout
Martin Perez (34)*
Nick Pivetta (32)
Zach Plesac (30)
Jose Quintana (36)
Robbie Ray (33)* – can opt out of remaining two years and $50MM
Colin Rea (34) – $5.5MM club option with a $1MM buyout
Max Scherzer (40)*
Luis Severino (31)
Drew Smyly (36) – $10MM mutual option with a $2.5MM buyout, if he does not opt out after 2023
Mike Soroka (27)
Matt Strahm (33)
Ross Stripling (35)
Justin Verlander (42)* – conditional player option
Michael Wacha (33) – $16MM player option
Zack Wheeler (35)*
Trevor Williams (33)

6-5 Sadler · Jan 7, 2024

Yelling At Clouds said:
I’ve noticed a weird strain of people

We’re really decent people…I swear. I’d be ok bringing back the people who were good last year while upgrading the people that sucked. I’ll make the case for Paxton and Duvall.

Paxton seems like a good buy low candidate in year 2 post-TJS. If we were to bring him back, I would hope they would also bring in another starter ahead of him on the depth chart.

The market for right handed power outfielders is really limited so Duvall also makes some sense. If we don’t want to go to 3 years with Teoscar, he would be a nice stopgap until we figure out what we have with Rafaela, Abreu, Duran, and Anthony. It would also allow us to hopefully use some of the savings on a starting pitcher (see above).

shanks · Jan 7, 2024

long time reader, ultra rare poster as i’m terrified of exposing my dumbness.

but as the new yr stumbled on me, i’m wearing my sox cap and thinkjn on baseball.

kenley on the block has been discussed and i’ve read here that thoughts are rangers are a good fit. saying that, this popped up for me just now and wanted to hear y’all’s wise thoughts:

https://chowderandchampions.com/posts/blockbuster-return-floated-for-red-sox-closer-kenley-jansen-01hkb4bm6ay3

not sure the source, but floating leiter ina trade for jansen. sounds freakin hot to me.

NickEsasky · Jan 7, 2024

absintheofmalaise said:
Here's a list of free agents after the 2024 season. Starters with their age after the 2023 season:
Shane Bieber (30)
Walker Buehler (30)
Corbin Burnes (30)
Luis Cessa (33)
Alex Cobb (37)*
Gerrit Cole (34)* – can opt out of remaining four years and $144MM, though Yankees can void by adding a $36MM salary for 2029
Patrick Corbin (35)*
Anthony DeSclafani (35)
Nathan Eovaldi (35)* – $20MM player option if Eovaldi meets certain conditions
Jack Flaherty (29)
Chris Flexen (30)
Max Fried (31)
Kyle Gibson (37) – option
Lucas Giolito (30) – can opt out of remaining one year, $19MM. If he does not opt out, Red Sox have $14MM club option with fewer than 140 innings pitched, or there’s a mutual option worth $19MM with 140+ IP. Both options include a $1.5MM buyout
Marco Gonzales (33) – $15MM club option (no buyout)
Andrew Heaney (34)
Kyle Hendricks (35)
Merrill Kelly (36) – $7MM club option with a $1MM buyout
Yusei Kikuchi (34)
Chad Kuhl (32)
Joey Lucchesi (32)
Jordan Lyles (34)
Lance Lynn (38) – $11MM club option with a $1MM buyout
Sean Manaea (33) – can opt out
Nick Martinez (34) – can opt out of remaining one year, $12MM
Wade Miley (38) – $12MM mutual option with a $1.5MM buyout
John Means (32)
Frankie Montas (32)
Charlie Morton (41)
Freddy Peralta (29) – $8MM club option with a $1.5MM buyout
Martin Perez (34)*
Nick Pivetta (32)
Zach Plesac (30)
Jose Quintana (36)
Robbie Ray (33)* – can opt out of remaining two years and $50MM
Colin Rea (34) – $5.5MM club option with a $1MM buyout
Max Scherzer (40)*
Luis Severino (31)
Drew Smyly (36) – $10MM mutual option with a $2.5MM buyout, if he does not opt out after 2023
Mike Soroka (27)
Matt Strahm (33)
Ross Stripling (35)
Justin Verlander (42)* – conditional player option
Michael Wacha (33) – $16MM player option
Zack Wheeler (35)*
Trevor Williams (33)

This is the downside to always wanting to keep your powder dry. There are no unicorns on this list either. We’ll be debating warts and value for every one of these guys next off season too. There really are no pitching unicorns and if there is one all the deep pocket teams will be in on the guy too and the cost will be astronomical. Unless you’ve got an assembly line of pitchers hitting your roster every year or magic pixie dust to sprinkle on mediocre pitchers, eventually you’re gonna have to pay retail for someone to make your team better.

Edit: obviously a trade is an option.

YTF · Jan 7, 2024

cantor44 said:
I'm going to fourth this and add the obvious: those 3 give you a solid 3, 4, 5 ....Now to get a 1 and a 2. Is Giolito a 2? He was a couple of years ago. Can he get back there? Uncertain. What is certain is that the team doesn't have an SP1 or perhaps even a 2 at present. I still hope they sign Snell or Montgomery and maybe make a trade, too. It's odd saying that feels "unreasonable" when just a few years ago it would be a solid bet the team would do just that.

Fishy1 said:
I think there's a good chance they're gonna grab one guy and hope someone else emerges from the pack. Giolito, Bello, Crawford, Whitlock, and Houck -- any of these guys could emerge as a number 2 for a season or more. Bello's got the pure stuff, and with better infield defense could be a monster. Crawford has a terrific peripherals and is only going into his third season. Whitlock too has terrific peripherals and could be healthy for a full season for once. Houck could put it all together.

I would totally understand though if the decided to try for a "sure thing" and signed two people. I just think it's going to be awfully hard to do without going out and getting someone on the wrong side of 30, where the wheels can fall off at any moment. And I think they've had about their fill of those kinds of contracts.

John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
I think that the real question is whether Snell, Montgomery and Imanga are better than what the Sox currently have in their rotation. In other words, would adding one of SIM make the Sox a better team in 2024 and beyond?

I am not definite on this answer like I was about Yamamoto but I think it’s a yes. Therefore my hope is that the Sox land one of these pitchers. For all of the reasons written about here, none of these players are a slam dunk; but they’d probably make the staff better.

The Sox are in desperate need of someone (really two people) who can do that. Money is just money and every contract is moveable.

Like many folks upthread, I think that Bello, Giolito and Crawford make up a very nice 3-5 slots in the rotation. I'm still hopeful for one FA signing and a trade that along with Bello round round the top three in the rotation. To my eye, even if we can get one guy to go with Bello, Giolito, Crawford and Pivetta/Houck we're much better off going into this season in that we're not depending on Sale and Kluber to pitch a meaningful number of innings while waiting 6 weeks for Paxton to come back and help stablize things. Kluber was mostly terrible and only pitched 55 innings. Sale pitched 102.2 and Paxton 96. If we can begin the season with 5 healthy starters, the current bullpen looks pretty complete outside of maybe another lefty. I think even if they move one of Jansen or Martin (hopefully not both) the pen would still be in pretty good shape. Defense up the middle is hopefully stronger with Story expecting to start the season on the field rather than the IL and Rafaela seeing more time in CF. If Grissom can play league average at 2B and Yoshida sees a fair amount of time at DH the over all defense should be much better (not top of the league) and should also impact the effectiveness of the pitching staff.

buckner's_ankles · Jan 7, 2024

Bello
Giolito
Crawford
Pivetta
SP5

Houck and Whitlock both go to the pen. Martin and Jansen both get traded.
OR
Houck/Whitock serve as SP5 if only one of Martin/Jansen gets traded.

This is the scenario I'm expecting, and I'm totally fine with it. If we sign someone to be SP5, it ought to be a 1-year deal.

Focus on acquiring long-term, controllable assets for 2025 and beyond, when we're likely to have a cluster of young players ready to contribute.

YTF · Jan 7, 2024

shanks said:
long time reader, ultra rare poster as i’m terrified of exposing my dumbness.

but as the new yr stumbled on me, i’m wearing my sox cap and thinkjn on baseball.

kenley on the block has been discussed and i’ve read here that thoughts are rangers are a good fit. saying that, this popped up for me just now and wanted to hear y’all’s wise thoughts:

https://chowderandchampions.com/posts/blockbuster-return-floated-for-red-sox-closer-kenley-jansen-01hkb4bm6ay3

not sure the source, but floating leiter ina trade for jansen. sounds freakin hot to me.

It's definitely an interesting thought, but I can't see Texas giving up on the #2 overall pick from just 2 1/2 years ago. Especially given that all of the team's control is still intact.

Harry Hooper · Jan 7, 2024

Leiter is a wonderful notion, but...

simplicio · Jan 7, 2024

I think it would take more than just Kenley, but I also think it would be extremely reasonable for the Rangers to give up on Leiter if someone came asking; he's walking 5 per 9 and can barely make it through 4 innings. That's not a starter.

BringBackMo · Jan 7, 2024

bosockboy said:
It’s almost impossible to win if you aren’t willing to eat some money later in a contract. It’s just the cost of winning now.

Manny’s 8/160 at the time is a good example. The last couple years were rough but they got 2 rings out of it.

Just pay the piper for a starter.

I don’t think anyone here disagrees with that. The question is whether Breslow believes Snell and Montgomery are the kinds of pitchers who are good enough to warrant such an overpay. If they’re not, then overpaying for them now could mean you can’t overpay a guy down the road who IS such a pitcher. Are Snell and Montgomery the pitching equivalents of Manny Ramirez?

YTF · Jan 7, 2024

Harry Hooper said:
Leiter is a wonderful notion, but...

We also need to remember that Texas has a new director of pitching strategy. https://www.mlb.com/news/rangers-hire-dave-bush-ex-red-sox-coach

bosockboy · Jan 7, 2024

BringBackMo said:
I don’t think anyone here disagrees with that. The question is whether Breslow believes Snell and Montgomery are the kinds of pitchers who are good enough to warrant such an overpay. If they’re not, then overpaying for them now could mean you can’t overpay a guy down the road who IS such a pitcher. Are Snell and Montgomery the pitching equivalents of Manny Ramirez?

Price was a much better example mentioned above. But the ones down the road who are such a pitcher, we’ve shown zero interest in paying market rate. That’s when the Dodgers and Mets step up and pay.

If we want to play in the Snell/Montgomery class, I’m fine with it. But just get it done.

Pedroia's Itchy Nose · Jan 7, 2024

scottieo2 said:
Yeah I would be pumped if they managed to get Snell. At first I was concerned about the innings but I almost think it’s a feature not a bug. Snell doesn’t go deep into games because he tends to pitch around guys. This runs up his pitch count but it also limits the number of balls that are put in play against him. Not necessarily a bad thing when pitching in front a below average defense in an offensive-oriented home park.

I’m not really concerned about the contract either as long as it stays reasonable (I don’t see him getting $200M). Contracts to free agent pitchers in his price range (call it $120M to $180M) and age range (30-32) have historically done okay. SSS obviously but Lester, Darvish, and Lee were all good values; Cueto less so as he collapsed after year one of the deal.

I've seen the "Snell doesn't go deep into games" comment before and was really surprised when I looked at his game log.

Snell started the season with five straight shortish starts of 4.1, 3.2, 5, 5, 5 IP each. I'm not sure if the shorter outing length had to do with an early season pitch count limitation or poor performance (he gave up 16 er, for a 6.26 ERA over that stretch.) After those first 5 starts Snell went 6 or more innings 20 times, including his last 9 starts. It's true that Snell doesn't go past 6 innings very often, but 6 is honestly pretty deep in today's game.

Montgomery (who has the opposite reputation as an innings-eater) only went 6+ innings two more times than Snell, although he did have 6 7+ IP starts to Snell's 3.

Snell's FIP of 3.44 isn't that much better than Montgomer's FIP of 3.56. Snell's xFIP stands out more at 3.62 vs. 4.01. By xERA Snell is at 3.77 vs Montgomery's 4.04. By ERA+ Snell is way ahead at 182 vs Montgomery's 138.

If you're looking at just last year, I think the differences between Snell and Montgomery are a bit exaggerated. Some people talk about them like they are from different planets, and the numbers don't really bear that out.

That said, if you look at career stats the picture is a bit different. Snell is very feast or famine, with a huge gulf between his two great years and everything else. Montgomery, on the other hand, has been pretty consistent throughout his career.

I'd be fine with the Sox signing either of these guys so long as the contracts aren't insane.

Average Game James · Jan 7, 2024

BringBackMo said:
Your argument here, at its core, is that not only are the Red Sox approaching pitching in the wrong way during the draft but so is the rest of baseball. Even if the belief is that some in the “herd“ are incompetent buffoons, isn’t there some chance that hiding somewhere in the herd there are at least a few teams employing one or two very smart and very hard working analysts who have studied years worth of data and determined that first round draft choices used on pitching have, on average, tended to result in poorer outcomes than ones used on hitters? Is there some chance that you have it wrong and that the Red Sox and the rest of baseball have it right?

This seems to be the broadly accepted strategy, and I don’t doubt there are many people much smarter than me in baseball front offices looking at these things, but a couple thoughts:

-If most teams are attacking the same strategy, odds are the edge has been/is being eroded.
-While this is hardly scientific and I need to dig into it more, a quick scan down the top 25 pitchers by WAR last year shows ~half drafted in the top 50 picks with several in the top 10.
-If your later round picks/IFA don’t produce quality pitchers, then you need to pivot to some combination of spending money on FA (in theory you can overpay if you have a good pipeline of cost-controlled position players) or trading excess hitting talent for pitchers. The Sox seem mostly unwilling to do the former, at least at the top of the market. The latter remains TBD, but it’s notable there are many teams looking to trade for pitching, the cost is reportedly very high, and most of the prospective trading partners seek young pitching in return… could the required overpay in terms of hitting prospects to acquire cost controlled pitching be big enough that it offsets the higher hit rate on first round hitters vs. pitchers? If so, and if the Sox aren’t willing to overpay in FA when the farm system doesn’t produce pitching, it might be optimal to pursue a different draft strategy.

This is just off the top of my head, and again I acknowledge that MLB analytics teams are much smarter than me, but I do wonder if there’s a good argument to be made that it’s a strategy that makes more sense on a spreadsheet, but isn’t necessarily easy to implement in practice because teams don’t really treat hitting/pitching as interchangeable commodities.

SouthernBoSox · Jan 7, 2024

I am wondering if the current plan isn’t to acquire a blocked right handed hitting left fielder via Kenley/Pivetta/prospect in the mold of Vaughn Grissom.

I just can’t really understand why they haven’t signed Teoscar to this point, he fits the park, his contract window makes sense, he fills a void, he isn’t insanely expensive. I’m just not sure what’s really the hold up there unless they have other offers plans.

I like the idea of parlaying expiring players (Kenley and Pivetta) into longer term pieces, even if it doesn’t necessarily max out the roster for 2024. There is almost no right handed hitting power in the high minors.

simplicio · Jan 7, 2024

The rumors and projections of 4/80 for Teoscar sound pretty expensive to me, idk. He's already a bad fielder, what's he going to be in 4 years?

SouthernBoSox · Jan 7, 2024

simplicio said:
The rumors and projections of 4/80 for Teoscar sound pretty expensive to me, idk. He's already a bad fielder, what's he going to be in 4 years?

I’d be shocked if he signed for that. But if that’s the case, then yea he’s a hard pass.

Offseason rumors

Member

Member

New Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

New Member

Member

thai good. you like shirt?

Member

New Member

Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Head Mason

New Member

Member

Head Mason

Member

has fancy plans, and pants to match

New Member

Member

New Member

Member

Member

Member

polka king

Member

New Member

Post-darwinian

Member

too many flowers

Member

New Member

Please Hammer, Don't Hurt 'Em

Member

New Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member