Fire Bloom .

[Kimmi]

Every GM makes moves and choices that, in hindsight, look bad or not so good. The fact that some posters hated some moves from day one, so it's "not hindsight," in those cases, does not mean they'd have been a better GM. It's one or two or maybe more moves out of hundreds of decisions that need to be made over a GMs career with one team.

 

I like the plan, too, and think we need to stick to it.

 

The farm needed rebuilding- not quite as badly as many of us had felt 3-4 years ago, as several of DD's farm choices look very good, now.

 

Perhaps less recognizable was the need to build up the 18-40th slots on the 40 man roster. Yes, Bloom took over a decent core of players left over from 2018, but the budget was strained and severely limited in his first two seasons, and some of the high-priced players, namely Price and Sale did not pull nearly their weight in production.

 

Those who keep saying "Henry can open his wallet, if he wants to" are correct, but that does not mean he will, and he really did not for Bloom's first two winters. He did give him a significant amount of money for 1 year deals, but with 18-22 slots to improve on a 40 man roster, $40M only goes so far. We saw that in 2020. We saw some of the wonders Bloom can do with a limited budget in 2021. This year started out very poorly, and of course sentiments like this thread title came to the surface.

 

Years ago, I had felt Ben deserved another year to let his long term plan come to fruition, but I totally understand the 3 last place finishes in 4 years part being thought of as the longest leash any Sox GM has been given in my lifetime- the ring in '13 not withstanding. The reason they went with DD, IMO, is that Henry decided he'd open his wallet for a 3-5 year window, and DD looked better equipped to handle that type of plan.

 

I hope Henry keeps the wallet open for a few more years, but let's give Bloom the chance Ben never got: let's see if he can build a power house team through spending, while still maintaining a solid farm from A ball to AAA. Keep the prospect pipeline working and contributing. Keep free agency and trades for filling the few gaps the farm can't fill. That's a long term winning strategy. It's one even Theo admitted he let get away from him, in his time with us. Let's not do it again.

 

2018 was an incredible season. I don't regret what we did to get that ring and the 3 first place finishes that went with it, but that was not really a sustainable plan, unless Henry was prepared to be the Dodgers East Coast team.

 

Just my take.

 

 

I pretty much agree with everything in this post. I think we have been on the same page here.

 

I think Henry got a little too impatient with Ben and made a mistake in going to the other extreme with Dombrowski. JMO

 

I have never agreed with the argument that Henry should sign a player or players at any cost because he can afford to do it. Yes, he can afford it if he really wanted to spend without limit. If I thought Henry was going to spend without limit, I'd be all for opening the checkbook for Bogaerts and Devers and any other player we wanted to keep. But the fact is that no owner is going to spend without limit. Tying up that much money in a player is going to mean that much less money to spend on the rest of the team. This becomes particularly difficult to manage when the huge contract starts going south.

[moonslav59]

I pretty much agree with everything in this post. I think we have been on the same page here.

 

I think Henry got a little too impatient with Ben and made a mistake in going to the other extreme with Dombrowski. JMO

 

I have never agreed with the argument that Henry should sign a player or players at any cost because he can afford to do it. Yes, he can afford it if he really wanted to spend without limit. If I thought Henry was going to spend without limit, I'd be all for opening the checkbook for Bogaerts and Devers and any other player we wanted to keep. But the fact is that no owner is going to spend without limit. Tying up that much money in a player is going to mean that much less money to spend on the rest of the team. This becomes particularly difficult to manage when the huge contract starts going south.

 

Indeed, and once you come to the conclusion that Henry will not spend wildly, you have to realize it's a trade off. If you spend big on player A, it means you have less to spend on player B, and maybe C and D, too.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Indeed, and once you come to the conclusion that Henry will not spend wildly, you have to realize it's a trade off. If you spend big on player A, it means you have less to spend on player B, and maybe C and D, too.

 

As a fan and spectator, I'll take a few A and B players over twice as many C and D guys any day. Which team wins more will then come down to who's coming up from the systems as complements.

[Bellhorn04]

As a fan and spectator, I'll take a few A and B players over twice as many C and D guys any day.

 

I don't think the math is quite that simple though. If it was I can't see anyone not agreeing with you.

[notin]

As a fan and spectator, I'll take a few A and B players over twice as many C and D guys any day. Which team wins more will then come down to who's coming up from the systems as complements.

 

So you’d be ok keeping Bogaerts and Devers both, even if it meant not adding two starting pitchers and a closer?

[notin]

I don't think the math is quite that simple though. If it was I can't see anyone not agreeing with you.

 

 

It’s not. Unless you’re one of those “but they print money” people who thinks having even an insanely high budget is still being cheap…

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

So you’d be ok keeping Bogaerts and Devers both, even if it meant not adding two starting pitchers and a closer?

 

Yes, but only because everything we've seen about Bloom tells us he won't spend on top quality pitching anyway. My posts the past two years have been all about adding established hurlers in their primes, via free agency and/or trade, but all he ever does over and over is scour bargain bins, while he loads up on farm arms.

 

Those are the guys the star position players will be supporting soon with bats and gloves.

[moonslav59]

As a fan and spectator, I'll take a few A and B players over twice as many C and D guys any day. Which team wins more will then come down to who's coming up from the systems as complements.

 

Agreed, but until you have a strong system that infuses low-cost, impact players nearly every year, it doesn't matter which higher spending plan you choose.

 

You ain't winning.

 

2013 proved you can win without spending wildly on top FA that previous winter. We went with 4-5 player C's and D's, instead of the David Prices, and still won.

 

I agree, though, every now and then you need to go with A players, at the expense of going cheaper at other slots.

 

We guessed wrongly on Sale. Some would argue Price, too.

 

We need to "guess" better, and Story is now on the hot seat.

[moonslav59]

Yes, but only because everything we've seen about Bloom tells us he won't spend on top quality pitching anyway. My posts the past two years have been all about adding established hurlers in their primes, via free agency and/or trade, but all he ever does over and over is scour bargain bins, while he loads up on farm arms.

 

Those are the guys the star position players will be supporting soon with bats and gloves.

 

We were hearing Bloom won't sign anyone to a big contract before the Story signing, too.

 

I think we will see Bloom go large for a pitcher, this winter, or trade some precious prospects for one.

 

Maybe hitting on Wacha and Hill might convince him to stick to $6-10M pitchers, but I doubt it.

 

(He missed on Richards and Perez I and Perez II. I might add, it looks like someone did OK on Perex III.)

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

We were hearing Bloom won't sign anyone to a big contract before the Story signing, too.

 

I think we will see Bloom go large for a pitcher, this winter, or trade some precious prospects for one.

 

Maybe hitting on Wacha and Hill might convince him to stick to $6-10M pitchers, but I doubt it.

 

(He missed on Richards and Perez I and Perez II. I might add, it looks like someone did OK on Perex III.)

 

We're all guessing, but the only thing we know for sure is that next offseason will be Bloom's fourth in charge of Boston.

[moonslav59]

We were hearing Bloom won't sign anyone to a big contract before the Story signing, too.

 

I think we will see Bloom go large for a pitcher, this winter, or trade some precious prospects for one.

 

Maybe hitting on Wacha and Hill might convince him to stick to $6-10M pitchers, but I doubt it.

 

(He missed on Richards and Perez I and Perez II. I might add, it looks like someone did OK on Perex III.)

 

Also, I think Blooms first task was to rebuild the farm and lower 40 man roster back up to respectability, and it looks like he has come close to reaching those goals. My thoughts are that he will begin looking to improve quality over quantity, now, and maybe the Paxton and Story signings are hints he's willing to spend for more than one season and for more than $6-7M a year. (The only other higher 1 year deal he has given was $10M/1 to Richards.)

[notin]

Yes, but only because everything we've seen about Bloom tells us he won't spend on top quality pitching anyway. My posts the past two years have been all about adding established hurlers in their primes, via free agency and/or trade, but all he ever does over and over is scour bargain bins, while he loads up on farm arms.

 

Those are the guys the star position players will be supporting soon with bats and gloves.

 

 

What makes you think you’ve seen everything about Bloom? Especially since you’ve been wrong about his methods (nearly?) every time?

[moonslav59]

Indeed, if you count 2020 as a full season.

 

Some context is needed. No other GM under Henry was handed a farm nearly void of any ML ready impact prospects and a very sad bottom half of the 40 man roster, while at the same time, being given a highly restricted winter spending budget. He was also saddled with the Price contract and a star player asking for $40M a year.

 

Did anyone expect a ring within 3 years?

[notin]

We're all guessing, but the only thing we know for sure is that next offseason will be Bloom's fourth in charge of Boston.

 

The first one was a mess and a shortened season and the team had no choice but to trade the insignia league Betts.

 

The second one got the team to the ALCS.

 

The third one is in progress, but he’s already added a nine figure contract…

[moonslav59]

What makes you think you’ve seen everything about Bloom? Especially since you’ve been wrong about his methods (nearly?) every time?

 

Using his time in Tampa as a template of who he is, is missing something.

 

His first season, here, he was given $40M to spend on 1 year deals, but he had 10-12 slots to fill.

 

His second winter, he was given about the same money but with 8-10 slots to fill.

 

How can you make a lasting judgment on a GM under those unigue circumstances? (Unique for a Sox GM's first 3 seasons, anyway.)

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

What makes you think you’ve seen everything about Bloom? Especially since you’ve been wrong about his methods (nearly?) every time?

 

Wow, thanks for correcting me, Sam Kennedy. Just so you know, someone else must have been using your forum alias to make posts all offseason advocating trading for actual quality pitchers in their primes.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

The first one was a mess and a shortened season and the team had no choice but to trade the insignia league Betts.

 

The second one got the team to the ALCS.

 

The third one is in progress, but he’s already added a nine figure contract…

 

And even some countries change their presidents after four years.

[Larry Cook]

Bullpen blows it again Today,

[notin]

Wow, thanks for correcting me, Sam Kennedy. Just so you know, someone else must have been using your forum alias to make posts all offseason advocating trading for actual quality pitchers in their primes.

 

 

I stand by Pivetta as one. I’d like others although I never know who will be available. I was hoping for Castillo or Montas all off-season. Or even Manaea…

[notin]

Bullpen blows it again Today,

 

Robles has been the Lucky Version of Brasier all year. Cora needs to stop thinking otherwise…

[mvp 78]

Robles has been the Lucky Version of Brasier all year. Cora needs to stop thinking otherwise…

 

Yup

[Bellhorn04]

Robles has been the Lucky Version of Brasier all year. Cora needs to stop thinking otherwise…

 

Which would move Schreiber to the top of the righty depth chart, unless they move Houck to the pen.

[moonslav59]

Which would move Schreiber to the top of the righty depth chart, unless they move Houck to the pen.

 

Now that Wacha is back, it's time to anoint Houck the closer and end all this crap.

 

Schreiber should pass Robles on the depth chart.

[Nick]

Which would move Schreiber to the top of the righty depth chart, unless they move Houck to the pen.

 

Repeating myself but I believe Sox thought between Robles, Dieckman and Barnes, they would find a closer. It has not worked out.

 

Lucky that Schrieber has come out of nowhere.

 

Both Houck and Whitlock were going to be multiple inning guys with Houck getting the first crack at starting.

 

I'm convinced Houck is better suited to be the closer. We can't have him pitch 3 or 4 innings every 5th day. As Cora like to say "piggyback" for a starter. With our bats heating up, we'll have to protect leads in 8/9th innings.

 

No confidence in Barnes, Sawamura, Dieckman and Robles in that order for me right now. Brasier was on the list but he got sent down.

 

Davis is out of my doghouse.

 

Tyler has take a step back for me.

 

Strahm and Schrieber have pitched well.

[dgalehouse]

As I have stated ad nauseum, Closin' ain't easy. There is a very short list of guys who have been able to do it at a high level for any length of time. Could Houck be good at it ? Maybe , maybe not. Might as well try .

[Bellhorn04]

Danish put up a pair of scoreless innings in yesterday's game, in a low-leverage situation that turned out to be important.

[Nick]

Danish put up a pair of scoreless innings in yesterday's game, in a low-leverage situation that turned out to be important.

 

I forgot about him...he's on positive side of ledger.

[moonslav59]

I forgot about him...he's on positive side of ledger.

 

Not for me. He needs more than 1 good game to move off the bad list.

[Bellhorn04]

As I have stated ad nauseum, Closin' ain't easy. There is a very short list of guys who have been able to do it at a high level for any length of time. Could Houck be good at it ? Maybe , maybe not. Might as well try .

 

I have to agree for the most part.

 

I also get notin's argument that the pitching the 8th inning can sometimes be harder, if the heart of the order is up.

 

But there's something about having a guy like Kimbrel or Papelbon or Rivera pitching the 9th every time you have the lead. It's a sort of comfortable feeling. They will occasionally blow games but they usually bounce right back. It's something you can count on.

 

As for the pressure of pitching the 9th, I do think it's different. To me it's like a field goal kicker who has a chance to win or lose the game on the last play from say 35 or 40 yards. It's a high-percentage play for them. But the thing is, the whole game is on them, and everyone is watching them, maybe many millions of people. Are you Adam Vinatieri, or Scott Norwood? Keith Foulke, or Calvin Schiraldi? Your career is going to be defined by this moment, and possibly ruined by this moment.

[moonslav59]

I have to agree for the most part.

 

I also get notin's argument that the pitching the 8th inning can sometimes be harder, if the heart of the order is up.

 

But there's something about having a guy like Kimbrel or Papelbon or Rivera pitching the 9th every time you have the lead. It's a sort of comfortable feeling. They will occasionally blow games but they usually bounce right back. It's something you can count on.

 

As for the pressure of pitching the 9th, I do think it's different. To me it's like a field goal kicker who has a chance to win or lose the game on the last play from say 35 or 40 yards. It's a high-percentage play for them. But the thing is, the whole game is on them, and everyone is watching them, maybe many millions of people. Are you Adam Vinatieri, or Scott Norwood? Keith Foulke, or Calvin Schiraldi? Your career is going to be defined by this moment, and possibly ruined by this moment.

 

Well said.