moonslav59

The prices have been going up, pretty steadily, so the hype did have some reasoning behind it, but it looks like just a handful of teams are going nutty with spending, and what they paid did not "set the price" for those looking to sign with non-nutty teams.

If we lose out on Monty, I'd bite the bullet on Bauer and give $500K more than the highest bidder. Promise him a SP slot, once in shape.

Why invite someone to the MLB complex and not play them?

The other thing about those big trades for pitchers, is that they all were extended, some at near FA market value, so it was really more than just the trades. We dished out big money for all of them. Pedro was extended shortly after the trade for a discount rate, but it only looks real good now, because of the sharp rise in salaries, after the extension. Schill was extended for a short period, and he was injured. The Beckett extensión was a lot of money, back then, but it was money well spent. The Sale extension was a total flop, but again, he got near FA money and length, at the time. The Porcello extension worked out okay, despite a bad year and a so-so one. The Nate extension was okay, but not really all that good. That's 6 trades and extensions (or re-signings.) As a group, they do compare favorably to the biggest FA signings: Price Lackey Dempster Clement Perez+Richards Wacha+ Hill Kluber

2019-2022 Sox SP'ers IP Leaders: 408 Nate (not great, but with 2020, it's not horrific) 361 ERod 345 Pivetta ~300 Perez + Richards 196 Sale fWAR 7.6 ERod (on DET for 2022 and missed all of 2020) 7.4 Nate 4.6 Sale 4.0 Pivetta 4.0 Price + Hill 3.1 Porcello + Wacha 2.2 Perez + Richards ERA- as SP (100+ IP) 81 Wacha 86 Sale 88 Price 90 ERod 91 Nate 101 Perez 104 Pivetta & Hill 114 Richards & Porcello Nate was not paid a huge salary, and it was 4 years not 7.

Not since last summer.

We still have so many "ifs," but spring seems to bring out the bright side in me. I'm feeling pretty good about Houc as the #5, too. I'm not sure, if it was the facial surgery or something else, but the guy has some very nasty stuff- maybe some of the best on the staff. The part about having extreme difficulty with batters the third time through is well-documented, but in these days, SP'ers going just 4 to 5 IP is not the big drag it used to be. Our pen should be able to handle that, as long as Wink and Whit stay there, and the other 4 starters aren't going 4 IP, too. I'm not going to go back and copy and paste the post that showed how all 5 of these guys have had long and solid stretches, as SP'ers, in recent years. Gio has had full seasons of success; Pivetta has had several 20-24 GS streaks of very solid pitching, Crawford's was just last year, Bello's, too and Houck had his own a couple years back. I think the pen will be fine, but only if our starting 5 rotation gives us 140-145 GS, minimum. That is likely asking way too much, but these guys are young or not too old. They are approaching prime or in prime (Gio,) right now. When I look at the list of 33 pitchers used in 2023 (27 over 6 IP, 23 over 11 IP and 20 over 21 IP,) I can't help but think there is a lot of room for improvement, if we don't have to keep searching for capable #7 and #8's in the pen. The ages of Jansen and Marting are worrisome, and jansen has already had some issues, but I may be in a minority thinking our pen is close to top 10 in MLB. If we could add monty, I'd be almost certain it is top 10, by adding Houck to it. A lot of the pen's success will, IMO, depend on how deep we have to go into the farm. Although I think our farm shows better depth in the pen, than previous years, I think we need to stay healthy and not have to cycle through 8-12 guys to find our 7's and 8's. Jansen & martin look solid as the 9th inning guys. Whitlock & Wink can go 2, maybe 3 IP, if needed. Bernardino & Campbell are not proven pen arms, and if they need replacing, early, it could be a tough year for our pen. Our current 7 & 8 guys look to be Slaten (Rule 5) and maybe Mata (out of options but may start on the IL.) These two are highly questionable. I get it. The chances they start the revolving door going, early, is pretty high, but call me a homer, if you wish: I like the depth beyond these 8, unless we start going to # and beyond: Weissert Murphy Z Kelly Joely Fitts (SP) Criswell (SP) Walter (SP) Gambrell (SP) Then, it gets real dicey... Guerrero Politi Booser Jacques Hagenman Luetge Hoppe Benitez Olivares Wikelman, Van Belle, Dobbins, Penrod, Song

We have 20 Ciriacos!

I'm not shooting you. I was just curious if Cora mean MLB games to be real ones. It is a bit surprising to see him change strategy that quickly, based on what another team is doing. Maybe even concerning, a little bit. Maybe, I just want to believe he's not that easily impressionable.

1. Waiting to fix our system's pitching production line will take years. That leaves just 2 options: trading top prospects for a solid pitcher or "splurging" on one. 2. Monty and Snell were not the only two, this winter, and Monty should be fine for 3 years. On a 4 year deal, that's not a bad gamble. 3. Past failures is a major concern and warning to not go 7 years on a stud pitcher, but it does not mean it can never or never works, of that pitchers on 4-5 year deals don't "hurt as much." The Nate and Porcello signings/extensions worked out okay, as did the Lackey 5 year deal. The Price (7) and Sale (5) deals- not so well. I'm all for trying to trade for a solid and controlled SP'er, but I can understand wanting to build an inexpensive foundation, but what good is a solid foundation with no rotation? If the plan is to go large on a SP'er, next year or even 2026, I can at least understand the reasoning, but I'm not so sure it will happen, even that soon/far away.

How many times do they invite players to ST'ing and never play them?

Agreed. I'm just not so sure the day will come when we splurge on a SP'er, anytime soon.

Did he mean MLB (non spring training) game before June 21st? We knew he was invited to ST'ing, so that usually means playing in ST'ing games.

I think the media and fans have the perception GG is talking about, but when I hear the word "industry," I think players, coaches, GMs and maybe baseball analysts.

The whole one year and done plan for SP'ers is a joke. Even if we did a little better with our choices, it would not have made a big enough impact to make us contenders. The weird part is, besides the lost 2020 season, our SP'er choices for 2021, the year we went pretty far, look the worst of the last 4 years, in terms of results per dollar spent. 2021: Richards $10M & Perez II $5M 2022: Wacha $7M & Hill $5M 2023: Kluber $10M 2023: Giolito $19M I've said this before, but you get what you pay for. We did actually offer Nate and Eflin multi year deals that matched or exceeded what they ultimately signed for, but of course the best two went elsewhere. Our biggest expenditures on SP'ers, since Lackey: Price $217/7 '16 Porcello $82.5M/4 "16 Eovaldi $68M/4 '19 Sale &145M/5 '20 (contract extended in 2019) We have not signed a pitcher to a multi-year deal in 5 years, unless you count Whitlock's $19M/4 extension that kicked in in 2023. You get what you pay for, and one year pitchers rarely work out- for obvious reasons.

I'd be curious to know how many teams spent over $500M of "new money" in the last 3 winters of spending. The reality is, we spent more than $600M on 4 players, and I did not include guys like Kluber, Kike, Richards, Duvall, Wacha, Hill and lesser players. Sure, not many teams lost big salaries like those from Bogey, JD, Nate, Sale and others, but the perception of us not spending a lot is just wrong, except for the "new spending" lows before 2019, 2020, to some extent 2021 and now 2024. We spent large on Sale, Bogey and Nate extensions, before DD left, and the Devers extension blows the others away, but "new spending" has not really been peanuts in 2 of the last 3 winters.

I'm not sure how much the "perception" is keeping players from signing, here. We just aren't making top offers, very often. The Eflin snub looked more like a geography thing- not our perception of being too cheap. (Afterall, he signed with the low spending Rays.) The fans and media certainly have the perception, and it is based in some reality. Although 2019 was our highest payroll ever, we actually let Kimbrell and Kelly go and added nobody new. 2020 was a massive budget cut season, and 2021 did not come close to replacing what we lost. 2022 and 2023 were, more or less, in line with previous spending, but some other teams shot up in budget spending. This winter looks like an obvious punt. The perception, now is equal to the reality, in terms of new spending, which is needed after 2 last place finishes. The big question is whether this tight-assness is just temporary, or not.

It might get better. I think Monty's age is what is making ]him look like not being part of the 2025 or 2026 "opening of the window." The age was one reason I was high on Yamo. Lauer 28 & 10 mos (not a significant upgrade) Monty 31 & 2 mos (best choice, to me.) Snell 31 & 3 mos (too injury prone, to me) Bauer 33 & 1 mo. (Major PR issues) Clevinger 33 & 2 mos (might take a short deal & PR issue) I think we wait until 2025 or 2026 to spend big on a SP'er, but it may never happen.

My point was that the perception does not really match up with reality. Yes, our budget ranking has gone way down. Some of that is due to massive increased spending by a handful or teams. Some is due to this self-imposed budget limiting by JH, this winter, before 2020 and 2021. (The 2022 and 2023 spending was not all that low. It was just spent in the wrong areas and on some players that did not produce or got hurt.)

I'm as pissed as anyone about JH's frugality. The 4 are Devers, Story, Yoshida (who total over $580, by themselves.) The 4th was Giolito, who puts the number over $600M.

I hate to admit it, but I'm starting to feel some optimism creeping into my blood.

2 wins, today- for what it's worth. Giolito 2 IP, 0 H, 1 BB, 1K Bello 2IP, 0H, 1 BB, 3K Devers with an HR Jacques and Zeferjhan let up almost all the opps runs.

2 good years in a row should help him get a better offer, but this guy's history is still scary.

I'm just saying a couple posters projected a sharp increase in signing costs for the remaining FAs, after these two, and it did not really happen. Most got close to projections, some got less, and some, like Bellinger, got way less.

Reality also includes the fact that we invested over $500M in just 4 players since March 2022.