moonslav59

Rafaela with a bases loaded triple give Greenville an 11-10 lead. (He is 3 for 4 and batting .324.)

The fire sale to end all fire sales.

Me neither. We've blown a bunch of saves. Our pen kept us in many games, early in the season, when the starters were struggling, and the bats were silent. I doubt having Houck or Whitlock closing would have made a huge impact, but who knows? The offense killed us early. The pen killed us in the middle, and now it's something different every loss. We're back to Devers throwing the ball away, and the bats sleeping.

We're not even sure what he's asking, and how much he will accept. I don't think he's demanding top 3 pay.

You never give your idea on a plan. You have repeatedly said (in so many words) prospects are not to be valued. You leave is guessing what you mean, because you won't say it.

Look it up yourselves.

He had his bags packed and ticket bought.

McDonough is now 4 for 5 for Greenville, who was up 8-3 but now down 10-8.

V Santos went 7 IP, tonight. 4 H 1 ER 0 BB 5 K

Koss has really come to life. We got him for Yoan Aybar. Maybe he needs to be at Woo.

I don't think they have high hopes for Granberg or Northcut. That being said, I think nthey have room for him on the Woo roster.

If you wont pay Mookie, how do you replace him, if you won't pay the next guy Mookie money of keep the farm improving? Tell us your idea. It's easy to point at ideas that are not working, but tell us yours. Saying we need to cut our blown saves in half is not a plan. Should we have signed R Iglesias, instead of Story? People swore signing Suzuki instead of Story was the solution. Now, cricketts.

He's against everything and for nothing but criticizing everything and anything.

This has nothing to do with the question at hand. I know many Sox fans are not Bloom supporters. I still talk to a lot of my friends in Maine, and go there for 4-7 weeks every summer. So, since you won't answer my question, can I assume you'd trade the farm away like DD for a 1-2 year window. Remember, it's Henry who decides how much we spend, but you act like it's Bloom. Bloom got us Story, an all around player to replace Fred Flintstone. He got us Wacha and Hill to replace Richards and Perez. He got us Strahm and Diekman to replace Ottavino and Andriese, and we are worse than last year. You and all the talk show callers can bash away at Bloom all you want, it doesn't change my opinion, and my idea of what a good long term plan for sustained winning looks like. Just because DD's trades all look good in hindsight, doesn't mean the guys we trade, now will suck like most of DD's ended up doing. There was a time talk show callers were wanting to trade the stars we have now, when they were "valueless" prospects. There is a time to go for broke, and a time not to. Blame who you wish. I'm not blaming Bloom, Cora or last of all Henry, but your beef should be with Henry more than Bloom

You are very good at criticizing the plans of Bloom and some of posters suggested ideas, but you rarely give your own plan or solutions. How can we win now AND set up the future for continued winning? (Please don't say Henry should spend more.)

I get it. I'm not trying to act like I'm better than other fans. I hate seeing those stars "wasted," too, but they did get a ring and 3 straight division wins, so not all was wasted. Devers may be around for more.

The rebuild before 2013 was highly criticized by the media and fans. Somehow, it worked, but we did suck in 3 of the years surrounding that ring season. I agree, I don't think fans will ever except a quick, total scrap and clean slate restart. It seems like some fans are not liking the slower approach either. Impatience is something Sox fans have no shortage of. I prefer the long approach. I expected a very bad stretch, and it wasn't as long as I thought it might be. I'm not for totally hoarding prospects, and I think some sort of balanced approach can be established, but only after the farm reaches a certain level, and the budget is flexible enough to supplement the influx of young talent. I feel like we are on the right path, so an disappointing season or two along the way does not upset me as much as it appears to upset others. This team is not "close enough" to make several drastic moves to make us a top contender. Someday, we will get to that point, and I think henry will know when that is, and open the wallet wider to make a strong push for our 5th ring, without dismantling the future.

Very true, but I really think they thought they could repeat what they did with the pen, again, this year. (There is still time for miracles.) I'm not saying we'd have struck gold with a big closer signing, but the plan has not worked like last year.

Maybe in the sense that Bloom and Cora felt they could repeat last year's success with an unheralded pen. The other sense was about the idea that winning may have prevented the fans from more readily accepting a more extreme rebuild, including this coming trade deadline and winter. Had we really sucked, last year, and truly wanted to start winning this year, we'd have likely not tried to repeat the same pen plan, again. Just my opinion.

I remember wishing we signed Scherzer, instead of HRam and Pablito, but at that time, Price had a better and longer track record. (He became a FA the year after Scherzer.) Both pretty much started their careers at age 23/24. Here's a comp on their pre-FA records: Scherzer (161 GS/1013 IP): 82-35 3.52 (117 ERA+) 1.197 WHIP and 3.53 K:BB ratio Price 104-56 3.09 (126 ERA+) 1.132 WHIP and 3.70 K:BB Price was better in every one of these stats listed. He was 29, when he became a FA- same as Scherzer. It's hard for a GM to project a FA signing going forward. Many felt Scherzer was a headcase, and Price was a true professional in every way. The difference is what they did afterwards: Scherzer (208 GS/ 1347 IP) 104-48 2.75 (154 ERA+) 0.954 WHIP and 5.88 K:BB Price (109 GS/671 IP) 51-26 3.85 (117 ERA+) 1.230 WHIP and 3.71 K:BB It's rare a pitcher gets batter at age 30 and beyond. Price expectedly declined, but maybe more than most thought he would. Price was better pre-age 30.

We don't really have a solid 8th inning guy either, unless you count Schreiber, so he could be a 1-2 inning closer and maybe reach that IP goal.

He made his bed. I doubt anyone is willing to trade us a solid RP'er, right now. We can keep saying it over and over, but at this point, there is likely no outside-the-system solution. It's Houck or Whitlock or a prayer that someone else improves and takes over the role. It's not promising, but it is what it is. Perhaps the success of last year hurt us in more ways than this.

Your comment about us not caring about winning was a bit out of line, IMO. I get your point. We'd have many more wins, had we been able to cut our blown saves in half, without adding losses elsewhere by removing a good pitcher from his previous role/slot. Once we started the season with the roster we had, there was little hope of adding a closer from outside the system. It had to come from the minors or from a pitcher already being used in another role. I think the vast majority of us feel Cora should have tried Houck or Whitlock or even both at closer, at some point, this season, so far. It may or may not have worked. Even if it worked, we may have lost as much from the role they vacated as we gained in the role they switched to. It obvious, the plan did has not worked, so far. The Sale injury, the continued troubles from Barnes, Robles and others counted on to do better than they have all hurt the plan. I never liked the Diekman signing from the start. I guess Strahm and the Scheiber call up moved cancel out some of the bad choices, but pen choices are always pretty much a shot in the dark. That's not meant to defend Cora or Bloom, but many felt the exact same way about the pen, last year, and it seemed like it worked way more often than it didn't, despite Ottavino being pretty much a flop, and Andriese barely making it half way through the season. Maybe, something happens, this year, like last year. Maybe a deadline move or two helps as much or more than Robles & Davis did, last year. Maybe the return of Sale and or Paxton allows us to move a starter into a key relief role, and they'll do even better than Richards did in relief, last year. It's hard to know or predict. I'm not sure anyone felt good about our pen going into the season, but with a limited winter spending budget, Bloom chose to spend in other areas. I scratched my head at some of his moves and signings, and I realize no GM is perfect, but I still like the overall direction Bloom is taking us, and I still think Cora gets the most out of most of our players, most of the time. I disagree, often enough, but I still am glad we have both. No, they don't walk on water, and do occasionally step in muddy puddles.

He pitched beyond 18 batters in 24 of his 31 starts, last year, and did pretty well. He ended the season with 8 straight starts facing 20 or more batters, while never allowing more than 3 ERs (0-2 ERs in 6 of those 8) From May 3rd to the end of the season, Hill started 25 games. The least amount of batters he faced were: 16 16 17 19 19 19 Only 3 of those last 25 starts saw him not get to the 3rd time through.

Unless we agree with you, we don't care about- our win-loss record? Maybe go 0-7 in Whitlock starts, had we started someone else. Maybe Whitlock would not cut our blown saves in half, had we used him as just a one inning relief guy only, something he's never done in his career. It's easy to look at the 3-4 record when Whiltock starts and in hindsight, say it didn't work, but he really had just 2 bad starts. If you want to look at his record in hindsight, why not look at how he has seemed to do much better in 2+ innings than just 1-1.2 IP games. Wouldn't that maybe show using him as atradional 1 IP pitcher would not be a good idea? All this being said, I wish Cora had tried Houck or Whitlock as "the closer," but we'll never know if it would have worked better, of if the guy used to take their place would have lost more games for us than the switch might have gained.