Red Sox Rumors - Just Kidding

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,667
Could not disagree more. 9+ years of home/road split data is surprisingly un-noisy (only Covid-shortened season of 2020 bucks the trend).

And your counter-argument -- which I presume is that Xander is not experiencing any power fall-off -- isn't really substantiated or persuasive to me. Xander's road OPS looks to be in line with the AL dropoff, but why did it drop off more at home in 2022? How much did the average OPS drop in Fenway in 2022? Did the AL average BABIP in 2022 also drop off in a similar fashion to OPS? If so, why did Xander's BABIP go up (well above his career norm) in 2022 while his OPS went down?

More importantly, why have Xander's numbers been trending down (regardless of at home or on the road) since 2019?

Finally, is this body of work sustainable going forward, and, if so, is it worth 11 years and $280 million?
I’m not arguing for matching that contract. I’m just pointing out that the raw numbers in your table don’t accurately measure a players relative performance in 2022. You’re arguing he was worth more to the Red Sox than to the Padres, I guess. I mean, it’s not a bad thing if someone is a very good hitter overall and particularly at Fenway. Is it sustainable? Probably not. Let’s see what treasures they sign with the extra money.

Also the home/road thing is a bit overstated generally. Road performance is not somehow indicative of “true” performance. If it was, the 2007 Red Sox were about as good as the 2007 Mariners.
 
Last edited:

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Story has an opt out after 2025 that the Sox can cancel by picking up a 7th year for $25M ($20M incremental over a $5M buyout). Not quite the full upside to price to market, but it does add another $20M guaranteed to the deal to not allow him to exercise.
Right, I forgot that detail. I think the point still stands that the Sox under Bloom are maximizing the their certainty as mush as possible.
 

mikcou

Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2007
919
Boston
Right, I forgot that detail. I think the point still stands that the Sox under Bloom are maximizing the their certainty as mush as possible.
Agreed, its really more of a mechanic that forces the team to trigger the club option in 2025 when Story is still 33 with the leverage of possibly missing out on his age 33 and 34 seasons rather than wait to see what he looks like at 34 and project what solely an age 35 season looks like.

That right in the context of player opt-outs is pretty minor.
 

flymrfreakjar

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
2,915
Brooklyn
Given that Senga went for pretty much the exact contract everyone was expecting him to sign, I'm pretty mystified how he didn't end up on the Sox. Seems like precisely the sort of acquisition they needed to make. That he didn't even sign for an "over market" contract like essentially every other FA so far, is even more disappointing.
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,711
Maybe he liked the idea of joining Scherzer and Verlander in a rotation?

If you're interested in going to the world series, joining the team willing to have a 360m payroll doesn't seem like a terrible bet.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,920
It seems like that the Sox are not an incredibly appealing option for a lot of players right now; if they have multiple offers, what’s the reason for preferring Boston? I suspect if they want to be chosen over others in competitive bidders, they are going to have to clearly be offering the most.
 

Tokyo Sox

Baka Gaijin
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 16, 2006
6,132
There
TokyoSox or someone else who knows about the Japanese market would know better, but could ownership’s concentration on Japanese players this cycle be to drive revenues in Japanese market? Are there some untapped revenues that they are trying to capture by signing star players?
I can't remember who but someone in Red Sox ownership or management was asked about this years ago and said the best way to make money is to win ballgames. It's great if they get some ad deals with Japanese companies or manage to sell some package tours, but none of that would be significant enough to meaningfully defray the costs of any given contract, I don't think. Maybe a couple million per year, which means by the end of the contract they make roughly the posting fee back? And if the structure of revenue sharing hasn't changed, any hats or shirts they sell over here benefit small market teams more than it does the Red Sox. Really I think the fact that none of these guys have a QO attached and don't cost any draft picks is the bigger part of the calculus than some marginal revenue generation.

That said...

Someone else pointed out that this might be a future play at Yoshida's teammate Yoshinobu Yamamoto, who is a really good 24 y/o pitcher.
I think that was me. Yamamoto will be the most sought after Japanese name making the move at this time next year. Not a sure thing he'll go but the timing is right. And he's better and 5+ years younger than Senga. And if the Sox had Yoshida & Yamamoto, you'd probably get half the Orix Buffaloes fan base trying to go to Fenway.

So to sum up: I don't think so but who knows.
 

woodros04!

New Member
Aug 7, 2020
12
I may have missed something but are people complaining that the Price signing happened at all? The only griping I have seen is how, overall, the signing worked out. Those are two very different things. The complaints about the Sale deal, meanwhile, tend to be about when it was made. He was still under contract, so it was an extension, one that may have played a role in not being able to resign Mookie without blowing past the luxury tax draft and international signings penalties. That extension is widely thought to have been a contributing factor in DD getting the ax. Again, I may have missed some recent posts but i think you’ve mischaracterized the nature of the complaints about those signings.
It's a little difficult when the same people who complain about not extending Bogaerts earlier complain about extending Sale early. Can't have that both ways. Also, the best part of the Mookie deal was that the Dodgers took $16Mil of the David Price money off of our hands.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
6,344
I doubt the Sox even had any real interest.

I already have some optimism on the rotation with Sale, Paxton, Whitlock, Bello and Pivetta. Add Eovaldi or Wacha and Houck (likely the BP ace) and IMO it’s got a very heigh ceiling but also low floor. I don’t see where Senga really fit without spinning, which I don’t see happening
 

ShoelessJoe

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 26, 2001
1,889
Watertown, MA
Yeah, the whole thing seemed pretty sus, but I allowed myself to get swept up in it because Hector Gomez vouched for the rando. sigh
 

Papo The Snow Tiger

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 18, 2010
1,409
Connecticut
It seems like that the Sox are not an incredibly appealing option for a lot of players right now; if they have multiple offers, what’s the reason for preferring Boston? I suspect if they want to be chosen over others in competitive bidders, they are going to have to clearly be offering the most.
Why would any player who has another option want to sign with Boston right now? Whether you have any faith in "The Truth" or not, outsiders are now openly questioning the front office's commitment. Add to that the players don't like the management, the clubhouse may not be a very happy place in 2023. Look at the players response to Kevin Plawecki"s release last September. And who would want to go into a situation where the fanbase is thoroughly pissed off? Anyone really think that the fans will be very forgiving when Kenley Jansen blows a save, Trevor Story two hops a throw from the shortstop hole to allow the go ahead run to score in the top of the 9th, or Masataka Yoshida has a difficult time adjusting to the major leagues and life in the United States? Fair or not the boo birds may be making a very early appearance in Fenway next year. I'm afraid that until there's a regime change all the fans will have to look forward to is leftovers, Bloom's attempts to catch lightening in a bottle and endless "prospect" hype
 

oumbi

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 15, 2006
4,167
BeantownIdaho

"Were you born in 2018?"


I really am not sure of your point here. Would you expand on this and explain exactly what you are saying? Thanks.
 
Last edited:

oumbi

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 15, 2006
4,167
Here is some information about Fujinami.

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/flamethrower-shintaro-fujinami-posted-by-japans-hanshin-tigers-could-be-mlb-reliever/

Fujinami, 28, pitched for the Tigers in parts of the last 10 seasons, amassing a 3.17 ERA and a 2.31 strikeout-to-walk ratio in 252 career appearances. He was once considered a top rival to Los Angeles Angels two-way phenom Shohei Ohtani, thanks in part to his impressive arm strength. Indeed, Fujinami's fastball sits in the mid-90s and has been clocked into triple digits. He also throws a splitter and a slider.
 

buttons

New Member
Jul 18, 2005
56
Maybe we should wait until the season starts and the smoke settles before determining
that Bloom has decimated the team. I hope he is just as aware of where we stand today and has a plan to make us a contender. I don’t think the plan is for us to be a joke.
 

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,950
Isle of Plum
Maybe we should wait until the season starts and the smoke settles before determining
that Bloom has decimated the team. I hope he is just as aware of where we stand today and has a plan to make us a contender. I don’t think the plan is for us to be a joke.
What should I do with my torches and pitchforks until then?
 

pinkhatfan

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2011
101
Maybe we should wait until the season starts and the smoke settles before determining
that Bloom has decimated the team. I hope he is just as aware of where we stand today and has a plan to make us a contender. I don’t think the plan is for us to be a joke.
In real life, this is my philosophy. This board would be far less entertaining, though, if everyone adopted such a moderate position!
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,711
Is it entertaining currently? I can't recall the main board being a more miserable place to be in the last decade than it has in the last few days.
 

buttons

New Member
Jul 18, 2005
56
Maybe we should wait until the season starts and the smoke settles before determining
that Bloom has decimated the team. I hope he is just as aware of where we stand today and has a plan to make us a contender. I don’t think the plan is for us to be a joke.
In real life, this is my philosophy. This board would be far less entertaining, though, if everyone adopted such a moderate position!
what would be fun is discussing the free agent and trade possibilities that will get us there.
Its not fun to rehash what could or should have happened last week or last year. Thank positive until there is no reason to.
 

brandonchristensen

Loves Aaron Judge
SoSH Member
Feb 4, 2012
38,144
We really hit a lull in rumors across the league. Feels like that Xander contract caused everyone to go back to the drawing board.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,014
Oregon
We really hit a lull in rumors across the league. Feels like that Xander contract caused everyone to go back to the drawing board.
I'm most surprised by is the lack of trades. Even Sean Murphy, who was all but traded before the WM started hasn't been dealt
 

brandonchristensen

Loves Aaron Judge
SoSH Member
Feb 4, 2012
38,144
I'm most surprised by is the lack of trades. Even Sean Murphy, who was all but traded before the WM started hasn't been dealt
I wish that they would do a FA period like the NFL. Allow one week or whatever for everything to happen. Allows the players to have certainty as well, which lets them start team building sooner.
 

P'tucket rhymes with...

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2006
11,624
The Coney Island of my mind
The Bogarts negotiations should teach us that "priority" is a pretty meaningless term. They have their value for Eovaldi, and will probably take him if they can get him at or around their price point. That other teams are more aggressive and quite probably offering more is no real surprise.
I'm most surprised by is the lack of trades. Even Sean Murphy, who was all but traded before the WM started hasn't been dealt
Maybe too many FA's still floating around?
 

deythur

New Member
So we should be signing him any moment.
Even being a little tongue and cheek, why should we read into any report regarding the Sox front office. They have been as airtight as you could be. Both in who they were looking at and who they "do not view as a priority" There would be no reason to make a comment like this. It doesn't change anything Sovaldi's agent may be working on.

As frustrating as not having good Sox rumors have been, I love that nothing is getting out. I just wish they would surprise us a little more and with bigger surprises.
 

brandonchristensen

Loves Aaron Judge
SoSH Member
Feb 4, 2012
38,144
Even being a little tongue and cheek, why should we read into any report regarding the Sox front office. They have been as airtight as you could be. Both in who they were looking at and who they "do not view as a priority" There would be no reason to make a comment like this. It doesn't change anything Sovaldi's agent may be working on.

As frustrating as not having good Sox rumors have been, I love that nothing is getting out. I just wish they would surprise us a little more and with bigger surprises.
I enjoyed the Xander saga on Wednesday - even though I woke up to bad news. It was fun to have something to follow. The out of nowhere signings are fun, but having a Nomar trade for A-Rod and Magglio saga is can't miss stuff. I miss those days.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
Why would any player who has another option want to sign with Boston right now? Whether you have any faith in "The Truth" or not, outsiders are now openly questioning the front office's commitment. Add to that the players don't like the management, the clubhouse may not be a very happy place in 2023. Look at the players response to Kevin Plawecki"s release last September. And who would want to go into a situation where the fanbase is thoroughly pissed off? Anyone really think that the fans will be very forgiving when Kenley Jansen blows a save, Trevor Story two hops a throw from the shortstop hole to allow the go ahead run to score in the top of the 9th, or Masataka Yoshida has a difficult time adjusting to the major leagues and life in the United States? Fair or not the boo birds may be making a very early appearance in Fenway next year. I'm afraid that until there's a regime change all the fans will have to look forward to is leftovers, Bloom's attempts to catch lightening in a bottle and endless "prospect" hype
This was a season where there were many reasons to question thought processes and the direct of the team. IMO Plawecki being released was the right thing to do. There was no reason for him to remain with the club at that point of the season.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,674
Maine
We really hit a lull in rumors across the league. Feels like that Xander contract caused everyone to go back to the drawing board.
I'm not sure it was the Bogaerts deal so much as simply the end of the Winter Meetings. There was a mad flurry of activity for the four days everyone was in San Diego, and now it's slowed back down to the pre-meetings pace. I expect we might see a bit of activity over the next week or so, but it will probably go quiet for the holidays.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
Is it entertaining currently? I can't recall the main board being a more miserable place to be in the last decade than it has in the last few days.
Word. A decade is about right.

Sox are spending money on free agents, just like they always have.

Bloom signed Story last year, two more market contracts for guys this year, Sale's albatross is still on the books, and we all remember having to DFA albatross contracts or staple assets to get rid of different albatrosses. Yet the narrative is that ownership is cheap or Bloom is trying to outclever everyone or whatever other shit is on 98.5.

It's fatalistic nonsense and should be beneath the fanbase that watched four titles in the last 20 years under this ownership. Now, if the argument is that Bloom is a shithead and signing or not signing the wrong guys, fine. But the "oh noes, cheap, greedy, clever bookworms" is abject bunk.
 

mikcou

Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2007
919
Boston
Word. A decade is about right.

Sox are spending money on free agents, just like they always have.

Bloom signed Story last year, two more market contracts for guys this year, Sale's albatross is still on the books, and we all remember having to DFA albatross contracts or staple assets to get rid of different albatrosses. Yet the narrative is that ownership is cheap or Bloom is trying to outclever everyone or whatever other shit is on 98.5.

It's fatalistic nonsense and should be beneath the fanbase that watched four titles in the last 20 years under this ownership. Now, if the argument is that Bloom is a shithead and signing or not signing the wrong guys, fine. But the "oh noes, cheap, greedy, clever bookworms" is abject bunk.
This is obviously correct - the cheap cries are noise and have been silly - at least to date, the Sox havent given any reason to think they wont spend.

There is a salient point though that is concerning - this ownership group over multiple baseball execs has had a serious problem negotiating at the top end of the market and the more it continue, the more it seems like they just wont be able to get to yes with any elite talent. I cant tell if they have a hard rule that they dont do long contracts, get too skittish, or what it is, but the second largest total commitment ever handed out by the team is still Manny's, which was done by the prior ownership twenty years ago. I suspect there aren't any large market teams whose second largest commitment was from a deal signed 20 years ago.

It is really hard to win without an elite player on a long term deal. No, its not impossible, but Manny was on the first two Sox World Series teams and Price was on the fourth. On the flip side, Tampa Bay as much as they have been consistently good; they've never been able to get over the hump and even there the Rays moved aggressively to get Wander Franco locked up for over a decade.

If you aren't willing to extend or sign elite talent, you have to be 95th percentile at developing it - for a team with big money it seems really silly to be making that bet. As much as the farm has improved over the past few years, the likelihood that any one of Casas, Bello, Mayer, Yorke, and Bleis become a consistent 5 win player is not high. If you want an example, take a look at the Yankees experience with their guys who have been BA top 10 guys.

Its reasonable to argue whether signing stars to long term deals is strictly necessary (and to be clear is obviously not sufficient) to win a World Series, but looking at who's won shows almost all of them have had at least one, if not multiple. They arent a small market or even a mid market and have the ability to sign these deals; so its frustrating to see them choose not to.

Edit: To broaden the point, four of their top 5 deals historically are from 7+ years ago (Price, Manny, Crawford, Gonzalez). Three of those are from over 10 years ago. That all strikes me as insane for a sport where salaries have doubled over the past twenty years and are probably up 50%+ in the past 10.
 
Last edited:

Average Game James

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 28, 2016
4,346
It is really hard to win without an elite player on a long term deal. No, its not impossible, but Manny was on the first two Sox World Series teams and Price was on the fourth. On the flip side, Tampa Bay as much as they have been consistently good; they've never been able to get over the hump and even there the Rays moved aggressively to get Wander Franco locked up for over a decade.
It's absolutely hard to win without elite talent, but that doesn't mean it makes sense to lock up guys on big money deals into their late-30s and early-40s. The past decade of World Series winners backs this up... with the exception of the maybe the 2020 Dodgers (like it or not, different financial stratosphere than the Sox) and the 2019 Nationals (big money contracts for Scherzer/Strasburg/Corbin - paying the latter two $57 million a year the past three years for zero production has contributed to 3 straight last place finishes), the cores of the past decade of championship teams were made up of pre-FA stars and shorter term free agent commitments. Manny's contract is an outlier among $20mn AAV 8+ year deals in terms of success and Price in 2018 will be the only year of that deal where he produced any real value. I'll consider the idea that signing players to massive long-term deals is the path to consistent winning when we see a team actually win multiple championships with this approach.
 

Tokyo Sox

Baka Gaijin
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 16, 2006
6,132
There
Here is some information about Fujinami.

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/flamethrower-shintaro-fujinami-posted-by-japans-hanshin-tigers-could-be-mlb-reliever/

Fujinami, 28, pitched for the Tigers in parts of the last 10 seasons, amassing a 3.17 ERA and a 2.31 strikeout-to-walk ratio in 252 career appearances. He was once considered a top rival to Los Angeles Angels two-way phenom Shohei Ohtani, thanks in part to his impressive arm strength. Indeed, Fujinami's fastball sits in the mid-90s and has been clocked into triple digits. He also throws a splitter and a slider.
There's now a similar rumor in Japanese. This article notes that like Yoshida, Fujinami has Boras as his agent:
https://news.yahoo.co.jp/articles/e2225b14d212e2ca0c1b770b04b8097abc21e87f

...the article also notes that what role he would play is unclear, and that he's not expected to command nearly the same contract as Yoshida or Senga.
My thoughts on Fujinami are that I wanted him to find a MLB team willing to take a shot on him, and want to see him succeed just because I like the kid, but I'm not necessarily stoked for the Sox to potentially be that team unless someone can teach him how to consistently throw strikes. I don't think he's an MLB starter, but he could turn into a very effective 6th and/or 7th inning guy, maybe eg freeing Whitlock up to be a starter.

If the Sox sign him it should be to an AAV of like 3mm tops -- 2/6 with a club option for a 3rd year, or just 3/9 or so. It would be about 4-5x what he's making here currently, and would hopefully be enough to get it done. Anything more and I'm not sure the risk/reward makes sense.

Here's what I wrote in the "Let's sign a starting pitcher" thread a while back:
Fujinami I think is likely better used as a bullpen arm, hopefully on a team that can help him with the control issues. The part about "some completely uninterested and others willing to take a chance on his arsenal with the aim of helping him harness his tools" is spot on, imho. When he was drafted in 2012 in the same draft class as Ohtani, he was actually more sought after (though that was in part because most teams thought Ohtani was going directly to the US), and went to the Tigers in the 1st round. Then the Tigers did absolutely nothing to develop him, protect him, or manage his workload. He threw twice as many innings as a 19yo than Ohtani. I think I've mentioned this here before but a few years ago I saw him make his first start of the season on a cold drizzly early April night at Jingu, and although he was clearly gassed around 90 pitches, he went on to throw over 140. Just criminal usage by the Tigers.

A guy called Yakyu Cosmopolitan on Twitter is, imho, putting out the best NPB content in English these days and yesterday released a video on Senga & Fujinami (and Masataka Yoshida):
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dobhf35uyg
Rooting for the kid.
 

Benj4ever

New Member
Nov 21, 2022
346
It's absolutely hard to win without elite talent, but that doesn't mean it makes sense to lock up guys on big money deals into their late-30s and early-40s.
Exactly. The longer the contract (especially those years on the wrong side of 30) and the higher the AAV, the riskier the deal is. Not a lot of fans seem to get this point.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
Given that Senga went for pretty much the exact contract everyone was expecting him to sign, I'm pretty mystified how he didn't end up on the Sox.
This might be obvious but players can only sign with 1 team...

I feel like people are always upset when a player signs reasonable contract X with team Y and say "why didn't we offer him that?!?!". For all we know, they did.

Certainly good reasons for Senga to choose the Mets if there were a few comparable offers.
 

mikcou

Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2007
919
Boston
It's absolutely hard to win without elite talent, but that doesn't mean it makes sense to lock up guys on big money deals into their late-30s and early-40s. The past decade of World Series winners backs this up... with the exception of the maybe the 2020 Dodgers (like it or not, different financial stratosphere than the Sox) and the 2019 Nationals (big money contracts for Scherzer/Strasburg/Corbin - paying the latter two $57 million a year the past three years for zero production has contributed to 3 straight last place finishes), the cores of the past decade of championship teams were made up of pre-FA stars and shorter term free agent commitments. Manny's contract is an outlier among $20mn AAV 8+ year deals in terms of success and Price in 2018 will be the only year of that deal where he produced any real value. I'll consider the idea that signing players to massive long-term deals is the path to consistent winning when we see a team actually win multiple championships with this approach.
How about the Astros with Altuve? The Sox with Manny? The Giants in 2010, 2012, 2014 (Cain and Zito each for two of the years)? The market moves so 8 and $20 isnt particularly relevant - its more of a how many teams are winning without elite talent outside the 6 year control window? Because if you arent: (i) willing to take risk and extend guys early; or (ii) pay market rate, youre basically banking on the player loving it so much that they're willing to take a ton less to stay or that you can develop enough good talent close enough together. Neither of those places are good places to be. Dustin Pedroia types are not common and banking on the elite talent you develop also being like him is insane; you're doing well enough to develop elite talent - that in and of itself is hard.

It doesn't necessarily need to be free agent market rates - you can extend early. Historically teams have had at least one and sometimes multiple long market rate deal or even longer deal that was signed pre-arb. What is really hard is to just hope that you can line up pre-arb and arbitration guys closely enough to win - it does happen once a decade (Royals in 2015 and Marlins in 2003) or so by teams that cant afford to spend. Here's the evidence:
  • 2022 - Astros - Altuve
  • 2021 - Braves - Pick whoever you want; Freeman was on the 8th year of an arbitration extension .
  • 2020 - Dodgers - Kershaw; Mookie was signed long term but was still in his last arbitration year
  • 2019 - Nationals - Corbin, Strasburg
  • 2018 - Red Sox - Price
  • 2017 - Astros - Justin Verlander (to be fair traded for him midseason, but they arent winning without him). Signed Altuve to a market deal in offseason before 2018.
  • 2016 - Cubs - Lester
  • 2015 - Royals - None
  • 2014 - Giants - Matt Cain
  • 2013 - Red Sox - Dustin Pedroia (I agree he signed at a significant discount, but he was no longer in the six year control; if youre lucky enough to get someone like this, great!), arguably Lester as well
  • 2012 - Giants - Matt Cain, Barry Zito
  • 2011 - Cardinals - Matt Holliday
  • 2010 - Giants - Barry Zito
  • 2009 - NYY - ARod, Jeter, CC Sabathia, Teixiera
  • 2008 - Phillies - Chase Utley
  • 2007 - Red Sox - Manny
Basically, you can use whatever strategy you like that results in locking up elite talent long term, but just letting it go away is not a winning strategy. Most of the above teams had at least one market rate and/or long term star deal; some had two. Trying to build a team where you're overlapping really good to elite talent all within the six year control window is incredibly difficult. Its why the Rays haven't won and only one team a decade or so does it. Beyond the talent point, I think it provides a level of certainty for baseball ops to build around something that is already settled. The argument you're making just doesnt really hold water - almost all World Series teams have a long term/big money guy who materially contributes to the team.

The point isn't to say to blow huge money everywhere, but to show that the likelihood of being able to win if you dont have any elite talent outside of the 6 year control window is exceedingly difficult and willingly going down the path of trying to time overlapping control windows of great talent when you have the resources to choose a different path is bizarre.

The Sox have shown minimal interest in any sort of long term deal whether its in arbitration or free agency. This is how the market is moving so if they dont change their practices and beliefs its hard to see how they acquire and, to the extent they develop, retain elite talent.
 

Tony Pena's Gas Cloud

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 12, 2019
357
It's absolutely hard to win without elite talent, but that doesn't mean it makes sense to lock up guys on big money deals into their late-30s and early-40s. The past decade of World Series winners backs this up... with the exception of the maybe the 2020 Dodgers (like it or not, different financial stratosphere than the Sox) and the 2019 Nationals (big money contracts for Scherzer/Strasburg/Corbin - paying the latter two $57 million a year the past three years for zero production has contributed to 3 straight last place finishes), the cores of the past decade of championship teams were made up of pre-FA stars and shorter term free agent commitments. Manny's contract is an outlier among $20mn AAV 8+ year deals in terms of success and Price in 2018 will be the only year of that deal where he produced any real value. I'll consider the idea that signing players to massive long-term deals is the path to consistent winning when we see a team actually win multiple championships with this approach.
Agreed with your statement, but in 2016 Price led the AL in starts and IP with a 112 ERA+ and 2.9 WAR. That would be a year of real value as well.
 

mikcou

Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2007
919
Boston
Chris Sale doesn’t count… why? Because his deal isn’t long enough?? His AAV beats Altuve’s easily.
Are you talking about 2018? Or currently?

The list wasnt meant to be exhaustive; there could definitely be others. The list was only intended to show that the idea that having large deals for stars wasnt limited to a one or two team strategy - its been the predominant the fact pattern for winners.

If for currently, sure he could count if hes able to get back on the mound and pitch.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,667
Exactly. The longer the contract (especially those years on the wrong side of 30) and the higher the AAV, the riskier the deal is. Not a lot of fans seem to get this point.
Well, I think everybody gets this point: you are paying mostly for short-term benefit. Those deals make more sense when you’re going for it right now. My question becomes what is the path they are blazing to a competitive team in, say, 2024? Or 2023 if you want to hold them to their word. (I’m tempted to say 2025 but no way bloom is still there if the team is non competitive the next two years). Perhaps it will reveal itself presently. I certainly have not given up as we’ve seen this ownership group get off the mat a few times now.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,091
Yes, long term deals that take a player into the mid and late 30s often suck, and not just in the final year. On the other hand, it's tough to fully leverage the benefits of being a high revenue team without them. Seems to me Bloom is trying to spend while still limiting long term risk. I suspect he will start to veer from this as the farm system provides more cost-controlled talent (should he survive that long), we will see how it shakes out.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,667
Yes, long term deals that take a player into the mid and late 30s often suck, and not just in the final year. On the other hand, it's tough to fully leverage the benefits of being a high revenue team without them. Seems to me Bloom is trying to spend while still limiting long term risk. I suspect he will start to veer from this as the farm system provides more cost-controlled talent (should he survive that long), we will see how it shakes out.
The bolded is very well said and exactly correct.
 

Average Game James

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 28, 2016
4,346
How about the Astros with Altuve? The Sox with Manny? The Giants in 2010, 2012, 2014 (Cain and Zito each for two of the years)? The market moves so 8 and $20 isnt particularly relevant - its more of a how many teams are winning without elite talent outside the 6 year control window? Because if you arent: (i) willing to take risk and extend guys early; or (ii) pay market rate, youre basically banking on the player loving it so much that they're willing to take a ton less to stay or that you can develop enough good talent close enough together. Neither of those places are good places to be. Dustin Pedroia types are not common and banking on the elite talent you develop also being like him is insane; you're doing well enough to develop elite talent - that in and of itself is hard.

It doesn't necessarily need to be free agent market rates - you can extend early. Historically teams have had at least one and sometimes multiple long market rate deal or even longer deal that was signed pre-arb. What is really hard is to just hope that you can line up pre-arb and arbitration guys closely enough to win - it does happen once a decade (Royals in 2015 and Marlins in 2003) or so by teams that cant afford to spend. Here's the evidence:
  • 2022 - Astros - Altuve
  • 2021 - Braves - Pick whoever you want; Freeman was on the 8th year of an arbitration extension .
  • 2020 - Dodgers - Kershaw; Mookie was signed long term but was still in his last arbitration year
  • 2019 - Nationals - Corbin, Strasburg
  • 2018 - Red Sox - Price
  • 2017 - Astros - Justin Verlander (to be fair traded for him midseason, but they arent winning without him). Signed Altuve to a market deal in offseason before 2018.
  • 2016 - Cubs - Lester
  • 2015 - Royals - None
  • 2014 - Giants - Matt Cain
  • 2013 - Red Sox - Dustin Pedroia (I agree he signed at a significant discount, but he was no longer in the six year control; if youre lucky enough to get someone like this, great!), arguably Lester as well
  • 2012 - Giants - Matt Cain, Barry Zito
  • 2011 - Cardinals - Matt Holliday
  • 2010 - Giants - Barry Zito
  • 2009 - NYY - ARod, Jeter, CC Sabathia, Teixiera
  • 2008 - Phillies - Chase Utley
  • 2007 - Red Sox - Manny
Basically, you can use whatever strategy you like that results in locking up elite talent long term, but just letting it go away is not a winning strategy. Most of the above teams had at least one market rate and/or long term star deal; some had two. Trying to build a team where you're overlapping really good to elite talent all within the six year control window is incredibly difficult. Its why the Rays haven't won and only one team a decade or so does it. Beyond the talent point, I think it provides a level of certainty for baseball ops to build around something that is already settled. The argument you're making just doesnt really hold water - almost all World Series teams have a long term/big money guy who materially contributes to the team.

The point isn't to say to blow huge money everywhere, but to show that the likelihood of being able to win if you dont have any elite talent outside of the 6 year control window is exceedingly difficult and willingly going down the path of trying to time overlapping control windows of great talent when you have the resources to choose a different path is bizarre.

The Sox have shown minimal interest in any sort of long term deal whether its in arbitration or free agency. This is how the market is moving so if they dont change their practices and beliefs its hard to see how they acquire and, to the extent they develop, retain elite talent.
Yes, they all had some FA talent (though most the elite talent was homegrown and some of these are certainly a stretch - Zito provided 1.1 and 0.1 WAR to those teams, Cain was on a 3 year deal in '12 when he was good and produced -0.1 WAR for the '14 team on the big FA deal), but there's a big difference between most of the deals up there and paying guys on long-term deals until they are 40. There's some pure-FA deals that took players into their mid-30s, some shorter term pitching commitments that worked out well (Kershaw - 3yr deal, '12 Cain - 3yr deal, Verlander was a 2.5 year commitment when they traded for him), and arb extensions. I think it's perfectly reasonable to question if the Sox should be more aggressive trying to extend guys early to leverage their relative financial advantage vs. 90% of the league since they seem reluctant to pay guys past their mid-30s. But nothing about that list makes me think the team needs to be throwing around more money into big free agent deals.
 

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,316
Seems to me Bloom is trying to spend while still limiting long term risk. I suspect he will start to veer from this as the farm system provides more cost-controlled talent (should he survive that long), we will see how it shakes out.
This is perfectly stated. We’ve been over this so many times, but in the (appropriate) fury over losing X, it’s getting drowned out. The Dodgers reduced payroll and let popular players go for years as Friedman built the organization the way he believed it needed to be for sustainable success. He did this in a division that was far weaker at the time than the AL East is today, and he was able to keep winning division titles yet he STILL almost lost his job along the way. Today, his organization is a machine and he spends and spends and spends to keep it humming. The Padres nickel and dimed as they tanked for years to build and build and build. Now they spend. The Astros still are pretty tight with their spending. Bloom has been crystal clear about the plan since he took over. He’s followed it closely and he’s still following it. If he’s the right exec to pull it off, the plan will work because it has worked elsewhere. Is he the right exec? I continue to be optimistic but fumbling the Bogaerts process and ultimately losing a player he wanted and who wanted to be here does raise some concerns. I think Bloom is capable of learning from his mistakes. But we are going to find out.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
911
Yes, long term deals that take a player into the mid and late 30s often suck, and not just in the final year. On the other hand, it's tough to fully leverage the benefits of being a high revenue team without them. Seems to me Bloom is trying to spend while still limiting long term risk. I suspect he will start to veer from this as the farm system provides more cost-controlled talent (should he survive that long), we will see how it shakes out.
I think there are three ways that big market clubs can more effectively maximize their advantage: aggressively buy out their young players prime years, take on bad contracts in trades for young stars, and offer really big dollar/short year contracts.

I'd love to see the Sox do all three, including adopting the big dollars/short years approach to free agent signings. When a team is confident that it has players in the farm system who will contribute in the near future, blow through the luxury tax levels with a specific year lined up for a reset (once the young players will arrive and contribute).

So, who says no to a Xander contract of 3 years, $135 million?
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,920
Pretty sure Xander says no to that. Could he get 8/145 in three years? I don’t think so.

The trend of players taking big AAV / short term deals is largely isolated to high end SP who are in their mid thirties or older; position players seem eo be taking the opposite approach.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
911
Pretty sure Xander says no to that. Could he get 8/145 in three years? I don’t think so.

The trend of players taking big AAV / short term deals is largely isolated to high end SP who are in their mid thirties or older; position players seem eo be taking the opposite approach.
You're right about the trend. I think some players might look at Mike Trout and consider a different approach. And, the Xander example is tough since it appears SD massively overpaid compared to the rest of the league's offers. If Xander landed a 8/225 deal, which is above what most expected, the math works a bit better (a follow-up deal of 5/90 seems plausible, considering Abreu signed for 3/59 as a 36 year old, coming off a year with 15 home runs). Or maybe the Sox would offer a huge two year deal. Xander's already made $75 million. I would have liked to have seen a short term offer from the Sox. Because, at a certain point, I'm guessing at least some players would value being able to control where they play.
 
Last edited:

mikcou

Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2007
919
Boston
Yes, they all had some FA talent (though most the elite talent was homegrown and some of these are certainly a stretch - Zito provided 1.1 and 0.1 WAR to those teams, Cain was on a 3 year deal in '12 when he was good and produced -0.1 WAR for the '14 team on the big FA deal), but there's a big difference between most of the deals up there and paying guys on long-term deals until they are 40. There's some pure-FA deals that took players into their mid-30s, some shorter term pitching commitments that worked out well (Kershaw - 3yr deal, '12 Cain - 3yr deal, Verlander was a 2.5 year commitment when they traded for him), and arb extensions. I think it's perfectly reasonable to question if the Sox should be more aggressive trying to extend guys early to leverage their relative financial advantage vs. 90% of the league since they seem reluctant to pay guys past their mid-30s. But nothing about that list makes me think the team needs to be throwing around more money into big free agent deals.
Kershaw was only a 3 year deal because it was the result of negotiations that occurred prior to the 2018 season where Kershaw was threatening to opt out of the remaining 2/70 or so that he had on a 7/210 to get paid even more (3/105). That is not a standard three year deal - it was effectively tacking an additional year (2021 to be clear) on to his initial 7 year deal so he would not opt out. He's a weird example to use if you like short term deals; he signed what was the largest pitching contract ever at the time. That 7 year deal would have covered 2020, if he hadn't negotiated a modified deal that gave him even more money. If you can get guys who are willing to sign extensions that only take them to 33 or 34, thats obviously preferable, just as it is preferable to have Dustin Pedroia take a deal for like 12M when going rate was close to 20M, but you can't plan as if your stars are going to be willing to do that because most arent.