moonslav59

AP Rankings: 1. Georgia 2. Ohio St. 3. Texas 4. Alabama 5. Notre Dame 6. Ole Miss 7. Oregon 8. Penn St. 9. Missouri 10. Michigan ND plays #13 USC on their last game of the season. GA Tech is now ranked 23rd. and Louisville 22nd, and we play them, too.

We don't know, if he will be bad on defense, so maybe someday, he shows he can and his value jumps over Mayer's.

Sweeping the Twins in September could be enough to get us to pass them, but we do have to beat other teams, too. After the CWS, it's all ALE & MIN.

While almost all our starters, except Bello have pitched worse since April to mid May, some have shown a bit of an uptick from their horrible stretches. Houck: 6.16 ERA/5.95 FIP (6 starts from 6/27-8/3) and 3.23/4.48 since. Crawford: 9.75/9.39 (5 starts from 7/21 to 8/13) and 3.52/3.92 last 4 starts. Pivetta: 5.47/2.46 (5 starts from 6/28 to 7/24) and 4.94/5.74 last 5. Criswell: 5.48/4.22 (7 games from 7/12 to 8/16) and 1.50/4.26 last 3 GS. Bello had a nice run from 7/14 to 8/17: 3.57/4.82, but then did worse in his last 3 GS: 4.42/2.69, at least with the ERA, despite the 2 hit 8 IP shutout game.

I think Detroit demands Anthony and tries to grab another top 4 prospect with him, but for just 2 years of control, I would not give into that demand. Trading Anthony also means we don't trade Abreu, so who is the second best player traded with Anthony? DHam? LOL. Montgomery, Arias, Cespedes and Bleis are too far away to have great trade value. Perales is hurt. Meidroth, Sandlin & Fitts combined might not be enough to sweeten the Anthony package enough for DET to say yes.

I'm a little worried that Campbell may be better suited for the OF, but if the guy can hit, I'm okay with an average or slightly below average defender at 2B, at least for a while. I was mostly against the idea of trading Mayer, and I'm not so sure his trade value is all that high, due to so many injury concerns, but I'm really liking Campbell more and more. Yes, with Romero (and later Arias) in the pipeline, we may only need Campbell to play 2B for 1-2 years. (Maybe Meidroth could win the 2B job, someday. This also begs the question, who goes in the OF, if Campbell moves there? (Campbell to DH/4th OF in 2 years?)

Skubal has 2 years of team control. That is what worries me most about trading 5-6 years of Mayer and 4-5 of Abreu, but Skubal looks like the real deal, and maybe we could extend him. If we do nothing else to improve the "2 year window" of Skubal, I'd think hard about saying no. Sign Burnes AND trade for Skubal, and I'm 100% behind this trade suggestion. Sign some other top 4-5 FA SP'er with Skubal, and I'm fine with it. Call Campbell up to the 40 and 26, and pray Story stays healthy.

Of course, and I fully agree that this was all about the plan to cut $10M from the 2023 budget. People look at what they paid Gio and that we paid $17M to ATL for Sale and think this wasn't about cutting salary. Had JH okay'd just $10M more, perhaps Brez decides to keep Sale. (maybe not.) I totally agree with your points, but isn't this also fun with hindsight hypotheticals? As long as JH decided we cut the budget, Brez had to work within those parameters. Yes, there were "holes" or risks involved with the chocies made. Gio could have sucked or got hurt. Sale could do well and pitch many innings. Grissom could suck. All three came true, but none were known, at the time. That's all I'm saying. I wasn't a big fan of the trade, and actually disliked it, at first. When we signed Gio, it made more sense, but I did not expect that to be the end of adding to the rotation. It was criminal to neglect the rotation, after we knew Gio was out for the year. We agree on all this. We ended up cutting... $11M Turner $10M Sale $10M kluber $10M Kike (some paid by LAD) $6M Dugo ($9M 2024 arb cost) $4M Paxton We added: $19M Gio, $6M O'Neill and bits at the deadline. This is the bottom line for this whole mess, along with the fact that, in hindsight, all 3 aspects of the trade came up as bad as could possibly be. I don't have a big issue with judging GMs on hindsight, but I can never agree with anyone who says, within all this context, that the "trade made no sense." That's not to say, we should have expected it to work our well, but I don't think anyone expected every part to go horribly wrong, like this.

I think ATL felt giving up Grissom did not hurt them at all, even if he turned out to be really good or even great. If Sale did not do all that well, they were better prepared for that than we were, as well. It's not like anyone felt Sale did not have the skills, anymore. Maybe many felt there was no way he be "this good," again, at this age, but he still showed skills. That's what ATL saw. It's not like we didn't see it, as well, but our focus was on finding an innings eater or limiting those on our staff who rated to not give us many. We have already discussed how watching Houck and Crawford blow past their career high in IP was risky and largely an unknown, but keeping them over Sale had obvious pluses, too.

If a butterfly farts in China... Knowing our luck, Sale would have stumbled on a pebble on Fenway's mound and missed 25 starts.

Am I wrong? This whole idea is why we traded Sale. We obviously thought counting on him to come through after 4 let- downs was the wrong choice.

That's basically it. Yes. They figured they got 100+ more IP than Sale would give, even if just barely better than mediocre pitching, plus the hope of solving the 2B problem we've had for about 5 years. There was some logic, at the time. All 3 aspects, if you count the money part, did not work out. The trade failed, but that does not mean it made no sense at the time. 1. More IP from the Sale>Gio slot. 2. Solve the 2B problem. 3. Spend the $10M saved wisely. (They actually cut $10M from the '23 budget, so no, we did not "spend the money on GIo.) We could just as easily say we spent Kluber and Kik's money on Gio, and left the $10M "saved" in JH's pocket. All three parts of the trade ended about as badly as anyone could imagine. Fine: blame Brez for that. That's the nature of a GM's job and grade assignment. IMO, just don't say "it made no sense, at the time."

Had we traded Sale in 2019, even for someone who did not work out, we'd have rejoiced for years and years, and maybe watching him have a great year in year 5 of his contract, we'd have not been as upset, IMO.

Just add a glove first cheap SS with ML experience, who will accept a minor league deal- maybe with an opt out, if not on the 26 by a certain date. Have somebody in the system, if case Story and mayer are hurt at the same time. DHam should only play 2B or be on the bench.

I agree, we should expect the owner and CBO to do their very best to help the team become a winner. If it seems like they are trying hard, and it doesn't work out, that's one thing, but clearly, the last 3-4 years has seen a leadership group focused more on trying to give the perception of trying hard. Thay have failed at that, as well as with the on the field results, except for 2021. I do think it is more obvious, now, that the fans are not fooled, anymore. I'm not sure that makes a difference, unless they see less NESN subscriptions and season ticket purchases. It seems it has to make business sense to win more games, for these guys to do something about it. I'm sure I'm oversimplifying this, but it's what I feel is going on. I still remain hopeful that this was a 5 year plan, and the 5 years are up. We already have a bunch of low cost, younger players on the 26 and 40. We have 4-6 pretty damn good players that are ML ready or very close to it. All will make min wage for several years. There really is no acceptable excuse for not spending on pitching, this year. It could be financial and trade capital or just money, but we should be pissed, if it doesn't happen, this winter. I'm not sure it will, and I'll be pissed again, if it doesn't. The worst thing is, I would not predict we spend big, this winter. That's how skeptical I am about these guys. We really could possibly do it, this winter, by just spending up to the tax line, without going over it. We'd have to be very good with our choices, and we haven't been, lately, but we need to focus on adding proven, quality pitchers with no or little reason to expect and injury. That is not easy. That is not cheap, but we have a lot of spending room between where we are and the tax line. If they try to "sham" us again with all talk and little action, it will be a joke that nobody will laugh at.

Not sure what this has to do with JH maximizing profits. Fans keep buying the product. There is no incentive to spend more, other than to make some fans happier. If they stopped buying the product, changes would be made. There is a long history of companies producing known inferior or eben dangerously defective products and selling it, anyway.

I'm not saying he has never made mistakes. It's likely everybody is to blame for our decline, even the actual players.

For a business owner?

Agreed. I did not like that signing. I never expected an injury, though. Had he given us 30 starts, 170 IP and a 4.15 ERA, we'd still be in the race.

He may actually have convinced himself that we could be an 85-90 win team from 2021-2024. We were still a top 3 spending team in '21, top 6 in '22 and top 23-23, the last 2 years. We had some bad luck with pitchers on the IL, but when you sign so many injury-prone pitchers (not Gio,) one could say it was expected. We have not had more than our share of injuries, so it's unfair to blame them for our sub .500 play. These horrific ending to the last few seasons have really been the main issue. It's easy to point to the loss and failure to replace these guys as the main reason, and I fully agree: Sale, Nate, ERod, Bogey Betts, Porcello, Price & Kimbrell/Kelly

It's hard to bash JH and Bloomslow for so much, then expect Cora to work miracles. Even the guys he gets end up on the IL.

It was a bad trade, but Bill Lee only has that one good season, after the trade. That whole period was mind-boggling. The worst thing was sending out Fisk's contract offer a day late, making him a free agent and getting nothing for losing him, but the systematic dismantling of the mid to late 70's team hurt this fan's baseball psyche. To me, it began with the Bernie Carbo trade, then the Cecil Cooper trade that brought Bernie back, along with over-the- hill George Scott. Nov '78: Tiant signs with Yankees. Dec '80: Burleson & Hobson for Lansford, Clear and Miller Jan '81: Lynn & Renko for Tanana, Rudi and Dorsey Mar '81: Fisk signs with CWS That winter of '80-'81 was shocking: we lost Fisk, Lynn, Burleson & Hobson While losing Betts sucked, bigtime, that winter was worse, despite getting some good player in return. The heart and soul of that team was ripped out. (I probably missed a few players.)

That's what I remember. I'm not sure how closely JH & Co. are looking at the service times of our big 4, and I'm not even sure how players are given "extra years" or the 4th arb year, but my guess is, if the timeline is close to adding another year, we will take that into strong consideration on the timing of a call-up or addition to the 40.

It's all about maximizing profits and lining pockets/wallets. Maybe the 99% part was hyperbole, but JH is doing exactly what most owners and corporate leaders are doing. It's the American way, but somehow, when it comes to baseball, an owner is supposed to fork over more of the profits to please his customers, even if he doesn't have to do it to make more money. I don't want this to morph into politics, and I don't despise owners for wanting to maximize profits. It just is what it is, except, apparently, for baseball, which has had a lot of slack from the government, over the years.

I don't consider AA the "low minors," but yes, at 24 many are in AAA. Soxprospects says this... Ceiling of an up-and-down, deception-based reliever. Throws strikes with a four-pitch mix and comes from a deceptive arm slot with an athletic delivery, but lack of velocity limits upside.