moonslav59

I have not heard anyone say that word in a long time. Strawman is arguing against someone or something that does not even exist. It would be like saying, "All those posters who predicted Dalbec would hit 50 HRs were totally wrong!"

I'm not saying he'll be worth it but most of the biggest contracts given out have been to players over 30-31. This guy will sell tickets, cable viewerships and jerseys like no other player in memory. All it takes is one desperate GM to make an absurd offer. I think one will. I doubt it reaches my example number, but I just put that out there to show that there likely is a number the Yanks will not match.

Well, they were the main reason we did not reset.

Besides the 15 players listed as 2023 arrivals, many of which may be inconsequential, here is the soxprospects.com list of 2024 arrivals: 1. Mayer (late '24) 5. York (mid) 17. Lugo (mid) 18. TWard (opening day) 22. Kavadas (late) 26. Abreu (opening day) 28. Drohan (late) 32. R Hernandez 33. Binelas 37. Ryan Fernandez 38. C Koss 44. D Hamilton 49. AJ Politi 50. J Wallace 56. Granberg D Feltman

Don't forget the crybaby fans' failures, too!

No doubt. I'm not for spending big on the DH and bench. If he hit lefty and played better RF, I'd see it differently.

What did Matz do to get $44M/4? Alex Wood and Alex Cobb had some previous success, but $25M/2 and $20M/2? DeSclafini got 3 years and $36M for having a 2021 season with 40 more IP than Wacha got, this year and nearly the same ERA+. Tell me how Kikuchi got $36M/3without ever having an ERA+ above 93. Wacha will be paid more than what you think. Maybe less than my projections, but a QO for one year is not a bad risk.

Mancini might draw some Sox interest. He can be a back-up/insurance 1B and corner OF, as well as a DH. We could then trade Dalbec or Hosmer, but I'm not sure the idea of Refsnyder as our near FT RF'er will be the plan. (Mancini bats RH'd like Ref, so not a great fit for a RF platoon. If we sign Nimmo, we will likely go with a DH rotation that could include a mix of players (some won't be on the 26 man): Ref, Arroyo, Dalbec, Hosmer, EValdez, Wong and the very unlikely $12M man, Pham.

The opening day roster did not include ERod or Sale. It also had JBJ in CF and Pillar as the 4th OF'er. https://www.soxprospects.com/2020SB.htm Plus, I said roster, not opening day roster and neither did Old Red in the post I responded to.

Others blame Cora. Others Bloom. Others JH. Others various combinations of each.

Wacha may think $18M/1 is better than $28M/2, if he can have a good 2023 season, he'd set himself up for a longer term and better deal. I admit, $28M/2 would probably get Wacha to turn down a QO, assuming he's certain he'd get it. With inflation and the recency effect, I think Hill will get $6M/1 in 2023.

Why not tell me why Wacha won't get $12-13M/1 and Hill $5-6M/1? I think Wacha may be offered $28/2 or $36M/3. I've seen higher offers for less than what Wacha did in 2022. Hill pitched better than $5M/1.

That roster was horrible. 26 man or 40 man. It was horrific beyond 4-5 good players and 5-10 decent role players.

I think the Astros win it all vs the Mets.

I thought you meant Wacha + Hill vs Nate. I doubt Wacha takes $12M/1 + Hill $6M/1, so I'm not sure the comp is realistic.

I said I'm against offering Nate a QO, many times. I'm not sure why you persist. He may get a $33M/3 offer, so $18M/1 is not absurd. I would not like it, but it is understandable- barely.

I'm not sure what Wach's previous highest contract has to do with a QO offer. I agree, it's an overpay, but it's just one year. I'm not for offering Nate a QO, but if the idea is to reset in '24, I would understand the offer.

The one year aspect of the QO might make them worthy of an offer, especially if the pan is to reset in '24 not '23. It also gives time for Bello, Mata, Walter, Crawford and others to try and earn a 2024 slot.

Are there still posters saying DD totally decimated the farm or was that just a strawman construction?

Look at the 2020 season, as well (all players with 0.7 or higher bWAR): bWAR 5.7 Bogey 4.4 Devers 3.3 Wacha 2.7 Schreiber 2.6 Pivetta 2.5 Story 2.2 Vaz 1.8 Whitlock 1.6 Houck 1.5 Nate 1.2 Ref 1.2 Dugo 1.1 JD 0.9 Hill 0.9 McGuire 0.8 Kike 0.7 Arroyo 0.7 Sawamura fWAR has the top 5 Sox pitchers as all Bloom additions: 1.8 Hill 1.7 Schreiber 1.5 Wacha 1.5 Pivetta 1.4 Whitlock 1.3 Bello

I get the feeling you think I am not understanding why low fan attendance and viewership is important, or that I lessen its importance when the team makes decisions on what to do, next. I think the Story signing was an example of how management hears the fans and plans with them in mind, while also trying to balance the longer term outlook, which they know most fans don't think about or care about, except in the abstract. I know full well, the product on the field has to match the high ticket prices and cost of a NESN subscription, or profits will suffer. I feel like you think "if I only understood" all this, my opinion might change. I may be wrong about this, and in some ways, maybe I do the same with those who disagree with my positions by thinking I just "need to help them understand." I'm no better than anyone here, and maybe I'm reading your messages incorrectly. I know I am in a minority by wanting us to build a sustainable winning system, even if it comes at a heavy cost for a 3-5 year window. I did not expect it to take 4-5 years. I always felt that if we ever resume paying near the tax line and going over for 1-2 years, here and there, we could get back to serious competition in 3 or less years. I expected the farm to take longer than 3 years to get to the point it is now, and that is extremely gratifying to me. I get that teh average fan could care less about this fact, but to me, it is a sign that we are getting closer to a sustainable, winning plan. (The prospects thread: https://www.talksox.com/forum/threads/20299-2022-Prospects lists 15-16 players that are expected to see MLB time in 2023.) I'm not for hoarding prospects. I think there are times- maybe every 3-6 years, where a strategic prospect trade is needed to obtain a key piece that puts us over the top- like the Pedro, Schill, Beckett and Sale trades. I'm not so sure this winter is that time, but I do think that time is near and the farm is deep and strong enough to withstand one such deal, but not 3-4 deals like those in a short window.

I disagree. I think we have done better than we should have, under Bloom. Things are better than they seem, and the outlook is better than the bashers think they are.

I don't believe the 13.50 ERA in Wacha's last 2 starts is the real Wacha more than I believe he's a 2.70 ERA pitcher, but I'm pretty certain he is neither. I trust he can come closer to 3.50 in 2023 than Nate. I can see offering them both a QO, but if they both take it, how are we improving on 2022? They'd take up close to 2/3 of the winter spending budget with SS, RF and the pen still needing serious attention, not to mention DH.

The shuffling sand piggy-backing needs to stop with Houck and Whitlock. I share your views on which of the two is better suited for starting and relieving, but moving Whitlock to the rotation has to coincide with major additions to the pen, which I'm not so sure will happen, or if they do, will it mean we go with Dugo, Refsnyder and some scrub signing at corner OF or count on Arroyo to play FT in the middle IF, to save enough resources to pay for the pen upgrades? This rotation looks okay, not great, to me: Wacha Sale Whitlock Pivetta Bello (Crawford, Wink, Mata, Walter) The pen would then look like this: ___FA___ Houck ___FA___ Schreiber ___FA___ Barnes Taylor, Kelly, German, Danish, Brasier, converted SP'er...

Year one: we are forced to trade Betts and include Price in the deal and end up paying half his contract for 3 years. We don't even spend enough to replace their salaries. We have 15-20 weak to very weak spots on the 40 and a bottom 5 farm. Year two: we spend $40M to upgrade some of those 15-20 weak slots and make some traded to improve the farm, at the expense of the big club roster. Year three: we look like we are spending only $40M again but have less than 15-20 slots to fill, then we make a semi-major splash signing of Story late in March. The farm has slowly improved, but Houck, Dalbec and Duran were the main prospects we added since the mid 2017 Devers call-up. The budget barely gave enough to fill some important roles with with %5-10M, mostly 1 year deals and a bunch of waiver wire pick-ups and under the radar additions like Schreiber, refsnyder and Whitlock. Does this look like the making of a 2 or 3 year rebuild? If you think yes, please explain how that is possible. Either you don't think the roster of 2020 was as bad as it looked, or you think the farm can be built up and the players developed to ML worthiness in 3 or less years, or you think $40M AAV in winter spending should have been enough to fill 15-20 slots on the 40. IMO, I think it's pretty incredible that year 4 is showing to be a major year for farm infusion. Whether they pan out or not, is yet to be known, but in terms of sheer numbers, the impact may be stunning. Much of this has to do with prospects here before Bloom, but it should be noted, he did not trade almost all of our best prospects in the 3 years the big club was suffering. (I'm pretty sure he did not want to, but there is a good chance he was also told not to.) I know it pains many fans to think we might still have a year or two to go, and when we look at over $200M in player salaries, excuse-making gets tiring and unimportant to many. Could Bloom have done better with the few signings he made? Of course, although this past winter's signings were some of our brightest areas. However, the JBJ trade darkened everyone's opinions- and rightfully so. I don't think anyone can deny that a rebuild was taking place. We are at the point where many feel it is or most definitely should be complete, but it doesn't always work out as we wish, and it's basically up to JH to decide, if 2023 is the beginning of the post-rebuild era. I know many don't want to think beyond what's in front of their noses, but do we really want to go all-in or nearly all-in just to reset in 2024? Maybe JH will, for the first time, pay taxes and be penalized for 3rd year overages, but I am acting on the assumption, he will not. Will going all in in 2023, mean good bye to Devers as we reset in '24? Will going all in mean a bunch of one year deals, so we can keep Devers in '24, but see us not replacing many of the holes left by departing one year signees? Will the farm help be enough to fill most of those slots and allow us to be highly competitive in '24, as we reset, or will we have traded some of those prospects to win in '23- only to suffer in '24 ands beyond as a result of going for it now? Only JH and the ownership group knows for sure. Bloom probably has an idea, already, but I'm not so sure on that. I think the Story signing was a late change of plans, but that is just a hunch, I have.