The Red Sox ARE good. So now what?
- Thread starter grimshaw
- Start date
I think you're exactly right. They don't want to bring up anybody they view as important when they're more likely to see game time in Worcester over the next few days. There is no break this week for the minors, so who would they rather have sitting idle over the next few days, Brice or pick one of Ort/Houck/Valdez?
I mean, most of the time I'd agree with this statement. But the other day, when we were playing the A's, up 6-4 in the 12th and down to our last pitcher (Andriese), it would've been nice to have a pitcher who didn't immediately come in and give up 3 runs.
Yes, almost all the time, the Andriese/Brice/fungible pitcher archetype doesn't matter, but that one cost us a game.
Considering RedsHawksFan's take on this in relation to being 2 days before the AS break you're probably right. Generally speaking, I'm guilty. I don't want to wait until some helpful pieces may end up going somewhere else. That said, when you consider that many of us see upgrades to the rotation and outfield to be in house solutions that are on the horizon, the Sox are fortunate that those bottom two spots seem to be the two slots of greatest concern. Thus the kvetching.
If you find yourself worrying about it publicly on a message board, that's too much time
I love the way you put this and appreciate your "good nudge" towards team balance and fresh bloom. Of course tweaking is essential, when you put it this way. I am old enough to remember the teams of the pre-free trade era and how the rosters were relatively constant and "our" players were deeply beloved by we kids. even with their foibles and completely different parcels of strengths that on a cohesive team became a powerful positive group dynamic. Experience with ensembles and productions that stimulate a group dynamic as you described , to become transcendent --well that would give you great insight, i think, into how important popping in a well-chosen player or two to can do just as you said and shake things up in a good way.
Alex Speier
@alexspeier
3m
Red Sox and closer Matt Barnes near agreement on two-year contract extension
https://bostonglobe.com/2021/07/11/sports/red-sox-closer-matt-barnes-agree-two-year-contract-extension/?event=event25… via
@BostonGlobe
@alexspeier
3m
Red Sox and closer Matt Barnes near agreement on two-year contract extension
https://bostonglobe.com/2021/07/11/sports/red-sox-closer-matt-barnes-agree-two-year-contract-extension/?event=event25… via
@BostonGlobe
I'm wondering if most folks still feel the starting pitching is just fine? It's a tricky group. One pass through they look great and it seems like there's no room at the Inn (for replacements). The next pass through they stink. I think the sum total is accurate: their inconsistency should be expected because they aren't blue chip talents. They're decent. Sometimes they'll look better than their mean, sometimes worse, and sometimes right at it, naturally. But I hope the organization doesn't get lulled by those good stretches. This is not a championship caliber starting rotation, and the team could otherwise compete for a championship.
IMO - still feel like the team needs to trade for a quality arm in addition to Sale's (hopeful) return.
IMO - still feel like the team needs to trade for a quality arm in addition to Sale's (hopeful) return.
As currently constructed, I don't think anyone thinks the rotation is just fine. Many see internal options as potential improvements. Many also wonder the cost of bringing in an outside arm that figures to be better than what is currently in house as well as how deep the organization is willing to dig in terms of personnel, $$$ against the luxury tax and commitment to taking on future years and $$$ if necessary.
Bradford's clearly lost his mind
https://www.audacy.com/weei/sports/red-sox/who-says-no-to-this-red-sox-trade-for-anthony-rizzo?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
https://www.audacy.com/weei/sports/red-sox/who-says-no-to-this-red-sox-trade-for-anthony-rizzo?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Rizzo for ... eclipses be damned ... Chavis
What you say makes sense. And certainly these considerations of cost/benefit are universal for any trade. There have been several comments in this thread and others that the team doesn't have space for an acquired starter. Meanwhile, I'm not sure I'd put all my chips in Sale and Houck. Sale coming off surgery so you never know (though I'm pollyanna-ish there for whatever reason, but the team should have contingencies); Houck's era is now over 5 so far at Worcester, and career MiLB era over 4 (I think his couple good ML starts maybe allowed us to project something on to him that might exceed his actual ability).
What a delight this year has been. They could do damage in the post season - but they're not quite there. And they might lose several core players after 2022 (JD, Xander, Eovaldi, Vazquez). I agree it might be important to hang on to the top 4-5 prospects. Though an even bigger rebuild might be coming after '22. Might be best to cease the unexpected opportunity of this season, and press the gas a bit to improve the rotation.
Yup.
Bradford has been talking a lot about how the Cubs will be in a firesale, but any trade offer needs to at least beat the value of a comp pick, which Chavis doesn't.
It's amazing how many baseball beat writers who deal with their teams day to day, have zero idea about trade valuation.
You have a valid point, but I think there are a couple ways of looking at this. The easy one (perhaps) is you look at Ort and what he's doing in WOOster at age 29 it's hard to wonder why he's not in Boston. Also while the rotation as a whole has done better than most of us would have expected, there are some concerns when your 1-5 is made up of 3-5's. Overall the bullpen has been a blessing and Andriese hasn't been pressed into action all that often, but when the staff struggles to get you more than 5 innings the pen will get taxed and you're going to have to use #14 in spots where you would rather not. The other take I have on this and I really haven't heard it anywhere else is that if you're opting to go with 14 pitchers and a 3 man bench that includes Marwin and Santana/Chavis, #14 has got to be more valuable than Matt Andriese
This thread seems to have gotten very quiet> But, for my part here I am in the middle of the night with an insatiable desire to clarify my earlier, post a page or so ago, to which cantor 44 made such a thoughtfully engaged response (I was chuffed) -anyway I am gonna quote my own post to explicate a little. s I do not post often i hope my little eccentricity here will be tolerated.
Hopefully the quote comes out above, but if not i will repos below., So what i was getting at is the sometimes magical balance that a winning team achieves.in ways which are both serendipitous and planned. And how individual prowess (whether by a player , manager, or coach and support staff ) - can be optimized by a kind of Zen approach to "getting in the zone" of performance that is supra-powered by mindful focus on targeted goal .. When enough individuals achieve this individually with focus that is continually directed away from distractions then no matter what their personalities or how they differ so long as their attention is managed like a light saber then it carries over with guided support from tacit trust in key individuals coaching and management calls into an optimized team. To an old-timer that has played the game, albeit not at the lofty levels but still valuable, amateur levels like the basketball playing courts of the old New York I knew for 3 decades (in my case womens softball leagues ) well sometimes the importance of stability to a winning team is overlooked in favor of tinkering. It is a baseball sacred cow that fans make valuable suggestions and have informed opinions about who and what will make a team advance to what used to be called October play time -now post season. And fans as well as managers also have plenty of their own fantasy baseball acquired numbers crunching to consider and support their theories. But to me the theories and the numbers crunching and the mid-season fiddling (when not brilliant and rare) almost treat the players as interchangeable widgets who should be able to manufacture optimal team feats despite lack of on-field playing time with new team members suddenly inserted into a new chemical composition . And no matter that they have forged a beautiful chemistry of previous player collaboration which is as critical to winning as their own playing at strength.
I do believe that winning teams do not have to achieve perfect harmony insofar as never having a diva or malcontent in their midst --rather I believe that championship teams have a level of tacit trust in themselves and knowing own and others weaknesses and strengths on the field and use that knowledge to build a kind of dynamic chemistry that is easier to renew in every game and that, when combined with the team trades and strategizing over the winter and during drought seasons of losing and struggling when clearly there is a need for tinkering and freshening . I am just not sure that when we have got a team that is demonstrating excellence over the long summer haul may not be helped and could possibly be harmed by interrupting focus and developed player knowledge of one another on the field, by popping in new personnel. (Except perhaps for an absolutely stellar player .)
MY ORIGINAL POST: As an old timer, I am a great believer in great Cora and Bloom, in the Zen of mindfulness by each player 's personal aiming with intent focus on each target. There is an enhanced performance realization resulting in game-winning that comes from doing so with intensity and practice. Many times in my lifetime i have seen that the chemistry of a team is greater than the sum of its individual parts. I have seen that when you have brilliance in the key triad of managers, coaching, and players that stellar results follow. I see the numbers and stats and endless playfulness with same by the fans and sadly team staff as too often a distraction from the daily grind challenging flesh and blood and brains to creatively adapt to each game's dynamics to achieve one win at a time and accomplish a winning season.
We have been achieving brilliance as a team. I would not dicker with the players. I would focus on stability and beautiful, dedicated intention aka creative visualization, and the mental and physical development of stamina, courage, and confidence in current players to keep this up for the entire season. As Alex said earlier this week, home field advantage is crucial to achieve playoff optimal strength and doing so could make our talented Sox unbeatable this year. JMO.
Hopefully the quote comes out above, but if not i will repos below., So what i was getting at is the sometimes magical balance that a winning team achieves.in ways which are both serendipitous and planned. And how individual prowess (whether by a player , manager, or coach and support staff ) - can be optimized by a kind of Zen approach to "getting in the zone" of performance that is supra-powered by mindful focus on targeted goal .. When enough individuals achieve this individually with focus that is continually directed away from distractions then no matter what their personalities or how they differ so long as their attention is managed like a light saber then it carries over with guided support from tacit trust in key individuals coaching and management calls into an optimized team. To an old-timer that has played the game, albeit not at the lofty levels but still valuable, amateur levels like the basketball playing courts of the old New York I knew for 3 decades (in my case womens softball leagues ) well sometimes the importance of stability to a winning team is overlooked in favor of tinkering. It is a baseball sacred cow that fans make valuable suggestions and have informed opinions about who and what will make a team advance to what used to be called October play time -now post season. And fans as well as managers also have plenty of their own fantasy baseball acquired numbers crunching to consider and support their theories. But to me the theories and the numbers crunching and the mid-season fiddling (when not brilliant and rare) almost treat the players as interchangeable widgets who should be able to manufacture optimal team feats despite lack of on-field playing time with new team members suddenly inserted into a new chemical composition . And no matter that they have forged a beautiful chemistry of previous player collaboration which is as critical to winning as their own playing at strength.
I do believe that winning teams do not have to achieve perfect harmony insofar as never having a diva or malcontent in their midst --rather I believe that championship teams have a level of tacit trust in themselves and knowing own and others weaknesses and strengths on the field and use that knowledge to build a kind of dynamic chemistry that is easier to renew in every game and that, when combined with the team trades and strategizing over the winter and during drought seasons of losing and struggling when clearly there is a need for tinkering and freshening . I am just not sure that when we have got a team that is demonstrating excellence over the long summer haul may not be helped and could possibly be harmed by interrupting focus and developed player knowledge of one another on the field, by popping in new personnel. (Except perhaps for an absolutely stellar player .)
MY ORIGINAL POST: As an old timer, I am a great believer in great Cora and Bloom, in the Zen of mindfulness by each player 's personal aiming with intent focus on each target. There is an enhanced performance realization resulting in game-winning that comes from doing so with intensity and practice. Many times in my lifetime i have seen that the chemistry of a team is greater than the sum of its individual parts. I have seen that when you have brilliance in the key triad of managers, coaching, and players that stellar results follow. I see the numbers and stats and endless playfulness with same by the fans and sadly team staff as too often a distraction from the daily grind challenging flesh and blood and brains to creatively adapt to each game's dynamics to achieve one win at a time and accomplish a winning season.
We have been achieving brilliance as a team. I would not dicker with the players. I would focus on stability and beautiful, dedicated intention aka creative visualization, and the mental and physical development of stamina, courage, and confidence in current players to keep this up for the entire season. As Alex said earlier this week, home field advantage is crucial to achieve playoff optimal strength and doing so could make our talented Sox unbeatable this year. JMO.
Even though we as fans may play GM, the players, coaches, and even management buy into your Zen theory. Heck, it was mentioned in the Houck and Duran call-ups how much juice the young uns would add. Cora promotes a community (e.g. rallying around Eovaldi after his heroic extra inning work in WS G3). I think Chaim is celebrated (at least by me) for his intuition to not only bring in the right pieces for better individual performances, but also because they can lift the community/team.
Three series losses in a row. Offense is in a funk and the bullpen has sprung a few leaks as well. They played over their heads in the first half, time for AC to earn his money and stem the tide, because this stretch of games ahead has the potential to do some serious damage to their standing in the division race if they can't get back to their winning ways.
IMO, the Yanks is a push due to freakishness.
July 6 loss to LAA 5-3. 1 for 10 with RISP, with 4 left on. Arroyo and Santana put up back to back 0fers. Cora believes n Santana. Santana does not believe in hitting. (Ohtani pitching for LAA goes 7.) Eovaldi goes 5.2, giving up 5 runs total, 2 in the 6th before he's pulled. Workman allows an inherited runner to score (prior to that it's 4-2 Angels).
July 7 loss to LAA 5-4. 4-13 with RSIP, with 6 left on. The box score shows a spreading of effective hitters, with Devers and Renfroe creating an 0fer gap. But a good lineup. (Angels starter was Heaney - 5.38 ERA) E-Rod goes 5 and gives up 4, including a pair of homers to lead off the 5th. Bullpen is sterling.
July 10 loss to Phillies 11-2. 0 for 6 with RISP, overall the decent line-up just didn't hit, including a 3rd inning with 3 left on base - outs by Dalbec, Verdugo, Devers. (Philly started Moore - 5.40 ERA and he only went 4.1) 3-2 in the 8th when Philly scores 8 off Taylor, Workman, Brice. (Perez pulled early with only one more game to play before the ASB.) Taylor's number came up after a long stretch of excellence. Then Cora threw gas on the fire by bringing in Workman (into a 5-2 game with two on.)
July 11 loss to the Phillies 5-4. Pivetta goes short, but the bullpen is excellent. Hernandez and Verdugo go 0 for 9, and the team is 1 for 9 with RISP. Decent lineup though. Bullpen game for the Phillies. Sox claw to within 1 in the 5th and 6th, but it's not enough. The core flails in the 7th and 9th, and in the 8th the bottom/top of the lineup loaded the bases for Verdugo, who grounded out.
I think my take on this is the team in a nutshell.
Overall the starters will hit and win, but, by design, Cora usually has no good bats off the bench to PH with, and is overly committed to rehabbing/playing scrappy marginal players: Gonzalez, Santana, Hernandez, Arroyo. Sometimes it mostly pays off, like the last two. Sometimes not ever really, like the first two. Vazquez has to be played, and Lord knows what's up with Dalbec - but if you're committed to a 2 man black hole, the least you can do is not feed it more mass.
If one of the core group has an off night, it can lead to multiple black holes in the lineup, isolating Arroyo or Renfroe somewhere lower down, next to the suck. If the core is solid and a couple of others contribute, the lineup is certainly long enough to move men around the bases. Verdugo is often the key to that. But do you start Santana against Ohtani? Why is he even on the team? Do you start Marwin Gonzalez at first on July 11th? (Dalbec replaced him anyway, and went 1 for 3 with an RBI.)
Likewise, Cora has a few shutdown relievers and a few scrubs. He tends to pull his starters early in this stretch, and goes to Workman too often with runners on. However, having Rodriguez start the 5th, and going to Taylor were completely defensible moves.
Addressing the starters is another subject, but IMO there's the whiff of a coaching/planning/approach failure with how the games have unfolded, rather than a "his stuff is just now hittable" vibe.
I believe it is 6, in 2003. All 6 actually hit 25+. They had 9 guys hit 12+ HR that year - the entire starting lineup. 218 combined HR from those 9 guys. 8 of the 9 had 85+ RBI as well. Just an insane offense.
There were a couple of teams in the late 70's with 5, but the 2003 team was a dinger machine as noted with 6, almost 7 with Bill Mueller at the doorstep with 19.
So that could be tied this year, and possibly broken if Verdugo gets hot. Although Dalbec is probably getting replaced and may struggle to get to 20 too.
The '77 Red Sox came close:
Rice: 39
Boomer: 33
Hobson: 30
Yaz: 28
Fisk: 26
Lynn: 18 (but in 129 games)
Carbo hit 15 as a part-time player - with an OPS of .931
But Muzzy's correct and that the 2003 version had the highest OPS of any Red Sox team. The 2019 Sox had the most homeruns (7 more than 2003)
Rice: 39
Boomer: 33
Hobson: 30
Yaz: 28
Fisk: 26
Lynn: 18 (but in 129 games)
Carbo hit 15 as a part-time player - with an OPS of .931
But Muzzy's correct and that the 2003 version had the highest OPS of any Red Sox team. The 2019 Sox had the most homeruns (7 more than 2003)
Chaim Bloom quoted today:
"I agree that we don't want to disrupt what we have, but I think if we're able to find the right additions with moves that make sense for the organization, I don't think it will do that," Bloom said. "I think it would be welcomed. It's on us to make sure anything we do makes sense and doesn't disrupt what we have going. We certainly don't want to do anything that is going to take away from a lot of the good stuff that we have going on here, but I also think that if the opportunities are there fresh reinforcements would be welcome. We just have to make sure they're the right fit, the right people and the right players."
Such a generic answer but that should always be his thinking. If there's a trade that makes sense, you pull the trigger. If not, you don't.
All the evidence points to Chaim being a great general manager (or President of Baseball Ops, or whatever dumb title they're giving out), but he's never said a single interesting thing in an interview. He's the master of stretching a generic obvious statement of doing what's best for the team in the near and long terms into 200 words.
Yes, a bit generic, but the relevant part to aminayaquin's posts are the considerations of getting the "right people" and being sure that they "don't disrupt what we've got going" ...
I don't expect anything other than generic but he basically repeated himself over and over. It's like a kid writing an essay with a word count. I like tacos. Tacos are good. I enjoy eating tacos. Tacos are tasty.
Agreed, these statements are pretty "vanilla," but I much prefer that to him tipping his hand to other teams out there. While less exciting for fans, as long as he's doing what he needs to do internally/behind closed doors (which he certainly seems to be doing), then I'm more than fine with that. Somewhat Belichickian, though with a kinder delivery.
Well, compadres and comadres , 1st, @cantor44 very sweet to read this quote from the GM of few words! And, I agree with @papelbonafide58 --what
he said as well as Mr Bloom's cagey pithy tantalization. Anyway, caps lock-whoops! But anyway another oldtimer concern for forecasting post season participation is the timing of the "seasonal slump". There may be more than one mini-slump in a season, but proverbially all teams have one comparatively longer one. And, WHEN in the season it is situated is of great importance. A serious slump watching fan NEVER wants their team to enter the post-season without having had it! So. I'll just observe that if we have just had ours, and this year our maxi - slump is a mini, then we are looking at perfect timing for another notch towards post-season play !! Okay. so I am having a bit of fun here, but the ZEN stuff is for real ; sports psychologists (some of them are also for real) have worked very successfully in various sports with this , often modified according to their creative and therapeutic approaches. Also there are two books that explore this: the lighthearted Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance and the scholarly Zen and the Art of Archery
Because some team might think we're in the market for a starting SS - and Bloom will confuse them to his advantage by instead asking about 1B options?
How would you read my statement and come away with thinking anything is wrong with tacos?
I'm probably missing the joke but if one says they like tacos, they don't really need to say they are tasty, or that they are good or that they enjoy eating them.
Point taken. I suppose I meant it more so to prevent the beginnings of a media circus that could create a distraction, rather than confusing a team.
Since losing their first three to Baltimore, the Sox have gone 28-10 against the AL East. Wowza! And I love Torchy's Tacos. Get one if you're ever in Texas.
Bloom openly stating that they are going to upgrade 1B could easily cause unnecessary friction where none exists today, especially if such upgrade never comes to fruition for whatever reason.
I'd much rather Bloom make generic, boring, bland statements, and then go and find the necessary roster upgrade at a reasonable cost. Hits and wins will be much more useful to the team and its fans than bold statements to the press come September 30.