48 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

My guess is they are looking at it as 3/54 and coming up with 18m/yr.

That seems so flawed, since at no point will he ever actually get $18M/yr.

22 minutes ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said:

That seems so flawed, since at no point will he ever actually get $18M/yr.

But he could get 54 million for 3 years of work. He just doesnt get the whole 54 during those 3 years.

4 hours ago, ptatc said:

But he could get 54 million for 3 years of work. He just doesnt get the whole 54 during those 3 years.

Any player with a guaranteed contract could get the total amount with less years played. The bottom line is, it's a 4yr/54 mil contract, but they have the option of creatively paying the final year off if the contract goes south.

1 hour ago, Sarava said:

Any player with a guaranteed contract could get the total amount with less years played. The bottom line is, it's a 4yr/54 mil contract, but they have the option of creatively paying the final year off if the contract goes south.

But it's not a 4 year contract. The Sox could not pick up the 4th year and it's a 3 year contract. He will then earn 54 for 3 years.

12 minutes ago, ptatc said:

But it's not a 4 year contract. The Sox could not pick up the 4th year and it's a 3 year contract. He will then earn 54 for 3 years.

How is that different than someone signing a 4 year deal for 54 mil. Then after 2 or 3 years they either suck, or are riddled with injuries and get released? They get their 54 mil still, whether it happened after 1 year, 3 years or they played out their contract.

The reality is, he would have to become near useless to not have that 4th year picked up. But that could happen. Those are the risks of a middle aged relief pitcher.

2 minutes ago, Sarava said:

How is that different than someone signing a 4 year deal for 54 mil. Then after 2 or 3 years they either suck, or are riddled with injuries and get released? They get their 54 mil still, whether it happened after 1 year, 3 years or they played out their contract.

The reality is, he would have to become near useless to not have that 4th year picked up. But that could happen. Those are the risks of a middle aged relief pitcher.

It's only different in the guaranteed years of the contract for official reporting purposes. If a player signs  4 year guaranteed deal for 54 million they calculate the AAV 4/54. This deal is only guaranteed  for 3 years , the 4th year is an option that isn't guaranteed.  However if the option is not picked up he gets 15 million. Thus he could pitch only 3 years and get 54 million.

Right...it only really affects anything relevant to us if the team is pushing the luxury tax threshold, which the Sox are not even close to.

9 hours ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said:

That seems so flawed, since at no point will he ever actually get $18M/yr.

Like I said before, it is either 54 million paid over 4 years, or 13 years.

3 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Like I said before, it is either 54 million paid over 4 years, or 13 years.

But he will only played 3. Hence he got paid 54 to only play 3 years. That's how the determine the AAV. How much did the contract stipulate you play.

Edited January 14, 20215 yr by ptatc

Just now, ptatc said:

But he will only played 3. Hence he got paid 54 to only play 3 years. That's how the determine the AAV. How much did you play.

Sure.  But plenty of guys are cut before the end of their contract, and those are not refigured.  They payout options are ONLY 4/54 and 13/54.

3 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Sure.  But plenty of guys are cut before the end of their contract, and those are not refigured.  They payout options are ONLY 4/54 and 13/54.

Sorry I edited it. Its how long the contract stipulates you play. He only has a 3 year guaranteed contract.

Edited January 14, 20215 yr by ptatc

25 minutes ago, ptatc said:

Sorry I edited it. Its how long the contract stipulates you play. He only has a 3 year guaranteed contract.

Yeah I think it's fine to say its 3/18 AAV. With someone like Eatons deal we saw people say it was 1/8 even though it is 1 for 7 with a 2 year option and a $1 mill buyout. Its decently straightforward that they have 3 guaranteed years of roster control while a total of 50whatever million for those three years owed.

 

It’s an interesting proposal, but I think I agree with @Y2Jimmy0 that the Brewers say no. Burnes is such a unique trade target. His potential is through the roof, which means the Brewers would probably want Kopech or Vaughn. But it’s tough for us to give up our best prospects for a guy who is still unproven in a way. 

The 1st three pieces I am ok with, as I think we can easily and mostly cheaply replace.  I don't want to deal Kelley without getting a proven star 8n return.

3 hours ago, aeichhor said:

 

Why?

4 hours ago, aeichhor said:

 

Boring.  Get me Kluber

Yeah, Garret Richards would be a L. 

 

 

 

21 minutes ago, aeichhor said:

 

I'm not sure on this either.  Speaking Metrically, Richards doesn't do anything special, so I don't get it.  Besides Kluber, where is a FA with any upside other than Bauer?  Maybe Kevin Gausman at about $10 million?  If the asking price is through the roof like the Burnes deal mentioned above, I guess we go into the season with ????? at 4 and 5......after you revisit Musgrove again

Edited January 15, 20215 yr by Wisebri224

I don't understand having interest in Richards at all.

If we get richards, I'd hope it's a factor of Katz seeing him so much last year and thinking he can convert his stuff to better effect. Not a big fan.

 

34 minutes ago, Wisebri224 said:

I'm not sure on this either.  Speaking Metrically, Richards doesn't do anything special, so I don't get it.  Besides Kluber, where is a FA with any upside other than Bauer?  Maybe Kevin Gausman at about $10 million?  If the asking price is through the roof like the Burnes deal mentioned above, I guess we go into the season with ????? at 4 and 5......after you revisit Musgrove again

Gausman accepted the qualifying offer to stay in San Francisco.