For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

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

    For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    First I will say
    FA people want Napoli...won't getting Napoli hurt Larvanway's progress
    Inf not much there
    Hamilton is a FA but what he will want goes against what many here are pizzed off about BIG contracts and he is 32. Will Ross resign???? Then nothing.
    Pitching Zack Greinke, Anibal Sanchez, & Joe Blanton and then a crap shoot not to say these 3 are great options

    Lastly there are now restrictions on other signings to make it all equal.....
    Ben will need to be a miracle worker for this team to be in contention the next two years.

    When the international signing period began last July, several teams jumped in with both feet, signing players to significant bonuses.

    The Texas Rangers, for example, spent $10 million on three players, including a record-setting $5 million for outfielder Nomar Mazara of the Dominican Republic. The Rangers were not alone, with at least seven seven-figure bonuses being awarded right out of the gate. In the 2010-11 signing period, teams spent a combined $47 million, including $11 million by the Rangers, on international signings.

    While First-Year Player Draft spending has escalated over the years, inflation hasn't been exclusive to amateurs involved in that process. The international signing scene has been an unfettered free-market system. After the Draft, only one team negotiates with a player, while all 30 teams can get into the act for an international player who is not subject to the Draft. And there were no constraints on what teams could spend on those players.

    The newly bargained Basic Agreement will change that. From putting in bonus-spending rules along with guidelines for the registering of players, an attempt is being made to level the playing field.

    2012 Draft
    • Top 50 2012 Draft Prospects
    • Competitive Balance Lottery
    • Draft Signing Bonus Pool
    • International Signing Bonus Pool

    The rules for the spending pools are somewhat similar to the Draft spending pools in terms of the penalties that come with going over the limit. Going over by up to five percent will result in a 75-percent tax on the overage. Landing in the 5-to-10-percent range will bring a 100-percent tax and the loss of the right to give more than one player in the next signing period a bonus of more than $500,000. Going over by 10-to-15 percent will lead to a 100-percent tax and the inability to sign any player for more than $500,000 in the next signing period. Any team going over a 15-percent threshold will get hit with a 100-percent tax on the overage and won't be able to exceed $250,000 for any one player in the next signing period.

    The pools for international signings will work a little different. The 2012-13 period will be a transition year, with every team getting the same amount to spend: $2.9 million. After that, there will be differentiated pools, from approximately $1.7 million to $4.7 million. Beginning with the 2013-14 signing period (July 2-June 15), the pools will be determined by winning percentage, with the clubs that finish the previous season with the lowest winning percentages assigned the largest pools. If that system were in place in 2012, the Houston Astros would have been able to spend up to $4.7 million without penalty.

    "The fact they put something in place like that, I've got no problem with it," an international scouting director said.

    The penalties will increase beginning with the 2014-15 signing period if there is not an agreement on an international draft, or drafts, by July 2014.

    Not all international players will be subject to these rules. Players in leagues deemed to be professional (those in Japan, Korea, Taiwan and Cuba apply), are at least 23 years old and have played a certain number of years in those leagues can be signed without the money counting against the pool. Yoenis Cespedes, the 26-year-old outfielder who is a free agent after defecting from Cuba for example, would not count against the pool. Neither would Japanese pitcher Yu Darvish, should he be posted by the Nippon Ham Fighters. But the money spent on Cuban left-hander Aroldis Chapman, who was 22 when he signed with the Reds almost two years ago, would have counted against the pool.

    While it might seem that the new system could hamstring some teams' ability to be aggressive with players similar to Chapman, there is some wiggle room. Like with the Competitive Balance Lottery, there is the ability to make trades to improve a team's position in the market.

    With the differentiated pools, each team's pool is divided into bonus slots. Using Houston as the example again, its $4.7 million is divided into four slots: $3 million, $450,000 and so on. That doesn't mean the Astros would be limited to spending a maximum of $3 million on one player. They could use all of the pool on one player if they wanted to. But the slots are tradeable, and a team can deal away one or more slots. If the Astros decided to include their $450,000 slot in a deal, the receiving team would then have that much more money to spend internationally (no actual money changes hands). One restriction: A team cannot, through trades, increase its pool by more than 50 percent.

    It leads to an intriguing possibility down the road: A trade involving a swap of an international bonus slot and a Competitive Balance Lottery pick.

    "We'll have to see how it plays out," said Royals general manager Dayton Moore. "I do like the opportunity to have flexibility. Your organization is going to go through different phases, where you can afford to give up slot money because you have another alternative. And there are times when you won't be able to do that, when you try to acquire more pool money. I'm for as much opportunity as possible to be creative."

    Finally, there's one more structural change to the market. Any player who wants to be eligible to be signed must be registered with the Major League Scouting Bureau. If that sounds similar to the Draft, it is. The hope is that all of this will be a movement toward some kind of international draft by the summer of 2014. A draft does not sit well with many who work to find good talent in markets like the Dominican Republic and Venezuela. In the end, it may take a while for some international scouts to adjust to a different way of doing business.

    "We expect players to compete on the field," the international scout said. "Not all scouts are created equal."

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

       Jim,  Yesterdays "trade of baseball history" needed to be done to allow the Red $-ox to re-tool for future gains......  Look at it this way, this trade was a lot like what the "BIG O"  did with his "CASH FOR CLUNKERS"   !!!
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....:
    [QUOTE]   Jim,  Yesterdays "trade of baseball history" needed to be done to allow the Red $-ox to re-tool for future gains......  Look at it this way, this trade was a lot like what the "BIG O"  did with his "CASH FOR CLUNKERS"   !!!
    Posted by Bill-806[/QUOTE]

    Cash for clunkers did not work and wasted OUR money. It caused a small spike in sales then it went away. That is why he was talking about doing another one. I'd also like to know how many who did the cash for clunkers have had their new cars taken back because they could not pay for them.

    Retooling is way different now than what it was last year and before, much much more difficult wit all on the same page except for FAs.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Alibiike. Show Alibiike's posts

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings.... : Cash for clunkers did not work and wasted OUR money. It caused a small spike in sales then it went away. That is why he was talking about doing another one. I'd also like to know how many who did the cash for clunkers have had their new cars taken back because they could not pay for them. Retooling is way different now than what it was last year and before, much much more difficult wit all on the same page except for FAs.
    Posted by JimfromFlorida[/QUOTE]

    Ben is planning for the future by building a prospect inventory, so he can trade those prospects away for more prospects, for future building. Right now doeesn't matter. When 2013 becomes a reality, and we are still fielding mediocre players, it will be about the future and all the great prospects we have.

    I hope Ben was not too late to compete for a number 1 pick in the first round of the amatuer draft.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    I don't think many posters here are advoacting spending the $60M saved on this trade on mega-longterm deals for Hamilton, Greinke, and Napoli, but the fact is, go to that extreme and we're still better with these 3 than the 4 we traded away.

    Better yet, don't go that extreme ever again, but instead make some quality trades for some players with shorter term contracts (less risk), bring up a few top prospects before they would have been up had we kept the 4, and sign a few low to mid range FAs to fill some gaps, and we can and should win more than this year, but more importantly, be positioned to pull the trigger when the right guy does come along.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....:
    [QUOTE]I don't think many posters here are advoacting spending the $60M saved on this trade on mega-longterm deals for Hamilton, Greinke, and Napoli, but the fact is, go to that extreme and we're still better with these 3 than the 4 we traded away. Better yet, don't go that extreme ever again, but instead make some quality trades for some players with shorter term contracts (less risk), bring up a few top prospects before they would have been up had we kept the 4, and sign a few low to mid range FAs to fill some gaps, and we can and should win more than this year, but more importantly, be positioned to pull the trigger when the right guy does come along.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]I just saw on another thread that Jim Thome is a free agent. He'd be a good fit for a year.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter55. Show parhunter55's posts

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....:
    [QUOTE]I don't think many posters here are advoacting spending the $60M saved on this trade on mega-longterm deals for Hamilton, Greinke, and Napoli, but the fact is, go to that extreme and we're still better with these 3 than the 4 we traded away. Better yet, don't go that extreme ever again, but instead make some quality trades for some players with shorter term contracts (less risk), bring up a few top prospects before they would have been up had we kept the 4, and sign a few low to mid range FAs to fill some gaps, and we can and should win more than this year, but more importantly, be positioned to pull the trigger when the right guy does come along.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Chances are you cannot get those three for $60 million, first of all.  And second, the Sox would not be any better with those three.  Grienke would not be any better than Beckett in this environment.  Hamilton might provide more power and the same average as Gonzalez, and he might revert to his addictive ways.  Tough to say, really, but Gonzalez was a guaranteed .300 hitter who drove in runs and played GG defense at firts.  No one like that is on their way or even on the horizon.  So unless you think Napoli is some difference maker, I do not see where you have improved the pitching, which is what this team needs and has for the last 5 years, really.  If Ben could have done that while keeping Crawford and AGon, then he should have.  They were not the reason this franchise continues to lose more games than it wins.  And Hamilton, Grienke and Napoli are not the solution, either.

    However, what you said in the last part of your post is one of the saving graces of this trade.  And let's all keep our fingers crossed on Webster and De LaRosa.  If either develops into a top end of the rotation starter, then your waiting for the right guy to come along plan will be fruitful.  But that is 2 or 3 years down the road.  This team is not heading to the playoffs any time sooner, IMO.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings.... : Chances are you cannot get those three for $60 million, first of all.  And second, the Sox would not be any better with those three.  Grienke would not be any better than Beckett in this environment.  Hamilton might provide more power and the same average as Gonzalez, and he might revert to his addictive ways.  Tough to say, really, but Gonzalez was a guaranteed .300 hitter who drove in runs and played GG defense at firts.  No one like that is on their way or even on the horizon.  So unless you think Napoli is some difference maker, I do not see where you have improved the pitching, which is what this team needs and has for the last 5 years, really.  If Ben could have done that while keeping Crawford and AGon, then he should have.  They were not the reason this franchise continues to lose more games than it wins.  And Hamilton, Grienke and Napoli are not the solution, either. However, what you said in the last part of your post is one of the saving graces of this trade.  And let's all keep our fingers crossed on Webster and De LaRosa.  If either develops into a top end of the rotation starter, then your waiting for the right guy to come along plan will be fruitful.  But that is 2 or 3 years down the road.  This team is not heading to the playoffs any time sooner, IMO.
    Posted by parhunter55[/QUOTE]Then we'll lose the fair weather fans. Even better.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter55. Show parhunter55's posts

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    Were that so, were that so...
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ADG. Show ADG's posts

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....:
    [QUOTE]I don't think many posters here are advoacting spending the $60M saved on this trade on mega-longterm deals for Hamilton, Greinke, and Napoli, but the fact is, go to that extreme and we're still better with these 3 than the 4 we traded away. Better yet, don't go that extreme ever again, but instead make some quality trades for some players with shorter term contracts (less risk), bring up a few top prospects before they would have been up had we kept the 4, and sign a few low to mid range FAs to fill some gaps, and we can and should win more than this year, but more importantly, be positioned to pull the trigger when the right guy does come along.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    moon - Perfectly stated and agreed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings.... : Chances are you cannot get those three for $60 million, first of all.  And second, the Sox would not be any better with those three.  Grienke would not be any better than Beckett in this environment.  Hamilton might provide more power and the same average as Gonzalez, and he might revert to his addictive ways.  Tough to say, really, but Gonzalez was a guaranteed .300 hitter who drove in runs and played GG defense at firts.  No one like that is on their way or even on the horizon.  So unless you think Napoli is some difference maker, I do not see where you have improved the pitching, which is what this team needs and has for the last 5 years, really.  If Ben could have done that while keeping Crawford and AGon, then he should have.  They were not the reason this franchise continues to lose more games than it wins.  And Hamilton, Grienke and Napoli are not the solution, either. However, what you said in the last part of your post is one of the saving graces of this trade.  And let's all keep our fingers crossed on Webster and De LaRosa.  If either develops into a top end of the rotation starter, then your waiting for the right guy to come along plan will be fruitful.  But that is 2 or 3 years down the road.  This team is not heading to the playoffs any time sooner, IMO.
    Posted by parhunter55[/QUOTE]

    You are probably right. This team is most likely 2-3 years away from contending. Such is the extent of the damage Epstein wreaked upon the franchise. The trade undid two of his mistakes and undid one that was decent (Agon was not being underpaid to be here; he may have been a little overpaid but never fit in). There is still the Lackey situation to deal with, and there is the neglect of the demise of our pitching quality that has been going on since 2008 that was never adequately addressed too. Ortiz will need to be replaced sooner or later. In summary, Epstein did such damage to this team that major rebuilding is going to be necessary. IF Cherington is up to the task (and I have my reservations since he was trained by Epstein) then it will almost certainly be at least two years before we have a "good" team again. Its going to take time, but at least its gotten started.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings.... : Chances are you cannot get those three for $60 million, first of all.  And second, the Sox would not be any better with those three.  Grienke would not be any better than Beckett in this environment.  Hamilton might provide more power and the same average as Gonzalez, and he might revert to his addictive ways.  Tough to say, really, but Gonzalez was a guaranteed .300 hitter who drove in runs and played GG defense at firts.  No one like that is on their way or even on the horizon.  So unless you think Napoli is some difference maker, I do not see where you have improved the pitching, which is what this team needs and has for the last 5 years, really.  If Ben could have done that while keeping Crawford and AGon, then he should have.  They were not the reason this franchise continues to lose more games than it wins.  And Hamilton, Grienke and Napoli are not the solution, either. However, what you said in the last part of your post is one of the saving graces of this trade.  And let's all keep our fingers crossed on Webster and De LaRosa.  If either develops into a top end of the rotation starter, then your waiting for the right guy to come along plan will be fruitful.  But that is 2 or 3 years down the road.  This team is not heading to the playoffs any time sooner, IMO.
    Posted by parhunter55[/QUOTE]

    i stopped reading after this nonsense about grienke/beckett...
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    Chances are you cannot get those three for $60 million, first of all.  And second, the Sox would not be any better with those three.  Grienke would not be any better than Beckett in this environment.  Hamilton might provide more power and the same average as Gonzalez, and he might revert to his addictive ways.  Tough to say, really, but Gonzalez was a guaranteed .300 hitter who drove in runs and played GG defense at firts.  No one like that is on their way or even on the horizon.  So unless you think Napoli is some difference maker, I do not see where you have improved the pitching, which is what this team needs and has for the last 5 years, really.  If Ben could have done that while keeping Crawford and AGon, then he should have.  They were not the reason this franchise continues to lose more games than it wins.  And Hamilton, Grienke and Napoli are not the solution, either.

    Greinke has pitched in some clutch situations since his recovery from anxiety issues. I'd take his chances for a good 2013 over Beckett anyday of the week.

    Hamilton is a better hitter than AGon.

    Napoli is a difference maker when comparing to what CC has given us so far.

    How much do you think these guys will get per year?
    Hamilton $25-27M?
    Greinke $19-20M?
    Napoli $13-14M?

    That's $57-61M a year.

    Plus, we still have about $30M more to get to this year's total.

    However, what you said in the last part of your post is one of the saving graces of this trade.  And let's all keep our fingers crossed on Webster and De LaRosa.  If either develops into a top end of the rotation starter, then your waiting for the right guy to come along plan will be fruitful.  But that is 2 or 3 years down the road.  This team is not heading to the playoffs any time sooner, IMO.

    I like Webster & de la Rosa, and we needed an infusion of top pitching prospects. My guess is we may use some of these guys or others to trade this winter.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter55. Show parhunter55's posts

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    I expect Hamilton to go in the 25-30 million range, a la Fielder and Pujols.  Grienke will probably get around $20 million, and Napoli between 13 and 15 million.  That means at the low end, they will cost aroudn 58-60 million.  But more likely they total more like 60 - 65 million.  We shall see. 

    And yes, Hamilton is a better hitter than AGon, but not by much (913 OPS to AGon's .881).  And that is when he is playing, and if he could actually come into the spotlight that is Boston and continue to produce at that standard.  Being that he is older and has far fewer games played, that is hoping against hope, really. 

    How can you posit that Napoli will give us better production than Crawford has given us so far?  Based on what, historical numbers?  Crawford's are clearly superior in everything but HRs.  Based on this year? You do know that Crawford has a higher OPS in 2012 than Napoli, no? Based just on the last two seasons? In 2011 Napoli had one tremendous season--a complete outlier, and Crawford had one terrible season-- also a complete outlier. You love the numbers and rail against using small sample sizes to prove arguments. You should know better.  Besides, Napoli is a parttime catcher/DH.  Having him in the lineup means still having a hole in LF and keeping Salty and Lavarnway out of the lineup (Salty is doing almost as well as Napoli, and Lavarnway is almost certain to improve the offensive production over what Salty has done, as you posted just recently).  So the improvement is not evident to me, even if Crawford became just the lousy .255 hitter he was during a year he had a wrist injury and Napols somehow miraculously returned to the .300 BAve, 1.000 OPS  hitter he was in 2011.

    As for Grienke...he has pitched miserably since coming back to the AL and into a pennant chase.  It is a complete crapshoot as to whether he would improve on what Lackey can offer, with a repaired elbow, IMO.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....:
    [QUOTE]I expect Hamilton to go in the 25-30 million range, a la Fielder and Pujols.  Grienke will probably get around $20 million, and Napoli between 13 and 15 million.  That means at the low end, they will cost aroudn 58-60 million.  But more likely they total more like 60 - 65 million.  We shall see.  And yes, Hamilton is a better hitter than AGon, but not by much (913 OPS to AGon's .881).  And that is when he is playing, and if he could actually come into the spotlight that is Boston and continue to produce at that standard.  Being that he is older and has far fewer games played, that is hoping against hope, really.  How can you posit that Napoli will give us better production than Crawford has given us so far?  Based on what, historical numbers?  Crawford's are clearly superior in everything but HRs.  Based on this year? You do know that Crawford has a higher OPS in 2012 than Napoli, no? Based just on the last two seasons? In 2011 Napoli had one tremendous season--a complete outlier, and Crawford had one terrible season-- also a complete outlier. You love the numbers and rail against using small sample sizes to prove arguments. You should know better.  Besides, Napoli is a parttime catcher/DH.  Having him in the lineup means still having a hole in LF and keeping Salty and Lavarnway out of the lineup (Salty is doing almost as well as Napoli, and Lavarnway is almost certain to improve the offensive production over what Salty has done, as you posted just recently).  So the improvement is not evident to me, even if Crawford became just the lousy .255 hitter he was during a year he had a wrist injury and Napols somehow miraculously returned to the .300 BAve, 1.000 OPS  hitter he was in 2011. As for Grienke...he has pitched miserably since coming back to the AL and into a pennant chase.  It is a complete crapshoot as to whether he would improve on what Lackey can offer, with a repaired elbow, IMO.
    Posted by parhunter55[/QUOTE]Tomato Tomahto
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....:
    [QUOTE]I expect Hamilton to go in the 25-30 million range, a la Fielder and Pujols.  Grienke will probably get around $20 million, and Napoli between 13 and 15 million.  That means at the low end, they will cost aroudn 58-60 million.  But more likely they total more like 60 - 65 million.  We shall see.  And yes, Hamilton is a better hitter than AGon, but not by much (913 OPS to AGon's .881).  And that is when he is playing, and if he could actually come into the spotlight that is Boston and continue to produce at that standard.  Being that he is older and has far fewer games played, that is hoping against hope, really.  How can you posit that Napoli will give us better production than Crawford has given us so far?  Based on what, historical numbers?  Crawford's are clearly superior in everything but HRs.  Based on this year? You do know that Crawford has a higher OPS in 2012 than Napoli, no? Based just on the last two seasons? In 2011 Napoli had one tremendous season--a complete outlier, and Crawford had one terrible season-- also a complete outlier. You love the numbers and rail against using small sample sizes to prove arguments. You should know better.  Besides, Napoli is a parttime catcher/DH.  Having him in the lineup means still having a hole in LF and keeping Salty and Lavarnway out of the lineup (Salty is doing almost as well as Napoli, and Lavarnway is almost certain to improve the offensive production over what Salty has done, as you posted just recently).  So the improvement is not evident to me, even if Crawford became just the lousy .255 hitter he was during a year he had a wrist injury and Napols somehow miraculously returned to the .300 BAve, 1.000 OPS  hitter he was in 2011. As for Grienke...he has pitched miserably since coming back to the AL and into a pennant chase.  It is a complete crapshoot as to whether he would improve on what Lackey can offer, with a repaired elbow, IMO.
    Posted by parhunter55[/QUOTE]

    You read too much into small sample sizes and this year's numbers only.

    I'd take hamilton, greinke & napoli over the 4 anyday, but I'm not even for getting those guys either. I just used them as an example of how $60M could be spent this winter. I'd much prefer making some trades and signing mid-level guys.

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

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings.... : Cash for clunkers did not work and wasted OUR money. It caused a small spike in sales then it went away. That is why he was talking about doing another one. I'd also like to know how many who did the cash for clunkers have had their new cars taken back because they could not pay for them. Retooling is way different now than what it was last year and before, much much more difficult wit all on the same page except for FAs.
    Posted by JimfromFlorida[/QUOTE]

    We just saw the movie '2016'...ya know, the movie the white house doesn't want anyone to see.

    I highly recommend everyone here see the movie with an open mind.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings.... : We just saw the movie '2016'...ya know, the movie the white house doesn't want anyone to see. I highly recommend everyone here see the movie with an open mind.
    Posted by ampoule[/QUOTE]The world ends this solstice. Didn't you know?
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter55. Show parhunter55's posts

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings.... : You read too much into small sample sizes and this year's numbers only. I'd take hamilton, greinke & napoli over the 4 anyday, but I'm not even for getting those guys either. I just used them as an example of how $60M could be spent this winter. I'd much prefer making some trades and signing mid-level guys.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]


    I just think you are being unfair to Crawford, and undervaluing AGon's contribution to this team.  I actually like the idea of shedding big money/long-term deals.  And agree with you that just turning those around to enter into more is a) foolish, and b) not going to happen.  And I am also all for making trades and signing some affordable guys who play specific roles on the team.  That is what the Sox did in 2004 and it worked. 

    IMHO, The Sox should trade Ells, Salty, Iglesias, Padilla, Aceves (Lackey, if possible) and almost any MiL position player not names Brentz, Bradley, Marrero or Bogaerts.  And they should sign Ross (and possibly Napoli if Salty is traded) if the money is reasonable, along with a decent utility guy for the IF. Don't know what they will do about 1B.  Hate to see them spend money here since there is not much available and I am not sure Gomez is up to the task glove-wise. But all of those trades are redundant pieces that do not (IMO) hurt the ML roster and have built-in replacements.

    What should they get in return?  Pitching, pitching and more pitching, especially of the young (22 and under) kind.  Then, by 2014 or 2015 they should have all the pieces for a championship caliber team.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings.... : I just think you are being unfair to Crawford, and undervaluing AGon's contribution to this team.  I actually like the idea of shedding big money/long-term deals.  And agree with you that just turning those around to enter into more is a) foolish, and b) not going to happen.  And I am also all for making trades and signing some affordable guys who play specific roles on the team.  That is what the Sox did in 2004 and it worked.  IMHO, The Sox should trade Ells, Salty, Iglesias, Padilla, Aceves (Lackey, if possible) and almost any MiL position player not names Brentz, Bradley, Marrero or Bogaerts.  And they should sign Ross (and possibly Napoli if Salty is traded) if the money is reasonable, along with a decent utility guy for the IF. Don't know what they will do about 1B.  Hate to see them spend money here since there is not much available and I am not sure Gomez is up to the task glove-wise. But all of those trades are redundant pieces that do not (IMO) hurt the ML roster and have built-in replacements. What should they get in return?  Pitching, pitching and more pitching, especially of the young (22 and under) kind.  Then, by 2014 or 2015 they should have all the pieces for a championship caliber team.
    Posted by parhunter55[/QUOTE]I'd keep Ace and Padilla around.
     
  21. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....:
    [QUOTE]Absurd to talk about "trading for mid level". The Red Sox should keep the Dodger farm scraps and never trade for "mid level". This was a Chapter 11 from ownership, to sweep the InePstein and Cherry contracts disasters, Crawford and Beckett. The future doesn't need to copy the past. The Red Sox need to stop pipe dreaming about these "mid level" bums and only take on large contracts for mid twenties type of proven MLB stars. Other than that, they need to develop their own talent and make sure that any clubhouse cancer like Beckett is not given an extension and is run out of town ASAP. They need an all business manager. Valentine is actually old on the scale, and is doing the real dirty clean-up work. They need to be grooming a younger manager who can handle members of the MLBPA.
    Posted by TrotterNixon[/QUOTE]


     
  23. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    Thanks for the repost. I actually read it the first time. Are you ready to talk about hank yet?
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....

    In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings....:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: For those that think the money saved will be a great boom to signing FA and other signings.... : The world ends this solstice. Didn't you know?
    Posted by carnie[/QUOTE]

    Look at the last 4 yrs.  Didn't you know?
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share