The Conductor: who should Breslow haul to Boston this winter?

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
7,608
I agree that having batters who excel against LHP and RHP is the ideal. And I share the hope that Campbell, Anthony, Grissom, Mayer fit that description, and that Duran, Casas, Yoshida etc can improve a bit. But the Sox did fine last year using matchups and should be in a position to be even better against all pitching this year.

The Sox had the 5th best OPS against LHP in the AL and the 6th best OPS in the AL against RHP. And both of those numbers should improve significantly by fielding a competent second baseman and the return of Casas. (I posted earlier with a breakdown of the horrendous 225 plate appearances against LHP by Dalbec, Valdez, Cooper etc, where they collectively put up an OPS under .500. Just removing that putrid subset will more than offset O'Neill's 150 PAs against lefties, and we won't miss his really bad 300+ PAs against RHP (.693 OPS)).

As a point of comparison, the Yankees had a much bigger split, with the top OPS against RHP and the the 6th ranked offense in the AL against LHP, with greater than 50 point drop between the two. They also lost Soto and Torres, who were two of their three best hitters against LHP (only Judge and those two had an OPS over .705 against LHP). FWIW, Bellinger has a limited split but Goldschmidt really struggled against RHP last year.
but...... we need a big RHH "thumper" and am willing to move Casas, move Devers to first and spend a stupid amount of money to get one, no matter what your "statistics" say.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,845
I agree that having batters who excel against LHP and RHP is the ideal. And I share the hope that Campbell, Anthony, Grissom, Mayer fit that description, and that Duran, Casas, Yoshida etc can improve a bit. But the Sox did fine last year using matchups and should be in a position to be even better against all pitching this year.

The Sox had the 5th best OPS against LHP in the AL and the 6th best OPS in the AL against RHP. And both of those numbers should improve significantly by fielding a competent second baseman and the return of Casas. (I posted earlier with a breakdown of the horrendous 225 plate appearances against LHP by Dalbec, Valdez, Cooper etc, where they collectively put up an OPS under .500. Just removing that putrid subset will more than offset O'Neill's 150 PAs against lefties, and we won't miss his really bad 300+ PAs against RHP (.693 OPS)).

As a point of comparison, the Yankees had a much bigger split, with the top OPS against RHP and the the 6th ranked offense in the AL against LHP, with greater than 50 point drop between the two. They also lost Soto and Torres, who were two of their three best hitters against LHP (only Judge and those two had an OPS over .705 against LHP). FWIW, Bellinger has a limited split but Goldschmidt really struggled against RHP last year.
While absolutely true, if you look at runs scored they're only 8th (vs LHPs) and 10th (vs RHP) If you look at wRC+ vs LHPs they were 14th (101) and 12th vs RHPs. So we can all find statistics to prove what we want, and I'm not trying to say that mine are any more valid than someone else' to be clear. They all should be used as pieces of the puzzle, not the "answer" on their own.

Though I continue to maintain that when one factors in that they play in the 2nd most hitter friendly park in baseball, if the offense is 9th in runs scored, that's a lot closer to a "middling" offense than a good one (because if we're going to talk about curving their pitching up for degree of difficulty in navigating Fenway, then their offense has to be graded down the curve to be consistent).

For example, the two teams directly above the Sox in terms of runs scored were San Diego and NYM. Petco has played closer to neutral the last several years, Citi Field is an extreme pitchers park and Fenway is 2nd only to Coors in terms of park effects that favor the offense. Last season, Boston was 13th in the game in terms of runs scored at home, for what it's worth. In 2023 they were only 8th in runs scored at home. In 2022 they were only 6th. For comparison the last time they made the playoffs (2021) they were first. The last title team in 2018 team was first as well.

The players currently in the organization, on balance, seem to not produce at levels they should at Fenway Park, and it's been that way for the past 3 seasons. That seems like something that should probably be addressed by substantial changes to the on field personnel when the team plays 81 games in the 2nd most hitter friendly park in the game and like a large systemic issue than tinkering around the edges would fix (or put another way, bringing in lets just say Randal Gricuck or Mark Canha instead of whoever is the last player on the bench) probably isn't going to substantially change much.

To be fair, bringing in one starting caliber player probably isn't going to change that much overnight. It's not like Breslow can fire the roster and start from scratch. But they should be looking to build this over time by adding pieces year over year instead of assuming that one spending spree (or two elite prospects) are going to do as such in one fell swoop.
 
Last edited:

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
1,371
So we can all find statistics to prove what we want, and I'm not trying to say that mine are any more valid than someone else' to be clear. They all should be used as pieces of the puzzle, not the "answer" on their own.
I agree, and appreciate, this sentiment. Do you have a link to OPS+ vs LHP and RHP? That could be another helpful piece of the puzzle that I haven't been able to find.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,845
I agree, and appreciate, this sentiment. Do you have a link to OPS+ vs LHP and RHP? That could be another helpful piece of the puzzle that I haven't been able to find.
Sure thing. FG does it for team batting stats. Here is the overall team pages for wRC+ vs LHPs last year. https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders/major-league?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&season=2024&season1=2024&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=&filter=&players=0&sortcol=17&sortdir=default&type=8&month=13

As it's a little tough to actually find, the splits tool is on the bottom, right hand third of the gray box from the FG page. It's interesting to play around with to get different situations. I'm honestly a little surprised (and I believe you, I don't mean it to sound like I don't, just that it's surprising) that there is such a difference in terms of OPS+ score and wRC+ score. I always thought of them as roughly similar (as in a 110OPS+ would be about a 110 wRC+).

Admittedly, I think that the lack of ability to consistently just bludgeon teams at Fenway Park is more damning than any other statistic I can find, and that is something that the stats match they eyeball test (kind of like putrid infield defense). Anyone can see it watching the games, and the stats back it up.

Theo always talked about building a team that can win at Fenway Park as one of his core tenants, and they have not been able to do that over the last several seasons. Which is a main reason I think that some substantial changes need to be made - both to the pitching staff (and Breslow has done this) and to the offense (hasn't been able to do this yet). But it's why I always talk about my belief that the team needs to be adding core bats and not just pieces around the edges.
 
Last edited:

20Ks

New Member
Jul 11, 2024
189
He hit through the injury all of last season, so I suspect he'll be able to DH long before he's ready to play the outfield. According to this article from last Saturday, he's expected to start dry swinging a bat within the next week or so. That would seemingly put him on track to be the Opening Day DH. Also noteworthy in Cora's comments is the acknowledgement that it was the shoulder that prevented Yoshida from playing the outfield and that if his shoulder is up to it, he'll be in the outfield mix this season.
Pjheff brings up a great point though. If you wish to acquire someone you can always start Yoshida on the DL. Then you have rehab assignments. rinse and repeat if need be. There will undoubtedly be opportunity/need for Yoshida as the year progresses, and at that time work him in. Or hopefully he just starts raking from the get go. Which is totally my preference.
 

chawson

Hoping for delivery
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
5,203
While absolutely true, if you look at runs scored they're only 8th (vs LHPs) and 10th (vs RHP) If you look at wRC+ vs LHPs they were 14th (101) and 12th vs RHPs. So we can all find statistics to prove what we want, and I'm not trying to say that mine are any more valid than someone else' to be clear. They all should be used as pieces of the puzzle, not the "answer" on their own.
Stats are stats, but the best way to measure this sort of thing with any predictive value is to look at expected wOBA. The expected stats had the Sox LHB vs. LHP at 9th among all MLB teams last year. Pretty good. However, their on-field wOBA was 26th.

This really seems like luck. They underperformed by 13 points of wOBA in 2024. They overperformed by 9 points in 2023.

The RHB vs. RHP issue is more of a problem, and really has been since we lost Xander and JDM after 2022. Refsnyder (.302 xwOBA) and O'Neill (.299) were both around league average (.305 xOBA) last year, but that's unideal if they're the team's best performers of the group.

FWIW, Bregman's expected wOBA vs. RHP last year was .310 — not much better than average. Though he was definitely better in the second half.

The guy who fixes all of this, instantly, is Vladimir Guerrero Jr., whose .417 xwOBA vs. RHP last year was 2nd in MLB only to Aaron Judge.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
1,371
Sure thing. FG does it for team batting stats. Here is the overall team pages for wRC+ vs LHPs last year. https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders/major-league?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&season=2024&season1=2024&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=&filter=&players=0&sortcol=17&sortdir=default&type=8&month=13

As it's a little tough to actually find, the splits tool is on the bottom, right hand third of the gray box from the FG page.

Admittedly, I think that the lack of ability to consistently just bludgeon teams at Fenway Park is more damning than any other statistic I can find, and that is something that the stats match they eyeball test (kind of like putrid infield defense). Anyone can see it watching the games, and the stats back it up.

Theo always talked about building a team that can win at Fenway Park as one of his core tenants, and they have not been able to do that over the last several seasons. Which is a main reason I think that some substantial changes need to be made - both to the pitching staff (and Breslow has done this) and to the offense (hasn't been able to do this yet). But it's why I always talk about my belief that the team needs to be adding core bats and not just pieces around the edges.
Thanks- so the Sox were 7th in OPS+ in the AL against RHP and 8th in the AL against LHP last year. My take is that those numbers stem from so many ABs given to sucky players rather than large splits for individual players (and I acknowledge both factors were at play). Said another way, giving Dalbec (.410 OPS), Gasper (.217), Reyes (.451), Cooper (.456), McGuire (.575), Westbrook (.584), Valdez (.633) and Sogard (.651) almost 1000 ABs was a much bigger deal than Devers' and Duran's split.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
Pjheff brings up a great point though. If you wish to acquire someone you can always start Yoshida on the DL. Then you have rehab assignments. rinse and repeat if need be. There will undoubtedly be opportunity/need for Yoshida as the year progresses, and at that time work him in. Or hopefully he just starts raking from the get go. Which is totally my preference.
If he's able to swing a bat without issue and his job is that of primary DH he's not likely to start the season on the IL. Now if his primary function with the team was as an OF and he's unable to throw the ball well enough to do his job that would be a different issue. I don't know that the player, his agent or the union would appreciate him being artificially ILed if he's fully capable of doing his job at the start of the season.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,845
Thanks- so the Sox were 7th in OPS+ in the AL against RHP and 8th in the AL against LHP last year. My take is that those numbers stem from so many ABs given to sucky players rather than large splits for individual players (and I acknowledge both factors were at play). Said another way, giving Dalbec (.410 OPS), Gasper (.217), Reyes (.451), Cooper (.456), McGuire (.575), Westbrook (.584), Valdez (.633) and Sogard (.651) almost 1000 ABs was a much bigger deal than Devers' and Duran's split.
Better for it's own post to respond:

I get what you're saying.

But that kind of "junk" happens every year - or at least it seems to have a way of happening when the entire thing is built on platooning and mixing and matching.

Yes, Casas should help. But at this point he basically washes out O'Neill.
Maybe Yoshida goes back to the guy he was in 2023. I'll buy that. (But that team was only 11th in runs scored, anyway).
Does adding in Canha (call it the 2023 v of Adam Duvall) really do all that much - again, they were 11th.
To your point, could a change at 2b and SS help - sure. But wasn't "anything" supposed to be a massive upgrade last year from what they got from the Hernandez/Reyes/Arroyo/Story grouping in 2023.


What I just keep coming back to is the more and more stats we have (putting all the pieces together) paints - at least to me - the picture of an offense / line up that is exactly what the team has been the past three years, entirely mediocre, or one that someone should "expect" a .500 team. The starting rotation has been addressed for the first time in half a decade, so I do think that's going to bump them up to the ~85 win area. I just don't see any real reason to "expect" more from the offense than we've gotten the last three seasons, and this is doubly true if they're not plugging in Anthony and Campbell from jump.

I just see the offense - as presently constructed - as a continuation of 2022, 2023 and 2024. Able to be average to slightly above average when all the platooning "works", but probably capped there with a ton of question marks.


Stats are stats, but the best way to measure this sort of thing with any predictive value is to look at expected wOBA. The expected stats had the Sox LHB vs. LHP at 9th among all MLB teams last year. Pretty good. However, their on-field wOBA was 26th.
If I understand wOBA anx xwOBA correctly (and that's a big if because I'm depending on my own research and Google), they're NOT park adjusted. So batters that play in hitter friendly parks should have inflated wOBAs and xwOBAs, yes? The theoretical hasn't kept up with the reality. I have to assume there is something bigger at play than just "bad luck" for the team to consistently be underperforming at Fenway. Or basically - all the guys SHOULD be better because Fenway Park, but they're not...

https://www.google.com/search?q=is+woba+park+adjusted&rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS1025US1026&oq=is+woba+park+adjusted&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyCggAEEUYFhgeGDkyDQgBEAAYhgMYgAQYigUyDQgCEAAYhgMYgAQYigXSAQg2NTcxajFqNKgCALACAQ&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

https://www.google.com/search?q=is+expected+woba+park+adjusted&rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS1025US1026&oq=is+expected+woba+park+adjusted&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyCQgAEEUYORirAjIHCAEQIRirAjIHCAIQIRirAjIHCAMQIRiPAjIHCAQQIRiPAtIBCDc0MTRqMWo3qAIAsAIA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8


Either way, maybe this year will be the year it turns around and they're good at Fenway Park again. I hope so because being a team poorly constructed for your own park isn't a recipe for winning a lot of baseball games. So hopefully you're right because the ingredients and recipe haven't changed, they haven't turned out a good result AND it doesn't look like they're going to change in any meaningful way this year, so hopefully the dish this season ends up a lot different.
 
Last edited:

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
15,635
I agree that having batters who excel against LHP and RHP is the ideal. And I share the hope that Campbell, Anthony, Grissom, Mayer fit that description, and that Duran, Casas, Yoshida etc can improve a bit. But the Sox did fine last year using matchups and should be in a position to be even better against all pitching this year.

The Sox had the 5th best OPS against LHP in the AL and the 6th best OPS in the AL against RHP. And both of those numbers should improve significantly by fielding a competent second baseman and the return of Casas. (I posted earlier with a breakdown of the horrendous 225 plate appearances against LHP by Dalbec, Valdez, Cooper etc, where they collectively put up an OPS under .500. Just removing that putrid subset will more than offset O'Neill's 150 PAs against lefties, and we won't miss his really bad 300+ PAs against RHP (.693 OPS)).

As a point of comparison, the Yankees had a much bigger split, with the top OPS against RHP and the the 6th ranked offense in the AL against LHP, with greater than 50 point drop between the two. They also lost Soto and Torres, who were two of their three best hitters against LHP (only Judge and those two had an OPS over .705 against LHP). FWIW, Bellinger has a limited split but Goldschmidt really struggled against RHP last year.
I’m not sure the Sox did fine with matchups, though. Take a look their RH batters vs RHP and LH batters vs LHP splits; they were abysmal and likely a reason why the team seemed to often score fewer runs than they should.

Here’s a look, along with the % of total team PA’s

RHB vs RHP 232/285/361 (39%)
LHB vs LHP 225/288/341 (19%)

Since you brought up the Yankees

RHB vs RHP 260/335/448 (49%)
LHB vs LHP 235/335/363 (17%)

The Red Sox were awful against same handed pitching, which accounted for close to 60% of at bats. It was a team wide problem.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
1,371
I’m not sure the Sox did fine with matchups, though. Take a look their RH batters vs RHP and LH batters vs LHP splits; they were abysmal and likely a reason why the team seemed to often score fewer runs than they should.

Here’s a look, along with the % of total team PA’s

RHB vs RHP 232/285/361 (39%)
LHB vs LHP 225/288/341 (19%)

Since you brought up the Yankees

RHB vs RHP 260/335/448 (49%)
LHB vs LHP 235/335/363 (17%)

The Red Sox were awful against same handed pitching, which accounted for close to 60% of at bats. It was a team wide problem.
I think the bigger factor is that the Sox had nearly 2,000 ABs by players who had an OPS under .700. I haven't run the numbers, but I'd bet those players were the largest factor in the stats you listed for performance against same handed pitching.

If 55% of a team's at bats are filled with objectively bad hitters, the offense is going to underperform.
 

Fishy1

Head Mason
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
8,411
So much depends on three guys: Grissom, Campbell, and Anthony. I have a high degree of confidence that Duran, Abreu, Casas, Yoshida, and Devers will be reasonable approximations of what they were in the past, and some confidence that Story will be healthy and pretty good defensively at worst, and mediocre offensively, unless he falls off a bridge or something. Catcher is an open question.

But if Grissom, Campbell and Anthony all show out, or just two out of the three of them do, that could solve your handedness issues right there.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
1,371
Better for it's own post to respond:

I get what you're saying.

But that kind of "junk" happens every year - or at least it seems to have a way of happening when the entire thing is built on platooning and mixing and matching.

Yes, Casas should help. But at this point he basically washes out O'Neill.
Maybe Yoshida goes back to the guy he was in 2023. I'll buy that. (But that team was only 11th in runs scored, anyway).
Does adding in Canha (call it the 2023 v of Adam Duvall) really do all that much - again, they were 11th.
To your point, could a change at 2b and SS help - sure. But wasn't "anything" supposed to be a massive upgrade last year from what they got from the Hernandez/Reyes/Arroyo/Story grouping in 2023.


What I just keep coming back to is the more and more stats we have (putting all the pieces together) paints - at least to me - the picture of an offense / line up that is exactly what the team has been the past three years, entirely mediocre, or one that someone should "expect" a .500 team. The starting rotation has been addressed for the first time in half a decade, so I do think that's going to bump them up to the ~85 win area. I just don't see any real reason to "expect" more from the offense than we've gotten the last three seasons, and this is doubly true if they're not plugging in Anthony and Campbell from jump.

I just see the offense - as presently constructed - as a continuation of 2022, 2023 and 2024. Able to be average to slightly above average when all the platooning "works", but probably capped there with a ton of question marks.
If the Sox can just avoid giving 55% of the ABs to sucky hitters, the offense should improve tremendously. But even if it just a modest improvement, that would give them a top 4 or 5 offense in the AL.

I'm not a big fan of WAR, but, for conversation purposes:
Wins Above Replacement on Baseball Reference for the 2024 team:
Starting Pitchers +3.2, 5th in the AL (10th overall)
Relief Pitchers -3.9, 4th worst in the AL (6th worst overall)
Batters +6.9, 4th best in the AL (7th best overall)

If the offense is a little bit better, the defense is a little bit better (with Story's return and not playing O'Neill in the outfield), the starting rotation is much better... I think we should continue to clamor for improvements to the bullpen rather than worrying about the offense. While also prioritizing well rounded players moving forward.
 
Last edited:

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,845
I think the bigger factor is that the Sox had nearly 2,000 ABs by players who had an OPS under .700. I haven't run the numbers, but I'd bet those players were the largest factor in the stats you listed for performance against same handed pitching.

If 55% of a team's at bats are filled with objectively bad hitters, the offense is going to underperform.
Of course, even their good hitters fell below that .700 OPS mark against same handed pitching.

Yoshida had 108PA for a .565OPS
Devers had 225 at .686OPS
O'Neill had 317 at .693
Duran had 230 at .665
Abreu had 67 at .532
Hamilton had 50 at .532 also (odd quirk)
Gonzalez had 86 at .498
Story (going back to his last "healthy" season to have any sample size at all) was 299 and .702 (this was in 2022)
Grissom (for his career) has 243 PA and .623.

Casas has been the only "good" player against same handed pitching over his career with 183PA and .772. He's going to replace O'Neill (who was actually the "best" of those 9 against same handed pitching last year, and he was below average).

I think it's going to be very difficult for the Sox to have those "same handed" at bats take place for hitters that produce over a .700OPS against same handed pitching. Either way, we're going to get a chance to see it play out in real time again because (similar to the last two seasons) nothing major in the personnel department looks likely to change.
 
Last edited:

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
1,371
Of course, even their good hitters fell below that .700 OPS mark against same handed pitching.

Yoshida had 108PA for a .565OPS
Devers had 225 at .686OPS
O'Neill had 317 at .693
Duran had 230 at .665
Abreu had 67 at .532
Hamilton had 50 at .532 also (odd quirk)
Gonzalez had 86 at .498
Story (going back to his last "healthy" season to have any sample size at all) was 299 and .702 (this was in 2022)
Grissom (for his career) has 243 PA and .623.

Casas has been the only "good" player against same handed pitching over his career with 183PA and .772
It's not that their players are "bad" it's that almost all of them are bad against same handed pitching, some atrociously so.
I think there is hope on this front:

Yoshida .746 against LHP in 2023
Devers .824 v LHP in 2023
O'Neill had 317 at .693 (another reason I'm glad he is no longer on the Red Sox)
Duran .749 v LHP in 2023
Abreu platoons with Refsnyder who is excellent against LHP
Hamilton should not see PAs against LHP moving forward
Romy should not see PAs against RHP moving forward
Story- a .700 OPS against RHP would be great if he plays excellent defense and has a .847 OPS against LHP (I suspect his numbers will be lower)
Grissom- let's give him some at bats and see what happens. He had an OPS of .908 against RHP in 2023 in the minors (300 ABs), and Campbell is waiting in the wings.
 
Last edited:

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,845
I think there is hope on this front:

Yoshida .746 against LHP in 2023
Devers .824 v LHP in 2023
O'Neill had 317 at .693 (another reason I'm glad he is no longer on the Red Sox)
Duran .749 v LHP in 2023
Abreu platoons with Refsnyder who is excellent against LHP
Hamilton should not see PAs against LHP moving forward
Romy should not see PAs against RHP moving forward
Story- a .700 OPS against RHP would be great if he plays excellent defense and has a .847 OPS against LHP (I suspect his numbers will be lower)
Grissom- let's give him some at bats and see what happens. Campbell is waiting in the wings.
I hope you're right.

It's so tough to look at any degree of relevant sample size when two of the fulcrums on which everything moves are Story (Colorado) and Yoshida (a small sample against MLB pitching). And of course on Devers being as close to fully healthy as can be (which is another reason I'd like him at DH, but that isn't possible). There are a lot of "ifs" when it comes to the line up and very little predictability, at least using the past 2/3 years of data samples.

*Case in point, I cannot imagine even the most bullish person on Story thinks he's going to put up his career numbers since those are skewed by Coors, so it's impossible to predict anything for him with a reasonable degree of confidence.
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
9,935
I get what you're saying.

But that kind of "junk" happens every year - or at least it seems to have a way of happening when the entire thing is built on platooning and mixing and matching.
I disagree with this. That junk has been happening because we've had a ton of injuries and no AAA depth actually ready to step up and into a full time job to this point. That list of guys is names we could pick off the scrap heap mid season, or milb seatfillers we could afford to lose or successfully slip through waivers as needed. They didn't bring up Gasper/Westbrook/Sogard cause they were better players than Meidroth, they just didn't want to start Meidroth's clock and/or be stuck with him eating the 40 man spot just to fill in for a while until Grissom was healthy, because he was too valuable an asset to be forced to lose for nothing.

The top 2-3 being ready (or close to it) is a huge change from how things have been the last few years.
 

20Ks

New Member
Jul 11, 2024
189
If he's able to swing a bat without issue and his job is that of primary DH he's not likely to start the season on the IL. Now if his primary function with the team was as an OF and he's unable to throw the ball well enough to do his job that would be a different issue. I don't know that the player, his agent or the union would appreciate him being artificially ILed if he's fully capable of doing his job at the start of the season.
Maybe I wasn't clear. In the event that he wasn't producing coming off an injury, and needed more time to recover. Necessitating an acquisition. Thats why I said the other option is he rakes from the get go. Obviously if he's putting up a 750+ OPS with low strike outs hes uber valuable. I apologize for my lack of clearity.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
22,960
Maine
Maybe I wasn't clear. In the event that he wasn't producing coming off an injury, and needed more time to recover. Necessitating an acquisition. Thats why I said the other option is he rakes from the get go. Obviously if he's putting up a 750+ OPS with low strike outs hes uber valuable. I apologize for my lack of clearity.
If he's not ready to go on Opening Day, they're not going to be acquiring a replacement from outside the organization. They'll fill in from the existing roster. Maybe that's the gateway to Campbell or Anthony starting the year in the big leagues (a la JBJ in 2013). More likely, it's an opportunity for someone like Sabol or Narvaez or Sogard to pick up a few big league paychecks before going back to Worcester.

It will have nothing to do with how he produces either. If he's healthy, he'll be active, even if he's hitting .105 through the first week or so.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
1,371
It's so tough to look at any degree of relevant sample size when two of the fulcrums on which everything moves are Story (Colorado) and Yoshida (a small sample against MLB pitching). And of course on Devers being as close to fully healthy as can be (which is another reason I'd like him at DH, but that isn't possible). There are a lot of "ifs" when it comes to the line up and very little predictability, at least using the past 2/3 years of data samples.
There are a ton of ifs but I think that is the norm in the American League right now. For the Sox, the difference from the last few years is that there are legit backup plans for both the batting lineup and the starting pitching depth. Reducing the number of at bats given to players with a sub-.700 OPS from 55% to ~35% would create a big offensive improvement. And, even with all of those sucky at bats last year, the team offense was still somewhere in the top 3rd of the American League.

Looking at the AL East:
NYY- question marks for offensive production at 1B, 2B, SS, CF/LF, DH and the looming question of how many games will Judge play. Rotation looks good and bullpen looks great.
BAL- far fewer questions on offense, loads of uncertainty in the starting rotation, bullpen should be solid.
TB- questions abound for where the offense is going to come from while we should assume the rotation and bullpen will be above average
TOR- lots of uncertainty in the batting order outside of Vlad, shallow starting pitching, and unclear bullpen

Houston and New York should be at the top of the AL, but the rest of the teams all have big questions. I'd rather have the Sox current ifs/uncertainties than any of those AL competitors.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,845
There are a ton of ifs but I think that is the norm in the American League right now. For the Sox, the difference from the last few years is that there are legit backup plans for both the batting lineup and the starting pitching depth. Reducing the number of at bats given to players with a sub-.700 OPS from 55% to ~35% would create a big offensive improvement. And, even with all of those sucky at bats last year, the team offense was still somewhere in the top 3rd of the American League.

Looking at the AL East:
NYY- question marks for offensive production at 1B, 2B, SS, CF/LF, DH and the looming question of how many games will Judge play. Rotation looks good and bullpen looks great.
BAL- far fewer questions on offense, loads of uncertainty in the starting rotation, bullpen should be solid.
TB- questions abound for where the offense is going to come from while we should assume the rotation and bullpen will be above average
TOR- lots of uncertainty in the batting order outside of Vlad, shallow starting pitching, and unclear bullpen

Houston and New York should be at the top of the AL, but the rest of the teams all have big questions. I'd rather have the Sox current ifs/uncertainties than any of those AL competitors.
This I totally agree with. Which is why I think the Sox should stive for more, and I think this is a really good off-season to do it. The FA market isn't as "deep" next year (and they're not signing Vladdy or Tucker), and not at positions that could seriously help defensive upgrades either (same for the following season).

However, the Sox are really "only" able to compete for two WC spots in my opinion. I think they're objectively "better" than Detroit or Kansas City. I think they also don't get the benefit of playing a bad AAA team (Chicago) and a bankrupt team that also can't keep it's guys on the field (Min) in 25% of their games, so one of them SHOULD make a wild card, at minimum. This obviously isn't the Red Sox fault, but it's also the reality in which they have to operate.

I disagree with this. That junk has been happening because we've had a ton of injuries and no AAA depth actually ready to step up and into a full time job to this point. That list of guys is names we could pick off the scrap heap mid season, or milb seatfillers we could afford to lose or successfully slip through waivers as needed. They didn't bring up Gasper/Westbrook/Sogard cause they were better players than Meidroth, they just didn't want to start Meidroth's clock and/or be stuck with him eating the 40 man spot just to fill in for a while until Grissom was healthy, because he was too valuable an asset to be forced to lose for nothing.

The top 2-3 being ready (or close to it) is a huge change from how things have been the last few years.
It's certainly possible. But I think the bigger issue is that they've been relying on guys as starters that just aren't guys that should be / are capable of starting 150 games consistently at the big league level, and they're relying too much on smaller and smaller samples to project that they could. It's what they did in 2022 with Kike Hernandez (in assuming that 2021 was his new baseline when he'd not had a 475PA season at any prior point in his career to 2021), Jackie Bradley Jr for RF and Christian Arroyo to be healhty.

They repeated it again in 2023 with many of the same players, to similar results (Arroyo, Hernandez, expecting Pablo Reyes to back up those two), ostensibly McGuire to start, same with Dalbec and his ridiculous Krate and inability to hit RHP as the eventual DH (because Casas in the minors). We can agree to disagree on our thoughts of Yoshida and Story as guys that can / should be starting 150 games and just agree to call those "TBD."

I think they're doing that again this year in a lot of places as well. Of course, you could be right, and I hope you are.



Which all isn't to say they stink - because they don't. I think they have a lot of "too limited to be full time starters" players on their roster. They also have a ton of guys that are also too good to be in AAA. So I agree the depth is really good and should certainly give the team a very high floor (as I've said, I'll be truly shocked if they win fewer than 81), but I think it also caps their ceiling (I'd be equally shocked if they won more than 87).


Edit - to be fair, I have no idea what they're looking at to project these players to be starters, so I shouldn't say they're looking at small sample sizes. But whatever data they're looking at has led to sub optimal results for several years.
 
Last edited:

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
1,371
This I totally agree with. Which is why I think the Sox should stive for more, and I think this is a really good off-season to do it. The FA market isn't as "deep" next year (and they're not signing Vladdy or Tucker), and not at positions that could seriously help defensive upgrades either (same for the following season).
I think we're almost in agreement. The Sox should definitely continue to look to improve- which is why the Crochet trade is massive since that is such an obvious upgrade. But clear upgrades for position players are not obvious at all. We've dissected the Bregman rumors to death, but, he's a good example of a player who cannot be classified as a reliable upgrade over the current options over the course of his likely contract. And that's a real problem when overlaid with the team's likely competitive window. So they have to let things play out a bit and see how these uncertainties get sorted. I anticipate this could create a very active trade deadline and the lineup in July will likely look a lot different than it does on opening day.

As far as free agent market in coming years, I think the team will instead look for a big trade at a position of need: for example, a massive move and extension for William Contreras or Cal Raleigh.
 

Fishy1

Head Mason
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
8,411
This I totally agree with. Which is why I think the Sox should stive for more, and I think this is a really good off-season to do it. The FA market isn't as "deep" next year (and they're not signing Vladdy or Tucker), and not at positions that could seriously help defensive upgrades either (same for the following season).

However, the Sox are really "only" able to compete for two WC spots in my opinion. I think they're objectively "better" than Detroit or Kansas City. I think they also don't get the benefit of playing a bad AAA team (Chicago) and a bankrupt team that also can't keep it's guys on the field (Min) in 25% of their games, so one of them SHOULD make a wild card, at minimum. This obviously isn't the Red Sox fault, but it's also the reality in which they have to operate.



It's certainly possible. But I think the bigger issue is that they've been relying on guys as starters that just aren't guys that should be / are capable of starting 150 games consistently at the big league level, and they're relying too much on smaller and smaller samples to project that they could. It's what they did in 2022 with Bobby Dalbec (1b), Kike Hernandez (in assuming that 2021 was his new baseline when he'd not had a 475PA season at any prior point in his career to 2021), Jackie Bradley Jr for RF and Christian Arroyo to be healhty.

They repeated it again in 2023 with many of the same players, to similar results (Arroyo, Hernandez, expecting Pablo Reyes to back up those two), ostensibly McGuire to start. We can agree to disagree on our thoughts of Yoshida and Story as guys that can / should be starting 150 games and just agree to call those "TBD."

I think they're doing that again this year in a lot of places as well.



Which all isn't to say they stink - because they don't. I think they have a lot of "too limited to be full time starters" players on their roster. They also have a ton of guys that are also too good to be in AAA. So I agree the depth is really good and should certainly give the team a very high floor (as I've said, I'll be truly shocked if they win fewer than 81), but I think it also caps their ceiling (I'd be equally shocked if they won more than 87).


Edit - to be fair, I have no idea what they're looking at to project these players to be starters, so I shouldn't say they're looking at small sample sizes. But whatever data they're looking at led to sub optimal results for several years.
There's a huge gulf between betting on Christian Arroyo (who never hit very well for longer than, like, 100 at-bats), or Kike, or Pablo Reyes, and betting on two of the best minor league players in baseball in Campbell and Anthony and young players like Wilyer and Duran who just had very impressive two-way seasons. Of course they're betting on Story, but they also have several young players ready to hold that position down if he's not (especially if Anthony is ready, as then Ceddanne or Mayer or Campbell can slide in there, depending on who is most ready and where we need them most).

As others have outlined, we're not the only team making bets, and we're making better bets than we have in the recent past.

And betting on young players isn't much different from betting on older ones. The Yankees may as well have replaced Rizzo with The Rizzler, instead, they've added the ghost of Goldschmidt... to a lineup featuring the Ghost of Giancarlo and they've got no way to replace Juan Soto except with Cody Bellinger (who knows what they're going to get from him), and, of course they're also hoping Jasson Dominguez will live up to his potential. And they've got Oswaldo Cabrera and DJ LePooPoo fighting it out at third base. AND for all those reasons they absolutely need Judge to not only be great but to be otherworldly again, for which there is no guarantee with a player who is turning 33.

If we're hoping that Houck keeps up his performance and Crochet becomes all he could be, well, then they're hoping Gerrit Cole doesn't start to decline, and Luis Gil's control issues don't flare up, and Clarke Schmidt is both healthy and effective (he hasn't been yet), and that Carlos Rodon doesn't give up 1.6+ HR's/9 again.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
22,765
Rogers Park
I think that when your team is likely to be mediocre is a really good time to place a bet on a Christian Arroyo type, a former back-of-the-top-100 prospect derailed by injuries. If it doesn't work, you've lost little: all you've committed is the PAs in a rebuilding year. If it does, you've got a tremendous asset to either play or trade.

It didn't work, but that doesn't mean it was a bad idea.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,845
I think we're almost in agreement. The Sox should definitely continue to look to improve- which is why the Crochet trade is massive since that is such an obvious upgrade. But clear upgrades for position players are not obvious at all. We've dissected the Bregman rumors to death, but, he's a good example of a player who cannot be classified as a reliable upgrade over the current options over the course of his likely contract. And that's a real problem when overlaid with the team's likely competitive window. So they have to let things play out a bit and see how these uncertainties get sorted. I anticipate this could create a very active trade deadline and the lineup in July will likely look a lot different than it does on opening day.

As far as free agent market in coming years, I think the team will instead look for a big trade at a position of need: for example, a massive move and extension for William Contreras or Cal Raleigh.
Generally speaking, isn't that true of every "desirable" free agent. Over the course of their entire contract, most of them are likely not going to be upgrades over what should be coming. Because generally speaking players are not as good once they hit lets say age 34. I mean, I hate to bring this up, but I don't think anyone here really thinks that Mookie is going to be the best option to start for the Dodgers in his age 35-39 seasons getting paid ~$170m over those 5 years either, right? I mean he's still awesome of course, but he's already had 2 of the last 4 seasons where he hasn't been able to play 125 regular season games, so it's not a stretch to think 3 years from now that could look bad.

Forced to pick an offensive comp for Bregman, I'm going Mike Lowell. I bet he'd be good through his age 34 season, and then probably kind of suck. (Edit - Lowell was still a considerably above average player at 35, he had a 106 OPS+; he just couldn't field at that point, I'd forgotten that. In my mind Lowell was a better defensive player than the stats actually bared out. He was never the defensive player that Bregman or Areando have been, and I really don't know why I had in my mind that he was anything special at 3b, the brain is a funny thing sometimes). If Baerga can be believed, that would be one year of a sunk cost. Per Baerga, Sox offered 3 and Bregman wants 5. Again, grain of salt and all that, but it's the most recent and detailed information from something approaching a reliable source (in the credibility tiers, I put him somewhere below lets say Rosenthal or Morosi but above Heyman and Nightengale). https://en.albat.com/thebigs/MLB-The-Contract-Alex-Bregman-Turned-Down-from-the-Red-Sox-and-His-Counteroffer-Revealed-20250115-0012.html

Maybe this is a more philosophical question for everyone - do you want the Red Sox signing long term term FA deals at all (I'll call this anything of 3+ years where those guaranteed years are past a players 35 year old season). Because they're almost all going to be bad at the end. It's what made Manny such a glorious exception...

There's a huge gulf between betting on Christian Arroyo (who never hit very well for longer than, like, 100 at-bats), or Kike, or Pablo Reyes, and betting on two of the best minor league players in baseball in Campbell and Anthony and young players like Wilyer and Duran who just had very impressive two-way seasons.
Edited down because I really can't believe I have to post this again since I've had a poster tell me I post it too much as is, but it's not Campbell or Anthony I want blocked. I want one starting on day one in LF (or RF if he's better than Abreu defensively, of which I have no idea) and the other starting day one at 2b. I thought I'd been incredibly clear on that. But not clear enough. So again, it's Yoshida that I think should be jettisoned for literally whatever dollar amount they can get (and if that is someone saying "well give you league minimum for him" so be it - and to be clear I think you'd still get about $15m total for him, with the Sox paying $39m), make Devers the 3b and have a good defensive 3b come in to replace him that should benefit from playing half their games at Fenway Park. Then you're not as "dependent" on a 32 year old Trevor Story that hasn't been healthy for his age 29, 30 or 31 seasons to fix the infield defense for the next several years.

It has nothing at all to do with blocking Anthony or Campbell. I think they should both be starting Opening Day.
 
Last edited:

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
15,635
Each individual player is likely going to be at his peak form ages say 26-31, but a player can still be productive and useful even if not at their peak. David Ortiz best seasons were from age 29-31, but even his age 35-40 season, despite being deep in the “steep decline phase” were still good.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
1,371
Generally speaking, isn't that true of every "desirable" free agent. Over the course of their entire contract, most of them are likely not going to be upgrades over what should be coming. Because generally speaking players are not as good once they hit lets say age 34. I mean, I hate to bring this up, but I don't think anyone here really thinks that Mookie is going to be the best option to start for the Dodgers in his age 35-39 seasons getting paid ~$170m over those 5 years either, right? I mean he's still awesome of course, but he's already had 2 of the last 4 seasons where he hasn't been able to play 125 regular season games, so it's not a stretch to think 3 years from now that could look bad.

Maybe this is a more philosophical question for everyone - do you want the Red Sox signing long term term FA deals at all (I'll call this anything of 3+ years where those guaranteed years are past a players 35 year old season). Because they're almost all going to be bad at the end. It's what made Manny such a glorious exception...
The inevitable decline of older players is the reason, I think, that the Sox have not done more to "improve" this team via free agency. And I'm fine with that since none of the available free agents are good fits with enough current upside to justify the looming decline.
As for your question, whether to sign a free agent under those terms depends on the team's competitive window and what other options are available. So, I think the Yankees were smart to sign Fried to that huge deal because they really need to go for it over these next two seasons and he'll likely be very good during that time. That contract would be less attractive for a team like the Angels who are unlikely to be competitive during the first half of the deal.
Which is a long way of saying while I'm generally not in favor of big free agent deals, in the right circumstances the Sox should pull the trigger.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,845
It's a really interesting philosophical discussion, I think. Just to remove talking about specific players which I'd say has been done time and again (yet I still had to type that it's Yoshida I want blocked, so who knows). Of course, we agree to disagree on the need to move Devers from 3b to DH sooner than later (or possibly we agree to disagree on the options to play 3b down on the farm). Unless of course we can find a way to clone Campbell and pencil him in to 2b, 3b and SS. Now that would be a good use of $1b dollars.

Generally, I kind of think that with big market teams (of which the Sox should be one) that they should be looking at the middle term deals when the prospects are further away (and this isn't hindsight, for better or worse I WANTED guys like Jose Abreu, Profar, Bassitt, Taillon, Eovladi, Schwarber, etc) signed to those 3 and 4 year deals when the team kind of stunk and was expected to kind of stink.

Now I think the team is primed to be pretty good - and while I do think that Anthony and Campbell will be very good, I'm not as sold on the rest of the young players / farm. Which is why I think now IS the time to sign someone like a Bregman (I'd also wanted Adames or Walker or Teoscar, and I'd still like Alonso or swing a trade for Arenado). Then you become less dependent on all of them hitting.

For example, the Red Sox do have a somewhat limited window with Houck (3 years left), Duran and Casas (4) to be spending another year without being aggressive.


Edit - though I quoted you, @Yo La Tengo I meant that more for anyone that wants to chime in. Wasn't meant to try and single anyone out about their FA philosophy in general.
 
Last edited:

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
1,371
It's a really interesting philosophical discussion, I think. Just to remove talking about specific players which I'd say has been done time and again (yet I still had to type that it's Yoshida I want blocked, so who knows). Of course, we agree to disagree on the need to move Devers from 3b to DH sooner than later (or possibly we agree to disagree on the options to play 3b down on the farm). Unless of course we can find a way to clone Campbell and pencil him in to 2b, 3b and SS. Now that would be a good use of $1b dollars.

Generally, I kind of think that with big market teams (of which the Sox should be one) that they should be looking at the middle term deals when the prospects are further away (and this isn't hindsight, for better or worse I WANTED guys like Jose Abreu, Profar, Bassitt, Taillon, Eovladi, Schwarber, etc) signed to those 3 and 4 year deals when the team kind of stunk and was expected to kind of stink.

Now I think the team is primed to be pretty good - and while I do think that Anthony and Campbell will be very good, I'm not as sold on the rest of the young players / farm. Which is why I think now IS the time to sign someone like a Bregman (I'd also wanted Adames or Walker or Teoscar, and I'd still like Alonso or swing a trade for Arenado). Then you become less dependent on all of them hitting.

For example, the Red Sox do have a somewhat limited window with Houck (3 years left), Duran and Casas (4) to be spending another year without being aggressive.
I think there is a good chance that some combination of Story, Grissom, Campbell, and Mayer will be the 2B, 3B, and SS over the next three years. But if we block those players by bringing in an older expensive free agent on a long contract, we delay the process of finding that fit and we very likely block a player who will outperform the aging FA as soon as next season. If the Sox had no prospects at those positions, it would be a different story. And if Cal Raleigh was a free agent, I'd want the Sox to make an exorbitant offer.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,845
I think there is a good chance that some combination of Story, Grissom, Campbell, and Mayer will be the 2B, 3B, and SS over the next three years. But if we block those players by bringing in an older expensive free agent on a long contract, we delay the process of finding that fit and we very likely block a player who will outperform the aging FA as soon as next season. If the Sox had no prospects at those positions, it would be a different story. And if Cal Raleigh was a free agent, I'd want the Sox to make an exorbitant offer.
I agree they will be.

Forced to guess, based on performance and availability, I think 1 of those players will be someone we're thrilled to have, 1 will be alright in an Andrew Benintendi / Alex Verdugo type of value, and two will be looked at as not first division starters. I doubt the Sox go 3 of 4 there. Hit big on 2 of 4, possible. But 3 of 4, I strongly doubt.

Either way though, I agree we're going to find out because I don't think the Sox will do anything significant this year (or next year) in terms of addressing the line up.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
1,371
I agree they will be.

Forced to guess, based on performance and availability, I think 1 of those players will be someone we're thrilled to have, 1 will be alright in an Andrew Benintendi / Alex Verdugo type of value, and two will be looked at as not first division starters. I doubt the Sox go 3 of 4 there. Hit big on 2 of 4, possible. But 3 of 4, I strongly doubt.

Either way though, I agree we're going to find out because I don't think the Sox will do anything significant this year (or next year) in terms of addressing the line up.
Not bumping Devers from third is a hedge toward your prediction. But, if Story is healthy, he'll be playing somewhere for the next three years which means that Grissom, Campbell, and Mayer would need to fill two of the three spots. I'm cautiously optimistic that two of the three (*or some other current Sox prospect) will be outperform Bregman from 2026 through the end of his next contract.
 

dynomite

Member
SoSH Member
This is a good an interesting conversation to follow.

This is pretty much exactly where I am on the offense, for the record:

I think the bigger factor is that the Sox had nearly 2,000 ABs by players who had an OPS under .700. I haven't run the numbers, but I'd bet those players were the largest factor in the stats you listed for performance against same handed pitching.

If 55% of a team's at bats are filled with objectively bad hitters, the offense is going to underperform.
Thanks- so the Sox were 7th in OPS+ in the AL against RHP and 8th in the AL against LHP last year. My take is that those numbers stem from so many ABs given to sucky players rather than large splits for individual players (and I acknowledge both factors were at play). Said another way, giving Dalbec (.410 OPS), Gasper (.217), Reyes (.451), Cooper (.456), McGuire (.575), Westbrook (.584), Valdez (.633) and Sogard (.651) almost 1000 ABs was a much bigger deal than Devers' and Duran's split.
Ultimately, I think the 2024 Red Sox should have been a very good hitting team that was dragged down to just a solid hitting team by:
1) nearly season-long injuries to the 1B, 2B, and SS in April (as well as significant injuries to the RF and DH)
2) a related lack of depth and the decision to give 1,000 ABs to guys who probably shouldn't have been on an ML roster trying to find a cheap replacement and/or see what they had in prospect depth.

The 2021 Sox were the last team to finish top 5 in Runs Scored (they were #5), and while they did give ~600 ABs to the Arauzs of the world, I think they overcame that in part because the starters stayed remarkably healthy (2B was the only position where they failed to have a player start 133+ games).

Now I think the team is primed to be pretty good - and while I do think that Anthony and Campbell will be very good, I'm not as sold on the rest of the young players / farm. Which is why I think now IS the time to sign someone like a Bregman (I'd also wanted Adames or Walker or Teoscar, and I'd still like Alonso or swing a trade for Arenado). Then you become less dependent on all of them hitting.

For example, the Red Sox do have a somewhat limited window with Houck (3 years left), Duran and Casas (4) to be spending another year without being aggressive.
I also agree with a lot of this.

I'm of the opinion that "contention windows" are an extremely overrated concept, and that getting into the playoffs as many seasons as possible (especially in MLB) is the best strategy.*

I think the 2025 Red Sox right now are likely to be a Wild Card team. But I also think they should be, to use Cora's (?) term, "greedy." Throw your financial weight around and go grab players who will turn "likely" into "almost definitely." I don't know exactly who that is (Tanner Scott?) but after 2023 and 2024 I'm all set with the idea that we need to punt on another season to see what the prospects have to offer. That's what AAA is for. I want guys on this roster who are there to win games.

* I've heard some national reporters suggest that unless you have a $300M roster juggernaut like the Dodgers or Mets, you can't compete, and I just don't think that's valid. The 2023 World Series proved that point to me, when a 90-win Rangers WC team beat an 84-win DBacks WC team, the year after a 90-win Phillies WC team made the World Series, the year after an 88-win Braves team lost their best player to injury and still won the World Series.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,845
Not bumping Devers from third is a hedge toward your prediction. But, if Story is healthy, he'll be playing somewhere for the next three years which means that Grissom, Campbell, and Mayer would need to fill two of the three spots. I'm cautiously optimistic that two of the three (*or some other current Sox prospect) will be outperform Bregman from 2026 through the end of his next contract.
Agree Story will be playing somewhere if healthy, obviously. My confidence in him being both healthy AND productive in his age 32, 33 and 34 seasons is quite low. This is a different can of worms, but I kind of feel the same on Mayer (health, not so much production). That's a lot of hope to pin on two guys, neither of which have been able to stay on the field for 100 games in any of the past 3 seasons. Especially when they are the key to fixing the defense (ie making Devers suck less, or at least mitigating how much his defensive suck hurts them). To be clear, this is not in any way saying they should trade Devers. I think the bat is elite, and I'm very happy to have him as the #3/4 hitter for the next 10 years. I'm less happy with the next 3 years of him being at 3b.

This is a good an interesting conversation to follow.

This is pretty much exactly where I am on the offense, for the record:




Ultimately, I think the 2024 Red Sox should have been a very good hitting team that was dragged down to just a solid hitting team by:
1) nearly season-long injuries to the 1B, 2B, and SS in April (as well as significant injuries to the RF and DH)
2) a related lack of depth and the decision to give 1,000 ABs to guys who probably shouldn't have been on an ML roster trying to find a cheap replacement and/or see what they had in prospect depth.

The 2021 Sox were the last team to finish top 5 in Runs Scored (they were #5), and while they did give ~600 ABs to the Arauzs of the world, I think they overcame that in part because the starters stayed remarkably healthy (2B was the only position where they failed to have a player start 133+ games).



I also agree with a lot of this.

I'm of the opinion that "contention windows" are an extremely overrated concept, and that getting into the playoffs as many seasons as possible (especially in MLB) is the best strategy.*

I think the 2025 Red Sox right now are likely to be a Wild Card team. But I also think they should be, to use Cora's (?) term, "greedy." Throw your financial weight around and go grab players who will turn "likely" into "almost definitely." I don't know exactly who that is (Tanner Scott?) but after 2023 and 2024 I'm all set with the idea that we need to punt on another season to see what the prospects have to offer. That's what AAA is for. I want guys on this roster who are there to win games.

* I've heard some national reporters suggest that unless you have a $300M roster juggernaut like the Dodgers or Mets, you can't compete, and I just don't think that's valid. The 2023 World Series proved that point to me, when a 90-win Rangers WC team beat an 84-win DBacks WC team, the year after a 90-win Phillies WC team made the World Series, the year after an 88-win Braves team lost their best player to injury and still won the World Series.
I agree that teams don't need to be a $300m roster to compete. But I also agree that it's somewhat skewed because by sheer definition teams in the AL and NL central are both going to spend less, generally. The areas of the country aren't as affluent, the markets aren't quite as big and they're not going to be able to support $200+ payrolls outside of probably the Cubbies. When a team is in the AL East (or NL West or AL East) and have to deal with the Dodgers and Yankees, now we can probably add the Mets to the table (NL East) for the foreseeable future, I think in order to consistently be in playoff position, they probably need to be in the top 25% of the game in terms of spending.

Realistically, I don't think Boston needs to spend $300m to contend year in and year out. Conversely, I also don't think they can do it spending 12th and 13th (like they are to this point and were last year, at least per Cots). They need to be more like Atlanta (4), Texas (5), Philly (6) and Houston (7), just to use last year's numbers. https://legacy.baseballprospectus.com/compensation/cots/.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
1,371
I think the 2025 Red Sox right now are likely to be a Wild Card team. But I also think they should be, to use Cora's (?) term, "greedy." Throw your financial weight around and go grab players who will turn "likely" into "almost definitely." I don't know exactly who that is (Tanner Scott?) but after 2023 and 2024 I'm all set with the idea that we need to punt on another season to see what the prospects have to offer. That's what AAA is for. I want guys on this roster who are there to win games.
I'm in full agreement on this point, but there are only a few places where there are obvious upgrades and the bullpen is probably all that is left for potential improvement via free agency this year. Hopefully they will work on extensions along with looking for trades for a bad contract attached to a good player.
 

SouthernBoSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2005
12,658
I'm in full agreement on this point, but there are only a few places where there are obvious upgrades and the bullpen is probably all that is left for potential improvement via free agency this year. Hopefully they will work on extensions along with looking for trades for a bad contract attached to a good player.
I’ve worked on some payroll scenarios the last few days and the long and short of it is this….

If you want this team to extend Crochet, Cambell, and Anthony you cannot be for signing Bregman.

If you don’t care or think they’ll extend Crochet, Campbell and Anthony, they should sign Bregman.

I do feel they are mutually exclusive. Adding Bregman on anything over 3 years makes it extremely difficult to find a path to resetting the luxury tax in 3 years while also extending the above three, absorbing arb, and filling out the rest of the roster.

Add the best reliever you can, upgrade the Romy** position on the roster allowing you to increase option-able depth with him in AAA, let Campbell and Anthony compete for spots and let’s roll.

**I just keep coming back to Dylan Moore as the best of these possibilities but am unsure on the trade fit.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,845
I'm in full agreement on this point, but there are only a few places where there are obvious upgrades and the bullpen is probably all that is left for potential improvement via free agency this year. Hopefully they will work on extensions along with looking for trades for a bad contract attached to a good player.
I think this is fair as well, but in some ways, I think that is what separates great teams from merely good ones.

Case in point, I adore the Crochet trade. I'm thrilled that it was made, I think he was the absolute right pitcher to target of those that have moved this off-season (or are free agents). I think it was a better move than signing Fried (and I think it would have been better for the Yankees to get Crochet than Fried, and I'm doubly thrilled they didn't). I'm not trying to "knock" Breslow for making an obvious move and that isn't at all my point (though I don't think Bloom would have pulled the trigger on the exact same deal, so there is that). But when anyone that follows baseball closely enough to know that SoSH exists and is a good enough poster to not get kicked off (99% of us) can see that going from Nick Pivetta to Garret Crochet is a good move, it doesn't exactly take an excellent GM to know that either.

But the excellent GMs will find small upgrades that pay huge dividends, either because of the trickle down effect or because something fits so much better (obvious and easy example - replacing a pretty decent closer in BK Kim with Keith Foulke). Or being able to realize the value in moving Kevin Youkilis (probably their best young player at the time) off his position to 1b to bring in Mike Lowell to play 3b.

Maybe that's not Alex Bregman or anyone I've talked about. But I think they need to find some places that aren't "obvious" upgrades, and upgrade them. I hope that makes sense.

I’ve worked on some payroll scenarios the last few days and the long and short of it is this….

If you want this team to extend Crochet, Cambell, and Anthony you cannot be for signing Bregman.

If you don’t care or think they’ll extend Crochet, Campbell and Anthony, they should sign Bregman.

I do feel they are mutually exclusive. Adding Bregman on anything over 3 years makes it extremely difficult to find a path to resetting the luxury tax in 3 years while also extending the above three, absorbing arb, and filling out the rest of the roster.

Add the best reliever you can, upgrade the Romy** position on the roster allowing you to increase option-able depth with him in AAA, let Campbell and Anthony compete for spots and let’s roll.

**I just keep coming back to Dylan Moore as the best of these possibilities but am unsure on the trade fit.
Genuinely curious as to how you arrived at this? Per Sox Payroll, they're presently at $30.14m below $LTT1 for 2025; $97.88m under for 2026 and (I'm guessing) $110m under for 2027 and $150m under for 2028, and I assume $LTT is the budget. If Bregman costs ~$25m; Crochet ~$25m; Anthony and Campbell ~$10m (Chourio deal) that leaves them $27.88m under for 2026. I suppose it comes down to if Sox Payroll figures in Arb Estimates (I always thought they did, but I could be wrong). This includes Duran's updated "deal" and assuming all of Yoshida's contract (and even I think they could get someone to kick in $5m per year for the next 3 to take him).

Even if not, they could easily save some coin there by dealing or simply non-tendering some of the arb guys Crawford, Winckowski, Kelly, Romy, etc if they needed to, no?

I could well be missing something, so I'm genuinely asking what it is.
 

SouthernBoSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2005
12,658
I think this is fair as well, but in some ways, I think that is what separates great teams from merely good ones.

Case in point, I adore the Crochet trade. I'm thrilled that it was made, I think he was the absolute right pitcher to target of those that have moved this off-season (or are free agents). I think it was a better move than signing Fried (and I think it would have been better for the Yankees to get Crochet than Fried, and I'm doubly thrilled they didn't). I'm not trying to "knock" Breslow for making an obvious move and that isn't at all my point (though I don't think Bloom would have pulled the trigger on the exact same deal, so there is that). But when anyone that follows baseball closely enough to know that SoSH exists and is a good enough poster to not get kicked off (99% of us) can see that going from Nick Pivetta to Garret Crochet is a good move, it doesn't exactly take an excellent GM to know that either.

But the excellent GMs will find small upgrades that pay huge dividends, either because of the trickle down effect or because something fits so much better (obvious and easy example - replacing a pretty decent closer in BK Kim with Keith Foulke). Or being able to realize the value in moving Kevin Youkilis (probably their best young player at the time) off his position to 1b to bring in Mike Lowell to play 3b.

Maybe that's not Alex Bregman or anyone I've talked about. But I think they need to find some places that aren't "obvious" upgrades, and upgrade them. I hope that makes sense.



Genuinely curious as to how you arrived at this? Per Sox Payroll, they're presently at $30.14m below $LTT1 for 2025; $97.88m under for 2026 and (I'm guessing) $110m under for 2027 and $150m under for 2028, and I assume $LTT is the budget. If Bregman costs ~$25m; Crochet ~$25m; Anthony and Campbell ~$10m (Chourio deal) that leaves them $27.88m under for 2026. I suppose it comes down to if Sox Payroll figures in Arb Estimates (I always thought they did, but I could be wrong). This includes Duran's updated "deal" and assuming all of Yoshida's contract (and even I think they could get someone to kick in $5m per year for the next 3 to take him).

Even if not, they could easily save some coin there by dealing or simply non-tendering some of the arb guys Crawford, Winckowski, Kelly, Romy, etc if they needed to, no?

I could well be missing something, so I'm genuinely asking what it is.
I plan on posting the breakdown early next week when I can better memorialize it.

But you gotta factor in Arb for Duran, Casas, Wong, Houck, Crawford, Hamilton, Kelly then you have to replace a Starting pitcher, 3-4 relievers, a 4th outfielder, and any other roster holes they have.

That’s a ton of wood to chop.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
15,635
Are the Red Sox going to stop producing young and impactful cost controlled players in the coming years? I’m guessing that the plan is to continue to churn those players out- so there may not be a need to extend everyone to long term deals. Ideally, there’s a continuous flow of young talent on the way which provides the team more options and pathways to success.

Being worried about extending players who have not even debuted yet seems a bit premature.
 

SouthernBoSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2005
12,658
Are the Red Sox going to stop producing young and impactful cost controlled players in the coming years? I’m guessing that the plan is to continue to churn those players out- so there may not be a need to extend everyone to long term deals. Ideally, there’s a continuous flow of young talent on the way which provides the team more options and pathways to success.

Being worried about extending players who have not even debuted yet seems a bit premature.
Having the best and third best players in the minors is not a normal set up.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
1,371
I plan on posting the breakdown early next week when I can better memorialize it.

But you gotta factor in Arb for Duran, Casas, Wong, Houck, Crawford, Hamilton, Kelly then you have to replace a Starting pitcher, 3-4 relievers, a 4th outfielder, and any other roster holes they have.

That’s a ton of wood to chop.
I'm looking forward to seeing the post. If the Sox are moving away from signing big name free agents, the initial luxury tax becomes a less of an impediment, since the penalties would just be dollars unless they sign or lose a player who received a Qualifying Offer. Roughly speaking, this is the approach that Atlanta has taken the last few years in extending their young players and using trades and mid-range free agent signings to bolster the team rather than big name free agent signings.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
1,371
I’ve worked on some payroll scenarios the last few days and the long and short of it is this….

If you want this team to extend Crochet, Cambell, and Anthony you cannot be for signing Bregman.

If you don’t care or think they’ll extend Crochet, Campbell and Anthony, they should sign Bregman.

I do feel they are mutually exclusive. Adding Bregman on anything over 3 years makes it extremely difficult to find a path to resetting the luxury tax in 3 years while also extending the above three, absorbing arb, and filling out the rest of the roster.

Add the best reliever you can, upgrade the Romy** position on the roster allowing you to increase option-able depth with him in AAA, let Campbell and Anthony compete for spots and let’s roll.

**I just keep coming back to Dylan Moore as the best of these possibilities but am unsure on the trade fit.
Can we make the math work to trade for Logan O'Hoppe and Anthony Rendon with the plan to just eat some/most/all of Rendon's contract?
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,511
Portland
I’ve worked on some payroll scenarios the last few days and the long and short of it is this….

If you want this team to extend Crochet, Cambell, and Anthony you cannot be for signing Bregman.

If you don’t care or think they’ll extend Crochet, Campbell and Anthony, they should sign Bregman.

I do feel they are mutually exclusive. Adding Bregman on anything over 3 years makes it extremely difficult to find a path to resetting the luxury tax in 3 years while also extending the above three, absorbing arb, and filling out the rest of the roster.

Add the best reliever you can, upgrade the Romy** position on the roster allowing you to increase option-able depth with him in AAA, let Campbell and Anthony compete for spots and let’s roll.

**I just keep coming back to Dylan Moore as the best of these possibilities but am unsure on the trade fit.
I parsed a list of road wRC+ vs lefties over the past three seasons as a cruder way to also see through some of the noise and I noticed Brendan Rodgers and his wRC+ of 124 - 4 points lower than Moore and he's someone who wouldn't get much of a contract IMO. I used road splits since they are also likely to succeed in Fenway and out of parks that suppress that

I am unconvinced they are looking to patch that way since it seems they can replicate close to that internally and the cost of righty mashers seems to be negligible if they don't bring much else to the table. My opinion is that they will get a good overall player or ride with what they've got there. I believe it's Bregman or bust.
https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders/splits-leaderboards?splitArr=1,4&splitArrPitch=&autoPt=true&splitTeams=false&statType=player&statgroup=2&startDate=2022-1-17&endDate=2025-1-16&players=&filter=&groupBy=career&wxTemperature=&wxPressure=&wxAirDensity=&wxElevation=&wxWindSpeed=&position=B&sort=16,1&pageitems=2000000000&pg=0
 
Last edited:

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,845
I plan on posting the breakdown early next week when I can better memorialize it.

But you gotta factor in Arb for Duran, Casas, Wong, Houck, Crawford, Hamilton, Kelly then you have to replace a Starting pitcher, 3-4 relievers, a 4th outfielder, and any other roster holes they have.

That’s a ton of wood to chop.
I too am very interested. It’s something I always keep in mind, because of my belief on their budget limitations.

Duran’s $8m is already factored in on SP. I also assume they can recoup about $5m in a Yoshida deal. With the extensions to Crochet, Campbell and Anthony (I assumed $25m, $10m and $10m) and a hypothetical Bregman deal at $25m, gives them approx $35m below.

Doubling Houck ($8m) leaves $27m. I estimated Casas will be arb1 (guessing $4m like Houck) is $23m under. Wong will be arb 1 (guessing $3m) and that’s $20m under. Leaves them (in my scenario):

Wong
Casas
Campbell
Bregman
Mayer
Anthony
Duran
Abreu

Rafaela (OF4), Grissom (MI1), Gonzalez, Narváez.

Crochet
Houck
Bello
Sandoval
Priester / Fitts (Dobbins / Sandlin in AAA)

Slaten
Whitlock
Weissert
Penrod
Guerrero

They could almost certainly move Crawford and Hamilton along with Story to free up some of Story’s money (maybe half). Or Crawford and Hamilton aren’t valuable at all, who really knows with trades.

But if we assume those two get them half out from Story, then they have ~$30m left to add another SP if necessary and a bullpen arm.

Of course it’s possible that Story continues to be worthless and they can’t move him even adding in Crawford and Hamilton OR that Mayer isn’t healthy / good enough to take over SS in 2026. But those would be their own set of huge issues (in which case I’d still probably be really happy having Bregman).

Of course then, Rafaela is probably SS1 already and one of Garcia or Castro is ready to be OF4.

Or Bregman could instantly start sucking - not impossible. But there should be plenty of ways to fit him in if we assume $25m for him, $25m for Crochet, $10m for Anthony, $10m for Campbell and the need to be under $LTT1 in 2026.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,511
Portland
Additional thoughts on platoon bats in general.

Here is a list of all part time players who had some degree of success in their roles as platoon/pseudo regulars guys since 2010. Lowest to highest via fWAR:
Steve Pearce
Chris Young
Justin Turner
Darnell McDonald
Adam Duvall
Jonny Gomes
Hunter Renfroe
Rob Refsnyder
Enrique Hernandez

None of these guys required much of anything to get. With the bigger emphasis on pitchers taking up half the roster, that player needs to have flexibility and a willingness to ride the bench.

Even the full time bats like Cody Ross and Tyler O'Neill were short contracts that didn't require much.
TL/DR I wouldn't waste a single prospect on a non impact guy.
 

SouthernBoSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2005
12,658
I too am very interested. It’s something I always keep in mind, because of my belief on their budget limitations.

Duran’s $8m is already factored in on SP. I also assume they can recoup about $5m in a Yoshida deal. With the extensions to Crochet, Campbell and Anthony (I assumed $25m, $10m and $10m) and a hypothetical Bregman deal at $25m, gives them approx $35m below.

Doubling Houck ($8m) leaves $27m. I estimated Casas will be arb1 (guessing $4m like Houck) is $23m under. Wong will be arb 1 (guessing $3m) and that’s $20m under. Leaves them (in my scenario):

Wong
Casas
Campbell
Bregman
Mayer
Anthony
Duran
Abreu

Rafaela (OF4), Grissom (MI1), Gonzalez, Narváez.

Crochet
Houck
Bello
Sandoval
Priester / Fitts (Dobbins / Sandlin in AAA)

Slaten
Whitlock
Weissert
Penrod
Guerrero

They could almost certainly move Crawford and Hamilton along with Story to free up some of Story’s money (maybe half). Or Crawford and Hamilton aren’t valuable at all, who really knows with trades.

But if we assume those two get them half out from Story, then they have ~$30m left to add another SP if necessary and a bullpen arm.

Of course it’s possible that Story continues to be worthless and they can’t move him even adding in Crawford and Hamilton OR that Mayer isn’t healthy / good enough to take over SS in 2026. But those would be their own set of huge issues (in which case I’d still probably be really happy having Bregman).

Of course then, Rafaela is probably SS1 already and one of Garcia or Castro is ready to be OF4.

Or Bregman could instantly start sucking - not impossible. But there should be plenty of ways to fit him in if we assume $25m for him, $25m for Crochet, $10m for Anthony, $10m for Campbell and the need to be under $LTT1 in 2026.
The problem isn’t your math it’s that you have zero projected free agent additions. That bullpen is horrible and the back end of the rotation is thin.

You have to leave room for additions if we want this team to compete. If you sign Bregman it makes it very challenging to make ancillary FA moves.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,845
The problem isn’t your math it’s that you have zero projected free agent additions. That bullpen is horrible and the back end of the rotation is thin.

You have to leave room for additions if we want this team to compete. If you sign Bregman it makes it very challenging to make ancillary FA moves.
I mean, I had $30m left to spend on FA additions. It was “that” and ~$30m to spend.


But I guess my point is more spending in the bullpen doesn’t necessarily equate to being good, especially in that area. Martin was the highest paid “non closer” in the pen last year. He was 8th in terms of WAR (Jansen, Booser, Weissert, Kelly, Guerrero, Bernardino, Winckowski and then Martin). 9th if one wants to call Criswell a pen arm.

If someone has a better stat to look at than bWAR to rank bullpen arms, I‘m game to hear it. That’s just what I used. I think (excepting proven closers) they‘re all just dart throws, and even the proven closers are incredibly volatile. If a team is going to adhere to any kind of budget, then outside of a closer they should just throw dart after dart after dart on league minimum guys. They’re just as likely to hit.

Or to remove the Sox, Detroit had a top 4 bullpen by ERA last year. I used Cle and TB last year, I picked a new team this year, just to illustrate the point. Did Det spend even $1m on any of them? Houlton was claimed off waivers, Vest was a R5 guy, Hurter wasn’t much of a prospect, I have no idea where Sean Gueither or Brenan Hanifee came from, Jason Foley was a “name”, I guess. Andrew Chafin they kind of spent on, and he, like Martin, was their 9th best reliever.

I think Breslow can do this too for very minimal cost. His track record so far is good (Slaten and Weissert).

Starting pitching is different, for sure. But I sincerely doubt they’re spending on Cease, Gallen or Valdez, with or without Bregman. You’re probably more talking another 1/$20m deal (let’s say Brandon Woodruff, just to pick a name somewhat similar to Buehler). They’d have money to add Bregman AND that guy. Probably adding in someone like Chapman / Pressly as well (assuming Yoshida isn’t literally worthless, as in DFA material, which even I think is drastically underselling his value AND that Crawford and Hamilton have enough value that you could staple them to Story to get 1/2 has money back. I could of course be over estimating the value of Yoshida, Crawford and Hamilton).



It really doesn’t matter because they’re not signing Bregman or trading for Arenado, but if they wanted to there should be ways to do it AND stay below $LTT1 (again assuming that is their budget). If that means relying on “scrub X” instead of Chris Martin, Justin Wilson, Joely Rodriguez or whatever, I’m good with that.

But, it doesn’t matter what I think. The bigger thing is, they clearly don’t want to and aren’t going to. Which I fully admit. But I appreciate the thought exercise. It was really interesting to look at closely since I think they’re “done” for this year (fringe moves like more versions of Matt McShane or Blake Sabol excepted).
 
Last edited:

SuperDieHard

New Member
Jun 13, 2015
67
I’m hoping they sign high end relief pitching and leave the lineup to shake itself out. I don’t want to block any of Grissom, Anthony or Campbell- I’d like to see them all on the team out of spring training. If they all disappoint, it’s easier to trade for hitters than pitching over the course of the year (at least as far as what you need to give up relative to value). I can think of multiple teams that added hitters mid year for not much cost (‘86 with Spike Owen and Dave Henderson, Buckner was a mid season add in ‘85 I think, Steve Pierce in ‘18, Billy Hatcher was a nice mid season shot in the arm one year). We certainly will have some bigger question marks going in to the year than if you stick Bregman in at second, but the long-term upside for the team might work out better going with the kids. Now next year at this time….all in no excuses…nothing held back…dare I say (while ducking)….FULL THROTTLE
 

Fishy1

Head Mason
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
8,411
Edited down because I really can't believe I have to post this again since I've had a poster tell me I post it too much as is, but it's not Campbell or Anthony I want blocked. I want one starting on day one in LF (or RF if he's better than Abreu defensively, of which I have no idea) and the other starting day one at 2b. I thought I'd been incredibly clear on that. But not clear enough. So again, it's Yoshida that I think should be jettisoned for literally whatever dollar amount they can get (and if that is someone saying "well give you league minimum for him" so be it - and to be clear I think you'd still get about $15m total for him, with the Sox paying $39m), make Devers the 3b and have a good defensive 3b come in to replace him that should benefit from playing half their games at Fenway Park. Then you're not as "dependent" on a 32 year old Trevor Story that hasn't been healthy for his age 29, 30 or 31 seasons to fix the infield defense for the next several years.

It has nothing at all to do with blocking Anthony or Campbell. I think they should both be starting Opening Day.
I'm quite sleep deprived and have been in and out of the hospital the last few days so forgive me if I've been a little thick. We're on the same page, basically. My point was a more general one, that we're not the only ones betting on players to be healthy or effective.

I think the Sox are hoping to rebuild some of Yoshida and Story's value before moving them, and I understand why, with both of them coming off surgeries/injuries. Yoshida might actually be worth something at the trade deadline to a team fighting for a playoff spot. I don't think these guys hamstring us so badly that we need to move them right now, and while I think Bregman would be nice insurance, it's also a deal that has a chance of blowing up in their faces. I would still like them to do it, of course, because I don't want to watch Devers play third base anymore, but I also think it's tinkering at the margins for a 1 to 2 win difference, while also sending out 50 million plus and adding 100-150 million in salary. I can understand why the Sox are reluctant to do that.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
1,845
I'm quite sleep deprived and have been in and out of the hospital the last few days so forgive me if I've been a little thick. We're on the same page, basically. My point was a more general one, that we're not the only ones betting on players to be healthy or effective.

I think the Sox are hoping to rebuild some of Yoshida and Story's value before moving them, and I understand why, with both of them coming off surgeries/injuries. Yoshida might actually be worth something at the trade deadline to a team fighting for a playoff spot. I don't think these guys hamstring us so badly that we need to move them right now, and while I think Bregman would be nice insurance, it's also a deal that has a chance of blowing up in their faces. I would still like them to do it, of course, because I don't want to watch Devers play third base anymore, but I also think it's tinkering at the margins for a 1 to 2 win difference, while also sending out 50 million plus and adding 100-150 million in salary. I can understand why the Sox are reluctant to do that.
First and foremost, hope that you and your family are doing better.

I didn’t mean that to be an a$$ post, more of an apology to guys like @chawson who asked me to stop posting about Yoshida. But probably should have said “sorry to have to post this again”, that would have worked better.

I do think there has been a bit of a straw man argument on the board (NOT directed specifically at you or anyone @Fishy1) that if someone wants to add any type of (non Soto) full time, starting bat that equates to not believing in or trying to block Anthony and Campbell, or jettison Casas.

Not for nothing, but I agree with you totally that adding a Bregman / Arenado / Kim / Alonso / Santander whatever piece is tinkering and likely only to result in a win or 2 difference. I also think moving from 86 to 88 wins could well be the difference between making the playoffs and not in both 2025 and 2026.

All moves can blow up in a team’s face. I don’t discount the possibility that Bregman immediately starts sucking while Story reverts back to his 2022 form. Or that Yoshida becomes a 120 wRC+ hitter and Alonso tears his labrum. I just find it more likely that Bregman, Story, Alonso and Yoshida continue to be the guys they’ve been the last two/three seasons since they’re all similar ages. Obviously other posters have different opinions, and I respect that.

Its mostly academic because while I have moves I’d like to see the team make, I also think it’s a 99% certain outcome that no starting level players are added to roster between now and Opening Day.