moonslav59

Good rentals often cost way more than their worth. Deadline deals are often rooted in desperation and hopes that 1-2 players can get a team over the hump and onwards to glory. It almost worked for us in 2021. The Schwarber trade, along wit savvy additions like Iggy, Shaw and Robles got us within a few outs of a WS appearance. The Schwarber trade cost us the highest ranked prospect Bloom ever traded, but it was only Aldo Ramirez, who was something like our 10th ranked prospect in a pretty depleted farm system, at the time. To get the Kikuchi''s of the world, like HOU did, last year, it's going to cost way more than Aldo Ramirez. I'm fine with trading Mikey Romero or even Cespedes or Bleis, since I view them as blocked, anyway. (Yes, nobody is really blocked, when they are 2-3 years away, but anyway....) Guys like these three, plus maybe a Mullins or Sandlin, might get us a couple useful players, but I'm not so sure even those type deals are worth it. We can do better with winter trades, and we have proven that over even these bad years. Recent winter deals: Top prospects for Crochet. Elmer Rodriguez for Narvaez Verdugo for Fitts, Weissert and others. Scraps for O'Neill Recent Deadline deals: Paxton, Luis Garcia, Lucas Sims (2024) Urias, Llovera, Nick Robertson (2023) To be fair, the deadline deals of 2022 were better, but just the one where we were selling (Vaz for Abreu & EValdez)

"Reasonable" at the time, not "good." Hey, the posters who hated the deal, at the time, got it right. Those of us who felt the deal was reasonable or "good," at the time, got it wrong. I was one who thought it was worth a shot. I had given up hope on Sale, and it turned out I was as wrong as wrong can possibly be. That does not change the fact that Sale's return to glory was far from a sure bet. Grissom's complete implosion was far from a sure bet. The Gio injury and failure was far from a known thing. The confluences of 3 spectacular failures helped you guys look like geniuses. Hats off to you, and I don't mean that facetiously. You got it dead right. I got it wrong. That doesn't mean I have to agree that the deal did not make some sense, at the time. That's all I'm saying. I'm not trying to rewrite history and justify the trade by saying it was a good one. It wasn't. It just made some reasonable sense, at the time.

Of course there were questions and several posters who hated or questioned the idea of trading pitching. Those questions were "foundational," so I disagree with notin on that point, but Sale's record of injury and even of production, when he did pitch from 2019-2023 made the decision, at least reasonable, at the time. We ended up signing a guy with a much better track record of taking the ball every 5th day. I was not a fan of the Gio signing, but I was confident, he'd pitch more than Sale. Not only was I wrong there, but Sale pitched like the old Sale, and Grissom stunk up the place. BTW, 2B had been our weakest position since Pedey left. That part of the deal had merit, too. It just backfired just not as as badly as the Sale-Gio swap out. Hey, how about Story + cash and Duran or Abreu for Sale, now?

Just looked, again: Bogey is down to .617. He's 18th in fWAR among SSs at +0.9. His apparent improvement on Defense has kept him above water. DRS: -5 SDP/ -50 BOS OAA: -1 SDP/-28 BOS His value page on fangraphs: $48M last year w BOS $37M first year w SDP $16M last year $6M this year, so far (projects to maybe $13-14M)

I did, too late, though. I get your points about the Bello & Rafaela extensions. They were hasty and overpays for their service time positions. I don't disagree, but right now, Bello is earning $6M and Rafaela is earning $2.2M. I can't say the extensions "don't look good."

Pretty much sums it all up, from the major deal aspect. One could add Story. Yoshi, Crochet and Bregman to the list, but this list was about just the major failures, except the Bogey one looks fine, now. One could also add the AGon deal and then dump. The Lackey deal and then dump, too.

The Crochet extension does not look good? While I agree with your positions on Bello & Rafaela's deals being too much and too long for players in their years of service range, both are doing well, now. Maybe it's still an overpay, to you, no matter how well they do, for that reason, but I wouldn't say the Bello and Rafaela extensions "don't look good."

With Bloom, our FA success rate was way below 50%, although that can be expected when your highest offers are $10M/1. When you look at the largest FA deals in MLB history, I think the success rate is under 50%, but there is debate about how to define success. Did the 2018 ring make the Price deal a success, is just one example. Breslow's biggest deals: Bregman: looks good despite the injury. Right away, he blows Bloom out of the water, but then again, I doubt Bloom was ever given the green light of a $40M AAV, even for one year deals. Crochet trade: looks like a winner. Crochet extension: see above. Sale trade: made some sense, at the time, but turned into a complete disaster. I see 3 for 4 on the real big deals. Now, the next tier: $39M/2 Gio with a chance to vest for a 3rd year: Bad, so far with a slight glimmer of hope we get some value out of him, like we never got from Kluber, Richards & Co. $21M + buyout for Buehler: Looks plain ugly, right now. $18M/2 Sandoval: TBD $11M/1 Chapman: win, so far We might be lucky to be at 50% on this tier. Maybe a 3rd tier? Hendriks: Yuch-A-Doodle-Doo! O'Neill trade: win Wilson is only a $2M deal, so maybe tier 4: a win, so far. Call it 50-50 on tier 3?

While I agree, this does look a lot like the smoke and mirrors philosophy we've seen in the past few years. Sign Story> wow we're spending again> let Bogey walk. Sign Yoshida> Yipee, we're spending again> let several key player walk, and now, sign Bregman> Triple WOW!> then trade an even higher paid guy. It's going to come down to what we spend this winter and how, and that is, once again, all about wait until next year. I'll say it again, "How Soon Is Now?" (The Smiths) I'll add, "The Waiting is the hardest part." (Tom Petty)

I'm not sure kid gloves would have worked, and while battling through the media is a horrible way to try and fix a mess, the fact is Devers felt he was a good defensive 3Bman and was offended and resistant to moving to DH. He criticized the GM and pouted. He dogged a few plays. Now, he's making more comments that exposes his what his true intentions were, since apparently, he's now fine playing "anywhere they want" him to play. He was acting like a baby, after we paid him $313M, which enough money to keep all his great-great grandchildren living the high life. No doubt, they are thrilled to get out from the $313M contract, but I do not think they felt that way in December. Maybe, after the Bregman signing, they had feelings that $31M a year for a DH was too much, but I doubt they were thinking of a way to dump his salary. Devers, himself, brought about the desire to look at dumping him and his salary. That's not letting Brez & Co off the hook. They certainly should have and could have handled it differently. It is believed that Cora never officially asked him to play 1B, so to me, that is evidence that he was walking on egg shells and WAS TREATING DEVERS WITH KID GLOVES! He was either afraid of offending Devers, or afraid he pout, dog it or demand a trade. How did that end up working out for Cora? Well, he got the pout and dog anyway, and it was Brez that ended up demanding a trade, and he got it. I do think they could have gotten Devers to agree to share time between DH and 1B, had they did it more smoothly and not through the media. Maybe, Devers would have been upset, for a while, but he doesn't seem like the type of guy that would let it get to him for too long of a time. People talk about the "disrespect" we showed towards Devers, but I saw disrespect sent the other way, too. I also think Devers disrespected Bregman's ability to play 3B way better than he can. Nobody talks about that, and notice how Bregman said all the right things, like "I'll play wherever they want me to play," like any team player should say, and not as he final nut kick, Devers is saying that in SF. I'm sorry to say it, but I agree with Bell: "Good riddance."

We lost 25% of our offense with the Devers trade. That's more important than having an approachable GM.

My first thought, too. I'm not so sure DD, Ben & Theo were all that personable, either.

I totally agree, but rental trades suck. A trade like Aldo Ramirez for Schwarber would be fine. I'm just not for trading Arias, Bleis and Early for Hoskins and Quintana.

I wasn't projecting those numbers for all 3 rookies: I was asking if those numbers would be enough to make up for the loss of literally 25% of our offense. I hate the idea of putting more pressure on these kids by batting them 3-4-5, like we had 3 rookies slotted, the other night. I don't expect any in house replacements to come close to making up 25% of our offense lost by trading Devers. I can hope and pray the remaining 12 guys + who? Eaton can maybe make up 5-10%. Maybe an outside addition can add another 5-10%, but I seriously doubt we can get to 15%, this summer/fall. I'm not for trading top prospects for a 2 month bat rental. This looks like yet another "wait till next year" moment way too soon within a season, but I'm not giving up, just now. I think Brez understands that the best trades are made in the winter, so I hope he doesn't go hog wild on rentals, unless we just trade marginal and blocked prospects to get them. It does seem like we manufacture or are terrible at avoiding these major cluster you-know-whats, time and time again.

I'm sure we'll hear more tidbits as time goes by. I will add that, we could have decided to say no, or put off the trade, once tings started "looking up." Rumor had it, we were all set to trade Betts in 2019, when suddenly, things started looking up, and we called it off. it could have happened here. The difference was, we wanted Betts but just wouldn't pay him: we did not want Devers, anymore. Plain & simple. I think we jumped at the timing, in case Devers got hurt, of SF found another trade to their liking

There is a window with Crochet and Bregman- both getting paid a lot. I'd like to think we will try to win, now, but not at the great expense of making a ton of prospect trades, especially for 2 month rentals. Key words: "I'd like to think"

Jordan is starting to get my attention. Maybe he was just a late bloomer. Tibbs went 1-3 w BB. Justin Gonzales went 2-3 and Musett 3-3.

How about Story, Casas, Abreu, Tolle and Romero for Olsen and Sale?

We aren't keeping any kid on the 26, if he's not going to be playing, a lot. I do think we make a trade, and Bregman will probably not be back until after the trade deadline, but even if we keep everyone of our everyday players, someone will not be doing to well and will be the obvious guy to be demoted. My guess is Toro. Campbell can platoon with Romy at 1B and get some time at 2B or CF, if he deserves it.

You know when you take a piece of bread and put it in the toaster? What comes out? That is Yoshida. And, there isn't even any butter.

Abreu is an aside? He's a better hitter vs R than Yoshida, and Duran, Rafaela and Anthony. He's a better defender than Duran, Refsnyder, Yoshida & Anthony.

Max, why does the last 6 games matter for the pitching staff but not for Toro?

I think that was the root of his being offended they moved him to DH. Even if he was good, he could not have possibly thought he was Bregman good, could he?

Winning low scoring games does not mean our O is good. I think the kids will improve, too, but the loss of Devers leaves a whole of 25% of our offense to plug. I like our D: they just have not played up to their level on paper, yet. I am more pessimistic about our pitching, despite the last 6 games.

The guy actually convinced himself he was a good defensive 3Bman.