moonslav59

Cora the "Best..." https://www.nbcsports.com/boston/red-sox/forget-manager-year-red-sox-have-arguably-best-alex-cora?cid=sm_npd_rsn_bos_fb_mn&fbclid=IwAR0s2PGAGMDj2x6jDj7tlmRtndAB1W6n5y_CwA__pfUkXYK2oywtRS8d79Y The Red Sox started nine different players at second, eight at first, and eight in left. Cora constructed 142 batting orders in 162 games, his most common grouping appearing together a grand total of four times. The Red Sox used 37 pitchers (including 4 position players) and never quite knew which relievers would be reliable. What started as a Matt Barnes-Adam Ottavino-Darwinzon Hernandez trio for the eighth and ninth innings morphed into a Garrett Whitlock-Josh Taylor-Ryan Brasier grouping by the end.... He held the club together through a season-opening sweep vs. the Orioles, a trade deadline that did not supply immediate help, and a COVID outbreak that could've ended the season in August. Once he engaged postseason mode during the final must-win weekend in Washington, the Red Sox transformed. He used starters Eduardo Rodriguez and Nick Pivetta to close out a comeback victory vs. the Nationals on the final day of the season, and then rode that all-spikes-on-deck mentality through the Yankees and Rays before succumbing to the superior talent of the Astros with a 2-1 lead in the ALCS.

Agreed. My point is that the piece of pie gong to the players should be more equitably distributed.

Now, that was entertainment! If bringing that back was the point being made by anti-robo strikes and ball calls crowd, I'd have no comeback.

Thank you for the thoughtful response, and I'm not trying to put down those against robo ump strikes & balls calls. I'm just trying to understand what is so upsetting, and your response helped me to do that. Personally, since I don't think it will ne noticeable, I'm thinking over time, it won't be a big deal to those against it, but I'm not trying to say it doesn't or won't ever matter. Changes like the DH, 3 batter rule, the extra inning nonsense, and the 7 inning DH were much more noticeable and impactful, IMO. I don't see this any sort of gateway drug or opening of the door to complete automation. I'd even trade this for eliminating some of the long delays for instant replays over some other calls. That is clearly a change to the game- forcing fans to wait for the replay decision.

So, if you almost doubled the min wage from like $600K to $1M, you'd be adding $400K for every non-arb and post arb player. If that's 10 players, it's $4M, 20 players- $8M. I don't think that is so crushing to owners, especially, if there is a give back by the union- perhaps directed at limiting mega deal contracts. While $4-8M is a lot of money, especially for small market or low-budget teams, I don't think it would be a deal-breaker for owners. A lot would depend on what the rest of the deal looks like, of course. OTOH, significantly raising minor league pay would be a big cost increase and might force further cutbacks to the amount of minor league teams and players.

MLBTR Projects these arb costs: $11.1 Devers $7.6M Renfroe $3.2M Pivetta $3.2M Verdugo $2.0M Kevin Plawecki $1.4M Ryan Brasier $1.1M Arroyo $1.1M Taylor $1.0M Franchy Cordero (was DFA'd, not claimed and reassigned to non 40 man minors) I'm thinking we may replace Plawecki with a $600K Wong or R Hernandez, or even go with a FA back-up, assuming we keep Vaz at $7M. I'm think Renfroe's deal looks kind of high, and we may look to find a better defensive RF'er to repalce or platoon with Hunter. $7.6M is a lot for a short end platoon player. The rest looks about right. The total is about $30-31M. Here's an updated look at our 2022 Lux Tax Budget: Locked Up: $100.5M 25.6 Sale 20.0 Bogey 17.0 Eovaldi 16.0 Price 9.38 Barnes 7.00 Kike 1.50 Sawamura Arbs $31M Devers 2 of 3, Renfroe 3 of 4, Plawecki 4 of 4, Brasier 2 of 3, Cordero 2 of 3, Pivetta 1 of 3, Arroyo 1 of 3, Taylor 1 of 4 Pre-Arb Keepers (on 40 man): D Hernandez, P Valdez, Houck, Dalbec. Whitlock, Duran, Groome, B Mata, Y Rios, C Seabold, C Wong Pre-Arb Bubblers (on 40 man): A Davis, Arauz, Bazardo, Ro Hernandez, H Potts, J Rosario Player Opt Out or Mutual Option: ($19.5M) 22.0 JD (19.4 projected no opt out) 10.0 Schwarber (11.5 m/o w 3 b/o) projected no option Team Options (my projection) 2021lux tax): ($7M) 10.0 w 1.5 b/o Richards (NO) 10.0 6.0 w 500K b/o Perez (NO) 5.0 7.0 w 250K b/o Vaz (YES) 4.5 3.5 w 250K b/o Andriese (NO) 2.1 Free Agents (2021 $$$ lux tax): 13.8 Pedey (Retired) 8.9 Ottavino 8.3 ERod 3.0 Marwin (DFA'd) 2.8 Beni (paid to KCR-2021) 2.0 Robles ??? Santana (NYY paid us $1.8M for Ottavino in 2021) TOTAL BUDGET: 159M 2.5M other 40man roster players +15.5M Player Benefits $177M If the Tax line is $210M, that leaves about $33M to reach it.

No doubt. The others are basically just place marks that fill out the roster, so there's enough players on the field to have a game.

True, and when you compare what these players that only make if for a year or two to other professions, they will look overpaid, but most of these guys went through years of minor league play, where the pay is also decent, when compared to most Americans, and we all feel like they are living the dream of getting paid to do what they and most of us love/loved to do. I get that, but this is not like most businesses, and a lot of money is being made. The entertainment business is loaded with highly paid people- some who flame out early but still accumulated a sizeable nest egg. In this sense, baseball is probably in line with the movie and music business. The stars get the lion's share of the money the owners don't take for themselves. I'm looking at it from the union's perspective. They seem to be focusing on maximizing the mega paydays for just a few dozen players at the expense of everyone else. It's just my opinion, and I used to be a union rep who fought for raising the most senior members pay as a top priority, but that was based on the idea that other members would all reach that years of service number and get the raises. That's not how baseball works.

No, it's not. It's only that for free agents. The union and management negotiate the working conditions, and the union could demand higher pay for the lower players, perhaps at the expense of lower wages to the highest paid players. That's all I'm saying. Yes, even $1M is "chump change" within the context of the overall pay structure, but it's a start. Personally, I'd make minor league, 40 man and min wage even higher than I suggested, but the numbers I mentioned would be a step in the right direction and might be realistic goals for a union who cared about this large swath of players.

Back to the Sox and their winter plans. I think there are 4-5 high priority needs and about 3-5 open roster slots after Rule 5's are added and options settled. (I'm counting ERod's slot as open, but JD's filled.) Option A 1. Solid #2 SP'er 2. Solid RP'er (Closer type, if Houck or Whitlock are not to be used here) 3. Depenable pitcher (SP/RP/Swingman) 4. Utility IF'er (like Iggy) who can play 2B and SS. 5. Depth pitching or defensive OF'er (platoon with Renfroe?) Option B 1. Solid #3 SP'er (ERod?) 2. Solid #3 SP'er (assuming Houck & Whitlock stay in the pen) 3. Solid RP'er 4. Utility IF'er (like Iggy) who can play 2B and SS. If we have $30-40M to spend on these 4-5 slots, assuming no trades fill one or two, we should be able to add some quality players. Hopefully, Bloom gets more players like Kike, Renfroe, Whitlock and Iggy than Richards, Perez, Andriese and Marwin. (Ottavino was close to a push.)

In the context of what the mega stars make, $600K is chump change, and if a player only stays in the bigs for a year or two, it is not all that much, when you consider what other players make. I haven't looked, but I'm pretty sure there is a sizeable amount of players making under $1M. I know $1M is a hell of a lot of money, but baseball generate a hell of a lot of money, and it's not like some of these min wage guys are just extras on a movie set grossing millions. They are needed on the field. They spent years perfecting their skill to get to the point where they earned a spot on the 26 man roster. Personally, I'd raise the minor league pay a lot, make the min wage for the 40 man roster $750K and the 26 man $1M. I'd also look at establishing a floor on team player budgets to force cheaper teams to spend more. If they can't still make a profit, then move the team or fold. I think the union focuses too much on getting the select very best players the most they can make- thinking that will trickle down to the moderate and lower-skilled players. In some cases, it does, but only to players who have reached arb or free agency. It is good that the union is pushing to shorten the window before arbs and free agency and maybe take an arb year away, but that is not enough, IMO. Either way, they can't demand too much, of the golden goose will be killed by a work stoppage.

With all due respect, how is an invisible earpiece make the game less interesting to you? Will it really bother you enough to enjoy the game less, knowing the ump is being told to make the correct and consistent call every time? Is part of your enjoyment of the game the suspense in knowing if the ump will make the right or wrong call? I'm not trying to be a prick, here. I honestly want to understand how this change seems to get so much under some fans' skin. (And, yes, at least one with "fury." His choice of wording- not mine.)

In today's climate- with the economy still shaky, the future so unknown and so many alternative entertainment opportunities, these guys would really be stupid (both sides), if they let this go to a shortened season. I'd say, "These guys can't be that idiotic," but this is baseball we're talking about. I'll always be a baseball fan, but many fans are not that bound to staying one.

That and they don't really push as hard as I think they should for raising the min wage- like doubling it, at least. That's where a lot of players sit for several years, and some never get the golden ticket.

I don't think the Sox see this market as one to go large and long in. I think the plan is to go a little higher with contracts than last year- maybe more than just two 2 year deals (Kike & Sawamura) and about the same amount of money but for about half the players. Of course, I could be wrong. If this is the plan, then a work stoppage may not bother us, too much. I also think we look into a trade and Devers extension. We may look to trade Dalbec or Casas, and if we sign Schwarber, it makes even more sense. I'm not sure JD is untradeable. Many teams are not afraid of big one year deals, and if we offered to pay some money or add on a prospect like the Yanks did with Ottavino, maybe we could find a taker. Note: I am not for trading JD, unless and until we have Schwarber signed. To me, the biggest issue to be resolved before the signings begin is ERod.

I was thinking more of any everyday single A player taken for Rule 5, hardly played all year, then went on to be something (or even did not go on to greatness.)

Wow. "Fury" over an invisible earpiece in the human home plate umpire's ear whispering the right call in his ear. Oh! The humanity!

To me, the JD decision is not that big of a deal. If he stays we have a top DH, next year. If he doesn't we'll probably bring back Schwarber. I don't see much difference for 2022. Beyond, yes, but not much for 2022- money and talent wise. The biggest choice I see is a 2 part one: 1) Offer a QO to ERod? 2) Does he accept or decline? One could argue the same thing here: if we lose him, we'll have the $18M to spend on other pitchers. If he stays, he may eat close to half our winter spending budget.

I'm not a big John Tomase and Justin Leger fan, but here are who they think Bloom should target, this winter: Tomase thinks a SS (2B) is the #1 target. Leger gives his top 10: 1. SS/2B Semien 2. SP R Ray/3. Stroman/ 7. Gausman 4. RP Graveman/ 5. B Hand/ 6. R Iglesias 8. Other S Marte OF/ 9. Bryant 3B/OF/ 10. C Taylor Utility

LOL. I've played more basketball than you ever dreamed of playing. (LOL) I know they miss calls, but they review the ones on baskets made. I'm surprised you did not know that.

AL Team Stats OBP .339 HOU .336 CWS .330 TOR .328 BOS .322 NYY .321 TBR .316 OAK SLG .466 TOR .449 BOS .444 HOU .428 TBR .423 MN .422 CWS .407 CLE .407 NYY ISO .200 TOR .188 BOS .186 TBR .182 MN .177 HOU .169 NYY Base Running (fangraphs) 132. KC 11.8 OAK 11.2 TBR 7.4 CLE 6.8 LAA 2.8 TOR We were... 2nd in BAbip .309 8th in BB/K 0.37 5th best K% 22.6 8th best BB% 8.4 5th in Hard Hit Ball % (33.1%) 5th in LD% (20.8) 14th in GB/FB (1.04) 7th HR/FB 13.7%

No, PAs. My bad, eagle eye.

Further proof the A's should move to Sacremento or somewhere else.

That's one reason I never advocated for benching Vaz or even significantly reducing his playing time. I also know Vaz has many plusses, and that the CERA-related aspects are just one of many areas to place value on catchers. I still saw some of our high IP pitchers do much better with someone not named Vaz. (3 out of 4 with 90+ PAs each and 3 out of 3 with 75+ PAs) I just think that should be a factor that is looked at when deciding who starts. I'm not arguing it should be the biggest factor, or that I know more than Bloom and Cora. I think it is a significant factor. MVP and many others do not. We are not sure how much, if any, of a factor it is with GMs and managers. I happen to think it probably is with Houston and Maldanado, but I don't know for sure. The only one acting like they know for sure is MVP. Why not question his firm position? I have said I don't know for sure. The problem with 2021 is that hardly any sample sizes have 100+ PAs with both catchers, so it's hard to argue anything. ERod never had Plawecki catch him and Perez, the one guy Vaz did better with had just 75 PAs with Plawecki. This is one reason, I was not firmly behind Plawecki being the clear choice to catch more often. 2021 ONLY (all pitchers with 80+ PAs) OPS Against (IP) Vaz/ Plawecki .766 (675)/ n/a ERod .766 (282)/ .644 (401)Eovaldi .771 (462)/ .639 (199) Pivetta .783 (434)/ 1.163 (75) Perez .854 (523)/ .699 (94) Richards

Yes, the Houck sample is 180 points. My bad. The IP'd are smaller, but that was not the point I made. I do think keeping Vaz over a couple 30 IP sample sizes is not reason enough, but if the powers in charge think Vaz is worth more than $7M, then I trust them to be right.