A Realistic View at 2024: Part I

[Duran Is The Man]

I'd be surprised, but it does seem possible.

 

We've still been spending a lot of money. Since 2019, we are a top 6-8 spending team. Since 2022, we are a top 9-11 spending team. It's not like we tried to totally tank, like other teams have. The many last place finishes suck, but we haven't really been a bottom 10 team, very often. Not that that should be the measuring stick.

 

I'm hopeful we can reach glory, again, sometime, soon. We have some very promising young players and soon-to-be young players joining the 26 and 40. We have a good chance at being very good, again, and soon, if we can just get the pitching staff jacked up, somehow.

 

all true. i just get sick of Henry the billionaire (and his $5 billion franchise) acting like he'd dead f***ing broke.

[moonslav59]

all true. i just get sick of Henry the billionaire (and his $5 billion franchise) acting like he'd dead f***ing broke.

 

He's not really spending less than before, even counting inflation. The problem arose when numerous teams decided to spend real big.

 

The 2018-2019 seasons were the peak of big spending, but he was able to get to glory without spending like a maniac.

 

I'm not defending JH. I think and wish he'd spend more, now and going forward. I don't see how signing Monty would wound his finances to a noticeable point

 

If the plan is to double splurge in a year or two, I can stomach this, but I have serious doubts.

[jad]

all true. i just get sick of Henry the billionaire (and his $5 billion franchise) acting like he'd dead f***ing broke.

 

And his cadre of burner accounts assuring us that all is well.

[moonslav59]

Top Remaining Free Agents (for what it's worth)

 

Montgomery & Snell

Clevinger, Lorenzen

Bauer, Greinke, Cueto, Syndergaard, Lauer

Duvall, Michael A Taylor, Tommy Pham, R Grossman

JD Martinez

 

(I might have missed a few.)

 

Edited March 3, 2024 by moonslav59

[notin]

Top Remaining Free Agents (for what it's worth)

 

Montgomery & Snell

Clevinger, Lorenzen

Bauer, Greinke, Cueto, Syndergaard, Ryu

Duvall, Michael A Taylor, Tommy Pham, R Grossman

JD Martinez

 

(I might have missed a few.)

 

 

Ryu is no longer available; he signed a deal with a KBO team. Eric Lauer is borderline useful…

[moonslav59]

Ryu is no longer available; he signed a deal with a KBO team. Eric Lauer is borderline useful…

 

I made the swap.

[Duran Is The Man]

Ryu is no longer available; he signed a deal with a KBO team. Eric Lauer is borderline useful…

 

so if Brez signs anyone, it'll be him. LOLOLOLOL

[moonslav59]

so if Brez signs anyone, it'll be him. LOLOLOLOL

 

Better than nothing.

 

Better than Mata.

[Larry Cook]

Better than nothing.

 

Better than Mata.

 

Mata seems to have issues staying out of the trainers room

[moonslav59]

Mata seems to have issues staying out of the trainers room

 

Yup.

 

8 years in the system (amazingly 5th in 40 man roster seniority,) and has never pitched in the bigs.

 

Never pitched more than 105 IP.

 

425 IP in 6 seasons as a SP. (Missed 2020 & 2021, totally)

 

9.3 K/9

 

4.7 B/9

 

Maybe someday, he'll find himself.

 

[moonslav59]

Speaking of 40 Man Roster seniority...

 

1. Devers (added in summer of '17 from minors)

 

2. Dalbec (added NOV '19 to avoid Rule 5)

 

3. Pivetta (trade 8/21/20)

 

4. Houck (added 9/15/20 when called up)

 

5. Mata (added NOV '20 to avoid Rule 5)

 

6. Wong (added NOV '20 to avoid Rule 5- traded for, earlier)

 

7. Whitlock (selected in Rule 5 DEC '20)

 

Everyone else was added after Duran in July '21.

 

Notes:

 

Mata is the only player in the top 28 in seniority on the 40 man roster to not play in MLB, yet. (Wikelman & Perales are #29 & 30th.) Slaten at #33 is the only other.

 

Pretty amazing how 38 players were not on the 40 Man Roster before the 2020 trade deadline.

 

36 players were added after the 2020 season to today. (That's 3.5 years.)

 

27 players were added at the 2022 trading deadline or later.

 

24 were added after the 2022 season.

 

12 have been added after the 2023 season. (Bernardino, Reyes & Jacques during the '23 season)

Edited March 3, 2024 by moonslav59

[notin]

Mata seems to have issues staying out of the trainers room

 

Mata gets injured every time we type his name…

[Bellhorn04]

Speaking of 40 Man Roster seniority...

 

1. Devers (added in summer of '17 from minors)

 

2. Dalbec (added NOV '19 to avoid Rule 5)

 

3. Pivetta (trade 8/21/20)

 

4. Houck (added 9/15/20 when called up)

 

5. Mata (added NOV '20 to avoid Rule 5)

 

6. Wong (added NOV '20 to avoid Rule 5- traded for, earlier)

 

7. Whitlock (selected in Rule 5 DEC '20)

 

Everyone else was added after Duran in July '21.

 

Notes:

 

Mata is the only player in the top 28 in seniority on the 40 man roster to not play in MLB, yet. (Wikelman & Perales are #29 & 30th.) Slaten at #33 is the only other.

 

Pretty amazing how 38 players were not on the 40 Man Roster before the 2020 trade deadline.

 

36 players were added after the 2020 season to today. (That's 3.5 years.)

 

27 players were added at the 2022 trading deadline or later.

 

24 were added after the 2022 season.

 

12 have been added after the 2023 season. (Bernardino, Reyes & Jacques during the '23 season)

 

As The Roster Churns

[Bellhorn04]

"Full throttle" sounded like spending money, now.

 

This statement, at least, explained what the current plan was, in detail, and gave a reason why they were not going to spend large on pitching, now.

 

Yes, it says they are "punting," but they never really came out and said it, so detailed and clearly, IMO, as this did.

 

They previously hinted that the here and now mattered and was a priority.

 

The ******** line they keep using about not spending, though, is "we didn't line up".

 

They could have used that line about Betts and about all the starting pitchers they haven't signed the last few offseasons.

 

"We didn't line up."

 

A cynic like me reads this quite simply as "we didn't want to pay what they wanted, so they went to a team that did".

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

The ******** line they keep using about not spending, though, is "we didn't line up".

 

They could have used that line about Betts and about all the starting pitchers they haven't signed the last few offseasons.

 

"We didn't line up."

 

A cynic like me reads this quite simply as "we didn't want to pay what they wanted, so they went to a team that did".

 

It just means they have too many usual suspects in the front office to fit into a police line up. Not that any fans could identify any, if we saw them.

 

The Globe today reported 33 Red Sox analytics personnel; they could fire about 30 and afford a couple dozen more scouts.

 

It's appalling there's been no core for half a freaking decade now. In Boston.

 

Raffy in the middle holding up the stem, with a lot of dead space around him where maggots ate the rest.

[notin]

It just means they have too many usual suspects in the front office to fit into a police line up. Not that any fans could identify any, if we saw them.

 

The Globe today reported 33 Red Sox analytics personnel; they could fire about 30 and afford a couple dozen more scouts.

 

It's appalling there's been no core for half a freaking decade now. In Boston.

 

Raffy in the middle holding up the stem, with a lot of dead space around him where maggots ate the rest.

 

So 3 people doing analytics? Why even waste time scouting at that point?

 

 

This chart is two years out of date, but there seems to be a fairly strong correlation between the teams not taking analytics seriously and teams winning 70 or fewer games repeatedly…

Edited March 3, 2024 by notin

[Bellhorn04]

So 3 people doing analytics? Why even waste time scouting at that point?

 

 

This chart is two years out of date, but there seems to be a fairly strong correlation between the teams not taking analytics seriously and teams wining 70 or fewer games repeatedly…

 

Also looks like a correlation between analytics investment and market size, with the Rays being a serious outlier.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

So 3 people doing analytics? Why even waste time scouting at that point?

 

 

This chart is two years out of date, but there seems to be a fairly strong correlation between the teams not taking analytics seriously and teams wining 70 or fewer games repeatedly…

 

Sorry, John Henry. How are your 33 analysts doing building that core the past five years while not supplementing it with actual big league talent through free agency and trades.

[notin]

Sorry, John Henry. How are your 33 analysts doing building that core the past five years while not supplementing it with actual big league talent through free agency and trades.

 

Just because they’re doing analytics doesn’t mean they’re doing them as well as possible or using the information perfectly. The only reality is the days of succeeding without analytics are done.

 

Analytics in MLB right now are like a pitching coach. I think we can are that every pitching coach isn’t going to be equally successful, but does that mean teams with a bad one should just go without?

 

The Sox are also not helped by being in a very analytically-driven division, assuming the Yankees embrace them. (They do. Heavily.)

Edited March 3, 2024 by notin

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

So 3 people doing analytics? Why even waste time scouting at that point?

 

 

But imagine how many funs ways 3 Notins in an office could deconstruct, destruct, mister and misconstrue the field reports of a couple dozen 5Gs just begging the department to trust the qualitative data...

[Duran Is The Man]

Just because they’re doing analytics doesn’t mean they’re doing them as well as possible or using the information perfectly. The only reality is the days of succeeding without analytics are done.

 

Analytics in MLB right now are like a pitching coach. I think we can are that every pitching coach isn’t going to be equally successful, but does that mean teams with a bad one should just go without?

 

The Sox are also not helped by being in a very analytically-driven division, assuming the Yankees embrace them. (They do. Heavily.)

 

ergo, the only solution is to hire more analysts. but of course to do that, you'd have to hire a group of analysts to analyze how many analysts you'd need. right?

 

how many analysts could analyze if an analyst could analyze analysts.

[Bellhorn04]

how many analysts could analyze if an analyst could analyze analysts.

 

And how many of them are anal retentive?

[notin]

ergo, the only solution is to hire more analysts. but of course to do that, you'd have to hire a group of analysts to analyze how many analysts you'd need. right?

 

how many analysts could analyze if an analyst could analyze analysts.

 

In 2022, the Dodgers had 29. The Rays had 37. The Sox had 18.

 

How did those teams do?

 

Also no one only had 3….

[notin]

But imagine how many funs ways 3 Notins in an office could deconstruct, destruct, mister and misconstrue the field reports of a couple dozen 5Gs just begging the department to trust the qualitative data...

 

Exactly what qualitative data would you provide?

[notin]

And how many of them are anal retentive?

 

Hopefully all of them. Who wants a loose cannon data analyst?

[moonslav59]

The ******** line they keep using about not spending, though, is "we didn't line up".

 

They could have used that line about Betts and about all the starting pitchers they haven't signed the last few offseasons.

 

"We didn't line up."

 

A cynic like me reads this quite simply as "we didn't want to pay what they wanted, so they went to a team that did".

 

Certainly, that is the major aspect of the "line-up" line, but also it's about timing, and to me it's an admission that the timing is not now, because we are in a "rebuild" or are "punting," at this moment.

 

It's all semantics, of course, but that statement seems more truthful and on point than others before it.

[moonslav59]

Just because they’re doing analytics doesn’t mean they’re doing them as well as possible or using the information perfectly. The only reality is the days of succeeding without analytics are done.

 

Analytics in MLB right now are like a pitching coach. I think we can are that every pitching coach isn’t going to be equally successful, but does that mean teams with a bad one should just go without?

 

The Sox are also not helped by being in a very analytically-driven division, assuming the Yankees embrace them. (They do. Heavily.)

 

Yes, everyone is "doing analytics" to some extent. Now, we need to do it better than almost everyone else.

 

It's not like the players we've identified to acquire have all sucked. One main problem is we failed to sign some of the better ones- like resigning Nate or outbidding the Rays for Eflin. Then, there are the near misses on Abreu and others that makes you wonder just how good our guys are.

[Bellhorn04]

Yes, everyone is "doing analytics" to some extent. Now, we need to do it better than almost everyone else.

 

It's not like the players we've identified to acquire have all sucked. One main problem is we failed to sign some of the better ones- like resigning Nate or outbidding the Rays for Eflin. Then, there are the near misses on Abreu and others that makes you wonder just how good our guys are.

 

I don't care how good analytics people are, there's still going to be a lot of randomness in the results, because that's just the way baseball is.

[notin]

I don't care how good analytics people are, there's still going to be a lot of randomness in the results, because that's just the way baseball is.

 

Not to mention all of the early conclusions based on one season.

 

The Sox have certainly had their analytical successes. Their issues aren’t the amount of analysts they have; they revolve around the fact that they’re just have no flat out direction. The goal appears to be “cheaper and more competitive,” But what are they doing along those lines to achieve that goal? Because this “waiting for divine inspiration” strategy they’ve been deploying all off-season just might not get the job done…

[dgalehouse]

Breslow had twenty of his analysts in a hotel for a two week meeting on pitching. After much discussion, breakout groups, flip charts , brainstorming and power point presentations ; they came to the groundbreaking and revolutionary conclusion that velocity was important. ( Of course, Timmy from Little League days could have told them that.). Next month's topic: Does movement on a pitch make it tougher to hit ?