A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to emp9's comment:

    Upon a Bailey return from the DL, does anyone think they kick the tires on Tazawa being a starter? Would he be stretched-out enough? 




    Morales is being stretched out right now and we need Taz in the pen. If I had to  guess, Id say this year is a no go for that.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    I agree that threr was nothing this past winter worth going after.

    There were some younger pitchers we could have signed and hoped they got it together by 2014 or 2015, and then there was Anibal Sanchez. Signing him and going with a ore defensive team including Iggy and JBJ may not have helped much this year, but knowing we had him past 2015 would have been more comforting to our future.

     

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    I agree that threr was nothing this past winter worth going after.

    There were some younger pitchers we could have signed and hoped they got it together by 2014 or 2015, and then there was Anibal Sanchez. Signing him and going with a ore defensive team including Iggy and JBJ may not have helped much this year, but knowing we had him past 2015 would have been more comforting to our future.

     




    I think thats where we differ. I didnt want to pack it in this year and look forward to the future in hopes a couple kids got it together by 2014-15. We already have a number of kids that may have it together by then ie; Vasquez, Iggy, Bogy, JBJ, Brentz, Ranaudo, Barnes, Webster, RDLR, Cecchini, etc...I wanted to at least make an attempt to compete this year. Business wise, that was what this team HAD to do.

    I dont think we had a realistic chance at Sanchez. He turned down a larger offer to stay in Detroit because he felt they gave him the best opportunity to win, like Hunter did. Believe me, I would have LOVED to get him. Not saying it was impossible, just improbable with what the Sox were trying to accomplish this year. If the Sox went with your plan, then I could see them making a competetive offer.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    I think thats where we differ. I didnt want to pack it in this year and look forward to the future in hopes a couple kids got it together by 2014-15.

    No, we didn't differ on "packing it in"; we differed on you not thinking my team was better than the one we have now.

    I think would be better in 2013 with Upton and Sanchez, with no Ellsbury, Doubront, Papi, Dempster, Victorino, Drew, and the 3 prospects sent to AZ (Ells traded for prospects that are flipped to AZ with more from us).

    C, 1B, 2B, 3B same

    SS: Drew> Iggy

    CF: Ells>JBJ

    LF: Gomes/Nava>Upton

    RF: Victorino> Nava/Brentz

    DH: Papi> Lava/Gomes/Nava

    SP3: Dempster>Sanchez

    SP5: Doubront>Tazawa/Webster...

    (Note: this was not my first choice option)

     

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    I think thats where we differ. I didnt want to pack it in this year and look forward to the future in hopes a couple kids got it together by 2014-15.

    No, we didn't differ on "packing it in"; we differed on you not thinking my team was better than the one we have now.

    I think would be better in 2013 with Upton and Sanchez, with no Ellsbury, Doubront, Papi, Dempster, Victorino, Drew, and the 3 prospects sent to AZ (Ells traded for prospects that are flipped to AZ with more from us).

    C, 1B, 2B, 3B same

    SS: Drew> Iggy

    CF: Ells>JBJ

    LF: Gomes/Nava>Upton

    RF: Victorino> Nava/Brentz

    DH: Papi> Lava/Gomes/Nava

    SP3: Dempster>Sanchez

    SP5: Doubront>Tazawa/Webster...

    (Note: this was not my first choice option)

     

     




    No, i think your team with those 2 would obviously be better. We differ on The fact that I dont think what the Sox wanted to do would have made sense with your plan. Now, I dont think your plan was a bad one, Ive said that before. But yours and the sox' plans were different.

     

    I still dont think unless you offer AS north of 100M hes not even listening. I also dont think Upton wanted to come here and would have rather gone to play with his brother, hence, the NTC. That, and Im not sure BC letting go of prospects was in his plan. If it was, then maybe.

    Bottom line is both plans are good IF they could accomplish what was needed to say each plan was a success. The difference is in the plans between yours and the Sox. I differ in that your proposed deals wouldnt have worked with what the Sox were trying to do. Not that it was bad. I actually liked it.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    I think thats where we differ. I didnt want to pack it in this year and look forward to the future in hopes a couple kids got it together by 2014-15.

    No, we didn't differ on "packing it in"; we differed on you not thinking my team was better than the one we have now.

    I think would be better in 2013 with Upton and Sanchez, with no Ellsbury, Doubront, Papi, Dempster, Victorino, Drew, and the 3 prospects sent to AZ (Ells traded for prospects that are flipped to AZ with more from us).

    C, 1B, 2B, 3B same

    SS: Drew> Iggy

    CF: Ells>JBJ

    LF: Gomes/Nava>Upton

    RF: Victorino> Nava/Brentz

    DH: Papi> Lava/Gomes/Nava

    SP3: Dempster>Sanchez

    SP5: Doubront>Tazawa/Webster...

    (Note: this was not my first choice option)

     

     




    No, i think your team with those 2 would obviously be better. We differ on The fact that I dont think what the Sox wanted to do would have made sense with your plan. Now, I dont think your plan was a bad one, Ive said that before. But yours and the sox' plans were different.

     

    I still dont think unless you offer AS north of 100M hes not even listening. I also dont think Upton wanted to come here and would have rather gone to play with his brother, hence, the NTC. That, and Im not sure BC letting go of prospects was in his plan. If it was, then maybe.

    Bottom line is both plans are good IF they could accomplish what was needed to say each plan was a success. The difference is in the plans between yours and the Sox. I differ in that your proposed deals wouldnt have worked with what the Sox were trying to do. Not that it was bad. I actually liked it.



    OK, well at least you don't believe this plan was "writing off" 2013.

    Why would we need to pay $20M more to get Sanchez? 

    He signed for $80M/5. I bet he'd have taken $85M/5 or $95M/6

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    I think thats where we differ. I didnt want to pack it in this year and look forward to the future in hopes a couple kids got it together by 2014-15.

    No, we didn't differ on "packing it in"; we differed on you not thinking my team was better than the one we have now.

    I think would be better in 2013 with Upton and Sanchez, with no Ellsbury, Doubront, Papi, Dempster, Victorino, Drew, and the 3 prospects sent to AZ (Ells traded for prospects that are flipped to AZ with more from us).

    C, 1B, 2B, 3B same

    SS: Drew> Iggy

    CF: Ells>JBJ

    LF: Gomes/Nava>Upton

    RF: Victorino> Nava/Brentz

    DH: Papi> Lava/Gomes/Nava

    SP3: Dempster>Sanchez

    SP5: Doubront>Tazawa/Webster...

    (Note: this was not my first choice option)

     

     




    No, i think your team with those 2 would obviously be better. We differ on The fact that I dont think what the Sox wanted to do would have made sense with your plan. Now, I dont think your plan was a bad one, Ive said that before. But yours and the sox' plans were different.

     

    I still dont think unless you offer AS north of 100M hes not even listening. I also dont think Upton wanted to come here and would have rather gone to play with his brother, hence, the NTC. That, and Im not sure BC letting go of prospects was in his plan. If it was, then maybe.

    Bottom line is both plans are good IF they could accomplish what was needed to say each plan was a success. The difference is in the plans between yours and the Sox. I differ in that your proposed deals wouldnt have worked with what the Sox were trying to do. Not that it was bad. I actually liked it.

     



    OK, well at least you don't believe this plan was "writing off" 2013.

     

    Why would we need to pay $20M more to get Sanchez? 

    He signed for $80M/5. I bet he'd have taken $85M/5 or $95M/6

     




    Id have to look for it, but I believe he was offered more. He wanted Detroit because he liked it there and thought they gave him the best chance to win. They also wanted him too, so it was ineveitable he was going to sign. Apparently a few million wasnt going to make a difference to him.

     

    Its kind of refreshing in a way though. He was willing to take a slightly lesser deal to win and didnt just chase the money. The Sox appeared to be a mess for most FA guys. If I was Sanchez, I would have stayed in Detroit too, even if Boston offered me more $$. Detroit should be able to compete for the next few years, especially in a ALC, whereas Boston is realistically in a bridge period over the next couple years.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    I doubt he turned down $20M more, but I do agree he wanted to stay in Detroit. However, I'd bet $95M/6 might have worked.

    (Note: I wasn't for signing Sanchez. I only mentioned him after seeing us spend nearly or over $80M on any 3 of these guys: Papi, Victorino, Dempster and Drew.)

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In concept there was some merit to Moon's approach IMO, but we were limited in our options in last year's FA class and we wanted to hold onto what apparently they thought was a talented farm, and they may have been right about that. And they wanted their picks in this year's draft, which to a degree they would have lost if they went after guys like Sanchez and Kuroda ( my targets ).

    Kuroda has been a rock for years and he could maybe have been had to an agressive short term deal. It would have hurt our biggest rival badly also. Even if he cost us $18 - $20 mil per year, we should have gone after him except for that pesky #7 pick....but consider where this team would be right now if he were our #3 starter.

    Strategically in a way they actually did a variant of moon's approach. Lots of short term deals which enabled them to keep both their prospects and their picks in this year's draft. Moon wanted to be more agressive in that approach and let go of some vets for even more of a reboot ( my interpretation of his proposal ) but to me, the FO had huge financial considerations in protecting the franchise. Fandom can be a fickle thing. They had to keep the turnstiles moving. It was a prudent decision not to write the year off competitively.

    I have got a lot of things right the past couple years but as with any of us got some things very wrong. It happens to those of us who man up to the facts, including Moon who is at least as stand up and honest as anyone here. I didn't like bringing back Ortiz for the last 2 years really because I'm not confident he is PED free and suspected he could tank at any time. But so far, he has been excellent if a little injury prone recently. Still a solid value. I was clearly wrong.

    I have been wrong to a degree recently on Salty but overall, would still have traded him as part of a Moon type reboot. He is signed short term only and I was confident Lavarnway would come back strong and it appears to me at least that he still will. He had some solid AB in the game the other day with 2 liners to RF and appears to have cut down on his swing and will get better results at the mlb level going forward. Eventually the pop may even come back but he's no longer an easy out at the mlb level...IMO. I'd still trade Salty in a heartbeat but I recognize that it is very important to have depth at the catcher position also and Lavarnway does still represent cheap depth. It's getting to the point though where Vasquez will be able to provide that same cheap depth that LAvarnway provides now. I would support trading Salty even more this July.

    I appear to be wrong to a degree on Victorino also but did like the concept of a really strong defender in RF. I didn't think the guy would hit .300 though or be so off the charts great defensively in RF. He makes JD Drew look like a piker out there. Good for him.

    I anticipated that LAckey would come back better than before and I'm still on target with that I think. He will never be like he was with the Angels but he might be close. The guy has gotten some bad luck and he is coming back from TJ. He probably ends up our #3 at some point IMO.

    I think a cautious Pollyanna approach is still the best analysis of this team. They had a chance this past winter, if the starters were better than most expected but there were some indications that they might be, and I think that has played out about right so far. They are better than conventional wisdom anticipated. 

    The recent problems are to a degree bad luck. We seem to be hitting line drives right at people and having the opposite happen recently regarding our pitchers. We don't look championship calibre but it's a lot closer than people thought last winter.We still have a chance. It's all about that starting pitching. It always is.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:

    In concept there was some merit to Moon's approach IMO, but we were limited in our options in last year's FA class and we wanted to hold onto what apparently they thought was a talented farm, and they may have been right about that. And they wanted their picks in this year's draft, which to a degree they would have lost if they went after guys like Sanchez and Kuroda ( my targets ).

    Kuroda has been a rock for years and he could maybe have been had to an agressive short term deal. It would have hurt our biggest rival badly also. Even if he cost us $18 - $20 mil per year, we should have gone after him except for that pesky #7 pick....but consider where this team would be right now if he were our #3 starter.

    Strategically in a way they actually did a variant of moon's approach. Lots of short term deals which enabled them to keep both their prospects and their picks in this year's draft. Moon wanted to be more agressive in that approach and let go of some vets for even more of a reboot ( my interpretation of his proposal ) but to me, the FO had huge financial considerations in protecting the franchise. Fandom can be a fickle thing. They had to keep the turnstiles moving. It was a prudent decision not to write the year off competitively.

    I have got a lot of things right the past couple years but as with any of us got some things very wrong. It happens to those of us who man up to the facts, including Moon who is at least as stand up and honest as anyone here. I didn't like bringing back Ortiz for the last 2 years really because I'm not confident he is PED free and suspected he could tank at any time. But so far, he has been excellent if a little injury prone recently. Still a solid value. I was clearly wrong.

    I have been wrong to a degree recently on Salty but overall, would still have traded him as part of a Moon type reboot. He is signed short term only and I was confident Lavarnway would come back strong and it appears to me at least that he still will. He had some solid AB in the game the other day with 2 liners to RF and appears to have cut down on his swing and will get better results at the mlb level going forward. Eventually the pop may even come back but he's no longer an easy out at the mlb level...IMO. I'd still trade Salty in a heartbeat but I recognize that it is very important to have depth at the catcher position also and Lavarnway does still represent cheap depth. It's getting to the point though where Vasquez will be able to provide that same cheap depth that LAvarnway provides now. I would support trading Salty even more this July.

    I appear to be wrong to a degree on Victorino also but did like the concept of a really strong defender in RF. I didn't think the guy would hit .300 though or be so off the charts great defensively in RF. He makes JD Drew look like a piker out there. Good for him.

    I anticipated that LAckey would come back better than before and I'm still on target with that I think. He will never be like he was with the Angels but he might be close. The guy has gotten some bad luck and he is coming back from TJ. He probably ends up our #3 at some point IMO.

    I think a cautious Pollyanna approach is still the best analysis of this team. They had a chance this past winter, if the starters were better than most expected but there were some indications that they might be, and I think that has played out about right so far. They are better than conventional wisdom anticipated. 

    The recent problems are to a degree bad luck. We seem to be hitting line drives right at people and having the opposite happen recently regarding our pitchers. We don't look championship calibre but it's a lot closer than people thought last winter.We still have a chance. It's all about that starting pitching. It always is.



    Unlike softy, I was not for keeping our budget low.

    Yes, I wanted to let some vets go- via trade or offering Papi $22M/2 plus incentives or $13M/1 and let him choose.

    I wanted to give a few of our prospects a better chance to win a position, but to fill other positions with younger or better players who would be here for 2015 and beyond.

    Ben's plan just put off those choices until later- in hopes that the FA classes are better in years to come. I'm sure he also wanted to get a better idea on what prospects can be trusted before making a big splash signing.

    Again, I was not for A Sanchez. That was my secondary plan.

    I was for trading for J Upton, which would have lost some prospects, but I thought they could have been replaced by trading Ellsbury, Aceves, Doubront, and maybe Miller. I also said we should trade Iggy or play him. Trade Salty or extend him. Trade Lester or extend him (or plan to extend him).

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:

    In concept there was some merit to Moon's approach IMO, but we were limited in our options in last year's FA class and we wanted to hold onto what apparently they thought was a talented farm, and they may have been right about that. And they wanted their picks in this year's draft, which to a degree they would have lost if they went after guys like Sanchez and Kuroda ( my targets ).

    Kuroda has been a rock for years and he could maybe have been had to an agressive short term deal. It would have hurt our biggest rival badly also. Even if he cost us $18 - $20 mil per year, we should have gone after him except for that pesky #7 pick....but consider where this team would be right now if he were our #3 starter.

    Strategically in a way they actually did a variant of moon's approach. Lots of short term deals which enabled them to keep both their prospects and their picks in this year's draft. Moon wanted to be more agressive in that approach and let go of some vets for even more of a reboot ( my interpretation of his proposal ) but to me, the FO had huge financial considerations in protecting the franchise. Fandom can be a fickle thing. They had to keep the turnstiles moving. It was a prudent decision not to write the year off competitively.

    I have got a lot of things right the past couple years but as with any of us got some things very wrong. It happens to those of us who man up to the facts, including Moon who is at least as stand up and honest as anyone here. I didn't like bringing back Ortiz for the last 2 years really because I'm not confident he is PED free and suspected he could tank at any time. But so far, he has been excellent if a little injury prone recently. Still a solid value. I was clearly wrong.

    I have been wrong to a degree recently on Salty but overall, would still have traded him as part of a Moon type reboot. He is signed short term only and I was confident Lavarnway would come back strong and it appears to me at least that he still will. He had some solid AB in the game the other day with 2 liners to RF and appears to have cut down on his swing and will get better results at the mlb level going forward. Eventually the pop may even come back but he's no longer an easy out at the mlb level...IMO. I'd still trade Salty in a heartbeat but I recognize that it is very important to have depth at the catcher position also and Lavarnway does still represent cheap depth. It's getting to the point though where Vasquez will be able to provide that same cheap depth that LAvarnway provides now. I would support trading Salty even more this July.

    I appear to be wrong to a degree on Victorino also but did like the concept of a really strong defender in RF. I didn't think the guy would hit .300 though or be so off the charts great defensively in RF. He makes JD Drew look like a piker out there. Good for him.

    I anticipated that LAckey would come back better than before and I'm still on target with that I think. He will never be like he was with the Angels but he might be close. The guy has gotten some bad luck and he is coming back from TJ. He probably ends up our #3 at some point IMO.

    I think a cautious Pollyanna approach is still the best analysis of this team. They had a chance this past winter, if the starters were better than most expected but there were some indications that they might be, and I think that has played out about right so far. They are better than conventional wisdom anticipated. 

    The recent problems are to a degree bad luck. We seem to be hitting line drives right at people and having the opposite happen recently regarding our pitchers. We don't look championship calibre but it's a lot closer than people thought last winter.We still have a chance. It's all about that starting pitching. It always is.




    good analysis Boom.

    What were your thoughts on the Drew signing and what are they now?

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    I dont think we had a realistic chance at Sanchez. He turned down a larger offer to stay in Detroit because he felt they gave him the best opportunity to win, like Hunter did.



    That's not exactly what happened.  Sanchez originally appeared to have a deal with the Tigers for 5 years, $75 million.  Then the Cubs jumped in and offered him $77.5 million for 5 years, and there were some premature stories that the Cubs had a deal with him.  But the Tigers bumped their offer to $80 million and Sanchez agreed to it.  So in effect he used the Cubs to get an extra $5 million out of the Tigers.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

     

    I dont think we had a realistic chance at Sanchez. He turned down a larger offer to stay in Detroit because he felt they gave him the best opportunity to win, like Hunter did.

     



    That's not exactly what happened.  Sanchez originally appeared to have a deal with the Tigers for 5 years, $75 million.  Then the Cubs jumped in and offered him $77.5 million for 5 years, and there were some premature stories that the Cubs had a deal with him.  But the Tigers bumped their offer to $80 million and Sanchez agreed to it.  So in effect he used the Cubs to get an extra $5 million out of the Tigers.

     




    Gotcha..Thank Hxf

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:

     

    In concept there was some merit to Moon's approach IMO, but we were limited in our options in last year's FA class and we wanted to hold onto what apparently they thought was a talented farm, and they may have been right about that. And they wanted their picks in this year's draft, which to a degree they would have lost if they went after guys like Sanchez and Kuroda ( my targets ).

    Kuroda has been a rock for years and he could maybe have been had to an agressive short term deal. It would have hurt our biggest rival badly also. Even if he cost us $18 - $20 mil per year, we should have gone after him except for that pesky #7 pick....but consider where this team would be right now if he were our #3 starter.

    Strategically in a way they actually did a variant of moon's approach. Lots of short term deals which enabled them to keep both their prospects and their picks in this year's draft. Moon wanted to be more agressive in that approach and let go of some vets for even more of a reboot ( my interpretation of his proposal ) but to me, the FO had huge financial considerations in protecting the franchise. Fandom can be a fickle thing. They had to keep the turnstiles moving. It was a prudent decision not to write the year off competitively.

    I have got a lot of things right the past couple years but as with any of us got some things very wrong. It happens to those of us who man up to the facts, including Moon who is at least as stand up and honest as anyone here. I didn't like bringing back Ortiz for the last 2 years really because I'm not confident he is PED free and suspected he could tank at any time. But so far, he has been excellent if a little injury prone recently. Still a solid value. I was clearly wrong.

    I have been wrong to a degree recently on Salty but overall, would still have traded him as part of a Moon type reboot. He is signed short term only and I was confident Lavarnway would come back strong and it appears to me at least that he still will. He had some solid AB in the game the other day with 2 liners to RF and appears to have cut down on his swing and will get better results at the mlb level going forward. Eventually the pop may even come back but he's no longer an easy out at the mlb level...IMO. I'd still trade Salty in a heartbeat but I recognize that it is very important to have depth at the catcher position also and Lavarnway does still represent cheap depth. It's getting to the point though where Vasquez will be able to provide that same cheap depth that LAvarnway provides now. I would support trading Salty even more this July.

    I appear to be wrong to a degree on Victorino also but did like the concept of a really strong defender in RF. I didn't think the guy would hit .300 though or be so off the charts great defensively in RF. He makes JD Drew look like a piker out there. Good for him.

    I anticipated that LAckey would come back better than before and I'm still on target with that I think. He will never be like he was with the Angels but he might be close. The guy has gotten some bad luck and he is coming back from TJ. He probably ends up our #3 at some point IMO.

    I think a cautious Pollyanna approach is still the best analysis of this team. They had a chance this past winter, if the starters were better than most expected but there were some indications that they might be, and I think that has played out about right so far. They are better than conventional wisdom anticipated. 

    The recent problems are to a degree bad luck. We seem to be hitting line drives right at people and having the opposite happen recently regarding our pitchers. We don't look championship calibre but it's a lot closer than people thought last winter.We still have a chance. It's all about that starting pitching. It always is.

     




    good analysis Boom.

     

    What were your thoughts on the Drew signing and what are they now?



    I wanted to play Iglesias but again, I think they were right not to count on Iglesias, That is the one thing people here miss. People are going to get hurt. Having a cheap, controllable sub really helps, especially if they are good enough to play at the mlb level. If they gave it to Iglesias I guarantee you he would have been hurt a lot. It is in his history. 

    I thought we would probably rebuild this year to a degree as well, projecting 91 wins or so, so I wanted the youngsters to play some but I think they did the right thing signing Drew, who is going to be fine long term.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

     

    I dont think we had a realistic chance at Sanchez. He turned down a larger offer to stay in Detroit because he felt they gave him the best opportunity to win, like Hunter did.

     



    That's not exactly what happened.  Sanchez originally appeared to have a deal with the Tigers for 5 years, $75 million.  Then the Cubs jumped in and offered him $77.5 million for 5 years, and there were some premature stories that the Cubs had a deal with him.  But the Tigers bumped their offer to $80 million and Sanchez agreed to it.  So in effect he used the Cubs to get an extra $5 million out of the Tigers.

     



    And, maybe Detroit would go to $85M, if Boston offered $83M/5. Maybe not.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    I heard Buster Wedgie reported that your grandmother didn't do the dishes, a few days ago? Is that true?



    You believe anything the press says, as long as they agree with you.

    Rumors of my grandma's demise have been grealy exaggerated.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    And, maybe Detroit would go to $85M, if Boston offered $83M/5. Maybe not.



    Yes, there's no way of knowing if the Red Sox could have landed Sanchez if they had been willing to go to $83 or $85 million.  It appears that they stayed away from him because they thought the price was too steep even at $75 million. 

    And the way Sanchez is pitching, this certainly may turn out to have been a mistake.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    And, maybe Detroit would go to $85M, if Boston offered $83M/5. Maybe not.

     



    Yes, there's no way of knowing if the Red Sox could have landed Sanchez if they had been willing to go to $83 or $85 million.  It appears that they stayed away from him because they thought the price was too steep even at $75 million. 

     

    And the way Sanchez is pitching, this certainly may turn out to have been a mistake.




    I think the deep pockets of the Detroit owners would have made it impossible, considering what the Sox were doing, to let them sign him. IMHO, the Sox could have upped the offer, but not matched what Detroit could or would offer.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    And, maybe Detroit would go to $85M, if Boston offered $83M/5. Maybe not.

     



    Yes, there's no way of knowing if the Red Sox could have landed Sanchez if they had been willing to go to $83 or $85 million.  It appears that they stayed away from him because they thought the price was too steep even at $75 million. 

     

    And the way Sanchez is pitching, this certainly may turn out to have been a mistake.

     




    I think the deep pockets of the Detroit owners would have made it impossible, considering what the Sox were doing, to let them sign him. IMHO, the Sox could have upped the offer, but not matched what Detroit could or would offer.

     



    I'm not sure Detroit matches $96M/6

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    And, maybe Detroit would go to $85M, if Boston offered $83M/5. Maybe not.

     



    Yes, there's no way of knowing if the Red Sox could have landed Sanchez if they had been willing to go to $83 or $85 million.  It appears that they stayed away from him because they thought the price was too steep even at $75 million. 

     

    And the way Sanchez is pitching, this certainly may turn out to have been a mistake.

    The Sox lost interest when it approached 50 million.  They clearly weren't going to sign anyone in this free agent class to a long term/high dollars contract.  They are obviously aware that they were going to likely have to extend Lester & Buchholz fairly soon, and having 3 guys in your rotation making close to 100 million or more is a recipe for disaster.  

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to jasko2248's comment:

    The Sox lost interest when it approached 50 million.  They clearly weren't going to sign anyone in this free agent class to a long term/high dollars contract.  They are obviously aware that they were going to likely have to extend Lester & Buchholz fairly soon, and having 3 guys in your rotation making close to 100 million or more is a recipe for disaster.  



    I don't know about this.  Buchholz is under control through 2017, so his contract + option years actually expires at the same time as Sanchez's.  And Lackey is off the books after 2014, except for the minimum wage option for 2015.

    The Sox may, of course, be eyeing a big pitching acquisition that we don't know about yet.   

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

     

    In response to jasko2248's comment:

     

    The Sox lost interest when it approached 50 million.  They clearly weren't going to sign anyone in this free agent class to a long term/high dollars contract.  They are obviously aware that they were going to likely have to extend Lester & Buchholz fairly soon, and having 3 guys in your rotation making close to 100 million or more is a recipe for disaster.  

     



    I don't know about this.  Buchholz is under control through 2017, so his contract + option years actually expires at the same time as Sanchez's.  And Lackey is off the books after 2014, except for the minimum wage option for 2015.

     

    The Sox may, of course, be eyeing a big pitching acquisition that we don't know about yet.   

     




     

    You are correct...forgot about 2 club options.  Either way, they weren't going to give Sanchez anything close to 100 million, the Ilitch family's Real Estate holdings rival Donald Trump's and the old man is approaching his mid-eighties and desperately wants to win now.  I don't see money  being an issue at all, but this has been beat to death on this board.  He wanted to pitch in Detroit, which isn't insignificant, either...

     

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to jasko2248's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    And, maybe Detroit would go to $85M, if Boston offered $83M/5. Maybe not.

     



    Yes, there's no way of knowing if the Red Sox could have landed Sanchez if they had been willing to go to $83 or $85 million.  It appears that they stayed away from him because they thought the price was too steep even at $75 million. 

     

    And the way Sanchez is pitching, this certainly may turn out to have been a mistake.

     

     

    The Sox lost interest when it approached 50 million.  They clearly weren't going to sign anyone in this free agent class to a long term/high dollars contract.  They are obviously aware that they were going to likely have to extend Lester & Buchholz fairly soon, and having 3 guys in your rotation making close to 100 million or more is a recipe for disaster.  



    Obviously you are right, but that doesn't mean some can't disagree with the choice.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share