moonslav59

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.

Do you have a link to Henry's edict?

I hope you are being sarcastic. Henry has been the best thing to happen to the Sox in almost 90 years.

So, with these you forgot #5 JH sells the team to a bigger spender.

If Diekman can net us a starting catcher, I’m not sure about anyone’s trade value or lack there of.

I’m called by my middle name as many are. I did not choose it.

My optimism on 2023 is not as high as it was pre-2022, but I think we should get better. Brining back Bogey and Wacha will take up a significant chunk of the winter spending budget, but we should have enough to improve on the 2022 JD, Hill, JBJ, Diekman and Strahm. I think we have already improved our 1B for 2023 with Casas and Hosmer. We should be able to equal or better our .750 DH OPS by using some sort of rotation or platoon which may include some from this group: Arroyo, Refsnyder, Casas or Hosmer (whoever is not at 1B), Dalbec, Cordero, Pham or E Valdez. It's not glitzy, but if we can improve at 1B/DH without spending a dime, we can then upgrade other slots with more resources: SS (Bogey or Swanson?) or 2B (K Wong?), if Story can play SS. RF (Nimmo?) SP 1 or 2 (via trade?) RP (too many to list) SP 3 or 4 (too many to list) Bloom has to hit on nearly all of these key 5 slots, but he'll have more money than he had in 2020, 2021 and 2022.

That's why I said "I get why the pen runs are more memorable." 2023 Pen Whitlock, Houck and Schreiber Addition Addition Taylor Barnes Crawford German That's 9 for 8 slots. On the farm: Kelly, Danisg, Wink, Seabold plus maybe converted minor league SP'ers Mata, Ward, Walter, Murphy, Santos and maybe Bazardo or Ort. I think we'll add one solid RP'er or two that I hope do better than Deik & Strahm.

He has trade value. Not much, but some.

Will Casas be our next Yankee killer?

I get why the pen runs are more memorable, but Hill and Wacha let up more and more per IP.

Sorry. My post was not clearly stated. My bad. Diekman had trade value, yes. We got the CWS to pay his full 2022-2023 contract while giving us our starting catcher for the next 2 years. If he had value, maybe Barnes (with some cash) might, too. (I went back and edited my previous post.)