A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1124455/1/index.htm

    Old SI article from 1981, on trading the players we loved.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Iglesias is hitting under .200 again. We gotta let that ride and hope he hits better at some point or he will be of little value to anyone. I still think he hits better over time. Even this year.

    Let's be honest. The only way we will this without Ellsbury this year is from a very strong performance from the pitching staff, especially the starters. There is still a chance of that even though they were 2nd from the bottom last I looked ( the overall staff ). We need to hang in there until Ellsbury comes back. The guy should have been MVP last year in my book. The Cy Young is for pitchers. Ellsbury should have been MVP.

    We need to get healthy. We have way too many injuries on this team to contend. It may be too many injuries already to compete at the needed level.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    I really don't think BV was trying to call out Youk. I think he was trying to support him. It just got misinterpreted and blown way out of proportion. Everyone knows Youk gives it his all. Youk will never be the same player he was but every player ages and deals with injuries which they never fully recover from. Maybe he didn't go to API last winter. Most players don't. Maybe Youk needed to though. He can't be like most players in order to succeed. He's got to try harder. There is ooomph in every engine. Youk has pushed himself as hard as anyone can be pushed. He might not be able to push himself at that level any more. His option probably doesn't get picked up. He's got enough money to retire already if he wants to. 

    What I'm projecting is a good year from Youk, but nothing like before. And he fades relatively quickly over the next few years. He's in later day Trot Nixon mode but hopefully he still has at least some gas in the tank left. I think he does.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    “I don’t think he’s as physically or emotionally into the game as he has been in the past for some reason. But [on Saturday] it seemed, you know, he’s seeing the ball well, got those two walks, got his on-base percentage up higher than his batting average, which is always a good thing, and he’ll move on from there.”

    Hi Boom,

    I find it difficult to interpret calling KY not emotionally into the game as support.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II:
    [QUOTE]“I don’t think he’s as physically or emotionally into the game as he has been in the past for some reason. But [on Saturday] it seemed, you know, he’s seeing the ball well, got those two walks, got his on-base percentage up higher than his batting average, which is always a good thing, and he’ll move on from there.” Hi Boom, I find it difficult to interpret calling KY not emotionally into the game as support.
    Posted by tom-uk[/QUOTE]

    I agree, but when you have been overemotional for several years, maybe being normal is good, but gives the appearance of not caring or having no emotion in a comparative sense.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Sorry, but as much as I would like to see Ellsbury back, I think the central issue for this team right now is the pitching. 

    Every starter has had at least one decent game and the bullpen has shown some promise, but overall they have been awful.  The Sox have the worst ERA in MLB.  Against Texas they gave up 18 runs, and last night, despite a pretty good game by Beckett who went 7 and gave up 3, the bullpen (Morales) gave up 3 in the 8th and put the game out of sight even though the lineup scored 1 in the 9th and could have scored more if Salty's line shot hadn't gone straight to the firstbaseman for an unassisted double play. 

    People keep complaining that the hitting is inconsistent, but I think that is the nature of hitting. 

    Right now the signature game of this season is game 3 at Detroit when the hitters scored 12 and the pitchers gave up 13, including a Sox 3 run lead in the 9th and 2 run lead in the 11th.  The one series the Sox won, 3 out of 4 against the Rays who are supposed to have a great pitching staff, was largely because of the hitters. 

    Two further thoughts on Ellsbury.  Right now I think his basestealing and home run power are suspect.  The latter was very much in evidence last September, but invisible during spring training and the first few games. Moreover, last year was a houmoungous spike for Ellsbury's dingers and it is reasonable to expect that to come down this year.  

    The former was last in evidence in May 2011 when he stole a bunch and didn't get caught very often.  After that, he attempted far fewer steals and got thrown out at least 1/3 of the time.  This spring and in the early games, he didn't even attempt to steal. 

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II : I agree, but when you have been overemotional for several years, maybe being normal is good, but gives the appearance of not caring or having no emotion in a comparative sense.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    I agree Moon about Youk being over the top in the past.  That aside, I am surprised that BV is getting a pass from some.  He may be right about Youk, or Youk may be better off calmer.  It is hard to say.  I am sure that forcing teammates to field questions about comments like these is not helpfull.  I am sure they resent it, he better be great at everything else (which Lieter thought), to compensate for running his mouth about his players.

    Maybe DP is aware that BV hasn't done that well as a manager and he was a fraction of the player (85 OPS+, and a poor fielder) he is. 

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    I agree that with you Max that the pitching is the number one issue.

    To me the bullpen is going to be the biggest concern. Bard looks like he will probably muddle through intially and may well be pretty good (Katz says this eating a bit of crow). The top 3 will be pretty solid barring injury over 162 IMO.

    But the bullpen is a different issue. IMHO bullpen's tend to snap into place pretty nicely if you have a solid set-up guy and closer. The effort to replace Papelbon and Bard has failed to this point with neither Melancon or Bailey even on the 25 roster today. Now all the other guys are elevated to in their roles and it is just a weak BP.

    Whatever the actual merits of Mr Ellsbury are or are not, the RS OF without Ellsbury and Crawford is not very good.

    But just like it was last September, it will be all about pitching and in this case even if the starting pitching rounds out as May approaches, this BP is not one that builds much confidence, may be the worst BP since 2003 the RS have had.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Fivekatz, I thought the worst bullpen was 2006's although that year the starting pitching was also bad. 

    I completely agree getting Crawford and Ellsbury back will make a difference.  Crawford needs to be as good as he was in 2010 or even 2009, and Jake only needs to be as good as he was in 2009 (a pretty good year without the dingers). 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from angeroo. Show angeroo's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    posted at 4/19/2012 1:07 PM EDT
     
    Posts: 1297
    First: 8/13/2010
    Last: 4/19/2012
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II : I agree, but when you have been overemotional for several years, maybe being normal is good, but gives the appearance of not caring or having no emotion in a comparative sense.
    Posted by moonslav59

    I agree Moon about Youk being over the top in the past.  That aside, I am surprised that BV is getting a pass from some.



    Tom--BV is getting the pass because he's new to Boston.  Let's see how it plays out before we hammer the guy for being critical of a player.  Now I know that his reputation precedes him as far as calling out players, but all I'm saying is it's been a small sample size, and we (fans) should see how it plays out.  Sox ownership knew he was like this, and had to expect some controversy during the season.  Who knows?  Maybe this kind of thing will bring the team together a bit.   A little Herb Brooks psychology ya know?  Get the players all together with one common enemy, BV...
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    We seem to be snake-bitten. These injuries have killed us for years. It's hard to plan on 2 OF'ers being hurt, but our pitching depth was suspect from day 1.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II


    McDonald is not as bad a fielder as all you experts seem to think.  Defensively, I'd take him over Ross in left field in a heart beat.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II:
    [QUOTE]McDonald is not as bad a fielder as all you experts seem to think.  Defensively, I'd take him over Ross in left field in a heart beat.
    Posted by ampoule[/QUOTE]

    Amp, I agree on LF only.

    I have watched nearly every play of every Sox game, every year since the early 80's. DMac is horrible in CF and worse than horrible in RF. I'd take Ross easily in RF over DMac. CF is closer, and I haven't seen enough of Ross there, but I do know DMac is not a good CF'er defensively.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Change of subjects:

    While the Rays broke records with all their top draft picks last year, things are looking a little better now.

    2011:
    Rays picks: 24, 31, 32, 38, 41, 42, 52, 56, 59, 60, 75, 89.
    Sox picks: 19, 26, 36, 40, 81

    2012:
    Rays picks: 25, 88, 119
    Sox picks: 24, 31*, 37*, 87, 118
    (* for losing Papelbon)


     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Given the injuries and the change of skipper, I suggest Sox fans consider at least the first six weeks of the season the rough equivalent of a shakedown cruise. The skipper is getting to know the crew and they him. Two players heavily counted upon, Ellsbury and Bailey, are sidelined. Youkilis is off to a sluggish start. ( One hopes that's all. ) Gonzalez hasn't hit his stride yet. The catchers have been nothing to write home about. )Melancon went puff. The pen, as almost always, is a work in progress, but Aceves looks to be settling in as the closer.
    Beckett and Lester have had two good to very good starts out of three. ( The Sox need at least three out of four of those from these two. ) Buchholz righted the ship when it was threatening to sink. ( The Sox need at least two out of three good starts from him. ) Doubront and Bard are showing real promise. CC has to be better than he was last year. Surely. 
    It's way premature to write off this team -- or its manager. He's not playing with the strongest hand at the moment. The flap about Youkilis, IMO, has been overblown. But Pedey did get nasty. He should get realistic. As far as "the way we do things around here" is concerned, the "we" is the manager ( especially after last year ), for better or worse. 
    No realist would at the moment predict great things for this club, but given the talent aboard great things are not entirely beyond the realm of possibility.
    Even if the Sox have a bad series against the Yankees, I still think that another month or so -- and patience -- is needed before the strengths and weaknesses of this team can be fairly evaluated. Unless it goes precipitately into the tank. It needs to get healthy and stay healthy, especially in the rotation, if it expects to contend. Fingers crossed. 
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Nice summary, ex. 

    I haven't given up on this team. They are going to have some great stretches at some point. I do think the key will be health more than anything else.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Ex, I agree with you on above.  Let this team and coach percolate a bit, maybe to July 1st, and see what happens.  We may see several emerge beyond expectation.
    Several may pick up after a slow start.  I think BV will be more open to going with the hot hand or a young promising player.  If at that time the team isn't performing then lets bring up some kids or make a trade or both. 

    Moon, I'm not giving up on this team; it's way too early to panic.  However, I am starting to consider that this team despite all its talent is flawed in some way.  The following is my slant on things--not necessarily the way "it really is."  If you look at the team that last won it all, there was a chemistry, a comraderie, leadership, a good mix of players, a grittiness to come back from 1-3 and beat the Yanks.  Now, A-Gon does not appear to be a vocal leader, Pedie appears to have the cachet but I'm not sure who follows him, Youk used to be on Pedie's level as far as working hard and caring but injuries, slumps, and life changes seemed to have blunted him for now, Ells has been injured a lot, jabbed by team mates and maybe management for not being with the team and often the topic of trades so has that left a bad residue with him, Ross is new but having watched him here in the Bay Area, a great team guy in my opinion, and then you have the C and SS positions trying to establish themselves.  The pen is not there yet and I personally don't think Beckett is a leader for other pitchers.  I think Lester would like to be that, but is he.  My point is that over a lifetime I've seen teams like Cardinals and Yanks in the past that were put together with some great pieces--but they never worked out.  Maybe it was chemistry, mingling of roles, leadership, whatever but it didn't work.  Anyone think we may have that here?  I know a four or five game winning streak would solve a lot of ills, but right now I'm thinking about the end of last year.  I know there were a lot of injuries, but there was a real lack of "scrap" too.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II:
    [QUOTE]Ex, I agree with you on above.  Let this team and coach percolate a bit, maybe to July 1st, and see what happens.  We may see several emerge beyond expectation. Several may pick up after a slow start.  I think BV will be more open to going with the hot hand or a young promising player.  If at that time the team isn't performing then lets bring up some kids or make a trade or both.  Moon, I'm not giving up on this team; it's way too early to panic.  However, I am starting to consider that this team despite all its talent is flawed in some way.  The following is my slant on things--not necessarily the way "it really is."  If you look at the team that last won it all, there was a chemistry, a comraderie, leadership, a good mix of players, a grittiness to come back from 1-3 and beat the Yanks.  Now, A-Gon does not appear to be a vocal leader, Pedie appears to have the cachet but I'm not sure who follows him, Youk used to be on Pedie's level as far as working hard and caring but injuries, slumps, and life changes seemed to have blunted him for now, Ells has been injured a lot, jabbed by team mates and maybe management for not being with the team and often the topic of trades so has that left a bad residue with him, Ross is new but having watched him here in the Bay Area, a great team guy in my opinion, and then you have the C and SS positions trying to establish themselves.  The pen is not there yet and I personally don't think Beckett is a leader for other pitchers.  I think Lester would like to be that, but is he.  My point is that over a lifetime I've seen teams like Cardinals and Yanks in the past that were put together with some great pieces--but they never worked out.  Maybe it was chemistry, mingling of roles, leadership, whatever but it didn't work.  Anyone think we may have that here?  I know a four or five game winning streak would solve a lot of ills, but right now I'm thinking about the end of last year.  I know there were a lot of injuries, but there was a real lack of "scrap" too.
    Posted by Critter23[/QUOTE]
    Right, some teams are greater than the sum of their parts. With others, it's the reverse. Last year's never looked unified, even when it was winning. It's too early to tell about this team or about its skipper. He's already being criticized both ways: when he calls out players AND when he sticks with them ( Bard and Morales ) in an attempt to build their confidence, or when he didn't walk the bases loaded in the first game, my goodness, but let Morales pitch to Fieldler to see what Morales is made of. ( The man actually made a good pitch. ) Valentine is still trying to find out what he's got on that roster, still studying the eyes and body language of his players, still looking for combinations that click. How could it be otherwise? He's acknowledged that the Bard and Morales decisions
    ( the second one ) "didn't work out." Longoria pretty much weighed in against the Bard decision, but what does he know about Daniel as a person? And he doesn't have to manage Daniel for the remainder of the year. Let's hope that he has a terrible time against Daniel. IMO, he, Longoria, needs to be moved back from the plate. So does Napoli. By now Gibson and Drysdale would have taken the letters off their shirts. Koufax would not have come that far inside -- just far enough off the inside corner to make the batter think about the destiny of the family jewels. Umpires should give pitchers a little leeway inside. ( Of course, Drysdale kept coming inside to Mays, and Willie kept hitting the ball out of the park. )
    FWIW, to the poster who's already comparing Valentine unfavorably with Francona ( in a burst of hyperbole ),  Terry said he too would have left Bard in the game.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II:
    [QUOTE]“I don’t think he’s as physically or emotionally into the game as he has been in the past for some reason. But [on Saturday] it seemed, you know, he’s seeing the ball well, got those two walks, got his on-base percentage up higher than his batting average, which is always a good thing, and he’ll move on from there.” Hi Boom, I find it difficult to interpret calling KY not emotionally into the game as support.
    Posted by tom-uk[/QUOTE]

    I'm not saying it was the ideal way of giving support but i really think he was trying to give support to his player, who has been fighting a groin problem as I understand it ( ergo the "physically" comment which he led with ) and it's tough to believe he was trying to question Youk's effort level. It's like questioning Babe Ruth's ability to hit HR. I just don't think that was his intention. This whole thing got blown out of proportion. 

    And for the many who have described this as "calling out" youk after a few short games, I don't think that is what happened at all.

    I'm not saying his intensity level hasn't fallen a little ( he did just get engaged and probably is in love right? ). I'm not saying he is performing optimally yet. I'm just saying I don't think the situation warrants him being called out by the manager after the guy is there for a total of 15 games or so. I really don't think that is what happened. He sure picked the wrong guy to do that with if that was the case don't you guys think? I'm pretty confident this was just misintergreted more than anything. I really think BV had good intentions on this one. He's not looking at this team and making the conclusion that Youk is dogging it IMO.

    There will be times when BV will call out a player or 2 in the press, I bet, but this instance clearly isn't it to me. We can agree to disagree for those who do.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Moon, I'm not giving up on this team; it's way too early to panic.  However, I am starting to consider that this team despite all its talent is flawed in some way.  The following is my slant on things--not necessarily the way "it really is."  If you look at the team that last won it all, there was a chemistry, a comraderie, leadership, a good mix of players, a grittiness to come back from 1-3 and beat the Yanks.  Now, A-Gon does not appear to be a vocal leader, Pedie appears to have the cachet but I'm not sure who follows him, Youk used to be on Pedie's level as far as working hard and caring but injuries, slumps, and life changes seemed to have blunted him for now, Ells has been injured a lot, jabbed by team mates and maybe management for not being with the team and often the topic of trades so has that left a bad residue with him, Ross is new but having watched him here in the Bay Area, a great team guy in my opinion, and then you have the C and SS positions trying to establish themselves.  The pen is not there yet and I personally don't think Beckett is a leader for other pitchers.  I think Lester would like to be that, but is he.  My point is that over a lifetime I've seen teams like Cardinals and Yanks in the past that were put together with some great pieces--but they never worked out.  Maybe it was chemistry, mingling of roles, leadership, whatever but it didn't work.  Anyone think we may have that here?  I know a four or five game winning streak would solve a lot of ills, but right now I'm thinking about the end of last year.  I know there were a lot of injuries, but there was a real lack of "scrap" too.

    You make some good points here. I can't say I disagreer with anything. I kind of thought Bobby V might be the type of manager that would light a fire and bring out the "scrap" in some of our players. It is early still.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    ...Longoria, needs to be moved back from the plate. So does Napoli...

    Along with a few other players as well. I agree 100%.
    We need another Pedro Martinez!
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II : I'm not saying it was the ideal way of giving support but i really think he was trying to give support to his player, who has been fighting a groin problem as I understand it ( ergo the "physically" comment which he led with ) and it's tough to believe he was trying to question Youk's effort level. It's like questioning Babe Ruth's ability to hit HR. I just don't think that was his intention. This whole thing got blown out of proportion.  And for the many who have described this as "calling out" youk after a few short games, I don't think that is what happened at all. I'm not saying his intensity level hasn't fallen a little ( he did just get engaged and probably is in love right? ). I'm not saying he is performing optimally yet. I'm just saying I don't think the situation warrants him being called out by the manager after the guy is there for a total of 15 games or so. I really don't think that is what happened. He sure picked the wrong guy to do that with if that was the case don't you guys think? I'm pretty confident this was just misintergreted more than anything. I really think BV had good intentions on this one. He's not looking at this team and making the conclusion that Youk is dogging it IMO. There will be times when BV will call out a player or 2 in the press, I bet, but this instance clearly isn't it to me. We can agree to disagree for those who do.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]All good points Boom. Personally I don't think Bobby V was trying to "call out" Youk.

    It was a case of inarticulateness. Now I really doubt the RS aren't going to make the playoffs because the manager has a tendency to articulate things poorly on occasion and has so many media gigs set up that he will be talking a lot.

    If the RS don't make the playoffs it will be other issues that dog the Sox. The BP has been twist of misfortune. There was risk in Bailey and Melancon replacing the Papelbon and Bard roles of course, but when both end up off the roster two weeks into the season, misfortune. Bobby Jenks turning out to be everything Ozzie Gullien thought he was doesn't help.

    Not having Ellsbury and Crawford so early in the season is bad luck, particularly when you look at their ages. Personally, I had no idea that Cody Ross would make Manny Ramirez look like a GG or that our RFers would take so long to adapt.

    Now I don't like the Valentine choice. Bobby IMO does not view the game like Cherington and his staff do. Bobby will be a focal point at moments, some self created, some media driven. But it isn't the red flag.

    It is the lack of starting pitching depth and a bullpen that is going to push any manager into trying to stay with his starting pitcher past the point of failure. And in that regard it would not be different with any manager IMO. Then again the BP might just snap together...

    Hope springs eternal after all.

    Happy 100 to Fenway Park. 

      
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Moon, I too hope BV can light some fires.  I agree it's early and he's even said about some of his moves, "I was trying to see what he would give me."  I think he's feeling things out too.  I think at some point he will be proactive in dealing with problems, shortcomings, etc.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II:
    [QUOTE]...Longoria, needs to be moved back from the plate. So does Napoli... Along with a few other players as well. I agree 100%. We need another Pedro Martinez!
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]Couldn't agree more. You can't just let these guys dig in and take their hacks. Teams like Texas, Detroit and New York (and Boston when semi-healthy) will murder you if you let them do that. As much as it's been talked about lately I have to beilieve BV is talking to McClure about that right now. Say moon is it alright to talk about next year's team here or should that be another thread?
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Say moon is it alright to talk about next year's team here or should that be another thread?

    I'm Ok with it here, because looking at 2013 or 2014 involves plans and moves with the current team.

    I have discussed earlier (on other threads) the idea of giving up on this year and having a firesale, so we can go for broke in 2013 or 2014. I'm not saying I am for the idea, but it's not far-fetched. We could get something good for several last contract year players and perhaps Ellsbury, if we are looking at 2014. Add the returns to our rising youth and the the return on the trades to the huge wad of money we should have, a very nice team could be rebuilt around a few key players.

    I'm not writing off this season in the least, but I also don't mind thinking about future scenarios...

    Assuming we deal all 2013 free agents:
    Papi, Youk, Dice-K, Salty, Ellsbury, Crawford (pay part of his deal), Ross, Padilla, & Shoppach.
    Lose the contracts of Jenks (and all the above).
    We'd be left with a foundational core of:
    (Incomplete list)

    S1 Beckett ('13 & '14)
    S2 Lester ('13 & option for '14)
    S3 Buchholtz ('13-'15 and option for '16)
    S4 Lackey ('13 & '14 and injury clause option)
    S5 Bard (Arb '13-15)
    S6 Doubront (3+ years of control)
    R1 Bailey (Arb for '13 & '14)
    R2 Aceves (Arb for '13 &'14)
    R3 Morales (Arb '13 & '14)
    R4 Melancon ('13 & Arb '14-'16)
    R5 RHill ('13)/ Tazawa (Arb '13-'15)
    R6 Albers ('13 only)/ Miller (Arb '13 & '14)/ Atchison ('13 &Arb '14-'16)
    P Carpenter, Mortensen, Britton, Pimental, Barnes, Wilson, Ranaudo, Owens,  Workman, and others

    C Lavarnway (4+ years of control)/ Swihart/ Vazquez (5+ years of control)
    1B Gonzalez ('13-'18)/ Anderson (4+ years of control)
    2B Pedroia '13 & '14 (option for '15)/ Tejada & Coyle (4+ yrs of control)
    3B Aviles ('13 & '14) Middlebrooks/Cecchini/Bogaerts/Vitek (4+ years)
    SS Iggy ('13 then Arb) Bogaerts
    LF Linares/Nava
    CF Kalish (4+ years of control)
    RF Sweeney (Arb '13 then FA)/ Che-Hsuan
    DH (Lavarnway)
    IF Punto ('13 only)
    OF DMac (Arb '13-'15)/ Brentz/Jacobs/Hassan/Bradley/Hazelbacker/Ramos

    Total Salary before Arbs: $85M (not counting the portion we pay for CC)
    Estimated Salary after Arbs and part of CC's deal: $105-110M
    Estimated money to spend on FAs and stay below the luxury limit: $60-70M
     

Share