moonslav59

I'm not sure either, but to me, it was probably more about price. Maybe moving off SS was part of the reason they set his value lower than BorA$$ did, but I do think they wanted him back. It's all conjecture, no matter which side you are on. I do think it's pretty obvious we never wanted him at the price BorA$$ demanded- something Ole Red thinks is some wild conspiracy theory that only I hold. (Cue: "Where did I ever say that?")

It doesn't matter at all to you that he was handed a top 5 farm and a checkbook even Theo would have gawked at. You think We'd have done better, these last years had Bloom traded Casas, Bello, Mayer, Rafaela, Mata and others? You think he should have? You think he could have? No, you won't even think about it, or you can't even see it with all the sand filling in around your head.

Still waiting for your top 5. I said why I don't count Betts, and there isn't enough info on the Bogey issue to say it was Bloom or that it was his fault we missed out on a decent deal or not, since we don't know if that was ever possible. If it turns out, it was possible, AND Bloom was the one who kept JH from making that offer, then yes, that would make my top 3 list. What's your top 5 Blunder list? You probably have it tattooed on your chest. It's easy to criticize others when you don't give your position. Let's have it.

If Sale has a great first half of 2023, a deadline deal might become worth while. I would not trade him, now.

Indeed, and if we don't win, someone must be to blame. It could not possibly be a set of circumstances that no GM could overcome. Nope. Blame the GM and not even a hint of the chance most had unrealistic expectations to begin with. 27 GMs should all be fired. No rings in 3 years! Here and NOW or bye bye!

No doubt, but because many choose to stick their heads in the sand, doesn't mean I'll do the same. BTW, I'm not sure if making lists proves anything either, of that more good moves means better. The bad m oves magnitude might have outweighed the good, or if he is doing good at 55% and other GMs are doing 60% good, then 55% is not good. I totally understand that GMs are graded on the end results by the vast majority of fans. I get it.

Or, that maybe they wanted him back but just never at... 1. The prevailing market rate at any given point on the timeline. 2. The lowest offer BorA$$ would accept. Note: these two numbers may never have converged.

I agree, the $30M/1 year added to the team friendly deal he signed 3 years ago was a joke. What I'd like to know is what was BorA$$'s offers along the way. If they were higher than I felt we should pay, all along the way, I'd find it hard to blame anyone for not paying it. I know I'd never have paid $250M, let alone $280M. If it turns out we offered $160M/6 last winter and $180M/7 or even $200M/8, later, and Bogey said no, I have no issues with the offers. Should he and others been locked up before or even long ago, under DD? Of course. I'm fine with blaming Bloom and maybe even DD for not doing that, but we are not sure they'd have ever said yes. I've agreed with your position on trading them, if we knew we could not sign them, but I'm not sure they ever felt like Betts would turn down $300M/10 or Bogey $___/__.

If they thought he was worth what BorA$$ would take, he'd have been signed. That's not some wild theory. As to who decided what he was worth or how much they would ever pay, I'm not sure we'll ever know, for sure. You can believe it was on Bloom. I believe they have a set way of assigning value that predated Bloom and might have been slightly or moderately affected by Bloom adjustments to that formula. Maybe more than I think it was. If BorA$$ wanted $250M/9 while Bloom set his value at $180M/7, I'm still not sure a mistake was made. You obviously think it was a slam dunk mistake, and Bloom led the top brass into the darkness. Nice theory. Attack Bloom at all cost. What Bloom might have "misread" is what other teams would pay, but it still doesn't mean he'd have offered more than what the team thought he was worth. If he thought Bogey was worth $200M/8 and would have given him that, but he got $280, I'm not so sure that's misreading anything. Someone else valued him more and offered him something no other GM offered. How is that a clear mistake by Bloom? Even if he thought he was worth only $160M/6, we won't know if that's a mistake until 6 years from now. "Read the room wrong?" You really think he went to JH and Co, and said we think Bogey is worth ____ and might be offered ___ by other teams, and everyone said, " We trust everything you came up with on your own."

If you think Bloom is the reason Bogey is gone, fine. (Same with Betts & Half-Price.) Giving reasons why we think the Sox top brass did not think Bogey was worth whatever the lowest price BorA$$ would have taken at any point in negotiations is not an attempt to discredit Bogey. We all wish he was back.

Which is also reflected in the "+" part of OPS+.

I don't blame Betts or Bogey on Bloom. We can rehash this for the 100th time, if you wish, but yes, his biggest mistakes were: 1. Renfroe 2. Richards 3. Perez Okay, Marwin, Andriese and Diekman sucked more, but if you think $3M dollar signings are bigger mistakes, then Bloom is better than even you think. Maybe he could have gotten slightly more for Betts, so that's not top 3. Maybe he could have met whatever BorA$$ would have taken much earlier in the process or traded him earlier, but until I know the specifics, I'm not counting that as top 3. Even if we could have gotten Bogey for $225M/8 or even $200M/8 of $80M/7, we can't say it's a mistake just yet. I'm fine with you and others saying it is, and I may place it top 3, once more info is known. What are your top 5. What are the best 5 moves Bloom has made? Let's compare.

I think the direction is to build for the future while trying to at least appear to be semi-competitive along the way.

They were ahead of the curve. Their tanking for a few years helped boost the amount of good prospects they have, but they did other things right, too.

Dodger, Astros, Braves and even teams like the Mets and Padres, who are going nutty with spending have seen way more meaningful prospects contribute than Houck in 5 years. Seriously, how easy is it to build a winning team with just Houck and a budget not even large enough to offset Betts, half Price and Porcello until the Story signing 2.5 years into Bloom's tenure? People expected a miracle, denied it would have been a miracle to win a ring in the past 3 years, and now find one guy to blame all the misery on out of convenience.

I'm sure you blame Betts, Bogey and even Sale, yes you said Sale was Bloom's fault as the 3 biggest failures. Keep your blinders in place.

Yes, but even that 15 was less than most other years, and less HRs and XBHs means less teammates driven in with one swat of the bat. Bogey XBHs 71 in 580 PAs '18 (.122 per PA) 85 in 698 '19 (.122) 19 in 225 '20 (.084) 58 in 603 '21 (.096) 53 in 632 '22 (.084) That's about a 27% drop off from 2018-2019 and 2020-2022. .122 ('18-'19) > .089 ('20-'22)

2022 Red Sox w RISP 537 RBI in 1688 PAs (.261 BA and 139 XBHs) 2021: 568 in 1633 (.268 & 143) Actually less PAs in 2021! 2018 622 in 1753 (.289 and 168) 2022 Red Sox w Men on Base 626 RBI in 2834 PAs (.266 BA and 238 XBHs) 2021 654 in 2730 (.273 and 245) 2018 711 in 2830 (.282 and 277)

One problem with the Sox is we don't score when someone gets a hit w RISP as much as other teams. The short LF is part of the reason, but not all of it. 65 of Bogey's 73 RBI came with RISP. Not hitting as many HRs- and XBHs with men on base as he used to helped keep his RBI numbers down but out of the 62 times he got on base with RISP, 43 were BBs and 1Bs. Men on base: 91 out of 120. (BBs or 1Bs) 2019: 94 out of 129 - hardly a difference. (117 RBIs) It was a fluke, but the fact is, we can match his RBI production with someone like Andrus, but not his BA and OBP or SLG.

True. Never say "Never" or "Ever." That 2004 team was nearly all constructed by trades and FA signings, several by Dan D before Theo arrived. VTek wasn't "homegrown," but he was a prospect when we traded for him and D Lowe who had like 50 IP in MLB, when we got him via trade. The 2013 team did have Lester , Doubront and Buch as 60% of our rotation plus, Pedey, Jake and Middlebrooks/Bogey at 3B and Nava being keys to winning. I just can't see us winning again by adding Houck every 5 years.

But, they had 6-7 studs from their farm, and could afford to let Springer and Correa bolt. Their current rotation is all homegrown and is one of the best and could keep getting better as they all reach prime.

Good one.

I'm not sure anyone has pointed to the rotation and said it's going to be better. I had hoped adding a solid #1/2 was a top winter priority. It looks like adding a solid #3 in Kluber or Nate is all we can do via free agency, and I doubt we are prepared to trade top prospects for a 1/2, right now, so we will be needing a lot of what ifs to come true, and this is getting tiresome and frustrating as all hell. For all the blame being thrown at Bloom, he did a fine job adding solid pitching at a very low cost, last winter. fWAR: 1.8 Hill at $5M (0.9 bWAR) 1.5 Wacha at $7M (3.3 bWAR) 0.3 Strahm at $3M (0.3 bWAR) (plus RP'er 1.7 Schreiber at dirt (2.7 bWAR) No starters added, this winter, so far is frightening. Moving Whitlock and doubling his IP and fWAR should help. Hopefully, and here I'm going off on what ifs, again, Bello improves and triples his IP. Those two would then give us this: 3.9 Bello at 173 IP 2.8 Whitlock at 157 IP 1.5 Pivetta at 180 IP I'm not counting on Sale or Paxton, perhaps ever again. I'm hoping they can combine for 180 IP and maybe a 2.5 fWAR, but we need to plan on 80 IP and 1.0 WAR from both combined. We need a solid and dependable SP'er added before opening day, and I don't mean Houck or Mata. Kluber would be a help, but still falls short of what I not only hoped for but expected. Adding Kluber and maybe someone like a Luzardo would satisfy me, but what do we need to give up for Luzardo? Better yet, what would it take to get Luzardo & Rojas from the Marlins (not the rumored Wendle?) 27.1 Luzardo (4 yrs) 5.9 Rojas (1 yr) 33 value total We could take on a salary dump like -26 A Garcia, -20.9 Soler or -0.7 Bleier, but I'm not sure that is possible. Maybe give them Dugo for A Garcia as part of the package. 33 Value would mean something like: 33.2 Bello (Nope. It would be a step down at SP'er.) 18.5 Houck + 15.1 Rafaela (Mmmmm....) 18.5 Houck + 8.0 Yorke + 6.7 Verdugo (Maybe) 15.1 Rafaela + 8.0 Yorke + 8.7 Romero (Maybe) In theory, adding A Garcia and his salary would only need Verdugo: Verdugo for A Garcia, Luzardo and Rojas. I'd give more. If they want Duran (5.9), of course, no problem. I'd give up Murphy (3.6) + Lugo (5.6), which would be an big overpay, according to BTV, but I'd do it. Others like Seabold (2.9) or Winckowski (2.6) could be added or substituted for Murphy, Duran or Lugo, if they preferred one of them. I may be way off base, but I think a deal like that would make me happy and is not unrealistic. (Plus signing Kluber and or Fulmer) We could drop the Rojas ask and sign Andrus, instead, but I think he wants and will get 3 years. With Mayer a year or year and a half away, I doubt we do that, although we could trade Andrus, later.

I think we may just go with 5-6 year deal max for a while, even if that means missing out on the best of the best. I'm not sure it's such a bad strategy. I do think we need to start locking up our younger players, and even if some don't work out, they won't be $217M/7 year mistakes. I, too, play the blame game. I'm not saying I don't, but how about giving some credit to upper management for seeing that the first priority is to build up the farm to a level we haven't see since Theo's era. We may never reach those levels, again, due to all the rule changes, but I'm glad the realized it needed to be fixed and are at least trying to do something about it. Maybe Bello, Mayer and Casas can become the next Lester, Betts and Bogeys, but even if they fall short or way short, we had to try. No way we win without a bunch of farm help. Ever.

No doubt, their loss will be tough. It's a mystery on why their low RBI totals occured. Only part of it can be blamed on lower OBP's with batters ahead of him, but they did have #1 Devers ahead of them and he had 88 RBI with nobody in front of him.