moonslav59

Ok. That's what I assumed.

I went from '72 to '04, and I was wondering if I'd ever see glory.

The murky middle might be 8-20 teams.

How many times have people discounted the Rays? Then, you look up, and they have 92 wins. (I do think this is the year, they don't win over 85 or 86 games.

Yes, and by 2.5 games. I do agree; they are not a good team, but they are about as good as we are, and about 10 other teams in the current ranks of about 9th to 18th in MLB.

I might have more posts, but you and Red lead the league in rips.

Agreed. I wasn't the one saying "We can't eat good teams." (or our own division teams)

Nice memory for such a young sprout! There were so many "what ifs" in that classic game. I really thought we had the better team, on paper, that year, but as so many Sox teams did for decades upon decades, we came up just short.

My penchant for good defensive SSs, I suppose.

When we lost to the Rays, we heard, "We can't beat the good teams." Now, we sweep them, and it's "The Rays are not a good team, anymore." (Okay, okay, this might be a bit fictionalized, but it does seem to be similar to what we've been hearing.)

That is the story of the year for the Sox and their fans. It's a top 5 or 10 story for all of MLB.

I get the value in adding a SP'er with 3-4 arbs remaining vs a trade like Luis Castillo, but I do think that trade was a very good one for SEA. Castillo was about as proven as proven can be. Point one. He was 29, when acquired, so maybe not as young as we'd like, but to get "proven," you do have to be good for a few years. The part that is an issue was his extension. I tend to think $108M/5 was an excellent deal for SEA. He'll be ages 30-34- not young, I know, but I like these types of deals. I agree, though, nobody is trading a Strider, although there were rumors Kirby was being shopped.

You did name a specific time frame instead of just saying long term. I responded to the criteria you established. I agree that Cease and Lopez were not long term additions. I agree with your point being made. Sorry for being a stickler for detail. BTW, word was that Cease and Lopez were on the market a year or two, before they were traded, but I guess they wanted more than what anyone would offer. You are right, the cost to get "proven" and young SP'ers with 2.5 or more years of control in very difficult, and it has not happened in a while. The days of guys like Sale being traded may be past us.

I don't consider it long term, either, but the point was no proven starters with 1.5 or less years of control are traded, these days. The list of proven starters traded with 3+ years of control does involve going back several years. I agree with that point- just not the 2 year point. Also, maybe one one traded, recently, but they just haven't become an ace, yet. (I know, I know, then they are not "proven.")

Your point was set at 1.5 years. You changed your point. Of course, I want young studs with 3-5 years, too, but not many are "proven" and have 4-5 years left. Yes, those guys are hard to find. Guys like Pivetta seem to be the best we can do.

It's hard to fault that logic. That was amazing. We only needed 5 starts from others. Those who look at ERA might find several teams that were better or way better, but these numbers look better than their ERAs do: ERA Pitcher ERA+/FIP 3.26 Schilling 148/3.11 3.90 Pedro 124/3.58 4.03 Arroyo 120/3.82 4.87 Wake 99/5.08 5.42 Lowe 89/4.26 I still like others more, but GS and IP are of great value.

Cease and Lopez were 2 years guys. That's 2 in 2 years. Why don't you count them? (Did you move the goalpost from 1.5 to more than 2?) We extended Nate to $17M x 4. That beat FA market prices.

Here is my top 25 prospects list that changes almost everyday... LOL... 1. Anthony (1 soxprospects.com) 2. Mayer (2) 3. Teel (3) 4. Cespedes (5) 5. Bleis (4) 6. Zanetello (9) 7. Slaten (12) may graduate, soon 8. Fitts (6) 9. Jo. Garcia (16) out for the season 10. K Campbell (20) 11. Perales (8) 12. Yorke (11) 13. Arias (22) 14. Sandlin (10) 15. Meidroth (13) 16. E R-C (18) 17. Hickey (19) 18. Castro (14) 19. Jordan (17) 20. Paulino (15) 21. Dobbins (23) 22. Wikelman (7) 23. Romero (24) 24. Monegro (21) 25. Penrod (29)

It does help that being 2 games over .500 makes you 1 game behind the 9th best record in MLB, but I'm with you. We have a chance. To me, this team is showing heart and soul, along with good old fashioned grit.

Staff ERAs in order of most IP 1.94 Houck (10 starts) 2.17 Crawford (10 starts) 4.04 Bello (I hope he can move towards 3.25) 2.86 Criswell (Will match Bello's 8 starts next game) 3.04 Pivetta (5 GS) 3.12 Slaten (17 games, almost all of them good) 3.33 Wink (In AAA getting his act together) 4.98 Anderson (Had one really bad game) 0.89 Bernardino (Proving he was no 2023 fluke) 2.21 Weissert (Looking like a nice addition) 3.26 Martin (Really in a groove, now.) 1.96 Whitlock (On the shelf, again) 3.71 Booser (Storybook history) 3.24 Jansen (17 IP and not overtaxed) 1.98 Kelly (10 BBs in 14 IP needs fixing) Not counting Whitlock, that's a pretty nice group of 14 pitchers, going forward.

Something about watching this game really made me happy. It was more than just watching 8 runs score, and Bello getting his act together, after a bad pitch. It was more than just watching an errorless games that also had some very nice defensive plays made by an improving defense. It was more than just watching our pen come through, despite not seeming to have their best stuff. It was watching a full team effort, situational hitting and going with the pitch, and players coming through when we needed it. It wasn't just one guy out there. It was a TEAM! Now, if we could just bottled this up and open it up, every game, going forward.

The Cora-Bailey-Breslow combo seems to have gelled, nicely. We still have a ways to go, but the future looks brighter to those who allow some light to come in.

Certainly, developing our own pitchers, especially starters is a great way to build up a staff. We can see the boost Crawford, Houck and Bello have given this team and its future. We also acquired Pivetta, Wink and Whitlock, along with others, who have helps, but are not ace-types. You set the bar at 1.5 years, and examples were given for 2 year guys being traded just months ago. Trades for proven, young or younger pitchers followed by extensions are numerous, as well. It is still a viable way to add a solid SP'er to a staff; it's just not been the Sox way since Nate (.5 yrs and re-signed,) Porcello (1 yr and extended 4 more,) and Sale (3 years and extended for 5 more.) Sometimes, trade & extensions come in below FA market value, which might be something JH would prefer over another David Price situation. There are several ways to add pitching. DD and Bloom ended up providing a better staff than many of us imagined possible, of course with the help of Bailey and Brez. No doubt, our farm still looks pretty weak, when it comes to pitching, but we are strong enough and deep enough, there, to provide players and prospects to trade. Others have done it. It has gotten harder, as you have pointed out, but it is not impossible, and it is still happening, every winter.

We have a pretty nice foundation or young and or controllable players at every position, along with strong or promising depth at most. Our staff has some key pitchers on their last year, and we will need to add there to take the next step forward, but the core looks very promising, to me.

Hey, we clawed back to within a half game of MIN for the last WC slot. (Cue: It's too early...) -5.5 from KCR -4.5 from BAL -0.5 from MIN Whodathunk we'd see 3 ALC teams in the top 6. We have the 12th best record in MLB and are 1 game behind a tie for 9th best. The Yanks now have the best ERA in MLB, but we are still under 3.00: 2.92 NYY 2.99 BOS 3.17 PHI 3.23 LAD 3.28 CLE 3.32 BAL 3.33 ATL 3.40 KCR We are 12th in runs scored (1 behind TEX and 4 behind BAL for top 10.) Out of the top teams in least amount of earned runs allowed, here are the differentials between ERs and Runs allowed: 37 BOS 23 PHI 20 NYY & BAL 16 ATL 15 CLE 14 LAD 6 KCR All I can say is "WOW!"