Poll: Rate Your Faith in the Red Sox Front Office

[JM3]

I agree.

But (I posted this in another thread, but it appears applicable to this discussion too), there is about a 51% chance that a 2nd round pick makes the majors as opposed to around 35% from the 4th round (assuming Baseball America to be a credible source). I think that percentage is significant enough when talking about two picks in round 2 vs two in round 4 AND the $1m allocation and a 67% chance of missing the playoffs SHOULD have outweighed not having those for a 33% chance at making them.

Especially if you could have gotten literally anything for Martinez, Hill, Wacha and even Strahm at the deadline. I don't know if they could have, but Speier at least seemed to think so.

Again, there were justifiable reasons for choosing the path Bloom did. There were also justifiable reasons to have said "we really should have sold more."

Speier https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/07/29/sports/last-days-jd-martinez-with-red-sox/
BBA Study https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/how-many-mlb-draftees-make-it-to-the-majors/

The picks are sandwich picks, though, so makes sense to average over the range. The 2nd round comp pick would be an average of the 51% for 2nd round & 39% for 3rd round, & the 4th round comp pick would be the average of the 35% for the 4th round & 30% for the 5th round (guessing at those #s based on the bar graph), so we're really closer to 45% to 32.5% (12.5% difference) rather than 51% to 35% (16% difference).

/nitpick

 

[TomRicardo]

I see no future where they keep Devers. He's going to command more than X because he's younger and better. He might get $400 million on the open market. Does anyone really think the Sox will make him a contract offer at that level? The club has shown an extreme aversion to such deals.

I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that Devers is not in Boston for 2024. Signing him would be a stark change from everything they've done since hiring Bloom.

Then they aren't going to compete. Look the Red Sox clearly hired Boom to recreate Tampa Bay boom or bust at a discount hoping they could maintain a large percentage of their income while lowering their bottom line greatly.

Sitting around saying the market is crazy when the market for premium talent is above 35 AAV is just denial. If you can't do 400/12 for a guy like Devers then you aren't be able to get a top 25 player unless you draft them which mean you are going to need to suck, really suck, a couple of years out of five year cycle and / or murder at trades. Bloom is not fantastic at trades. Mookie Betts situation all around showed where the Red Sox were going to go.

So the question is does the Red Sox fan base want to be irrelevant 3 out 5 years to really compete for a year or two? My guess is that is not a sustainable long term plan for a big market team like the Red Sox.

 

[Big Papi's Mango Salsa]

I'm sure teams would have taken Hill or Wacha for nothing...The Red Sox would have gotten very little, if any, asset value for dumping the remaining pieces necessary to get under the threshhold. So the balancing then basically becomes is the chance of playoffing worth more than the potentially higher comp picks, international bonus pool $, and being in straight salary dump mode & angering the vast majority of the fan base who would insist this shows just how cheap the Red Sox are & unwilling to spend $$$ & not committed to winning. It would have caused a massive revolt.


You cite that 0-11-1 record against the AL East almost constantly, but is there that much predictive value to that... a 33% chance of making the playoffs, then obviously to you they are overly optimistic.

The problem is, without being able to bring back anything of value, just hopping below the tax line is pretty horrible optics because the "2 games out" is the easiest casual fan guidepost. & if you're not getting prospects back, how much are you really setting your franchise back by staying over the tax this year?

3) Extra draft slot $$$ - Back of the napkin math, I think they would get about $1.7m for the 2 picks in the 70s & about $900k for the 2 picks in the 130s, so that would be an extra $800k to spend on draft picks. It's not nothing...but it's also not like, super-duper valuable.

I disagree with your opinion on Bloom, but I have no issue with your posting on the subject. The bad posts are the constant driveby hate posts that are negative about literally everything.

Here's a quickie unscientific thing on the draft picks. Just going to eyeball the drafts from 2000 to 2014 to see the best players drafted in the 70s & the best player drafted in the 130s:

Results: Draft is a crapshoot, but yeah, you're slightly more likely to get a really good player in the 70s than the 130s...

I cross posted this over here because it makes more sense in a front office discussion than FA pitcher signings. Also, I tried pairing it down a little to make it easier to read. Please forgive me if that makes things taken out of context or a point you weren't trying to make, certainly not my intent...

Overall I think we agree (and the same can be summed up nicely for those of us whom think Bloom made the right choice vs the wrong choice vis a vis the deadline, even if both were defensible at the time) that it's a question of: is the 33% chance of making the playoffs, picking in the 4.5 round (ie supplemental) as opposed to the 2.5 round and losing $1m in draft allocation more valuable than picking in the 2.5 vs 4.5 and the $1m (along with whatever we MIGHT have gotten in a trade) with the 67% likelihood of not making the playoffs.

I cite the 0-11-1 just as a counter to the "all these guys were coming back" refrain. Sale was already out the beginning of the season with the rib injury. He pitched two games in early July, and had his finger broken on July 17th. They were "hoping" he'd be back toward the end of the season following that, but certainly not banking on it, then he broke his wrist in a bike accident. He wasn't exactly counted on to be a part of the stretch run as a front of the rotation ace for 2022 from July 18th through the deadline. https://www.mlb.com/news/chris-sale-to-miss-rest-of-2022-season

It is to reference that even WITH guys like Wacha, Hill, Hernandez and the like having played significant numbers of games (up to that point) they were STILL absolutely horrible in their division and would have needed to have overtaken at last two of those teams to make the second wildcard. As such, I think the 67% likelihood of missing the playoffs should have outweighed the 33% likelihood of making them.

While I also agree about the "casual fan guidepost", short of the Red Sox going 162-0 and winning every post season game on the way to a World Series title the media is going to paint something negative. The CHB wrote that winning the 2004 World Series was bad for the franchise for the love of everything pure. It's going to happen no matter what, I think we all expect (if not accept) that.

Accepting that, I can't imagine that a team which in the span of 3 calendar years decided (off the top of my head) to 1) trade Mookie Betts (aside, I think they did need to, and I think Bloom did a good job getting Verdugo in that deal); 2) trade Benintendi at a nadir in his value; 3) have a good 2021 where the vast majority of the fan base still DIDN'T like the trade deadline moves (they worked perfectly, credit to Bloom, but it's not like they were massively applauded at the time - though they should have been); 4) have a rather uninspiring 2022 off-season; 5) lowball another face of the franchise, fan favorite type, in the off-season; 6) have a horrible 2022 season; 7) have arguably the most important player in franchise history and also arguably the best (Papi and Pedro) whom are both members of the organization at present cast doubt on the moves of the front office; 8) allow said "face of the franchise" to leave via FA; 9) allow themselves to continually get pummeled by former players, the local and national media over their moves to have said: "nope, we DRAW THE LINE at selling Michael Wacha, Rich Hill and JD Martinez in a season where we're trailing 4 teams in the playoff race. That would anger our fans." It just seems wildly inconsistent with pretty much every other action in 3 years before and after that.

Agree totally about your opinion on Bloom (which is different from mine) but I think totally rational and more than fine. Disagreements are fun, it's what makes discussion interesting, so long as it can be done respectfully, which I think is what we're doing here.

I also agree on the overall crapshoot nature of the draft, but I do think it's better to have higher picks and more money to spend. Relative to the $800k (and I totally accept that number based on what you found), look at the Blaze Jordan selection - which I happen to think was the most inspired of Bloom's tenure (Mayer is a better prospect, Jordan was the higher degree of difficulty, if that makes sense). We paid him $1.75m to back out of his college commitment; not having $800k toward that (or more likely call it a portion of that $800k so maybe "only" being able to offer him $1.25m vs $1.75m) and he's at Mississippi State instead.

I guess I'll put it like this. None of us (possible exception of Yankee fans on here) go into a season WANTING the Red Sox to miss the playoffs. So when we get to around the trade deadline and it's considerably more likely to miss the playoffs (67%) than make them (33%), and the decision has been made not to push chips in to make massive acquisitions, I think we're better served a) chalking up that season as a loss and getting more (better chance of) assets for the future than to b) hope that the 33% probability happens vs the 67% probability.


*Also @JM3 - thanks for the clarity in percentages on the 2.5 round picks vs the 4.5 round picks.

 

[JM3]

I cross posted this over here because it makes more sense in a front office discussion than FA pitcher signings. Also, I tried pairing it down a little to make it easier to read. Please forgive me if that makes things taken out of context or a point you weren't trying to make, certainly not my intent...

I also agree on the overall crapshoot nature of the draft, but I do think it's better to have higher picks and more money to spend. Relative to the $800k (and I totally accept that number based on what you found), look at the Blaze Jordan selection - which I happen to think was the most inspired of Bloom's tenure (Mayer is a better prospect, Jordan was the higher degree of difficulty, if that makes sense). We paid him $1.75m to back out of his college commitment; not having $800k toward that (or more likely call it a portion of that $800k so maybe "only" being able to offer him $1.25m vs $1.75m) and he's at Mississippi State instead.

I guess I'll put it like this. None of us (possible exception of Yankee fans on here) go into a season WANTING the Red Sox to miss the playoffs. So when we get to around the trade deadline and it's considerably more likely to miss the playoffs (67%) than make them (33%), and the decision has been made not to push chips in to make massive acquisitions, I think we're better served a) chalking up that season as a loss and getting more (better chance of) assets for the future than to b) hope that the 33% probability happens vs the 67% probability.

I'm going to snip this too lol...

But let's get into this portion:

1) trade Mookie Betts (aside, I think they did need to, and I think Bloom did a good job getting Verdugo in that deal);

They had to do this. Period. This has been rehashed to death, but I don't think we disagree.

2) trade Benintendi at a nadir in his value;

Wouldn't it be more unpopular if we traded him when he was good? His skillset seemed to be declining. I'm not too concerned about moving on from him for a few lottery tickets & a cost-controlled 8th starter. I think the White Sox are going to end up feeling a bit silly over his 5/$175m.

3) have a good 2021 where the vast majority of the fan base still DIDN'T like the trade deadline moves (they worked perfectly, credit to Bloom, but it's not like they were massively applauded at the time - though they should have been);

Fans want the team to be all-in, all the time. You can't cow-tow to every one of their whims. You have to make smart baseball moves.

4) have a rather uninspiring 2022 off-season;

They kept all of their best prospects, gave themselves approximately the 5th highest payroll in baseball, & acquired fan favorite JBJ (smh).

5) lowball another face of the franchise, fan favorite type, in the off-season;

If he's not worth the contract to them, he's not worth the contract. We shall see if they were right.

6) have a horrible 2022 season;

Pretty sure that was an accident more so than a plan to piss off the fan base.

7) have arguably the most important player in franchise history and also arguably the best (Papi and Pedro) whom are both members of the organization at present cast doubt on the moves of the front office;

I...don't really know what that has to do with running a baseball team? I love Papi & Pedro to death...but they aren't members of the front office privy to all the same information and the plan.

8) allow said "face of the franchise" to leave via FA;

Once they got here, it seems wise. Padres will almost certainly regret that contract soon.

9) allow themselves to continually get pummeled by former players, the local and national media over their moves

Yeah, I think the way they do PR is dumb. The messaging is silly. They are trying to serve multiple masters & compete in the short term, while more importantly trying to build something sustainable long term, and that takes time. Just own it.

to have said: "nope, we DRAW THE LINE at selling Michael Wacha, Rich Hill and JD Martinez in a season where we're trailing 4 teams in the playoff race. That would anger our fans." It just seems wildly inconsistent with pretty much every other action in 3 years before and after that.

Those other things are baseball moves where you are receiving something tangible back to attempt to help the team in the near & long-term. These would be straight up salary dumps in which we would net nothing back. The Red Sox gave away 3 players for nothing to avoid having their billionaire owners pay a tax??? They got 2 pretty good prospects for 2 months of Vaz & the majority still freaked out.

But I agree in a vacuum the PR of it shouldn't make a difference - I just think it changes the calculus a ton that I don't think they could actually get anything for selling those pieces.

Re: Blaze Jordan - They were able to do that because they paid Nick Yorke underslot, & they were able to do that combo even without a 2nd round pick in a 4 round draft. That's why I think the bashing of the Yorke pick is both silly & premature. & also why there are lots of ways to get creative.

Last year the Red Sox had a bit over $8 million in draft $ & got creative on a lot of over & underslot things. This year I assume they'll be closer to around $11m due to a better pick & the comp picks. Would it be better if they had better picks & $12m? Sure. But how much better? 9%?

Silly hypothetical but...

Red Sox are down 3 games to 0 to the Yankees in the 2004 ALCS. MLB teams were 0-25 in that situation at that time (& 0-9 since that series). If the Red Sox had the option to trade away players before game 4, should they have done it? The odds were microscopic of victory, & they would still have to beat the 105-57 Cardinals in the World Series (Yankees won 101 games that season, Red Sox 98).

If you make the playoffs, you have a chance to win the championship in a sport like baseball. The Draft Kings odds after the trade deadline had the Red Sox at 80-1. It would have to be adjusted to get the true odds, but is a 1% chance at a championship season worth some tax $ & some draft value? Probably.

(here's the list btw...cut off before the teams that were 1,000-1 or better)

With the Trade Deadline in the books, here are the DraftKings World Series odds as of 5 p.m. PT:

Dodgers + 370
Yankees + 390
Astros + 475
Mets + 650
Braves 10/1
Padres 11/1
Blue Jays 12/1
Brewers 22/1
White Sox 35/1
Phillies 45/1
Rays 45/1
Mariners 50/1
Cardinals 50/1
Twins 65/1
Guardians 80/1
Red Sox 80/1
Giants 130/1
Orioles 200/1

https://www.vsin.com/2022-mlb-trade-deadline-how-deals-impact-the-betting-odds/

To me, the upside of a playoff run like '21, or the slimmest of slim World Series chances if everything breaks right, is worth that downside risk, even if the true odds of the downside risk are closer to 80 or 90% because the upside joy is so much more valuable than what you're gaining by giving that up.

 

[Big Papi's Mango Salsa]

Just for what it’s worth, I’m not debating the merit of any of those situations one way or another. I’m simply saying they were things that caused varying levels of upset to the casual fan - at least here in Boston. Regardless of if they worked well (ie Schwarber) or poorly (ie Benintendi).

Appeasing the casual fans is not a wise criteria for winning / losing baseball games. If they didn’t care about fan perception in those instances, why should it have played any role in just the 2022 deadline? I’m happy to agree it should or should not have any bearing for purposes of this discussion (I think it should play no role, personally, but I’ll allow for someone arguing the other, so long as it’s consistent).

I‘ll agree not to bash the Yorke pick if you agree the $800k in money to allocate is not a minuscule thing, fair?



I don’t think 2022 and 2004 are at all similar situations. I honestly don’t think you do either, but I assume you are trying to use an extreme to illustrate the point, and that we both realize there is a world of difference between being in the ALCS and the 5th place team in your own division in July and that the situations are not at all comparable.

I also truly don’t believe you equate the talent on the 2004 team to the 2022 team, so I won’t go there. But if you do, I’m happy to discuss why I’d vehemently disagree.

However…

If the 2004 Red Sox were down 0-3 to the Yankees and at the time 1) for some reason their advancement were dependent on the elimination of 3 additional teams as well; 2) had gone 0-19 against the Yankees during that regular season as opposed to the 11-9 record they did have; 3) were (at best, assuming they didn’t think internally Sale was done for the year after breaking his finger, but before breaking his wrist)banking on their 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 5th starters as well as their CF and lead off hitter, and also their third best offensive player all returning from injuries; 4) didn’t have an elite closer; 5) had a sub par bullpen beyond not having an elite closer as opposed to 5 pitchers who (at worst) had a 117 ERA+ for the season (Timlin and Myers’s, both); 6) had already decided to trade their starting catcher having a very good season after game 3; 7) had needed to replace their 1st basemen, and RF because they were terrible (and the replacement in RF with an 84 OPS+ being a marked improvement) - then yes, I would have said to sell.

Of course, all those things applied to the 2022 Red Sox. Literally none of them applied to the 2004 Red Sox. But I wanted to give a thoughtful and researched answer to your example.

Since I truly don’t think the situations are at all similar, I’ll try to stick to discussing the current and future Red Sox and their present FO because I think it has literally nothing to do with the roster, circumstances or front office from the greatest sports entity of all time.

 

[JM3]

Betting market had the Red Sox at 120-1 to win the World Series when they were down 3-0 to the Yankees.

https://www.actionnetwork.com/general/best-bets-in-boston-sports-history

& 80-1 after the trade deadline this year. Is that stupid? Probably. But the teams don't have to be comparable to show what the betting public thought of their relative chances.

 

[scottyno]

For the people complaining about the Benintendi trade what exactly did you want them to do with him? He has really only ever been a left fielder, and Verdugo profiled much more as a left fielder and they were never going to play Beni over Verdugo.

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

For the people complaining about the Benintendi trade what exactly did you want them to do with him? He has really only ever been a left fielder, and Verdugo profiled much more as a left fielder and they were never going to play Beni over Verdugo.

I guess trade him for prospects better than the ones they got? Especially since one of the key pieces was another guy best profiled as a LF.

Also…where is Verdugo playing this season? Seems like he’s gotta be playing CF, RF, or traded. Unless Yoshida is mostly DHing which seems unlikely.

 

[scottyno]

I guess trade him for prospects better than the ones they got? Especially since one of the key pieces was another guy best profiled as a LF.

Also…where is Verdugo playing this season? Seems like he’s gotta be playing CF, RF, or traded. Unless Yoshida is mostly DHing which seems unlikely.

So you think they just traded him without asking around to figure out the best deal? He was a mediocre at best outfielder with a pretty low downside, why exactly should he have had much trade value? I'm also unclear how Cordero was one of the key pieces of the trade, consensus at the time was that he was largely a lotto ticket throw in, WInckowski was the key piece.

 

[Big Papi's Mango Salsa]

Betting market had the Red Sox at 120-1 to win the World Series when they were down 3-0 to the Yankees.

https://www.actionnetwork.com/general/best-bets-in-boston-sports-history

& 80-1 after the trade deadline this year. Is that stupid? Probably. But the teams don't have to be comparable to show what the betting public thought of their relative chances.

Fair - we agree (I think) that the 2004 Red Sox down 0-3 in the ALCS and the 2022 Red Sox down 2 games to the last wild card in July are not comparable - and that the public are by and large not smart.



To move the discussion more into a general idea since we won't get any more data on which to judge Bloom's strategy until sometime during the 2023 season, I'm genuinely curious - At what point do people whom think Bloom's plan is working and he is the right guy to execute it (or any GM of the Boston Red Sox, really) - should be judged based on the results of their decisions vs their defensibility at the time? As mentioned, I happen to really like the Yoshida signing, for instance, but I think a rational person could make an argument that a) signing him is justifiable; b) signing him is not justifiable or c) signing him is justifiable but there are different options that could have been reasonably pursued that they'd have preferred, justifiably, of course.

So at what point is it a large enough sample size to judge someone on their overall success (or failure) from the results of their moves? Even moves that I've disliked (or haven't worked) I can't think of a single move Bloom has made that I would not be able to look at and find reasonable justification for at the time (same is true of Dombrowski; same is true of Cherington - at least since I think we all accept he didn't have a choice in hiring Bobby the 5th).

Cherington got a year and a half after winning the WS (we have no way of knowing how long he would have been given if the 2013 team hadn't won it all, but they did) and Dombrowski was hired in August of 2015.

Dombrowski was given (at least) 3 years of leeway, though 2016 and 2017 were both division champion seasons and 2018 was 2018. He was fired in September of 2019 after the disastrous start of Sale's and Eovaldi's extension, as well as (I assume) Price's injury and remaining years.

Theo won a WS his second year, then again in 2007. He was then gone 4 seasons later after the 2011 (I assume HE chose to leave, not that he was fired, but I don't know that for sure and don't know if there is any tangible evidence one way or the other).

How long should Bloom have before we can judge? Should he be held to the same standard as prior heads of baseball operations (ie winning a world series) or should he be judged differently - and if so, why should winning a world series no longer be a realistic goal?

Should he be given 4 years because people care more about building a sustainable pipeline than winning another championship (I chose 4 because that is when we started seeing Epstein's picks come up like David Murphy, Abe Alvarez Jonathan Papelbon in 2005?

Does it get pushed to 5 years like 2006 when you added in names like Dustin Pedroia, Jon Lester (whom maybe should be credited to Mike Port, but I'll say Epstein) and Craig Hansen arrived?

Do we need to push it back further because it's unfair to equate Bloom with arguably the greatest baseball architect of the generation?

If winning a world series is no longer important to people so long as we have a team that is "consistently in the playoffs" how long would you like Bloom to be in charge if he's able to be in the playoffs call it 3 of every 4 years but never wins a title?

I'm genuinely curious as to what people feel the "goal" should be for Bloom, how long he should have to reach it, and what is an "acceptable outcome" if he doesn't reach the goal at which to say he should or should not be replaced.


FWIW, I no longer think Bloom should be in charge of baseball operations for the Boston Red Sox, so my answer is he should be gone already, but he's here and since I'm a fan of the team he runs, I'm rooting for his success in 2023, that the team wins the WS and he makes me look like an idiot, and that he continues to win multiple World Series titles for the Red Sox from now until he retires from running baseball teams.

However, I also think that if the 2023 team is able to establish a core for the future success from the Yoshida, Casas, Rafaela (if he's up at some point like the guys at Sox Prospects suggest), Whitlock, Houck, Bello, Mata group and the farm system looks better at the end of 2023 than it does right now (lets call it 10th since I think that's a fair range based on what we have) OR we've moved prospects for significant core pieces (some have said Adames, some have said Woodruff, some have said Alcantara, some have said P Lopez, some have said just extending Devers), I would also agree there would be no reason to fire him at that point - but that is a complete unknown, of course.

But it's December, there isn't a ton to talk about, and I'm genuinely asking the people whom like what he's doing as to their goals for the Red Sox under Bloom, the level of "acceptance" if Bloom doesn't reach those goals to keep trying to reach them and what is a line of demarcation of saying "I'd support looking a different direction, too?"

 

[YTF]

I would have been happy had he GONE for it, one way or the other. Same at the deadline in 2021. Same in the off seasons of 2021 and 2022. Jeesh, he is an equivocator and a hedger. Eventually, the proof is gonna be in the pudding, yes?

Were you though?

 

[JM3]

I'm genuinely curious as to what people feel the "goal" should be for Bloom, how long he should have to reach it, and what is an "acceptable outcome" if he doesn't reach the goal at which to say he should or should not be replaced.

The goal is basically to be the Dodgers/Astros/rich man's Rays. That means playoffs every year once they are able to have sufficient cost-controlled talent to supplement the roster with more expensive players.

DD left the Red Sox with 0 cost-controlled talent, which caused a large # of problems & the juggling act Bloom has had to try to do the last few years. I expect to make the playoffs every year from '24-'30 & beyond, & if they don't, I'm happy to revisit Bloom.

Dodgers have been in the playoffs 10 straight years, Astros & Yankees 6, Braves 5, Rays & Cards 4. I expect to be there every season. I hope to win the World Series on occasion, but that sustained consistency is achievable & I believe it's on the horizon.

If they make it this year, that would be a bonus, & I think it's very achievable with just a bit more tweaking, but regardless, the cost-controlled talent is starting to roll in, & we're moving in the right direction in terms of sustainability.

If we were to replace Bloom, I would want to replace him with someone basically almost exactly like Bloom only better at PR (X) & a bit more infallible (JBJ). For the most part, I think his moves have both been smart, & have worked out. It's just a process that requires some patience.

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

Eh; even forgetting Betts, Dombrowksi left the team with Rafael Devers, Andrew Benintendi, Xander Bogaerts and Eduardo Rodriguez- all of them under the age of 27 and signed for multiple years. That’s pretty damn good. To say he left the team with 0 cost controlled talent is silly.

 

[YTF]

Eh; even forgetting Betts, Dombrowksi left the team with Rafael Devers, Andrew Benintendi, Xander Bogaerts and Eduardo Rodriguez- all of them under the age of 27 and signed for multiple years. That’s pretty damn good. To say he left the team with 0 cost controlled talent is silly.

Yes, that's even less correct than claiming that DD stripped the farm system.

 

[Big Papi's Mango Salsa]

Totally fair and valid on 2024-25 as a "starting point." Disagree, but I understand your point and respect it - thank you for the well thought out answer.

Our biggest disagreement is, I think, not that the plan is a bad plan but in how Bloom is doing executing it.

FWIW, I'm going to assume you meant "0 cheap MLB labor" as opposed to "0 cost-controlled talent". The farm sucked, but he inherited a beastly line up of cost controlled core pieces like Devers, Bogaerts, Benintendi and Vazquez along with Eduardo Rodriguez, Houck and however one wants to characterize Eovaldi and Sale (I happen to personally think Sale is an albatross that should not be "penciled in" at all but forced to earn his way into the rotation, but plenty of smart people with reams of good information are projecting him to be our #1 starter this year and I value their stance even though we disagree).

Also, I happen to prefer the boom / bust cycle (as evidenced by the point that I think selling in 2020 was correct, adding in 2021 was correct - though I would have liked adding more pitching and not being a massive seller in 2022 was a horrible choice). Though I admit I'm in the minority on the boom / bust cycle thing. I do prefer the "we're going for it, so add big" or " we're not, so sell big" choice to be made during the deadline relative to players on short term deals and "depth" in the farm system.

In other words, trade the Aldo Ramirez' of the world all the time to add; also trade the Rich Hill's of the world all the time to sell. For instance, I wanted Bloom to sell last year, but if instead he'd moved pieces from the middle of the farm for pieces that WERE moved for prospects I don't even know (call it Brandon Drury, Mitch White and Jorge Lopez) I wouldn't be nearly as adamant about how badly I think the situation was handled.

 

[jteders1]

I think it’s tough to justify Bloom continued employment when you just look at the current results. Look at our season Phytag under him:

2022 - P: 76-86, Actual:78-84
2021 - P: 88-74, Actual: 92-70
2020 - P: 25-35, Actual: 24-36

2020 was obviously a COVID shortened season, but if you calculate it our over a full season, it‘s 72-90ish. I also don’t buy that Bloom should get a pass because of COVID, everyone was operating under the same situation.

Now, looking at the farm, you could make a strong argument to keep him. Take a look at these rankings:

2019 - 30th: Absolutely gutted by DD
2020 - 25th
2021 - 24th
2022 - 11th

Bloom has done a great job improving the depth of the farm, even if it’s a little light on top end prospects. He has established a base of tradeable prospects, along with a couple of pieces that look like potential franchise cornerstones. Has it helped that he’s picked higher in the draft? Of course, but it’s easy to miss on prospects once you get outside the top 10 or so, and he’s done a good job of scouting.

The question on Bloom is how long do you want to wait. Based on the farm results, I think if it you’re in Blooms camp, you could talk yourself into waiting another 2-3 years when a guy like Meyer is expected to break in. Me personally, I don’t give a damn what Portlands record is. The big league results speak for themselves, he deserves another year because of financial restraints he had, but those are now gone. This team needs to take a step forward and should be a playoff team.

 

[JM3]

Eh; even forgetting Betts, Dombrowksi left the team with Rafael Devers, Andrew Benintendi, Xander Bogaerts and Eduardo Rodriguez- all of them under the age of 27 and signed for multiple years. That’s pretty damn good. To say he left the team with 0 cost controlled talent is silly.

I'm referring to pre-free agency & the miniscule cost of young talent, especially pre-arb talent. DD also brought in literally 0 of those players.

Devers - Yes. He's been super cheap. So not literally 0. Was signed in 2013. DD came 8/18/2015.

Benny - Had a really good 2018, a pretty bad 2019, & a terrible 2020. Bloom signed him to a 2/$10m before the '20 season to avoid 2 years of arbitration. They used him to get 2 cost controlled talents...although neither of them seem particularly good at baseball. Benny is now overpaid. Drafted June 2015, pre-DD.

X - Was signed to $20m/year. Fine price for what he provided, but not what I was referring to. Signed in '09.

ERod - Missed '20 & did make only $8.1m in '21 before becoming a free agent. Acquired via trade in '14.

Having cheap players graduate from the minors is a huge part of being able to build a team. Those players simply were not in the system.

In '20, Devers & Houck were the only competent Pre-Arb players for the Red Sox that Bloom hadn't already brought in.

In '21 it was only Dalbec.

In '22 it was Bello & Casas (& Dalbec if you count him as competent last year).

Like here are the Pre-Arb players the Astros (all made $760k or less except Garcia who made $1.2m):

Alvarez (6.6 fWAR)
Tucker (4.7 fWAR)
Pena (3.4 fWAR)
Javier (3.4 fWAR)
Garcia (2.1 fWAR)
McCormick (2.0 fWAR)
Abreu (1.4 fWAR)
Urquidy (1.1 fWAR)
Brown (0.6 fWAR)
Meyers (0.3 fWAR)
Dubon (0.2 fWAR)
Hensley (0.2 fWAR)
Total: 26.0 fWAR

Other notable teams weren't quite as high, but still much higher than the Red Sox...

Yankees
Trevino (3.7 fWAR)
Cortes (3.6 fWAR)
Cabrera (1.5 fWAR)
Effross (1.3 fWAR - albeit mostly for the Cubs)
Schmidt (0.5 fWAR)
Peraza (0.4 fWAR)
Abreu (-0.1 fWAR)
Total: 10.9 fWAR

Dodgers
Smith (3.9 fWAR)
Lux (3.0 fWAR)
Gonsolin (2.7 fWAR)
Phillips (2.2 fWAR)
Vesia (1.5 fWAR)
Graterol (0.8 fWAR) - sore subject
Vargas (-0.5 fWAR)
Total: 13.6 fWAR

Phillies (i.e. the reason Dombrowski was able to succeed this year)
Suarez (2.3 fWAR)
Marsh (1.7 fWAR)
Bohm (1.5 fWAR)
Stott (1.4 fWAR)
Sosa (1.2 fWAR)
Bellatti (1.0 fWAR)
Maton (0.8 fWAR)
Stubbs (0.6 fWAR)
Brogdon (0.6 fWAR)
Falter (0.6 fWAR)
Hall (0.4 fWAR)
Guthrie (0.3 fWAR)
Vierling (0.0 fWAR)
Total: 12.4 fWAR

That's important, & DD killed that pipeline for the Red Sox.

I won't do the Rays right now because it would take a long time, but yeah...being the Rays only rich would not be a bad outcome.

 

[Big Papa Smurph]

Yes, that's even less correct than claiming that DD stripped the farm system.

I found this article looking back at Dombrowski's trades during his Red Sox tenure and he traded away a whole lot of nothing. Outside of Yoan Moncada and Michael Kopech, who are still young and talented enough to have bright futures, the most productive players from the farm system he traded away are Travis Shaw and Manuel Margot.

*Edit - I just looked it up and Moncada is going into his age 28 season and Kopech into his age 27 season, so not as young as I thought.

 

[JM3]

Yes, that's even less correct than claiming that DD stripped the farm system.

DD did strip the farm system to some extent - but much more importantly he failed to replenish it.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

I found this article looking back at Dombrowski's trades during his Red Sox tenure and he traded away a whole lot of nothing. Outside of Yoan Moncada and Michael Kopech, who are still young and talented enough to have bright futures, the most productive players from the farm system he traded away are Travis Shaw and Manuel Margot.

Dombrowski did well to keep the most productive farm products while trading away prospects that didn't amount to much in order to acquire proven major league talent. The result was three straight division titles and a World Series win. But there's no denying there was a dry spell in the pipeline. Maybe that's him. Maybe it's the last drafts Cherington ran. Maybe it was the fact that the winning and the spending resulted in later draft picks and less money to spend on those draft picks. Most likely it's a combination of all of the above. Shit happens. Theo's farm system hit a dry spell too, with not a lot of high level talent graduating to the bigs from 2008-2014ish. Some of it is dumb luck (Westmoreland, for example), some of it is how the system is designed to work (winning teams drafting later).

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

DD did strip the farm system to some extent - but much more importantly he failed to replenish it.

That goes beyond DD, check out the last few drafts under Cherington; the org hasn’t drafted well since the rules changed a decade or so ago. But, it’s weird to say DD failed to replenish the system when a good % of the top prospects now… are Dombrowksi guys. Hell, DD was only here four years; or one more than Bloom has been.

That the Sox struggled in 09 when their top starters went down is really no different than what happened last year, and what could happen this year.

 

[JM3]

That goes beyond DD, check out the last few drafts under Cherington; the org hasn’t drafted well since the rules changed a decade or so ago. But, it’s weird to say DD failed to replenish the system when a good % of the top prospects now… are Dombrowksi guys. Hell, DD was only here four years; or one more than Bloom has been.

That the Sox struggled in 09 when their top starters went down is really no different than what happened last year, and what could happen this year.

Yes, there are a couple top guys finally floating through. But there was a large drought of no players. Graduating 1 or 2 WAR players from the minors on a regular basis is really, really important to allow for paying full market rate for free agency eligible players. The fact that those rank & file competent players weren't coming through, combined with the Sale/Price albatrosses, led to a lot of the roster scrambling over the last few years, & is the reason Mookie had to go.

We can blame Cherington for it, too, idc. But it's just kinda weird to give DD credit for all these players he didn't acquire.

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

I’m not giving him credit for them; merely disputing the idea that he left the organization in shambles or bereft of talent. That the infusion of major league ready talent (Casas, Bello) is largely driven by “DD guys” speaks to how complicated and intertwined the regimes are and how these things take time.

I agree on the need to identify cheap, productive players. I don’t know that they need to come from the minors, but you do need to find them, to ideally, supplement high ceiling talent. Hopefully the Sox are able to start doing that a bit better.

 

[YTF]

DD did strip the farm system to some extent - but much more importantly he failed to replenish it.

Much of the wealth in the Sox farm system leading up to and including the early DD years had been promoted in a short period of time. The promotions of Bogaerts, Betts, Vazquez, Bradley, Benintendi, Devers and perhaps a couple of others played a far larger role in the Sox cupboards being bare than trades made by DD. Much to his credit, he also refused to include any of those players in trades that he made to strengthen the team.

 

[JM3]

Here are a couple posts I've made analyzing what Bloom was left with from DD. I think this paints a pretty stark picture of what Bloom inherited, but YMMV.

Let's see what those guys cost this year...

Vaz $7m (1.6 fWAR)
X $20m (6.1 fWAR)
Devers $11.2m (4.9 fWAR)
Benny $8.5m (2.7 fWAR)
JBJ $12m (-0.1 fWAR)
Mookie $30.4m (6.6 fWAR)
JD $22m (1 fWAR)

Plus...
Price $32m (0.1 fWAR)
Sale $25.6m (0.2 fWAR)
Eovaldi $17m (1.0 fWAR)

That's $185.7m for 10 players who earned a total of 24 fWAR...with almost no Major League ready cost controlled talent. Where are you getting the other 16 guys to fill out a roster that gets you to a successful team? Where are you getting the playable depth when injuries happen?

Even if you go to $270m like the Dodgers did this year, that gives you $85m to fill those spots, including almost literally an entire pitching staff. Continuing what the Red Sox were doing and being successful this past season would have been literally impossible.

For reference purposes, the Dodgers put up 63.6 fWAR this past season.

That's not sustainable. Of the people who were already in house when Bloom took over, the Red Sox received the following supplements in 2022:

Dalbec $0.6m (-0.1 fWAR)
Duran $0.3m (-0.4 fWAR)
Casas $0.1m (0.3 fWAR)
Crawford $0.5m (0.5 fWAR)
Brasier $1.4m (0.5 fWAR)
Bello $0.3m (1.3 fWAR)
Barnes $8.1m (0.1 fWAR)
Bazardo $0.1m (-0.2 fWAR)
Darwinzon $0.1m (-0.5 fWAR)

So that's another $11.5m (oops Barnes) for 1.5 fWAR.

& it's not like Bloom had a bunch of guys he inherited go on to great success elsewhere...

Here's a list of the other 2019 players (not 100% sure if all these guys are retired or just not in MLB in 2022):

Chavis $0.7m (-0.6 fWAR)
Moreland - retired
HOLT - retired
Leon $1m (-0.3 fWAR)
Nunez - retired
Travis - retired
Marco Hernandez - retired
Pearce - retired
Gorkys Hernandez - retired
Owings $0.4m (-0.7 fWAR)
Swihart - retired
Lin - retired
Pedroia - retired
Centeno - retired

ERod $14m (0.6 fWAR)
Porcello - retired
Walden - retired
Workman - retired
Velazquez - retired
Brewer - retired
Cashner - retired
Taylor - still around, just didn't play last season
Weber $0.1m (0.0 fWAR)
Johnson - retired
Hembree $0.7m (-0.7 fWAR)
Smith - retired
Lakins $0.3m (-0.3 fWAR)
Shawaryn - retired
Thornburg $0.1m (0.0 fWAR)
Chacin $1.3m (-0.2 fWAR)
Poyner - retired
Kelley $0.7m (-0.5 fWAR)
Wright - retired
Erasmo $0.7m (0.4 fWAR)

So total...$20m (mostly ERod) for -2.3 fWAR.

So simply rolling everything forward from 2019 to 2022, & including the $2m each they paid Pedey & Manny in 2022, leads to a team that's paid $221.2m for 23.2 fWAR.

The cupboard was very bare when Bloom took over. It's a process. Etc.

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

DD came aboard at the end of 2015, presided over 4 drafts.

2016- Groome, Dalbec
2017- Houck, Crawford
2018- Casas, Duran
2019- Cannon, Lugo, Song, Murphy

Hardly an exhaustive analysis, but not terrible, but of course guys drafted in 16 aren’t likely to be ready to help in 2019 when the team needed.

the four prior drafts..woof

2015- Benintendi, Allen, Poyner
2014- Chavis, Kopech, Travis, Beeks
2013- Ball, Stankiewicz, Denney, Dubon
2012- Marrero, Johnson, Light, Maddox, Buttrey

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

Here are a couple posts I've made analyzing what Bloom was left with from DD. I think this paints a pretty stark picture of what Bloom inherited, but YMMV.

When your top starters get hurt, the team won’t be great- although that 09 Sox team was hardly terrible, largely because they still had high ceiling talent like Betts, Devers, JD, Bogaerts, Etc.

Look at last years team and how much they paid / got from Sale, Eovaldi, Paxton, Bradley, Price, JD, etc. Not much, and the team was even worse because they were lacking the high ceiling talent that the 19 team had.

I suspect the same thing could happen this year; despite a lower payroll and fewer high paid players, it’s not as if this team looks very deep at all. But I guess that’s the goal- to spread out risk across multiple players. So instead of Rodon, you get Kluber, Martin, and Jansen (although the Sox guys have slight higher aav). You are spending the same amount but have less risk in any one individual player, but I think you miss out on the potential high ceiling performances.

 

[gibreel]

Susan Sontag once wrote that a person who read Reader's Digest between 1950 and 1970 would have been better informed about the nature of the Soviet Union than someone who read The Nation. I do wonder if something similar is playing out with regards to evaluations of the Red Sox front office, in that the most engaged, ostensibly sophisticated fans have been defending the current configuration, while the typical WEEI listener is closer to understanding the reality of the situation: Bloom and company are incompetent and/or working under marching orders focused on reducing payroll above all else.

 

[simplicio]

Cool, now show your work about how you know that to be reality.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Susan Sontag once wrote that a person who read Reader's Digest between 1950 and 1970 would have been better informed about the nature of the Soviet Union than someone who read The Nation. I do wonder if something similar is playing out with regards to evaluations of the Red Sox front office, in that the most engaged, ostensibly sophisticated fans have been defending the current configuration, while the typical WEEI listener is closer to understanding the reality of the situation: Bloom and company are incompetent and/or working under marching orders focused on reducing payroll above all else.

"reducing payroll above all else"

What exactly does that mean? Because I read that and think that reducing payroll involves significant cuts, on the order of what the Orioles did a few years ago by dropping from a high of ~$180M (2017) to last season's $64M. But when I look at the Red Sox year over year salary numbers, they dipped significantly in 2020 (a pro-rated version of ~$180M) but have raised the payroll each of the last two years ($201M & $241M) and right now appear to be committed to another season above $200M (~$215M and counting).

Bitch about how they're spending the money, but they are without question spending money. There is no "reality of the situation" in which they are actively trying to reduce payroll.


*all numbers from Cot's. Other sources may vary but generally tell the same tale.

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

I don’t think they are necessarily reducing payroll; but they do seem to be trying to limit future commitments as much as possible. So spend as much as you can in each individual year but as little as you can in future years.

 

[JM3]

When your top starters get hurt, the team won’t be great- although that 09 Sox team was hardly terrible, largely because they still had high ceiling talent like Betts, Devers, JD, Bogaerts, Etc.

Look at last years team and how much they paid / got from Sale, Eovaldi, Paxton, Bradley, Price, JD, etc. Not much, and the team was even worse because they were lacking the high ceiling talent that the 19 team had.

I suspect the same thing could happen this year; despite a lower payroll and fewer high paid players, it’s not as if this team looks very deep at all. But I guess that’s the goal- to spread out risk across multiple players. So instead of Rodon, you get Kluber, Martin, and Jansen (although the Sox guys have slight higher aav). You are spending the same amount but have less risk in any one individual player, but I think you miss out on the potential high ceiling performances.

Yeah, those 4 hitters were great in '19. Carried the team to the 84-78 record. Problem is, JD was no longer particularly good this year, & they cost $30m+ more in '22 than they did in '19 (for 3.9 less fWAR), so they would have been even shorter everywhere else.

I think the team is deeper this year than it has been in...a lot of years. It's definitely missing the top-end talent, though. The problem is that you need that baseline of cheap talent for it to be worthwhile to start handing out the big contracts. Otherwise you are going right back to the boom & bust cycle.

I suspect they are trying to avoid that, & that's why the rebuild is more methodical. Especially since they feel pressure to actually also try to field competent baseball teams during the build-up phase.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

I don’t think they are necessarily reducing payroll; but they do seem to be trying to limit future commitments as much as possible. So spend as much as you can in each individual year but as little as you can in future years.

Which isn't a terrible strategy for a team in transition from one core to its next (even if what that next core is isn't yet clear). For all the talk about the Braves model, it's tougher to pull off once you have the young talent to lock up if a bunch of future payroll is already tied up in free agent market rate contracts.

 

[Rovin Romine]

DD came aboard at the end of 2015, presided over 4 drafts.

2016- Groome, Dalbec
2017- Houck, Crawford
2018- Casas, Duran
2019- Cannon, Lugo, Song, Murphy

Hardly an exhaustive analysis, but not terrible, but of course guys drafted in 16 aren’t likely to be ready to help in 2019 when the team needed.

the four prior drafts..woof

2015- Benintendi, Allen, Poyner
2014- Chavis, Kopech, Travis, Beeks
2013- Ball, Stankiewicz, Denney, Dubon
2012- Marrero, Johnson, Light, Maddox, Buttrey

Yeah, for drafts Theo was 2004-2011, Cherrington was 2012-2015, and DD 2016-2019. I added notable international signings with an underline. So:

DD:
2019- Cannon, Lugo, Song, Murphy
2018- Casas, Duran. Rafaela, Bello.
2017- Houck, Crawford. Hector Velazquez.
2016- Groome, Dalbec. Mata.

BC:
2015- Benintendi, Allen, Poyner
2014- Chavis, Kopech, Travis, Beeks. Moncada, Rusney, Espinosa, Bazardo.
2013- Ball, Stankiewicz, Denney, Dubon. Devers, Darwinzon.
2012- Marrero, Johnson, Light, Maddox, Buttrey

TE:
2011- Barnes, Swihart, Owens, JBJ, Jerez, Ramirez, Mookie, Travis Shaw. Margot.
2010- Brentz, Workman.
2009- Kelley, Hazelbaker. Iglesias, Bogaerts.
2008- Weiland, Federowicz, Vazquez. Tazawa.
2007- Hagadone, Rizzo, Middlebrooks.

 

[4 6 3 DP]

I think if you believe the Boston Red Sox, in this market, with this fan base, should be in purgatory because the General Manager likes playing cute games with contacts like Paxton and Richards and Kluber and buying a prospect like German with Ottaviano's contact, then you're thrilled with what this guy is doing.

If you believe the Red Sox in this market with this fan base should generally be a bully, trying to win every year to the best of their ability, then this is somewhere between appalling and confusing.

This guy loves trying to be cute, he will overpay for a Japanese outfielder they've seen from a carnival ride but not their own guys, or a lefty they can attach a team option to, or Garrett Richards, or other yard sale reclamation projects, but not a team that on day one is prepared to win a world series, and that's what we have seen so far and that's what we can evaluate. If he at some point is allowed to stay in his job and puts that team on the table then as fans we can evaluate that. But right now, since 2002-3 until 2020 the Red Sox have generally fielded a team to contend for the world series walking out of spring training. In certain years that team has been terrible and they've dumped and started over the next year. But this guy doesn't pretend to contend, he partners with Sam Kennedy to go out there to look like a fool and take the hits, and does his Tampa routine. In 2021 he slid in last day of the season and then they made a nice run, he deserves the credit for that run even if they weren't dominant late in the season. 2022 he tried to slide in and instead looks silly in forfeiting multiple rounds of draft picks and still finishing out of the playoffs. I hope it works going forward, because I love playoff baseball and I love rooting for excellent baseball teams. But this isn't what's being done right now. Not sure why we would sit and squint and try to pretend that Christian Arroyo and Rob Refsnyder is part of some big plan. He isn't. You have to live in fantasy land to think the organization right now is set up for anything other than selling concessions and hoping for best case scenarios to contend in September. Nothing wrong with that, any fan can be content with whatever they want, but sliding into a wild card spot on the last day of the season wasn't the goal in 2003, or 2004, or 1986, or 1977, or whatever years most on this board became fans, and I'm not sure what Chaim Bloom did to convince anyone that was the new target of the Boston Red Sox.

 

[E5 Yaz]

This guy loves trying to be cute, he will overpay for a Japanese outfielder they've seen from a carnival ride but not their own guys

I'm sure they would love to have Mookie or X or Devers sign for 5/90

 

[4 6 3 DP]

I'm sure they would love to have Mookie or X or Devers sign for 5/90

Not sure that's really the argument, but sure. When the agent says they negotiated with only one team, I suppose it's a pretty reasonable argument that one team has placed a significantly higher value on that player than the others. They may end up being right on that evaluation, but they certainly valued him in an outlier position.

 

[mr_smith02]

View: https://twitter.com/SurvivingGrady/status/1608551868900179968?s=20&t=ldqZ1xr_RCOJbuUIvOQn5A

 

[Yelling At Clouds]

Yeah, for drafts Theo was 2004-2011, Cherrington was 2012-2015, and DD 2016-2019. I added notable international signings with an underline. So:

DD:
2019- Cannon, Lugo, Song, Murphy
2018- Casas, Duran. Rafaela, Bello.
2017- Houck, Crawford. Hector Velazquez.
2016- Groome, Dalbec. Mata.

BC:
2015- Benintendi, Allen, Poyner
2014- Chavis, Kopech, Travis, Beeks. Moncada, Rusney, Espinosa, Bazardo.
2013- Ball, Stankiewicz, Denney, Dubon. Devers, Darwinzon.
2012- Marrero, Johnson, Light, Maddox, Buttrey

TE:
2011- Barnes, Swihart, Owens, JBJ, Jerez, Ramirez, Mookie, Travis Shaw. Margot.
2010- Brentz, Workman.
2009- Kelley, Hazelbaker. Iglesias, Bogaerts.
2008- Weiland, Federowicz, Vazquez. Tazawa.
2007- Hagadone, Rizzo, Middlebrooks.

Not sure if this was the intended takeaway, but mostly it suggests to me that, for all of the talk of how DD “left the cupboard bare” to borrow the popular phrase, it’s not at all clear that they’d be in a better position these last few years if he hadn’t made those moves. Better draft position, I guess? But almost definitely not the additional WS title. Seems like whatever troubles they had with the MiLB pipeline began under Cherington.

(This is making me angry about the BC years all over again. I felt about him the way some of you feel about Bloom.)

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

Yeah, I think that is kind of the key point….there’s certainly a lag in how long it takes prospects to make it to the bigs, so a team that is changing GM’s / Baseball Ops guys every 4-5 years leads to some likely misattribution in terms of who is getting credit or getting dinged for what.

 

[Rovin Romine]

Not sure if this was the intended takeaway, but mostly it suggests to me that, for all of the talk of how DD “left the cupboard bare” to borrow the popular phrase, it’s not at all clear that they’d be in a better position these last few years if he hadn’t made those moves. Better draft position, I guess? But almost definitely not the additional WS title. Seems like whatever troubles they had with the MiLB pipeline began under Cherington.

(This is making me angry about the BC years all over again. I felt about him the way some of you feel about Bloom.)

Somebody could add to that with notes on what was traded for what. But I don't think the popular one-line DD narrative is particularly accurate.

I think Cherrington did well to pick up some good international signings, but his drafts are pretty bad. Benintendi was very high up #7, so good for not wasting it a la Trey Ball (also #7) two years earlier. Not that the #7 is a sure thing, but our development machine outcomes weren't exactly glorious.

Kopech proved to be a valuable trade chip down the road.

But that 2011 draft. Every time I see it it boggles the mind. And add Margot in as a signing. . .that's just nuts.

 

[JBJ_HOF]

Washington Post: What are the Boston Red Sox doing?

Yet the predominant feeling about the Red Sox seems to be that signing stars or retaining them simply shouldn’t be this hard. Exactly how much of that feeling is a result of Bloom’s leadership is difficult to quantify, but there is a sense around the game and the franchise that his hands are often tied by owner John Henry’s less-aggressive approach.

 

[Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat]

But that 2011 draft. Every time I see it it boggles the mind. And add Margot in as a signing. . .that's just nuts.

The Cody Kukuk draft!

 

[JM3]

Mookie probably was happy getting well over slot with his $750k...until he got Kukuk'd to the tune of $800k.

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

There’s a great book by Alex Speier that goes into crazy depth about that draft, Homegrown. Highly recommend.

 

[streeter88]

Faith continuing to drop. Their actions since this poll came out on December 10th have been cold comfort:

1. Eovaldi swapped for Kluber. Decline
2. JD swapped for Turner. Push
3. Anyone? Anyone? Buehler?

This quote from the WaPo article was jarring:
"Bloom made the Betts deal before the 2020 season, one that has become symbolic of the franchise’s approach under his regime: Homegrown stars have not stayed. Free agent stars have not come. And a franchise that always seemed to have money to spend and a city that cares has stagnated in a division that does not make way for the mediocre."

Happy New Year everyone. 2023 looking fantastic from this side of the dateline. Ugh.

 

[nattysez]

Washington Post: What are the Boston Red Sox doing?

The things that stand out from this article are that:
(1) the writer parrots everything that's been said on this board for the past months. Not sure if that's an indication of how obvious her analysis is or how good ours is.
(2) This line encapsulates a lot of this thread in terms of where to point fingers:

Yet the predominant feeling about the Red Sox seems to be that signing stars or retaining them simply shouldn’t be this hard. Exactly how much of that feeling is a result of Bloom’s leadership is difficult to quantify, but there is a sense around the game and the franchise that his hands are often tied by owner John Henry’s less-aggressive approach. Henry’s Red Sox had the highest payroll in baseball in 2018 and 2019, according to Cot’s Baseball Contracts. The year after they traded Betts, that payroll plummeted to 13th overall, then climbed back to sixth (and more than $200 million).

(3) This discussion of the X deal also nicely summarizes the difficulty in judging Bloom:

The Bogaerts deal was particularly jarring because Bloom had said many times that the Red Sox wanted desperately to re-sign him. Conversations with league executives and other agents suggest widespread skepticism that Bogaerts will be worth the $280 million San Diego gave him. Perhaps, one could argue, the Red Sox were wise to show restraint.

But Bogaerts’s decision came after years of advanced notice in which the Red Sox had the chance to negotiate an extension and were not able to do so.

I think it's a little unfair to say "the Padres will live to regret the Bogaerts contract" and a paragraph later say "the Sox could've extended Bogaerts." X hired Boras for a reason. I'm not sure there's any evidence that he was going to agree to a "reasonable" extension if the Sox had offered one earlier when there was a massive payday waiting for him.

I also think everyone is trying to determine what X being "worth" his contract means given all the mega-deals being thrown around. For how many years does he have to be good to be "worth" that 11-year deal?

 

[simplicio]

Counterpoint: that article is pure fluff. It's another feeeelings piece with zero insight into the business of baseball.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

Counterpoint: that article is pure fluff. It's another feeeelings piece with zero insight into the business of baseball.

Because why? I don’t have a Post subscription, so I can’t read it. But if it’s fluff*, provide some counterpoints other than the implied, “no one understands the genius that is Chaim Bloom except the true believers”.

* if you want to say this is clickbait, also show your work. Why would the Post’s baseball writer just start slamming Bloom for no reason?

Jeans is another writer in a long list (Abraham, Speier, Finn, Jennings, Rosenthal, Calcaterra, Stark and more) who are wondering WTF is going on in the Fenway front office. Are these all haters? All enemies of the state?

When professional baseball journalists (and if you notice, even though I think he’s right I didn’t add professional shit stirring Dan Shaughnessy to that list) are saying you had a bad off season, you might have had a band off season.

Most journalists, who are established and don’t need the clicks, don’t write bullshit just to write bullshit. That’s not the way this works.

 

[tims4wins]

Because why? I don’t have a Post subscription, so I can’t read it. But if it’s fluff*, provide some counterpoints other than the implied, “no one understands the genius that is Chaim Bloom except the true believers”.

* if you want to say this is clickbait, also show your work. Why would the Post’s baseball writer just start slamming Bloom for no reason?

Jeans is another writer in a long list (Abraham, Speier, Finn, Jennings, Rosenthal, Calcaterra, Stark and more) who are wondering WTF is going on in the Fenway front office. Are these all haters? All enemies of the state?

When professional baseball journalists (and if you notice, even though I think he’s right I didn’t add professional shit stirring Dan Shaughnessy to that list) are saying you had a bad off season, you might have had a band off season.

Most journalists, who are established and don’t need the clicks, don’t write bullshit just to write bullshit. That’s not the way this works.

You don't need a sub to read. Just need a free sign-in.