Red Sox sign Adrian Beltre

[Transmogrified Tiger]

the key is that it's a one year deal. if you have money leftover and have nothing else to spend it on, you might as well. there's not really any risk involved with a one year deal.

 

this is why it's hilarious that aaron miles got a 2 year deal.

So paying $9M for 1 year is smarter than paying $4.9M for 2 years. Fascinating.

 

wtf

 

are you actively try to be obtuse with every post you make now? i mean, seriously. assuming you're a rational person, there's no way you can make a post like that and not understand how pointless/irrelevent it is in regards to the post i made before it.

 

but to answer your question, yeah. paying 9 mil to an above average player is better than giving 2/5 to a crappy player. (not that any of this has anything whatsoever to do with my original point.... which was all about contract length and risks).

Hey you're the one that drew the comparison to Aaron Miles. I just pointed out the unintended hilarity in your "logic": <$5M spread over two years is apparently a bigger risk than $9M spread over one.

 

Just stop and let that resonate for a moment, and maybe you'll crack up too.

 

No one compared Beltre to Miles. The point was that 1 year deals made with surplus money are smart because there's little lost. If you signed a 2 year deal with what you have left over, you can still be burned by the second year. That's what happened with Miles. The team had much tighter budget restrictions in year two of his contract, and since he didn't meet expectations they were forced to eat money just to get him off the team.

[17 Seconds]

the key is that it's a one year deal. if you have money leftover and have nothing else to spend it on, you might as well. there's not really any risk involved with a one year deal.

 

this is why it's hilarious that aaron miles got a 2 year deal.

So paying $9M for 1 year is smarter than paying $4.9M for 2 years. Fascinating.

 

wtf

 

are you actively try to be obtuse with every post you make now? i mean, seriously. assuming you're a rational person, there's no way you can make a post like that and not understand how pointless/irrelevent it is in regards to the post i made before it.

 

but to answer your question, yeah. paying 9 mil to an above average player is better than giving 2/5 to a crappy player. (not that any of this has anything whatsoever to do with my original point.... which was all about contract length and risks).

Hey you're the one that drew the comparison to Aaron Miles. I just pointed out the unintended hilarity in your "logic": <$5M spread over two years is apparently a bigger risk than $9M spread over one.

 

Just stop and let that resonate for a moment, and maybe you'll crack up too.

 

obtuse obtuse obtuse

 

Which would be a bigger risk to you.....

 

-signing albert pujols to a 4/40 contract

 

-signing carlos delgado to a 2/20 contract

 

Pujols is getting more money, so he's a bigger risk... right?

[17 Seconds]

the key is that it's a one year deal. if you have money leftover and have nothing else to spend it on, you might as well. there's not really any risk involved with a one year deal.

 

this is why it's hilarious that aaron miles got a 2 year deal.

So paying $9M for 1 year is smarter than paying $4.9M for 2 years. Fascinating.

 

wtf

 

are you actively try to be obtuse with every post you make now? i mean, seriously. assuming you're a rational person, there's no way you can make a post like that and not understand how pointless/irrelevent it is in regards to the post i made before it.

 

but to answer your question, yeah. paying 9 mil to an above average player is better than giving 2/5 to a crappy player. (not that any of this has anything whatsoever to do with my original point.... which was all about contract length and risks).

Hey you're the one that drew the comparison to Aaron Miles. I just pointed out the unintended hilarity in your "logic": <$5M spread over two years is apparently a bigger risk than $9M spread over one.

 

Just stop and let that resonate for a moment, and maybe you'll crack up too.

 

No one compared Beltre to Miles. The point was that 1 year deals made with surplus money are smart because there's little lost. If you signed a 2 year deal with what you have left over, you can still be burned by the second year. That's what happened with Miles. The team had much tighter budget restrictions in year two of his contract, and since he didn't meet expectations they were forced to eat money just to get him off the team.

 

yes

[Pushfrog98]

C - Martinez

1B - Youkilis

2B - Pedroia

SS - Scutaro

3B - Beltre

LF - Ellsbury

CF - Cameron

RF - Drew

DH - Ortiz

 

That's some serious defensive versatility and a pretty damn good offense. And with a bench containing Varitek, Kotchman, Lowrie, Lowell, and Hermida... A pitching staff with Beckett, Lackey, Lester, Matsuzaka, Buchholz and Wakefield to cycle in and out... not to mention Papelbon and Okajima to shut down games in the late innings.

 

Talk about overpowered...

 

The last few years, the Red Sox and Yankees have redefined what is expected of big market teams attempting to embark on a rebuilding process... the turnaround isn't 2-4 seasons anymore... it's maaaaybe one. I'll be real interested to see how our organization responds to the fact that the window is closing quickly on the team as it is currently constructed.

 

 

Great lineup. Still wondering if they are really gonna roll Martinez out there at C everyday. I guess when you have the money, you just sign the player no matter what. Man, baseball needs a cap.

 

He'll probably DH when they face a lefty, but I imagine Youkilis gets the vast majority of starts at 1B... and if he has to fill in at 3B to cover a Beltre injury, you're probably looking at Kotchman getting the start more often than not.

 

And I think you'd be shocked if you saw how little the Red Sox were actually paying. I know their payroll was actually lower than the Cubs last year at least.

 

 

So they're going to platoon Ortiz?

 

I was predicting a semi-platoon based on the idea of keeping Ortiz's knees healthy... but yeah, he hasn't really hit lefties for a few years and should probably be platooned at this point.

I'm flabbergasted at the thought of needing to "semi-platoon" a DH so that you can keep his knees healthy. He only plays half a game each day! Not saying you're incorrect, just the thought is astounding.

[jersey cubs fan]

I'm flabbergasted at the thought of needing to "semi-platoon" a DH so that you can keep his knees healthy. He only plays half a game each day! Not saying you're incorrect, just the thought is astounding.

 

Yeah, it is, but then you look at Ortiz and you realize it's inevitable.