Red Sox 2025 Season Review/Offseason Preview Thread

[moonslav59]

2 hours ago, Randy Red Sox said:

I don't know about you but I am sick of SIX years of mediocrity

I'm pretty sure we all are. 2021 and 2025 offered brief glimpses of hope, but I see 2026 as a chance to open the window wide.

We don't need to mortgage the future or spend like the Mets and Dodgers to do it, either. We probably don't even have to spend like the Phillies, Yanks and Jays. Going up to the second line and one more trade could get us to a top 5-6 team in MLB.

Hell, fangraphs has us projected at a .531 winning %, which is 7th best and just .002 from NYY and .004 from the Jays and M's atop the AL.

Fangraphs has us ranked 9th at 42.9 fWAR. That's 0.2 from PHI & BAL and a tie for 7th place. We are currently 21st for everyday players and 2nd for pitching. Add a big bat or two good ones and we should be fine.

[JoeBrady]

3 hours ago, Randy Red Sox said:

Personally I could care less if we spend another dime.

Can the moderator please let Randy know his account has been hacked?  His previous 127 posts were some version of JH being cheap.  The new Randy doesn't seem to care.

[Randy Red Sox]

1 hour ago, JoeBrady said:

Can the moderator please let Randy know his account has been hacked?  His previous 127 posts were some version of JH being cheap.  The new Randy doesn't seem to care.

no i am just frustrated at the constant mediocrity. FA apologists like you are just content with it.  I used to live and die on the Sox and watch 90% of their games on MLB package. But as far as I am concerned until JH shows he cares about actually winning again I have cancelled my MLB package {3 yrs ago} and as I live in Canada I will watch them when they play the Jays and on Fox game of the week and Sunday night baseball BUT I WILL NOT PAY A DIME to watch them anywhere else.

JH should be upset about how longtime fans about the last 6 years but as long as there are fans like you he has nothing to worry about. 84-90 wins again this yr and an early out if we qualify for the post season.

[moonslav59]

2 hours ago, JoeBrady said:

Can the moderator please let Randy know his account has been hacked?  His previous 127 posts were some version of JH being cheap.  The new Randy doesn't seem to care.

LOL

[moonslav59]

42 minutes ago, Randy Red Sox said:

no i am just frustrated at the constant mediocrity. FA apologists like you are just content with it.  I used to live and die on the Sox and watch 90% of their games on MLB package. But as far as I am concerned until JH shows he cares about actually winning again I have cancelled my MLB package {3 yrs ago} and as I live in Canada I will watch them when they play the Jays and on Fox game of the week and Sunday night baseball BUT I WILL NOT PAY A DIME to watch them anywhere else.

JH should be upset about how longtime fans about the last 6 years but as long as there are fans like you he has nothing to worry about. 84-90 wins again this yr and an early out if we qualify for the post season.

"Free Agent Apologist" or did you mean JH apologist?

[Randy Red Sox]

12 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

"Free Agent Apologist" or did you mean JH apologist?

i will let you figure out that one

[vjcsmoke]

Okamoto is off the table now. He went to the Blue Jays for 4 years/60m.

He would have been the cheaper option at 3B.

If the Blue Jays flourish and again go deep into the playoffs with Okamoto playing well and the Red Sox miss out on Bregman, will this be yet another mistake by the Red Sox front office?

After we missed out on Soto I said it would be wise for the Red Sox to trade for Vladimir Guerrero Jr. before he signed an extension. Some people insisted it was better to wait for him to become a free agent. Instead the Jays re-signed him and went to the World Series thanks in part to his power hitting.

I just don't feel this front office is aggressive in acquiring talent to make the team better. At this rate they will keep lowballing Bregman until the cows come home or somebody else signs him.

[moonslav59]

3 minutes ago, Randy Red Sox said:

i will let you figure out that one

Has JH spent or not?

It's not apologizing for him to point that out. I'm not speaking for Joe, but I have pointed out many times, I wish and think he should and could spend more.

I do know he spent way more than previous owners.

[JoeBrady]

50 minutes ago, vjcsmoke said:

I said it would be wise for the Red Sox to trade for Vladimir Guerrero Jr.

I'm not sure you can make a case for trading for a player that was never traded.

[JoeBrady]

50 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I'm not speaking for Joe,

I'm on record many times that JH should spend to a dollar of the second tier.  I just see no point of complaining about it.  And I am going to enjoy the season regardless if he spend $240M or $260M.

[moonslav59]

22 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

I'm not sure you can make a case for trading for a player that was never traded.

We'd never have paid him what he got.

The whole argument is that JH will not spend, so how would this happen?

Just sign Suarez and trade and OF+ Crawford for a much better SP, and let the season begin with us as a top 5-6 MLB team on paper.

[moonslav59]

Maybe I get surprised, but I doubt we sign Bregman or Bichette, so I only see one FA that seems good enough and maybe cheap enough to get: E Suarez.

That keeps Mayer and Romy at 2B.

Maybe trade for a SP'er or find a way to dump Yoshida and save $4-6M a year to help pay for the tax Suarez caused JH to pay.

[Randy Red Sox]

9 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Maybe I get surprised, but I doubt we sign Bregman or Bichette, so I only see one FA that seems good enough and maybe cheap enough to get: E Suarez.

That keeps Mayer and Romy at 2B.

Maybe trade for a SP'er or find a way to dump Yoshida and save $4-6M a year to help pay for the tax Suarez caused JH to pay.

Sox are not signing Suarez or Bichette.  There is about a 20% chance that they are able to wait out Bregman since he seems to want too return.  There is also no chance of adding a #2 SP either.

[Randy Red Sox]

10 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Has JH spent or not?

It's not apologizing for him to point that out. I'm not speaking for Joe, but I have pointed out many times, I wish and think he should and could spend more.

I do know he spent way more than previous owners.

Given that Henry has owned the team since the very early 2000's that is a weak argument.

[JoeBrady]

1 hour ago, Randy Red Sox said:

Given that Henry has owned the team since the very early 2000's that is a weak argument.

Given that we have 4 WSC since the early 2000's, I feel pretty okay about that argument.

[moonslav59]

4 hours ago, Randy Red Sox said:

Sox are not signing Suarez or Bichette.  There is about a 20% chance that they are able to wait out Bregman since he seems to want too return.  There is also no chance of adding a #2 SP either.

If money and years is what limits us to 20% on Bregman, why wouldn't Suarez be a 25% chance?

He will get less AAV and less years- maybe even a 2 year deal.

I agree our chances on Bichette are very low, but he does fit the age range for longer term offers.

[moonslav59]

4 hours ago, Randy Red Sox said:

Given that Henry has owned the team since the very early 2000's that is a weak argument.

He has spent recently. He has a long history of splurging, including from the Devers extension to today, as well as pull-backs on spending, sometimes right after a ring season.

Yes, the pull back after 2018 was longer than any other, and his aversion to any FA large and long deals is reaching a record length, but his extension lengths and numbers have soared.

To say he's "cheap" and "isn't spending a lot" is the weak argument, here.

The whole revenue number vs spending number argument has meaning and merit, but is that ratio much different from what it was in 2004, 2007, 2013 and even 2018? My guess is it is not much different.

The difference is that a handful of other teams have switched into overdrive on spending AND we've made some poor choices on the moderate & major FA spending we have made, When you actually look at our largest FA contracts since JD and Nate, an argument can easily be made that more spending is NOT the answer. We suck at it!

Okay, blame JH for hiring Bloom & to a lesser extent Brez, but other than the 3-4 year lul in spending, JH has spent and spent a lot. We are 8th, now, and that still includes wasted money on Yoshida and Hicks- both with 2 years left. The no long term deal mandate has handcuffed our GMs, for sure, and that is on JH, but even that area has seen a major change since 2019-2023. While we haven't seen a Story or Masa type signing since Masa, we have seen much higher AAVs given out, even when factoring inflation. Again, this is not "apologizing" for JH. It's just stating facts. I, too wish, he'd allow more spending and longer deals, but I do shudder at the though of another Masa or even Story. Even the Sale extension sucked.

Yes, what happened in 2003 and 2004 matters little, now, but let's look at this 6 year period spoken about:

2019: The Sale and Nate extensions kicked in and Betts & Bogey made $32M in arbs, combined. Porcello was on his last year at over $21M. We failed to bring back Kimbrel & Kelly and basically did nothing in FA signings, except re-signing Pearce and accepting the Nunez option. We spent $6.3M on FAs. NEW FA money. (We lost a lot of contracts over these years- far more than we added.)

2020: about $10M (6 Martin Perez, 2.9 Peraza & 1.5 Lucroy)

2021: about $25M total (10 Richards, 6 Kike, 5 Martin II, 3 Renfroe) We also traded for Ottavino's $8M deal.

2022: about $47M total (22 Story, 7 Wacha, 6 Paxton, 5 Hill, 4 Diekman & 3 Strahm) We also brought Kike back with an extension at $7M x 2 and traded for JBJ's contract. A measurable uptick in spending began.
 

2023: $61M (18 x 5 Masa, 16 x 2 Jansen, 10 Kluber, 9 x 2 Martin, 7 Duvall) plus the Kike $10M x 1 extension and $3M Mondesi deal, (This started the 2 year deals & was the last longterm FA deal given.) Two years in a row with a long term deal signed and further uptick in new spending.

2024: $23M (18M x 2 Giolito, 5 x 2 Hendriks) plus 6 in the O'Neill trade. The $31M x 10 Devers extension began. There was a big drop in FA signings, but the Devers extension kept the spending close to 2023 and still more than 2022.

There was a clear leveling off of spending from '22-'24 after the horrific "new" spending record from 2019-2021.

Now, look at 2025 and 2026:

2025: $83M total (40 Bregman, 21 Buehler, 11 Chapman, 9 x 2 Sandoval, 2 Wilson) plus $9M x 6 years and $6M x 8 extensions for Bello & Rafaela. That's almost $100M of new spending. Is that a Sox record?

(Yes, we then dumped the Devers deal, so go ahead and subtract $30M, and it's still $70M- still way more than the '22-24 era.)

2026: Zero on FAs, so far. Contracts via trade or extensions given:

28.3 x 6 Crochet

21.3 x Contreras

21.0 x 1 w option Sonny Gray

16.3 Anthony

13.3 Chapman w option

10.2 x 2 Hicks

7.5 x 8 Campbell

That's over $115M spent on trades and extensions, not counting the $20M STL is paying for Gray.

Go ahead and say we've made mistakes in spending and trades, but can we stop saying we aren't spending money?

Of course, net new spending needs to be offset by lost contracts, and we've lost some big ones, most without replacing or coming close to replacing in kind. The fact that our two biggest FA deals given from 2020 to 2025 we largely busts (Masa & Story) hurt like hell, as they were our largest efforts at replacing lost talent.. Had both done very well, we'd probably still have missed the playoffs in '22, '23 and '24, so it wasn't enough- agreed.

Let's look at opening day budgets since JH took over. We saw a +$27M from 2003 to 2004 and a ring.

Then, 2 years of cuts.

$23M more for 2007 and a ring.

Then, 2 years of cuts.

$47M more for 2010 and about the same for 2011 and 2012. We saw a cut for 2013 by over $20M, but won a ring. No increase in 2014.

The 5 year era of glory spending began in 2015: 184>197>197>234>236. This was the actual era posters long for, as the era from 2003 to 2014 was up and down spending. The period you speak of was 6-10 years ago, not 15-20 years ago.

The 2020 COVID season as a disaster of horrific proportions.  

2021 was $56M behind 2019's opening day budget! That was a deep hole dug, so increases after that must be taken in that context.

2022 saw $26M added ($30M end of year) but that is not restoring the $56M lost.

2023 saw a drop of $25M and that was unacceptable. JH deserved the abuse. 

2024 saw another $10M cut, after the "full throttle comment" fans became justifiably irate. Before inflation, this opening day budget was $65M less than 2019. there is no comparison to the cuts made in the early 2000's.   No sugar coating. No JH apologies, here.

2025 saw a $24M increase. Kind of a drop in the bucket. We started the season at $195M and ended at $204, but the tax line was $249M, which is more than 2018 and 2019. Those are facts not apologies.

Spotrac says we are aat $235M, now, which is about the same as 2018 and 2019, without adjustments for inflation. We  are one big signing away from being very similar to the "glory era" level of spending.

We are spending and spending a lot.

 

[Old Red]

19 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

He has spent recently. He has a long history of splurging, including from the Devers extension to today, as well as pull-backs on spending, sometimes right after a ring season.

Yes, the pull back after 2018 was longer than any other, and his aversion to any FA large and long deals is reaching a record length, but his extension lengths and numbers have soared.

To say he's "cheap" and "isn't spending a lot" is the weak argument, here.

The whole revenue number vs spending number argument has meaning and merit, but is that ratio much different from what it was in 2004, 2007, 2013 and even 2018? My guess is it is not much different.

The difference is that a handful of other teams have switched into overdrive on spending AND we've made some poor choices on the moderate & major FA spending we have made, When you actually look at our largest FA contracts since JD and Nate, an argument can easily be made that more spending is NOT the answer. We suck at it!

Okay, blame JH for hiring Bloom & to a lesser extent Brez, but other than the 3-4 year lul in spending, JH has spent and spent a lot. We are 8th, now, and that still includes wasted money on Yoshida and Hicks- both with 2 years left. The no long term deal mandate has handcuffed our GMs, for sure, and that is on JH, but even that area has seen a major change since 2019-2023. While we haven't seen a Story or Masa type signing since Masa, we have seen much higher AAVs given out, even when factoring inflation. Again, this is not "apologizing" for JH. It's just stating facts. I, too wish, he'd allow more spending and longer deals, but I do shudder at the though of another Masa or even Story. Even the Sale extension sucked.

Yes, what happened in 2003 and 2004 matters little, now, but let's look at this 6 year period spoken about:

2019: The Sale and Nate extensions kicked in and Betts & Bogey made $32M in arbs, combined. Porcello was on his last year at over $21M. We failed to bring back Kimbrel & Kelly and basically did nothing in FA signings, except re-signing Pearce and accepting the Nunez option. We spent $6.3M on FAs. NEW FA money. (We lost a lot of contracts over these years- far more than we added.)

2020: about $10M (6 Martin Perez, 2.9 Peraza & 1.5 Lucroy)

2021: about $25M total (10 Richards, 6 Kike, 5 Martin II, 3 Renfroe) We also traded for Ottavino's $8M deal.

2022: about $47M total (22 Story, 7 Wacha, 6 Paxton, 5 Hill, 4 Diekman & 3 Strahm) We also brought Kike back with an extension at $7M x 2 and traded for JBJ's contract. A measurable uptick in spending began.
 

2023: $61M (18 x 5 Masa, 16 x 2 Jansen, 10 Kluber, 9 x 2 Martin, 7 Duvall) plus the Kike $10M x 1 extension and $3M Mondesi deal, (This started the 2 year deals & was the last longterm FA deal given.) Two years in a row with a long term deal signed and further uptick in new spending.

2024: $23M (18M x 2 Giolito, 5 x 2 Hendriks) plus 6 in the O'Neill trade. The $31M x 10 Devers extension began. There was a big drop in FA signings, but the Devers extension kept the spending close to 2023 and still more than 2022.

There was a clear leveling off of spending from '22-'24 after the horrific "new" spending record from 2019-2021.

Now, look at 2025 and 2026:

2025: $83M total (40 Bregman, 21 Buehler, 11 Chapman, 9 x 2 Sandoval, 2 Wilson) plus $9M x 6 years and $6M x 8 extensions for Bello & Rafaela. That's almost $100M of new spending. Is that a Sox record?

(Yes, we then dumped the Devers deal, so go ahead and subtract $30M, and it's still $70M- still way more than the '22-24 era.)

2026: Zero on FAs, so far. Contracts via trade or extensions given:

28.3 x 6 Crochet

21.3 x Contreras

21.0 x 1 w option Sonny Gray

16.3 Anthony

13.3 Chapman w option

10.2 x 2 Hicks

7.5 x 8 Campbell

That's over $115M spent on trades and extensions, not counting the $20M STL is paying for Gray.

Go ahead and say we've made mistakes in spending and trades, but can we stop saying we aren't spending money?

Of course, net new spending needs to be offset by lost contracts, and we've lost some big ones, most without replacing or coming close to replacing in kind. The fact that our two biggest FA deals given from 2020 to 2025 we largely busts (Masa & Story) hurt like hell, as they were our largest efforts at replacing lost talent.. Had both done very well, we'd probably still have missed the playoffs in '22, '23 and '24, so it wasn't enough- agreed.

Let's look at opening day budgets since JH took over. We saw a +$27M from 2003 to 2004 and a ring.

Then, 2 years of cuts.

$23M more for 2007 and a ring.

Then, 2 years of cuts.

$47M more for 2010 and about the same for 2011 and 2012. We saw a cut for 2013 by over $20M, but won a ring. No increase in 2014.

The 5 year era of glory spending began in 2015: 184>197>197>234>236. This was the actual era posters long for, as the era from 2003 to 2014 was up and down spending. The period you speak of was 6-10 years ago, not 15-20 years ago.

The 2020 COVID season as a disaster of horrific proportions.  

2021 was $56M behind 2019's opening day budget! That was a deep hole dug, so increases after that must be taken in that context.

2022 saw $26M added ($30M end of year) but that is not restoring the $56M lost.

2023 saw a drop of $25M and that was unacceptable. JH deserved the abuse. 

2024 saw another $10M cut, after the "full throttle comment" fans became justifiably irate. Before inflation, this opening day budget was $65M less than 2019. there is no comparison to the cuts made in the early 2000's.   No sugar coating. No JH apologies, here.

2025 saw a $24M increase. Kind of a drop in the bucket. We started the season at $195M and ended at $204, but the tax line was $249M, which is more than 2018 and 2019. Those are facts not apologies.

Spotrac says we are aat $235M, now, which is about the same as 2018 and 2019, without adjustments for inflation. We  are one big signing away from being very similar to the "glory era" level of spending.

We are spending and spending a lot.

 

If the Red Sox had a dollar for every time you said you’re not defending, or apologizing for JH, or Bloom back in the day they would have enough money by now to have afforded both Flintstone, and Alonso.🤭

[moonslav59]

11 minutes ago, Old Red said:

If the Red Sox had a dollar for every time you said you’re not defending, or apologizing for JH, or Bloom back in the day they would have enough money by now to have afforded both Flintstone, and Alonso.🤭

I shouldn't have to say it. If we had a dollar for every comment that misrepresents stating facts as apologizing or defending, we could have afforded Soto and Tucker.

[JoeBrady]

57 minutes ago, Old Red said:

If the Red Sox had a dollar for every time you said you’re not defending, or apologizing for JH

 

57 minutes ago, Old Red said:

If the Red Sox had a dollar for every time you said you’re not defending, or apologizing for JH, or Bloom back in the day they would have enough money by now to have afforded both Flintstone, and Alonso.🤭

If I had a dollar for every time you mentioned the name Inepstein or Francoma, I'd own the RS.  And both guys will be 1st ballot HOFers.

[moonslav59]

47 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

 

If I had a dollar for every time you mentioned the name Inepstein or Francoma, I'd own the RS.  And both guys will be 1st ballot HOFers.

Anyone remember softlaw calling posters "Theo apologists" and "pink hat fans?"

[JoeBrady]

13 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Anyone remember softlaw calling posters "Theo apologists" and "pink hat fans?"

Were there two 'Laws'?  I remember one of them posting these 1,000 word screeds that he must have stayed up all night writing.  I remember thinking how badly his head must have exploded when we won the WS in 2007.  Of course, a few of them survived long enough to complain about 2013 and 2018, and 2026, 2027, 2028, etc.

[harmony]

Is Wilyer Abreu back from Venezuela after winning a home run derby in Valencia last month?

https://worldbaseball.com/the-latest-mlb-players-stuck-in-venezuela-after-maduros-capture-future-of-lvbp-playoffs-serie-de-las-americas-uncertain/

https://worldbaseball.com/amid-military-action-by-the-u-s-venezuelas-lvbp-playoffs-scheduled-to-continue-tonight/

https://bosoxinjection.com/red-sox-news-wilyer-abreu-home-run-derby-kristian-campbell-offseason-update#:~:text=Prospects-,Red Sox News: Wilyer Abreu Home Run Derby%2C Kristian Campbell,Francisco Rentería and Yasiel Puig.

The Milwaukee Brewers reportedly are working to bring rising star Jackson Chourio and others back from Venezuela:

https://heavy.com/sports/mlb/milwaukee-brewers/chourio-brothers-shining-amid-venezuela-uncertainty/

The projected Red Sox lineup has three Venezuelans in Abreu, Willson Contreras and Carlos Narvaez.

[Randy Red Sox]

8 hours ago, JoeBrady said:

Given that we have 4 WSC since the early 2000's, I feel pretty okay about that argument.

none since 2018 and only 2 postseason appearances. Do they WS titles in the early 2000's give JH a pass for as long as he owns the team ?

[Randy Red Sox]

4 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

He has spent recently. He has a long history of splurging, including from the Devers extension to today, as well as pull-backs on spending, sometimes right after a ring season.

Yes, the pull back after 2018 was longer than any other, and his aversion to any FA large and long deals is reaching a record length, but his extension lengths and numbers have soared.

To say he's "cheap" and "isn't spending a lot" is the weak argument, here.

The whole revenue number vs spending number argument has meaning and merit, but is that ratio much different from what it was in 2004, 2007, 2013 and even 2018? My guess is it is not much different.

The difference is that a handful of other teams have switched into overdrive on spending AND we've made some poor choices on the moderate & major FA spending we have made, When you actually look at our largest FA contracts since JD and Nate, an argument can easily be made that more spending is NOT the answer. We suck at it!

Okay, blame JH for hiring Bloom & to a lesser extent Brez, but other than the 3-4 year lul in spending, JH has spent and spent a lot. We are 8th, now, and that still includes wasted money on Yoshida and Hicks- both with 2 years left. The no long term deal mandate has handcuffed our GMs, for sure, and that is on JH, but even that area has seen a major change since 2019-2023. While we haven't seen a Story or Masa type signing since Masa, we have seen much higher AAVs given out, even when factoring inflation. Again, this is not "apologizing" for JH. It's just stating facts. I, too wish, he'd allow more spending and longer deals, but I do shudder at the though of another Masa or even Story. Even the Sale extension sucked.

Yes, what happened in 2003 and 2004 matters little, now, but let's look at this 6 year period spoken about:

2019: The Sale and Nate extensions kicked in and Betts & Bogey made $32M in arbs, combined. Porcello was on his last year at over $21M. We failed to bring back Kimbrel & Kelly and basically did nothing in FA signings, except re-signing Pearce and accepting the Nunez option. We spent $6.3M on FAs. NEW FA money. (We lost a lot of contracts over these years- far more than we added.)

2020: about $10M (6 Martin Perez, 2.9 Peraza & 1.5 Lucroy)

2021: about $25M total (10 Richards, 6 Kike, 5 Martin II, 3 Renfroe) We also traded for Ottavino's $8M deal.

2022: about $47M total (22 Story, 7 Wacha, 6 Paxton, 5 Hill, 4 Diekman & 3 Strahm) We also brought Kike back with an extension at $7M x 2 and traded for JBJ's contract. A measurable uptick in spending began.
 

2023: $61M (18 x 5 Masa, 16 x 2 Jansen, 10 Kluber, 9 x 2 Martin, 7 Duvall) plus the Kike $10M x 1 extension and $3M Mondesi deal, (This started the 2 year deals & was the last longterm FA deal given.) Two years in a row with a long term deal signed and further uptick in new spending.

2024: $23M (18M x 2 Giolito, 5 x 2 Hendriks) plus 6 in the O'Neill trade. The $31M x 10 Devers extension began. There was a big drop in FA signings, but the Devers extension kept the spending close to 2023 and still more than 2022.

There was a clear leveling off of spending from '22-'24 after the horrific "new" spending record from 2019-2021.

Now, look at 2025 and 2026:

2025: $83M total (40 Bregman, 21 Buehler, 11 Chapman, 9 x 2 Sandoval, 2 Wilson) plus $9M x 6 years and $6M x 8 extensions for Bello & Rafaela. That's almost $100M of new spending. Is that a Sox record?

(Yes, we then dumped the Devers deal, so go ahead and subtract $30M, and it's still $70M- still way more than the '22-24 era.)

2026: Zero on FAs, so far. Contracts via trade or extensions given:

28.3 x 6 Crochet

21.3 x Contreras

21.0 x 1 w option Sonny Gray

16.3 Anthony

13.3 Chapman w option

10.2 x 2 Hicks

7.5 x 8 Campbell

That's over $115M spent on trades and extensions, not counting the $20M STL is paying for Gray.

Go ahead and say we've made mistakes in spending and trades, but can we stop saying we aren't spending money?

Of course, net new spending needs to be offset by lost contracts, and we've lost some big ones, most without replacing or coming close to replacing in kind. The fact that our two biggest FA deals given from 2020 to 2025 we largely busts (Masa & Story) hurt like hell, as they were our largest efforts at replacing lost talent.. Had both done very well, we'd probably still have missed the playoffs in '22, '23 and '24, so it wasn't enough- agreed.

Let's look at opening day budgets since JH took over. We saw a +$27M from 2003 to 2004 and a ring.

Then, 2 years of cuts.

$23M more for 2007 and a ring.

Then, 2 years of cuts.

$47M more for 2010 and about the same for 2011 and 2012. We saw a cut for 2013 by over $20M, but won a ring. No increase in 2014.

The 5 year era of glory spending began in 2015: 184>197>197>234>236. This was the actual era posters long for, as the era from 2003 to 2014 was up and down spending. The period you speak of was 6-10 years ago, not 15-20 years ago.

The 2020 COVID season as a disaster of horrific proportions.  

2021 was $56M behind 2019's opening day budget! That was a deep hole dug, so increases after that must be taken in that context.

2022 saw $26M added ($30M end of year) but that is not restoring the $56M lost.

2023 saw a drop of $25M and that was unacceptable. JH deserved the abuse. 

2024 saw another $10M cut, after the "full throttle comment" fans became justifiably irate. Before inflation, this opening day budget was $65M less than 2019. there is no comparison to the cuts made in the early 2000's.   No sugar coating. No JH apologies, here.

2025 saw a $24M increase. Kind of a drop in the bucket. We started the season at $195M and ended at $204, but the tax line was $249M, which is more than 2018 and 2019. Those are facts not apologies.

Spotrac says we are aat $235M, now, which is about the same as 2018 and 2019, without adjustments for inflation. We  are one big signing away from being very similar to the "glory era" level of spending.

We are spending and spending a lot.

 

this is a pointless argument Moon. You bounce all over the place. In one post you are critical of JH not spending enough and then your very next post you are saying he spends plenty. I do agree that we have made poor choices on our FA signings as a rule but don't throw Hicks into your argument. Sox were forced into taking his contract as a payoff for offloading the entire Devers money. I watched Hicks stink in Toronto and said from day 1 I hated adding him. Like Yoshida no-one will take either.

[Old Red]

10 minutes ago, Randy Red Sox said:

this is a pointless argument Moon. You bounce all over the place. In one post you are critical of JH not spending enough and then your very next post you are saying he spends plenty. I do agree that we have made poor choices on our FA signings as a rule but don't throw Hicks into your argument. Sox were forced into taking his contract as a payoff for offloading the entire Devers money. I watched Hicks stink in Toronto and said from day 1 I hated adding him. Like Yoshida no-one will take either.

I can’t believe his 1000 word column didn’t convince you. YOU are right about being all over the place, but remember again he’s not defending, or apologizing for JH. Seems I heard the word SHAM coming from one poster more than once on here though. 🤫

[Randy Red Sox]

17 minutes ago, Old Red said:

I can’t believe his 1000 word column didn’t convince you. YOU are right about being all over the place, but remember again he’s not defending, or apologizing for JH. Seems I heard the word SHAM coming from one poster more than once on here though. 🤫

i don't have an issue with Moon.  Seems like a decent guy but yeah some of posts are a bit long. I generally don't read all of them as a result.

[moonslav59]

56 minutes ago, Randy Red Sox said:

none since 2018 and only 2 postseason appearances. Do they WS titles in the early 2000's give JH a pass for as long as he owns the team ?

I can see some thinking yes.

2018 seems long ago, but there are 30 teams in MLB- maybe 10 that are really building for a strong chance, e very year.

The history of 2 year lulls in sending seemed okay. Then, he went 4 years, and it's the firing squad for him.

[moonslav59]

2 hours ago, JoeBrady said:

Were there two 'Laws'?  I remember one of them posting these 1,000 word screeds that he must have stayed up all night writing.  I remember thinking how badly his head must have exploded when we won the WS in 2007.  Of course, a few of them survived long enough to complain about 2013 and 2018, and 2026, 2027, 2028, etc.

I think there were two. I joined the site after one had left.

I remember he joined forces with me on my "No Manny-No Rings" thread that went over 10,000 posts long, and I agreed with him on "Jake's" poor defense early in his career, but there was little else we were even close on. He despised Theo and anyone who defended him.

The 2007 ring season blew him apart, but of course, he'd never admit it.

[moonslav59]

44 minutes ago, Old Red said:

I can’t believe his 1000 word column didn’t convince you. YOU are right about being all over the place, but remember again he’s not defending, or apologizing for JH. Seems I heard the word SHAM coming from one poster more than once on here though. 🤫

I've been highly critical of JH and team management, but I won't lie and say he doesn't spend to make my point.

It's ok to hold both views.