One of two choices: Blow it up or build it back up?

Blow it up or build it back up?

  • Blow it up -- rip that Band-Aid off and I'll have awesome cheap seats in Sept!

    Votes: 111 37.6%
  • Build it back up -- we're closer than you think, these are but flesh wounds!

    Votes: 184 62.4%

  • Total voters
    295

DiamondLou

New Member
Dec 12, 2022
4
KABOOM!

Trade Devers. Just bottom out. No more half measures. Rip off the band aid and do it already.

This offseason has been bad. The only thing that hasn’t made it a complete disaster is that the bullpen looks fixed. The outfield power is still weak, the infield has a huge hole, no DH still, catcher is meh and the starters are held together with spit and gum.

It’s going to be a long year, my dudes.
It's amazing how some fans don't agree with your assessment. I would add that management could have at least made this team respectable. Rodon, swing a trade for another starter, DH, Swanson and power hitting outfielder. Good to go. If we tank, I can at least say they tried.
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,711
Over the past 6 seasons, Rodon has pitched about 25 fewer innings than Sale. You really wanted to sign up for more of that?
 

Daniel_Son

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2021
1,683
San Diego
It's not that hard to see a scenario where things break right and the Sox are competitive:
  • Sale comes back and gives us 120-140ish innings of #2-quality starting pitching.
  • Eovaldi comes back and does the same.
  • Verdugo continues to play like he did in the 2nd half of last year.
  • Yoshida breaks out and becomes the high-OBP leadoff hitter we needed last year.
  • Kiké continues to provide excellent defense in center.
  • Story/Arroyo/Valdez provide adequate defense up the middle.
  • Wong/McGuire are sufficient behind the dish and McGuire provides some flare at the bottom of the lineup.
  • Bloom's bullpen additions provide some lock-down coverage.
  • Bello takes a step forward and becomes a consistent #2/3 starter.
  • Casas continues to develop into a middle-of-the-order threat and gives Devers and Story some coverage.
All of that happening is unlikely, but with a little luck, some timely development, and an easier schedule, I can totally see the Sox winning 85 games and fighting for a wild card.
 

soxin6

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
7,028
Huntington Beach, CA
It's not that hard to see a scenario where things break right and the Sox are competitive:
  • Sale comes back and gives us 120-140ish innings of #2-quality starting pitching.
  • Eovaldi comes back and does the same.
  • Verdugo continues to play like he did in the 2nd half of last year.
  • Yoshida breaks out and becomes the high-OBP leadoff hitter we needed last year.
  • Kiké continues to provide excellent defense in center.
  • Story/Arroyo/Valdez provide adequate defense up the middle.
  • Wong/McGuire are sufficient behind the dish and McGuire provides some flare at the bottom of the lineup.
  • Bloom's bullpen additions provide some lock-down coverage.
  • Bello takes a step forward and becomes a consistent #2/3 starter.
  • Casas continues to develop into a middle-of-the-order threat and gives Devers and Story some coverage.
All of that happening is unlikely, but with a little luck, some timely development, and an easier schedule, I can totally see the Sox winning 85 games and fighting for a wild card.
it is more likely that the Sox finish in last again than make the playoffs. Toronto, Baltimore, and the Yankees are all better teams on paper and you never know what the Rays will accomplish. This has been a disappointing off season. People will say that it isn’t over, but the Sox didn’t make any game changing moves.
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,711
I feel confident about Kike's defense, but we really need his bat to look more like last year than this year.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,083
It's not that hard to see a scenario where things break right and the Sox are competitive:
  • Sale comes back and gives us 120-140ish innings of #2-quality starting pitching.
  • Eovaldi comes back and does the same.
  • Verdugo continues to play like he did in the 2nd half of last year.
  • Yoshida breaks out and becomes the high-OBP leadoff hitter we needed last year.
  • Kiké continues to provide excellent defense in center.
  • Story/Arroyo/Valdez provide adequate defense up the middle.
  • Wong/McGuire are sufficient behind the dish and McGuire provides some flare at the bottom of the lineup.
  • Bloom's bullpen additions provide some lock-down coverage.
  • Bello takes a step forward and becomes a consistent #2/3 starter.
  • Casas continues to develop into a middle-of-the-order threat and gives Devers and Story some coverage.
All of that happening is unlikely, but with a little luck, some timely development, and an easier schedule, I can totally see the Sox winning 85 games and fighting for a wild card.
So, with a little luck and some timely development, we might be able to win 85 games and fight for a wild card spot?

…yay?
 

Ganthem

a ray of sunshine
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2022
914
Do people realize it is not even Hanukah yet? There is still a long way to go.
 

Daniel_Son

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2021
1,683
San Diego
So, with a little luck and some timely development, we might be able to win 85 games and fight for a wild card spot?

…yay?
Well they're probably not winning the division, no. All I'm saying is that there's a chance this team is going to be playing competitive ball in September, which is a far cry from where most of the board is at right now.
 

bsan34

New Member
Jul 31, 2006
338
C'ville, VA / Hingham, MA
The problem with blowing it up is that is dependent on Bloom actually getting resources for the pieces he unloads. After his Joe Thornton esque Mookie return, why on earth should he be trusted to get anything for Devers or any other pieces on the roster?
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,829
Unreal America
It's not that hard to see a scenario where things break right and the Sox are competitive:
  • Sale comes back and gives us 120-140ish innings of #2-quality starting pitching.
  • Eovaldi comes back and does the same.
  • Verdugo continues to play like he did in the 2nd half of last year.
  • Yoshida breaks out and becomes the high-OBP leadoff hitter we needed last year.
  • Kiké continues to provide excellent defense in center.
  • Story/Arroyo/Valdez provide adequate defense up the middle.
  • Wong/McGuire are sufficient behind the dish and McGuire provides some flare at the bottom of the lineup.
  • Bloom's bullpen additions provide some lock-down coverage.
  • Bello takes a step forward and becomes a consistent #2/3 starter.
  • Casas continues to develop into a middle-of-the-order threat and gives Devers and Story some coverage.
All of that happening is unlikely, but with a little luck, some timely development, and an easier schedule, I can totally see the Sox winning 85 games and fighting for a wild card.
I agree with this. And it’s really a similar hope for all but the handful of the worst teams in MLB.

Honestly the easier schedule may be our best hope, given how historically putrid we were vs. the AL East last year.
 

Philip Jeff Frye

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2001
10,229
It's not that hard to see a scenario where things break right and the Sox are competitive:
  • Sale comes back and gives us 120-140ish innings of #2-quality starting pitching.
  • Eovaldi comes back and does the same.
  • Verdugo continues to play like he did in the 2nd half of last year.
  • Yoshida breaks out and becomes the high-OBP leadoff hitter we needed last year.
  • Kiké continues to provide excellent defense in center.
  • Story/Arroyo/Valdez provide adequate defense up the middle.
  • Wong/McGuire are sufficient behind the dish and McGuire provides some flare at the bottom of the lineup.
  • Bloom's bullpen additions provide some lock-down coverage.
  • Bello takes a step forward and becomes a consistent #2/3 starter.
  • Casas continues to develop into a middle-of-the-order threat and gives Devers and Story some coverage.
All of that happening is unlikely, but with a little luck, some timely development, and an easier schedule, I can totally see the Sox winning 85 games and fighting for a wild card.
So basically, everything goes right, we have no injuries, and we resign a guy that is a free agent in a hot market.

Speaking of Eovaldi, some people cite his 4 year, $68 million contract as something that contributed to Dombrowski's firing. Isn't he likely to get that much or more in this market? Are people good with that?
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,711
In the wake of the Rodon deal, I've been ripping him for having 25 fewer innings pitched than Sale over the last six seasons. Well Eovaldi has 25 fewer than that. Thanks for the good times Nate, but I hope you're someone else's problem next year.
 

Ganthem

a ray of sunshine
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2022
914
So you’re saying that although we expect Chris Sale to only make one start this year that he might actually make it thru eight starts?

It’s a miracle!
Don't forget Paxton. Come spring I feel he will be ready to Pass Over the low expectations of him.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,170
Those relievers were probably signed to flip at the deadline.
Cross posted from the "rumors" thread to not add something in there that isn't a rumor, but I actually think this would a) make sense and b) is something I'd endorse.

With the different rules for slot bonuses, over-signing and the IFA system, it's getting harder and harder for teams to flex their financial muscle WITHOUT incurring massive luxury tax penalties. I don't at all blame FSG for being cognizant of this - even if others are not.

Yes, the farm system is good, but I've said before that from a GM standpoint (I know that's not Bloom's actual title), if your strength is building from the farm, it should look better after three years of letting every prominent player leave the franchise.

So spend money to buy prospects, and the best way to do that is with short term veterans whom you aren't tied to long term that you CAN flip at the deadline. The problem, of course, is that we had that very opportunity to do that last year (Eovaldi, Wacha, Hill, JDM, Strahm) and didn't do that. I think the plan is sound - the execution of that plan has not been.

A forward thinking GM would sign guys like that and move them. The problem is that history has shown that if things break right and this collection of "well, it MIGHT work" is 0-11-1 against their division, but is within a handful of games of the last wild card, this current GM WON'T trade those pieces. We'll let them play out the string, continue to lose, finish in the middle of the pack (so have a worse pick in the draft) AND lose the opportunity for any lottery ticket prospects to add to the system.

That said, I fully admit that I'd rather finish 25 games out of the playoffs, get a higher picker and move whatever isn't part of the "core" for prospects than finish 2 games out, get a worse pick, and watch those pieces leave with nothing to show for it.
 

grepal

New Member
Jul 20, 2005
193
Cross posted from the "rumors" thread to not add something in there that isn't a rumor, but I actually think this would a) make sense and b) is something I'd endorse.

With the different rules for slot bonuses, over-signing and the IFA system, it's getting harder and harder for teams to flex their financial muscle WITHOUT incurring massive luxury tax penalties. I don't at all blame FSG for being cognizant of this - even if others are not.

Yes, the farm system is good, but I've said before that from a GM standpoint (I know that's not Bloom's actual title), if your strength is building from the farm, it should look better after three years of letting every prominent player leave the franchise.

So spend money to buy prospects, and the best way to do that is with short term veterans whom you aren't tied to long term that you CAN flip at the deadline. The problem, of course, is that we had that very opportunity to do that last year (Eovaldi, Wacha, Hill, JDM, Strahm) and didn't do that. I think the plan is sound - the execution of that plan has not been.

A forward thinking GM would sign guys like that and move them. The problem is that history has shown that if things break right and this collection of "well, it MIGHT work" is 0-11-1 against their division, but is within a handful of games of the last wild card, this current GM WON'T trade those pieces. We'll let them play out the string, continue to lose, finish in the middle of the pack (so have a worse pick in the draft) AND lose the opportunity for any lottery ticket prospects to add to the system.

That said, I fully admit that I'd rather finish 25 games out of the playoffs, get a higher picker and move whatever isn't part of the "core" for prospects than finish 2 games out, get a worse pick, and watch those pieces leave with nothing to show for it.
I can't stomach paying the price of going to games and watching a team with little or no hope of being in the post season. Even if the Sox sign say
Swansby, Eovaldi and another decent starter with durability history are we good enough to compete with Seattle, Toronto, Tampa and Baltimore and/or Chicago for a wild card spot. I am trying to not be angry about the current state of the Sox and how they tore down a really good core of players, and the more I think about it I see the best chance is to throw in the towel for this and probably next year, trade Devers for whoever will give the most money and hope we can trade some other veteran players before the deadline. That being said i would sign Kimbrel so we have the best/most tradeable bullpen help available at the deadline and if we can't be Kings we can be King Makers and at least know out last place finish comes with an upside. Can't afford to repeat last years errors.
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,711
Banking on Kimbrel fetching value at the deadline seems dicey to me, his K rate dropped by a third last year.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,170
I can't stomach paying the price of going to games and watching a team with little or no hope of being in the post season. Even if the Sox sign say
Swansby, Eovaldi and another decent starter with durability history are we good enough to compete with Seattle, Toronto, Tampa and Baltimore and/or Chicago for a wild card spot. I am trying to not be angry about the current state of the Sox and how they tore down a really good core of players, and the more I think about it I see the best chance is to throw in the towel for this and probably next year, trade Devers for whoever will give the most money and hope we can trade some other veteran players before the deadline. That being said i would sign Kimbrel so we have the best/most tradeable bullpen help available at the deadline and if we can't be Kings we can be King Makers and at least know out last place finish comes with an upside. Can't afford to repeat last years errors.
Totally get it. At a certain level, I don't mind watching bad baseball IF it's because you're playing prospects, guys whom are part of your core.

I can't stand watching average baseball players on the wrong side of 30 you brought in "just because" for a year or two; there is nothing being built there. Though I think there is a HUGE difference from watching - lets say C- McGuire, 1b - Casas, 2b - Story, 3b - lame duck Devers, SS - Elvis Andrus, LF - Yoshida, CF - Hernandez, RF - Verdugo, DH - Hosmer, Rotation - Sale, Paxton, Whitlock, Bello, Houck go 78 - 84 as opposed to watching lets say C - McGuire, 1b - Casas, 2b - Story, 3b - Devers (with a shiny new 10yr $300m contract - yes I think he'd take something around Turner money), SS - Swanson, LF - Yoshida, CF - Rafaela, RF - Verdugo, DH - Rowdy Tellez (just picking someone relatively young, with upside, whom could be reasonably acquired), rotation of Whitlock, Bello, Houck, Mata and Prospect X (some trade) go 78 - 84. The results might be the same, the process to get there is not.

To be clear, Devers is young enough that I'd give him literally anything he wants to sign an extension. Literally. If he is so disillusioned by the team around him that he just wants out, I get that too. But you need to figure that out NOW so that if it's the latter (and I would assume it is) you move him. I'd rather go 70-92 with "Brett Baty" as your 3b and Alex Ramirez in the OF down in Greenville than 75-87 with Devers watching him leave next year for nothing. (Which is why I think the Betts move WAS the right call, to be fair to Bloom. He may have targeted the wrong guys, but moving Betts needed to be done then when you couldn't extend him, and it's the right move with Devers now, if you can't extend him either).
 

ElcaballitoMVP

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 19, 2008
3,932
Cross posted from the "rumors" thread to not add something in there that isn't a rumor, but I actually think this would a) make sense and b) is something I'd endorse.

With the different rules for slot bonuses, over-signing and the IFA system, it's getting harder and harder for teams to flex their financial muscle WITHOUT incurring massive luxury tax penalties. I don't at all blame FSG for being cognizant of this - even if others are not.

Yes, the farm system is good, but I've said before that from a GM standpoint (I know that's not Bloom's actual title), if your strength is building from the farm, it should look better after three years of letting every prominent player leave the franchise.

So spend money to buy prospects, and the best way to do that is with short term veterans whom you aren't tied to long term that you CAN flip at the deadline. The problem, of course, is that we had that very opportunity to do that last year (Eovaldi, Wacha, Hill, JDM, Strahm) and didn't do that. I think the plan is sound - the execution of that plan has not been.

A forward thinking GM would sign guys like that and move them. The problem is that history has shown that if things break right and this collection of "well, it MIGHT work" is 0-11-1 against their division, but is within a handful of games of the last wild card, this current GM WON'T trade those pieces. We'll let them play out the string, continue to lose, finish in the middle of the pack (so have a worse pick in the draft) AND lose the opportunity for any lottery ticket prospects to add to the system.

That said, I fully admit that I'd rather finish 25 games out of the playoffs, get a higher picker and move whatever isn't part of the "core" for prospects than finish 2 games out, get a worse pick, and watch those pieces leave with nothing to show for it.
There are a few issues though. One, if you're a free agent and you see the Sox sign guys year after year just to flip them a few months later, are you jumping at the opportunity to sign with them if the money is comparable to other teams who won't do that to you? Two, what kind of return are we really expecting for guys like Jensen and Martin? They need to pitch great and even then they probably aren't netting you a huge return.

Just looking at '22 trades, we've got ATL getting Raisel Iglesias for Jesse Chavez and Tucker Davidson (back of the rotation starter), PHI getting David Robertson for their #26 prospect Ben Brown, Toronto getting Anthony Bass and Zach Pop for prospect Jordan Groshans (now #12 on Miami's prospect list and was struggling before being traded), the Twins got Jorge Lopez for 4 prospects, the best being their #22 prospect Cade Povich and Lopez has another year on his deal, Hader went to SD for their #7 and #28 prospects. I suppose that's what you're hoping for, but neither Martin or Kenley are likely to generate that kind of return.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,170
Guys are looking at Boston as a team that doesn't want to win already; might as well get something for it.

Snide comments aside, if you're taking a one year deal or two year deal, I have to assume you're understanding that being on the move is a real possibility. I think we should sign Dansby Swanson (assuming something like 6/$175m), I wouldn't advocate doing that just to trade him. One / two years of late 30s relievers is different - especially in the context of "Hey, Kenley, we have a chance for you to still get paid your money but go close games for Division Leader X vs pitching in the last game of a 4 game series against the Yankees where we've lost the first three 12-0 and are trying to get some work in this 4th game since we're only down 3-0, interested?"

If I could trade Chris Martin and his $8M AAV for Tucker Davidson right now, I'd do it in a second. I'd be applauding Bloom if he did (or the 2023 version of Tucker Davidson because I know the labor agreement doesn't allow Martin to be traded right now).

Same with Groshans.

Again, there is very little Bloom has done (not done) since November of 2021 that I've agreed with, so I'm trying to at least be positive on what he might be trying to do with guys like Martin and Rodriguez. You can't "buy prospects" from another team, but maybe this is a way to do something similar. Yes, I'm grasping at straws for what I think have been a series of terrible decisions leading to this point.
 

ElcaballitoMVP

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 19, 2008
3,932
Guys are looking at Boston as a team that doesn't want to win already; might as well get something for it.

Snide comments aside, if you're taking a one year deal or two year deal, I have to assume you're understanding that being on the move is a real possibility. I think we should sign Dansby Swanson (assuming something like 6/$175m), I wouldn't advocate doing that just to trade him. One / two years of late 30s relievers is different - especially in the context of "Hey, Kenley, we have a chance for you to still get paid your money but go close games for Division Leader X vs pitching in the last game of a 4 game series against the Yankees where we've lost the first three 12-0 and are trying to get some work in this 4th game since we're only down 3-0, interested?"

If I could trade Chris Martin and his $8M AAV for Tucker Davidson right now, I'd do it in a second. I'd be applauding Bloom if he did (or the 2023 version of Tucker Davidson because I know the labor agreement doesn't allow Martin to be traded right now).

Same with Groshans.

Again, there is very little Bloom has done (not done) since November of 2021 that I've agreed with, so I'm trying to at least be positive on what he might be trying to do with guys like Martin and Rodriguez. You can't "buy prospects" from another team, but maybe this is a way to do something similar. Yes, I'm grasping at straws for what I think have been a series of terrible decisions leading to this point.
Snide comments? Um...okay. I actually think your idea is an interesting one, I just don't think it would net much of a return and you run the risk of having guys like Martin and Jensen avoid Boston in the future if they flip them so quickly (Rodriguez, I can). Of course it's a possibility these guys on short deals can get traded, but if you're a free agent wouldn't you want to sign with a team that is more likely to keep you around? It's not like this is Pittsburgh signing a guy coming off a down year or two and flipping them for prospects if they do well (like Jose Quintana was, for example). These are solid arms coming off good years. Wouldn't they be more likely to look to sign with say, New York or Houston or Philly, where if you're pitching well enough to net a nice prospect they just keep them because they're trying to get to the playoffs?
 

pedro1999mvp

New Member
Dec 9, 2022
46
Do people realize it is not even Hanukah yet? There is still a long way to go.
I do know the date on the calendar. But at this point, unless trades are made and supposedly our top prospects are off the board, there aren't any FAs left that move the needle much. There are complimentary pieces. If we had Bogaerts and Betts still, complimentary pieces would be great. But we are down to just Devers to build around, and at this point, if they aren't willing to meet the market, he might as well be traded while we can still get something for him. The offseason might still be early calendar-wise, but as far as impact players, it is very late.
 

Ganthem

a ray of sunshine
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2022
914
I do know the date on the calendar. But at this point, unless trades are made and supposedly our top prospects are off the board, there aren't any FAs left that move the needle much. There are complimentary pieces. If we had Bogaerts and Betts still, complimentary pieces would be great. But we are down to just Devers to build around, and at this point, if they aren't willing to meet the market, he might as well be traded while we can still get something for him. The offseason might still be early calendar-wise, but as far as impact players, it is very late.
We lost Bogey and that sucks. If the front office adds an Evoldi/Kluber type, trade for a right fielder and see if they can get Justin Turner, then they have a chance of competing for a wildcard. Everybodie's pessimism is totally unwarrented and part of the reason that most threads here have turned into a massive dumpster fire.
 

pedro1999mvp

New Member
Dec 9, 2022
46
We lost Bogey and that sucks. If the front office adds an Evoldi/Kluber type, trade for a right fielder and see if they can get Justin Turner, then they have a chance of competing for a wildcard. Everybodie's pessimism is totally unwarrented and part of the reason that most threads here have turned into a massive dumpster fire.
You are right, there are still moves that can be made. But I also feel like "if everything falls perfectly in place and we catch a few breaks and stay healthy, we MIGHT be able to get to 85 wins and qualify for the final WC spot" shouldn't be the goal of a big market team like the Red Sox.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,083
You are right, there are still moves that can be made. But I also feel like "if everything falls perfectly in place and we catch a few breaks and stay healthy, we MIGHT be able to get to 85 wins and qualify for the final WC spot" shouldn't be the goal of a big market team like the Red Sox.
It shouldn't be - I don't think people are suggesting it's the goal but it is the current reality. The base line for the Boston Red Sox every year, barring something unforeseen, should be competing for a wild card. You have to be pretty bad, or have a disproportionate bad luck, to have our financial resources and not even be close to the final wild card.

This current team, as presently constructed, just isn't likely to be very good. Sure, more moves are coming but odds are they won't be huge impact moves. The talent just isn't there in FA anymore. Trades are always possible but if you trade minor league prospects, you're weakening the "development machine" that we're trying to build. It won't be easy to find impact guys on the trade market either. Chaim clearly doesn't have a great record in that department either.

I certainly hope we have guys outperform current expectations and have some of our injured guys produce more than we thought. But I have zero problem with people being "pessimistic" or skeptical of where we are now. Dismissing those opinions, many of which have been well-communicated, because one doesn't agree with them is just silly. There is plenty of room in these threads for disagreement. In fact, that back-and-forth is what makes this place interesting to read. We all just have to be fair and open-minded and willing to overcome our own blind spots. We all have them.

I've been critical of Chaim, heavily in some cases, but if he starts pulling rabbits out of a hat in trade or finds some FA bargains, I will be first in line to give him the credit he deserves. But, right now, I need to see more. My concerns have nothing to do with his intelligence, work ethic, or any of that stuff. It's just a really hard job, even moreso in a market like Boston.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,170
Guys are looking at Boston as a team that doesn't want to win already; might as well get something for it.

Snide comments aside, if you're taking a one year deal or two year deal, I have to assume you're understanding that being on the move is a real possibility. I think we should sign Dansby Swanson (assuming something like 6/$175m), I wouldn't advocate doing that just to trade him. One / two years of late 30s relievers is different - especially in the context of "Hey, Kenley, we have a chance for you to still get paid your money but go close games for Division Leader X vs pitching in the last game of a 4 game series against the Yankees where we've lost the first three 12-0 and are trying to get some work in this 4th game since we're only down 3-0, interested?"

If I could trade Chris Martin and his $8M AAV for Tucker Davidson right now, I'd do it in a second. I'd be applauding Bloom if he did (or the 2023 version of Tucker Davidson because I know the labor agreement doesn't allow Martin to be traded right now).

Same with Groshans.

Again, there is very little Bloom has done (not done) since November of 2021 that I've agreed with, so I'm trying to at least be positive on what he might be trying to do with guys like Martin and Rodriguez. You can't "buy prospects" from another team, but maybe this is a way to do something similar. Yes, I'm grasping at straws for what I think have been a series of terrible decisions leading to this point.
Snide comments? Um...okay. I actually think your idea is an interesting one, I just don't think it would net much of a return and you run the risk of having guys like Martin and Jensen avoid Boston in the future if they flip them so quickly (Rodriguez, I can). Of course it's a possibility these guys on short deals can get traded, but if you're a free agent wouldn't you want to sign with a team that is more likely to keep you around? It's not like this is Pittsburgh signing a guy coming off a down year or two and flipping them for prospects if they do well (like Jose Quintana was, for example). These are solid arms coming off good years. Wouldn't they be more likely to look to sign with say, New York or Houston or Philly, where if you're pitching well enough to net a nice prospect they just keep them because they're trying to get to the playoffs?
I meant my own comment (bolded above) was a snide remark @ElcaballitoMVP. There is nothing of substance to that line other than cynicism and I meant no offense toward anyone (other than myself) by it. I apologize if it came off otherwise!
 
Last edited:

Ganthem

a ray of sunshine
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2022
914
You are right, there are still moves that can be made. But I also feel like "if everything falls perfectly in place and we catch a few breaks and stay healthy, we MIGHT be able to get to 85 wins and qualify for the final WC spot" shouldn't be the goal of a big market team like the Red Sox.
So every single year the Sox should be contenders for the top spot in the AL east? Do you realize how unrealistic that is?
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2001
24,533
So every single year the Sox should be contenders for the top spot in the AL east? Do you realize how unrealistic that is?
Honest question: why is this so unrealistic? Isn't this what you want?

It's just the top spot in the AL East. No one is saying they have to win the World Series every year; but for a club with the Sox' resources, contending for the top spot in the division is not a huge ask. They were doing that every year for the first 10-12 years that Henry owned the team. What changed?
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
7,877
Boston, MA
Honest question: why is this so unrealistic? Isn't this what you want?

It's just the top spot in the AL East. No one is saying they have to win the World Series every year; but for a club with the Sox' resources, contending for the top spot in the division is not a huge ask. They were doing that every year for the first 10-12 years that Henry owned the team. What changed?
The competitive balance tax and the other teams stopped being run by dummies or meddlesome owners.
 

Ganthem

a ray of sunshine
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2022
914
Paxton is hurt every year. Why is this year different from all other years?
There is a lot of numbers between 0 innings and 200 innings. More to the point that was a joke having to do with the Jewish holiday of Passover
 

Ganthem

a ray of sunshine
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2022
914
Honest question: why is this so unrealistic? Isn't this what you want?

It's just the top spot in the AL East. No one is saying they have to win the World Series every year; but for a club with the Sox' resources, contending for the top spot in the division is not a huge ask. They were doing that every year for the first 10-12 years that Henry owned the team. What changed?
I want a team that is built to be competitive (competing for the top spot more often then not) and I realize that part of that is some down years. Down years could be years where they don't make the playoffs, but it can also be years in which they are going for the Wildcard. I understand that is just the reality of baseball.
 

mikcou

Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2007
919
Boston
So every single year the Sox should be contenders for the top spot in the AL east? Do you realize how unrealistic that is?
That may be unrealistic. Being a slam dunk wild card team in the era of three wild card teams and not having to hope that everything breaks right for them to be one isnt. For example, I dont want to hear that "oh we had two pitchers get hurt at the same time" type excuses again this year. That's the type of thing that is bound to happen on a team where one starter (Pivetta) and maybe a second (Bello) is a good bet for 150+ innings and two starters I'd bet heavily (Sale, Paxton) cant get to 100 and a third (Whitlock) who probably cant go more than 120.

They are going to have multiple guys out at the same time absent extremely good luck. They shouldnt have to rely on extremely good luck like that to make the last wild card spot.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2001
24,533
I want a team that is built to be competitive (competing for the top spot more often then not) and I realize that part of that is some down years. Down years could be years where they don't make the playoffs, but it can also be years in which they are going for the Wildcard. I understand that is just the reality of baseball.
But it's not the reality of baseball. The Yankees contend every year. The Dodgers do too. As do the Astros. The Giants are usually in the mix, the Cards, the Guardians, the Twins.

There's no reason for the Red Sox not to be competitive year in and year out. If you're not gunning for the AL East crown, what are you saying; you'd be satisfied with a mediocre 85-win team that sneaks into the playoffs? Expect more from the Red Sox. They aren't the A's or the Rays or the Pirates.
 

cannonball 1729

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 8, 2005
3,572
The Sticks
Pitching
Pitching
Pitching

Rays has been top 5in team ERA every year since 2019. In 2018, they were 6th so it’s almost 5 straight years of top 5 finishes.
I was going to use BSF's post as a jumping-off point in the other thread, but I feel like this probably fits better over here:

I think replicating the Rays pitching model is what Bloom is trying to do with all the bullpen signings. The easiest way to improve the starting rotation ERA is to give the starters a shorter leash...and the only way to do that is with more bullpen options.

Like, take Nick Pivetta. His ERA+ last year was 92, which isn't good by any measure. But a lot of that damage came in the fifth inning, when batters hit .336/.379/.543 (i.e. a .922 OPS) off of Pivetta - which was the only inning where batters OPSed over .750 against him. If you give Cora options in the bullpen, he has a chance to pull Pivetta in the fifth before things get out of hand. If you don't (like last year), Cora is forced to push Pivetta until Nick either makes it through the inning or falls apart. Starter ERA is very dependent on bullpen availability - those middle innings have to come from somewhere, and if the bullpen isn't picking them up, the tired starters are.

THAT, more than anything, is the Rays model. For as good as their pitching is, they rarely get much mileage from their starters - last year they averaged the fewest IP by starters in the AL. Some of that is because of their use of openers, of course, but a lot of it is because they pull starters earlier than almost anyone else. (We all might remember the whole "pulling Blake Snell early" controversy in the 2020 World Series.) This has been the Rays' mantra for years; they're the ones who first championed the idea of "third time through the order penalty" and limiting the starters to 18 batters.

(In case you're wondering, Nick Pivetta's 3rd time through the order OPS was .828, as opposed to .744 the first time through and .733 the second.)

For what it's worth, this was basically also the Jimy Williams model from the late 90's. If you can pull the starter two batters before he starts getting into trouble, you can have retreads like Jeff Fassero put up career years in Boston. Of course, it helps when you have a miracle worker as your pitching coach so that you can put together a bullpen with the Hipolito Pichardos of the world....

I'm still not sure what Bloom is going to do about the hitting, but I think the moves that he's made on the pitching side give us a sense of what the pitching plan is. Bullpen arms tend to be cheaper (if higher variance) and easier to stockpile, so that seems to be where Bloom's emphasis lies this offseason.
 

cannonball 1729

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 8, 2005
3,572
The Sticks
Paxton is hurt every year. Why is this year different from all other years?

There is a lot of numbers between 0 innings and 200 innings. More to the point that was a joke having to do with the Jewish holiday of Passover
Uhh...you might have missed curly's joke. Read the post again and then ask yourself a question - or four - about why he might have used that phrasing to describe Paxton as such a bitter herb...
 

curly2

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 8, 2003
4,887
There is a lot of numbers between 0 innings and 200 innings. More to the point that was a joke having to do with the Jewish holiday of Passover
So was mine. At a passover Seder, a child asks "Why is this night different from all other nights?"

Edit: Cannonball got it. :)
 

Ganthem

a ray of sunshine
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2022
914
But it's not the reality of baseball. The Yankees contend every year. The Dodgers do too. As do the Astros. The Giants are usually in the mix, the Cards, the Guardians, the Twins.

There's no reason for the Red Sox not to be competitive year in and year out. If you're not gunning for the AL East crown, what are you saying; you'd be satisfied with a mediocre 85-win team that sneaks into the playoffs? Expect more from the Red Sox. They aren't the A's or the Rays or the Pirates.
The Yanks went through a lean period, The Astros sucked for many years and the Giants are hit or miss. I could go on, but I think the point is clear. Bloom could have wiped the decks and had years of futility, ala the Astros, or he could try to contend while building a foundation that will allow this team to contend year in and year out for the top spot. Even then there is going to be bumps in the road and years the team has to compete for a wildcard.
 

Ganthem

a ray of sunshine
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2022
914
So was mine. At a passover Seder, a child asks "Why is this night different from all other nights?"

Edit: Cannonball got it. :)
I just got it. Its the last day before winter break. My brain has taken an earlier then usual vacation. I applaud you Curly and give you your due:)
 

curly2

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 8, 2003
4,887
I just got it. Its the last day before winter break. My brain has taken an earlier then usual vacation. I applaud you Curly and give you your due:)
I think the Xander news has fried all our brains. :)