Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    I think we have the players in the system to replace Salty, Napoli, Drew and the pitching vacancies. And at a low cost.

    While I agree that Bogaerts/Middlebrooks at 3B and Iggy at SS looks pretty nice compared to S Drew at SS and Iggy at 3B, I'm not sold on D Ross/Lava/Vazquez at catcher for 2014 or Carp/Middlebrooks at 1B. We also will need a significant pen build up and, to me, a big starting pitcher.

    I'm really not sure why so many psoters seem to be more comfortable with Lava, Vazquez, Middlebrooks, Alex Wilson, de la Torre than Jackie Bradley Jr., Brentz or other OF in-house options. They are "low cost" too.

    Sox4ever




    I don't know about Brentz, but I would be comfortable with Bradley. I think he is ready. He would not necessarily have to replace Ellsbury. Nava moving to first base is one possibility. Especially if Middlebrooks does not work out. I think Iglesias at short and Bogaerts at third is close to a certainty. If we think enough of our pitching prospects that we are reluctant to trade them , then we should have faith in promoting them.

     
  2. 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]

     

    I think we have the players in the system to replace Salty, Napoli, Drew and the pitching vacancies. And at a low cost.

    While I agree that Bogaerts/Middlebrooks at 3B and Iggy at SS looks pretty nice compared to S Drew at SS and Iggy at 3B, I'm not sold on D Ross/Lava/Vazquez at catcher for 2014 or Carp/Middlebrooks at 1B. We also will need a significant pen build up and, to me, a big starting pitcher.

    I'm really not sure why so many psoters seem to be more comfortable with Lava, Vazquez, Middlebrooks, Alex Wilson, de la Torre than Jackie Bradley Jr., Brentz or other OF in-house options. They are "low cost" too.

    Sox4ever

     




    I don't know about Brentz, but I would be comfortable with Bradley. I think he is ready. He would not necessarily have to replace Ellsbury. Nava moving to first base is one possibility. Especially if Middlebrooks does not work out. I think Iglesias at short and Bogaerts at third is close to a certainty. If we think enough of our pitching prospects that we are reluctant to trade them , then we should have faith in promoting them.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    When I look at any of these "open positions" I feel pretty good about our in-house options, with the possible exception of the catcher position for 2014 (Ross, Lava,  & Vazquez), the rotation, and the pen.

    More Comfortable ...(2014 only)

    1B: Carp, Nava, Middlebrooks, Papi (NL parks) and maybe even Bogaerts or Cecchini in the advanced future with Almanzar, Snyder and T Shaw as well.

    3B: Bogaerts, Middlebrooks, Holt, Snyder, and Iggy if we have a capable SS with Cecchini off somewhere in a more distant future.

    CF: JBJ, Victorino (from RF), Brentz with Nava as an emergency, and several others in the wings.

    Less Comfortable... (2014 only)

    C: Ross, Lava, Vazquez with Swihart and Denny farther away.

    RP: Wilson, de la Torre, DLR

    SP: Webster, DLR, Ranaudo, and others

     

    To me, the last 3 slots listed here is where the money should be spent.

     

     

     

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    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. 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.

    I heard from God today.... and she sounded just like me.

    what have i done? and who have i become?

    I saw the Devil today..... and he looked a lot like me

    I looked away.... I TURNED AWAYYY!

    I'm on the wrong side of heaven and the righteous side of hell.

     

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    This thread ws supposed to be about Ellsbury, not who plays SS and third. It was posted more than 2 weeks ago. In Ellsbury's last 38 at bats, he has hit 3 home runs. The trend was easy to spot, but a lot of naysayers thought otherwise.

    I would say his value has probably doubled in that 2 weeks; 'nuf sed!

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to bosoxmal's comment:

    This thread ws supposed to be about Ellsbury, not who plays SS and third. It was posted more than 2 weeks ago. In Ellsbury's last 38 at bats, he has hit 3 home runs. The trend was easy to spot, but a lot of naysayers thought otherwise.

    I would say his value has probably doubled in that 2 weeks; 'nuf sed!



    No way. The base rate for Jacoby Ellsbury is 15 per. Are you saying that 3 home runs in 38 ABs has made him a 30Mil/year player?

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    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

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to mef429's comment:

    In response to bosoxmal's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    This thread ws supposed to be about Ellsbury, not who plays SS and third. It was posted more than 2 weeks ago. In Ellsbury's last 38 at bats, he has hit 3 home runs. The trend was easy to spot, but a lot of naysayers thought otherwise.

    I would say his value has probably doubled in that 2 weeks; 'nuf sed!

     



    No way. The base rate for Jacoby Ellsbury is 15 per. Are you saying that 3 home runs in 38 ABs has made him a 30Mil/year player?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    ...and I'm the one being portrayed as unreasonable for daring to think that re-signing Ellsbury will have far reaching effects beyond CF and beyond 2014.

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to mef429's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to bosoxmal's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    This thread ws supposed to be about Ellsbury, not who plays SS and third. It was posted more than 2 weeks ago. In Ellsbury's last 38 at bats, he has hit 3 home runs. The trend was easy to spot, but a lot of naysayers thought otherwise.

    I would say his value has probably doubled in that 2 weeks; 'nuf sed!

     

     



    No way. The base rate for Jacoby Ellsbury is 15 per. Are you saying that 3 home runs in 38 ABs has made him a 30Mil/year player?

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    ...and I'm the one being portrayed as unreasonable for daring to think that re-signing Ellsbury will have far reaching effects beyond CF and beyond 2014.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    The sox have less than 1M commited in 2016. i think we can manage 16-20M for jacoby through 2016 and beyond. Even if we go over the luxury tax in 2014 and 2015 the fine will be minimal since we reset it last season. I don't think the Sox FO view going over the tax threshold as a life or death situation. they know their financial situation better than any of us so they definitely know about the dump trucks of cash that will come off the books in the next few years. got to invest that money somewhere. IMO there are not a lot of ways to better spend that money. Boston is the best place for Jacoby and Jacoby is the best player for Boston. FO should do everything short of giving out a CC type contract to retain him.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to mef429's comment:



    Boston is the best place for Jacoby and Jacoby is the best player for Boston. FO should do everything short of giving out a CC type contract to retain him.



    I don't think many people would disagree with what's in bold above.  The problem of course, is Boras.  While I think it's laudable that some posters give Boras the benefit of doubt and say, "But he's ONLY a good agent doing his job", I see things differently. 

    I don't see Scott Boras as doing anything that's not in his own best interest.  What Boras does best is getting as much money as he can for his clients which in turn gets more money for Boras.  IMO Boras would advise a player to sell his soul to the Devil if the price was right - and Boras's commission was high enough. 

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to S5's comment:

     

    In response to mef429's comment:

     



    Boston is the best place for Jacoby and Jacoby is the best player for Boston.FO should do everything short of giving out a CC type contract to retain him.

     

     

     

     



    I don't think many people would disagree with what's in bold above.  The problem of course, is Boras.  While I think it's laudable that some posters give Boras the benefit of doubt and say, "But he's ONLY a good agent doing his job", I see things differently. 

     

     

    I don't see Scott Boras as doing anything that's not in his own best interest.  What Boras does best is getting as much money as he can for his clients which in turn gets more money for Boras.  IMO Boras would advise a player to sell his soul to the Devil if the price was right - and Boras's commission was high enough. 

     



    that's an agents job. To get the best deal possible for their client. and their motivation is the % commission they make. Boras is not going away anytime soon. He represents the top talent in baseball and the top prospects in baseball. You have to deal with him and to shun a player simply becauce of his choice of agent is proposterous (not saying you are doing this S5 but there have been plenty of posters who would let him walk just so they didnt have to deal with Boras). love him or hate him he is an advocate for his players first. Hes constantly giving presentations and promoting his players in the media. not promoting his agency.

    Also you have to consider that the player runs the show, not boras. but how many players are going to refuse getting a bigger deal? job security and financial security?

    Do you think Pedroias agent tells him what to do? You know he is telling Dustin to hold off on making a decision until Cano gets his deal. That way he can get a similar deal. But Dustin runs the show and he will probably sign a contract under his market value. But that doesn't detract from his agent (not boras) trying to get him the best deal possible. You cant say Boras is in it for himself and leave out every other agent. It's how they all get paid, so yes they try and get the most money for their client.

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to mef429's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to mef429's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to bosoxmal's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

    This thread ws supposed to be about Ellsbury, not who plays SS and third. It was posted more than 2 weeks ago. In Ellsbury's last 38 at bats, he has hit 3 home runs. The trend was easy to spot, but a lot of naysayers thought otherwise.

    I would say his value has probably doubled in that 2 weeks; 'nuf sed!

     

     

     



    No way. The base rate for Jacoby Ellsbury is 15 per. Are you saying that 3 home runs in 38 ABs has made him a 30Mil/year player?

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    ...and I'm the one being portrayed as unreasonable for daring to think that re-signing Ellsbury will have far reaching effects beyond CF and beyond 2014.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    The sox have less than 1M commited in 2016. i think we can manage 16-20M for jacoby through 2016 and beyond. Even if we go over the luxury tax in 2014 and 2015 the fine will be minimal since we reset it last season. I don't think the Sox FO view going over the tax threshold as a life or death situation. they know their financial situation better than any of us so they definitely know about the dump trucks of cash that will come off the books in the next few years. got to invest that money somewhere. IMO there are not a lot of ways to better spend that money. Boston is the best place for Jacoby and Jacoby is the best player for Boston. FO should do everything short of giving out a CC type contract to retain him.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    The fact that we have very little commited in 2016 and beyond does not change the fact that if Jacoby is going to be paid close to $20M a year, his contract would be about 1/9th to 1/10th of our total player payroll budget. It will limit what we spend elsewhere. That's all I am saying.

    That statement does not mean we can't spend anything elsewhere, or that we cannot field a great team by spending that much on one player. In 2016, Jacoby will turn 33 that September. We paid CC big money, and he fell apart way younger than that. I'm not saying Jacoby will fall apart, in fact I have projected very good numbers for Jacoby over the years, including this season. I think he will do fine for 2-3 more years and then slowly decline. Slowly. He would be a great player for this team for sure, but the fact is, if we sign him to big money, it means we will have that amount less to spend elsewhere, we will not have the comp draft pick, and we will be shying away from the recent strategy that has been working: building a balanced team without big paid superstars and longterm commitments that may strangle us, if things turn sour down the road.

    I know we can still put some very good to great teams on the field, even if we pay Jacoby $100M/6. If we go as high as $120M/6, it may get even harder. It's not like Ben has proven he can choose very helpful FAs so far. The only sure A has been Uehara. What if we take Lester's $13M option and he gets hurt or stinks? What if Iggy and Nava come down to earth? What if most of our prospects fizzle? What if Buch never recovers? What if we need to spend big for a SP on the open market to have any chance to win down the road? Now, we'd have 2 guys eating a 1/4th to a 1/5th of our total payroll budget. We'd need about 10-15 homegrown players to be above average to great to stay strong. I'm not saying any of those things will happen. I like how our future looks right now. I like how our finances look. I like the freedom we have to spend big when we feel it is right to do so. I just am not sure that Jacoby is the one guy to do that with, especially when we lose a draft pick by doing so. (Not saying the draft pick is the central point of my position, but it is a contributing factor along with my faith in JBJ and my belief that we need to bolster our rotation, pen, catching position, and corner IF this winter.)

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to mef429's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

     

    In response to mef429's comment:

     

     

     

     

    In response to bosoxmal's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

     

    This thread ws supposed to be about Ellsbury, not who plays SS and third. It was posted more than 2 weeks ago. In Ellsbury's last 38 at bats, he has hit 3 home runs. The trend was easy to spot, but a lot of naysayers thought otherwise.

    I would say his value has probably doubled in that 2 weeks; 'nuf sed!

     

     

     

     



    No way. The base rate for Jacoby Ellsbury is 15 per. Are you saying that 3 home runs in 38 ABs has made him a 30Mil/year player?

     

     

     

     

     

     



    ...and I'm the one being portrayed as unreasonable for daring to think that re-signing Ellsbury will have far reaching effects beyond CF and beyond 2014.

     

     

     

     



    The sox have less than 1M commited in 2016. i think we can manage 16-20M for jacoby through 2016 and beyond. Even if we go over the luxury tax in 2014 and 2015 the fine will be minimal since we reset it last season. I don't think the Sox FO view going over the tax threshold as a life or death situation. they know their financial situation better than any of us so they definitely know about the dump trucks of cash that will come off the books in the next few years. got to invest that money somewhere. IMO there are not a lot of ways to better spend that money. Boston is the best place for Jacoby and Jacoby is the best player for Boston. FO should do everything short of giving out a CC type contract to retain him.

     

     



    The fact that we have very little commited in 2016 and beyond does not change the fact that if Jacoby is going to be paid close to $20M a year, his contract would be about 1/9th to 1/10th of our total player payroll budget. It will limit what we spend elsewhere. That's all I am saying.

     

    That statement does not mean we can't spend anything elsewhere, or that we cannot field a great team by spending that much on one player. In 2016, Jacoby will turn 33 that September. We paid CC big money, and he fell apart way younger than that. I'm not saying Jacoby will fall apart, in fact I have projected very good numbers for Jacoby over the years, including this season. I think he will do fine for 2-3 more years and then slowly decline. Slowly. He would be a great player for this team for sure, but the fact is, if we sign him to big money, it means we will have that amount less to spend elsewhere, we will not have the comp draft pick, and we will be shying away from the recent strategy that has been working: building a balanced team without big paid superstars and longterm commitments that may strangle us, if things turn sour down the road.

    I know we can still put some very good to great teams on the field, even if we pay Jacoby $100M/6. If we go as high as $120M/6, it may get even harder. It's not like Ben has proven he can choose very helpful FAs so far. The only sure A has been Uehara. What if we take Lester's $13M option and he gets hurt or stinks? What if Iggy and Nava come down to earth? What if most of our prospects fizzle? What if Buch never recovers? What if we need to spend big for a SP on the open market to have any chance to win down the road? Now, we'd have 2 guys eating a 1/4th to a 1/5th of our total payroll budget. We'd need about 10-15 homegrown players to be above average to great to stay strong. I'm not saying any of those things will happen. I like how our future looks right now. I like how our finances look. I like the freedom we have to spend big when we feel it is right to do so. I just am not sure that Jacoby is the one guy to do that with, especially when we lose a draft pick by doing so. (Not saying the draft pick is the central point of my position, but it is a contributing factor along with my faith in JBJ and my belief that we need to bolster our rotation, pen, catching position, and corner IF this winter.)




    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.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to mef429's comment:

     

    Also you have to consider that the player runs the show, not boras. but how many players are going to refuse getting a bigger deal? job security and financial security?

    Do you think Pedroias agent tells him what to do? You know he is telling Dustin to hold off on making a decision until Cano gets his deal. That way he can get a similar deal. But Dustin runs the show and he will probably sign a contract under his market value. But that doesn't detract from his agent (not boras) trying to get him the best deal possible. You cant say Boras is in it for himself and leave out every other agent. It's how they all get paid, so yes they try and get the most money for their client.

    Boras is not God.  In my mind Boras is still the guy who almost got Jason Veritek out of Boston by recommending that 'Tek go to FA when the Sox were prepared to pay ~$10MM to keep 'Tek here.  I believe that Boras, "Mr. Prepared", had a good idea that 'Tek was more valuable to the Sox than to anyone else but gambled with 'Tek's future in an effort to boost his own commission.  That gamble cost Boras the commission on about $9MM, but it also cost 'Tek the entire $9MM.  That's what you sometimes get for listening to Scott Boras. The reason the 'Tek signed that $1MM contract with the Sox at all was because he fired Boras.   

    Now to reply to something I deleted, I would never shy away from negotiating with a player just because Boras is that player's agent.  To do that would be beyond ridiculous.  The situation with Boras is what it is and teams HAVE to deal with him to get "his" players.

    My issue is at least as much with the players as it is with Boras, because I think in too many situations the players DON'T run the show. Instead they defer to Boras's judgement and IMO Boras is much more interested in the size of his commission than he is interested in the best interests of the players. 

    Some of us are now talking about $100MM to sign Ells for whatever duration of time.  Should the Sox offer Ells $95MM and some other team (NYY?) offer $100MM I believe Boras would push Ells toward the NYY.  Not because he thinks Ells would be happier living in NYC, but because Boras would be getting the commmission from an additional $5MM. 

    IMO players should start thinking a little less about job security and financial security and a little more about where they want to play.  This whole argument about job and financial security doesn't 'wash' with me when we start talking about players making lottery winning salaries.  I'd be interested in knowing what Ells woudl buy with $100MM that he couldn't have afford with $95MM. 

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    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.

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to S5's comment:

    In response to mef429's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Also you have to consider that the player runs the show, not boras. but how many players are going to refuse getting a bigger deal? job security and financial security?

    Do you think Pedroias agent tells him what to do? You know he is telling Dustin to hold off on making a decision until Cano gets his deal. That way he can get a similar deal. But Dustin runs the show and he will probably sign a contract under his market value. But that doesn't detract from his agent (not boras) trying to get him the best deal possible. You cant say Boras is in it for himself and leave out every other agent. It's how they all get paid, so yes they try and get the most money for their client.

     

     

    Boras is not God.  In my mind Boras is still the guy who almost got Jason Veritek out of Boston by recommending that 'Tek go to FA when the Sox were prepared to pay ~$10MM to keep 'Tek here.  I believe that Boras, "Mr. Prepared", had a good idea that 'Tek was more valuable to the Sox than to anyone else but gambled with 'Tek's future in an effort to boost his own commission.  That gamble cost Boras the commission on about $9MM, but it also cost 'Tek the entire $9MM.  That's what you sometimes get for listening to Scott Boras. The reason the 'Tek signed that $1MM contract with the Sox at all was because he fired Boras.   

    Now to reply to something I deleted, I would never shy away from negotiating with a player just because Boras is that player's agent.  To do that would be beyond ridiculous.  The situation with Boras is what it is and teams HAVE to deal with him to get "his" players.

    My issue is at least as much with the players as it is with Boras, because I think in too many situations the players DON'T run the show. Instead they defer to Boras's judgement and IMO Boras is much more interested in the size of his commission than he is interested in the best interests of the players. 

    Some of us are now talking about $100MM to sign Ells for whatever duration of time.  Should the Sox offer Ells $95MM and some other team (NYY?) offer $100MM I believe Boras would push Ells toward the NYY.  Not because he thinks Ells would be happier living in NYC, but because Boras would be getting the commmission from an additional $5MM. 

    IMO players should start thinking a little less about job security and financial security and a little more about where they want to play.  This whole argument about job and financial security doesn't 'wash' with me when we start talking about players making lottery winning salaries.  I'd be interested in knowing what Ells woudl buy with $100MM that he couldn't have afford with $95MM. 

    [/QUOTE]

    The agent , in this case Boras , will negotiate to get the maximum amount of money and length of contract. In the end , the player will make the decision .  I am sure that the desirability of the city is a consideration, but not too  many players will take the lower dollar offer. The difference between 100 mil and 95 mil is not insignificant , no matter how rich you are. 

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from pinstripezac35. Show pinstripezac35's posts

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to S5's comment:

     

    In response to mef429's comment:

     



    Boston is the best place for Jacoby and Jacoby is the best player for Boston.FO should do everything short of giving out a CC type contract to retain him.

     

     

     

     



    I don't think many people would disagree with what's in bold above.  The problem of course, is Boras.  While I think it's laudable that some posters give Boras the benefit of doubt and say, "But he's ONLY a good agent doing his job", I see things differently. 

     

     

    I don't see Scott Boras as doing anything that's not in his own best interest.  What Boras does best is getting as much money as he can for his clients which in turn gets more money for Boras.  IMO Boras would advise a player to sell his soul to the Devil if the price was right - and Boras's commission was high enough. 

     




     

    I'm not disagreeing

    just wondering how you guys know this


    ''Boston is the best place for Jacoby''


    correct me if I'm wrong

    but I don't think of him as a guy who uses the wall much

    so I'm thinking a park with bigger gaps would be  more favorable

     

    we have done the boras dance B4 but

    I'm still asking

    how can anyone be sure if a player will enjoy playing on a certain team or not

    I mean sure enough to turn down millions

     

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to pinstripezac35's comment:

    In response to S5's comment:

     

    In response to mef429's comment:

     



    Boston is the best place for Jacoby and Jacoby is the best player for Boston.FO should do everything short of giving out a CC type contract to retain him.

     

     

     

     



    I don't think many people would disagree with what's in bold above.  The problem of course, is Boras.  While I think it's laudable that some posters give Boras the benefit of doubt and say, "But he's ONLY a good agent doing his job", I see things differently. 

     

     

    I don't see Scott Boras as doing anything that's not in his own best interest.  What Boras does best is getting as much money as he can for his clients which in turn gets more money for Boras.  IMO Boras would advise a player to sell his soul to the Devil if the price was right - and Boras's commission was high enough. 

     




     

    I'm not disagreeing

    just wondering how you guys know this


    ''Boston is the best place for Jacoby''


    correct me if I'm wrong

    but I don't think of him as a guy who uses the wall much

    so I'm thinking a park with bigger gaps would be  more favorable

     

    we have done the boras dance B4 but

    I'm still asking

    how can anyone be sure if a player will enjoy playing on a certain team

    I mean sure enough to turn down millions

     

    Jacoby is good enough that he will put up great stats no matter what park he plays half his games in.
    i made that comment in terms of Ellsburys brand. Being a homegrown guy and a fan favorite in Boston he already gets plenty of support. If he resigns here then the prospect of him potentially playing his entire career here is sure to raise his stock among Bostonians resulting in better endorsements and such. As opposed to signing a similar deal to go play in a different city where it will take some time to win over the fans and marketing.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from billge. Show billge's posts

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    Agree  His best future is here.  He should take a lesson fron Fred Lynn.  He left and was never quite the same.

    NC

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from pinstripezac35. Show pinstripezac35's posts

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW



     

    I'm not disagreeing

    just wondering how you guys know this


    ''Boston is the best place for Jacoby''


    correct me if I'm wrong

    but I don't think of him as a guy who uses the wall much

    so I'm thinking a park with bigger gaps would be  more favorable

     

    we have done the boras dance B4 but

    I'm still asking

    how can anyone be sure if a player will enjoy playing on a certain team

    I mean sure enough to turn down millions

     

     

     

     

    Jacoby is good enough that he will put up great stats no matter what park he plays half his games in.
    i made that comment in terms of Ellsburys brand. Being a homegrown guy and a fan favorite in Boston he already gets plenty of support. If he resigns here then the prospect of him potentially playing his entire career here is sure to raise his stock among Bostonians resulting in better endorsements and such. As opposed to signing a similar deal to go play in a different city where it will take some time to win over the fans and marketing.




     

    ok mef thanks

    of course 1 could argue that he has to compete harder with papi & pedey for endorsement deals

    but why bother, your statement has merit

     

    so how do you feel about MFYfans lurking over you chatroom

     

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    In response to pinstripezac35's comment:



     

    I'm not disagreeing

    just wondering how you guys know this


    ''Boston is the best place for Jacoby''


    correct me if I'm wrong

    but I don't think of him as a guy who uses the wall much

    so I'm thinking a park with bigger gaps would be  more favorable

     

    we have done the boras dance B4 but

    I'm still asking

    how can anyone be sure if a player will enjoy playing on a certain team

    I mean sure enough to turn down millions

     

     

     

     

    Jacoby is good enough that he will put up great stats no matter what park he plays half his games in.
    i made that comment in terms of Ellsburys brand. Being a homegrown guy and a fan favorite in Boston he already gets plenty of support. If he resigns here then the prospect of him potentially playing his entire career here is sure to raise his stock among Bostonians resulting in better endorsements and such. As opposed to signing a similar deal to go play in a different city where it will take some time to win over the fans and marketing.




     

    ok mef thanks

    of course 1 could argue that he has to compete harder with papi & pedey for endorsement deals

    but why bother, your statement has merit

     

    so how do you feel about MFYfans lurking over you chatroom

     



    Jete has been a regular there. You know i don't mind yankee fans as long as they aren't belligerent..

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    BTW, catching back up. Nobody here is talking about a 55 game sample size. We are talking about a resergent trend. Where in the last 55 games, Ells finishes with more power as he did in 2011. Which is doing nothing but trending up since June. 

    April:

    .283 .336 .416 .752  

    May:

    .254 .338 .331 .669  

    June:

    .360 .414 .480 .894

    July:

    .358 .414 .566 .980

    That along with 3 homeruns in July that indicate a resurgence in power.

    Personlly, I think the Red Sox first offer will be in the $18-$19/5 year range. Forcing others to go to $20 if they want Ells.

    -Daf.

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    David Ortiz is the face of this franchise. But he is getting near the end of his run. Pedroia and Ellsbury came up in 2007 and they now represent the core of the club. These are the guys you want to keep and build around. Supplement with your young prospects and spend on the top free agents. This is the recipe for success. Above all , do not waste payroll on a bunch of veteran ham and eggers. That is a recipe for failure. Watching a bum like Dempster tonight is discouraging. Cannot win like that. 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Lock up Ellsbury---NOW

    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.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share