sk7326

Dalbec has a better approach than Middlebrooks ever did ... but with that many holes in your swing, approach stops mattering

Law's updated Top 60 based on midseason check-in and prospects being called up https://theathletic.com/3461142/2022/08/01/mlb-top-prospects-2022-minor-leaguers/ Preamble 15. Marcelo Mayer (up from 18) 31. Triston Casas (56 previously)

It is. Really 1B has been the maddening one for me, only because the offensive threshhold was so high. Of course, now that I said that watch Dalbec go on a 2 month heater again.

Yeah, Mookie is a separate thing - it is disturbing, but that is disturbing relative to ownership priorities. Once ownership decided to fire sale David Price along with dealing Mookie, Bloom made a pretty good baseball deal all things considered. It's NOT sufficient value for a player like Mookie - but that horse left the barn and was at least two counties away by then Benintendi's value had soured, and ex ante Cordero was enough of a high ceiling lottery ticket to try, but it has worked out like most lottery tickets. The thing with Bradley is that the first time he was here, he combined terrific defense with wildly inconsistent offense, but at least enough peaks to pay for the valleys. But the guy who came back was a guy who struck out less, but also worked counts less and made less good contact. So, woof. That said, both Binelas and Hamilton have shown flashes of interesting somethings. But clearly the Brewers have gotten the best of it. I know we have talked about the Tampa Bay best practices and such. But one of those is fielding the ball, and one thing that has been true in Bloom's time is that the Sox have been very bad at that. It's even starker noting that of course they traded their best defensive outfielder to the Dodgers. Indeed the last two years have been bad enough that it raises questions whether it is purely a lack of talent or whether the defensive positioning algorithms the team has are effective.

That is fair ... they probably could get something better than you'd expect if they took calls for Schreiber ... good reliever, lots of team control. If you could turn Workman and Hembree's entrails into a decent starting pitcher, who knows?

To get a good hitter for free??? (or a non-premium prospect)

Ownership drives the train here - in terms of what sort of team they want back. In 2014 ownership wanted a major league level return for Lester so that was the trade Cherington made.

He has been a homerun machine ... but he also has had an excellent ground ball rate and his strikeouts and walks are still pretty good. If his warts offer enough for a reasonable contract I'd do it. Like 3 years 40-50 million is kind of okay?

Getting some high-A lottery tickets with upside along with at least some "likely average regular" potential would be fine. Eovaldi has been one of the better starters in the league when healthy - I think he could get something decent. JD might have some market but the Sox might have to eat some salary. But he is still a professional bat.

Bloom has done a good job - the team has gotten a lot of pitching in the org. But I think the org is maintaining an attitude about contracts which is prudent on paper but not great in real life for a franchise like Boston. But the story this season is that the Red Sox have gotten absolutely nothing about of positions where you expect offensive production, and of course the health of the starters has been a disaster. Signing high upside guys with some medical risk is a good way to build a rotation cheaply - but it is not often that all of the medical risks crap out at the same time. The sad thing was that two month stretch where Pivetta teased us before turning back into a pumpkin.

It is also worth noting that Bradley has been absolutely terrible ... in his first incarnation, his terrific defense was augmented by decent production, which was annoying because it was decent with extremely high variability. Basically, offensively - he was a working class Adam Dunn. But he basically has totally forgotten how to hit at this point. This year he has cut down his strikeouts - but he also cut down everything positive he did too (walking, hitting the ball hard)

Both of those things are true.

Might have actually been good enough to keep Whitlock in the rotation.

Indeed - but it does keep a tradition the owners (across baseball) have had treating the luxury tax as a de facto cap. It is why the players have the worst salary deal in the big North American sports - something which the new CBA helps somewhat but not at that level.

I am all for it. The nice thing is that the dude throws tons of strikes. Tanner Houck, M.D., I am sort of conflicted. I think he has done a good job working around his arm slot split issues - but I am skeptical of him longer term being able to get lefties out consistently enough in the rotation.

Right - I am not saying Bogaerts and Story have been bad ... but the team's offensive expectations were built around them being excellent and that did not materialize, and particularly with the giant sucking sound at 1B and the OF corners it just made it all look worse. I'd also add the Sox have also been a bad defensive team, and have to figure how much of that is talent vs their positioning algorithms

I think the season has come down to a few factors 1. Letting Schwarber walk was perfectly fine, but they have ended up getting exactly nothing from what is supposed to be one of the bedrock offensive positions in baseball 2. Their offense was predicated on the middle infield being superior and that has not happened 3. Injury risks getting injured. Indeed, Wacha has been good for them and the team has really missed him. Schreiber has been one of the best reliever in baseball. 4. The team was right to try Whitlock in the rotation, but it did hurt the bullpen and the ripple effect is what it was. 5. Really a lot of this hinged on Sale's health and a real sad trombone there. Really the last few seasons (2021 aside which was a nice surprise) feel like baseball cosmic punishment for that Sale extension, which looked like a car accident in slow motion at the time.

100%

I am actually lukewarm on keeping Bogaerts - I totally understand letting him get to FA. That said, I think fans might be using Bogaerts as a proxy for the very real question as to whether ownership will ever actually retain great players?

I question how avaiable Soto really is btw

I think Eovaldi is clearly the best available "rental starter" for what its worth. There might be some names with more years of control.

They have made some decisions - not to pay Springer or not to pay for Correa. But they paid top dollar for Altuve's prime. The Red Sox with Betts and (fingers crossed this is not true) Devers would be walking away from paying regular prices for the years that you want the star player on your team. For a team with Boston's means, that is not great. The Red Sox have won a lot - honestly it has been because their baseball people HAVE done a great job, sometimes in spite of some of the whiplash at the ownership level.

If the city of Boston could be moved to the West Coast, the Red Sox would be a 110 win team. Boston's record against >.500 teams NYY: 4-6 TOR: 3-10 TB: 2-8 BAL: 3-5 CLE: 4-1 MIN: 2-2 CHW: 2-4 HOU: 2-1 SEA: 2-1 ATL: 1-1 STL: 2-1 12-29 against the East, 27-40 against >.500 teams. I guess a surge is possible - and the team deserves credit for feasting on the dregs of its schedule ... but woof

I think it is clear the rainbow is the Dodgers where they have a rich farm system but can use their financial hammer too. The Dodgers and the Red Sox indeed are both using Tampa Bay organizational best practices. Really, ownership probably gets the lion's share of the blame - not because Henry did not spend money, but because his organizational priorities have fluctuated wildly and at times seems way way too responsive to what talk shows say about the team. After all, the team greenlighted David Price, a deal which went poorly (even acknowleding Price's yeoman work in the 2018 postseason) in some somewhat difficult to anticipate ways (his arm). Ownership greenlighted the Sale extension, a deal which looked shaky as it was happening. At the same time, the team gets weak kneed about paying a superstar for the superstar's superstar years - and then moves him to help get rid of Price. I largely don't blame any of the GMs - they have all done jobs that ownership asked of them. Dombrowski drafted well and did a good job - and he did exactly what ownership wanted him to do. Bloom has done a nice job making some good value signings and bringing in more quality arms than the org has had in a while. Cora is one of the league's best managers - but when you have to negotiate "Eovaldi, a Pavetta hot streak and hope" as your starting pitching, you can only conjure up so much magic. But still, his era will come down to ownership priorities. If the team is not willing to pay Devers superstar prices for his superstar years - a team with Boston's $$ heft - then what are we doing here.

Let's put it this way - given how flaccid the team has looked against the AL East, you have to consider being sellers to some degree. 1. The team has a ready made solution for SS next year on the roster already - and 2B seems like it should be easy enough to source. 2. If the Red Sox want to be aggressive sellers, they can offer the best pitcher (Eovaldi), hitter (JD) and overall player (Bogaerts) that would be available for the deadline. 3. I hope Devers gets figured out. I sort of feel the same way I did there as with Mookie (though to a lesser extent since Betts is a better player). Even fully acknowledging that it is a negotiation, if a big market team gets weak kneed about signing a superstar through a superstar's superstar prime, it's tough to see what we are doing here.