low-risk, potentially high-return play

I've never heard buying a bunch of lottery tickets being called a low risk play before.
Real life lottery tickets are a losing proposition, hopefully baseball player ones will work out better for the Sox.

I've never heard buying a bunch of lottery tickets being called a low risk play before.

By low risk, they mean asymetric distrribution. You can only loose a dollar with a lotter ticket. Plus like a lotter ticket RSN bought a dream.

I'd rather have Teix, but since he's gone and the Sawx don't seem interested in the rest of the free agent class, I think it makes sense for them to take flyers on these guys with, what I'm assuming, is left in their payroll budget.

They have also used their payroll budget to extend Pedroia and Youkilis and give them large raises.

I can't really call Bard and Baldelli even low risk, as they're basically both no-risk guys. With Baldelli, he's only guaranteed 500K, which is basically what the Red Sox will pay for the post game buffet this year, and just the generic amount which is thrown in with any minor league invite. In the case of Bard, they need someone to play Catcher, and he can't really hit that much worse than Varitek did last year. Given that Wakefield's current status is unclear, it's also possible that his inability to catch a knuckleball might not ever even come into play.

Well, it isn't exactly "low-risk," I don't think. As much as I love the Smoltz and Penny signings, they could easily be disastrous. These would be low-risk pick-ups for a non-contender or a team with hopes of contending, but for a team like the Red Sox where marginal wins are far more important, a couple of bad Penny starts could be the difference between the playoffs and playing golf. Sure, it only costs the Sox pocket change but they may be paying for these signings in losses, too.

Medium (yet calculated) risk? Sure. But I don't think it's as low as much as the term has been tossed around regarding these signings.

It could also be that the depth these signings provide will help Boston in the long run, too. If someone is ineffective, it'll be easier to replace him with another player. The Sox are, at least, deeper in options with pitching than most other teams, so the difference between their sixth and seventh starters versus the Rays and Yankees' sixth and seventh starters might be enough to make up that difference.

Well, it isn't exactly "low-risk," I don't think. As much as I love the Smoltz and Penny signings, they could easily be disastrous. These would be low-risk pick-ups for a non-contender or a team with hopes of contending, but for a team like the Red Sox where marginal wins are far more important, a couple of bad Penny starts could be the difference between the playoffs and playing golf.

Isn't the risk more that they just can't play at all than that they can play but not well? The Red Sox are a team that can afford to risk paying somebody for not playing at all if, say, Smoltz or Penny can't come back (just like Schilling last year or Pavano on the Yankees). But you're right, they're not necessarily in a good position to be able to risk playing bad players.

The Sox are, at least, deeper in options with pitching than most other teams

Well, on paper they are. Smoltz and Penny could be worthless in 2009.

The Sox are, at least, deeper in options with pitching than most other teams

It will really help the depth if the Sox can figure out a way to stagger these guys' DL visits. If that's part of the plan, then the risk is significantly reduced.

In the case of Bard, they need someone to play Catcher, and he can't really hit that much worse than Varitek did last year.

One would think that, but in 2008 Bard's OPS (.549) was actually 123 points worse than Varitek's (.672). Could be a bit of a fluke since he was much better the prior 2 seasons, but Bard has had 4 seasons with an OPS lower than Varitek's 2008. Doesn't there have to be an option with a better bat than either Bard or Varitek?

One would think that, but in 2008 Bard's OPS (.549) was actually 123 points worse than Varitek's (.672). Could be a bit of a fluke since he was much better the prior 2 seasons, but Bard has had 4 seasons with an OPS lower than Varitek's 2008. Doesn't there have to be an option with a better bat than either Bard or Varitek?

Well, that does have to be balanced against the respective salary expectations. I'd imagine that Varitek would want roughly three to four times what Bard was willing to accept.

In terms of other options out there, there's really not too much. There's I-Rod, but he'll probably want about the same amount as Varitek, and isn't much of a hitter anymore. There's Greg Zaun, but he's also coming off a not terribly good year, and his defense is probably more questionable than Bard's. I'm not sure who else is out there, unless Piazza wants to try a comeback.

We're all assuming that the Red Sox will find a way to trade for a catcher. I don't like either Bard or Varitek as the primary catcher, and I'm not much of a fan of a job-sharing arrangement between Bard and Varitek. But as Ryan points out, on this free agent market, some sort of Bard/Varitek platoon is the best thing that can be purchased for money.

Thus the need for a trade.

In terms of other options out there, there's really not too much. There's I-Rod, but he'll probably want about the same amount as Varitek, and isn't much of a hitter anymore. There's Greg Zaun, but he's also coming off a not terribly good year, and his defense is probably more questionable than Bard's. I'm not sure who else is out there, unless Piazza wants to try a comeback.

Did Paul Lo Duca get a contract yet? Although I don't think he's an upgrade on Bard.

Zaun reportedly agreed to terms with the O's yesterday.

Zaun reportedly agreed to terms with the O's yesterday.

Good for him. He did a nice job for the Jays while he was here - especially considering he was just viewed as a stop-gap when he was first signed.

Even stop-gap might be generous to describe Zaun's initial role with the team. I remember when he arrived, he gave interviews where he claimed that he just wanted to last something like 20 games with the team, so he could qualify for the MLB pension.

Even stop-gap might be generous to describe Zaun's initial role with the team. I remember when he arrived, he gave interviews where he claimed that he just wanted to last something like 20 games with the team, so he could qualify for the MLB pension.

That's exactly it. He was basically there to get enough playing time to qualify for a full pension (or whatever was the next tier up from what he was currently at). In the end, he ended up being the starter for the Jays for the next 4.5 years. It was a nice surprise for everyone involved.

I think it's ok that the RSox missed on Tex, or passed or whatever, but to then defend it by saying - "Hey, look what we did with the money we would have spent!" is just stupid. If they had grabbed Tex, and then, say Smoltz did his throwing session and he really excelled as the reports suggested, you're telling me they wouldn't have thrown the $5 million out there?

These moves and the Tex thing are mutually exclusive, and to say otherwise is deliberately trying to confuse the situation. They don't have an unlimited budget, but I'm pretty confident they have a lot of slack before they hit it.

I think it's ok that the RSox missed on Tex, or passed or whatever, but to then defend it by saying - "Hey, look what we did with the money we would have spent!" is just stupid.

Has anyone from the FO done anything like that?