The Sox were finding ways to lose. Now they're finding ways to win. Somehow, I figure things might turn out okay today even with Devers and Bogey out.
Thats what I saw in the Glob this morning.So Downs at SS and Dalbec at 3rd?
Actual runs aren't park adjusted?By the way.... how are the Red Sox averaging more runs scored per game than Toronto (4.74 to 4.62)? Look at these lineups:
Boston (min 50 PA):
Vaz 99 ops+
Dalbec 71 ops+
Story 100 ops+
Bogaerts 144 ops+
Devers 168 ops+
Verdugo 78 ops+
Kiké 69 ops+
JBJ 65 ops+
JDM 156 ops+
Franchy 88 ops+
Arroyo 50 ops+
Plawecki 29 ops+
Toronto (min 50 PA):
Kirk 147 ops+
Vlad 144 ops+
Espinal 106 ops+
Bichette 104 ops+
Chapman 94 ops+
Gurriel 108 ops+
Springer 132 ops+
Hernandez 106 ops+
Collins 108 ops+
Tapia 87 ops+
Biggio 97 ops+
Zimmer 24 ops+
Jansen 152 ops+
I mean... Toronto's regular starting lineup has ONE guy with a sub-100 ops+, and that's Chapman at 94. They have three guys at 132 or higher. And their subs - besides Zimmer - are all at 87 or higher.
Meanwhile, Boston has just four starters that are 100 or higher. They have three guys at 144 or higher. They've got 6 guys who get somewhat regular playing time that have ops+ numbers below 80.
It just doesn't seem possible that Boston is scoring more runs than Toronto this year.
I'm not discounting Tampa, but they are not as scary as they have been in recent years and with 16 games left between the two I see it as an opportunity if they can in some way keep Franco in check. There's a series with the Cubbies, one with Pittsburgh, two with KC another with Texas and if they can beat up on Baltimore like they should there is still plenty of reason for optimism.Just half a game behind Toronto now, but the cupcake portion of the schedule ended tonight. The dreaded three and a half weeks is upon us, where the Sox will have only a single series against a sub-.500 team (Cubs), and seven of the 23 games are against the juggernaut Yanks. For everyone who has suggested that the recent winning has been a mirage based on the schedule, we are about to find out. Given the number of games against the Rays and Jays, even .500 over this stretch wouldn't really harm them much in the wildcard standings, so they just need to not get wrecked before the ASB. Should be getting healthier, which will help.
Three and a half weeks? From now until August 14, the Red Sox have two series (Cubs and Royals plus one game against the O's) against teams that currently sit above .500.Just half a game behind Toronto now, but the cupcake portion of the schedule ended tonight. The dreaded three and a half weeks is upon us, where the Sox will have only a single series against a sub-.500 team (Cubs), and seven of the 23 games are against the juggernaut Yanks. For everyone who has suggested that the recent winning has been a mirage based on the schedule, we are about to find out. Given the number of games against the Rays and Jays, even .500 over this stretch wouldn't really harm them much in the wildcard standings, so they just need to not get wrecked before the ASB. Should be getting healthier, which will help.
I wish I could share your optimism....Tampa has what, 8 pitchers on the 60 day IL and 2 on the 15 day IL. All but 1 or 2 will probably be active this year. And they have 5 position players on the IL and 4 will probably be back this year. How they are able to stay so close to the WC is amazing. I'll be shocked if they are not one of the WC teams.I'm not discounting Tampa, but they are not as scary as they have been in recent years and with 16 games left between the two I see it as an opportunity if they can in some way keep Franco in check. There's a series with the Cubbies, one with Pittsburgh, two with KC another with Texas and if they can beat up on Baltimore like they should there is still plenty of reason for optimism.
Collectively 49 games over .500 this year, 7 games over last year.AL East
70 game mark for BOS (2022 vs. 2021, diff)
BOS 39-31 vs 42-28 (-3.0)
MFY 52-18 vs. 36-33 (+15.5)
TOR 39-30 vs. 33-35 (+5.5)
TBR 37-32 vs. 43-28 (-5.0)
BAL 32-39 vs. 23-46 (+8.0)
Thanks for putting this together. Really demonstrates that despite the Sox' rough start, the biggest difference between last year and this year is how much better the Yankees are playing.AL East
70 game mark for BOS (2022 vs. 2021, diff)
BOS 39-31 vs 42-28 (-3.0)
MFY 52-18 vs. 36-33 (+15.5)
TOR 39-30 vs. 33-35 (+5.5)
TBR 37-32 vs. 43-28 (-5.0)
BAL 32-39 vs. 23-46 (+8.0)
If the Sox were in the AL Central or NL Central as of today they'd be in first place. Instead they are 13 games back. Kinda nuts.Thanks for putting this together. Really demonstrates that despite the Sox' rough start, the biggest difference between last year and this year is how much better the Yankees are playing.
11 games back now.If the Sox were in the AL Central or NL Central as of today they'd be in first place. Instead they are 13 games back. Kinda nuts.
Bello went 7 last Tuesday. If he's pitching today, he won't be making his MLB debut in Canada.With Hill starting today, might we get Seabold and Bello for Games 1 and 2 against Toronto? Pivetta on normal rest will start Game 3. Winckowski just pitched, Crawford can’t go because he’s unvaccinated. Whitlock and Eovaldi are still injured.
The 1 inning start was planned, so he could start or be a bulk reliever in Toronto.Seabold went 1 inning on Thursday. Did something happen to him?
FWIW, The Fielding Bible overall defensive stat, Defensive Runs Saved, has NY way ahead of everyone in baseball currently at +51, CLE in 2nd at +39, BOS in 7th at +31:A stat the Sox as a team are leaving the other 29 teams in the dust in is Total Zone Fielding Runs Above Average. It's the net amount players above or below average runs saved as a team is worth.
The Sox are at +37. Only one other team is 30 (Guardians) or better. The White Sox are a league worst -38. As a result, the team defensive efficiency has improved from 2021's dumpster fire of 65.9% to this season's 71.4%. This is also with a k% going down 3% as a team from last season to this one, so more balls are being put in play.
Blinded by the light?FWIW, The Fielding Bible overall defensive stat, Defensive Runs Saved, has NY way ahead of everyone in baseball currently at +51, CLE in 2nd at +39, BOS in 7th at +31:
http://www.fieldingbible.com/TeamDefensiveRunsSaved
Not that total unearned runs allowed are a great judge of anything, but NY has allowed just one (!!) in the last 50 games, and even that one was a Manfred Man in extra innings. All season long they have allowed just 8 unearned runs as a team, and 3 of those are Manfred Men in extra innings.
B-Ref has the Yanks as #1 in defensive efficiency too. They were 12th last season.FWIW, The Fielding Bible overall defensive stat, Defensive Runs Saved, has NY way ahead of everyone in baseball currently at +51, CLE in 2nd at +39, BOS in 7th at +31:
Thank you for this.It was all there in the song decades earlier: "revved up like a deuce, another runner in the night."
Enough can't be said about guys like Pivetta, Franchy and Schrieber to name a few. Those are guys that were on nobodies radar and yet they have been integral to the Sox turn around.It's really, really hard to believe that this team, who was at 10-19 and looking absolutely lifeless, is suddenly 11 games over .500, with the third best record in the AL, and sixth best record in all of baseball.
FWIW, here are some "on pace for" numbers...
Story: 111 rbi, 24 homers, 22 stolen bases
Devers: 213 hits, 386 total bases, 55 doubles, 122 runs
Pivetta: 18 wins
Chaim Bloom's radar says "hello."Enough can't be said about guys like Pivetta, Franchy and Schrieber to name a few. Those are guys that were on nobodies radar and yet they have been integral to the Sox turn around.
I think one of the other notable names on that list is Vazquez. He seems to have rebounded nicely from last year.Current bWAR leaders on the Sox
Devers 4.0
Bogaerts 2.9
Pivetta 2.4
Wacha 2.2
Story 2.0
JD 1.7
Eovaldi 1.3
Schreiber 1.3
Vaz 1.0
Houck 0.9
Seems like the stars of the season so far are really the three pitchers that Bloom acquired (Pivetta, Wacha, and Schreiber) who have been much better than anyone could have expected and have complemented the high paid stars who are supposed to and have been really good.
He's very good at finding surplus value on his acquisitions and his drafts are very promising so far. His scrap heap guys have been for the most part pretty good.Bloom spent a total of 12m on 2 pitchers everyone trashed, and so far one has pitched like an ace and the other has pitched like a solid 3/4. Almost like the dude is good at this or something.
He also gave up almost nothing for 2 other starters in the rotation who are pitching very well, and acquired another who was pitching well until he got hurt. The only starter he doesn't get full credit for is Eovaldi, and he has to get some credit for not dumping him at some point in 2019 or 2020.
My post was more about what Bloom's(and ownership's) philosophy is moving forward. Are they moving towards a Tampa like approach where they are constantly churning and burning players and trading them before they get expensive or is it going to be a multi-pronged Dodgers-type approach of expensive stars plus drafted/developed future stars and scrap heap guys to balance out the payroll?Well they have stars (X, Raffy, JD), and they have potential stars (Sale, if healthy, and Paxton - don't laugh...from 17-19 he put up a 3.54 era, 119 era+, with a 1.16 whip and 11.1 k/9...when healthy he's REALLY good). Is Story a star? Yeah probably. Anyway, the point is the Sox should always have some stars, given their payroll status.
Devers is my bellwether for this question.My post was more about what Bloom's(and ownership's) philosophy is moving forward. Are they moving towards a Tampa like approach where they are constantly churning and burning players and trading them before they get expensive or is it going to be a multi-pronged approach?
What evidence is there that Bloom is going to try to set the record for winning games with cheap, deep depth?He's very good at finding surplus value on his acquisitions and his drafts are very promising so far. His scrap heap guys have been for the most part pretty good.
That is all well and good for being competitive throughout the 162 game regular season and hitting on those guys should get you in the playoffs most years especially in this era where 6 teams per league get in. You need deep depth to survive the grind of a season. But, like teams in Oakland and Tampa Bay, solely doing it this way is not a likely way to win a championship. The '13 Red Sox and '15 Royals are outliers. You need a few star players to compliment that depth. I'd be very disappointed if ownership is content with continuing to not pay guys like Betts/Bogaerts/Devers and is just happy with being merely a competitive team who gets in the playoffs and hope to get lucky one of those years. They can afford to use their financial advantages to lock in a Rafael Devers while also being a draft/develop machines plus finding some diamonds in the rough.
Why would you think that, short of reading Dan Shaughnessy columns?My post was more about what Bloom's(and ownership's) philosophy is moving forward. Are they moving towards a Tampa like approach where they are constantly churning and burning players and trading them before they get expensive?
Bloom's only been here 2.5 years, but I see no reason to think it won't be a multi-pronged approach. If they were aiming for the Tampa approach, Trevor Story would be elsewhere, just for one example.My post was more about what Bloom's(and ownership's) philosophy is moving forward. Are they moving towards a Tampa like approach where they are constantly churning and burning players and trading them before they get expensive or is it going to be a multi-pronged approach of expensive stars plus drafted/developed future stars and scrap heap guys to balance out the payroll?
Me too. There is no godly reason to let this kid play anywhere else. If they let him go, I have a much bigger problem with that then I did with Betts. I mostly understood the Betts trade.Devers is my bellwether for this question.
What I can envision is the Sox implementing a Tampa system that does churn the roster over. You have young guys and they become stars. When they get to the point where they're demanding a 10/400 contract, Chaim trades them for top prospects. But every year this happens so there's constant stars being developed - and they are, in fact, stars for Boston - so there's always some stars on the team. It's just DIFFERENT stars all the time. But because this is Boston, they supplement these guys with some expensive additions, unlike what limited him in Tampa. Because one benefit to this system is that payroll is small, so they can afford to supplement them with some major contracts.My post was more about what Bloom's(and ownership's) philosophy is moving forward. Are they moving towards a Tampa like approach where they are constantly churning and burning players and trading them before they get expensive or is it going to be a multi-pronged Dodgers-type approach of expensive stars plus drafted/developed future stars and scrap heap guys to balance out the payroll?
There’s an extra variable here that overlaps with Bloom’s tenure. The pandemic threw a wrench into prospect development and service time, and among other GMs I think Bloom has done a good job identifying talent that was squeezed off other team’s rosters. In other words, the pandemic created a situation where there were more good players or guys with fixable mechanics, particularly relievers, among the typical pool of fungible AAAA-types. That and the use of pitch tracking technology that previous Sox FOs just didn’t have.My post was more about what Bloom's(and ownership's) philosophy is moving forward. Are they moving towards a Tampa like approach where they are constantly churning and burning players and trading them before they get expensive or is it going to be a multi-pronged Dodgers-type approach of expensive stars plus drafted/developed future stars and scrap heap guys to balance out the payroll?
Before Story, the biggest FA contract he gave out was Hernandez so it's not like he's been that aggressive in adding payroll. Now, mind you he inherited a big payroll so he hasn't really had to add many big pieces. This trade deadline and subsequent offseason will tell us how aggressive ownership will let Bloom be. It's just interesting to see if ownership's stance has changed.What evidence is there that Bloom is going to try to set the record for winning games with cheap, deep depth?
Why would you think that, short of reading Dan Shaughnessy columns?
I get it – they let Mookie go and now have some decisions to make about Devers and Xander.
I think if one thing defines this ownership group across the last two decades it’s that they don’t fall in love with their guys every time and sign them to big flabby market-rate (or above-market) deals like the Yankees did with their core in the 2000s. As much as everyone dwells on the guys that got away (like Lester), they also extended Papi and Pedey to perpetuity. And most people here are pissed DD extended Sale but would’ve been equally crabby if he had a bounce back 2019 and left in FA.
On balance, I think this is the right approach. Would I have preferred Lester to Price? Probably – but I’m not sure the result would’ve been that much different (big contract, a ring).
Whether or not they sign Raffy and Xander or not, this team is going to be the multi-prong approach you mention. Why do I know that? Because they have been for 20 years.
Shank has been calling us “Tampa Bay North” for about a year, possibly longer. Even if you haven’t read him, you’ve heard the criticism that the Sox hired Bloom to find cheap depth while the charge record prices for tickets.Before Story, the biggest FA contract he gave out was Hernandez so it's not like he's been that aggressive in adding payroll. Now, mind you he inherited a big payroll so he hasn't really had to add many big pieces. This trade deadline and subsequent offseason will tell us how aggressive ownership will let Bloom be. It's just interesting to see if ownership's stance has changed.
The Story acquisition is interesting too. Do they see Story's contract as better value than re-upping Bogaerts going forward? Devers should be a different story though.
I haven't read a Dan S column in many years, so I don't know what he's saying and I could care less.
The difficulty with that, of course, is having those obvious "can't miss" guys debuting. Whether its been due to draft position, trades or development, we haven't had a whole lot of obvious studs come out of the farm system lately. I mean...maybe Devers? But he was far from a sure thing when he came up. Using Acuna as a comparison (almost every player is going to look bad doing that, but I digress), his age 20 season he put up a 4.1 WAR compared to Dever's 0.7 (admittedly, Ocuna had 2x as many ABs). Comparing age 21 seasons, it was 5.6 War to 1.0 (albeit with a still significant playing time advantage). My point isn't that Devers sucked when he came up, but that in his debut season, he was more of a "promising hitter that may not be long for 3B, hurting his value) rather than an Acuna or Franco-level talent.I would like to see them be more aggressive with offering long contract extensions to premium prospects early on in their careers. Deals like the Acuna/Franco contracts. If it looks like Mayer is going to be a stud in two years, give him a long term contract after his rookie season or two months into it.
I am confident of that as well. But I have to admit that, given his age and timing of his control, Raffy is sui generis to me; failing to keep him would leave me with regret that neither of Lester nor Mookie did, or Bogaerts would.Whuch is a long way of saying that if they lose Xander and maybe even Raffy, I completely expect they will sign or trade for guys who give us most of what they provide – without a $300-400 million price tag.
How often does the best team actually win the WS? I still think the old adage is true. Make the playoffs as often as you can because once you are there, it's a coin flip and anyone can win.He's very good at finding surplus value on his acquisitions and his drafts are very promising so far. His scrap heap guys have been for the most part pretty good.
That is all well and good for being competitive throughout the 162 game regular season and hitting on those guys should get you in the playoffs most years especially in this era where 6 teams per league get in. You need deep depth to survive the grind of a season. But, like teams in Oakland and Tampa Bay, solely doing it this way is not a likely way to win a championship. The '13 Red Sox and '15 Royals are outliers. You need a few star players to compliment that depth. I'd be very disappointed if ownership is content with continuing to not pay guys like Betts/Bogaerts/Devers and is just happy with being merely a competitive team who gets in the playoffs and hope to get lucky one of those years. They can afford to use their financial advantages to lock in a Rafael Devers while also being a draft/develop machines plus finding some diamonds in the rough.
Yeah. Cheer for the laundry, not the players.What I can envision is the Sox implementing a Tampa system that does churn the roster over. You have young guys and they become stars. When they get to the point where they're demanding a 10/400 contract, Chaim trades them for top prospects. But every year this happens so there's constant stars being developed - and they are, in fact, stars for Boston - so there's always some stars on the team. It's just DIFFERENT stars all the time. But because this is Boston, they supplement these guys with some expensive additions, unlike what limited him in Tampa. Because one benefit to this system is that payroll is small, so they can afford to supplement them with some major contracts.
He'll hit FA a year younger than Mookie did. Does it really make that much of a difference? Signing a 26 year old to a 10-12 year deal doesn't seem all that different than signing a 27 year old to one. Unless you think Betts is going to age worse than Devers for some reason. There's also the chance Devers has to move to 1b.I am confident of that as well. But I have to admit that, given his age and timing of his control, Raffy is sui generis to me; failing to keep him would leave me with regret that neither of Lester nor Mookie did, or Bogaerts would.
Can't a team with the resources the Red Sox have do both? Can't they have a couple of star players with lengthy contracts while also drafting well and have a good amount of cost-controlled young talent?How often does the best team actually win the WS? I still think the old adage is true. Make the playoffs as often as you can because once you are there, it's a coin flip and anyone can win.
I'd also argue pretty much every team who has ever won the WS got lucky that year. They had a lot of things break the right way. Winning a WS involves a lot of good luck.
I'd rather the team field a competitive team with payroll flexibility that makes the playoffs every year than a team that is a favorite to win the WS for a year or two than is forced to rebuild/retool because of bad contracts.
I'd argue they already do both. They just aren't willing to go to 10 years to keep their stars or sign stars. I tend to agree with them.Can't a team with the resources the Red Sox have do both? Can't they have a couple of star players with lengthy contracts while also drafting well and have a good amount of cost-controlled young talent?