Bloom is just a gmGPT-bot set with direction not to trade prospects so I don’t see anything dramatic happening. The smartest thing to do, and the thing mostly like to be a force multiplier, is get a strong defensive SS.So last night's loss to the Rays featured some pretty bad fielding gaffes. Casas left first to get a bunt. Dalbec appeared at SS. At the plate, there was a yo-yo approach of patience and hacking. Alex Cora did his usual squirrel-on-the-roadway approach by bringing in a scrub when down (making the problem worse) and then going to key pitchers.
And yet. . .the Sox scored 7 runs. Which is normally enough for a victory.
So the question is: if the Sox were to improve in some fundamental areas, would they be looking at something like a 7-5 record, instead of their current 5-7 record?
And if so, what should the team be doing?
And conversely, we allowed ourselves to take less than our allotted 27 outs with the idiotic bunt in the ninth last night. I know they said afterwards that it was a play to try to get a hit out of the bunt, but come on, how shallow is the team if we're down by two in the ninth and we don't have a batter that we trust to do more than hopefully beating out a bunt single in that situation?There are some runs in this lineup but as Cora noted after last nights game “if you give them more than 27 outs”….
I mean, we have one of those. It's incredibly frustrating that they are starting off with a pile of injuries all up the middle. If we can't have actual injury luck could we at least spread them around a little better?Bloom is just a gmGPT-bot set with direction not to trade prospects so I don’t see anything dramatic happening. The smartest thing to do, and the thing mostly like to be a force multiplier, is get a strong defensive SS.
If you wait for the injury stuff to play itself out -- I know, nobody has any patience -- then you have Kiké in center, Mondesi and Story up the middle, two corner OFs who probably won't kill you, etc. You can see the plan. It just isn't "let's focus all our resources on early 2023".Seems like a fundamental grocery shopping issue. If Bloom actually values defense and fundamental soundness then I'm not seeing it in his player acquisition. Trades for Schwarber and put him at multiple new positions. Pray it doesn't blow up in your face. Biggest and most difficult RF in the MLB? Staff it with fundamentally suspect OFs like Renfroe and Verdugo. Bat first fringe CF? Sign him up. Japanese import with a suspect defensive reputation? Give'em $75 mil and stick him in left. Toughest and most important defensive position on the field? Staff it with a 31-year-old utility guy coming off a serious injury. Oh yeah, he's also your new CF, so now you're dealing with the almost unfathomable situation of having to play Dalbec at SS. Trevor Story? Huge question marks pre-signing about whether or not he could stick at SS. Elbow blows up in year two of a $150 deal.
-Duval and +facing lefty pitchers may be a determining factor here.The approach at the plate seemed so good in the first series - taking a lot of walks, getting contact over K's - and it's reverted back to 2022 levels of impatience since then.
It's likely the "injury stuff" never plays out. We have several guys who have had injury-plagued careers, it's not reasonable to expect that there will be some magical multi-month stretch where they're all healthy.If you wait for the injury stuff to play itself out -- I know, nobody has any patience -- then you have Kiké in center, Mondesi and Story up the middle, two corner OFs who probably won't kill you, etc. You can see the plan. It just isn't "let's focus all our resources on early 2023".
Yes, when you sign injury plagued players because you can get them cheaply, you have to expect them to get injured. Can a team have a pitching staff and a bench (and I'm including minor league assets here) with enough quality depth that it can survive have a significant number of players miss a significant part of the season every year? Seems like a hard thing to accomplish.It's likely the "injury stuff" never plays out. We have several guys who have had injury-plagued careers, it's not reasonable to expect that there will be some magical multi-month stretch where they're all healthy.
I believe the team has a training staff, which is designed to condition players, help prevent injuries, treat injuries, etc. Probably a topic for another thread, though.Can one coach injuries?
I just don't share this view. Mondesi is coming back from an ACL. If I can come back from one, pretty sure he can too. Story is already progressing getting over surgery for the one major injury in his career. Duvall has a fracture which will heal. If you think they are injury plagued then you either believe in black cat stuff or you are just planning for future events to happen to them. Show me a guy with a chronic condition and I'll agree, he's injury plagued.It's likely the "injury stuff" never plays out. We have several guys who have had injury-plagued careers, it's not reasonable to expect that there will be some magical multi-month stretch where they're all healthy.
I hear ya. I just feel that every MLB team deals with injuries throughout a season. Some more acutely than others. And very few teams ever have a long stretch of the season where no one(s) of consequence are on the IL.I just don't share this view. Mondesi is coming back from an ACL. If I can come back from one, pretty sure he can too. Story is already progressing getting over surgery for the one major injury in his career. Duvall has a fracture which will heal. If you think they are injury plagued then you either believe in black cat stuff or you are just planning for future events to happen to them. Show me a guy with a chronic condition and I'll agree, he's injury plagued.
Bingo. Guys get hurt. Some are tough to overcome, admittedly. But a franchise needs to have depth to deal with the inevitable time lost over the course of a season. The Sox don't seem to be equipped to do that. But we'll see, of course.I think the point is that while some guys will come back from injuries, other new injuries will develop. It would be nice if the team is at some point at perfect health, but that rarely happens (when it does, it’s a beautiful thing)- it’s like having too much pitching.
"Don't tell me what you value; I'll look at your roster construction/payroll and I'll tell you what you value."Seems like a fundamental grocery shopping issue. If Bloom actually values defense and fundamental soundness then I'm not seeing it in his player acquisition. Trades for Schwarber and put him at multiple new positions. Pray it doesn't blow up in your face. Biggest and most difficult RF in the MLB? Staff it with fundamentally suspect OFs like Renfroe and Verdugo. Bat first fringe CF? Sign him up. Japanese import with a suspect defensive reputation? Give'em $75 mil and stick him in left. Toughest and most important defensive position on the field? Staff it with a 31-year-old utility guy coming off a serious injury. Oh yeah, he's also your new CF, so now you're dealing with the almost unfathomable situation of having to play Dalbec at SS. Trevor Story? Huge question marks pre-signing about whether or not he could stick at SS. Elbow blows up in year two of a $150 deal.
Mondesi has 239 AB since 2021 including MiLB. I'm not sure how much he can be counted on.I just don't share this view. Mondesi is coming back from an ACL. If I can come back from one, pretty sure he can too. Story is already progressing getting over surgery for the one major injury in his career. Duvall has a fracture which will heal. If you think they are injury plagued then you either believe in black cat stuff or you are just planning for future events to happen to them. Show me a guy with a chronic condition and I'll agree, he's injury plagued.
Just curious, which injuries are you questioning?I believe the team has a training staff, which is designed to condition players, help prevent injuries, treat injuries, etc. Probably a topic for another thread, though.
What sort of depth are you expecting though? Does any rational person expect a replacement to…. Be above replacement level? I’d they were that, they’re likely starting on another team being paid way more than “depth” costs.Bingo. Guys get hurt. Some are tough to overcome, admittedly. But a franchise needs to have depth to deal with the inevitable time lost over the course of a season. The Sox don't seem to be equipped to do that. But we'll see, of course.
Mondesi has played in more than 100 MLB games in a season once. He couldnt stay healthy before he tore his ACL. Expecting him to stay healthy is like expecting Paxton to stay healthy. Its just not what these guys do. Some guys can consistently stay healthy; some cannot. When someone continually shows themselves to be in the second group, you need to expect them to miss significant time each year.Mondesi has 239 AB since 2021 including MiLB. I'm not sure how much he can be counted on.
https://www.foxsports.com/mlb/raul-mondesi-player-injuries
Well I didn't think the depth was bad but the injuries are all up the middle.Bingo. Guys get hurt. Some are tough to overcome, admittedly. But a franchise needs to have depth to deal with the inevitable time lost over the course of a season. The Sox don't seem to be equipped to do that. But we'll see, of course.
No I don't because that's totally unscientific and baseball is littered with examples that disprove your point. There is no medical diagnosis of "injury-prone." For sports purposes, once an injury heals, there are guys with degenerative conditions and there are guys who are healthy. This whole discussion, which goes on and on and on because people are mad that the Sox didn't make it back to the ALCS last year and have decided that 2023 is their last chance before we write off the entire team, is based on emotion and not fact.Mondesi has played in more than 100 MLB games in a season once. He couldnt stay healthy before he tore his ACL. Expecting him to stay healthy is like expecting Paxton to stay healthy. Its just not what these guys do. Some guys can consistently stay healthy; some cannot. When someone continually shows themselves to be in the second group, you need to expect them to miss significant time each year.
Guys who get injured a lot tend to get injured more than guys who havent. That doesnt mean that they will necessarily keep getting hurt every season; it just means there is a heightened risk. I dont think you can possibly look at a large sample of player pools and not see that there are certain players whose bodies break down.No I don't because that's totally unscientific and baseball is littered with examples that disprove your point. There is no medical diagnosis of "injury-prone." For sports purposes, once an injury heals, there are guys with degenerative conditions and there are guys who are healthy. This whole discussion, which goes on and on and on because people are mad that the Sox didn't make it back to the ALCS last year and have decided that 2023 is their last chance before we write off the entire team, is based on emotion and not fact.
"Oh ya? Give me examples?"
OK, for a pitcher...
- Year 1: torn labrum, done after 21 games
- Year 2: recovers late, only 15 games
- Year 3: Cy Young, MVP, should've finished off the Mets
Batter:
Year 1: broken wrist
Year 2-3: Pretty good
Year 4: broken wrist
Year 5: knee trouble
...
Year 15: "This is our fuckin city and nobody gonna dictate our freedom. Stay strong."
That's some circular logic you've got there.Guys who get injured a lot tend to get injured more than guys who havent.
Let me rephrase, guys who have prior injury histories, tend to get hurt more in the future.That's some circular logic you've got there.
Some higher upside than he's shown, plus generally lauded for defense and speed. He's a 4.3 WAR player even with the stops and starts, and that's before the change in baserunning. All of the reports were that he's streaky and can clearly hit but hasn't sustained it.Mondesi was injured when they acquired him, so it’s no surprise that he is injured now. He’s also not a very good player, so what are we even arguing about here? Is his absence really what is separating this team from contention?
Do you have data to back that up? You seem to be suggesting that injuries are predictable, or at least who will get injured is predictable, which except in the case of something chronic like a bad back or a damaged knee, is not really true at all. Did Duvall break his wrist on Sunday because he'd injured the same wrist last season? Did Sale break his finger last year because he had the UCL tear in 2020? Did Mondesi tear his ACL because he had a strained hamstring the year before or was it because he had a shoulder subluxation in 2019?Let me rephrase, guys who have prior injury histories, tend to get hurt more in the future.
Edit: I see you've since rephrased, but still....Guys who get injured a lot tend to get injured more than guys who havent. That doesnt mean that they will necessarily keep getting hurt every season; it just means there is a heightened risk. I dont think you can possibly look at a large sample of player pools and not see that there are certain players whose bodies break down.
If you dont think there are any of those guys around, we dont have anything to talk about.
We know this is not the case for soft tissue injuries. There have been plenty of studies that show specific players are more at risk for continued injuries (e.g., a single hamstring pull suggests an increased rate of recurrence). For example: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2325967119861064.Do you have data to back that up? You seem to be suggesting that injuries are predictable, or at least who will get injured is predictable, which except in the case of something chronic like a bad back or a damaged knee, is not really true at all. Did Duvall break his wrist on Sunday because he'd injured the same wrist last season? Did Sale break his finger last year because he had the UCL tear in 2020? Did Mondesi tear his ACL because he had a strained hamstring the year before or was it because he had a shoulder subluxation in 2019?
Injuries are all fluky random occurrences. We naturally want to find patterns to explain what otherwise doesn't make a lot of sense. Doesn't make it true.
Good teams get these kinds of guys. They stash guys with talent and when they don't have someone in AAA they have good scouts who identify guys for trades.What sort of depth are you expecting though? Does any rational person expect a replacement to…. Be above replacement level? I’d they were that, they’re likely starting on another team being paid way more than “depth” costs.
I can understand the soft tissue thing. But that isn't the case with any of the players on the IL for the Red Sox right now. If it were, I could accept the argument that mistakes have been made in acquiring "injury-prone" players. But none of their injuries are recurring injuries to vulnerable soft-tissue areas, or even repetitive use injuries (which is how I would categorize pitchers and arm injuries). In fact, none of the "injury prone" players on the roster have demonstrated a chronic issue with a particular soft tissue area in their careers. They've all suffered a number of different and unrelated injuries over their careers, which isn't predictive in the least.We know this is not the case for soft tissue injuries. There have been plenty of studies that show specific players are more at risk for continued injuries (e.g., a single hamstring pull suggests an increased rate of recurrence). For example: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2325967119861064.
We also know that is not the case for arm injuries with pitchers - shoulder injuries have an increased risk of recurrence. For example: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26118941/
That isnt to say that all injuries make people more at risk for future injuries, but if you really want to make a case that a player who has never sustained a serious injury in his career is as likely to have an injury as a guy whos had them every year, I'd love to see some support for that as it: 1) definitely is contrary to what we know of soft tissue injuries specifically; and 2) seems completely illogical.
Hmm...I think the fact that they may have moved him off of first base in part because his knees couldn't seem to take a season of standing on the infield might weaken this example somewhat. Especially since he also had a torn meniscus in 2006-07 (that required surgery after '07), a torn tendon sheath that sent him to the DL in 2008, a season-ending Achilles injury in 2012, and a season-ending wrist injury in 2014.Batter:
Year 1: broken wrist
Year 2-3: Pretty good
Year 4: broken wrist
Year 5: knee trouble
...
Year 15: "This is our fuckin city and nobody gonna dictate our freedom. Stay strong."
Okay, but does that mean the solution is to never sign or trade for players with any injury history at all? Like never sign a pitcher who has had Tommy John? Never trade for an outfielder who tore a meniscus? All players this side of Cal Ripken Jr get hurt once in a while (and even he played through stuff that would warrant a few days off in today's environment). It's next to impossible to acquire only players who have a history of staying healthy, and even they can get hurt out of the blue.There’s tons of articles out there about predicting injuries; most seem to suggest that a player who has a specific injury is more likely to have that same injury occur again in the future.
I think the point is that those guys were acquired, even with known injuries, with the expectation that they could recover from the injuries and then contribute. Schwarber was injured when they trade for him, and that paid off. Whitlock was unprotected in rule 5 largely because he was coming off Tommy John. That paid off too, even if he's missed a bit of time with other injuries.I don’t know what injuries we are really discussing here though; is it just Duvall, whose injuring of his wrist was probably a fluke?
Mondesi was hurt when acquired. Story had elbow issues when signed. Paxton was hurt when acquired; a different injury now of course. Whitlock & Bello missed a few starts, Wyatt and Mills seem relatively inconsequential.
I don’t want to suggest that, but a model and analytics driven team that is not appropriately incorporating risk of injury into their forecasts might consistently see excess value from repeat injury risk players. It might be why Trevor story was perceived as value (by me too at the time!) but is broken down again for the Red Sox and not some other team. It’s probably quite hard (near impossible?) to factor injuries systematically, but perhaps there’s a reason players coming off injury are cheap and there is some wisdom in the market.Okay, but does that mean the solution is to never sign or trade for players with any injury history at all? Like never sign a pitcher who has had Tommy John? Never trade for an outfielder who tore a meniscus?
….snip…
How did guys like Perez, Richards, Wacha, Hill, Strahm actually do?For the past few years, they’ve seem focused on signing players, especially pitchers, who are willing to take really short term deals (usually one year, with a team option). That’s a pretty limited pool of players, guys like Perez, Richards, Wacha, Hill, Kluber, Paxton, etc (and Hernandez, Duvall, Gonzalez, etc on the position player side). I’d imagine that players who are willing to sign these kinds of deals are generally older, often coming off injury and or poor performance and are probably more likely to get injured. The upside is if they fail, you aren’t on the hook for long. The downside is wasted money and probably a fairly low ceiling of production.
Some good, some not so good. And missed a lot of time with injury. But you know this.How did guys like Perez, Richards, Wacha, Hill, Strahm actually do?
They're not alone in that strategy!For the past few years, they’ve seem focused on signing players, especially pitchers, who are willing to take really short term deals (usually one year, with a team option). That’s a pretty limited pool of players, guys like Perez, Richards, Wacha, Hill, Kluber, Paxton, etc (and Hernandez, Duvall, Gonzalez, etc on the position player side). I’d imagine that players who are willing to sign these kinds of deals are generally older, often coming off injury and or poor performance and are probably more likely to get injured. The upside is if they fail, you aren’t on the hook for long. The downside is wasted money and probably a fairly low ceiling of production.
The Rodon deal was actually 2/44 with a player opt-out after one year, not sure that fits here.The Giants struck gold with Gausman and Rodón.
They were actually average to better than average (by ERA+). So, Bloom's been pretty canny in his acquisitions in this regard. And the upside is you get good production for your allotted resources. But you know this.Some good, some not so good. And missed a lot of time with injury. But you know this.
Forgot that, thanks.The Rodon deal was actually 2/44 with a player opt-out after one year, not sure that fits here.
Regular folks do not throw 95 mile an hour fastballs and 12-to-6 curve balls. Those things produce tremendous, unnatural forces on shoulders and elbows, don't they?A lot of the assumptions we hear seem to come from other sports. I think what Mikcou is saying could be true in football for sure and maybe the NBA, where guys' bodies are having to withstand extreme impacts -- 300-pound guys tackling you, Rob Williams coming down from leaping into the stratosphere, etc. Baseball has some risky plays but apart from catcher they are relatively minimal and not too far outside what regular folks do.