moonslav59

i disagree on Group A: 6 players 3 busts 1 meh 1 pending 1 was Bogey's deal that mostly just bought out his last arb year + just 2 years. That deal could be a group B one. We are 50-50 on group B, which is about the norm. (Bello and Rafaela's AAV is really group C and are pending, anyway) Group C is 4 failures out of 6 with Martin pending. Below norm. Group D is the best, but my point was about the highest paid players. Set the bar at $18M AAV or more: 13/10 Devers* 145/5 Sale 140/6 Story 90/5 Yoshida 68/4 Nate 60/3 Bogey (counted up to opt out) 39/2 Giolito 4 out of 7 fails 1 meh 1 pending 1 Bogey's final 2 yrs as the best big deal we made since 2018. No way this is on par.

Nicely laid out. One could put DHam above Rafaela, too. (so far) We need Casas back, badly. O'Neill's unreliability was a major concern when we traded for him. We keep trotting out the Pillar, Renfroe, Duvall, O'Neill types, year-after-year.

We don't know what Bogey would have taken, but I'd rather have Devers Turns 28, soon) and his contract vs Bogey and his contract (turns 32, soon and is at .581 in '24 and .741 w SDP and .779 '22-'24.) It might not even be a slam dunk that a Bogey extension of even $200M/4 or $220M/5 would have been worth it, at this point.

Signing none of the "big 3" would have been gross mismanagement.

The problem is too many whiffs on our biggest contracts. It's not just Yoshida. Sure, bad luck plays into some of the "mistakes," but the fact is our biggest contracts handed out since the Sale and Nate deals have largely been disappointing or outright busts. Call it bad luck. Call it understandable. Call it mismanagement. The fact is we have swung and missed on far too many of our biggest deals, and even a big chunk of our intermediate-sized deals. You tell me, how many misses and mehs you see on this list: Group A: 313/10 Devers* 145/5 Sale 140/6 Story 90/5 Yoshida (plus posting fee) 68/4 Nate 60/3 Bogey (counted up to opt out) Group B: 39/2 Giolito 32/2 Jansen 55/6 Bello* 50/8 Rafaela* Group C: 19/2 Barnes 18/2 Martin* 13/1 Turner 10/1 Kike II 10/1 Kluber 10/1 Richards Group D 19/4 Whitlock* 14/2 Kike I 10/2 Paxton 10/2 Hendriks* 14/3 Vaz (traded at end) (12/1 JBJ added by trade and offset some by Renfroe's contract) (9/1 Ottavino was added by trade) 7/1 Wacha 7/1 Duvall 6/1 Perez I 8/2 Diekman (traded) 5/1 Perez II 5/1 Hill Some are obviously still pending, but I think you can guess what red means. Blue means "meh."

I am 100% on board with the opinion we blew it with Betts. I don't really care, if it was the main reason we signed Devers. The fact is, we did. I don't think JH dished out $313M for just that reason, alone, but I do think it was a significant factor. Of course, I wish we'd have signed Betts and let Devers (and Bogey) walk, instead. That does not change the fact that JH has spent big, recently. While the Gio signing went kaput before day one of the season, the fact is, he was the highest paid pitcher since the Sale/Nate contracts (5 years ago.) It's not all doom & gloom- not that you are saying it is. Again, I have no expectations JH will spend bigly, again, but nobody can be sure what he will do. I'm hoping (not hopeful) he will spend when he sees the foundation is just 2-3 big additions away from a chance at a ring: and ace and a closer or a big RH'd bat.

No. You did not come out and say it, but the question you posed suggested it, or at best we might be close to being as mismanaged as the CWS.

I'm not big on the blame game, but they did make a major mistake. Is it "mismanagement?" Maybe not.

Theo even admitted, he made mistakes, at the end of his tenure with BOS. It actually started a year or two before Theo left. We have, however, won 2 rings in those 13-14 seasons, which is still better or equal to anyone else. The last place finishes suck, badly. There is no sugar-coating that. With the money we spent, every year, even 2020, we should not ever finish last- okay maybe once. Mismanagement of the payroll given our GMs has been a major aspect of the failures. DD gets some criticism for being allowed to spend more than Ben, Bloom & Brez, but he spent almost every dollar wisely. Sure, there were some overpays and borderline bad contracts given, and there were ven a small amount of bad deals, but overall, he managed what he was given, very well, and way better than the three Bs. I'm cutting Brez some slack over Gio, but he better do better, this winter, of it will look like more of the same ole-same ole. It sucks being at .500, but I like our future, now, even better than during DD's last 2 years with BOS. We have Story and Yoshida dragging down the budget, but in terms of future budget concerns (beyond the uncertainty of JH's budget demands,) we are better off, now. In terms of young controllable players, many who are still pre-arb or entering their first arb year in 2024 or 2025, plus a promising top 5 or 6 prospects who are near MLB ready, we are looking better, going forward, than in a long time. Even our rotation looks brighter than anytime since 2018. Not many saw that coming, including me. Fans can choose to focus on the bad and the ugly. They can poo-poo the future all they want, and there is good reason to do so, but I'm excited about watching this year's team and how it can easily be a stepping stone to a very bright next 3-5 years. I'm not saying these younger players rival the Betts, Bogey, Devers, Beni, JBJ years, or that our younger player core looks better than Baltimore's or Atlanta's or maybe a couple other team's young cores, but it looks very promising, to me. Yes, promising is not reality, but the promises are not based on just speculation. We are seeing several young players proving themselves, this year. It is reality, now, for more players than maybe we thought we'd see: Houck, Crawford, Casas, Duran, Abreu, Wong and even guys like Rafaela, DHam and some pen arms look better than I expected. Devers has just reached prime and is heading towards a career year. He should be fine for the 3-5 year window, I mentioned. We'll need to add a few pieces, especially in replacing Jansen, Pivetta and Martin, plus a power RH bat, and that is where the "promise" depends un the undependable JH to step up. I get this worry. It worries me, too, but I still like our core going forward: C: Wong, McGuire transition to Teel 1B: Casas 2B: Grissom/ Story SS: Sory transition to Mayer 3B: Devers LF: Duran/Refsnyder CF: Rafaela/Anthony RF: Abreu/Anthony DH: Big RH bat/Refsnyder/Duran SP: _____, Houck, Crawford, Bello, Gio transition to Fitts/Perales (Criswell/Whitlock?) RP: Hendriks, Whitlock, ______, Slaten, Bernardino, Weissert, Fulmer, Wink, Criswell/ Kelly/Campbell/Guerrero

No doubt, and right from the top to the GM, to the scouts who cried for Yoshida. Even from the end of 2018 to the end of 2023, we were not mismanaged as badly as the CWS, who have played in a weak division for that time period.

One game never tells the whole story. Never. If you think we are as mismanaged as the CWS, we are farther apart than I originally thought. We've made a ton of mistakes, no doubt- from top to bottom. I'm going to give this new management team a chance to show, if they can be good, bad or in between- just like I have all our GMs on day one. Of course, if JH never opens his wallet, again, it might not matter how good Brez & Co. are, but that is the great unknown. We did just see a $313M contract kick in, this year. We did just see the largest salary given to a pitcher (Gio) since Sale. This is the third time our player payroll has dipped 2 years in a row under JH ('04>'06 and '07>'09 were the others.) It happened twice in his first decade and once in the most recent decade ('22>'24) 2014 was our lowest end of year payroll since 2009 (cots.) Since then, our end of year payroll has gone... up up down '17 (-$11M) up down '19 (-$2M) up up down '23 (-14M) down '24 (est about $11M as we stand, now) I'm not defending JH or predicting future spending, but anyone who firmly believes this is an entrenched pattern has no evidence to support that position, just as there is no evidence to prove he will spend bigly again, anytime soon or ever again. Nobody knows. The optimist in me says he will see (maybe in '25 or '26) that the core/foundation has improved to a place where we have a significant window of opportunity, and will open his wallet, even if just briefly or maybe without any super mega deals, to help push us over the top and to possible glory. The pessimist says don't ever count on JH to spend heavily, again, especially on pitching. The realist say, we can't possibly know what JH will do.

Nothing surprised me. The only thing that raised aqn eyebrow was the 1 in 20 and 30 comment.

Easy, in hindsight. He could have also signed Stroman, Flaherty, Imanaga or Seth Lugo, instead of Gio. I was not a big fan of Gio, but he did look like a better gamble (and more expensive) than the Kluber, Richards, Perez I, Perez II, Wacah and Hill gambles.

I guy mof his stature should know how to talk.

Talk about a mismanaged team...

I thought of that, too, but then throwin in the 20:1 made me think he felt even 30:1 was for real "odds."

I did, but thought more likely Sept '25 at the earliest. No issue with thinking 2025.

It's not even 1 in 100. These guys really overestimate how good the current team is. I get the talk about fans not valuing the future, but 20 to 30 to 1 is way off base.

Assuming no roster additions and the loss of Pivetta, Jansen, Martin, Anderson, O'Neill, Cooper & Smith, this might be the 2025 26 and 40 man roster: 26 SP: Houck, Gio, Bello, Crawford, Whitlock/Criswell/Fitts RP: Hendriks, Slaten, Bernardino, Weissert, Fulmer, Wink, 2 from Whit/Cris/Fitts C: Wong & McGuire (Teel?) 1B: Casas 2B: Grissom & DHam SS: Story & Romy (Mayer?) 3B: Devers LF: Duran (CF) CF: Rafaela (SS/2B) (Anthony?) RF: Abreu (CF/LF) (Anthony? DH: Yoshida & Refsnyder (LF/RF) The 40 (14 in the minors) SP: Perales, Wikelman, Bastardo (Rule 5) RP: I Campbell, Kelly, Booser, Guerrero (Rule 5) or (Mata/Uwasawa/Horn?) C: Teel (?not rule 5) or Jh. Garcia (Rule 5) or Heineman 1B/3B: Dalbec or Kavadas (Rule 5) IF: Mayer (not Rule 5) & Yorke (Rule 5) OF: Anthony (not Rule 5) & Castro and or Lugo (both Rule 5)

Yes, Whitlock showed he deserved a shot, too. 4 GS and 0-2 ERs allowed in all 4 1.96 ERA 3.30 FIP Pivetta, too. 2 GS before IL 11 IP and 1 ER (8hits, 1 BB, 13K) 0.82 ERA/2.23 FIP Crawford was sub 2.70 until start 9 1.75 ERA/2.81 FIP after start 7 0.42/2.15 after start 4. Bello was our least effective pitcher, but was considered our #1 going into day 1.

Great points. Speaking of age 22... Sox top prospects by ages: 18: Cespedes 6, Arias 21 19: Zanetello 8, Jo Garcia 18 20: Anthony 1, Bleis 5 (missed time), E R-C 16 21: Mayer 2, Perales 4, K Campbell 10, Castor 12, Paulino 14 22: Teel 3, Meidroth 11, Lugo 13, Wikelman 15, Yorke 17 23: Sandlin 9 24: Fitts 7 Looks like a pretty good mix. RED= ML Ready or should be by 2025.

They seem to not drop some guys as much as others, for some reason. Lugo had just one bad year after rising to #14. Guys like Castro, Paulino and Jordan seem to drop more slowly.

What 2 days can do to a player's numbers. Looking at last 7 days OPS, we have 10 players over .830, 8 over .950 and 7 over 1.010! 5 players are over 1.200!, including Westbrook with just 8 PAs. Last 28 Days 1.221 Valdez (22 PAs) 1.002 Devers .872 Duran .858 Ref .856 Abreu .844 DHam (WOW!) OPS Against, Last 28 days: .374 Bernardino (thanks Bloom) .475 Houck (amazing for a SP) .561 Pivetta (please, stay healthy) .623 Jansen (back on track) .661 Kelly & Booser .693 Anderson .706 Martin .733 Slaten .780 Bello .787 Crawford .802 Criswell .881 Weissert Last 2 games: 23 runs scored vs 2 Allowed 40 Hits 8 BB 7 2Bs 1 3B 6 HRs

He'd have taken Criswell's slot, for sure, but it's hard to know. They did start him 5th, so that makes it look like he was 5th on the list. Criswell's first start was our 15th game (Pivetta to IL,) so in theory, Houck might have missed 2 starts.

Indeed. This is not rocket science, and players make jumps and falls, often at unpredictable times in their development. It's expected to have some big misses. I think soxpropsects does a very good job with most of their rankings and projections. When you read the summations, they are often hyperconservative.