Your catchall JOHN HENRY AND THE SOX ARE SOOOO CHEAP!!! thread

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
A rotation of Burnes, Crochet, Houck, Bello, and Giolito (or Crawford) is more than competitive. That's a hell of a group, especially if Bello takes the next (expected) leap forward.

(I don't expect Burnes to be on Boston, by the way...this is just a "what if" scenario)
Yeah that rotation would seem to be among the best in baseball, but my gut tells me we end up with Flaherty. Rounding things out, I think Breslow looks to find a short term RH replacement for Yoshida, signs Grandal who has been a decent defender, but is 36 years old or trade for a glove first catcher and bolster the pen with one of Scott or Hoffman. I'm fine with keeping the rest of the team mostly intact hoping that Anthony impresses enough in ST to get the job in LF and that competition between Grissom and Campbell is fierce for the 2B position.
 

jarv

New Member
Sep 30, 2011
89
I think it's a good idea to avoid Burnes. He's going to want 8-9 years, but it looks like no teams are biting. I think the longest I'd go would be 6 years, but the Sox don't seem to want to give long term deals to pitchers 30+. Which is smart.

Buehler would be a gamble, but maybe worthwhile. He wants a 1 or 2 year deal with an opt-out. That's the kind of deal for a pitcher 30+ the Sox might go for. The question is whether he can stay healthy a full year and outside of coming back for the Dodger's WS run hasn't done much of anything since 2021...when he was 26. But he would be cheap. Like I said, a gamble.

Flaherty would be my choice. The question is what kind of deal and how many years he's looking for.
 

brienc

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 26, 2005
1,429
Shakedown Street
I don’t want to post this in the Crochet thread and piss in the holiday punch bowl, but why would anyone expect the Red Sox to extend Crochet? I expect the Lester low ball, followed by an angered Crochet following so many other players that wanted to be here out the door. Happy holidays. :)
 

brienc

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 26, 2005
1,429
Shakedown Street
Lester was 30.
Lester wanted to stay and would have taken a team friendly deal. And it was a different era with a version of FSG with looser wallets in charge. My point isn’t to beat the past like the dead horse it is. My concern is the 2024 version of Fenway Sports Group.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
24,681
Let's be honest, we've got to blame the real culprits here.
Mo Salah
Virgil Van Dijk
Trent Alexander-Arnold
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
I don’t want to post this in the Crochet thread and piss in the holiday punch bowl, but why would anyone expect the Red Sox to extend Crochet? I expect the Lester low ball, followed by an angered Crochet following so many other players that wanted to be here out the door. Happy holidays. :)
Lester was 30 when they cut bait on him. Crochet is 25. This is the key factor for how this org thinks. Night and day from Lester.
 

TheDogMan

New Member
Oct 25, 2024
200
Connecticut
A rotation of Burnes, Crochet, Houck, Bello, and Giolito (or Crawford) is more than competitive. That's a hell of a group, especially if Bello takes the next (expected) leap forward.

(I don't expect Burnes to be on Boston, by the way...this is just a "what if" scenario)
Burnes and Scott are the way to go. Spend money, keep the young guys. If we want to trade a lefty bat for a right bat ok. Sox have plenty of cash and now have a young ace for two years on the cheap.
 

curly2

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 8, 2003
5,214
I don’t want to post this in the Crochet thread and piss in the holiday punch bowl, but why would anyone expect the Red Sox to extend Crochet?
I have to think Breslow got an indication from ownership that they would be good with an extension. I doubt he would put Teel and Montgomery in the same trade for a guy who would be in Boston for just two years.
 

TeeJayOrTj

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
Jul 21, 2005
52
Lester wanted to stay and would have taken a team friendly deal. And it was a different era with a version of FSG with looser wallets in charge. My point isn’t to beat the past like the dead horse it is. My concern is the 2024 version of Fenway Sports Group.

It blows my mind people regret the Lester deal. He was maybe good for 2 years after he got traded. If he was pitching half his games at Fenway it would have been a disaster the entire time. It was smart to not sign him to a big extension.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,531
Portland
It blows my mind people regret the Lester deal. He was maybe good for 2 years after he got traded. If he was pitching half his games at Fenway it would have been a disaster the entire time. It was smart to not sign him to a big extension.
It didn't bother me at the time that Lester left. Though as pitcher free agent contracts go, it was pretty good overall in that it was only about 30 mill underwater. The Sox ended up going cheaper with Porcello and got more value out of him and still spent other money. Big picture is that it worked out well for both teams as both contributed to world series winners.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
23,029
Maine
I don’t want to post this in the Crochet thread and piss in the holiday punch bowl, but why would anyone expect the Red Sox to extend Crochet? I expect the Lester low ball, followed by an angered Crochet following so many other players that wanted to be here out the door. Happy holidays. :)
Why are you using a choice the team made TEN YEARS AGO to guide expections now? Since they traded Lester, they've signed a number of player to contract extensions (for better or worse). They extended Porcello and Bogaerts and Sale and Eovaldi to big money deals. More recently they extended Bello and Rafaela way before they needed to. And the biggest of all, they extended Rafael Devers less than two years ago to the largest/longest contract in team history.

This feels less about concern over whether Crochet gets an extension and more just a reason to whine about something that happened a decade ago.
 

Otis Foster

rex ryan's podiatrist
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
1,806
Lester wanted to stay and would have taken a team friendly deal. And it was a different era with a version of FSG with looser wallets in charge. My point isn’t to beat the past like the dead horse it is. My concern is the 2024 version of Fenway Sports Group.
And the only basis for your concern is…. The dead horse of the Lester negotiations.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
30,002
Not here
Lester wanted to stay and would have taken a team friendly deal. And it was a different era with a version of FSG with looser wallets in charge. My point isn’t to beat the past like the dead horse it is. My concern is the 2024 version of Fenway Sports Group.
Y’all really need to go back and look at what Lester did in the years before 2014.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Yes, the only reason to be concerned about the intentions of the ownership group is something that happened 10 years ago. Not anything that has happened since then.
Fair but I think you have to look at SP stuff separately. It's pretty clear what their position is, reluctance to give out huge deals for guys 30+, but (eg Pedro) willing to go big anytime you can nab a guy in his early prime. I find it fascinating that they are going after Burnes, not because it wouldn't be awesome (it would) but because we might learn something about their evolving position on 30+ guys. Willing to make an occasional exception?

And since this is the "cheap!" thread, I'll add that it might seem like just money, but it's actually also inflexibility. It's not just a guy in the clubhouse who you can ignore if he isn't playing well. The Price situation went OK, he behaved fine, but if they had just stuck him in the bullpen it would have been uncomfortable. Burnes will probably have opt-outs with whoever signs him but those aren't for the team. As long as he's good the contract will be tradeable but at some point you're eating the money and the roster spot.

If they sign Burnes they are either betting on him staying fit (maybe; good frame) or accepting that it's just the new economy, and they can tolerate one chunk of risk.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
33,396
Fair but I think you have to look at SP stuff separately. It's pretty clear what their position is, reluctance to give out huge deals for guys 30+, but (eg Pedro) willing to go big anytime you can nab a guy in his early prime. I find it fascinating that they are going after Burnes, not because it wouldn't be awesome (it would) but because we might learn something about their evolving position on 30+ guys. Willing to make an occasional exception?
I would almost bet the farm (that I don't have) that the "exception" with Burnes is they might be willing to up the AAV, but not the years. I would be surprised if they go beyond 4 (maybe maybe 5) . I can't imagine that would get it done, but anyone who questions whether the "over 30" approach is real just isn't paying attention. (Questioning whether it's good strategy is another question entirely). Especially if they see the decline in some of his peripherals as a red flag.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
I would almost bet the farm (that I don't have) that the "exception" with Burnes is they might be willing to up the AAV, but not the years. I would be surprised if they go beyond 4 (maybe maybe 5) . I can't imagine that would get it done, but anyone who questions whether the "over 30" approach is real just isn't paying attention. (Questioning whether it's good strategy is another question entirely). Especially if they see the decline in some of his peripherals as a red flag.
Heh well the strategy will have a depressing influence on the 2034 free agency class, but until then...
 

bsj

Renegade Crazed Genius
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2003
22,980
Central NJ SoSH Chapter
I know I am going to get crushed for this, but I am getting incredibly frustrated by this team's lack of free agent activity here. The Yankees strike out on Soto and take multiple big swings elsewhere. We miss on him and revert back into a shell in which the only way we look to "improve" is by raiding our farm system.

I know this isn't the deepest of thoughts, and thats why I tend to avoid the main board. But this is getting so frustrating. This feels like an ownership group whose 2025 goal is to not finish last. That's it.
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
10,099
I know I am going to get crushed for this, but I am getting incredibly frustrated by this team's lack of free agent activity here. The Yankees strike out on Soto and take multiple big swings elsewhere. We miss on him and revert back into a shell in which the only way we look to "improve" is by raiding our farm system.
They've signed a single free agent.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
23,029
Maine
I know I am going to get crushed for this, but I am getting incredibly frustrated by this team's lack of free agent activity here. The Yankees strike out on Soto and take multiple big swings elsewhere. We miss on him and revert back into a shell in which the only way we look to "improve" is by raiding our farm system.

I know this isn't the deepest of thoughts, and thats why I tend to avoid the main board. But this is getting so frustrating. This feels like an ownership group whose 2025 goal is to not finish last. That's it.
What multiple swings have the Yankees taken? They signed Max Fried. That's it. That's the list. Anyone else they've "swung for" is based on reports as speculative and vague as what the Sox are allegedly doing (or not doing) on the free agent market.

If we're doing the scoreboard thing for free agent signings, it's Red Sox 2, Yankees 1, and we're in the bottom of the third inning. Game's not over and won't be for a while.
 

johnlos

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2014
361
What multiple swings have the Yankees taken? They signed Max Fried. That's it. That's the list. Anyone else they've "swung for" is based on reports as speculative and vague as what the Sox are allegedly doing (or not doing) on the free agent market.

If we're doing the scoreboard thing for free agent signings, it's Red Sox 2, Yankees 1, and we're in the bottom of the third inning. Game's not over and won't be for a while.
Are you trolling? The Yankees seem to have legitimately come in second in the Juan Soto sweepstakes, got beat, and immediately turned around and spent 8/$218m on Fried. And the Bellinger deal is more of a salary dump than a trade, since Cody Poteet is a 30 year old nothing, so go ahead and tack on an additional 2/$47.5m.

The Sox have spent 1/$2.25m on Justin Wilson and 1/$10.75m on Chapman. So the Yankees have outspent us by a factor of 20 (or a factor of 4 for 2025 alone).

I like the Crochet deal since I buy the idea of backing a 26 year old starter instead of a 30 year old. But don't try and tell us the Sox are suddenly active in free agency with more middling 1-2 year deals.
 
Last edited:

cantor44

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2020
1,867
Chicago, IL
It's beginning to feel like indeed the Red Sox won't flex financial muscle to acquire all-star caliber free agents, unless they are fully elite and in their prime (Yamamoto, Soto), in which case we know they will always lose to a NYC team or LAD. Which means, the new organizational philosophy is simply not to sign free agents beyond short term stuff, or discounts for guys with broken parts. The team would be decidedly better if they signed, say, Flaherty and Teoscar (I mean I'd like Burnes, but I'm trying to temper even my own fantasies). And neither player would break the bank or jeopardize the future. They just have to hit the gas a little. And they don't seem to want to do that. Yes, yes, there's still time, but I'm skeptical. It's maddening - with just a little spending, IMO, they become a playoff caliber team. The players available.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
1,392
It's beginning to feel like indeed the Red Sox won't flex financial muscle to acquire all-star caliber free agents, unless they are fully elite and in their prime (Yamamoto, Soto), in which case we know they will always lose to a NYC team or LAD. Which means, the new organizational philosophy is simply not to sign free agents beyond short term stuff, or discounts for guys with broken parts. The team would be decidedly better if they signed, say, Flaherty and Teoscar (I mean I'd like Burnes, but I'm trying to temper even my own fantasies). And neither player would break the bank or jeopardize the future. They just have to hit the gas a little. And they don't seem to want to do that. Yes, yes, there's still time, but I'm skeptical. It's maddening - with just a little spending, IMO, they become a playoff caliber team. The players available.
I think you just have to wait a bit. The pitching market is stalled, likely until Sasaki picks a team. At that point things should move again.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
49,859
I think you just have to wait a bit. The pitching market is stalled, likely until Sasaki picks a team. At that point things should move again.
I don’t really see why Roki would stall the pitching market. Literally every team wants him so the chance is like 2-3%. He should be treated as a bonus for anyone who gets him. The FA market seems to be stalling for the same reason as prior years. Once the top guys go, all that is left is the more flawed guys and a Boras guy who’s probably overplaying his hand (Burnes). And owners appear to be content waiting them out. Also possible the Flaherty’s of the world haven’t budged much.

Like you say, can’t draw any conclusions yet but I don’t blame any Sox fans for being a little anxious about FA spending. Thankfully, the Crochet trade has taken the heat down a little bit but the RHH and RP needs remain.
 

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
2,784
Isle of Plum
I don’t really see why Roki would stall the pitching market. Literally every team wants him so the chance is like 2-3%. He should be treated as a bonus for anyone who gets him. The FA market seems to be stalling for the same reason as prior years. Once the top guys go, all that is left is the more flawed guys and a Boras guy who’s probably overplaying his hand (Burnes). And owners appear to be content waiting them out. Also possible the Flaherty’s of the world haven’t budged much.

Like you say, can’t draw any conclusions yet but I don’t blame any Sox fans for being a little anxious about FA spending. Thankfully, the Crochet trade has taken the heat down a little bit but the RHH and RP needs remain.
Is there a thread investigating the salary cap over the next 3-5 as the kids start to get paid? Not rhetorical, I’m guessing someone can point me to it…

Definitely still time, but possible the ‘FA’ money may end up Sox extension money. When the season start three years from now, are they going to be paying an expensive RH bat and a TopOMarket(tm) starter signed this year, on top of an extended Crochet, and then extend the kids?

Skeptical, unless they plan to return to the glory days where they sustain payrolls in the top…3-5? Just don’t see it working while you’re under cbt.
 

Fishy1

Head Mason
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
8,504
Is there a thread investigating the salary cap over the next 3-5 as the kids start to get paid? Not rhetorical, I’m guessing someone can point me to it…

Definitely still time, but possible the ‘FA’ money may end up Sox extension money. When the season start three years from now, are they going to be paying an expensive RH bat and a TopOMarket(tm) starter signed this year, on top of an extended Crochet, and then extend the kids?

Skeptical, unless they plan to return to the glory days where they sustain payrolls in the top…3-5? Just don’t see it working while you’re under cbt.
Yeah, I'd much rather we see if we can buy a couple years of free agency from the younger guys than go buck wild on 30-something pitchers. Keep in mind that as Houck, Duran, and Crawford move further along in arbitration, they'll also get more expensive. Not prohibitively so, but enough to add 20 million or so total to the payroll.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
15,718
What is the benefit to extending Houck, Duran, or Crawford, though? They are already under team control for the bulk of what should be their prime years. Is there a desire to lock them up beyond that? Seems like going year to year is best from the team POV, although the players may not love it.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
49,859
What is the benefit to extending Houck, Duran, or Crawford, though? They are already under team control for the bulk of what should be their prime years. Is there a desire to lock them up beyond that? Seems like going year to year is best from the team POV, although the players may not love it.
Yeah, the only guys I want to lock up are the younger guys like Anthony, Campbell, Mayer, and Casas. Will gladly play the arbitration game with the above 3.
 

Fishy1

Head Mason
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
8,504
What is the benefit to extending Houck, Duran, or Crawford, though? They are already under team control for the bulk of what should be their prime years. Is there a desire to lock them up beyond that? Seems like going year to year is best from the team POV, although the players may not love it.
Oh no, I see how that was confusing, I don't want to lock those guys up. I just meant they will be getting more expensive during arbitration.

The guys I want to extend are the guys @BigSoxFan mentioned, with the exception, maybe, of Casas. And maybe also Grissom, if he figures things out. The guys who will be hitting the majors as 22-23 year olds, basically.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
49,859
Oh no, I see how that was confusing, I don't want to lock those guys up. I just meant they will be getting more expensive during arbitration.

The guys I want to extend are the guys @BigSoxFan mentioned, with the exception, maybe, of Casas. And maybe also Grissom, if he figures things out. The guys who will be hitting the majors as 22-23 year olds, basically.
Ah, got it. If the Sox aren’t going to be big spenders in FA, you’d think they’d be aggressive on the extensions. I know it takes two to tango but figure the best time to do this is before they’ve played an MLB game. The downside risk is meaningful but not nearly as big as busting on a Burnes FA deal or something.
 
Last edited:

Fishy1

Head Mason
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
8,504
Ah, got it. If the Sox aren’t going to be big spenders in FA, you’d think they’d be aggressive on the extensions. I know it takes two to tangle but figure the best time to do this is before they’ve played an MLB game. The downside risk is meaningful but not nearly as big as busting on a Burnes FA deal or something.
Exactly. Spread the risk out on these guys with tremendous upside rather than blowing your load on a pitcher in their 30's. As I've posted elsewhere guys who do what Campbell and Anthony have done are way better bets to be reliable value adds than Burnes is to even be healthy over the next five years.
 

20Ks

New Member
Jul 11, 2024
205
Ah, got it. If the Sox aren’t going to be big spenders in FA, you’d think they’d be aggressive on the extensions. I know it takes two to tango but figure the best time to do this is before they’ve played an MLB game. The downside risk is meaningful but not nearly as big as busting on a Burnes FA deal or something.
Exactly this. This is why the Crochet trade is something you do whenever that opportunity comes up. Would you rather pay Crochet $30m AAV for his ages 26-31 or commit to that AAV for all of Burnes 31-39. Which one has the most risk?
Thats why in my dream scenario they are able to use some assets and go get Jared Jones as well (Skenes is my dreamiest but that aint happening.)
 

apc020420129

New Member
Oct 12, 2023
10
I know I am going to get crushed for this, but I am getting incredibly frustrated by this team's lack of free agent activity here. The Yankees strike out on Soto and take multiple big swings elsewhere. We miss on him and revert back into a shell in which the only way we look to "improve" is by raiding our farm system.

I know this isn't the deepest of thoughts, and thats why I tend to avoid the main board. But this is getting so frustrating. This feels like an ownership group whose 2025 goal is to not finish last. That's it.
I am with you 100%
I think it’s disgusting we are so close to being competitive just a few more key pieces but the ownership seems too cheap
 

TheDogMan

New Member
Oct 25, 2024
200
Connecticut
I think you just have to wait a bit. The pitching market is stalled, likely until Sasaki picks a team. At that point things should move again.
We waited a little bit last year, as we were asked to do. The year before we were asked to wait a year. Patience and belief are stretched too thin. Trades are great but the Sox have the money to precisely what they need to open the window this year. I hate to think it. But I do not believe the Sox are willing to sign the big ticket items thet need to be legitimate contenders. The time will not be better. Great value contract players Casas, Abreu, Bello, Houck, Anthony, Campbell and probably Mayer in the near future. Add a second ace, a right power bat, a legit closer and another major league catcher and we are there.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
1,392
We waited a little bit last year, as we were asked to do. The year before we were asked to wait a year. Patience and belief are stretched too thin. Trades are great but the Sox have the money to precisely what they need to open the window this year. I hate to think it. But I do not believe the Sox are willing to sign the big ticket items thet need to be legitimate contenders. The time will not be better. Great value contract players Casas, Abreu, Bello, Houck, Anthony, Campbell and probably Mayer in the near future. Add a second ace, a right power bat, a legit closer and another major league catcher and we are there.
My original post was a bit cryptic- the whole market is stalled, I think as teams wait for Sasaki with the other FA pitchers on hold in hopes that the loser of that contest will shift their attention and big dollars. I am very encouraged by the Crochet trade, and I generally agree with the strategy of not paying top dollar for FA pitchers over the age of 30. And, as I've typed too many times of late, the FA hitters are a poor fit for the roster. So, what's on tap? I'm hoping it is a trade for a big name catcher.... we'll see.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,884
My original post was a bit cryptic- the whole market is stalled, I think as teams wait for Sasaki with the other FA pitchers on hold in hopes that the loser of that contest will shift their attention and big dollars. I am very encouraged by the Crochet trade, and I generally agree with the strategy of not paying top dollar for FA pitchers over the age of 30. And, as I've typed too many times of late, the FA hitters are a poor fit for the roster. So, what's on tap? I'm hoping it is a trade for a big name catcher.... we'll see.
I agree totally with this. I'd far rather them take the Crochet path than the Burnes / Fried path. Though they are still in a spot that I think they should get another starter that projects as better than a #4 (ie better than Giolito or Crawford).


I think that (this strongly assumes a Crochet extension, which I believe will happen) the strategy of trading prospects for pitching and then extending that pitching as the "only" bidder is a much better strategy for the Red Sox. If nothing else the hit rate has been much better: Pedro - and I know he was before FSG, but I'm talking about the strategy; Schilling; Beckett; Sale (would not have been nearly as big a deal if they'd given him his 5yr/$145m deal before he ever made a single pitch to the Red Sox - it's that they waited 2 seasons and then didn't have it even kick in until his age 31 season).

The flip side is that you need to be willing to "over pay" in terms of hitting sent out the door when you have no top end pitching prospects to send back. For what it's worth, I'm fine with that overpay and I'm thrilled Boston has gotten back to that move of shipping off prospects for elite pitching talent. I would be pro them doing it again even at costs including some of Casas, Abreu, Mayer if they were able (as in Jared Jones, Logan Gilbert, George Kirby, Pablo Lopez, etc).


My issue has never and not once been with the Red Sox not playing at the top of the FA market for pitching over the past 5 seasons. It's that they didn't "pay" for it at all (in terms of top of the market FAs, middle of the market FAs, trades or high capital draft picks).

Now, if they for some reason don't extend Crochet, we can have the "cheap" conversation (and to be clear, I think they will). But I do think that trading hitting (and overpaying) to get someone like Crochet and extending them is smart and what they should be doing.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
35,791
FWIW, the AP reported that the Red Sox were one of 6 teams with over $500k left unspent in their 2024 international signing bonus pool allotment. The specific amount unspent was $740,000.

LINK
 

johnlos

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2014
361
Are you trolling? The Yankees seem to have legitimately come in second in the Juan Soto sweepstakes, got beat, and immediately turned around and spent 8/$218m on Fried. And the Bellinger deal is more of a salary dump than a trade, since Cody Poteet is a 30 year old nothing, so go ahead and tack on an additional 2/$47.5m.

The Sox have spent 1/$2.25m on Justin Wilson and 1/$10.75m on Chapman. So the Yankees have outspent us by a factor of 20 (or a factor of 4 for 2025 alone).

I like the Crochet deal since I buy the idea of backing a 26 year old starter instead of a 30 year old. But don't try and tell us the Sox are suddenly active in free agency with more middling 1-2 year deals.
Update: love the Buehler signing as a buy low on a short contract (fine with the logic of not signing 30+ starters long-term).

Sandoval signing seems like another too-cute move but will be happy to be proven wrong if they see something in him. He is talented but hasn’t really been good since 2022…

Pay for Tanner Scott and I’ll begrudgingly consider it a successfully not cheap offseason.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
49,859
Update: love the Buehler signing as a buy low on a short contract (fine with the logic of not signing 30+ starters long-term).

Sandoval signing seems like another too-cute move but will be happy to be proven wrong if they see something in him. He is talented but hasn’t really been good since 2022…

Pay for Tanner Scott and I’ll begrudgingly consider it a successfully not cheap offseason.
They’re spending a bunch of short term money so they’re not “cheap” in the sense they’re spending money. They’re still being “cheap” until they make a big multiyear commitment to someone. But if you look around the league, not many teams are doing this.

I think the only FA deals > 3 years so far are Soto, Fried, Snell, and Adames. I think Bregman really screwed up passing on Houston’s $156M contract offer, if it really happened. And not sure a guy like Alonso can expect more than 3-4 years himself.
 

johnlos

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2014
361
They’re spending a bunch of short term money so they’re not “cheap” in the sense they’re spending money. They’re still being “cheap” until they make a big multiyear commitment to someone. But if you look around the league, not many teams are doing this.
They were sure cheap until they signed Buehler, with an island of misfit lefties in Sandoval, Wilson, and Chapman hardly worthwhile for a top-5 revenue franchise. At least now they have a high upside starter that shined under the biggest lights this past postseason.

I think the only FA deals > 3 years so far are Soto, Fried, Snell, and Adames. I think Bregman really screwed up passing on Houston’s $156M contract offer, if it really happened. And not sure a guy like Alonso can expect more than 3-4 years himself.
MLBTR estimates Bregman as the third best FA at 7/$182m, and their estimates have largely been on the low side. Maybe there’s some apprehension at the next Story/Swanson/Correa/Baez flop, but I suspect he still gets paid with his defensive floor.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
49,859
They were sure cheap until they signed Buehler, with an island of misfit lefties in Sandoval, Wilson, and Chapman hardly worthwhile for a top-5 revenue franchise. At least now they have a high upside starter that shined under the biggest lights this past postseason.



MLBTR estimates Bregman as the third best FA at 7/$182m, and their estimates have largely been on the low side. Maybe there’s some apprehension at the next Story/Swanson/Correa/Baez flop, but I suspect he still gets paid with his defensive floor.
Bregman will be an interesting follow. I don’t see the Sox going anywhere near an Adames level contract for Bregman. If Astros pull their 6/156 or whatever offer, I’m not sure who is stepping in to give Bregman what he seems to want.
 

johnlos

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2014
361
Good point—I dunno who either. Hope it’s not us!! Never really made much sense for us to pick up an IFer unless we were trading Casas for a starter (and if the rumors were even true SEA appears to have shot that down immediately)
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
3,115
Honolulu HI
From the article:
Vlad is not a viable option for the Sox regardless. He’s one of the few players in the majors who gets regular starts in the field who is a worse fielder than Devers.
The Sox already committed big bucks longterm to a future DH. They can’t sign another for even more money.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
28,622
Saskatoon Canada
Vlad is not a viable option for the Sox regardless. He’s one of the few players in the majors who gets regular starts in the field who is a worse fielder than Devers.
The Sox already committed big bucks longterm to a future DH. They can’t sign another for even more money.
They could be the 1996 Sox many Dh types
Reggie Jefferson
Jose Canseco
Kevin Mitchell
Mike Stanley
Will Cordero should have been DHing by that time too
 

TheDogMan

New Member
Oct 25, 2024
200
Connecticut
They’re spending a bunch of short term money so they’re not “cheap” in the sense they’re spending money. They’re still being “cheap” until they make a big multiyear commitment to someone. But if you look around the league, not many teams are doing this.

I think the only FA deals > 3 years so far are Soto, Fried, Snell, and Adames. I think Bregman really screwed up passing on Houston’s $156M contract offer, if it really happened. And not sure a guy like Alonso can expect more than 3-4 years himself.
I worry about a long term deal for Big Pete, he may well flame out after a couple of years, then again, he is clutch, could be Big Papi, II and crush until he is 40 or so. IMO a great short term buy. Bregman on the other hand, is a good athlete. Barring injury I can easily see 4 to 6 very good years. Not worth 30 million a year for 6 or 7 years, no way. The more I think about it the more I want Santander or Bregman for about 4 to 5 years. Maybe up to 30 mil per for Bregman and a little less per year for Anthony. Whatever we do this club needs Big time closer in the worse way. We are building around starting pitching and young guys in 2025. That probably means close games, and a killer bullpen is required. We do not have that yet