moonslav59

Just Baseball updated their Top 100: 12. Anthony 26. Mayer 33. Teel 90. Cespedes The Athletic's Top 50: 4. Mayer 19. Teel 25. Anthony MLB.com (May) 11. Mayer 16. Anthony 29. Teel If you average them all, we have 3 in the top 30. 14. Mayer 18. Anthony 27. Teel In some ways, it sucks having to pin almost all our hopes un unproven rookies, but this sure beats how we looked in 2020 to 2022, in terms or long term outlook. Even if 2 or 3 work out fine, we might still need a significant boost in spending to reach glory again.

DSL rosters are set. Scroll to the very bottom... https://www.soxprospects.com/org.htm

We will never spend like LAD. Maybe the Mets might, someday. I'd be happy with #4-6 in 2025.

Its got to the point where this is expected.

Kavadas Shmovadas... It's Bobby Freakin' Dee!

I doubt anyone but the Dodgers would take him at half price. Look how everyone complained about paying Sale to pitch elsewhere, even before he did well, and Sale did not come close to what Price had done the 3-4 years before the trade. We'd have had to pay $24M out of the $32M to find someone to take him. That's $8M less to spend for a few years on budgets already cut to the bare bone.

Except for the $300M on Devers, the $100+ on Yoshida, the $140 on Story and a $36M, $18M and others thrown in just for giggles.

There comes a point where replacing the same thing every year gets you to move away, or stop buying shingles made of paper. It seems JH is happy with paper shingles.

Indeed.

In terms of the return, yes. I do not think LA wanted Price. The way the trade worked out, had they not given Downs if Price was not in the deal, then not much changes, but we’d have theoretically spent less on other players in the following years other than 2020. I do think we’d have traded Betts without Price if nobody took half his contract, but who knows the return.

Non pitchers list

Okay, but you don’t replace your roof every year.

I guess a lot depends on thinking we could or could not have won without him. I think it's a close call, but I'd say we needed him. $217M is a lot for 1 ring. One could probably find a cheaper pitcher that would have allowed us to win without him, but hye, a win is a win, and in that sense, it's seems okay. Winning a ring with Rusney on the books does not carry the same weight. Does no rings after the Nate signing mean the deal was bad? If not, why isn't the same standard applied? I thought the Price signing was necessary, as it was also pre-Sale trade. I thought he was as good of a gamble as one could possibly hope for, at the time. He was not old. He was a proven winner. He had been durable. He checked all the boxes, as Scherzer did the previous season, when we signed Pablito & HRam, instead. I get the "ring argument." I use it myself, sometimes. Price did help us win a ring and did well in the playoffs in 2018. I'm not sure that makes him worth $217M and his being a necessary part of the Betts trade makes his deal look worse, to me. Without the ring argument, I think it seems clear he was not worth the money, especially with the Betts trade factored into it. With the ring, it seems like a close call of "worth it," to me.

Let's count the wins and losses in his starts with BOS 20-15 '16 6-5 '17 22-8 '18 10-12 '19 58-40 is very good, but in 3 of the 4 years, we went 36-32 in his starts (23 GS/season)

And for your 10 year old car in need of many repairs?

Very true. Also, if we just hit on 50% of our most expensive 4, 6, 8 or 10 most recent signings, I doubt we'd be sub .500 most of the time. To me, we've had major injury and low performance issues with just about every major signing, except Devers, who just started his 10 year deal, in March. Sale Story Yoshida Giolito JD and Bogey did okay after 2018, but did not produce nearly as much as before 2019. Nate did okay but missed some time and was not really good all teh time, when healthy. It's very hard to win when almost all your highest paid players are on the IL, playing badly, playing worse than their norm or two of these 3 things, almost continually. Certainly, spending less has hurt, but to me, the results of our spending has sucked. It may also be a major reason why JH is avoiding trying to fix these mistakes by repeating them.

No, I don't. That is why I am not saying Cora is wrong. I'm just saying what I'd do. I'd ride the hot hand with Ref, until he shows he can't do it anymore. He was also not bad vs RHPs in '22, so it may not be a fluke. His sample size is not tiny. Wong seems to have come close to proven he is better vs RHPs than Cooper has been in 2.3 years. Ref compares to Coop over a 2.3 year sample size, too, so it's not just a "hot hand." 2022-2024 vs RHPs .918 Devers 1035 PAs) .906 Abreu (236) .852 Casas (541) .748 Wong (441) .746 Valdez (226) .713 Refsnyder (263) .708 Cooper (781) .689 O'Neill .677 Smith .654 McGuire .621 Rafaela (230) .611 Grissom (224) .583 Romy (145) .560 Dalbec hell, EValdez seems like a better choice, right now. I'm fine with Coop getting a nother chance, if he starts hitting LHPs, well.

Yes, the team around Betts after the trade was better in LA, overall. You disagree?

Eye opening. How about 20 game sample sizes: ERA/xFIP First 20: 1.35/2.54 Houck 4GS 0.42/3.66 Crawford 4 1.96/3.74 Whitlock 4 0.82/2.57 Pivetta 2 3.92/3.46 Bello 4 Middle 20: 3.16/3.07 Houck 4 2.88/4.24 Crawford 4 1.40/2.89 Criswell 4 2.13/5.43 Wink 3 1.64/3.54 Bello 2 Last 20 1.05/3.05 Houck 4 6.55/4.64 Crawford 4 6.50/3.76 Criswell 4 4.43/2.77 Pivetta 4 6.14/3.53 Bello 4

I think that came out long ago. I haven't heard they are actively looking to do it now.

I did mention in my earlier post that DD had 4 of the top 6 signings after Theo, but my graphic does show Ben was able to get JH to spend, too. How about this... Ben signed 6 of the 13 player signed for more than $72M. Is $72M a large enough number? Is 5 of 12 over $82M large enough? (1 more than DD) How about 4 of the top 11 at $88M+ (same as DD?) Ben signed 3 of the 9 over $95M. DD signed 4. I think they both were able to convince JH to spend- certainly way more than Bloom + Brez combined.

Assuming we trade Jansen for a prospect, it weakens the 2024 chances, so why not just complete the plan and trade all of the big 4 not extended?

The thing is, he would still "get his shot" as a platoon 1Bman. Granted, it's the short end platoon, but if he started hitting, he could be given more chances vs RHPs, assuming those DH'ing vs RHPs start to slump, too. I'm all for giving guys a shot, but why not give Ref a shot vs RHPs? Wong has already shown he does much better vs RHPs, despite batting RH'd. With him, it's not a short "ride the hot hand" opinion. I happen to like McGuire behind the plate a little more than Cora has played him, there. So far, GS as catcher: 34 Wong/ 26 McGuire. We could have McGuire catch 4 out of 7 games. Wong catch 3 of 7 and DH 3 of 7 and rest 1 of 7. Ref DHs against all LHPs and vs the RHPs that Wong is not the DH. Cooper platoons with Smith, until Casas returns. Nobody is being benched from this group. Perform better and you play more often, and vice versa.

Really? of the highest 24 signed after Theo: 11 by Ben (6 of the big 14) 5 by DD (all from the top 14) Of the top 16 deals of $35M+ 7 Ben 5 DD

Agreed, but he did start only 16 games in '17 and had an okay 112 ERA+ in '16. It was not 3 full years of vintage Price. It was more like 1.5 plus some playoff heroics.