Red Mosquito

No, they are not broke, this is a farce.

Price hasn’t been near bad enough to justify something like that, anyway.

However, I could potentially see them doing what you suggested but using Price as part of a Mookie trade, you take Price you don’t have to give up as much in return.

numbers wrote:I suspect we are entering a dark period with the Red Sox now.

God I fucking hope so.

numbers wrote:No, they are not broke, this is a farce.

They're not broke, but they have a ridiculous amount of money committed to a small group of players and are likely to be over the luxury tax without even extending Betts.

That’s fine, they can afford it.

Baltimore's time is finally upon us!

numbers wrote:That’s fine, they can afford it.

So can any other team in baseball, then.

I mean... if signing Betts is going to keep them in the luxury tax, then the cost of signing him is 50% more for Boston than it is for anyone else.

The problem with this kind of thinking, of course, is that it literally never ends. So they sign Betts and it ends up costing them $45 million a year due to the luxury tax and the team still isn't very good so... just sign someone else to a huge contract that costs 50% extra! And then the team is approaching 90 wins but still isn't a playoff team so of course you need to spend a bunch more to push them over the top. Suddenly you have a $300 million contender and the answer to any question about what direction to go will still always be "Meh, they can afford it."

philpritchard wrote:

numbers wrote:That’s fine, they can afford it.

So can any other team in baseball, then.

I mean... if signing Betts is going to keep them in the luxury tax, then the cost of signing him is 50% more for Boston than it is for anyone else.

The problem with this kind of thinking, of course, is that it literally never ends. So they sign Betts and it ends up costing them $45 million a year due to the luxury tax and the team still isn't very good so... just sign someone else to a huge contract that costs 50% extra! And then the team is approaching 90 wins but still isn't a playoff team so of course you need to spend a bunch more to push them over the top. Suddenly you have a $300 million contender and the answer to any question about what direction to go will still always be "Meh, they can afford it."

I get what youre saying and youre not wrong, however, if this was such a concern for them, why did they re-sign Eovaldi to the length they did? You cant all of a sudden decide 6 months later that you MUST get under the CBT after every move you've made did not have that taken into account.

Plus, Henry does this EVERY time they win the WS. The next year he raises all prices and slashes payroll, but what's going to happen is, come June when hes getting lambasted and they stink and the ratings/ticket sales are down, he will do a 180 and mandate they sign the most expensive free agents available. Like signing Price to replace Lester rather than just signing Lester for example. I'd rather just keep Mookie Betts, instead of paying more money for Yelich or whoever it is the year after.

Also, the CBT needs to go away. The only purpose it serves is salary suppression. This whole welfare for teams that are profitable stuff is ridiculous. The Royals dont need welfare money from the Red Sox and Yankees when they are about to sell for a billion dollars.

numbers wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

numbers wrote:That’s fine, they can afford it.

So can any other team in baseball, then.

I mean... if signing Betts is going to keep them in the luxury tax, then the cost of signing him is 50% more for Boston than it is for anyone else.

The problem with this kind of thinking, of course, is that it literally never ends. So they sign Betts and it ends up costing them $45 million a year due to the luxury tax and the team still isn't very good so... just sign someone else to a huge contract that costs 50% extra! And then the team is approaching 90 wins but still isn't a playoff team so of course you need to spend a bunch more to push them over the top. Suddenly you have a $300 million contender and the answer to any question about what direction to go will still always be "Meh, they can afford it."

I get what youre saying and youre not wrong, however, if this was such a concern for them, why did they re-sign Eovaldi to the length they did? You cant all of a sudden decide 6 months later that you MUST get under the CBT after every move you've made did not have that taken into account.

Plus, Henry does this EVERY time they win the WS. The next year he raises all prices and slashes payroll, but what's going to happen is, come June when hes getting lambasted and they stink and the ratings/ticket sales are down, he will do a 180 and mandate they sign the most expensive free agents available. Like signing Price to replace Lester rather than just signing Lester for example. I'd rather just keep Mookie Betts, instead of paying more money for Yelich or whoever it is the year after.

And to me, that's a perfectly legitimate complaint. If ownership said "This is your budget and this is the direction we want the team to go" at least they could make decisions based on that information. Flip-flopping all over the place and changing course based on the whims of the fans is insanity and will only lead to worse results because fans are stupid.

A lot of their financial turmoil currently is the result of him doing one of these flip flops in the 14-15 offseason.

numbers wrote:A lot of their financial turmoil currently is the result of him doing one of these flip flops in the 14-15 offseason.

don't forget giving Chris Sale that ridiculous contract 6 months before they had to

and a bunch of this amazingly STILL falls on Cherington...that fucking Pedroia extension, the Rusney deal (which doesn't even count against the calculation for luxury tax but still has to hurt), we were STILL paying Sandoval this past season,

I don't think Martinez's decision will have any impact on their plans for Betts, so I am happy to see him stay. It's crazy that we'll have to play the will he/won't he game after next season too, though (and 2021 if he sticks around).

Simple Torture wrote:I don't think Martinez's decision will have any impact on their plans for Betts, so I am happy to see him stay. It's crazy that we'll have to play the will he/won't he game after next season too, though (and 2021 if he sticks around).

I can't imagine him sticking around now and then opting out when he's a year older unless he bounces back to his 2p17-18 production. It's a weird spot for him... if he sucks, he obviously stays. But if he's good enough to warrant opting out, they're going to give him the QO, which means his earning power drops significantly and... it's probably not worth opting out.

There's probably about a 98% chance he plays out the full contract.

Boras not taking him to the open market speaks volumes about where things are right now with free agency. I think he did the best thing for his client, which he doesn’t always do, but it’s kind of shocking to me that Boras doesn’t think he can do better.

The union is already filing complaints regarding free agent tampering; it's going to be a loooooong winter.

Yeah, the Braves GM brazenly talked about the ongoing collusion like it isn’t prohibited by the CBA

Personally I will be shocked if there isn’t a work stoppage when the deal is up.

Yeah I think a strike is likely at this point.

That's a hell of a reach to think that comment suggests collusion in any way, but the union's response says a lot about where the two sides stand right now.