Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

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

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    consider or propose same thing you stated a trade possibility.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    Even if Lackey was healthy, we'd still be tight with what we can do this winter. We'd probably still have to lose one of Papi or Paps, and be restricted on who we could get as our 5th starter, pen help, and RF'er. I know many of the pro-CC signing knew the contract would restrict future planning. My thread is geared towards those who acted as if we'd have money to spare, and it would be easy to keep highly competitive. I can't remember the specific names of posters who held that position, but I know they were numerous.

    If both Lackey and Matsusaka were healthy. Our need would be to replace Papi, Papelbon and Drew...IMHO we'd have plenty of capital to do just that...the issue with the 2012 roster is that we need to replace all five of them...

    In the end the Red Sox under Henry have laid out the game plan for how they build their rosters and the goal of staying below the luxary tax is well documneted...So I get that they don't have unlimited funds...I will also not argue that Crawford is overpaid, but again using your math we're talking 7M per year and while that is certainly a ton of money and you could buy some pretty good bench groceries with that cash. The reality is the moneys already spent. But they still have in excess of 150M to 160M to fill the rest of the roster.

    If your motive for starting this thread was to call out those that supported the Crawford signing, I am one of them. Thus I fell compelled to argue your contentions and while I accept that in an ideal world it probably would've better served us to pass and let him sign with another team. I supported the move when it happened, didn't give much thought to the moneys frankly, and today I understand that given the terms of his deal he ain't going anywhere soon...

    I will add that given the injuries to Lackey & Matsusaka and the replacement cost of signing another big bat (Papi) and the cost of bolstering the pen and the bench that Henry may well have to dig a little deeper this offseason. If he doesn't then I think the next best move he could make is to trade Beckett, Ellsbury and Youk get busy with retooling the team through the farm...
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from soxnewmex. Show soxnewmex's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    I think alot of people wanted Crawford on the team, but doubt many thought the price was right.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    moon I'm not wrong I included all the ups and ones that go away. I think you do not see that I do not bring back Papi.

    OK, Jim. I'm not sure if you were or were not one to say we'd have no problem signing all our players after the CC signing. I'll take your word for it.

    It's not just about Paps and Papi. We might have let them walk even if we had not signed CC. It was, still is, and will be for 5 years to come about other alternatives, and having more choices. I'm OK with those who are happy with the CC deal, but I just want them to realize that some of these guys we are losing or won't be signing for years to come, is because of the restricted payroll budget that includes CC at about 1/8th or 1/9th of the total player payroll.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    Even if Lackey was healthy, we'd still be tight with what we can do this winter. We'd probably still have to lose one of Papi or Paps, and be restricted on who we could get as our 5th starter, pen help, and RF'er. I know many of the pro-CC signing knew the contract would restrict future planning. My thread is geared towards those who acted as if we'd have money to spare, and it would be easy to keep highly competitive. I can't remember the specific names of posters who held that position, but I know they were numerous.

    If both Lackey and Matsusaka were healthy. Our need would be to replace Papi, Papelbon and Drew...IMHO we'd have plenty of capital to do just that...the issue with the 2012 roster is that we need to replace all five of them...

    You are assuming a pretty large payroll budget increase. By my calculations, after we sign the arb players, we will be at about $5-7M below last year's budget. Even if we go up to a payroll of $176M, we'll still only have about $15M to spend to replace these players:
    Closer Paps
    DH Papi
    RF Drew
    C2 VTek
    S6 Wake

    We can fill some of these with kids:
    Lava for VTek and/or Papi
    Reddick/Kalish/DMac/Linares/Brentz for Drew
    Bard for Paps (then find a new set-up guy)

    I'm actually OK with any of the above replacements, but maybe not all 3 at once. My point was that we would not be able to replace Paps, Papi, and Drew "in kind". Instead, we will have to gamble and pray to some extent. We are not free to spend the $38M spent on Paps, Papi and Drew to replace them, unless we radically raise our budget. There were some posters this spring who were saying we'd have plenty of money. Now, the AGon signing and Buch extension ate up a lot of that slack, and both were worthy investments, I get that.

    In the end the Red Sox under Henry have laid out the game plan for how they build their rosters and the goal of staying below the luxary tax is well documneted...So I get that they don't have unlimited funds...I will also not argue that Crawford is overpaid, but again using your math we're talking 7M per year and while that is certainly a ton of money and you could buy some pretty good bench groceries with that cash. The reality is the moneys already spent. But they still have in excess of 150M to 160M to fill the rest of the roster.

    Like I said, we will be at about $160M after the arbs... not counting Paps, Papi, or a Drew replacement. The luxury tax threshold is supposed to go up, so we may have some play, but I doubt we will have enough to build a team that is the favorite to win it all or even be top 3.

    If your motive for starting this thread was to call out those that supported the Crawford signing, I am one of them. Thus I fell compelled to argue your contentions and while I accept that in an ideal world it probably would've better served us to pass and let him sign with another team. I supported the move when it happened, didn't give much thought to the moneys frankly, and today I understand that given the terms of his deal he ain't going anywhere soon...

    My motive was to call out those who said the signing was a lot or even too much, but that it was worth it, and that we'd be able to afford to keep all our rising stars and make key purchases along the way where needed. There were several posters who held that view last winter. Now that it appears we are poised to lose Paps and Papi, and not be able to fill the voids left by Drew, Dice and Lackey, I wanted to hear their plan. Show me the money. How can we have replaced Paps, Papi, and Drew on $6-16M (even if Lackey and Dice were healthy-not that we should count on 100% health every year anyway).

    I will add that given the injuries to Lackey & Matsusaka and the replacement cost of signing another big bat (Papi) and the cost of bolstering the pen and the bench that Henry may well have to dig a little deeper this offseason. If he doesn't then I think the next best move he could make is to trade Beckett, Ellsbury and Youk get busy with retooling the team through the farm...

    I seriously think this may be an option to lessen our payroll and bolster our future and flexibility for the next few years. I'm not sure if Henry got any money from insurance on Lackey and Dice. That may make a difference in his plans to up the budget or not.

    Bean, you make some good argumants, and I enjoy discussing the Sox with you. I respect your position, and hope you are right about Henry being willing to dig deep this winter to at least make a bunch of minor deals to fill up the 5-7 holes that we don't count on kids to fill.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    I think alot of people wanted Crawford on the team, but doubt many thought the price was right.

    I agree; there were not many posters who said they were happy with the contract amount, except for the few that think Henry can and should spend, spend, spend. That's not my point. My point is that after the signing, I showed the budget numbers and who were coming off the books over the next year or two. I claimed that the CC signing would "cripple" our team for years to come. One can argue that the AGon trade and signing and Buch extension proved me wrong, at least for the first year out of the 7 of CC's deal, but I showed that $20+M/yr paid to CC would probably mean that we'd have to let some rising stars go (like Buch, Ells, Bard, or others), say goodbye to vets (like Paps, Papi, or others), and not be able to outbid teams for crucial big named FAs for years to come. There were quite a few posters who argued that we'd have plenty to spare. Yes, I know the Lackey and Dice-K longterm injuries can be labelled "unexpected", but not expecting and planning for at least one major injury is , IMO, being short-sighted.

    If you weren't one of the posters who said the CC contract would not be overly restrictive, then this post is not about you, and I apologize for implying that you need to explain yourself. The key word in the post title is "signing", not Crawford. It's about his $142M deal and how it will affect us for 7 years. I think everyone realizes now that our hands are tied to some extent by the "overpay". We may disagree on how much or what might have been if....., but I'm not hearing anyone say, "I am still happy we spent $142M, and I think we can stay under the tax threshhold and still build a solid team, and here's how....". I heard that last winter. I'm asking those guys to come forward and give me a realistic plan.

    A quick look at winter 2012-13: We lose Dice-K ($10M, but just $8M CBT), Jenks ($6M), and Scutty ($6M). That's $20M, but maybe Iggy or Bogaerts will be ready by then or Aviles or Lowrie will look stable. Replacing Dice-K and Jenks is not replacing much, in terms of recent production.

    Maybe after we win a ring, I'll have to eat my words ("cripple"), but I will be here to do so... happily. However, if we win as a result of greatly increasing our payroll budget, then the situation changed beyond my expectation.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    all I know is this was my reaction the day he signed "....unfrickenbelievable...they obviously didn't look back at their already topheavy lefty lineup, and they obviously didn't think about his inadequacies with the Monster...terrible, terrible signing and terrible, terrible fit."...that was my reaction. He's an albatross, unflavored and over-priced.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from UticaClub. Show UticaClub's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
    [QUOTE]The CPI was 172.2 when Manny was signed in 2000 and is 226.9 now. That is a gain of 32 percent. Manny's $20 mil. in 2000 would be worth $26.4 mil. in today's dollars. That is higher than Crawford's average salary of 20.2 over his contract before discounting the declining purchasing power of his salary down the road.
    Posted by UticaClub[/QUOTE]

    No response?
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from UticaClub. Show UticaClub's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    Did the Crawford "apologists" know at the time of his signing that we would need #4 and #5 starters now because of injuries to Lackey and Dice-K? Did they know that Jenks and Wheeler would bomb and need to be replaced? Did some of the "apologists" figure that Drew could be replaced internally? Did they see Youk as to being more durable and healthy? One can't use today's information to mislabel the what the Crawford "apologists" were thinking last winter.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    You're missing the point. Even if Lackey & Dice-K were 100% healthy, we still could not afford to keep just one of Paps or Papi and stay below the 2011 budget, let alone fill other needs that were expected. That's the point I tried to make last winter. The injuries make it worse.

    Some "apologists" denied this situation could/would occur. If it wasn't you, then so be it.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from UticaClub. Show UticaClub's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
    [QUOTE]You're missing the point. Even if Lackey & Dice-K were 100% healthy, we still could not afford to keep just one of Paps or Papi and stay below the 2011 budget, let alone fill other needs that were expected. That's the point I tried to make last winter. The injuries make it worse. Some "apologists" denied this situation could/would occur. If it wasn't you, then so be it.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Forgive me but I thought that you point was that we need new #4 and #5 starters. The injuries were unpredictable at the time of the signings of Crawford and Gonzalez. Didn't your OP state that we need to replace Lackey and Jenks? How was that foreseeable? Were you happy when Jenks was signed?
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from bosoxmal. Show bosoxmal's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    If I had a week, or so, I'd actually read one of these posts from top to bottom. What's so complicated here? Bard is not and never has had the psche to be closer. Make him a starter. (forget the #; means nothing). Bat Els #3 behind Pedroia and Crawford. Get a RH hitting outfielder to play left, and move Crawford to right.

    Wwe'll be OK. I predict Dice K will come back strong, in ,mid season. There are plenty of mi-level pitchers out there; make Aceves the closer. We know he can do the job.

    Get a conditioning ptogram together that does not incl;ude beeer and pizza!
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    Forgive me but I thought that you point was that we need new #4 and #5 starters. The injuries were unpredictable at the time of the signings of Crawford and Gonzalez. Didn't your OP state that we need to replace Lackey and Jenks? How was that foreseeable? Were you happy when Jenks was signed?

    A lot of questions.

    1) The point of the thread was that the signing of CC has severely limited our ability to keep our rising stars and sign players needed to fill need areas.
    ,
    2) Yes, I do think our biggest need area is starting pitching, but I thought that even before I learned of Lackey's injury. I'm willing to sacrifice some of our offense to fill those pitching needs.

    3) Injuries should be planned for to some extent. Of course losing 3 starters in 2011 is totally out of the realm of projection, but our tight budget was partially responsible for us only being allowed to go out and get one $1M pitcher (Bedard). Like I said, even if Dice & lackey were 100% healthy, our hands would still have been tied in bringing back both Papi and Paps as well as building up our pen, RF and back-up catcher.

    4) We are not "replacing Lackey and Jenks". Technically, we are replacing Wakefield, Bedard, Papelbon, maybe Wheeler. It's totally understandable to think that one pitcher might get hurt or decline so much unexpectedly that a replacment may be needed. (Two is stretching it, but not absurd.) Besides, I wasn't counting on great years from Lackey or Dice-K before 2011 began anyways. My position on wanting a top quality pitcher is more out of fear that one of Beckett, Lester or Buchholtz will not have a very good season next year (for whatever reason). I am not blaming the CC deal on our inability to upgrade that position, but an argumant could be made there.  We basically had about $35M to play with for 2012 after the CC deal. We spent $22M on AGon, $6M on Scutty, and a few million to extend Buch. That leaves us with about $5-7M to stay at about last year's budget level , but we have several slots to fill. You may want to blame the $22M for AGon, but I think he will earn close to that amount. My position on CC is that even if he meets his career norm or 2010 numbers for 6 years, he's not even close to "earning" $20+M/yr, and so the $7-8M a year in "overpay" is lost for 6 more years!

    5) At the time of the Wheeler and Jenks signings I was Ok with them, but I had prefered Downs, Crain, Guerrier, Putz, and others. The Jenks deal ties our hands somewhat too, but this thread is about CC's contract.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    If I had a week, or so, I'd actually read one of these posts from top to bottom. What's so complicated here? Bard is not and never has had the psche to be closer. Make him a starter. (forget the #; means nothing). Bat Els #3 behind Pedroia and Crawford. Get a RH hitting outfielder to play left, and move Crawford to right.

    Wwe'll be OK. I predict Dice K will come back strong, in ,mid season. There are plenty of mi-level pitchers out there; make Aceves the closer. We know he can do the job.

    Great! Let's replace a .370 OBP leadoff guy with a .335 one (like .310 vs LHPs).
    Let's put a noddle arm in Fenway's RF.
    Go with Weiland & Bard until Dice-K rehabs.
    Move Aceves to closer and have who as set-up men to replace bard & Aceves (one of the best two noncloser tandems in MLB in 2011).
    Gotta love Morales, Albers, Atchison, Bowden, and who else? Doubront? Oki? Wally?
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Soxdog67. Show Soxdog67's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
    [QUOTE]Forgive me but I thought that you point was that we need new #4 and #5 starters. The injuries were unpredictable at the time of the signings of Crawford and Gonzalez. Didn't your OP state that we need to replace Lackey and Jenks? How was that foreseeable? Were you happy when Jenks was signed? A lot of questions. 1) The point of the thread was that the signing of CC has severely limited our ability to keep our rising stars and sign players needed to fill need areas. , 2) Yes, I do think our biggest need area is starting pitching, but I thought that even before I learned of Lackey's injury. I'm willing to sacrifice some of our offense to fill those pitching needs. 3) Injuries should be planned for to some extent. Of course losing 3 starters in 2011 is totally out of the realm of projection, but our tight budget was partially responsible for us only being allowed to go out and get one $1M pitcher (Bedard). Like I said, even if Dice & lackey were 100% healthy, our hands would still have been tied in bringing back both Papi and Paps as well as building up our pen, RF and back-up catcher. 4) We are not "replacing Lackey and Jenks". Technically, we are replacing Wakefield, Bedard, Papelbon, maybe Wheeler. It's totally understandable to think that one pitcher might get hurt or decline so much unexpectedly that a replacment may be needed. (Two is stretching it, but not absurd.) Besides, I wasn't counting on great years from Lackey or Dice-K before 2011 began anyways. My position on wanting a top quality pitcher is more out of fear that one of Beckett, Lester or Buchholtz will not have a very good season next year (for whatever reason). I am not blaming the CC deal on our inability to upgrade that position, but an argumant could be made there.  We basically had about $35M to play with for 2012 after the CC deal. We spent $22M on AGon, $6M on Scutty, and a few million to extend Buch. That leaves us with about $5-7M to stay at about last year's budget level , but we have several slots to fill. You may want to blame the $22M for AGon, but I think he will earn close to that amount. My position on CC is that even if he meets his career norm or 2010 numbers for 6 years, he's not even close to "earning" $20+M/yr, and so the $7-8M a year in "overpay" is lost for 6 more years! 5) At the time of the Wheeler and Jenks signings I was Ok with them, but I had prefered Downs, Crain, Guerrier, Putz, and others. The Jenks deal ties our hands somewhat too, but this thread is about CC's contract.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    At this point why are you wasting your time posting here, you should be applying for a job with the Red Sox front office or somewhere in MLB...it appears you know more about making baseball player decisions and managing a 'so-called' team payroll budget than anyone on the Sox can do, or has done in the last 10 years. BTW, what is this budget number you speak of and where are the Sox compared to it right now?

    Also, Cherington was one of the primary advocates for signing Crawford, by his own admission, so it appears he needs your help because obviously he must be clueless. Get your resume over there right away.

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

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    Overall, I think Theo did a very good job. I never have said he should go. I have never pretended to think I could have done better. I have a few disagreements, but have not always thought my idea would have worked better. This one I do. I guess, to you, any dissent is blasphemy or something. I happen to have thought we overpaid CC by about $50M last winter and said at the time, the deal would cripple us for years to come. I am seeing it cripple our options now. I am bringing up the issue. If you don't like it, tough.

    If you don't believe my budget numbers, go to baseball reference and look for yourself:

    http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/BOS/2011-roster.shtml

    (Cots has us at $131.4M, but that is not the CBT number, and it is with just 12 players counted. Add the arb players and all the min wage guys, and it will be close to $160M)

    They have us (after estimated arb raises) at $160.4M for 2012.
    We were at $166.7 in 2011.
    I'm not saying we will stay at the 2011 budget number, but if we stay close, it means we only have about $6-10M to spend on filling these slots:
    SP#4 (Tazawa?)
    SP#5 (Doubront/Weiland/Aceves?)
    Closer (or set-up if Bard or Aceves becomes the closer)
    DH (We could go with Lava and Youk)
    RP  (Bowden/???)
    RF (Reddick/Kalish/DMac)
    C2 (Lava?)

    If we increase to $175-180M, we may be able to equal the 2011 team "on paper" (after injuries, not before), but it won't be easy.

    I trust Ben. I don't judge GMs by one deal. I never have. I think he will do a fine job. Much better than I ever could, but I will accept a advisory fee...

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

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    This team will probably spend about $10mill to bring Ortiz back and $14mill on a SP (Buerhle?).  RF will go to a cheap platoon partner (Ross? Ludwick?).  Catcher is all set.

    Ortiz is coming back.  We all know it. 

    And once Albers is offered arbitration, the bullpen is set, at least for opening day.  (Albers, Bard, Bowden, Doubront, Jenks, Morales and either Scott Atchison, Cesar Cabral, or Josh Fields)

    Not what I would do, but thats another matter.

    I will say I don;t get all this obsession over a RHH bat.  The Sox had the second highest OPS in the AL vs. LHP.  This was not really a weakness.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    My motive was to call out those who said the signing was a lot or even too much, but that it was worth it, and that we'd be able to afford to keep all our rising stars and make key purchases along the way where needed. There were several posters who held that view last winter. Now that it appears we are poised to lose Paps and Papi, and not be able to fill the voids left by Drew, Dice and Lackey, I wanted to hear their plan. Show me the money. How can we have replaced Paps, Papi, and Drew on $6-16M (even if Lackey and Dice were healthy-not that we should count on 100% health every year anyway).


    I think the plan along along was to let Papelbon & Drew walk and replace them with in hosue affordable options like Bard and Kalish. Papi is still in the mix, whether they chose to resign him or not in my mind comes down dollars/years vs replacement cost. Because they still need someone to hit behind Youk.

    So entering the offseason the teams to-do is pretty clear. They need to add 1 proven veteran starter for 2012 and beyond to replace Matsusaka and another backend type for 2012 to bolster the teams organizational depth to compete with internal candidates for the 5th and 6th starter spots (Doubront, Miller and even Wake). Then in 2013 hopefully Lackey is ready to show that he can still get out big league hitters and/or one of our young guns Ranaundo or Barnes is ready to step up. Secondarily to that is to then answer the Papi question...if not he, then whom? Clearly Cherington has his work cut out for him and as you suggested we may need to go light in RF and simply addanother RH bat to the mix but we do have plenty of affordable in house options to use as trade chips or to provide us with depth...

    My intuition suggest that Luccino will lobby to use every dollar at the teams disposal to address the 2012 roster. I don't see them spending more than the projected 178M to 186M competitive balance threshold for 2012. I also don't see them slashing the budget either...Don't under estimate Luccino's influence on Henry and his desire to show that he is, and was indeed, the man behind the curtain! I doubt that he wants to tear up the nucleaus and start anew. Rather do as they did in 2003 and that is to be creative in adding players to the mix to enhance the nucleaus.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Soxdog67. Show Soxdog67's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
    [QUOTE]Overall, I think Theo did a very good job. I never have said he should go. I have never pretended to think I could have done better. I have a few disagreements, but have not always thought my idea would have worked better. This one I do. I guess, to you, any dissent is blasphemy or something. I happen to have thought we overpaid CC by about $50M last winter and said at the time, the deal would cripple us for years to come. I am seeing it cripple our options now. I am bringing up the issue. If you don't like it, tough. If you don't believe my budget numbers, go to baseball reference and look for yourself: http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/BOS/2011-roster.shtml (Cots has us at $131.4M, but that is not the CBT number, and it is with just 12 players counted. Add the arb players and all the min wage guys, and it will be close to $160M) They have us (after estimated arb raises) at $160.4M for 2012. We were at $166.7 in 2011. I'm not saying we will stay at the 2011 budget number, but if we stay close, it means we only have about $6-10M to spend on filling these slots: SP#4 (Tazawa?) SP#5 (Doubront/Weiland/Aceves?) Closer (or set-up if Bard or Aceves becomes the closer) DH (We could go with Lava and Youk) RP  (Bowden/???) RF (Reddick/Kalish/DMac) C2 (Lava?) If we increase to $175-180M, we may be able to equal the 2011 team "on paper" (after injuries, not before), but it won't be easy. I trust Ben. I don't judge GMs by one deal. I never have. I think he will do a fine job. Much better than I ever could, but I will accept a advisory fee... LOL
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    I guess I will assume you were responding to my post here..

    Based on the numbers you provided in your response (above) are you getting "Expected Payroll" and "Budget" confused??

    Budget, to me, would represent the total amount the team would consider spending on player salaries in 2012...which would bring us to the $175-180M number you mentioned. The other numbers would be actual player salaries if these guys are still on the team.

    The fact that you ASSUME the Sox will not bring in players because of Crawford's contract is a reach, in my opinion. 

    I can see the Sox paying for the following:
    • bring Ortiz back at around $10M for 2 years.
    • bring in a free agent closer off the market for 2/3 years at $8-11M .
    • If Ortiz is not signed expect a push for Beltran than at the same contract they'd offer Ortiz, maybe less.
    • If they make a big splash in FA it will be for Buerhle...not Wilson.
    • bring in one more bullpen arm...like Mike Gonzalez

    I don't see Crawford's contract preventing them from doing any of these moves...if you expected the Sox to chase Pujols and Fielder (which I don't think you are) than you are foolong yourself because that ain't happening.




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

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    Based on the numbers you provided in your response (above) are you getting "Expected Payroll" and "Budget" confused?? 

    No, I have been very clear about the differences. Arb projections are pretty standard, but can be off by a million here or there. Ellsbury is the hardest to project. However, it is a near certainty that all the arb players will be signed, except maybe Oki and DMac. Their impact is minimal anyways. Then "expected payroll" number of about $160M includes the 12 guys we have signed now, plus all our arb and pre-arb players. It does not incluse Papi, Miller, Wheeler, Drew...

    Maybe some of these players will be traded, but other than the 12 signed players and Ellsbury, there isn't an easy way to dump salary. If our payroll budget rises to $175-180M, we will have about $20-25M to spend. I think if Ben does a good job, we can field a highly competitive team in 2012.

    That still doesn't mean we couldn't have done better without CC, but it would prove I was wrong about "crippling us" for 2012 anyways. I did not foresee a buget increase of over 12%. (That's one reason why I don't pretend to be a know-it-all like others on this site.)


    The fact that you ASSUME the Sox will not bring in players because of Crawford's contract is a reach, in my opinion.  

    Are yopu assuming that if we didn't spend $20M on CC, our payroll budget would be $20M less?  $15M less?  $10M less?

    I may be wrong, but I'm assuming it would have been close to the same, and we could have done better with $20M even if CC was reaching his career norm numbers x 7 years. 

    If we had paid $13M/yr for CC, I am assuming we'd have spent the other $7M a year on other players, keeping our own players or making several mini-upgrades.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    I think the plan along along was to let Papelbon & Drew walk and replace them with in hosue affordable options like Bard and Kalish. Papi is still in the mix, whether they chose to resign him or not in my mind comes down dollars/years vs replacement cost. Because they still need someone to hit behind Youk. 

    So entering the offseason the teams to-do is pretty clear. They need to add 1 proven veteran starter for 2012 and beyond to replace Matsusaka and another backend type for 2012 to bolster the teams organizational depth to compete with internal candidates for the 5th and 6th starter spots (Doubront, Miller and even Wake). Then in 2013 hopefully Lackey is ready to show that he can still get out big league hitters and/or one of our young guns Ranaundo or Barnes is ready to step up. Secondarily to that is to then answer the Papi question...if not he, then whom? Clearly Cherington has his work cut out for him and as you suggested we may need to go light in RF and simply addanother RH bat to the mix but we do have plenty of affordable in house options to use as trade chips or to provide us with depth...

    My intuition suggest that Luccino will lobby to use every dollar at the teams disposal to address the 2012 roster. I don't see them spending more than the projected 178M to 186M competitive balance threshold for 2012. I also don't see them slashing the budget either...Don't under estimate Luccino's influence on Henry and his desire to show that he is, and was indeed, the man behind the curtain! I doubt that he wants to tear up the nucleaus and start anew. Rather do as they did in 2003 and that is to be creative in adding players to the mix to enhance the nucleaus.

    Excellent post, bean.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    Let Theo walk, Tito walk, Drew walk, Papelbon walk, but not Ortiz? Strange time to cease letting people walk.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    burrito, i'm with you on this one....if you are going to purge, then do it, don't be half-azzed about it. Start anew by separating from the old. I don't like the way it happened, and I still go on record here to say that despite failings for both Theo and Tito, I'd rather have both still.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
    [QUOTE]burrito, i'm with you on this one....if you are going to purge, then do it, don't be half-azzed about it. Start anew by separating from the old. I don't like the way it happened, and I still go on record here to say that despite failings for both Theo and Tito, I'd rather have both still.
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]

    I think that lost on many is that Epstein didn't leave the Sox for a like position. He left becasue the Cubs offered him a promotion to team President and as part of that they also allowed him to hire a GM (Hoyer). Frankly with Luccino blocking his path to the CEO/presidents position with the Sox it was a matter of when not if before Epstein went elsewhere...My guess is that once Henry and Luccino sorted out Luccino's intent to stay on and Luccino agreed to sign an extension, which according to Henry happened this past summer. That's when the Epstein to the Cub's rumor was floated. Had the Cub's job not been there for the taking, Epstein would've stayed on until the next opportunity for career advancement presented itself and then left anyways...For Henry, it was a question of one or the other not both...and he chose to continue to trust his partner vs forcing Luccino to retire or take a less active role in the team. Time will tell if Henry made the right choice, for my money I'd much rather have the teacher, than the pupil...

    Francona's situation was two fold, the terms of his contract and his desire to stay. Had the Sox picked up his option, they would've had to commit to two more years. Their failure to do so before the begining of the season spoke volumes about their confidence in his ability to continue to manage the team. My guess is that had the team not imploded and the Francona himself not openly questioned his ability to continue to be the voice of the team and was ready willing and able to put forth the effort needed to commit to staying on, that they would've renegoitated a new deal. I too would ahve loved for Francona to return, but only if he was truly committed to being part of the solution. Much of what transpired this past season was out of his control, however, some of the disipline issue were clearly part of his job description...

    Danny boy, you appear to be positioning yourself as someone that wants to see all that is wrong and that's your right to do so. What I will state emphatically is that your sense of entitlement is due to three key guys...John Henry, Larry Luccino and the silant one Werner...they are the ones that built the infrastructure that is the todays Red Sox and I trust that they will use the same buissness accume that righted what was a franchise that under achieved for almost 9 decades into one of the most recogonized brands in sport...It may take a few years to right the ship but in the end I trust that they each will and are committed to the conitnued success of the Boston Red Sox Baseball Club!
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    The Sox were already a recognized brand before those 3 got here...all they brought in was the allotment of non-fans to jump on the bandwagon. In reality, the Sox won 2 WS titles thanks to a combination of two regimes--Damon, Manny, Tek, Wakefield, Pedro, Lowe--and then the Larry/Theo players added on top. It's the winning that made the brand, not the owners. The winning brought on the bandwagon effect. The Patriots were an unrecognized brand before Kraft took over. It's different in that respect. The Sox always were a recognized brand--as for underachieving, I think this ownership group has done quite well in that area since 2007. The 2008 and 09 teams were not built to win the WS and were thusly eliminated. The 2010 was a non-playoff team, rightfully so. The 2011 team was built to win--and greatly underachieved.
     

Share