moonslav59

For the fourth time, I've said you don't have to answer, but when you assign fealty motives for me asking why 2 posters chose offer him nothing, I kind of hoped for a reason other than one that I suggested MIGHT be a reason. It was not meant as a criticism. I genuinely wanted to know why people chose nothing. I never thought about the idea that the other choices were so bad, one might think nothing was closer to their opinion. That's on me, but all it takes is for someone to say that a bit sooner, but then again, nobody is obligated to clarify anything they write here. Nobody is saying you have to answer. It's a delusion you are still holding onto. It's your right to be deluded, too. Carry on. (not that you need my permission to carry on.)

Yes, I read that and repeated your reply in a post. Not answering is your choice. That way, nobody can ever say you were wrong. (Not implying that was your intention- just pre-empting a misguided counter attack.)

You are so clueless. Where do I even come close to saying I didn't like that 2 people offered nothing. I actually asked them why no offer at all... like not even something like $5M/1? This is "how it all started?" What got started? Can I ask why someone chose their choice? Are you sending investigators to determine why I broke protocol? You really are something! I didn't like the choices offered in this poll, either. None really captured my opinion. I was curious why some chose offer nothing. I tried to think of why they maybe chose that answer. If I was wrong about the dishonor part as a possible reason, then fine. I never said that was the only reason why someone chose that option. Instead of reading motives into my statement, why not actually answer why you chose nothing, until now? Why be so obtuse?

Again, I've said twice you don't have to answer. Stop pretending people are saying something they are not saying. I stated my opinion that I think you should provide your ideas or plans for building a staff, since you seem to have an opinion on everyone else's plans. It's not about changing anyone's mind. I happen to agree with you on much of what you said about our farm pitching and extending Eovaldi. Asking someone's opinion is not trying to change their mind. Again, you are reading into things that are not said or even implied.

So, if they DFA him, tonight, what will you say?

It's pointless debating someone who cannot understand how debating goes, then when cornered, he says, "I told you I'd just change the question," or something like that.

Please! Stop. It's not just about Eovaldi.

This is totally false. You bashed me for criticizing Cora and still saying I'm glad we have him as our GM. Specifically, yes, you did. You are still saying it now and missing the context. Not surprising.

Yes! Go on vacation, Celtics! Go Bucks!

I have no idea how this relates to what is now being discussed. You miss the context so often, it's difficult to have a debate with you. Do you think it's possible to disagree with someone on a few things out of thousands of things, but still like them and think they do an overall good job? That was the context of my statement on Cora. Obviously, you still don't get it.

I actually said you don't have to have a plan. I just said that criticizing other people's idea and plans without stating your own on how to build a better staff, rings hollow, to me. "Just my opinion." Again, you don't have to give us a plan. You can continue being "lazy" as you put it. Nobody is forcing you to tell us a better way to build a strong pitching staff, but some of us might take the criticism differently if you also gave us your "better ideas." It's usually how conversations and debates progress, but again, it need not be.

He keeps confusing the two ideas. It's okay to speculate what we think Bloom will do, too, but it's not the same as saying what we would do. I'd also add that a differing opinion or plan than what Bloom might have does not mean we think Bloom is necessarily wrong with his plans.

You really have issues with understanding questions. Our whole point is that you have never presented your plan or ideas, and now you act like we have said you had a plan. We are asking for your plan on how to build our 2023 staff. It's easy to say everyone else is wrong in their ideas, but why not tell us your ideas? I'm not saying you are wrong about free agents signings or the likelihood our farm will produce and ace or 2-3 really good pitchers, but not being wrong does not take you off the hook. You really should tell us how you would do it. You don't have to, but criticizing other people's plans without having one of your own makes the critiques ring a little hollow. Just my opinion, of course.

Every great pitcher once had no ML stats. You still won't tell us your plan on addressing our staff building for 2023. What good is having Bogey and Devers, if we have a s***** staff? If we don't sign any big FA pitchers, and won't get anything for prospects with zero stats in the bigs, the only thing left is trading "useless" prospects.

Still no plan about pitching.

Keep that mojo risin' Slendid! Let's keep the bats hot! (We may need it, today.)

One could apply the same reasoning to Red's clamoring to extend Bogey, too. If we are going to lose Devers, JD, Eovaldi and others and never get any good pitching from the farm, forever, why waste money on Bogey?

We were 19-13 in Eovaldi's starts, last year. If every starter gave us that, we'd be 30 games over .500 or 96-66. Maybe that's not ace material, but it's close. When you look at ERod's history of leading our team to wins, it's shockingly great. 19-12 in 2021 0-0 in 2020 26-8 in 2019 19-4 in 2018 One could argue, he was our "ace" since 2018.

Yes, but he was a prospect when we obtained him. No, he's not homegrown, but trading for prospects is one way to build up a farm that has trouble developing young SP'ers. We are trying to figure out ways to build a strong pitching staff, going forward. We can't count on Rule 5 picks like Whitlock to be commonplace. We tried trading for pitching prospects like Seabold and Winckowski, but they both have a ways to go to prove they are ML caliber starters. We can hope some of our most recent drafted or IFA pitching prospects do better than those in the past. It is possible history does not keep repeating itself forever, especially when changes have been made to your system of identifying who to draft/select and how to develop them, since the days of Ben and DD. I believe you seem to not give much importance to the potential value prospects hold, but we have some starters in the minors that are doing much better than anything I've seen in over a decade. Maybe I'm just being overly optimistic, but I like our chances of developing 1-2 very good pitchers out of the current bunch: AAA 2.75 Winckowski (.498 OPS Against) 19 K: 5 BB 2.93 Seabold (.563 OPSAgainst) 26K: 9 BB These OPS Against numbers is like getting JBJ results from all the hitetrs youface! AA 1.60 Bello (.460 and 28K:8 BB) 1.97 Murphy (.526 and 41K:14BB 2.97 Walter (.532 and an amazing 42:2!!!) 4.26 Groome (.648 and 28:10) We also have some pen arms doing very well, like Frank German (trade) .449 OPSA, Politi .509 OPSA and Schreiber .643. I'd prefer to rely on more than hopes, too. That's why I think we should try to find top pitchers via trade, and every now and then via free agency. Wacha and Hill seem to be working, but Richards, Perez I and Perez II did not. Trying to find gems in the rough is a slippery slope, and relying on taht method, alone is scary as hell, to me. How about you? Tell us how you'd build a strong staff.

I touched on this, a while ago, especially with guys like Dalbec & Kike, and Renfroe, last year.

No, what's your answer on how to fix the problem- not why we have the problem. Put your plan out there.

Why are you acting like I'm saying we should or have counted on getting starters from the farm? (The jury is still out on Houck and Whiitlock as starters from our farm.) Maybe, we will under this new management, but personally, I would not count on it. Is your position that we don't need any aces to be highly competitive? I don't want to put words in your mouth, so why not tell us your idea of what would be a good way to build a winning staff. Then, people won't have to keep guessing what your ideas are. (Not Bloom's, but your ideas and plan.) Forget the starters and build a strong pen? Do you think we can win without an ace? (It has happened several times in MLB history, buy is this your wish?)

I'm not pretending to know what the 2023 team will look like, and I don't think anyone is. Many use this site to express their ideas on what we could or should do to make the team better going forward. Sometimes it's hard to know if someone is saying what they want or what Bloom might want. Some think it's pointless to express any ideas that it seems like Bloom would not go for. I would offer Eovalid $25M/1 and maybe $42M/2. If push comes to shove, maybe $45M/2. $60M/3 is pushing it, for me, but I realize overpaying is needed to keep our rotation strong- either that or trade away half the farm to try and find the next Sale.

Even our outs seem louder.

He says the farm cannot produce starters. He says not top FA pitchers are NOT worth it. Trading for aces is the only option left.