moonslav59

Really? I never knew defense mattered.

Good points, but many felt his bat was washed up before 2020. It's not just about 2021. I'm hopeful he can give us .650-.725.

Did we expect much from Richards, Perez, Andriese and Sawamura? In fact, we got very little from them and still came very close to glory. I hope this year's crop does better.

Nothing really new, but something to read during this boring winter... https://www.nbcsports.com/boston/red-sox/top-10-prospects-reveal-impressive-strides-red-sox-farm-system-under-chaim-bloom?fbclid=IwAR1ckVsRhCUgmkGhybRXnxfT2tqWw2Ku1SlpAhhIPzWom3UNlwRRK_rvduM

No doubt. He may also end up being released like Andriese was, but I think Bloom has higher expectations for Wacha than he did for Andriese. Perhaps much higher.

Andriese made $2.1M. Wacha is making $7M. You may end up being right about him being replaced mid-season, but he was not signed to fill a role similar to Andriese. Andriese was never viewed as a starter. $7M is a lot to spend on a fill-in/ throw-away.

Yes. I was responding to your point about ERod not pitching in 2020. That's why I said "neither did Sale." Both did not pitch in 2020. I responded to this, where it was not mentioned Sale did not pitch in 2020- only ERod: Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post Interesting that some believe 2022 rotation of Sale, Eovaldi, Pivetta, Hill and Wacha has greater health concerns than 2021 rotation of Eovaldi, Pivetta, Erod, Richards and Perez. I don't see much difference when you consider E Rod did not pitch in 2020.

I could see Hill being viewed as a "placeholder" for Paxton. I think Wacha will be given a chance in ST'ing to earn the 5 slot. Winckowski, Seabold and maybe Crawford will be in the mix, too. The take on Whitlock and Houck is up in the air.

For what it's worth, I felt much worse about our rotation in March 2021. Here's my early take... Eovaldi: The guy has become a horse, when his history was almost the opposite until maybe 2020. There is no reason to think he will decline, significantly or get injured. I'd expect close to what we saw in 2021. Sale: I'm optimistic, here. I'm expecting 160-170+ IP, so that alone, could be a big boost, even if he doesn't come to close to the "old Sale." I do think this guys is a fierce competitor, and if that means anything, he could come close to his prior form. Pivetta: I've been a big believer in this guy. He has some nasty stuff. He's had some ups and downs, but he seemed to come into his own, overall. He still has a serious issue with BBs, and his 3.8 BB/9 was higher than his career 3.5 mark. (9.8 BB% vs 9.0% career) Gotta like his ERA+ with the Sox in 165 IP from 2020-2021. Paxton: I'm setting my sights on 2022 for him. Anything we get from him, late in the season, might be icing on the cake (or lipstick on a pig.) Wacha: I'm not impressed, but apparently he showed signs of turning things around, late in the season. I'm thinking things often turn both ways. I'm trying to be hopeful but finding it hard, here. Hill: This guy can pitch. He may pitch until he's 50. With him, it has been and always will be about his health. Here are his IP over the last 5 years: 136 (2017) 125 ERA+ 132 (2018) 106 59 (2019) 169 39 (2020) 143 159 (2021) 103 Others: Whitlock, Houck, Winckowski, Seabold- lots of promise here.

Neither did Sale. Richards was even worse.

You win! Now that I'm blocked, I can not give you your prize.

Less than 1% chance on any of the 3 trifectas. It's probably a 2% chance we sign just one from any of these lists. Maybe I put this on he wrong thread.

It must be a reading comp issue, that's why I thought Swi hacked your count. I don't know or have the answer. The question was a joke. Here's another one: How many total blades of grass were on the filed for the last game of the 2021 season?

Could we see one of these? Rodon, Pham & Iggy Suzuki, Tepera & Iggy Story, Pham & Tepera Which would you prefer?

Has Swi hacked into your account?

I told you I don't know. That's the main reason I said don't ask.

Again, I agree 100%, and that is why I feel there should be a min budget line. If teams don't meet it, they lose the CBT and maybe pay fines like those who go over. They won't spend unless forced to spend.

So... Pham > MCCutchen?

I agree 100%. The only argument in their favor are the owners (maybe about half) who never or hardly ever sign anyone to mega deals. The system is set up to help richer and more profitable teams have a much better chance at acquiring top talent and winning more games. Sure, even the low budget teams have rich enough owners who could spend way more, but nothing forces them to. While they cry poverty and losing bottom lines, with their books kept in secret, I might add, the values of their franchises are growing exponentially. When they sell, they make millions or hundreds of millions. That is not part of their poverty cries.

The answer is dont ask. I dont know. The Q was a joke- like the thread is.

Maybe once Casas gets the call, Dalbec plays LF vs LHPs.

Try reading where I said Bloom was not there. I was speaking to the Rays' historical tendancies not to go large and long on free agents. Their last ones were 2 decades ago.

It must be his spell-correct, again.

Don't ask me for the answer.

You mean this winter or for as long as Bloom is the GM? The word that we kicked the tires hard on Baez makes me think Bloom is not against longer deals, but he's yet to value a player more than the other GMs and or his budget is too tight to allow him the opportunity to overpay on any one player seeking a long and large contract. Looking at Cots contracts, it's interesting to see that the Rays have only signed 3 free agents to contracts of 4+ years and none above 5. Wilson Alvarez $35M/5 (1998) Greg Vaughn $34M/4 (2000) Roberto Hernandez $22.5M/4 (1998) Their biggest 2 year FA signing was Charlie Morton at $30M/2 (2019). Now, they have extended their own players to very long deals, several times, but this is just free agency. Of course, Bloom was not with the Rays, this whole time, and their budgets have been highly restricted, so I'm not sure we can read that as being Bloom's M. O.