moonslav59

Holt might fit into Bloom's strategy.

I disagree. Every year, excpet maybe last year, teams wanted JBJ. I think teams wanted him, but DD was asking for too much in return.

Ig JBJ has a surplus value, then he must be worth more than his arb will award him. I'm not saying I agree his open market value is that high, but I still think we'll trade him not non tender. (Close call.)

Well, I'm going on the assumption that JBJ is worth close to $10M on the open market, since there were rumors someone wants to trade for him. Yes, if Pillar would get $7M or less on the open market, he's a better choice than JBJ at $10-11M. If they both cost the same, I'd choose JBJ. I still think JBJ has the potential to hit over .800 again. He did it twice. Pillar has never come close.

This makes me like him even more, Kimmi.

I'd probably say it's more like 5-25% after the WC play-in game is played. I'm think more of the head-to-head series. I know it's hard to choose the "favorite" based on winning % or WAR or who is hotter. Teams get better as the season goes on- soemtimes through trades or players getting healthy or just gelling at the right time (like the Rockies). It's hard to say, "The better team won," if we can't all agree on who the better team was/is. I get that this makes it hard to prove anything, but in my opinion, the better team wins closer to 75% of the time than 50%. Would you agree with that? (basically 62.5% or more) Now, if a team is just marginally better, the chances are likely less than 62.5%. I just happened to choose Winning % and showed that if the Astros win this year, a top 2 team from each league will have won the WS 75% of the time in the last 16 years. If these were all a one game playoff structure all the way through, we'd see closer to a 50% number, but a 5 and 7 game series helps the better teams win more often. Even if, like you propose, one team had a 10% chance and they play a team with a 15% chance, it's hardly a coin toss. It sounds like we both have a different isea of what a crap shoot means.

If he has a great 6 years then declines quickly, he may still be a draw at the gate and TV.

I'm for just about anything it takes to keep him here, unless some clown GM offers him the world. Let's see what Cole gets, this winter.

I'm not arguing there are no upsets and the odds are 100% the best teams win. Maybe we have different ideas of what crap shoot means, but to me a complete crap shoot means every series is a 50-50 guess. It's not a 100%. It's not 50%. It seems clearly somewhere in between. To me, it's closer to 75% than 50%. Are there upsets 50% of the series? Would you call 40-45% upsets a crapshoot? (Just trying to see, if we are arguing semantics and not theory.) How about 35%? 33%? 25%?

I can understand your position, and the history of long contracts is pretty bad, especially how they end. I just think Mookie is special. I'd rather get him for less years, and I think he's probably worth $45M x 4 years, then $25M x 2 and maybe $10M x 4, so $300M/10 looks about right to me.

I guess I missed them.

Me, too. I'm still happy he's on our team. The guy is a fierce competitor, and if anyone can come back from whatever is bothering him, it's... Chris Freakin' Sale!

Yes, and to me, I'm prouder of the ones we won without being the highest spender. (Not that we ever won by being a low spender.)

I agree, and I'm fine with us finding a cheap defensive whiz to play CF, even if he hits for a .650-.700 OPS.

You are hereby appointed to set up said meeting and arrange my paid travel plans.

As much as they get hurt, maybe we need to revisit that strategy.

The Cone of Silence.

I also think there's a pride aspect to it all. If you outspend other top spenders by $10-30M and others by $130M+, people expect you to win. When you do, they say, "You bought the championships." I think it feels better to win, when you aren't the biggest spender on the block. (Just conjecture on my part.)

It was more Cashman's fault than his, but you are right.

If we lose JBJ and Hembree and add nobody, we should still be over .500. I'm hopeful this GM can add a few low-cost players that will shine.

T Ward https://blogs.fangraphs.com/sunday-notes-red-sox-prospect-thad-ward-has-a-chris-sale-slider/

He's not as good a hitter as JBJ. JBJ: .738 (2019), .727 (last 3 yrs), .765 (last 5 yrs) Pillar: .719 (2019), .711 (last 3 yrs), .705 (last 5 yrs) It's close, but JBJ is better. 3 yr UZR/150: JBJ 4.2 Pillar 2.8

No, I know you know what it is. I thought you didn't understand why we'd want to or feel the need to reset. After this post, I get where you're coming from and agree 100%. I think Bloom can keep us competitive without going over the line, and hopefully he can rebuild the farm at the same time. Usually, our roster has only a few openings (40 and 25 man), but this year we should have plenty. It's perfect for a GM like Bloom to fill in the slots with low cost but talented players.

True. Do we know, if the Sox have insurance on Price?

Like it was his fault the Yankee starters sucked.