Bellhorn04
-
Posts
54,666 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
75
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
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by Bellhorn04
-
We don't. The stories that we have to free up more payroll are ridiculous.
-
I agree with most of your post but I disagree about 2021. It's never a bad thing when you come close to the World Series. They could have had the big fire sale in 2022 if they wanted. Like you have said in the past, the worst thing to be is mediocre. The Sox proved that in '22 and '23. Bloom got completely boggled by what to do at the deadline both years.
-
He was great in September, no? .571 OPSa
-
Tough question, of course. I guess I'd be in on either one of them up to about 175 mill. If Snell or Monty are outrageously overpriced, the trade has to materialize. What dampens the trade prospects is that they have reportedly put the top 3 off limits. If they don't pull the trigger on any of the above, then we come back to why the hell weren't we in on Gray or E-Rod, or what the hell was the strategy coming into the offseason? If they don't pull the trigger they are going to look like lying/incompetent bozos. Just my take, but I have a lot of company based on my travels around Soxdom on the internet.
-
-Can't find anything about Cora/E-Rod fallout. Is it supposed to be about the Houston game where Cora got upset with E-Rod for showing up Correa? That was just Cora doing his job and I don't see anything about E-Rod having a problem with it. -I started a thread questioning what's going on with all the unsigned free agents. It's definitely concerning for various reasons. -If the Sox sign Snell or Monty or make a trade for a legit starter the complaining goes away. If they don't, it's a brutal and inexplicable failure. They have the need and they have the money.
-
He means Hitch. To each their own, of course.
-
Cot's has us at 190.5.
-
Sounds good to me.
-
Pitchers are risky investments, period. We're no good at drafting and developing them, so we have to sign them or trade for them.
-
Based on what?
-
The Espinoza trade was basically a deadline trade. Buchholz had gone down. The Sox were in position to make the playoffs but needed a starter desperately. Pomeranz was available.
-
Gray E-Rod Imanaga seemed interesting at the price There's been a lot of Goldilocks/sour grapes going on. At the start of FA season it seemed like there were plenty of worthwhile targets. If we thought we were in on Snell or Montgomery we'd feel differently. You're saying you're fine with them not being on the Sox, but they're much better than anything we have. When people say things like that I just don't get it.
-
Well, if they don't add a legit starting pitcher by Opening Day, this offseason has to be deemed a colossal failure by someone.
-
But they apparently aren't letting Breslow spend much this offseason or letting him trade one of the top 3 prospects. So he's very limited in what he can do. It's ownership that's the problem. Changing CBO's won't change that.
-
I know. But most of the top starting FA pitchers have signed, and we're getting a steady stream of stories that the Red Sox don't plan to go after Snell or Montgomery and don't plan to make a trade that involves Mayer, Anthony or Teel. So I'm depressed.
-
Meanwhile, the 2024 Red Sox shape up as being thoroughly mediocre and boring.
-
We all know the only pitchers fans pay to see are the Aces.
-
Debatable. His last 2 contracts have added up to 120 mill for 7 years, which isn't chump change. He's arguably a guy with star-level talent, whose only downside is the obvious one.
-
Don't forget the other Nate.
-
Sure. Of course a lot of the fans at any particular game are season ticket holders, non-STH hardcore types who attend a lot of games, and tourists who buy their tickets based on when they're in town. One question that spins out of this is whether teams that win the title tend to have big stars or not. My guess is they usually do. Red Sox champs of this century certainly did.
-
Like I said, we want both. We want a winning team with some stars on it. We're a little greedy, I guess. A faceless team that wins is preferable to a team of stars that loses - if that's your main point, I agree.
-
It's both. Winning games and winning the championship are the bottom line, but our experience as Sox fans wouldn't be the same without the stars, from Yaz/Rice/Luis to Manny/Ortiz/Pedro.
-
I don't think there's much evidence to support the idea that playing experience is a plus in a CBO. If you run through the list of the most successful CBOs in history, I don't think you'll find very many former players. I am suffering from confirmation bias these days, I will freely admit that. When it comes to Breslow's hiring, the thing that stands out is that the Red Sox ended up with a much smaller field of candidates than they expected, which was concerning and frankly embarrassing in itself. Then they choose a guy who is a total unknown quantity as a CBO, just as the previous guy was. Then they tell us full throttle and follow it up with a stunningly inactive offseason. It's hard to get a sense they have any clue what they're doing any more.
-
And it might be screwing the pooch and killing the golden goose, for some more animal-related metaphors. It's not really just hyperbole any more that the Sox are becoming an organization that's not well thought of around the game. The poor selection of candidates for CBO cemented that reality.
-
I think you're reading too much in there. I consider myself a cerebral type, so I don't think of it as an insult. And I thought Theo Epstein was cerebral and obviously very successful. All I'm saying is that it might be questionable to fire someone and then replace them with someone who checks so many of the same boxes.
