Red Sox ownership

[mvp 78]

I just hate $16M for so few innings, but you are right. Forget the saves. I think his call to Cora to put him in in the 8th inning against the Yankees with the score 6-4, Sox, Yankees on 1st and 3d, and 2 outs sent a huge message to the team.

 

I get it. It's just the market value for what he does.

[Maxbialystock]

Does this bother people?

 

Sometimes I think people want the Sox to spend more than they want the Sox to win…

 

See above my lengthy piece on the Nationals and Phillies and the significance of Bryce Harper. We on Talksox may love a team of no-names, but they don't put butts in seats. Attendance is down from last year.

[Maxbialystock]

I get it. It's just the market value for what he does.

 

It sure is, and for the life of me I can't figure out why he's so effective. He throws 2 pitches that are far from spectacular and maybe not even that different. But he has pretty good command and confidence he can get guys out. When Barnes was good in 2021, it was because he had a good 95 mph+ fastball and a great curve. When Koji Uehara was incredible in 2013, he had an awful fast ball (88 mph) and a terrific splitter and terrific control--and, just like Jansen, complete confidence he could get guys out.

[mvp 78]

See above my lengthy piece on the Nationals and Phillies and the significance of Bryce Harper. We on Talksox may love a team of no-names, but they don't put butts in seats. Attendance is down from last year.

 

They don't have less names than last year though? They are still 5th of 15 in the AL. Attendance being down less than 800 people a game isn't that surprising coming off back to back 78 wins seasons and a team that was looking like .500 at best. About the same attendance as 2022 when they still had Xander and some other stars.

[notin]

See above my lengthy piece on the Nationals and Phillies and the significance of Bryce Harper. We on Talksox may love a team of no-names, but they don't put butts in seats. Attendance is down from last year.

 

Names? No names? I want wins.

 

I’d much rather have a team of dirt cheap no-name winners than overpaid, famous, big name losers. I guess I’m in the minority there.

 

 

I’m starting to wonder if most baseball “fans” really like the sport. Or do they just like watching rich people spend lots and lots of money needlessly…

[Old Red]

They don't have less names than last year though? They are still 5th of 15 in the AL. Attendance being down less than 800 people a game isn't that surprising coming off back to back 78 wins seasons and a team that was looking like .500 at best. About the same attendance as 2022 when they still had Xander and some other stars.

 

The attendance might stay up there, but I think more, and more of the visiting fans are filling up the park more so than Red Sox fans. Either way it’s money in JH pockets.

[Bellhorn04]

Names? No names? I want wins.

 

I’d much rather have a team of dirt cheap no-name winners than overpaid, famous, big name losers. I guess I’m in the minority there.

 

 

I’m starting to wonder if most baseball “fans” really like the sport. Or do they just like watching rich people spend lots and lots of money needlessly…

 

Yes, you are the only fan who enjoys watching cheaper guys play well.

[mvp 78]

The attendance might stay up there, but I think more, and more of the visiting fans are filling up the park more so than Red Sox fans. Either way it’s money in JH pockets.

 

Hard to say for sure as there isn't any specific data tracking it. It definitely seems like there is more of a visiting fanbase at Fenway now. Local crowd seems a lot quieter too.

[notin]

Yes, you are the only fan who enjoys watching cheaper guys play well.

 

Hey according to the data, it puts me in the minority…

[mvp 78]

Yes, you are the only fan who enjoys watching cheaper guys play well.

 

Expensive guys playing poorly is my kink.

[Old Red]

Hard to say for sure as there isn't any specific data tracking it. It definitely seems like there is more of a visiting fanbase at Fenway now. Local crowd seems a lot quieter too.

 

It’s not like except for the last home stand the Red Sox have played that well at Fenway either.

[moonslav59]

Just win, baby!

[notin]

Expensive guys playing poorly is my kink.

 

Do you have an inflatable Anthony Rendon doll?

[mvp 78]

It’s not like except for the last home stand the Red Sox have played that well at Fenway either.

 

I'm not sure home W/L % plays a part in it. Most fans aren't paying attention to that.

[Old Red]

I'm not sure home W/L % plays a part in it. Most fans aren't paying attention to that.

 

I was referring to the local crowd being quiet.

[moonslav59]

A lot of Sox fans at Cincy, including our good luck charm, Thunder.

[mvp 78]

Do you have an inflatable Anthony Rendon doll?

 

That guy has it all since he's expensive and even hates baseball!!! *insert wolf with tongue out and bulging eyes*

[Dipre]

Names? No names? I want wins.

 

I’d much rather have a team of dirt cheap no-name winners than overpaid, famous, big name losers. I guess I’m in the minority there.

 

 

I’m starting to wonder if most baseball “fans” really like the sport. Or do they just like watching rich people spend lots and lots of money needlessly…

 

This is how I see it. I couldn't give a rat's ass about how much they spend as long as the team is winning.

[Bellhorn04]

Hey according to the data, it puts me in the minority…

 

What data would that be?

[Bellhorn04]

This is how I see it. I couldn't give a rat's ass about how much they spend as long as the team is winning.

 

Sure. But anyone suggesting there are a lot of fans who care more about spending than winning are erecting a straw man the size of The Wicker Man in the original movie.

[Dipre]

Sure. But anyone suggesting there are a lot of fans who care more about spending than winning are erecting a straw man the size of The Wicker Man in the original movie.

 

But a lot of fans do seem to care a lot about how much money the team spends. Like A LOT.

[Bellhorn04]

But a lot of fans do seem to care a lot about how much money the team spends. Like A LOT.

 

Sure, but I think complaining is understandable when the Red Sox win 78 games 2 years in a row and we see teams like the Yanks/Dodgers/Phillies spending and winning.

 

In spite of what's going on with the Sox right now, spending does have a high correlation with winning.

 

And good cheap players don't stay that way long. Extensions for good young players are spending too.

Edited June 25, 2024 by Bellhorn04

[Old Red]

But a lot of fans do seem to care a lot about how much money the team spends. Like A LOT.

 

Don’t judge what’s cared about on here to what’s out in the vast other parts of RSN.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

The average avid baseball fan -- follows a team regularly, knows most names on the roster, and best players on most opposing clubs -- may not care about budgets and luxury taxes, or even signing big name free agents (unless division rivals keep signing them all).

 

But when it comes to spending, loyal fans are adamant that their franchise pays market value to keep their favorites in the laundry they root for.

 

Continuity matters to fans. Most would probably say they'd prefer their team has a winning record, even if it means entire roster turnover with line-ups rife with no-name players every couple years. To others it may be more fun - though more difficult to admit - cheering for familiar favorites throughout their primes, if they only win some and lose some...

[mvp 78]

But a lot of fans do seem to care a lot about how much money the team spends. Like A LOT.

 

Fans only care insomuch that the owner seems to overly care about the budget in ways that he never did before.

[Bellhorn04]

Losing Betts was of course the prime example of this ownership not spending when it should have.

[Old Red]

Fans only care insomuch that the owner seems to overly care about the budget in ways that he never did before.

 

Change in philosophy, or tired of being burned so much on big contracts? All of the above.

[mvp 78]

The average avid baseball fan -- follows a team regularly, knows most names on the roster, and best players on most opposing clubs -- may not care about budgets and luxury taxes, or even signing big name free agents (unless division rivals keep signing them all).

 

But when it comes to spending, loyal fans are adamant that their franchise pays market value to keep their favorites in the laundry they root for.

 

Continuity matters to fans. Most would probably say they'd prefer their team has a winning record, even if it means entire roster turnover with line-ups rife with no-name players every couple years. To others it may be more fun - though more difficult to admit - cheering for familiar favorites throughout their primes, if they only win some and lose some...

 

If Red Sox nation was polled, what % would be upset that the Sox didn't do whatever it took to keep Mookie? 75%? More? Less?

[mvp 78]

Losing Betts was of course the prime example of this ownership not spending when it should have.

 

I think Xander, Eovaldi and others are lesser issues. Mookie is what put this franchise on a downward spiral for 4 or more years.

[mvp 78]

Change in philosophy, or tired of being burned so much on big contracts? All of the above.

 

Well, now he can get blue balls from waiting for prospects that never pan out.