Red Sox (Fitts) vs Twins (Woods Richardson): 7/28/25, 7:40pm

[Bellhorn04]

1 minute ago, dannycater said:

He was, agreed...he was horrific...and then he started to hit, and then the Sox were in a winning streak or winning mode when he adjusted to full-time DH...which is what--the most perfect thing you wanted for Raffy--no one wanted him defensively--we wanted his offense and his RBI and his power--you know EXACTLY what he was doing when Breslow impulsively salary dumped.

That was not Breslow being impulsive.  He can't make that move without the full backing of ownership.  Ownership may even have directed it.  You know Henry was not happy with Devers.

[dannycater]

1 minute ago, Bellhorn04 said:

That was not Breslow being impulsive.  He can't make that move without the full backing of ownership.  Ownership may even have directed it.  You know Henry was not happy with Devers.

yes, agreed on that too...I should have said Henry--as it seems Breslow and Bloom and others were figureheads

[FredLynn]

44 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Not long ago you were saying the team had no chance to make the playoffs.  Now you're admitting they have a realistic chance of making the playoffs but you don't want them to.

You call them the Flops, but you're a Flip Flopper.

Wrong again! I ALWAYS want what is best for the team, even if it means losing games. Too many people here are satisfied with the mediocrity of the past four years or so. I am not. I don't want them to TRY to make the playoffs-which is possible with some help-because there is no chance to compete for a ring. I am sure you will agree with that. I am not satisfied with last place or .500 finishes, unlike too many posters here. I want to see exciting October baseball, and these FLOPS simply are not going to be able to do that. So why  not TANK and fortify the team for a long run in about 2-3 years?

[Bellhorn04]

4 minutes ago, FredLynn said:

Wrong again! I ALWAYS want what is best for the team, even if it means losing games. Too many people here are satisfied with the mediocrity of the past four years or so. I am not. I don't want them to TRY to make the playoffs-which is possible with some help-because there is no chance to compete for a ring. I am sure you will agree with that. I am not satisfied with last place or .500 finishes, unlike too many posters here. I want to see exciting October baseball, and these FLOPS simply are not going to be able to do that. So why  not TANK and fortify the team for a long run in about 2-3 years?

NO TANKS.

[mvp 78]

1 hour ago, Bellhorn04 said:

In 35 games with the Giants Devers has a .722 OPS, 4 HR and 15 RBI.  He's had a lot of bad games.

Toro has a 558 OPS since 6/13. 

[mvp 78]

1 hour ago, FredLynn said:

Absolutely! Move way up that draft order so they can be a competitive team in a couple of years.

At this point, they wouldn't lose enough games to make a difference in the type of player they could draft. The draft is a tiered crap shoot. 

[FredLynn]

2 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

At this point, they wouldn't lose enough games to make a difference in the type of player they could draft. The draft is a tiered crap shoot. 

You don't know that. Would you rather the FLOPS have the 25th pick or the 40th pick? For example. Be honest!

[jad]

9 minutes ago, FredLynn said:

You don't know that. Would you rather the FLOPS have the 25th pick or the 40th pick? For example. Be honest!

I personally wouldn't give a cr*p or even notice.

 

[mvp 78]

11 minutes ago, FredLynn said:

You don't know that. Would you rather the FLOPS have the 25th pick or the 40th pick? For example. Be honest!

The 40th or 25th pick? Aside from the difference in bonus pool money, I really don't think there's a real difference in talent at that point. 

[mvp 78]

2 minutes ago, jad said:

I personally wouldn't give a cr*p or even notice.

 

We're not talking a top 5 pick. If they sold off a bunch of guys, they'd still get like the 10th pick. It's a good pick, but not necessarily a slam dunk. If Crochet was going to be out for an extended period, you could sell me on a different strategy going forward. 

[FredLynn]

3 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

The 40th or 25th pick? Aside from the difference in bonus pool money, I really don't think there's a real difference in talent at that point. 

Thats not a good enough answer for a real Flops fan. We both know that the ODDS ARE that the higher the draft pick the better the chance of being able to select a player with more talent. Its not a certainty, its an odds thing. Its why there IS a draft order. Overall the higher the pick the better the chance that the player is more talented.

[Bellhorn04]

20 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

At this point, they wouldn't lose enough games to make a difference in the type of player they could draft. The draft is a tiered crap shoot. 

As it should be.  Tanking shouldn't be rewarded.

[mvp 78]

1 minute ago, FredLynn said:

Thats not a good enough answer for a real Flops fan. We both know that the ODDS ARE that the higher the draft pick the better the chance of being able to select a player with more talent. Its not a certainty, its an odds thing. Its why there IS a draft order. Overall the higher the pick the better the chance that the player is more talented.

The chance in odds decreases as the draft moves on. Better to go for the playoffs when you can. I don't think there is much of a difference between the 25th and 40th picks. 

I mean, the current Sox may play their asses off, get into the playoffs and still have a pick better than the 25th. Not sure where you're coming up with 25th and 40th. 40th is like a Comp pick? Are you thinking about QO's or something. I don't get your logic here. 

[Bellhorn04]

Just now, mvp 78 said:

The chance in odds decreases as the draft moves on. Better to go for the playoffs when you can. I don't think there is much of a difference between the 25th and 40th picks. 

I mean, the current Sox may play their asses off, get into the playoffs and still have a pick better than the 25th. Not sure where you're coming up with 25th and 40th. 40th is like a Comp pick? Are you thinking about QO's or something. I don't get your logic here. 

It's facts he lacks.

[mvp 78]

5 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

As it should be.  Tanking shouldn't be rewarded.

And no matter what, it's still the baseball draft, not football. Half of these first rounders don't work out. Tanking for the draft is a dumb strategy if you're trying to build for the future. Selling off players for good trades would make more sense. Not if you have told your fans over and over that you are going to buy though.

[FredLynn]

1 minute ago, mvp 78 said:

The chance in odds decreases as the draft moves on. Better to go for the playoffs when you can. I don't think there is much of a difference between the 25th and 40th picks. 

I mean, the current Sox may play their asses off, get into the playoffs and still have a pick better than the 25th. Not sure where you're coming up with 25th and 40th. 40th is like a Comp pick? Are you thinking about QO's or something. I don't get your logic here. 

The logic is simple: the ODDS ARE that the higher the pick the more talented the player is. Otherwise why even have a draft? Its done so that the teams with poorer records have a chance to choose better players. Look at the teams that have consistently had higher draft picks-the O's, the Rays....and while they haven't won rings they have been able to select some high end talent. Those teams have gone from awful to pretty good. 

[FredLynn]

2 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

It's facts he lacks.

The fact that some people here lack is the ability to admit that they are WRONG and that in general the higher the draft pick the better chance the player selected is more talented. Since the FLOPS are going nowhere this year its best to position themselves to get the best draft pick possible by losing as many games as possible for the rest of the year.

[Bellhorn04]

2 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

And no matter what, it's still the baseball draft, not football. Half of these first rounders don't work out. Tanking for the draft is a dumb strategy if you're trying to build for the future. Selling off players for good trades would make more sense. Not if you have told your fans over and over that you are going to buy though.

And if fans lose interest that can translate to lost revenue and less money to spend on players.  

[Bellhorn04]

Just now, FredLynn said:

The fact that some people here lack is the ability to admit that they are WRONG and that in general the higher the draft pick the better chance the player selected is more talented. Since the FLOPS are going nowhere this year its best to position themselves to get the best draft pick possible by losing as many games as possible for the rest of the year.

OK FLIP.  

I could swear I saw some posts from you not that long ago talking about moves the Sox should make to improve their chances this year.

[notin]

50 minutes ago, FredLynn said:

Wrong again! I ALWAYS want what is best for the team, even if it means losing games. Too many people here are satisfied with the mediocrity of the past four years or so. I am not. I don't want them to TRY to make the playoffs-which is possible with some help-because there is no chance to compete for a ring. I am sure you will agree with that. I am not satisfied with last place or .500 finishes, unlike too many posters here. I want to see exciting October baseball, and these FLOPS simply are not going to be able to do that. So why  not TANK and fortify the team for a long run in about 2-3 years?

Because this isn’t the NFL or NBA where you tank to gain a better chance at a draft pick capable of making an immediate impact…

[mvp 78]

2 minutes ago, FredLynn said:

The logic is simple: the ODDS ARE that the higher the pick the more talented the player is. Otherwise why even have a draft? Its done so that the teams with poorer records have a chance to choose better players. Look at the teams that have consistently had higher draft picks-the O's, the Rays....and while they haven't won rings they have been able to select some high end talent. Those teams have gone from awful to pretty good. 

Since 2008, the Rays have been selecting in the last half of the draft 70% of the time! If they are drafting high end talent, it's not because of where they are selecting, but because of their scouting, development, other...

The Orioles sucked for years and years and had high draft picks. They picked at the top of the draft for 14 straight years from '98 to '11 and it didn't guarantee success. They turned their development team over and have had much more success recently. Will that come with a WS? IDK. They haven't won a WS since Jim Palmer retired 40+ years ago and are now in 5th place. 

If it took just high draft picks, would the Rockies and Pirates be perennial contenders by now? 

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

2 hours ago, drewski6 said:

same ole non-committal, scared money red sox.

But what if we're wrong!!!

When has anyone including myself ever  been wrong on the game thread?

[mvp 78]

2 minutes ago, SPLENDIDSPLINTER said:

When has anyone including myself ever  been wrong on the game thread?

The only person who is wrong is whoever is producing NESN during the game. 

[Bellhorn04]

Here's a Fred post from just a few days ago.  Seems to be a whole different tune from the one he's been singing about the benefits of tanking.

Well Naylor is off the board. The M's scooped him up. My guess is that cheapskate Henry isn't going to spend any (or much) of the $250M he saved by trading Devers. The FO will do what they did last year IMO: pick up some also-rans and demoralize thet team and the fans because they are not committed to winning. Same as last year; same as the year before and the year before that.

[FredLynn]

19 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Since 2008, the Rays have been selecting in the last half of the draft 70% of the time! If they are drafting high end talent, it's not because of where they are selecting, but because of their scouting, development, other...

The Orioles sucked for years and years and had high draft picks. They picked at the top of the draft for 14 straight years from '98 to '11 and it didn't guarantee success. They turned their development team over and have had much more success recently. Will that come with a WS? IDK. They haven't won a WS since Jim Palmer retired 40+ years ago and are now in 5th place. 

If it took just high draft picks, would the Rockies and Pirates be perennial contenders by now? 

You have to admit that the Rays and the O’s are better teams because of their recent draft pick selections. That’s what I want the Flops to be: improved from the mediocrity they have given their fans for at least four years. I KNOW that if you were the GM you would the highest draft pick possible when the draft begins. 

[FredLynn]

16 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Here's a Fred post from just a few days ago.  Seems to be a whole different tune from the one he's been singing about the benefits of tanking.

Well Naylor is off the board. The M's scooped him up. My guess is that cheapskate Henry isn't going to spend any (or much) of the $250M he saved by trading Devers. The FO will do what they did last year IMO: pick up some also-rans and demoralize thet team and the fans because they are not committed to winning. Same as last year; same as the year before and the year before that.

Not at all! I want that money spent during the offseason-not now when the goal is to LOSE as many games as possible. Or at least that SHOULD be the goal. I mentioned Naylor as evidence that the Flops are committed to that lofty goal. It’s the proper strategy.

[notin]

1 hour ago, FredLynn said:

You don't know that. Would you rather the FLOPS have the 25th pick or the 40th pick? For example. Be honest!

It would give them a better chance to pick the next Trey Ball over the next Aaron Judge…

[notin]

12 minutes ago, FredLynn said:

You have to admit that the Rays and the O’s are better teams because of their recent draft pick selections. That’s what I want the Flops to be: improved from the mediocrity they have given their fans for at least four years. I KNOW that if you were the GM you would the highest draft pick possible when the draft begins. 

1. The Orioles are in last place.  The Rays are just ahead of them.  Possibly not good examples.

2. The Rockies, Pirates and Marlins don’t help your case either.

3. The reality is tanking for draft picks in MLB is a losing venture.  Being a deadline seller is far more effective and even it fails far too frequently…

[Maxbialystock]

12 hours ago, illinoisredsox said:

Called that one; Hicks blows it.

You sure did.  I did not watch the bottom of the 9th, but did look at his pitches on mlb.com.  He actually looked pretty good against the first Twins batter, throwing 6 strikes in 8 pitches.    But Kiersey fouled off a bunch until he hammered pitch #8, a 98.4 mph fastball on the inside corner.  Then came the 2 HBP's, maybe because he was frustrated.  Then came the groundout with the bases loaded.  Finally, the game winning single on an 0-2 count and off a fastball up and away and outside the strike zone.  

[Maxbialystock]

1 minute ago, notin said:

1. The Orioles are in last place.  The Rays are just ahead of them.  Possibly not good examples.

2. The Rockies and the Marlins don’t help your case either.

3. The reality is tanking for draft picks in MLB is a losing venture.  Being a deadline seller is far more effective and even it fails far too frequently…

Agree on the tanking for draft picks as a losing venture.