Red Sox Rumors - Just Kidding

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,354
I suppose one way to look at the Sox losing some players in the draft is that it's a sign of a healthy farm system.
This is exactly right. Bloom has made it a priority to incrementally improve the quality of the 40-man, as well as the overall system. What that means is that you're going to have more players with some potential than you have room to keep. Want to quibble with some of the decisions on which specific players to protect and not protect? Totally fair. But no matter how you sliced it, the Sox were going to lose some not-bad players.
 

Merkle's Boner

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2011
3,864
Wow losing three in the Rule 5 seems like a lot. Was there a mistake made in who they protected or is it just a numbers game?
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
16,108
Friend at MLBPA just texted me that for player options (opt-outs are treated the same way) the CBA has what they call a "valley charge" that essentially adds dollars to the guaranteed years of a contract and then the player option years (or the years post opt-out) are a certain percentage below the guaranteed years. So it's not strictly two diff contracts but there's a disincentive in the CBA.
This is what I see in the CBA:

The AAV shall be calculated as follows: the sum of (a) the Base Salary in each Guaranteed Year plus (b) any portion of a Signing Bonus (or any other payment that this Article deems to be a Signing Bonus) attributed to a Guaranteed Year in accordance with Section E(3) below plus (c) any deferred compensation or annuity compensation costs attributed to a Guaranteed Year in accordance with Section E(6) below shall be divided by the number of Guaranteed Years.
But team options years are not guaranteed years & player option years can be guaranteed years (I missed that part before).

Club Option Years shall not be considered “Guaranteed Years.”
A Player Option Year shall be considered a “Guaranteed Year” if, pursuant to the Player’s right to elect or subject to his right to nullify, the terms of that year are guaranteed within the definition in Section A(8); provided, however, that a Player Option Year shall not be considered a Guaranteed Year if the payment the Player is to receive if he declines to exercise his option or nullifies the championship season is more than 50% of the Base Salary payable for that championship season. In the event that the Player has the right to exercise or nullify multiple Contract Years at one time (“Player Opt-Out”), the Contract Years following the Player Opt-Out shall be considered Guaranteed Years; provided however, that the Contract Years following the Player Opt-Out shall not be considered Guaranteed Years if the payment the Player is to receive if he opts out of the Contract is more than 50% of the sum of the Base Salaries in the Contract Years following the Player Opt-Out.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
12,532
Jeez, good thing we still have Kaleb Ort and Darwinzon Hernandez, though. Ugh.

The Song thing seems shitty; seems like guys on the restricted list should be off limits, or something.

Edit- although, guess we will just dump Ort and Darwinzon for Martin and the next pitcher added, so guess it’s inevitable.
 
Last edited:

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
16,108
& this is what happens if the Player Option which is treated as a "Guaranteed Year" is rejected. Going to put it in a spoiler because it's lots of words...

(i) If a Player fails to exercise or chooses to nullify a Player Option Year that is deemed a Guaranteed Year pursuant to Section E(5)(a)(ii) above, the difference between the amount paid to the Player under his Contract (including any Option Buyout payout) and the amount that has been attributed to Actual Club Payroll of a Club under that Contract shall be added to (or subtracted from) Actual Club Payroll in the Contract Year in which the Player Option Year falls. If the Contract has been assigned, the adjustment called for in the preceding sentence shall be made to the Actual Club Payroll(s) of the Club(s) to which Salary under that Contract had been attributed in any Contract Year. If a Player exercises or fails to nullify a Player Option Year that was not deemed a Guaranteed Year, the Player’s Salary in the Player Option Year shall be the difference between the Salary provided in the Player Option Year (including any earned bonuses) and the Option Buyout that had been attributed, in all previous Contract Years, to a Club pursuant to Section E(5)(b)(i) above. (ii) If the Base Salary (plus any deferred compensation or annuity costs) in a Player Option Year (“Player Option Year Value”) is less than 80% of the Base Salary (plus any attributed Signing Bonus, deferred compensation or annuity costs) in the Guaranteed Year with the smallest such figure before the first such Player Option Year (80% Figure), then, for each such Player Option Year, the difference between the Player Option Year Value and the 80% Figure shall be allocated pro rata across the Guaranteed Years preceding the first such Player Option Year; provided, however, that if the 80% Figure is itself less than 75% of the AAV of the Contract (calculated as if the Player Option Year was not a Guaranteed Year), then the 80% Figure shall instead be 75% of the AAV calculation set out immediately above.

I think this is the valley stuff ehaz was mentioning. Looks like there's a recapture.
 

KingChre

New Member
Jul 31, 2009
130
Jeez, good thing we still have Kaleb Ort and Darwinzon Hernandez, though. Ugh.

The Song thing seems shitty; seems like guys on the restricted list should be off limits, or something.

Edit- although, guess we will just dump Ort and Darwinzon for Martin and the next pitcher added, so guess it’s inevitable.
+1 on this. How could they have kept him at all under these rules?

If it were as simple as putting him on the 40 man temporarily then removing him via whatever Restricted List he's on, why didn't they?

I'm so confused but this seems like a loophole that needs to be closed and a screw up by Bloom.

A small one, but a screw up nonetheless.
 

Over Guapo Grande

panty merchant
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2005
4,563
Worcester
+1 on this. How could they have kept him at all under these rules?

If it were as simple as putting him on the 40 man temporarily then removing him via whatever Restricted List he's on, why didn't they?

I'm so confused but this seems like a loophole that needs to be closed and a screw up by Bloom.

A small one, but a screw up nonetheless.
Why does it matter if he is on the restricted list for Phi, or for Bos? The year doesn't count for his Rule 5 status... if he is on the RESERVED list in 23, the rule 5 requirements then "toll" to '24.

edit - changed "restricted" to reserved
 

greek_gawd_of_walks

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 14, 2009
9,191
Wiscansin, by way of Attleboro
The only one I really question not getting a shot is Politi (Ward and Song both have reasons as to why teams would claim them, and the Sox have their reasons for not protecting them-- still sucks to lose them). Politi seems like the exact guy you'd want throwing innings in August and September during the stillborn third of a lost season. Figure out if there is a Schrieber-like turnaround for him.

He put up excellent numbers between AA and AAA (lion's share at Worcester). Being Rule 5 eligible this offseason and already 26, I would have been thrilled to see him fail instead of Braiser or others of his ilk.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,891
I don't think it's a screw up, literally no one was expecting him to ever be picked. And now he has to rehab / first pitch in hte majors if he ever makes it instead of AA? lol
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,900
Assume the Sox finalize the deal with Bogaerts, and it's for 7-8 years. Whither Mayer? What do they do with him? He's basically the best prospect the team has had since Mookie, maybe even more highly regarded *as a prospect* than Mookie. Maybe they just deal him but it would suuuuuuck seeing him become a megastar for someone else. Is it possible he needs two more years and by then, they move Xander to 3b (which he may not like but at least he's getting paid like an elite SS, so maybe he wouldn't care that much) and put Mayer at SS?

If they deal him, it had better be for an absolute rock star.
 

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
47,330
Hartford, CT
Assume the Sox finalize the deal with Bogaerts, and it's for 7-8 years. Whither Mayer? What do they do with him? He's basically the best prospect the team has had since Mookie, maybe even more highly regarded *as a prospect* than Mookie. Maybe they just deal him but it would suuuuuuck seeing him become a megastar for someone else. Is it possible he needs two more years and by then, they move Xander to 3b (which he may not like but at least he's getting paid like an elite SS, so maybe he wouldn't care that much) and put Mayer at SS?

If they deal him, it had better be for an absolute rock star.
Mayer is too far from the majors to worry about it right now, but I think you answered your own question: they’ll move one of them to another position in the event Mayer is still here.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
16,108
Assume the Sox finalize the deal with Bogaerts, and it's for 7-8 years. Whither Mayer? What do they do with him? He's basically the best prospect the team has had since Mookie, maybe even more highly regarded *as a prospect* than Mookie. Maybe they just deal him but it would suuuuuuck seeing him become a megastar for someone else. Is it possible he needs two more years and by then, they move Xander to 3b (which he may not like but at least he's getting paid like an elite SS, so maybe he wouldn't care that much) and put Mayer at SS?

If they deal him, it had better be for an absolute rock star.
Play X at shortstop until Mayer is ready. Move X to some other position that I am sure they have discussed as part of these contract negotiations when Mayer is ready.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
6,567
Assume the Sox finalize the deal with Bogaerts, and it's for 7-8 years. Whither Mayer? What do they do with him? He's basically the best prospect the team has had since Mookie, maybe even more highly regarded *as a prospect* than Mookie. Maybe they just deal him but it would suuuuuuck seeing him become a megastar for someone else. Is it possible he needs two more years and by then, they move Xander to 3b (which he may not like but at least he's getting paid like an elite SS, so maybe he wouldn't care that much) and put Mayer at SS?

If they deal him, it had better be for an absolute rock star.
Listen to offers but they better be amazing. Otherwise assume X will change positions. IF he returns he could slide to 3rd if Devers leaves….. LF possibly.
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
4,988
Assume the Sox finalize the deal with Bogaerts, and it's for 7-8 years. Whither Mayer? What do they do with him? He's basically the best prospect the team has had since Mookie, maybe even more highly regarded *as a prospect* than Mookie. Maybe they just deal him but it would suuuuuuck seeing him become a megastar for someone else. Is it possible he needs two more years and by then, they move Xander to 3b (which he may not like but at least he's getting paid like an elite SS, so maybe he wouldn't care that much) and put Mayer at SS?

If they deal him, it had better be for an absolute rock star.
I don't think they look to deal him this year. Maybe at the deadline if the team is really playing well and they're in contention for Burnes type piece. But even then, I think he's good Devers insurance since Mayer or Xander could slide to third. He obviously won't be ready in 2023 but it's not inconceivable he's ready at some point in 2024. If you sign X and extend Devers, you're probably more willing to deal but even then, you could explore moving Xander to LF or Devers to DH.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,686
deep inside Guido territory
Joel Sherman: “Even if they bring back Bogaerts and with their bullpen additions, they still have the 5th best talent in the division.”

Tom Verducci: “Jansen is the antithesis of what you want with the new rules.What the Red Sox are doing, it’s a question.”
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
12,532
Isn’t it possible that Mayer himself plays a different position? Not ideal, I guess, but in the event that the Sox resign X and Devers and both are still impact players and competent at their positions and Mayer is ready…well, that’s a good problem to have and maybe Mayer moves to CF or something .
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,614
Joel Sherman: “Even if they bring back Bogaerts and with their bullpen additions, they still have the 5th best talent in the division.”

Tom Verducci: “Jansen is the antithesis of what you want with the new rules.What the Red Sox are doing, it’s a question.”
Oh, WS rings are won in the offseason? Whats the point of having a season then? Someone should tell the Dodgers and Yankees that.. Given the "amazing" seasons they had last year that resulted in... Zero rings.....


Edit: the yankees have been considered WS favorites like every year for the last 10 years..... and.... How many rings has that resulted in?
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,686
deep inside Guido territory
The Athletic’s anonymous agent survey
After a last-place finish, is Chaim Bloom on the hot seat in Boston?
Yes: 5 votes

“Now I don’t necessarily think it’s fair because he’s been under this whole ‘we’re not spending money’ (directive). Where does that come from? It comes from ownership.”

“They want to do it like they do in Tampa. They brought him in because of that Tampa mentality. They’re going to be more efficient with their money. But at the end of the day, you got to step up and spend some dough.”

No, but…: 8 votes

“Another losing season and he’s gone.”

“It isn’t hot, but it’s getting there. You have to win in Boston, and looking at that division, it’s going to be tough.”

“What is Boston doing? I don’t think anyone knows.”

No: 4 votes

“He’s earned the track record of being reliable. Everybody’s had a down year. Certainly, there were a lot of underperformers there in Boston this year. I think that he ultimately gets it all turned around. Boston will be a contender next year. It won’t take them long to bounce back.”

“He speaks the new front-office speak and has a lot of money off the books now. Let’s see what he does this year before we start talking about Boston making another change.”

https://theathletic.com/3977016/2022/12/07/mlb-free-agency-aaron-judge/
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
4,988
Joel Sherman: “Even if they bring back Bogaerts and with their bullpen additions, they still have the 5th best talent in the division.”

Tom Verducci: “Jansen is the antithesis of what you want with the new rules.What the Red Sox are doing, it’s a question.”
What is Verducci talking about?
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,738
Assume the Sox finalize the deal with Bogaerts, and it's for 7-8 years. Whither Mayer? What do they do with him? He's basically the best prospect the team has had since Mookie, maybe even more highly regarded *as a prospect* than Mookie. Maybe they just deal him but it would suuuuuuck seeing him become a megastar for someone else. Is it possible he needs two more years and by then, they move Xander to 3b (which he may not like but at least he's getting paid like an elite SS, so maybe he wouldn't care that much) and put Mayer at SS?

If they deal him, it had better be for an absolute rock star.
Why would they deal their SS of the future because they have an aging player that no longer fields the position as well? They can just shift Xander to 2B, 3B, or LF.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,900
Joel Sherman: “Even if they bring back Bogaerts and with their bullpen additions, they still have the 5th best talent in the division.”

Tom Verducci: “Jansen is the antithesis of what you want with the new rules.What the Red Sox are doing, it’s a question.”
What new rule is in place that will make Jansen's pitching ability not work? Just the pace of play rule?
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,900
Why would they deal their SS of the future because they have an aging player that no longer fields the position as well? They can just shift Xander to 2B, 3B, or LF.
It is not remotely clear that Xander can play LF. And 3b might be occupied by a fella named Rafael Devers. I don't think it's QUITE as easy as you imply. But this is why I'm asking. They must have this thought through, and probably that's part of the negotiations with Xander.
 

Murby

New Member
Mar 16, 2006
2,116
Boston Metro
What new rule is in place that will make Jansen's pitching ability not work? Just the pace of play rule?
Think that’s what Verducci’s hinting at. Someone in the Jansen specific thread mentioned he takes nearly 2x the time limit with batters on and not on. If he can’t adjust, it could be problematic.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,738
It is not remotely clear that Xander can play LF. And 3b might be occupied by a fella named Rafael Devers. I don't think it's QUITE as easy as you imply. But this is why I'm asking. They must have this thought through, and probably that's part of the negotiations with Xander.
Yeah, Devers isn’t much of a defensive 3B. Him you could DH pretty easily.
 

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,354
Jeez, good thing we still have Kaleb Ort and Darwinzon Hernandez, though. Ugh.

The Song thing seems shitty; seems like guys on the restricted list should be off limits, or something.

Edit- although, guess we will just dump Ort and Darwinzon for Martin and the next pitcher added, so guess it’s inevitable.
So you’re saying it’s a slam dunk that the Sox should have protected Ward over Darwinzon Hernandez who has already pitched in the majors?
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,900
Think that’s what Verducci’s hinting at. Someone in the Jansen specific thread mentioned he takes nearly 2x the time limit with batters on and not on. If he can’t adjust, it could be problematic.
Well, who knows? Maybe he'll actually be better if he pitches faster.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
71,540
Well, who knows? Maybe he'll actually be better if he pitches faster.
Have you watched him much? He is max effort on every pitch, it seems. This would be a concern for me as a BOS fan until I saw how it actually played out to start the season.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
51,773
Amazing that Verducci can predict how a brand new rule will affect anyone! What are the lotto numbers Tom?

And does Sherman think an X signing signals the end of the offseason?
 

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,354
The only one I really question not getting a shot is Politi (Ward and Song both have reasons as to why teams would claim them, and the Sox have their reasons for not protecting them-- still sucks to lose them). Politi seems like the exact guy you'd want throwing innings in August and September during the stillborn third of a lost season. Figure out if there is a Schrieber-like turnaround for him.

He put up excellent numbers between AA and AAA (lion's share at Worcester). Being Rule 5 eligible this offseason and already 26, I would have been thrilled to see him fail instead of Braiser or others of his ilk.
It’s a fair question but I think we should keep in mind that the Sox didn’t bring him up at all last year despite a willingness to try others from AAA. They may be proven wrong but they obviously didn’t feel Politi’s stuff would play in the majors.
 

greek_gawd_of_walks

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 14, 2009
9,191
Wiscansin, by way of Attleboro
They may be proven wrong but they obviously didn’t feel Politi’s stuff would play in the majors.
Yeah, that's my point of contention. With absolutely nothing to gain by winning games with two months left in the season, it would've been prudent to find out. I get that the team appears to not believe in his ability to face ML hitting. I just don't think anything would have been lost in finding out definitively.

There's a fairly low likelihood of it mattering I imagine. Just musings around a hot stove.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
12,532
Ultimately I think they took a chance at sneaking these guys through knowing that the last few spots currently occupied on the 40-man (Ort, Hernandez, etc.) will be filled in by major leaguers signed as FA’s soon anyways. Odds are we get these guys back anyways.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,646
so sort of a technicality but a delayed one
Can the Phillies trade Song right now to a team unlikely to contend for a couple of seasons? If yes, pretty slick move by DD.

Or, would he have to be offered back to Boston first?
 

BigJay

New Member
Jul 22, 2022
86
They can trade him, but the new team has the same requirements about him having to spend a year on the active roster.