moonslav59

Good point. .831 Home .724 Away A much higher differential that OPS Against: .767 Home .729 Away Player splits: Home/Away 1.262/.522 TShaw 1.146/.771 Schwarber .937/.796 Bogey .899/.689 Dalbec .895/.886 Devers .891/.542 Plawecki .890/.840 JD .870/.760 Renfroe .864/1.000 Wong .845/.720 Kike .825/.734 Dugo .721/.555 Arauz .663/.655 Vaz .616/.978 Arroyo .572/.583 Duran

I hate to use one example, but getting hurt running out to your position does not bode well for your injury prone index.

I'm with you on all of this, except maybe the last statement. It's been hitting over defense, but much of our spending budget goes to pitching over hitting. Every ring we've won has been after acquiring a strong second or third starter by FA (Lackey, Price) or trade (Pedro, Schilling, Beckett, Sale, Eovaldi). Sure, we paid the Mannys and JDs, too. I also think, we tried to draft players that looked to be good on defense and offense (Betts, JBJ, Vaz, Beni...)

True. If we need to go to Richards over Sawamura, we're in trouble or up by 7.

We might PH Renfroe for Vaz and then Shaw for Plawecki, and end the game with Wong.

I forgot about Sawamura, but what about Ottavino and Davis? I see nobody clearly better.

Maybe, slightly. More injury prone, too.

They do not draw well, because most of the people living in the area are established fans of other teams, not because they trade their studs, IMO.

They make many of these moves in the offseason, and rarely at the deadline. Once you get in the groove, it works, because you have guys you traded for, last year and the year before waiting in the wings, but getting started with this plan is highly problematic with any team, let a lone a big market one with fans watching every move you make like a hawk. I actually stated, it is not always about "outrageous prices" with the Rays. Snell's contract was not bad. Am I certain I want Bloom to adopt this strategy? No. For one, it has to work, right away. There is no room for mistakes, of he's out of a job. I do, however, see the value in trading Bogey and/or JD and Vaz, this winter rather than lose them for nothing. The harder choice is someone like Devers. TB would be thinking of trading him, now, before his arb payments get to high and knowing they cannot afford him. This is where the Sox can diverge from the "Rays Plan" and splurge on certain players like him. I would like to see us try some kind of hybrid plan. I'm probably more willing to trade key players than most posters, but I know it's a huge gamble, and I'm putting my faith in Bloom's evaluation of the return package we get. That faith may be misplaced. I get that.

Indeed. They do make signings like Morton and Rich Hill, and even make trades for guys like Cruz. They also traded Adames, this year. One area where they really excel is identifying and correctly valuing talent in other teams' farm systems and ML rosters. Maybe part of it is seeing a tweak that can be made to improve a player they want to acquire, but by far, their biggest additions to their roster come not from draft picks. They actually just do okay with the draft. Their strength is picking up players from other teams and either watching them be or turning them into studs. They are not afraid to trade players that look like studs, even if they are low paid- like Snell, when they get multiple players back that often more than one turn out better than who they traded. That is one area Bloom might do very well in, but the strategy might not be accepted in a "big market" environment, despite it being a proven winning strategy, if done right.

What pitchers would you replace Richards or the two with doubts?

No Perez was expected. The third catcher indicates the desire to PH for our catcher(s). Not a bad idea.

He's been our DH mostly, anyway, right? He played OF at the Nats, because there was no DH. He'd DH (just about) every game in the AL playoffs, even with healthy ankles.

It all seems like it fits into this year's Sox narrative, though.

That's true, but I'm thinking more about trading key players while being a competitive team. We hardly ever do that, and the reasons are obvious, but in terms of a long term winning strategy, it can be helpful to a big market team, too. I don't think the only reason TB traded players like Archer and Snell was financial. I think they do it to improve the roster as the main reason. If you keep doing that, you continually have young players coming up (from previous trades) to take the places of the new guys you are trading. The problem is getting that strategy started, when you have nobody from a previous trade, and the fall out from the media and fans when trading a star. Look what happened with Betts, and that was a classic TBR type move. Imagine us trading Bogey, JD and Vaz, this winter for prospects. Even if we went on to sign Baez, Schwarber and Pina, something the Rays couldn't do, our fans and media would still be irate.

His "downish season" was a second best in OPS on the team. He might have beaten out Devers for number one, had Devers not gone nutty in game 162. Also, JD has been getting dome huge hits on the last few games, but who am I to being up recency bias? .908 in his last `6 games (3 HRs). 1.132 in his last 5 games, when we really needed it.

We also have Whitlock and can use starters, if needed, out of the pen. Eovaldi going deep would certainly give us a big boost in chances of winning, but even if does not, we may still be able to cobble together a formidable pen plan. Having just 2 major hitters to worry about (plus that pesky Gardner dude) helps, too. Our line-up vs the righty looks pretty damn good. No JD hurts, but Schwarber at DH helps our defense look better, as we don't have to play him in LF or 1B, and who knows, maybe our 1Bman (Dalbec) or LF'er (Verdugo) give us some offense similar to what JD might have given us. (The real swap is likely Arroyo for JD's bat, but a better defensive alignment with Arroyo at 2B, Kike in CF, and Verdugo in LF.)

1) I don't think anyone is doubting the game is officially called the "post season." 2) Some are saying they don't view the game as being the "Playoffs" but rather similar to a "tie-breaker" play-in game that used to be game 163 of the regular season. 3) Some may be making a distinction between "post season" and "playoffs." (not sure on this one)

True, but you're not "in" the Championship series, unless you win, as well. The difference is the one game format vs the series format, and one game has connotations of tie-breaker games, like the one in 1978. I'm fine with people viewing the game anyway they wish. I see it as making the playoffs, but our "first round" is a one-gamer.

I know this. There used to be far fewer teams, too. Once they hit 3 divisions per league, they valued division winners over wild card teams with better records. That part had nothing to do with money. Yes, it's always been about money- as is much of what goes on in our lives.

MLB has always valued winning the division more than overall record.

I agreed, when I said, “of course,” then I gave my opinion.

Yes, in the context of this recent debate, it was "strawman." It went off on a tangent.

Of course, but I think the WC game is the "post season," so it is making the playoffs, where as a tie- breaker is game 163 of the season. Do these stats count towards the regular season or post season? I think the answer to this tells it all. (just my opinion)

Maybe we can all hit- just not well. Maybe all of us can act- just not well. To see what Oprah has made vs some ball players is a valid comp, IMO.