Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

moonslav59

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    104,843

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    130

 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 Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by moonslav59

  1. moonslav59
    Well, we know the TOR series will be a sweep by one team, and ask MVP to explain why that would be a 6 game "swing."
  2. moonslav59
    We should plan on him as SP depth, not as a 1-5 slot pitcher.
  3. moonslav59
    Agreed.
  4. moonslav59
    None of us have that answer.
  5. moonslav59
    I'm fine with saying that was the biggest mistake. I wanted Betts to stay. I do think that if our budgets stayed the same as they were in 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023, we'd be in the same boat with or without Betts.
  6. moonslav59
    I never thought we'd sign him after he left. I did say we could sign him, if he he became a FA like he emphatically said that's what he wanted to do.
  7. moonslav59
    Yup. Losing to them, now, will "hurt like hell," too.
  8. moonslav59
    I did say "I'm not sure," but at this point in the season, we had to win a game like this one, and the way we lost hurt like hell. Of course, "hurt" is a personal thing.
  9. moonslav59
    Of course any team rich enough can trade for Sale. It's funny how the Dodgers have a long history of doing just that.
  10. moonslav59
    What does that have to do with the point you made about there being no justification for trading him? Some fans did think we could trade him and then sign him, the following winter, but as long as the fact remained that we were not going to pay him, there was always justification for trading him. One could argue it was mandatory we do.
  11. moonslav59
    They have a long history of taking our high-priced players off our hands- the good (Betts), the bad (AGon & Beckett) and the ugly (Crawford & Price.)
  12. moonslav59
    This is the issue that "justification" can be argued for or against, and not saying the trade cannot be justified. The trade was 100% justifiable, once the decision was made not to sign him.
  13. moonslav59
    Exactly. It was about choosing not to sign him. That was the choice to be debated. The choice was made not to do it, perhaps because Betts was saying no number would get him to sign, but that's not the point, either. Once it was decided he was not going to be signed, there is a ton of justification to trade him. That's the point.
  14. moonslav59
    Any scenario would have to involve the Dodgers.
  15. moonslav59
    God, I hope so.
  16. moonslav59
    All of them. LOL
  17. moonslav59
    So, once they decided not to sign Betts, they should have just gotten a comp pick, because there is no "justification" for trading him? The "justification" point should be made about the choice not to sign him. The trade had to be done, once they made the wrong choice not to extend him. (Also, it was also up to betts to agree to an extension.)
  18. moonslav59
    The Price signing was worse. My point is that a trade is the safer and best route, and I'm being told that it is not only a bad idea, but that my point is not even valid.
  19. moonslav59
    Indeed, and other GMs see this, too.
  20. moonslav59
    You assume Casas won't hit like April in September.
  21. moonslav59
    Who would you trade instead? Mayer? Anthony? Rafaela and Duran? Teel? Nobody wants to trade Casas or any of these guys, but choose one.
  22. moonslav59
    ...and nobody to trade for pitching.
  23. moonslav59
    Who isn't? It's just not so simple. It's riskier drafting pitchers highly. What do we do until that area is fixed, and once it is fixed, there will be a delay of 3-6 years before seeing results. In the mean time, we can keep signing David Prices or trade for pitching.
  24. moonslav59
    Trading your third best offensive player (maybe 4th) who sucks on D for your 2nd or third best pitcher is valid.
  25. moonslav59
    True. Some just seemed more okay with not doing anything than others.
×
×
  • Create New...