Red Sox ownership

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

No idea as I'm not a therapist. I think he probably believes a batter not being able to put the ball in play is the best option for a pitcher? The second best option would be for a batter to weakly put the ball in play, but if the defense sucks it may not help much.

 

Option 1 is definitely the best option for a new CBO looking for the quickest way to improve the D... but alas, the most expensive.

 

And sorry I called you a lass... should've been a lad.

[moonslav59]

It’s not like he’s suggesting Mayer, Teel, or Anthony. Or even Wikelman.

 

My question is - is Jordan enough?

 

I suggested Jordan, because he seems blocked. Giving Paulino & Jordan would be a gross overpay according to BTV, but I might do it. (If they want Mata, I'd go Jordan & Mata.)

[notin]

I think the trade is fair for Boston. I'm just saying that I don't know if he's an upgrade over Houck especially when looking at last year's numbers and realizing the Sox have to give up a prospect to acquire him.

 

They’re very similar in many ways, but Houck’s career high in IP is 106 while Urquidy’s is 164. Houck has had his worst all around year last year with only 106 IP. He looks like he can be an asset at 75 IP or less, but too many more and he just gets exposed.

 

While he dazzles no one, Urquidy at a minimum can eat more innings than Houck, and probably with less reduction in performance…

[mvp 78]

They’re very similar in many ways, but Houck’s career high in IP is 106 while Urquidy’s is 164. Houck has had his worst all around year last year with only 106 IP. He looks like he can be an asset at 75 IP or less, but too many more and he just gets exposed.

 

While he dazzles no one, Urquidy at a minimum can eat more innings than Houck, and probably with less reduction in performance…

 

Maybe eat SOME more innings, but is it enough of an upgrade to throw out some prospects?

[notin]

Maybe eat SOME more innings, but is it enough of an upgrade to throw out some prospects?

 

I think so for the names suggested.

 

Obviously Houston might feel different…

[moonslav59]

Maybe eat SOME more innings, but is it enough of an upgrade to throw out some prospects?

 

I'm not thinking Jordan, Paulino or Mata will amount to much, but there is a risk they might.

 

I like Urquidy's ability to eat innings and allow Houck or Crawford to be in the pen, more often.

 

I wish we could do better, but at $3.8M arb, he fits the profile, IMO.

[mvp 78]

I'm not thinking Jordan, Paulino or Mata will amount to much, but there is a risk they might.

 

I like Urquidy's ability to eat innings and allow Houck or Crawford to be in the pen, more often.

 

I wish we could do better, but at $3.8M arb, he fits the profile, IMO.

 

Ability to eat innings? He's thrown 160 innings once!

 

If you extrapolate Houck's '23 to a full season, it comes out to 160 innings. They are the same pitcher.

[Hitch]

It's not Henry's 660 million investment he doesn't care about. It's his customers. He apparently has convinced himself that they are morally obliged to throw money at him even for a mediocre product. What a lot of us life-long customers want is simple: we want him to improve the product. We don't (or I don't) give a rat's behind how much money he makes or loses.

 

And therein lies the problem. He does care how much money he makes or loses and it isn't going to change.

 

I also think he wants to be seen as beating the game and being smart enough to build a winning team for much less than others.

[notin]

Ability to eat innings? He's thrown 160 innings once!

 

If you extrapolate Houck's '23 to a full season, it comes out to 160 innings. They are the same pitcher.

 

To be fair, Urquidy has actually pitched 160 IP at the MLB level. Houck has not. In fact, Houck has only topped 70 one time, regardless of extrapolations.

 

Urquidy would likely be an improvement. Just not necessarily a big one…

[Hitch]

 

The point is, Tom, that it's a lot easier for a fanbase to root for a club with continuity, for familiarity, for regulars. Constantly replacing players with replacement players only sustains suckitude disguised as mediocrity.

 

 

I'm not sure how true this is. The '13 team was beloved by the fans with the free agents at the front of the queue. If we were winning every year with chances at a WS all while trading players and making changes routinely, the fans would be loving it and boasting about how smart the organisation is. Unfortunately, that's not the case and we're doing neither thing right.

 

Fans want a winning organisation. Everything else is just noise.

[notin]

I'm not sure how true this is. The '13 team was beloved by the fans with the free agents at the front of the queue. If we were winning every year with chances at a WS all while trading players and making changes routinely, the fans would be loving it and boasting about how smart the organisation is. Unfortunately, that's not the case and we're doing neither thing right.

 

Fans want a winning organisation. Everything else is just noise.

 

If fans want continuity, they may need a Time Machine. Most teams nowadays turn over at least 20 roster spots every 5 years…

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I'm not sure how true this is. The '13 team was beloved by the fans with the free agents at the front of the queue. If we were winning every year with chances at a WS all while trading players and making changes routinely, the fans would be loving it and boasting about how smart the organisation is. Unfortunately, that's not the case and we're doing neither thing right.

 

Fans want a winning organisation. Everything else is just noise.

 

The noise from that '13 team -- for fans of the strategy of collecting affordable free agents bent on comebacks -- always seems to drown out the fact that the best Red Sox were mostly still homegrown stars.

 

2013 World Champion WAR Leaders: Pedroia 6.1, Victorino 6.0, Ellsbury 5.8, Ortiz 4.4, Buchholz 4.3.

[Hitch]

The noise from that '13 team -- for fans of the strategy of collecting affordable free agents bent on comebacks -- always seems to drown out the fact that the best Red Sox were mostly still homegrown stars.

 

2013 World Champion WAR Leaders: Pedroia 6.1, Victorino 6.0, Ellsbury 5.8, Ortiz 4.4, Buchholz 4.3.

 

And the non-homegrown players like Gomes, Koji Victorino and Napoli among others were and still are loved. And if another raft of new signings came in and we repeated they'd have been held in the same asteem.

 

I'm not saying it's the right way to go about things. I'm saying fans want to win. While not everyone is the same, the vast majority want it any way it comes.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

And the non-homegrown players like Gomes, Koji Victorino and Napoli among others were and still are loved. And if another raft of new signings came in and we repeated they'd have been held in the same asteem.

 

I'm not saying it's the right way to go about things. I'm saying fans want to win. While not everyone is the same, the vast majority want it any way it comes.

 

Of course. But any fan can see that good teams are assembled from all the ways of player acquisition. And just like GMs can't empty the farm and swap for big-time talent... nor can they say we're just going to let our homegrown guys mature -- and not supplement them with veteran stars who will establish a winning culture.

 

Especially when it comes to pitching. Seasons should never be forfeited for the future. Teams can't wait until they have good regulars before they recruit good starting pitchers.

 

It all starts with starters.

[moonslav59]

Of course. But any fan can see that good teams are assembled from all the ways of player acquisition. And just like GMs can't empty the farm and swap for big-time talent... nor can they say we're just going to let our homegrown guys mature -- and not supplement them with veteran stars who will establish a winning culture.

 

Especially when it comes to pitching. Seasons should never be forfeited for the future. Teams can't wait until they have good regulars before they recruit good starting pitchers.

 

It all starts with starters.

 

Agreed. While we have some hopes for 5-6 pitchers, and all have had some nice stretches of doing well as starters, we will need a perfect storm of everyone doing their career best or matching it, all at the same time, to have a real chance. Okay, maybe just 4 of them.

 

We have very little wiggle room, and must be healthy, too.

 

To me, it's too much to ask, as of now, and the way these guys are talking, I'm not encouraged about any major additions to the rotation by opening day.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Agreed. While we have some hopes for 5-6 pitchers, and all have had some nice stretches of doing well as starters, we will need a perfect storm of everyone doing their career best or matching it, all at the same time, to have a real chance. Okay, maybe just 4 of them.

 

We have very little wiggle room, and must be healthy, too.

 

To me, it's too much to ask, as of now, and the way these guys are talking, I'm not encouraged about any major additions to the rotation by opening day.

 

I know some posters despise John Tomase, but he wrote a column today echoing our concerns that "Everything Needs To Go Just Right..."

 

Since every guy who makes the big leagues is one of the best ballplayers in the world... then all of them have the potential to become All-Stars...

 

Boston just needs about six or eight to morph into stars at the same time.

[moonslav59]

I know some posters despise John Tomase, but he wrote a column today echoing our concerns that "Everything Needs To Go Just Right..."

 

Since every guy who makes the big leagues is one of the best ballplayers in the world... then all of them have the potential to become All-Stars...

 

Boston just needs about six or eight to morph into stars at the same time.

 

Out of Pivetta, Crawford, Houck and Whitlock, none have put together a full season of pitching like a solid #3 or better.

 

All have a nice stretch or two of 8-20 or even 24 starts in a row pitching like a 2 or 3, but it's too much to expect most of them to do something they have never done for a whole season.

 

We are also asking 3 of the 4 I listed to blow past their highest MLB IP total AND at a better or equal pace to their best stretch.

 

Hoping one can might be asking too much. Hoping two can is a very long shot. Hoping 3 can is setting yourself up for a major disappointment.

 

 

 

[vegasbob]

The Red Sox are not setting us up for disappointment because now that bummer is fully expected. So, instead they have set us up to be excited and thrilled when the team makes a slight move ( 5 game win streak? ) to get within striking distance of of the 4th place AL East team. There is no downside, in ownership eyes, for this team . It can only get better or at worst, be the cover for starting a lot of "promising" rookies and 2nd year guys. The 10 game west coast opening schedule will keep us glued to our seats, I'm sure.

 

Just removing the nervous energy of July's trade deadline anticipation takes away one of the major critiques of Bloom's era. This is clearly all about another bridge to maybe 2-3 year's out, built around cost controllable home grown studs.

 

Personally, I'm just waiting for the ST injury bug to further erode the failure to lineup about 8-10 legitimate/potential MLB starters.

Edited January 23, 2024 by vegasbob

[jad]

I know some posters despise John Tomase, but he wrote a column today echoing our concerns that "Everything Needs To Go Just Right..."

 

Since every guy who makes the big leagues is one of the best ballplayers in the world... then all of them have the potential to become All-Stars...

 

Boston just needs about six or eight to morph into stars at the same time.

 

Yup. All the RS need is for each player to produce what players making twice as much do. No other team is as uniquely poised for success.

[Randy Red Sox]

Agreed. While we have some hopes for 5-6 pitchers, and all have had some nice stretches of doing well as starters, we will need a perfect storm of everyone doing their career best or matching it, all at the same time, to have a real chance. Okay, maybe just 4 of them.

 

We have very little wiggle room, and must be healthy, too.

 

To me, it's too much to ask, as of now, and the way these guys are talking, I'm not encouraged about any major additions to the rotation by opening day.

 

but there will be 1 or 2 low end starters brought in on M/L deals to provide "depth"

[cp176]

With Paxton signing with LA., why keep anybody that amounts to anything? It really is becoming sickeningly apparent that this team's direction is - who knows where. If it's about a total remake of a roster, let them go for prospects - Jansen, Martin, Devers, Story, and whoever else makes a competitive wage.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

With Paxton signing with LA., why keep anybody that amounts to anything? It really is becoming sickeningly apparent that this team's direction is - who knows where. If it's about a total remake of a roster, let them go for prospects - Jansen, Martin, Devers, Story, and whoever else makes a competitive wage.

 

Breslow said this weekend a big part of the build-out will be drafting pitchers -- who usually take about five years to make the majors and establish themselves as big leaguers.

 

That's basically an admission the Red Sox will be wasting Devers' prime; he's only signed for 10 more years...

[Bellhorn04]

Yup. All the RS need is for each player to produce what players making twice as much do. No other team is as uniquely poised for success.

 

Excellent.

[notin]

With Paxton signing with LA., why keep anybody that amounts to anything? It really is becoming sickeningly apparent that this team's direction is - who knows where. If it's about a total remake of a roster, let them go for prospects - Jansen, Martin, Devers, Story, and whoever else makes a competitive wage.

 

You’re running up the white flag after missing out on a starting pitcher who’s been averaging 30 IP per season?

 

I know everyone wants SP help, but Paxton has shown us he’s more problem than solution. If the Sox want to save mo year, they should just go sign the guy they were going to need to replace Paxton in the rotation anyway and cut out the middle man…

[cp176]

Breslow said this weekend a big part of the build-out will be drafting pitchers -- who usually take about five years to make the majors and establish themselves as big leaguers.

 

That's basically an admission the Red Sox will be wasting Devers' prime; he's only signed for 10 more years...

 

Thankfully for him that it's all about the money i guess right. That's a sarcastic little snarky, Eddie from LB comment for those wondering. Any of these guys who can play just a little bit have to be wondering just like us what the hell is going on here. Trade these guys and give them a chance to win. Upper management can then start promoting the idea of a real youth rebuild.

[cp176]

You’re running up the white flag after missing out on a starting pitcher who’s been averaging 30 IP per season?

 

I know everyone wants SP help, but Paxton has shown us he’s more problem than solution. If the Sox want to save mo year, they should just go sign the guy they were going to need to replace Paxton in the rotation anyway and cut out the middle man…

 

Many of us have been running up the white flag for awhile now. Anything is better than nothing. Not signing anyone who is remotely serviceable such as Paxton just seems like a continuation of a nothingness campaign. I'll take it all back if a signing or two takes place to sort of indicate that they really do give a s*** about this year's team. Sadly, and I freely admit, I really am losing interest in them daily. I hardly know the names of these guys anymore.

[Bellhorn04]

If they fail to add a legit starting pitcher, somebody in that front office (my vote goes to Sham), needs to be publicly horsewhipped. The Sox can sell tickets to it and livestream it and make some money off it, so it'll be a win-win for everyone.

[notin]

Many of us have been running up the white flag for awhile now. Anything is better than nothing. Not signing anyone who is remotely serviceable such as Paxton just seems like a continuation of a nothingness campaign. I'll take it all back if a signing or two takes place to sort of indicate that they really do give a s*** about this year's team. Sadly, and I freely admit, I really am losing interest in them daily. I hardly know the names of these guys anymore.

 

As slow as the Sox have been, they are right there with the rest of the league (except the Dodgers). There are still 27 starting pitchers listed on MLBTR. Granted, they still list Paxton but they don’t list Trevor Bauer.

 

You could still make a very competitive rotation with these remaining arms.

 

This is why missing out on Paxton just won’t bother me. Heck I’m more upset about missing out on Aroldis Chapman…

[notin]

If they fail to add a legit starting pitcher, somebody in that front office (my vote goes to Sham), needs to be publicly horsewhipped. The Sox can sell tickets to it and livestream it and make some money off it, so it'll be a win-win for everyone.

 

They won’t sign a guy with a horsewhip…

[Old Red]

If they fail to add a legit starting pitcher, somebody in that front office (my vote goes to Sham), needs to be publicly horsewhipped. The Sox can sell tickets to it and livestream it and make some money off it, so it'll be a win-win for everyone.

 

I asked this question yesterday. How do you feel getting called out by Sam at Winter Weekend, and calling you a liar for not believing in ownership?