moonslav59

That's about the floor of my possible acceptance, but if I lived it, I might amend it to 4-6 years not 9. Through the 70's and 80's, I often said to my fellow Sox fans, "I'd take 10 last place finished for just one ring." After 2004, I got spoiled. My position is probably close rto 4-5 last place finishes followed by a ring, rinse and repeat, but there is a caveat: I'd want to see and feel the growth of the team and farm over those 5 years to keep the flame of hope alive. If those 5 last place finishes were 50-60 win seasons, I'd likely change my tune.

Yes, that is your opinion. Yes, that is a big reason Bloom was fired. With the budget he was given, he should have done better to much better in 2022 and 2023. We should not be finishing in last place, when spending near the middle of the pack or better. I totally agree. My "floor" is just give me a ring every 4-7 years (10 is pushing it.) I know Iam in a tiny minority, on this, but those first 30 years as a Sox fan were not as fun as the last 20, despite way more last place finishes in the last 20 years. To each his own, I guess.

Every big signing is an "if." Of course, some look less risky than other, especially those one year contracts Bloom fell in love with. IMO, we need to bite the bullet and take a chance on someone. We have the budget space. If we don't go for quality signings, we'll end up taking the Bloom path, again. Sign 5 guys for $10M/1, instead of one guy for $50M/5 or $200M/7.

I know this is your opinion. Of course, I'd prefer several competitive seasons mixed in with a ring every 4-10 years, but just get me more rings. That's my main priority.

To me, I'm okay with some down years, as long as the future keeps looking brighter, but there is a certain amount of time, where it becomes unbearable. That time seems to vary widely between fans. To me, time is up. We better compete in 2024, or at least make a legitimate effort. The farm is where we want it to be. We can afford to trade some top prospects and still be plus. We have some young and capable payers on the 26 and 40, who should provide a nice framework of a foundation for Brez to build up and fill in the holes. To me, it's all about the winter budget and if we go for quality over quantity.

It changes mine, but I guess I'm nobody.

100%

I'd take 6-9 last place finishes for every ring.

Yes, that is the reason, IMO. Although FSU does play in an easier conference, they still played 3 ranked teams, which is about what most others played. They beat LSU #13 now, but was higher ranked, then. #15 Louisville (has been higher ranked than 15) #22 Clemson NR Duke (I think they were 16th when FSU beat them.) NC St is not bad.

Sign him.

I'd love ERod as the second best SP'er we acquire, this winter.

Agreed on Clevinger. I'd be fine changing my 3rd tier to... 7. Clevinger 8. Lugo 9. Wacha I knoe I'm putting a lot of faith into the one good season Lugo had in 2023, as a starter, but I think you overvalue Stroman. (I almost put him in the third tier.

That's a good start. He's probably identified several trade targets and determined which prospects he's more likely to part with. The heavy action should start soon. Tuesday: Draft Lottery Wednesday: Rule 5 Draft

I totally agree. I do worry more about trading Bleis than Mayer, because I doubt Bleis brings us a very good pitcher, even if coupled with two tier two prospects. I think Mayer has high trade value and is the logical one to trade. We also have a SS for the next 3-4 years.

My order might look like this: (Assuming Kershaw to LAD.) 1. Yamo 2. Monty 3. Snell 4. Imanaga 5. Erod 6. Stroman 7. Lugo 8. Wacha Some 4/5, which we don't need: Paxton, Giolito, Flaherty, Clevinger, Mahle, YRod, Lorenzen Montas. Severino

He thinks he's a headcase. He would not be the first pitcher like that, and some are damn good. I don't really put Stroman in the same class as Yam, Snell and Monty. I put him in the next tier with ERod and maybe 1-2 others.

I read this after my recent post. You said it very well, and in much fewer words.

It really has sucked, but to me, I see it as a mix of two things that distract me from some of the pain: 1. The stretch from 2016 to 2018 was so amazing that sacrificing some of the future was worth it. (I did not expect it to be over 5 years of the future, but that stretch helped, some, especially the early years of 2019 or 2020 to 2021/2022. 2. The belief that the farm system and ML foundation were improving quickly enough to make us exciting to watch by 2023, at the latest. (That did not work out all that well.) The sour part has been the whole "sham" thing by the front office. I still like our foundation. I have not been this upbeat about our top 4-5 prospects in a very long time. I may end up disappointed, but I'm clinging to that for my optimism fix. I'm not part of the dump Henry Brigade, but I am pissed about being the shammed. I'm not going to say I have hope for 2024, because I don't. I refuse to get my hopes up, again, until I see the commitment made, again, by the front office. There is zero optimism on that, from me. I'm thinking we'll have to go over the tax line and up close to the second one to get my juices flowing, but maybe Brez can work some wonders. Let's see what his first big move will be.

We'll have to give to get. Of course, I'd prefer a larger package of mid tier prospects than one of our top 4, but that's a pipedream, if we want an ace or possible one. To me, the trade order is this, and it's not about who I think is the 4th best, 3rd best... It's about current trade value to other teams, our current needs and my perception of these guys' ceilings: 1. Mayer 2. Bleis, but I'm not sure his trade value is worth his very high ceiling. T3. Teel, since great catching prospects are hard to come by. T3. Anthony, because this guy seems to be most likely to be a stud, to me, and I think other GMs would prefer Mayer or Teel. Rafaela is probably #5, but the gap is big between 4 & 5. Yorke, Perales, Wikelman, Abreu and Cespedes will not get us an ace. I'm not sure two or three would.

Lot's of teams lose to one team during the season only to lose to them in the playoffs. AL did not lose to Texas in the playoffs. Look, I get the head-to-head argument, and said I'm not against it. My point was that it is not always "the criteria." The criteria changes. I see Texas beat #12 OKL and jump from 7 to 4. I see FSU beat #15 Louisville and drop from 4 to 5. There is no rhyme or reason. Because AL beats GA, all of a sudden that AL win means a ton more. Maybe OK should have made it, since they beat the team that beat the team that beat GA, and if GA was so good, why aren't they the 4th team? Because they lost to a crappy #8 team? It's easy to go round and round. are undefeated IMO, FSU and WSH aren't as good as MI, GA, AL and Ohio St, but they both are undefeated, and that is usually the top priority, unless you play a really easy schedule. The criteria seems to waver between who is the best team vs who deserves to go based on record, strength of schedule and head to head. The is no set criteria. That's my point.

True, but I'd still rather finish 20th in W-L% and last in the ALE than 18th in W-L and 4th place.

Yup. I'd try to bring the AAV down by going 8-9 years. I'm not sure he's the right guy to take the plunge on, but I'm not sure how much longer we can wait and play the patchwork game.

The D should be better, even if no changes are made and injuries are not a major issue. SS was horrific in 2023. It should be top 5-8 in 2024. LF was horrific and with Yoshida at DH shoudl move to mid pack. CF was bad. Rafaela should turn it plus. 2B was awful. Reyes should improve it a little. C & 1B have young players who could improve, but we can't count on it. RF & 3B looks the same. Adding 2 legit SP'ers who give us 170+ IP would be a major improvement to the rotation and the pen, as well. I'm not sure I'd say just 2 SP'ers is enough, but I think this reasonable winter would do the trick: Sign Monty, Lugo and Duvall Trade Duran and Mata for Rogers and Berti

When you draft almost all HS players and are gone in 4 years, how can anyone know?

Power Rankings Guru has Texas with the toughest schedule in the NCAA. 1. Texas 5. Alabama 9. Washington 41. Ohio St 44. Georgia 51. Michigan 55. FSU, Another site has... 3. Alabama 11. Ohio ST 17. Texas 32. Wash 43. Georgia 47. Michigan 50. FSU