Craig Breslow: CBO of the Red Sox

[moonslav59]

3 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

This is a very weird statement. Why should we feel the same way about the owner of Dunkies as the way we feel about the Red Sox? Is it the owner who has taken your favorite drink off the menu or someone else? For the Red Sox, we know that JH had a say as to whether or not Mookie was going to be here for life. 

It's all about maximizing profits and lining pockets/wallets. Maybe the 99% part was hyperbole, but JH is doing exactly what most owners and corporate leaders are doing.

It's the American way, but somehow, when it comes to baseball, an owner is supposed to fork over more of the profits to please his customers, even if he doesn't have to do it to make more money.

I don't want this to morph into politics, and I don't despise owners for wanting to maximize profits. It just is what it is, except, apparently, for baseball, which has had a lot of slack from the government, over the years.

[mvp 78]

The history of sports franchises haven't been "milk this thing dry for shareholders" the way we've seen with venture capitalists. Ownings sports teams have been more of a play thing for rich bastards. It's more about getting their rocks off from feeling like a big shot around ballplayers. Making money has been secondary.

If you want to root for JH to hold onto additional money as fans spend more and more of it on a losing product, more power to you. It's fine for me to use my voice to tell ownership how to spend the money because in absence of shareholders, we are the only ones that can hold him accountable.

[Bellhorn04]

22 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

He's intentionally being kept away from the media because whenever he is in front of the camera he says something that needs a PR spin. 

It's even worse than that, because when he had a chance to explain himself without being in front of a camera he used it to tell fans they have unrealistic expectations.

[mvp 78]

If he was being honest, he'd say "we'll be around .500 for 3-4 more years, but be competitive enough to be in reach of the playoffs at times. We'll have a window of another 3-4 years and then have to rebuild most likely. I've won 4 World Series already so you have to trust what I'm doing even though what I'm doing now is completely different than what I've done in the past!"

[mvp 78]

"You piggies are just going to keep eating this slop anyway." 

[vegasbob]

Been out of the country for a couple weeks so just catching up on the recent play and the "new" site .

All I can say at the moment  on  topic is that Craig Breslow may be one of the unluckiest individuals I am aware of with his choices of personnel to fill gaps on the  Red Sox or he is  not real sharp unlike the pins stuck in his voodoo doll.

Glad I was gone and missed the details of the slide down the razor of playoff chances.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

All the old guys with punctured eardrums on this site misheard Sam Kennedy this summer.

We thought Sam said, "The Red Sox have underachieved."

But recent Forensic Audio and Visual Analysis gives the soundbite clarity:

"The Red Sox have underdeceived."

[Bellhorn04]

Sam really has his work cut out for the next pep talk.

[Bellhorn04]

Sam might just opt to go with humor, like when he told the press about Pedroia calling him to plead for some free agent signings and Sam laughing his ass off about it.

[moonslav59]

26 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

If he was being honest, he'd say "we'll be around .500 for 3-4 more years, but be competitive enough to be in reach of the playoffs at times. We'll have a window of another 3-4 years and then have to rebuild most likely. I've won 4 World Series already so you have to trust what I'm doing even though what I'm doing now is completely different than what I've done in the past!"

He may actually have convinced himself that we could be an 85-90 win team from 2021-2024. We were still a top 3 spending team in '21, top 6 in '22 and top 23-23, the last 2 years.

We had some bad luck with pitchers on the IL, but when you sign so many injury-prone pitchers (not Gio,) one could say it was expected. We have not had more than our share of injuries, so it's unfair to blame them for our sub .500 play.

These horrific ending to the last few seasons have really been the main issue. It's easy to point to the loss and failure to replace these guys as the main reason, and I fully agree:

Sale, Nate, ERod, Bogey

Betts, Porcello, Price & Kimbrell/Kelly

 

[Bellhorn04]

2 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

He may actually have convinced himself that we could be an 85-90 win team from 2021-2024. We were still a top 3 spending team in '21, top 6 in '22 and top 23-23, the last 2 years.

We had some bad luck with pitchers on the IL, but when you sign so many injury-prone pitchers (not Gio,) one could say it was expected. We have not had more than our share of injuries, so it's unfair to blame them for our sub .500 play.

These horrific ending to the last few seasons have really been the main issue. It's easy to point to the loss and failure to replace these guys as the main reason, and I fully agree:

Sale, Nate, ERod, Bogey

Betts, Porcello, Price & Kimbrell/Kelly

 

Giolito was a hugely questionable signing too, after 2 months of pitching batting practice, and a contract that guaranteed he would leave after one year if he actually pitched well.  

[Bellhorn04]

6 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

He may actually have convinced himself that we could be an 85-90 win team from 2021-2024. We were still a top 3 spending team in '21, top 6 in '22 and top 23-23, the last 2 years.

We had some bad luck with pitchers on the IL, but when you sign so many injury-prone pitchers (not Gio,) one could say it was expected. We have not had more than our share of injuries, so it's unfair to blame them for our sub .500 play.

These horrific ending to the last few seasons have really been the main issue. It's easy to point to the loss and failure to replace these guys as the main reason, and I fully agree:

Sale, Nate, ERod, Bogey

Betts, Porcello, Price & Kimbrell/Kelly

 

And Betts was irreplaceable, so that was kind of a problem in itself.  

[Duran Is The Man]

1 hour ago, moonslav59 said:

It's all about maximizing profits and lining pockets/wallets. Maybe the 99% part was hyperbole, but JH is doing exactly what most owners and corporate leaders are doing.

It's the American way, but somehow, when it comes to baseball, an owner is supposed to fork over more of the profits to please his customers, even if he doesn't have to do it to make more money.

I don't want this to morph into politics, and I don't despise owners for wanting to maximize profits. It just is what it is, except, apparently, for baseball, which has had a lot of slack from the government, over the years.

and here i thought it was about winning baseball games. 

[moonslav59]

30 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Giolito was a hugely questionable signing too, after 2 months of pitching batting practice, and a contract that guaranteed he would leave after one year if he actually pitched well.  

Agreed. I did not like that signing.

I never expected an injury, though. Had he given us 30 starts, 170 IP and a 4.15 ERA, we'd still be in the race.

[moonslav59]

6 minutes ago, Duran Is The Man said:

and here i thought it was about winning baseball games. 

For a business owner?

[Duran Is The Man]

7 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

For a business owner?

for the owner of a baseball team, yes.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

1 hour ago, moonslav59 said:

It's the American way, but somehow, when it comes to baseball, an owner is supposed to fork over more of the profits to please his customers, even if he doesn't have to do it to make more money.

The American way is if you buy a gallon of milk and it's sour, they give you a refund.

[moonslav59]

15 minutes ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

The American way is if you buy a gallon of milk and it's sour, they give you a refund.

Not sure what this has to do with JH maximizing profits. 

Fans keep buying the product. There is no incentive to spend more, other than to make some fans happier.

If they stopped buying the product, changes would be made.

There is a long history of companies producing known inferior or eben dangerously defective products and selling it, anyway.

[notin]

1 hour ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Giolito was a hugely questionable signing too, after 2 months of pitching batting practice, and a contract that guaranteed he would leave after one year if he actually pitched well.  

If he pitched, the option was a clever way to ensure he’d reject a QO.  They had faith he would pitch well enough to make this matter…

[notin]

1 hour ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

The American way is if you buy a gallon of milk and it's sour, they give you a refund.

No, they give you another gallon of milk, not knowing whether or not it’s also sour…

[Bellhorn04]

9 minutes ago, notin said:

If he pitched, the option was a clever way to ensure he’d reject a QO.  They had faith he would pitch well enough to make this matter…

So the hope was he pitches well for one year, he leaves and we get an extra draft pick after the second round or whatever it is?  That was Breslow's big move to upgrade the rotation?

I just don't get how that all makes sense for a team that needs starting pitching NOW.

Not seeing much clever, personally.  

As the guy in Spinal Tap said, there's such a fine line between clever and stupid.

 

[notin]

2 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

If he was being honest, he'd say "we'll be around .500 for 3-4 more years, but be competitive enough to be in reach of the playoffs at times. We'll have a window of another 3-4 years and then have to rebuild most likely. I've won 4 World Series already so you have to trust what I'm doing even though what I'm doing now is completely different than what I've done in the past!"

With a better ending, this speech, while not pleasing, would at least be refreshingly honest…

[notin]

13 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

So the hope was he pitches well for one year, he leaves and we get an extra draft pick after the second round or whatever it is?  That was Breslow's big move to upgrade the rotation?

I just don't get how that all makes sense for a team that needs starting pitching NOW.

Not seeing much clever, personally.  

As the guy in Spinal Tap said, there's such a fine line between clever and stupid.

 

First of all, getting Giolito’s normal IP is an upgrade. The Sox have desperately needed it this year.  .

Second, it’s Lucas Giolito.  How long should they have committed?  
 

Third, if Sale gave them any sort of hint he would be able to provide significant IP, he’d probably still be here.  (Obviously they were not remarkably convinced with 40 injury-free IP after shoulder problems).

 

Fourth - and this I think might be a big part of it - they very likely had more faith in Bello, Houck, Whitlock and Crawford than most of us.  They did show Bello and Whitlock some faith already.  But one are all of them needed help in that was painfully obvious - IP…

[Old Red]

11 minutes ago, notin said:

First of all, getting Giolito’s normal IP is an upgrade. The Sox have desperately needed it this year.  .

Second, it’s Lucas Giolito.  How long should they have committed?  
 

Third, if Sale gave them any sort of hint he would be able to provide significant IP, he’d probably still be here.  (Obviously they were not remarkably convinced with 40 injury-free IP after shoulder problems).

 

Fourth - and this I think might be a big part of it - they very likely had more faith in Bello, Houck, Whitlock and Crawford than most of us.  They did show Bello and Whitlock some faith already.  But one are all of them needed help in that was painfully obvious - IP…

So they paid Gio, and Sale $35M this year for a hope of more innings pitched? I don’t think they had any big sort of faith in what the rest of the rotation would look like, and the most likely part of it to me was that it was a cheap option, which was all the better.

[notin]

5 minutes ago, Old Red said:

So they paid Gio, and Sale $35M this year for a hope of more innings pitched? I don’t think they had any big sort of faith in what the rest of the rotation would look like, and the most likely part of it to me was that it was a cheap option, which was all the better.

Oh I’m sure price mattered.  Or they figured Giolito met the bare minimum requirements for quality and durability.  And Sale didn’t…

[Old Red]

1 minute ago, notin said:

Oh I’m sure price mattered.  Or they figured Giolito met the bare minimum requirements for quality and durability.  And Sale didn’t…

I still can’t believe they paid $35M to Sale, and Gio to do it.

[mvp 78]

There was a certain amount of that value attributed to Grissom working out in some way shape or form. He's shown signs of life in AAA recently, but it's been a very rough year for him. 

[moonslav59]

21 minutes ago, notin said:

Oh I’m sure price mattered.  Or they figured Giolito met the bare minimum requirements for quality and durability.  And Sale didn’t…

That's basically it. Yes.

They figured they got 100+ more IP than Sale would give, even if just barely better than mediocre pitching, plus the hope of solving the 2B problem we've had for about 5 years. 

There was some logic, at the time. All 3 aspects,  if you count the money part, did not work out. The trade failed, but that does not mean it made no sense at the time.

1. More IP from the Sale>Gio slot.

2. Solve the 2B problem.

3. Spend the $10M saved wisely. (They actually cut $10M from the '23 budget, so no, we did not "spend the money on GIo.) We could just as easily say we spent Kluber and Kik's money on Gio, and left the $10M "saved" in JH's pocket.

All three parts of the trade ended about as badly as anyone could imagine. Fine: blame Brez for that. That's the nature of a GM's job and grade assignment. IMO, just don't say "it made no sense, at the time."

[vegasbob]

Just asking , but what is Breslow achieving by having Mickey Gaspers on the 28 . 0-12 for the SSS  and career.

I assume it is to allow Wong and  D. Jansen to play in the same game and still have a spare C.   

Along similar lines, I appreciate and respect Rich Hill still competing, sort of, at the MLB level but honestly, is that the best option from the entire Red Sox system, DFA slag heap, and  retired list ?    Gaspers and Hill showed up before the roster expansion.

Breslow will get a pass on this season, but between his bad luck with  the now injured  signings/pickups  and Story /Grissom's season long misses , Craig really needs to have a championship off season.    Especially if the Sox slip below the tide line and slide further backwards. 

[moonslav59]

4 minutes ago, vegasbob said:

Just asking , but what is Breslow achieving by having Mickey Gaspers on the 28 . 0-12 for the SSS  and career.

I assume it is to allow Wong and  D. Jansen to play in the same game and still have a spare C.   

Along similar lines, I appreciate and respect Rich Hill still competing, sort of, at the MLB level but honestly, is that the best option from the entire Red Sox system, DFA slag heap, and  retired list ?    Gaspers and Hill showed up before the roster expansion.

Breslow will get a pass on this season, but between his bad luck with  the now injured  signings/pickups  and Story /Grissom's season long misses , Craig really needs to have a championship off season.    Especially if the Sox slip below the tide line and slide further backwards. 

Nobody in the entire Sox system, including Devers and Campbell has more PAs (over 300) and a higher OPS than Gasper (1.017.)

Maybe they felt he earned a look-see.

Hell, EValdez got another chance.