moonslav59

1) The money spent per win comment was directed at the comment about the job Beane did. 2) The comment about rather being an A's fan than several other low spending or low performing teams has to do with them winning more games than many teams over many years and having some exciting players to watch for many years, too. I think my point and distinctions were pretty clear.

What about it? You tell me. He's given one of the strictest budgets in MLB, but you guys totally ignore that context. I'd hate being an A's fan watching that, but at least he got guys like Olsen and Chapman and Murphy and... Would you rather watch the Pirates over the last 25 years?

If you are using just advancing into the second round of any playoffs as your rubric, then yea, maybe. The only measure I mentioned was wins per dollar spent and who I'd rather be a fan of. (I didn't imply my measure was the only one or the best one.)

As long as you keep constructing them, I'll fira away. Not sure what the Candy Man has to do with this, but I'll refrain from asking for clarification, as that upsets you, so much. Still waiting for links. Don't be lazy.

Under the strict spending limits imposed on Beane, the A's must be pretty close to being a top 3 team in wins per dollar spent in MLB over Beane's tenure as GM. How is he a fake or phony anymore than other GMs who often promise the world, knowing full well, they can't deliver? Over his term, I'd much rather have been an A's fan than a Pirates and many other team's fan.

I never said Dugy did. I was responding to the point about getting prospects. Ant trade of a star may or may not be just prospects. Sometimes, as in the Lester and Lackey trades, we got ML level players in return. Also, We did not get Dugy, Downs and Wong for 5-10 years of Betts. We got them for a 60 game season of Betts, so I'm not sure the deal was as lops-ded as you make it sound by saying "Dugy for a future HOF'er." While the statement is true, you ignore the context that it was maybe 660 games of Verdugo for just 60 games of Betts. Then, there is the dumping half of Price's 3 years of contract remaining. That added to the value of the deal, from our side, much more than shedding Bett's 2020 contract, which did us no good at all, really. We got one year of Jason Bay for a few months of HOF- worthy Manny.

Curious why you mentioned, "at least temporarily."

Better than the idea of getting just a comp pick, but yes, it’s not something anyone loves. BTW, Verdugo and his 5 years of team control was not a prospect. Downs and Wong were.

I told you already. Several times. Stop being “lazy” as you called me. The strawman comment is 100% spot on accurate. It’s your MO. Every time you construct one, I will call you in it. I’d you want the strawman comments to end, stop constructing them.

With nothing in return or not replacing their contracts on the budget, likely last place. IMO

It would also clear room for rule 5 protectees and future FA singnees.

Wrong again. I’ve told you several times my circle of Sox discussions goes way beyond this site, but again you choose to believe alt facts and argue with strawman.

The guy who still owes us the link that shows “all reviews of the Betts trade said Bloom failed.”

All fact and little opinion.

Maybe his misreads the masses.

It's not just the Wink case. The vast majority of SP'ers do better with anyone-but-Vaz. Small sample sizes, unbalanced sample size and laeger/balanced sample sizes almost all show the same results, pitcher-by- pitcher, year-by-year or careers as a whole. You can debate or dispute the ability of a catcher to make a significant difference, but the facts are the facts.

To use one of your favorite phrases, "You ignore" that Winckowski's other start w Vaz was against a team that is also "nothing more than a minor league team in major league uniforms," so the small sample size point does make a point.

BTV accepted this multi-team deal: To BOS RHP Bednar SP J Quintana C Rodrigues (prospect) 1B Josh Bell To PIT Duran Dalbec Downs Gonzalez Jimenez Milas (C prospect from WSH) To WSH Jordan We get a decent rental SP'er in Quintana, a solid RHP in Bednar with several years of team control remaining, a solid 1B rental in Bell and a possible catcher for the future in Rodriquez. We give up more than Bloom would likely do, but this deal might make us top contenders, if other players are stepping up their game and one of Sale or Paxton are contributing. It allows Whitlock to return to the pen along with using Bednar is a pen role. Bell gives us a reliable 1Bman for 2+ months.

I guess "in over your head" might have varying comotations and degrees of suckiness among different posters.

Yes, and the one time he didn't, it was Wong not Plawecki. 2.93 v Vaz (70.2 IP) / 4.21 Career (182) 11.25 w Wong (4.0) N/A w Plawecki / 2.87 Career (53) Big Nate 3.10 w Plawecki (52.1) / 2.99 Career (162) 3.97 w Vaz (11.1) /4.55 Career (166) 1.93 w Wong (4.2) Wacha 0.40 w Plawecki (22.1) 3.69 w Vaz (31.2) Hill 2.89 w Plawecki (9.1) 4.72 w Vaz (40.0) Whitlock 0.00 w Plawecki (4) / 3.29 Career (13.2) 3.92 w Vaz (43.2) / 2.52 Career (107) 0.00 w Wong (1.0) Houck 1.41 w Vaz (32.0) / 1.55 Career (87) 9.28 w Plawecki (10.2)/ 6.31 Career (41) Davis 0.00 w Plawecki (8.0) / 4.38 Career (12.1) 2.16 w Vaz (16.2) / 2.17 Career (29) Note: some very small sample sizes and some very unbalanced IP totals in most cases- like Plawecki has not caught a single inning with Pivetta, this season.

Are they the only 2 catchers in MLB? But what about CERA...?

I doubt that is ever a reason for a promotion, since it's unknown the player will do better at the higher level. If the value increases with the promotion, it would be just as helpful to keep the player than to trade him, IMO. I think this kid is the real deal, and I think Bloom is looking at getting serious input from the farm over the next few years. That's part of the strategy of improving the long term outlook while building up the 40 man roster, at the same time. It's a delicate balance, but so far, Bloom has traded away very few prospects, and none that had super high value. The highest ranked prospect traded was Aldo Ramirez (correct me, if I'm wrong), and he was ranked 9th by soxprospects.com, last spring. He's added prospects Whitlock, German, Winckowski, Seabold, Binelas, Hamilton, Koss, Downs, Wong, R Hernandez and others via trades. Clearly, this has been a high priority. The results on many of these guys are yet to be seen. Surely, some will fail, but there is some good talent in this group, and some will likely do well. Whitlock has already shown a plus. Bloom has also benefited from some DD prospects that eventually rose up to ML readiness and have contributed, namely Houck and Dalbec, but there are more that are nearing ML readiness, soon- like Duran, Casas, Bello, Mata, Murphy and Rafaela, among others. I'm liking what I see on the farm, but we are still not a top 7-10 system. At best, we might be viewed as top 10-14.

Same with my state, but they don't need to pass the test to advance to the next grade. (IN high school, they do need to pass them to get credit, though.)

The other thing is that Arroyo hit pretty well, last year, and a platoon vs LH'd starters, which has been rare, this year, is such a small sample size, that one could argue, Arroyo was given a reasonable amount of time to find his 2021 offensive groove, but he failed. Blame Cora for his failure, but it's not like he was expected to hit .550. It's not like Refsnyder was a known plus, either. I'm not defending Arroyo in RF, but his poor offense could not have been expected. We've faced 16 LH'd starters this year to 46 RH'd starters, so we're talking about 25% of the games played and a 9th hole batter.

You don't think talking about predictions on win totals has to do with the moves Bloom made or didn't make? The title of the thread is Grading Bloom & Cora. It's fine to discuss them separately, but when you bring up expectations of wins, I don't think I'm going off on a wild tangent to bring up Bloom's influence in those expectations. I also find it interesting that expectations seem to factor into a manager's grades but not necessarily a GM's grade.