moonslav59

I agree, but I do wonder, if JH kept the budgets the same as he did, what sort of players could we have filled the rest of the roster with- the types we saw in 2020? Remember, no Mokkie trade, no Price trade, either. I'm not saying it would be impossible, but it's not as simple as just saying sign them both and we'd be better. JH would have had to have spent more, too.

Maybe not, but taking on Price lessened the return needed, and the Dodgers do try to keep their farm strong and deep, even if it costs them money.

I get that, but expecting every our owner to do the same is not going to make him change. BTW, the Dodgers are resetting, this year, so budgets do matter- in cycles.

Did you look what the O's and Rays lost and gained? I'm not expecting great things, either, at least as the roster looks, now, but I still don't think we should have paid any of these mega deals, this winter. There were some deals, I liked, and thought they'd have been good for the Sox, but not playing the mega contract game, at all, may be the right choice,

He lives only to stir up the Talksox forum!

The Dodgers paid Price $45M for measly relief pitching for one year. I guess, since money does not matter to them, if could be viewed as a plus.

Only if he helps us put up crooked numbers.

Here's what I'd like to see done: Trade: Dugo, Duran, Dalbec and Murphy to MIA For: Luxardo (SP w 4 arb yrs of control- est $2M in '23), Rojas (SS- one year remaining at $5M) & A Garcia (RF salary dump- 3 yrs at $12M each with $5M buyout/$13.25M tax) Lux tax hit for 2023: -$5.5M Dugo + $15M That leaves enough to maybe sign Kluber and Nate, but I'd sign Kluber & Fulmer. Here's the 2023 Red Sox: 1. L Yoshida LF/DH 2. R Story 2B 3. L Devers 3B (extended, starting in 2024) 4. R Turner DH/ 3B-1B 5. L Casas 1B 6. R Kike CF 7. R Garcia RF/DH 8. L McGuire/ R Wong C 9. R Rojas SS Bench: Arroyo, Refsnyder, Wong and EValdez S1 Sale/Paxton S2 Kluber S3 Whitlock S4 Bello S5 Pivetta RP1 Jansen RP2 Martin RP3 Houck RP4 Fulmer RP5 Schreiber RP6 Barnes RP7 Joely RP8 Mills/Brasier/Taylor/Crawford/Kelly/German/Mata...

Sarcasm on sarcasm will likely be missed by most posters.

If you listened to talk radio from every MLB city, like I do 24/7, you'd hear the complaining.

Ultimately, right or wrong, even if every GM would have loved to have Downs, but we got him, it falls on the GM for choosing a failure.

Sounds about right. It might also depend on how the players who are coming back in 2025 did, especially down the stretch, or if injuries played a big role in just missing the playoffs. How well did Bloom additions do in 2023 might be a factor, too. I guys like Sale and Barnes and other non Bloom guys do great, but we still lose, he's probably a goner.

Agreed, and I even mentioned the whole "finding gems in the rough" often, since we hired Bloom- thinking this was his specialty. Expecting great things by trading guys like Moreland, Pillar, Workman & Hembree might not have been realistic, and seeing as how often Renfroe has moved on to a new team makes his value seem suspect, but the Betts and Beni trades should have produced more. I'm not going to say the totality of Bloom's tardes have been a net plus, despite the Price aspect of the Betts trade and the suspected caveat that nearly every trade for a prospect also include a coupled-vet. Is that Bloom's choice or a mandate to balance the hear and now with the future that ends up helping neither?

Yes, that was unintentionally implied with that wording. I kinda had Downs on my mind, and I do think he had the skillset many GMs would have wanted. Maybe 2020 hurt him more than others, but he sucked. He was the "jewel" of all the prospects Bloom acquired by ranking. Whitlock and others passed him quickly.

You think the vast majority of MLB fans are happy with what the Mets are doing? I just said most of the talk about the heavy spending by a handful of teams is not flattering. Do you disagree? No, I don't see 4 teams spending like maniacs' as a good thing for MLB. My guess is the fans of 25-26 teams feel the same way.

Someone will sign Nate, and I hope it's not the Sox, so we can get that measly comp pick, but if his price drops so low, due to the QO that he becomes a bargain, they why not? I'd still rather have Kluber or trade for a salary dump like AGarcia and get a Luzardo and maybe Rojas or Berti thrown in. Getting Kluber and Nate plus someone like Andrus might even get me a bit excited about our staff and its depth.

I'm still not sure why yo keep choosing to believe what these guys say. I also think Sam & Co. firmly believe moving towards having the best system is the best way to increase the odds of winning a WS, so it seems like doublespeak, to me. Again, I could be wrong and have been often enough.

I don't disagree, but better than 2022 is a low bar. I'm thinking as good as 2021 or he's probably gone. The issue, to me, is unless we are prepared to change our strategy or philosophy, it wont do any good bringing in another DD. I'm thinking they may want to give the farm building and long term plan longer than they gave Ben. If they replace Bloom and misdirect all the blame on him, which they seem to love doing, IMO, they will not go back to the DD days. They will hire someone like Click and continue seeking a balanced approach, but maybe with someone who does trades better than Bloom has done.

He is the lightening rod, because he was made into one. The soxprospect podcast stated he had to have known he'd be made the "punching bag," when he was hired, and I agree, but that does not mean he is or has been the major reason for what has happened over the last 3 years. The team strategy and philosophy changed, and it wasn't the first time. The Ben hiring was very similar to the Bloom one. The no signing pitchers over 30 strategy was suddenly lifted under DD, as budget limitations changed drastically at the same time. Is the strategy to be cyclical? Who knows? I realize the blame game is the way of the world and has been- moving more and more in that direction more and more over the last few decades. Identifying a punching bag and relentlessly punching away until they guy is totally toast does not get to the core of the situation. Only when the strategy changes will we begin to see a change, or if the long term plan is given a chance to succeed, which requires a level of patience seemingly impossible to realize in Sox nation to occur. I can rail and rail about the "context" in which Bloom has been placed, but it would just be repeating the same points over and over. I'm trying to be positive about the long game being the right strategy. I share in the frustration of the past 3 years (or 2 out of 3, or even 4, if we count 2019,) but I fully believe the strategy chosen was not Bloom's idea. They hired Bloom to fit the strategy they chose during the 2019 season. He's trying to follow the plan they gave him. He seems to have done a pretty good job with a couple top priorities (farm improvement and strengthening the foundation of the 40 man roster,) but he has largely failed with the "remaining competitive" along the way part of his charter. Should he be fired for that? Hard to determine, but my general opinion is what did we expect under the circumstances handed to him? I expected the dreaded "C word," so maybe that's why I have been more lenient with Bloom, but that does not make me any less frustrated with the choices we've made in the last 4 years.

You don't see the farm is better? You don't see the depth of the 40 man roster as vastly better than 2020? Fine, if that's not enough for you and the vast majority of Sox Nation, but don't say you "don't see anything better." If you truly don't see those two thing, I'd have to say you just choose not to see them.

Most of "the talk" is not flattering. The bottom teams don't care how they look or if they look worse. Forcing other owners to spend more does what for the game? Do I care what the name of the next evil empire is, or that 3-4 teams are all vying for that title or that the Sox should or should not going that group?

I get that this may be the new reality of MLB, at least until the next CBA, but I find it hard to not see some hypocrisy here. For years, Sox fans railed against King George and the Yankees for "buying championships after championships," and no matter how hard we tried to spend more and more, it was never enough, until 2004. Now, it looks like the only way to win is become the next King George among a sea of kings that is growing in numbers and magnitude. I guess, in some ways, being the king of kings and winning rings would be "fun" for a while, as you pointed out, but do we really wish we become the old Yankees? Again, I'm not here to defend JH's reluctance to spend when he can and probably should spend more, but where does it stop? Why should the Sox be the one to spend the most or 5th most or 8th most and not every team? Is it some sense of today's "entitlement culture" or a philosophy of Sox exceptionalism that drives these beliefs?

Ever watch War Games? Remember the theme? "The only winning move is NOT to play."

My bad. I thought he was a 40 man roster addition.

The other trade that might work was the one Bloom traded nothing away for: Ottavino & German for basically nothing. The Diekman for McGuire deal looks good, even as just a salary dump, but the dumpee was Bloom's own signee. I'd like to say I have some hopes for Breau & E Valdez (for 2 months of Vaz,) but they seem like Hamilton/Binelas types. Certainly, the failure of Downs not progressing makes that Betts and salary dump of Price trade underwhelming, and the Beni trade seems to be coming down to Wink & de la Rosa. The Renfroe trade was the worst, but all the others were fringe players, and getting Pivetta & Seabold hardly makes up much ground on the losses from the other trades. The Price aspect of the Betts trade makes that one harder to accurately evaluate, but certainly more was expected from the return. 5 years of Dugo has real value, and I suppose Wong may still surprise, but no. It can't be viewed as even a break even deal, IMO, despite dumping half-Price. I worry about the return we'd get for Devers, too. The worry is well-founded.