A Realistic View at 2020: Part II

[mvp 78]

Your talking about building a Rays like team. We have the right guy in Bloom to do it.

 

We have a couple of impediments. We haven't had a decent draft position in years and we traded away a lot of quality prospects.

 

I also wonder about the quality of our player development. Case in point being Dalbec, who came up with years in the minors with a reputation as a power hitter with a high strike out rate. His first period seemed to confirm the book on him and then after a few days coaching he seems to have found a way to improve significantly. If coaching was what this kid needed, was it lacking in the minors? Probably the answers are more complex but it begs the question Are we lacking in the player development area?

 

I don't think the coaching was lacking. There's nothing about his first few days that weren't evident in the minors. He has easy power. He strikes out a lot. That hasn't changed.

[notin]

I don't think the coaching was lacking. There's nothing about his first few days that weren't evident in the minors. He has easy power. He strikes out a lot. That hasn't changed.

 

Dalbec is what they call a Three True Outcome guy. He'll hit home runs. He'll walk. But he ill strike out a lot. He's basically a newer version of Mark Reynolds, which is actually not a bad thing for a guy on a rookie contract...

[mvp 78]

Dalbec is what they call a Three True Outcome guy. He'll hit home runs. He'll walk. But he ill strike out a lot. He's basically a newer version of Mark Reynolds, which is actually not a bad thing for a guy on a rookie contract...

 

Right now, he's at least an upgrade over Chavis who doesn't walk and is worse in the field.

[notin]

Right now, he's at least an upgrade over Chavis who doesn't walk and is worse in the field.

 

Chavis is a role player. Dalbec is trying to be a starter.

 

I like that they are trying Chavis in the outfield, although I know it's more out of him being a warm body not named Peraza...

[Nick]

Chavis is a role player. Dalbec is trying to be a starter.

 

I like that they are trying Chavis in the outfield, although I know it's more out of him being a warm body not named Peraza...

 

It's good to know that Dalbec can also play third, which maybe his best position if and whenever Casas shows up down the road.

[notin]

It's good to know that Dalbec can also play third, which maybe his best position if and whenever Casas shows up down the road.

 

It might be a tad early to worry about logjams created by A ball players. There is no such thing as a player in A-ball being blocked...

[Bellhorn04]

Dalbec is what they call a Three True Outcome guy. He'll hit home runs. He'll walk. But he ill strike out a lot. He's basically a newer version of Mark Reynolds, which is actually not a bad thing for a guy on a rookie contract...

 

5 dingers in his first 35 PA's. It'll be a tough pace to maintain.

[Nick]

It might be a tad early to worry about logjams created by A ball players. There is no such thing as a player in A-ball being blocked...

 

Understood....I never really cared about being 'blocked' theory....It just gives you plenty of options which is always good to have..

[notin]

Understood....I never really cared about being 'blocked' theory....It just gives you plenty of options which is always good to have..

 

Devers looks to have one corner INF spot locked up for a few years. Beyond that, the other corner is wide open for the time being.

[moonslav59]

Dalbec is making a strong play for the 1B job in 2021.

 

There's still a long time to go for that to be a sure bet. He won't even get as many PAs, this year, as Middy got before he flopped.

[moonslav59]

It's pretty sad state of affairs, when the only thing to get a little bit excited about, this year, are tiny sample sizes by Munoz and Dalbec, and maybe Perez's whole season.

[Bellhorn04]

Dalbec is making a strong play for the 1B job in 2021.

 

There's still a long time to go for that to be a sure bet. He won't even get as many PAs, this year, as Middy got before he flopped.

 

Middy gave us all a serious phobia about hitters of his breed, and Chavis has made it worse.

[Bellhorn04]

It's pretty sad state of affairs, when the only thing to get a little bit excited about, this year, are tiny sample sizes by Munoz and Dalbec, and maybe Perez's whole season.

 

Well, there was that tweet with the re-set button.

[jad]

My dream is to field a team of mostly home grown, cost controlled players, then fill the gaps with inexpensive, yet very productive free agents, then beat up on the Yankees year after year with a team that costs a fraction of what the Yankees spend.

 

Why wouldn't you be happy beating up on thte Yankees with a team that costs as much as their team? The purpose is to beat the Yankees, not to pretend tto make a moral point by keeping John Henry's wallet bulging.

[vegasbob]

Your talking about building a Rays like team. We have the right guy in Bloom to do it.

 

We have a couple of impediments. We haven't had a decent draft position in years and we traded away a lot of quality prospects.

 

I also wonder about the quality of our player development. Case in point being Dalbec, who came up with years in the minors with a reputation as a power hitter with a high strike out rate. His first period seemed to confirm the book on him and then after a few days coaching he seems to have found a way to improve significantly. If coaching was what this kid needed, was it lacking in the minors? Probably the answers are more complex but it begs the question Are we lacking in the player development area?

 

I think you do need to take a long look at the player development staff and abilities, especially in the area of pitchers over the last decade. If the talent is not there, coaching won't help it much, but Fredo has to answer for the failure to get anyone as a regular starting pitcher since Buchholz . I can't say that the flameouts on the hitting side are as noticeable since we have graduated some pretty decent position players going back to Pedroia's introduction. If Pedey was not injured, then at one point in 2019 the entire infield ( Pedey, Bogey, Chavis, Devers) and outfield (Betts, JBJr, Benintendi) plus Vazquez were all products of the farm system.

[Kimmi]

Your talking about building a Rays like team. We have the right guy in Bloom to do it.

 

We have a couple of impediments. We haven't had a decent draft position in years and we traded away a lot of quality prospects.

 

I also wonder about the quality of our player development. Case in point being Dalbec, who came up with years in the minors with a reputation as a power hitter with a high strike out rate. His first period seemed to confirm the book on him and then after a few days coaching he seems to have found a way to improve significantly. If coaching was what this kid needed, was it lacking in the minors? Probably the answers are more complex but it begs the question Are we lacking in the player development area?

 

I have stated before that I almost wish that the Sox were a small market team. I fully appreciate Henry's willingness to spend, but I don't think that we have to forego small market philosophies just because we have a big budget.

 

It will take us a few years to get the farm back to where we want it. In the meantime, high quality, stop gap players can be found to keep us in contention. It will take quite a bit of work, but it's possible.

 

I don't follow player development very closely, but I have often wondered about our player development system, or lack thereof. Even though we are not typically drafting high, you would think that somewhere over the recent years, we would have developed a solid starting pitcher.

[Kimmi]

Why wouldn't you be happy beating up on thte Yankees with a team that costs as much as their team? The purpose is to beat the Yankees, not to pretend tto make a moral point by keeping John Henry's wallet bulging.

 

I didn't say I wouldn't be happy, I just said that I have a different ideal in how to build a team to beat the Yankees. It is far more difficult to build a championship team without a huge payroll, and therefore, doing so would bring me more satisfaction.

 

It matters very little to me how much Henry's wallet is bulging.

[notin]

As much as we complain about the pitching, how many people realize that the Sox put up 13 runs on opening day and haven't had a double digit run day since?

 

Now they do have a disadvantage in that they never get to face Red Sox pitching...

[Kimmi]

As much as we complain about the pitching, how many people realize that the Sox put up 13 runs on opening day and haven't had a double digit run day since?

 

Now they do have a disadvantage in that they never get to face Red Sox pitching...

 

I have complained about our underperforming offense often. IMO, they have been far more frustrating than our pitching. We expected our pitching to be a struggle. We, or at least I, expected to slug our way into the playoffs. I have been very disappointed in and frustrated with our offense.

[jad]

I didn't say I wouldn't be happy, I just said that I have a different ideal in how to build a team to beat the Yankees. It is far more difficult to build a championship team without a huge payroll, and therefore, doing so would bring me more satisfaction.

 

It matters very little to me how much Henry's wallet is bulging.

 

Again, why? Just bec. it's difficult to win with a smaller payroll, why is that better from a fan's point of view? (Note that we're ttalking about self-imposed frugality, not necessary frugality, as say Pittsburg faces). Surely you wouldn't be in favor of any other kind of deliberate handicapping--e.g., how about playing with a 20-man roster, or fielding a team with no one over 170 pounds. That too would give the opponent an advantage and it would be 'satisfying' I suppose to beat them. But again, why?

[Bellhorn04]

Again, why? Just bec. it's difficult to win with a smaller payroll, why is that better from a fan's point of view? (Note that we're ttalking about self-imposed frugality, not necessary frugality, as say Pittsburg faces). Surely you wouldn't be in favor of any other kind of deliberate handicapping--e.g., how about playing with a 20-man roster, or fielding a team with no one over 170 pounds. That too would give the opponent an advantage and it would be 'satisfying' I suppose to beat them. But again, why?

 

The answer is simple - personal philosophies and feelings. We all have different ones.

[notin]

The answer is simple - personal philosophies and feelings. We all have different ones.

 

For me, I don't care about the size of the payroll, but I do care when too much money starts getting tied up in aging players, because that limits the team's ability to retain younger players and limits their ability to improve in the near future, which is where we are today. That's why I did not like the Price signing and the Eovaldi signing. I would have liked the Sale extension, but I do think Sale only signed it because he knew he was hurt (and I think Dombrowski only offered that lowball extension because he also knew).

 

But paying heavily for younger players like was done for Manny and Pedro were both fine with me...

[moonslav59]

I do think it is a little less satisfying to win rings while being the top spender in MLB and maybe even top 3-5 spender. I remember blasting Yankee fans for "buying championships," so I think not taking spending into account would be hypocritical.

 

That being said, I still love the 2018 ring season, despite the massive spending.

[Nick]

I do think it is a little less satisfying to win rings while being the top spender in MLB and maybe even top 3-5 spender. I remember blasting Yankee fans for "buying championships," so I think not taking spending into account would be hypocritical.

 

That being said, I still love the 2018 ring season, despite the massive spending.

 

Lets be clear. Most of us are okay with bloated contract as long as player is earning it. But we've now gone to it's okay to pay a guy for 7 years as long as he performs for 4 of those years.

 

It's becoming rare that a player beyond 33-35 perform at the high level he's performed in the past.

 

Who here doesn't want a team full of home grown talent? Cheaper team controlled years for younger talent. We all want the Xander experience.

 

Size of contract doesn't bother me as much as the length. Waiting out for Price's contract to end is painful (even though Dodgers are picking up half of it)

 

I think Bloom will be good for this organization. He thinks like a small market GM and then he wakes up in middle of night realizing, hey I got some money to burn.

Edited September 10, 2020 by Nick

[moonslav59]

Lets be clear. Most of us are okay with bloated contract as long as player is earning it.

 

For me that includes guys like Dustin Pedroia. His money could have gone elsewhere.

 

It's rare that a player beyond 33-35 perform at the high level he's performed in the past.

 

Who here doesn't want a team full of home grown talent? We all want the Xander experience.

 

Size of contract doesn't bother me as much as the length. Waiting out for Price's contract to end is painful (even though Dodgers are picking up half of it)

 

I think injury (Pedey, Sale) vs just plain sucking (Crawford, Pablito & HRam) makes a difference, too.

[notin]

Lets be clear. Most of us are okay with bloated contract as long as player is earning it. But we've now gone to it's okay to pay a guy for 7 years as long as he performs for 4 of those years.

 

It's becoming rare that a player beyond 33-35 perform at the high level he's performed in the past.

 

Who here doesn't want a team full of home grown talent? Cheaper team controlled years for younger talent. We all want the Xander experience.

 

Size of contract doesn't bother me as much as the length. Waiting out for Price's contract to end is painful (even though Dodgers are picking up half of it)

 

I think Bloom will be good for this organization. He thinks like a small market GM and then he wakes up in middle of night realizing, hey I got some money to burn.

 

 

Exactly.

 

I care more about years than money. And about age when those years begin...

[notin]

I do think it is a little less satisfying to win rings while being the top spender in MLB and maybe even top 3-5 spender. I remember blasting Yankee fans for "buying championships," so I think not taking spending into account would be hypocritical.

 

That being said, I still love the 2018 ring season, despite the massive spending.

 

Typically spending is also related to fanbase. Teams that have a more voluminous and more enthusiastic/rabid fanbase tend to get better revenue streams and therefore can spend more money. It's not like anyone owning a major sports franchise is living paycheck-to-paycheck. If they have a product people want, they can use that to generate more money and produce a better product. But the small market teams do tend to lack fans, so when they spend less fewer people are disappointed.

 

However, there is a self-propagating aspect to this, too...

[moonslav59]

Exactly.

 

I care more about years than money. And about age when those years begin...

 

Agreed, and that's why I loved the Porcello deal, as all his years fell within prime (or were before post-prime).

 

It's also why I was fine with trading Price just as he reached post-prime, despite having to pay half his deal. We essentially paid him 150% of his total deal for just his 4 prime years of his deal. (The injuries made that not look so great, but we don't have to "live through" his last 4 likely declining years.)

[moonslav59]

Typically spending is also related to fanbase. Teams that have a more voluminous and more enthusiastic/rabid fanbase tend to get better revenue streams and therefore can spend more money. It's not like anyone owning a major sports franchise is living paycheck-to-paycheck. If they have a product people want, they can use that to generate more money and produce a better product. But the small market teams do tend to lack fans, so when they spend less fewer people are disappointed.

 

However, there is a self-propagating aspect to this, too...

 

I'm fine with spending large. I'm just saying that winning seems a bit more satisfying when you are not blowing everyone away in spending.

[notin]

Agreed, and that's why I loved the Porcello deal, as all his years fell within prime (or were before post-prime).

 

It's also why I was fine with trading Price just as he reached post-prime, despite having to pay half his deal. We essentially paid him 150% of his total deal for just his 4 prime years of his deal. (The injuries made that not look so great, but we don't have to "live through" his last 4 likely declining years.)

 

And Eovadi probably would have also fallen into that same category, but he had a whole different set of issues that made his contract foolish....