moonslav59

Maybe, I'm wrong, but I think this was the best the ALE has ever been, in terms of most wins by all 5 teams. It has slipped a bit from when I first said it- back when we had no losing records in the division, but I still think it is the strongest, top to bottom, ever. (Show me I'm wrong, and I'll gladly admit I was wrong. 2 in top 8 (2 in 12 would be the norm) 3 in top 12 (3 in 18 the norm) 4 in top 14 (4 in 24) 5 in top 18 (5 in 25-30) 2021 2 in top 7 3 in 8 4 in 9 but BAL was 30th with 110 losses 2018 2 in 3 3 in 11 4 in 22 5 in 30 (BAL had 115 losses) 2013 2 in 9 3 in 14 BAL w 77 losses) 4 in 15 NYY w 77 5 in 22 (TOR w 88 losses) 2007 2 in 4 3 in 15 (TOR w 77 losses) 4 in 27 (BAL w 93) 5 in 30 (TBR w 96) 2004 2 in 3 3 in 18 (BAL w 84) 4 in 23 (TBR w 91) 5 in 26 (TOR w 94) And once again, I think you are reading more into one part of adding context to this season's sucky record. Strength of schedule does factor into a team's record, Like it or not.

Not even counting all of the promising prospects traded for guys like Pedro, Schill, Agon, Sale and Kimbrel, look at the farm pipeline of the past to that of the last 4-5 years. How can that not be accepted as part of the reason rebuilding the team has been so slow and sporadic? Tight budgets and injuries, and just plain bad luck have been factors, but here's an incomplete list of major farm additions over the last decade or so. Some here have stated that they expected to see Bloom farm help after just 3 years. Many are the same ones that bitched about trades that brought us prospects, like Betts, Beni, Ottavino, JBJ and others (not that some were not worthy of criticism.) 2012-2016 Betts Devers Bogey Beni JBJ Barnes Vaz Workman Iggy TShaw 2017-2021 Houck Dalbec Duran Brian Johnson (I can't think of anyone else.) 2022 Casas Bello Wink Crawford Wong Downs Due to the delay in rebuilding the farm and then developing the rebuild, we should start seeing some of Bloom's prospects in the next 1-5 years. (One could count Whitlock as a Bloom prospect, but he really should not count as a Sox farm product. Wink, Seabold and German, yes, to some degree. I'm not saying the b loom bashers ignore this, but I hardly ever hear them add this type of context to the results that clearly are linked to what type of players a GM gets from the farm established over the previous 2-6 years. Then, there are the prospect trades we all are all-to-familiar with.

Again, I'm not sugar coating last place. I'm not denying we suck. I'm not complaining about the schedule. I'm pointing out that is was a factor. I don't want us to be in the ALC or ALW. BTW, the ALE has never been as tough as now, so bringing up 2016-2018 is deceptive. If you don't want to add any context, fine. Nowhere have I ever even hinted that not winning is or should be our goal. Those kind of statements are absurd and inflammatory.

1. Umlike others, I have never said DD "emptied the arm," but I don't think it's an exaggeration to say his trades had a profound affect on the prospect pipeline from 2015 to 2021. 2. He traded about 20 prospects that at one time or another were top 20 Sox prospects. We can argue, in hindsight, how many turned out to be plusses, but that's an undisputed fact. No other Sox GM has come close to doing that in just 3 years. (BTW, I'm fine with those choices but accept the consequences, too.) 3. Injuries and underperforming players are also part of the reason. Where did anyone ever say the bad farm was the only reason?

I agree. 10th place sucks. I don't think Oh for 80+, then 4 in 20 is a fluke not influenced by the owner and management team he put in place. Agree to disagree on that. Yes, we came close in '67, '75, '78 and '86, and yes, we lost on the field and due to circumstances like Rice getting hurt, but by your standards, isn't that just excuse making for poor management choices?

Wacha looks to be pitching his way out of a QO.

I know that, but I think it's a pipedream to think we can fix 10 holes with guys like Judge and Turner. When you look at the 2020 roster, we've improved in many areas. The farm has begun to help and looks to keep helping more than from 2016-2021. Improving slightly at a few psoi2tions, so we can focus more resources on key upgrades is a solid plan, when you don't have the Dodger's owner.

In your opinion, obviously not. I wouldn't say it's "alright,"either, but I'd choose this philosophy over the '72 to '03 philosophy 7 days a week. I know those shouldn't be the only two choices, but IMO, the only way you find the balance we need is to build and maintain a deep and strong farm- something many think differently about. (I'm not claiming to know better than those who want to use the farm for the hear and now by trading many of the best away. It's just my opinion.) Building a farm takes time. Seeing the results of a built up farm takes even more time. Finishing last and panicking by trading away almost the whole farm is the type of plan that gets us to where we are, right now.

I try really hard to answer any questions asked of me. I wonder why others can't even try to answer simple questions. I'm fine with follow up questions, but can you just answer this one question?.

If playing the toughest schedule in MLB does not matter or make a slight difference to you or others, that's fine. I can disagree and think otherwise., but it's our right to look beyond just place ranking and W-L record when evaluating just how bad this team has been. Nobody is saying the toughest schedule makes us a good team. We are just trying to state our opinion that maybe we are not as bad as the record and rankings indicate. Having a rigid criteria is a choice you and others make. When some of us look back at 30 or more years of complete frustration following the Sox followed by 4 rings and a bunch of last place finishes, we can view the results in many various ways. For one, I'm thrilled with the JH era. It's way better than anything I saw, before. That tempers my opinion on where we are right now. I know you like to say, "Last year was last year," but that is just your view. Nobody likes last place finishes. I don't think I dislike them any more of less than you or others. It sucks- bigtime. I could add a "but..." here, but it won't get us anywhere we haven't already been. "Better than they really are" is a subjective view. Where we go from here is largely affected by where you think we are, right now.

Like you keep saying, "I never said it did."

YES, of course! (See how easy it is to answer with a question.)

Your memory does not go back to 2020? JBJ- 5th in PAs Chavis-7th Pillar 8th Peraza 9th Dalbec 10th Plawecki 11th Arauz 12th and Lin 14th The pitching was even worse... Perez 1st in IP Weber 3rd PValdez 4th Mazza 5th Godly 6th Brewer 7th Brasier 8th Barnes 9th Springs 10th Brice 11th (on pace for more than 55 IP over 162) Osich 13th Covey 14th Kickham 15th Stock 16th Walden 17th Hart 18th (on a pace for about 30 IP over 162!) Look at where Bloom started from.

Can you answer my question? Would a repeat of 2021 be enough?

A fair opinion, for sure. Some see more context and nuances than others, when it comes to assigning blame. Was Bloom responsible for 2020? If you say, no, then there is an acceptance of more than W-L as the final and only gauge of success or failure. Of course 2021 and 2022 did not have all the context that 2020 had, but the world is not always so black or white to some of us. .

By an infinite factor. TRADE CASAS! Bring BOBBY DEE BACK!

Cora for MOY!!!

I do think McGuire/Wong will be better than Vaz/Plawecki, but I certainly may be wrong. I do think it will be close enough to be a plus, due to the $7M saved on the Vaz/Plawecki cost differential. That $7M will allow us to try and upgrade another position by at least more than anything we might lose at catcher. Also, remember that Vaz has not always been a .750 hitter. .617 in 2014 .585 in 2016 .735 '17 .540 '18 .798 '19 .801 '20 .659 '21 .711 (overall in 2022) Keeping Vaz would be no guarantee of .700+. Bloom is forced to try and cobble together decency at a number of positions, with hopes for slight improvements, while he focuses resources towards improving our highest need areas. Before the Vaz trade, our 2023 and beyond catcher situation was scary as hell. Now, it is less scary. To me, it is much less scary. That may be all we can hope for, when we have about 8-10 positions in need of improvement: C 1B RF CF DH SP1 SP2 SP3 Closer Set up Set up We can dream about signing Judge, Turner, Bell, Rodon, Syndergaard and Diaz and still spend enough to improve on our catcher and extend Devers, but it ain't happening. Like it or not, some positions will have to be left to the likes of McGuire and Wong at catcher and Casas, Dalbec and Hosmer at 1B. Most likely, we will have to count on Sale and Bello to fill 2 SP'er slots, too. We will have to fill at least 1-2 key RP'er roles with players we already have- like Barnes and or Schreiber. There just isn't enough budget room to fix every problem in significant ways. I think Bloom has succeeded in slightly improving some longer term outlooks without giving up top prospects of tying up a bunch of money. I'm fine with opinions that disagree these were slight improvements, but IMO, they were and still are. It's not really McGuire/Wong > Vaz/Plawecki. For 2023, it's McGuire/Wong > Wong/RHern. It's Casas/Hosmer/Dalbec> Dalbec/Cordero It's Dugo/Pham> Dugo/Duran It's Bello> Wink/Craw None of these might end up being earth-shattering upgrades, but it is what is needed when you have 10 slots to fill and a limited budget and priorities that hoard prospects.

Indeed, and the 2 rings in those 11 years helps mitigate that pain- for some, more than others. I'm not saying I want us to repeat the last 11 years, again, but I'd much rather see that than what I saw from 1972-2003.

I'm the driver of the Devers Forevers bandwagon, so I think that answers that question. His age and durability makes the choice clear, to me.

I think I'd rather have Devers and a defensive SS who can hit well, but not at Bogey's rate. Just those signings, alone, will restrict how many other psoitions we can upgrade in significant ways. With a continued restricted budget, I'm not sure it's realistic to assume greatness, until our farm can start providing 1-2 key additions each year. Casas and Bello might be the first time that has happened in a long while, unless you want to count Houck and Whitlock as one season, in which it technically was not or additions fro "our farm," which Whitlock was not.

Very true, but that has happened before. He did spend big from 2016-2018, but we still never went 3 years over or paid a mega tax in any year, like the Dodgers and soon to be Mets.

The farm is much better, and Casas and Bello are the best two prospects we've called up in the same year in many many years, but we are not "there, yet," and it takes time to start seeing farm results, especially when you focus on adding HS players in the draft and 17-18 year olds in IFA.

It's hard to know what his spending plan looks like. History shows he does NOT spend big, unless and until we seem to be 1-2 key pieces away from being highly competitive, and then, the mega spending does not last for more than 1-2 years. He has never paid a 3rd year tax. The key questions are: Is he prepared to go 3 years over and be significantly over in year 2 or 3? Are we 1-2 key players away from being highly competitive, orwill that long-standing strategy be abandoned? Perhaps, only Henry knows. My guess, the answer is no to both questions. I think we reset in 2023 or 2024. I think we are not just 2 key players away from being highly competitive, and that is beyond bringing Bogey and Devers back beyond 2023 and 2024, which will be costly without adding anything to what we already have.

I hope he can score hits like Wacha, Hill, Strahm, Schreiber, Refsnyder, McGuire and others, like last winter. Those results speak for themselves, too. Sure, there is the JBJ deal everyone wants to focus, solely on and the W-L record, and yes, we cannot have a repeat of this year. Would a repeat of 2021 be good enough for the bloom-bashers?