moonslav59

I'd give Crawford, too.

I like WHIP more for RP'ers and OPS Against for SP'er.

It's hard to construct an accurate system to divide all of the top MLB SP'ers into 5 categories of 30 each. To get a sample size of 150 pitchers (30 teams x 5 SP'ers) the sample size needs to be around 75 IP. If you use that, then you have some smaller sample pitchers that show up on the ERA, ERA+, ERA-, FIP and other non cumulative value stats leader boards, most likely undeservedly. Since most #5 starters are interchangeable, maybe getting the sample size to 120 is best, and all the rest are #5's or better. This is flawed, too, for many of the same reasons. The sample size is 100 to get 120 pitchers, and someone going 100 IP vs someone else going 180-200+ IP is apples to oranges in many ways (unless you use something like fWAR, which accounts for longevity.) Here is a look at the top 120 rankings: fWAR: #1 Crochet (4) & Gray (20), #2 Bello (59) Gio was a #3 at 64 and nobody else had 120 IP. ERA-: #1 Crochet (9) #2 Bello (31 is almost a #1) Gio was a high #2 (33) and Gray is a #3 at 77. FIP: #1 Crochet (8) #1 Gray (21) High #3 Bello (62) & Gio (64) Does this get us any closer to knowing if Gray or Bello should be called a #2, a #3 or something else? Then, we have to try and project 2026 from past numbers: 1 year, 2 years, 3 years??? Geeeessh!

Sox projections adjusted to 180-190 IP: 5.6 Crochet 3.9 Gray 3.2 Early 2.5 Sandoval 2.1 Bello 2.0 Tolle 1.6 Crawford 1.3 Harrison 1.0 Dobbins

In 2025, the Sox had 10 SP'ers with an fWAR at +0.1 or better. We had 7 over 0.3 and 5 at 1.0 or more: 5.8 Crochet 2.0 Bello 2.0 Giolito (FA) 1.1 Early 1.0 Dobbins (In 2024 Crawford was at 1.8 and Criswell 1.1) The Yanks had 5 SP'er over 1.3 and have Cole returning: 4.8 Fried, 3.2 Rodon, 2.1 Warren, 1.3 Schlitter & Schmidt (Gil 0.6 in 57 IP) The Jays had 3 and Bassitt is a FA: 4.1 Gausman, 2.4 Bassitt, 1.4 Berrios (0.8 Lauer in 74 IP & Yesavage 0.4 in 14 IP)

Me, too. Maybe having Tolle and Early, as well as Perales in the system will take some of the spotlight off Valera a bit, but we have so many very promising pitchers in the next group poised for a big jump, that I'm super pumped up. The two 19 year olds, Valera and Fajardo are equally exciting to me. The three college draftees, all 21, can show major growth, too: Witherspoon, Phillips & Eyanson. I'm pretty pumped up about 23 year old Holobetz, 18 year old Travieso & 17 year old Soto, too. These older guys hold some promise, and maybe one surprises us with a big jump: Sandlin (24) Uberstine (26) Drohan (26) & Mullins (26) I'm not sure about Paez (21) Monegro (23) and Delzine (17.)

Texas A & M lost, but they will be in the dance. All the other top 18 teams that player won, some just barely. People down here in Texas are arguing that Texas belongs, but with 3 loses, I don't think they should. With some conference championship games coming up, some teams in the top 12 could get bounced out. (Ratings are from before games played this past week.) 11 BYU vs 5 Texas Tech: Tech is in with win or loss, IMO. BYU is in with a win and out with a loss. 4 GA vs 10 ALA: GA is in no matter what. ALA is out with a loss. 1 Ohio St vs 1 Indiana: both are in, win or loss. 18 VA vs Duke (North Texas v Tulane and James Madison v Troy) This might be the new rankings: 1. Ohio St 12-0 (play IN) 2. Indiana 12-0 (play OSU) 3. Georgia 11-1 (play ALA) 4. Texas Tech 11-1 (play BYU) 5. Texas A & M 11-1 6. Ole Miss 11-1 7. Oregon 11-1 8. Oklahoma 10-2 9. Notre Dame 10-2 10. Alabama 10-2 (play GA) 11. BYU 11-1 (play TEX Tech) 12. Vanderbilt 10-2 __________________ 13. Miami 10-2 (Need BYU or ALA loss) 14. Utah 10-2 (Need BYU, ALA and VA losses) 15. Virginia 10-2 (May sneak in with win over Duke) ___________________ 16. Texas 9-3 (I don't see them jumping 4 teams) 17. James Madison 11-1 (I doubt they jump to 12th, even with a 70-0 win) 18. No. Texas 11-1 (I doubt they jump to 12th, even with a 70-0 win) __________________ T19. USC & Mich 9-3 (No chance)

I agree. It's about as bad as star players sitting out bowl games to avoid injury.

Our 40 was unbalanced, and the top 20-30 prospects are unbalanced, too. Still is. We did add Sandlin, Uberstine and Drohan to replace 3 pitchers leaving. Guerrero for Gray was a sort of balancing of the minors. (Bernardino, Murphy, Wink.) We are losing Gio, Buehler, Wilson, Matz and May. We added Gray and lost Clarke & Fitts.

Yes, and we lost about 850 PAs from Devers and Bregman. Anthony had 300, so he cannot make up 850. Mayer is a long shot to hit like Devers or Bregman, so let's assume Anthony gets 650 PAs and has no sophomore slump. That leaves 500 PAs for ????. Bringing Bregman back might keep us even and not a top contender for one more year. The window is open. We need to be bold. Hoping on Mayer is not a good plan.

He's better than what we expected from Wacha, too. I like him more than I liked Gio, and 1 year is better than 2.

How do we rank #2-5?

Trusting a 36 year old pitchers with ERA-/ERA+ in the #3-#4 range seems like we are repeating the same strategy that has failed from Richards to Buehler, but IMO, Gray is the second best starting pitcher we have added since the Nate trade in 2018. (Crochet is the clear #1.) That being said, the comp group is headlined by Wacha, who missed key time in his one and done year.

That dollar amount includes the 2027 $10M buyout.

I think many teams want Gore, and trusting prospects is not ideal. The Sox have some highly ranked prospects, and we aren't handing a rotation slot to any of them.

I agree, even if his ERA-/ERA+ places him in the 61-90 group (#3's.)

So? I like Gray. He's better than Sandoval. Crawford & Co. and probably better than Bello in 2026. I had hoped we'd do better, but we didn't use up the trade capital I was expecting to give up for Ryan or Lodolo, so if we use that capital in a good way, I might be fine with the winter moves as a whole.

The Sox have 6 SP'er at 0.9 or more, 6 over 1.1 and 3 over 1.7. The Yanks have 6 over 0.9, 5 over 1.1 and 4 over 1.7. TOR has 5 over 0.0, 5 over 1.1 and 4 over 1.7 Kinda what I expected: we are heavy on quantity not quality.

IMO, he's a decent #3, who has some numbers that show he's a high #2. He's better than Crawford, but may not do much better than Gio did in 2025.

I've listed the numbers several times, including fWAR and FIP, which hold Gray in a more glamorous light. He they are a 4th or 5th time: K-BB% (I have showed he has not declined here) 17.0>24.4>21.6 (but slightly from '24>'25) fWAR: 5.4>3.8>3.6 (YES, very slight decline '24-'25) bWAR: 5.6>1.8>1.4 (Clear and continuing decline) ERA+: 157>107>96 (Clear decine) ERA-: 65>95>104 (Clear 2 year decline) FIP: 2.83>3.12>3.39 (an almost perfect straight line decline.) They guy has gotten worse, but is still pretty good. We don't have to deny the decline to thiink he's still good.

He was better in '24 than '25. He was better in '23 than '24.

That was the strategy when we had 10 holes to fill. I don't see many positions needing improvement, but the ones we have are doozies. IMO< we had 3 big holes and need 3 big pluses. We filled one to some extent.

I get that, but the gap between Bello, who most view as a #3 and Crochet is a wide one.

Yes. I posted them. He's also 36 and is on a 2 year trend downwards, already.

That's how I see it, too. Same with bringing Bregman back- it's just not an improvement. (Replacing Breggie with Bichette might be a push, as well.) Were is our big plus coming from? If the idea is Casas at 1B, what other position is left? (Please don't say Realmuto at catcher.)