Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    In response to djcbuffum's comment:

    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.



    I think this was a hey we tried.  Low ball offer bc they know he will get more.  If there was a 3rd year option maybe.    I see Ruiz and Ross as our catchers.  I think its pretty clear they wont get salty and mccann arent gonna happen at this point.  

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    How can you all be so sure that Saltalamacchia will not be back with the Red Sox?  How do you  know what is a "lowball offer" until other offers are out there to be compared with?

    A first offer does not have to be the last and final offer either in years or in dollars.  That is what negotiations are-offers and counter offers until a deal is struck.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    In response to shuperman's comment:

    In response to djcbuffum's comment:

    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.



    I think this was a hey we tried.  Low ball offer bc they know he will get more.  If there was a 3rd year option maybe.    I see Ruiz and Ross as our catchers.  I think its pretty clear they wont get salty and mccann arent gonna happen at this point.  



    They don't want to commit to any catchers long term because some people in the Sox organization feel Vasquez could be ready for a shot as soon as the middle to the end of next season with Swihart being another guy who could be ready sooner rather than later.  Some people feel Butler could even help out at the Big League level next year.  My guess is Lavarnway is moved this winter regardless of how this plays out over the next couple of months.  

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    In response to djcbuffum's comment:

    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.



    Generally you do not start negotiations with your best offer. Two years at X dollars is a starting point. Salty may or may not be back. Ruiz may be OK down the line, but from what I hear he still cannot hit the baseball. And thats a huge drawback at ANY position.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    They benched Salty when it counted.

    They have Lava, Butler, Vazquez, Swihart and Denny in the wings.

    I doubt they sign anyone to more than 2 years, unless (I hope not) they see McCann and our future DH.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sportswizard1. Show Sportswizard1's posts

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    If Salty doesn't like losing he'll stay in Boston. Money and winning are important, also according to gordon Edes no contract offer has been made. There are several catchers availible including some who are trade bait, amongst the catchers there are interesting guys: McCann probably wants too much money and years, Ruiz already has a 2yr deal in his pocket @10 mil per,Pierzynski is an interesting guy who is garnering a lot of interest, of the FA's Navarro interest me necause he can play D and he hits better from the LHS and would make a nice platoon catcher with Ross except he would have to play the bulk because I don't think Ross can play effectively for half of the games 60-70 and he's a good option. Other guys availible are Suzuki, Hanigan, Conger and Castro 3 of these guys are by trade only, where as Suzuki is a FA who hasn't done much the last few years. Then there is the in house options of Butler, Lavarnway and Vasquez and on the way out side looking in there's Swihart....Lots of options. 

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from one-for-the-road. Show one-for-the-road's posts

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    You all may not realize it, but there are no better options than Salty, not now not for less than insane money...

     

    Pierz doesnt fit the new clubhouse culture and is old; Ruiz at 10M per cant hit; McCann for 100M?

     

    what is left? Susuki? Dioner Navarro? Lavarnway is not ready, if they believed he was they wouldnt offer Salty any deal; might as well call back 'Tek

     

    I really hope he takes the 2 year offer

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    "Generally you do not start negotiations with your best offer. Two years at X dollars is a starting point. "

    When your starting point is a low ball, home town discount with some level of implied insult then it is not a negotation, but a PR move. 

    That's how I see it in this case. Having said that I am not all knowing of the offers he may get so if I am wrong I will fess up :)

     

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.


    Probably will end up being a 3 yr deal if RS really want to get it done. Good chance someone might blow RS away, not a lot of catchers on FA mkt, unless your willing to pay a ton for McCann. Salty could be a nice option for others. Ross deal ends after next year, and a Vasquez could then be 2nd catcher on team for 2015. Swihart/Denney still a couple of years away. If RS are forced to go to 4yrs to match other offer, think they will walk away and pursue C.Ruiz @ 2yrs.

    Obviously its easiest to know your own players best. Something tells me the RS are willing to walk away from Salty. Just a hunch?

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    Ruiz at 10M per cant hit;

    Career .274/.358/.412...for a catcher, I'd say he has something of a bat. (Check out his excellent season in 2012.)

    Or do you mean he's no good because he's coming off a down year? Because that's what everyone a lot of people said about Victorino, Napoli, Drew, etc.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from slasher9. Show slasher9's posts

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    Looks like the Sox offered a deal they knew Salty wouldn't take to placate us fans.

     

    Jayson Stark was on Philly sports radio yesterday afternoon and reported that Boston's primary target at C is Ruiz and Ruiz will end up signing with Boston.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    Looks like the Sox offered a deal they knew Salty wouldn't take to placate us fans.

     

    I think the Sox offered what they think meets their needs: a two year catcher to bridge to the kids.

    Yes, they know he may walk, and for all we know, we may counter with a 3 year deal or club option 3rd year, but my guess is that Salty's fate was sealed when they benched him when it counted most.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from J-BAY. Show J-BAY's posts

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    Pete Abraham ‏@PeteAbe 18h

    #RedSox need a catcher but don't want to block their prospects. Could see a two year deal at a lofty rate for somebody.

     

     
  15. 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:

    In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:

    "Generally you do not start negotiations with your best offer. Two years at X dollars is a starting point. "

    When your starting point is a low ball, home town discount with some level of implied insult then it is not a negotation, but a PR move. 

    That's how I see it in this case. Having said that I am not all knowing of the offers he may get so if I am wrong I will fess up :)

     



    +1

    That was my thought. Since the inside prognosticators and know-it-alls have all proclaimed Salty worthy of a three to four year contract, two at less than $10m per seems (to my amateur sensibilities) too low to be serious. Sure they might negotiate upward, but this seems to be less than 50% where I think Salty's camp will start (4 years, at least $40mm). That makes a pretty big divide to cross.

    I can see how the Sox would value Salty at around that for the reasons people have mentioned. There are lot's of catchers on the market, the Sox have propects only 2 years away, Salty was "benched" in the WS, and so on. It's not unreasonable that the Sox felt his worth was in this ballpark area. I just think other teams are going to value his services a lot higher.

    But, having said that, I'm just a guy reading the internet. WTH do I know, right? Stranger things have happened. See: Crawford, Carl.



    Last winter, I proposed we either extend Salty or trade him while his value was high and before we get nothing in return for his departure.

    (Now, to be fair, one reason behind that position was that I thought we had little chance to win in 2013 and I was looking towards 2014 and beyond.)

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    They benched Salty when it counted.

    They have Lava, Butler, Vazquez, Swihart and Denny in the wings.

    I doubt they sign anyone to more than 2 years, unless (I hope not) they see McCann and our future DH.

    pLEASE ben, DON'T DO IT..... let salty walk !!!!!


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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    Unless he accepts a 2yr deal, he will be in CWS, Tex, CHC, or somewhere else on a 3-4 year deal. The Sox believe in Vasquez and Swihart. Butler is a good BU option. Lavarnway will probably be trade bait unless hes willing to switch to 1b, if the Sox even care to do that.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    "Yes, they know he may walk, and for all we know, we may counter with a 3 year deal or club option 3rd year, but my guess is that Salty's fate was sealed when they benched him when it counted most."

    What if they offered Salty an attractive team third option year but also included a fat buyout?

    If he was cut short, it would make his effective pay for the previous two years significantly higher, and we'd still be under the lux tax in that year because bringing up the kids would knock our payroll down.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    To be honest, I think they're overvaluing their prospects, and they'd be better off keeping Salty around for three years. He'll be tradable, he'll be usable in a platoon or as backup, he won't "get in the way" of a prospect who is ready for prime time. But those prospects are not a sure bet, so better to have him around than not. 

    We only need one of these guys to shine:

    Vazquez

    Swihart

    Denny

    Lava

    Butler

    J Hernandez

     
  20. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    If Salty is going to stay in Boston it will have to be on a two or three (at the most) year deal. He and Ross can combine in 2014. He can share duties with Vasquez in 2015. But by 2016, if not sooner, Vasquez wtll be the number one backstop. He is special! A Molina clone.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    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.

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

    Re: Sox offer Salty a 2-year deal.

    In response to 2013champions' comment:

    Butler is a good BU option.


    Provide the details on Butler and why in your opinion you speculate he's a good BU option. Thanks.




    seriously?

     
  24. 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:

    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.  

     
  25. 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:

    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.

     

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share