2022 Bullpen Thread

[Kimmi]

They are for this season. They reset in 2020 and didn't go over in 2021.

 

It feels like they could have taken on more this offseason.

 

Bloom didn't want to get too far over the tax limit during the offseason. By midseason, he will have a good idea of whether the team is a true contender and a good idea of what the team's specific needs are. He can take on more salary at that time, if necessary. Otherwise, he can trade away enough salary to get back under the cap.

[mvp 78]

Bloom didn't want to get too far over the tax limit during the offseason. By midseason, he will have a good idea of whether the team is a true contender and a good idea of what the team's specific needs are. He can take on more salary at that time, if necessary. Otherwise, he can trade away enough salary to get back under the cap.

 

If he waits until the deadline, will there be enough time in the season to get the number down?

 

Also, with the new CBA, is the luxury tax the handcuff it used to be?

[Kimmi]

If he waits until the deadline, will there be enough time in the season to get the number down?

 

Also, with the new CBA, is the luxury tax the handcuff it used to be?

 

Yes to the first question.

 

No to the second question.

 

I think the idea of waiting into the season to see exactly what the team's strengths and weaknesses are makes sense. Sure, the Sox can afford to pay the luxury tax as a first year offender. But if it's not necessary to go over, it would make sense to prolong the higher penalties by another year.

 

I think Bloom would have added more salary during the offseason if the right deal could be found. I just don't think anything came along that made a lot of sense to him for both the short and long term goals.

[mvp 78]

Yes to the first question.

 

No to the second question.

 

I think the idea of waiting into the season to see exactly what the team's strengths and weaknesses are makes sense. Sure, the Sox can afford to pay the luxury tax as a first year offender. But if it's not necessary to go over, it would make sense to prolong the higher penalties by another year.

 

I think Bloom would have added more salary during the offseason if the right deal could be found. I just don't think anything came along that made a lot of sense to him for both the short and long term goals.

 

Personally, I would have signed the Syndergaard and Suzuki deals. I would have passed on adding Paxton and either Hill or Wacha.

 

It comes down to what the long term plan is. If Raffy and Xander still walk out the door, I can't say I'll be happy about the lack of spending.

[moonslav59]

If he waits until the deadline, will there be enough time in the season to get the number down?

 

Also, with the new CBA, is the luxury tax the handcuff it used to be?

 

Is it less of a burden?

[mvp 78]

Is it less of a burden?

 

Seems to be. I don't know why we focus on it so much here.

[moonslav59]

Personally, I would have signed the Syndergaard and Suzuki deals. I would have passed on adding Paxton and either Hill or Wacha.

 

It comes down to what the long term plan is. If Raffy and Xander still walk out the door, I can't say I'll be happy about the lack of spending.

 

I agree, but I doubt we stop spending.

 

Instead of paying Bogey + Devers $60M, we might pay 5 guys $12M or 4 guys $15M.

 

Instead of paying JD + Eovaldi $40M, we might pay 4 guys $10M.

 

With an anticipated influx of farm help, I'm not sure how far you can spread out top money, and still have everyone play enough to earn the $10M.

 

Let's assume we don't extend or re-sign anyone, this winter, and Bogey opts out. We'd start with this as a roster:

 

SP1 Sale (health?)

SP2 Houck

SP3 Pivetta

SP4 Whitlock

SP5 Paxton/Groome/Winckowski/Bello/Mata/Seabold

 

Closer: Barnes

RP2: Taylor

RP3: Crawford

RP4: Diekman

RP5: Brasier

RP6: Sawamura

RP7: DHerrn

RP8: Davis/Valdez/Danish/Murphy/Walter

 

C: _______, Wong, RHernandez/Cottam

1B: Casas, T Reed (Binelas)

2B: Arroyo, Hamilton (Yorke)

3B: Devers (last year), Arauz (Howlett)

SS: Story, Downs (Lugo)

LF: Duran, Fitzy

CF: JBJ, Jimenez

RF: Verdugo, McDonough

DH: Dalbec, Rafaela

 

Let's say instead of replacing (in kind at nearly the same pay) or extending Devers, Bogey, JD & Eovaldi, we sign 10 players. Where would they play?

 

1. SP

2. Closer

3. RP

4. CF

5. RF

6. 2B

7. 3B (replacing Devers after 2023)

8. P

9. P

10. P

 

Not sure there is room for 10 and the incoming rookies.

[moonslav59]

Seems to be. I don't know why we focus on it so much here.

 

Did any rules change to make going over less punative?

 

I focus on it a lot, because it seemed like Henry has had restricted winter budgets because of it, and not so much because of actual salaries.

[mvp 78]

I agree, but I doubt we stop spending.

 

Instead of paying Bogey + Devers $60M, we might pay 5 guys $12M or 4 guys $15M.

 

Instead of paying JD + Eovaldi $40M, we might pay 4 guys $10M.

 

At some point, I'm not sure 3 $10M guys always add up to a $30M guy. Unless we are talking about extensions to younger in house guys. The drop off from top tier to second tier in FA is usually pretty steep.

[notin]

I wonder if we’re reaching the end of the line with Brasier.

 

Even 4 years ago, his 95mph heat was at least something. But now while it’s still his best pitch, he’s become one of the softest tossers in the bullpen…

[mvp 78]

I wonder if we’re reaching the end of the line with Brasier.

 

Even 4 years ago, his 95mph heat was at least something. But now while it’s still his best pitch, he’s become one of the softest tossers in the bullpen…

 

I think he stays until they are ready to bring up some of their younger arms. Zack Kelly should be the first guy called up and he throws hard. Feltman should get his chance at some point this year. Maybe we see Mata in the pen towards the end of the season down the stretch?

[Bellhorn04]

Did any rules change to make going over less punative?

 

I focus on it a lot, because it seemed like Henry has had restricted winter budgets because of it, and not so much because of actual salaries.

 

No, I don't think anything is less punitive.

[Bellhorn04]

Seems to be. I don't know why we focus on it so much here.

 

It's no less of a big deal than it was before, I don't think. They bumped the thresholds is all.

[moonslav59]

No, I don't think anything is less punitive.

 

Agreed. I just think there are times Henry thinks it's worth spending more and times he feels like spending less.

 

I happen to think it is related to when he feels like we have a good shot at being a strong contender or not, but it's just my opinion.

 

I think he tries to spend enough to keep the team entertaining and somewhat competitive, except for 2020, but is willing to go the extra mile, when he thinks we are 1-2 big players away from being a top contender.

 

[mvp 78]

Agreed. I just think there are times Henry thinks it's worth spending more and times he feels like spending less.

 

I happen to think it is related to when he feels like we have a good shot at being a strong contender or not, but it's just my opinion.

 

I think he tries to spend enough to keep the team entertaining and somewhat competitive, except for 2020, but is willing to go the extra mile, when he thinks we are 1-2 big players away from being a top contender.

 

 

I'm not sure what the point is on trying to be his psychotherapist from 1,500 miles away. There's lots of "I think Henry believes" or "I think Henry feels" statements, but we don't really have his actual thoughts put to paper.

 

All we hear are thoughts from Bloom or Sam Kennedy about creating a strong organization that can compete year in and year out. Aside from not trading prospects away, it doesn't really say much about payroll implications. We know Henry has taken on some big contracts, but have eschewed others. Why sign Price, but not Lester? Why sign JD and Story, but let Betts go. Is he deliberately staying away from the 300M threshold? We don't really know. We don't know how they evaluate these MLB guys and what there thought process is.

[moonslav59]

I'm not sure what the point is on trying to be his psychotherapist from 1,500 miles away. There's lots of "I think Henry believes" or "I think Henry feels" statements, but we don't really have his actual thoughts put to paper.

 

All we hear are thoughts from Bloom or Sam Kennedy about creating a strong organization that can compete year in and year out. Aside from not trading prospects away, it doesn't really say much about payroll implications. We know Henry has taken on some big contracts, but have eschewed others. Why sign Price, but not Lester? Why sign JD and Story, but let Betts go. Is he deliberately staying away from the 300M threshold? We don't really know. We don't know how they evaluate these MLB guys and what there thought process is.

 

Um, there is a lot of evidence to support what I think. I don't just pull it out of a hat.

 

Henry has had a long history of spending large for short periods of times, and then resetting the tax and not going over the threshold for 2-3 years at a time. The times he spends big seems to line up with the times we are in an upward cycle towards being a top contender.

 

Only 2013 breaks that mold, in terms of ring seasons.

[Old Red]

Um, there is a lot of evidence to support what I think. I don't just pull it out of a hat.

 

Henry has had a long history of spending large for short periods of times, and then resetting the tax and not going over the threshold for 2-3 years at a time. The times he spends big seems to line up with the times we are in an upward cycle towards being a top contender.

 

Only 2013 breaks that mold, in terms of ring seasons.

 

If you keeping throwing things against the wall sooner, or later something will stick. The pile on the floor keeps getting bigger though.

[Bellhorn04]

Um, there is a lot of evidence to support what I think. I don't just pull it out of a hat.

 

Henry has had a long history of spending large for short periods of times, and then resetting the tax and not going over the threshold for 2-3 years at a time. The times he spends big seems to line up with the times we are in an upward cycle towards being a top contender.

 

Only 2013 breaks that mold, in terms of ring seasons.

 

There really isn't that much to figure out.

 

Since Henry bought the team the Sox have had one of the top 3 payrolls almost every year.

[moonslav59]

There really isn't that much to figure out.

 

Since Henry bought the team the Sox have had one of the top 3 payrolls almost every year.

 

Indeed, but there have been numerous stretches where we spend under the tax line. It doesn't appear to be random, either.

 

I think they strategically plan ahead when to reset, stay under or go over, and going over usually happens when we have a core of players poised to be top contenders.

 

I get the stay competitive every year mantra, and I don't disagree, but I do think we step up the spending when it looks like we are on the rise.

 

Going by cots year end numbers, our biggest increases happened here:

 

Red= Ring Year

 

2003 (105M) to 2004 (130M) +24%

 

2005 (116M)> 2006 (137M) +18%

 

2006 (137M)> 2007 (155M) +13%

 

2009 (140M)> 2010 (171M) +22%

 

2017 (189M)> 2018 (230M) +22%

 

The biggest drops:

 

We dropped 6M from '01 to '02 and '02 to '03, but 2001 was a 52% increase (Manny signing).

 

We dropped from 2007 to 2008 (8M) and the following year, too (7M).

 

We dropped from 2011 to 2012 (8M) and did increase for 2013's ring year, but the opening day 2013 budget was 21M lower than the 2012 budget- a sign we did not plan to win it all in 2013, but once we saw the team, we went all in at the deadline.

 

We dropped after 2013 (6M)

 

We dropped after 2016 (11M)

 

Our biggest drop was after 2019 (59M), a clear sign that 2020 was not viewed as a highly competitive team.

 

[mvp 78]

There really isn't that much to figure out.

 

Since Henry bought the team the Sox have had one of the top 3 payrolls almost every year.

 

They are always towards the top, that's for sure.

[mvp 78]

The easier way to look at it is:

 

2002: no CBT

2003: under

2004: over

2005: over

2006: over

2007: over

2008: under

2009: under

2010: over

2011: over

2012: under

2013: under

2014: under

2015: over

2016: over

2017: under

2018: over

2019: over

2020: under

2021: under

2022: over for now

 

It's hard to really say if they'll go over again this year or try to go under. They reset for 1 - 3 years it seems like. If they stay over, I guess they go over in 2023 and then get back under in 2024? It's hard to really forecast. It's not as simple as moon is making it out to seem. If they go for it with younger core teams, why didn't they go over in 2009? There was no difference between that team and 2010 really. They reset in 2020, so why not go over in 2021 when you still have JD/Xander/Raffy? If they are waiting for the next young core to mature, that might not be until 2024 or 2025. Will they go over in 22 and 23 and then force themselves to get under in 24 when they could have a young core? Who knows! Not us.

[Nick]

My Bullpen Ranking after Detroit series

 

1 Whitlock

2 Barnes

3 Robles

4 Diekman

5 Strahm

6 Sawamura

7 Valdez

8 Brasier

9 Kutter

10 Davis

[moonslav59]

My Bullpen Ranking after Detroit series

 

1 Whitlock

2 Barnes

3 Robles

4 Diekman

5 Strahm

6 Sawamura

7 Valdez

8 Brasier

9 Kutter

10 Davis

 

Looks exactly how I'd have listed them.

 

Let's hope Taylor can add some strength.

[Larry Cook]

My Bullpen Ranking after Detroit series

 

1 Whitlock

2 Barnes

3 Robles

4 Diekman

5 Strahm

6 Sawamura

7 Valdez

8 Brasier

9 Kutter

10 Davis

 

Maybe Cora should not send Crawford into the dumpster fire and just let him start an inning fresh!

[Nick]

Maybe Cora should not send Crawford into the dumpster fire and just let him start an inning fresh!

 

He has good stuff. I hope he's given a good look. Another multiple inning guy.

[moonslav59]

The easier way to look at it is:

 

2002: no CBT

2003: under

2004: over

2005: over

2006: over

2007: over

2008: under

2009: under

2010: over

2011: over

2012: under

2013: under

2014: under

2015: over

2016: over

2017: under

2018: over

2019: over

2020: under

2021: under

2022: over for now

 

It's hard to really say if they'll go over again this year or try to go under. They reset for 1 - 3 years it seems like. If they stay over, I guess they go over in 2023 and then get back under in 2024? It's hard to really forecast. It's not as simple as moon is making it out to seem. If they go for it with younger core teams, why didn't they go over in 2009? There was no difference between that team and 2010 really. They reset in 2020, so why not go over in 2021 when you still have JD/Xander/Raffy? If they are waiting for the next young core to mature, that might not be until 2024 or 2025. Will they go over in 22 and 23 and then force themselves to get under in 24 when they could have a young core? Who knows! Not us.

 

When and where did I even hint is was "simple."

 

I think a lot of thought goes into the timing on going "over" and "under."

 

It's not simple. The year 2013 looked like they were heading for an under, but when things looked bright, they spent big during the summer and ended up adding a lot of salary from the previous off season.

 

I agree, it's hard to tell where they go from here. Next winter will be a unique situation as so much salary comes off the books. Just staying even with this year's budget would mean spending more than maybe we ever have in one winter.

[Larry Cook]

He has good stuff. I hope he's given a good look. Another multiple inning guy.

 

Absolutely, he needs the chance to grow. He will make mistakes, but if you believe in his stuff, you have to give him the chance to learn from then and get better.

[notin]

Absolutely, he needs the chance to grow. He will make mistakes, but if you believe in his stuff, you have to give him the chance to learn from then and get better.

 

And if he can limit his meltdowns to games where the Sox have big leads late, not a big deal…

[Bellhorn04]

My Bullpen Ranking after Detroit series

 

1 Whitlock

2 Barnes

3 Robles

4 Diekman

5 Strahm

6 Sawamura

7 Valdez

8 Brasier

9 Kutter

10 Davis

 

AKA one stud hoss and a bunch of worker bees.

[oldtimer]

AKA one stud hoss and a bunch of worker bees.

 

Take the bottom most performer out and replace him with our best prospect? Is it Bello? Just a thought and perhaps too early to consider at this point.