moonslav59

I really hope we add two more SP'ers, but I realize that it is just hope. We may not even add one, but I have much more faith we do add one- even if it is a $5-10M/1 type starter, again. If we can get 140 IP from the addition, that would mean less time in the rotation needed from our "swingmen." 1. Bello (really a number 3) 2. Giolito (really a number 3) 3. ______ (addition) 4. Pivetta (IMO, he's a lock for a rotation slot, unless he gets hurt.) Then, I stack up the rest or the rotation like this, along with the depth chart: 5. Houck (yank him after 18 batters) 6. Crawford (fine with swapping him with Houck at #5) 7. The best from Max Castillo, Richard Fitts, Brandon Walter, Richard Fitts or Chris Murphy from AAA rather than Whitlock or Wink 8. Whitlock (or another one from #7) 9. Winckowski (I don't see any advantage of moving him from the role he grew into in 2023.) 10. Others from the #7 list (More: Wikelman or Perales, if the impress, greatly.)

Houck going 18 batters is not far from the league average and likely better than Wink & Whitlock can do. To me, Pivetta should be the first choice. Crawford and Houck are close, and I'd like both in the pen, but I'd pick Houck. 1st, 2nd & 3rd PA as SP ONLY OPS Against .575>.709>.957 Houck .656>.770>1.069 Crawford .760>.692>1.122 Whitlock .723>.905>.957 Winckowski (15 GS career) Pitch 1-25, 26-50, 51-75, 76-100 as SP & RP .519>.656>.844>.836 Houck .671>.742>.747>.845 Crawford .685>.600>.823>.969 Whitlock .730>.808>.920>.965 Winckowski

You gave up on Alex Wood?

Joc Pederson close to signing with AZ.

If the price drops a whole lot on some good pitcher, I could see top brass changing stride, yet again. I won't predict it or expect it, but who knows with these clowns?

I'd rather we sign these two than nobody or just one. I do think they both have a better chance at doing well starting and going 140+ IP than Houck, Crawford or Whitlock (not Pivetta.) I think our pen gets way better with 2-3 of those 3 in the pen. We'd have really good pen depth, something we saw hurt us, last year. The pen does better when not taxed. Maybe we could even trade a pen arm, if we get bottlenecked. Lauer pitched 277 Innings from '21-'22. He had a 3.47 ERA and a 4.30 FIP over that time. Best of all, he might fit JH's tight-fisted budget. Another shot in the dark could be Alex Wood. 269 IP from '21-'22 4.44 ERA but a 3.62 FIP. Clevinger probably offers the best hope, but he might be too over-priced for our miser owner.

It seems that for a team to just stay even, you need to look better than last year, on paper. Even the 2019 team looked good, on paper, but not better than 2019. Sure, the 2013 team example is one for the other view. I have not given up on 2024. We may add some players that improve my opinion, but we were not all that good last year, and there are doubts we look better without JT, Dugo, Duvall, Paxton, Sale and a few others. We added Gio, Grissom, Cambell and O'Neill.

Do you expect us to spend more than 2023, which was still not real close to the first tax line?

I'm optimistic that Gio will outpitch what we got from Paxton and Sale in 2023, but it by no means an odds on thing to expect. 2023: Gio 33 GS and 184 IP 4.88 ERA/5.27 FIP/ 1.31 WHIP Sale 20 GS 102 IP 4.30 ERA/ 3.80 FIP/ 1.13 WHIP Paxton 19 GS 96 IP 4.50 ERA/ 4.68 FIP/ 1.31 WHIP Combine Sale & Paxton and it's about.... 39 GS 199 IP 4.40 ERA 4.15 FIP 1.22 WHIP

No, but when you say it "probably will be..." I'm thinking they don't lie in that direction. “It probably will be lower than it was in 2023,” Kennedy said before the team’s Winter Weekend began at the MassMutual Center. “I don’t know that for sure. We don’t talk about specific payroll numbers.”

Okay. I listed 30 thi8ngs that "could go right" in another post. All of your nine listed could happen, and maybe even should happen, but we all know the odds are some will not. Maybe something else happens to outweigh ones that don't go right. I do think there are some slivers of hope, and enough of them to have some optimism, but without the commitment from the FO, I can't get excited. You, yourself have gone on and on about our failure not to make deadline moves to get us over the hump. You blame the FO for the team not doing better. Now, the FO is not even trying in the winter, and we can bet they won't at the deadline either. I'm not going to criticize anyone for being optimistic. I'm just not there, right now. I might not ever get there in 2024. I do think our D will improve from 28th to 30th up to near 15th. I think our offense will end up near #10. I think our pen could be #5-14th, depending on how Houck and Crawford are used, and how taxed it will be in 2024. For argument's sake, let's say 10th O, 10th pen, 15th D. That, alone should give us enough hope to be at least cautiously optimistic. I guess I vale the rotation more than some. Yes, I know about the Royals winning a ring with one that looks worse than ours does, now. I'm just thinking too much has to go exactly right, for us to have a real chance at the playoffs. Maybe, as we near ST'ing, my opinion will change. Maybe not.

True, but maybe Story had his one and is done with injuries. I see no reason to think otherwise. We have just seen his injury years, and are skeptical.

4.5 Devers 2.9 Casas 2.2 Grissom 1.7 Yoshida 1.6 Story 1.4 Duran, O'Neill 1.1 Abreu 1.0 Wong, 0.7 McGuire 0.6 Rafaela 0.4 Ref 0.3 EValdez, Reyes 2.4 Bello 2.2 Giolito 2.2 Pivetta 1.7 Houck & Crawford 1.0 Whitlock 0.9 Martin 0.6 Jansen 0.5 Scheiber & Wink 0.4 Bernardino & Walter 0.3 Campbell 0.2 Criswell & Murphy 0.1 Weissert

Fangraphs has these final fWAR projections: C: 0.8 McGuire 0.2 R Perez 0.1 Wong 1B: 3.0 Casas 2B: 2.3 Grissom SS: 1.7 Story 3B: 4.7 Devers LF: 1.7 O'Neill CF: 1.3 Duran RF: 1.3 Abreu DH: 1.9 Yoshida OF: 0.7 Refsnyder 0.3 Rafaela IF: 0.5 EValdez 0.2 Reyes SP: 2.5 Bello 2.4 Giolito 2.0 Pivetta 1.7 Crawford 1.7 Houck Pen: 1.0 Whitlock 0.9 Jansen 0.9 Martin 0.6 Wink 0.3 Schreiber & Walter 0.2 Bernardino, Mata, Murphy & Criswell 0.1 Campbell 0.0 Slaten ALE Projected Winning %: .553 NYY .529 TOR .522 TBR .513 BAL .505 BOS

Even with just a couple minor additions, we still have a chance in 2024. Yes, it's not likely, but we could get a confluence of things going well and be a surprise team. I'm just not seeing much to be optimistic about, right now. I'll still watch every pitch of every game.

I'm not confused about my own feelings. In a way, I feel less confused, now that the "cat is out of the bag." They have said they want to spend less than 2023. That's all I need to know to feel very confident with my pessimism.

He has not been an injury prone player over his career. He's not Freakin' Chris Frail.

Exactly. I'm not for trading away any one year players, if we added Monty & Duvall. I'm still trying to figure out what was so bad about being optimistic last January, but being pessimistic, this January is wrong.

If we were so bad the last 2 years, and look worse on paper, why is complaining something weird?

No doubt, we were bad. Nobody is saying otherwise. There are, however, degrees of being bad. I know us Sox fans view any season of missing the playoffs as horrible, but IMO, we were not as bad as our record showed, the last 2 years. Maybe we weren't as good as our 2021 record showed, but the nice playoff run kinda showed we were that good. It's not crying. It's not whining. It sucks finishing last, but IMO, we were still about as good as half the teams in MLB, the last 2 years combined, for what that is worth. Obviously that "worth" mean less to some than others, which is fine. I hate finishing last, too, but I'd rather go 78-84 in the ALE than 79-83 in the ALC. We finished 20th in wins. (10 teams were worse. We finished 8 games from 15th and 4 games from 16th We've been pretty mediocre, within the context of strength of schedule. This is NOT a complaint or some sort of excuse.

FSU was left out of the college playoffs because of their easier schedule. They ended up proving they did not belong. I'm not whining or complaining about our tougher schedule. It is what it is. In 2022, we killed non ALE teams. In 2023, we did not. To me, a team that is 78-84, but plays a much tougher schedule than another 78-84 team with an easier schedule is probably better. That does not change the fact that we were not good enough to pass any ALE team, the last two years. We obviously were not. We still ended up with a mediocre record that may be a bit misleading, due to the tougher schedule. It's part of the game and the rules. Call it unfortunate, or whatever you want, but facts are facts. It is likely were were not as bad as our record indicated, just like ALA, GA and others were not a worse team than FSU. We have not been one of the worst 10 teams in MLB since 2020. We have not been a top 10 team, since 2021. It sucks to finish in last place, and the stigma that goes with that is hard to shake off. I'm not whining about the schedule. I like playing the Yanks more than others do.

I'm not denying they deserved the 78-84 record. Yes, they could have been worse, and played much worse vs tough teams in Sept than they did earlier in the same season. They were pretty good, before they played the dregs and tough teams. Before playing the dregs, they still had played a tougher than average schedule and were over .500. They played like a better team before the last 5 weeks of the season. Yes, I can say that. Yes, we could have ended up with less than 78 wins, but we could have ended up with more, just as easily.

Yup, and as late as Sept 4th, we were still on pace for 84 wins.

You had me, until the Blaze Jordan at #7 on any list.

Part of the reason we were only 3 over .500 before playing those "dregs," was because we had played a tougher schedule up to that point. Beating the dregs, when you play them, is part of the reason all teams have more wins.