moonslav59

In a way, the fact that so many of our pitchers have shown they can go long stretches of doing well as a SP'er may end up hurting us more than helping us, if we put to much hope in them repeating it over a full season- something some have never done, or haven't done in a long time. I know I have repeated this point a few times, so I hope it doesn't bother anyone to hear it again. IMO, we can count on Bello for 26+ GS and 160+ IP in 2024. We can count on Pivetta for the same, as long as he pitches well enough to hold a rotation slot for the whole year. The rest are just hopes and prayers- some really good ones, but still not even close to being depended upon for 26+/160+, and it's not like 26 or 160 is asking for workhorses. The other factor that seems to be a part of the decision making process on adding SP'ers is that we have so many of these "hopes and prayers" type SP'ers, that we may be thinking, "We only need 3-4 out of the 5 or 6 to do well, for us to have a good rotation. How has that worked out for us? The last factor is how jerking pitchers Between the pen and rotation never seems to help the pitcher, and it actually seems to hurt their numbers. I get the argument about how a pitcher should have better numbers in the pen than as a starter, due to several factors, I won't repeat, but the disparity on many of our guys is too wide to use this factor as a balancing tool. We clearly have some guys who are better suited for long relief tha starting. Keeping a pitcher in one role seems to be a good idea, at least per season. I think Winckowski is a good example of that, but Whitlock, Houck, Crawford and Pivetta also have shows massive disparities between starting and relieving. I think we need to make some smart choices. Maybe choose one guy, beyong Pivetta to start, and try our best to not jerk others in and out of the rotation in 2024. Here is a look at the teasing we have seen from so many of our pitchers: Sale: It's all about his health. The guy used to be a stud and a 200IP guy. His 20 starts and 102 IP in 2023 were the most since 2019, and IMO have teased fans into expecting a return to giving more than that. I'm sorry: I can't do it. The 2023 "tease:" After his first 3 starts, he went 17 starts (sandwiched around an IL stint) with a 3.38 ERA/3.31 FIP. he was at 3.16/3.41 in his last 15 GS and 3.01/3.09 in an 11 game stretch in the middle of his season. That is not quite vintage Sale, but pretty freakin' good! What a great help it would be, if he could give us that over 26+ starts! What's the chances? Pivetta: He led MLB with 33 GS in 2022 and had 30 in 2021. (180 and 155 IP.) He could have probably done that, this year, if he didn't suck so much out of the gate and get demoted. Still, he has given us multiple "teases" over his career: 3.49/3.29 in his first 13 GS for the Sox (70 IP) 3.76/3.91 over his first 17 GS (91IP). 2022: 3.58/3.66 over a 15 start stretch. This year, he had a great and long run of mixed starts and relief stints. He's been pretty consistent: each year a long tease (or whatever you want to call it.) Crawford: He had a great 23 game stretch with 15 GS, included: 3.23/3.93. I'm not sure that is a long enough tease to pencil him in as a SP in 2024. His last 6 GS: 5.40/2.94. Whitlock and Houck have well-documented long stretches of doing very well, as well as some poor stretches.

That clause also includes him not being on the IL to end the season. Cots: 2025 option guaranteed if Sale finishes in top 10 in 2024 Cy Young vote and is not on the injured list at end of 2024 season

To think this, implies his resolve (or lack of it) played a part in his missing so much time before 2024. To me, he's always been a fierce competitor, and this has killed him missing so much time, and then sucking, too often when he has pitched, here and there. I do think it's possible he may start 26+ games and give 160+ IP in 2024. I won't be shocked, if he does. I just think we cannot plan on even one start. If we do, we are dooming ourselves into the same trap we've fallen into for over 4 years.

They had some, but too few to swing many games into losses. Devers was still defending 3B (28th in DRS at 3B.) (Overall, we were 15th in DRS, so not really a weakness.) The closer fell apart in the playoffs, but we shrugged it off and got the key outs, when needed. Now, when the team loses, our 3B defense is magnified into major reason we lost. (It was part of the reason, for sure.)

I know you are not, and it's entirely possible to be critical about a lot of things a manager does, yet still like him and not want him replace- like me. Also, when I am critical, I know I don't have the whole picture, and might admit I was wrong, if I knew the reasons Cora chose option B over option A. The scheduled days off, to me, seems to go against metrics and splits. I get why someone might think the benefits outweigh the possible losses in splits, but I disagree on this one. I think he can easily give himself a 1-2 game window before and after the "day" he wants a player to rest, and adjust once he know who is starting or sees a player is struggling or heating up near the scheduled day. Yes, other player's rest days may factor into adjustment decisions, and could have been applied without us knowing. I do remember one game, where a player asked to play on his scheduled day off, and Cora let him play. It's the rigidity of the plan that seems to fly in the face of using data to better project success. Again, this does not mean I think I am smarter than Cora. I know I am not, but other smart managers don't do this, so I think I have a leg to stand on. Also, in the grand scheme of everything a manager does and influences, this is pretty minor. I still really like Cora as our manager, despite some minor differences I have with his choices.

Will a new park really make a big difference? Too many transplanted fans in the area, IMO.

Lowest non-COVID playoff total since 1919!

They gave Dugo the day off right before the AS break, but it was vs a LHPs. Ref started in LF (good idea) and Duvall started in RF (good idea.) When the lefty was pulled, Dugo cam in the game to replace Ref (good idea.) I don't think this was a good example to criticize Cora.

It accepts: Duran or Dugo Yorke Urias or Drohan for Torres and Schmidt

Rich Hill is still winning... or is he?

Not a bad type of trade. We could then trade Urias. How about Urais & Dugo or Duran for Torres and Schmidt.

I should not have said power RHB. If we can get a high OBP RHB, that would be very helpful, too.

That was one trade I felt we could have jumped at. Apparently, that 1Bman was pretty highly, so it's hard to know what we would have had to have given. The multiple years of control was the big plus.

The window is/was 2023-2028ish.

So, is 2024 year 5 or 6?

Maybe we need to make a big trade for a RHB, and use all the money on SP'ers.

If he would agree to DH, he'd likely play more games and have more good years, but they can't even get him to move to LF.

If we don't go all in, this year, we need to add 2-3 players with longer term deals that rate to still be good in 2-3 years, when maybe the "true window" opens wide. I hate the ides of thinking 2-3 years ahead, continuously. We've been in this mode since the trade deadline in 2019 (4.5 years.) Now, we are looking at another 1 year added on? It's easy for me to say, JH just has to step it up on spending, and I have expected that to happen the last 1-2 years, but it's gotten to the point, where I'm not expecting it, but still think it could happen.

We already have 4-5 players on the 26, who are negatives on defense. At least 3 could be the FT DH, and others might platoon at DH and be a back-up elsewhere. To me, we could use a big RHB at at 2B and OF, but only if we trade a LHB OF'er like Dugo or Duran. If we move Yoshida to DH, we could sign Duvall and not trade anyone, except maybe Refsnyder, despite him being our best hitter vs LHPs since 2022. We need to thread a needle on our winter choices concerning a big RHB. I'm a huge Turner fan, but I can't see signing him, unless we can somehow trade Yoshida. (Not happening.)

According to BTV, Trout is owed about $250M/7 and has a net value of -87. That does show they feel his value before applying the contract cost is about $160M/7. With all the injuries, and the fact that he is getting older, I'd pass. For argument's sake, let's say the Angels pay about half: $125M/7. His BTV would be about $35M. In terms of Sox values, Mayer (59) would be an overpay, unless LAA paid an additional $25M. Houck at $30M is about the closest. Bleis + Wink does it, too. We don't need another OF'er.

Good points. Normally, I'd say trade for a younger, top pitcher, as they cost too much in free agency, and are usually not "younger.' and sign FA batters, where needed, but this year is not good for big RH'd bats.

They also did try to spend on Rollie Fingers and Joe Rudi, so there was a time period where it did look like they were willing to "go that extra mile." While the guys you mentioned were big names, many were over the hill or close to it. Tian'ts resurgence was amazing, but not really predictable. I saw the Catfish Hunter signing by the Yanks, along with countless others, and it was frustrating to see us avoid going the full distance.

Me, too. Sometimes the frustration becomes so much, I forget to point out that fact.

It must be that the AL Central is so great.

soxprospects.com gave out 3 awards: Tristan Casas- Graduate of the Year Brayan Bello- Homegrown Player of the Year Mookie Betts- Ex-Prospects of the Year