moonslav59

I'm not worried about our offense. Not even a lil bit.

I always wondered why Hartford wasn't the choice for a Sox AAA team. I know it is also Yankee turf, but maybe we could win over more CT fans.

I'd trade JD for nothing, but nobody will take on that whole contract. Would I trade him for nothing, if the other team paid half his contract, but I doubt we find a taker, even for that. (Also, this really doesn't help us this year.)

Probably a good idea.

I liked Remy, when he first started out, but he seems to just say the same things over and over, and I get the sense, he thinks too highly of himself. OB drove me away.

I switched to the O's broadcast. I can't take the Sox announcers for 2 days in a row.

To be fair, the idea trading JD came up last deadline and a little over the winter. Trading him might only free up $8-10M a year for two years, and since this year is not likely going to be all that competitive, we are really taking about just freeing up some cash for 2022, and not all that much. He's not going anywhere, unless we are out of it by the deadline, and someone will pay a sizable chunk of his deal.

They also wanted to ban Sunday voting but caved when they realized that would be too obviously targeting minority voters.

Why should poll workers, who are already under enormous pressure and now time constraints have to go give water? What is the purpose of not allowing someone else to give water, while here in Texas, they allow people to video and harass voters standing in line?

Here in Texas, at 1:39 am a couple days ago, the GOP led Senate ended it's session and then started the next one at 1:40 am to meet the public notice requirement and then went on to enact a voter restriction bill that clearly targets only urban and minority groups. One bill actually targets just voting districts with large populations by restricting how many voting booths they can have per registered voter, but rural (mostly GOP and white) districts can have as many as they want. They also will now allow people to video voters standing in line (as if the intimidation many voters of color already have faced recently is not enough.) They banned overnight and drive thru voting that is used widely by minorities and those with disabilities (how is this stopping voter fraud, when these voters go through the same strict voter ID protocols as daytime and other voting methods?). Speaking of disabilities: now, anyone seeking a absentee ballot based on a disability will need a second "proof of disability" to be allowed to vote (not hard for people who have printers and scanners- like more well off citizens). There's much more beyond some of the strictest voter ID laws already on the books, here. For instance, college students must vote in their home district not at school, and they cannot use a student ID to vote, but a hunting License will be accepted.

It's more than just showing an ID- much more.

Defensive Metrics from 2018-2021 (1000+ innings): 3B: Devers: -2.7 UZR/150 (26th out of 33.) -21 DRS (31st out of 33.) SS: Bogey +0.9 UZR/150 (13th out of 35) -22 DRS (T35th out of 35.) 2019-2021 (800+ innings): Devers: -1.3 UZR/150 (19th out of 26) improved over 2018. -10 DRS (T 25th out of 26) also improved Bogey: +1.0 UZR/150 (12th out of 30.) -14 DRS (T30th out of 30.)

It is a wonder. I'm thinking maybe Betts's counter offer just blew them away, and they didn't even bother to make a counter offer, which I think they should have, ifonly to appease the fan base, who was still ticked off over the Lester scenario. The fact that Betts took a COVID discount with the Dodgers makes it harder to swallow, but at the time of the offer, I think we all know, Betts would have said no had the Sox offered what he ended up taking with LA. That alone, makes it hard to know what we could have-should have done, and what Betts would have done, even if we had done more or much more. I was firmly in the camp of signing Betts to what it would take, within reason. He's a once in a generation (or more) player, but I've come to see the logic in not tying up 15-20% of your player spending budget in one player for 10+ years. I still wish we had him, but that's a lot of money to spend elsewhere. We better spend it wisely.

It's the first step, and it's not always easy or successful. We hit rock bottom in 2020, and in some ways, the shortened season was a blessing. I'm not going to call it the "C" word, but many of us saw it coming, and it looks like management saw it too, early in 2019. We extended ourselves, too thin, and we are still paying the price, I wasn't a Sox fan before the early 70's, or a baseball fan before 1967, but 2020 was about as bad as I've seen. I, too, cheered for many a mediocre team for too many decades, and the last two decades have brought so much joy, the this 2-4 year blip is not going to kill me. I see a light, and it's getting brighter. We shed Pedey's contract, next winter, and a bunch of these one year deals will also free up a lot of spending room,this upcoming winter. I'm confident we will be playoff competitors in 2022 and ring contenders by 2023. Bloom and Cora are just right for the job at hand. We have a solid core of young and prime players to build around. Our oldest players are not the most essential players, anyway, except for maybe JD, but he's only got 2 years left, and he's not really way past prime for those 2 years.

That's probably not uncommon for teams projected to win 78-86 games. We are a top 10 offensive team, and I mean batting not being offensive to the eyes. If our pitching is healthy, we are top 15, but being #14 is not really a strength. I hear you, and I don't disagree, but we made some moves that improved the team and set us up financially to improve even more, next year. We draft high, this year, so that can help our longer term outlook. I think the best we can hope for is that no two teams run away with the wildcard race, and we can stay in the WC hunt late into the season. In terms of the longer view, it might do better, if we trade away our 1 year players, this summer. The moves we made, last summer, are one reason our farm jumped up in the rankings. Even the Beni, Ottavino and Rays deals boosted the farm, this winter. I'm trying to stay optimistic as much and as long as possible. I was one of the first to jump ship, last year, and that's not usual for me. Hang in there, jad.

I beg to differ, although almost anything said can be viewed as "political."

One guy is not "integration." Some teams took until the 60's to add just one player.

As nearly everyone knows, I'm a huge Cora fan, and I know managers say things just to boost the confidence of their players, but no way is Kike one of the "best defensive 2Bmen" in MLB. (And, that's not based on one mishap in one game.) I'm glad he's in CF, today, where he belongs. That being said, Marwin is no defensive gem at 2B, either, and neither is Arroyo. Flexibility is all well and good, but it does help to be at least decent at a few of the positions you play. Only Dalbec at 1B and Verdugo in RF seem like plusses on defense. Some will argue Vazquez at catcher, but I'm not gonna start that debate up again. EHern has plus numbers in CF in a scattered sample size over many years. Maybe he can do it for a full season, but he likely won't play CF in even 80 games. Cordero has the tools, and Renfroe should be fine for LF, so maybe we can salvage a plus in LF, but there's too much speculation there to check that box, right now. We have to win games with out offense and a near totally healthy pitching staff. That's our best chance.

Even our best defensive line-up is sub par. Let's hope we can "get away with it."

If we lose today, posters will be calling for a fire sale and management heads to roll.

I'm fine with learning the lesson that mega deals should be thought about, long and hard. The JD deal was strange.It seemed we were the only ones bidding on a long term deal (with opt outs). I don't consider the Eovaldi deal all that large or long, but it did hurt our chances at spending large on Betts. The Bogey extension also hurt our chances at keeping Betts, but it was an underpay in the grand scheme of things. Plus, there's an opt out that may very well keep the deal short. The Sale extension was a gamble, too, but the deal signed reflected the health risks. The Pablo, HRam and Rusney deals hurts us badly, and in some ways forced the all out DD plan, but the HRam deal was really not all that bad. His injury ruined it. The Risney deal was a gamble- much like Dice-K and Moncada, and it ended up being a big bust. What really sucks, is that when we finally choose to wake up and smell the coffee, we choose Betts as the poster boy for a new era of fiscal responsibility. BETTS! The best overall player Boston has seen in a long long time, perhaps ever!

"Major concerns" over one game. Sure, Devers' defense has been a concern for quite a while and EHern's, too, but trading JD, moving Devers to DH, Dalbec to 3B and Chavis/Martwin to 1B after one game is literally cracking me up.

Corporations have always been "political." Baseball has been "political" in many ways, before- like being very slow to integrate blacks into MLB. Perhaps, it's what they are getting "political" about is what distresses you.

I see Richards as bigger, but he only has an option for year 2, but yeah, surprise-surprise, it's a re-build year.

Even if Devers never learns to play 3B well enough, IMO, he's a keeper as a 1Bman or DH. The man can flat out hit.