moonslav59

I literally live on a street corner.

In this sense, I agree the past few management teams botched the roster construction and several of their biggest moves back-fired. If sticking to the no trade policy causes the team to keep missing out, then that can be considered evidence of a botch, but was it a Brez botch? You brought up some key points about logjammed areas, and we knew we had that last winter, but kept it as is while leaving big holes open. We even added KC to the OF mix for this year, but we did move the password. Another area was the rotation. I'm glad we beefed it up, but we went into the winter hearing the FO say "We need a #2 SP," but then we went out and made 3 of our 4 biggest additions SP'ers. We got the #2 SP'er last, and it makes you wonder if they'd take back the Gray trade, if they knew we'd get Suarez, and use those assets to get an infielder. Now, if we get a decent infielder, I'll be fine with the end result, but the path we have taken looks shaky, at best and aimless at worst.

You don't think they are bending in heaven? By all accounts they still are.

We need to plan for 26 injuries and have two full all star rosters by opening day, or else Brez is a complete failure.

By all accounts Brez botched the Ranger signing by not forcing him to defer money. I heard that on every street corner!

It seems like this could very well have been the main reason Breggie went to Chicago. It sounds plausible. If it is true, and Bloom was not given the opportunity to offer a no trade clause, it's hard for me to think that was a botch. Of course, he could have botched other aspects of the talks and hardened Breggie against coming back to BOS, and that's not a good thing, at all. If "bay all accounts" he did that, he made a mistake, but that does not mean he "botched" a signing that could never have happened, unless Breggie dropped the no trade clause. One could argue the animosity Brez caused made it more difficult for Breggie to drop the no trade clause demand, and maybe there is truth to that, and indirectly, that was a botch. To me, I don't know. I'm not throwing anyone under a bus before knowing. Brez seems to have some faults with communication and interpersonal relationships. That's kind of a human trait we all share to some degree.

You didn't give your opinion. That's the point. "I think we know what happened" is not saying what you think happened. Can you get that? No, it's not giving your opinion. You dont have to, if you dont want, but just don't say you gave one when you didnt. You just regurgitate what others say and try to imply that because by all accounts it makes something true or seem true, but again, you never said you think what they said was true. You simple won't say it. You don't have to have the opinion that Brez botched it or not. It's okay to say "I'm not sure," which is my position. What's silly is thinking that me saying I and nobody knows is somehow a defense of Brez. I'm fully open to the idea that Brez botched it or parts of it, and that maybe it didn't make a difference anyway, since the limits of where he could go were never going to get Breggie to sign. (That's a different subject, I know.) I never said i did not defend Bloom. Another lie. I did defend many of his moves and thought he fit the mold of what JH & Co were looking for- someone who could find "diamonds in the rough," but he largely failed at that. I often pointed out the impossible situation he was was put in and added context. I pointed out he left Brez with a decent core and farm. If you disagree, fine. If you agree he did, are you "DEFENDING BLOOM?" Gasp... You can't stop the outright lies. You think you know my positions and motives and you are just plain wrong. I'm not all black and white. I rarely try to pin blame on one person. Bloom & Brez made several serious mistakes- some more in hindsight, but some seemingly indefensible. Nobody is perfect.

But he can really bend that string better than Jimi, Eric and Jeff.

LOL. I was almost on the floor. I gotta ask this, let's assume all accounts were right: Brez thought the Cubs were bluffing and they weren't. Id that botching it? I counts as "misreading the room," for sure, but you don't botch anything if you walk away as the loser of a bid, if you made the best offer you were able to make. Sure, you may look silly as Breggie is snickering under his breathe and calling you a clown to his friends, but Brez was not the one that overpaid, gave a no trade clause to insure he's stuck with the guy and deferred less money than he could have to get Breggie. No, that would be the winner of the negotiations- the Cubs. Won't Breggie look so good as a Cubby? I'm glad we got Suarez. If Brez was baffled by the apparent bluff that wasnt a bluff, negotiations are a lot like poker. (Sorry for the lame apology, as I know Drew hates those.) He called the bluff while holding a decent hand (offer) and the other guy drew an inside straight. That doesn't automatically make Brez a clown. It's not like he was holding jack high on nothing in his hand.

I was gonna respond to both statements, too and agree. I don't think we budge much, but we may have on Alonso, if Breggie signed first. We certainly came closer to Breggie than Alonso, so it would have been a massive budge to get Pete. This begs a question, did we offer Suarez more, the minute Breggie signed with the Cubs?

The worst quick pivot was after he said we'd never sign anyone good, and we signed Suarez, and he was back to the same rant like 3 minutes after, saying, "Golly gee, that surprised me." (just razzin' ya Fred. You know I'm okay with pessimistic fans. I was one for decades.)

Yup, and not Bregman as a plan C.

Still can't answer a simple question. and, we don't know exactly what happened, except we lost out on a close negotiation by a team that offered more money, a no trade clause and maybe less deferred money. Maybe it was only closer than we think because Berggie wanted Boston. Nobody knows, so let's stop the pretending based on a few talking heads all jacked up about losing another first prize star.

You are assuming they did not have Suarez high on their list. I admit, after getting Gray and Oviedo, it looked like a frantic pivot. The point about Alonso signing before Breggie might have messed up our order of thinking, but one hopes that was one of the contingencies. If these guys are continually messing up, then sure, it's a major issue, but when I keep hearing their best offer was far short (not on Breggie but others) I'm thinking it's not messing up the strategy of negotiations its messing up knowing the market and wasting time on players you actually thought you might get but are in la-la land or something. Then, I think maybe its just going through the motions so the fans think you are really trying to get good players, but these bad, bad super looney owners are ruining the game by offering the world to marginal stars. Eventually, I accept I don't know jack about what the hell is going on in baseball negotiations by anyone, including the Sox. I think we did pretty good, this winter, except for the one missing piece. I went in hoping we went full quality over quantity, even if it meant just two mega adds, 3 at most. We've added 4 but missed the two biggest goals: big RHB and 3B/2B. That part is not good, at all, but there are many ways to build a winning team, and while I prefer filling biggest need areas first and as best u can, we added 3 really good players plus Oviedo. Last year, we added 3 kinda biggies: Bregman, Buehler & Chapman, and one of em burned us badly. Then, we dumped Devers but got lucky with Gio. Baseball is a strange game to figure out, and I'm not sure figuring out front offices is any easier.

This really getting silly. Nobody knows exactly what happened. Even if some missteps or misguesses were made, isn't that kinda the nature of negotiations when multiple entities are involved.

It's not often we mostly agree on one thing. This could be it.

Exactly. Setting a criteria like that is not well thought out. Lets trade for Altuve- NOT IP!!!

Bregman would have been enough? Being career .820+? I would not be one bit surprised if IP outhits Bregman year 1 of Breggie's deal.

I think your idea of mediocre is pretty stringent, as you called Gray a #4. I do agree that we settle for less than good enough, too often. I think we've stepped it up the last 2 winters, but not by enough, and we swung and missed on Buehler at $21M. Had he pitched like a $21M guy, maybe we finish with a much better record. I get the point about how high AAV on short term deals isn't going to get you the talent a $21M x 6 years gets you, let alone a $28M x 6 year might get. The odds go up on a swing and miss when you go one and done, so often. We did step it up to 2 years with Gio, and he did his best to make it a one and done. LOL

So, Paredes doesn't count. (He's over 50 points below .820, career and 30 below over the last 3 seasons combined. He was 10 below in '25. Since 2016, these are the only 2B and 3Bmen above .820: .879 Ramirez .862 Altuve... LOL .855 Devers .854 Arenado... LOL .846 Bregman (I doubt he hits .820 over this contract) .835 Machado .833 Muncy .827 KMarte .826 Riley

If we dont add an infielder, I'm assuming Mayer is at 3B FT and DHam/Romy platoon at 2B. It would look like this: C: Narvaez/Wong 1B: Contreras 2B: DHam/Romy SS: Story 3B: Mayer LF: Anthony (some RF) CF: Rafaela RF: Abreu DH: Duran (some LF & CF) with Masa/Casas/Romy as secondary options with Paredes minus an OF'er: C: Narvaez/Wong 1B: Contreras 2B: Mayer/Romy SS: Story 3B: Paredes LF: Anthony or Duran CF: Rafaela RF: Anthony or Abreu DH: Masa/Casas/Romy as secondary options ___________________________ That's if we don't play Rafaela at 2B.

Well, "the process" involves watching suspects become superstars, but you poo-poo that idea. Can you for just once answer what you think? Did Brez botch the negotiations? Iy yes, do you think Breggie signs with the Sox if Brez does everything right but can't offer the no trade clause or even match the Cubs numbers?

That could very well be true, and also the next step. They felt they made a competitive offer to Breggie, and for once, I agree that they did, and when they were outbid and beat by a no trade clause, they knew they were not taken out of the Suarez bidding, since it was lower.

Ive never argued against the need to go large and long on the right players. I thought Alonso fit the need, until we got Contreras, of course. To me, Suarez just barely meets the requirement of "large" or "long" and some players make 3-4 times what he got and 2-4+ years more, but it was a significant signing. I'm not happy with just one year deals, but Contreras has 2 years plus a team option for year 3, so you missed that. We have locked up 4 young players for long term, when we used to have zero to one, at any given time. That is a positive shift in one area. I'm with you on hoping we start paying what it takes to get the best of the best, which normally means large and long.

With no trades, I see Duran at DH nearly FT. The other OF'ers are just too much better to have any sort of rotation beyond just norm rest time at DH. I don't think Cora plans on platooning Abreu and he never has with Duran, except maybe year one. Maybe Romy could DH vs LHPs, but we'd need him at 2B (unless Rafaela is there.) I'm against the idea of Rafaela at 2B for any time, except as an emergency, but that is one way to play Masa more at DH. I'm not sure I'm even saying those words. Why am I moving a GG CF'er off position so Masa can DH not Duran/Romy/Casas/Campbell.