Red Sox in season discussion

catsooey

lurker
Jun 27, 2019
100
I hope Bloom will do what is best for the team regardless of how popular a player might be with the fan base.
I don’t think Bloom should sign anyone just for their popularity. I obviously want him to do what’s best for the team like I assume everyone does. But I don’t see players purely as laundry to be exchanged. I think a team needs an identity and cohesion - for the fans and the players. And I don’t want Bloom to trade away an all star player and core member of the team for a player that’s not as good just to stick to a philosophy.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
41,635
View: https://twitter.com/redsoxstats/status/1543711994175447041

If anyone is blaming the pen for this horrific cubs series they are insane.
The Red Sox scored 4 runs in the first 2 innings of this series, and 4 runs in the last 24 innings. Dejecting.
4 runs in almost three innings worth of games is insane. And todays runs were the result of the cubs infield dropping in infield popup.

Being that anemic on offense is putting an obscene amount on our pen.Doubly so when two starters went 5ip or less in this series.

also. I hate that Dalbec is getting shit on when he isnt the only one that deserves criticism
View: https://twitter.com/bostonsportsinf/status/1543698391858823168
Xander Bogaerts Has now gone 51 AB’s without a RBI and 95 AB’s without a HR hard to believe
Did you know..

Over the last 13 games

RBI
Rob Refsnyder - 8 RBI
JD, Bogey, Raffy - 8 RBI

JD - 5
Raffy - 3
Bogey - 0

As they go so go the Red Sox
View: https://twitter.com/bostonsportsinf/status/1543588251054792705
 
Last edited:

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
17,039
Maine
View: https://twitter.com/redsoxstats/status/1543711994175447041

If anyone is blaming the pen for this horrific cubs series they are insane.

4 runs in almost three innings worth of games is insane. And todays runs were the result of the cubs infield dropping in infield popup.
Shades of April coming back.

Easy to blame the bullpen blowing a 4-0 and a 5-3 lead. Bit more difficult to put all the blame on the pen for giving up a 2-1 lead. Especially against a team that doesn't have great pitching to begin with.
 

sean1562

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 17, 2011
3,572
Xander has a .854 OPS, JDM has a .864 OPS, and Devers has a .967 OPS. People are criticizing Dalbec because it is July and he is a 1B with a .617 OPS and 5 HRs. Of all players with at least 200 PAs, his OPS is 188 of 214 players. JBJ is 204 of 214. They really shouldnt be playing as much as they are.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
46,136
So Pivetta is the only starter to be healthy all year?
While it’s annoying, I wonder if we’ll look back at this half-season and be glad that the young guys are getting opportunities they otherwise wouldn’t have. Good to see what some of these guys have.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
17,039
Maine
Xander has a .854 OPS, JDM has a .864 OPS, and Devers has a .967 OPS. People are criticizing Dalbec because it is July and he is a 1B with a .617 OPS and 5 HRs. Of all players with at least 200 PAs, his OPS is 188 of 214 players. JBJ is 204 of 214. They really shouldnt be playing as much as they are.
FWIW, since the end of May, JD has a .680 OPS while Dalbec has a .711 in 50 fewer plate appearances.

Now JBJ, I'm not going to argue. 2 for 22 with 2 walks for the whole road trip. His time should be running out.
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
View: https://twitter.com/redsoxstats/status/1543711994175447041

If anyone is blaming the pen for this horrific cubs series they are insane.

4 runs in almost three innings worth of games is insane. And todays runs were the result of the cubs infield dropping in infield popup.

Being that anemic on offense is putting an obscene amount on our pen.Doubly so when two starters went 5ip or less in this series.

also. I hate that Dalbec is getting shit on when he isnt the only one that deserves criticism
View: https://twitter.com/bostonsportsinf/status/1543698391858823168


View: https://twitter.com/bostonsportsinf/status/1543588251054792705
They scored 5 runs on Friday and lost because Robles sucked. The bullpen was very good overall. Robles was terrible on Friday.

Yeah, the Cubs gave the Sox some soft runs today. The Sox also hit a lot of hard balls at people the last two games. Those things seem to even out.

Bottom line, this is a 2 of 3 for the Sox if not for another Robles implosion.
 

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
612
Good teams sometimes lose series to bad teams. It happens. Good offenses sometimes go cold for stretches. It happens.

I personally would like to see Bloom make a couple of moves to improve the bullpen now. I think the time is right, and I think there are some interesting options in Worcester right now. But I’m very confident that he has a plan and will implement it at the appropriate time.

The Sox are playing .557 ball right now even with the bad start factored in. They are in the first wild card spot. They have the fourth best record in the AL. If you are feeling panic right now, I suggest a deep breath and maybe an hour or so away from your phone.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
78,141
Oregon
Austin Davis starts Monday in place of Wacha. Bullpen game / PeteAbe
 

Ganthem

a ray of sunshine
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2022
700
I don’t think Bloom should sign anyone just for their popularity. I obviously want him to do what’s best for the team like I assume everyone does. But I don’t see players purely as laundry to be exchanged. I think a team needs an identity and cohesion - for the fans and the players. And I don’t want Bloom to trade away an all star player and core member of the team for a player that’s not as good just to stick to a philosophy.
What if the only way to keep Xander is to offer him 7 years 200 million and agree not to take him off short? I think most people here would love to see Xander play his entire career in Boston, but there has to be a line. Otherwise you end up with Pablo Sandoval and Chris Sale.
 

scottyno

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
9,840
I think people get tripped up on the "it takes time" part because the Dodgers and Yankees didn't really have a fallow period while they built up the farm. Really no team has had a roller-coaster ride like the Red Sox have.
The yankees had a 4 year period from 2013-16 where they missed the playoffs 3 times and lost a wild card game. That included the 2016 year where they sold off a bunch of guys to build up the farm system.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
17,039
Maine
The yankees had a 4 year period from 2013-16 where they missed the playoffs 3 times and lost a wild card game. That included the 2016 year where they sold off a bunch of guys to build up the farm system.
Noteworthy that the 2016 sell-off wasn't just building the farm system, it was bolstering an already good one (thanks in part to those "down years" and a big international spending spree). Among their prospects in 2016 were Gary Sanchez, Aaron Judge, Miguel Andujar, Jordan Montgomery, Luis Cessa, Domingo German, Rob Refsnyder, and Chad Green. And those are just the ones that spent at least a little time playing for the Yankees since.

Just highlights that the Sox biggest shortcoming over the last five years has been the minor league pipeline. They've struggled to develop pitchers for over a decade, but even the position player pool (fertile under Cherington) dried up after Benintendi and Devers graduated to the bigs.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,054
The yankees had a 4 year period from 2013-16 where they missed the playoffs 3 times and lost a wild card game. That included the 2016 year where they sold off a bunch of guys to build up the farm system.
While the Red Sox traded for Joe Kelly, Allen Craig and Cespedes. I hated they didn't trade for prospects. Though they did get EdRod.
 

Yelling At Clouds

Post-darwinian
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
2,578
The yankees had a 4 year period from 2013-16 where they missed the playoffs 3 times and lost a wild card game. That included the 2016 year where they sold off a bunch of guys to build up the farm system.
They were above .500 all four years. I think most teams would be pretty ok if that was their worst four-year stretch in thirty years.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
17,896
Miami (oh, Miami!)
One really ought to do the analysis of why the team had the ups and downs. The hangover years, the bloated contracts (which some here are now again urging), the Punto trade, valentine, the 2019 hangover, Covid, draft failures and successes, etc.

It’s not like there was some stable plan in place all those years.
 

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
612
2016 Red Sox 93-69 1st in AL East
2017 Red Sox 93-69 1st in AL East
2018 Red Sox 108-54 1st in AL East
2019 Red Sox 84-78 3rd in AL East
2020 Red Sox 24-36 5th in AL East
2021 Red Sox 92-70 2nd in AL East

Where is all this up and down inconsistency we’re suddenly talking about? Or do we mean the one that ended seven years and two general managers ago? Cherington perhaps prioritized amassing prospects at the expense of the big league club. Dombrowski unquestionably prioritized the success of the big league club over the development of the minor league system. They were both fired, despite each of them overseeing a world champion. The guy in place now appears to be doing a masterful job of competing at the major league level while rapidly improving the system. Yet here we are still complaining about what amounts to three crap years: 2012, 2014, and 2015. And of those, only two were truly crap. If the Yankees get credit for a 2016 sell off, why don’t the Sox get credit for one in 2014, when they were a middling team that dumped a ton of players and wound up getting Eduardo Rodriguez and the number 7 pick in the 2015 draft, Andrew Benintendi?
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
4,252
One really ought to do the analysis of why the team had the ups and downs. The hangover years, the bloated contracts (which some here are now again urging), the Punto trade, valentine, the 2019 hangover, Covid, draft failures and successes, etc.

It’s not like there was some stable plan in place all those years.
There has been 4 GM’s ( or other relevant title) over this time stretch while the MFY’s have had one. Henry and his lieutenants actually shockingly seem to meddle in philosophy and spending more than Steinbrenner! Hank has (from my reading and observations) allowed Cashman to fix his own problems- either with cash or trades while Henry has brought in new management to fix the problems created by the prior management- whether they were created by that management or by higher directives, or not. This has IMO lead to pulling back spending or trades that had to clean out some good in order to flush out waste.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,054
There has been 4 GM’s ( or other relevant title) over this time stretch while the MFY’s have had one. Henry and his lieutenants actually shockingly seem to meddle in philosophy and spending than Steinbrenner! Hank has (from my reading and observations) allowed Cashman to fix his own problems- either with cash or trades while Henry has brought in new management to fix the problems created by the prior management- whether they were created by that management or by higher directives, or not. This has IMO lead to pulling back spending or trades that had to clean out some good in order to flush out waste.
Maybe replacing the GM every so many years is part of the strategy. Our last 3 GMs have won a WS, here's hoping it's 4 in a row.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
62,249
There has been 4 GM’s ( or other relevant title) over this time stretch while the MFY’s have had one. Henry and his lieutenants actually shockingly seem to meddle in philosophy and spending more than Steinbrenner! Hank has (from my reading and observations) allowed Cashman to fix his own problems- either with cash or trades while Henry has brought in new management to fix the problems created by the prior management- whether they were created by that management or by higher directives, or not. This has IMO lead to pulling back spending or trades that had to clean out some good in order to flush out waste.
Hank died in early 2020 but didn't have much to do with NY decision making after the A-Rod opt-out/new massive deal mess. You are thinking of Hal, who was always the 'smart one' (this is relative admittedly) of the two.
 

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
612
There has been 4 GM’s ( or other relevant title) over this time stretch while the MFY’s have had one. Henry and his lieutenants actually shockingly seem to meddle in philosophy and spending more than Steinbrenner! Hank has (from my reading and observations) allowed Cashman to fix his own problems- either with cash or trades while Henry has brought in new management to fix the problems created by the prior management- whether they were created by that management or by higher directives, or not. This has IMO lead to pulling back spending or trades that had to clean out some good in order to flush out waste.
This is almost certainly not true. Since the firing of Lucchino, Henry and Co have clearly hired the guy they thought was best for the moment and let him run the organization his way. Otherwise, you would not have seen such radically different philosophies and approaches in back to back GMs. It was only when Cherington proved unwilling to pull the trigger on trading prospects for major leaguers, and when Dombrowski went on his mad spree of signing Sale and Eovaldi to extensions while essentially ignoring the minors, that they were eventually fired. If Henry had been “meddling in philosophy and spending” all along, then you never would have seen these wild swings. And what do you mean by meddling in spending? Do you think the Sox have been reluctant to spend on players
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
4,252
This is almost certainly not true. Since the firing of Lucchino, Henry and Co have clearly hired the guy they thought was best for the moment and let him run the organization his way. Otherwise, you would not have seen such radically different philosophies and approaches in back to back GMs. It was only when Cherington proved unwilling to pull the trigger on trading prospects for major leaguers, and when Dombrowski went on his mad spree of signing Sale and Eovaldi to extensions while essentially ignoring the minors, that they were eventually fired. If Henry had been “meddling in philosophy and spending” all along, then you never would have seen these wild swings. And what do you mean by meddling in spending? Do you think the Sox have been reluctant to spend on players
Well that's one way of saying that Henry and Co. have meddled. Changing the course 4 different times because they felt that the GM has made a mess of things and then getting the new GM to move in a different direction than their predecessors is exactly what I think falls under a category of "meddling". In a way. I can see how someone could see it differently but they didn't stick with the Cherington model- they poked around and signed a bunch of "splashy" FA's. Then when they were unhappy with how Dombrowski was moving, they brought in Bloom with budget constraints and demanded he trade the best Red Sox player in decades and rebuild a farm system that they were okay with depleting earlier.
The contrast between Hal (thanks JA) and getting involved in how Cashman has moved since he took over and Henry is pretty different.
And the way I see it.... the wild swings are exactly because of the meddling. And while, no.... I don't think that Henry has been tight with the spending, they have pulled back from where the spending was clearly headed (after Eo and Sale contracts and some of their older bad contracts, they could have ponied up and spent like the Dodgers but Bloom was clearly directed to reign in "out of control spending". Not to "not spend" but again, Bloom wasn't told to sign Mookie at any cost. Hasn't been told to sign X and Devers at whatever the cost. I'm not arguing good or bad there... just arguing that there clearly is some limits being imposed.
 

Minneapolis Millers

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,031
Twin Cities
Well that's one way of saying that Henry and Co. have meddled. Changing the course 4 different times because they felt that the GM has made a mess of things and then getting the new GM to move in a different direction than their predecessors is exactly what I think falls under a category of "meddling". …
Four times? Hiring Theo wasn’t really because the new ownership thought Duquette had made a mess of things, they just wanted their guy. Then Theo left for the Cubs. You really only have two times that fit your meddling definition, which isn’t that strong a case for meddling.
 

cantor44

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2020
1,397
Chicago, IL
I agree with @Daniel_Son. Franchy and Refsnyder aren't really comparable here. There's nothing in Refsynder's career that I'm aware of to suggest a breakout, and like @cantor44 mentioned he's 31 and it's rare for hitters to make major advances at that point. But still, one can hope.

Franchy on the other hand has always had elite skills that have been held back by too many strikeouts and poor contact. This year he has cut his K rate significantly, and no @cantor44, it's not too small of a sample size to suggest that change is real. Breaking out at 27 is certainly late-bloomer territory but hardly unheard of. It takes only 60 plate appearances for strikeout rate to stabilize, and Franchy has nearly three times that number. If Franchy really has cut his K rate by 10% and added 2.5% to his BB rate, there's every reason to believe that his breakout is real. So far his batted ball results have really lagged what they should have produced, but even if that difference is "real" and not just due to luck then Franchy has still broken out in a meaningful way. Franchy is a 2-3 win player this season, which is really valuable considering how cheap he is. And there's still a lot of room for upside.
Yes, I do understand that Franchy has some good peripherals and raw talent. At his age, he may well keep improving - that is an important distinction between him and Refsynder, indeed, and you're right to point that out. I think we're still dealing with a SSS in terms of his results ...is what we're seeing part of his ascendency, or a blip were he played above his mean for a couple weeks. I hope it's the former, but it will take more time to determine . Certainly his season stats are solid right now and not incredible (so, that's the other question, will the improved Francy be a 750 OPS guy, or even better?) ...
 

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
612
Well that's one way of saying that Henry and Co. have meddled. Changing the course 4 different times because they felt that the GM has made a mess of things and then getting the new GM to move in a different direction than their predecessors is exactly what I think falls under a category of "meddling". In a way. I can see how someone could see it differently but they didn't stick with the Cherington model- they poked around and signed a bunch of "splashy" FA's. Then when they were unhappy with how Dombrowski was moving, they brought in Bloom with budget constraints and demanded he trade the best Red Sox player in decades and rebuild a farm system that they were okay with depleting earlier.
The contrast between Hal (thanks JA) and getting involved in how Cashman has moved since he took over and Henry is pretty different.
And the way I see it.... the wild swings are exactly because of the meddling. And while, no.... I don't think that Henry has been tight with the spending, they have pulled back from where the spending was clearly headed (after Eo and Sale contracts and some of their older bad contracts, they could have ponied up and spent like the Dodgers but Bloom was clearly directed to reign in "out of control spending". Not to "not spend" but again, Bloom wasn't told to sign Mookie at any cost. Hasn't been told to sign X and Devers at whatever the cost. I'm not arguing good or bad there... just arguing that there clearly is some limits being imposed.
Meddling is generally understood to mean micromanaging on a daily kind of level. You know, the kind of thing the original Steinbrenner was famous for. It’s laughable to call Henry a meddler when, if anything, the criticism with him has typically been that he’s not engaged enough because he spreads his attention across investing, the Globe, Liverpool, NASCAR, and the Sox. I don’t agree with that characterization, either, but I bring it up because I find it quite funny that when Henry isn’t being accused of being disinterested he’s being called a meddler. Can you imagine what this fan base would have to say if he *hadn’t* delivered four championships in the past 18 years?
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
4,252
Meddling is generally understood to mean micromanaging on a daily kind of level. You know, the kind of thing the original Steinbrenner was famous for. It’s laughable to call Henry a meddler when, if anything, the criticism with him has typically been that he’s not engaged enough because he spreads his attention across investing, the Globe, Liverpool, NASCAR, and the Sox. I don’t agree with that characterization, either, but I bring it up because I find it quite funny that when Henry isn’t being accused of being disinterested he’s being called a meddler. Can you imagine what this fan base would have to say if he *hadn’t* delivered four championships in the past 18 years?
The term is used only in direct comparison to the MFY’s over the same time period if that wasn’t clear.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
31,462
John Henry had a long-term longing for Dombrowski to be his GM for the Sox, so JWH jumped when he finally became available. If DD isn't on the market, then Cherington probably has a much longer tenure in Boston as the head of baseball ops. As it was, JWH tried to keep Ben on board with DD.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
78,141
Oregon
Cora: "We’re still the Red Sox, right? We should be able to get something done regardless of whether it’s July 4 or not.” / PeteAbe

edit: this is in regards to getting an MRI for Hill
 
Last edited:

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
3,895
Portland
So what could a hypothetically fully healthy August Boston staff look like?

Rotation:

-Sale
-Eovaldi
-Pivetta
-Winckowski
-Hill

Bullpen:
--Davis
-Danish
-Schreiber
-Wacha
-Houck
-Whitlock
-Strahm
-Crawford

Shuttle - Seabold, Bello, German, Zack Kelley
Injured/rehab - Mata, Brandon Walter, Paxton, Taylor (been awful)
4-5 current drek members depending on your drek definitions
Plus potential acquistions
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,054
So what could a hypothetically fully healthy August Boston staff look like?

Rotation:

-Sale
-Eovaldi
-Pivetta
-Winckowski
-Hill

Bullpen:
--Davis
-Danish
-Schreiber
-Wacha
-Houck
-Whitlock
-Strahm
-Crawford

Shuttle - Seabold, Bello, German, Zack Kelley
Injured/rehab - Mata, Brandon Walter, Paxton, Taylor (been awful)
4-5 current drek members depending on your drek definitions
Plus potential acquistions
Chris Murphy is in AAA now too, I imagine he's pretty far down the depth chart. Probably higher up than Mata though.
 

DisgruntledSoxFan77

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 12, 2015
1,548
Quincy
So what could a hypothetically fully healthy August Boston staff look like?

Rotation:

-Sale
-Eovaldi
-Pivetta
-Winckowski
-Hill

Bullpen:
--Davis
-Danish
-Schreiber
-Wacha
-Houck
-Whitlock
-Strahm
-Crawford

Shuttle - Seabold, Bello, German, Zack Kelley
Injured/rehab - Mata, Brandon Walter, Paxton, Taylor (been awful)
4-5 current drek members depending on your drek definitions
Plus potential acquistions
I don’t know that I see them bumping Wacha from the rotation in favor of Hill. I would think Hill would be the one who goes to the pen
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
5,259
A fully healthy rotation would be Sale, Eovaldi, Pivetta, Paxton, and Wacha; with Hill, Winckowski, Crawford, Seabold and Bello the depth behind that. That’s pretty solid, even expecting a few injuries.

Have to feel really good with the way todays game went. It feels to me like at least one of the Crawford, Seabold, Winckowski trio could be moved in a deal; but at this point, not really sure what the team needs beyond bullpen help (which any of those guys could provide themselves).
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
3,895
Portland
I don’t know that I see them bumping Wacha from the rotation in favor of Hill. I would think Hill would be the one who goes to the pen
Thought about that, but I'm not sure Hill would be as effective out of the pen and I'm mostly thinking about Wacha's potential regression. Though the other shoe hasn't dropped for a while now.
A fully healthy rotation would be Sale, Eovaldi, Pivetta, Paxton, and Wacha; with Hill, Winckowski, Crawford, Seabold and Bello the depth behind that. That’s pretty solid, even expecting a few injuries.
It's really a great mix, because they can all go multiple innings too. There could be a few guys on any given game to give you length instead of blowing through all the one inning guys all the time.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
42,231
A fully healthy rotation would be Sale, Eovaldi, Pivetta, Paxton, and Wacha; with Hill, Winckowski, Crawford, Seabold and Bello the depth behind that. That’s pretty solid, even expecting a few injuries.

Have to feel really good with the way todays game went. It feels to me like at least one of the Crawford, Seabold, Winckowski trio could be moved in a deal; but at this point, not really sure what the team needs beyond bullpen help (which any of those guys could provide themselves).
Dalbec could clearly be upgraded and Casas’ injury makes it more unlikely that he’s this season’s solution. I would definitely be searching for a minor deal there that doesn’t really give to anyone we care about.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
5,259
Dalbec could clearly be upgraded and Casas’ injury makes it more unlikely that he’s this season’s solution. I would definitely be searching for a minor deal there that doesn’t really give to anyone we care about.
Totally agree; I think a deal or two involving Dalbec, Downs, Seabold, Winckowski, Crawford, Groome, etc is pretty likely; to clear a few bodies off the 40-man if nothing else.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
42,231
Totally agree; I think a deal or two involving Dalbec, Downs, Seabold, Winckowski, Crawford, Groome, etc is pretty likely; to clear a few bodies off the 40-man if nothing else.
Josh Bell seems like a great target. Don’t believe extension talks got anywhere and he’d be a nice rental. Problem is that I doubt some combination our 40 man guys would get it done. Really sucks how awful Downs has performed.
 

Apisith

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2007
2,930
Bangkok
Arroyo's statcast numbers are as good as Xander's (whose numbers are in line with his career). Hopefully he gets some games at 1B to get him more PAs. I think at this point the only real need is the bullpen and RF.
 

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
612
Totally agree; I think a deal or two involving Dalbec, Downs, Seabold, Winckowski, Crawford, Groome, etc is pretty likely; to clear a few bodies off the 40-man if nothing else.
I don’t believe that Bloom will trade Winck or Seabold, nor do I believe that they should be considered part of the 40-man crunch. They’ve both shown enough to believe that they can contribute in a bullpen role, where their stuff will play up, they make peanuts, and each has flashed enough that you can still dream on them as backend starters. They‘re precisely the kinds of players that you hold on to and see what you’ve got.
 

bsj

Renegade Crazed Genius
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2003
21,972
Central NJ SoSH Chapter
Arroyo's statcast numbers are as good as Xander's (whose numbers are in line with his career). Hopefully he gets some games at 1B to get him more PAs. I think at this point the only real need is the bullpen and RF.
Didn’t they play him at first last year and he got hurt his first game?
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
17,039
Maine
Didn’t they play him at first last year and he got hurt his first game?
So? One fluke injury and he should never play there again?

FWIW, he's played there twice this season (3 total innings) with no ill effects. He's probably the third option there right now. But if it's a matter of getting his hot bat in the lineup (if/when it is hot), there should be no hesitation to play him.
 

Apisith

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2007
2,930
Bangkok
Totally agree; I think a deal or two involving Dalbec, Downs, Seabold, Winckowski, Crawford, Groome, etc is pretty likely; to clear a few bodies off the 40-man if nothing else.
Wait, we only have two spots in the rotation locked up next year (Sale and Pivetta). Why not throw 6-7 guys into the mix for the last 3 spots? I’m talking Winckowski, Mata, Seabold, Crawford, Bello, Walter and Houck. Maybe Houck stays in the bullpen, and Walter also ends up in the ‘pen.

Instead of spending $80m on our rotation, we would only be spending $40m. That will leave a lot of room to re-sign Devers and sign a replacement for Xander. Or maybe Bloom wants to give DeGrom $40m/year for 3 years (next offseason). We will have the room for that. There’s no reason to trade away cost-controlled pitchers until we figure out which ones will stick in the rotation because we need at least 2 to stick long-term.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
17,039
Maine
Wait, we only have two spots in the rotation locked up next year (Sale and Pivetta). Why not throw 6-7 guys into the mix for the last 3 spots? I’m talking Winckowski, Mata, Seabold, Crawford, Bello, Walter and Houck. Maybe Houck stays in the bullpen, and Walter also ends up in the ‘pen.

Instead of spending $80m on our rotation, we would only be spending $40m. That will leave a lot of room to re-sign Devers and sign a replacement for Xander. Or maybe Bloom wants to give DeGrom $40m/year for 3 years (next offseason). We will have the room for that. There’s no reason to trade away cost-controlled pitchers until we figure out which ones will stick in the rotation because we need at least 2 to stick long-term.
Whitlock is going to be in the rotation next year as well. Don't leave him out of the mix.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
5,259
I think the 40-man “crunch” just makes it really difficult to keep all these guys, but you are right in that it could likely come down to what roles they envision for Houck and Whitlock. But, if you have a rotation of Sale, Pivetta, Paxton, Houck, and Whitlock; there probably isn’t room to keep all these guys around.
 
Last edited:

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
612
Whitlock is going to be in the rotation next year as well. Don't leave him out of the mix.
Paxton, too. But Apisith's point remains. You need more than five starters over the course of a season, and a lot of these young arms have the potential to contribute both as starters and relievers over the next couple of years. I don't see the Sox parting with any of Winck, Seabold, Walter, or Murphy. Bello and Mata are essentially untouchable, I would guess.