Saltalamacchia Tracker...

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

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    Where's the Reddick Tracker?

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    i love the fact that the rationale for trading salty is that vasquez will make him expendable....a guy who is noiwhere near ready to play mlb this year and wont be until salty's contract is close to ending....if he's ready at all ever

     

     

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Kingface12. Show Kingface12's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I can't believe there's going to be a thread dedicated to a former player throughout the season. What a waste of time and space. And it's totally disrespectful to the team we have out there playing now.

    He's gone. It's one thing to voice your opinion about a player leaving, but keeping track of him all season just to try to prove the GM wrong is just ridiculous. If you're this obsessed with a former player, maybe you should just give him a call and see if he's free this weekend.

    [/QUOTE]


    And que in the board police.......

     
  4. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    They didn't need to offer a QO. 

    We probably could have gotten him for $24M/3, if we wanted him-  that is assuming Salty could get over being benched in the WS.

    Had Vazquez or Swihart eventually earned the FT job, Salty could have easily been traded, most likely for a handsome return.

     



    As I mentioned earlier, you don't sign players that you don't see as part of the future to three year contracts, just so that you "might" be able to trade that player later on.  It's just not how it's done.  The Sox were clearly ready to move on from Salty, letting him find his own deal was the right move, and again, how much do the fans know about how Sox pitchers felt about throwing to him?  This was never a "tough" decision for this Front Office, that I do know.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree.  You see this in here a lot, but I don't see it working like that in real life.  I've seen some GMs try to get cute and overpay for SPs, thinking they'll just trade them for value at the deadline, and usually they don't.

    Salty's fate, as the RS starting catcher, was sealed as soon as we decided, last year, that he was no longer our starting catcher.

    It bears repeating, we decided that we preferred Ross over Salty last year, and for all the right reasons.

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

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    Extend Salty in the winter of 2012-2013 or trade him for something good rather than lose him for nothing.

    It's okay to let players play out.  The only valid reason for a big market team to trade a player for value, is if they have someone to take their place.  If we traded Salty last year, we'd have had to trade for another catcher to take Salty's place.  It'd be different if we weren't competitive, but trading a player to create a hole is never going to work.

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

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    i love the fact that the rationale for trading salty is that vasquez will make him expendable....a guy who is noiwhere near ready to play mlb this year and wont be until salty's contract is close to ending....if he's ready at all ever 

    [/QUOTE]

    Stay in the shallow end geo...you have no clue about how close to being ready Vazquez is.

     

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

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    i love the fact that the rationale for trading salty is that vasquez will make him expendable....a guy who is noiwhere near ready to play mlb this year and wont be until salty's contract is close to ending....if he's ready at all ever

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd be more than willing to make a tag bet that we'll see him this season.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    They didn't need to offer a QO. 

    We probably could have gotten him for $24M/3, if we wanted him-  that is assuming Salty could get over being benched in the WS.

    Had Vazquez or Swihart eventually earned the FT job, Salty could have easily been traded, most likely for a handsome return.

     



    As I mentioned earlier, you don't sign players that you don't see as part of the future to three year contracts, just so that you "might" be able to trade that player later on.  It's just not how it's done.  The Sox were clearly ready to move on from Salty, letting him find his own deal was the right move, and again, how much do the fans know about how Sox pitchers felt about throwing to him?  This was never a "tough" decision for this Front Office, that I do know.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree.  You see this in here a lot, but I don't see it working like that in real life.  I've seen some GMs try to get cute and overpay for SPs, thinking they'll just trade them for value at the deadline, and usually they don't.

    Salty's fate, as the RS starting catcher, was sealed as soon as we decided, last year, that he was no longer our starting catcher.

    It bears repeating, we decided that we preferred Ross over Salty last year, and for all the right reasons.

    [/QUOTE]

    There are countless examples of GMs signing players and then trading them at some point, sometimes the very year they saign them. It doesn't mean it was their plan all along, and I do not think anyone here is making the claim that we should have signed Salty to trade him.

    The point many here were making was/is that signing Salty to 3 years might have impeded the promotion of a deserving young catching prospect like Vazquez and or Swihart. Of course GMs look ahead and think they may end up trading a player from a log-jammed position.

    I'm talking theory in this case, because as I mentioned, Salty was not coming back here, perhaps even before his World Series benching, but certainly afterwards. The theory is still sound. You can sign a player to 3+ years knowing that you have some top prospects that may knock on the door before the contract is over. You don't "plan on tading him", but you try and make sure that option is probably there if needed. I am pretty certain Salty could be traded in 2 years with one year left on his deal at about $8M.

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

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Extend Salty in the winter of 2012-2013 or trade him for something good rather than lose him for nothing.

    It's okay to let players play out.  The only valid reason for a big market team to trade a player for value, is if they have someone to take their place.  If we traded Salty last year, we'd have had to trade for another catcher to take Salty's place.  It'd be different if we weren't competitive, but trading a player to create a hole is never going to work.

    [/QUOTE]

    You mean you think there was no AJ P type catcher available last year?

    Look, I get that we got a lot of value out of Salty last season. As much as many here want to believe otherwise, Salty was a net plus last year. Could we have won without him? Maybe- maybe not. Could we have won with Lava, Ross (healthy or otherwise), Butler and maybe a journeyman type add-on catcher? Maybe closer to no than yes.

    First, I want to say that I was for extending Salty last winter, and we probably could have gotten better terms than what he ended up signing for this year, and his deal may have ended after 2014 or 2015, instead of 2016 as now.  That would have matched up better with the Vazquez/Swihart projections as well.  I liked Salty and saw he was improving in just about every area of his game, except throwing (which I think the importance of is over-rated).

    I admit that part of my reasoning for saying extend him now or trade him was that I did not think we were going to be highly competitive last year. I was grossly wrong. I agree that competitive teams sometimes have to let players "play out", even if we get nothing in return after they leave. It's hard to argue with the strategy Ben employed last winter- it woked like a charm thanks in part, to Salty's fabulous regular season and key hit in the Tiger series.

    I wish Salty well. I do not think it is unreasonable or disrespectful to track his career going forward. It's interesting to watch ex-Sox players and wonder "what if". That's part of what makes MLB exciting and multi-dimensional.

    I'm happy with AJ P. I think we may get close to the same offense from our catchers this year as last, and I think the defense will be improved. The one year deal vs the 3 year Salty deal is a plus on paper, but that is assuming a kid is ready and does well for us very soon, otherwise, we will be desperate for a catcher next year.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    i love the fact that the rationale for trading salty is that vasquez will make him expendable....a guy who is noiwhere near ready to play mlb this year and wont be until salty's contract is close to ending....if he's ready at all ever

     what choice do they have with two dinosaurs behing the plate now? one of them is going to get hurt....or are you saying Lavarnway is the next Carlton Fish because he played a few games the past few years, hence we didnt need Salty? 

    BillJoey?

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd be more than willing to make a tag bet that we'll see him this season.

    [/QUOTE]


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

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    You mean you think there was no AJ P type catcher available last year?

    Therein lies the problem with the trade theory.  If we could've traded Salty, and gotten an identical player for the identical salary as a free agent, then we couldn't have traded Salty.

    It's the same with the folks that want to trade Nava or Carp.  You can only do that when you have a replacement within the organization.  This goes back to the beginning of this site.  Someone wanted to trade Youk, because he was never going to hit 15 HRs.  And their plan for replacing Youk was to pick up a similar 1B via free agency.

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

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    i love the fact that the rationale for trading salty is that vasquez will make him expendable....a guy who is noiwhere near ready to play mlb this year and wont be until salty's contract is close to ending....if he's ready at all ever

     what choice do they have with two dinosaurs behing the plate now? one of them is going to get hurt....or are you saying Lavarnway is the next Carlton Fish because he played a few games the past few years, hence we didnt need Salty? 

    BillJoey?

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd be more than willing to make a tag bet that we'll see him this season.

    [/QUOTE]


    [/QUOTE]

    When I hooked you with the last sucker bet, I had you pegged as a Goober.  It doesn't always work.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    i love the fact that the rationale for trading salty is that vasquez will make him expendable....a guy who is noiwhere near ready to play mlb this year and wont be until salty's contract is close to ending....if he's ready at all ever

     what choice do they have with two dinosaurs behing the plate now? one of them is going to get hurt....or are you saying Lavarnway is the next Carlton Fish because he played a few games the past few years, hence we didnt need Salty? 

    BillJoey?

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd be more than willing to make a tag bet that we'll see him this season.

    [/QUOTE]


    [/QUOTE]

    When I hooked you with the last sucker bet, I had you pegged as a Goober.  It doesn't always work.

    [/QUOTE]

    will he start next year is the question based on AJs one year gig. thats one worh having...lol

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

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    will he start next year is the question based on AJs one year gig. thats one worh having...lol

    And that's an excellent question.  I hesitate to start rookie catchers more so than any other position.

    Pure guess here, but we extend Ross one year, and split duties with Vazquez.  Then in 2016, Swihart backs up Vazquez.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from ma6dragon9. Show ma6dragon9's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    i love the fact that the rationale for trading salty is that vasquez will make him expendable....a guy who is noiwhere near ready to play mlb this year and wont be until salty's contract is close to ending....if he's ready at all ever

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd be more than willing to make a tag bet that we'll see him this season.

    [/QUOTE]

    That's not a very long stretch. With 2x 37 year old catchers, 162 game season, and September call ups...it's all but assured he will be on the team at some point.

    I started this thread because, as I mentioned in the original post (I love how people mold posts to whatever is convenient for their argument, apparently ignorant of it's sustained existence), he was one of my favorite players while here. He is the first Sox player since Bronson Arroyo who I honestly was sad to see go. I didn't mention here, but have previously that I followed this guy as a young, elite prospect when the Sox were trying to deal him, and TEX way overshot in asking for Buccholz, then gave him to the Sox 2 years later for nothing because they'd burned all his options. No, I'm not trying to prove anyone wrong. I'm actually trying to support a player I like. 

    There's no board mercenaries dragging people in here at e-gunpoint.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    will he start next year is the question based on AJs one year gig. thats one worh having...lol

    And that's an excellent question.  I hesitate to start rookie catchers more so than any other position.

    Pure guess here, but we extend Ross one year, and split duties with Vazquez.  Then in 2016, Swihart backs up Vazquez.

    [/QUOTE]

    that is sound reasoning but i say the load early in season is 60/40 Ross

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

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    will he start next year is the question based on AJs one year gig. thats one worh having...lol

    And that's an excellent question.  I hesitate to start rookie catchers more so than any other position.

    Pure guess here, but we extend Ross one year, and split duties with Vazquez.  Then in 2016, Swihart backs up Vazquez.

    [/QUOTE]

    that is sound reasoning but i say the load early in season is 60/40 Ross

    [/QUOTE]

    I just threw out the 'split' thing.  For better or worse, I'd give Ross all the worst matchups against opposing pitchers, and give matchups that maybe required more experience, and give Vazquez the starts against the best running teams.

    And maybe more Ross early and more Vazquez later in the season.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    will he start next year is the question based on AJs one year gig. thats one worh having...lol

    And that's an excellent question.  I hesitate to start rookie catchers more so than any other position.

    Pure guess here, but we extend Ross one year, and split duties with Vazquez.  Then in 2016, Swihart backs up Vazquez.

    [/QUOTE]

    that is sound reasoning but i say the load early in season is 60/40 Ross

    [/QUOTE]

    I just threw out the 'split' thing.  For better or worse, I'd give Ross all the worst matchups against opposing pitchers, and give matchups that maybe required more experience, and give Vazquez the starts against the best running teams.

    And maybe more Ross early and more Vazquez later in the season.

    [/QUOTE]

    i dont disagree which brings us to my original point - realistically speaking we couldve signed Salty for three years and transitioned vasquez nicely into his starting role if he was ready by the end of his contract....next year both our catchers will be older....i guess the salty project of theo was never ben's cup of tea because he came cheaply and then left cheaply...

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

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    You mean you think there was no AJ P type catcher available last year?

    Therein lies the problem with the trade theory.  If we could've traded Salty, and gotten an identical player for the identical salary as a free agent, then we couldn't have traded Salty.

    You are assuming no GM valued Salty more than the free agent in question.

    The salary of the free agent did not need to be identical to Salty's. The fact that Salty's contract was low for his value in 2014 means we could have gotten something nice in return. That return value, in theory, could have offset the extra money paid for a free agent catcher last winter, or a catcher to be acquired via trade.

    The only FA catcher I can think of last year was Russell Martin, who I think got something like $8M x 2. I'm not saying I wanted Martin, but in theory, we could have signed him, traded Salty and had Martin right now at about the same cost and length as AJ P, plus we'd have whatever we got for Salty via trade. (Yes, martin's contract was more than Salty's last year, so that would have effected our budget.)

     

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from ma6dragon9. Show ma6dragon9's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...


    .283 average. 6th among catchers in ALL of MLB.


    .397 OBP! NOBODY thought he could do that. Still early, granted, but the progression continues, and better than I anticipated given the new staff he had to learn. 2nd among catchers in ALL of MLB.


    .869 OPS. 4th among catchers in ALL of MLB.


    Napoli is right there with him, above or below. Unfortunately, Napoli isn't a catcher, he just shows up on the list because of his history there.


    He's gotten off the a MUCH better start than I thought in the best of circumstances. 

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    In response to ma6dragon9's comment:
    [QUOTE]



    .283 average. 6th among catchers in ALL of MLB.


     


    .397 OBP! NOBODY thought he could do that. Still early, granted, but the progression continues, and better than I anticipated given the new staff he had to learn. 2nd among catchers in ALL of MLB.


     


    .869 OPS. 4th among catchers in ALL of MLB.


     


    Napoli is right there with him, above or below. Unfortunately, Napoli isn't a catcher, he just shows up on the list because of his history there.


     


    He's gotten off the a MUCH better start than I thought in the best of circumstances. 


    [/QUOTE]

    Salty could hit - im not sure why this is shocking...and given what he signed for and how he was a great clubhouse guy, im certain ben sort of screwed up here with AJ replacing him

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

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    Salty could hit - im not sure why this is shocking...and given what he signed for and how he was a great clubhouse guy, im certain ben sort of screwed up here with AJ replacing him


     1-I like Salty, but there is no such thing as being certain when a player has finished 3-4% of his contract.  Most FAs look good for at least a month.  I remember how many posters lamented not signing Teixeira one year into his contract.  Followed by two mediocre years, followed by a weak year, followed by a bad year.


    2-I'd still be willing to wager that the RS get more WAR/$$$ over the life of Salty's contract than the Marlins do.

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

    Re: Saltalamacchia Tracker...

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    i love the fact that the rationale for trading salty is that vasquez will make him expendable....a guy who is noiwhere near ready to play mlb this year and wont be until salty's contract is close to ending....if he's ready at all ever


     


     


     


    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]


    Somebody posted this on one of the other threads-


    case in point the Roberts signing....more lateral moves by Ben trying to squeeze anything out of marginal players rather than give youngsters a shot...do you even watch the game at all? jb is a gold glove caliber outfielder right now with his range, instincts, and arm....let him play everyday in CF where he belongs.


    That's as close a description of Vazquez as possible.  There really isn't much of a reason to think that JBJ and Cecchini will progress, but not Vazquez.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share