moonslav59

Most recent Sox signings for over $15M a year and 3+ years: By timeline (last listed first and by date deal started) Red= SP $31M x 10 Devers (EXT) '24 $18M x 5 Yoshida (+posting fee) '23 $23M x 6 Story '22 None in '21 $29M x 5 Sale (EXT) '20 $20M x 6 Bogey (EXT w opt out) '20 $17M x 4 Eovaldi '19 $22M x 5 JD M '18 None in '17 $31M x 7 Price '16 $20M x 4 Porcello (EXT) '16 $22M x 4 HRam '15 $19M x 5 Sandoval '15 $14M x 8 Pedroia '14 None in '13 $22M x 7 AGon (EXT) '12 $20M x 7 Crawford '11 $17M x 4 Beckett (EXT) '11 $17M x 5 Lackey '10 None in '09 Adjusted for inflation: $13M x 3 Lowell (EXT) '08 $14M x 5 JD Drew '07 $13M x 4 Papi (EXT) '07 $9M x 6 Dice K '07 (+ massive fee) I'll stop at '07 but mention Manny $20M x 8 in '01 and $13M x 7 Pedro in '98 (EXT)

I would say we'll make a trade, but I have no expectations of anything good happening.

How many scouts rely on watching TV to make evaluations of player's skills? Hell, they rely more on radar guns and stats like On base % than TV highlights.

Yes, indeed. They do use some other data, like how hard the ball was hit and how far from the fielder it was hit, but yes, eye tests by people watching ever play of every games (at the ball parks)and entering calibrated data into a formula beats one guy watching most of the Sox games on TV.

Has it really come down to Stroman or bust?

We are getting closer to the point where we say, "Then, there were none."

LOL. It's funny how things like that are all but forgotten, now.

The thing is, the obvious ball between the legs of a throw off the mark is not just noticed with the eye test, but also every single defensive metric and even fldg%. Nothing is gained with the eye test on those plays. It's the range plays, the difficult and semi-difficult plays that are hard to judge from a TV. If one OF'er consistently gets a great break and takes the exact right angle nearly every time, it's hard to see that on TV. We see him running hard and catching or missing the ball. When the opposite type OF'er goes after a ball that the previous OF'er catches easily or maybe spectacularly, we might not even notice it could have been caught. Maybe he has to dive to make a catch the other guy glides to an easily makes the out. We might even think the guy who took the wrong angle and made the diving catch is the better defender, because he made the highlight reel.

I do think watching nearly every game of one team does give the TV viewer a pretty good idea of who is good- bad, great or crappy, but just like stats and metrics, it is flawed, for many of the reasons you mention. My biggest beef with "eye test" proponents is that Horrible, bad, okay, good and great are all relative terms in MLB. I'll use the defense of Bogey as the example, Bogey is a damn good fielder compared to everyone who every played or tried to play baseball, but in MLB he can be viewed as anywhere from near average to bottom tier. While it might be true, in our own mind that Bogey is a "good fielder," what good does that label mean, if 20-28 SSs are better than him? Is that really "good?" Now, the next point: no single person watched nearly every play of every team, so how can we determine just how Bogey compares to other SSs? We simply cannot by using only the eye test. If we watch nearly every Sox game and just a few other games, we may not even see some SSs play, at all. Others, we may see 3-6 games, each. A few others more than a dozen games, tops. While metrics are highly flawed, they do inspect every play or every game in a way that attempts to be impartial and calibrated to be as consistent as possible, unlike home field scorers, who routinely assign errors and non errors in seemingly haphazard ways. In defense of watching games on TV, often a replay will show a play from another angle that does capture the jump a player gets and how much ground he covers to make the play. This works better for IF'ers than OF'ers, because angles taken, jumps off the crack of the bat and the fielder's speed is harder to judge than an IF'ers. The fact that DRS, OAA and UZR/150 often vary by wide degrees shows none are perfect, but to me, looking at all three, together has to be better than the eye test, when a blindfold is over our eyes for most of 28 out of 30 teams, each day.

Take both and deal Yoshida plus some cash, and maybe sign Soler or Duvall.

I don't think anyone should cry about Brez trading these 3: Dugo: He had 1 year left, had attitude problems, hit lefties badly. Urias: He had 1 year left, was not a plus defender and didn't look like he was going to get his O from 2-3 years ago back. Sale: He had 1 year left, couldn't stay healthy and when healthy was sort of up and down for 5 years, from 2019 to 2023. I like O'Neill, Grissom, Campbell and Fitts. I'm not high on Gio, but we got better signing him. I'm hoping something exciting happens: I'm expecting nothing. I will not be shocked to see Yoshida and or Jansen traded. I think maybe Story or Martin could be traded, as well, perhaps at the deadline. It's who we add that matters most.

Double Choco- doo-doo dipper: I don't either.

One service had ND with the top recruiting ledger, although no 5-star commits. Commits Team 5's-4's-3's 13 ND 0-9-4 8 LSU 3-4-1 7 ALA 2-5-0 9 OKL 0-5-4 8 AUB 0-7-1 6 GA 2-3-1 7 Clem 0-5-1 5 Ohio St 1-3-1 https://247sports.com/season/2025-football/compositeteamrankings/

I agree on GA. People complained about FSU missing out: I complained about GA. My final Dozen: 1. MI 2. GA 3. WA 4. TX 5. AL 6. MO 7. OR 8. FSU 9. Ohio ST 10. Ole Miss 11. LSU 12. ND

It sure seems that way, for whatever reason. I guess the value of the Sox increasing by $3.75B on a $750M investment just ain't enough for this ownership group.

Metrics come closer to evaluating what "translates" to wins (or losses) than traditional stats. They've actually ran the numbers. Even many of those who value traditional stats more than metrics, realize that the RBI stat has a whole lot to do with how many men are on base, when that batter comes up and how many are in scoring position. BA, HRs and RBIs do matter. They do translate to runs and wins. Other things do, too, like BBs, XBHs, SBs and good defense saves runs. A great fielding SS saves more runs than a great fielding 1Bman. Where is that captured in traditional stats?

Which would you prefer? Imanaga $105M/6 Imanaga $100M/5 Stroman $70M/3 Stroman $50M/2

Did you mean to say "cloud?"

The Butterfly Man was on pace for 90 runs scored per 700 PAs.

BTV accepted this wild ass trade as a major overpay by BOS: 3 team deal... T0 BOS: Luzardo (3 yrs) Keaton Winn (SP prospect rated higher than Wikelman or Perales) To MIA: Mayer Rafaela Wisenhunt (SP prospect) Mata To SFG Yoshida (+$6M or $1.5M per year) Yorke

I have not heard a peep about the Sox & Duvall. I mentioned him, because I think he can play RF much better than Soler and maybe better than O'Neill. I'd be fine, if we sign neither. If we trade Yoshi, I think either would be okay.

Am I alone in liking Imanaga over Stroman? My wish list, as of now: FA only 1. Monty 2. Snell 3. Imanaga 4. Stroman-Bauer tie 6. Clevinger-Paxton (1 yr) tie

LOL! I said that after the Sale trade? Sounds about how I remember feeling.

Not sure why you used fWAR for the DH and wRC+ for the OF'er, but you still made a good point. We still lost 2 of our best on O and overall: wRC+ (We lost 3 of our top 7 batters with over 150 PAs, counting Dugo.) 129 Casas 124 Devers 120 Duran (362 PAs) 116 Duvall (353 PAs) 114 Turner 109 Yoshida 98 Verdugo fWAR 3.1 Devers 2.4 Duran 2.0 Dugo 1.9 Duvall 1.7 Casas 1.2 Turner 0.6 Yoshida We lost 3 of the top 6 fWAR guys. (bWAR: 3 of top 7, as Wong slotted #4.) I do agree, we can possibly make that up with no more additions than O'Neill and Grissom. Our 2B fWAR and wRC+ was putrid. Just average play from Grissom would go a long way in making up for these losses. I like O'Neill, if he can stay healthy. I like some of our young guys looking to improve, and we don't need all of them to do so. I think Story can gives us some much better O, if he can go 450+ PAs, maybe even 550+. I'm not bummed about the O, and the D should be better, but still not plus. It's the rotation.

I remember loving the trade, despite what appeared to be a very steep price. One main reason was the 3 years of team control at a very reasonable and low cost. I think I came up with the Chris Freakin' Sale thing the day of the trade. When a guy like him becomes available with those many years of control, you do what it takes.