Sell - Sell -Sell

[notin]

3 hours ago, Donnie Sadler was short said:

Wrong. We have a lot of young platers who would benefit greatly from post season experience. If you think that players with no post season experience will be able to just step up when its decided that this is The Year, I think you are mistaken. Let the kids see what October baseball is all about. 

I like that take. As long as Mayer is back on time for that experience…

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

We need better pitchers to throw late innings in the playoffs. Whether they are called starters or relievers, many will be used out of the bullpen for the best teams trying to play deep into October.

[moonslav59]

10 hours ago, SPLENDIDSPLINTER said:

Also, the Sox are 1-0 over their last 1. For those who prefer smaller sample sizes.

2-0 in last 2 and 3-1 in last 4 vs top teams.

If anyone wants to sell, now, when should we ever be buyers?

[Maxbialystock]

1 hour ago, moonslav59 said:

2-0 in last 2 and 3-1 in last 4 vs top teams.

If anyone wants to sell, now, when should we ever be buyers?

The numbers I prefer are 4-5 vs the NL's three best--with 6 of 9 being on the road.  That to me says these guys can compete in the postseason and no way, no how, should the Sox be sellers.

Cora has even shown how he can allow all 10,000 Sox outfielders to play regularly.  The price is Rafaela at 2b, but tonight he made one heckuva play at 2b.  

For those who want to trade Duran (as I usually have done), you should know Duran leads the Sox in total bases, runs scored, games played, and is 2d in rbi's.  \

About the rotation and getting a really good #2 starter behind Crochet.  The Sox are ranked 4th in MLB in quality starts, 47.  Most--41-- are by Crochet 14, Bello 10, Giolito 9, Buehler 6, and Fitts 2.  

If Breslow can make a favorable deal for a good starter, fine.  But I would be just as happy with good reliever(s).  Maybe Chapman's going on the IL. 

 

 

[Bellhorn04]

19 hours ago, Nick said:

Jim Cramer is not right very often.....Tariffs will cause inflation? Yep, that's happening.

If the tariffs stay in place (big court case starts this week), inflation is coming.  It's just kind of a slow process.

[moonslav59]

7 hours ago, Maxbialystock said:

The numbers I prefer are 4-5 vs the NL's three best--with 6 of 9 being on the road.  That to me says these guys can compete in the postseason and no way, no how, should the Sox be sellers.

Cora has even shown how he can allow all 10,000 Sox outfielders to play regularly.  The price is Rafaela at 2b, but tonight he made one heckuva play at 2b.  

For those who want to trade Duran (as I usually have done), you should know Duran leads the Sox in total bases, runs scored, games played, and is 2d in rbi's.  \

About the rotation and getting a really good #2 starter behind Crochet.  The Sox are ranked 4th in MLB in quality starts, 47.  Most--41-- are by Crochet 14, Bello 10, Giolito 9, Buehler 6, and Fitts 2.  

If Breslow can make a favorable deal for a good starter, fine.  But I would be just as happy with good reliever(s).  Maybe Chapman's going on the IL. 

I don't want to trade Duran: we need to trade an OF'er. 

It should not be Anthony, but I'd trade him for the right piece.

It probably shouldn't be Rafaela, due to his defense and flexibility, plus the longer team control at a reasonable cost.

That leaves GG RF'er and team HR leader Abreu vs Duran.

Nobody wants to hand Duran away. Nobody thinks he's not a very good or even great offensive weapon. Some like the idea of selling high not low. Some see his defense as the worst of the 4. Some worry about his emotional instability or whatever you want to call it. Some see his splits vs LHPs as just marginally better than Abreu's, especially of late. JH  Garcia offers a very promising look at OF depth and a Yoshida-Ref platoon in LF offers and emergency depth plan.

It's not an easy choice to make, but Rafaela should be playing CF and Anthony needs to play everyday. Those are the two foundational aspects of our loaded OF, as of now and probably for many years to come.

[mvp 78]

Still selling today? 

I think they are still stuck in no man's land. They are good enough for that final playoff spot, but not really good enough to do any damage in the playoffs. BUT ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN IN THE PLAYOFFS!!! No. The sixth seed has to run through 4 teams now. This team looked rough against the Cubs/Phillies/Dodgers. It wasn't even pretty during the Dodgers series win. The expectations for a contender have fallen so far that people want to heavily buy for a deeply flawed team. 

[moonslav59]

2 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Still selling today? 

I think they are still stuck in no man's land. They are good enough for that final playoff spot, but not really good enough to do any damage in the playoffs. BUT ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN IN THE PLAYOFFS!!! No. The sixth seed has to run through 4 teams now. This team looked rough against the Cubs/Phillies/Dodgers. It wasn't even pretty during the Dodgers series win. The expectations for a contender have fallen so far that people want to heavily buy for a deeply flawed team. 

Earlier, this year, almost everyone felt the Sox were not close to the Yanks, in terms of being a top competitor. Now, it looks the the Jays and a couple NL teams look too hard to beat.

I'm not going to claim going 3-3 vs those two NL teams proves anything, but adding 2 key pieces would certainly put us close enough to have a legit chance. Granted, those two teams may also add 1-2 key pieces, as well.

While I do not think we should sell out the majority of the farm to go for it in 2025 (with mostly rentals,) I do think we can make a couple strategic moves without killing our future and make a serious run in '25.

[mvp 78]

7 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Earlier, this year, almost everyone felt the Sox were not close to the Yanks, in terms of being a top competitor. Now, it looks the the Jays and a couple NL teams look too hard to beat.

I'm not going to claim going 3-3 vs those two NL teams proves anything, but adding 2 key pieces would certainly put us close enough to have a legit chance. Granted, those two teams may also add 1-2 key pieces, as well.

While I do not think we should sell out the majority of the farm to go for it in 2025 (with mostly rentals,) I do think we can make a couple strategic moves without killing our future and make a serious run in '25.

I just think we make moves similar to what we saw from Breslow in '24, selling Rule 5 eligible guys. If expectations are Joe Ryan or bust, people will be let down IMO. 

[Nick]

1 hour ago, Bellhorn04 said:

If the tariffs stay in place (big court case starts this week), inflation is coming.  It's just kind of a slow process.

We will have taken in close to $1Trillion in 12 months in tariff revenue.

I will bet you there will be no effect on inflation.

Most think that tariff is priced on $200 Nike shoes (whatever the retail is). Tariff is charged on the wholesale price. Using slave/child labor in China, I bet it's less than $20 to produce a Nike shoes. 30% on $20 is only $6. How many Nike shoes do you buy in a year. Skip a McDonald lunch and you got it covered. Not to mention the Chinese government will devalue their currency to drive the price down further. Speaking of McDonalds, Californians in fast food industry has lost thousands of employees. Thank you $20 minimum wage. Good intentions does not always mean good results.

I am not into 'politics' but I am into 'math'. Some idiot is spewing that inflation is 'up'. We're not interested in 'inflation' going up. It will always go up. I've had to deal with several contracts that has escalator clause on the revenue side based on CPI's and any other government metrics are out there. It's the rate of increase that's our concern. Simply to proclaim "it went up by 0.1% is NOT relevant. 

My life will be perfect if JH gets us some help within a week. I'll young people figure out the world they want to live in.......my group of friends are just living out the dream......playing golf, traveling and going to doctors.

 

[Bellhorn04]

28 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Still selling today? 

I think they are still stuck in no man's land. They are good enough for that final playoff spot, but not really good enough to do any damage in the playoffs. BUT ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN IN THE PLAYOFFS!!! No. The sixth seed has to run through 4 teams now. This team looked rough against the Cubs/Phillies/Dodgers. It wasn't even pretty during the Dodgers series win. The expectations for a contender have fallen so far that people want to heavily buy for a deeply flawed team. 

1) Who cares if it's pretty when you win?  All 3 games with the Dodgers were tight.

2) Which AL teams look dominant?  I'd say zero.

[notin]

29 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

1) Who cares if it's pretty when you win?  All 3 games with the Dodgers were tight.

2) Which AL teams look dominant?  I'd say zero.

The Jays have the best record in the AL. Are they really flawless? 
 

The Tigers were looking like the darlings of the AL for over 3 months.  They’re 1-12 in their last 13 games, including getting swept by Pittsburgh.  
 

Sure the Sox aren’t perfect.  What team is?

[mvp 78]

39 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

1) Who cares if it's pretty when you win?  All 3 games with the Dodgers were tight.

2) Which AL teams look dominant?  I'd say zero.

I think the Sox would not beat the Jays, Tigers, Astros or Mariners in a playoff series. Rangers are on a 10-2 run. There's a good chance they push the Sox out of the playoff position for good by the time the deadline comes anyway. Sox best chance is for the Yankees to free fall. 

The reason winning pretty matters is because ugly baseball doesn't win in the playoffs. The bad baseball that gets the Sox by during the regular season won't work in October for long. 

[moonslav59]

44 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

I just think we make moves similar to what we saw from Breslow in '24, selling Rule 5 eligible guys. If expectations are Joe Ryan or bust, people will be let down IMO. 

I'm not expecting a Joe Ryan or Keller. I'm not even expecting a Cease or M Kelly type.

My point is that I think we'd be significant contenders if we added a Ryan, a solid RP'er and a decent LH'd 1Bman to platoon with Romy.

I agree on what you think Brez will do. He may step it up, slightly. While Paxton, Danny Jansen, Luis Garcia and Lucas Sims might not have worked out real well, they were fairly decent attempts at striking gold (or maybe bronze.)

Brez traded far away hopefuls: Moises Bolivar, Y Vargas, Bautista & Ovis Portes and Rule 5/borderline prospects like M Lugo, Paulino, Coffey, Kavadas, Zeferjahn, 

He also traded Yorke for Quinn Priester- sort of a sideways move.

That's 10 prospects traded in just a week. Yorke was ranked 12th, Lugo 13th, Paulino 15th (overrated) Coffey 28th and falling and Portes 29th, perhaps rising. The rest were below 30th.

If we traded the same ranked players, it might be:

12 Romero (Sandlin is 11th/Early 10th)

13 Bleis

16 Cespedes (15th is J Gonzales)

28th Ehrhard

29th Hector Ramos

This year, I could see us trading #4 Arias or #6 Jh Garcia, but I would not bet on it. Maybe...

7 Tibbs

10 Early

11 Sandlin

12 Romero, 13 Bleis

16 Cespedes, 17 Paez, 19 Jordan, 21 Uberstine

23 Mullins, 24 Castro, 25 Wehunt, 31 Monegro

I'm not sure trading away Rule 5 guys with no chance of being selected makes them more likely to be traded.

[illinoisredsox]

13 minutes ago, notin said:

Sure the Sox aren’t perfect.  What team is?

My 1970 Little League team?  We went 20-0.

But to your overall point, exactly.  The winningest MLB teams ever still lost 40+ games.  No team is perfect

[mvp 78]

6 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

This year, I could see us trading #4 Arias or #6 Jh Garcia, but I would not bet on it. Maybe...

7 Tibbs

10 Early

11 Sandlin

12 Romero, 13 Bleis

16 Cespedes, 17 Paez, 19 Jordan, 21 Uberstine

23 Mullins, 24 Castro, 25 Wehunt, 31 Monegro

I'm not sure trading away Rule 5 guys with no chance of being selected makes them more likely to be traded.

I think some of those guys are on the table, but I don't think he's going to deal more than 6 of those names. If he's dealing Arias or Garcia, it needs to be for something better than the arms we've traded for in the past. 

[Bellhorn04]

23 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

The reason winning pretty matters is because ugly baseball doesn't win in the playoffs. The bad baseball that gets the Sox by during the regular season won't work in October for long. 

What exactly is the big difference between regular season games and playoff games? 

We just played an extremely tough stretch of 9 games and held our own.  We were in almost every game.  The pitching was pretty good, that's the real key IMHO.  

 

 

 

[Bellhorn04]

1 hour ago, Nick said:

We will have taken in close to $1Trillion in 12 months in tariff revenue.

I will bet you there will be no effect on inflation.

Most think that tariff is priced on $200 Nike shoes (whatever the retail is). Tariff is charged on the wholesale price. Using slave/child labor in China, I bet it's less than $20 to produce a Nike shoes. 30% on $20 is only $6. How many Nike shoes do you buy in a year. Skip a McDonald lunch and you got it covered. Not to mention the Chinese government will devalue their currency to drive the price down further. Speaking of McDonalds, Californians in fast food industry has lost thousands of employees. Thank you $20 minimum wage. Good intentions does not always mean good results.

I am not into 'politics' but I am into 'math'. Some idiot is spewing that inflation is 'up'. We're not interested in 'inflation' going up. It will always go up. I've had to deal with several contracts that has escalator clause on the revenue side based on CPI's and any other government metrics are out there. It's the rate of increase that's our concern. Simply to proclaim "it went up by 0.1% is NOT relevant.

I think we can talk economics without getting into the ugly political end of things.

I don't see how the US government can take in vast amounts of tariff revenue without prices to US consumers ultimately being driven up.  Someone has to pay that money.  Exporters can absorb some of it but eventually the costs will pass through to US businesses and consumers, it's inevitable.

We'll see what happens.  The court case starting this week should be very interesting.

 

 

[mvp 78]

15 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

What exactly is the big difference between regular season games and playoff games? 

If the Sox continue to play dumb baseball and reach the postseason. They will not win. They will lose. They will lose due to Rafaela being a bad 2b. They will lose due to catcher's interference. They will lose due to Jarren Duran running into Masa. 

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

1 hour ago, notin said:

The Jays have the best record in the AL. Are they really flawless? 
The Tigers were looking like the darlings of the AL for over 3 months.  They’re 1-12 in their last 13 games, including getting swept by Pittsburgh.  
Sure the Sox aren’t perfect.  What team is?

 

The Yankees. They're always the perfect choice to be favored in the preseason to win the American League and go to the World Series.

They're the favorites every year: my favorite team to root against, my favorite to see not win it all, my favorite to have their rabid fans choke on their own foaming saliva...

... just not my favorite to watch broadcast on any national network with a Judge Cam.

[Soxlover]

2 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

I think the Sox would not beat the Jays, Tigers, Astros or Mariners in a playoff series. Rangers are on a 10-2 run. There's a good chance they push the Sox out of the playoff position for good by the time the deadline comes anyway. Sox best chance is for the Yankees to free fall. 

The reason winning pretty matters is because ugly baseball doesn't win in the playoffs. The bad baseball that gets the Sox by during the regular season won't work in October for long. 

Possibly being slight underdogs vs 2-4 AL teams is not insurmountable or long odds. 

the Jays will hit a wall at some point.

i do not think the Rangers are this good.

Detroit and the Yanks are bearable.

the Astros have some flaws and injuries

 

[mvp 78]

18 minutes ago, Soxlover said:

i do not think the Rangers are this good.

I'd give the Sox the edge at C, OF (if Rafaela is moved back), 3B. If Chapman is out, the pens are about equal. Rangers have a better rotation, even if you break it down to a short series. TEX is the 2nd best pitching team in MLB per fWAR. If the bats get hot, they'll make a run down the stretch.

[dgalehouse]

4 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

If the tariffs stay in place (big court case starts this week), inflation is coming.  It's just kind of a slow process.

I don't know nearly enough about economics to have much of an opinion on this. But I know this much: When I was a kid, my father worked an ordinary job. My mother stayed home to raise us kids. We owned a nice home in a nice neighborhood with a reasonable mortgage. We had one car. We never had a lot of money to throw around, but we had enough to live decently. Over the years, due to inflation, that way of life has become nearly impossible for most people. I think the reason for this is that our elected officials of both parties and at all levels of government don't know any more about economics than I do. Maybe less.  I have no idea what the future holds.  

[dgalehouse]

The Red Sox just went 4-5 against some of the best teams in MLB. At no point did they look like they were outclassed or in over their heads. The playoffs are not so different. People overthink the post season. It's just more baseball. There is no team in the A.L. that is better than the teams that the Sox just played. Go for the brass ring. Full speed ahead. 

[notin]

2 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

I think the Sox would not beat the Jays, Tigers, Astros or Mariners in a playoff series. Rangers are on a 10-2 run. There's a good chance they push the Sox out of the playoff position for good by the time the deadline comes anyway. Sox best chance is for the Yankees to free fall. 

The reason winning pretty matters is because ugly baseball doesn't win in the playoffs. The bad baseball that gets the Sox by during the regular season won't work in October for long. 

The Rangers hot run has come at the expense of the A’s, Braves and Tigers.  While the Tigers are normally tough, theyre in a massive funk right now going 1-12 over their past 13 games. (That one win - against Texas.)

So why is it the Rangers can beat up on teams and be rolling, but when Boston does, its only because those other teams are struggling?

[mvp 78]

5 minutes ago, notin said:

The Rangers hot run has come at the expense of the A’s, Braves and Tigers.  While the Tigers are normally tough, theyre in a massive funk right now going 1-12 over their past 13 games. (That one win - against Texas.)

So why is it the Rangers can beat up on teams and be rolling, but when Boston does, its only because those other teams are struggling?

The old adage is that pitching wins in the playoffs. The Rangers are 2nd in MLB in fWAR. I believe they underperformed in the first half. If that team is starting a run, it may be tough for the Sox to keep up. 

Red Sox lost to the Cubs and Phillies and those teams looked much more legitimate to me.

The Dodgers are now on a 5-13 run and will set a record for most pitchers used in a season. I don't know why they continue to collect pitchers like Snell and Glasnow when they already have Gonsolin and May. Even Ohtani is a mighty risk for them if they are relying on him to be a starter. 

[cp176]

I have enjoyed watching this team.  They are young and resilient.  Sometimes I don’t think that they are as good as they look.  I just think that something very special is at work here.  With respect to trading any player on this roster who can hit just a little bit, I think would be the wrong decision unless he is replaced by someone who hits better - note I didn’t say pitches.  It is sad that Devers really did choose to not be a part of this team - and I do think that it was his choice plus I’m not at all sad that he is gone.  I would love to see that certain top of the rotation guy or the next best thing brought in but not at the expense of this current roster.  What I would really like to see is a real professional hitter brought in to play first base.  The kind of guy I would want though I don’t think exists.  Someone who could care less about exit velocity and all of the rest of the analytical ways for a hitter to face a pitcher.  Maybe someone who just hits the ball hard and hates to strike out.  Oh by the way I would like to see Bregman signed for whatever.  He like us and we like him.  His type of real leadership is too valuable to lose.

[Soxlover]

1 hour ago, cp176 said:

I have enjoyed watching this team.  They are young and resilient.  Sometimes I don’t think that they are as good as they look.  I just think that something very special is at work here.  With respect to trading any player on this roster who can hit just a little bit, I think would be the wrong decision unless he is replaced by someone who hits better - note I didn’t say pitches.  It is sad that Devers really did choose to not be a part of this team - and I do think that it was his choice plus I’m not at all sad that he is gone.  I would love to see that certain top of the rotation guy or the next best thing brought in but not at the expense of this current roster.  What I would really like to see is a real professional hitter brought in to play first base.  The kind of guy I would want though I don’t think exists.  Someone who could care less about exit velocity and all of the rest of the analytical ways for a hitter to face a pitcher.  Maybe someone who just hits the ball hard and hates to strike out.  Oh by the way I would like to see Bregman signed for whatever.  He like us and we like him.  His type of real leadership is too valuable to lose.

Well said, cp.

[Bellhorn04]

1 hour ago, cp176 said:

I have enjoyed watching this team.  They are young and resilient.  Sometimes I don’t think that they are as good as they look.  I just think that something very special is at work here.  With respect to trading any player on this roster who can hit just a little bit, I think would be the wrong decision unless he is replaced by someone who hits better - note I didn’t say pitches.  It is sad that Devers really did choose to not be a part of this team - and I do think that it was his choice plus I’m not at all sad that he is gone.  I would love to see that certain top of the rotation guy or the next best thing brought in but not at the expense of this current roster.  What I would really like to see is a real professional hitter brought in to play first base.  The kind of guy I would want though I don’t think exists.  Someone who could care less about exit velocity and all of the rest of the analytical ways for a hitter to face a pitcher.  Maybe someone who just hits the ball hard and hates to strike out.  Oh by the way I would like to see Bregman signed for whatever.  He like us and we like him.  His type of real leadership is too valuable to lose.

Keeping Bregman would be big.  Players like him don't become available very often.

[Soxlover]

2 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

I'd give the Sox the edge at C, OF (if Rafaela is moved back), 3B. If Chapman is out, the pens are about equal. Rangers have a better rotation, even if you break it down to a short series. TEX is the 2nd best pitching team in MLB per fWAR. If the bats get hot, they'll make a run down the stretch.

If they get hot?

that’s a big if, and why not the same type what if for the Sox.

the Rangers need a major improvement with hitting. They have 6 batters under .680 and 8 under .730.

they have way more holes than we have, and that’s assuming de Grom stays healthy, and Nate & Mahle keep this up.