A Realistic View at 2023: Part I

[Bellhorn04]

It seems weird how everyone on this site loved the signings and nobody complained about it.

 

 

He means "high-risk, high upside" is the correct way to state it.

[notin]

He means "high-risk, high upside" is the correct way to state it.

 

Ok. Didn’t we all realize that a year ago? At least the “high risk” part?

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Ok. Didn’t we all realize that a year ago? At least the “high risk” part?

 

Paxton never seemed better than "medium upside, high no-side" (or "hide and go seek)."

 

He's not even Sonny Gray... or Sonny and share. Definitely not Santino, who at least made it to the tollbooths on the causeway.

[moonslav59]

Ok. Didn’t we all realize that a year ago? At least the “high risk” part?

 

That was why I posted in green.

 

"Finally," someone got it right. LMAO.

 

This is one where we almost all got it right... day one.

[Hugh2]

It seems weird how everyone on this site loved the signings and nobody complained about it.

 

 

The Paxton deal I think was always about 2023, with the hope that maybe he could be a late season pick-up for 2022 which didn't materialize and wouldn't have mattered anyways. His setback seems to have been minor. I think it's fair and wise to move on and cut the losses BUT I'd be happy to have him at 4 million. I don't think it's out of the question he exercises it.

[Bellhorn04]

Ok. Didn’t we all realize that a year ago? At least the “high risk” part?

 

That was why I posted in green.

 

"Finally," someone got it right. LMAO.

 

This is one where we almost all got it right... day one.

 

You guys are missing the point here.

 

700 hates it when people call these "low risk high reward" instead of "high risk high reward". So he was being complimentary to the writer.

[Hugh2]

You guys are missing the point here.

 

700 hates it when people call these "low risk high reward" instead of "high risk high reward". So he was being complimentary to the writer.

 

I just don't understand why we don't go after all these No risk High reward deals.

[Bellhorn04]

I just don't understand why we don't go after all these No risk High reward deals.

 

Those are the best, for sure.

[notin]

I just don't understand why we don't go after all these No risk High reward deals.

 

If financial flexibility is part of the risk, do they exist?

[moonslav59]

He means "high-risk, high upside" is the correct way to state it.

 

It was never low risk at that contract cost.

 

We all knew it was high risk.

[moonslav59]

Those are the best, for sure.

 

...and the ones that get massive overpays by some desperate or uninhibited owner/GM.

[mvp 78]

Jim Bowden of the Athletic's prediction for Xander:

 

7/196

 

Other SS's

 

Correa 10/327

Turner 8/264

Swanson 6/154

 

Note: he predicted 4/65 for Diaz.

 

Just a bit outside... the margin of error.

[mvp 78]

Paxton never seemed better than "medium upside, high no-side" (or "hide and go seek)."

 

He's not even Sonny Gray... or Sonny and share. Definitely not Santino, who at least made it to the tollbooths on the causeway.

 

Since 2016, Gray has had 1 season above 3 fWAR. Paxton has had 4 seasons above 3 fWAR. When Paxton is healthy, he's much better than Gray.

[mvp 78]

You guys are missing the point here.

 

700 hates it when people call these "low risk high reward" instead of "high risk high reward". So he was being complimentary to the writer.

 

Well, there is really no such thing as low risk high reward.

[mvp 78]

“They seem happy with their rotation of Chris Sale, Nick Pivetta, Brayan Bello, Garrett Whitlock and Tanner Houck.” (Via @JimBowdenGM)

 

Boo this man. Booo!!!

[Bellhorn04]

Well, there is really no such thing as low risk high reward.

 

And yet people have said it many times...

[mvp 78]

Mark Feinsand, MLB Reporter and author of "The Franchise: New York Yankees":

 

“According to sources, the Red Sox have started reaching out to some teams regarding the availability of their second basemen, hoping to figure out Plan B in the likely event that Bogaerts leaves Boston.”

[mvp 78]

And yet people have said it many times...

 

CHUDs.

[notin]

“They seem happy with their rotation of Chris Sale, Nick Pivetta, Brayan Bello, Garrett Whitlock and Tanner Houck.” (Via @JimBowdenGM)

 

Boo this man. Booo!!!

 

Houck is the only name that bothers me.

 

Although I consider Sale and Bello to occupy one spot. If Sale is healthy, he pitches and someone needs to step aside. (Whitlock could go to the pen as another option, but I hope they don’t keep bouncing him around.)

[mvp 78]

Mark Feinsand, MLB Reporter and author of "The Franchise: New York Yankees":

 

“According to sources, the Red Sox have started reaching out to some teams regarding the availability of their second basemen, hoping to figure out Plan B in the likely event that Bogaerts leaves Boston.”

 

@redsoxstats

Last night at the same time, two mlb insiders published stories and one said Story is next line to play SS, the other said Correa, Swanson, or Turner would be. It’s like this every winter and is going to be like this even more so this winter. These are mostly agents putting out press releases. Anyone mad the Sox are doing due diligence on everything, turning over every rock, or thinking “interest kings” is some kind of slanderous term, need to shake the rocks out of their head.

[moonslav59]

Well, there is really no such thing as low risk high reward.

 

Maybe a guy like Martin Perez, who signed for $4M, this year.

[mvp 78]

Houck is the only name that bothers me.

 

Although I consider Sale and Bello to occupy one spot. If Sale is healthy, he pitches and someone needs to step aside. (Whitlock could go to the pen as another option, but I hope they don’t keep bouncing him around.)

 

I agree about both Houck and Whitlock. Whitlock is a better fit for the rotation and Houck for the pen. However, they just need to be given a role and stuck their for a whole season for the good of their careers.

[a700hitter]

You guys are missing the point here.

 

700 hates it when people call these "low risk high reward" instead of "high risk high reward". So he was being complimentary to the writer.

Bells, you get me. LOL! It has always irked me when people call these signings “low risk high reward”.

[a700hitter]

Well, there is really no such thing as low risk high reward.

And more often than not people use that term for these types of signings.

[a700hitter]

Off the top of my head, the Red Sox ,at a minimum, need:

 

2 starting pitchers

1 Shortstop

1 Corner OFer

1 Power bat (could be the Corner OFer)

1 closer (Committee never works and the 9th inning is different)

 

This is the bare minimum needed to compete in the Division.

[mvp 78]

Maybe a guy like Martin Perez, who signed for $4M, this year.

 

No.

[mvp 78]

Off the top of my head, the Red Sox ,at a minimum, need:

 

2 starting pitchers

1 Shortstop

1 Corner OFer

1 Power bat (could be the Corner OFer)

1 closer (Committee never works and the 9th inning is different)

 

This is the bare minimum needed to compete in the Division.

 

That's basically what we've all come up with, just with different names filled in.

[moonslav59]

No.

 

In hindsight, only.

[notin]

Off the top of my head, the Red Sox ,at a minimum, need:

 

2 starting pitchers

1 Shortstop

1 Corner OFer

1 Power bat (could be the Corner OFer)

1 closer (Committee never works and the 9th inning is different)

 

This is the bare minimum needed to compete in the Division.

 

I think Houck, like him or not, has a leg up on the closer role if he’s healthy…

[moonslav59]

I think Houck, like him or not, has a leg up on the closer role if he’s healthy…

 

I think we will sign a couple RP'ers who are capable of sliding into the closer role, but may not have a proven record there, and we let Houck and those 2 fight it out.