moonslav59

Apparently, he did it to "challenge himself."

He should just go under the knife, now. Mark my words.

Santana had a fantastic 2019 season, so I assumed you felt he might be in the running. He may very well get a chance in 2021, if he does well for a few weeks or months.

He'd have to be added to the 40 man roster. I'm not saying I'm in love with our #40 or even 39, 38 or 37, but I think Chavis is ahead of Santana. Arauz might be, too. Munoz and Santana are later in the season options.

That pretty much slots Arroyo into the three. The choice comes down to do we go with 4 (13 pitchers) or just 3 (14 pitchers). Chavis will get a chance at some point, but I feel a need to get his chance to shine over and done with as soon as possible. If he continues to rake in ST'ing, and never ends up getting a long look, there will always be those lingering "what ifs?" I've been rather down on Chavis from the start, but I have not given up on him. He has true power. He deserves at least one more long look. When, is the question, to me. If everyone is healthy, this might be my starting 9 and bench of 4: C Vaz 1B Dalbec 2B Chavis 3B Devers SS Bogey LF Cordero-Renfroe platoon CF EHern RF Verdugo DH Martinez Bench: Plawecki, Gonzalez, Arroyo, Renfroe or Cordero

First, the April schedule is not like "the old days." Yes, we have the day off after opening day and then another a week later, but that is followed by 16 straight days with games, assuming no rainouts. I don't see the need for 14 pitchers, even with a pretty full schedule, but I guess they may want to start pitchers off very slowly. Second, Munoz and Santana are not even on the 40 man roster, so unless we add them, they will not be chosen. If anyone is place on the 60 day IL, God forbid, then maybe. So, your nine plus 3-4. Gonzalez has to be one. If Cordero is ready to play, he's a clear #2. That leaves 1-2 slots (I hope 2.) My guess is Arroyo has the inside track, as of now. He can play SS, 2B and 3B, and Chavis cannot. Arauz can, too, and he's off to a nice start, but I think Arroyo is #3. To me, Chavis needs to get a long look, so we can decide his future with the Sox. I get the excitement and hype over Duran, but I've thought all along that he could use a little more time in the minors, but since AAA does not start until May, I'd hate to think he's not playing. #4 is a tough call. I think it's all about Cordero. If he looks like he can play everyday, that would squeeze Duran out of playing time, and I like Chavis as a PH'er and back up 1B, 3B and 2Bman- maybe even LF. I'd start Duran, Munoz, Santana and Arauz in AAA and go with 13 pitchers. (Sale on 60 day IL) SP1 ERod SP2 Eovaldi SP3 Richards SP4 Pivetta SP5 Perez (Houck starts in AAA) RP1A Ottavino RP1B Barnes RP3 D Hern RP4 Brasier RP5 Sawamura RP6 Andriese (spot starter) RP7 Brice (out of options) RP8 Whitlock (Rule 5) (Taylor & Valdez in AAA)

Why not? His rehab is going to advance to throwing hard at some point.

Teenie Tiny Sample Sizes ST OPS 2.300 EHern 1.682 Duran 1.569 Chavis 1.500 Verdugo 1.318 Munoz 1.262 Downs .856 Devers .844 Renfroe .833 Arauz .818 JD .667 Vaz .444 Arroyo

LOL. My picks... Over/Under? Over Sale 80 IP Under Richards 100 IP Under Eovaldi 120 IP Over ERod 140 IP Over Houck 4.00 ERA Under Pivetta 4.50 ERA Under Vaz .790 OPS Over Dalbec .800 OPS Over EHern .750 Way Over Devers .890 Over Bogey .890 Under JD .850 Under Verdugo .850 Under Renfroe .800 Over Cordero 100 games Big Questions: Who plays the more innings in CF? X Verdugo Cordero EHern Duran (Who gets the least of those 4? Cordero) Who gets more saves? X Ottavino Barnes (Who blows more saves? Ottavino) Who has the best ERA in 2021 (assuming 80+ IP)? Sale X ERod Richards Eovaldi Who gets more PAs? Marwin X Arroyo Chavis

I figured it was something like that, and I have very little hope he can or will come anywhere near those numbers again, but it's nice to have one more long shot to pull for. I didn't mean my post to be antagonistic, but I thought maybe you might want to know, I don't click on the comps.

Over/Under? Sale 80 IP Richards 100 IP Eovaldi 120 IP ERod 140 IP Houck 4.00 ERA Pivetta 4.50 ERA Vaz .790 OPS Dalbec .800 OPS EHern .750 Devers .890 Bogey .890 JD .850 Verdugo .850 Renfroe .800 Cordero 100 games Big Questions: Who plays the more innings in CF? Verdugo Cordero EHern Duran (Who gets the least of those 4?) Who gets more saves? Ottavino Barnes (Who blows more saves?) Who has the best ERA in 2021 (assuming 80+ IP)? Sale ERod Richards Eovaldi Who gets more PAs? Marwin Arroyo Chavis

I remember that stretch against KC. UGH-LEEEEE! West coast trips used to kill us, too.

Not trying to be mean or anything, but these comps to Seattle players do not interest me in the least. (I never click the link. Maybe other do.)

...and Burleson had a .365 OBP in 1976 and a respectable .338 in 1977 (.351 combining the previous 2 seasons).

I agree. (I had hoped we got Verdugo and Maeda, but we did well.)

I hope I end up being wrong about Chavis- the guy I traded most on the BTV site. I have said he deserves a long look, this year, and I think that even more after this start to ST'ing.

Oh, I'm expecting many "no's." If I had to pick the most likely, it would be Chavis, Richards and Eovaldi. Cordero might be, too. We don't need a ton of "yeses" to give us something to build around for 2022 and beyond. I'm thinking Devers will be a yes- he will bust out beyond 2019 numbers, this year or next, IMO. I think Sale becomes great again, but maybe not in 2021. Ottavino doesn't matter, because he's got one year left, as do some others. ERod is 50-50. I love the guy and if he looks good, I hope we extend him. I've always been high on Dalbec, so I'm thinking "yes." D Hern is 50-50. Houck is someone I find hard thinking better than 50-50. I actually like Pivetta more than most- maybe more than Houck.

I hear you, and agree. I'm not on the side of those who think overkill is such a bad thing. I, too, loved our chances in 2018 from day one (and before opening day, too.) I liked our chances in 2019, but I quickly soured and was one of the first to give up on 2019. (I'm usually one of the last.) I don't blame team management for choosing to reset after 2019, and once that became a priority, the Betts choice became an either or choice. Either we pay Betts and have a bad team around him, or we pay several players what we would have paid Betts. It kills me to see Betts in Dodger blue, and I wanted us to keep him, but the choice to let him go had a lot of merit, too. I think we'll be back on top, sooner than some think.

Yes, and this is not the first year we re-set or didn't go over the tax line. We've even gone back-to-back before. Years paying no tax: 1997 2000 2001 2002 2003 2008 2009 2012 2013 2014 2017 2020 My guess is, we go over, next winter, so looking at this chart, it looks like we re-set and were more frugal before 2015. We've only re-set twice since 2014 (2017 & 2020). I'm just not getting the Henry bashing and never did.

I'm not projecting greatness from a player who had just one, outlandishly outlier season, but Danny Santana had these numbers in 2019: .283 28 81 in just 474 ABs .324 OBP .534 SLG .857 OPS That projects over 162 games to.... .283 34 100 (with 69 XBHs and 26 SBs)

Weird how the two times the Sox apparently tried to do "what it took" to "get over the hump," the league stopped them. As a frustrated Sox fan all those years, I often told my fellow Sox fans and friends, "I'd take 10 last place finishes, if we just went all in to win just one ring." Now, that feeling was not present after the 2004 ring, but I meant what I said. I'd have take a ring followed by a huge fire sale and 10 years of horrific teams for just one ring. That's one reason I can never fault Henry- ever! Not only did he help build teams that won 3 rings, we were good enough, on paper, to be serious contenders in many more seasons and pre-seasons. The 2020 season was about the only exception, but had Sale and ERod not gone down, it might not have been so bad. (We may have even made a few deals to try and be a little more respectable.)

Certainly, I'd rather have Betts than Price, but since I thought the Price signing was needed, I feel like I'd be hypocritical to say, "We should not have signed Price, so we could keep Betts," and probably just not having his contract would have made it much more doable. There is a chance, however, that even if we hadn't signed any combination of Price, Eovaldi, JD, Sale or Bogey, we still may have just deemed Betts's demands as just too much to agree to. While Price's contract was about one-sixth of our player budget, it was for 7 years not 10-12. Personally, I think the Dodgers made out on the signing, but paying him that much and giving up Verdugo, Downs and Wong seems like an overpay.

True, and maybe I'm too close to the subjects of these questions, but ours seem deeper and more significant. Many are health-related, as with many teams. Some are based on knowing so little about some players due to small, scattered or foreign sample sizes (Houck, Cordero and Sawamura to name just 3).

Hard to disagree, but I often got the sense that the Sox refused to just go that extra step to put them over the top and become the prohibitive favorite to win it all during years where they clearly were a strong contender, until Henry rolled into town. Now, had Bowie Kuhn allowed the Rollie Fingers & Joe Rudi deal to stand, maybe... (The yanks also had the Vida Blue deal nixed, too.)

Off to a good start, today. ERod went 2.2 IP (1 ER). 4 runs scored in the 1st with the first 6 guys getting a hit or a walk.