Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

moonslav59

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    107,121

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    144

 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

2026 Boston Red Sox Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by moonslav59

  1. moonslav59
    I agree, but I know more about the specifics of the Astros "tank," due to living here and hearing what top brass was saying to fan through the "lean years." The Rays did it for a while, but it's harder to know if it was mostly about getting top draft picks, because they barely spent more, after they started winning. Their strategy is just spend as little as possible, but still try to win. It's hard to imagine teams like PIT and KC telling themselves, "let's not try to win." I'm sure they all look at OAK and TBR and think, let's be like them, but it's not easy to win without spending more. One thing to think about, if MLB imposed a min team budget of $100M, it would likely make it much harder for big spending teams to win, without going to absurd spending lengths, like the Mets tried. The Sox haven't been able to win with a constant budget over $200M.
  2. moonslav59
    They should have forced a team minimum budget that increased every year. If teams do not meet the rule, they could lose their revenue sharing, which to me, would "incentivize" those owners more than taking away draft picks or reducing pool money. I like the idea of trying to give worse teams a better chance to catch up, but only if they are legitimately trying to do so.
  3. moonslav59
    The Astros admitted to their fans they were waiting to stockpile young players and would spend big in a few years. That is "tanking." Then, they did what they promised.
  4. moonslav59
    Again, you chose just a 3 year stretch, when their tank was for longer than that, and having a higher pick in each round helped them get better. Also, I think getting a guy like Correa with your top pick, every 3 years, is not something I'd call a downside. Getting constant picks in the 10-20 slots don't even do that well.
  5. moonslav59
    Indeed, and there may be several reasons to not try to win. To me, the biggest reason is to not spend on the player salary budget, so they can make more money. Some teams do seem to want to do that but also compete, so they may value higher draft picks and signing pools more highly that those who don't seem to ever try to make the playoffs. Oak & TBR might be the best examples of the this. Some posters were suggesting we "tank" the end of the season to just move up a few slots in the draft, so it's not like the idea that it is not just about getting the top pick or 2 is not something new.
  6. moonslav59
    IMO, yes and yes. The Astros admitted it.
  7. moonslav59
    Getting the 3rd pick in every round is better than getting the 15th or 20th. I'm not sure the draft position is a major reason teams decide to not try to win. I'm not sure that is called tanking. I think the main reason teams decide not to try to win is about making more money. They appreciate the higher draft picks and more bonus pool money, but it's not the driving factor, IMO.
  8. moonslav59
    I know what people were talking about. Keep pretending you know what everyone wants to specifically talk about. Somehow your "Ted Talk" went from the hiring of Breslow to teams tanking to get the top pick, without anyone changing the direction of the flow of conversation. Magical!
  9. moonslav59
    Yanks-Padres have begun talks on a Juan Soto trade.
  10. moonslav59
    The first pick in MLB is not like the NFL or NBA. Getting to top 3-5 is still a nice spot to get to. Plus, now you get more bonus money and IFA bonus money, when you suck.
  11. moonslav59
    Why just pick a 3 year period? Yes, they had 3 really awful seasons (2011-2013,) but their tank last longer than that. They drafted Springer in 2011, after a 76 win 2010 season. They drafted Bregman & Tucker in 2015, after a 70 win season in 2014. They also drafted McCullers with the 41st pick in '12.
  12. moonslav59
    Either way works. I kind of like the idea that a bad team picking high can trade their top pick for something of value and then still spend more on lower slot picks, and still make out very well. It would make it hard for the "better team" to manage the money, and may lose out on some lower level picks.
  13. moonslav59
    I did not forget him. He didn't really get better or worse, after leaving. He is about like he was from '21-'22. It's weird how people assume people forget things, just because their posts aren't in great detail.
  14. moonslav59
    I like this idea.
  15. moonslav59
    It would be difficult to apply the cap numbers to a changing draft order. I guess an adjustment could be made with every trade. I like the idea of trades being allowed. I don't care much about the specifics.
  16. moonslav59
    It's weird how they don't do this, already. It would add a whole new dimension to draft day.
  17. moonslav59
    Back then, many teams like the Sox and Rays were able to stockpile picks by losing players to free agency. In 2011, we had 4 picks in the top 40. The Rays had 10 in the top 60 and 12 in the top 89, that year. They got Snell with their 7th pick at #52.
  18. moonslav59
    I forgot them? I listed some and said "among others."
  19. moonslav59
    Springs was the big punch in the gut. The martin Perez turn-around hurt, too. ERA+ 89 in 2 years w BOS in 176 IP 118 in 2 years w TEX in 338 IP, afterwards He did drop off in 2023, but if he was the 2022 season he had w TEX for us, we may have made the WS
  20. moonslav59
    There seems to be a pattern of ex-Sox players improving after leaving Boston. Brasier Kike Even JD had his best OPS+ since 2019. Payamps Martin Perez Springs I guess one could counter with names like... Vaz JBJ Beni Workman Among others.
  21. moonslav59
    Duran was more of an outlier than a common occurrence. Verdugo was never thought to be a plus RF'er. In fact, it seemed we went out of our way to keep him out of RF, until the Tommy Pham trade. He improved. Devers seemed to be improving, then poof! It does happen, but I agree, we should not expect it to happen. I'd like to hear that Casas is working hard on his D over the winter.
  22. moonslav59
    There certainly is flameout potential to Bloom's drafts, but it might take many years to get the final results. The amount of top picks going to HS players will prolong the final grade submission. It didn't help that his first draft was during COVID and was just 4 rounds deep. Yorke still shows promise. Drohan and Jordan, not so much, but still a little. 2021's draft included Mayer, but there are a few prospects clinging to some hopes: E R-C, Hickey, Dobbins, Guerrero, Troye and maybe Kavadas. Romero, the top pick from '22, could turn out a bust. C Coffey is about out of hopes. Anthony looks like a big prize (79th pick.) Rogers, Meidroth, I Coffey, Hoppe and maybe a couple others have some promise remaining. The '23 draft is still pretty fresh, but Teel did nothing to cause any more doubts. A few others looked good out of the gates. I'm hopeful Bloom's prospects do better than Ben & DD's: DD: Casas, Houck, Crawford Ben: Beni, Kopech, Beeks Theo's last draft blew away all of Ben's and DD;'s drafts combined: Betts, JBJ, Barnes, TShaw, Noe Ramirez
  23. moonslav59
    So, if we add nobody and lose all or FAs to be plus Turner, is this the opening day 26? C: Wong & McGuire 1B: Casas 2B: Urias & Reyes SS: Story 3B: Devers LF: Duran & Refsnyder CF: Rafaela & Abreu RF: Verdugo DH: Yoshida SP1: Bello SP2: Sale SP3: Crawford SP4: Pivetta SP5: Houck Closer: Jansen RP2: Martin RP3: Winckowski RP4: Schreiber RP5: Whitlock RP6: Bernardino RP7: Murphy RP8: Mata (out of options) or Kelly
  24. moonslav59
    DD only had 3 first round picks. Their 2019 first round pick (#33) was dropped to #43 due to going over the lux tax (per soxprospects.com). His only other first pick was Casas in 2018. DD's pitcher's drafted: 2016: 4 of top 6 picks (Groome, S Anderson, Shawaryn, Nogosek) 2017: 4 of top 6 picks (Houck, Thompson, Scherff, Schellenger) 2018: 2 of top 6 picks (Feltman & Ward) 2019: 3 of top 3 picks (Zeferjahn, Song, Murphy) 13 pitchers drafted in the top 6: Houck looks good and could get better. Murphy looked okay in '23 but is a long shot. The rest are very long shots. He was basically 1 for 13. Among the 11 non pitchers taken in the top 6 picks: Casas '18 Dalbec '16 Lugo '19 Brannon '17 (Duran in 7th rd '18) Maybe 1 for 11, here.
  25. moonslav59
    It could still be based solely on crunching numbers, that include risk of injury and other variables pitchers bring to the formula that batters don't.
×
×
  • Create New...