moonslav59

I don't think that's it. I think they know Whitlock can start, but they want to give the 5 current starters a reason to move our best RP'er to a starter role. If none do, Whitlock can be very valuable in the role he has, now.

G. W. ! Forevers!

Devers Forevers!

These games count as much as others, but every season, every team has poor 4 game stretches. I just don't get all worked up over any 4 game stretch, unless it involves an elimination game or we're a game or two away from elimination games. (That doesn't make me better than anyone who does.) Hell, bad 10-25 games stretches don't both me half as much as some, here.

Pre Season Sox All Star Minor League Team: http://news.soxprospects.com/2022/04/2022-soxprospects-pre-season-all-stars.html There's a part 1 and 2, but the links are the same.

Why do you expect 1 for 8 to keep repeating itself over and over? Is that what happens more often than not?

Indeed, but there have been numerous stretches where we spend under the tax line. It doesn't appear to be random, either. I think they strategically plan ahead when to reset, stay under or go over, and going over usually happens when we have a core of players poised to be top contenders. I get the stay competitive every year mantra, and I don't disagree, but I do think we step up the spending when it looks like we are on the rise. Going by cots year end numbers, our biggest increases happened here: Red= Ring Year 2003 (105M) to 2004 (130M) +24% 2005 (116M)> 2006 (137M) +18% 2006 (137M)> 2007 (155M) +13% 2009 (140M)> 2010 (171M) +22% 2017 (189M)> 2018 (230M) +22% The biggest drops: We dropped 6M from '01 to '02 and '02 to '03, but 2001 was a 52% increase (Manny signing). We dropped from 2007 to 2008 (8M) and the following year, too (7M). We dropped from 2011 to 2012 (8M) and did increase for 2013's ring year, but the opening day 2013 budget was 21M lower than the 2012 budget- a sign we did not plan to win it all in 2013, but once we saw the team, we went all in at the deadline. We dropped after 2013 (6M) We dropped after 2016 (11M) Our biggest drop was after 2019 (59M), a clear sign that 2020 was not viewed as a highly competitive team.

Wish we had Story.

If they go with 8 divisions of 4, how would they balance it? 3 games x 28 non div games? (84) + 26 games x 3 div teams (78) 4 games x 28= 112 17 games x 2 div= 34 and 16 x 1 div= 16 5 games x 28 teams= 140 7 games x 3 div= 21 (8 gms vs 1 div foe) If they went with 4 divisions of 8: 5 x 24 non div teams= 120 6 x 7 div teams= 42 This is balanced, but just 6 games vs your own division is lame. 4 x 24= 96 9 x 4= 36 + 10 x 3 div teams= 30 Not balanced 3 x 24 non div= 72 12 x 1 div=12 13 x 6 div=78 Close to balanced

Would they go to 4 divisions of 4 in each league? I'd like to see them break down the NL-AL barriers and re-align geographically. At 30 teams: 5 divisions of 6 East BOS NYY NYM PHI BAL WSH North TOR PIT DET CLE CIN CWS South TBR MIA ATL HOU TEX KC Central Cubs MN MIL STL COL AZ West SEA OAK SFG LAD LAA SDP 6 divisions of 5 BOS NYY NYM PHI BAL WSH ATL TBR MIA KC TOR PIT DET CLE CIN MN MIL CWS CC STL TEX HOU COL AZ SDP SEA OAK SFG LAD LAA

Um, there is a lot of evidence to support what I think. I don't just pull it out of a hat. Henry has had a long history of spending large for short periods of times, and then resetting the tax and not going over the threshold for 2-3 years at a time. The times he spends big seems to line up with the times we are in an upward cycle towards being a top contender. Only 2013 breaks that mold, in terms of ring seasons.

You think 32 teams is in the works?

Agreed. I just think there are times Henry thinks it's worth spending more and times he feels like spending less. I happen to think it is related to when he feels like we have a good shot at being a strong contender or not, but it's just my opinion. I think he tries to spend enough to keep the team entertaining and somewhat competitive, except for 2020, but is willing to go the extra mile, when he thinks we are 1-2 big players away from being a top contender.

I'm not trying to defend JBJ, here. I did not like the trade. I'm not expecting a big bounce back from him or even a moderate one. I was hoping for some improvement over 2021, but I also know 2020 was not that long ago either, and selectively choosing specific samples sizes to suit our cases, does not always do justice to a player. (I do it, too.) What is scary is if you go back and include the short 2020 season, where JBJ did well, he's still at .595 since the start of 2020! .661 since 2019 .678 since 2018 .689 since 2017 We may see his career OPS dip below .700, this year.

Did any rules change to make going over less punative? I focus on it a lot, because it seemed like Henry has had restricted winter budgets because of it, and not so much because of actual salaries.

I agree, but I doubt we stop spending. Instead of paying Bogey + Devers $60M, we might pay 5 guys $12M or 4 guys $15M. Instead of paying JD + Eovaldi $40M, we might pay 4 guys $10M. With an anticipated influx of farm help, I'm not sure how far you can spread out top money, and still have everyone play enough to earn the $10M. Let's assume we don't extend or re-sign anyone, this winter, and Bogey opts out. We'd start with this as a roster: SP1 Sale (health?) SP2 Houck SP3 Pivetta SP4 Whitlock SP5 Paxton/Groome/Winckowski/Bello/Mata/Seabold Closer: Barnes RP2: Taylor RP3: Crawford RP4: Diekman RP5: Brasier RP6: Sawamura RP7: DHerrn RP8: Davis/Valdez/Danish/Murphy/Walter C: _______, Wong, RHernandez/Cottam 1B: Casas, T Reed (Binelas) 2B: Arroyo, Hamilton (Yorke) 3B: Devers (last year), Arauz (Howlett) SS: Story, Downs (Lugo) LF: Duran, Fitzy CF: JBJ, Jimenez RF: Verdugo, McDonough DH: Dalbec, Rafaela Let's say instead of replacing (in kind at nearly the same pay) or extending Devers, Bogey, JD & Eovaldi, we sign 10 players. Where would they play? 1. SP 2. Closer 3. RP 4. CF 5. RF 6. 2B 7. 3B (replacing Devers after 2023) 8. P 9. P 10. P Not sure there is room for 10 and the incoming rookies.

Is it less of a burden?

I guess it's entertaining to see some varying opinions.

Good for you

Reality is he was handed a weak farm and bottom of the 40 man roster (like the bottom 18 slots) and a tight new spending budget. The checkbook was opened, this winter, so the clock starts ticking now. Blaming Bloom for 2020 and the over performing 2021 season is short-sighted.

I disagree.

My running blame game breakdown: More responsible for each loss: Starters: 2 Relievers: 1 More responsible for each win: Starters: 0 Relievers: 1 (Note: this is not necessarily a reflection of which area is better or worse, or which area needs an upgrade most of all.)

He'll likely end up better than maybe half our pen by year's end.

Citing small sample sizes is too. Oh wait, I do it, too!

Nice hit, but to the wrong place. Tough loss.