Trade Deadline 2023

[sk7326]

Still, a Bello and Duran might have turned the 2019 team into a contender.

 

Bello maybe. But the team's two best starters falling to pieces would ruin any season.

[notin]

Per MLBTR, the Sox are looking for a LHH middle infielder. The Padres just released Rougned Odor.

 

I wouldn’t be surprised, even if it was just for a week or two. (Frankly I don’t see the need for a LHH middle infielder.)

[Bellhorn04]

Per MLBTR, the Sox are looking for a LHH middle infielder. The Padres just released Rougned Odor.

 

I wouldn’t be surprised, even if it was just for a week or two. (Frankly I don’t see the need for a LHH middle infielder.)

 

Yeah, that is one unexciting rumor.

[moonslav59]

The 2019 team was a great team on paper to start the season. It's simply untrue that the team sucked because of a lack of farm infusion.

 

So it would not have been a contender with the 2023 Bello and Duran?

[notin]

Yeah, that is one unexciting rumor.

 

Want me to jazz it up a bit?

 

The Red Sox are searching hard for Rougned Odor in order to avenge the murder of their father. Odor brutally killed him with powerful left-handed swings after an argument ensued about the definition of the word “ensue.” Odor can often be found manning second base and has connections in Texas, Baltimore, New York and San Diego. He is rumored to be unarmed, particularly against breaking pitches.

 

 

Better?

[Bellhorn04]

So it would not have been a contender with the 2023 Bello and Duran?

 

It would have been a better team with 2023 Bello and Duran, sure. And it would have been so much better if so many players didn't underperform expectations. It was a stacked team on paper. It was the 2018 team redux, and it wasn't an old team. You're the first person to say the real problem was the lack of good rookies.

[notin]

It would have been a better team with 2023 Bello and Duran, sure. And it would have been so much better if so many players didn't underperform expectations. It was a stacked team on paper. It was the 2018 team redux, and it wasn't an old team. You're the first person to say the real problem was the lack of good rookies.

 

There’s a difference between the problem was a lack of good rookies and two good rookies would have helped.

 

But the 2019 Sox finished 12 games out of the postseason. I doubt these two, even playing like they are now, would have made up that difference. That’s a lot. The 2021 Sox were closer to making the playoffs (thanks to an additional wild card) than the 2019 team was…

[sk7326]

It would have been a better team with 2023 Bello and Duran, sure. And it would have been so much better if so many players didn't underperform expectations. It was a stacked team on paper. It was the 2018 team redux, and it wasn't an old team. You're the first person to say the real problem was the lack of good rookies.

 

The 2019 story was really simple. They returned one of the best "on paper" rotations in the AL and only one of the pitchers was any good. (E-Rod)

[vegasbob]

Want me to jazz it up a bit?

 

The Red Sox are searching hard for Rougned Odor in order to avenge the murder of their father. Odor brutally killed him with powerful left-handed swings after an argument ensued about the definition of the word “ensue.” Odor can often be found manning second base and has connections in Texas, Baltimore, New York and San Diego. He is rumored to be unarmed, particularly against breaking pitches.

 

 

Better?

 

No, Notin, that story about Odor stinks., just like any story about Story

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

The 2019 story was really simple. They returned one of the best "on paper" rotations in the AL and only one of the pitchers was any good. (E-Rod)

 

Right -- ERod: the youngest and more importantly, only one from the rotation whose arm wasn't overextended, starting and relieving, up to the previous November (Price and Eovaldi more than doubled his postseason innings, while Porcello and Sale threw 50% more).

 

This might be one of the main reasons it is so difficult for World Series champs to repeat.

[moonslav59]

I remember reading somewhere, once, that to have a sustainable contender you need to get a decent 1.5 starting players from your system every year.

 

I am sticking to my point that going from Devers in the summer of 2017 to Bello and Casas in the summer of 2022 or 2023 to actually get solid results and only getting one guy- Houck, is a major, if not the most significant reason the team went downhill, fast.

 

Sure, deadwood contracts hurt.

 

Sure, too many players declining all at once, even some still in their prime hurt.

 

Sure, slashing the budget after 2019, hurt like hell, but getting no farm infusion of significance was the ball-buster to me.

 

Not adding anyone in2018 or 2019 added to the demise of the 2019 team. Other factors may have been more significant that one year, grant you that, but overall, from 2019-2022, IMO, little farm help hurt most.

[Bellhorn04]

I remember reading somewhere, once, that to have a sustainable contender you need to get a decent 1.5 starting players from your system every year.

 

I am sticking to my point that going from Devers in the summer of 2017 to Bello and Casas in the summer of 2022 or 2023 to actually get solid results and only getting one guy- Houck, is a major, if not the most significant reason the team went downhill, fast.

 

Sure, deadwood contracts hurt.

 

Sure, too many players declining all at once, even some still in their prime hurt.

 

Sure, slashing the budget after 2019, hurt like hell, but getting no farm infusion of significance was the ball-buster to me.

 

Not adding anyone in2018 or 2019 added to the demise of the 2019 team. Other factors may have been more significant that one year, grant you that, but overall, from 2019-2022, IMO, little farm help hurt most.

 

So moon, hopefully this doesn't happen, but since you're a man who likes to indulge in hypotheticals, what if the 2023 team wins 83 games or less, a worse record than 2019 or 2021, in spite of the farm infusion? How would you fit that into your thesis?

[moonslav59]

So moon, hopefully this doesn't happen, but since you're a man who likes to indulge in hypotheticals, what if the 2023 team wins 83 games or less, a worse record than 2019 or 2021, in spite of the farm infusion? How would you fit that into your thesis?

 

I would hold Bloom even more accountable than I already am. However, adding 4 players all at once, assuming they keep doing very well the next 2 months, still leaves us behind that theoretical pace of 1.5 players per year. In theory, since the Devers call up, we should have sen about 9 regular players from the farm. I’m not sure Houck counts, since is not regular. We’ve seen 4-5 not 9.

 

Again, it’s not the only reason we have been mostly s*****, but it has to be a major one. To me, it is the biggest reason.

[Bellhorn04]

I would hold Bloom even more accountable than I already am. However, adding 4 players all at once, assuming they keep doing very well the next 2 months, still leaves us behind that theoretical pace of 1.5 players per year. In theory, since the Devers call up, we should have sen about 9 regular players from the farm. I’m not sure Houck counts, since is not regular. We’ve seen 4-5 not 9.

 

And where did the 1.5 per year number come from again? You read it somewhere once?

[moonslav59]

And where did the 1.5 per year number come from again? You read it somewhere once?

 

Yes, and it sounds about right, or low to me. I’m not talking 1.5 stars- just 1.5 decent to solid players per year.

 

Does that seem high to you?

 

If you get 6 years of control, then lose the player, that’s 9 out of 26 players being homegrown.

[Bellhorn04]

Yes, and it sounds about right, or low to me. I’m not talking 1.5 stars- just 1.5 decent to solid players per year.

 

Does that seem high to you?

 

If you get 6 years of control, then lose the player, that’s 9 out of 26 players being homegrown.

 

I would definitely need to see some empirical evidence before I make any judgment.

 

I think the 2019 Red Sox are a decent test case. I will continue to dispute that the biggest problem of that team was the lack of farm infusion. There's no way that accounts for the biggest part of a 24-game drop.

 

Then there's the question of how the 2021 team succeeded after a further 2 years of no farm help. It should have gotten even worse.

 

There are just too many factors involved that keep it from being simple.

[Dipre]

It shouldn't be an argument that being able to add regular contributors from the farm to the MLB roster is a must to be able to create a sustainable contender. The economic landscape in baseball isn't what it used to be, as salaries have exploded while the league punishes teams for lavish spending. Also, the best teams in the league over the past 5-7 years (Dodgers and Houston) have adopted exactly this model. Gotta copy the teams that clearly have the formula for success.

[Bellhorn04]

It shouldn't be an argument that being able to add regular contributors from the farm to the MLB roster is a must to be able to create a sustainable contender. The economic landscape in baseball isn't what it used to be, as salaries have exploded while the league punishes teams for lavish spending. Also, the best teams in the league over the past 5-7 years (Dodgers and Houston) have adopted exactly this model. Gotta copy the teams that clearly have the formula for success.

 

I agree, but that's not the specific argument that moon is making. He's trying to apply this principle to the 2019 team. That was a team that looked like a 100-win team on paper. A whole bunch of bad s*** happened, is the simplest explanation for why that team only won 84 games.

[Dipre]

I agree, but that's not the specific argument that moon is making. He's trying to apply this principle to the 2019 team. That was a team that looked like a 100-win team on paper. A whole bunch of bad s*** happened, is the simplest explanation for why that team only won 84 games.

 

That's a silly argument and y'all should drop it. To quote the great Morpheus: What happened, happened and couldn't have happened any other way.

[moonslav59]

I agree, but that's not the specific argument that moon is making. He's trying to apply this principle to the 2019 team. That was a team that looked like a 100-win team on paper. A whole bunch of bad s*** happened, is the simplest explanation for why that team only won 84 games.

 

I’ve already back peddled on 2019, saying it may not have been “the major reason,” but maybe it still was.

 

Maybe no farm help was 26% of the issue, not spending to replace Kimbrell, Kelly and others was 25%, declining numbers from returning vets was 25% and restgate was 24%. What was the “major reason?”

 

(They also added nobody at the 2019 deadline.)

 

Obviously, not spending much to upgrade the roster via spending since the deadline of 2019 is a major reason for the near steady decline, 2021 notwithstanding.

 

Declining production from returning vets has been a major issue, and this includes some big name players in their primes that did not meet expectations.

 

Not hitting on a large enough percentage of FA signings and trades was another major issue. It’s also the issue that seems to be debated more than any other issue. Personally, I do not think Bloom has done as poorly in this area as many do, because I looked at his budget and counted all the holes that needed filling and lowered my expectations accordingly, but I digress.

 

What have I missed?

 

Have we had more key injuries than most contenders? I’d say maybe, but not by enough to make it a major issue like the one I just listed.

 

Poor manager? Don’t get me started on this.

 

How would you guys order the reasons for this 4 year decline? (Don’t look just at 2019 or 2020 or 2022: take them all in one big lump.)

 

Humor me.

 

I’d rank…

 

1. lack of farm infusion that actually began in late 2017, and the effects began to be noticed in ‘19.

 

2. Decline in production from prime and post prime returning vets.

 

3. Some blunders in signings and trades.

 

To be honest, I’m not even sure the signings and trades amount to a net negative or one that is a “major” issue, if it was one, but I seem to be in a minority on that one.

 

[moonslav59]

I agree, but that's not the specific argument that moon is making. He's trying to apply this principle to the 2019 team. That was a team that looked like a 100-win team on paper. A whole bunch of bad s*** happened, is the simplest explanation for why that team only won 84 games.

 

Not the simplest, but perhaps the most important issue out of several issues. After 2019, it snow-balled, as we moved from missing 2 homegrown starters to 3, 5, 6, 9….

[mvp 78]

So moon, hopefully this doesn't happen, but since you're a man who likes to indulge in hypotheticals, what if the 2023 team wins 83 games or less, a worse record than 2019 or 2021, in spite of the farm infusion? How would you fit that into your thesis?

 

83 wins is 5 more than last year. Thanks farm!

[Bellhorn04]

That's a silly argument and y'all should drop it. To quote the great Morpheus: What happened, happened and couldn't have happened any other way.

 

Get Morpheus on here and we'll talk.

[Bellhorn04]

Not the simplest, but perhaps the most important issue out of several issues. After 2019, it snow-balled, as we moved from missing 2 homegrown starters to 3, 5, 6, 9….

 

So why were we better in 2021 than 2019?

 

I think chalking it up as a fluke is weak.

Edited July 25, 2023 by Bellhorn04

[moonslav59]

So why were we better in 2021 than 2019?

 

I think chalking it up as a fluke is weak.

 

I’ve said a couple times that 2019 might not count. I’m still not so sure the 2021 was all that much better than 2022 or maybe 2023. Going by just wins is not my choice.

 

Many vets underperformed in 2022 when compared to 2021. Same with 2019 to 2018.

 

My point is that when looking at the full time period from 2020 to 2022 or from maybe 2019, tge lack of farm infusion was the major culprit out of several contributing factors.

 

With the 2023 Bello, Duran, Casas and Wong, maybe we make the playoffs in 2019 and 2022. Maybe we win it all in 2021.

 

Does not signing Richards and Marwin to a hindsight hero chnge the 2021 team as much as just adding the 3 players I mentioned? Now, figure we should have added 4-5 more by 2021, not just 3.

 

I’m not saying I can scientifically prove this was the biggest factor out of many, but I don’t think my theory is as far-fetched as you seem to think it is.

 

[Bellhorn04]

I’ve said a couple times that 2019 might not count. I’m still not so sure the 2021 was all that much better than 2022 or maybe 2023. Going by just wins is not my choice.

 

Many vets underperformed in 2022 when compared to 2021. Same with 2019 to 2018.

 

My point is that when looking at the full time period from 2020 to 2022 or from maybe 2019, tge lack of farm infusion was the major culprit out of several contributing factors.

 

With the 2023 Bello, Duran, Casas and Wong, maybe we make the playoffs in 2019 and 2022. Maybe we win it all in 2021.

 

Does not signing Richards and Marwin to a hindsight hero chnge the 2021 team as much as just adding the 3 players I mentioned? Now, figure we should have added 4-5 more by 2021, not just 3.

 

I’m not saying I can scientifically prove this was the biggest factor out of many, but I don’t think my theory is as far-fetched as you seem to think it is.

 

 

I'm not saying it's far-fetched, but I think you're falling victim to confirmation bias in assessing all the factors that contributed.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

 

How would you guys order the reasons for this 4 year decline? (Don’t look just at 2019 or 2020 or 2022: take them all in one big lump.)

 

Humor me.

 

I’d rank…

 

1. lack of farm infusion that actually began in late 2017, and the effects began to be noticed in ‘19.

 

2. Decline in production from prime and post prime returning vets.

 

3. Some blunders in signings and trades.

 

 

I have to reverse the order. Just going by a recent post naming Red Sox rookies of the year and prospects that almost instantly turned into stars (the following are just some): 60s -- Yaz, Tony C, Lonborg, Rico, Reggie, Boomer; 70s -- Fisk, Lynn, Rice, Evans, Rooster; 80s -- Boggs, Clemens, Hurst, Greenwell, Burks; 90s- Nomar, Tek/Lowe (both emerged from the minors), Val; 00s- Papelbon, Lester, Pedroia, Youk, Ells; teens-- Mookie, Xander, Jackie, Beni, Raffy...

 

... is that kind of production from the farm system normal for the average big league franchise -- or are Red Sox fans lucky and spoiled?

 

Before Bloom, at least since the advent of free agency, Boston always sought to improve its chances by keeping homegrown fan favs and supplementing with talented primetime recruits... not just rehab projects and waiver wire pick-ups.

[mvp 78]

So why were we better in 2021 than 2019?

 

I think chalking it up as a fluke is weak.

 

Eovaldi was injured in 2019, but amazing in 2021.

 

-0.3 fWAR 2019

5.7 fWAR 2021

 

That's 6 wins right there.

[moonslav59]

I'm not saying it's far-fetched, but I think you're falling victim to confirmation bias in assessing all the factors that contributed.

 

Perhaps I am. I’m curious why you seem to think it can’t be more important that the other factors taken individually.

 

Biggest factor does not mean 51+% responsible.

[moonslav59]

I have to reverse the order. Just going by a recent post naming Red Sox rookies of the year and prospects that almost instantly turned into stars (the following are just some): 60s -- Yaz, Tony C, Lonborg, Rico, Reggie, Boomer; 70s -- Fisk, Lynn, Rice, Evans, Rooster; 80s -- Boggs, Clemens, Hurst, Greenwell, Burks; 90s- Nomar, Tek/Lowe (both emerged from the minors), Val; 00s- Papelbon, Lester, Pedroia, Youk, Ells; teens-- Mookie, Xander, Jackie, Beni, Raffy...

 

... is that kind of production from the farm system normal for the average big league franchise -- or are Red Sox fans lucky and spoiled?

 

Before Bloom, at least since the advent of free agency, Boston always sought to improve its chances by keeping homegrown fan favs and supplementing with talented primetime recruits... not just rehab projects and waiver wire pick-ups.

 

I’m not talking stars. I’m talking decent regulars like JBJ, Nixon, Vazquez, Barnes, and so many others.

 

We got nobody better than Houck, who has been far from reliable or regular from the summer of ‘17 Devers call-up to the trio of prospects helping us in the spring and summer of ‘23.

 

Devers helped in 2018 and beyond, but the lack of farm infusion took a mighty toll on the roster. Most winning rosters have several contributing low cost players on the 26, and this allows more targeted spending on fewer needs.

 

A GM with a winter spending budget if $50M, but with just 3 slots to fill has a better chance at success than one with 10-12 holes to fill and the same $50M. That is what Bloom was handed in 2020 and 2021. That changed in March ‘22, but we had nog replaced the departing players with young, low cost players for too long to make much of a difference by signing better players.

 

I swear the signings were better in 22 than 21.

 

No doubt, other factors had major impact. I even named two and suggested there were others. If someone wants to say the tight budgets were 26% of the reason and lack of farm infusion was 24%, then we aren’t far apart.