A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Sometimes a change of venue can really help a guy. We had a stud in Becket back 2007. That same guy might be gone but in another location I wouldn't be surprised if he turns it up again. He might be a guy who would benefit from such a deal. It's really a shame that players like him and Youk end up moving on sometimes even with Boos. I hated to see it when Yaz got booed. These guys are human. I never would have booed Crawford. Sometimes it's injuries which cause things or just a bad period we all go through in life. I would only boo a guy who isn't even trying.
    Posted by RedsoxProspects[/QUOTE]

    I was at the game wednesday when Beckett pitched...He was noticably out of shape...yet again...I think they boo him for obvious reasons (bad performance), but also because he just refuses to do the proper conditioning that a 32yr old  needs to do to maintain throughout the year and not keep ending up on the DL with contiuous back issues...I think when your being paid like these guys are that is part of the deal...You need to stay in the best shape possible throughout the whole year...Josh isnt the same guy he was 5 years ago...He needs to change but for some reason he refuses to and i think thats what a lot of fans are upset about too...
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    My perspective ( bottom line )

    1) Keep Ellsbury. We only get one pick for him if we are lucky. He has a good chance of being a similar stud to the guy we had last year and if we are going to win next year he is probably one of the main drivers on that bus. Keep Ellsbury and let him go in FA.

    2) Don't trade any of our big horses ( Crawford, Beckett, Lester...ect. ) unless we can get real solid value for them. I think ( and have thought all year BTW ) that Crawford probably is not the guy we had last year. He was injured and still is but we probably get a lot closer to the guy we thought we signed, rather than what we got last year. His reputation was impeccable when we signed him. Extremely hard worker with consistent performance. His value is at a near all time low. My bet it keeps going up for the next year or so and if we are going to win in 2013, Crawford is one of the drivers of that bus also.

    3) Offer Ortiz arb and let Ortiz go in FA if he doesn't accept it. Use the money to sign a Sanchez if reasonably possible. We do have Lackey coming back and he probably will contribute significantly next year. He is another guy with a good reputation when we signed him. He also was injured and pitched through it to help the team with few complaints. Lackey could well contribute. Our starting pitching is BY FAR our biggest need and it should be our priority next winter. Letting Ortiz go, Matsuzaka etc... go resets the luxury tax impact and allows us to use that money for other priorities. Who knows, maybe we can put 3 solid pitchers together next year and actually have a real chance to win.

    4) If at the July 31 deadline we do not have a reasonable shot try to at least sell some pieces, unlike this year's debacle.

    5) We still have potentially a great team. If we had even 2-3 solid starters performing we would have the potential to get n the playoffs. Maybe next year Morales, Lackey and Buchholz are those three. We should not blow up this team yet. I'm talking 2013.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : I was at the game wednesday when Beckett pitched...He was noticably out of shape...yet again...I think they boo him for obvious reasons (bad performance), but also because he just refuses to do the proper conditioning that a 32yr old  needs to do to maintain throughout the year and not keep ending up on the DL with contiuous back issues...I think when your being paid like these guys are that is part of the deal...You need to stay in the best shape possible throughout the whole year...Josh isnt the same guy he was 5 years ago...He needs to change but for some reason he refuses to and i think thats what a lot of fans are upset about too...
    Posted by southpaw777[/QUOTE]

    Regarding him being in shape, you could be right. I don't know. He could also be another alpha dog in the BV's clubhouse though, just like Youk was. I don't know. I prefer to give the guy the benefit of the doubt, especially when he carried us to a WS victory on his back in 2007. I do percieve that you may be right though southpaw. I just do not know and am hesitant to boo him unless I do.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : No glove. He sure can mash though.
    Posted by carnie[/QUOTE]
    He is just a possible DH. Nothing more. Cheap and potentially a very low cost replacement for Ortiz. As Ortiz ages and Gomez comes into his prime, their performance lines will clearly intersect. And Gomez or someone like him ( PT Lavarnway, #4 or 5  OF....etc. ) are a heck of a lot cheaper.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]summer, looking at the big contracts, many here feel we are in a bind until 2015 when we lose most of them. I, myself, said we would be "crippled" financially for 7 years once we signed CC. While I have not been proven wrong, we can still compete for a ring between now and 2017 (CC's last year) or 2018 (AGon's last year). I figure we will have about $28M to spend this winter (not counting Papi). That may be enough to fill enough holes for us to compete in 2013, but having more would increase our odds. Dumping salary is generally not the way to do it, as with the Youk trade, but let's look at each big contract and see what can/should/might be done (contract cost listed is avg salary or luxury tax number): AGon: $22M to 2018- Along with most posters on this site, I was all for this trade and extension, but I did mention the fact that paying a top 6 1Bman $22M to be just marginally better than the #14-16 1Bman is not financially defendable, and that moving Youk to 3B at his age and increased fragility was a gamble. (I advocated trading Youk coming off his best OPS year of his career- while his stock was high.) That being said, I seriously doubt AGon is traded soon. We do have Mauro Gomez, Travis Shaw and numerous 3B & SS prospects that could be converted to 1Bmen, but none of these guys, except for maybe Gomez,  will be ML ready for 2013. AGon stays for the time being. Crawford: $20.3M to 2017- "Glorified platoon player", over-rated fielder and base-runner, overpaid by $8-12M a year depending on how you see his future? Many here say CC is "untradable".  "Nobody wants him." This is not true. Nobody wants him at $20M/yr, but many teams would like CC on their team, especially NL teams or teams with OF needs , both immediate and/or long term. The 3 questions are: 1) How much of his contract do we have to pay another team to take him? 2) Is CC worth the differential of the above question?  3) Do we have a replacement LF'er in house, or can we find one on the market for less cost, and be a plus over keeping Crawford.  I think CC's need for surgery makes any trade unlikely. He probably should just get the surgery now, so he can recover earlier. I have mentioned trading CC to other teams in exchange for their shorter term salary dump player(s) like Barry Zito and pay part of CC's deal up to the end. Personally, I think we're better off paying someone $10-11M a year to take CC. We save $9-10M a year, and can easily find an inhouse solution that is not a drop off from what CC has given us thus far, but if CC rebounds might be worse. I say, try hard to move this guy, but don't pay over $13-14M a year. His future potential is worth more than $6-7M a year. Beckett: $17M to 2014- Everyone seems to be jumping on the trade Josh bandwagon, but as with the CC situation, we need to weigh how much we will have to pay towards his deal with how much his future potential is (the 17 Million dollar question), and how can we replace him. With Lackey? With another high-priced FA that could be our next longterm bust? I think not. Josh's attitude, conditioning, injury issues, and up and down seasons have been discussed enough already, but the fact is, Josh has has very decent to great seasons every other year coming into MLB in 2001. Is the odd-even year thing going to continue? If so, we should keep him for 2013 and trade him before 2014. He may still not earn $17M with a good season in 2013, but paying someone $7-10M/yr to take him off our hands, means we have to find someone at $7-10M who can match Beckett's odd year numbers, which to me, is highly unlikely. We don't really have any MLB ready prospects for 2013, and if anyone thinks this is a World Series rotation, think again: 1) Lester 2) Buchholtz 3) Lackey 4) Morales 5) Doubront 6) Mortensen I'd look to get good return in trade for Josh. I wouldn't give him away. I mentioned something like a Beckett, Ellsbury, Melancon, and Ranaudo (plus some cash to offset Beckett's deal) for Cuerto & Marshall deal, but who knows who wants Josh. I think management will look hard to dump Beckett, and he will rebound next year. Josh's replacement will not do better. Just my opinion.   Lackey: $13.8M to 2015 (counting $500K for 2015's injury option)  With the injury option kicked in, Lackey is an interesting player going forward. He has a lot to prove, but I said the same about Beckett after last September and looking to 2012. I even wonder if he might retire rather than play for the minimum wage in 2015. Maybe a re-structuring of his deal this winter might help both parties. Lackey is not going to be traded this winter. Long shot for next ST, if he looks good, but if he looks good, we'll probably keep him. I'd certainly keep any trade door open, but it is highly unlikely he is dealt before 2013. Ortiz: ($15.575M in 2012) Arb? Extension? Walk? This is at the top of the Sox off-season flowchart of moves along with possibly the keep or trade Ellsbury decision. With only about $28M to spend and so many holes to fill, an argument has been made by several posters that spending over half of our 2013 acquisition budget on a DH is foolhardy, especially when we have guys like Lavarnway, Gomez, Nava, and maybe a returning Ross who fit the DH profile wonderfully. The lack of clutch hitting by Papi over the last 3-4 years is also an issue, although many blame the lack of proper line-up protection as the main reason. Clutch or not, Papi is a big driving force of our offense, and replacing his numbers is near impossible. The question is, is a step down from Papi to Lava worth a $15M savings that can be applied to other positional upgrades? If we were able to get a Braun or Upton (via trade) or FA Josh Hamilton instead, would that make it worthwhile to let Papi walk or offer arb and hope he declines (getting draft picks)? I can see both sides to this argument, and it may end up being Ben's first big defining choice. Dice-K: Free Agent. Nothing more to be said. Pedey: $6.75M to 2014 w/ $11M option for '15 ($0.5M buyout)- His cost is minimal, even if he never regains his MVP form. Pedey's not going anywhere before 2013 and probably ever. Moving a 3B or SS prospect to 2B could be a future option, but I think Pedey is a 2B fixture in Boston. Ellsbury: ($8.05M in 2012): Last arb this winter. The big decision. I happen to think there is close to a zero chance Ellsbury plays for Boston in 2014. If my psoition is valid, it comes down to this: how much is 1 year of Ellsbury and likely 2 comp picks after he walks worth? How much will he get in his last arb year? Not having a big 2012 will help keep that cost down, but I think the Sox have to look at total value: Ellsbury + his 2013 contract cost+ 2 draft picks in 2014 or Whatever we can get in trade, possibly in a bigger package deal. I'm thinking the latter might make more sense, but it would probably mean lessening our chances for 2013, but improving our chances beyond 2013, unless we involve a 3rd team in the trade and bring back a MLB ready player who helps us at another position, such as starting pitcher (#1-2 slot type) or a RH'd clean-up hitter type. Hard to guess what Ben will do, but I think Ellsbury will be traded before next season begins (when the comp pick value would be lost). Lester: $6M to 2013 w/ $13M option for '14 ($0.25M buyout)- Before this season, I seriously doubt anyone thought Lester's $13M option for 2014 was going to be too high. Now, it's a real possibility we decline the option after we see what Lester gives us in 2013. Trading Lester could happen, but I think moving Josh is a higher liklihood. Lester has more trade value, especially because of the 2014 option and not Josh's guaranteed money. I think Jon stays in Boston next year, but chances are good either him or Josh is gone. Buchholtz: $7.5M to 2015 2/$13M option for '16 ($0.25M buyout)- Buch is not going anywhere, unless in a package deal that nets us a bonafide ace. His cost is low, His upside is big. He needs to stay healthy. Not going anywhere soon. Others who may get big arb raises in the near future: Salty: ($2.5M in 2012) Last arb this winter. Could see Salty traded, especially if Papi returns. If Papi walks, we could see a Lava (DH/C), Salty (C), and Shoppach (C) roster. Bailey: ($3.9M in 2012) 2 arb year left. Bailey should be our closer next year, which will improve our pen by returning Aceves to his rightful role: short-mid set-up man. Overall: say we save  $10M/yr x 2 by dumping Beckett $10M/yr x 5 by dumping CC and not bring Papi back, we'd have about $50M to spend and this for a beginning roster: C: Salty DH/C: Lava (Gomez/Nava) 1B: AGon 2B: Pedey 3B: Middlebrooks SS: Iggy/Ciriaco IF: Aviles IF: Punto (Ciriaco if not the FT SS) LF: _____ (Nava) CF: Ellsbury RF: ______ OF: Sweeney OF: Kalish (Bradley/Brentz?) SP: _______ SP: Lester SP: Buchholtz SP: Lackey SP: Doubront SP: Morales/Mortensen (Stewart) Cl: Bailey RP: Aceves RP: Breslow RP: Bard RP: Melancon RP: Hill RP: Atchison RP: Miller (Mortensen if not SP) (Carpenter) If we trade Ellsbury and fill in one of these gaps, we'd have about $60M (depending on how much the player we get for Jacoby costs) to fill these holes plus the new CF hole caused by Jacoby's departure. Maybe we could take a chance and try Bradley in CF to open the 2013 season. That would allow us much more money to spend on filling the other open slots. All is not lost for 2013 and beyond, but with these big contracts and the new CBA rules, we will have to get more creative, be more pro-active, and take some chances on fast-tracking prospects.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Moon,
    I seriously think they should stretch Tazawa back out again this offseason and put him in the rotation for 2013, or at least let him compete for a spot...With a consistant 94-96mph FB his offspeed stuff, which was already + stuff, will be and is that much better...I just got a feeling about him since hes had TJS and how good hes looked...
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    I find it interesting that they continue to advance Bogaerts at an accelerated pace. In AA ball now at 20 ( or is it 19 ? ). This kid seems to be for real and we clearly do need a SS. Is it at all possible that by mid year 2013 they might actually call this kid up and give him the SS job? Pull an Elvis Andrus?

    His head is in the right place:

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Wow, Bogaerts is still only 19 years old in AA ball. Incredible.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Wow, Bogaerts is still only 19 years old in AA ball. Incredible.
    Posted by RedsoxProspects[/QUOTE]

    I think he could stick at SS as long as the errors stay low, which he is improving at...Hes only 19 so you have to expect that (lots of E's), but as long as you see consistent improvement in footwork and agility, thats a very good sign...With WMB looking more and more like the real deal, I think moving bogie to 3b is out of the equation. and with CC signed long term LF is out too..Unless they trade CC, X will be a SS...Wouldnt it be nice to have some power at that position again?
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : No, I'm just a guy waiting to be taught baseball 101 while Salty continues his downward spiral. I'm a real dummy. Now on another thread he's taking credit for making astute assessments on Salty. Amazing.  Oh well. Life goes on.
    Posted by RedsoxProspects[/QUOTE]
    No one is "taking credit" for what has become an obvious problem. Nor does a discussion of the problem require "astute assessments." What "he" did a few weeks ago was  comment that the high K-rate could catch up with Salty. That comment was taken recently by "him" into speculation about playing time the remainder of this season and possible trades during the off-season. 
    You're easily amazed if it's a response to straightforward analysis, then and now.  


     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Bogaerts seems to start off every level slow and then really crank as he adjusts. From the numbers, he looks like a better prospect than Hanley at this point. If it continues we may be looking at a top 10 BA prospect at some point.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Bogaerts seems to start off every level slow and then really crank as he adjusts. From the numbers, he looks like a better prospect than Hanley at this point. If it continues we may be looking at a top 10 BA prospect at some point.
    Posted by RedsoxProspects[/QUOTE]

    I am really excited about this kid...People say because of his size and power potential he should be a corner IF/OF...I say why? If he can field the position (SS), then we have ourselves a solid defener with power up the middle for many years to come...To bad we gave up his brother to the cubbies in the Theo deal...would have loved to see what he turned out to be...
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]My perspective ( bottom line ) 1) Keep Ellsbury. We only get one pick for him if we are lucky. He has a good chance of being a similar stud to the guy we had last year and if we are going to win next year he is probably one of the main drivers on that bus. Keep Ellsbury and let him go in FA. 2) Don't trade any of our big horses ( Crawford, Beckett, Lester...ect. ) unless we can get real solid value for them. I think ( and have thought all year BTW ) that Crawford probably is not the guy we had last year. He was injured and still is but we probably get a lot closer to the guy we thought we signed, rather than what we got last year. His reputation was impeccable when we signed him. Extremely hard worker with consistent performance. His value is at a near all time low. My bet it keeps going up for the next year or so and if we are going to win in 2013, Crawford is one of the drivers of that bus also. 3) Offer Ortiz arb and let Ortiz go in FA if he doesn't accept it. Use the money to sign a Sanchez if reasonably possible. We do have Lackey coming back and he probably will contribute significantly next year. He is another guy with a good reputation when we signed him. He also was injured and pitched through it to help the team with few complaints. Lackey could well contribute. Our starting pitching is BY FAR our biggest need and it should be our priority next winter. Letting Ortiz go, Matsuzaka etc... go resets the luxury tax impact and allows us to use that money for other priorities. Who knows, maybe we can put 3 solid pitchers together next year and actually have a real chance to win. 4) If at the July 31 deadline we do not have a reasonable shot try to at least sell some pieces, unlike this year's debacle. 5) We still have potentially a great team. If we had even 2-3 solid starters performing we would have the potential to get n the playoffs. Maybe next year Morales, Lackey and Buchholz are those three. We should not blow up this team yet. I'm talking 2013.
    Posted by RedsoxProspects[/QUOTE]

    This plan certainly has merit. Losing Ellsbury after 2013 will likely net us 2 draft picks which can help in 2016 and beyond, and we have several prospects that should be ready in 2014 and beyond.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Moon, 
    I seriously think they should stretch Tazawa back out again this offseason and put him in the rotation for 2013, or at least let him compete for a spot...With a consistant 94-96mph FB his offspeed stuff, which was already + stuff, will be and is that much better...I just got a feeling about him since hes had TJS and how good hes looked...

    I agree 100% and take it a step further. We should have kept bard in the Pen and Taz as a starter.

    It's much easier to slide Taz from starter to long relief than back from relief to starter, so I think he should go back to starting this offseason/ST.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    I am really excited about this kid...People say because of his size and power potential he should be a corner IF/OF...I say why? If he can field the position (SS), then we have ourselves a solid defener with power up the middle for many years to come...To bad we gave up his brother to the cubbies in the Theo deal...would have loved to see what he turned out to be...

    I think that before Middlebrooks rocked our world, some saw Bogaerts as our 3Bman of the future and Iggy at SS. Now, many see Ciraico, Iggy and Bogaerts all having possibilities at SS, plus we drafted Marrero and have Vinicio and Lin at SS in our system as well. Although minor league SSs are often moved to other positions, I think we trade a SS prospect or two this winter. We also have other blocked prospects to think about:

    9) 3B Cecchini
    21) 1B/3B Travis Shaw (I think this kid could become very special)
    25) 2B Sean Coyle
    26) 1B/3B Mauro Gomez (DH if Papi walks?)

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Moon,  I seriously think they should stretch Tazawa back out again this offseason and put him in the rotation for 2013, or at least let him compete for a spot...With a consistant 94-96mph FB his offspeed stuff, which was already + stuff, will be and is that much better...I just got a feeling about him since hes had TJS and how good hes looked... I agree 100% and take it a step further. We should have kept bard in the Pen and Taz as a starter. It's much easier to slide Taz from starter to long relief than back from relief to starter, so I think he should go back to starting this offseason/ST.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]
    Agree. 
    This club needs to explore all possibilities for shoring up the rotation. Morales figures to get a good shot at the rotation for the remainder of this year and in ST. Doubront will surely be in the mix. But, as you have said all year, the real need is for a horse. The absence of one took a big toll on the Sox this season.
    I have no idea how Beckett, Lester, and Buchholz will perform in 2013, if all three are still with the club. Neither did Cherrington for 2012.  He gambled on health and effectiveness -- and lost. Given the history of the Big Three, it was not a smart gamble, IMO. 

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    My understanding is that Ellsbury would only result in one pick, if he is still a high performing player ( I'm assuming but even that is suspect ) and is offered a "qualifying offer". I don't think, from reading the agreement, that we even need to offer him "arb" going forward but need only offer him a qualifying offer which is the average salary of the top 125 players in baseball ( or something like that ). When they talk about more than one compensation pick below, i believe that refers to a team which lost 2 or more players who were offered "qualifying offers". This is on page 88 of the new CBA:

    (3) Rights of Former Club

    The following provision shall apply only to each Player who becomes a free agent under this Section B after having been contin- uously under reserve (without interruption) to the same Club (either at the Major or Minor League level) since Opening Day of the recently completed championship season (“Qualified Free Agent”).

    During the Quiet Period, the former Club of a Qualified Free Agent may tender the Qualified Free Agent a one-year Uniform Player’s Contract for the next succeeding season with a guaranteed

    87salary that is equal to the average salary of the 125 highest-paid Players each year (“Qualifying Offer”). The amount of the Qualify- ing Offer each year shall be determined pursuant to Attachment 45 to this Agreement, and shall be communicated to Clubs and Players by the parties within ten (10) days of the conclusion of the championship season. Clubs shall inform the Labor Relations Department (“LRD”) of the Office of the Commissioner whether they will make a Qualifying Offer to a Qualified Free Agent, and the LRD will inform the Players Association no later than 5 P.M. East- ern Time on the last day of the Quiet Period of each Club’s Quali- fying Offers to Qualified Free Agents. If the former Club of a Qualified Free Agent does not tender him a Qualifying Offer, it shall not be entitled to compensation under paragraph (4) of this Section B with respect to that Qualified Free Agent.

    A Qualified Free Agent may accept a Qualifying Offer until the seventh day following the conclusion of the Quiet Period (“Accep- tance Period”). The Players Association shall provide the LRD with a list of the Qualified Free Agents who have accepted the Qualify- ing Offer by 5 P.M. Eastern Time of the final day of the Acceptance Period. Any Qualifying Free Agent whose name is not included on the list provided by the Players Association to the LRD will be deemed to have rejected the Qualifying Offer.

    If the Player accepts the Qualifying Offer, he shall be a signed player for the next season on a one-year contract with a salary equal to the amount of the Qualifying Offer, and shall be eligible for in- season termination pay as set forth in Article IX, Section C if his Contract is terminated under paragraph 7(b)(2) of the Uniform Player’s Contract from the date of acceptance through the conclu- sion of the championship season.

    (4) Compensation

    (a) A Qualified Free Agent shall be subject to compensation only if: (i) his former Club tenders him a Qualifying Offer pursuant to paragraph (3) of this Section B; (ii) the Player declines the Qualify- ing Offer or signs a contract with another Major League Club prior to the expiration of the Acceptance Period; and (iii) the Player signs a Major League contract with another Major League Club that is confirmed by the Players Association and the LRD before the next

    88

    succeeding Major League Rule 4 Draft (“Rule 4 Draft”). A Quali- fied Free Agent who signs a bona fide Minor League contract shall not be subject to compensation irrespective of whether the Minor League contract is subsequently assigned to the Major League Club provided that the execution of the Minor League contract and the subsequent assignment were not the product of an agreement or understanding designed to circumvent Article XX(B)(3) and (4).

    (b) Former Club. The former Club of a Qualified Free Agent subject to compensation shall receive an amateur draft choice (“Special Draft Choice”) in the next Rule 4 Draft. Clubs that have lost Qualified Free Agents subject to compensation shall receive a Special Draft Choice in the reverse order of their won-lost percent- age in the recently completed season, with the selections beginning immediately following the last regular selection in the first round of Rule 4 Draft. If a Club is entitled to more than one Special Draft Choice, its selections will be slotted in succession. If two or more Clubs are tied, the Clubs shall select in the reverse order of their winning percentages in the season prior to the recently completed season, with any remaining ties to be resolved based on preceding season winning percentages.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Tazawa has not been back that long from TJ surgury. He is just now getting his act together strongly, and able to put in more innings. Agreed that he is in the mix next year. We have a lot of guys who could be potential #5 or 6 starters. It would be great if we could develop a #2 or more #3. 

    Heh, Tazawa could be that guy. Mortensen? Morales? We are still in this thing next year with a little luck even without signing a top starting pitcher. Put me down for wanting one though!
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : Agree.  This club needs to explore all possibilities for shoring up the rotation. Morales figures to get a good shot at the rotation for the remainder of this year and in ST. Doubront will surely be in the mix. But, as you have said all year, the real need is for a horse. The absence of one took a big toll on the Sox this season. I have no idea how Beckett, Lester, and Buchholz will perform in 2013, if all three are still with the club. Neither did Cherrington for 2012.  He gambled on health and effectiveness -- and lost. Given the history of the Big Three, it was not a smart gamble, IMO. 
    Posted by expitch[/QUOTE]

    How is it you can say it all so succinctly, when it takes me 10 paragraphs to say the same thing?

    ;)

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]My understand is that Ellsbury would only result in one pick, if he is still a high performing player ( I'm assuming but even that is suspect ) and is offered a "qualifying offer". I don't think, from reading the agreement, that we even need to offer him "arb" going forward but need only offer him a qualifying offer which is the average salary of the top 125 players in baseball ( or something like that ). When they talk about more than one compensation pick below, i believe that refers to a team which lost 2 or more players who were offered "qualifying offers". This is on page 88 of the new CBA: (3) Rights of Former Club The following provision shall apply only to each Player who becomes a free agent under this Section B after having been contin- uously under reserve (without interruption) to the same Club (either at the Major or Minor League level) since Opening Day of the recently completed championship season (“Qualified Free Agent”). During the Quiet Period, the former Club of a Qualified Free Agent may tender the Qualified Free Agent a one-year Uniform Player’s Contract for the next succeeding season with a guaranteed 87salary that is equal to the average salary of the 125 highest-paid Players each year (“Qualifying Offer”). The amount of the Qualify- ing Offer each year shall be determined pursuant to Attachment 45 to this Agreement, and shall be communicated to Clubs and Players by the parties within ten (10) days of the conclusion of the championship season. Clubs shall inform the Labor Relations Department (“LRD”) of the Office of the Commissioner whether they will make a Qualifying Offer to a Qualified Free Agent, and the LRD will inform the Players Association no later than 5 P.M. East- ern Time on the last day of the Quiet Period of each Club’s Quali- fying Offers to Qualified Free Agents. If the former Club of a Qualified Free Agent does not tender him a Qualifying Offer, it shall not be entitled to compensation under paragraph (4) of this Section B with respect to that Qualified Free Agent. A Qualified Free Agent may accept a Qualifying Offer until the seventh day following the conclusion of the Quiet Period (“Accep- tance Period”). The Players Association shall provide the LRD with a list of the Qualified Free Agents who have accepted the Qualify- ing Offer by 5 P.M. Eastern Time of the final day of the Acceptance Period. Any Qualifying Free Agent whose name is not included on the list provided by the Players Association to the LRD will be deemed to have rejected the Qualifying Offer. If the Player accepts the Qualifying Offer, he shall be a signed player for the next season on a one-year contract with a salary equal to the amount of the Qualifying Offer, and shall be eligible for in- season termination pay as set forth in Article IX, Section C if his Contract is terminated under paragraph 7(b)(2) of the Uniform Player’s Contract from the date of acceptance through the conclu- sion of the championship season. (4) Compensation (a) A Qualified Free Agent shall be subject to compensation only if: (i) his former Club tenders him a Qualifying Offer pursuant to paragraph (3) of this Section B; (ii) the Player declines the Qualify- ing Offer or signs a contract with another Major League Club prior to the expiration of the Acceptance Period; and (iii) the Player signs a Major League contract with another Major League Club that is confirmed by the Players Association and the LRD before the next 88 succeeding Major League Rule 4 Draft (“Rule 4 Draft”). A Quali- fied Free Agent who signs a bona fide Minor League contract shall not be subject to compensation irrespective of whether the Minor League contract is subsequently assigned to the Major League Club provided that the execution of the Minor League contract and the subsequent assignment were not the product of an agreement or understanding designed to circumvent Article XX(B)(3) and (4). (b) Former Club. The former Club of a Qualified Free Agent subject to compensation shall receive an amateur draft choice (“Special Draft Choice”) in the next Rule 4 Draft. Clubs that have lost Qualified Free Agents subject to compensation shall receive a Special Draft Choice in the reverse order of their won-lost percent- age in the recently completed season, with the selections beginning immediately following the last regular selection in the first round of Rule 4 Draft. If a Club is entitled to more than one Special Draft Choice, its selections will be slotted in succession. If two or more Clubs are tied, the Clubs shall select in the reverse order of their winning percentages in the season prior to the recently completed season, with any remaining ties to be resolved based on preceding season winning percentages.
    Posted by RedsoxProspects[/QUOTE]

    I have read elsewhere that the team that signs one of these type free agents gives a draft pick as well. Did you leave any section out of this cut and paste?

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Tazawa has not been back that long from TJ surgury. He is just now getting his act together strongly, and able to put in more innings. Agreed that he is in the mix next year. We have a lot of guys who could be potential #5 or 6 starters. It would be great if we could develop a #2 or more #3.  Heh, Tazawa could be that guy. Mortensen? Morales? We are still in this thing next year with a little luck even without signing a top starting pitcher. Put me down for wanting one though!
    Posted by RedsoxProspects[/QUOTE]

    I'm extremely happy with our 4 through 8 starters on the depth chart, but I worry about our #1, #2 and #3. My guess is one of Beckett, Lester or Buch will be a nice #3 or maybe #2. We may get two to be nice 2-3 starters, but we need that "horse".

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : I have read elsewhere that the team that signs one of these type free agents gives a draft pick as well. Did you leave any section out of this cut and paste?
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    No I didn't. I'm asking others to look at the entire agreement to find anything which says 2 picks now. I would not intentionally omit any such references. I just don't have time Moon. I really don't. If I told you what I have going on right now you would probably not believe me. I'm squeezing in this stuff.

    I think any remnants to the 2 picks is from references before the new agreement. There are huge changes in the new agreement. This is one of them I'm pretty sure. Draft pick compensation issues during FA. Tougher salary guidelines for draft picks. International signing issues. It's a new world we live in.

    I put a link there for a certain well informed and comprehensive poster who I normally rely on to fill me in on all details!


     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : I'm extremely happy with our 4 through 8 starters on the depth chart, but I worry about our #1, #2 and #3. My guess is one of Beckett, Lester or Buch will be a nice #3 or maybe #2. We may get two to be nice 2-3 starters, but we need that "horse".
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    All we can do is a very expensive trade for a horse or sign Greinke. No one else is a "horse" IMO ( even Sanchez although he would be the one I would consider signing ). Not saying I'd recommend Greinke. Ergo the possibility that we might just have to hope our guys come around, Buchholz becomes that horse and some of the other guys step up to take over supplementary slots.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Apparently my link post didn't go active for some reason. The new CBA. Here it is again:

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : No I didn't. I'm asking others to look at the entire agreement to find anything which says 2 picks now. I would not intentionally omit any such references. I just don't have time Moon. I really don't. If I told you what I have going on right now you would probably not believe me. I'm squeezing in this stuff. I think any remnants to the 2 picks is from references before the new agreement. There are huge changes in the new agreement. This is one of them I'm pretty sure. Draft pick compensation issues during FA. Tougher salary guidelines for draft picks. International signing issues. It's a new world we live in. I put a link there for a certain well informed and comprehensive poster who I normally rely on to fill me in on all details!
    Posted by RedsoxProspects[/QUOTE]

    I'm not disagreeing with you, and do not doubt your veracity. I'm just saying I read somewhere that the team signing a player who was offered a high enough salary but refuded to accept it, would have to give up a 1st round pick.

    I found this...

    Starting in 2012, Type A and Type B free agents and the use of the Elias ranking system will be eliminated. The current system will be replaced with the following system, according to the new agreement.

    • Only players who have been with their clubs for the entire season will be subject to compensation.

     

    • A free agent will be subject to compensation if his former club offers him a guaranteed one-year contract with a salary equal to the average salary of the 125 highest-paid players from the prior season. The offer must be made at the end of the five-day free agent “quiet period,” and the player will have seven days to accept the offer.

    A club that signs a player subject to compensation will forfeit its first round selection, unless it selects in the top 10, in which case it will forfeit its second highest selection in the draft.

    • The players’ former club will receive a selection at the end of the first round beginning after the last regularly scheduled selection in the round. The former clubs will select based on reverse order of winning percentage from the prior championship season.

    Although is says the club signing the player "forfeits its [pick]", it does not say the team losing the player gets that pick plus the sandwich pick, so it looks like you are right.

    I'm just saying that other posters, including softy, have posted quotes that say something different.


     

     

     

     


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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : All we can do is a very expensive trade for a horse or sign Greinke. No one else is a "horse" IMO ( even Sanchez although he would be the one I would consider signing ). Not saying I'd recommend Greinke. Ergo the possibility that we might just have to hope our guys come around, Buchholz becomes that horse and some of the other guys step up to take over supplementary slots.
    Posted by RedsoxProspects[/QUOTE]

    I am looking at Greinke in a better light than I had before, but perhaps I'm a bit gunshy after the Lackey,Beckett and Crawford deals (although Josh was not a FA).

    My point for years has been, I don't want us to sign a FA #4-5 slot starter, or even a bottom #2 of top #3 slot type. We need, at worst, a solid # 2 slot. Free agents will cost a lot, but we don't lose prospects (just a possible draft pick). Trades can work out better, if the pitcher we get is at a low cost and under control for several years, but those are hard to find. Nobody is trading away a Moore or Bumgarner for peanuts.

    I do see Greinke as a #1 or top #2 starter.
    Other possible (emphasis on possible) FA #2 types:
    Anibel Sanchez
    Jake Peavy
    Brandon McCarthy

    Sleeper types:
    Jeremie Guthrie
    Colby Lewis
    Shaun Marcum

    My thought about trading for a starter is based on the idea that FA money spent on positional players seems to be less risky. I have no data to back this up, but I think spending big on Josh Hamilton is less risky than Greinke, but who knows.



     

Share