Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    Dempster would be a waste of 27 million as a number nine starter. The guy has nothing. We have a number of minor leaguers who could do as well or better for much less. This guy is a loser. 

    Stabbed by Foulke.



    no way. In case you haven't noticed, since buch has been hurt we've given minor leaguers the chance to start and none have done better than Dempster. BTW, Dempster has an ERA+ of 101 which is essentially the definition of a #5 starter..... His 4.14 ERA ranks #26 among ALL american league starters and is T-13 for most strikeouts in the AL.

    Just DFA this bum, clearly the guy has nothing and we would be better off without him..

    Almost any team in the majors would like to have dempster as their #5 starter.

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to mef429's comment:

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Dempster would be a waste of 27 million as a number nine starter. The guy has nothing. We have a number of minor leaguers who could do as well or better for much less. This guy is a loser. 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

     



    no way. In case you haven't noticed, since buch has been hurt we've given minor leaguers the chance to start and none have done better than Dempster. BTW, Dempster has an ERA+ of 101 which is essentially the definition of a #5 starter..... His 4.14 ERA ranks #26 among ALL american league starters and is T-13 for most strikeouts in the AL.

     

    Just DFA this bum, clearly the guy has nothing and we would be better off without him..

    Almost any team in the majors would like to have dempster as their #5 starter.

    [/QUOTE]

    If they would pick up his contract, we would be crazy not to let them have him. Numbering your starting pitchers one through five serves no purpose whatsoever. 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    In response to mef429's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Dempster would be a waste of 27 million as a number nine starter. The guy has nothing. We have a number of minor leaguers who could do as well or better for much less. This guy is a loser. 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

     

     



    no way. In case you haven't noticed, since buch has been hurt we've given minor leaguers the chance to start and none have done better than Dempster. BTW, Dempster has an ERA+ of 101 which is essentially the definition of a #5 starter..... His 4.14 ERA ranks #26 among ALL american league starters and is T-13 for most strikeouts in the AL.

     

     

    Just DFA this bum, clearly the guy has nothing and we would be better off without him..

    Almost any team in the majors would like to have dempster as their #5 starter.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Numbering your starting pitchers one through five serves no purpose whatsoever. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    what a great counterpoint. Don't worry about addressing all my other points that actually relate to the topic. just focus on one arbitraty detail of my post and hope the deflection works.

    good job DG!

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    good job DG.                  Thanks. About time I got some credit on here.

    Stabbed by Foulke.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    It is possible to watch the spending and put together a contending team as some teams have been able to do. But if you have the money to spend in a big market, you should spend it and spend it wisely.  I don't know how much Ellsbury will be offered in free agency, but I do think he is one of the top players in the game today. If the Sox can sign him without breaking the bank, they should do it.  This year they are paying 23 million to Dempster and Drew.  For what ?  Mediocrity and more mediocrity.

    I was against those signings and Victorino's as well.

    I don't see how bringing up these signings helps your case. To me it makes it shakier. Think of it this way: everyone here seems to think that because we have so little money on the books over the next few years, $18+M a year for Jacoby will hardly restrict us at all, but what if a few of the other guys we sign turn out like Dempster, Drew and Shane? Mediocrity. Then we will need more to fill the gaps, and it may not be there, because one player out of 40 is eating up 1/9th of the payroll budget.

    Why do you now trust Ben to fill the gaps with anything more than mediacrity?

    I happen to think this won't happen. I still trust Ben to do better with next year's signings. We have been snake bitten a bit this year with our signings, IMO.

     

    BTW, what is "not breaking the bank" to you?

    We may be arguing about nothing here. Jacoby will probably get $16-20M a year x 5-6 years. Is $90M/5 breaking the bank? 

    Sox4ever

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Moon, we can fill those holes you mentioned without throwing money at them. We have a great farm system and will not allow every prospect the chance to make the ML roster. Some will be traded. JBJ is a perfect cantidate to be traded if we resign Jacoby. You seriously think we couldn't get a good Catcher/SP/RP in return for Bradley? One that is cost controlled as well. Your making a mountain out of a molehill with this cash thing.

    I am not. I am just pointing out that spending on Ellsbury will restrict the spending elsewhere. It is undeniable. I never said that signing Ellsbury meant we can not fill other slots capably. My point has been that many here are quick to rely on guys like Lava, Carp. Middlebrooks, Bogaerts, Wilson, Webster, Workman or others, but then are down on JBJ as a capable option (with Victorino and Brentz as back-ups).

    I know we can sign Ellsbury and trade or keep JBJ. I never said it would be a bad thing (unless the cost is way overboard). All I am saying that I feel the drop off from Jacoby to JBJ is not as great as what we can gain by spening the money elsewhere and gaining the comp pick.

    You say we can sign Jacoby and trade JBJ. True, but couldn't I argue that we can sign a great 3Bman and trade Boggy for something great? Sign an ace pitcher and trade one of our starters for a catcher and more? Sign a 1Bman and trade Carp and/or Middlebrooks.

     

    Over the next few years we WILL have an influx of talent coming from our farm system on the cheap. That allows us to spend big(er) in other areas like retaining Pedey, Jacoby and other core players that will help us be a world series contender. Yeah we could spread that money out a bit more but i don't think we better off than giving 100M to jacoby. the sox will make more than 100M off of him with his play on the field and merchandizing... Plus that turns JBJ into the centerpeice of a deal for a stud pitcher or stud RH'ed bat you've been clamoring for over the years.

    That is certainly an option, but I do not think jacoby is worth $100M/6 (assuming that is what you meant). If you meant $100M/5, I can never go along with that. That's 1/9th of our total budget and about half of our winter budget not counting any Pedey extension or Lester option taken.

    Losing Ellsbury will be a big loss, but paying $100M will restrict us for years regardless of how many of our prospects come through for us at low cost. 

    Sox4ever

     




    It wont restrict us for years. maybe 2014 a little bit, but thats it. we have under 30M committed to 2015 and less than 1M committed to 2016. less arbitration. We have plenty of room on the budget to pay him and pedey 16-18M each. To keep together a group of core players that are proven producers in the ALE and in Boston for years to come is they way to go. Every team that wants to have ongoing and continued success season to season needs to have a group of core players. Its not like they are just throwing money at guys like Gonzo and CC. Pedey and Ells have proved themselves here.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    It's basic math. It doesn't matter where our base salary budget is in 2015 and beyond, if we are paying Jacoby $14M a year or $20M a year, the amount is deducted from what we have to spend that year on other players. This does not mean his contract will cripple us, as I said the CC deal would, but none the less, any amount we pay any player over minumum wage is that amount we can't spend elsewhere. That is the defintion of restriction.

    I am not saying we can't or won't win if we pay Jacoby $18M x 5. We will have a lot of money to fill a lot of opening slots in coming years, but some of those slots are some huge shoes to fill- like Papi, and now Lackey among others. I am confident some of our prospects are going to make it bigtime, but I do not think all will. We will need to spend money to fill several slots. I like the way we are positioned with or without Ellsbury in the coming years. It's a close call, but I like our outlook better with the draft pick, JBJ in CF and an added $18M to spend elsewhere.

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    In response to mef429's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Dempster would be a waste of 27 million as a number nine starter. The guy has nothing. We have a number of minor leaguers who could do as well or better for much less. This guy is a loser. 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

     

     



    no way. In case you haven't noticed, since buch has been hurt we've given minor leaguers the chance to start and none have done better than Dempster. BTW, Dempster has an ERA+ of 101 which is essentially the definition of a #5 starter..... His 4.14 ERA ranks #26 among ALL american league starters and is T-13 for most strikeouts in the AL.

     

     

    Just DFA this bum, clearly the guy has nothing and we would be better off without him..

    Almost any team in the majors would like to have dempster as their #5 starter.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    If they would pick up his contract, we would be crazy not to let them have him. Numbering your starting pitchers one through five serves no purpose whatsoever. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Forget 1-5 numbers. There are 15 teams in the AL and only 25 pitchers with a better ERA.

    He's had horrible run support.

    He has not pitched like a guy making $26M/2, but he is doing better than most SP'ers in the AL.

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    It is possible to watch the spending and put together a contending team as some teams have been able to do. But if you have the money to spend in a big market, you should spend it and spend it wisely.  I don't know how much Ellsbury will be offered in free agency, but I do think he is one of the top players in the game today. If the Sox can sign him without breaking the bank, they should do it.  This year they are paying 23 million to Dempster and Drew.  For what ?  Mediocrity and more mediocrity.

    I was against those signings and Victorino's as well.

    I don't see how bringing up these signings helps your case. To me it makes it shakier. Think of it this way: everyone here seems to think that because we have so little money on the books over the next few years, $18+M a year for Jacoby will hardly restrict us at all, but what if a few of the other guys we sign turn out like Dempster, Drew and Shane? Mediocrity. Then we will need more to fill the gaps, and it may not be there, because one player out of 40 is eating up 1/9th of the payroll budget.

    Why do you now trust Ben to fill the gaps with anything more than mediacrity?

    I happen to think this won't happen. I still trust Ben to do better with next year's signings. We have been snake bitten a bit this year with our signings, IMO.

     

    BTW, what is "not breaking the bank" to you?

    We may be arguing about nothing here. Jacoby will probably get $16-20M a year x 5-6 years. Is $90M/5 breaking the bank? 

    Sox4ever




    I can't give you a number that breaks the bank. That is up to John Henry. We can speculate all we want to. It means nothing. I just want to see us put our best possible team on the field within whatever our spending limitations are. I think the best way to do that is to try and lock up your core players, add in your young, low cost talent and spend on the needed pieces in free agency. It is not easy to do all that and do it right. As far as Ellsbury is concerned ; I think he is one of our best players, and it would be good to try and keep him. As for a dollar amount  ,  I don't know. Obviously , it is always a risk. You could end up regretting any long term, big money contract. If I  was a wealthy team owner in a big market, I would try my best to give the fans a championship team. But I would not be in business to lose money either. So , I can't answer your question about how much it takes to break the bank here.  Sorry.

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    It is possible to watch the spending and put together a contending team as some teams have been able to do. But if you have the money to spend in a big market, you should spend it and spend it wisely.  I don't know how much Ellsbury will be offered in free agency, but I do think he is one of the top players in the game today. If the Sox can sign him without breaking the bank, they should do it.  This year they are paying 23 million to Dempster and Drew.  For what ?  Mediocrity and more mediocrity.

    I was against those signings and Victorino's as well.

    I don't see how bringing up these signings helps your case. To me it makes it shakier. Think of it this way: everyone here seems to think that because we have so little money on the books over the next few years, $18+M a year for Jacoby will hardly restrict us at all, but what if a few of the other guys we sign turn out like Dempster, Drew and Shane? Mediocrity. Then we will need more to fill the gaps, and it may not be there, because one player out of 40 is eating up 1/9th of the payroll budget.

    Why do you now trust Ben to fill the gaps with anything more than mediacrity?

    I happen to think this won't happen. I still trust Ben to do better with next year's signings. We have been snake bitten a bit this year with our signings, IMO.

     

    BTW, what is "not breaking the bank" to you?

    We may be arguing about nothing here. Jacoby will probably get $16-20M a year x 5-6 years. Is $90M/5 breaking the bank? 

    Sox4ever

     




    I can't give you a number that breaks the bank. That is up to John Henry. We can speculate all we want to. It means nothing. I just want to see us put our best possible team on the field within whatever our spending limitations are. I think the best way to do that is to try and lock up your core players, add in your young, low cost talent and spend on the needed pieces in free agency. It is not easy to do all that and do it right. As far as Ellsbury is concerned ; I think he is one of our best players, and it would be good to try and keep him. As for a dollar amount  ,  I don't know. Obviously , it is always a risk. You could end up regretting any long term, big money contract. If I  was a wealthy team owner in a big market, I would try my best to give the fans a championship team. But I would not be in business to lose money either. So , I can't answer your question about how much it takes to break the bank here.  Sorry.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Fair enough.

    I also think Jacoby is one of our best players.

    Pedey, Papi, Ells and Buch is a super core.

    With Papi probably retiring after 2015 or declining steeply by then, I can see the reasoning behind wanting to keep Jacoby around.

    Of course we don't know really know what "breaking the bank" is, since henry can, at any time, just give the okay to go way over the luxury treshhold, but I am going on the assumption that we will try and stay under the limit or very near it for years to come.

    Based on that assumption, I think $90M/5 or $105M/6 is over the top. As much as I want Ellsbury here for 5 more years, I just can't see spending that big a percent of the payroll budget on Jacoby. Pedroia will probably be taking up 1/9th of the budget soon, and we will need to fill some big shoes over the next few years as well.

    I like the direction we are going. I like building a balanced team and looking to the extended future as much as the here and now. Maybe I am over-valuing JBJ and the comp draft pick. Maybe I am showing too much faith in Ben to spend the $90-105M wisely elsewhere. Certainly, if Ellsbury was making $18M this year, he is outplaying what Ben spent money on this past winter for the most part...

    SV $13M + Gomes $5M = $18M

    Demp + D Ross

    Drew + Gomes + D Ross

     

    I'd sure hate to see Ellsbury have 4-5 seasons like 2011 on another team.

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW


    Interesting how our opinions can change, if slightly.  When this thread started, I was all for letting Ellsbury go because Bradley was standing in the wings.  But right now the three most consistent offensive players on this team are Ortiz, Pedroia, and Ellsbury, and offense is what wins games.  Ellsbury leads the team in runs, is second (by 2) to Pedroia in hits, and is 3d behind Ortiz and Pedroia in total bases.  His "home run stroke" might or might not be coming back, but it is clear he is hitting the ball hard.  He is the fastest Sox ever or close to it, and that helps in CF and on the basepaths. 

    As moonslav59 and others keep saying, in the end it comes down to cost--how much is too much?  Moonslav says 5 x $18M is too much, and I am almost certain Boras thinks $90M for five years is not enough.  Boras calls Ellsbury a franchise player, which I disagree with.  On the other hand, he is something of a fan favorite, almost co-equal with Ortiz and Pedroia. 

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW


    Ells is a game changer.  During ESPN broadcast last night, announcers said John Henry had gone on record as saying he wanted Ells in Boston for long run.  That's encourgaging if true...if Boras doesn't muck it up too badly.  Boras or no Boras - Ells gets last word.

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    It is possible to watch the spending and put together a contending team as some teams have been able to do. But if you have the money to spend in a big market, you should spend it and spend it wisely.  I don't know how much Ellsbury will be offered in free agency, but I do think he is one of the top players in the game today. If the Sox can sign him without breaking the bank, they should do it.  This year they are paying 23 million to Dempster and Drew.  For what ?  Mediocrity and more mediocrity.

    I was against those signings and Victorino's as well.

    I don't see how bringing up these signings helps your case. To me it makes it shakier. Think of it this way: everyone here seems to think that because we have so little money on the books over the next few years, $18+M a year for Jacoby will hardly restrict us at all, but what if a few of the other guys we sign turn out like Dempster, Drew and Shane? Mediocrity. Then we will need more to fill the gaps, and it may not be there, because one player out of 40 is eating up 1/9th of the payroll budget.

    Why do you now trust Ben to fill the gaps with anything more than mediacrity?

    I happen to think this won't happen. I still trust Ben to do better with next year's signings. We have been snake bitten a bit this year with our signings, IMO.

     

    BTW, what is "not breaking the bank" to you?

    We may be arguing about nothing here. Jacoby will probably get $16-20M a year x 5-6 years. Is $90M/5 breaking the bank? 

    Sox4ever

     

     




    I can't give you a number that breaks the bank. That is up to John Henry. We can speculate all we want to. It means nothing. I just want to see us put our best possible team on the field within whatever our spending limitations are. I think the best way to do that is to try and lock up your core players, add in your young, low cost talent and spend on the needed pieces in free agency. It is not easy to do all that and do it right. As far as Ellsbury is concerned ; I think he is one of our best players, and it would be good to try and keep him. As for a dollar amount  ,  I don't know. Obviously , it is always a risk. You could end up regretting any long term, big money contract. If I  was a wealthy team owner in a big market, I would try my best to give the fans a championship team. But I would not be in business to lose money either. So , I can't answer your question about how much it takes to break the bank here.  Sorry.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Fair enough.

     

    I also think Jacoby is one of our best players.

    Pedey, Papi, Ells and Buch is a super core.

    With Papi probably retiring after 2015 or declining steeply by then, I can see the reasoning behind wanting to keep Jacoby around.

    Of course we don't know really know what "breaking the bank" is, since henry can, at any time, just give the okay to go way over the luxury treshhold, but I am going on the assumption that we will try and stay under the limit or very near it for years to come.

    Based on that assumption, I think $90M/5 or $105M/6 is over the top. As much as I want Ellsbury here for 5 more years, I just can't see spending that big a percent of the payroll budget on Jacoby. Pedroia will probably be taking up 1/9th of the budget soon, and we will need to fill some big shoes over the next few years as well.

    I like the direction we are going. I like building a balanced team and looking to the extended future as much as the here and now. Maybe I am over-valuing JBJ and the comp draft pick. Maybe I am showing too much faith in Ben to spend the $90-105M wisely elsewhere. Certainly, if Ellsbury was making $18M this year, he is outplaying what Ben spent money on this past winter for the most part...

    SV $13M + Gomes $5M = $18M

    Demp + D Ross

    Drew + Gomes + D Ross

     

    I'd sure hate to see Ellsbury have 4-5 seasons like 2011 on another team.

    [/QUOTE]


    Personaly, I believe Papi might be one of those rare players, like Yaz, who lasts into his 40's. I would love it if the Sox gave him a Wakefield like contract going forward. Plus it seems kinda unfair how he gets a -17.1 on his dWar, when he's only played 258 defensive games in his career.

    And I'd hate to see Ells have a year or two like this one on another team. A 6 WAR on the Yankees would kill me.

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to michaelsjr's comment:


    Ells is a game changer.  During ESPN broadcast last night, announcers said John Henry had gone on record as saying he wanted Ells in Boston for long run.  That's encourgaging if true...if Boras doesn't muck it up too badly.  Boras or no Boras - Ells gets last word.



    I don't doubt Henry's veracity on Ellsbury, but if Jacoby does bolt, he will want the fans to be left with the impression that we wanted him and tried hard to keep him.

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    Personaly, I believe Papi might be one of those rare players, like Yaz, who lasts into his 40's. I would love it if the Sox gave him a Wakefield like contract going forward. Plus it seems kinda unfair how he gets a -17.1 on his dWar, when he's only played 258 defensive games in his career.

    I agree and hope whenever it happens- Papi retires in Boston.

     

     

    And I'd hate to see Ells have a year or two like this one on another team. A 6 WAR on the Yankees would kill me.

    The Yanks love to take our stars from us, but if they overpay for him and we can get a 6 WAR from alternatives to Jacoby, maybe the impact could be minimal.

    Sox4ever

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    I would sign Ellsbury for 5/$90 mil max, but I don't think that will get it done.  I see 5/$100mil or even 6/$115 mil.  Just my opinion.  I agree mostly with Moon in that I can see the Sox spending the money to improve the team elsewhere.  When Ortiz is done, where does the power come from?  The Sox will need to find a middle of the order bat (or two if one isn't in their system).  That can be done by FA or trade, but if you trade you are still spending the money.


    If a manager doesn't have confidence in his ball players, even when they're going badly, they're not going to have confidence in themselves. And when a ballplayer's confidence is gone, you haven't got a ballplayer - Birdie Tebbetts

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to fizsh's comment:

    I would sign Ellsbury for 5/$90 mil max, but I don't think that will get it done.  I see 5/$100mil or even 6/$115 mil.  Just my opinion.  I agree mostly with Moon in that I can see the Sox spending the money to improve the team elsewhere.  When Ortiz is done, where does the power come from?  The Sox will need to find a middle of the order bat (or two if one isn't in their system).  That can be done by FA or trade, but if you trade you are still spending the money.


    If a manager doesn't have confidence in his ball players, even when they're going badly, they're not going to have confidence in themselves. And when a ballplayer's confidence is gone, you haven't got a ballplayer - Birdie Tebbetts



    Some people act like having a clean budget slate after 2015 is all good. While there a lot of potential for good with upcoming prospects at a low cost, we will also have some huge shoes to fill. Some still feel we have not won, because we never filled Manny's shoes. How are we going to look when Papi retires? I know Boggy or someone else may step up, but chances are we are going to need to spend big on a power bat, an ace pitcher and more in years to come.

    I know ellsbury does a lot of things Manny and Papi never could do, but I just don't see him as  near $20M player. Even in today's market, $20M can go a long way at upgrading several positions.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share