moonslav59

You were acting like Bloom's farm has given us nothing, despite that being an unrealistic expectation after just 3 years. Bloom's 2022 farm additions still outnumber DD's: German, Wink, Kelly, RHern, Ort, Downs, Seabold (1 gm in '21) and Wong (14 PAs in '21) 6, 8 if you count Seabold & Wong DD's: Casas, Bello, Crawford (1 gm in '21) 2, 3 if you count Crawford Ben's Bazardo (1 gm in '21) 1, 0 if don't count Bazardo

I will add that we should have done better in 2022. It was a failure. Injuries and clubhouse discontent, perhaps attributed in part to uncertain contract issues were some reasons for the failure, but not all. Bloom and Cora share some of the blame. Not a single poster denies this. Many posters deny the contextual aspects of the tasks Bloom was handed after 2019. They also deny that the 2019 was not team that looked promising, going forward, especially the financial aspect of the contracts handed to Bloom. Not only was Bloom forced to trade the franchise player Betts and limit the return by including Price, he had to cut the budget even further than that in 2020. Add to that no Sale or ERod for all of 2020 makes for a untenable situation for any GM. Bloom wasn't even allowed to replace Betts & prices contract costs, in full, let alone not adding the savings of losing other contracts like Porcello, pearce and Holt. We cut about $80M from 2019: $27M Betts $21M Porcello $16M of Price $6M Pearce $5M Nunez $4M Holt Bloom was given $40M before the 2020 season and about $40M prior to 2021. (This doesn't even touch on the cost of Pedey, Sale, Nate, ERod (missing 2020) and JD, plus the continuing Price payments)

The jury is still out on Bloom. What sounds like Bloom love to you is just defending him against many (not all) baseless attacks. Many of us like the fact that he is rebuilding the farm, but nobody knows if he has done a good job on that, or not, just yet, but he gets good marks for trying and at least improving the farm, on paper. When that was likely his top priority and not the here and now, like with DD, ignoring that context is ignorin g reality. Saying we are just making excuses and are seeing Bloom as doing only good things is a strawman argument. When you objectively look at the ML players Bloom has added ve the ones he inherited, do you see something we don't see? Dollar for dollar, Bloom's players blow the inherited ones away, and they include Devers & Bogey, who were not DD acquired players. Many of us expected a cliff. You refused to believe it was possible for any high spending team. Instead of realizing you were wrong, you cling to blaming the new management team- not the old. It's your choice, and that's fine, but stop with the whole thing about your view being the only objective one. You choose your criteria and negate the actual results of what this management team has added to the team vs what they inherited. Doing that is also an objective way of evaluating results.

You named farm guys like Casas and Bello, who were both DD additions as some sort of comment on Bloom's prospects, and failed to mention Whitlock or the somewhat promising Wong. Sounded like ignoring, to me. Bloom acquired prospects have already outperformed DD prospects, and we have yet to see a Bloom drafted or IFA signing promoted. If that doesn't say a lot, nothing will get through to you. You really think Bloom's drafting and farm should already be affecting our W-L record? Really? If yes, then you are missing the whole picture of what a farm system is or can be. The fact that Bloom's best draftees and signings were from HS or teen IFA signings means a longer wait for impatient fans is a reality but is not a bad thing.

Too many of you guys believed 2 falsehoods: 1. That a farm can be fully rebuilt in 1-3 years. 2. That a rebuilt farm will produce significant players in 1-3 years, and not even 1-3 years after the 1-3 years it took to rebuild. You expected a drafted prospect to contribute in a significant way in just 2-3 years. Our farm has never done that. Our most impactful home grown stars took this long to even make the big club, and some took a year or two in the bigs to become the stars they are/were: Devers (IFA in 2013- did not play in '13) debut in 2017 for 58 games (3+ years on farm/4+ years since signed) Betts (drafted 2011): debut 2015 for 52 games (4+ years on farm) Bogey (IFA in 2009-did not play in '09) debut in 2013 for 18 games (3+ yrs farm/4+ since signing) Lester (drafted 2002) debut 2006 for 15 starts (4+ years) Why expect results in 3 or less years, especially since the 2020 draft was just 4 rounds and we've seen HS players drafted... first 2 in 2020 first and fourth in 2021 first 3 in 2022

Add Walter to DD's prospects with an ETA of late 2023.

Hard to know. We have seen some help already, which you ignored, but not from drafted or IFA signings, just yet, and in that area, it may be a longer wait than you can accept, mostly due to Bloom drafting many HS players with his highest picks. Bloom acquired prospects that have played already: Whitlock (already proven to be better than any DD prospect) Wong Downs German Winckowski Z Kelly Seabold R Hern (Cordero, Schreiber and Refsnyder were not prospects, when acquired.) One could argue that Bloom's called-up farm additions (all via trade or Rule 5) have already shown more hope than all of DD's acquired prospects combined. That alone is astounding and objective. You can continue to ignore it. Soxprospects ETAs on Bloom's drafted or IFA prospects (with current ranking): 2023 2024 4. Yorke Late 2024 1. Mayer 29. Drohan 2025 10. Paulino 16. Jordan 20. Hickey 22. Kavadas 2026 or beyond 5. Bleis 9. Romero 11. Anthony 21. Coffey 28. Rodrigiez-Cruz 30. Brannon Acquired b y trade ETAs 2023 14. E Valdez 2024 26. WAbreu, A Binelas DD Prospects knocking on the door: 2023 7. Mata (may be the best DD prospect of all.) 12. Murphy (likely as a low-leverage RP'er) 2024 6. Rafaela (lots of promise) 17. T Ward 18. Lugo 19. Perales 2025 10. Paulino (2025 is 8 yrs after signed as IFA!) 15. Wikelman (has upside) 24. Bonaci (89 BB/89 Ks, this season)

Knee jerk reactionary moves breed success and less excuse making?

Also, Casas and Bello were not Bloom additions- nor were Duran, Dalbec and other less than impressive prospects getting the call. You blame this on Bloom, too. Wow!

You expect a farm to start producing studs earlier than 3 years? Look at the players coming up from DD's farm. How long ago were they drafted or signed as IFAs?c Look at the studs DD inherited, and how long before they were acquired by Ben and Theo. You should know better. You can blame Bloom for drafting HS players over college, which prolongs the ETAs, but had he not drafted Mayer, would you have been happy? Casas was drafted in 2018. Duran drafted in 2018. Houck was drafted in 2017. Bello: IFA in 2017. Crawford drafted in 2017. Dalbec drafted in 2016. Bazardo: IFA 2014 All other inherited, homegrown players were acquired in 2013 or earlier. Not a single DD prospect was called up within 3 years. I'm not sure how many Ben or Theo ones were.

I forgot to add JBJ to Bloom's winter additions. (I added on this post, but the editing button is not working, today.) If you do a WAR calculation for each category and then convert to WAR per dollar, the picture will become clear and is as objective as any one using W-L results as the only gauge for grading a GM's performance and effect on an inherited, troubled team about to go on a highly restricted budget. That's not excuse-making. It is reality.

I think choosing just W-Ls records is a subjective choice. "Results orientated" should include farm building and grading the results of each move made by Bloom and not by previous GMs. That is as "objective" as your choice of "rationalized" evaluation.

Still, if you compare the complete financial vs return for all of Bloom's winter additions vs DD's returning players, the balance sheet would be very unbalanced. In Lux Tax Dollars: Bloom in-season additions (salaries not pre-rated) 6.0 Pham Min Hosmer Min McGuire Min Almonte Min Chang Bloom winter additions: 23.3 Story 10.0 Paxton 9.38 Barnes 7.0 Wacha 5.0 Hill 4.0 Diekman (traded for McGuire) 3.0 Strahm Min Refsnyder Bloom previous additions: 7.0 Kike 3.6 Dugo 2.7 Pivetta 1.2 Arroyo Min Whitlock Min Schreiber Min Wong Min German Min Cordero, Seabold, Wink, Kelly, Ort, RHern, Downs DD inherited: 25.6 Sale 22.0 JD 17.0 Nate 1.40 Taylor Min Houck, Dalbec, Crawford, Bello, Casas, Duran (drafted), Mata (IFA) Pre DD: 20.0 Bogey 11.2 Devers Min DHern, Bazardo To me, this breakdown tells a significant story about Bloom's additions vs inherited players, and the best inherited players are pre-DD, the second best are DD drafted or IFA, and the worst are DD acquired via trade, FA or extensions players.

One could argue that Bloom could have traded these guys, but the very people who bash Bloom the most, except for maybe Red (to his credit), would have been the most irate had he done that right before their decline. (In some cases, he'd have had to pay part of their contracts, spurring even harsher criticism.)

Yes. A big omission on my part, at least for 2023 only.

If you notice, many of the biggest Bloom bashers were cliff deniers. No coincidence.

So, just can them all for the sake of change? The one major complaint against Bloom, and I hardly ever see the Bloom bashers use it, is more of a hindsight point. Bloom should have/could have foreseen the coming declines of returning vets and traded them before their declines. Many would have been after the promising 2021 season, and I can just imagine the bashers' reaction had he traded all major players but Bogey, Devers, Vaz, Housk and Whitlock. A GM who inherits players about to decline can choose to maximize their value by trading them when their stock is high. Fan reaction to trading players after good years can often be extreme. (See trading Renfroe, although the disgust was equally about the return we got.)

I was thinking major expenditures, but even Diekman case turned positive after the trade that dumped his $4M for 2023, about $1M from this year and netted us a starting catcher in McGuire.

He has only played over 148 games once, back in 2017. He will likely pass 148, this year, but he only has 3 seasons over 112 games and 4 over 102. He'll turn 31, early next year. It's hard to imagine him improving on his injury history.

Only Barnes is on Bloom, unless you count Story or Kike. He still wants to blame Bloom for the cliff.

.Dream on.

No, I meant what person has been the best thing that has happened to the Sox in over 80 years. Not who was the best person to watch. Sure, we don't win in 2004 and 2007 without Papi, Manny and maybe a couple other players. 2013 without Papi, too. We don't win in 2018 without a handful of key players, but JH is directly responsible for all 4 rings and a bunch of highly competitive non ring teams. Without Henry we'd be looking at 100+ years without a ring. It's not close.

I was hoping we might finish in the top half of AL teams by W-L records, but these last 3 tight games have pretty much dashed those hopes. 7. CWS 76-76 8. MN 74-78 (-2.0) 9. BOS 72-79 (-3.5) with 11 games to play v tough opps

The Sox have always been near the luxury tax line and go through cycles of re-setting and going over the line, but never by too much. In that sense, nothing has changed, and maybe it never will, but IMO, the team seems to spend only when they think a ring season is near or upon us. 2013 was the exception, as I think that team surprised Henry. (They did trade Iggy & Montas for Jake Peavy at the deadline, and that added to the payroll.) I think sometimes JH gives the okay to spend more, when the team has done so badly that fans are restless- like after 2015, but even then, we had a solid core of young players on that 2016 team and had a chance to compete, that year, when spending grew. I don't think Henry and Bloom felt like 2021 was "the year," either. I actually think the Story signing was a late decision based on falling ticket and NESN purchases and grumbling about not "going for it." This time, however, increased spending was not paired with trading several highly-ranked prospects, like it was from 2016-2018. I think that part of the our history has changed, and maybe for good. That does not mean we will never trade top prospects, again, but I doubt we ever come near to what DD's plan entailed. That was not a plan for sustained winning. Just my opinion. Here is a list of the biggest gains in opening day player spending budgets by year: 47 2010 (ended up worse than 2008 and 2009) 36 2018 28 2004 28 2015 (after finishing last in 2 of the previous 3 years- did improve, some) 26 2022 (after 3 years of ups and downs- ended up worse than '21) 23 2007 19 2000 (the beginning of the building up to 2004) Years the Sox paid a luxury tax: 1998 1999 (pre-Henry) 2004 2005 2006 2007 2010 2011 2015 2016 2018 2019 2022 Some observations: 1. Once the 3rd year in a row penalties were added, the Sox have never gone 3 years paying the tax. 2. Going over 2 straight years has been common. 3. Staying under for 1-3 years has been the range ( 1 year twice, 3 years once, since 2004. (4 years from 1999-2003- mostly pre JH)) I think we go over in 2023 or 2024 but not both. The nation is restless and grumbling, but the second criteria for spending big- having a rising young core is not quite there, yet.

Of course I enjoy watching the players and the great game of baseball more than an owner. I hardly know anything about Henry. He is still, b y far, the best thing that has happened to the Red Sox for over 80 years. It's not even close. Without him, we'd still have zero rings since 1918. Unless you think we'd have won without him, there is no debate, IMO.