moonslav59

Now that Wacha is back, it's time to anoint Houck the closer and end all this crap. Schreiber should pass Robles on the depth chart.

Big win with no JD in the line-up and Big Nate coming off a shaky start. He was a K machine, today. The pen struggles, but a nice team win.

The thing is, if it was a ball hit over the wall, why would the defenders try to hustle and risk injury to prevent extra runs? It kinda has to be that way.

Good points. He's got his OPS over .700, now, which is more than quite a few regulars can say.

Watch him "change the question," now.

I've agreed $7M was fine. We could have played him in LF, too. (We should have traded Verdugo, "while his stock was high!")

I've never heard anyone say it was a fluke. They said things like, "trading him while his stock was high," or "he will likely regress," but maybe I missed some posts. His HRs were not that surprising. His .816 OPS was a career, but not by all that much. His career OPS before us was .776. The one thing that kind of jumped out about 2021 was the 572 PAs. His previous high was 440. His ISO of .242 was actually his second lowest in 4 seasons. The jump in rbi was a result of having more men on base and having way more PAs.

I'd have much preferred Renfroe at $7M than JBJ at even the same money, despite his poor defense in an important position like RF in Fenway. You do seem to be "sticking up for Renfroe," and I'm not sure why you are denying you are. To me, this debate turned into the value of rbi's then HRs vs other stats, and not necessarily "metrics," like you claimed. OBP is not a metric. Good defense is not a metric. BA and speed are not metrics. Renfroe had power and a strong arm that wasn't always that accurate. His arm helped mitigate some of his defensive deficiencies, especially in Fenway, but he was not as big of an overall plus, as many felt he was. At $3M, yes. At $7M, not so much. I was fine with trading Renfroe and saving $7M, but not for a higher priced guy like JBJ. To me, the prospects better pan out, of this was a bad trade. Unlike you, I see value in prospects, before they make the bigs. All stars were once prospects.

I'm not sure what that has to do with it, but Kike does have about 20 points on Renfroe with OBP, and he was decent power, too... not Renfroe power, but his defense way outshines Renfroe's. Renfroe's rbi total, last year, was largely a result of having good hitters in front of him. He placed 13th in team BA with RISP. (7th among starters) Even Vaz had a batter BA w RISP. His OPS was better without men in scoring position. Also, for someone who harps on career numbers vs recent 3-4 year stretches, you sure seem to be focusing on Renfroe's last 2 seasons. Before coming to BOS, he was a .228 hitter with a .290 OBP, coming from a team that did not want to pay him $3M for a season. Yes, he averaged 85 rbi per 162 games, but only 49 were runs knocked in by players not named Renfroe.

Using his time in Tampa as a template of who he is, is missing something. His first season, here, he was given $40M to spend on 1 year deals, but he had 10-12 slots to fill. His second winter, he was given about the same money but with 8-10 slots to fill. How can you make a lasting judgment on a GM under those unigue circumstances? (Unique for a Sox GM's first 3 seasons, anyway.)

Indeed, if you count 2020 as a full season. Some context is needed. No other GM under Henry was handed a farm nearly void of any ML ready impact prospects and a very sad bottom half of the 40 man roster, while at the same time, being given a highly restricted winter spending budget. He was also saddled with the Price contract and a star player asking for $40M a year. Did anyone expect a ring within 3 years?

Also, I think Blooms first task was to rebuild the farm and lower 40 man roster back up to respectability, and it looks like he has come close to reaching those goals. My thoughts are that he will begin looking to improve quality over quantity, now, and maybe the Paxton and Story signings are hints he's willing to spend for more than one season and for more than $6-7M a year. (The only other higher 1 year deal he has given was $10M/1 to Richards.)

We were hearing Bloom won't sign anyone to a big contract before the Story signing, too. I think we will see Bloom go large for a pitcher, this winter, or trade some precious prospects for one. Maybe hitting on Wacha and Hill might convince him to stick to $6-10M pitchers, but I doubt it. (He missed on Richards and Perez I and Perez II. I might add, it looks like someone did OK on Perex III.)

Agreed, but until you have a strong system that infuses low-cost, impact players nearly every year, it doesn't matter which higher spending plan you choose. You ain't winning. 2013 proved you can win without spending wildly on top FA that previous winter. We went with 4-5 player C's and D's, instead of the David Prices, and still won. I agree, though, every now and then you need to go with A players, at the expense of going cheaper at other slots. We guessed wrongly on Sale. Some would argue Price, too. We need to "guess" better, and Story is now on the hot seat.

Sounds about right, but I think the Sox will be more willing to find a compromise number with Devers than Bogey. Maybe $27M x 9 for Devers. Maybe $25M x 6 for Bogey.

I'd cringe at $200M/8 for Bogey more than I'd cringe at $300M/10 for Devers. I would never go $240M/8 for Bogey. I wouldn't even go $240M/10 for him, now that we have Story.

To me, the age factor is the premium. I agree. People get locked into the "never 10 years" mantra that is possibly based on the normal FA age of 28-31 range. . Devers is 25, and could be just 26 to 35 with a 10 year extension that buys out his 2023 final arb year. 35 is not 37-40

His "metric" is rbi, and comparing a leadoff hitter vs a 6 slot hitter skews that flawed comp even more.

My follow up, had we blank checked Betts, that might have been $400M/12. Could we then afford blank checking Devers, who might demand $340M/12?

If you are buying out his last arb year, Devers would be only 33 his last year of the deal. Do you really doubt his value at ages 34, 35 and maybe 36, so much that you would not pay him $20M a year for those 2 or 3 years. Why not add $40M and 2 years to your offer and make it $280M/10? Age 35 is not all that past prime, and Devers is the kind of pure hitter that should age well, even if just as a DH or 1Bman at that point in his career. IMO, I'd go even farther and try to get him to take max money while lowering the AVV. I might start at $300M/12, then offer $300M/11 and finally settle on $300M/10. $300M/10 is certainly pushing the envelope on the last 2-3 years of the deal, but to me, he's worth more than $30M a year for the first 5-7 years of the deal. Hie improved defense has stepped up my plea... Devers Forevers!

So, yes on blank check Betts?

...and B eeks, Mazza & Spring, too!

Indeed, and once you come to the conclusion that Henry will not spend wildly, you have to realize it's a trade off. If you spend big on player A, it means you have less to spend on player B, and maybe C and D, too.

Every GM makes moves and choices that, in hindsight, look bad or not so good. The fact that some posters hated some moves from day one, so it's "not hindsight," in those cases, does not mean they'd have been a better GM. It's one or two or maybe more moves out of hundreds of decisions that need to be made over a GMs career with one team. I like the plan, too, and think we need to stick to it. The farm needed rebuilding- not quite as badly as many of us had felt 3-4 years ago, as several of DD's farm choices look very good, now. Perhaps less recognizable was the need to build up the 18-40th slots on the 40 man roster. Yes, Bloom took over a decent core of players left over from 2018, but the budget was strained and severely limited in his first two seasons, and some of the high-priced players, namely Price and Sale did not pull nearly their weight in production. Those who keep saying "Henry can open his wallet, if he wants to" are correct, but that does not mean he will, and he really did not for Bloom's first two winters. He did give him a significant amount of money for 1 year deals, but with 18-22 slots to improve on a 40 man roster, $40M only goes so far. We saw that in 2020. We saw some of the wonders Bloom can do with a limited budget in 2021. This year started out very poorly, and of course sentiments like this thread title came to the surface. Years ago, I had felt Ben deserved another year to let his long term plan come to fruition, but I totally understand the 3 last place finishes in 4 years part being thought of as the longest leash any Sox GM has been given in my lifetime- the ring in '13 not withstanding. The reason they went with DD, IMO, is that Henry decided he'd open his wallet for a 3-5 year window, and DD looked better equipped to handle that type of plan. I hope Henry keeps the wallet open for a few more years, but let's give Bloom the chance Ben never got: let's see if he can build a power house team through spending, while still maintaining a solid farm from A ball to AAA. Keep the prospect pipeline working and contributing. Keep free agency and trades for filling the few gaps the farm can't fill. That's a long term winning strategy. It's one even Theo admitted he let get away from him, in his time with us. Let's not do it again. 2018 was an incredible season. I don't regret what we did to get that ring and the 3 first place finishes that went with it, but that was not really a sustainable plan, unless Henry was prepared to be the Dodgers East Coast team. Just my take.

Two tools: power and strong arm, though not always that accurate. Let's not forget, the guy has a .297 career OBP and .236 BA. His .261 BA & .313 OBP since the start or 2021 may or may not be the "new Renfroe," but some players do improve after age 29.