moonslav59

Yes, I saw that. The 14th placing is puzzling. We were 8th, last year and lost O'Neill and McGuire/Jansen. We could be adding Story, Casas and 1-3 top prospects to the mix. I'd think that would keep us close to even, at worst. It's not like other AL teams added so much, over the winter, to pass us. The Yanks lost Soto. HOU lost Bregman. BAL lost Santander. Who gained a lot? There are other teams as young as we are, but about 10 of our 13 everyday players are pre-prime, just entering prime or in peak prime. Our oldest everyday player is our short-side DH/LF platoon, Refsnyder at age 34. Then, a guy who barely played last year- Story at age 32. In terms of expected age progression, most key So everyday players should improve on 2024's numbers. The defense hurts their WAR. We were 5th in offense on fangraphs, last year and 12th on D.

I've never been a fan of the 6 man rotation, even after the roster was expanded to 26 (and 13 pitchers.) I want Crochet and Houck starting every 5 days- maybe Buehler, too. 32-33 starts not 27 (162/6=27.) It also takes away a RP'er, unless the plan includes using a SP'er on his "throwing day," if needed, in between starts. Our pen is bad enough, as it is. It would be better with Crawford as a bulk innings guy, even bulk high leverage innings. I can understand why they want to do it, at least to start the season, and if someone goes on the IL, it's easy to just flip to a 5 man, or bring up Criswell, Fitts or priester, but I'd pass on the idea.

I seriously doubt he takes that, unless he bets against himself. $25M x 6 for a pitcher who will be will be 26 when he signs a FA contract in 2027. Of course, there is a question about him being really good or not, but we obviously felt he was to give all we gave to get him. Now, we want to hedge our bets and let him walk after two? (Not saying you do.) Let's say he says the only way I take $150M/6 is with an opt out after 2027 or 2028. Give me that or $200M/6. Do you say no? My first question was, do you say no to him insisting on $200M/6 or 7 with an opt out after '27 or '28. I agree that as extreme, but what if that is the reality? Do you let him walk after 2 or give him that deal? I'm a yes, if it's an opt out after 2028 and a close to a yes on 2027. 3 years vs 2 is better, even at near $30M a year. Sure, if he ends up sucking or gets hurt, now we have a Price II situation, but I'll take the risk on a 26 year old over a 31 year old.

They agreed to a 2025 number, but an extension can be started in 2025 with a new number. Forget about the AAV or years, can you guys answer the question? Do you let him walk after his two arb years, because you refuse to give him an opt out after 2027 or 2028, even if he insists? Call it $150 or $200. hell, call it $120, do you do it or not? One of the big plusses we heard about this trade was how young Crochet was, compared to the FA options out there. Of course there is a great risk with signing a guy like Crochet to 6+ years, when he has just one year with a lot of IP, but we all know the great risk signings a 31-32 year old pitcher to 6-8 years. We pretty much know, their last few years will be a drag, or worse. We obviously rolled the dice on Crochet. We gave up a big chunk of our future hopes to make sure we got him, instead of other teams. Now, we are supposed to be all afraid he might suck as he reaches prime? Well, of course we should be afraid. Even the best pitchers of their time, like Sale and Price can become big letdowns. Crochet will turn 26 in June of 2026. A 6 year extension controls him from ages 27 to 32. Hisa time ends about a year after the age when Burnes and Fried's deal start in 2025. This is a major reason we chose this route- DON"T MESS IT UP! I hate the idea of an opt out after 2027 or 2028. It would totally suck, but Crochet has every right to insist on one, unless the annual AAV is greatly increased to compensate for the chance he ends up being great and misses out on a massive payday. Look what Yamo got with no ML experience. Yes, $150M/6 sounds about right, but he could make $240M/6 at age 26 on the open market, in 2 years. I seriously doubt he takes $150M/6 with no opt out. Again, please answer the question: do you let Crochet walk after two years, if he insists on an opt out after 2028? How about after 2027? (Yes, the money amount matter for the rest of the deal, but I'm just asking about the opt out part.) It is very likely he pushes hard for one, and he may insist on it or get $210M+/6 without one (or an opt out after 2029.) Why not answer? Can you at least explain why you won't answer?

We certainly have a boatload of TJS returnees, as well as other injury recoveries going on... Gio & Hendriks Buehler & Whitlock Sandoval and Chris Murphy likely to start 2025 on the 60 Day IL. Even guys like Slaten, I Campbell and a few others missed some time or dealt with injuries in 2024. Those are just the pitchers! Story is a story, all by himself. Devers missed time and played hurt for a while. Casas is close to the same as Story. Grissom had something going on. Yoshida and Ref couldn't even stay healthy as DHs.

The Lackey addition was not the shiny example to cement my point, but he was an important addition to the team, in terms of the 2013 ring. Look at all the mashing teams the Sox had that went nowhere, or lost quickly onc making the playoffs. Yes, some of them had decent pitching and even the exact same names as the teams that did win it all, but to be the strongest correlation to Sox teams winning, is when we made that extra step to add a solid SP'er to oen or two we already had. Adding big hitters helped, too. I'm not trying to minimize that. No Manny- No rings. No Papi- No rings. Adding JD was a big boost. Lynn & Rice. Baylor & Boggs...

We added Pedro and Schilling and won. We added Beckett and won. We added Lackey and won. We added Price & Sale and won. We traded one of the Sox greatest hitters, Nomar, for a glove at SS and won. Of course hitting matters, bigtime, but the Sox have traditionally been great hitting teams for decades, even beyond the park padding stats, but we tend to win, or come close to winning, when we boost the pitching, or have some elite pitchers. (Lonborg '67, Tiant & Lee '75, added Torrez in '78, Clemens & Co in '86...

TJS now means Tommy John Sox.

It's not like McGuire was doing great things, last year. Losing Jansen hurt. I think Narvaez may be okay, and he's good on D, but I'd feel better with someone else- not for back-up, but as a starter. On the everyday player side of the coin, the big losses were O'Neill and a couple months of Jansen. Our gains have to come from Narvaez and 2024 injured players (Story, Casas and a few other shorter stints) to make up for those losses, at least until we decide to call up the kids. The rotation made great gains. We replaced Pivetta with Crochet, Buehler, Giolito and Sandoval. Guys like Criswell, Fitts, Priester, Dobbins and Fulmer look better than our depth did, last January. The pen has some promise, but losing Jansen & Martin makes it a huge question mark. We added Chapman & Wilson, and may add more to come, but we also will see Hendriks & Whitlock and maybe our 6th starter and or Criswell & other AAA starters helping in the pen. To me, the pen looks deeper than last winter but lacking at the closer slot. The defense can improve with a near full season from Story, but that is sounding like a broken record. C, 3B and 1B remain awful. The OF should be better with Rafaela replacing O'Neills innings on OF D.

No Penn St completions to a WR. Notre Dame wins 27-24 after a late game INT and a 41 yard FG with 7 seconds left. WOW!

Tied up: 24-24 on 54 yard TD pass.

Orange Bowl nailbiter: Penn St 24- Notre Dame 17 with under 8 minutes to go. ND ball.

Carlos Narvaez is doing well in the Venezuela League playoffs. His team won the first 6 games, and he got on base 8 out of 17 times. (5 walks)

Only 15 of the 40 Man Roster players are non pitchers. One is in AA (Jh Garica) and one is Sogard. We do have the big three prospects ready to jump on the 40, when we are ready for them on the 26, but that is pretty amazing having 25 of the 40 as pitchers. On top of that, we have a pretty decent list of ML ready pitchers after those 25: Fulmer, I Campbell, Mata, Mills, A Adams, N Davis, J Adames, H Harris Well, we did use 34 players as pitchers in 2024, 3 were non pitchers in a clean-up role. 10 were added to the organization after opening day: Keller, Horn, Garcia, Sims, Paxton, Priester, Hill, Wingenter, Jacquez and Y Ramirez, so basically, we used 21 pitchers that started the year in the Sox organization. We might not have to go outside the organization, so much, this year.

Let's say we hold off trying to trade Yoshida and Abreu and make one RP'er signing like Carlos Estevez. (Maybe, we DFA Sogard or Shugart or make some minor trade to clear a spot.) How competitive is this team? SP: Crochet, Houck, Bello, Buehler, Giolito, Crawford (Sandoval 60 IL) (AAA: Criswell, Fitts, Priester, Dobbins- NR Fulmer) RP: Hendriks, Chapman, Slaten, Estevez, Whitlock, Winckowski, Wislon, Guerrero (AAA: Guerrero, Kelly, Bernardino, Penrod, Shugart- NR Campbell, Mata) C: Wong, Narvaez- NR Zavala 1B: Casas- NR Hickey 2B: DHam, Grissom- NR Campbell SS: Story, Romy- NR Mayer 3B: Devers- NR Eaton LF: Duran, Refsnyder CF: Rafaela- NR Anthony RF: Abreu- Sogard - NR Sikes DH: Yoshida

The exchanged numbers and might go to the arb. Still time before the hearings begin Jan 27th.

I don't disagree, but great defense makes pitching easier. A great pen makes mediocre starters enough to give a team a shot. Of course great batting helps. This all started with you saying "fine is not enough" for batting. I think it is, if the other areas make up for it. Right now, ours does not. Our weakest area is not batting. It's not the rotation or depth. It's the pen and defense. I was pulling for a Soto signing, like all of us, even if it meant not upgrading a SP'er. His impact would have been immense.

I'm not comfortable with mediocre, and I said top 8-10, which is better than mediocre and exactly the ranking the Nats had in 2019. We don't have a Soto or Rendon. We might have a couple Turners and better balance, but not a lot of elite batters. I'd love to see us add one, and certainly think it would improve our chances. I'm not predicting a top 3 rotation, but I do think it is possible. I have serious doubts our pen can stay 11-20th. I have serious doubts our defense can finish top 20. I have more confidence in our batting finishing top 10 than the pen and defense finishing top 20. It's rally hard to win with a 20th ranked pen and D, just as it is with less than 2-3 elite hitters.

They did have two mashers and a very good 3rd hitter, but they placed 9th. I guess 9th can be "fine" if it's top heavy, only.

So, 9th is "fine," then, right?

Did the Royals have "crazy" anything? The 2014 Giants were tied for 11th in wRC+. They were 26th in pitching fWAR and 19th in ERA-

You moved the goal posts from a general just "fine hitting" to having no "elite bats."

Okay, we are talking about two different things. I just threw out those numbers to set an example of what could go down. Can you answer the Q about what you do if he insists on an opt out after 2027? (of course, the money matters, too.) let's say his opt out is after $8M in '25, $18M in '26 and 22M in '27? That's the same as him getting $20M/2 in arbs and $28M in 2027. You walk away and just take 2 years?

At this point, I'd only take Arenado, if they took Yoshida plus $6M x 3 yrs. We don't need 2 Yoshida's, but at least Arenado can play defense.

Just go to the next full season: 2019 The Nats were 9th in wRC+ and 6th in OPS They were 5th in fWAR pitching but 13th in ERA- 5th in OAA and 12th in DRS