Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    In response to BMav's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BMav's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    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.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    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.  

    [/QUOTE]

    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.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    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.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.


    The Red Sox salvaged Salty from the garbage heap.  Nobody wanted him and everyone gave up on him.  He was in such dire straits when the Sox got him that he was having trouble throwing the ball back to the pitcher...remember?

    Salty should get on his knees and thank the Sox for the opportunity to resume his career. 

    A two year deal is totally fair.  The Sox were loyal to him.  Shouldn't he show some loyalty to the Sox in return?

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BMav's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BMav's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    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.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    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.  

    [/QUOTE]

    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.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    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.

    [/QUOTE]

    You mentioned 4 possible reasons. However, every one of them is just as big an issue on a one year deal as a 4 year deal. they are reasons not to sign him......period.

    If he is not good enough to be the long term answer, he shouldn't be good enough for the short term answer either. And if he is good enough to be the short term answer, he is good enough to trade in two years.

    I stand by the thought that 4 years in Salty's case should not stop the Sox from signing him unless they don't trust his work ethic. Catchers defense is like a fine wine. A 30 year old is in his prime.

    But I agree that if they decide not to sign him, they will have their reasons.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.


    I think Salty can easily be traded once one of our kids prove they are ready, but signing Ruiz to 2 years is less risky.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    I agree with going 4 years on Salty. Having a C on a cost controled contract is a very valuable asset, if the time comes that he is blocking a prospect. Ross (age), Swihart (potential position change) and Vasquez (will he hit) IMO are not compelling enough reasons to not resign Salty to 4/$40...Salty at 4/$40 is a better value than Ruis at 2/$20 factoring in the additional value of controling Salty's contract for those 2 remaining years 

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I agree with going 4 years on Salty. Having a C on a cost controled contract is a very valuable asset, if the time comes that he is blocking a prospect. Ross (age), Swihart (potential position change) and Vasquez (will he hit) IMO are not compelling enough reasons to not resign Salty to 4/$40...Salty at 4/$40 is a better value than Ruis at 2/$20 factoring in the additional value of controling Salty's contract for those 2 remaining years 

    [/QUOTE]

    We may be able to get Salty for $36M/4. But, if it is $40/4, we could even make it 13, 11, 9 & 7M per year, so it would be easier to trade him down the line.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    In response to ampoule's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    The Red Sox salvaged Salty from the garbage heap.  Nobody wanted him and everyone gave up on him.  He was in such dire straits when the Sox got him that he was having trouble throwing the ball back to the pitcher...remember?

    Salty should get on his knees and thank the Sox for the opportunity to resume his career. 

    A two year deal is totally fair.  The Sox were loyal to him.  Shouldn't he show some loyalty to the Sox in return?

    [/QUOTE]


    Totally fair is what he can get.  The Sox weren't exactly all that warm on him.  Little was expected as a C.  He still had potential as a DH or maybe 1B in many eyes.  Yes they gave him a chance, but he took it and grew into the position. I'd like him back, but wish him well where ever he winds up. 

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    In response to croc's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ampoule's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    The Red Sox salvaged Salty from the garbage heap.  Nobody wanted him and everyone gave up on him.  He was in such dire straits when the Sox got him that he was having trouble throwing the ball back to the pitcher...remember?

    Salty should get on his knees and thank the Sox for the opportunity to resume his career. 

    A two year deal is totally fair.  The Sox were loyal to him.  Shouldn't he show some loyalty to the Sox in return?

    [/QUOTE]


    Totally fair is what he can get.  The Sox weren't exactly all that warm on him.  Little was expected as a C.  He still had potential as a DH or maybe 1B in many eyes.  Yes they gave him a chance, but he took it and grew into the position. I'd like him back, but wish him well where ever he winds up. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes, who here would walk away from millions of dollars meant for your kids and their kids...

     
  9. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    In response to ampoule's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    The Red Sox salvaged Salty from the garbage heap.  Nobody wanted him and everyone gave up on him.  He was in such dire straits when the Sox got him that he was having trouble throwing the ball back to the pitcher...remember?

    Salty should get on his knees and thank the Sox for the opportunity to resume his career. 

    A two year deal is totally fair.  The Sox were loyal to him.  Shouldn't he show some loyalty to the Sox in return?

    [/QUOTE]

    is this a serious post or a joke?

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    In response to tvfrank's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I only have a one word response: WHY?

    [/QUOTE]

    why what? resign Salty? as discussed in this entire post, the alternate options for this year at C range from crappy (Ruiz/Pierz/Lava) to wildly over priced (Mcann)

    In this market and with the state of the RS minor league C options, Salty at $10 is a fair value. The question seems to be for how long.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    In response to ampoule's comment:


    The Red Sox salvaged Salty from the garbage heap.  Nobody wanted him and everyone gave up on him.  He was in such dire straits when the Sox got him that he was having trouble throwing the ball back to the pitcher...remember?

    Salty should get on his knees and thank the Sox for the opportunity to resume his career. 

    A two year deal is totally fair.  The Sox were loyal to him.  Shouldn't he show some loyalty to the Sox in return?




    He had an issue with his shoulder, thoracic outlet syndrome, and had surgery to fix it. He didnt have the "yipps" as some people believe...

    http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/mlb/news/story?id=4800012

     

    Texas totally blew it with him. They did with all their young catchers including Teagarden and Ramirez at that time. If they actually stuck with him and taught him the position insead of shuffling him to DH/1b and C in MLB and in the minors, they would have had better luck.. That organization handled all their catchers terribly.

    With that said, Salty was a Theo guy. I just dont think Ben values him as much as Theo did. They did him a favor in not offering him a QO. He will be paid well and unfortunately it probably wont be in Boston. There are no guarentees with our catching prospects and looking at all the alternatives at the position, I think a deal with Salty should happen here.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to ampoule's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     


    The Red Sox salvaged Salty from the garbage heap.  Nobody wanted him and everyone gave up on him.  He was in such dire straits when the Sox got him that he was having trouble throwing the ball back to the pitcher...remember?

    Salty should get on his knees and thank the Sox for the opportunity to resume his career. 

    A two year deal is totally fair.  The Sox were loyal to him.  Shouldn't he show some loyalty to the Sox in return?

     




    He had an issue with his shoulder, thoracic outlet syndrome, and had surgery to fix it. He didnt have the "yipps" as some people believe...

     

    http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/mlb/news/story?id=4800012

     

    Texas totally blew it with him. They did with all their young catchers including Teagarden and Ramirez at that time. If they actually stuck with him and taught him the position insead of shuffling him to DH/1b and C in MLB and in the minors, they would have had better luck.. That organization handled all their catchers terribly.

    With that said, Salty was a Theo guy. I just dont think Ben values him as much as Theo did. They did him a favor in not offering him a QO. He will be paid well and unfortunately it probably wont be in Boston. There are no guarentees with our catching prospects and looking at all the alternatives at the position, I think a deal with Salty should happen here.

    [/QUOTE]


    The Braves were the first to try Salty at 1B. In 2007, he almost played as much at 1B as catcher that year between the two clubs.

    The Rangers only used Salty at 1B that one first year (2007) for 199 innings, then never again.

    He only started at DH 4 times for the Rangers, but was bounced back and forth from the minors like a yo-yo.

    While all this certainly didn't help Salty's development as a defensive catcher, particularly sitting on the bench, it has "saved his legs", so to speak, so he is not a worn out 28 year old catcher.

    Signing Salty to a 4 year deal is certainly not going to happen in Boston, and despite the clowns implying that's what we think might happen, some of us do reserve the right to state our opinions that differ from Ben's. 

    Salty turns 29 next May. It's a young 29, in terms of wear and tear on his body. He's been on the bench of platooned basically his whole ML career. Signing him to a $38M/4 deal makes sense to me.  $9.5M off the luxury limit beats what McCann and Ruiz will probably cost, and if one of our catching prospects proves he's ready, the catching situation in MLB is so dire right now, that teams will be knocking down the door to trade for him at age 30, 31 or 32. Remember guys, VTek did not become the "complete catcher" until about age 31.

    Worst case scenarion: Salty becomes a .225  17 HR (.295 OBP) hitter and an average fielding catcher with throwing issues. At worst, we might have to pay a team a couple million to take him via a trade.

    Best case scenario: Salty continues to improve, and we get 4 good seasons from him against RHPs, or he improves and we trade him for something very very good as Vazquez, Swihart, Lava and/or Denny make the seemless transition.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    In response to djcbuffum's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to capecodredsoxfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    We may be able to get Salty for $36M/4. But, if it is $40/4, we could even make it 13, 11, 9 & 7M per year, so it would be easier to trade him down the line.


    Henry basically said that Salty is gone, if another GM goes beyond 2 years. Salty on a 4 year contract, stand alone, would cost millions to "trade". 

    [/QUOTE]

    Has there ever been a contract with decreasing annual value over its term? I can't think of one.

    [/QUOTE]

    Many contracts include a signing bonus that pays a player a lot more year one.

    Pedey's new contract ends like this:

    2018: $16M

    2019: $15M

    2020: $13M

    I'm sure there are more, but it doesn't really matter as the Sox can just pay part of a abck-end deal anyways. For the Sox, it's more about the luxury tax limit budget based on AVV than the actual yearly player payroll budget.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to ampoule's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     


    The Red Sox salvaged Salty from the garbage heap.  Nobody wanted him and everyone gave up on him.  He was in such dire straits when the Sox got him that he was having trouble throwing the ball back to the pitcher...remember?

    Salty should get on his knees and thank the Sox for the opportunity to resume his career. 

    A two year deal is totally fair.  The Sox were loyal to him.  Shouldn't he show some loyalty to the Sox in return?

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    He had an issue with his shoulder, thoracic outlet syndrome, and had surgery to fix it. He didnt have the "yipps" as some people believe...

     

     

    http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/mlb/news/story?id=4800012

     

    Texas totally blew it with him. They did with all their young catchers including Teagarden and Ramirez at that time. If they actually stuck with him and taught him the position insead of shuffling him to DH/1b and C in MLB and in the minors, they would have had better luck.. That organization handled all their catchers terribly.

    With that said, Salty was a Theo guy. I just dont think Ben values him as much as Theo did. They did him a favor in not offering him a QO. He will be paid well and unfortunately it probably wont be in Boston. There are no guarentees with our catching prospects and looking at all the alternatives at the position, I think a deal with Salty should happen here.

    [/QUOTE]


    The Braves were the first to try Salty at 1B. In 2007, he almost played as much at 1B as catcher that year between the two clubs.

    The Rangers only used Salty at 1B that one first year (2007) for 199 innings, then never again.

    He only started at DH 4 times for the Rangers, but was bounced back and forth from the minors like a yo-yo.

    While all this certainly didn't help Salty's development as a defensive catcher, particularly sitting on the bench, it has "saved his legs", so to speak, so he is not a worn out 28 year old catcher.

    Signing Salty to a 4 year deal is certainly not going to happen in Boston, and despite the clowns implying that's what we think might happen, some of us do reserve the right to state our opinions that differ from Ben's. 

    Salty turns 29 next May. It's a young 29, in terms of wear and tear on his body. He's been on the bench of platooned basically his whole ML career. Signing him to a $38M/4 deal makes sense to me.  $9.5M off the luxury limit beats what McCann and Ruiz will probably cost, and if one of our catching prospects proves he's ready, the catching situation in MLB is so dire right now, that teams will be knocking down the door to trade for him at age 30, 31 or 32. Remember guys, VTek did not become the "complete catcher" until about age 31.

    Worst case scenarion: Salty becomes a .225  17 HR (.295 OBP) hitter and an average fielding catcher with throwing issues. At worst, we might have to pay a team a couple million to take him via a trade.

    Best case scenario: Salty continues to improve, and we get 4 good seasons from him against RHPs, or he improves and we trade him for something very very good as Vazquez, Swihart, Lava and/or Denny make the seemless transition.

    [/QUOTE]

    I simply don't see the in house options bearing fruit yet. I have been on this board for 2 years saying Lava is not a C prospect. He is a 4A player that at his advanced age still has no value in a platoon situation. Swihart is 175 pounds and has trouble keeping weight on. Denny is 19. Ruiz is 35 and coming off a horrible year including suspension and wants 2/$20. 

    Salty warts and all doesn't look so bad for the next couple of years in a platoon. 

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    Because of his familiarity with the staff, Salty would be our best option to bridge the gap to the prospects.  A two year deal would be ideal.  A three year deal wouldn't be the worse thing in the world.  I would not offer more than that.

    I think that the Sox would be willing to go three years with Salty if they could bring him back for that.

     

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    MLB Network asked Pierczinski about is it hard to get familar with new Staff, he said no big deal. By time Spring Training ends, they have it down.
    If I were the Sox I would offer him a 3 year deal, or 2 years with an Option Year thats it. Gives our Minor Leaguers time, Ross is probably a goner after next year.
    Also gives us a valueable trade chip, though the 2 year Contract is the best one if you do want to Trade.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    Salty turns 29 next May. It's a young 29, in terms of wear and tear on his body. He's been on the bench of platooned basically his whole ML career. Signing him to a $38M/4 deal makes sense to me.  $9.5M off the luxury limit beats what McCann and Ruiz will probably cost, and if one of our catching prospects proves he's ready, the catching situation in MLB is so dire right now, that teams will be knocking down the door to trade for him at age 30, 31 or 32. Remember guys, VTek did not become the "complete catcher" until about age 31.

    Worst case scenarion: Salty becomes a .225  17 HR (.295 OBP) hitter and an average fielding catcher with throwing issues. At worst, we might have to pay a team a couple million to take him via a trade.

    Best case scenario: Salty continues to improve, and we get 4 good seasons from him against RHPs, or he improves and we trade him for something very very good as Vazquez, Swihart, Lava and/or Denny make the seemless transition.

    [/QUOTE]

    I simply don't see the in house options bearing fruit yet. I have been on this board for 2 years saying Lava is not a C prospect. He is a 4A player that at his advanced age still has no value in a platoon situation. Swihart is 175 pounds and has trouble keeping weight on. Denny is 19. Ruiz is 35 and coming off a horrible year including suspension and wants 2/$20. 

    You forgot Vazquez.

    I agree Lava is probably a 4A player going forward, but there is still hope he can improve. Swihart has a lot of potential, as does Denny. Between the 4 of them, there is a good chance one becomes a plus catcher, or that two combined in a platoon can form a plus.

    Salty warts and all doesn't look so bad for the next couple of years in a platoon. 

    He wants more than 2 years, and there in lies the rub.

    I say give him 4 and trade him if we have to whenever a kid is ready.

     

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Because of his familiarity with the staff, Salty would be our best option to bridge the gap to the prospects.  A two year deal would be ideal.  A three year deal wouldn't be the worse thing in the world.  I would not offer more than that.

    I think that the Sox would be willing to go three years with Salty if they could bring him back for that.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Salty is only 28 and it is a "young" 28 due to the fact that he has not caught a lot of games over his career. Catchers often hold value past age 34 or 36, so what is the fear about maybe trading Salty when he is 31 or 32? Teams will likely be beating down the door to trade for a 31-32 year old Salty with 1-2 years of team control.

    3 years may not be enough to land him, so the choice is likely 4 years of Salty (with the rights to trade him) vs 2 years of Ruiz maybe at a higher luxury limit number. I hope McCann is not part of the equation.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    Salty turns 29 next May. It's a young 29, in terms of wear and tear on his body. He's been on the bench of platooned basically his whole ML career. Signing him to a $38M/4 deal makes sense to me.  $9.5M off the luxury limit beats what McCann and Ruiz will probably cost, and if one of our catching prospects proves he's ready, the catching situation in MLB is so dire right now, that teams will be knocking down the door to trade for him at age 30, 31 or 32. Remember guys, VTek did not become the "complete catcher" until about age 31.

    Worst case scenarion: Salty becomes a .225  17 HR (.295 OBP) hitter and an average fielding catcher with throwing issues. At worst, we might have to pay a team a couple million to take him via a trade.

    Best case scenario: Salty continues to improve, and we get 4 good seasons from him against RHPs, or he improves and we trade him for something very very good as Vazquez, Swihart, Lava and/or Denny make the seemless transition.

    [/QUOTE]

    I simply don't see the in house options bearing fruit yet. I have been on this board for 2 years saying Lava is not a C prospect. He is a 4A player that at his advanced age still has no value in a platoon situation. Swihart is 175 pounds and has trouble keeping weight on. Denny is 19. Ruiz is 35 and coming off a horrible year including suspension and wants 2/$20. 

    You forgot Vazquez.

    I agree Lava is probably a 4A player going forward, but there is still hope he can improve. Swihart has a lot of potential, as does Denny. Between the 4 of them, there is a good chance one becomes a plus catcher, or that two combined in a platoon can form a plus.

    Salty warts and all doesn't look so bad for the next couple of years in a platoon. 

    He wants more than 2 years, and there in lies the rub.

    I say give him 4 and trade him if we have to whenever a kid is ready.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    In response to djcbuffum's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    As reported by mlbtraderumors:

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/11/red-sox-offer-saltalamacchia-two-year-deal.html

    Since I'm confident that he can get three or more years elsewhere, this means to me that he's gone. The FO must know that; this has to be a formality just in case he'll give a home-town discount.

    [/QUOTE]I THINK TWO YEARS WITH A VESTING OPTION 3RD YEAR, AND A MILLION ADDED TO EACH YEAR WOULD GET HIM!  AND, THAT WOULD BE CHEAPER THAN ANY ALTERNATIVE.


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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    In response to REBEL's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to djcbuffum's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    As reported by mlbtraderumors:

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/11/red-sox-offer-saltalamacchia-two-year-deal.html

    Since I'm confident that he can get three or more years elsewhere, this means to me that he's gone. The FO must know that; this has to be a formality just in case he'll give a home-town discount.

    [/QUOTE]I THINK TWO YEARS WITH A VESTING OPTION 3RD YEAR, AND A MILLION ADDED TO EACH YEAR WOULD GET HIM!  AND, THAT WOULD BE CHEAPER THAN ANY ALTERNATIVE.


    [/QUOTE]

    I am nearly certain Salty is gone. We benched him when it counted most, so obviously he is not valued that highly by Sox management.

    Personally, I think we should offer him:

    2014: $9M

    2015: $9M

    2016: $9M

    2017: $11M club option with a $3M buyout

     

    That amounts to $30M/3 or $38M/4.

     

    If one of our prospects proves he is ready, we can look to trade the 30 or 31 year old Salty.

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share