How interested are you in the Red Sox at this point?

How interested are you in the Red Sox right now?

  • All time high ... this team could win next year (Willing to pay for season tickets/watch 100+ games)

    Votes: 11 2.3%
  • Pretty Interested, not as much as 2004 but I still going watch a majority of games

    Votes: 187 39.5%
  • Eh, the least interested I have been since FSG took over but still watch a game a week (Fire Chaim)

    Votes: 152 32.1%
  • Not even sure why I am here, couldn't care less, might catch some games this season out of habit

    Votes: 89 18.8%
  • I actively dislike the team and FSG at this point.

    Votes: 30 6.3%
  • Not a Red Sox fan, just here for the hawt MS Paint action

    Votes: 5 1.1%

  • Total voters
    474

Traut

lost his degree
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
12,811
My Desk
I love the team. My son is 9 and loves to watch the Red Sox. So that is a tie in for me.

The problem right now is there’s no one who when they are pitching it is much watch. There’s no hitter where you are like - I’m stopping what I’m doing to watch this at bat.

They weren’t an exciting club last season and they won’t be this season.
 

Pat Spillane

New Member
Feb 12, 2021
64
I will never be not interested in the team. Have been a fan since the 83 team of Armas, Easler Boggs and Gutierrez. There have been some good ones and bad ones along the way. A few things have not gone the right way for the front office. I dont think they are cheap I think they are trying to learn from past mistakes when they couldnt make any moves due to payroll being eaten up by non performing or non playing staff. I think we need patience. Going all in on big names contract now can ruin this team for the next 5 years

Going back over the big contracts put out how many just perform a couple years of it an teams are saddled with 5 and 6 years of crap. Pujols, Cano, Adrian Gonzalez, Prince Fielder and our own Chris Sale and Pedroia. Bar the Sale contract most of the teams fans were happy with those. To build a winner you need the low cost talent and then sprinkle in the expensive players. I dont think the team as it stands are 2 or three vets away from competing

I am going with some patience here
 

fiskfan75

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 14, 2006
42
I'm a Sox fan and always will be. That being said, the team as currently constructed is not interesting enough for me to spend money to travel to see them in person. This will be the first year in over a decade that I will not excitedly sit in a virtual waiting room in January for tickets. Regardless of who they sign , I have no personal attachment to any players on this team and its really sad.
 

Philip Jeff Frye

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2001
10,392
I started following the team in the early 1970s. There have been some low points (certainly Fisk/Lynn/Burleson), some of the mediocre Matt Young/Jack Clark/Andre Dawson years, so perhaps today isn't rock bottom, but it's got to be pretty close. I certainly followed those teams more closely than I currently expect to follow the 2023 team.

One thing that's different today is that we KNOW this franchise can do better. In the 1980s and 1990s, the financial strengths of the Red Sox had not become apparent (or perhaps hadn't even emerged yet), and we weren't in a world where half the teams in MLB weren't even trying to compete. We'd had decades of incompetent management - we weren't in a position to believe something else was possible.

The first two decades of this century changed all of that. The team used its resources to sign top notch talent. We lost some home grown talent in ways that were upsetting, and there was the occasional ugly episode like the Bobby Valentine interregnum or the departures of Theo and Tito. But as Hank Scorpio points out, there were always new players to root for, developed by a savvy front office or acquired through the use of our financial resources. Four World Series championships and a few dozen Red Sox Hall of Fame members were the result.

Now the financial resources are still there (driven by the astronomical ticket and concession prices) but instead of using those resources to compete for top end talent, we get the Jackie Bradley Reunion Tour and "let's give $10 million to a guy who might never pitch again." We'd rather take a $100 million flier on a Japanese guy whose skills might not transition to MLB and who apparently cannot field a position than stretch on Xander or Judge or whomever. We prefer to build a rotation around starters whose injury history makes them cheap, and then act like nobody could have expected the injury bug to strike. We'd rather get Eric Hosmer for free than make deadline move that might actually help the team compete.

The team is a boring collection of other people's has-beens and never-weres, fungible players on short term contracts who come and go. Michael Wacha was great this year when healthy. Is anybody going to remember that he was on this team five years from now? Hunter Renfroe, we hardly knew you. The faceless parade of mediocre relievers (something all of baseball suffers from now), the execrable bench players, the Dalbecs and Corderos that we keep running out there after all hope is gone that they can hit in the big leagues. And I haven't even mentioned the stupidity with which the team has often played.

It's just painful and boring to watch, especially if you're paying for a ticket and especially when you know this franchise is capable of so much more.
 
Last edited:
Feb 26, 2002
6,708
Citifield - Queens, NY
I started following the team in the early 1970s. There have been some low parts (certainly Fish/Lynn/Burleson), some of the mediocre Matt Young/Jack Clark/Andre Dawson years, so perhaps today isn't rock bottom, but it's got to be pretty close. I certainly followed those teams more closely than I currently expect to follow the 2023 team.

One thing that's different today is that we KNOW this franchise can do better. In the 1980s and 1990s, the financial strengths of the Red Sox had not become apparent (ow perhaps hadn't even emerged yet), and we weren't in a world where half the teams in MLB weren't even trying to compete. We'd had decades of incompetent management - we weren't in a position to believe something else was possible.

The first two decades of this century changed all of that. The team used its resources to sign top notch talent. We lost some home grown talent in ways that were upsetting, and there was the occasional ugly episode like the Bobby Valentine interregnum or the departures of Theo and Tito. But as Han Scorpio points out, there were always new players to root for, developed by a savvy front office or acquired through the use of our financial resources. Four World Series championships and a few dozen Red Sox Hall of Fame members were the result.

Now the financial resources are still there (driven by the astronomical ticket and concession prices) but instead of using those resources to compete for top end talent, we get the Jackie Bradley Reunion Tour and "let's give $10 million to a guy who might never pitch again." We'd rather take a $100 million flier on a Japanese guy whose skills might not transition to MLB and who apparently cannot field a position than stretch on Xander or Judge or whomever. We prefer to build a rotation around starters whose injury history makes them cheap, and then act like nobody could have expected the injury bug to strike. We'd rather get Eric Hosmer for free than make deadline move that might actually help the team compete.

The team is a boring collection of other people's has-beens and never-weres, fungible players on short term contracts who come and go. Michael Wacha was great this year when healthy. Is anybody going to remember that he was on this team five years from now? Hunter Renfroe, we hardly knew you. The faceless parade of mediocre relievers (something all of baseball suffers from now), the execrable bench players, the Dalbecs and Corderos that we keep running out there after all hope is gone that they can hit in the big leagues. And I haven't even mentioned the stupidity with which the team has often played.

It's just painful and boring to watch, especially if you're paying for a ticket and especially when you know this franchise is capable of so much more.
Awesome post. This explains a lot of my feelings as well. Really well-done IMO.

Just a couple of soundbites / snippets that I'll reply to pertaining to your post:

Now the financial resources are still there (driven by the astronomical ticket and concession prices) but instead of using those resources to compete for top end talent, we get the Jackie Bradley Reunion Tour and "let's give $10 million to a guy who might never pitch again."

I'd like to know what metric / set of data in the spreadsheets told them that a return to JBJ was going to yield positive results. Any halfwit could see the guy couldn't hit himself out of a wet paper bag and that a DH for him (!!!) could have been defended at times. Seriously - I'd love to see the analysts defend the move to bring him back.

"We'd rather take a $100 million flier on a Japanese guy whose skills might not transition to MLB and who apparently cannot field a position"

Spot on! 12 months ago, we could have had Kyle Schwarber at 4/$80M and decided not to. Presumably because he couldn't field a position. One more piece of evidence to solidify how Bloom (and his cohorts) has disastrously judged the market.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,257
I get what you're saying, @Philip Jeff Frye but I am going to choose to look at it differently.

The team - not just in the early part of this century - gave me some of the best moments I've ever had as a baseball fan. Over the last seven seasons they've given me three AL East titles, two trips to the ALCS, and a World Series title with the greatest team in franchise history. They've owned the Yankees in the postseason (what can be better than that?). And they've managed to be pretty competitive through what is obviously a MASSIVE rebuild of the entire organization.

While they've lost some players dear to my heart, that's how it's always been. I listed in a previous post some of my all-time favorite Sox players that the team let go: Lynn, Fisk, Clemens, Hurst, Boggs, Nomar, Valentin, Vaughn, Damon, Pedro, Trot, Lester, Manny, Betts, etc.. It's part of the business, unfortunately. And as the team transitions, there's a wonderful crop of exciting new players waiting in the wings: Bello, Casas, Mayer, Rafaela, Yorke, Mata, Romero, etc. Guys I've started to follow, just like I followed Betts and Bogaerts and Devers when they were in the minors. And I am pumped for the next wave of homegrown talent to show up at Fenway.

There have always been nameless, faceless mercenaries. We tend to remember the championship (or our favorite, even if not championship) teams fondly, for obvious reasons. But that doesn't mean they didn't have mercenaries and other teams' has-beens. The 2013 team had these guys, for example, who were castoffs from other organizations:

Saltalamacchia - came in 2010 and had a .661 ops with the Rangers in 2009.
Napoli - came over from Texas in 2013. He was a good player but nothing special. The Rangers sure didn't seem to need him.
S. Drew - Oh man another Drew? He was terrible for Arizona and Oakland in 2012, with an 81 ops+ and compiling a bWAR of 0.1.
Victorino - Was a solid player but had a down year in 2012 with an ops+ of 91. Why would the Sox sign this guy?
And then there were Lackey and Dempster in the rotation.

And more.

And the 2018 team had its share of that too: Moreland, Nunez, Pearce, Price, with the immortal Hector Velazquez in the bullpen.

The point is that they've always brought in these kinds of players. We remember them fondly because they won or did something special, but the philosophy hasn't really changed I don't think. They give out some big contracts, sometimes to players that make us scratch our heads. And they don't give out big contracts to some players we think they SHOULD be giving them to. And then they scour the league to find guys they can use to field a (hopefully) competent MLB team.

What excites me is the pipeline of really good young talent that this particular management group has assembled. I can clearly envision in the not too distant future (like, within a couple of years) an ongoing stream of stars in the making arriving from Portland and Worcester. Players we will fall in love with. Players who will do special things on the field in a Red Sox uniform.

We aren't there YET. But that's what Chaim is building. And as frustrating as it is to see the Sox flounder here and now and lose players I love, that's always been how it goes, ever since I can remember being a Red Sox fan (and couldn't understand losing Lynn and Fisk).

Now, I'm not you, and I'm not suggesting you should feel the same way I do. You feel how you feel. I don't love looking up at the Yankees, Rays, Jays, and Orioles in the division, but I can see what they're doing here and what they're building gives ME excitement and something to look forward to as a Sox fan. This organization - specifically this ownership group - has given me more than I ever could have imagined as a Sox fan, and I'm fine with the building process taking a little time. The Astros are a juggernaut but they endured a lot of lean years to get there. The Braves now look like a machine, but they were pretty awful from 2014-2017. I'm looking forward to what this team will become. I wish that was NOW, but I am ok with it not being NOW. We'll get there again.
 

jose melendez

Earl of Acie
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2003
31,535
Geneva, Switzerland
Whoever mentioned the broadcast team had a great point.

I've never liked O'Brien. I actually hated the rotating cast of analysts less than a lot of people, but the lack of a good, day in day out broadcast team is a big problem. If these people are going to be in my living room 80-120 times per year, I kind of want to like them.
 

Steve Dillard

wishes drew noticed him instead of sweet & sour
SoSH Member
Oct 7, 2003
6,013
Out of market subscriber to MLB ticket the past decade, will probably cancel this year. Many things going on with kids in summer but also I can’t think of anyone interesting on team — young core to see how exciting they’ll be in “future” or the big FA signing who will hold down the 3/4 spot for the next decade. There is something to be said about team identity, and having a Tampa like group of situational players may “work” but hardly sees interest.

maybe 2025 when Juan Soto signs for 14 years/425 and is joined by Mayer, Rafaela, Yorke and the 8th overall pick in 2024.
 
Last edited:
Feb 26, 2002
6,708
Citifield - Queens, NY
We aren't there YET. But that's what Chaim is building. And as frustrating as it is to see the Sox flounder here and now and lose players I love, that's always been how it goes, ever since I can remember being a Red Sox fan (and couldn't understand losing Lynn and Fisk).
Really? You fully understand what Chaim's strategy is?

How does that translate with letting Schwarber go -- but signing a Japanese question mark 12 months later for similar money?

How about the patchwork approach to building a bullpen 12 months ago (presumably via the mathematical data which produced the 5th worst relief corps in the MLB) and now having to spend decent dollars on Chris Martin and Kenley Jensen?

How does translate with his one foot in / one foot out approach during the most recent trading deadline (which looked bad then --- and even worse retrospectively)?

I'd love to hear a solid representation of what Chaim's schematic is...because it's all over the place.
 

CantKeepmedown

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
2,620
Portland, ME
Interest has waned over the years for sure. I wouldn't say this coming season is that much different that the past few. Losing the homegrown players sucks for sure. But even if they had signed Mookie or Bogie, I"m still not watching regular season games. I'll follow box scores and highlights in the regular season and then start watching playoff games if they are lucky enough to make it.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
13,013
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Really? You fully understand what Chaim's strategy is?

How does that translate with letting Schwarber go -- but signing a Japanese question mark 12 months later for similar money?

How about the patchwork approach to building a bullpen 12 months ago (presumably via the mathematical data which produced the 5th worst relief corps in the MLB) and now having to spend decent dollars on Chris Martin and Kenley Jensen?

How does translate with his one foot in / one foot out approach during the most recent trading deadline (which looked bad then --- and even worse retrospectively)?

I'd love to hear a solid representation of what Chaim's schematic is...because it's all over the place.
There's a universe in which they have both Bogaerts and Schwarber under contract for similar money as they're commiting to Story and Yoshida and I have to actively push that notion out of my brain in order to not kill my excitement for this team.
 

Philip Jeff Frye

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2001
10,392
There have always been nameless, faceless mercenaries. We tend to remember the championship (or our favorite, even if not championship) teams fondly, for obvious reasons. But that doesn't mean they didn't have mercenaries and other teams' has-beens. The 2013 team had these guys, for example, who were castoffs from other organizations:

Saltalamacchia - came in 2010 and had a .661 ops with the Rangers in 2009.
Napoli - came over from Texas in 2013. He was a good player but nothing special. The Rangers sure didn't seem to need him.
S. Drew - Oh man another Drew? He was terrible for Arizona and Oakland in 2012, with an 81 ops+ and compiling a bWAR of 0.1.
Victorino - Was a solid player but had a down year in 2012 with an ops+ of 91. Why would the Sox sign this guy?
And then there were Lackey and Dempster in the rotation.

And more.

And the 2018 team had its share of that too: Moreland, Nunez, Pearce, Price, with the immortal Hector Velazquez in the bullpen.
Yes, of course. Nobody can have 9 All Stars in the lineup and a rotation of Hall of Famers. Kike Hernandez or Alex Verdugo or Trevor Story could certainly be fine contributors to a championship team. But you can't get there surrounding players like that with Jackie Bradley and Rich Hill instead of Manny Ramirez and Pedro Martinez. We show zero interest in acquiring talent like that these days, unless it happens to percolate up from our minor league system.
 

Archer1979

shazowies
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
8,059
Right Here
Always will be a Sox fan. The hope is that they will be competitive. The toughest part of the 2022 season is that, with the exception of their one big push, they weren't a competitive team. Often times, I wouldn't be able to start watching until the third / fourth inning and they were down and into particularly prone to coming back. Couple that with the times that they were up and blew the games late, it was a slog to watch.

I'm holding off on judgment on what 2023 is going to look like. I was already mentally prepared for X leaving. I knew that Judge was not going to happen. The writing is on the wall that after the Sale contract, this ownership is not going to get caught up in throwing around crazy money. We're still two months from Truck Day and a lot of servicable names still out there. Their bullpen has a lot of new faces. We've got some good players in the pipeline and some already through (Casas, Bello). There's always a glimmer of optimism. Of course, having an ace pitcher would be a great way to jumpstart the malaise we're all feeling.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,257
Really? You fully understand what Chaim's strategy is?

How does that translate with letting Schwarber go -- but signing a Japanese question mark 12 months later for similar money?

How about the patchwork approach to building a bullpen 12 months ago (presumably via the mathematical data which produced the 5th worst relief corps in the MLB) and now having to spend decent dollars on Chris Martin and Kenley Jensen?

How does translate with his one foot in / one foot out approach during the most recent trading deadline (which looked bad then --- and even worse retrospectively)?

I'd love to hear a solid representation of what Chaim's schematic is...because it's all over the place.
I think he's trying to put a competitive team on the field now while building a developmental machine that will enable the team to be good year-in and year-out with a pipeline of young, cost-controlled talent. Kind of like what the Braves and Astros have done.

I can't speak for every single roster decision, mainly because I don't know what all the circumstances are surrounding them all. None of us do.

On the bullpen, I think he was hoping to find some diamonds in the rough. We know relievers are volatile from year to year. We also know that sometimes on-field performance doesn't look the same as underlying metrics, and that scouts and baseball people see certain things (spin rate, whatever) that makes them think that maybe they can get a guy who could be really good, but for not much money. Other times they may realize that a pitcher they want fills a real need, and it's going to cost more to get that pitcher.

It may look random ("all over the place" as you put it) to us, but that's because we're not there in those discussions. They don't tell us what they see. And the landscape is always changing, obviously, so what may seem like a good move now may not have been, and what may seem like a bad move now may turn out to be a good one. I mean, if Xander craters (and his power has been dropping significantly the past few years) in the next couple seasons, we will all be grateful that Chaim didn't do "whatever it took" to sign him. We don't know.

It seems pretty clear to me that Chaim is trying to build this developmental machine that will provide them with an ongoing source of really good, cost-controlled talent, but that at the same time, they don't want to bottom out if they can help it. So what you're seeing now is an attempt to balance those two things out. Some decisions are made to keep the current roster MLB-level viable, and if things break right maybe they can make a deep run into the playoffs (see 2021), all the while focusing primarily on building this developmental machine that will give them what they need, once it comes to fruition, to perennially be a high level MLB club.

That's what it seems to me they're doing. I can't, obviously, explain every single decision like you want me to. Sorry. But I think it all fits in this framework.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
25,611
Unreal America
Btw, if there’s anyone in Sox management who’s reading this, the fact that folks on *this board* are saying this should terrify you.

As should the fact that the core group of posters still has many of the same names as when I joined in my 30’s, 20 years ago, and while we have some excellent younger posters they are fewer. The kids aren’t picking up what you’re laying down.

Selling the Red Sox in Boston should be the easiest gig since selling booze to sailors on shore leave and you guys are blowing it.
I agree with your sentiment. However I don’t think selling the Sox to younger people is nearly as easy as you suggest.

The entertainment landscape is far more competitive than it was when we were kids. Baseball is really slow. And it now has less action than ever, by design, which is just mind blowing to me. There’s also fewer star starting pitchers who go deep into games that compel people to watch on certain days. Again, by design.

So the fundamentals for baseball are challenging. Now couple that with a Sox team that is all over the damn map recently. An unbelievably compelling product in 2018, that just 2 years later was utterly unwatchable. Systematically letting star players walk.

Making it more personal, I think my 15 year old son really wants to be a Sox fanatic. But they’re not making it easy. He loved Mookie, and we all know how that went. He was riveted by the 2021 run, but this past season became a slog. His favorite player is Xander, and that’s over. He’s old enough to wonder what the hell Chaim is doing, and living in a world where it’s really easy to play video games or watch YouTube if the Sox stink.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,257
Yes, of course. Nobody can have 9 All Stars in the lineup and a rotation of Hall of Famers. Kike Hernandez or Alex Verdugo or Trevor Story could certainly be fine contributors to a championship team. But you can't get there surrounding players like that with Jackie Bradley and Rich Hill instead of Manny Ramirez and Pedro Martinez. We show zero interest in acquiring talent like that these days, unless it happens to percolate up from our minor league system.
Here's where the Sox stood in terms of opening day payroll....

1999: #6

Henry et al bought the Sox in 2002.

2003: #6
2004: #2
2007: #2
2008: #4
2013: #4
2016: #3
2018: #1
2021: #3
2022: #6

So 2022 was a down year in terms of spending, but they still spent the 6th most money in baseball, at $195 million for their opening day payroll. It's not like they were "cheap". And they dropped down there because they were trying to reset the luxury tax situation.

Now I don't know when they'll once again be in the top 3 - the Dodgers, Yankees, Mets, and Padres are going BONKERS with spending, so who knows. But you know how many championships those four teams have in the past 12 years? ONE. Add in the Phillies, who are always at the top, and you are still talking about ONE World Series championship since 2010 for all those teams COMBINED.

So I'm sure Chaim isn't thinking, if we only spend MORE, we'll have it. I think he's looking to spend SMARTER, not just MORE. The Astros had the 11th highest payroll this season. Atlanta was at #13 last season. The Nationals were at #7 in 2019. Houston in 2017 was #18 in payroll. In 2016 the Cubs were #14. In 2015 the Royals were #15. In 2014 the Giants were #7.

I mean, pretty clearly you don't have to be a top spender to win the World Series. So I want Bloom to spend SMART, not just to spend MORE. This past year he didn't spend smart. It happens. I hope he's spending smarter this year than last year. We shall see.
 

Light-Tower-Power

ask me about My Pillow
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2013
16,407
Nashua, NH
Mid-30s millenial. Baseball post-2010 feels different, I think it's just competing with too many other compelling entertainment choices now for me to tune into it much. I catch baseball games in bars when they're on but I generally can't be damned to turn on the TV and watch the Sox vs doing something else like playing video games. I don't think this is FSG fault, legitimately the product of baseball itself, is boring compared to the other options that are available now. I stopped caring about the stats and the makeup of the team a long time ago too.

So yea, watch in bars, watch playoffs. If the Sox are in the playoffs I watch most of the games. Non-Sox playoff games I tune in for late ALCS and World Series games.
Late 20s millennial and my attitude toward the team/sport is almost exactly the same as yours. Was basically a superfan from childhood until my early 20s, but my enthusiasm for the team and baseball itself has waned significantly over the last five or so years. I'll still watch the postseason when the Sox are involved, and I found last October to be quite entertaining, but my odds of turning on a weekday game in June at this point are pretty much zero. The glacial pace and three true outcomes nature of the sport have almost completely turned me off, and NESN's shittastic broadcast booth post-Orsillo was more or less the nail in the coffin. I'll give it another go this spring hoping the pitch clock and shift ban help with those first two items, but there's little hope in improving the last.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
6,702
So the Sox now have just one borderline “elite” talent in Devers (and, in theory one pitcher in Sale). They lost one in JDM - but he no longer is even borderline elite. The two questions I have is 1- is X closer to JDM going forward? If no, then it’s a great decision to not bring him back.
2- certain players just are determined to test FA no matter what. The Sox recently haven’t been able to draft the types that may want to sign long term deals, unlike Atlanta and Houston. Why? I suspect it’s partially the location and weather, the other being the culture of Sox media and fandom. I still think X targeted age 30 to hit FA as the ideal time to get the most money…. So how do you find players that want to stick long term with a team? It’s not just money.
 
Feb 26, 2002
6,708
Citifield - Queens, NY
I think he's trying to put a competitive team on the field now while building a developmental machine that will enable the team to be good year-in and year-out with a pipeline of young, cost-controlled talent. Kind of like what the Braves and Astros have done.
Do you know how many franchises in MLB are trying to do that year-in and year-out? Even franchises like the Pirates, the Tigers, the Rays and more...who consistently draft at the top each season experience the challenges of 'building a development machine'.

For the obvious reasons, it's really effin' hard to do it in baseball. And the only reason those teams (and yes - even the Braves and Astros) do it - is because they lack the economic advantages that the Boston Red Sox have.

You keep mentioning in this thread the importance of 'cost-controlled talent' and 'value' and (indirectly) the desire to be judicious with resources; why? There's no salary cap in baseball (!!!) and this ain't Kansas City or Oakland or Tampa.

And despite attempts to be a contrarian; there's a direct correlation to spending money and making the playoffs.

If Chaim wants his shoulders rubbed for the most 'efficient wins' relative to his team salary --- then Boston isn't the place for him (and this ownership group).

This isn't a private equity firm in Cleveland, Ohio where you're measured by cash flow and IRR or NPV...for some distressed consumer goods manufacturer that was acquired in a leveraged environment.

This is a baseball franchise in Boston, Massachusetts. One of the iconic sports organizations in the history of American Sports. Either engage in the economic environment that is required to win --- and win consistently --- or move on.
 

CarolinaBeerGuy

Don't know him from Adam
SoSH Member
Mar 14, 2006
10,293
Kernersville, NC
I think I'll always be interested. This thread is depressing in many ways, but I get it. That said, I'm cautiously optimistic about the future and can't wait for spring to roll around again. I'll keep watching 100+ games and if the Sox aren't competitive in late summer, I'll find another game to watch at night. I just love baseball and it's part of my nightly routine once the wife and kid are in bed. I don't see that changing anytime soon.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,257
Do you know how many franchises in MLB are trying to do that year-in and year-out? Even franchises like the Pirates, the Tigers, the Rays and more...who consistently draft at the top each season experience the challenges of 'building a development machine'.

For the obvious reasons, it's really effin' hard to do it in baseball. And the only reason those teams (and yes - even the Braves and Astros) do it - is because they lack the economic advantages that the Boston Red Sox have.

You keep mentioning in this thread the importance of 'cost-controlled talent' and 'value' and (indirectly) the desire to be judicious with resources; why? There's no salary cap in baseball (!!!) and this ain't Kansas City or Oakland or Tampa.

And despite attempts to be a contrarian; there's a direct correlation to spending money and making the playoffs.

If Chaim wants his shoulders rubbed for the most 'efficient wins' relative to his team salary --- then Boston isn't the place for him (and this ownership group).

This isn't a private equity firm in Cleveland, Ohio where you're measured by cash flow and IRR or NPV...for some distressed consumer goods manufacturer that was acquired in a leveraged environment.

This is a baseball franchise in Boston, Massachusetts. One of the iconic sports organizations in the history of American Sports. Either engage in the economic environment that is required to win --- and win consistently --- or move on.
Ok, some questions/comments for you then.

1. Yes it's hard, but all the great teams - including the Dodgers - have as their foundation a tremendous farm system that consistently pumps in new, cheap talent. That's how you win long-term, and that's what Chaim is trying to build. How do YOU think the Sox should build a consistently winning organization?

2. I'm not being contrarian to point out the fact that most of the recent teams to win it all were NOT in the top tier of payroll spending. They just weren't. Now, you are, of course, right in that if you consistently spend a lot of money (assuming you make halfway decent decisions), you should typically field better teams, year-in and year-out. But of course, the Sox DO spend money - and lots of it. They were #6 in payroll last year at nearly $200 million. It's not like they are the Marlins here.

3. This "iconic sports organization" under this ownership group (and make no mistake, it's the OWNERS who tell Chaim how much money he can spend) has, since 2002 when they took over, won FOUR World Series championships, five division titles (including three in a row for the first time ever from 2016-2018), been to the playoffs 11 times, went to the ALCS 7 times, and won 90+ games 12 times. I mean....they're winning consistently, and they've won it ALL more times than anyone else since they took over. What other organization since Henry et al took over the team would you rather have had?

4. How much money do you think the Red Sox ought to be spending year-in and year-out? Serious question. The luxury tax, though not a salary cap, is a real thing that virtually every team pays attention to and takes into account. Everyone - including the Dodgers - does a luxury tax reset at some point. The Sox just did it. How much money should they be spending? Be specific; you can't just say "more".
 

Bob002

New Member
Dec 3, 2022
2
I'm interested in the change to a younger, hopefully more athletic, hungry and aggressive team on the field over the next few years. I was disturbed over the last couple of seasons by what I perceived as disinterested play and the lack of attention to fundamentals by the core veterans. At least with younger players I can be optimistic about improvement. Although it cannot be entirely eliminated, I really dislike the amount of financial resources over the last decade that has been paid to older, injured players who got big contracts later in their careers and to players that had to be jettisoned to other clubs.
 

Coachster

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2009
9,068
New Hampshire
I've been a baseball fan my whole life. I'm a transplant to this coast, so although growing up I knew some stuff about the team, I wasn't a true Sox guy till I was here a couple of years. ('86 has a totally different meaning to me, because if you grew up a California Angels fan, the Hendu HR off of Donny Moore in game 5 was about the most heartbreaking thing ever.)

I have some doubts about the direction management is taking (and when I do watch, it'll be with the sound off because I dislike Massaroti that much....), but I have to say I'm really curious to see what they can manage to do to salvage this season. It's no fun watching a last-place team, and it appears that's what we'll be, but the moves Bloom makes between now and April will probably rope me in for a while.
 

cornwalls@6

Less observant than others
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
6,356
from the wilds of western ma
Late 50's, I voted category #2, but there wasn't an option that exactly fits where I am. I still "watch", in the sense that the game is on most days(at least in the first half the season), but it's much more background/a stop on channel surfing than it was from 99-2018 for me. Still catch 4-5 games a year@ Fenway, but that's down from 10-15 a few years ago. Will likely resume taking a road trip to watch them after covid disrupted that for the last three seasons. But, my overall interest has waned some, due mainly to the length, pace, and style of play(as @Light-Tower-Power pointed out, hoping the rule changes for 2023 help with that, to some degree). Announcers, though I miss Rem, and will definitely miss Eck, generally don't mean that much to me in any sport. If the product on the field is compelling, I'm watching. As far as the Sox, after decades of watching religiously, regardless of the standings, they need to be competitive/in the hunt now for me to keep watching every night, all season. In 2021, I was with them until the end. Last year, I was effectively through tuning in by the middle of august. Though I did continue to follow them here, and reading elsewhere. Some of this was inevitable after wining 4 titles since 2004. The obsession just couldn't sustain itself at that level for me after the holy grail had been reached multiple times.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
13,013
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Ok, some questions/comments for you then.

1. Yes it's hard, but all the great teams - including the Dodgers - have as their foundation a tremendous farm system that consistently pumps in new, cheap talent. That's how you win long-term, and that's what Chaim is trying to build. How do YOU think the Sox should build a consistently winning organization?

2. I'm not being contrarian to point out the fact that most of the recent teams to win it all were NOT in the top tier of payroll spending. They just weren't. Now, you are, of course, right in that if you consistently spend a lot of money (assuming you make halfway decent decisions), you should typically field better teams, year-in and year-out. But of course, the Sox DO spend money - and lots of it. They were #6 in payroll last year at nearly $200 million. It's not like they are the Marlins here.

3. This "iconic sports organization" under this ownership group (and make no mistake, it's the OWNERS who tell Chaim how much money he can spend) has, since 2002 when they took over, won FOUR World Series championships, five division titles (including three in a row for the first time ever from 2016-2018), been to the playoffs 11 times, went to the ALCS 7 times, and won 90+ games 12 times. I mean....they're winning consistently, and they've won it ALL more times than anyone else since they took over. What other organization since Henry et al took over the team would you rather have had?

4. How much money do you think the Red Sox ought to be spending year-in and year-out? Serious question. The luxury tax, though not a salary cap, is a real thing that virtually every team pays attention to and takes into account. Everyone - including the Dodgers - does a luxury tax reset at some point. The Sox just did it. How much money should they be spending? Be specific; you can't just say "more".
How would re-signing Xander in any way negatively impact their farm system? If that was the main concern, right after you came at him with the laughable 4/90 offer and he was stunned, just deal him for prospects at the deadline.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,257
How would re-signing Xander in any way negatively impact their farm system? If that was the main concern, right after you came at him with the laughable 4/90 offer and he was stunned, just deal him for prospects at the deadline.
I didn't say it would. I really wish they had re-signed Xander. Can you at least admit that you really don't know how it all went down? (none of us do, of course; we are all guessing) You made some assumptions there that may - or may not - be true.

As for not dealing him; I think (again, guessing) that Chaim thought the Sox still had a shot at the playoffs (and as Philly showed, if you get there, anything can happen), and dealing Xander would have been waving the white flag, and he didn't want to do that. Plus, keeping him meant they at least could continue to negotiate with him before anyone else got in the game. Now that didn't work out obviously. But there were good reasons to keep him.
 
Aug 17, 2022
32
Do you think they would sign an age 29 Manny Ramirez now? Not likely. Or sign a 37 year old Curt Schilling now? Not likely either. Deeper pockets required. Sell the team. Meanwhile all your favorite stars can be seen on the MLB package playing for other teams. Would be nice if they can put someone who actually played the game in the radio booth for us poor folks.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,676
So the Sox now have just one borderline “elite” talent in Devers (and, in theory one pitcher in Sale). They lost one in JDM - but he no longer is even borderline elite. The two questions I have is 1- is X closer to JDM going forward? If no, then it’s a great decision to not bring him back.
2- certain players just are determined to test FA no matter what. The Sox recently haven’t been able to draft the types that may want to sign long term deals, unlike Atlanta and Houston. Why? I suspect it’s partially the location and weather, the other being the culture of Sox media and fandom. I still think X targeted age 30 to hit FA as the ideal time to get the most money…. So how do you find players that want to stick long term with a team? It’s not just money.
I think X is going to age similarly to Jeter and their career numbers aren't too far off. Jeter had OPS+ of 120 through age 30 and Bogaerts is at 117. Both guys saw declining power but maintained good contact. Jeter had a very productive (on offense at least) 30s. Clearly, nobody wanted Xander for 11 years because that's nuts but having him for the next 7-8 years likely would have been a good thing for this organization, especially when it might contribute to the departure of an even better player, Devers.
 

Farty Barrett

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2012
49
Thanks for checking in on all of us Tom. You’re reading each response right? Classic.

I’m still all in on the Red Sox, Tom.
Favorite team. Favorite sport.

My kid misses Mookie and is awfully sad to learn Xander is gone. She also wished Strahm was coming back. He was the closest to a baseball playing poodle mix she’s ever seen. But she said “now we get to root for them on other teams when the Red Sox get eliminated” and her optimistic view makes sense and is pretty healthy.

She’s still excited to watch baseball with me this summer. Just like I loved watching with my dad. Be happy for these players who entertain us. Wish them well. And if/when the home team’s season wraps up too early, we have these former Sox to root for.

I will be pissed if they cut Chaim loose too early. This era of the team may not pan out, but it would be worse to not let the plan run it’s course. We have exciting prospects. What a crop.

The team definitely needs to improve the broadcast though. Tom Werner was a TV man. So maybe there’s a change of the tides coming in the booth too. He has to know this current team is lacking

Tom, you should be in the booth.
I’m serious.
 

Isles

New Member
Aug 31, 2021
7
I've done a *great* job of raising a young Sox fan for the past decade. Kid can rattle off 2018 highlights like any of you. Knows the ballpark real well. Can keep score. Has been to a heap of parks. Woke up at weird hours to watch Taiwan baseball in 2020. Misses Mookie like crazy.

The last bunch of games we went to were just abysmal. Xander was a last straw and Devers is a forgone conclusion to leave.

Enthusiasm for this round of laundry is a tough sell. Looking forward to a summer of hiking up north. 50, 2, and 11 should have been the next numbers in right field.
 
Feb 26, 2002
6,708
Citifield - Queens, NY
Ok, some questions/comments for you then.

1. Yes it's hard, but all the great teams - including the Dodgers - have as their foundation a tremendous farm system that consistently pumps in new, cheap talent. That's how you win long-term, and that's what Chaim is trying to build. How do YOU think the Sox should build a consistently winning organization?

2. I'm not being contrarian to point out the fact that most of the recent teams to win it all were NOT in the top tier of payroll spending. They just weren't. Now, you are, of course, right in that if you consistently spend a lot of money (assuming you make halfway decent decisions), you should typically field better teams, year-in and year-out. But of course, the Sox DO spend money - and lots of it. They were #6 in payroll last year at nearly $200 million. It's not like they are the Marlins here.

3. This "iconic sports organization" under this ownership group (and make no mistake, it's the OWNERS who tell Chaim how much money he can spend) has, since 2002 when they took over, won FOUR World Series championships, five division titles (including three in a row for the first time ever from 2016-2018), been to the playoffs 11 times, went to the ALCS 7 times, and won 90+ games 12 times. I mean....they're winning consistently, and they've won it ALL more times than anyone else since they took over. What other organization since Henry et al took over the team would you rather have had?

4. How much money do you think the Red Sox ought to be spending year-in and year-out? Serious question. The luxury tax, though not a salary cap, is a real thing that virtually every team pays attention to and takes into account. Everyone - including the Dodgers - does a luxury tax reset at some point. The Sox just did it. How much money should they be spending? Be specific; you can't just say "more".
Ok, some questions/comments for you then.

1. Yes it's hard, but all the great teams - including the Dodgers - have as their foundation a tremendous farm system that consistently pumps in new, cheap talent. That's how you win long-term, and that's what Chaim is trying to build. How do YOU think the Sox should build a consistently winning organization?


Well obviously, a solid farm system is the pre-requisite for success. No one is saying that’s not part of the ingredients. But locking-up that home-grown talent – when you make the assessment that they are an elite talent - is as equally important. And it’s equally as important for intangible reasons as well (disappointment for the fandom upon the departures of those homegrown stars). And I would argue that “both” the ‘development machine’ and the retention of homegrown stars could be / should be part of the entire repertoire – given our resources. You’re alluding to an environment where it’s one or the other.

2. I'm not being contrarian to point out the fact that most of the recent teams to win it all were NOT in the top tier of payroll spending. They just weren't. Now, you are, of course, right in that if you consistently spend a lot of money (assuming you make halfway decent decisions), you should typically field better teams, year-in and year-out. But of course, the Sox DO spend money - and lots of it. They were #6 in payroll last year at nearly $200 million. It's not like they are the Marlins here.

They were #6 in payroll last year with a lot of money spent during the Dombrowski era (Xander, JDM, Eovaldi, Sale etc.)

3. This "iconic sports organization" under this ownership group (and make no mistake, it's the OWNERS who tell Chaim how much money he can spend) has, since 2002 when they took over, won FOUR World Series championships, five division titles (including three in a row for the first time ever from 2016-2018), been to the playoffs 11 times, went to the ALCS 7 times, and won 90+ games 12 times. I mean....they're winning consistently, and they've won it ALL more times than anyone else since they took over. What other organization since Henry et al took over the team would you rather have had?

I appreciate the results of this ownership group. By and large, they’ve been committed to winning. The ’04 roster (the match that lit the flame) was solidly crafted via Dan Duquette with large / industry changing contracts – “correctly” given to Manny and Pedro. Both were elite levels of talent that were obviously developed by other organizations.

4. How much money do you think the Red Sox ought to be spending year-in and year-out? Serious question. The luxury tax, though not a salary cap, is a real thing that virtually every team pays attention to and takes into account. Everyone - including the Dodgers - does a luxury tax reset at some point. The Sox just did it. How much money should they be spending? Be specific; you can't just say "more".

Impossible question to answer on a message board in a definitive way. Some franchises (like the Mets or Padres) will ignore it --- because an attempt at ‘winning baseball’ is their main, short-term objective. The Red Sox (JHG) --- by way of the circumstantial evidence --- appear to be, or are charged with utilizing, being economical with this mature asset to assist in scaling-up some of the other assets in their portfolio (i.e. Pittsburgh Penguins, soccer interests, etc.). If that is true --- then it’s time for the ownership to move-on and allow a group that is willing to spend / overspend in order to win.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
25,611
Unreal America
1. Yes it's hard, but all the great teams - including the Dodgers - have as their foundation a tremendous farm system that consistently pumps in new, cheap talent. That's how you win long-term, and that's what Chaim is trying to build. How do YOU think the Sox should build a consistently winning organization?
A thought on this... the 2018 Sox were largely built this way, offensively. They had a strong, homegrown core (Mookie, Xander, Devers, Benintendi, Bradley, Vazquez) and a key FA (Martinez). What's disorienting to me is that 4 years later most of that core is playing for other teams, and we're still years away from their homegrown replacements ascending to the major league club.

I get that DD left the cupboard bare. But the return on jettisoning that 2018 core has been pretty bad. I'm confused as to why in our lust for a 'development machine' we didn't acquire young talent that was nearly MLB ready? And if the answer is that a lot of prospects don't work out, then that's all the more reason to retain at least some of your young players until said prospects are actually ready to play.

I feel like ownership had a choice to build a bridge from the aftermath of the DD era to this hoped for new era of a development pipeline: either take the financial hit and pay to retain talent, and likely exceed the luxury tax; or jettison players, incur the wrath of fans, and lose more than you'd like for several years. They clearly chose the latter. It's a frustrating outcome for fans.
 

Skiponzo

Member
SoSH Member
Just as interested as any year and I've been an ardent fan since the late 70's. I'm guessing that the level of interest has a lot to do with where people are in their "real" lives. When my kids were little (19/16 now) it was hard to break out enough time to watch a lot....I still did but not like I can now. I'll watch some of around 155-160 games. Baseball is a part of life for my family (16 y/o plays HS ball) and I GREATLY enjoy the daily drumbeat of the game. It's just part of who I am.
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
21,094
Row 14
Thanks for checking in on all of us Tom. You’re reading each response right? Classic.
Actually I am. I live in New York so I a bit removed from the Sox, and honestly outside someone noticing me wearing a Red Sox hat, I have stopped talking about the Red Sox. I am curious if it was just me or everyone else, and I am seeing it be more like I feel the same as other people.

I think the thing that sticks with me right now is how terrible a team they have right now for $150 million dollars.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
I'm very interested. I get the disappointment over Bogaerts leaving and many questioning the previous off season, but if the further development of Casas, Houck, Whitlock and Bello leave you uninterested, if the arrival of Yoshida doesn't interest you and you have no interest in seeing if there is anything to be salvaged from Sale and Paxton then I question you fandom. Be disappointed, be angry if that's you thing, but for those who have no interest or are "done" with the team...adios.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
43,804
AZ
I would say that if 2004 and 2018 are 100 percent I am somewhere around 68 percent interested.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
36,192
Deep inside Muppet Labs
I had already resolved to myself that X was leaving so I'm not less interested just because he's gone, but that doesn't mean my interest is particularly high or anything. 2022 was a depressing, disastrous season and they were out of the running to be interesting by April 30, so they didn't make much of an impact.

I'm curious about Yoshida. I like that they've shored up the bullpen. The offense looks horrible at the present time, though. Not sure if that will change. Right now I'm very "meh" on the team.

If they're horrible against divisional opponents yet again and it begins early, I'll likely check out early as well. The Bruins are a wagon, as are the Celtics. Next spring will be filled with other sports opps to watch if the Sox fall flat on their faces again.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,257
A thought on this... the 2018 Sox were largely built this way, offensively. They had a strong, homegrown core (Mookie, Xander, Devers, Benintendi, Bradley, Vazquez) and a key FA (Martinez). What's disorienting to me is that 4 years later most of that core is playing for other teams, and we're still years away from their homegrown replacements ascending to the major league club.

I get that DD left the cupboard bare. But the return on jettisoning that 2018 core has been pretty bad. I'm confused as to why in our lust for a 'development machine' we didn't acquire young talent that was nearly MLB ready? And if the answer is that a lot of prospects don't work out, then that's all the more reason to retain at least some of your young players until said prospects are actually ready to play.

I feel like ownership had a choice to build a bridge from the aftermath of the DD era to this hoped for new era of a development pipeline: either take the financial hit and pay to retain talent, and likely exceed the luxury tax; or jettison players, incur the wrath of fans, and lose more than you'd like for several years. They clearly chose the latter. It's a frustrating outcome for fans.
Well yeah, DD emptied the cupboard, and it takes time to restock it. Chaim's been doing that, and yes he knows a lot don't work out - that's why you need a ton of them, figuring that SOME will hit.

But yes, I agree - none of us likes being a bad MLB team, even if we do see what Chaim is trying to do.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
11,063
Btw, if there’s anyone in Sox management who’s reading this, the fact that folks on *this board* are saying this should terrify you.

As should the fact that the core group of posters still has many of the same names as when I joined in my 30’s, 20 years ago, and while we have some excellent younger posters they are fewer. The kids aren’t picking up what you’re laying down.

Selling the Red Sox in Boston should be the easiest gig since selling booze to sailors on shore leave and you guys are blowing it.
Im going to quote this one (because it’s shorter) but this post and @Philip Jeff Frye both nailed what I’ve been thinking.

I live in Tampa but I am close with a good amount of people who are New England transplants/New England sports fans. I wouldn’t classify any of them as “rabid” but they all care….literally all of them have lost interest in the Sox and have no Idea what Bloom is trying to accomplish.

@Philip Jeff Frye articulated a point I have been thinking about for a while. The “Rays Strategy” is clearly smart but it basically forces the fanbase to become fair weather fans. There’s no continuity, no one the fans feel like they can grow with or develop a connection to…and if there appears to be one, you can’t fully invest in that player because they’re probably going to leave when they get expensive. So if the team isn’t doing well then what the hell is the point of even tuning in? Especially when it’s a random game in the middle of the season?

it’s completely inexcusable that the Red Sox ownership/FO has allowed us to have these types of conversations
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
969
I find it impossible not to be interested. The Red Sox are a constant in my life. I almost never go to Fenway these days and I find it hard to make time to sit in front of the TV to watch a full game, but the Red Sox on the radio is the soundtrack to my spring and summer. It will be a hard day for me when Castiglione retires.

I also love the hot stove, including this board. It gets me through the winter.

It would interesting to see how many of those expressing disinterest became fans near/after 2004. I suspect that for those of us who lived and breathed the Red Sox for the decades prior, not being interested is just not an option.
 

Farty Barrett

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2012
49
Actually I am. I live in New York so I a bit removed from the Sox, and honestly outside someone noticing me wearing a Red Sox hat, I have stopped talking about the Red Sox. I am curious if it was just me or everyone else, and I am seeing it be more like I feel the same as other people.

I think the thing that sticks with me right now is how terrible a team they have right now for $150 million dollars.
I’d say being in NY certainly hurts. Yesterday I had four people bring up Bogaerts to me at work. I also have two brothers that are fans and we talk daily about this team.

TBH I am not sure Bogaerts, despite the solid play, is the kind of star that would ignite interest. Especially over the next 6-11 years.

I was in NYC 2003-2009. There was a thirsty group of fans at Riviera and Prof Thoms. That may have been the most exciting the team could ever possibly be for fans. But 2018 was a party!

I’d imagine there’ll always be ebbs and flows with relevancy. A new star can do that for the Sox. I know the Braves fans in New England are still riding high. As hurt as they were losing Freeman, they’ve locked up so many fun players they will retain interest for a while.

Let me ask, if the Sox surprise and sign someone like Juan Soto in the near future, would you start getting more excited? Or do you think you’re just past it all?
I remember caring very little when Aaron Sele started opening day. But Duquette then went out and brought in Pedro and Manny and the world has ever been the same.

Are we one or two players away from this? When we were little we never thought we’d win championships, but Clemens and Burks and the Gator were enough.
I get sad hearing fans lose interest. I’ve lurked SOSH for 20 years because I love the wisdom and passion… and whatever the game threads bring. As someone who isn’t into other sports I really hope you all hang in there.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
25,611
Unreal America
Well yeah, DD emptied the cupboard, and it takes time to restock it. Chaim's been doing that, and yes he knows a lot don't work out - that's why you need a ton of them, figuring that SOME will hit.

But yes, I agree - none of us likes being a bad MLB team, even if we do see what Chaim is trying to do.
I see it, kinda, but I'm not sure it's working. And that troubles me. Last year's young batters were uniformly lousy: Dalbec, Durran, Cordero, Downs, Wong. Cassas showed promise with his power and plate patience.

Bello showed some promise after a very rocky start. But I was baffled at our usage of guys like Houck and Whitlock. Part of the development pipeline should be establishing clear roles for our young pitchers, and we sure didn't do that.

I don't know, I'm just kind of down on things because it's not like Chaim crushed the trades where we dumped the old core. We're about to be 5 seasons removed from 2018 and most of the prospects people here seem excited about are still years away.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,676
I find it impossible not to be interested. The Red Sox are a constant in my life. I almost never go to Fenway these days and I find it hard to make time to sit in front of the TV to watch a full game, but the Red Sox on the radio is the soundtrack to my spring and summer. It will be a hard day for me when Castiglione retires.

I also love the hot stove, including this board. It gets me through the winter.

It would interesting to see how many of those expressing disinterest became fans near/after 2004. I suspect that for those of us who lived and breathed the Red Sox for the decades prior, not being interested is just not an option.
There are literally multiple examples in this thread alone of longtime former "diehard" fans losing interest. Since SoSH isn't a representative sample of the broader Red Sox fan base, this should concern the ownership group quite a bit.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
969
There are literally multiple examples in this thread alone of longtime former "diehard" fans losing interest. Since SoSH isn't a representative sample of the broader Red Sox fan base, this should concern the ownership group quite a bit.
I think there is a difference between "losing interest" and being frustrated with the current status of the team. Is there anyone on this thread who would not tune in next September if the Sox are in the playoff hunt?
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,802
Hingham, MA
I think there is a difference between "losing interest" and being frustrated with the current status of the team. Is there anyone on this thread who would not tune in next September if the Sox are in the playoff hunt?
To me losing interest means the ability to tune out / not care when things aren’t going well. Kind of like being a fair weather fan, with the slight difference that I’ll still pay attention at a macro level.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
25,611
Unreal America
I think there is a difference between "losing interest" and being frustrated with the current status of the team. Is there anyone on this thread who would not tune in next September if the Sox are in the playoff hunt?
In this thread, no.

If “playoff hunt” means scuffling along a little over .500 and trying for the 3rd wild card? Then a lot of the broader fan base won’t be tuning in.
 

Teachdad46

New Member
Oct 14, 2011
128
Vermont
It's a marriage for me. I committed and I'm not going to cheat or leave.
That said, it's depressing how far and how fast they've fallen. Every time I ponder X wearing Padres' brown I wince. It's sad.
I've defended Bloom's approach for the entire time he's been here but the evidence is piling up that maybe he's indefensible. Regardless of whether or not having X on the team for the next six years would have been a good baseball move, the way it was handled was embarrassing. He was their Number One Priority? Seriously? That's either a lie or the man is self-delusional.
At 3AM on one of my tosses and turns I had an epiphany and suddenly it all made sense.
Bloom is still on TB's payroll, and the rest of the AL East is helping to fund it.