Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

Bellhorn04

Community Moderator
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    54,805

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    76

 Content Type 

Profiles

Boston Red Sox Videos

2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking

Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker

News

2026 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Bellhorn04

  1. Bellhorn04
    Agreed. At this point I feel like all I can do is derive a twisted sort of entertainment from their messaging shenanigans.
  2. Bellhorn04
    As for the delay in trading Betts, I think there's an excellent chance they delayed because they didn't want to impact the decisions of season ticket buyers. Bloom did kind of lie in December when he said there were no plans to trade Betts. I think he phrased it a bit more ambiguously than that, something like, "I'm proceeding on the assumption he will be part of the 2020 team". At that point the media clearly had no idea that the Sox had actually been in discussions to trade Betts at the deadline in 2019.
  3. Bellhorn04
    You're really muddying the waters. Max's statement wasn't about Bloom having to trade Betts to meet Henry's budget, it was about the Red Sox having to trade Betts because they can't compete financially with the Dodgers. I have said repeatedly that it wasn't Bloom's idea to trade Betts. He was just the patsy.
  4. Bellhorn04
    Another heapin' helpin' of ingratiating bafflegab. Sam thinks they're not far way, and they're going to keep trying their darndest, and they're going to be aggressive and explore all avenues to improve, but they also have to stay smart and keep balancing the future with the present. If Sam was being 100% honest he'd admit there's a very strong chance he's going to be saying the same things one year from now. An aggressive questioner unafraid to ask the tough ones would ask Sam why they did so little about the 2024 rotation, why all they did was swap Sale for Giolito and then sat on their hands when Giolito quickly bid arrivederci to the 2024 season!
  5. Bellhorn04
    No one can dispute what actually happened, that's Captain Obvious! Not the point! The dispute can only be about why it happened. My dispute is with Max's take, which is essentially that Betts had to be traded because the Red Sox can't compete financially with the Dodgers. Here's what he said: Betts went to the Dodgers because they could afford the contract he was going to insist upon and the Sox could not.
  6. Bellhorn04
    Personally I'd like to think the CBO would take a deep personal interest in a player he's going to spend over a hundred million on. Bloom was the guy who was supposed to be the architect of the team. This was a pretty big move so he shouldn't just be taking the advice of the scouts. There would be a ton of data and presumably video for him to peruse.
  7. Bellhorn04
    I was surprised Porcello never got signed by anyone after 2020.
  8. Bellhorn04
    "Financial reasons" covers an awful lot of ground. No one disputes that money is the driver in most transactions. But we're talking about whether the Red Sox could have *afforded* a $365 million contract for Betts, and I don't see how that can be disputed. It's much more reasonable to assume that they balked at going higher not because of financial limitations but because of the limits they placed on his value. Max talks like we're Sisters of the Poor compared to the Dodgers. But last I checked the Sox franchise was worth only marginally less than the Dodgers.
  9. Bellhorn04
    Surely the scouts should have realized he was a poor fielder, slow as molasses and with limited power. The whole thing is just embarrassing.
  10. Bellhorn04
    Actually, now that you mention it, I think Bloom made a public statement in December/19 to the effect that he was assuming Betts would be with the Red Sox in 2020. I remember 700hitter being livid because he thought Bloom had lied to season ticket buyers about Betts. Maybe the delay had something to do with that.
  11. Bellhorn04
    Well, they did *reportedly* offer Betts 10 years and 300 million. You don't think they could have managed an additional 2 years and 65 million? I'm calling horsehockey right back at ya.
  12. Bellhorn04
    That'd be another salary dump. If they trade Devers it's a really bad sign for where things are headed. But there's no chance of it happening except here in Wheeler Dealer Fantasy World.
  13. Bellhorn04
    They're planning to explore it, I'm sure.
  14. Bellhorn04
    I agree, we should all be scared about what the 2025 pitching staff is going to look like. My expectations are through the floor.
  15. Bellhorn04
    I think the details on this are pretty sketchy.
  16. Bellhorn04
    Right, but what I'm saying is Betts wasn't traded until February, and I think if they had started shopping him, right after the season we would have known about it. Soto was traded in the first week of December.
  17. Bellhorn04
    Every situation is different, that's for sure. It's not a one size fits all thing. What I've been harping on is that the Sox do not have a surplus of offense - not even close - so to me trading Duran absolutely does not fit their situation.
  18. Bellhorn04
    With the Betts trade I keep coming back to the fact that it didn't seem to develop until really late. Seems like there must have been indecision on the Sox part. (Would that be a surprise?) Whereas the Padres started shopping Soto right away I think. Or maybe it was the inclusion of Price in the deal that minimized our return.
  19. Bellhorn04
    And the Red Sox traded their best player one other time recently when they traded Betts. That was a disaster. There's a whole spectrum of outcomes. San Diego got a phenomenal return for Soto as it turns out, but I don't think it's the norm.
  20. Bellhorn04
    Iglesias had a 3.1 bWAR and 2.5 fWAR in less than half a season this year. That's a little better than utility level. Pretty impressive really and yes a little surprising.
  21. Bellhorn04
    Fun fact: Duran's Offensive Runs Above Regulation per PA was virtually the same in 2024 as it was in 2023. 2024 32.8 in 735 2023 15.9 in 362 It was the improvement in defense (and being on the field) that really boosted his WAR.
  22. Bellhorn04
    Well done. I find little to disagree with, with the possible exception that maybe Houck pitched like a #2 this year based on his WAR at least. But I think it's spot on about Crawford.
  23. Bellhorn04
    2024 was Duran's last year at minimum wage. 2025 is his first of 4 arb years.
  24. Bellhorn04
    What's really surprising to me is anyone thinking that our offense would look fine without him.
  25. Bellhorn04
    They probably don't make a big effort to extend him because he's such a late bloomer - he'll be 32 by the time he's a free agent. They've got him for 4 arb years - prime years age-wise - that's a pretty good situation for the team. Not a lot of risk.
×
×
  • Create New...