What does 2023 look like?

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,032
Oregon
Here’s a question: have the second half collapses of Devers and Bogaerts shifted anyone’s thinking on the necessity or desirability of extending either or both of them?

I am genuinely unsure.
Since both are most likely injury-related, I don't think that should change opinion. Devers is a must. I'm more on the fence about Xander -- love the player, but I think the end of that deal will be ugly
 

Jack Rabbit Slim

Member
SoSH Member
May 19, 2010
1,304
Here’s a question: have the second half collapses of Devers and Bogaerts shifted anyone’s thinking on the necessity or desirability of extending either or both of them?

I am genuinely unsure.
Devers' poor production seems related to the hamstring injury, and given his improved defense I would be disappointed if they didn't offer him something in the 10/300 range.

Bogaerts is a different matter. The shoulder injury from the collision with Verdugo would seem to be a prime culprit for the power outage but he put up good numbers for a while after that. It also seems like an injury that may never heal 100%. I would be fine if he signed for something like 6/150 but I am no longer sure if I would be upset if they didn't offer it. Xander without the power is a far less rare player.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Here’s a question: have the second half collapses of Devers and Bogaerts shifted anyone’s thinking on the necessity or desirability of extending either or both of them?

I am genuinely unsure.
Devers represents the single most valuable type of player in baseball, guys who become proven all stars before entering their so called "prime." Their contracts come up at a time where if you pay them top of the market rate, it might actually be for future performance, which is a huge change from the CBA's structure that keeps players on one team until close to 30 or older, who you have to pay right when they are about to drop off. Devers has played parts of 6 seasons, racked up over 15 bWAR, and seems to be improving defensively. Anyone in the Sox' FO who changes their mind about him based on one bad month needs to be fired.

Bogaerts, different story. When is the dropoff coming? Now? Not for a while? That's a real decision, although I suspect his dip is temporary too.
 

Papo The Snow Tiger

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 18, 2010
1,409
Connecticut
Hitting coach is the main suspect. They're supposed to keep guys on track. Very few hitters trend better for the Red Sox.
This is probably my biggest concern with the Red Sox organization. One of Bloom's core competencies is supposed to be player development, so you'd think that a key requirement up and down the entire organization would be having the best of coaches and instructors at every level. I know a coach can't prevent injuries or take a fork out of a guy's back, but when very few players trend better for the team you have to wonder what's up with the staff.
 

Daniel_Son

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2021
1,693
San Diego
This is probably my biggest concern with the Red Sox organization. One of Bloom's core competencies is supposed to be player development, so you'd think that a key requirement up and down the entire organization would be having the best of coaches and instructors at every level. I know a coach can't prevent injuries or take a fork out of a guy's back, but when very few players trend better for the team you have to wonder what's up with the staff.
Is there a way to see when development/scouting staff members were hired? I'm wondering how much of the PD framework is Bloom's. I do agree with you, though - the feast-or-famine hitting approach has sucked for awhile now.
 

Papo The Snow Tiger

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 18, 2010
1,409
Connecticut

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
Let me start by saying that I know fuck all about what it takes to be a MLB level hitting coach. Early in the season when the team got off to such a shitty start I mentioned the promotion of Fatse this past off season and wondered if there was any direct correlation between the two. Then the team went on that great June run and I thought perhaps adjustments had been made and many of guys seemed to have all found their groove at the same time. Since that run there has been a dramatic drop off in offensive production. I'm sure there are many things in play here including injury, team philosophy, the correct personnel to implement said philosophy (both player and staff) as well as the ability and inability to recognize a failed approach. RR stated all of this much better in post #492, but I can't help but wonder if Fatse is the right guy for the job. I fully understand that some have the ability to coach better than to perform, but I look at where this guy came from and scratch my head a bit. 24th round draft pick in 2009, no MLB playing experience, 2 seasons of MiL ball topping out at high A, 160 games total (638 PAs .232 avg .328 OBP with 125 total hits) followed by 2 seasons of Indie league in Pittsfield, MA and Florence, KY for a grand total of 4 seasons of professional baseball played. Fatse came aboard in 2020 serving as assistant hitting coach under Tim Heyers for 2 seasons. For whatever reason, the Sox where high enough on him to consider naming him as co hitting coach along with Heyers who'd been the HC since the start of the 2018 season. That promotion seems a bit odd considering the team won a championship under Heyer's instruction in '18 and fell a couple of games short of the WS last year. Heyers decided to move onto Texas and Fatse was given the reins after two seasons as Heyer's assistant.
 
Last edited:

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
What's Dustin Pedroia doing these days? He always seemed to notice when people's swings were off.

Coaching his kids in Arizona, apparently.
 

Niastri

Member
SoSH Member
Maybe this is game-thready and reaction to the end of the game tonight, but why is there any optimism that 2023 will be that much better? Bloated contracts for guys who haven’t and maybe won’t ever pitch for us, free agents that will be banging down the door to get the fuck out of Boston. Why is 2023 any better than 2022? I argue it could be worse.
Because it would suck to be sick routing for a team you write off a whole year in advance?

The team is going to look a lot different next year, whether Bloom goes with a bunch of $10 million free agents or a couple superstar free agents and a bunch of young guys.

We have no idea how good or not we will be.

But, I will say this. If the guys we already have under contract next year play their best and are healthy, we are absolutely a contender. I know that last bit is a huge dose of wishful thinking, but it is also ignoring the $100 million of additional salary they are going to spend.
 

johnlos

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2014
248

BravesField

New Member
Oct 27, 2021
252
There's 0 chance that there won't be another big bat in the lineup next year, probably several with as much money as they'll be spending. We just don't know who it will be.
I agree there will be some moves, but several FA moves? Aside from CF and maybe, maybe DH, what other positions do you think the Sox will sign FA for?
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
I agree there will be some moves, but several FA moves? Aside from CF and maybe, maybe DH, what other positions do you think the Sox will sign FA for?
Shortstop? Catcher? Starting pitcher? Relief pitcher? Right field? It's not like they're lacking for positions that can be upgraded over internal solutions. Not to mention that spending this winter could include trading for a higher priced player or three. Doesn't have to be just free agents.

I think scottyno's point is that they've got a ton of money coming off the books and they're not likely going to significantly reduce the payroll next year.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,947
While it’s true that they have money to spend, I don’t think we can just assume that it will all work out well- I mean, we’ve heard folks go on and on about how Schwarber has been no better than JD; and how bad most of the FA pitcher signings were. Needing to fill a ton of key roles in a weak FA marketplace isn’t necessarily ideal. I’m most concerned about the pitching staff; if Houck and / or Whitlock move to the rotation, you probably still a need a starter or two, and most of a bullpen…if they stay in the pen, you need most of a rotation. Good luck, Chaim.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
7,879
Boston, MA
The return of good Barnes makes things a little bit easier for next year. His curveball looks as good as ever and his fastball seems just as effective even though it's 94-96 instead of 96-98. That's one less bullpen slot to worry about.
 

soxin6

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
7,028
Huntington Beach, CA
There's 0 chance that there won't be another big bat in the lineup next year, probably several with as much money as they'll be spending. We just don't know who it will be.
Zero chance based on what? Bloom was brought in to alter the Red Sox approach and rebuild the organization. Big bats typically want big contracts and Bloom hasn’t shown that he wants to give them out easily.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,947
I think his point is that teams are locking up young talent long before they get to free agency. Sox have not; and thus, while they have little on the books going forward, they also have little major league talent under control and free agent classes are weaker and weaker because elite talent is getting locked up.

Once the Sox have some elite young players emerging, I imagine they will try to lock them up, of course.
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,763
So, according to Buster, the Red Sox are out of step due to not giving Mookie Betts a J-Rod/Tatis Jr/Franco type deal in 2015? Or because they didn't lock up Devers in 2018? Do I have that right?
Henry isn't using his billionaire time machine to preempt current trends years before they happen, and that's a clear sign he doesn't care about winning.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
I think his point is that teams are locking up young talent long before they get to free agency. Sox have not; and thus, while they have little on the books going forward, they also have little major league talent under control and free agent classes are weaker and weaker because elite talent is getting locked up.

Once the Sox have some elite young players emerging, I imagine they will try to lock them up, of course.
They locked up Bogaerts before he got to free agency (and he's opting out of the final three years of that deal). They locked up Whitlock this year. Going back further, they did pre-arb/early-arb contracts with Pedroia, Buchholz, Lester, etc. It's not like this is a new trend that they're missing out on.

Also, there's the fact that long term contracts require two signatures: the team's and the player's. Just because they didn't signed a Devers or Betts to a J-Rod/Franco type contract doesn't mean they didn't try. Player has to agree to it too.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,947
Of course. I’m also highly skeptical that these are great deals from the teams perspective. There seems to be a difference in the Wander Franco and Julio Rodriguez contracts, no? The trend seems to be for teams to be assuming a lot more risk than the players. Often times, being outside the realties of the market may be a good thing. Of course, the Red Sox are in kind of a weird position where doing so may mean a few rough years.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,032
Oregon
Olney's point comes across as a conclusion looking for anecdotal evidence. The Dodgers haven't done many (if any) of these massive deals with their own prospects. And while it's easy to point at the Braves as the leader at doing this, how much of a trend is it when you can count the number of teams following suit on one hand.
 

Apisith

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2007
3,208
Bangkok
The JRod deal is creative. It’s not a standard give away 2-3 FA years and a few option years to the team for a big chunk of money. It gives the team a lot of cost-controlled years, and an option that would be cheaper than signing him in free agency. The player gets an option if he’s underperforming as well. This is not what the Braves have been doing but it’s better than us letting our best players get to free agency.
 

LogansDad

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
29,152
Alamogordo
I generally like Buster, but that tweet seems like it has blinders on to me.

How many players have the Sox developed since the turn of the century that they might have wanted to give mega-contracts (10 years+) to? Three? It's basically Mookie, Devers and Xander, no?

For one, you can't Tango all by yourself. As far as I could (and can) tell, Mookie was basically always planning on making it to free agency, and was never in the hometown discount discussion. Xander signed a pretty team friendly deal (for a Boras agent), and I think they did as well as they could in that one as they either get Xander for the next three years while he is still a very good player, or he opts out and gets paid a ton of money by another team while he gets old. Maybe they should have signed Devers sooner, but I haven't really gotten the sense that he was willing to sign something in the Austin Riley range, or even something like Julio's contract. Like Mookie, I really think he wants his big payday to be all but guaranteed.

You could probably add Pedey, and he signed what was a pretty spectacular deal until he got Machado'd.

The bigger problem, I think, is that the team hasn't been able to develop these kinds of players. Sure, they have had lots of solid contributors throughout the years, but those four are the only real home grown superstars. Hopefully that is changing over the next couple of years, and we will see how they handle it then.
 

curly2

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 8, 2003
4,887
Whitlock begs to differ
TECHNICALLY Olney is right. Whitlock's extension was 4/$18.75M, and even counting his 2022 salary, he is just under $20 million. Obviously the two option years would bring Whitlock another $19M, but they're not guaranteed if his arm falls off -- which is likely the only way the Sox wouldn't pick them up.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,308
Zero chance based on what? Bloom was brought in to alter the Red Sox approach and rebuild the organization. Big bats typically want big contracts and Bloom hasn’t shown that he wants to give them out easily.
Because they already had a bunch of big contracts and a ton of money tied up before free agency even started. Now they don't. Even so they spent for one of the highest priced free agent bats on the market last year.

The Sox payroll has gone up each successive year of Bloom's tenure. There is 0 reason to think that the 2023 Sox won't at least spend to near the luxury tax, which means they're going to spend a lot of money this offseason on somebody.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
21,510
Rogers Park
I agree there will be some moves, but several FA moves? Aside from CF and maybe, maybe DH, what other positions do you think the Sox will sign FA for?
If I had to guess, I expect we will:
  • Sign a starting catcher to pair with McGuire, with Wong as depth. I suspect this could be Contreras, which is why I list it as an FA, but trade acquisitions are definitely on the table here as well. One could also just hand the keys to Wong.
  • Retain Kiké as CF1/MI on a 2-3 year deal.
  • Sign a veteran SP (this might mean retaining Paxton and/or Wacha). We have Sale, Pivetta, Whitlock, and a bunch of kids. It would be nice to add a veteran with ace upside — either of those two qualify — because we're well-cushioned with Crawford, Bello, Mata, Ward, Seabold, etc. to withstand injuries.
  • And then some sort of middle of the order bat, whether that person is a corner OF or a DH. Again, there are some splashy options in FA — Judge!?!?! — but also more reasonble options like Mitch Haniger, but trades are again a possibility.
Which way things go with Bogaerts have some bearing on how much it makes sense to commit to 30-somethings from a risk perspective, so I could imagine a range of rosters.
 

BravesField

New Member
Oct 27, 2021
252
If I had to guess, I expect we will:
  • Sign a starting catcher to pair with McGuire, with Wong as depth. I suspect this could be Contreras, which is why I list it as an FA, but trade acquisitions are definitely on the table here as well. One could also just hand the keys to Wong.
  • Retain Kiké as CF1/MI on a 2-3 year deal.
  • Sign a veteran SP (this might mean retaining Paxton and/or Wacha). We have Sale, Pivetta, Whitlock, and a bunch of kids. It would be nice to add a veteran with ace upside — either of those two qualify — because we're well-cushioned with Crawford, Bello, Mata, Ward, Seabold, etc. to withstand injuries.
  • And then some sort of middle of the order bat, whether that person is a corner OF or a DH. Again, there are some splashy options in FA — Judge!?!?! — but also more reasonble options like Mitch Haniger, but trades are again a possibility.
Which way things go with Bogaerts have some bearing on how much it makes sense to commit to 30-somethings from a risk perspective, so I could imagine a range of rosters.
Yeah that's all well and good, but Scottyno and I, were discussing how to protect Devers in the lineup next year so teams don't pitch around him. Scottyno said that there probably will be several FA moves to protect Devers. All your points are well taken, but aside from an outfielder and maybe a DH, I don't know what other big FA signings can or will be made to protect Devers.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
Yeah that's all well and good, but Scottyno and I, were discussing how to protect Devers in the lineup next year so teams don't pitch around him. Scottyno said that there probably will be several FA moves to protect Devers. All your points are well taken, but aside from an outfielder and maybe a DH, I don't know what other big FA signings can or will be made to protect Devers.
They could sign a "big bat" shortstop (re-sign Bogaerts, sign Correa) or catcher (Contreras). And there is always the possibility of a trade or two (which no one can really predict right now). Their options aren't as limited as you are making it out to be.

Besides, how many bats does it take to "protect" Devers? Bloom doesn't need to sign 3-4 "big bats". One or two plus a solid "supporting cast" type vet or two would be a good outcome for next year's lineup.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,402
Yeah that's all well and good, but Scottyno and I, were discussing how to protect Devers in the lineup next year so teams don't pitch around him. Scottyno said that there probably will be several FA moves to protect Devers. All your points are well taken, but aside from an outfielder and maybe a DH, I don't know what other big FA signings can or will be made to protect Devers.
a Cody Ross-level signing or 2 would help
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,308
Yeah that's all well and good, but Scottyno and I, were discussing how to protect Devers in the lineup next year so teams don't pitch around him. Scottyno said that there probably will be several FA moves to protect Devers. All your points are well taken, but aside from an outfielder and maybe a DH, I don't know what other big FA signings can or will be made to protect Devers.
To have a similar payroll to this season they have around 100m to spend once X opts out and they take care of the arb guys (mainly Devers).

Kike, a starting catcher, a mediocre vet starter, and some bullpen help is maybe 30-40m. So that leaves you with 60-70m for 2-3 impact bats, whether that's at DH, 2b/SS, or in the outfield. They have plenty of money for everything they need, of course they need to spend it right. That calculus changes some if they go for a big time ace or a big time closer, but then the pitching looks a lot better so it evens out.
 

mikcou

Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2007
921
Boston
To have a similar payroll to this season they have around 100m to spend once X opts out and they take care of the arb guys (mainly Devers).

Kike, a starting catcher, a mediocre vet starter, and some bullpen help is maybe 30-40m. So that leaves you with 60-70m for 2-3 impact bats, whether that's at DH, 2b/SS, or in the outfield. They have plenty of money for everything they need, of course they need to spend it right. That calculus changes some if they go for a big time ace or a big time closer, but then the pitching looks a lot better so it evens out.
Its interesting how things come full circle - the Red Sox were in a similar scenario with significant payroll flexibility 10+ years ago - the signings were almost uniformly bad. Having $100M is is nice in theory, but there actually have to be players worht spending the money on - this year's free agent class is quite poor, especially so once the top SS (Correa, Xander, Dansby) are excluded. There just isnt much out there worth paying for on the position player side. This was known going into last offseason and was a good reason to spend more (even if it necessitated paying some tax) to lock in some level of talent long term.

Unless the ability to spend is matched at a period where talent is available, its not as helpful as it immediately seems. The trend towards teams giving huge deals to their own will only perpetuate and exacerbate the issue.
 

j-man

Member
Dec 19, 2012
3,649
Arkansas
your pitching is inj-prone and its hard to rebuild 6 bullpen spots in 1 offseason the biggest worry with your gm is he still thinks he is in tampa bay when he has a 250 mil payroll where u can do both have a great minor league system and sign great FA'S

aaron J is going to want 400 mil which is too much your biggest q is story a winning player i wouild move sale to the pen and have a lights out 1-2 with witlock
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,308
your pitching is inj-prone and its hard to rebuild 6 bullpen spots in 1 offseason the biggest worry with your gm is he still thinks he is in tampa bay when he has a 250 mil payroll where u can do both have a great minor league system and sign great FA'S
There's no reason they need to rebuild 6 spots in the bullpen.

Schreiber is a lock for a spot. Barnes is a lock for a spot. I expect at least one of Houck or Whitlock is a lock for a spot, maybe both. Sawamura could easily be brought back on his option, he's fine as a mid to back end guy. I could see Danish competing for a back end spot too.

The one thing they really do need is a lefty who can also get righties out. Davis and Taylor are both great vs lefties, assuming that Taylor ever gets healthy, but they both suck vs righties, which makes them pretty situational and vulnerable to use. Probably one makes the roster, I doubt they have space for both. If they add a great lefty reliever then they really can cover the rest of the bullpen with the guys they already have, though they could always use another power righty if they're Houck or Whitlock into the rotation.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
6,348
Barnes looking like he found his mojo again is a great thing for ‘23. Definitely opens up Whitlock to a starting role.
I know people here say it’s foolish to count on Sale…. But when one roster spot is eating $30M in payroll, you’re sort of forced to hope he can be counted on. You can’t just sign another $30M FA replacement. You need Wacha/Hill to step up.

Sale
Whitlock
Pivetta
Wacha
Crawford

With Bello, Seabold and Winckowski as depth is very good
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,308
Barnes looking like he found his mojo again is a great thing for ‘23. Definitely opens up Whitlock to a starting role.
I know people here say it’s foolish to count on Sale…. But when one roster spot is eating $30M in payroll, you’re sort of forced to hope he can be counted on. You can’t just sign another $30M FA replacement. You need Wacha/Hill to step up.

Sale
Whitlock
Pivetta
Wacha
Crawford

With Bello, Seabold and Winckowski as depth is very good
If they have a rotation similar to that one, plus a slightly improved bullpen, and add 2 big name position players, which could include re-signing X, then there's no reason to think this team won't be right back in the playoff mix next season. Houck is also potential starting depth, though I'd have no problem with them making him the closer from day 1 next year, he's excelled in that role so far.

And if Bello has another month like his last few appearances he's going to force his way into the rotation starting in April.
 

BravesField

New Member
Oct 27, 2021
252
To have a similar payroll to this season they have around 100m to spend once X opts out and they take care of the arb guys (mainly Devers).

Kike, a starting catcher, a mediocre vet starter, and some bullpen help is maybe 30-40m. So that leaves you with 60-70m for 2-3 impact bats, whether that's at DH, 2b/SS, or in the outfield. They have plenty of money for everything they need, of course they need to spend it right. That calculus changes some if they go for a big time ace or a big time closer, but then the pitching looks a lot better so it evens out.
I guess I'm more focused on the holes in the 2023 team as they currently appear to be, and how do protect Devers so teams don't pitch around him.

This year we had X, JDM and Tek batting along side Devers in the lineup. Well we expect JDM to leave and X opt out. So there is a real probability that 3 of the 4 big hitters in our lineup are gone.

SS....we could resign X, or sign Correa/Dansby, but that blocks Mayer, I don't think anyone wants that. I think Story just slides over from 2B and Valdez gets his shot to play 2B

1B....Casas. Obviously placed in the batting order to protect Devers.

OF....Free Agent pick up who can HIT.

C....Maybe Contreras, but he is sort of like Tek with the bat (isn't he?) and will cost a lot more money than Tek.

DH...Hosmer. I just don't see any change here. Chaim brought in Hosmer for a reason and it was not just to shore up 1B for 2 months of 2022.

In 2023, having Casas, FA outfielder, Hosmer to bat around Devers. Is that enough?
 

Apisith

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2007
3,208
Bangkok
Mayer’s ETA is 2025 (A+/AA next year, AA/AAA year after, AAA and majors in ‘25), maybe 2026 if we want to control him during his peak years. Bringing him up in 2026 would give us control for his age 23-28 seasons. There’s no little reason to plan this off-season about a prospect who may make the majors 3-4 years from now. Correa would be a great replacement for Bogaerts.

For C, Wong is hitting well enough that he should get a shot. He’s cost controlled and the options in free agency are very limited. If we bring up Wong next year, we have him for his age 27-32 seasons, covering his peak years.

1B is probably a platoon with Arroyo, Hosmer, Dalbec and eventually Casas.

2B is Story and Arroyo.

SS is Correa ($30m AAV)

3B is Devers under a long term deal ($30m AAV).

RF is Verdugo. LF is Haniger/Pham/Brantley (2-3 year deal, max $15m AAV). CF is Kike ($8m). DH is Hosmer, Casas and AAAA guys.

It isn’t much better than this year, but a higher floor.

Rotation: Sale, Houck, Pivetta, Eovaldi QO, Bello, Crawford, Winckowski, Seabold. Hill on a similar deal would be interesting.

Bullpen: Barnes, Sawamura, Schreiber, Whitlock and $20m on 2-3 guys. If Bello starts the year in the majors then Houck stays in the ‘pen. Depending on how Bloom spends the $20m on the ‘pen, we would be a high 80s to low 90s win team. If Bloom throws away $30m like he did this year (JBJ, Paxton, Diekman) then we end up as a .500 team and he probably ends up getting fired.

Total payroll: ~$240m.

There’s not a lot of upside in this team, we would need to see progress from the young starters (Bello, Winckowski, Crawford, Seabold - maybe Walter and Mata) to end up as a really good team. Downsides are obvious, this is not a young team and there’s not a lot of high upside players.
 

Apisith

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2007
3,208
Bangkok
For the bullpen, I would really like to see Bloom go big on Diaz (5 years/$75m). This gives us a 4 top tier guys (Houck, Whitlock, Schreiber and Diaz). A minimum of two would be available most nights, it would really shorten games. This still leaves enough money for Bloom to give to 2 of the Strahm/Diekman potential surplus value guys that he loves.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
6,348
If they have a rotation similar to that one, plus a slightly improved bullpen, and add 2 big name position players, which could include re-signing X, then there's no reason to think this team won't be right back in the playoff mix next season. Houck is also potential starting depth, though I'd have no problem with them making him the closer from day 1 next year, he's excelled in that role so far.

And if Bello has another month like his last few appearances he's going to force his way into the rotation starting in April.
It’s a lot of things breaking positive for it to be playoff caliber- mostly health wise- but that goes for all teams. Henry put a lot of his chips in on Sale so the team really is going to be turn on his health.
Recent struggles of Crawford seem more likely exhaustion than teams adjusting to him without counter adjustments figured in.
 

Humphrey

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2010
3,163
How about letting Wong play in September; perhaps that would verify whether the Wong that purportedly has made great strides the past couple months can do it at the major league level? Nothing at the ML level so far indicates anything other than him being overmatched.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,308
I guess I'm more focused on the holes in the 2023 team as they currently appear to be, and how do protect Devers so teams don't pitch around him.

This year we had X, JDM and Tek batting along side Devers in the lineup. Well we expect JDM to leave and X opt out. So there is a real probability that 3 of the 4 big hitters in our lineup are gone.
JDM and X becoming not big hitters while being paid 40m was a big part of their 2nd half struggles. And looking at the 2023 team based on the 2022 roster is silly, of course a lineup that loses a bunch of guys and adds no replacements is going to look bad.
 

BravesField

New Member
Oct 27, 2021
252
Mayer’s ETA is 2025 (A+/AA next year, AA/AAA year after, AAA and majors in ‘25), maybe 2026 if we want to control him during his peak years. Bringing him up in 2026 would give us control for his age 23-28 seasons. There’s no little reason to plan this off-season about a prospect who may make the majors 3-4 years from now. Correa would be a great replacement for Bogaerts.

For C, Wong is hitting well enough that he should get a shot. He’s cost controlled and the options in free agency are very limited. If we bring up Wong next year, we have him for his age 27-32 seasons, covering his peak years.

1B is probably a platoon with Arroyo, Hosmer, Dalbec and eventually Casas.

2B is Story and Arroyo.

SS is Correa ($30m AAV)

3B is Devers under a long term deal ($30m AAV).

RF is Verdugo. LF is Haniger/Pham/Brantley (2-3 year deal, max $15m AAV). CF is Kike ($8m). DH is Hosmer, Casas and AAAA guys.

It isn’t much better than this year, but a higher floor.

Rotation: Sale, Houck, Pivetta, Eovaldi QO, Bello, Crawford, Winckowski, Seabold. Hill on a similar deal would be interesting.

Bullpen: Barnes, Sawamura, Schreiber, Whitlock and $20m on 2-3 guys. If Bello starts the year in the majors then Houck stays in the ‘pen. Depending on how Bloom spends the $20m on the ‘pen, we would be a high 80s to low 90s win team. If Bloom throws away $30m like he did this year (JBJ, Paxton, Diekman) then we end up as a .500 team and he probably ends up getting fired.

Total payroll: ~$240m.

There’s not a lot of upside in this team, we would need to see progress from the young starters (Bello, Winckowski, Crawford, Seabold - maybe Walter and Mata) to end up as a really good team. Downsides are obvious, this is not a young team and there’s not a lot of high upside players.
I see you have both Correa and Devers as 30m AAV signings. How many years do you think it will be for each guy?
 

dhappy42

Straw Man
Oct 27, 2013
15,725
Michigan
your pitching is inj-prone and its hard to rebuild 6 bullpen spots in 1 offseason the biggest worry with your gm is he still thinks he is in tampa bay when he has a 250 mil payroll where u can do both have a great minor league system and sign great FA'S

aaron J is going to want 400 mil which is too much your biggest q is story a winning player i wouild move sale to the pen and have a lights out 1-2 with witlock
How much is Judge worth? I predict a big bounce-back from Story next year. New town, new baby, broken hand... can't be any worse. Sale to the bullpen is an interesting idea that I've been too afraid to mention here. But it makes some sense, health and durabilty-wise.
 

Mueller's Twin Grannies

critical thinker
SoSH Member
Dec 19, 2009
9,386
I don't know if Sale would happily go to the bullpen permanently, but they could make him an "opener," pitching 2-3 innings max. But I think he'd balk at even that.
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I don't know if Sale would happily go to the bullpen permanently, but they could make him an "opener," pitching 2-3 innings max. But I think he'd balk at even that.
That seems like just about the worst use of him possible. If he isn't going to be a starter--which I think he will be--he should get high lev innings.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,662
If we've already got conceivably shutdown multi-inning relievers in Whitlock, Houck and Schreiber, what kind of hi-leverage innings are we allocating to Chris Sale? Moving him to the bullpen seems like some combination of a waste, a hassle and a different sort of injury risk.

Sale looked really good in the one start against Tampa. I think he should just try to be Chris Sale, which is an excellent pitcher. If he's a good starter in 2023 and everyone still rabidly detests him, they'd have a lot better argument for trading him before his final contract year than they would if he were a reliever.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,308
Would any of Sale's injuries over the last few years have been prevented if he was in the bullpen instead of starting? I don't really see the benefit, if he can go starter innings then that's how they should use him. There's no way he can make up the full value of his contract at this point, but it's not impossible he could be worth close to the value of the remainder of his contract.