A Realistic View at 2024: Part I

[moonslav59]

I'll join you if we don't finish in last place again in the ALE. All the other teams in our division are better than we are. Finishing last is getting very very old

 

We have not been horrible, since 2020. The weird thing is, no other ALE team has had a "bad year," since 2021. One could say NYY did, last year, but not bad enough for the Sox to pass. The last 3 weeks of the season allowed the Yanks to finish 4th.

 

I'm not sure what the odds are that another team in the ALE has a confluence of bad things happen, and we could finish 4th, even with a worse record than '22 and '23.

[notin]

We have not been horrible, since 2020. The weird thing is, no other ALE team has had a "bad year," since 2021. One could say NYY did, last year, but not bad enough for the Sox to pass. The last 3 weeks of the season allowed the Yanks to finish 4th.

 

I'm not sure what the odds are that another team in the ALE has a confluence of bad things happen, and we could finish 4th, even with a worse record than '22 and '23.

 

Since the creation of the central divisions, only 4 teams have finished last with 78 wins or more. The Red Sox have done it 3 times.

 

So, yes, they are not horrible. But if you are going to play in a tough division like the AL East currently is, then you do need to step it up if you want to be competitive. You simply cannot wait for the rest of the division to come down and meet you and limbo under your .500-ish performance...

[moonslav59]

Since the creation of the central divisions, only 4 teams have finished last with 78 wins or more. The Red Sox have done it 3 times.

 

So, yes, they are not horrible. But if you are going to play in a tough division like the AL East currently is, then you do need to step it up if you want to be competitive. You simply cannot wait for the rest of the division to come down and meet you and limbo under your .500-ish performance...

 

I agree.

 

The other 4 teams have "stepped it up" to not be last place material.

 

ALE last place finishes since ...

 

Cherry-picked worst era for the Sox (2012-2023)

BOS 6 (half of these 12 years)

BAL 4 (1/3 of these 12 yrs)

TBR 1

TOR1

NYY 0

 

Since 2003 (21 years) Henry Era

8 BAL

6 BOS

5 TBR

2 TOR

0 NYY

 

Since 1997 (TOR added as expansion team)

10 TBR

8 BAL

6 BOS

3 TOR

0 NYY

 

(DET finished last in the 1996 ALE)

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

In the past two seasons, the Red Sox have had winning records in the first half of each, and losing records in the second half of each.

 

Overall, 78-win seasons are bad because you lost more than you won... not horrible, but the 9-19 finish last year was certainly horrible, as was team defense for six months.

 

Some may say it was coincidence, but the players didn't perform as well after not getting the help many requested at the trading deadlines. Others may say the boys surrendered after the men in the front office gave up on them.

 

Last year's end was even more depressing, after Cora somehow coaxed a 15-8 July out a group with literally three starting pitchers. Anyone doubting he'll get a nice contract to manage somewhere should remember that feat, plus the two weeks of late summer 2021 when he kept the club in the hunt, despite half the roster out with Covid.

[Duran Is The Man]

If the Sox sign Montgomery, I’m going 85+. Granted injuries could derail that, and do so significantly…

 

how many without? 78? would that mean predicting a WAR of 7+ for Montgomery?

[notin]

how many without? 78? would that mean predicting a WAR of 7+ for Montgomery?

 

First of all, I assume whoever would be there in lieu of Montgomery would not be worth 0.0 fWAR. I certainly hope not. Even Houck was worth 1.2 fWAR in 21 starts.

 

But also I think Bello and Crawford can both improve on their performance from last year. I could see at least 80 wins without Montgomery.

[dgalehouse]

Since the creation of the central divisions, only 4 teams have finished last with 78 wins or more. The Red Sox have done it 3 times.

 

So, yes, they are not horrible. But if you are going to play in a tough division like the AL East currently is, then you do need to step it up if you want to be competitive. You simply cannot wait for the rest of the division to come down and meet you and limbo under your .500-ish performance...

 

Where do you live Bobby ? Bobby: We live in the cellar, but I think the upper floors are nice , so it's not too bad.

[moonslav59]

First of all, I assume whoever would be there in lieu of Montgomery would not be worth 0.0 fWAR. I certainly hope not. Even Houck was worth 1.2 fWAR in 21 starts.

 

But also I think Bello and Crawford can both improve on their performance from last year. I could see at least 80 wins without Montgomery.

 

True, but now replace our 8th RP'er with Houck and what do we gain, there?

 

Maybe Monty with 4.7 more fWAR than Houck?)

 

Maybe Houck with 1.3 more fWAR in the pen over the 8th guy, now (someone like Weissert?)

 

Maybe a 6 fWAR gain, overall (high side guess.)

[notin]

Where do you live Bobby ? Bobby: We live in the cellar, but I think the upper floors are nice , so it's not too bad.

 

Gee, on the other thread you were all about wins. Apparently those only matter for pitchers and not for teams...

[notin]

True, but now replace our 8th RP'er with Houck and what do we gain, there?

 

Maybe Monty with 4.7 more fWAR than Houck?)

 

Maybe Houck with 1.3 more fWAR in the pen over the 8th guy, now (someone like Weissert?)

 

Maybe a 6 fWAR gain, overall (high side guess.)

 

6 more wins gets them to 84. Hey, that win total can get you to a World Series...

[dgalehouse]

Gee, on the other thread you were all about wins. Apparently those only matter for pitchers and not for teams...

 

A team's won/loss record amazingly seems to match the sum of the pitchers' won/loss records.

[moonslav59]

A team's won/loss record amazingly seems to match the sum of the pitchers' won/loss records.

 

Not SP's, only.

 

Are you saying wins and losses is how you judge RP'ers, too?

[notin]

A team's won/loss record amazingly seems to match the sum of the pitchers' won/loss records.

 

That doesn’t mean it’s worthwhile for individual pitchers. In fact, it supports why it isn’t…

[dgalehouse]

Not SP's, only.

 

Are you saying wins and losses is how you judge RP'ers, too?

 

I don't want you to ask me any questions. I want to ask you a question. Does a teams won/loss record match the sum of the pitching staff's won/loss record? Yes or no. Because that was my post that you responded to. We all know that there are guidelines for who gets the win and who gets the loss. Maybe they should change those guidelines, but that is another matter.

[Old Red]

That doesn’t mean it’s worthwhile for individual pitchers. In fact, it supports why it isn’t…

 

Once again that’s your opinion, and you definitely don’t speak for everyone.

[notin]

Once again that’s your opinion, and you definitely don’t speak for everyone.

 

Am I not entitled to an opinion? It’s odd you keep calling me out for having one you don’t like. And telling me to respect the opinions you do.

 

And then telling me that just because you’re closed-minded to viewpoints that conflict with yours doesn’t mean you’re not open-minded…

[dgalehouse]

I think I heard somewhere that everyone is entitled to their opinion. In fact, I have heard it many, many times. Sick of hearing it. But there is also a reality. And the reality does not always coincide with one's opinion. With Montgomery, the reality is that he has yet to win more than ten games in a season. You don't have to like it, but it is the truth.

[Nick]

I'm simply talking about contract structure for Montgomery.

 

Idea is that we can use him for at least two years as we build up our starting rotation internally.

 

Why not front loaded it and have an opt out after two years?

 

Now if Henry is concerned about actual cash outflow for 2024/25, ($60M combined) then obviously it does not work.

 

I guess I'm always thinking in terms of luxury tax payroll. So a 4 year deal at $100M, with payouts $30M, $30M, opt out then $20M the last two years comes to $25M luxury tax payroll, keeping us below the penalty. It's always a gamble with injuries and what not.

 

Hopefully he can have two outstanding years then opt out. You could go 5 years and $120M, reducing the luxury tax payroll from $25M to $22M+. Hope the guy has two good years and then opt out.

Edited February 27, 2024 by Nick

[notin]

I think I heard somewhere that everyone is entitled to their opinion. In fact, I have heard it many, many times. Sick of hearing it. But there is also a reality. And the reality does not always coincide with one's opinion. With Montgomery, the reality is that he has yet to win more than ten games in a season. You don't have to like it, but it is the truth.

 

All anyone is saying is his W-L record doesn’t say much about him as a pitcher…

[notin]

I'm simply talking about contract structure for Montgomery.

 

Idea is that we can use him for at least two years as we build up our starting rotation internally.

 

Why not front loaded it and have an opt out after two years?

 

Now if Henry is concerned about actual cash outflow for 2024/25, ($60M combined) then obviously it does not work.

 

I guess I'm always thinking in terms of luxury tax payroll. So a 4 year deal at $100M, with payouts $30M, $30M, opt out then $20M the last two years comes to $25M luxury tax payroll, keeping us below the penalty. It's always a gamble with injuries and what not.

 

Hopefully he can have two outstanding years then opt out. You could go 5 years and $120M, reducing the luxury tax payroll from $25M to $22M+. Hope the guy has two good years and then opt out.

 

The real problem is there’s been no coverage (that I’ve seen). So we don’t know what he’s turning down, if anything. I haven’t heard of anyone making actual formal offers. No idea what numbers get bandied about in conversations with Boras.

 

This is one very quiet high profile negotiation…

[dgalehouse]

I am not too concerned about what the Sox pay Montgomery or anyone else. If they want a guy bad enough, they can certainly afford to pay him. If the owner doesn't want to spend what it takes, then so be it. All I am saying is that if you sign a guy to a big contract, you want him to do better than 10-11. Will Montgomery do that?

[notin]

I am not too concerned about what the Sox pay Montgomery or anyone else. If they want a guy bad enough, they can certainly afford to pay him. If the owner doesn't want to spend what it takes, then so be it. All I am saying is that if you sign a guy to a big contract, you want him to do better than 10-11. Will Montgomery do that?

 

Montgomery didn’t get wins. Why not?

 

He has never had an ERA over 4.00 (with more than 50IP). He throws innings, racking up 524 of them in the past 3 seasons.

 

So he is pitching innings and not allowing runs. Why isn’t he getting wins?

Edited February 28, 2024 by notin

[moonslav59]

I don't want you to ask me any questions. I want to ask you a question. Does a teams won/loss record match the sum of the pitching staff's won/loss record? Yes or no. Because that was my post that you responded to. We all know that there are guidelines for who gets the win and who gets the loss. Maybe they should change those guidelines, but that is another matter.

 

Of course the sum of all pitchers' records equals the team record.

 

See, I actually answer questions asked.

[moonslav59]

Montgomery didn’t get wins. Why not?

 

He has never had an ERA over 4.00 (with more than 50IP). He throws innings, racking up 524 of them in the past 3 seasons.

 

So he is pitching innings and not allowing runs. Why isn’t he getting wins?

 

Bad pen?

 

Bad D?

 

Bad O?

 

Bad luck?

 

A mix of the 2-4?

 

Dumb "win" rules?

[dgalehouse]

Montgomery didn’t get wins. Why not?

 

He has never had an ERA over 4.00 (with more than 50IP). He throws innings, racking up 524 of them in the past 3 seasons.

 

So he is pitching innings and not allowing runs. Why isn’t he getting wins?

 

I don't know. I guess you would have to go back and look at the games he pitched. Maybe he is just unlucky. But he has been in MLB for seven years now. And ten wins is his career best. Maybe that will change.

[jad]

Bad pen?

 

Bad D?

 

Bad O?

 

Bad luck?

 

A mix of the 2-4?

 

Dumb "win" rules?

 

Ha ha! All of which he will face if he signs with the RS.

[Tedballgame]

Red Sox bullpen has already blown two 9th inning leads. They are in midseason form already.

[moonslav59]

Ha ha! All of which he will face if he signs with the RS.

 

LOL! Good one!

 

I'd say the Sox will have plus O, plus pen, near average D and bad luck.

[moonslav59]

Red Sox bullpen has already blown two 9th inning leads. They are in midseason form already.

 

Yea, the plan of using Noah Song as our closer is deeply flawed.

[notin]

I don't know. I guess you would have to go back and look at the games he pitched. Maybe he is just unlucky. But he has been in MLB for seven years now. And ten wins is his career best. Maybe that will change.

 

We don’t really need to look into his games.

 

In three years, he pitched 524 innings (16th most in MLB), had a 3.48 ERA (31st in MLB for 300 inning minimum) but was only credited with 25 wins (53rd most in MLB). This tells us he pitched slot, didn’t give you a lot of runs, but was still rarely credited with a win. Heck, Tony Gonsolin had more wins despite pitching 260 fewer innings. Alek Manoah had more wins despite pitching fewer innings with a higher ERA.

 

And the reasons are most likely the obvious ones - lack of run support or blown leads by the bullpen. Poor defense and unearned runs could be another culprit. And these three primary causes for his lack of wins are all not factors Montgomery can control. Those are Outside Factors.

 

Yet when we look at his wins solely, we hold these outside factors against him…