moonslav59

Good post. It's been going on for so long, it's like a given. I, too, hope Bello is a sign of more to come. I do think having Crawford, Wink, Houck and Whitlock as hopefuls is better than the long list of failed Sox prospects since Lester and Buch, but we need better or a continued infusion of guys like Crawford.

I'd take Nimmo, too, but on the budgets we seem to be on, having Nimmo, instead of Yoshi would mean fewer other signings. It's like Nimmo vs Yoshida + Duvall every other year.

Our scrub pitchers are redefining the word "SCRUB!"

DD would have quit had JH demanded the same budgets on him. Just saying.

It's what we will do, but how often do we do the right thing? I's say the chances are higher that 2 or 3 of tese 4 start next year than 1. Whitlock Houck Crawford Winck It's pretty much a given Bello and Pivetta are slotted in the 2024 rotation. My guess is they slot Sale as one with Crawford as his first replacement or just slot them both and get just one SP'er.

JT has the O's so terrified, they can't filed anything he hits.

100%. I'd rather call up someone from AAA than pitch one of these guys just one time as a SP'er, ever again, unless as an opener.

Not every pitcher has SP-RP splits like Crawford, Houck and Whit. Why are you insisting on repeating the same mistakes made? Just add some freaking real SP'ers and leave those good at relieving where they are. It's not rocket science.

With the money Nimmo got, I'd still take Yoshida.

Can he bunt?

The D should get better with more play from Story and Rafaela and Yoshida moving to DH. I agree, all or 90% of the resources need to be directed to the rotation, of just pack it in for 2025.

Same ole Story.

Seriously? He's a repeat of Houck and Whitlock. ERA/OPS Against 1.66/.471 as RP 5.04/.756 as SP Yes, we need 4 SP'ers- 3, if you are okay with Pivetta and Sale slotted as our #5. Playing pitchers in situations where they do much worse is not my idea of good management. Having 3 solid long men like Houck, Whitlock (assuming he returns to form) and Crawford would make our pen one of the best in MLB. It would also minimize the innings pitched by scrubs like Jacques, and the 10 others. I'm not hopeful we add 3-4 solid SP'ers, this winter, but counting on guys like Houck, Whitlock, Crawford and Sale to go 28+ starts and 160+ IP is just asking to repeat the same jack-ass results, again.

I think he'll hit fine, next year, but he'll probably want and get 2 years. Maybe he likes it here, enough to take a 1 year deal. He might take $12M with option on 2nd year for $7M with $1M buy out. ($13M/1 or $17M/2) Again, it also makes sense to just move Yoshida to DH, with Casas playing some at DH, and use the money on pitching and a RH'd bat that can play RF or CF (like Duvall.)

Gotta love his approach, example and production. I'm re-thinking my position that we must move Yoshida to DH, next year. Getting this guy back would be a pretty sure bet on someone worth watching play, next year. (It might take a 2 year deal to get him.)

You should know the answer to this. HELL YES, they would.

Yes. I have spoke of the parallels, often. We'll never know how Ben would have done with trades, but we did know some more about his big FA signings, and he was allowed to replace much of the salary dump contracts, almost right away. To be honest, I'm not sure if Bloom is the guy for trading prospects and or signing large and long deals. Hell, I'm not even sure that's in the plans for this winter, or even next winter. It wouldn't shock me, if we replace Bloom. It would not upset me, either. If we do, I hope we bring in someone with a balanced approach, who knows how to find good pitching.

Sure was fun watching JT in a Sox uniform. What a pro!

I think we have to just hope it's a slump or a long rehab stretch. Let's hope he can approach his old self in 2024. I'm not sure what else we can do. He won't be traded. He might end up sucking on O. He might not.

I'm not sure anyone knows. I offered one possible explanation based on' the plan being 4-5 years all along, which in theory goes like this: 1. Build up the farm and foundation of young players first. 2, Start signing longer term contracts as you near the first year of the planned "window." 3. Wait until you are at the window to go large and long on pitchers, so you maximize their production, which usually comes in years 1-3 of large and long contracts. Had we signed an ace 2-3 years ago, and the planned window opens in 2024, that pitcher would be in decline. Note: I am not saying this was or is the plan. I am not saying this is a good plan. I do think it makes some sense in this context, and perhaps only this context.

Re-visiting the Catcher-Pitcher dynamics on the Sox in 2023. Bello w Wong 3.27 ERA/.727 OPSA (321 PAs) w McGuire 4.05/.764 (256) Pivetta w Wong 3.38 ERA/.639 OPSA (280 PAs) w McGuire 6.36/ .881 (211) Crawford w Wong 4.89 ERA/.767 OPSA (301 PAs) W McGuire 2.81 ERA/.481 (98) Paxton w Wong 4.58 ERA/.724 OPSA (316 PAs) w McGuire 4.70 ERA/.846 (73) Houck w Wong 5.21 ERA/.734 OPSA (329 PAs) w McGuire 4.91 ERA/.833 (48) Sale w Wong 3.31 ERA/ .641 OPSA (284 PAs) w McGuire 11.25 ERA/ 1.061 (64) Major unbalanced samples Wink w Wong 3.56 ERA/.751 OPSA (181 PAs) w McGuire 1.42 ERA/ ,619 (111) Whitlock w Wong 5.52 ERA/.921 OPSA (198 PAs) w McGuire 5.40 ERA/.734 (70) Kluber w. Wong 6.00 ERA/.918 OPSA (51 PAs) w McGuire 7.33 ERA/.982 (206) Major Unbalanced sample sizes Martin w Wong 1.36 ERA/.615 (129 PAs) w McGuire 0.73 ERA/.350 (44) Jansen w Wong 3.86 ERA/ .743 (132 PAs) w McGuire 2.08 ERA/.487 (47) Some sample sizes are rather small and or lop-sided. Judge for yourself. (I highlighted in red the better numbers and left some in black, if the sample sizes were more than 4:1 PAs ratios.)

1. Verdugo RF 2. Devers 3B 3. Turner DH 4. Casas 1B 5. Yoshida LF 6. Story SS 7. Abreu CF 8. Valdez 2B 9. Wong C

I think we can count on more innings from Bello in 2024, and he has been pretty good with giving us 4 or more IP in every starts, after his first one. 23 GD After game 1: 6.2 to 7: 8 times 6: 7 times (over half were 6 or more) 4.2 to 5.2: 6 times 4.0 IP: 2 times Now, we just need 4 more.

I'm not arguing our pitching sucked. It has improved, especially the pen, but it has sucked. Rebuilding teams often have sucky pitching. It's not an excuse: it's a description of facts.

Call it whatever you want. None of us know what the plan has been or will be. If the organization decided to build up the foundation before spending money or prospects on pitching, then I guess it is an excuse, and maybe even a valid one for Bloom but maybe not those who made that choice. If the choice was all or mostly on Bloom, then he deserves the blame, of if it ends up working, the credit. IMO, we were not an ace away from top contention, on paper, in any year under Bloom, so looking at the best way to plan for 4 years or more is a context that can be debated from all sides. Look, I'm always for adding to the top of the rotation. It would have been more fun watching the Sox over the last 4 years had we had decent rotations (and pens in 2020-2022.) I'm just not sold on the idea that the correct order for a 4-5 year plan is to start with pitching. By the time we reach the "window" the pitching would be in decline. Not allowing for a complete teardown and rebuild only complicates the rebuild, too. It's not a simple situation to judge, IMO. I fully understand why and how others can and do judge harshly.