X wanted to stay. Boras works for X. If the Sox made an offer that X felt was reasonable he would have taken it. Boras has an obligation to acquiesce to the desires of his client.
Poll: Rate Your Faith in the Red Sox Front Office
- Thread starter Pozo the Clown
- Start date
What if the Sox' plan is to build up a developmental machine that constantly churns out really good players (and cheap!), pays very little for their ages 23-29 years, gets great value per WAR, and then lets those guys go as they hit the first couple of holes of the back nine, allowing other teams to pay huge dollars for declining production, and then just churns out another cheap, talented player? What if their plan is to always pay for players' front nines at low cost but high production and let them go as they hit the back nine at huge cost but declining production?
Isn't that generally speaking smart business as a model?
The way to get there is to (a) take the time to build up a truly great farm system that gives you lots of chances at developing future star players, (b) the willingness to let these fan favorite homegrown stars go, and (c) the ability to consistently introduce new quality young prospects/players into the system.
The Dodgers and Astros and Braves seem to have figured out all this, but at least the Dodgers and Astros have added in the ability to sign some big time players as well. I think this is generally the model Chaim is going for. Not that I've spoken with him about it, obviously. I'm just guessing here.
Isn't that generally speaking smart business as a model?
The way to get there is to (a) take the time to build up a truly great farm system that gives you lots of chances at developing future star players, (b) the willingness to let these fan favorite homegrown stars go, and (c) the ability to consistently introduce new quality young prospects/players into the system.
The Dodgers and Astros and Braves seem to have figured out all this, but at least the Dodgers and Astros have added in the ability to sign some big time players as well. I think this is generally the model Chaim is going for. Not that I've spoken with him about it, obviously. I'm just guessing here.
Ownership signs off on all this stuff, I'd imagine. And let's be real: Bloom is operating under parameters set by ownership. He's not some free-lancer just doing his own thing while Henry and company just focus on the Premier League.
I'm not sure this dichotomy scans.
1) If the team wins, the seats will fill, the TVs will remain tuned, and the advertising revenue will come. That's the bottom-line incentive in play here. Apart from prestige and pride, ownership wants a successful team.
2) Yet good custodianship of the club means there will also be some lean years, and some development years where initially unimpressive players like Pedroia, Xander, Casas and Bello get to adjust.
3) PR will always put a positive spin on the upcoming season.
The fuzzy talk-radio/podcast realm might attempt to drive down pink-hat interest in tickets in the abstract, but I suspect tickets will sell when the time comes. Especially if the team actually preforms. I mean, was there a year where a segment of the Boston media didn't find something to be bitterly and deeply critical about re: ownership? It's as predictable as the sunrise.
And yet, as you say, I honestly doubt the pink-hats are literally hanging on every off-season tweet, be it positive or negative. Do they know or care about half the stuff that gets raised here? Will it affect them during the season?
So what's the argument? To reach potential pink-hats in the middle of their busy holiday season, and "reinforce public trust" we ought to sign a "proven winner" like Pablo Sandoval/Carl Crawford? Or placate talk-radio personalities? Or trumpet to the skies that there's a chance the team will suck next year?
No, I think the decline you're speaking of is more rooted in the hours-long midnight-ending games than the Sox off-season PR.
If you want to see what a truly irrelevant team looks like, come visit me in Miami.
(And lest this be misread, it's not a blanket endorsement of either ownership or management.)
Sure, sounds great. But what teams aren’t trying to do this? Every organization is trying to churn out productive and inexpensive players. Every team participates in the draft. Actually doing it; identifying, acquiring, and developing talent…that is the difficult part. The current roster looks to have, what, 4-5 homegrown players on it next year?
Seems easy. Why didn't we think to do this years ago?!
Seriously, that seems to be exactly what the Sox want to do. It's not easy. And the Astros were friggin' GAWD AWFUL for nearly a decade as they built using that model. It's also been a great 6 year run for them, but we'll see how many more years they can sustain it.
I'm fairly convinced that you need to. I think the Rays are a bit of an aberration. Clearly, they are the best at what they do and they have shown it over a significant period, but (1) they have never gone all the way, and (2) they have had a little bit of perfect storm to them. We'll see. I may be wrong.
Getting a bunch of runs above replacement from one or two positions leaves you flexibility to apportion it among the other seven positions in a way where you can make some errors along the way and still be ok. You need to build that base. It's hard enough to find a 2.8 WAR player for $4 million. It's near impossible to find all of them and to have them all stay on the field all year.
Of course it's not easy. It's also not easy winning consistently and/or winning championships using any other model. It's just plain HARD to win constantly and to win championships, in any sport.
I wonder if the Astro fan base would do it all over again - have the AWFUL years but also the INCREDIBLE run they've had. The Sox are trying to do this while at the same time remaining somewhat competitive - which is why I think Bloom tried his approach this past trade deadline. Looking to add the pieces for the future while still giving the postseason a shot. It's a very small needle to thread. It's especially hard, I'd imagine, when the fan base that's experienced the most WS titles in the last 20 years in all of MLB - while going to the playoffs a ton as well - isn't willing to go more than a year or two being bad. This despite so many fans saying back in October 2004, "I don't care if they ever win it again after this, just win it THIS ONE TIME PLEASE!!!!!!" Since then, this ownership group has given Sox fans THREE MORE titles, division championships, ALCS appearances, and playoff berths.
This isn't me saying they do everything right. It's more of a statement on the fan base than anything else, and it's what - along with the media - makes it so hard to do what they're trying to do (oh, and the fact that there are other really-well-run organizations trying to beat you). But again, ANY method of team building and championship winning is HARD. Very hard. Look at the Yankees - they spend more money than Elon Musk and they are always good yes, but they've won one title in the last 22 years.
They did sign Bogaerts to a six-year deal. They let him walk after he opted out, which may have been the right thing to do. We won’t know if it was the right decision until all the pieces are in place for the Red Sox and we see how Xander performs.
I’m not happy to see homegrown guys leave, but I’m interested in how they’re going to put a competitive team on the field. In the end, winning will cure a lot of ills. Time will tell how soon that will be.
Homegrown is overrated. Papi and Pedro weren't homegrown. Neither was, say, Shane Victorino.
The only thing that matters to me about homegrown is we get a period where nobody else can fuck with them and we can try to get a good deal.
I hate seeing players that I love leave the team. But it makes no difference to me whether they were homegrown or not, and the only things that I really care about are whether we could have kept them at a deal that makes sense.
The only thing that matters to me about homegrown is we get a period where nobody else can fuck with them and we can try to get a good deal.
I hate seeing players that I love leave the team. But it makes no difference to me whether they were homegrown or not, and the only things that I really care about are whether we could have kept them at a deal that makes sense.
Alex Speier was on Keith Law's podcast yesterday and there were a few interesting takeaways about the relationship between the FO and ownership.
- When Law speculated that ownership should share more of the fan/media ire being directed at Bloom related to letting Xander walk, Boston's aversion to long-term deals, value hunting, etc. Speier shut it down pretty quickly. He said that ownership gives a ton of deference to its GM and while ownership might push back or express their own opinions on certain moves, they ultimately let the FO make final decisions.
- Speier pointed to Dombrowski and the Sale/Eovaldi contracts as deals that ownership was strongly opposed to and thought were too risky, but they backed their guy. That those contracts appeared to backfire so quickly with Sale and Eovaldi's struggles and injuries in 2019 were one of the primary reasons for Dombrowski's firing.
- Speier was confident that if Bloom proposed a big offer for Xander as the best way to make use of the available payroll, Henry and Werner would've similarly backed him, but like Dombrowski, would've held Bloom responsible.
- Speier thinks the FO is higher on Devers and will extend themselves in contract negotiations more for him than they did for Xander. Mentions Devers' youth and thinking that hard hit rates/numbers will age well.
- Speier said the Sox are looking for a potential middle-of-the-order right handed hitter. They're open to multiple positions.
- Law brought up that without further moves, the rotation looks like one of the worst staffs in baseball. Speier suggested the FO doesn't see it that way and thinks they're really high on Whitlock, Bello, Houck, etc. Speier looked at it more as the rotation has among the highest error bars/possible range of outcomes in baseball.
- Speier is really high on Rafaela and thinks he will open 2023 in AAA, but his plate discipline is bad and he will likely need to spend a lot of time in Worcester.
Over the long-term, I think that's right. The casual fan will pay less attention if the Sox aren't competitive for a long time. The flip side of that, though, is that the band wagon jumpers will jump right back on if there is a winning team.
Take the start of 2013, for example. The Sox had missed the playoffs three years running. Many fans were very unhappy with how Francona left, even more unhappy about the Bobby Valentine year, and I seem to recall a general feeling, much like now, that management didn't have a clue. The epic Fenway sellout streak ended in April of 2013. And then the rest of that year happened and the Sox won the World Series and all was forgiven.
I'm one of the posters who's on record as being in for the long haul. And I'm absolutely in agreement with everyone saying that it does not seem like the plan is working and this might be a rough year. But I guess I'm more confident than some that ownership is smart enough to change strategy and not let this become a long-term stretch of cellar-dwelling for the Sox.
Rays look like a player development machine from afar but part of their reputation IMO is because they aren't as scrutinized as BOS. In a five-year span from 2014 to and including 2018, they went: 4th / 4th / 5th (last) / 3rd / 3rd and didn't make the playoffs.
It's just not that easy these days to win and stock the cupboards. It's much easier to draft premium talent if you have premium picks.
The Rays just seem to be grade at making trades and identifying players who can be productive in their system. Their most productive players last year were, by bWAR, Shane McClanahan, Jeffrey Springs, Yandy Diaz, Drew Rasmussen, Randy Arozarena, and Jason Adam. McClanahan was the only one they drafted.
I don't think anyone is banging on the table because they won't tolerate being bad for a couple years, or not winning a title. I think it's more that they aren't good; they have no stars (or won't once Devers walks or is dealt); and they aren't particularly young and upcoming. If the 2023 had a bunch of really young players on the cusp, we'd be fine with a 70 win season if we saw hope for the future. Instead, we're likely stuck in that 78-82 win range with a boring team filled with mostly JAGs in all areas of the roster. Blah. It's boring and there isn't hope for the immediate future.
I think most here have faith that ownership will figure it out, other than the hard core FSG doesn't care about the Sox any more crew. The question is whether this director of baseball ops or whatever his title is and GM are capable of figuring it out.
This is all fair, I was obviously being flippant in my reply.
As much as some folks critique "entitled" fans and the aggressive Boston media, there is another aspect that doesn't always get a lot of play here... It is remarkably expensive for a fan to follow the Sox closely. If you're in market you need to subscribe to cable to get NESN, along with FOX, ESPN, TBS and MLB Network, so you can watch games. If you're out of market you need to buy MLB.tv. if you want to attend a game going to Fenway costs more than seeing any other team in MLB. Plus, most of the best online sources for news require a subscription (Boston.com, BSJ, The Athletic, etc).
There's a real, tangible investment to be an avid Sox fan. And the notion that we'll just purposefully be mediocre-to-lousy for a few years while we vaguely "build up the farm" isn't going to sit well with people who are being asked to spend money on the product.
*edir* I got an email from the Sox yesterday hawking ticket packs as a holiday gift. I literally LOL'd at it before I deleted it. I'll almost certainly go to a game or 2 this season, because I just love Fenway, but that's really what they're selling at this point. Location.
And it's not a new phenomena. The '86 Sox team was the one that really propelled my lifetime fandom. I was 12. By 1990 - four seasons later - just two players remained that had been in the starting 9 from '86 (Boggs and Evans).
Roster turnover has been the reality for the entire time I've been a baseball fan. It's not the turnover that upsets people, it's letting good players walk in a way that harms the club.
Correction to this: Chris Sale has been with the Red Sox longer than Devers (who came abord mid '17) and Brasier (who arrived in '18)
Yes, this is it. If Devers is eventually dealt in 2023, that will be 3 stars leaving the Red Sox since February of 2020. Basically, 3 in 3 years. How many of these situations have the Yankees been through under Cashman in 25+ years? Cano over a decade ago? Anyone else. All teams eventually lose a star. It's the clustering of the star loss that is the big issue here. They have one final chance to reverse course with Devers. Most here don't actually think they'll take it. They may not have a shot here given how the market has turned. It's just incredibly poor optics.
Your first sentence is true. If the team wins, all of the good things will happen. But they finished last last year. They finished last two years ago. There's been a lot of hew and crying about the Sox being cheap and they haven't really gone out of their way this offseason to change that perception*. Confidence in the Sox is in the toilet now. Like 8Slim, I get about three to five emails a week from the Red Sox begging me to buy tickets or ticket packages or partial ticket packages or tickets with free gifts. When things were going well, I don't recall getting this much of a full court press. Right now, December 15, the Sox don't look very good and they need people to buy tickets to the upcoming season. I doubt that many people are doing that in the volume that Boston expects. The reason is because the team is, at best, boring and at worst, dysfunctional.
* Whether the team really is cheap or not is immaterial. So many people think that they are, that at this point the truth doesn't matter at all. That's an issue.
I don't think that I agree with your second assessment. Why does a team like Boston, a team with untold riches and one of the Cadillac franchises of the sport, need to go through lean years. And didn't we already go through a bunch of lean years during the last decade? (2012-2015 -- aside from 2013). Are we going big boom--bigger bust every five years? That sucks. I think that's okay for a Pittsburgh, an Oakland, a Tampa Bay, but Boston? I don't think so. And before you ask, this doesn't mean that every season is World Series or bust. That's not what I'm saying, but there needs to be some sort of hope for the dawning of a new season. That's what drives ticket sales in the winter. Hope for summer, hope for great baseball.
Yeah. Obviously the PR folks paints a rosy picture. But at this point their painting with finger paints and a Gatling gun. They're all over the place with their message. Either we're pregnant or not, this half measures stuff is not working. I think that while most people wouldn't be happy with a full reboot, if that's what the Sox feel that they need to do, just do it. It can't be any worse than what they're doing now. "Yeah, we're in on EVERYONE -- until the player tells us he won't take below market value."
Maybe sign a "proven winner" like Manny Ramirez. Or Johnny Damon. Or the dozens of other free agents that the Sox signed that have helped them the next season. You're making the same mistake that the FO is making, there are bad signings yes, but not every free agent is a bad deal. And yes, you need to assure people that the 2023 is not going to be another lost season. And what's wrong with that, BTW? The Boston Red Sox are an entertainment based organization. Rafael Devers isn't curing cancer. Chris Sale isn't building rockets. Kike Hernandez isn't trying to end the Ukranian/Russian war. Half of these guys hit a ball with a bat, the other half try to have a ball miss a bat. This idea that the season and the preparation for future seasons is so sacrosanct and must be viewed with the utmost seriousness is silly.
You're losing sight of what the Red Sox and MLB and all of sports really is. It's a way to pass time. It's entertainment.
The Red Sox should trumpet that the team won't suck next year. Why? Because of the same reason Marvel tells the audience that the next Marvel movie won't stink. Or why Taylor Swift tells her fans her next album is the best album she's ever done. Or why Malcolm Gladwell is letting people know that his next book is super important and will be full of a lot really neat ways of looking at things. Because they're all competing for your dollar. Yes, the Boston Red Sox should be spending money to make money. They should be promoting to the lowest common denominator. They should be doing what they can for today, because tomorrow might never come. Someone said up thread, what if Mayer sucks? Or what if he busts his leg on a go-kart accident? Then where is this team. And BTW, I think it's malpractice that the Red Sox are constantly hyping a 19-year-old kid in A+ as the next big thing. That's a lot of pressure to heap on a kid, "You're the savior of the Red Sox, buddy and we're not spending dime one until you prove it."
I find this impossible to believe, personally. If the FO is ultimately making the decisions, it's pretty odd that Bloom's first order of business was to look at Betts and trade him for a bag of baseballs! Or, and I realize this sounds crazy... but maybe ownership *actually* does direct what the FO does since it is their team and they wanted to drop Betts to save money. As to the second point, that is Monday morning QBing to the point of being laughable. I hated the Sale extension at the time (Eo I did not love either, but was better with) and I find it nuts that once again, ownership had these supreme doubts but were absolutely beholden to the FO who they hired, paid for and could replace at any point. All this reads as the ownership group doing what a lot of successful CEOs/owners do, which is making sure that some one else is the fall guy when things go south, no matter the truth of the situation or how in touch with reality it is. "We really wanted to keep Lester/Betts/X, and never sign Crawford/Price/Sandoval/Sale's extension, but the big bad FO absolutely held us to it and gave us no options, we had to do it! We hated those transactions as much as you did, believe us, we never wanted to do them!" Sure, Jan.
Part of the turnover from 86 to 90 was because of the age of the 86 roster. Armas, Baylor, Rice, Seaver, Stanley, even Hurst was starting to show signs of aging before 90. The only young guys to actually build around on the 86 team were Clemens and Boggs and they were both still there in 90. Also, Greenwell wasn't a key part of the team in 86 but he did get called up that year, and he was a key player in 90. I wouldn't say they let a bunch of key young players go between 86 and 90.
Appreciate the context. I wasn't saying that they let valuable players go, just that we're all well conditioned to seeing roster turnover. And that it's not a 2022 phenomena, it's been going on for decades.
Kind of remarkable -- both that Sale has more tenure than Devers and also that we have nobody that goes back further. I guess Sale's time away from the game because of injury makes it seems like Devers has been here longer.
Thank you for sharing this with us, it's really good stuff. Speier is easily the reporter in this market that I trust the most, and when he says something, I generally believe it. I'll be honest, it also cements my opinion that I have a TON of faith in FSG but very little faith in Bloom's ability to run the front office effectively here in Boston. FSG isn't always going to get the hire right (like no GM will hit on every move) but they also generally tend to not compound an issue by allowing the same mistake to be made over and over again. I think acting quickly and decisively if something isn't working is the sign of good leadership, not a mark against it.
The note about the budget is something I've always believed, but it's good to see it backed up. I've always felt ownership gives the head of baseball OPS $Luxury Tax Threshold each year to spend, and pretty much lets them do that. Of course they sign off on the deals, but it's always seemed to be Henry's MO (his infamous "Larry Lucchino runs the Red Sox" take), and I think it's smart. I doubt he any more tells Bloom what players to sign than he does whomever the head of Liverpool is - justify it in your budget - but you're accountable. I tend to think that is the way wise sports owners operate - and I think FSG are some of the wisest in major American sports.
While I am in the minority, before he left I would have (made it clear I'd come close and...) offered Bogaerts 10/$250m guaranteed when SD offered 11/$280m, along with incentives to get up above $280m . Maybe he takes it, maybe not, but I would have at worst given him something to think about. Bloom obviously doesn't think he's worth that (and he could be right) but he'd also better do something to address the gaping hole left in the middle of the line up, the middle of the diamond and the middle of the franchise, and a platoon of Christian Arroyo for the 90 games he'll play and Rob Refsnyder for the 70 he won't isn't going to get it done, at least not if your goal is WINNING in October baseball, not just playing in it (though playing in it would be a good start).
Hope he's right on Devers. You need some semblance of a core. I'll remain cautiously optimistic that we'll make him a real offer (with Bogaerts gone, I'm less certain he'll take it).
Interesting note on the middle of the order RHH. That has to be a trade as we've let every one of those in FA sign elsewhere, so it'll be interesting to see what they come up with.
The error bars point is very well stated. The variance is soooo high. I don't like that it's an enormous error bar on literally every pitcher on the staff. That's why I advocated so much for multiple guys in the Bassitt, Tallion, Eovaldi mold instead. I'm fine with taking the chance on the kids for those error bars. Betting on guys whom haven't pitched more than 60ip in any of the past 3 seasons combined and are both over 32 WITH those guys seems like a recipe for disaster. If they're healthy and effective, awesome - you can manage some innings in the 'pen for the kids or skipping starts. If not, you're not dependent on it - but I'd make Sale and Paxton EARN rotation spots, I wouldn't count on them.
Last edited:
I never really thought of it this way, but it is an astute point. Mayer is out there on an island now being asked to impossibly be the savior to the team (I would look at the Angels and Trout and see how far relying on one megastar gets you) or to take all the heat for not being the savior. That the Sox appear to be failing to produce any other elite contributors around him to share the load (good and bad) is once again, part of the failure of Bloom's "plan".
Thanks for this. Just to be clear, my point wasn't that ownership gets involved in every decision made by Bloom. It's that they set the parameters and budget and such, and so Bloom doesn't just have the freedom to bring the payroll to whatever the heck he wants. So those constraints put him in a bit of a bind at times. It's not all on him is what I'm trying to say.
I'm not sure I agree with this, though I understand what you mean. I think there's plenty of hand-wringing and whining among the Sox fan base. It's clear that the Sox have potentially a very bright future. The sheer volume of high level prospects in the system should give every Sox' fan hope for the future. It's just a little further away than people want to tolerate. And even then, there's a sizable portion of the fan base that says the MLB club is all that matters and they should be willing to deal the prospects for MLB talent as often as possible.
Mayer should be a luxury item for a big market team like the Red Sox, like how Len Bias (RIP) was supposed to be for the Celtics. Imagine a world where you have Devers entering his prime, Bogaerts/Story still productive, Casas growing into a force, Yoshida spraying line drives all over the field, and, oh yeah, here comes a top 5 pick with some serious pedigree making peanuts for several years. This was my main issue with how all of this unfolded. It was all right there for Chaim and Co. We had the foundation in Bogey/Devers/Story. We have the prospect who's ready to make an impact in Casas (we hope). We have the supporting cast of solid "glue" guys like Hernandez, Yoshida, Verdugo, and whoever else they acquire in FA/trade for, etc.
All of this was predicated on keeping your two stars in Bogaerts and Devers. They had every chance in the world to get Bogaerts to stay long-term at a more reasonable amount than 11/280. They blew it. And now the market has completely gone nuts so the odds of them retaining Devers, especially after losing a close friend, has to be very low.
So, instead of having a really nice core of Bogaerts, Devers, Story, Casas, Yoshida with Mayer on the way, they're going to be left with much less. And all of this means that the burden to be a star from almost Day 1 is that much larger for a guy like Mayer. And the odds of replacing Bogaerts/Devers with a comparable combo is just low. It didn't have to be this way.
Interesting point. A bunch of my very favorite all-time Sox players weren't homegrown: Pedro, Ortiz (#1 and #2 all time, respectively), Koji, Manny, Varitek. Same is true for many of my favorite players in other sports: Chara, Garnett, Moss, etc.
I root mostly for the team, and sometimes my favorite players on my favorite team were drafted by that team, but lots of times they weren't.
In fairness, I haven't seen anyone on the Baseball Ops team/ FO proclaim the Mayer is any sort of savior, that has been us.
I'd argue 90% of any promises or declarations or proclamations being held against the baseball ops team/FO came from us (or the media). For example, I don't remember anyone from the Red Sox claiming that the Betts trade happened specifically to clear money to extend Bogaerts/Devers. That was all fan/media projection.
They certainly weren’t very specific, but the general refrain seemed to be that the trade set them up for “sustained, long term success”. What that means seems open to interpretation.
https://es.pn/38kEiP6
Thank god the Tigers and Pirates had two of the three picks before us and didn’t want to pay him and Leiter what’s they’re worth
Thanks for posting this. Interesting stuff about the Henry/Werner/Bloom dynamic.
As for the middle-of-the-order right-handed hitter, I don't know why the team didn't just sign George Springer when they had the chance. His 6/$150 deal seemed high-end but not eye-popping when he signed it, but he's been fantastic for a direct rival since returning from an early 2021 injury.
Does Springer's 4/$96.5 million look like a problem now? Seemed, and still seems, like a missed opportunity. Who knows how those talks went, but he's a local guy and got along well with Cora, so it seemed like there could have been a good fit. I don't think it would have been too disruptive of an alternative history — we might have even still signed Kiké Hernandez to play right field, where he'd seem to be just as solid. We'd have probably exceeded the cap in 2021 and then reset in 2022, having not traded for JBJ and trimming elsewhere.
I think this is where those of us doing most of the hand-wringing on this board disagree. FanGraphs prospect rankings are not the be all and end all for prospect evaluation, but it's pretty close to the best we have. When you look at their approximate top 150 prospects, the Red Sox have 5 of them (Mayer, Casas, Bleis, Yorke and Gonzalez). On average, every MLB team should have - 5 of them - if they were randomly dispersed. A team banking on prospects and trying to build the farm should ostensibly have more because that's where they're focused, right? Good farm systems and good development machines will have more, bad ones will have less...
For example Baltimore has 7 in the top 150. Cherington has 8 out in Pittsburgh. Friedman has 8 in LA. Hazen has 7 in Arizona. Those are just the teams I happen to think of as the best farm systems in the game.
Bloom has done a nice job rebuilding the farm system. It was terrible, it's now top 10, which is very good. But it's more a very strong middle class; it is neither looking at 4 or 5 guys whom have demonstrated an ability to perform at the upper minors and are ready to step in to provide cost controlled help to a contending team nor is it 7 guys all in the top 75 or some such. I'm not saying cost controlled players in the middle of your roster aren't important, they clearly are. But a lot of them project out to be more "middle of the roster" players (at least if you believe, like I do, that the guys on SoxProspects are a good source to cite).
But more in that you have a cost controlled CF like Rafaela so that you CAN spend $27M on a 4.5WAR player like Xander Bogaerts (or Carlos Correa if you don't think Bogaerts can play short). Not so that your entire future hinges on hitting on every prospect. (Or, you can pay Dustin Pedroia nothing to offset Manny Ramirez, you can pay Jon Lester nothing to offset Matsuzaka, you can pay Rafael Devers nothing to off-set David Price).
If this system were top 5 with 8 top 100 prospects and Bloom had brought in 5 of them in 3 years, we'd re-signed Devers and maybe gotten a reliable who would be here for 3 or 4 years or actually paid for a premium player instead, many of us would say "there is the plan, and look at what Bloom has done to build the next core"; this doesn't look like that at all.
Last edited:
I'd say it matters quite a bit if you're trying to evaluate Chaim's impact. It'd be like giving Theo full credit for 2004 when Duquette brought in Pedro, Manny, etc. Not suggesting that's what you're doing but much of Chaim's perceived value is built on his ability to revamp the farm system. He's done that, to some extent. But some of the higher impact guys had nothing to do with him. We'll see how this list looks in a year because some of his guys haven't had much opportunity to rise up the ranks yet.
These things take time...you don't just wander in & magically have top rated prospects. Mostly because prospects take years to develop & the highest rated ones are mostly the ones who are almost ready to contribute at a major league level.
Let's look at the top prospects on MLB & see when they were acquired by their team (keeping in mind Bloom was hired 10/25/2019):
Of the top 25:
14 are players acquired before Bloom arrived in Boston, including Casas (#25).
3 are other '21 draft picks that are rated lower than Mayer (#7), and were gone well before the Red Sox 2nd pick (they went 1st, 6th & 13th).
2 are '20 draft picks that were drafted before the Red Sox 1st pick (Yorke at 17).
2 are the top 2 picks in the '22 draft that we could not have drafted.
1 is Mayer
So there are exactly 3 players that Bloom could have gotten:
#6 Jordan Walker - drafted by the Cardinals 21st overall & it seems like a miss for 20 teams as he is by far the highest rated prospect from this draft right now. The Cards paid him a $2.9m bonus (Yorke, the 17th pick, received $2.7m from the Red Sox).
#10 Jackson Chourio - signed as an international free agent in January 2021 by the Brewers for $1.9m as a 16 year old. The Red Sox spent their 2019 International Pool money ($5.5m) on 38 different players, no one more than $900k. Seemed like they were going for depth?
#21 Kyle Harrison - was the 85th overall pick in the 2020 draft. Fell to the 3rd round due to signability concerns. Giants gave him a $2.5m signing bonus. For reference purposes, the Red Sox did not have a 2nd round draft pick that year (sign stealing), and their 3rd round pick was #89 overall, so the 17th pick would have been their only shot at Harrison.
https://www.mlb.com/prospects
So, bottom line, patience is required if one really wants to be able to judge the quality of a farm system & it's effects on the eventual MLB product, & the fact that Bloom doesn't have a ton of current top prospects already, really isn't surprising.
Dombrowski came in 2015 & Bello/Casas are the 1st decent MLB players he acquired...7 years later.
Top 25 list in Spoilers...
1) Alvarez - Mets - July 2018
2) Henderson - Orioles - June 2019
3) Carroll - DBacks - June 2019
4) Rodriguez - Orioles - June 2018
5) Volpe - Yankees - June 2019
6) Walker - Cardinals - June 2020 (21st pick - Red Sox pick prior was Yorke at 17)
7) Mayer - Red Sox - June 2021
8) Cartaya - Dodgers - June 2017
9) Perez - Marlins - July 2019
10) Chourio - Brewers - January 2021 (international free agent)
11) Jones - DBacks - June 2022 (2nd pick)
12) Lawlar - DBacks - June 2021 (6th pick)
13) Holliday - Orioles - June 2022 (1st pick)
14) De la Cruz - Reds - June 2018
15) Espino - Guardians - June 2019
16) Luciano - Giants - July 2018
17) Marte - Reds - July 2018
18) Baty - Mets - June 2019
19) Davis - Pirates - June 2021 (1st pick)
20) Bradley - Rays - June 2018
21) Harrison - Giants - June 2020 (3rd round, 85 overall - Red Sox only pick prior was Yorke at 17)
22) Hassell III - Padres - June 2020 (8th pick)
23) Veen - Rockies - June 2020 (9th pick)
24) Painter - Phillies - June 2021 (13th pick)
25) Casas - Red Sox - June 2018 (Dombrowski)
2) Henderson - Orioles - June 2019
3) Carroll - DBacks - June 2019
4) Rodriguez - Orioles - June 2018
5) Volpe - Yankees - June 2019
6) Walker - Cardinals - June 2020 (21st pick - Red Sox pick prior was Yorke at 17)
7) Mayer - Red Sox - June 2021
8) Cartaya - Dodgers - June 2017
9) Perez - Marlins - July 2019
10) Chourio - Brewers - January 2021 (international free agent)
11) Jones - DBacks - June 2022 (2nd pick)
12) Lawlar - DBacks - June 2021 (6th pick)
13) Holliday - Orioles - June 2022 (1st pick)
14) De la Cruz - Reds - June 2018
15) Espino - Guardians - June 2019
16) Luciano - Giants - July 2018
17) Marte - Reds - July 2018
18) Baty - Mets - June 2019
19) Davis - Pirates - June 2021 (1st pick)
20) Bradley - Rays - June 2018
21) Harrison - Giants - June 2020 (3rd round, 85 overall - Red Sox only pick prior was Yorke at 17)
22) Hassell III - Padres - June 2020 (8th pick)
23) Veen - Rockies - June 2020 (9th pick)
24) Painter - Phillies - June 2021 (13th pick)
25) Casas - Red Sox - June 2018 (Dombrowski)
One correction - not sure why I looked at the '19 IFAs (which Dombrowski did) when comparing to Chourio.
The '21 IFA for the Red Sox was headlined by Miguel Bleis ($1.5m), the Red Sox 3rd rated prospect by SoxProspects. Jedixson Paez was signed for $450k & is 30th on that list.
The Red Sox spent $5.3m on 31 different players.
Sure I guess. I'm just trying to decide whether I'm hopeful for this organization. And I am. Resoundingly so.
I certainly won't begrudge you for it. I'm less hopeful but I, at least, acknowledge there is a path here if some in the Casas, Bello, Rafaela, etc. group start to reach some of their potential with guys like Mayer, Yorke showing some good AA production by the end of the year. And who knows, there could be a surprise or two along the way. Rafaela wasn't even remotely on my radar this time last year. As for the major league squad, Devers' situation will hang over the entire season but even with that, it'll be interesting to see how guys like Whitlock, Houck, Yoshida, Story, etc. do this year. I also hope there are some impact guys in 2023 not currently on our roster.
This is a big year all around for the organization.
It takes time, but we actually are getting very close to when we should start seeing major league debuts from the earliest Bloom guys.
Mookie was drafted in 2011 and debuted in 2014.
Xander played his first minor league year in 2010 and was up with the big club in 2013.
Devers was 2014 —> 2017.
JBJ was 2011 —> 2013.
Hearing that the Yankees have signed Rodon has just added to my depression of how this offseason is going.
Bloom -- like every other GM -- had multiple chances to draft Spencer Strider, but he's not on your list because he's a post-prospect. Again, other GMs also missed the boat on him, but if the Sox in 2020 had drafted Strider in the fourth round instead of Jeremy Wu-Yelland, the future would look very different now.