In response to BMav's comment:
In response to jasko2248's comment:
In response to BMav's comment:
Why don't the Red Sox offer a 4-36 vs. a 2-20 deal? The main explanation for me is that they would prefer other players or simply don't believe Salty is that good. The Vasquez-Swihart explanation doesn't hold water.
Lets say they structure a 4 year deal like this.....10.5-9.5-8.5-7.5. They get Salty in the first two years at the 2-20 they supposedly prefer. They get the AAV down 1 million dollars from 10 to 9 million. And then they would have a good left handed starting catcher who is still only 30. Salty has a 2 year 16 million dollar contract left. Wouldn't that be a really nice trade chip?
So why not do that? He is 100% healthy. He is young. Whats the problem stopping them from doing that. Either they don't think he is that good. They prefer somebody now they believe is better. Or they don't trust him on a long term deal to work hard and fear a long term deal. Seems like it has to be one of the three.
If I truely believed in the abilities of Salty, believed he was still improving, and wanted him back, I would prefer the longer, less expensive contract.
I see your points, BMav, but it's pretty clear that their current plan is just the opposite - "Big dollars/shorter term." You can't argue with the results so far. I think they "like" Salty, but "love" Vasquez as the catcher of the future. There are some people in baseball who will tell you that he is the 2nd best defensive catcher in the game (behind Yadier) RIGHT NOW. I can't see them going 3 or 4 years on a guy who was replaced during the World Series.
Salty is also obviously not the ideal size for a catcher and there has to be concerns how he will hold up moving forward. I think they like him as a 2 year bridge & possibly as a platoon with Vasquez in 2015, but that's about it.
I like the short contracts on older players. And on pitchers cause they get hurt. And on players who have injury problems already. But if you have a player you believe in who is healthy, and not a pitcher, and fairly young, why pay more per year. Inflation will only make the contracts higher in the future as well. You also have insurance in case either of the two minor league catchers bust.
I agree that they like Vasquez and Swihart. But that still doesn't take away from the ability to trade him. Only if he isn't that good on offense and defense is he not tradable on a 2-16 contract at 30, 2 years from now.
If they believe in him and if they want him to be their catcher next season, then 2 years vs. 4 years should not stop them.
Salty is very likely going to get a 4 yr deal from someone & they are well aware that he's looking for security, as this will very likely be his biggest contract. They obviously don't see him as a long term solution at the position, so why go 4 years? There could be some hidden variables that we are currently unaware of. Is Salty bitter that Farrell benched him during the World Series? Do the Sox feel his average for balls hit in play was ridiclously high and he will likely regress? Do they feel he is not good enough of a right handed hitter to not be part of a platoon?
The Sox Front Office under this ownership group has been excellent at knowing when to let players go and I'm sure they have their reasons why they have no interest in holding onto Salty long term. It also takes a lot out of a team to win it all these days and you need to change it up a bit and bring in some guys who have that same hunger this team did. Maybe they feel that a guy like Ruiz will have that hunger coming off a subpar year in a bad environment. Either way, I'm sure they have some valid reasons behind their decision to avoid the long term deal with Salty.