A Realistic View at 2024: Part III

[Randy Red Sox]

2 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Of course, the odds are better with higher picks, but once you get past the first 5-8 picks, it kind of becomes more of a crapshoot.

i think it goes a bit deeper than 8 but I get your point. i guess that is why we took Yorke at #12 I believe

[Randy Red Sox]

6 hours ago, Duran Is The Man said:

he's St. Louis's problem now. glad i'm not a Cardinals fan. 

and shocking that the Cards are said to be cutting payroll. Bloom has lots of experience in that area

[Randy Red Sox]

5 hours ago, Old Red said:

What did this all add up to in the WL column?

after winning today it looks from a quick glance that we get the #13 pick in next year's draft

[moonslav59]

3 hours ago, Duran Is The Man said:

those three years belong to Ben Cherington, not DD. Houck, Dalbec, Duran, Bello, Casas & Rafaela were all acquired under DD. the rest of those you mentioned were acquired by Bloom. interestingly, all of the Bloom acquisitions you mention were via trade or Rule5, while all of the DD acquisitions were drafted.

 

3 hours ago, Duran Is The Man said:

those three years belong to Ben Cherington, not DD. Houck, Dalbec, Duran, Bello, Casas & Rafaela were all acquired under DD. the rest of those you mentioned were acquired by Bloom. interestingly, all of the Bloom acquisitions you mention were via trade or Rule5, while all of the DD acquisitions were drafted.

DD did use Ben's top prospects in trade, but you are correct.

It's not really all that "interesting" that most of Bloom's recent additions were Rule 5 or trade pick-ups (Whitlock, Wink, Wong & DHam,) since Bloom drafted many HS players and  later, college players, whose time in the minors is just coming to an end.

All these guys are Bloomers:

Anthony, Mayer, Campbell, Teel, Arias

Bleis, Meidroth, Cespedes, Romero & Jo Garcia

Let's give a little more time.

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, Randy Red Sox said:

i think it goes a bit deeper than 8 but I get your point. i guess that is why we took Yorke at #12 I believe

I do think picking 9th vs 12th makes a difference, but maybe not all that much. (Maybe, it does.)

[moonslav59]

How fitting we end up 81-81.

Final 2024 OPS

.870 Devers

.847 O'Neill

.834 Duran

.830 Refsnyder

.799 Casas

.781 Abreu

.764 Yoshida

.758 Wong

.734 Story (.790 Sept)

.723 Romy

.707 D Smith

.698 DHam

.664 Rafaela

.651 Sogard

.633 Valdez

.623 Jansen

.575 McGuire

.465 Grissom (.787 Sept)

[Larry Cook]

7 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I do think picking 9th vs 12th makes a difference, but maybe not all that much. (Maybe, it does.)

Chance for someone to fall to us 

[moonslav59]

Final ERAs

2.93 Slaten(55 IP)

3.12 Houck (179)

3.13 Weissert (63)

3.29 Jansen (55)

3.38 Booser (43)

3.45 Martin (44)

3,97 Kelly (57)

4.06 Bernardino (51)

4.08 Criswell (99)

4.09 Paxton (11)

4.14 Pivetta (146)

4.14 Wink (76)

4.36 Crawford (184)

4.49 Bello (162)

4.85 Anderson (52)

 

Under 20 IP

0.00 Guerrero (10 IP)

1.74 Fitts (21 IP)

1.80 Priester (5)

1.96 Whitlock (18)

2.25 Penrod (4)

[moonslav59]

8 minutes ago, Larry Cook said:

Chance for someone to fall to us 

13th pick, as I understand.

We missed being tied for 11th with SFG & TBR by one loss.

We'd have had to lose 3 more to tie with TEX for #10.

4 more for #9 (CIN)

We missed being a top 10 team by  8 games.

We missed top 11 by 5 wins (DET & KCR) Also, the last WC slot.

We missed top tier (15th) by 2 wins.

[moonslav59]

MLB OPS Leaders w 300+ PAs

1.159 Judge (over 120 pts ahead of #2)

1.036 Ohtani (First to ever hit 50+ HRs and 50+ SBs)

.993 Tucker

.988 Soto

.977 Witt (40+ 2B, 30+ HR & SB, 10+ 3Bs)

.959 Alvarez

.940 Guerrero

.933 Ozuna

.932 K Marte

.927 Rooker

.910 Yelich

.908 Pederson

.905 Correa

17. Devers .870

19. Betts .863

22. Schwarber .851

25. O'Neill .847

30. Duran .834 (40+ 2B, 30+ SB, 20+ HR, 10+ 3B)

34. Refsnyder .830

62. Abreo .781

 

[Randy Red Sox]

4 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

13th pick, as I understand.

We missed being tied for 11th with SFG & TBR by one loss.

We'd have had to lose 3 more to tie with TEX for #10.

4 more for #9 (CIN)

We missed being a top 10 team by  8 games.

We missed top 11 by 5 wins (DET & KCR) Also, the last WC slot.

We missed top tier (15th) by 2 wins.

actually 1 more loss today would have put us behind TB

[moonslav59]

I'm still glad we won. I know being .500 is no great achievement, but having losing records suck more.

[Old Red]

12 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I'm still glad we won. I know being .500 is no great achievement, but having losing records suck more.

500 May look good on paper, but in reality it was a step back IMO. The Div was weaker this year, and the league was weaker this year. 81-81 would have still gotten you last place in the division the last two years, and I don’t believe the Red Sox got better than Tampa, and Toronto, but Tampa, and Toronto just got that much worse. Like I keep saying the Red Sox were fantasy contenders in fantasy contention, and once again a Cora led club quit, and caved after the AS break.

[Hugh2]

1 hour ago, Old Red said:

500 May look good on paper, but in reality it was a step back IMO. The Div was weaker this year, and the league was weaker this year. 81-81 would have still gotten you last place in the division the last two years, and I don’t believe the Red Sox got better than Tampa, and Toronto, but Tampa, and Toronto just got that much worse. Like I keep saying the Red Sox were fantasy contenders in fantasy contention, and once again a Cora led club quit, and caved after the AS break.

Teams don't abundantly play their division like they did in the past.   The year was an improvement, little consolation prize for missing the playoffs so I'd be more comfortable on bargaining to say there was no improvement rather than it was a step back.  The later just sounds unreasonably pessimistic. 

[mvp 78]

19 hours ago, Duran Is The Man said:

the FO has been nothing but boiled crap since DD left. i really don't expect anything to change.

Boiled crap since they won the WS in '18.

[Bellhorn04]

15 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Teams don't abundantly play their division like they did in the past.   The year was an improvement, little consolation prize for missing the playoffs so I'd be more comfortable on bargaining to say there was no improvement rather than it was a step back.  The later just sounds unreasonably pessimistic. 

3 solid years of being:

Stuck in a rut.

Treading water.

Hamsters on wheels.

Maestros of Mediocrity.

[notin]

15 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

I do think picking 9th vs 12th makes a difference, but maybe not all that much. (Maybe, it does.)

The way the Sox have been drafting lately, a top ten player will fall to them in that position, a la Teel and Montgomery…

[notin]

5 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

3 solid years of being:

Stuck in a rut.

Treading water.

Hamsters on wheels.

Maestros of Mediocrity.

Given the publicly announced direction the team was going to take - reduce spending and build the farm to where it can produce a steady stream of MLB talent - are the last 3 years really a surprise?  
 

Thereal surprise might be the 2021 team, although the reality there is that team was largely the same as the 2018 team…

[Bellhorn04]

14 minutes ago, notin said:

Given the publicly announced direction the team was going to take - reduce spending and build the farm to where it can produce a steady stream of MLB talent - are the last 3 years really a surprise?  

I think the public announcements also included some stuff about competing and about making the playoffs still being top priority. 

And they would never say that reduced spending is a goal. 

[Hugh2]

33 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

3 solid years of being:

Stuck in a rut.

Treading water.

Hamsters on wheels.

Maestros of Mediocrity.

I'd call 81-81 mediocrity.

I'd call last place with a losing record beneath mediocrity. 

 

 

[moonslav59]

I don’t think further reductions in the budget will go unchallenged by the fans and media. It might not matter at all but I think the pushback will be fierce and unending, this time.

im not sure if the uproar might open up a willingness to make a big and bold trade. I really doubt they care much at all, unless they see unexpected drops in season ticket and NESN sales.

im not optimistic on being bold but I’m also not without hope.

as much as I love the incoming farm infusion, I do t think Gio, Hendricks and Fulmer make up for losing Pivetta, Jansen, Martin, O’Neill and others. Counting on Story and others to be healthy and produce more is neglecting the probability of new injuries and unexpected declines.

[notin]

22 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

I think the public announcements also included some stuff about competing and about making the playoffs still being top priority. 

And they would never say that reduced spending is a goal. 

They can’t really control the postseason part. 
 

The “reduced spending” might not have been physically voiced, but everything else they said (except “full throttle”) fell right into that line.  Their actions starting with hiring Bloom would have fit right in just as if someone had challenged them to say you’re going to reduce spending g without saying you’re going to reduce spending…

[moonslav59]

They have not cut tge budget, every winter.

[Yaz Fan Since 67]

I just can't get into the Red Sox after watching what Jayden Daniels is.  You guys got this for 2 decades, glad it's finally our turn to have a real QB.  

[Nick]

6 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

They have not cut tge budget, every winter.

Moon, it's time for the Realistic View 2025, Part I

Start with what we have, our probable 26 man roster, maybe our 40 man roster. Thanks

 

[Bellhorn04]

4 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

They have not cut tge budget, every winter.

The telling fact is that they stayed under the tax threshold 2 years in a row.  They re-set and stayed re-set.

And of course Sam did flat out tell the world in January the payroll was probably going to be lower in 2024 than it was in 2023, to cap off an amazing offseason of mixed messages. 

[moonslav59]

1 minute ago, Nick said:

Moon, it's time for the Realistic View 2025, Part I

Start with what we have, our probable 26 man roster, maybe our 40 man roster. Thanks

 

I started it a couple hours ago.

[moonslav59]

1 minute ago, Bellhorn04 said:

The telling fact is that they stayed under the tax threshold 2 years in a row.  They re-set and stayed re-set.

And of course Sam did flat out tell the world in January the payroll was probably going to be lower in 2024 than it was in 2023, to cap off an amazing offseason of mixed messages. 

They have gone 2 years cutting before, several times.

i can’t find the quote about a cut for 2025. Can you provide a link?

[Bellhorn04]

3 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

They have gone 2 years cutting before, several times.

i can’t find the quote about a cut for 2025. Can you provide a link?

I assume you mean what Sam said in January.

https://www.masslive.com/redsox/2024/01/red-soxs-sam-kennedy-2024-payroll-expected-to-be-lower-than-it-was-in-2023.html

[mvp 78]

11 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

They have not cut tge budget, every winter.

Opening Day Payroll:

18: 233M

19: 236M

20: 200M (prorated)

21: 180M 

22: 206M

23: 181M

24: 171M

Certainly feels like they've cut the budget! The last time they were under 170M was 2014, but they ended up within 5M of the CBT by year end. Not sure they'll get there this time.