Cashman is worse.
Bloom is better at what is needed for the Sox. My opinion might change, after this winter/upcoming season.
How is that for a conversation starter?
All I said was the Beni trade was TBD, still. I do think the money saved and what we did with it can be counted as a factor, butlike I said, one could use Renfroe or Marwin.
I'm not defending the trade.
The Beni portion is over. The Sox haul is still TBD, but I am not as optimistic about it than I was at the time.
I hope the Yanks cripple their budget by signing Judge.
I don't see them ever becoming the Dodgers East, so overpaying Judge will restrict their signings for many, many years.
I had hoped we'd spend the $80M on 3-4 slots not 5-6, but we are running out of options on 3 for $80M, unless we sign Judge (zero chance) or Correa (very slim chance.)
Will we trade for high contracts?
I'll be more upset if we way overpay for him than passing on him.
This is not the season to just sign one of the better FA SP'ers just because we need one.
Just because one happened before the other, doesn't mean it wasn't planned.
I'm not talking about the horrific trade, but it seems it is overlooked that Bloom signed Renfroe to begin with, and I do think the money saved in the Beni trade allowed for the signing. (I guess one could argue we signed Marwin with the money, too, but the budget was tight that winter and Bloom had over a dozen slots to fill.
$44.4M x 2. WOW!
He wanted 3 years, but that AAV is wild! Apparently, there is a vesting option for 2025, but details are unknown, right now.
This is one deal I might have thrown the dice on, due to the short term.
Yes, you keep saying that. We get your opinion.
I disagree, as we spent on Story, when we had more slots to fill and less money to spend than this winter. (Just my opinion, and yes, I've repeated that often, too. )
Exactly. You can't just look at one move in a vacuum.
I seriously doubt Bloom is going to "leave much money on the table," so what he doesn't spend in one area, he can spend more in others.
Lets wait for the totality of his moves to make a final judgement. I'm not saying each move cannot be judged separately, but to me, we need to see how he spends the whole budget to give a final grade.
Then, the hindsight grade will be how his legacy is set.
In theory, we might have gotten Maeda instead of Downs/Wong, and he did pretty good for a year or two, after he was traded.
I just don't think the argument that "he could have done better" is all that significant. We might have done slightly better, and who knows what Wong and to a lesser extent, Downs have left in them?
They all will be "too high." Swanson's will be lower (and maybe shorter) than the big 3, and if the savings from him allows us to go big elsewhere, it might be worth it.