It is beginning to look clearer that there will be no blockbuster free agent signings as it appears that Carl Crawford, Cliff Lee, Adrian Beltre and Victor Martinez are and were out of the team’s price range.
Some fans are frustrated with the lack of activity thus far in the 2010 offseason and it may lead to a less than thrilling Opening Day lineup. The Red Sox are currently without a third-hitter and the idea of Jayson Werth is making fans groan.
There is not enough available money in the coffers to buy as we wish and the Red Sox have been accused of running the team like a small-market club.
So in this week’s poll, we ask “Should the Red Sox Exceed the Luxury Tax Threshold?” Would spending more money result in more success and thus pay for itself in the long run? Would it be an exercise in futility? (poll is on the right of your screen)
If it’s just barely past the threshold, but it’s for a difference maker, do you do it?
John Henry recently said that the team is evolving in strategy so we will see what that means. The Yankees are going to exceed the luxury tax threshold again.
Do the Red Sox need to?
And as far as our last poll is concerned, the readers of FireBrand AL cast their opinions on expanding MLB’s playoffs and 45% do not want to see it changed. Here are the results for the previous poll.
Poll Question: Should MLB expand the playoff format?
- No. It will water down the postseason and reward mediocrity. Just look at the NBA and NHL. – 45%
- Yes. It will create more excitement and opportunity. – 33%
- Bud Selig should be focusing on other game improvements like expanded replay. – 19%
- I don’t care. I just want to see the DH gone. – 3%
I voted NO as well. I am really against watering down baseball the way basketball and hockey currently are. Also, for the 3 percent of you who want the DH gone — it’s time the National league adopts the DH-rule! Who wants to watch pitchers hit?
Loading ...
evanbrunell: 
alexconvery: 
CharlieSaponara: 
The answer is “no” to Red Sox & luxury tax!
So many people already disagree. It looks like fans want the owners to spend some dough.
Just a personal preference, but the teams I get the most pleasure following have certain factors that make them lovable. Winning is clearly an important factor; but team that is #1 or #2 in payroll, to me, is less lovable. I recognize that being in the upper tier of payroll is probably necessary for sustained excellence. But I'd rather see the Sox rank somewhere between 3-8 in total payroll, and still win. I don't want us to be Yankee wannabes.
Agree. I'm getting tired of Sox fans hating the MFY for their free spending ways, and then getting down on the FO for not matching them $ for $. IMO we should be embarrassed to lose to teams with payrolls one half to one third of our own team.
The reality is that Boston is NOT a Big Market team. Sorry, it's simply not. By U.S. Census Bureau's 2008 estimates, Boston's population ranks behind NYC, LA, Chi, Hou, Phx, Phil, Dallas, S. Diego, Detroit and Baltimore and is only marginally larger than Millwaukee, Denver & Seattle. In terms of regional base, Boston trails NYC, LA, Chi, Hou, Phil, DFW, Det & Phx.
Boston is not a "Big Market Team" but the Red Sox (and other Boston teams) are a "Big Money Team" due to, for numerous historical reasons, the passionate support of their fans. But the big $$ one-upsmanship vs. the MFY comes from high priced tickets, concessions, and high cost of and ad-nauseum ads on NESN. The Luxury Tax necessitates even higher prices and more ads to offset the cost. It doesn't seem worth it.
After what Small Money Teams like the Giants, Rangers, Padres, Rays, Braves, DBacks have accomplished in recent years, IMO it's time for another direction … perhaps accepting Theo's so called bridge to our best prospects who are likely to be as good as or better than many of the imported big $$ "stars" available out there. (I would put trading for Upton & his reasonable salary in the category of bridge building.)
This team, as constituted with Cam in LF, Lowrie at 3b, Scutaro @ SS, Salty/? at C remains an elite contender. At what point does the law of diminishing returns kick in when buying big $$ players in favor of potential internal stars (Buchholz, Ells, Lowrie, Doubront, Kalish, Iglesias, Expo, Ranaudo)? I think we are already at the point where these "kids" can carry the team, as they did in 2010, and continuing down the Luxury Tax road at the expense of this top talent is short sighted and wasteful in the extreme.
Yes, I want the Sox to win it all, but not at the expense of buying the championship MFY style. $40MM off the books this year and again next year should be more than enough to contend without reaching into luxury tax range, and should allow the Sox to reduce payroll and stabilize ticket prices. We are not the MFY, don't want to be the MFY, and shouldn't act like junior versions their current arrogant Wall St. personna. Oh, and how many rings have they won this century with their big $$? No, they won most of their rings before the free spending era, largely with their internal stars back in the 90's and mid-20th century. Pardon the rant. I just think the Sox are at a tipping point in terms of the philosophy of developing vs. buying their team, and the latter approach has seldom proven successful long term.
good post right here!
this is so incorrect…you don't go by city population to decide market size. Bostons population is only smaller than those cities because it doesn't take up nearly as much land area. The city of Boston is surrounded by other cities which add up to millions in population…boston is the 5th largest market in the country. Its only behind NYC and LA and slightly behind chicago and philly. add this to the fact all of new england follows boston sports and its only behind NYC and LA. check you facts before you post…
haha yeah that dude clearly doesn't know anything