Red Sox have spent what they saved

By my math, the Red Sox have taken on a total of $156.2 million in new FA contracts. That includes the Ortiz signing as well as the potential signing of Napoli. In turn, the trade with the Dodgers relieved them of $275.69 million in total salaries, with $11 million going to the Dodgers.

@Bishop - They're using Obama math, where you can just print money when you predictably spend much more than you take in. Get with the program!

QUOTE(#2):

Originally posted 09:28 AM ET  01.01 by Hoos Your Daddy

@Bishop - They're using Obama math, where you can just print money when you predictably spend much more than you take in. Get with the program!

That's okay. You go on ahead without me.

Losing Crawford and Beckett is addition by subtraction. They're not going backwards when substituting less expensive players with shorter contracts. A-Gonz is a loss - pure and simple. Good baseball player, and good man.

In any case I see a team with no less total talent, more salary flexibility, and an ability to grow in the next few years.

QUOTE(#4):

Originally posted 09:52 AM ET  01.01 by Hoos Your Daddy

Losing Crawford and Beckett is addition by subtraction. They're not going backwards when substituting less expensive players with shorter contracts. A-Gonz is a loss - pure and simple. Good baseball player, and good man.In any case I see a team with no less total talent, more salary flexibility, and an ability to grow in the next few years.

Exactly.... A-Gonz was a loss, but at least we essentially never spent the money. The article is misleading because it fails to account for the fact that long-term, Sox saved a TON of money... this year's cash is full of much shorter contracts. Papi 2 yrs... Victorino 3-yrs... Gomes 2-yrs.... None of this 7-year ****. They'll still finish better than 2012 -- albeit, probably neither they nor the Yankees will make the playoffs -- and will build a team moving forward like everyone else does... without the blank-check policy that Epstein, Cashman, even Minaya when he came to Mets, all had.

Fourth or fifth place, but definitely better than the Astros.

Any way you look at it, they gained long term flexibility.
If the minor leagues provide some front line players over the next three years they are way ahead of where they were before the trade with the Dodgers.
If not, and they need to go into the FA or Trade markets they have more money to spend.
So what's the issue? The only real loss was Gonz, and he wasn't as productive as his contract required; for the money he was making he needed to be superstar. Plus, I was not convinced he was a clubhouse leader, seemed somewhat passive about wininning/losing.
They need some pitching to emerge from the minors. That's the biggest issue. We'll see won't we.

QUOTE(#7):

Originally posted 11:06 AM ET  01.01 by SportsFun

The only real loss was Gonz, and he wasn't as productive as his contract required; for the money he was making he needed to be superstar. Plus, I was not convinced he was a clubhouse leader, seemed somewhat passive about wininning/losing.They need some pitching to emerge from the minors. That's the biggest issue. We'll see won't we.

Gonzo was a great player. But make no mistake about it - he was no Kevin Millar, Johnny Damon, Dustin Pedroia, or David Ortiz. He was a follower and not a leader or a critical element of team chemistry. When sheet was going down around him, nothing he did quieted the fires or pointed the way. Like the Bosox teams pre-2003, he did his work, picked up his paycheck, and went hom.

Agree totally on the pitching. Hopefully getting John Farrell back will convince ownership to take some risks on good developing talent or one established FA talent.

the red sox took a step back by replacing higher salaries players,
the new red sox look alike much as the pirates or the padres in the past two seasons ago,,,

QUOTE(#4):

Originally posted 09:52 AM ET  01.01 by Hoos Your Daddy

Losing Crawford and Beckett is addition by subtraction. They're not going backwards when substituting less expensive players with shorter contracts. A-Gonz is a loss - pure and simple. Good baseball player, and good man.In any case I see a team with no less total talent, more salary flexibility, and an ability to grow in the next few years.

the red sox would need at least 2 to 3 yearsrow as a competetive team, now lets not forget that this franchise did replace the majority in higher salary players....

the boston team did miss lackey in the dodgers mega-trade, but still this team could have a better flexibility financially!!!

QUOTE(#2):

Originally posted 09:28 AM ET  01.01 by Hoos Your Daddy

@Bishop - They're using Obama math, where you can just print money when you predictably spend much more than you take in. Get with the program!

Well this came out of left field.

QUOTE(#12):

Originally posted 12:04 PM ET  01.01 by .ChiSoxFan.

Well this came out of left field.

You made a funny - intentionally or otherwise. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt.

+2

QUOTE(#6):

Originally posted 10:59 AM ET  01.01 by dkredsox1

Fourth or fifth place, but definitely better than the Astros.

better than the astros?? i think the team has a fair shot in their division, lets not forget they DO have a new manager who could bring a better chemistry to the team itself!!!

the marlins have asured the last place on the national league by far this is the easy prediction to assest!!

so red sox DO sign napoli or no napoli at all?? after all the napoli player won't be able to play a single game until he gets a surgery,,,,

QUOTE(#1):

Originally posted 08:55 AM ET  01.01 by THE BISHOP!

By my math, the Red Sox have taken on a total of $156.2 million in new FA contracts. That includes the Ortiz signing as well as the potential signing of Napoli. In turn, the trade with the Dodgers relieved them of $275.69 million in total salaries, with $11 million going to the Dodgers.

Yeah, I am thinking long term. None of the recent contracts are for more than three years, right?

Seeing as how the Red Cox are in a serious battle with the Spankees for 2nd place in the American East this upcoming season, there is no reason to overspend for any player.

QUOTE(#18):

Originally posted 01:28 PM ET  01.01 by IzzySweetpea

Seeing as how the Red Cox are in a serious battle with the Spankees for 2nd place in the American East this upcoming season, there is no reason to overspend for any player.

You are being extremely generous with both teams, although I don't see any AL East team with a lock on first place. Toronto overspent, and got more in the way of names than they did consistent performance. They Rays have been steady. Other than that, not much competition.

QUOTE(#19):

Originally posted 01:31 PM ET  01.01 by Hoos Your Daddy

You are being extremely generous with both teams, although I don't see any AL East team with a lock on first place. Toronto overspent, and got more in the way of names than they did consistent performance. They Rays have been steady. Other than that, not much competition.

I agree. I could see all five teams falling somewhere between 80-90 wins.