It's the halfway mark. Where we at?

[Petagine in a Bottle]

Totally with @LogansDad here. Just give me as much meaningful baseball as possible and the thought- even if it’s far fetched- that the team could win it all. Sometimes thinking that you might win the WS Is as exciting as actually doing it. The only thing worse than no baseball is meaningless baseball.

Is this team going to win the WS? Probably not, but I’d like to keep the potential of doing it open as long as we can.

 

[Margo McCready]

Totally with @LogansDad here. Just give me as much meaningful baseball as possible and the thought- even if it’s far fetched- that the team could win it all. Sometimes thinking that you might win the WS Is as exciting as actually doing it. The only thing worse than no baseball is meaningless baseball.

Is this team going to win the WS? Probably not, but I’d like to keep the potential of doing it open as long as we can.

This is where I’m at right now. I was on Team Blow It Up in 2012, 2014, 2020 and 2022. Those teams were sad and depressing to watch. This team is different, 2015 vibes, only with a chance to sneak in a year early. Stay the course.

 

[scottyno]

Is this for real? You'd rather watch two months of meaningless baseball, than a week, tops? I couldn't possibly disagree more. Missing by 2 games means that we got to watch meaningful and, likely, exciting games well into September.

I get it. It's championship or bust around these parts, which, while I think is a ridiculous way to watch sports, I have given up trying to convince anyone otherwise. Last year was miserable after about the end of June, and this year looks like, even if they may not be the "strongest" team in the field, a fall that could be a lot of fun, even if the team decides that standing pat is the right thing to do. I'd take that kind of a season any year.

Also missing by 2 games means that guys like Casas, Duran, Bello, Yoshida etc probably had good years, the guys that we hope are the centerpieces of the next truly great Sox teams. If they won 65 games this year and those guys all sucked then they'd be in big trouble for awhile.

 

[pokey_reese]

To be absolutely certain, I'm not saying they should be looking to move Marcelo Mayer (or any of the lets say top 20ish prospects) for a two month rental. But there are plenty of holes on the team that could be addressed by finding players that are even slightly below average at the positions in question which shouldn't cost more than prospects that are unlikely to be protected in the off-season anyway.

I use the Joc Pederson reference that Martin made when talking about the Braves in 2021 and how the team viewed that. Joc Pederson wasn't exactly going out and getting Acuna but he was a competent MLB player that they moved something called Bryce Ball for. I think Bloom absolutely has to make deals like the "starting pitching and middle infield" equivalent of that.

I feel like this is just a matter of unrealistic expectations, or at least different expectations, to remove the value judgement. Johanfran Garcia, Chase Meidroth, and Elmer Rodriguez-Cruz are top-20 prospects, and the wouldn't bring back much. This has been coming up every year lately, but we all need to re-evaluate our deadline assumptions to align with how team value cost-controlled players in this day and age. If you don't want to move top prospects, you can't get anything but a rental, period. Because anyone who isn't a rental either has significant surplus value (which has to be paid in prospects), or has a contract with negative value, which hamstrings the team in future years. Even small-market teams aren't just giving away valuable players to avoid paying them anymore.

As far as Pederson goes, that was a guy who was below replacement value the year before that trade, and effectively replacement value when they traded for him. If you really miss Raimel Tapia then fine, but that's the caliber of player we are talking about. If your argument is 'make any move for the sake of making a move, because it signals to the players that you mean business' then you can advocate for that, but I'm having a hard time figuring out what you want, when in other posts you advocate for both selling off parts of the team for prospects, and simultaneously trade multiple top prospects for Dylan Cease, who maybe turns an 86-win team into an 88-win team?

I think that's the problem here, at least from where I'm sitting; the team isn't close enough to being a top WS contender to justify the type of 'buyer' behavior you are advocating for, but they are also not bad enough to sell the way you also maybe want them to do. I don't understand what you are trying to maximize, since it is seemingly neither 'probability of a WS this year,' nor 'probability of a WS at some point in the next four years.' With probabilities of WS titles, people undervalue the opportunity and associated cost. You only get once chance at a title per year, so each year with even a chance at the playoffs is extremely precious. Teams that are obviously eliminated from contention should sell, but it's why the extra playoff slots have been so good at supressing the sellers' market; teams are rightfully reluctant to throw away even a decent chance at making the playoffs, because winning the WS is a conditional probability, based on having the opportunity to play October baseball at all.

 

[Tony Pena's Gas Cloud]

But, they're not. They're on a pace to win 86 games. .530 WP

Per their pythag, they'd be on a pace to win 87 games. .540 WP

(FWIW, Tampa got into the WC last year with 86 wins.)



Most of us actually predicted something in the 85-89 range.

https://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/lets-predict-the-2023-red-sox-season.38943/

Their "true talent level" is hard to opine about with any kind of accuracy. They suffered through inconsistent play early on, then were hit with a slew of SP injuries/bad luck, esp. regarding the rotation and middle infield. (If Houck hadn't been hit with that comebacker, we'd probably think very differently about the team's chances. We'd also more likely be on a 90 game win pace.) Or not - because nobody predicted Duran, and Yoshida has been best-of-projection thusfar.

***

As of today, they have 62 games left - approximately 12-13 times through the rotation. The course of those 62 games really will depend on who comes back and how healthy they are.

As mentioned above, Tampa got in last year with 86 wins (or a .531 WP). Now those 86 wins came in the context of an unbalanced schedule that heavily favored division rivals: 76 divisional games, 60 non-divisional games, and 26 inter-league games.

This year, not only have the composition of the teams changed (as they will every year) but we're on a more balanced schedule where we play only 52 divisional games, 64 non-divisional games, and 46 inter-league games. So comparisons will always never quite be point-to-point. A lot of have-not teams with very low WPs will have total wins shift to the "have" teams. . .but again, there's the more balanced schedule, so those wins won't always stay in the AL, let alone the division.

However, for whatever it's worth, last year the AL WC standings went like this:

[TH]Rk[/TH] [TH]Tm[/TH] [TH]W[/TH] [TH]L[/TH] [TH]W-L%[/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH]1[/TH] [TH]2[/TH] [TH]3[/TH] [TH]4[/TH] [TH]5[/TH] [TH]6[/TH] [TH]7[/TH] [TH]8[/TH] [TH]9[/TH] [TH]10[/TH] [TH]11[/TH] [TH]12[/TH] [TH]13[/TH] [TH]14[/TH] [TH]15[/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH]

Houston Astros	106	56	.654
New York Yankees	99	63	.611
Cleveland Guardians	92	70	.568
Toronto Blue Jays	92	70	.568
Seattle Mariners	90	72	.556
Tampa Bay Rays	86	76	.531
Baltimore Orioles	83	79	.512
Chicago White Sox	81	81	.500
Minnesota Twins	78	84	.481
Boston Red Sox	78	84	.481
Los Angeles Angels	73	89	.451
Texas Rangers	68	94	.420
Detroit Tigers	66	96	.407
Kansas City Royals	65	97	.401
Oakland Athletics	60	102	.370

This year we're currently at:

1 Baltimore Orioles 61 38 .616
2 Tampa Bay Rays 61 42 .592
3 Texas Rangers 59 41 .590
4 Houston Astros 56 44 .560
5 Toronto Blue Jays 55 45 .550
6 Boston Red Sox 53 47 .530
7 New York Yankees 53 47 .530
8 Minnesota Twins 53 48 .525
9 Los Angeles Angels 51 49 .510
10 Seattle Mariners 50 49 .505
11 Cleveland Guardians 49 50 .495
12 Detroit Tigers 45 54 .455
13 Chicago White Sox 41 60 .406
14 Kansas City Royals 28 73 .277
15 Oakland Athletics 28 74 .275

So the way this is shaping up is that the AL central might take one of the 6 playoff slots with a very low WP (who knows) but that a .530 to .540 WP might be enough to get into the playoffs.

Right now it looks like the Jays, Yanks, and Red Sox might be in a scrum for that spot.

Anything can happen in 62 games, but strength of schedule does matter quite a bit here. It's possible that apart from the division leaders, the 3 WC teams will run up a higher WP than they did in the unbalanced schedule. Or maybe it will stay close to the 2022 WC results.

But even there, as far as direct games against WC rivals, the Sox play:
BAL - 7
TBR - 2
TEX - 6
HOU - 7
TOR - 6
NYY - 7

Their destiny is till very much theirs to write.

They only have three more games against Texas

 

[Rovin Romine]

They only have three more games against Texas

Thanks.

 

[joe dokes]

Totally with @LogansDad here. Just give me as much meaningful baseball as possible and the thought- even if it’s far fetched- that the team could win it all. Sometimes thinking that you might win the WS Is as exciting as actually doing it. The only thing worse than no baseball is meaningless baseball.

Is this team going to win the WS? Probably not, but I’d like to keep the potential of doing it open as long as we can.

Same here.

Also missing by 2 games means that guys like Casas, Duran, Bello, Yoshida etc probably had good years, the guys that we hope are the centerpieces of the next truly great Sox teams. If they won 65 games this year and those guys all sucked then they'd be in big trouble for awhile.

And here.

 

[Rovin Romine]

I get it. It's championship or bust around these parts, which, while I think is a ridiculous way to watch sports, I have given up trying to convince anyone otherwise.

I'm not really convinced people with that mentality actually watch the games.

 

[Sandy Leon Trotsky]

Same here.

And here.

BUT…. Missing the playoffs by a game or two or three hurts a lot more than just punting. There’s be a lot more second guessing of Cora, Bloom, etc… little “marathon” decisions that could be seen as difference makers get amplified.
I’m definitely for exciting games in August and September and understand that for every dumb loss that may have cost a playoff spot, there’s also games that opponents likely also pissed away…. Those just don’t get the attention.
The ‘21 team is the perfect example. They JUST made it and I recall so many games that Cora mismanaged that I thought would kill their chances

 

[Yelling At Clouds]

Also missing by 2 games means that guys like Casas, Duran, Bello, Yoshida etc probably had good years, the guys that we hope are the centerpieces of the next truly great Sox teams. If they won 65 games this year and those guys all sucked then they'd be in big trouble for awhile.

Yep, agree with this. I have to say, even knowing how this place sometimes can get, I'm still surprised by some of the negativity. It's true that they might not make the playoffs this year, but they've taken some important steps towards the future, and there's a straightforward path to improvement in the areas of weakness (namely, acquire 2-3 more starters, at least one of whom clears the "Garrett Richards Line"). I'm feeling better about the team than I have at any point in the Bloom years, including the year they actually made the ALCS, personally. I also don't really get this seemingly desperate thirst for a title - maybe if they hadn't just won in 2018 then I would agree? - but that's a different conversation.

 

[Max Power]

I'm not really convinced people with that mentality actually watch the games.

At least not the regular season games.

 

[Rovin Romine]

The ‘21 team is the perfect example. They JUST made it and I recall so many games that Cora mismanaged that I thought would kill their chances

It was also very exciting baseball. As you know I'm not a Cora fan, but I said I'd give him a free pass for 2022 if he brought home the bacon, and I by and large did. In fairness, I hope I would have anyway, as I think the injuries that crippled the 2022 squad were pretty much entirely out of Cora's control and therefore "harvesting marginal wins" (or not) wouldn't have made a difference.

This season those marginal wins might matter.

But the standard we should be applying isn't the game-outcome per se, but whether Cora is making good choices - is putting the team in a position to pick up as many wins as they can, while balancing other factors. Overall, he's had his share of complete head-scratchers, and tends to stick with "no-upside" players more than he should. (Though less so in previous years, I think.) However, he is adapting and PHing and PRing more: https://www.baseball-reference.com/managers/coraal01.shtml So that's a good sign.

 

[joe dokes]

BUT…. Missing the playoffs by a game or two or three hurts a lot more than just punting. There’s be a lot more second guessing of Cora, Bloom, etc… little “marathon” decisions that could be seen as difference makers get amplified.

That logic leads to "let's not make the playoffs because all but one team ends up losing."

I’m definitely for exciting games in August and September and understand that for every dumb loss that may have cost a playoff spot, there’s also games that opponents likely also pissed away…. Those just don’t get the attention.

That's why I don't get too hot and bothered by moves I don't agree with (or, more specifically, moves that don't appear to have a rational reason behind them, because I don't think my opinion of a move is worth shit, without some attempt to see the reasoning behind it). Everyone seems pretty good at counting the games that "the manager lost." No one seems interested in either counting the games "the manager won," or in comparing this manager's "win-loss" record with other managers currently managing. Nor do I. Mostly because both are pretty close to impossible. So I dont count any of them.

The ‘21 team is the perfect example. They JUST made it and I recall so many games that Cora mismanaged that I thought would kill their chances

And were *probably* balanced out by the games where he outmanaged the other guy. (Which, again, nobody counts. Including me).

 

[Sandy Leon Trotsky]

It was also very exciting baseball. As you know I'm not a Cora fan, but I said I'd give him a free pass for 2022 if he brought home the bacon, and I by and large did. In fairness, I hope I would have anyway, as I think the injuries that crippled the 2022 squad were pretty much entirely out of Cora's control and therefore "harvesting marginal wins" (or not) wouldn't have made a difference.

This season those marginal wins might matter.

But the standard we should be applying isn't the game-outcome per se, but whether Cora is making good choices - is putting the team in a position to pick up as many wins as they can, while balancing other factors. Overall, he's had his share of complete head-scratchers, and tends to stick with "no-upside" players more than he should. (Though less so in previous years, I think.) However, he is adapting and PHing and PRing more: https://www.baseball-reference.com/managers/coraal01.shtml So that's a good sign.

His Kiké obsession I believe is on Bloom at this point... although I could be led to believe that Cora has some say over player personnel. I suspect that Kiké reminds Cora of himself- a "smart" player with physical limits that just needs patience (which Cora likely feels he wasn't given enough of) for him to "click". We've seen Kiké "click" in the past but I think it's far too long of a leash he's been given to continue hoping. Yes, this is a bit of arm-chair psychology.... but I'm trying to understand what exactly it is that is keeping him on the roster.

 

[joe dokes]

His Kiké obsession I believe is on Bloom at this point... although I could be led to believe that Cora has some say over player personnel. I suspect that Kiké reminds Cora of himself- a "smart" player with physical limits that just needs patience (which Cora likely feels he wasn't given enough of) for him to "click". We've seen Kiké "click" in the past but I think it's far too long of a leash he's been given to continue hoping. Yes, this is a bit of arm-chair psychology.... but I'm trying to understand what exactly it is that is keeping him on the roster.

Cora undoubtedly likes him personally. But I think his roster spot has been ensured at various times by: Story's injury; Chang's injury, Arroyo's general inability to stay healthy, Valdez's general inability to play defense at 2B; and Reyes's injury. And maybe Duvall's injury, as they needed another OF-capable player around. And maybe original uncertainty about Duran's real-ness.
I'd be very surprised if his roster spot survives the return of Story, Chang, Duvall and Reyes, as well as Duran's play. I dont count on Arroyo any more, even though I wish I could.

 

[Rovin Romine]

His Kiké obsession I believe is on Bloom at this point... although I could be led to believe that Cora has some say over player personnel. I suspect that Kiké reminds Cora of himself- a "smart" player with physical limits that just needs patience (which Cora likely feels he wasn't given enough of) for him to "click". We've seen Kiké "click" in the past but I think it's far too long of a leash he's been given to continue hoping. Yes, this is a bit of arm-chair psychology.... but I'm trying to understand what exactly it is that is keeping him on the roster.

I think moderately-good-offensive Hernandez, plus moderately-good-defensive Hernandez, would be a fantastic fit for this roster. Up the middle starter for stretches, and off-day depth otherwise.

I'm sure Cora's reports to Bloom influence roster decisions and how much rope each player is given. So I'd guess it's on both of them to some degree.

 

[RobertS975]

Cora undoubtedly likes him personally. But I think his roster spot has been ensured at various times by: Story's injury; Chang's injury, Arroyo's general inability to stay healthy, Valdez's general inability to play defense at 2B; and Reyes's injury. And maybe Duvall's injury, as they needed another OF-capable player around. And maybe original uncertainty about Duran's real-ness.
I'd be very surprised if his roster spot survives the return of Story, Chang, Duvall and Reyes, as well as Duran's play. I dont count on Arroyo any more, even though I wish I could.

Kike has one of the lowest WAR ratings (-1.4) amongst all players in baseball. There is a roster crunch that needs to be sorted out very soon. Bleier probably off the IL today and Bello off the paternity leave plus Reyes reactivated. If Arroyo goes on the IL, the extra infielder problem can be kicked down the road a while longer. By my math, the Sox are still +1 on the roster and someone needs to either go on the IL or DFA today.

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

Bleier is already off the DL, pitched the other day.

 

[RobertS975]

Does anyone disagree that cutting ties with the current rendition of Kike Hernandez would represent addition by subtraction?

 

[Fishy1]

Does anyone disagree that cutting ties with the current rendition of Kike Hernandez would represent addition by subtraction?

No, but I also don't blame the team for waiting a little while to see if the artist formerly known as Kike might return. As recently as a couple of years ago he would have been the most valuable player on the team.

Now, are those days over? I don't know. I think some of his poor performance is he's abandoned his approach. His walk rate has cratered, his K rate is elevated, and his Hard Hit% is the lowest it's ever been. It's possible he's cooked a la Jackie Bradley Jr, and it's also possible he comes back next year or next month and tears the cover off the ball, as he's been known to do. He's been way up and down in his career.

 

[LogansDad]

BUT…. Missing the playoffs by a game or two or three hurts a lot more than just punting.

Any chance you could expand on this? Are you saying you'd rather be out of it in June than bear the pain of improtant losses in September?

 

[Sandy Leon Trotsky]

I thought I did.
Just missing can lead to blaming small decisions that could have won those few games.
I don’t support it though…. I want meaningful games as long as possible.

 

[Big Papi's Mango Salsa]

I feel like this is just a matter of unrealistic expectations, or at least different expectations, to remove the value judgement. Johanfran Garcia, Chase Meidroth, and Elmer Rodriguez-Cruz are top-20 prospects, and the wouldn't bring back much. This has been coming up every year lately, but we all need to re-evaluate our deadline assumptions to align with how team value cost-controlled players in this day and age. If you don't want to move top prospects, you can't get anything but a rental, period. Because anyone who isn't a rental either has significant surplus value (which has to be paid in prospects), or has a contract with negative value, which hamstrings the team in future years. Even small-market teams aren't just giving away valuable players to avoid paying them anymore.

As far as Pederson goes, that was a guy who was below replacement value the year before that trade, and effectively replacement value when they traded for him. If you really miss Raimel Tapia then fine, but that's the caliber of player we are talking about. If your argument is 'make any move for the sake of making a move, because it signals to the players that you mean business' then you can advocate for that, but I'm having a hard time figuring out what you want, when in other posts you advocate for both selling off parts of the team for prospects, and simultaneously trade multiple top prospects for Dylan Cease, who maybe turns an 86-win team into an 88-win team?

I think that's the problem here, at least from where I'm sitting; the team isn't close enough to being a top WS contender to justify the type of 'buyer' behavior you are advocating for, but they are also not bad enough to sell the way you also maybe want them to do. I don't understand what you are trying to maximize, since it is seemingly neither 'probability of a WS this year,' nor 'probability of a WS at some point in the next four years.' With probabilities of WS titles, people undervalue the opportunity and associated cost. You only get once chance at a title per year, so each year with even a chance at the playoffs is extremely precious. Teams that are obviously eliminated from contention should sell, but it's why the extra playoff slots have been so good at supressing the sellers' market; teams are rightfully reluctant to throw away even a decent chance at making the playoffs, because winning the WS is a conditional probability, based on having the opportunity to play October baseball at all.

I wanted to address this because I really enjoy spirited and respectful discourse, especially when I might disagree with someone. It's what makes discussing baseball on here fun. We can get "Bloom sucks, and he's a moron" or "Bloom is awesome and anyone who thinks otherwise is a moron" by tuning into Sports Radio for the half an hour a day they discuss the Red Sox. Here it's all Red Sox all the time, and I enjoy that, but beyond addressing your points, I won't say much more because I don't want to clog up the board with one person's opinion.

However, I do feel it's important to lay the ground work for how I feel right now so that it can also be discussed in the off-season. I was just "lurking" last year (and for the 20 years or so before that), so I want to make sure I'm at least laying out what I hope happens (and doesn't happen) so that in the off-season when we're talking about needs and the like, there is some continuity and / or accountability (I don't mind admitting I'm wrong, ever).

To the point of arguing for "multiple" avenues, I suppose that is because the one (realistic) thing I don't want them doing is NOTHING. I would personally find doing nothing a totally unacceptable waste, so I'm arguing for plans that are contingent on things either being achieved or shown to not be possible.


My ideal scenario - I agree the 2023 team isn't close enough to being a top WS contender, but that is why ideally they'd pay to acquire someone like Cease (or Sandoval like @Yo La Tengo mentioned in, and should cost less than Cease) - I agree that they're not going to do much but turn an 86 win team into an 88 win team this year. However, I think that could really help the playoff push this year but FAR MORE IMPORTANTLY, they'd be under control for the next 2 to 3 seasons, and help address something this team seems to be pretty clearly lacking for that time frame, which is a second top half of the rotation starter to go with Bello. Obviously cost-controlled pitching is going to cost real prospect capital. These are the type of players I'd consider moving real prospect assets for. It would help the 2023 team AND it should drastically help the 2024 and 2025 teams as well. Maybe others don't think adding someone like Cease / Sandoval, etc would increase the WS odds of the 2024 and 2025 team, I just happen to disagree, respectfully.


Ideal scenario is proven to be not possible / scenario 2 - Make small buys (rentals) with pieces outside the top 20 ish prospects. As to the point of Joc Pederson (Ramiel Tapia) you mentioned above, that is why I said "the pitching / middle infield equivalent" of Joc Pederson. So I think of that as taking a shot on guys like Lance Lynn, Jack Flaherty (might be unrealistic), Carlos Carrasco, Paul DeJong level players. However, you could absolutely be right that the Sox' prospects in the lets say 25 and below range aren't valuable enough to get something like Lance Lynn and Joe Kelly just to throw out a couple names from a seller, so if they're not...

Scenario 2 isn't possible / Scenario 3 - This is when I think the team should turn to being a seller. I guess I don't think of the idea of "even a chance at the playoffs" as being extremely precious. Especially in an era when nearly 40% of the league makes the playoffs (6 of 15). A team with the resources of the Red Sox should probably "have a chance at the playoffs" in July most seasons. If not, whoever is at the head of baseball ops is likely quite bad at their job. But to the point of selling, if Jack Flaherty and Paul DeJong are so valuable that they would command top 15ish prospects then turn around and sell Paxton and Turner (they have the same amount of "control" as Flaherty and DeJong AND are having better seasons, so they should be more valuable, right?). I think this increased prospect capital that could be landed would be more useful to increasing the WS chances of the 2024-2030 team than having Paxton and Turner increase the WS chances of the 2023 Red Sox.

 

[joe dokes]

Does anyone disagree that cutting ties with the current rendition of Kike Hernandez would represent addition by subtraction?

I think he's cooked.
But until recently, a series of outside events conspired to make him (and his nominal skills) necessary. That need seems to be fading.

 

[jmcc5400]

Does anyone disagree that cutting ties with the current rendition of Kike Hernandez would represent addition by subtraction?

I won't gnash my teeth over the Sox parting ways with Enrique, but I'd keep him over Arroyo (which is faint praise, to be sure). I still think he gives you more potential upside with the bat and is fine at 2b and good in CF. He also has had a knack for the big moment over the course of his career. Arroyo is lower variance but can't stay healthy.

 

[pokey_reese]

I wanted to address this because I really enjoy spirited and respectful discourse, especially when I might disagree with someone. It's what makes discussing baseball on here fun. We can get "Bloom sucks, and he's a moron" or "Bloom is awesome and anyone who thinks otherwise is a moron" by tuning into Sports Radio for the half an hour a day they discuss the Red Sox. Here it's all Red Sox all the time, and I enjoy that, but beyond addressing your points, I won't say much more because I don't want to clog up the board with one person's opinion.

However, I do feel it's important to lay the ground work for how I feel right now so that it can also be discussed in the off-season. I was just "lurking" last year (and for the 20 years or so before that), so I want to make sure I'm at least laying out what I hope happens (and doesn't happen) so that in the off-season when we're talking about needs and the like, there is some continuity and / or accountability (I don't mind admitting I'm wrong, ever).

To the point of arguing for "multiple" avenues, I suppose that is because the one (realistic) thing I don't want them doing is NOTHING. I would personally find doing nothing a totally unacceptable waste, so I'm arguing for plans that are contingent on things either being achieved or shown to not be possible.


My ideal scenario - I agree the 2023 team isn't close enough to being a top WS contender, but that is why ideally they'd pay to acquire someone like Cease (or Sandoval like @Yo La Tengo mentioned in, and should cost less than Cease) - I agree that they're not going to do much but turn an 86 win team into an 88 win team this year. However, I think that could really help the playoff push this year but FAR MORE IMPORTANTLY, they'd be under control for the next 2 to 3 seasons, and help address something this team seems to be pretty clearly lacking for that time frame, which is a second top half of the rotation starter to go with Bello. Obviously cost-controlled pitching is going to cost real prospect capital. These are the type of players I'd consider moving real prospect assets for. It would help the 2023 team AND it should drastically help the 2024 and 2025 teams as well. Maybe others don't think adding someone like Cease / Sandoval, etc would increase the WS odds of the 2024 and 2025 team, I just happen to disagree, respectfully.


Ideal scenario is proven to be not possible / scenario 2 - Make small buys (rentals) with pieces outside the top 20 ish prospects. As to the point of Joc Pederson (Ramiel Tapia) you mentioned above, that is why I said "the pitching / middle infield equivalent" of Joc Pederson. So I think of that as taking a shot on guys like Lance Lynn, Jack Flaherty (might be unrealistic), Carlos Carrasco, Paul DeJong level players. However, you could absolutely be right that the Sox' prospects in the lets say 25 and below range aren't valuable enough to get something like Lance Lynn and Joe Kelly just to throw out a couple names from a seller, so if they're not...

Scenario 2 isn't possible / Scenario 3 - This is when I think the team should turn to being a seller. I guess I don't think of the idea of "even a chance at the playoffs" as being extremely precious. Especially in an era when nearly 40% of the league makes the playoffs (6 of 15). A team with the resources of the Red Sox should probably "have a chance at the playoffs" in July most seasons. If not, whoever is at the head of baseball ops is likely quite bad at their job. But to the point of selling, if Jack Flaherty and Paul DeJong are so valuable that they would command top 15ish prospects then turn around and sell Paxton and Turner (they have the same amount of "control" as Flaherty and DeJong AND are having better seasons, so they should be more valuable, right?). I think this increased prospect capital that could be landed would be more useful to increasing the WS chances of the 2024-2030 team than having Paxton and Turner increase the WS chances of the 2023 Red Sox.

Don't worry about clogging the board with your opinion, it's a message board! I've been clogging this place with my opinions for many years, and as long as you are on-topic and making a good faith effort to engage in the conversation, you are fine (you will see plenty of examples of what not to do get called out).

That said, I think that we are in agreement on some things, like the fact that Cease would improve the team's WS odds for 2023-25 in a vacuum (though depending on the prospects given up and how far away they are, the net impact can be debated certainly, but that's all hypothetical, and we all remember being upset at Anderson Espinoza being dealt...), so it's not like we are worlds apart there. In that 'scenario 1' then it seems like you are advocating for maximizing short term chances at a ring (and willing to sacrifice value that might not be realized until after that 2023-2025 window, like younger prospects), which is totally reasonable.

For your 'scenario 2,' the thing I'm still objecting to isn't which specific names you are plugging in, but that when you look at the roster, if your goal is still the same as scenario 1 (2.5 year window, but with less investment this year to save chips for next season) I'm not sure that adding an expiring contract of a player of that caliber improves the team's chances for this year at all. Lance Lynn is mediocre at best (same WAR as guys like Crawford and Whitlock in twice the innings), Carlos Carrasco has been terrible, below replacement level. This team is better off letting Winkowski and Pivetta eat those innings at no cost, versus giving up a low level lottery ticket. It seems like the value to you is that they aren't on the team, and that they have ever been reasonably successful major leaguers, regardless of what they offer today.

Which brings me to the bolded in your quote above. It's a position that you can take, but it feels like an emotional one rather than a logical one. Sometimes, doing nothing is a valid strategy, but you are writing it off up front, and I think that's where our biggest disagreement lies. It's possible that doing nothing leads to the highest estimated win rate/playoff odds/WS odds over the next 1/3/5/7 years, or however the FO calculates those things, and that while it might not be satisfying in the short term, it is seen as the best use of resources both for this year's push and the long term outlook.

 

[Rovin Romine]

Does anyone disagree that cutting ties with the current rendition of Kike Hernandez would represent addition by subtraction?

Short version - Yes.

Long version - He's apparently physically healthy, and in the game thread there were reports that he's apparently spraying the ball around in BP. So the physical capability is there. I think it really comes down to whether or not he can get unstuck at the plate and return to his earlier-career (sporadic) success. He has the potential to be the starting 2B, even after Story returns if that's the case.

But he's had the season to do so already and it's far from a guarantee. Offensively his season numbers are neck and neck with Chang, and well behind Reyes and Arroyo on the year. His recent "hot" 5 game stretch is good for a .615 OPS. (.483 for the last 28 days.) Compare to Chang since his return - .734 OPS, almost all empty slugging, but still. . .

I don't see him with the 2024 Sox in any real role.

So at this point the 2023 season is all that matters - and I'd cut/trade him with no regrets. If he has a resurgence elsewhere in a new environment with new teammates (and good for him if he does) there's no guarantee it would have happened here.

 

[Brohamer of the Gods]

For those on the Lance Lynn bandwagon, we aren't on his no-trade list:

According to The Athletic’s Ken Rosenthal, the 10 clubs on Lynn’s no-trade list are the Padres, Dodgers, Giants, Cardinals, Mets, Angels, Mariners, Yankees, Rays, and Blue Jays.

 

[Big Papi's Mango Salsa]

Don't worry about clogging the board with your opinion, it's a message board! I've been clogging this place with my opinions for many years, and as long as you are on-topic and making a good faith effort to engage in the conversation, you are fine (you will see plenty of examples of what not to do get called out).

That said, I think that we are in agreement on some things, like the fact that Cease would improve the team's WS odds for 2023-25 in a vacuum (though depending on the prospects given up and how far away they are, the net impact can be debated certainly, but that's all hypothetical, and we all remember being upset at Anderson Espinoza being dealt...), so it's not like we are worlds apart there. In that 'scenario 1' then it seems like you are advocating for maximizing short term chances at a ring (and willing to sacrifice value that might not be realized until after that 2023-2025 window, like younger prospects), which is totally reasonable.

For your 'scenario 2,' the thing I'm still objecting to isn't which specific names you are plugging in, but that when you look at the roster, if your goal is still the same as scenario 1 (2.5 year window, but with less investment this year to save chips for next season) I'm not sure that adding an expiring contract of a player of that caliber improves the team's chances for this year at all. Lance Lynn is mediocre at best (same WAR as guys like Crawford and Whitlock in twice the innings), Carlos Carrasco has been terrible, below replacement level. This team is better off letting Winkowski and Pivetta eat those innings at no cost, versus giving up a low level lottery ticket. It seems like the value to you is that they aren't on the team, and that they have ever been reasonably successful major leaguers, regardless of what they offer today.

Which brings me to the bolded in your quote above. It's a position that you can take, but it feels like an emotional one rather than a logical one. Sometimes, doing nothing is a valid strategy, but you are writing it off up front, and I think that's where our biggest disagreement lies. It's possible that doing nothing leads to the highest estimated win rate/playoff odds/WS odds over the next 1/3/5/7 years, or however the FO calculates those things, and that while it might not be satisfying in the short term, it is seen as the best use of resources both for this year's push and the long term outlook.

Thanks - I'm, if nothing else, making a good faith effort to engage in conversation.

Just FWIW, in scenario 2 I'm also - for better or worse - someone that subscribes to the belief that there is a human element to the players in the clubhouse and going out and acquiring an actual MLB player that could fill what appears to be a hole (which is why I liked the Joc Pederson example Martin gave - but again - with pitching and middle infield versions of "Joc Pederson"). Maybe others on the board put literally no stock in the emotional state of the clubhouse, maybe they don't think it matters. Both are valid, I just tend to think when you have two of the more "successful" MLB players on the roster talking about the desire to buy, and the manager talking about it, that it accounts for something.

I also suppose there is emotion tied in to the "just don't do nothing" approach - (just as there is an emotional component to the desire to watch a team finish 2 games out vs 20 games out for many on the board) but there is logic behind my hoping for avenue 3 vs doing nothing. What it comes down to is that I'd argue the Yankees and Astros are both getting back more than the Red Sox (Judge, Cortes, Rodon vs Altuve, Alvarez and Urquidy vs Story, Sale, Houck and Whitlock) so if all three teams "do nothing", I think both Houston and NYY come out ahead, which means the Red Sox miss the playoffs.

As such, when you look at players similar to what the Red Sox would be dealing in Scenario 3 (Paxton and Turner are the two that matter), what the selling team "got" last year I think outweighs what the Red Sox "got" by holding on to players last year as far as "value" toward the future.

For Joey Gallo and his 78 OPS+ last year the Yankees got Clayton Beeter. I'd be more than thrilled with that, but one would assume Turner and a 122 OPS+ would get more than Gallo, no?

While not a Relief Pitcher, closest I can come up with to a one year rental comparison to Paxton last year was maybe David Robertson when he posted a 1.9 bWAR (Paxton is a 1.7 presently) for the Cubs and they turned him into Ben Brown, so I'd assume you're talking about similar return for Paxton. Maybe Syndergaard is a better example as an SP, and he was posting a 1.3 bWAR when traded, but I can't see the Red Sox targeting an young OF, though I'd be really happy with Mickey Moniak and his 2.3 bWAR and his 5 years of control on the roster.


I could be wrong, but I think Clayton Beeter and Ben Brown would have much more "value" right now for the 2024-2030 Red Sox (whether on the roster or as trade chips) vs Kristian Campbell and Justin Riemer as the comp picks the Sox got in the draft earlier this month.

Doing nothing would be in my opinion both failure to increase (the already low) chances of making the post-season this year AND would probably yield less impact for chips for the 2024-2030 team.

 

[simplicio]

Does anyone disagree that cutting ties with the current rendition of Kike Hernandez would represent addition by subtraction?

From the roster as it stands today? I'm in absolute agreement.

But if they were to get something useful for Duvall and make Duran the primary CF, I wouldn't be opposed to keeping Kiké around to back that up.

 

[Sandy Leon Trotsky]

I wanted to address this because I really enjoy spirited and respectful discourse, especially when I might disagree with someone. It's what makes discussing baseball on here fun. We can get "Bloom sucks, and he's a moron" or "Bloom is awesome and anyone who thinks otherwise is a moron" by tuning into Sports Radio for the half an hour a day they discuss the Red Sox. Here it's all Red Sox all the time, and I enjoy that, but beyond addressing your points, I won't say much more because I don't want to clog up the board with one person's opinion.

However, I do feel it's important to lay the ground work for how I feel right now so that it can also be discussed in the off-season. I was just "lurking" last year (and for the 20 years or so before that), so I want to make sure I'm at least laying out what I hope happens (and doesn't happen) so that in the off-season when we're talking about needs and the like, there is some continuity and / or accountability (I don't mind admitting I'm wrong, ever).

To the point of arguing for "multiple" avenues, I suppose that is because the one (realistic) thing I don't want them doing is NOTHING. I would personally find doing nothing a totally unacceptable waste, so I'm arguing for plans that are contingent on things either being achieved or shown to not be possible.


My ideal scenario - I agree the 2023 team isn't close enough to being a top WS contender, but that is why ideally they'd pay to acquire someone like Cease (or Sandoval like @Yo La Tengo mentioned in, and should cost less than Cease) - I agree that they're not going to do much but turn an 86 win team into an 88 win team this year. However, I think that could really help the playoff push this year but FAR MORE IMPORTANTLY, they'd be under control for the next 2 to 3 seasons, and help address something this team seems to be pretty clearly lacking for that time frame, which is a second top half of the rotation starter to go with Bello. Obviously cost-controlled pitching is going to cost real prospect capital. These are the type of players I'd consider moving real prospect assets for. It would help the 2023 team AND it should drastically help the 2024 and 2025 teams as well. Maybe others don't think adding someone like Cease / Sandoval, etc would increase the WS odds of the 2024 and 2025 team, I just happen to disagree, respectfully.


Ideal scenario is proven to be not possible / scenario 2 - Make small buys (rentals) with pieces outside the top 20 ish prospects. As to the point of Joc Pederson (Ramiel Tapia) you mentioned above, that is why I said "the pitching / middle infield equivalent" of Joc Pederson. So I think of that as taking a shot on guys like Lance Lynn, Jack Flaherty (might be unrealistic), Carlos Carrasco, Paul DeJong level players. However, you could absolutely be right that the Sox' prospects in the lets say 25 and below range aren't valuable enough to get something like Lance Lynn and Joe Kelly just to throw out a couple names from a seller, so if they're not...

Scenario 2 isn't possible / Scenario 3 - This is when I think the team should turn to being a seller. I guess I don't think of the idea of "even a chance at the playoffs" as being extremely precious. Especially in an era when nearly 40% of the league makes the playoffs (6 of 15). A team with the resources of the Red Sox should probably "have a chance at the playoffs" in July most seasons. If not, whoever is at the head of baseball ops is likely quite bad at their job. But to the point of selling, if Jack Flaherty and Paul DeJong are so valuable that they would command top 15ish prospects then turn around and sell Paxton and Turner (they have the same amount of "control" as Flaherty and DeJong AND are having better seasons, so they should be more valuable, right?). I think this increased prospect capital that could be landed would be more useful to increasing the WS chances of the 2024-2030 team than having Paxton and Turner increase the WS chances of the 2023 Red Sox.

Teams that barely make the playoffs have gone on to compete in the pennant and WS quite often. Some recent winners have had terrible flaws. Just get in… Chang could turn into an ALCS hero.