The Red Sox have "dramatically changed the look of their lineup and took some risks" during a "wild Monday" that saw the team come to agreements with both SS Hanley Ramirez and 3B Pablo Sandoval, according to Peter Abraham of the BOSTON GLOBE. Ramirez agreed to a four-year, $88M deal that includes a $22M option for '19 "based on playing time." Sandoval "accepted a five-year contract" in the $100M range. Low-cost, conservative moves "gave the Red Sox a championship" in '13. But that model "collapsed from within last season and the team fell back into last place." While the team could make some trades to reduce payroll, Abraham adds the Red Sox "simply could exceed the luxury tax threshold" of $189M in the "interest of fielding a better team with higher ratings" on NESN (BOSTON GLOBE, 11/25). In Providence, Brian MacPherson notes the additions of Ramirez and Sandoval "push the projected Red Sox payroll" close to $170M for '15. The Red Sox have not paid the luxury tax since '11, but GM Ben Cherington and President & CEO Larry Lucchino have said repeatedly that they are "not averse to doing so for the right player" (PROVIDENCE JOURNAL, 11/25). SPORTS ON EARTH's Anthony Castrovince wrote the Red Sox "might be willing to pay the luxury tax." They have "done it before" from '04-11, and because they "stayed under the threshold the last few years, the '15 hit would not be a total back-breaker, knowing what their roster will look like in '16." Even if they get to $200M, the 17.5% tax on the $11M excess "would be manageable" -- a little less than $2M (SPORTSONEARTH.com, 11/24).
THROWING A CHANGEUP: In Boston, Christopher Gasper in a front-page piece writes the Red Sox are "back to playing the big-market version of Moneyball." Adding Ramirez and Sandoval represents an "important and encouraging shift for the Sox -- a willingness to take on risk again." By "limiting themselves on financial commitments" the last couple years, the Red Sox were "leveling the playing field" for the A's, Rays and Royals of the world (BOSTON GLOBE, 11/25). ESPN BOSTON's Gordon Edes wrote of Red Sox ownership's plans to not pay out for big time free agents over the last two years, "Turns out they really weren't Sam's Club kind of guys, after all." It is "only wasteful spending when the other guy does it, which the Red Sox were more than happy to point out last winter." But after finishing in last place for the "second time in three years, a worst-to-first-to-worst odyssey that has no precedent" in MLB, team owner John Henry is "tacking the Sox ship back into familiar waters, identifying a problem and throwing money at it" (ESPNBOSTON.com, 11/24). In N.Y., Tyler Kepner writes the Red Sox "are going for it, again." This is their "intention every season, but they know a lost cause when they see one." They were "willing to sacrifice the end of their 2012 and 2014 seasons to better prepare for the future." That "paid off with the 2013 title, and now we will see how it works" in '15 (N.Y. TIMES, 11/25). MLB.com's Phil Rogers wrote, "What an era this is for the Red Sox. Has any team undergone so many seismic shifts in such a short time?" (MLB.com, 11/24). SI's Joe Sheehan noted the Red Sox "have committed" a reported $190M combined over four and five years to Ramirez and Sandoval. With the two signings, the Red Sox "set the stage for more moves -- including the certainty of big trades -- that should ripple through the industry as we head for the winter meetings." The Red Sox, "like every other team in MLB, have money and need wins." Two years ago, dumping big contracts and signing mid-level free agents "was their play, and it helped produce a title." Now, signing the "top two free-agent hitters on the market and pushing the payroll to a franchise record is their play." If it "produces a championship, no one will care about how it came about" (SI.com, 11/24).
REBUILDING NOT AN OPTION: USA TODAY's Paul White writes rebuilding "is not an option" for the Red Sox. With yesterday's "bold but prudent moves ... the Red Sox are making it clear that last season's infatuation with young talent only goes so far." Cherington "now can direct a significant segment of the offseason market" (USA TODAY, 11/25). In Massachusetts, Jason Mastrodonato wrote the Red Sox "have done what big-market teams are supposed to do," as they "locked up the two best position players on the free agent market" (MASSLIVE.com, 11/24). GRANTLAND's Jonah Keri wrote last season's edition of the Red Sox "was both depressing and dull." Keri: "Maybe it’s fitting that baseball’s most high-variance team is adopting an incredibly high-risk, high-reward strategy" (GRANTLAND.com, 11/24).
TOO MUCH OF A RISK? ESPN.com's Keith Law wrote of the Sandoval signing, "I'm not even sure it's a bad move, but it is awfully strange." This "seems like a contract that won't kill the Red Sox, but won't live up to expectations" (ESPN.com, 11/24). FOXSPORTS.com's Ken Rosenthal likened the signings to previous Red Sox splurges -- like following the '10 season when the team acquired Adrian Gonzalez and Carl Crawford -- and wrote observers have "seen this movie before," and it "didn't end well the last time." Rosenthal: "Why should anyone be convinced it's going to end any better this time, when the Red Sox won the 2013 World Series by pretty much taking the opposite approach to the one they're taking now?" (FOXSPORTS.com, 11/24). In Hartford, Jeff Jacobs writes it is "head-scratchingingly hilarious" when MLB execs "issue over-arching philosophical pronouncements and stroke-by-pen-stroke debunk their own words." Lucchino's words last spring about controlling costs "turned out to be B.S." The Red Sox have "been all over the place in their off-field moves" (HARTFORD COURANT, 11/25). In Boston, John Tomase writes Ramirez' "makeup is questionable, to be kind." Tomase writes "boom or bust, there’s really no in-between, which is what makes this signing the riskiest" of Cherington’s four-year tenure (BOSTON HERALD, 11/25).
A DIFFERENT KIND OF MONEYBALL: YAHOO SPORTS' Jeff Passan wrote money "still rules baseball more than it does any professional sport." For a team like the Red Sox, the "ability to swallow the risk of multiyear deals amounts to perhaps the greatest competitive advantage that exists in baseball today." In a game "overflowing with cash, elite players who take the risk of going to free agency want their rightful piece" (SPORTS.YAHOO.com, 11/24). In N.Y., Bill Madden writes the Red Sox for almost three years "have taken great pride in saying how they learned their lesson about the foolhardiness of longterm contracts of near or well over" $100M. But "apparently that all changed when, last year, ravaged by injuries, they finished last in the AL East and 18th in runs and 22nd in homers in the majors" (N.Y. DAILY NEWS, 11/25).
 |
Sandoval accepted a five-year contract in the range
of $100M |
I LEFT MY HEART IN S.F.: In Sacramento, Marcos Breton writes there can be "no ill feelings" between the Giants and Sandoval, a player "as beloved as any" for the franchise. Giants President & CEO Larry Baer said, "We should honor Pablo. He was a great player for us" (SACRAMENTO BEE, 11/25). In S.F., Henry Schulman writes Sandoval's departure "will leave a lot of holes ... in the hearts of fans who came to love" him. Sandoval and Giants fans "have enjoyed a special bond" (S.F. CHRONICLE, 11/25). Also in S.F., Ann Killion writes Sandoval’s departure is "more than just a player leaving." He is "taking a chunk of the Giants’ identity with him" (S.F. CHRONICLE, 11/25). In San Jose, Mark Purdy writes the Red Sox "surely told Sandoval that the opportunities to market his image on the East Coast could lead to more lucrative off-field income than in the isolated hinterlands of Northern California." Sandoval was "adored by most of the orange and black tribe at AT&T Park during his almost cinematic adventures there" (SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS, 11/25).
STICKING TO THEIR PLAN: In N.Y., Joel Sherman writes the Red Sox' moves "will not stir the Yankees to react in kind." Sherman: "In other words, these are not Hal Steinbrenner’s father’s Yankees" (N.Y. POST, 11/25). Also in N.Y., David Waldstein writes the Yankees "barely flinched." They "remained quiet, sticking to their off-season plan to add specific and moderate pieces without spending nearly as lavishly as they did a year ago" (N.Y. TIMES, 11/25).
