moonslav59

More than just "get under the cap." it was a massive payroll cut that put us significantly under the tax line (about $10M under.) The 2020 salaries were pro-rated, so it's hard to compare apples to apples, but we all know we cut a lot more salary than we added. In 2021, we added about $40M in new spending, but lost about that much in expiring or traded salaries. Only the Story signing in late March of this year, did the negative trend end.

Until the Story signing, the Sox GMs went a pretty long stretch where the new money spent did not equal departing money via trades, releases and free agency. If I'm not wrong, that time period lasted from the start of 2019 to March 20, 2022. That's almost 3 years. (Maybe even counting the Story contract still leaves a net negative dollar amount.) According to cot, we started the 2019 season at $236M and ended the season at $228M. We are at $141M now, counting $16M for Price, so the Story signing apparently put us a net $5M up, but for over 3 years, we were a net negative on new spending. He's done something like this, before, so I'm not alarmed, but some just look at the total budget and wonder why Bloom is not more successful. Max has done a good job showing how little many of our biggest contracts have contributed to the 2022 team. Your point is still correct, but some context may be needed..

They miss a lot, but hit enough to make an impact. (Mazza wasn't too bad in '21.) It was Beeks (Nate trade) that let up the granny, last night in NY.

5-4 keeps us in it, but makes it tougher. Remember, each win we get means a loss to a team we are competing with. We'll still have a month left to the season with many games vs TBR and TOR. Sure 6-3 or 7-2 would be better, but 5-4 will keep us alive. Beat PIT, today!

And, what are we hearing from many of us fans and posters? "We better lock up Bogey and Devers, or I'm going to be very mad!"

One aspect of being a GM must be maddening. You want to keep a star on your team and offer him a fair or slightly above market rate deal, but what is the market? The market is really what the wildest GM offers or MIGHT offer, but how do you know what that number is, or if teams like LAD and NYY will even pursue your player? So, if you want to keep Bogey, do you have to offer Seager or Correa type deals, and if you don't, some fans will blast you to kingdom come? The Sox top brass have made some serious mistakes, in the past, with lowball initial offers and slow secondary offers, if any. No doubt, but it's not an easy thing to do. I think they were fair with Betts. They were lucky Bogey took his last contract, but now at this age, I'm not sure they want to go much higher than Story's deal, and personally, I can't blame them. The Story deal is already looking a bit scary. Ideally, you lock young stars up early, like the Braves and Rays do, but we did sign Whitlock like that, and I think we tried to get Betts & Devers to do that a few years back, if I'm not mistaken. It's a rough business for guys just under the1 or 2 highest salary teams.

Just with Kavadas. He should not ignore: 79 BB - 78 K Bonaci (.400 OBP) 2nd on the farm in total walks 53 BB- 60 Ks Hickey (.412 OBP) Kavadas has 86 BBs and 112 Ks- not a bad ratio but not the best.

This is a big part of the "Rays way." So many player have their career years with them, and often they move on to be replaced by the next Springs. Sometimes, they can trade them for the next Springs.

The Yanks came back to beat the Rays! We are back to .500. We are now 4 down (5 in the loss column) to TBR & TOR. There are 3 teams between us and TBR/TOR. Lots of baseball left. This is not the same team as a few weeks ago.

What a comeback! The loss to the Rays helps the Sox hopes stay alive.

Chapman is toast.

We hear a lot of criticism of how badly our offense is doing. Imagine having these numbers from all your batters with 70+ PAs (17 of them): OPS, listed in order of players by most PAs 755 767 563 726 819 740 704 724 649 714 475 788 627 477 499 584 548 This is the Tampa Rays. (.681 team OPS) Now, how about the Yanks? (14 players with 70+ PAs) .761 team OPS 1.061 798 825 729 690 640 644 807 621 723 609 1.138 621 526 Now, the Sox (before tonight): 14 over 70 PAs (.719 team OPS) 818 714 933 779 713 759 649 578 660 603 651 738 469 885 (Pham is at .831 but only 59 PAs)

Where are all the DFA Arroyo posters?

If JD can keep walking 2-3 times a game, he can be productive. I'm not sure why pitchers are so afraid to pitch to him, though.

If the guy could just stay healthy...

The fact that he is the 41st best player on the Pirates shows just how bad the Sox were in 2020.

Most of the guys who get opt outs are signing extensions with teams that go beyond their arb years. It gives them some security while also giving them an upperhand, if they end up doing very well. (The Bogey situation is an example.) It's interesting to see that the biggest contract given to a player, Price, saw the player not opting out.

Hey, the Pirates just DFA'd Austin Brice, so how bad can they be?

Like I said, I was for offering Betts a lot more than he ended up getting. I'm also the "Devers Forevers" guys, but I'm just saying I understand the strategy not to do it.

Actually, none of the biggest contracts have opt out. Top All Time Contracts: How many have/had opt outs? $426M Trout $365M Betts $341M Lindor $340M Tatis $330M Harper $325M Stanton $325M Seager $324M Cole $300M Machado $275M ARod '08 $260M Arenado $252M ARod '01 $248M Miggy $245M Strasburg $245M Rendon $240M Pujols $240M Cano $225M Votto (Price had an opt out with his $217M deal.)

If you are ever going to large and long again, it should be with someone like Betts. Now that Devers is nearing crunch time, I feel almost the same as with Betts, but I can understand holding firm to the theory of avoiding extra large and extra long contracts.

I think $300M was a fair offer and close to "market value," at the time. I would not offer more than the market value, unless you know you'd do that when he gets to free agency. I think the Sox likely felt no player is worth more than that or for more than 10 years. The record of these large and long deals support their thinking, but man, what a PR hit the team takes when he walks. (This is coming from the poster, who I believe, suggested the highest and longest offer out of anyone else on the board.)

Remember we used DHern, first, and he was actually worse than the horror show Diekman was.

Happiness is a good thing. Can we all agree on that?

Max, I'm on your side on this issue. I don't think the lack of a star closer is the major reason we are not closer in the WC race. I do think we could have a few more wins than we have, if we had a better closer, but until someone says at who's expense, I'm not sure about claiming X amount of net wins. Personally, I wish we had used Houck as the closer from day one and never tried the piggy-back idea. I'm okay with using Whitlock as a starter, because we needed him, there, but I wish we could have used him as a high leverage set-up man from day one (multiple innings, too.) Injuries and other factors made a lot of Cora's choices "lose-lose," and I think Bloom deserves some heat for forcing that on Cora. The fact is, we are 50-6 when leading after 8 IP. For anyone to think we'd have more than 4-5 more wins with a solid traditional closer, I'd like to see an explanation. Plus, had we signed a closer, who do we not sign? If we used Houck or Whitlock as a closer, who starts or sets up? How many games do we lose by using someone else in those open roles? This is not an easy thing to prove from either side.